scientificamerican--2020-10-02--Climate Change and COVID Threaten to Sink Small Island Nations

Under assault from climate change , they need to spend big to protect their communities from rising seas and dangerous storms .
But a major source of income—international tourism—has dried up due to the coronavirus pandemic .
So now they ’ re pleading with world leaders for help and relief .
“ As small island developing states , we are struggling to stay afloat literally and figuratively , ” said Jerome Xavier Walcott , minister for foreign affairs of Barbados .
“ We are of the view that a need for adequate climate finance in the midst of the COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was one of several island nations to raise concerns this week with the United Nations .
Their calls were aimed at the World Bank and International Monetary Fund .
The World Bank-IMF annual meetings kick off in two weeks .
The pleas for debt relief came from leaders of the Bahamas , Barbados , Dominica , Grenada , the Maldives , Samoa , the Solomon Islands , Vanuatu and other small island developing countries .
They said lockdowns implemented to fight the pandemic have sent revenues plummeting , thereby crippling national climate adaptation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tropical weather disasters .
Yet they insisted that adaptation spending must proceed , as failure to build up resilience to natural disasters would cause economic pain down the road .
For example , the Pacific nation of Kiribati is considering raising the elevation of its islands , while the neighboring Solomon Islands says it ’ s busy fixing maritime claims before sea-level rise eats away at its land .
Dominica said it may spend up to 30 % of its budget to hurricane-proof buildings and infrastructure .
Many of these countries have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus , as there are no reported cases of COVID-19 in nine Pacific island nations .
But this vigilance has come at a price .
“ Such success was and is only possible through concerted action and stringent measures , which further exacerbate our socioeconomic crisis , ” said Peter David , Grenada ’ s minister of foreign affairs .
The Group of 20 nations , or the G-20 , has organized a temporary Debt Service Suspension Initiative ( DSSI ) that runs out at the end of the year .
Small island @ @ @ @ @ @ @ welcome but not nearly enough .
The Maldives says its climate planning has been crippled by the pandemic .
Its government has requested an extension of DSSI out to at least the end of 2021 .
More aid is needed , it said .
“ The toll that debt burdens have on small island developing states like the Maldives is clearer now , ” said Maldives Foreign Minister Abdulla Shahid .
“ But debt suspension is only half of the story for countries like ours , ” he added .
“ We need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better and greater access to concessional finance.
” IMF says it ’ s taking these governments ’ warnings seriously .
Yesterday , IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva called on the international community to reform global sovereign debt systems .
In a post to the agency ’ s website , she and other IMF economists warned that several nations are at “ high risk of a debt crisis , ” especially smaller developing countries .
IMF predicts the world ’ s average debt ratio will have risen by a further 17 % of global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and by 12 % of GDP in developing nations by the end of 2021 .
Currently , the developing world ’ s debt burden stands at around 60 % of GDP , while the developed world is straining under a debt-to-GDP ratio in excess of 120 % .
The world ’ s debt burden is now higher than it ’ s ever been since the end of World War II .
IMF warned of skyrocketing debt even before the pandemic led to increased spending and decreased revenues .
Yesterday , IMF launched @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world ’ s “ debt architecture.
” In a presentation of the report ’ s key recommendations , IMF First Deputy Managing Director Geoffrey Okamoto said the world has only avoided “ a systemic debt crisis ” due to record low interest rates , central bank intervention and emergency measures like DSSI .
“ This kind of support has bought the world some time , ” he said .
Okamoto said richer nations should do more , such as extending DSSI “ ideally for another 12 months ” and restructuring bilateral debts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talks with their creditors as soon as possible .
“ Countries with unsustainable debts should not delay restructuring and open negotiations with creditors before the situation worsens , ” said Okamoto .
“ Delaying only increases the costs , both economic and human.
” Small island governments say they are doing just that , adding that help is needed for general debt repayment as well as climate financing , which has been made more difficult by the crisis .
Barbados commended the United Kingdom for doubling its contribution to the U.N. ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic .
The Bahamas expressed its appreciation to dozens of bilateral donors and financial institutions helping it to rebuild from the destruction caused last year by Hurricane Dorian .
Dominica thanked contributors to its “ climate resilience recovery plan.
” And the government of the Solomon Islands publicly thanked Australia , New Zealand , Japan , China and the U.N. for their “ generosity , ” which Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare said “ will continue to be needed.
” Kenneth Darroux , minister for foreign affairs of Dominica , said time is of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dire .
The situation is urgent .
And we welcome any support which could influence the provision of adequate financial support in a timely and applicable manner , ” he said .
“ Climate financing has to be new , additional and predictable , ” said Maldives Foreign Minister Shahid .
“ Adaptation is no longer something to plan for in the future .
It is our every day.
” Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from E & E News .
E & E provides daily coverage of essential energy and environmental news @ @ @

Small island nations are in a bind.
Under assault from climate change, they need to spend big to protect their communities from rising seas and dangerous storms.
But a major source of income—international tourism—has dried up due to the coronavirus pandemic.
So now they’re pleading with world leaders for help and relief.
“As small island developing states, we are struggling to stay afloat literally and figuratively,” said Jerome Xavier Walcott, minister for foreign affairs of Barbados. “We are of the view that a need for adequate climate finance in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic cannot be overstated.”
Barbados was one of several island nations to raise concerns this week with the United Nations. Their calls were aimed at the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. The World Bank-IMF annual meetings kick off in two weeks.
The pleas for debt relief came from leaders of the Bahamas, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, the Maldives, Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and other small island developing countries.
They said lockdowns implemented to fight the pandemic have sent revenues plummeting, thereby crippling national climate adaptation plans and efforts to rebuild from recent tropical weather disasters. Yet they insisted that adaptation spending must proceed, as failure to build up resilience to natural disasters would cause economic pain down the road.
For example, the Pacific nation of Kiribati is considering raising the elevation of its islands, while the neighboring Solomon Islands says it’s busy fixing maritime claims before sea-level rise eats away at its land. Dominica said it may spend up to 30% of its budget to hurricane-proof buildings and infrastructure.
Many of these countries have been successful in protecting their people from the virus, as there are no reported cases of COVID-19 in nine Pacific island nations.
But this vigilance has come at a price.
“Such success was and is only possible through concerted action and stringent measures, which further exacerbate our socioeconomic crisis,” said Peter David, Grenada’s minister of foreign affairs.
The Group of 20 nations, or the G-20, has organized a temporary Debt Service Suspension Initiative (DSSI) that runs out at the end of the year. Small island governments say this assistance is very much welcome but not nearly enough.
The Maldives says its climate planning has been crippled by the pandemic. Its government has requested an extension of DSSI out to at least the end of 2021.
More aid is needed, it said.
“The toll that debt burdens have on small island developing states like the Maldives is clearer now,” said Maldives Foreign Minister Abdulla Shahid.
“But debt suspension is only half of the story for countries like ours,” he added. “We need structural change, innovative facilities, and better and greater access to concessional finance.”
IMF says it’s taking these governments’ warnings seriously.
Yesterday, IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva called on the international community to reform global sovereign debt systems. In a post to the agency’s website, she and other IMF economists warned that several nations are at “high risk of a debt crisis,” especially smaller developing countries.
IMF predicts the world’s average debt ratio will have risen by a further 17% of global gross domestic product in the richer world, and by 12% of GDP in developing nations by the end of 2021. Currently, the developing world’s debt burden stands at around 60% of GDP, while the developed world is straining under a debt-to-GDP ratio in excess of 120%. The world’s debt burden is now higher than it’s ever been since the end of World War II.
IMF warned of skyrocketing debt even before the pandemic led to increased spending and decreased revenues.
Yesterday, IMF launched a report and laid out recommendations for the world’s “debt architecture.”
In a presentation of the report’s key recommendations, IMF First Deputy Managing Director Geoffrey Okamoto said the world has only avoided “a systemic debt crisis” due to record low interest rates, central bank intervention and emergency measures like DSSI. “This kind of support has bought the world some time,” he said.
Okamoto said richer nations should do more, such as extending DSSI “ideally for another 12 months” and restructuring bilateral debts.
He urged debtor nations to begin talks with their creditors as soon as possible.
“Countries with unsustainable debts should not delay restructuring and open negotiations with creditors before the situation worsens,” said Okamoto. “Delaying only increases the costs, both economic and human.”
Small island governments say they are doing just that, adding that help is needed for general debt repayment as well as climate financing, which has been made more difficult by the crisis.
Barbados commended the United Kingdom for doubling its contribution to the U.N.’s Green Climate Fund in spite of the pandemic. The Bahamas expressed its appreciation to dozens of bilateral donors and financial institutions helping it to rebuild from the destruction caused last year by Hurricane Dorian.
Dominica thanked contributors to its “climate resilience recovery plan.” And the government of the Solomon Islands publicly thanked Australia, New Zealand, Japan, China and the U.N. for their “generosity,” which Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare said “will continue to be needed.”
Kenneth Darroux, minister for foreign affairs of Dominica, said time is of the essence.
“The situation is dire. The situation is urgent. And we welcome any support which could influence the provision of adequate financial support in a timely and applicable manner,” he said.
“Climate financing has to be new, additional and predictable,” said Maldives Foreign Minister Shahid. “Adaptation is no longer something to plan for in the future. It is our every day.”
Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from E&E News. E&E provides daily coverage of essential energy and environmental news at www.eenews.net.


