Seven in ten women who are pregnant or planning to become pregnant believe or are unsure about false claims related to COVID-19 vaccines, a Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) poll found.
Pollsters presented three false statements to respondents: Pregnant women should not get the COVID-19 vaccine, it is unsafe for breastfeeding women to get a COVID-19 vaccine and the COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to cause infertility.
Twenty-nine percent of respondents in the demographic believed at least one of three false statements.
Beyond those who heard the misinformation and believed it to be true, larger shares of pregnant women or those planning to become pregnant were unsure about the statements.
Nearly 4 in 10 respondents in that group were unsure if pregnant women should not get the COVID-19 vaccines. Forty-four percent were unsure if the vaccines cause infertility.
For women younger than 50, the poll found a higher tendency to believe or be unsure of the misinformation among those who were unvaccinated and those who did not have a college degree.
About half of women under the age of 50 said that they were confident vaccines were safe for pregnant people.
Roughly 3 in 10 pregnant women remain unvaccinated against COVID-19, a figure that lags adults overall, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
The CDC recommends pregnant people get vaccinated for COVID-19 and stay up-to-date on booster shots. The agency also suggests vaccination during pregnancy might help protect babies against COVID-19, but the CDC cautions that more data is needed to assess the potential protection.
Seventy-two percent of all adults in the poll were at least somewhat confident in the safety of COVID-19 vaccines for adults, but that figure fell to 53 percent when asked about their confidence in safety for pregnant people.
The poll also found a split in vaccine confidence along party lines. Seventy percent of Democrats said they were very confident that the COVID-19 vaccines were safe for adults, compared to 23 percent of Republicans.
When asked about their confidence in safety for pregnant people, those figures fell to 40 percent and 10 percent, respectively.
The survey was conducted May 10-19, by an online representative sample of 1,537 U.S. adults including 615 women aged 18 to 49, conducted in English (1,442) and in Spanish (95).
Groundbreaking University of Limerick, Ireland research has revealed for the first time that loneliness and social stresses can have a negative impact on our antibody response to COVID-19 vaccines.
In a world's first, a group of UL researchers have found that lower neighborhood cohesion is associated with antibody response to COVID-19 vaccines.
This is important as the more antibodies a person makes, the better the level of protection against hospitalization and death from COVID-19.
The research team have demonstrated in a study published in the prestigious journal Brain, Behaviour and Immunity, that lower social cohesion also made people feel lonelier, and this was an additional factor in reducing COVID-19 vaccine responses.
Social cohesion is the degree of social connectedness and solidarity among different community groups within a society, including levels of trust and connectedness between individuals and across community groups.
Professor Stephen Gallagher, lead author and director of the study of anxiety stress and health lab at UL, said that low social cohesion was "a social stressor and we have known for a long time that these psychosocial stressors can have damaging effects on immunity in general but also antibody responses following vaccination, which we have demonstrated previously. Thus, it made sense to explore antibody responses to COVID-19 vaccinations".
Using data from over 600 people who took part in the UK's Understanding Society COVID-19 antibody study in March 2021, the researchers examined whether factors such as social cohesion and loneliness had a negative impact on people's antibody responses to the COVID-19 vaccine.
The authors found that lower social cohesion was predictive of a lower response to a single-shot of the COVID-19 vaccine; that those who felt less connected to their neighborhood, had lower trust in their neighbors, and felt unsupported or less similar to their neighbors, made fewer antibodies in comparison to those who reported higher social cohesion.
In addition, those who reported lower social cohesion also tended to report that they felt lonelier, and this, in turn, reduced their antibody response.
Professor Orla Muldoon, who was a member of the Irish National Public Health Emergency Team (NPHET) advisory group on behavior and communication and was a co-author of the paper, said that these results highlight once again the relevance of public trust and social cohesion to the success of our pandemic response.
"Public and neighborhood trust, social cohesion, and loneliness have all come to the fore during the pandemic," explained Professor Muldoon.
