scientificamerican--2020-10-15--Why a Historic Emissions Drop from COVID Is No Cause to Celebrate

In 1945 , as World War II came to a close , scientists logged a record drop in carbon dioxide emissions .
They reckoned that global CO emissions fell by some 790 million metric tons—a record that stood for more than 70 years .
Global emissions fell 1,550 million metric tons in the first half of 2020 , according to a study published yesterday in Nature Communications , obliterating the 1945 record and underlining the depths of the economic damage wrought by the coronavirus pandemic this year .
The study , conducted by a team of 43 scientists from across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the emissions impact of the pandemic ( Climatewire , May 20 ) .
It at once highlighted how much emissions have fallen as a result of the virus and the difficult road facing the world as it seeks to meet the targets of the Paris climate agreement .
The world essentially would need to replicate 2020 ’ s emission reductions every year for the next decade to have any chance of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius by century ’ s end , according to the United Nations ’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic has been in all our lives , it seems like a small number , ” said Steven Davis , a professor at the University of California , Irvine , who contributed to the study .
“ The task of decarbonizing our planet will not mean just changes in personal behavior but changes in the energy structure.
” In the immediate term , the study ’ s largest impact may be on emissions monitoring itself .
Researchers compiled a lengthy list of real-time energy and emissions statistics from countries around the world .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ major step forward for a field that has traditionally relied on previous years ’ data to develop emissions estimates .
“ The pandemic has really forced our hand to do better and find these data sources where they are , ” Davis said , noting that researchers plan to continue the emissions monitoring efforts .
“ What is critical is we need to shorten the feedback cycle from the policymaker putting some policy in place to the scientific community telling the policymaker whether that has had an effect on emissions.
” The data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of emission reductions as the pandemic rolled across the world .
The year began with deep reductions in emissions in China , where the shutdown of heavy industry and resulting drop in power demand led to big decreases in CO .
Emissions from the Chinese cement industry , about 22 % of the country ’ s industrial emissions , fell by a combined 30 % in January and February compared to 2019 levels .
But cement emissions began to surge as the Chinese economy jolted back to life .
By April , Chinese @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same month last year .
The rebound in Chinese economic activity , and cement in particular , helps explain the relatively modest 3.7 % reduction , or 187 million tons , in overall Chinese emissions over the first half of 2020 .
By the spring , the pandemic had the United States and Europe in its grasp .
There , the emissions reduction story was largely about transportation .
American transportation emissions , the largest source of CO emissions in the U.S. , were down 24 % over the first seven months @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 13.8 % compared to 2019 levels or by 338 million tons , the largest absolute drop in the world .
Still , the study suggests the pandemic has not altered the worldwide energy system in a fundamental way .
Emissions across the globe were rebounding quickly as large parts of the world began to shake off the virus over the summer .
The research team has continued to monitor emissions beyond the time period in the Nature Communications study .
By August , they showed that world emissions had fallen 1,481 million tons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggesting that some of the reductions from earlier in the year already have been offset .
Reprinted from Climatewire with permission from E & E News .
E & E provides daily coverage of essential energy and environmental news at www.eenews.net .

In 1945, as World War II came to a close, scientists logged a record drop in carbon dioxide emissions. They reckoned that global CO 2 emissions fell by some 790 million metric tons—a record that stood for more than 70 years.
Then 2020 rolled around.
Global emissions fell 1,550 million metric tons in the first half of 2020, according to a study published yesterday in Nature Communications, obliterating the 1945 record and underlining the depths of the economic damage wrought by the coronavirus pandemic this year.
The study, conducted by a team of 43 scientists from across the world, confirms earlier research on the emissions impact of the pandemic (Climatewire, May 20). It at once highlighted how much emissions have fallen as a result of the virus and the difficult road facing the world as it seeks to meet the targets of the Paris climate agreement.
The world essentially would need to replicate 2020’s emission reductions every year for the next decade to have any chance of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius by century’s end, according to the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
“Considering how disruptive the pandemic has been in all our lives, it seems like a small number,” said Steven Davis, a professor at the University of California, Irvine, who contributed to the study. “The task of decarbonizing our planet will not mean just changes in personal behavior but changes in the energy structure.”
In the immediate term, the study’s largest impact may be on emissions monitoring itself. Researchers compiled a lengthy list of real-time energy and emissions statistics from countries around the world.
The authors described the effort as a major step forward for a field that has traditionally relied on previous years’ data to develop emissions estimates.
“The pandemic has really forced our hand to do better and find these data sources where they are,” Davis said, noting that researchers plan to continue the emissions monitoring efforts. “What is critical is we need to shorten the feedback cycle from the policymaker putting some policy in place to the scientific community telling the policymaker whether that has had an effect on emissions.”
The data sources allowed researchers to pinpoint the locations of emission reductions as the pandemic rolled across the world. The year began with deep reductions in emissions in China, where the shutdown of heavy industry and resulting drop in power demand led to big decreases in CO 2 . Emissions from the Chinese cement industry, about 22% of the country’s industrial emissions, fell by a combined 30% in January and February compared to 2019 levels.
But cement emissions began to surge as the Chinese economy jolted back to life. By April, Chinese cement emissions were up 3.8% over the same month last year. The rebound in Chinese economic activity, and cement in particular, helps explain the relatively modest 3.7% reduction, or 187 million tons, in overall Chinese emissions over the first half of 2020.
By the spring, the pandemic had the United States and Europe in its grasp. There, the emissions reduction story was largely about transportation. American transportation emissions, the largest source of CO 2 emissions in the U.S., were down 24% over the first seven months of 2020. Overall U.S. emissions fell 13.8% compared to 2019 levels or by 338 million tons, the largest absolute drop in the world.
Still, the study suggests the pandemic has not altered the worldwide energy system in a fundamental way. Emissions across the globe were rebounding quickly as large parts of the world began to shake off the virus over the summer. The research team has continued to monitor emissions beyond the time period in the Nature Communications study. By August, they showed that world emissions had fallen 1,481 million tons since the start of the year, suggesting that some of the reductions from earlier in the year already have been offset.
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--2020-10-15--Luminous Zebra Fish Wins Contest for Microscopic Photography

The human eye is a limited organ .
The portion of the electromagnetic spectrum that we can see is about 0.0035 percent of the total light in the universe .
Without any aid , a normal human eye with 20/20 vision can clearly view up to only about five kilometers ( about three miles ) in the distance and can distinguish an object as small as about 0.1 millimeter .
Just as spyglasses and telescopes extended our range of sight across Earth and into the cosmos , light microscopes allow us to peer at scales hundreds of times smaller than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Such technology has bred innumerable discoveries in medicine , biology , geology and plant science .
For 46 years , camera company Nikon has run its Small World contest , which prizes excellence in photography at the tiniest scales—achieved with the aid of the light microscope .
Scientists make up a substantial proportion of contest entrants because their work naturally lends itself to stunning visualization .
Below is this year ’ s first-place winner and our editors ’ picks for the best images .
As entrant Jason Kirk of the Baylor College @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ unique opportunity to celebrate the convergence of art and science .
Images like the ones showcased here are a [ wonderful ] bridge between the scientific community and the general public.
” This year ’ s winning image of a juvenile zebra fish was captured as part of research by a team at the National Institutes of Health .
They discovered that zebra fish have lymphatic vessels inside their skull—a feature previously thought to only occur in mammals .
Such a discovery could expedite and revolutionize research related to neurological diseases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ researchers stitched together more than 350 individual images to create this single one .
Radula , or “ tongue , ” of a freshwater snail , stained and captured as a stack of images .
The realm of tiny animals is replete with bizarre and sometimes alien forms , says the image ’ s creator , Igor Siwanowicz of Howard Hughes Medical Institute , who obtained the snail from his lab mate ’ s aquarium .
“ It 's a snail 's tongue , looking like a decadent rococo chandelier , ” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Scale from the wing of a blue emperor butterfly ( Papilio ulysses ) .
Photographer Yousef Al Habshi , says the challenge in creating this image was finding the correct focal balance between the camera and the scales to capture the light , avoiding overexposure or underexposure .
Daphnia , a water microorganism .
To create this image , photographer Paweł Błachowicz used the reflected-light technique : light bounces off the subject and is captured by the camera .
This method is usually reserved for opaque objects , Błachowicz says , so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Daphnia is a transparent organism , and despite this , with the reflected-light technique , it looks astonishing , ” he adds .
Crystals formed after heating an ethanol-and-water solution containing L-glutamine and beta-alanine .
The proportions of both amino acids must be precisely balanced in order to form such striking crystal structures , says photographer Justin Zoll .
He used a polarized-light filter to capture this image , which won 13th place .
Lateral view of a leaf-roller weevil ( Byctiscus betulae ) .
The hard exoskeleton is highly reflective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ photographer Özgür Kerem Bulur , who had to balance the light properly in order to capture these rainbow colors .
This image won 14th place .
Head of a tapeworm ( Taenia pisiformis ) from the gut of a rabbit .
The angle of this photograph shows the “ teeth ” on the edge of the parasite ’ s head that help it embed itself in its host ’ s digestive tract .
“ I love the image 's geometrical beauty , its sculptural qualities and its ambiguity , ” says image creator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fossil or something embedded in sandstone ?
What is it ?
” Microtubules ( orange ) inside a bovine pulmonary artery endothelial cell .
The nucleus is shown in cyan .
In his work , Jason Kirk of the Baylor College of Medicine uses such cells to benchmark the performance of his microscopy equipment .
But the end result , which won seventh place , deserves acknowledgement for its artistic value .
Science in Images is a new category of articles featuring photographs and videos from all the disciplines of science .
Click @ @ @ @ @ @ @ full collection .