scientificamerican--2020-10-02--How the Immune System of Older Adults Like Trump Weakens with Age

President Donald Trump ’ s announcement that he ’ s tested positive for COVID-19 is especially concerning because of his age .
At 74 years old , Trump is solidly within an age group that ’ s been hit hard during the coronavirus pandemic .
People of all ages can get sick from SARS-CoV-2 , the virus that causes COVID-19 .
But the severity of the illness tends to worsen the older the patient is .
Through the end of September , 79 % of COVID-19 deaths in the United States had been in patients over 65 .
These statistics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world .
What is it that puts older people at increased risk from viruses like SARS-CoV-2 ?
Scientists think it ’ s primarily due to changes in the human immune system as we age .
Your body ’ s tools to fight off virus infections As you go about your life , your body is constantly bombarded by pathogens—the bacteria , fungi and viruses that can make you sick .
A human body is a great place for these organisms to grow and thrive , providing a nice warm environment with plenty of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immune system comes in .
It ’ s your body ’ s defense system against these kinds of invaders .
Before you ’ re even born , your body starts producing specialized B-cells and T-cells—types of white blood cells that can recognize pathogens and help block their growth .
During an infection , your B-cells can proliferate and produce antibodies that grab onto pathogens and block their ability to spread within your body .
T-cells work by recognizing infected cells and killing them .
Together they make up what scientists call your “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ physician has checked your white blood cell levels .
That ’ s a measurement of whether you have more B-cells and T-cells in your blood than usual , presumably because they ’ re fighting infection .
When you ’ re very young , you don ’ t have a lot of these B- or T-cells .
It can be a challenge for your body to control infection because it ’ s simply not used to the job .
As you mature , your adaptive immune system learns to recognize pathogens and handle these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off infection quickly and effectively .
While white blood cells are powerful people-protectors , they ’ re not enough on their own .
Luckily , your immune system has another layer , what ’ s called your “ innate ” immune response .
Every cell has its own little immune system that allows it to directly respond to pathogens quicker than it takes to mobilize the adaptive response .
The innate immune response is tuned to pounce on types of molecules that are commonly found on bacteria and viruses but not in human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ invader molecules , it triggers production of an antiviral interferon protein .
Interferon triggers the infected cell to die , limiting infection .
Another type of innate immune cell , called a monocyte , acts as a sort of cellular bouncer , getting rid of any infected cells it finds and signaling the adaptive immune response to shift into gear .
The innate and adaptive immune systems can act together as a fine-tuned machine to detect and clear out pathogens .
When a pathogen invades , the difference between illness and health is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can spread within you and how fast your immune response can react without causing too much collateral damage .
As people age , their innate and adaptive immune responses change , shifting this balance .
Monocytes from older individuals produce less interferon in response to viral infections .
They have a harder time killing infected cells and signaling the adaptive immune response to get going .
Low-grade chronic inflammation in individuals that commonly occurs during aging can also dull the ability of the innate and adaptive immune responses to react to pathogens .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to an annoying sound over time .
As you age , the reduced “ attention span ” of your innate and adaptive immune responses make it harder for the body to respond to viral infection , giving the virus the upper hand .
Viruses can take advantage of your immune system ’ s slow start and quickly overwhelm you , resulting in serious disease and death .
Everyone , no matter their age , needs to protect themselves from infection , not just to keep themselves healthy but also to help protect the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individuals have in controlling viral infection , the best option is for these individuals to avoid becoming infected by viruses in the first place .
This is where washing hands , avoiding touching your face , self-isolation and social distancing all become important , especially for COVID-19 .
COVID-19 is caused by a respiratory virus , which can spread via tiny virus-containing droplets .
Larger droplets fall to the ground quickly ; very small droplets dry up .
Mid-range droplets are of most concern because they can float in the air for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be inhaled into the lungs .
Keeping at least 6 feet away from other people helps significantly reduce your chance of being infected by these aerosol droplets .
But there ’ s still the possibility for virus to contaminate surfaces that infected people have touched or coughed on .
Therefore , the best way to protect vulnerable older and immunocompromised people is to stay away from them until there is no longer a risk .
By stopping the spread of SARS-CoV-2 throughout the whole population , we help protect those who have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

President Donald Trump’s announcement that he’s tested positive for COVID-19 is especially concerning because of his age. At 74 years old, Trump is solidly within an age group that’s been hit hard during the coronavirus pandemic.
People of all ages can get sick from SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. But the severity of the illness tends to worsen the older the patient is. Through the end of September, 79% of COVID-19 deaths in the United States had been in patients over 65. These statistics are broadly similar in countries around the world.
What is it that puts older people at increased risk from viruses like SARS-CoV-2? Scientists think it’s primarily due to changes in the human immune system as we age.
Your body’s tools to fight off virus infections
As you go about your life, your body is constantly bombarded by pathogens—the bacteria, fungi and viruses that can make you sick. A human body is a great place for these organisms to grow and thrive, providing a nice warm environment with plenty of nutrients.
That’s where your immune system comes in. It’s your body’s defense system against these kinds of invaders. Before you’re even born, your body starts producing specialized B-cells and T-cells—types of white blood cells that can recognize pathogens and help block their growth.
During an infection, your B-cells can proliferate and produce antibodies that grab onto pathogens and block their ability to spread within your body. T-cells work by recognizing infected cells and killing them. Together they make up what scientists call your “adaptive” immune system.
Maybe your physician has checked your white blood cell levels. That’s a measurement of whether you have more B-cells and T-cells in your blood than usual, presumably because they’re fighting infection.
When you’re very young, you don’t have a lot of these B- or T-cells. It can be a challenge for your body to control infection because it’s simply not used to the job. As you mature, your adaptive immune system learns to recognize pathogens and handle these constant invasions, allowing you to fight off infection quickly and effectively.
While white blood cells are powerful people-protectors, they’re not enough on their own. Luckily, your immune system has another layer, what’s called your “innate” immune response. Every cell has its own little immune system that allows it to directly respond to pathogens quicker than it takes to mobilize the adaptive response.
The innate immune response is tuned to pounce on types of molecules that are commonly found on bacteria and viruses but not in human cells. When a cell detects these invader molecules, it triggers production of an antiviral interferon protein. Interferon triggers the infected cell to die, limiting infection.
Another type of innate immune cell, called a monocyte, acts as a sort of cellular bouncer, getting rid of any infected cells it finds and signaling the adaptive immune response to shift into gear.
The innate and adaptive immune systems can act together as a fine-tuned machine to detect and clear out pathogens.
Older immune systems are weaker
When a pathogen invades, the difference between illness and health is a race between how fast the pathogen can spread within you and how fast your immune response can react without causing too much collateral damage.
As people age, their innate and adaptive immune responses change, shifting this balance.
Monocytes from older individuals produce less interferon in response to viral infections. They have a harder time killing infected cells and signaling the adaptive immune response to get going.
Low-grade chronic inflammation in individuals that commonly occurs during aging can also dull the ability of the innate and adaptive immune responses to react to pathogens. It’s similar to becoming used to an annoying sound over time.
As you age, the reduced “attention span” of your innate and adaptive immune responses make it harder for the body to respond to viral infection, giving the virus the upper hand. Viruses can take advantage of your immune system’s slow start and quickly overwhelm you, resulting in serious disease and death.
Social distancing is vital
Everyone, no matter their age, needs to protect themselves from infection, not just to keep themselves healthy but also to help protect the most vulnerable. Given the difficulty older individuals have in controlling viral infection, the best option is for these individuals to avoid becoming infected by viruses in the first place.
This is where washing hands, avoiding touching your face, self-isolation and social distancing all become important, especially for COVID-19.
COVID-19 is caused by a respiratory virus, which can spread via tiny virus-containing droplets. Larger droplets fall to the ground quickly; very small droplets dry up. Mid-range droplets are of most concern because they can float in the air for a few feet before drying. These droplets can be inhaled into the lungs.
Keeping at least 6 feet away from other people helps significantly reduce your chance of being infected by these aerosol droplets. But there’s still the possibility for virus to contaminate surfaces that infected people have touched or coughed on. Therefore, the best way to protect vulnerable older and immunocompromised people is to stay away from them until there is no longer a risk. By stopping the spread of SARS-CoV-2 throughout the whole population, we help protect those who have a harder time fighting infection.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


scientificamerican--2020-10-02--What a Joe Biden Presidency Would Mean For Science