"For example, during the initial lockdowns a sense of being in it together was an oft used mantra. We had 'clap for carers' in the UK, Italians singing from balconies, Dubliners playing bingo in the flats, all of which increased social cohesion and public trust.
"These feelings of social cohesion and trust were short-lived; something UK researchers now call the 'Dominic Cummings effect'. Similar diminishing levels of trust were also seen in the US during these periods. Along with this, lockdowns brought social risks such as less social interaction and an increased risk of loneliness.
"As well as the findings of this study showing their role in antibody responses, trust and cohesion have also been shown to drive compliance with public health guidelines and vaccine uptake," added Professor Muldoon.
Dr Siobhn Howard, a co-author on the study, added that loneliness was a "well-established risk factor for several health conditions, with immune suppression a likely underlying pathway. Thus, this study adds to the growing body of evidence linking loneliness to poor health".
Source:
Journal reference:
Gallagher, S., et al. (2022) Social cohesion and loneliness are associated with the antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination. Brain Behavior and Immunity. doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2022.04.017.
We are troubled by widespread reports that employers are firing or denying employment opportunities to unvaccinated workers without regard to potential religious or medical accommodations. See, e.g., Susan Edelman & Dean Balsamini, NYPD Puts 4,650 Vaccine Firings on Hold: Insiders, N.Y. Post, May 21, 2022 (reporting that nearly 5,000 NYPD employees are facing potential termination, including an undisclosed amount whose medical and exemption requests were rejected); Liz Hamel et al., KFF COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor: October 2021, Kaiser Family Foundation (Oct. 28, 2021) (1% of all adults lost their job due to the vaccine requirement; 8% of all adults reported that they would ask for an exemption). Government workers may have recourse under civil service laws and labor agreements, and even at-will employees cannot be easily fired here. While we are not promoting an anti-vaccine message, and indeed believe most should be vaccinated, we are concerned about employers disregarding the legally mandated accommodation process.
To be clear, the termination of workers for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine in many instances contravenes Federal, State and City laws, unless they are provided with an opportunity to seek exemptions for sincerely held religious beliefs and medical reasons. Notwithstanding the headlines which suggest terminations of all vaccine refusers are permissible, relevant law requires employers to carefully consider requests for religious or medical accommodations.
On December 13, 2021, New York Citys Commissioner of Health and Mental Hygiene issued an Order requiring COVID-19 vaccinations in all workplaces throughout New York City. While the Order requires that workers must provide proof of vaccination against COVID19 to a covered entity before entering the workplace, and a covered entity must exclude from the workplace any worker who has not provided such proof, the Order also requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for medical or religious reasons. Ord. of the Commr of Health & Mental Hygiene to Require COVID-19 Vaccn in the Workplace, 1, 5 (Dec. 13, 2021). The Citys workplace vaccine mandate is modeled after President Bidens Executive Order of September 9, 2021, which ordered federal agencies to implement, to the extent consistent with applicable law, a program to require COVID-19 vaccination for all of its Federal employees, with exceptions only as required by law. Exec. Order No. 14042, 86 FR 50985 (Sept. 9, 2021). The exceptions include accommodations for religious or medical reasons. Neither the Citys workplace vaccination requirement nor President Bidens executive order requires employers to fire unvaccinated employees.
Religious and medical exceptions to workplace vaccine mandates are codified in Federal, State, and City laws. Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when an employee has a genuine religious practice that conflicts with a requirement of employment, [an] employer, once notified, must offer the aggrieved employee a reasonable accommodation, unless doing so would cause the employer to suffer an undue hardship. Cosme v. Henderson, 287 F.3d 152, 158 (2d Cir. 2002) (citing 42 U.S.C. 2000e(j)). Likewise, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provide for employee medical accommodations, so long as those accommodations do not cause the employer undue hardship. 42 U.S.C. 12112(b)(5)(A).