The human eye is a limited organ. The portion of the electromagnetic spectrum that we can see is about 0.0035 percent of the total light in the universe. Without any aid, a normal human eye with 20/20 vision can clearly view up to only about five kilometers (about three miles) in the distance and can distinguish an object as small as about 0.1 millimeter. Just as spyglasses and telescopes extended our range of sight across Earth and into the cosmos, light microscopes allow us to peer at scales hundreds of times smaller than we would otherwise be able to detect. Such technology has bred innumerable discoveries in medicine, biology, geology and plant science.
For 46 years, camera company Nikon has run its Small World contest, which prizes excellence in photography at the tiniest scales—achieved with the aid of the light microscope. Scientists make up a substantial proportion of contest entrants because their work naturally lends itself to stunning visualization. Below is this year’s first-place winner and our editors’ picks for the best images. As entrant Jason Kirk of the Baylor College of Medicine says, the contest is a “unique opportunity to celebrate the convergence of art and science. Images like the ones showcased here are a [wonderful] bridge between the scientific community and the general public.”
This year’s winning image of a juvenile zebra fish was captured as part of research by a team at the National Institutes of Health. They discovered that zebra fish have lymphatic vessels inside their skull—a feature previously thought to only occur in mammals. Such a discovery could expedite and revolutionize research related to neurological diseases such as Alzheimer’s. The researchers stitched together more than 350 individual images to create this single one.
Radula, or “tongue,” of a freshwater snail, stained and captured as a stack of images. The realm of tiny animals is replete with bizarre and sometimes alien forms, says the image’s creator, Igor Siwanowicz of Howard Hughes Medical Institute, who obtained the snail from his lab mate’s aquarium. “It's a snail's tongue, looking like a decadent rococo chandelier,” he adds. The image won third place.
Scale from the wing of a blue emperor butterfly (Papilio ulysses). Photographer Yousef Al Habshi, says the challenge in creating this image was finding the correct focal balance between the camera and the scales to capture the light, avoiding overexposure or underexposure.
Daphnia, a water microorganism. To create this image, photographer Paweł Błachowicz used the reflected-light technique: light bounces off the subject and is captured by the camera. This method is usually reserved for opaque objects, Błachowicz says, so he was surprised at this striking outcome. “Daphnia is a transparent organism, and despite this, with the reflected-light technique, it looks astonishing,” he adds.
Crystals formed after heating an ethanol-and-water solution containing L-glutamine and beta-alanine. The proportions of both amino acids must be precisely balanced in order to form such striking crystal structures, says photographer Justin Zoll. He used a polarized-light filter to capture this image, which won 13th place.
Lateral view of a leaf-roller weevil (Byctiscus betulae). The hard exoskeleton is highly reflective and therefore challenging to capture, says photographer Özgür Kerem Bulur, who had to balance the light properly in order to capture these rainbow colors. This image won 14th place.
Head of a tapeworm (Taenia pisiformis) from the gut of a rabbit. The angle of this photograph shows the “teeth” on the edge of the parasite’s head that help it embed itself in its host’s digestive tract. “I love the image's geometrical beauty, its sculptural qualities and its ambiguity,” says image creator David Maitland. “Is it a fossil or something embedded in sandstone? What is it?”
Credit: Jason Kirk Baylor College of Medicine
Microtubules (orange) inside a bovine pulmonary artery endothelial cell. The nucleus is shown in cyan. In his work, Jason Kirk of the Baylor College of Medicine uses such cells to benchmark the performance of his microscopy equipment. But the end result, which won seventh place, deserves acknowledgement for its artistic value.
Science in Images is a new category of articles featuring photographs and videos from all the disciplines of science. Click on the button below to see the full collection.
Science in Images


scientificamerican--2020-10-16--How Straight Talk Helped One State Control COVID

The state of Maine has the nation ’ s oldest population , with an average age of 45.1 versus 38.5 for the U.S. overall .
It is also among the country ’ s poorest .
Fewer than one third of residents hold a bachelor ’ s degree or higher .
Yet despite these risk factors , Maine has a remarkably low prevalence of COVID-19 : at last count , there have been 5,780 cases ( about 430 per 100,000 people ) , 463 hospitalizations and a mere 143 deaths .
The state ’ s COVID-19 test positivity rate—averaging roughly 0.5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In comparison , equally rural and far flung North Dakota , with roughly 60 percent of the population of Maine and an average age of 35.5 , has suffered 28,244 cases ( about 3,700 per 100,000 people ) , 357 deaths and a test positivity rate of roughly 8.1 percent .
The face of Maine ’ s successful policy is Nirav Shah , director of the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention .
Shah ’ s rock star status is reflected in his impressive Twitter following , a Facebook fan club and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state ’ s Route 196 that blinks “ In Shah We Trust.
” The fact that a self-described “ brown guy with a funny name from another state who has been here for 400 days could be viewed as a voice for science , ” Shah has tweeted , “ speaks more about the character of Maine people than anything else could.
” Clearly , that “ voice for science ” has had a powerful influence .
Cell-phone-tracking data indicate that Maine residents have sharply curtailed travel since March .
And surveys suggest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on mask wearing and social distancing , even in outdoor spaces such as hiking trails .
Trained in law and economics as well as medicine , Shah takes a broad view of public health that relies on equal parts science , persuasion and empathy .
His twice-weekly public radio briefings follow three principles : never shy away from the truth , answer questions directly , and acknowledge the statistics and numbers without overlooking the human element .
Our national approach , he says , does not adhere to those principles .
This month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ record numbers of COVID-19 cases .
As the days grew shorter , and the nation began to face what many fear will be a viral second wave , Shah spoke with Scientific American about how lessons learned in Maine might be applied to curb the disease across the country and the world .
[ An edited transcript of the interview follows . ]
What sets Maine apart in terms of limiting transmission ?
First , the people in this state believe in science .
We know from cell-phone-tracking data that when we asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When we asked them to wear masks , they did .
Not everyone , of course , but most .
They took heed of public health folks , took our advice to heart .
When I chat with my colleagues in other states—Ohio , Michigan—I hear things are entirely different .
Maine seemed to respond to initial reports of the virus far sooner than many other states , including Massachusetts and New York , both of which suffered from frightening outbreaks last spring .
Can you explain what tipped you off ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the SARS epidemic and also through part of the avian flu outbreak .
I was part of a large team there , and I learned a lot about the politics of epidemics and the resistance public health experts face .
I still have close contacts in Asia , and late last year I heard about a cluster of fevers in December .
And the chorus of warning voices grew between Christmas and New Year ’ s .
As soon as we all returned from the New Year ’ s break on January @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to prepare .
By February 8 , we had distributed PPE [ personal protective equipment ] to nursing homes , hospitals and first responders .
We had our contract tracing plan all mapped out .
This was weeks ahead of our first documented case of COVID-19 on March 12 .
How important are testing and contact tracing to your response ?
They ’ re essential .
Though we ’ ve had relatively few cases , we have 100 people tracing , and we have plans to hire more .
Since May , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , IDEXX , that has a very deep bench in reagents .
So unlike some states , we ’ ve had no problems getting reagents for tests .
Everyone in the state 12 months or older can get tested at no cost , no questions asked .
Do you think part of Maine ’ s success comes from its being relatively rural and remote ?
Not really .
Other rural states such as Idaho , the Dakotas , West Virginia have much higher rates .
That suggests that geography doesn ’ t have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you rely on to measure success ?
Our goal is not to eradicate the disease but to suppress the virus to put us in a favorable position for vaccination .
Our test positivity rate is consistently under 1 percent , and for weeks it [ remained ] under 0.6 percent .
That ’ s the lowest in the U.S. , and we think that puts us in a good position .
What went wrong with the federal government ’ s response to the virus ?
It ’ s unclear… .
We do know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nancy ] Messonnier , [ head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ’ s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases ] , warned Americans to prepare for a pandemic , she was threatened [ with firing by President Donald Trump in a call to the Secretary of Health and Human Services , according to reporting by the Wall Street Journal ] and the CDC started to take a back seat .
What would be your first step in changing the federal response ?
Stop candy coating .
The communication approach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Washington , D.C. , want the intended impact to be : it ’ s outcome driven , and that doesn ’ t work .
They have to stop shaping the message to conform with what they think people want to believe .
Can you a give concrete example of this distorted messaging ?
The rollout of [ the antiviral ] remdesivir , as though it were “ mission accomplished.
” We actually knew very little at that time about whether the drug worked in the treatment of COVID-19 .
This happened with other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ press briefings on public radio , as well as daily interviews on Maine AM radio .
What do you hope to accomplish with these frequent interactions with the press and public ?
All too often , government is on the defensive , and our first inclination is to say , ‘ Here ’ s what [ the government has ] done ; here ’ s what we need to do.
’ But in a high-anxiety , low-trust situation like this , you have to empower people to act .
Every five or six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we are and come up with a couple of key asks of the people in Maine .
For example , this week , I asked them to commit to get a flu shot .
It ’ s a concrete call to action , something everyone can do for themselves and their family .
And it builds confidence and trust .
The president has claimed that he did not inform the public early about COVID-19 ’ s seriousness in order to avoid causing panic .
Could too much truth telling engender such a reaction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says often has a grain of truth : of course panic is never good .
My goal is not to cripple people with fear , but nor is it to give them a false sense of security .
I try to encourage them to go forth into activities with knowledge of the risks and with proper precautions .
If they feel they must go attend a crowded Sunday morning revival meeting where the risk level is very high , I recommend they wear a mask .
If they choose to go out for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do so , knowing that the risk is very low .
Do you think a full economic shutdown is necessary to control COVID-19 ’ s spread ?
Last March and April we knew very little about this disease , and that led to a shelter-in-place mentality .
We needed to be there then , but we ’ re not there now .
We know that most folks with this disease will [ eventually ] fare well .
We still need precautions , of course , but we also need to offer context .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health , but when I see people driving alone in their cars wearing a mask , well , there ’ s no need for it .
So what do you propose we do to turn the epidemic around on a national level ?
We need a much stronger federal voice advising us .
First , I ’ d return the daily CDC press briefing .
I ’ d start every briefing with the hard facts and follow it with a call to action—lay out specifics on what citizens can to do help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d bring back the many experts who resigned from the CDC—we need them—and also strengthen the agency ’ s presence in Washington , D.C. , which is where it all happens .
And I ’ d encourage the CDC and other government agencies to present a grand unified theory of COVID-19—that is , to clearly lay out goals , metrics and strategies for the American people .
Because in public health , our first and most important job is to get the people behind us .
Read more about the coronavirus outbreak from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from our international network of magazines here .