Election Day in the United States is a little more than a month away , and scientists are watching the outcome of the presidential race closely .
President Donald Trump ’ s handling of the coronavirus pandemic , actions to downplay climate change and perpetuation of misinformation have horrified many scientists .
“ We face a national crisis unlike any we have witnessed , ” says a statement of concern about the state of democracy in the country , drafted by US scientists and signed by more than 3,400 supporters in response to Trump ’ s leadership .
Early polls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his running mate , senator Kamala Harris of California , have a lead over the Republican ticket of Trump and vice-president Mike Pence .
But what does Biden , a six-term senator from Delaware who served as vice-president under former president Barack Obama , stand for science-wise ?
Nature interviewed current advisers to Biden , advisers who served during Obama ’ s presidency and policy analysts about actions the former vice-president might take in five key science areas if he ’ s elected .
( The Biden campaign did not respond to questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election on 3 November , he will inherit not only a country in the throes of a pandemic that ’ s destroyed lives and livelihoods—but also one in which public opinion is deeply divided over the true extent of the coronavirus outbreak and the measures taken to abate it .
Despite public-health agencies counting more than 200,000 COVID-19 deaths in the country , some Trump supporters feel that the impact of the virus has been exaggerated in an effort to control the populace .
Biden would also inherit a haphazard pandemic response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with our whole response is that we ’ ve been changing the response since day one , ” says Georges Benjamin , the executive director of the American Public Health Association in Washington DC .
This has led to testing failures , a lack of contact tracing , confusion and debate about wearing face masks and restrictions on gatherings—and ultimately to the highest death toll in the world , says Benjamin .
Coming in with a strong response plan and the ability to adapt to an evolving situation will be crucial for steadying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he adds .
Biden ’ s pandemic plans—which his team has been preparing since March , say sources close to the campaign—promise to ramp up the country ’ s test-and-trace programmes ; address racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 infection rates and outcomes ; and rebuild pandemic-readiness programmes cut by the Trump administration .
Still , it will take time to bring the pandemic under control in the United States , says Kavita Patel , a physician who advises on health policy for Harris but is not currently advising the campaign .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ says , “ need to hit the ground running ” in order to turn the US response around .
Months of Trump politicizing the pandemic will be hard to undo .
The president has repeatedly said that wearing masks is unnecessary , despite public-health researchers ’ assurances that they are among the most effective non-pharmaceutical interventions for preventing viral spread .
The Biden team will need to change the public-health messaging so that it supports the science without driving sceptics even further away , says Marta Wosińska , the deputy director of Duke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Policy in Durham , North Carolina .
“ We need to figure out a bipartisan push and identify who are the right messengers.
” If Biden wins , his administration will have to tackle public mistrust of the federal agencies leading the US response to curtail the pandemic .
The Trump administration has criticized and censored guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) and has claimed , without evidence , that the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) is intentionally slowing vaccine testing to hurt his re-election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that his administration would direct the CDC to issue transparent , evidence-based guidance around the public-health risks of reopening restaurants , schools and public spaces .
This could also go a long way towards restoring morale within the CDC and the FDA .
“ Agency scientists feel marginalized and that their voices aren ’ t heard , ” Patel says .
“ You need someone who can reinvigorate them.
” If elected , Biden has committed to supporting the World Health Organization ( WHO ) , which Trump began to withdraw the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as providing badly needed funds to the WHO to fight the coronavirus , polio and other diseases globally , reinstating the United States ’ commitment to the organization would pave the way for joining its international COVAX facility , which aims to accelerate the search for and manufacture of coronavirus vaccines .
Trump ’ s vaccine initiative , Operation Warp Speed , includes funds for manufacturing , but Wosińska says that sufficient supplies aren ’ t assured without international partnerships , including COVAX .
“ We haven ’ t come to the table @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that could change the course of how things play out , ” she says .
But even with these partnerships , it will take time to adequately expand global manufacturing .
Biden has committed to continue supporting coronavirus-vaccine research , and has pledged that an eventual vaccine will be priced fairly by the federal government .
In the longer term , researchers hope that a Biden administration will build up US public-health infrastructure to better prepare for future crises .
“ We absolutely know how to do this .
We know what it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We just have to have the leadership and the commitment of resources to do it.
” The coronavirus pandemic isn ’ t the only divisive issue that Biden would face if elected—he would also be confronting climate change .
Trump has moved to pull the United States out of the 2015 Paris climate treaty , rolled back a suite of regulations intended to reduce greenhouse-gas regulations and called global warming a hoax .
In contrast , Biden is now campaigning on the most aggressive climate platform ever advanced by a US presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the demands of an increasingly vocal liberal base , his US $ 2-trillion plan calls for massive investments in clean-energy research and development and low-carbon infrastructure , such as public transit and energy-efficient buildings .
It also calls for the United States to generate 100 % clean electricity by 2035 and to produce “ net-zero emissions ” by 2050 .
The question facing Biden and his team , if they win in November , is how to make it happen .
Biden has said he will have the United States rejoin the Paris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ active partner of the more than 190 nations that have committed to limiting global warming to 1.5–2 oC above pre-industrial levels .
He would also appoint climate-friendly leadership at the Environmental Protection Agency and quickly move to restore—or even bolster—climate and environmental regulations rolled back under Trump over the past four years .
It could take a few years to finalize those changes , but Biden could do so with existing authority under federal law .
The first big opportunity to advance climate legislation through Congress would probably come in the form of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US economy in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic .
Campaigning under the slogan “ Build back better ” , Biden and his fellow Democrats are likely to add investments in energy , climate , infrastructure and environmental justice to that plan .
But whether the legislation makes it through depends on whether the Democrats take back the Senate and maintain their majority in the House of Representatives during the upcoming election .
“ If they have the votes , the stimulus package could be the single-most important climate policy that this country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Victor , a political scientist at the University of California , San Diego .
If the Democrats do win a majority in the Senate , they will still need to contend with a filibuster rule that requires 60 out of the chamber ’ s 100 possible votes to pass major legislation .
Democrats currently hold 45 seats in the Senate , and getting to 60 would be tough , so senior Democrats are considering getting rid of the rule if their party wins in November .
According to Leah Stokes , a political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Santa Barbara , who is volunteering for the Biden campaign : “ We may get Democratic reform first , and use that to secure climate reform.
” As well as tackling the pandemic and climate change , a President Biden would have the opportunity to develop other science priorities for his administration .
This process typically includes tapping experts to coordinate science policy and establishing research focuses for the White House .
( The actual job of doling out science funding is left to Congress . )
These advisers will be crucial because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and its role in crafting public policy , neither has worked extensively on science issues .
When he served in the Senate , Biden ’ s focus was more on foreign affairs and the judiciary , and Harris has a background in criminal justice , including her former position as California ’ s attorney general .
If Biden is elected , he should choose a science adviser as quickly as possible to start developing and implementing whatever research priorities do emerge , says Michael Lubell , a physicist and science-policy expert at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ position is currently held by meteorologist Kelvin Droegemeier—who did not start until nearly two years into Trump ’ s presidency .
Droegemeier and the Trump administration have focused on , among other things , initiatives in artificial intelligence and quantum science , areas that are seen as necessary to keep the United States competitive with China .
If Biden were to win the presidency , those would probably continue to be areas of focus—in part because Congress is interested in them .
As a former senator , Biden “ will likely look to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jenny Luray , vice-president of strategy and communications for Research !
America in Washington DC .
Other potential focuses could include manufacturing technology , public health and health disparities , she says .
Biden ’ s most obvious research interest has been in cancer science , particularly following the death of his 46-year-old son Beau in 2015 to brain cancer .
As vice-president , Biden headed a government ‘ cancer moonshot ’ initiative that kicked off in 2016 , the last year of Obama ’ s presidency .
It aimed to speed up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by coordinating with companies and researchers to share data and results .
The initiative later morphed into a non-profit group , which Biden suspended last year after deciding to run for president .
“ Biden will want to make sure that any momentum from that effort that began in 2016 has not waned , '' says Jon Retzlaff , vice-president for science policy and government affairs at the American Association for Cancer Research .
He also notes that Harris ’ s mother , Shyamala Gopalan , a major influence on the vice-presidential candidate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ died of cancer .
The combination of Biden 's and Harris 's personal histories with the disease would probably mean that cancer and medical research will be a priority of the administration , he says .
But beyond medical research , Biden ’ s broad science priorities remain a bit of a mystery .
Despite having nearly five decades in public service , when it comes to research policy , “ Biden fundamentally is a blank page , ” says Lubell .
“ He ’ s certainly not anti-science ; it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , NASA has pursued an ambitious strategy — named Artemis , after Apollo ’ s twin sister—to put US astronauts on the Moon four years from now .
Space exploration is one of the few areas where the Trump administration has put in significant effort to develop science policy.How Biden , if elected , might alter the course set out by Trump is another unknown .
As vice-president , Biden was not deeply involved in space-policy issues—unlike Pence , who has actively worked on Trump ’ s space initiatives .
He did , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May , when NASA sent two astronauts to the International Space Station on a privately built spacecraft for the first time .
In response , Biden posted his congratulations on the website Medium—and noted that he was vice-president when this ‘ commercial crew ’ programme began in 2009 .
NASA might not dramatically change its course under a President Biden , experts say .
The Democrats ’ official platform says the party is “ committed to continuing space exploration and discovery ” , including “ NASA ’ s work to return Americans to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
But a Biden administration would have to decide what to do with NASA ’ s human space-flight programme , which has been through whiplash-inducing changes in recent years .
In 2010 , Obama cancelled earlier plans to send astronauts to the Moon and told NASA to fly them to an asteroid .
Trump , in turn , redirected NASA to focus on landing humans on the Moon by the end of 2024—a highly ambitious deadline , widely assumed to fall at the end of a hypothetical second presidential term for Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ I would expect that the 2024 date would disappear , ” says John Logsdon , former head of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University in Washington DC .
Beyond NASA , another question regards the fate of the National Space Council , which had been dormant since 1993 until Trump re-established it in 2017 .
The space council brings together representatives from various national agencies , including the military and NASA , to coordinate space policy across the government .
In the past few years , it has worked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of space , to set national policy on space-traffic management and to establish a ‘ space force ’ as a new branch of the US military , charged with protecting the nation ’ s interests in space .
“ I think the council has proven its worth , ” says Logsdon .
The National Space Council is headed by the vice-president , so Harris would take over from Pence if Biden is elected .
Harris has not worked much on space issues , but Logsdon notes that in Congress she represents California , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies and several NASA centres .
That might position her to work on issues involving the commercialization of space exploration .
Scientists widely feel that Trump ’ s isolationist stance has eroded the position of the United States as a global leader in major scientific collaborations and dimmed its allure as a destination for foreign students and researchers .
Biden ’ s foreign-policy and immigration plans could mend some frayed ties , but science-policy experts warn that the road to recovery will be longer than a single four-year presidential term .
Well before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nationalist campaign rhetoric , with vivid promises to build a wall along the US–Mexico border , spooked foreign scientists .
And weeks after his presidential inauguration , a ‘ travel ban ’ executive order targeted at seven Muslim-majority countries stranded international students at airports , sparked protests and sent shock waves through the US research community .
“ When you do n't have certainty over what the future immigration laws of the host country are going to be , you 're going to think twice before deciding to uproot yourself and move to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” says Ali Nouri , a molecular biologist and president of the Federation of American Scientists .
Biden has pledged to reverse the travel bans and to make it easier for foreign scientists and engineers who graduate with PhDs to permanently stay in the United States .
He has also proposed to increase the number of visas available to highly skilled workers , including scientists .
In contrast , the H-1B programme used by foreign workers , including scientists , has been a long-time Trump target .
In June , Trump announced that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new H-1B visas until the end of the year , contending that this would preserve US jobs for citizens in an economy endangered by the pandemic .
“ What I would hope is that in the future , the United States would reverse some of these restrictions on talent flows , ” says Kei Koizumi , a former White House Office of Science and Technology Policy adviser under the Obama administration , who is not currently advising Biden .
Citing the threat of foreign interference in US research , Trump ’ s administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China and of US scientists receiving foreign funding .
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought to find , and in some cases arrest , researchers that it says were agents sent to steal scientific expertise and intellectual property on behalf of the Chinese government .
In May , the United States took a new step : the issuance of rules to restrict researchers from universities associated with China ’ s military from entering the country .
Amid this crackdown , US scientists are concerned about racial profiling against Chinese scientists , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ travelling to the United States for conferences or partnering on projects with US scientists .
US funding agencies have denied that the increased scrutiny has caused collaborations to suffer and insist that the US government ’ s interest is in select cases of unethical or illegal behavior .
A President Biden would probably continue the focus on research and national security .
He has pledged to out-compete China in developing crucial emerging technologies , and the United States ’ effort to track China ’ s interference in its research laboratories began while he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s second term .
Regardless of the outcome in November , says Koizumi , this issue is set only to intensify , and it will be a challenge for either a Biden or a Trump administration to secure the country ’ s intellectual property while not alienating Chinese scientists .
“ You have to balance openness versus security.
” This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on October 1 2020 .