State and City laws are similar, in that they too provide for religious and medical accommodations. State law requires employers to accommodate sincerely held religious beliefs or practices, unless, after engaging in a bona fide effort, the employer demonstrates that it is unable to reasonably accommodate the employees or prospective employees sincerely held religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employers business. N.Y. Exec. Law 296(10)(a). Further, medical accommodations are also subject to the undue-hardship standard. Id. 296(3)(a)-(b).
City law provides for a similar accommodation process. Employers in New York City must make reasonable accommodation to the religious needs of their employees, so long as those needs do not impose an undue hardship on the employer. N.Y.C. Admin. Code 8-107(3)(a)-(b). Like Federal and State law, a similar standard for medical accommodations applies under City law. Id. 8-107(28)(a).
Many employers may doubt whether employees are seeking religious exemptions to the vaccine requirements on account of a sincere religious belief. New York Citys Guidance on Accommodations for Workers feeds into this skepticism by suggesting that employers should actively question those workers seeking religious-based vaccine exemptions by asking them to provide a general vaccine history, explain why those vaccines were not against their religion, and a list/describe other commonly used medicines, food/drink, or other substances they do not allow to enter their bodies. N.Y.C. Law Dept, Guidance on Accommodations for Workers, at 3 (Dec. 20, 2021). Moreover, if the religious-based exemption request is based on an objection to the vaccine because it was developed and/or tested using fetal cells that the worker is concerned may have been the result of an abortion, then employers are advised to ask workers whether they take medications such as ibuprofen (Advil), acetaminophen (Tylenol), or anu other medications similarly developed or tested using fetal cell derivative lines. Id. New York Citys guidance then advises employers that if a worker answers affirmatively, then [s]uch behavior would be inconsistent with the religious belief, and generally means the worker would be denied an accommodation. Id.
This guidance potentially conflicts with that of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and New York Citys own Commission on Human Rights (NYCCHR). See, e.g., EEOC, What You Should Know About COVID-19 and the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and Other Laws, Technical Assistance Questions and Answers, K.12 (updated Mar. 14, 2022) (citing 29 C.F.R. 1605.1); NYCCHR, Guidance for Employers on Equitable Implementation of COVID-19 Vaccine Requirements (Dec. 15, 2021) (Equitable Implementation). The EEOC has cautioned employers that the definition of religion is broad and protects beliefs, practices, and observances with which the employer may be unfamiliar. EEOC, What You Should Know K.12; NYCCHR, Equitable Implementation at 3 ([T]he NYCHRL protects not only employees who belong to organized religions, such as Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism, but also employees who have religious, ethical, or moral beliefs that are sincerely held with the strength of religious views.). Under Title VII, protected religious beliefs are not dependent on whether they are acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others, Thomas v. Review Bd. of the Ind. Empt Sec. Div., 450 U.S. 707, 714 (1981), but instead, include moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong which are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views. 29 C.F.R. 1605.1.
Although an employer may question the sincerity of an employees religious objection, the EEOC has reiterated its longstanding guidance that employer[s] should ordinarily assume that an employees request for religious accommodation is based on a sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance. EEOC, Compliance Manual on Religious Discrimination 12-IV(A)(2)-(3) (Jan. 15, 2021); EEOC, What You Should Know K.12, L.2; see also NYCCHR, Equitable Implementation at 3 (Employees . . . should not be required to submit supporting documentation unless their employer has an objective basis to question the sincerity of the religious basis for the employees inability to show proof of vaccination.). The EEOCs guidance regarding the presumed sincerity of an employees religious beliefs is premised on a reluctance of the courts to opine on what is religion, and what is not. EEOC, Compliance Manual 12-I(A)(2) (citing, inter alia, Adeyeye v. Heartland Sweeteners, LLC, 721 F.3d 444, 452 (7th Cir. 2013)). The Supreme Court has long held, in First Amendment religion-clause cases, that its inappropriate for a jury to determine the truth or falsity of . . . religious beliefs or doctrines, United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78, 88 (1944), and that a persons contention that a belief is an essential part of [their] religious faith must be given great weight. United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163, 184 (1965).