The state of Maine has the nation’s oldest population, with an average age of 45.1 versus 38.5 for the U.S. overall. It is also among the country’s poorest. Fewer than one third of residents hold a bachelor’s degree or higher. Yet despite these risk factors, Maine has a remarkably low prevalence of COVID-19: at last count, there have been 5,780 cases (about 430 per 100,000 people), 463 hospitalizations and 143 deaths. The state’s COVID-19 test positivity rate—averaging roughly 0.5 percent—is the lowest in the nation. In comparison, equally rural and far flung North Dakota, with roughly 60 percent of the population of Maine and an average age of 35.5, has suffered 28,244 cases (about 3,700 per 100,000 people), 357 deaths and a test positivity rate of roughly 8.1 percent.
The face of Maine’s successful policy is Nirav Shah, director of the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Shah’s rock star status is reflected in his impressive Twitter following, a Facebook fan club and even an electronic road sign on the state’s Route 196 that blinks “In Shah We Trust.” The fact that a self-described “brown guy with a funny name from another state who has been here for 400 days could be viewed as a voice for science,” Shah has tweeted, “speaks more about the character of Maine people than anything else could.” Clearly, that “voice for science” has had a powerful influence. Cell-phone-tracking data indicate that Maine residents have sharply curtailed travel since March. And surveys suggest a general adherence to public health advice on mask wearing and social distancing, even in outdoor spaces such as hiking trails.
Trained in law and economics as well as medicine, Shah takes a broad view of public health that relies on equal parts science, persuasion and empathy. His twice-weekly public radio briefings follow three principles: never shy away from the truth, answer questions directly, and acknowledge the statistics and numbers without overlooking the human element. Our national approach, he says, does not adhere to those principles.
This month 23 states—from Alaska to New Mexico—have reported record numbers of COVID-19 cases. As the days grew shorter, and the nation began to face what many fear will be a viral second wave, Shah spoke with Scientific American about how lessons learned in Maine might be applied to curb the disease across the country and the world.
[An edited transcript of the interview follows.]
What sets Maine apart in terms of limiting transmission?
First, the people in this state believe in science. We know from cell-phone-tracking data that when we asked them to stay home, they did. When we asked them to wear masks, they did. Not everyone, of course, but most. They took heed of public health folks, took our advice to heart. When I chat with my colleagues in other states—Ohio, Michigan—I hear things are entirely different.
Maine seemed to respond to initial reports of the virus far sooner than many other states, including Massachusetts and New York, both of which suffered from frightening outbreaks last spring. Can you explain what tipped you off?
I worked in Cambodia at the start of the SARS epidemic and also through part of the avian flu outbreak. I was part of a large team there, and I learned a lot about the politics of epidemics and the resistance public health experts face. I still have close contacts in Asia, and late last year I heard about a cluster of fevers in December. And the chorus of warning voices grew between Christmas and New Year’s. As soon as we all returned from the New Year’s break on January 2 or 3, my office started to prepare. By February 8, we had distributed PPE [personal protective equipment] to nursing homes, hospitals and first responders. We had our contract tracing plan all mapped out. This was weeks ahead of our first documented case of COVID-19 on March 12.
How important are testing and contact tracing to your response?
They’re essential. Though we’ve had relatively few cases, we have 100 people tracing, and we have plans to hire more. Since May, we’ve partnered with a Maine-based laboratory, IDEXX, that has a very deep bench in reagents. So unlike some states, we’ve had no problems getting reagents for tests. Everyone in the state 12 months or older can get tested at no cost, no questions asked.
Do you think part of Maine’s success comes from its being relatively rural and remote?
Not really. Other rural states such as Idaho, the Dakotas, West Virginia have much higher rates. That suggests that geography doesn’t have much explanatory power.
What metrics do you rely on to measure success?
Our goal is not to eradicate the disease but to suppress the virus to put us in a favorable position for vaccination. Our test positivity rate is consistently under 1 percent, and for weeks it [remained] under 0.6 percent. That’s the lowest in the U.S., and we think that puts us in a good position.
What went wrong with the federal government’s response to the virus?
It’s unclear…. We do know that on February 25, when [Nancy] Messonnier, [head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases], warned Americans to prepare for a pandemic, she was threatened [with firing by President Donald Trump in a call to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, according to reporting by the Wall Street Journal], and the CDC started to take a back seat.
What would be your first step in changing the federal response?
Stop candy coating. The communication approach has been filtered through what folks in Washington, D.C., want the intended impact to be: it’s outcome driven, and that doesn’t work. They have to stop shaping the message to conform with what they think people want to believe.
Can you a give concrete example of this distorted messaging?
The rollout of [the antiviral] remdesivir, as though it were “mission accomplished.” We actually knew very little at that time about whether the drug worked in the treatment of COVID-19. This happened with other therapies as well.
You give regular press briefings on public radio, as well as daily interviews on Maine AM radio. What do you hope to accomplish with these frequent interactions with the press and public?
All too often, government is on the defensive, and our first inclination is to say, ‘Here’s what [the government has] done; here’s what we need to do.’ But in a high-anxiety, low-trust situation like this, you have to empower people to act. Every five or six weeks, I take stock of where we are and come up with a couple of key asks of the people in Maine. For example, this week, I asked them to commit to get a flu shot. It’s a concrete call to action, something everyone can do for themselves and their family. And it builds confidence and trust.
The president has claimed that he did not inform the public early about COVID-19’s seriousness in order to avoid causing panic. Could too much truth telling engender such a reaction?
What President [Donald] Trump says often has a grain of truth: of course panic is never good. My goal is not to cripple people with fear, but nor is it to give them a false sense of security. I try to encourage them to go forth into activities with knowledge of the risks and with proper precautions. If they feel they must go attend a crowded Sunday morning revival meeting where the risk level is very high, I recommend they wear a mask. If they choose to go out for a hike, I encourage them to do so, knowing that the risk is very low.
Do you think a full economic shutdown is necessary to control COVID-19’s spread?
Last March and April we knew very little about this disease, and that led to a shelter-in-place mentality. We needed to be there then, but we’re not there now. We know that most folks with this disease will [eventually] fare well. We still need precautions, of course, but we also need to offer context. Nuance doesn’t work well in public health, but when I see people driving alone in their cars wearing a mask, well, there’s no need for it.
So what do you propose we do to turn the epidemic around on a national level?
We need a much stronger federal voice advising us. First, I’d return the daily CDC press briefing. I’d start every briefing with the hard facts and follow it with a call to action—lay out specifics on what citizens can to do help themselves and their families. I’d bring back the many experts who resigned from the CDC—we need them—and also strengthen the agency’s presence in Washington, D.C., which is where it all happens. And I’d encourage the CDC and other government agencies to present a grand unified theory of COVID-19—that is, to clearly lay out goals, metrics and strategies for the American people. Because in public health, our first and most important job is to get the people behind us.
Read more about the coronavirus outbreak from Scientific American here. And read coverage from our international network of magazines here.


scientificamerican--2020-10-16--NASA's OSIRIS-REx Seeks to Grab a Piece of Asteroid Bennu