Election Day in the United States is a little more than a month away, and scientists are watching the outcome of the presidential race closely. President Donald Trump’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, actions to downplay climate change and perpetuation of misinformation have horrified many scientists. “We face a national crisis unlike any we have witnessed,” says a statement of concern about the state of democracy in the country, drafted by US scientists and signed by more than 3,400 supporters in response to Trump’s leadership.
Early polls show that Democratic challenger Joe Biden and his running mate, senator Kamala Harris of California, have a lead over the Republican ticket of Trump and vice-president Mike Pence. But what does Biden, a six-term senator from Delaware who served as vice-president under former president Barack Obama, stand for science-wise? Nature interviewed current advisers to Biden, advisers who served during Obama’s presidency and policy analysts about actions the former vice-president might take in five key science areas if he’s elected. (The Biden campaign did not respond to questions from Nature.)
Pandemic response
If Biden wins the election on 3 November, he will inherit not only a country in the throes of a pandemic that’s destroyed lives and livelihoods—but also one in which public opinion is deeply divided over the true extent of the coronavirus outbreak and the measures taken to abate it. Despite public-health agencies counting more than 200,000 COVID-19 deaths in the country, some Trump supporters feel that the impact of the virus has been exaggerated in an effort to control the populace.
Biden would also inherit a haphazard pandemic response, researchers say. “The problem with our whole response is that we’ve been changing the response since day one,” says Georges Benjamin, the executive director of the American Public Health Association in Washington DC. This has led to testing failures, a lack of contact tracing, confusion and debate about wearing face masks and restrictions on gatherings—and ultimately to the highest death toll in the world, says Benjamin. Coming in with a strong response plan and the ability to adapt to an evolving situation will be crucial for steadying both the outbreak and the US economy, he adds.
Biden’s pandemic plans—which his team has been preparing since March, say sources close to the campaign—promise to ramp up the country’s test-and-trace programmes; address racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 infection rates and outcomes; and rebuild pandemic-readiness programmes cut by the Trump administration.
Still, it will take time to bring the pandemic under control in the United States, says Kavita Patel, a physician who advises on health policy for Harris but is not currently advising the campaign. Biden’s staff members, she says, “need to hit the ground running” in order to turn the US response around.
Months of Trump politicizing the pandemic will be hard to undo. The president has repeatedly said that wearing masks is unnecessary, despite public-health researchers’ assurances that they are among the most effective non-pharmaceutical interventions for preventing viral spread. The Biden team will need to change the public-health messaging so that it supports the science without driving sceptics even further away, says Marta Wosińska, the deputy director of Duke University’s Margolis Center for Health Policy in Durham, North Carolina. “We need to figure out a bipartisan push and identify who are the right messengers.”
If Biden wins, his administration will have to tackle public mistrust of the federal agencies leading the US response to curtail the pandemic. The Trump administration has criticized and censored guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and has claimed, without evidence, that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is intentionally slowing vaccine testing to hurt his re-election chances. The Biden campaign has stated that his administration would direct the CDC to issue transparent, evidence-based guidance around the public-health risks of reopening restaurants, schools and public spaces. This could also go a long way towards restoring morale within the CDC and the FDA. “Agency scientists feel marginalized and that their voices aren’t heard,” Patel says. “You need someone who can reinvigorate them.”
If elected, Biden has committed to supporting the World Health Organization (WHO), which Trump began to withdraw the United States from in July. As well as providing badly needed funds to the WHO to fight the coronavirus, polio and other diseases globally, reinstating the United States’ commitment to the organization would pave the way for joining its international COVAX facility, which aims to accelerate the search for and manufacture of coronavirus vaccines.
Trump’s vaccine initiative, Operation Warp Speed, includes funds for manufacturing, but Wosińska says that sufficient supplies aren’t assured without international partnerships, including COVAX. “We haven’t come to the table with other countries on vaccines, and that could change the course of how things play out,” she says. But even with these partnerships, it will take time to adequately expand global manufacturing. Biden has committed to continue supporting coronavirus-vaccine research, and has pledged that an eventual vaccine will be priced fairly by the federal government.
In the longer term, researchers hope that a Biden administration will build up US public-health infrastructure to better prepare for future crises. “We absolutely know how to do this. We know what it looks like,” says Benjamin. “We just have to have the leadership and the commitment of resources to do it.”
Climate change
The coronavirus pandemic isn’t the only divisive issue that Biden would face if elected—he would also be confronting climate change. Trump has moved to pull the United States out of the 2015 Paris climate treaty, rolled back a suite of regulations intended to reduce greenhouse-gas regulations and called global warming a hoax.
In contrast, Biden is now campaigning on the most aggressive climate platform ever advanced by a US presidential nominee in the general election. Addressing the demands of an increasingly vocal liberal base, his US$2-trillion plan calls for massive investments in clean-energy research and development and low-carbon infrastructure, such as public transit and energy-efficient buildings. It also calls for the United States to generate 100% clean electricity by 2035 and to produce “net-zero emissions” by 2050. The question facing Biden and his team, if they win in November, is how to make it happen.
Biden has said he will have the United States rejoin the Paris climate accord, making the country an active partner of the more than 190 nations that have committed to limiting global warming to 1.5–2 oC above pre-industrial levels. He would also appoint climate-friendly leadership at the Environmental Protection Agency and quickly move to restore—or even bolster—climate and environmental regulations rolled back under Trump over the past four years. It could take a few years to finalize those changes, but Biden could do so with existing authority under federal law.
The first big opportunity to advance climate legislation through Congress would probably come in the form of an economic stimulus plan to revive the US economy in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. Campaigning under the slogan “Build back better”, Biden and his fellow Democrats are likely to add investments in energy, climate, infrastructure and environmental justice to that plan. But whether the legislation makes it through depends on whether the Democrats take back the Senate and maintain their majority in the House of Representatives during the upcoming election.
“If they have the votes, the stimulus package could be the single-most important climate policy that this country has ever adopted,” says David Victor, a political scientist at the University of California, San Diego.
If the Democrats do win a majority in the Senate, they will still need to contend with a filibuster rule that requires 60 out of the chamber’s 100 possible votes to pass major legislation. Democrats currently hold 45 seats in the Senate, and getting to 60 would be tough, so senior Democrats are considering getting rid of the rule if their party wins in November. According to Leah Stokes, a political scientist at the University of California, Santa Barbara, who is volunteering for the Biden campaign: “We may get Democratic reform first, and use that to secure climate reform.”
Research priorities
As well as tackling the pandemic and climate change, a President Biden would have the opportunity to develop other science priorities for his administration. This process typically includes tapping experts to coordinate science policy and establishing research focuses for the White House. (The actual job of doling out science funding is left to Congress.)
These advisers will be crucial because although Biden and Harris generally support science and its role in crafting public policy, neither has worked extensively on science issues. When he served in the Senate, Biden’s focus was more on foreign affairs and the judiciary, and Harris has a background in criminal justice, including her former position as California’s attorney general.
If Biden is elected, he should choose a science adviser as quickly as possible to start developing and implementing whatever research priorities do emerge, says Michael Lubell, a physicist and science-policy expert at the City College of New York. That position is currently held by meteorologist Kelvin Droegemeier—who did not start until nearly two years into Trump’s presidency.
Droegemeier and the Trump administration have focused on, among other things, initiatives in artificial intelligence and quantum science, areas that are seen as necessary to keep the United States competitive with China. If Biden were to win the presidency, those would probably continue to be areas of focus—in part because Congress is interested in them. As a former senator, Biden “will likely look to the Senate for ideas,” says Jenny Luray, vice-president of strategy and communications for Research!America in Washington DC. Other potential focuses could include manufacturing technology, public health and health disparities, she says.
Biden’s most obvious research interest has been in cancer science, particularly following the death of his 46-year-old son Beau in 2015 to brain cancer. As vice-president, Biden headed a government ‘cancer moonshot’ initiative that kicked off in 2016, the last year of Obama’s presidency. It aimed to speed up the rate of progress against the disease by coordinating with companies and researchers to share data and results. The initiative later morphed into a non-profit group, which Biden suspended last year after deciding to run for president.
“Biden will want to make sure that any momentum from that effort that began in 2016 has not waned," says Jon Retzlaff, vice-president for science policy and government affairs at the American Association for Cancer Research. He also notes that Harris’s mother, Shyamala Gopalan, a major influence on the vice-presidential candidate, was a leading breast-cancer researcher who died of cancer. The combination of Biden's and Harris's personal histories with the disease would probably mean that cancer and medical research will be a priority of the administration, he says.
But beyond medical research, Biden’s broad science priorities remain a bit of a mystery. Despite having nearly five decades in public service, when it comes to research policy, “Biden fundamentally is a blank page,” says Lubell. “He’s certainly not anti-science; it’s just not a priority.”
Space exploration
Under Trump, NASA has pursued an ambitious strategy — named Artemis, after Apollo’s twin sister—to put US astronauts on the Moon four years from now. Space exploration is one of the few areas where the Trump administration has put in significant effort to develop science policy.How Biden, if elected, might alter the course set out by Trump is another unknown. As vice-president, Biden was not deeply involved in space-policy issues—unlike Pence, who has actively worked on Trump’s space initiatives.
He did, however, express enthusiasm for space in May, when NASA sent two astronauts to the International Space Station on a privately built spacecraft for the first time. In response, Biden posted his congratulations on the website Medium—and noted that he was vice-president when this ‘commercial crew’ programme began in 2009.
NASA might not dramatically change its course under a President Biden, experts say. The Democrats’ official platform says the party is “committed to continuing space exploration and discovery”, including “NASA’s work to return Americans to the Moon and go beyond to Mars”.
But a Biden administration would have to decide what to do with NASA’s human space-flight programme, which has been through whiplash-inducing changes in recent years. In 2010, Obama cancelled earlier plans to send astronauts to the Moon and told NASA to fly them to an asteroid. Trump, in turn, redirected NASA to focus on landing humans on the Moon by the end of 2024—a highly ambitious deadline, widely assumed to fall at the end of a hypothetical second presidential term for Trump. If Biden were to become president, “I would expect that the 2024 date would disappear,” says John Logsdon, former head of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University in Washington DC.
Beyond NASA, another question regards the fate of the National Space Council, which had been dormant since 1993 until Trump re-established it in 2017. The space council brings together representatives from various national agencies, including the military and NASA, to coordinate space policy across the government. In the past few years, it has worked to streamline regulations on the commercial use of space, to set national policy on space-traffic management and to establish a ‘space force’ as a new branch of the US military, charged with protecting the nation’s interests in space. “I think the council has proven its worth,” says Logsdon.
The National Space Council is headed by the vice-president, so Harris would take over from Pence if Biden is elected. Harris has not worked much on space issues, but Logsdon notes that in Congress she represents California, which is home to many large aerospace companies and several NASA centres. That might position her to work on issues involving the commercialization of space exploration.
International research collaborations
Scientists widely feel that Trump’s isolationist stance has eroded the position of the United States as a global leader in major scientific collaborations and dimmed its allure as a destination for foreign students and researchers. Biden’s foreign-policy and immigration plans could mend some frayed ties, but science-policy experts warn that the road to recovery will be longer than a single four-year presidential term.
Well before the 2016 election, Trump’s nationalist campaign rhetoric, with vivid promises to build a wall along the US–Mexico border, spooked foreign scientists. And weeks after his presidential inauguration, a ‘travel ban’ executive order targeted at seven Muslim-majority countries stranded international students at airports, sparked protests and sent shock waves through the US research community. “When you don't have certainty over what the future immigration laws of the host country are going to be, you're going to think twice before deciding to uproot yourself and move to another country to pursue your PhD,” says Ali Nouri, a molecular biologist and president of the Federation of American Scientists.
Biden has pledged to reverse the travel bans and to make it easier for foreign scientists and engineers who graduate with PhDs to permanently stay in the United States. He has also proposed to increase the number of visas available to highly skilled workers, including scientists. In contrast, the H-1B programme used by foreign workers, including scientists, has been a long-time Trump target. In June, Trump announced that there would be a pause in issuing new H-1B visas until the end of the year, contending that this would preserve US jobs for citizens in an economy endangered by the pandemic.
“What I would hope is that in the future, the United States would reverse some of these restrictions on talent flows,” says Kei Koizumi, a former White House Office of Science and Technology Policy adviser under the Obama administration, who is not currently advising Biden.
Citing the threat of foreign interference in US research, Trump’s administration has also upped scrutiny of scientists from China and of US scientists receiving foreign funding. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has sought to find, and in some cases arrest, researchers that it says were agents sent to steal scientific expertise and intellectual property on behalf of the Chinese government. In May, the United States took a new step: the issuance of rules to restrict researchers from universities associated with China’s military from entering the country.
Amid this crackdown, US scientists are concerned about racial profiling against Chinese scientists, and some scientists in China are wary of travelling to the United States for conferences or partnering on projects with US scientists. US funding agencies have denied that the increased scrutiny has caused collaborations to suffer and insist that the US government’s interest is in select cases of unethical or illegal behavior.
A President Biden would probably continue the focus on research and national security. He has pledged to out-compete China in developing crucial emerging technologies, and the United States’ effort to track China’s interference in its research laboratories began while he was still vice-president, during Obama’s second term. Regardless of the outcome in November, says Koizumi, this issue is set only to intensify, and it will be a challenge for either a Biden or a Trump administration to secure the country’s intellectual property while not alienating Chinese scientists. “You have to balance openness versus security.”
This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on October 1 2020.