Courts that have considered the issue of sincerity of religious beliefs in the context of labor and employment litigation have held that while employers may inquire into a workers religious beliefs when they are seeking an accommodation, they must do so in a limited fashion solely to ascertain the sincerity of the religious belief. For example, in Bushouse v. Local Union 2209, a federal district court ruled that an employees Title VII rights were not violated when his union required independent corroboration of alleged sincerely held religious beliefs that prohibited him from paying union dues. 164 F. Supp. 2d 1066, 1078 (N.D. Ind. 2001). The Bushouse court cautioned that its decision was limited to the facts of the case before it, and reasoned that the union was entitled to a limited inquiry into the sincerity of [the plaintiffs] claimed religious beliefs allows the union to ascertain whether an individual is motivated by sincere religious convictions as opposed to political or other convictions. Id. at n. 18. Other courts have similarly endorsed narrow inquiries into religious sincerity because the employees burden is not a heavy one and courts must avoid any test that might turn on the factfinders own idea of what a religion should resemble. Philbrook v. Ansonia Bd. of Educ., 757 F.2d 476, 482 (2d Cir. 1985) (internal quotations and citation omitted). Moreover, courts confronted with Title VII religious discrimination issues often assume that plaintiffs have established [sincerity] because courts are generally mindful that Title VIIs capacious definition of religion leaves little room for a party to challenge the religious nature of an employees professed beliefs. Together Employees v. Mass Gen. Brigham Inc., 2021 WL 5234394, at *17 (D. Mass. 2021) (internal quotations and citations omitted). Thus, employers should be cautious in questioning the sincerity of a workers religious-based vaccine exemption request.
When considering vaccine exemptions for medical accommodations under the ADA, the employee must have a disability. 42 U.S.C. 12112(b)(5)(A). But not all medical conditions qualify as disabilities. Rather, the condition must substantially limit[] a major life activity. 42 U.S.C. 12102(1)(A), 12102(2). Thus, an employer may inquire into the employees medical condition with somewhat more precision than it may with religious beliefs, as the employer may ask the individual for reasonable documentation about his/her disability and functional limitations. The employer is entitled to know that the individual has a covered disability for which s/he needs a reasonable accommodation. EEOC, Enforcement Guidance on Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA, EEOC-CVG-2003-1 (Oct. 17, 2002).
Under City law, the NYCCHR has advised employers that they must consider requests for reasonable accommodations from employees who need them because of disability, pregnancy, childbirth, lactation, and has advised employees that they may be required to provide a doctors note as proof of the medical condition. See NYCCHR, Equitable Implementation. Similar to the guidance related to religious exemptions, New York Citys accommodation guidance also appears skeptical of medical exemptions by seeming to limit the categories of individuals entitled to medical exemptions. For example, the guidance does not mention the consideration of exemption requests based upon disabilities, pregnancy, childbirth, or lactation; it instead only mentions permanent medical exemptions because of severe allergic reactions, and temporary exemptions due to of monoclonal antibody or convalescent plasma treatment of COVID, recent stem cell transplant, CAR Tcell therapy, or other therapy or treatment that would temporarily interfere with the workers ability to respond adequately to vaccination, or mount an immune response due to treatment, or [p]ericarditis or myocarditis. N.Y.C. Law Dept, Guidance on Accommodations at 2. Here, too, employers should be cautious in evaluating medical exemption requests.