On the other side of the sun , an interplanetary heist is afoot .
Next week NASA ’ s OSIRIS-REx spacecraft will make a daring attempt to steal samples from the surface of an asteroid , dodging giant boulders and other hazards in the process .
If all goes well , it will then make the long journey back home , returning the largest amount of extraterrestrial material to Earth from a nonlunar mission in history .
Its precious cargo of otherworldly rocks could hold answers to long-standing questions about our cosmic origins .
“ We hope to get material @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phase of our solar system ’ s formation , ” says Patrick Michel of the Côte d ’ Azur Observatory in France .
The roughly $ 1-billion OSIRIS-REx was launched back in 2016 on a mission to the asteroid Bennu , which has an orbit slightly larger than Earth ’ s .
Equipped with an extendable armlike instrument called the Touch-and-Go Sample Acquisition Mechanism ( TAGSAM ) , the primary goal of the spacecraft is to descend to Bennu ’ s surface and scoop up a sizable amount of sample , up to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The only previous successful asteroid-sample-return mission , Japan ’ s Hayabusa , returned just a few micrograms in 2010 .
Its successor , Hayabusa2 , is scheduled to drop off a new sample in December but with only up to a gram onboard .
OSIRIS-REx has been nearly two decades in the making , says Dante Lauretta , a planetary scientist at the University of Arizona , who is the mission ’ s principal investigator .
“ I ’ ve been working on this for over 16 years , ” he says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has arrived .
This Tuesday , October 20 , at about 1:50 P.M. EST , mission controllers will command the spacecraft to begin its autonomous approach to Bennu from its parking orbit 700 meters above the surface .
Over the next four and a half hours , it will slowly descend and make its way toward a preselected landing site called Nightingale .
Then , at about 6:10 P.M. EST , the spacecraft should touch the surface for no more than 15 seconds , sucking up a sample before making its escape .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ other side of the sun , about 334 million kilometers from Earth .
That means it takes 18 minutes to communicate one way with the spacecraft , necessitating the autonomous nature of the landing .
But the mission ’ s team is well prepared : in August it completed the second of two landing rehearsals , in which the spacecraft approached to just 131 feet ( 40 meters ) from the landing site before backing away .
This rehearsal included a test of the spacecraft ’ s ability to use visual images to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ An overview of OSIRIS-Rex ’ s Touch-And-Go ( TAG ) sample collection event , slated to occur at asteroid Bennu on Oct. 20 , 2020. Credit : NASA ’ s Goddard Space Flight Center Originally , the scientists had planned to use laser tracking to touch down at Bennu .
But upon arrival , they discovered it was a “ rubble pile ” asteroid , meaning it was composed of a lot of rocks of varying sizes .
This quality would make landing via laser difficult because the beam ’ s light would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surface .
Instead the team decided to employ the spacecraft ’ s cameras to guide the touchdown at Nightingale , a relatively flat 16-meter-wide region among the rubble .
“ We ’ re basically trying to park a large van in a spot that ’ s two parking spaces wide , ” Lauretta says .
Bennu ’ s structure and composition have been of keen interest since OSIRIS-REx arrived .
Last week a series of papers published in the journals Science and Science Advances detailed some new findings about the asteroid , based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the studies , scientists describe the presence of organic carbon-bearing material on Bennu ’ s surface .
“ Organic carbon is interesting because we think asteroids like Bennu could have delivered organic matter to early Earth , ” says Hannah Kaplan of NASA ’ s Goddard Space Flight Center , who is lead author of one of the recent studies and a co-author of another .
“ So to be able to go back and look at what these very early pristine organic materials look like , that ’ s really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , scientists were able to use OSIRIS-REx ’ s images of material ejected from the surface of Bennu to work out its interior composition and gravity .
After the spacecraft arrived at the asteroid in 2018 , scientists were surprised to discover that Bennu was actively ejecting particles into space that remained in orbit around it .
“ We used this ‘ particle gravity field ’ to analyze how the mass is distributed within Bennu , ” says Daniel Scheeres of the University of Colorado Boulder , who was lead author of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the asteroid was heterogeneous , meaning some parts were more dense than others—something that could account for the Bennu ’ s odd bulgelike shape , too .
Pulled by the asteroid ’ s rotation , “ material is flowing down into the equatorial region , albeit relatively slowly , ” Scheeres says .
The rubble-pile nature of Bennu adds some complexity to OSIRIS-REx ’ s landing .
The first major milestone will come about four hours after leaving its parking orbit , when the spacecraft will start its “ checkpoint burn ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come to a momentary halt 410 feet ( 125 meters ) above the Nightingale landing site before beginning its descent .
About 11 minutes later , OSIRIS-REx will slow its descent to the surface with a “ matchpoint burn , ” ultimately reducing its speed to just 10 centimeters per second , with its TAGSAM arm extended out toward the asteroid .
When the arm touches the surface , a spring system inside will slow the spacecraft ’ s relative velocity to zero .
The arm ’ s circular collector head will remain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 15 seconds , pumping nitrogen gas into the surface to kick up material for collection .
The spring will then recoil and push the OSIRIS-REx away like a pogo stick before the craft fires its thrusters and returns to its parking orbit above the asteroid ’ s surface .
Owing to COVID-19 restrictions , much of the OSIRIS-Rex team will watch the action unfold from the comfort of home , save for about a dozen people at mission control .
The procedure is not without its nail-biting perils .
First , the spacecraft @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rocks on the surface below before beginning its descent .
It will autonomously make the call on the fly , just before the matchpoint burn .
The team will also be hoping the TAGSAM arm does not touch any inconveniently angled rock on the surface , which could tilt the entire spacecraft askew .
The biggest danger in this scenario is a nearby massive boulder , nicknamed “ Mount Doom , ” that would prove deadly if OSIRIS-REx were to crash into it on the spacecraft ’ s ascent .
“ The worst-case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next to Mount Doom , tip over right toward it and fire your thrusters , and slam into that rock , ” Lauretta says .
If all goes to plan , the team expects to collect anywhere from 60 grams to two kilograms of material inside the collector head .
By spinning the spacecraft with the arm extended , the researchers will be able to measure the sample ’ s inertia and work out how much of Bennu they have collected with an accuracy of plus or minus 20 grams .
If there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grams or more , the spacecraft will store the collector head inside a container designed to bring the sample safely through Earth ’ s atmosphere .
If no samples have been collected , the spacecraft has enough nitrogen gas onboard to attempt up to two more landings in December or January .
In the event that Nightingale is disturbed by the spacecraft ’ s thrusters , those landings will occur at a second site called Osprey .
If , however , enough samples are collected from Nightingale—which the team will decide on October @ @ @ @ @ @ @ March 2021 and then depart Bennu on a voyage home .
In September 2023 it will arrive back at our planet and drop its capsule into our atmosphere .
The capsule will then parachute to safety in the Utah desert with its scientific spoils in tow .
But before all that , there is the small matter of actually putting the most crucial part of this grand and elaborate plan in action .
“ The biggest disappointment is that the team can not gather to celebrate this event , ” says Lauretta , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s late 2023 return to Earth for some revelry .
“ We better be over the pandemic by then .
”