scientificamerican--2020-10-02--Scientists Must Rise in Defense of Democracy

Democracy is currently under threat in the United States .
Some scientists have joined in efforts to counter this threat , but most of us have not .
We are understandably focused on our pressing professional and family responsibilities , particularly during the current COVID-19 pandemic .
But in this time of crisis for our nation we need to sound the alarm .
To do so—to express our concerns and recommend actions—a group of us posted a statement on September 18 for our colleagues to sign : As scientists committed to democratic principles , we observe troubling developments in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the undermining of democratic checks and balances ; threats to the electoral process ; subversion of the rule of law ; vilification of people of color , of other minorities , and of immigrants ; the fomenting of hate , division , misogyny , and violence ; attacks on the free press ; propagation of disinformation ; and sidelining of science as input to public policy .
We must counter these trends that are moving the nation away from its roots in democratic self-governance towards authoritarianism .
We face a national crisis unlike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at a time when there is a pressing need to employ science to address urgent national and international challenges , including COVID-19 , climate change , the danger from nuclear weapons , and racial and economic injustice .
Action is needed now to defend the democratic foundations of the United States .
Other nations have gone down the path away from democracy , leading to dark places .
We call on all people of conscience to consider and to act on these issues through the full exercise of their democratic and civil rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , supporting candidates , voting , and defending the integrity of the electoral process .
Initial signers included eight Nobel Prize winners ; more than 60 members of the U.S. National Academies ; former high-level government officials ; and university presidents .
A week later , more than 2,500 scientists had added their endorsements , from a broad spectrum of scientific disciplines , and the number is now approaching 4,000 , if it has n't already reached that milestone .
Scientists are trained to separate truth from fiction , signal from noise .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a hallmark of authoritarianism .
And we see clearly when scientific analysis is being neglected in setting policies that affect the welfare of the nation .
The presidents of the National Academies of Science and Medicine have released a statement that they are “ alarmed by political interference in science amid [ the ] pandemic.
” Others are also voicing concern , but more is needed .
We hope that our statement will stimulate other sectors of U.S. society to speak up similarly—the business community , the sports world , universities , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues identified in the above statement , such as racial and economic injustice , pre-date the current crisis .
What is now under attack is the very possibility of addressing these deep systemic problems through a participatory , cooperative , deliberative , democratic process .
The United States is at a turning point .
We are all familiar with many nations that have made the transition from democracy to authoritarianism .
All such transitions have led to a reduction in freedom and some to true horrors inflicted on minority groups and dissidents .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we never have to experience an authoritarian version of America .
As one step , we urge our scientific colleagues to sign on to the above statement at https : //secure.everyaction.com/onlineactions/wyqo2a6rB0aXTH1XB4icYQ2 We must use whatever channels are available to make our voices heard , including through our scientific societies , the media , nongovernmental organizations and political associations .
We must join together in this effort .
Note : We list our affiliations for the purpose of identification only ; the views expressed here are those of the authors , not of @ @ @