Contrary to widespread belief, courts have not determined that terminations of COVID-19 vaccine refusers seeking religious or medical exemption are lawful. Courts thus far have merely denied requests for injunctive relief, which is a remedy requiring special justification. See, e.g., Dr. A v. Hochul, 142 S.Ct. 552 (2021); Kane v. DeBlasio, 19 F.4th 152 (2d. Cir. 2021). And, courts have determined that healthcare employers may well face an undue hardship if accommodations were granted. See, e.g., Together Employees, 2021 WL 5234394; Bare v. Cardinal Health, Inc., 2022 WL 702593 (E.D. Tenn. Mar. 8, 2022). Thus, it would be a mistake for employers to rely on the headlines and ignore the legally required reasonable-accommodation process.
Moreover, employers must show good faith when confronted with an employee requesting a reasonable accommodation in the form of a vaccine exemption for religious or medical reasons. EEOC, Compliance Manual 12-IV(A)(3) (collecting cases). [T]he first step in providing a reasonable accommodation is to engage in a good-faith interactive process that assesses the needs of the [employee] and the reasonableness of the accommodation requested. Hosking v. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Ctr., 186 A.D.3d 58, 62-63 (1st Dept 2020) (citations omitted). In other words, employers must engage[ ] in interactions with the employee revealing at least some deliberation upon the viability of the employees [accommodation] request. Jacobsen v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 22 N.Y.3d 824, 837 (2014). This inquiry also must be individualized for each employee seeking an accommodation. See, e.g., Wright v. New York State Dept of Corr., 831 F.3d 64, 77 (2d Cir. 2016). For their part, employees must cooperate with their employers in this processemployees who cause the interactive process to break down will forfeit their failure-to-accommodate claims. See Moxley v. New York, 2019 WL 5788440, at *12 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 6, 2019). While an employers failure to engage in a good-faith interactive process is not an independent claim under Federal or State law, it may be used as evidence of discrimination, Sheng v. M&T Bank Corp., 848 F.3d 78, 87 (2d Cir. 2017) (citations omitted), and is an independent claim under City law (which requires a good faith cooperative dialogue). N.Y.C. Admin. Code 8-107(28)(a); see also Hosking, 186 A.D.3d 58, 64.
Because employers must seriously consider their employees religious and medical accommodation requests on a case-by-case basis, more attention should be given to vaccine alternatives that will permit employees to do their jobs effectively without risking the safety of their coworkers or overburdening their employers. Employers must work together with their employees to consider what options are available to them, whether masking, regular testing, a schedule change, remote work, or other arrangement, given the nature of their employees work and their specific religious or medical needs. It is imperative that the legally mandated accommodation process not be cast aside for the sake of expediency or personal feelings regarding the necessity of vaccinations in the face of the pandemic.
Reprinted with permission from the May 26, 2022, issue date of the New York Law Journal 2022 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All rights reserved. Further duplication without permission is prohibited, contact 877-257-3382 or reprints@alm.com
Garrett Kaske, an associate at Kessler Matura P.C., assisted in the preparation of this article.
(Stacker) - The vaccine deployment in December 2020 signaled a turning point in the COVID-19 pandemic.
By the end of May 2021, 40% of the U.S. population was fully vaccinated.
But as vaccination rates lagged over the summer, new surges of COVID-19 came, including Delta in the summer of 2021, and now the Omicron variant, which comprises the majority of cases in the U.S.
The United States as of May 27 reached over 1 million COVID-19-related deaths and nearly 83.8 million COVID-19 cases, according to Johns Hopkins University.
Currently, 66.6% of the population is fully vaccinated, and 46.6% of vaccinated people have received booster doses.
Stacker compiled a list of the counties with highest COVID-19 vaccination rates in Kentucky using data from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services and Covid Act Now.
Counties are ranked by the highest vaccination rate as of May 26, 2022.
Due to inconsistencies in reporting, some counties do not have vaccination data available.