On the other side of the sun, an interplanetary heist is afoot. Next week NASA’s OSIRIS-REx spacecraft will make a daring attempt to steal samples from the surface of an asteroid, dodging giant boulders and other hazards in the process. If all goes well, it will then make the long journey back home, returning the largest amount of extraterrestrial material to Earth from a nonlunar mission in history. Its precious cargo of otherworldly rocks could hold answers to long-standing questions about our cosmic origins. “We hope to get material that will inform us about the first phase of our solar system’s formation,” says Patrick Michel of the Côte d’Azur Observatory in France.
The roughly $1-billion OSIRIS-REx was launched back in 2016 on a mission to the asteroid Bennu, which has an orbit slightly larger than Earth’s. Equipped with an extendable armlike instrument called the Touch-and-Go Sample Acquisition Mechanism (TAGSAM), the primary goal of the spacecraft is to descend to Bennu’s surface and scoop up a sizable amount of sample, up to two kilograms, before returning to Earth. The only previous successful asteroid-sample-return mission, Japan’s Hayabusa, returned just a few micrograms in 2010. Its successor, Hayabusa2, is scheduled to drop off a new sample in December but with only up to a gram onboard.
OSIRIS-REx has been nearly two decades in the making, says Dante Lauretta, a planetary scientist at the University of Arizona, who is the mission’s principal investigator. “I’ve been working on this for over 16 years,” he says. And now the moment of reckoning has arrived. This Tuesday, October 20, at about 1:50 P.M. EST, mission controllers will command the spacecraft to begin its autonomous approach to Bennu from its parking orbit 700 meters above the surface. Over the next four and a half hours, it will slowly descend and make its way toward a preselected landing site called Nightingale. Then, at about 6:10 P.M. EST, the spacecraft should touch the surface for no more than 15 seconds, sucking up a sample before making its escape.
OSIRIS-REx and Bennu are currently on the other side of the sun, about 334 million kilometers from Earth. That means it takes 18 minutes to communicate one way with the spacecraft, necessitating the autonomous nature of the landing. But the mission’s team is well prepared: in August it completed the second of two landing rehearsals, in which the spacecraft approached to just 131 feet (40 meters) from the landing site before backing away. This rehearsal included a test of the spacecraft’s ability to use visual images to make its way to the surface.
An overview of OSIRIS-REx’s Touch-and-Go (TAG) sample-collection event, slated to occur at asteroid Bennu on October 20, 2020. Credit: NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center
Originally, the scientists had planned to use laser tracking to touch down at Bennu. But upon arrival, they discovered it was a “rubble pile” asteroid, meaning it was composed of a lot of rocks of varying sizes. This quality would make landing via laser difficult because the beam’s light would be scattered by the asteroid’s surface. Instead the team decided to employ the spacecraft’s cameras to guide the touchdown at Nightingale, a relatively flat 16-meter-wide region among the rubble. “We’re basically trying to park a large van in a spot that’s two parking spaces wide,” Lauretta says.
Bennu’s structure and composition have been of keen interest since OSIRIS-REx arrived. Last week a series of papers published in the journals Science and Science Advances detailed some new findings about the asteroid, based on data from the spacecraft. In one of the studies, scientists describe the presence of organic carbon-bearing material on Bennu’s surface. “Organic carbon is interesting because we think asteroids like Bennu could have delivered organic matter to early Earth,” says Hannah Kaplan of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, who is lead author of one of the recent studies and a co-author of another. “So to be able to go back and look at what these very early pristine organic materials look like, that’s really exciting.”
In another of the papers, scientists were able to use OSIRIS-REx’s images of material ejected from the surface of Bennu to work out its interior composition and gravity. After the spacecraft arrived at the asteroid in 2018, scientists were surprised to discover that Bennu was actively ejecting particles into space that remained in orbit around it. “We used this ‘particle gravity field’ to analyze how the mass is distributed within Bennu,” says Daniel Scheeres of the University of Colorado Boulder, who was lead author of the study. The researchers found the interior of the asteroid was heterogeneous, meaning some parts were more dense than others—something that could account for the Bennu’s odd bulgelike shape, too. Pulled by the asteroid’s rotation, “material is flowing down into the equatorial region, albeit relatively slowly,” Scheeres says.
The rubble-pile nature of Bennu adds some complexity to OSIRIS-REx’s landing. The first major milestone will come about four hours after leaving its parking orbit, when the spacecraft will start its “checkpoint burn”: it will use its thrusters to come to a momentary halt 410 feet (125 meters) above the Nightingale landing site before beginning its descent. About 11 minutes later, OSIRIS-REx will slow its descent to the surface with a “matchpoint burn,” ultimately reducing its speed to just 10 centimeters per second, with its TAGSAM arm extended out toward the asteroid.
When the arm touches the surface, a spring system inside will slow the spacecraft’s relative velocity to zero. The arm’s circular collector head will remain in contact with Bennu for up to 15 seconds, pumping nitrogen gas into the surface to kick up material for collection. The spring will then recoil and push the OSIRIS-REx away like a pogo stick before the craft fires its thrusters and returns to its parking orbit above the asteroid’s surface. Owing to COVID-19 restrictions, much of the OSIRIS-REx team will watch the action unfold from the comfort of home, save for about a dozen people at mission control.
The procedure is not without its nail-biting perils. First, the spacecraft must check that there are no hazardous rocks on the surface below before beginning its descent. It will autonomously make the call on the fly, just before the matchpoint burn. The team will also be hoping the TAGSAM arm does not touch any inconveniently angled rock on the surface, which could tilt the entire spacecraft askew. The biggest danger in this scenario is a nearby massive boulder, nicknamed “Mount Doom,” that would prove deadly if OSIRIS-REx were to crash into it on the spacecraft’s ascent. “The worst-case scenario is: you come in right next to Mount Doom, tip over right toward it and fire your thrusters, and slam into that rock,” Lauretta says.
If all goes to plan, the team expects to collect anywhere from 60 grams to two kilograms of material inside the collector head. By spinning the spacecraft with the arm extended, the researchers will be able to measure the sample’s inertia and work out how much of Bennu they have collected with an accuracy of plus or minus 20 grams. If there is deemed to be enough, 60 grams or more, the spacecraft will store the collector head inside a container designed to bring the sample safely through Earth’s atmosphere. If no samples have been collected, the spacecraft has enough nitrogen gas onboard to attempt up to two more landings in December or January. In the event that Nightingale is disturbed by the spacecraft’s thrusters, those landings will occur at a second site called Osprey.
If, however, enough samples are collected from Nightingale—which the team will decide on October 30—the spacecraft will remain in orbit until March 2021 and then depart Bennu on a voyage home. In September 2023 it will arrive back at our planet and drop its capsule into our atmosphere. The capsule will then parachute to safety in the Utah desert with its scientific spoils in tow. But before all that, there is the small matter of actually putting the most crucial part of this grand and elaborate plan in action. “The biggest disappointment is that the team cannot gather to celebrate this event,” says Lauretta, who is instead now eyeing the spacecraft’s late 2023 return to Earth for some revelry. “We better be over the pandemic by then.”


scientificamerican--2020-10-16--When Scientists Become Political Dissenters

Science advances by the free exchange of ideas .
New ones are put forward and pitted against existing ones , and fights are fought with rational arguments .
Scientists tend to take this freedom for granted , and carry it over to other fields , such as politics , where challenging prevailing opinion goes under the name of dissent , and may be much less welcome .
Scientists make tough dissenters for the powers that be .
They can not be dismissed offhand as incompetent , and they bring to the discussion professional standards that are hard to match .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for their opinions , for they belong to an international community that will support them .
So , they have to be discredited in some way .
In the time of the Soviet Union , the preferred charge was insanity .
Dissenting scientists , such as Alexander Esenin-Volpin and Leonid Plyushch , were routinely sent to psychiatric hospitals .
Nowadays , the favored charge is supporting terrorism .
Here are three examples , among many others : Turkish mathematician Tuna Altınel has lived and worked in Lyon , France since 1996 .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Lyon on the subject of alleged massacres in southeastern Turkey .
The local Turkish consul reported on this meeting to the Turkish authorities in Ankara , mentioning that Altınel had served as a poll watcher .
A charge of membership in an armed terrorist group resulted .
On an April visit to Turkey , Altınel 's passport was confiscated .
He was subsequently arrested and placed in pretrial detention for 81 days .
Charges were later reduced to propaganda for a terrorist group .
Altınel was acquitted of the latter charge in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been restored , and the government recently sent a letter saying it will not be ; he thus remains unable to leave Turkey .
Administrative sanctions not subject to public scrutiny have been widely applied in Turkey in response to political expression .
With reference to the statutes invoked , the European Court of Human Rights has condemned the use of criminal procedures such as detention on remand to punish and discourage the exercise of freedom of expression .
For more information see http : //math.univ-lyon1.fr/SoutienTunaAltinel/ ?
lang=en .
The case of Azat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moscow State University , is somewhat special .
Miftakhov was neither a public opponent of Putin 's regime nor yet a professional scientist .
His academic career was only starting ( with a single publication in the field of stochastics ) .
By that reason one can hardly expect that professional organizations would step up for him .
However , Miftakhov 's figure became a sort of litmus test for Russian academic society , dividing people into those who trust the system and those who question its justice .
Miftakhov comes from Tatarstan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in school , he won prizes in several math competitions and received support given to talented young people by the Ministry of Education and Science .
As a student in Moscow , he became involved with the anarchist movement .
In June 2018 and January 2019 Miftakhov was harassed via a telegram channel allegedly connected with Russia ’ s law enforcement agencies .
In February 2019 , right after his return from a conference in Nizhni Novgorod where Miftakhov gave his first talk in English , he was detained by the state authorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was reportedly tortured by the police .
After three days he was released as the court found no evidence for his detention .
In less than two days , on February 9 , 2019 , Miftakhov was again arrested and accused of destruction of the office window of the ruling political party , United Russia , which occurred more than a year ago .
Miftakhov has pled not guilty .
Despite the obvious lack of evidence , he has been kept in jail since then .
The Russian human rights center Memorial recognizes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ letter condemning torture against Miftakhov and calling for his immediate release was signed by many prominent scientists from Russia and worldwide .
For more information about both Miftakhov and Altınel see http : //www.ams.org/about-us/governance/committees/humanrights On Thursday , July 16th 2020 , Palestinian astrophysicist Imad Barghouthi , a professor at the university of Al-Quds in East Jerusalem , was detained by Israeli military forces during a routine stop at a military checkpoint outside of Anata .
After more than two weeks without information on the reason for his detention , on August 2 Barghouthi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with `` incitement and support for a hostile organization '' on the basis of his Facebook posts .
After an Israeli judge twice accepted his lawyer 's request that Barghouthi be released on bail , the military commander of the West Bank ordered him placed under administrative detention until November 15 .
Administrative detention is an illegal measure under international law commonly used by the Israeli military forces to hold Palestinians in prison without charge or trial .
This is not the first time that the Israeli military forces have arrested Barghouthi , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scientists .
In 2014 he was placed under administrative detention for two months , and in 2016 he was again detained for six months .
In both cases his arrest triggered significant indignation on the part of the international scientific community .
The procedures may differ , but the result is the same : through administrative and juridical harassment , civil or military , our colleagues are deprived of their fundamental freedoms , including academic freedom .
It is up to scientists to alert their professional associations and to mobilize , as they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Union , to demand that Altınel , Miftakhov , and Barghouthi recover their freedom and their rights , immediately and unconditionally .
The views expressed by the authors are their own , and do not represent those of their institutions , which are included for identification purposes only .