Democracy is currently under threat in the United States. Some scientists have joined in efforts to counter this threat, but most of us have not. We are understandably focused on our pressing professional and family responsibilities, particularly during the current COVID-19 pandemic. But in this time of crisis for our nation we need to sound the alarm. To do so—to express our concerns and recommend actions—a group of us posted a statement on September 18 for our colleagues to sign:
As scientists committed to democratic principles, we observe troubling developments in the public affairs of the United States: the undermining of democratic checks and balances; threats to the electoral process; subversion of the rule of law; vilification of people of color, of other minorities, and of immigrants; the fomenting of hate, division, misogyny, and violence; attacks on the free press; propagation of disinformation; and sidelining of science as input to public policy. We must counter these trends that are moving the nation away from its roots in democratic self-governance towards authoritarianism.
We face a national crisis unlike any we have witnessed. It comes at a time when there is a pressing need to employ science to address urgent national and international challenges, including COVID-19, climate change, the danger from nuclear weapons, and racial and economic injustice.
Action is needed now to defend the democratic foundations of the United States. Other nations have gone down the path away from democracy, leading to dark places. We call on all people of conscience to consider and to act on these issues through the full exercise of their democratic and civil rights, including participating in the national debate, supporting candidates, voting, and defending the integrity of the electoral process.
Initial signers included eight Nobel Prize winners; more than 60 members of the U.S. National Academies; former high-level government officials; and university presidents. A week later, more than 2,500 scientists had added their endorsements, from a broad spectrum of scientific disciplines, and the number is now approaching 4,000, if it hasn't already reached that milestone.
Scientists are trained to separate truth from fiction, signal from noise. We can spot scientific disinformation, which is a hallmark of authoritarianism. And we see clearly when scientific analysis is being neglected in setting policies that affect the welfare of the nation. The presidents of the National Academies of Science and Medicine have released a statement that they are “alarmed by political interference in science amid [the] pandemic.” Others are also voicing concern, but more is needed. We hope that our statement will stimulate other sectors of U.S. society to speak up similarly—the business community, the sports world, universities, and more.
Some of the grave issues identified in the above statement, such as racial and economic injustice, pre-date the current crisis. What is now under attack is the very possibility of addressing these deep systemic problems through a participatory, cooperative, deliberative, democratic process.
The United States is at a turning point. We are all familiar with many nations that have made the transition from democracy to authoritarianism. All such transitions have led to a reduction in freedom and some to true horrors inflicted on minority groups and dissidents. Now is the moment to act so that we never have to experience an authoritarian version of America.
As one step, we urge our scientific colleagues to sign on to the above statement at https://secure.everyaction.com/onlineactions/wyqo2a6rB0aXTH1XB4icYQ2
We must use whatever channels are available to make our voices heard, including through our scientific societies, the media, nongovernmental organizations and political associations. We must join together in this effort.
Note: We list our affiliations for the purpose of identification only; the views expressed here are those of the authors, not of their institutions.


scientificamerican--2020-10-02--The Moss That Lives under a Rock

The Moss That Lives under a Rock

With the way this year is going , the idea of living under a rock has become—possibly for the first time in our lives—alluring .
But it turns out there ’ s a plant that beat us to it .
That plant is moss .
Yes , moss .
The fuzzy green stuff famed for its love of waterfalls , rainforests , glades filled with frolicking elves , and assorted other moist locales .
It turns out they have some hardscrabble kin that live in the desert .
Because moss has a superpower : it can survive desiccation .
Those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , big leaves and pretty flowers have a little problem when they don ’ t get watered enough , a problem with which any houseplant owner is familiar : they die .
Not so moss .
Dehydrated mosses can linger indefinitely , but once moistened , they reanimate so speedily that it ’ s as if nothing happened .
This power is called poikilohydry , and it is possessed by only a few other relatively large creatures , like the infamously hard-to-kill tardigrade , or water bear ( not coincidentally also called moss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the same habitat with the same drought-survival needs ) .
So , moss and desert are not actually the terrible match you might suspect .
In fact , moss is one of the most common plants in the driest desert in North America .
That would be the Mojave Desert , the home of Death Valley .
It gets a few inches of rain per year .
One of the dominant components of the complex communities called the BSC ( biological soil crusts , which visitors are exhorted not to bust ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Syntrichia .
This plant can also live independently of BSC .
In the Sheep Creek Wash at the western edge of the Mojave near Wrightwood , Calif. , the desiccated but still very much alive bodies of Syntrichia caninervis litter the ground , along with another species called Tortula inermis .
And if you pick up a rock , you might find them living under there too .
Desert mosses are nothing if not resourceful when it comes to homestead selection .
There are those that choose to live in the shade of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on dapples of light .
Others capitalize on the sides of boulders—but only the north sides .
And there are plenty who live right out in the baking sun , and somehow make it work .
If life gives you desert , make dessert .
There are other ways desert mosses make the best of their environment .
Many have translucent leaf tip cells that may help shield the plant by reflecting light .
Others possess natural sunscreens like carotenoids , anthocyanins and flavonoids .
Or you can , you know , just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any rock will do , though .
Only milky quartzes work .
Such rocks range from about one to four centimeters thick and permit just 1 to 4 percent of the sunlight that hits them to reach their bottom .
For anything underneath , it 's like living in a cave—or a very , very dim greenhouse .
A recent study in PLOS ONE by Jenna Ekwealor and Kirsten Fisher , scientists at the University of California , Berkeley , and California State University , respectively , attempted to chronicle exactly what the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mojave Desert and determine what effect these have on the mosses that live under there .
They discovered that the benefits of living under a rock in the Mojave include a home that is cooler by day and in summer and warmer by night and in winter .
Temperature swings in either direction are buffered .
Because quartz warms in the sun and retains that heat longer than air , it may also prevent sheltering mosses from freezing when air temperatures suggest they otherwise would .
It ’ s also often moister .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ quartz rocks was still damp two weeks after a May rainfall .
Exposed mosses may be dry within three hours of rain , though one to four days is more common .
In short , life under quartz is more temperate .
It ’ s wetter .
It ’ s cushier .
it ’ s practically the Florida of the Mojave Desert under there , except with fewer pythons and better-run elections .
Although sublithic light intensity is a shadow of its usual self , thanks to these conditions , mosses there may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ portion of the year than exposed mosses .
In an additional pro over actual Florida , quartz also filters out nearly all ultraviolet light , making sunscreen unnecessary .
Indeed , covered Syntrichia lacks the dark brown or black color of its sunbathing compatriots , reverting to a more standard mossy green .
Finally , there ’ s the advantage that you ’ ve staked out some real estate that pretty much no one—aside perhaps from some easily trounced cyanobacteria—is going to fight you for .
The Mojave isn ’ t even the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Such inhabitants have been found so many times there is even a formal name for them : hypoliths .
As in , things that live under rocks .
Scientists have reported a moss growing under a translucent rock in Death Valley and yet another moss species growing under quartz pebbles on the Kansas prairie .
( There are even some humans that may qualify : the inhabitants of Coober Pedy , Australia , an opal-mining town so sun-blasted that many live in underground homes called “ dugouts.
” ) One implication of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seem trivial to us are not trivial to a large portion of this planet ’ s inhabitants .
A mountain range has well-known and well-studied effects on the life around it .
Ekwealor and Fisher argue that on the scale of a moss , a quartz chunk is no less significant .
A second not unreasonable conclusion may be that we should open our minds when we contemplate “ Places One Might Expect to Find Things Living ” both on this planet and others .
Under rocks is not generally a place you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mosses teach us that it is wise to leave no stone unturned .