Keep reading to see whether your county ranks among the highest COVID-19 vaccination rates in your state.#50. Simpson County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 50.9% (9,451 fully vaccinated)
--- 11.6% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 512 (95 total deaths)
--- 43.8% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 30,729 (5,707 total cases)
--- 1.6% more cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#49. Logan County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 51.1% (13,859 fully vaccinated)
--- 11.3% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 469 (127 total deaths)
--- 31.7% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 31,001 (8,402 total cases)
--- 2.5% more cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#48. McLean County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 51.2% (4,718 fully vaccinated)
--- 11.1% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 587 (54 total deaths)
--- 64.9% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 28,706 (2,643 total cases)
--- 5.1% less cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#47. Mason County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 51.2% (8,741 fully vaccinated)
--- 11.1% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 621 (106 total deaths)
--- 74.4% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 29,678 (5,066 total cases)
--- 1.8% less cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#46. Muhlenberg County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 51.3% (15,714 fully vaccinated)
--- 10.9% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 402 (123 total deaths)
--- 12.9% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 33,496 (10,257 total cases)
--- 10.8% more cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#45. Washington County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 51.4% (6,213 fully vaccinated)
--- 10.8% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 513 (62 total deaths)
--- 44.1% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 33,055 (3,998 total cases)
--- 9.3% more cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#44. Magoffin County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 51.4% (6,255 fully vaccinated)
--- 10.8% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 428 (52 total deaths)
--- 20.2% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 32,654 (3,971 total cases)
--- 8.0% more cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#43. Grayson County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 51.7% (13,659 fully vaccinated)
--- 10.2% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 511 (135 total deaths)
--- 43.5% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 30,548 (8,073 total cases)
--- 1.0% more cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#42. Henderson County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 51.7% (23,355 fully vaccinated)
--- 10.2% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 372 (168 total deaths)
--- 4.5% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 31,079 (14,051 total cases)
--- 2.8% more cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#41. Fleming County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 52.0% (7,587 fully vaccinated)
--- 9.7% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 418 (61 total deaths)
--- 17.4% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 27,474 (4,006 total cases)
--- 9.1% less cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#40. Hopkins County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 52.0% (23,253 fully vaccinated)
--- 9.7% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 571 (255 total deaths)
--- 60.4% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 33,717 (15,067 total cases)
--- 11.5% more cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#39. Estill County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 52.1% (7,353 fully vaccinated)
--- 9.5% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 362 (51 total deaths)
--- 1.7% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 29,370 (4,143 total cases)
--- 2.9% less cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#38. Rowan County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 52.4% (12,829 fully vaccinated)
--- 9.0% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 286 (70 total deaths)
--- 19.7% less deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 27,792 (6,798 total cases)
--- 8.1% less cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#37. Caldwell County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 52.5% (6,696 fully vaccinated)
--- 8.9% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 479 (61 total deaths)
--- 34.6% more deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 32,745 (4,174 total cases)
--- 8.3% more cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#36. Nelson County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 52.5% (24,288 fully vaccinated)
--- 8.9% lower vaccination rate than Kentucky
- Cumulative deaths per 100k: 335 (155 total deaths)
--- 5.9% less deaths per 100k residents than Kentucky
- Cumulative cases per 100k: 31,770 (14,688 total cases)
--- 5.1% more cases per 100k residents than Kentucky#35. Leslie County, KY
- Population that is fully vaccinated: 52.6% (5,191 fully vaccinated)
Jefferson Health New Jersey was awarded a $574,503 grant from the New Jersey Department of Health.
The grant will be used to establish an outreach program to provide education, as well as COVID-19 vaccinations and boosters, to a wide array of community members in southern New Jersey. It will also be used to fund and train a team of social workers and community health workers to connect with various segments of the population throughout Camden and Gloucester counties and provide education and needed vaccinations.
Although New Jersey has one of the highest COVID-19 vaccination rates in the nation, there are still communities and subpopulations where rates remain under 70%.
Only 53.2% of residents of Gloucester County and 50.4% of residents of Camden County have received a booster shot.
The grant will fund education and vaccinations for more than a dozen communities in Camden and Gloucester counties. Specific areas of attention will include children ages 5 and up; women who are planning to become pregnant, are pregnant or are breastfeeding; people with intellectual or developmental disabilities; and homebound community members.