Science advances by the free exchange of ideas. New ones are put forward and pitted against existing ones, and fights are fought with rational arguments. Scientists tend to take this freedom for granted, and carry it over to other fields, such as politics, where challenging prevailing opinion goes under the name of dissent, and may be much less welcome.
Scientists make tough dissenters for the powers that be. They cannot be dismissed offhand as incompetent, and they bring to the discussion professional standards that are hard to match. They cannot be quietly put away for their opinions, for they belong to an international community that will support them. So, they have to be discredited in some way.
In the time of the Soviet Union, the preferred charge was insanity. Dissenting scientists, such as Alexander Esenin-Volpin and Leonid Plyushch, were routinely sent to psychiatric hospitals. Nowadays, the favored charge is supporting terrorism. Here are three examples, among many others:
Turkish mathematician Tuna Altınel has lived and worked in Lyon, France since 1996. In 2019 he participated in a public meeting in Lyon on the subject of alleged massacres in southeastern Turkey. The local Turkish consul reported on this meeting to the Turkish authorities in Ankara, mentioning that Altınel had served as a poll watcher. A charge of membership in an armed terrorist group resulted.
On an April visit to Turkey, Altınel's passport was confiscated. He was subsequently arrested and placed in pretrial detention for 81 days. Charges were later reduced to propaganda for a terrorist group. Altınel was acquitted of the latter charge in January 2020. His passport has not been restored, and the government recently sent a letter saying it will not be; he thus remains unable to leave Turkey. Administrative sanctions not subject to public scrutiny have been widely applied in Turkey in response to political expression.
With reference to the statutes invoked, the European Court of Human Rights has condemned the use of criminal procedures such as detention on remand to punish and discourage the exercise of freedom of expression.
For more information see http://math.univ-lyon1.fr/SoutienTunaAltinel/?lang=en.
The case of Azat Miftakhov, a mathematics graduate student at Moscow State University, is somewhat special. Miftakhov was neither a public opponent of Putin's regime nor yet a professional scientist. His academic career was only starting (with a single publication in the field of stochastics). By that reason one can hardly expect that professional organizations would step up for him. However, Miftakhov's figure became a sort of litmus test for Russian academic society, dividing people into those who trust the system and those who question its justice. Miftakhov comes from Tatarstan in the Russian Federation. While still in school, he won prizes in several math competitions and received support given to talented young people by the Ministry of Education and Science.
As a student in Moscow, he became involved with the anarchist movement. In June 2018 and January 2019 Miftakhov was harassed via a telegram channel allegedly connected with Russia’s law enforcement agencies. In February 2019, right after his return from a conference in Nizhni Novgorod where Miftakhov gave his first talk in English, he was detained by the state authorities and accused of manufacturing explosives. Miftakhov was reportedly tortured by the police. After three days he was released as the court found no evidence for his detention. In less than two days, on February 9, 2019, Miftakhov was again arrested and accused of destruction of the office window of the ruling political party, United Russia, which occurred more than a year ago.
Miftakhov has pled not guilty. Despite the obvious lack of evidence, he has been kept in jail since then. The Russian human rights center Memorial recognizes Miftakhov as a political prisoner. A letter condemning torture against Miftakhov and calling for his immediate release was signed by many prominent scientists from Russia and worldwide. For more information about both Miftakhov and Altınel see http://www.ams.org/about-us/governance/committees/humanrights
On Thursday, July 16th 2020, Palestinian astrophysicist Imad Barghouthi, a professor at the university of Al-Quds in East Jerusalem, was detained by Israeli military forces during a routine stop at a military checkpoint outside of Anata. After more than two weeks without information on the reason for his detention, on August 2 Barghouthi was charged by an Israeli military prosecutor with "incitement and support for a hostile organization" on the basis of his Facebook posts.
After an Israeli judge twice accepted his lawyer's request that Barghouthi be released on bail, the military commander of the West Bank ordered him placed under administrative detention until November 15. Administrative detention is an illegal measure under international law commonly used by the Israeli military forces to hold Palestinians in prison without charge or trial.
This is not the first time that the Israeli military forces have arrested Barghouthi, one of Palestine’s most prominent scientists. In 2014 he was placed under administrative detention for two months, and in 2016 he was again detained for six months. In both cases his arrest triggered significant indignation on the part of the international scientific community.
The procedures may differ, but the result is the same: through administrative and juridical harassment, civil or military, our colleagues are deprived of their fundamental freedoms, including academic freedom. It is up to scientists to alert their professional associations and to mobilize, as they did at the time of the Soviet Union, to demand that Altınel, Miftakhov, and Barghouthi recover their freedom and their rights, immediately and unconditionally.
The views expressed by the authors are their own, and do not represent those of their institutions, which are included for identification purposes only.


scientificamerican--2020-10-16--Leading Scientists Urge Voters to Dump Trump

Science has long considered itself to be an apolitical enterprise .
But in the midst of a global pandemic and with the 2020 election looming , some scientific institutions and elite journals have suddenly become willing to take a political stance against President Donald Trump and his allies .
On October 8 , for instance , the New England Journal of Medicine ( NEJM ) jumped into the fray for the first time in 208 years with an unprecedented political editorial calling for leadership change .
Although it stopped short of endorsing Democratic candidate Joe Biden , the article labeled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incompetent ” and added that “ we should not abet them and enable the deaths of thousands more Americans [ from COVID-19 ] by allowing them to keep their jobs.
” This week the journal Nature added similar sentiments in an editorial that did endorse Biden and called Trump 's record `` shameful . ''
A month earlier 81 U.S. Nobel laureates signed an open letter that expressed their Biden support .
“ At no time in our nation ’ s history has there been a greater need for our leaders to appreciate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy , ” they wrote .
And the nonpartisan National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Medicine—a pair of notoriously cautious and conventional institutions—issued a statement in late September denouncing political interference in public health agencies , particularly the Trump administration ’ s efforts to rush the approval of a COVID-19 vaccine before tests for safety and effectiveness are completed .
“ Policymaking must be informed by the best available evidence without it being distorted , concealed , or otherwise deliberately miscommunicated , ” they wrote .
“ We find ongoing reports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , particularly the overriding of evidence and advice from public health officials and derision of government scientists , to be alarming.
” Sociologists say the scientific establishment seems to be making a switch from a long-held condemnation of political interference in science to actually condemning a politician .
“ In some ways , this is the last stand , ” says Dana Fisher , a sociologist at the University of Maryland , College Park .
“ They have to stand up , at this point , for science because science and its role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Scientific leaders contend that Trump is uniquely unfit for the presidency and has harmed science to an unprecedented degree .
But some social scientists worry that aligning the research enterprise with a political party could ultimately backfire , politicizing science beyond repair .
Speaking out against antiscience policies has long been the domain of advocacy groups such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science and others .
In 2017 , for instance , several such organizations backed the March for Science in Washington , D.C. , which was sparked by concerns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seeming disregard for evidence-based policies that arose during the 2016 presidential campaign .
Although journals and institutions such as the National Academies of Sciences , Engineering , and Medicine largely stayed out of the debate , “ all of the ingredients were there for a showdown at some point , ” says political scientist Matthew Motta of Oklahoma State University .
The three years that followed saw a mass exodus of researchers from government , appointments of federal research agency officials with few scientific credentials , the muzzling of government scientists , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dismissing the threat posed by COVID-19 .
Institutions ’ new willingness to speak out , Fisher says , “ basically shows how far the Trump administration has sunk and how far they ’ ve dragged down the discourse.
” National Academy of Sciences president Marcia McNutt agrees .
Unlike previous infringements on scientific independence , such as suppressing federal reports on climate change , McNutt says , the president ’ s statements and actions around the COVID-19 pandemic could immediately harm public health , and that is why her academy has acted .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was because we don ’ t do it very often , ” she says .
“ Rather than being a political statement , it is rather a statement saying , ‘ Please don ’ t be political when it comes to science.
’ ” Other calls have been more explicit .
At the journal Science , editor in chief Holden Thorp has published about a dozen editorials criticizing the government ’ s response to the pandemic and attitude toward science this year .
His September 18 editorial , entitled “ Trump Lied about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for downplaying the danger of the pandemic .
“ Before I started [ in August 2019 ] , it was the tradition at Science to refer to it as ‘ the administration , ’ not by [ a person ’ s ] name , ” Thorp says .
“ But I felt that when Trump went into heavy denial on COVID , it was time to change that.
” It is unclear whether these kinds of statements will have much impact .
At their best , editorials such as Thorp ’ s can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says communications researcher Matthew Nisbet of Northeastern University .
But he points out that because most of the general public already has strong opinions about the election , endorsements from elite institutions will not change many minds .
“ They ’ re read and heard about by people who follow Science , ” Nisbet says .
Still , Thorp and others see taking this new political stance as a moral imperative .
“ I think of myself as speaking for the scientists who either don ’ t have the platform or are in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speak out , ” such as government scientists or researchers at universities with conservative trustees , Thorp says .
While Thorp and McNutt say the response from their members and subscribers has been almost universally positive , the reaction to NEJM ’ s editorial was more mixed .
The journal ’ s editor in chief Eric Rubin says that one of its regular article reviewers wrote to say he would no longer evaluate submissions because he thought NEJM ’ s “ political stance ” disqualified it from judging papers .
But Rubin says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that facts and evidence are a matter of opinion .
“ It ’ s not a matter of ‘ he said , she said ’ ; it ’ s a matter of these stupid things cost lives.
” Rubin , who says he has received some “ uncomfortably vile ” letters , is not surprised at the mixed response from NEJM ’ s readership .
Although academic scientists are overwhelmingly liberal on average , physicians tend to be equally liberal and conservative—similar to the general public .
Nisbet and Motta worry that taking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ institutions .
“ There is an important potential cost to keep in mind : that it may alter the way public thinks about science , ” Motta says .
Historically , Republican politicians have been at least as enthusiastic as Democrats about funding and support for scientific research—a trend that has contributed to scientists ’ general avoidance of politics .
If science is seen to have a liberal bias , Motta says , Republican politicians could become less willing to fund scientific research , and conservative students could become more reluctant to enter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to support that concern .
In a survey of 428 online volunteers , he found that while liberals viewed scientists more favorably after the 2017 March for Science , conservatives ’ views of scientists and their research became more negative .
Similarly , a 2017 study found that although climate scientists ’ credibility is not always impacted when they advocate for specific policies , it can sometimes suffer when they do so .
To McNutt , that is all the more reason to hope that the recent spate of science activism is short-lived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I would like to unwrap science and politics as quickly as possible , ” she says .
“ We want to just say , ‘ Here ’ s the science .
You political leaders decide .
’ ”