With the way this year is going, the idea of living under a rock has become—possibly for the first time in our lives—alluring. But it turns out there’s a plant that beat us to it.
That plant is moss. Yes, moss. The fuzzy green stuff famed for its love of waterfalls, rainforests, glades filled with frolicking elves, and assorted other moist locales.
It turns out they have some hardscrabble kin that live in the desert. Because moss has a superpower: it can survive desiccation. Those big seed plants with their stout trunks, big leaves and pretty flowers have a little problem when they don’t get watered enough, a problem with which any houseplant owner is familiar: they die.
Not so moss. Dehydrated mosses can linger indefinitely, but once moistened, they reanimate so speedily that it’s as if nothing happened. This power is called poikilohydry, and it is possessed by only a few other relatively large creatures, like the infamously hard-to-kill tardigrade, or water bear (not coincidentally also called moss piglet for its fondness for hanging out in the same habitat with the same drought-survival needs).
So, moss and desert are not actually the terrible match you might suspect. In fact, moss is one of the most common plants in the driest desert in North America.
That would be the Mojave Desert, the home of Death Valley. It gets a few inches of rain per year. One of the dominant components of the complex communities called the BSC (biological soil crusts, which visitors are exhorted not to bust) in the Mojave is a moss called Syntrichia. This plant can also live independently of BSC.
In the Sheep Creek Wash at the western edge of the Mojave near Wrightwood, Calif., the desiccated but still very much alive bodies of Syntrichia caninervis litter the ground, along with another species called Tortula inermis. And if you pick up a rock, you might find them living under there too.
Desert mosses are nothing if not resourceful when it comes to homestead selection. There are those that choose to live in the shade of shrubs where they manage to get by on dapples of light. Others capitalize on the sides of boulders—but only the north sides. And there are plenty who live right out in the baking sun, and somehow make it work. If life gives you desert, make dessert.
There are other ways desert mosses make the best of their environment. Many have translucent leaf tip cells that may help shield the plant by reflecting light. Others possess natural sunscreens like carotenoids, anthocyanins and flavonoids.
Or you can, you know, just live under a rock.
Not just any rock will do, though. Only milky quartzes work. Such rocks range from about one to four centimeters thick and permit just 1 to 4 percent of the sunlight that hits them to reach their bottom. For anything underneath, it's like living in a cave—or a very, very dim greenhouse.
A recent study in PLOS ONE by Jenna Ekwealor and Kirsten Fisher, scientists at the University of California, Berkeley, and California State University, respectively, attempted to chronicle exactly what the conditions are under quartz rocks in the Mojave Desert and determine what effect these have on the mosses that live under there.
They discovered that the benefits of living under a rock in the Mojave include a home that is cooler by day and in summer and warmer by night and in winter. Temperature swings in either direction are buffered.
Because quartz warms in the sun and retains that heat longer than air, it may also prevent sheltering mosses from freezing when air temperatures suggest they otherwise would.
It’s also often moister. The scientists found that the basement of quartz rocks was still damp two weeks after a May rainfall. Exposed mosses may be dry within three hours of rain, though one to four days is more common.
In short, life under quartz is more temperate. It’s wetter. It’s cushier. It’s practically the Florida of the Mojave Desert under there, except with fewer pythons and better-run elections. Although sublithic light intensity is a shadow of its usual self, thanks to these conditions, mosses there may be able to grow for a longer portion of the year than exposed mosses.
In an additional pro over actual Florida, quartz also filters out nearly all ultraviolet light, making sunscreen unnecessary. Indeed, covered Syntrichia lacks the dark brown or black color of its sunbathing compatriots, reverting to a more standard mossy green.
Finally, there’s the advantage that you’ve staked out some real estate that pretty much no one—aside perhaps from some easily trounced cyanobacteria—is going to fight you for.
The Mojave isn’t even the only place this is a thing. Such inhabitants have been found so many times there is even a formal name for them: hypoliths. As in, things that live under rocks.
Scientists have reported a moss growing under a translucent rock in Death Valley and yet another moss species growing under quartz pebbles on the Kansas prairie. (There are even some humans that may qualify: the inhabitants of Coober Pedy, Australia, an opal-mining town so sun-blasted that many live in underground homes called “dugouts.”)
One implication of this research is that landscape features that may seem trivial to us are not trivial to a large portion of this planet’s inhabitants. A mountain range has well-known and well-studied effects on the life around it. Ekwealor and Fisher argue that on the scale of a moss, a quartz chunk is no less significant.
A second not unreasonable conclusion may be that we should open our minds when we contemplate “Places One Might Expect to Find Things Living” both on this planet and others. Under rocks is not generally a place you look for beings that require light. Mosses teach us that it is wise to leave no stone unturned.


scientificamerican--2020-10-03--Readers Respond to the June 2020 Issue

Readers Respond to the June 2020 Issue

“ What Should Carbon Cost ?
” by Gilbert E. Metcalf , is unsuccessful in answering the question of how @ @ @ @ @ carbon tax rate .
The uncertainties are too great .
And probable impacts of climate @ @ @ @ @ of usual economic analyses .
The use of integrated assessment models ( IAMs ) to @ @ @ @ @ employing Newtonian physics to analyze phenomena far outside its range of applicability .

CALCULATING CATASTROPHE
“What Should Carbon Cost?” by Gilbert E. Metcalf, is unsuccessful in answering the question of how to calculate the most appropriate carbon tax rate. The uncertainties are too great. And probable impacts of climate change are beyond the scale of usual economic analyses. The use of integrated assessment models (IAMs) to calculate climate damage is like employing Newtonian physics to analyze phenomena far outside its range of applicability.
Metcalf states that “the richer future generations are compared to us, the less we should feel compelled to incur costs now to make them better off. That leans toward a high discount rate.” But it is quite possible that future generations will be poorer than us as a result of the climate change that is already baked into current atmospheric carbon dioxide—and because perpetual economic growth is not sustainable. If so, ethical and economic considerations suggest a negative discount rate.
Further, Metcalf mentions “low-probability, high-damage” catastrophes such as runaway heating caused by thawing permafrost. There is much uncertainty about such events. But “uncertainty” is different from “low probability.” Their probability may be high with the surprising six-degree-Celsius increase in economist William D. Nordhaus's cited analysis—three times the limit recommended by climate scientists.
DICK WALTON Billings, Mont.
METCALF REPLIES: Economist Frank Ramsey's rule states that the richer future generations are, the higher the discount rate. Walton is correct that the poorer they are, the lower that rate should be. But 2,000 years of history suggest our best estimate is of rising economic well-being going forward. As for permafrost melting, the probability may be high if we fail to reduce emissions, but the ultimate damages after accounting for unforeseen feedbacks still involve considerable uncertainty. The larger point, however, is that the possibility of catastrophes complicates measuring the social cost of carbon.
DEATH ON THE BRAIN
In “Tales of the Dying Brain,” Christof Koch describes near-death and out-of-body experiences in humans. He does not mention nonhuman animals, however.
Many animal species, vertebrate and invertebrate, exhibit a temporary deathlike state called thanatosis, or tonic immobility, when confronted or physically touched by predators. Physically, vertebrates exhibit reduced respiratory rate, bradycardia and hypotension. Recovery takes at least minutes after the threat is removed.
Does tonic immobility relate to human near-death experiences?
BERND ESCHE via e-mail
Koch's article reminded me of a comment by a Baptist minister who had attended many bedside deaths. He related the story of one individual who, on his deathbed, saw glimpses of heaven and called out, “They are all there,” naming deceased members of his family. When the minister was asked about this near-death experience, his response surprised and pleased me. He said he believed that such an experience of heaven was whatever the dying person believed heaven would be.
JEAN HOWARD via e-mail
KOCH REPLIES: In response to Esche: the possibility of animals having near-death experiences (albeit shorn of their cultural context) during thanatosis is fascinating. Death feigning may indeed trigger such a state. The methodological challenge would be to train animals to subsequently report something about their internal condition—say, by pressing levers or some other simple motor behavior—in a way accessible to an external, trained observer.
Howard reports a wise comment by a Baptist minister. To me, this astute observation—that people from different faiths and cultures experience their own idiosyncratic heaven and hell—argues against the hypothesis that near-death experiences reveal a single, universal truth about the hereafter. Instead everyone seems to be granted a very different vision of an afterlife that is formed by their own expectations and upbringing.
UNHEEDED WARNING
Ben Santer does a very good overview of our nation's current president in “Failure to Lead” [Forum]. He does leave out one very important occurrence, however: Donald Trump's trade adviser circulated a memo, dated January 29, 2020, that warned the West Wing that the coronavirus was coming and would be a pandemic. Of course, history is rife with moments in which disasters would have been lessened or stopped if leaders had listened to their subordinates.
RALPH KUNDTZ, Jr. Akron, Ohio
COVID-19 ANTIBODIES
In “The Vaccine Quest,” Charles Schmidt describes the new DNA and RNA techniques being pursued for a speedy vaccine for the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. The article left me with a nagging question about possible side effects: With these methods, once your cells make virus antigens, do they not display them on their surface—akin to waving a red cape at a bull? Could a vaccine thus cause your antibodies to savage your own cells?
I cannot help but think of the 1966 sci-fi movie Fantastic Voyage, in which a group is shrunk and placed into a scientist's body. In the film, a miniaturized Raquel Welch injures some of the scientist's cells, causing multiple antibodies to attack her.
ROBERT A. LEE Brewster, N.Y.
SCHMIDT REPLIES: The answer to Lee's perceptive question is that the number of human cells expressing SARS-CoV-2's spike protein is very small, and their location is limited to sites close to where a given vaccine is administered. Those cells could potentially be killed by the immune reaction to the spike protein. But they are so few in number that there would be no adverse effects if they were eliminated.
PLANE ERROR
“Landing on the Right Foot,” by Leslie Nemo [Advances], discusses problems caused by two different types of “feet” used in measurements: the international foot and the U.S. survey foot. It cites an engineer's account of a building that was constructed near a landing strip and had to lose its top floor at the last minute to avoid obscuring planes' glide path because of that discrepancy.
But the article says the ratio between the two types is only 0.999998. With that calculation, the difference would only come to a small fraction of an inch for a mile-high building.
ALBERT D. MASON via e-mail
THE EDITORS REPLY: A handful of letters requested more information about how such a small difference in the length of the foot could lead to a building needing to be a floor shorter. A structure's location is designated in coordinates, which are typically rendered in meters and then converted to feet—and these values can be in the millions. At such high numbers, the otherwise minuscule differences between U.S. survey and international feet add up. In this case, surveyors and designers from different companies used different versions of the foot, resulting in the building being built two feet farther south than intended. This result meant the top of the building intersected with planes' east-west flight paths to a nearby airport. Had everything gone to plan, the flight path would have sat just south of the building.