Jefferson Health New Jersey is proud to lead outreach efforts to engage vulnerable, undervaccinated communities in Camden and Gloucester counties, Amanda Kimmel, vice president of ambulatory operations for the Jefferson Medical Group in New Jersey, said. By ensuring equitable access to vaccines, we can help to lessen the disproportionate impacts of the pandemic for underserved populations, and prevent widening disparities while achieving broader population immunity.
Jefferson Health said it anticipates administering some 1,340 vaccines at hospital-based sites, outpatient locations and pop-up clinics. As the program expands, it is expected that flu shots will also be provided.
--Phase 1 clinical trial will evaluate safety and immunogenicity of several formulations of SCB-2020S as a 2-dose vaccination series in adults--
--SCB-2020S to further validate the use of Trimer-Tag as a plug-and-play technology platform and bolster Clovers COVID-19 vaccine pipeline--
SHANGHAI, China, May 31, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Clover Biopharmaceuticals, Ltd.(Clover; HKEX: 02197), a global clinical-stage biotechnology company developing novel vaccines and biologic therapeutic candidates, today announced the first participants have been dosed in a Phase 1 clinical trial to assess the safety and immunogenicity of several formulations of SCB-2020S.
SCB-2020S is a second generation, potentially broadly protective COVID-19 vaccine candidate based on a chimeric Beta and prototype trimeric SARS-CoV-2 S-protein, preserving potential neutralization epitopes across multiple variants of concern (VOCs) of SARS-CoV-2, including Omicron. Clover intends to explore how the SCB-2020S constructcould further expand the breadth of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies to address the existing and potential new variant strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
As new COVID-19 variants emerge, it is critical we continue to develop variant-adapted and potentially broadly protective COVID-19 vaccines to stay one step ahead of this highly contagious virus. The clinical evaluation of SCB-2020S will further demonstrate the proof-of-concept for variant strain change utilizing our Trimer-Tagtechnology platform, said Dr. Nicholas Jackson, President of Global Research and Development of Clover.
The Phase 1 trial is a double-blind, randomized, dose-finding study that will evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of SCB-2020S with CpG 1018/alum and CAS-1 adjuvants respectively. CAS-1 is Clovers proprietary oil-in-water emulsion-based adjuvant system developed in-house. The active comparator will be Clovers prototype COVID-19 vaccine candidate, SCB-2019 (CpG 1018/Alum). All vaccine formulations will be administered as a two-dose regimen, given 21 days apart to approximately 150 adults (18 to 75 years of age) in South Africa. Initial safety and immunogenicity data from the trial is expected in the second half of 2022.
Dr. Peng Liang, Founder and Chief Scientific Officer of Clover and inventor of Trimer-Tagtechnology added, We are thrilled to see the first participants dosed in this Phase 1 study, which marks another significant milestone on our journey to providing the world with much-needed solutions to address the future of this evolving COVID-19 pandemic utilizing our Trimer-Tagtechnology platform. We are also excited to bring CAS-1 our in-house oil-in-water emulsion adjuvant into the clinical trial stage and believe it could become a powerful tool used across our portfolio of Trimer-Tag vaccine candidates.
The evaluation of SCB-2020S will help inform Clovers future COVID-19 vaccine development strategy. Clover remains focused on completing regulatory submissions to the NMPA, the EMA, and the WHO for SCB-2019 (CpG 1018/Alum) as well as preparing for commercialization in China and around the world as the highest priorities and will continue to leverage the Trimer-Tag technology platform to create variant-specific and broadly protective COVID-19 vaccines.