Science has long considered itself to be an apolitical enterprise. But in the midst of a global pandemic and with the 2020 election looming, some scientific institutions and elite journals have suddenly become willing to take a political stance against President Donald Trump and his allies.
On October 8, for instance, the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) jumped into the fray for the first time in 208 years with an unprecedented political editorial calling for leadership change. Although it stopped short of endorsing Democratic candidate Joe Biden, the article labeled people running the current administration “dangerously incompetent” and added that “we should not abet them and enable the deaths of thousands more Americans [from COVID-19] by allowing them to keep their jobs.” This week the journal Nature added similar sentiments in an editorial that did endorse Biden and called Trump's record “shameful.” A month earlier 81 U.S. Nobel laureates signed an open letter that expressed their Biden support. “At no time in our nation’s history has there been a greater need for our leaders to appreciate the value of science in formulating public policy,” they wrote.
And the nonpartisan National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Medicine—a pair of notoriously cautious and conventional institutions—issued a statement in late September denouncing political interference in public health agencies, particularly the Trump administration’s efforts to rush the approval of a COVID-19 vaccine before tests for safety and effectiveness are completed. “Policymaking must be informed by the best available evidence without it being distorted, concealed, or otherwise deliberately miscommunicated,” they wrote. “We find ongoing reports and incidents of the politicization of science, particularly the overriding of evidence and advice from public health officials and derision of government scientists, to be alarming.”
Sociologists say the scientific establishment seems to be making a switch from a long-held condemnation of political interference in science to actually condemning a politician. “In some ways, this is the last stand,” says Dana Fisher, a sociologist at the University of Maryland, College Park. “They have to stand up, at this point, for science because science and its role in society is threatened right now.” Scientific leaders contend that Trump is uniquely unfit for the presidency and has harmed science to an unprecedented degree. But some social scientists worry that aligning the research enterprise with a political party could ultimately backfire, politicizing science beyond repair.
Speaking out against antiscience policies has long been the domain of advocacy groups such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science and others. In 2017, for instance, several such organizations backed the March for Science in Washington, D.C., which was sparked by concerns about the incoming Trump administration’s seeming disregard for evidence-based policies that arose during the 2016 presidential campaign. Although journals and institutions such as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine largely stayed out of the debate, “all of the ingredients were there for a showdown at some point,” says political scientist Matthew Motta of Oklahoma State University.
The three years that followed saw a mass exodus of researchers from government, appointments of federal research agency officials with few scientific credentials, the muzzling of government scientists, and most recently, constant statements and policies dismissing the threat posed by COVID-19. Institutions’ new willingness to speak out, Fisher says, “basically shows how far the Trump administration has sunk and how far they’ve dragged down the discourse.”
National Academy of Sciences president Marcia McNutt agrees. Unlike previous infringements on scientific independence, such as suppressing federal reports on climate change, McNutt says, the president’s statements and actions around the COVID-19 pandemic could immediately harm public health, and that is why her academy has acted. “The reason the statement had impact was because we don’t do it very often,” she says. “Rather than being a political statement, it is rather a statement saying, ‘Please don’t be political when it comes to science.’”
Other calls have been more explicit. At the journal Science, editor in chief Holden Thorp has published about a dozen editorials criticizing the government’s response to the pandemic and attitude toward science this year. His September 18 editorial, entitled “Trump Lied about Science,” chastised the president personally for downplaying the danger of the pandemic.
“Before I started [in August 2019], it was the tradition at Science to refer to it as ‘the administration,’ not by [a person’s] name,” Thorp says. “But I felt that when Trump went into heavy denial on COVID, it was time to change that.”
It is unclear whether these kinds of statements will have much impact. At their best, editorials such as Thorp’s can help scientists articulate their own arguments, says communications researcher Matthew Nisbet of Northeastern University. But he points out that because most of the general public already has strong opinions about the election, endorsements from elite institutions will not change many minds. “They’re read and heard about by people who follow Science,” Nisbet says.
Still, Thorp and others see taking this new political stance as a moral imperative. “I think of myself as speaking for the scientists who either don’t have the platform or are in a situation where they can’t speak out,” such as government scientists or researchers at universities with conservative trustees, Thorp says.
While Thorp and McNutt say the response from their members and subscribers has been almost universally positive, the reaction to NEJM’s editorial was more mixed. The journal’s editor in chief Eric Rubin says that one of its regular article reviewers wrote to say he would no longer evaluate submissions because he thought NEJM’s “political stance” disqualified it from judging papers. But Rubin says this attitude speaks to the mistaken idea that facts and evidence are a matter of opinion. “It’s not a matter of ‘he said, she said’; it’s a matter of these stupid things cost lives.”
Rubin, who says he has received some “uncomfortably vile” letters, is not surprised at the mixed response from NEJM’s readership. Although academic scientists are overwhelmingly liberal on average, physicians tend to be equally liberal and conservative—similar to the general public.
Nisbet and Motta worry that taking a political stance could backfire on scientific institutions. “There is an important potential cost to keep in mind: that it may alter the way public thinks about science,” Motta says. Historically, Republican politicians have been at least as enthusiastic as Democrats about funding and support for scientific research—a trend that has contributed to scientists’ general avoidance of politics. If science is seen to have a liberal bias, Motta says, Republican politicians could become less willing to fund scientific research, and conservative students could become more reluctant to enter scientific fields.
Motta has some evidence to support that concern. In a survey of 428 online volunteers, he found that while liberals viewed scientists more favorably after the 2017 March for Science, conservatives’ views of scientists and their research became more negative. Similarly, a 2017 study found that although climate scientists’ credibility is not always impacted when they advocate for specific policies, it can sometimes suffer when they do so.
To McNutt, that is all the more reason to hope that the recent spate of science activism is short-lived. “If I could do anything, I would like to unwrap science and politics as quickly as possible,” she says. “We want to just say, ‘Here’s the science. You political leaders decide.’”