scientificamerican--2020-10-03--A Brief History of Presidents Disclosing--Or Trying to Hide--Health Problems

President Donald Trump went directly to the public and announced via Twitter early on Oct. 2 that “ Tonight , @ FLOTUS and I tested positive for COVID-19 .
We will begin our quarantine and recovery process immediately .
We will get through this TOGETHER !
” The president ’ s straightforward announcement was unlike many presidents in the past .
My research has focused on how politicians dodge questions .
I have co-authored an entry in the Encyclopedia of Deception with scholar Michael J. Beatty about how rampant deception is when it comes to presidential health .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of political deception perpetuated against journalists and the public .
And in a presidential campaign , public opinion polls have suggested that voters want to know details about the candidates ’ health .
I will be watching with interest how the White House , the Trump campaign and the news media handle the president ’ s COVID-19 .
Here ’ s a roundup of how other U.S. leaders and their administrations have handled information about presidential health problems .
At a press briefing in 1893 , President Grover Cleveland ’ s secretary of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the president having surgery were wrong .
The nation was in a recession , and Cleveland feared that his economic plan would be doomed if the public knew that his doctor thought he could have cancer .
Cleveland had surgery secretly on a yacht , the tumor was removed , but the nation continued spiraling into an economic depression .
During President William McKinley ’ s second term in office , which began in 1901 , his health plummeted .
He had eye trouble .
He was bedridden with the flu .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Yet his spokesman tamped down media speculation , telling journalists that reports of the president being ill were “ foolish stories.
” When Woodrow Wilson became gravely ill from syphilis , his spokesman issued press statements that the president was recovering from fatigue .
For the entirety of his service to Franklin Delano Roosevelt , Press Secretary Stephen Early tried to hide the president ’ s paralysis caused by polio by having the press snap photos of the president in ways that hid his wheelchair .
Even after FDR died , Early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was given a thorough examination by seven or eight physicians ” and “ he was pronounced organically sound in every way.
” Dwight Eisenhower was hospitalized with a heart attack , but his press operation initially told reporters he had an upset stomach .
There is even precedent for presidential staffers lying about their own health .
William Howard Taft ’ s press spokesman , Archie Butt , was sickened from stress and fatigue .
He flew to Rome to escape and get rested .
Rather than admit that he was exhausted – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working in such a high-stress position – he told the press corps that his trip was to meet with the pope .
Sometimes presidents lie about medical conditions to distract from other , non-health issues .
When John F. Kennedy was holding secret meetings dealing with the Soviet Union and the Cuban Missile Crisis , Press Secretary Pierre Salinger told reporters that the president ’ s schedule changes and lack of public appearances were due to a cold .
He even released the president ’ s symptoms and temperature .
Perhaps proving that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Salinger used the same cold excuse to explain Vice President Lyndon Johnson ’ s impromptu flight from Hawaii to the White House at the same time .
The Washington Post ’ s editor suspected the colds were awfully coincidental , but Salinger refused to comment .
As the political public relations adage goes : The cover-up is worse than the crime .
In 2016 , both U.S. presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were caught deceiving the public about their health .
Each candidate accused the other of lying about medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to whether Trump gave a subpar performance in the debate because of his health , although presumably he and his wife and staff were tested for COVID-19 prior to the debate .
Nonetheless , it is worth noting that in the most famous televised debate in U.S. history , the Sept. 26 , 1960 , Kennedy vs. Richard Nixon showdown – after which many voters said they decided to vote for Kennedy – Nixon was ill and unrested .
Nixon had been in the hospital a couple of weeks earlier and looked a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pounds .
Nixon had been campaigning intensely and did not prepare for the debate .
He held a campaign event that morning with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners , and never met with his staff and didn ’ t even take their calls .
Meanwhile , Kennedy had been fiercely preparing with his advisers at the Knickerbocker Hotel in Chicago .
Similarly , Trump had held several public events prior to the debate and did not spend time preparing in private for it , as Biden did .
After an initial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be seen whether Trump will continue in that vein or adopt the more traditional practices of presidents who were less than open about their health .
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

President Donald Trump went directly to the public and announced via Twitter early on Oct. 2 that “Tonight, @FLOTUS and I tested positive for COVID-19. We will begin our quarantine and recovery process immediately. We will get through this TOGETHER!”
The president’s straightforward announcement was unlike many presidents in the past. My research has focused on how politicians dodge questions. I have co-authored an entry in the Encyclopedia of Deception with scholar Michael J. Beatty about how rampant deception is when it comes to presidential health.
It’s one of the most common types of political deception perpetuated against journalists and the public.
And in a presidential campaign, public opinion polls have suggested that voters want to know details about the candidates’ health.
I will be watching with interest how the White House, the Trump campaign and the news media handle the president’s COVID-19. Here’s a roundup of how other U.S. leaders and their administrations have handled information about presidential health problems.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 2, 2020
Lie early and often
At a press briefing in 1893, President Grover Cleveland’s secretary of war told inquiring journalists that their speculations about the president having surgery were wrong.
The nation was in a recession, and Cleveland feared that his economic plan would be doomed if the public knew that his doctor thought he could have cancer. Cleveland had surgery secretly on a yacht, the tumor was removed, but the nation continued spiraling into an economic depression.
During President William McKinley’s second term in office, which began in 1901, his health plummeted. He had eye trouble. He was bedridden with the flu. And he was near death from pneumonia. Yet his spokesman tamped down media speculation, telling journalists that reports of the president being ill were “foolish stories.”
When Woodrow Wilson became gravely ill from syphilis, his spokesman issued press statements that the president was recovering from fatigue.
For the entirety of his service to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Press Secretary Stephen Early tried to hide the president’s paralysis caused by polio by having the press snap photos of the president in ways that hid his wheelchair. Even after FDR died, Early released a statement that “the president was given a thorough examination by seven or eight physicians” and “he was pronounced organically sound in every way.”
Dwight Eisenhower was hospitalized with a heart attack, but his press operation initially told reporters he had an upset stomach.
There is even precedent for presidential staffers lying about their own health.
William Howard Taft’s press spokesman, Archie Butt, was sickened from stress and fatigue. He flew to Rome to escape and get rested. Rather than admit that he was exhausted – which would seem reasonable for a person working in such a high-stress position – he told the press corps that his trip was to meet with the pope.
Sometimes presidents lie about medical conditions to distract from other, non-health issues. When John F. Kennedy was holding secret meetings dealing with the Soviet Union and the Cuban Missile Crisis, Press Secretary Pierre Salinger told reporters that the president’s schedule changes and lack of public appearances were due to a cold. He even released the president’s symptoms and temperature.
Perhaps proving that he wasn’t talented at deception, Salinger used the same cold excuse to explain Vice President Lyndon Johnson’s impromptu flight from Hawaii to the White House at the same time. The Washington Post’s editor suspected the colds were awfully coincidental, but Salinger refused to comment.
As the political public relations adage goes: The cover-up is worse than the crime.
Trump, Nixon and candidate debates
In 2016, both U.S. presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were caught deceiving the public about their health. Each candidate accused the other of lying about medical conditions.
Questions may now arise as to whether Trump gave a subpar performance in the debate because of his health, although presumably he and his wife and staff were tested for COVID-19 prior to the debate.
Nonetheless, it is worth noting that in the most famous televised debate in U.S. history, the Sept. 26, 1960, Kennedy vs. Richard Nixon showdown – after which many voters said they decided to vote for Kennedy – Nixon was ill and unrested. Nixon had been in the hospital a couple of weeks earlier and looked a little gaunt from having recently lost five pounds.
Nixon had been campaigning intensely and did not prepare for the debate. He held a campaign event that morning with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners, and never met with his staff and didn’t even take their calls. Meanwhile, Kennedy had been fiercely preparing with his advisers at the Knickerbocker Hotel in Chicago.
Similarly, Trump had held several public events prior to the debate and did not spend time preparing in private for it, as Biden did.
After an initial announcement with remarkable transparency, it remains to be seen whether Trump will continue in that vein or adopt the more traditional practices of presidents who were less than open about their health.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.