scientificamerican--2020-10-16--Coronavirus News Roundup: October 10-October 16

The items below are highlights from the free newsletter , “ Smart , useful , science stuff about COVID-19.
” To receive newsletter issues daily in your inbox , sign-up here .
Are you in need of a “ dose of optimism ” about the pandemic , at least in the U.S. ?
Check out this 10/12/20 story at The New York Times by by Donald McNeil Jr. , who has covered infectious diseases and epidemics for many years .
McNeil notes the 215,000 people in the U.S. dead so far from the novel coronavirus , as well as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high as 400,000 before this era draws to a close .
But here is some of the good news that he tallies : 1 ) mask-wearing by the public is “ widely accepted ” ; 2 ) the development of vaccines to protect against SARS-CoV-2 and of treatments for COVID-19 are proceeding at record speed ; 3 ) “ experts are saying , with genuine confidence , that the pandemic in the United States will be over far sooner than they expected , possibly by the middle of next year ” ; and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than did earlier this year , even at nursing homes .
About 10 percent of people in the U.S. have been infected with the virus so far , according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control , the story states .
“ Pandemics don ’ t end abruptly ; they decelerate gradually , ” McNeil writes .
A 10/14/20 story by Carl Zimmer for The New York Times puts into context three late-stage ( Phase 3 safety and effectiveness ) COVID-19 experiments that have been paused in recent weeks due to illness among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studies — in this case Johnson & Johnson ’ s vaccine candidate and AstraZeneca ’ s vaccine candidate — are “ not unusual , ” the story states , partly because the safety threshold is extremely high for a product that , if approved , could be given to millions or billions of people .
But pauses are rare in treatment studies — in this case Eli Lilly ’ s monoclonal antibody cocktail drug .
Once a drug or treatment experiment ( trial ) is paused , a safety board determines whether the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or a placebo .
If it was the placebo , the study can resume .
If not , the board looks deeper into the case to determine whether or not the illness is related to the drug or treatment .
If a clear connection is discovered , “ the trial may have to stop , ” Zimmer writes .
Dr. Eric Topol at Scripps Research is quoted in the piece as saying he is “ still fairly optimistic ” about monoclonal antibody treatments for COVID-19 .
The safety-related pauses of all three experiments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are supposed to work , ” says Dr. Anna Durbin of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in the story .
The top of a story at The Washington Post features an instructive interactive that sketches “ Scienceville , ” a fictional place where “ politicians and public health officials use every tool at their disposal to contain the coronavirus.
” It basically shows how genetic analysis and tracing of viral strains found in a frequently and widely tested population could help officials control outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 .
Then the 10/13/20 text @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chris Mooney , Sarah Kaplan , and Harry Stevens , focuses on the details of such a “ genomic epidemiology ” approach and describes some real-life efforts under way , primarily in the UK , to implement the approach .
The U.S. has not been able to effectively use the approach , in part because genetic sequencing of viral strains “ has largely been left up to states and individual researchers , rather than being part of a coordinated and well-funded national program , ” the story states .
The rise in SARS-CoV-2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by “ small gatherings in people ’ s homes , ” according to officials with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control , reports Carolyn Crist for WebMD ( 10/14/20 ) .
People should continue to wear face masks and to practice social distancing “ since most people have still not been exposed to the coronavirus worldwide , '' the researchers suggest , Crist writes .
A newly developed test can detect SARS-CoV-2 in 5 minutes , reports Robert F. Service at Science ( 10/8/20 ) .
The test relies on CRISPR gene-editing technology @ @ @ @ @ @ @ University of California , Berkeley , and Emmanuelle Charpentier of the Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry earlier this month .
Doudna heads up the work that led to this new 5-minute CRISPR test for the coronavirus .
By comparison , it can take a day or more to get back standard SARS-CoV-2 test results , the story states .
Donald G. McNeil Jr. at The New York Times has written a guide to distinguishing common cold , flu , and COVID-19 symptoms ( 10/3/20 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a cold and having the flu is that `` Flu makes you feel as if you were hit by a truck , ” McNeil quotes experts as saying .
The symptom that best distinguishes COVID-19 from flu is loss of your sense of smell — strong smells don ’ t register , he writes .
But many flu and COVID-19 symptoms overlap , the story states .
The most common symptoms for COVID-19 are a high fever , chills , dry cough and fatigue .
For flu , it ’ s a fever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ throat , runny nose , stuffed sinuses , coughing and sneezing , the story states .
Dr. Anthony Fauci ’ s three daughters do not plan to visit him for Thanksgiving to avoid potentially transmitting the new coronavirus to their parents , reports Ralph Ellis at WebMD .
The story includes holiday traveling and visiting tips from a pulmonary critical care doctor at the University of Washington Medical Center who “ believes traveling for the holidays is risky.
” The tips include ensuring you have no COVID-19-like symptoms two weeks before traveling , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hotel for at least 48 hours before visiting with loved ones , traveling by car , and cutting down on “ close contact and talking without a mask ” ( 10/9/20 ) .
Adele Chapin has written a guide for reducing kids ’ risk of catching and spreading SARS-CoV-2 at the playground .
The 10/8/20 piece in The Washington Post makes the usual recommendations for mask-wearing , hand-washing , hand-sanitizer , disinfecting wipes , and distancing .
It quotes a Children ’ s National Hospital pediatrician advises against gloves , because “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which defeats the purpose.
” The piece also recommends visiting playgrounds at less busy times and choosing playgrounds with more than one play structure , which makes it easier for kids to distance from one another .
A story by Carl Zimmer for The New York Times beautifully describes and illustrates some of the amazing imaging work that scientists have done to study the structure of SARS-CoV-2 and how it infects our cells and multiplies ( 10/9/20 ) .
For starters , check out a mesmerizing video about a quarter of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complex molecules ) doing a “ molecular dance ” on the virus membrane .
The video ( just one of several in this stunning piece ) is part of research by a computational biophysicist at the Max Planck Institute of Biophysics and colleagues .
The spikes appear to shimmy , which “ increases the odds of encountering the protein on the surface of our cells it uses to attach , ” the researchers suspect , Zimmer writes .
You might enjoy , “ A letter of recommendation in the age of Zoom , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s ( 10/14/20 ) .

The items below are highlights from the free newsletter, “Smart, useful, science stuff about COVID-19.” To receive newsletter issues daily in your inbox, sign-up here.
Are you in need of a “dose of optimism” about the pandemic, at least in the U.S.? Check out this 10/12/20 story at The New York Times by by Donald McNeil Jr., who has covered infectious diseases and epidemics for many years. McNeil notes the 215,000 people in the U.S. dead so far from the novel coronavirus, as well as the estimates that the figure could go as high as 400,000 before this era draws to a close. But here is some of the good news that he tallies: 1) mask-wearing by the public is “widely accepted”; 2) the development of vaccines to protect against SARS-CoV-2 and of treatments for COVID-19 are proceeding at record speed; 3) “experts are saying, with genuine confidence, that the pandemic in the United States will be over far sooner than they expected, possibly by the middle of next year”; and 4) fewer infected people die today than did earlier this year, even at nursing homes. About 10 percent of people in the U.S. have been infected with the virus so far, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the story states. “Pandemics don’t end abruptly; they decelerate gradually,” McNeil writes.
A 10/14/20 story by Carl Zimmer for The New York Times puts into context three late-stage (Phase 3 safety and effectiveness) COVID-19 experiments that have been paused in recent weeks due to illness among some study participants. Pauses in vaccine studies — in this case Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine candidate and AstraZeneca’s vaccine candidate — are “not unusual,” the story states, partly because the safety threshold is extremely high for a product that, if approved, could be given to millions or billions of people. But pauses are rare in treatment studies — in this case Eli Lilly’s monoclonal antibody cocktail drug. Once a drug or treatment experiment (trial) is paused, a safety board determines whether the ill participant was given the new product or a placebo. If it was the placebo, the study can resume. If not, the board looks deeper into the case to determine whether or not the illness is related to the drug or treatment. If a clear connection is discovered, “the trial may have to stop,” Zimmer writes. Dr. Eric Topol at Scripps Research is quoted in the piece as saying he is “still fairly optimistic” about monoclonal antibody treatments for COVID-19. The safety-related pauses of all three experiments are “an example of how things are supposed to work,” says Dr. Anna Durbin of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in the story.
The top of a story at The Washington Post features an instructive interactive that sketches “Scienceville,” a fictional place where “politicians and public health officials use every tool at their disposal to contain the coronavirus.” It basically shows how genetic analysis and tracing of viral strains found in a frequently and widely tested population could help officials control outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2. Then the 10/13/20 text story below, by Brady Dennis, Chris Mooney, Sarah Kaplan, and Harry Stevens, focuses on the details of such a “genomic epidemiology” approach and describes some real-life efforts under way, primarily in the UK, to implement the approach. The U.S. has not been able to effectively use the approach, in part because genetic sequencing of viral strains “has largely been left up to states and individual researchers, rather than being part of a coordinated and well-funded national program,” the story states.
The rise in SARS-CoV-2 infections in the U.S. is now driven by “small gatherings in people’s homes,” according to officials with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, reports Carolyn Crist for WebMD (10/14/20). People should continue to wear face masks and to practice social distancing “since most people have still not been exposed to the coronavirus worldwide," the researchers suggest, Crist writes.
A newly developed test can detect SARS-CoV-2 in 5 minutes, reports Robert F. Service at Science (10/8/20). The test relies on CRISPR gene-editing technology, for which Jennifer Doudna of the University of California, Berkeley, and Emmanuelle Charpentier of the Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry earlier this month. Doudna heads up the work that led to this new 5-minute CRISPR test for the coronavirus. By comparison, it can take a day or more to get back standard SARS-CoV-2 test results, the story states.
Donald G. McNeil Jr. at The New York Times has written a guide to distinguishing common cold, flu, and COVID-19 symptoms (10/3/20). A major difference between having a cold and having the flu is that "Flu makes you feel as if you were hit by a truck,” McNeil quotes experts as saying. The symptom that best distinguishes COVID-19 from flu is loss of your sense of smell — strong smells don’t register, he writes. But many flu and COVID-19 symptoms overlap, the story states. The most common symptoms for COVID-19 are a high fever, chills, dry cough and fatigue. For flu, it’s a fever, headaches, body aches, sore throat, runny nose, stuffed sinuses, coughing and sneezing, the story states.
Dr. Anthony Fauci’s three daughters do not plan to visit him for Thanksgiving to avoid potentially transmitting the new coronavirus to their parents, reports Ralph Ellis at WebMD. The story includes holiday traveling and visiting tips from a pulmonary critical care doctor at the University of Washington Medical Center who “believes traveling for the holidays is risky.” The tips include ensuring you have no COVID-19-like symptoms two weeks before traveling, getting tested before traveling, quarantining in a hotel for at least 48 hours before visiting with loved ones, traveling by car, and cutting down on “close contact and talking without a mask” (10/9/20).
Adele Chapin has written a guide for reducing kids’ risk of catching and spreading SARS-CoV-2 at the playground. The 10/8/20 piece in The Washington Post makes the usual recommendations for mask-wearing, hand-washing, hand-sanitizer, disinfecting wipes, and distancing. It quotes a Children’s National Hospital pediatrician advises against gloves, because “people wearing them often touch their faces, which defeats the purpose.” The piece also recommends visiting playgrounds at less busy times and choosing playgrounds with more than one play structure, which makes it easier for kids to distance from one another.
A story by Carl Zimmer for The New York Times beautifully describes and illustrates some of the amazing imaging work that scientists have done to study the structure of SARS-CoV-2 and how it infects our cells and multiplies (10/9/20). For starters, check out a mesmerizing video about a quarter of the way down-page that simulates spike proteins (complex molecules) doing a “molecular dance” on the virus membrane. The video (just one of several in this stunning piece) is part of research by a computational biophysicist at the Max Planck Institute of Biophysics and colleagues. The spikes appear to shimmy, which “increases the odds of encountering the protein on the surface of our cells it uses to attach,” the researchers suspect, Zimmer writes.
You might enjoy, “A letter of recommendation in the age of Zoom,” by Matt Cheung, for McSweeney’s (10/14/20).