About SCB-2020SEmploying the Trimer-Tag technology platform, Clover developed the SCB-2020S antigen, a stabilized trimeric form of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) protein based on the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the Beta variant and the N-terminal domain (NTD) of the original strain. This chimeric S-protein preserves potential neutralization epitopes across multiple variants of concerns (VOCs) of SARS-CoV-2, including Omicron. Clover will evaluate SCB-2020S with CAS-1, an in-house developed oil-in-water emulsion-based adjuvant, to further inform the development of the COVID-19 prophylaxis platform and adjuvant development programs.
About Clover BiopharmaceuticalsClover Biopharmaceuticals is a global clinical-stage biotechnology company committed to developing novel vaccines and biologic therapeutic candidates. The Trimer-Tag technology platform is a product development platform for the creation of novel vaccines and biologic therapies. Clover leveraged the Trimer-Tag technology platform to become a COVID-19 vaccine developer and created SCB-2019 (CpG 1018/Alum) to address the COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2.
For more information, please visit Clovers website:www.cloverbiopharma.comand follow the company onLinkedIn.
Clover Forward-looking StatementsThis press release contains certain forward-looking statements and information relating to us and our subsidiaries that are based on the beliefs of our management as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to our management. When used in this [document], the words aim, anticipate, believe, could, estimate, expect, going forward, intend, may, might, ought to, plan, potential, predict, project, seek, should, will, would and the negative of these words and other similar expressions, as they relate to us or our management, are intended to identify forward-looking statements.
Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and assumptions regarding our business, the economy and other future conditions. We give no assurance that these expectations and assumptions will prove to have been correct. Because forward-looking statements relate to the future, they are participant to inherent uncertainties, risks and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict. Our results may differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements. They are neither statements of historical fact nor guarantees or assurances of future performance. We caution you therefore against placing undue reliance on any of these forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement made by us in this document speaks only as of the date on which it is made. Factors or events that could cause our actual results to differ may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for us to predict all of them. Participant to the requirements of applicable laws, rules and regulations, we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. All forward-looking statements contained in this document are qualified by reference to this cautionary statement.
Clover Biopharmaceuticals:
Cindy MinSVP, Public Affairsmedia@cloverbiopharma.com
Naomi EichenbaumVP, Investor Relationsinvestors@cloverbiopharma.com
American Rescue Plan Act Covid-19 relief funds
$24 billion is promised to New York state and local governments through the American Rescue Plan Act
Peter Carr, Rockland/Westchester Journal News
New York's statewide COVID-19 case countfell by 36.5% last week, signalingthat a spring wave caused by severalomicron subvariants is subsiding.
The state added45,469 new cases in the week ending Sunday, down from the previous week's tally of 71,647 new cases of the virus that causes COVID-19.
New York ranked 22nd among the states where coronavirus was spreading the fastest on a per-person basis, a USA TODAY Network analysis of Johns Hopkins University data shows.
The trends in New York casesin recent weeks suggested that a COVID-19 wave, which began in early April and was fueledbyhighly contagious omicron subvariants,wasrecedingin upstate counties and movingdownstate, causing upticks there.
Now, cases are fallingstatewide, with both urban and rural regions showing double-digit declines.
Still,32out of New York's 62 countiescountiesfellintothe high-risk COVID-19 category, of as Thursday,due to local infection rates and strains on hospitals, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That's down from 54counties deemed high risk a week ago.
State and federal health officials urged people to wear masks indoors in public spaces in all counties within the high-risk category, regardless of vaccination status,to help curb the virus' spread.
"It is important that we don't let our guard down and continue to use the tools we have available to us to stay safe and healthy,"Gov. KathyHochul said in a statement Friday."The best way to protect yourself and your loved ones from serious illness is to get vaccinated and keep up to date with your booster doses."
Regulators have taken several steps in recent weeks to strengthen vaccination and booster rates nationally, including recommending a booster earlier this monthfor ages 5-11,at least five months after their initial vaccination series.
Meanwhile, Pfizer-BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine appears to be safe and effective for children ages 6 monthsto 5 years, according toa company study released last week.The report suggested regulators could soon approve the vaccine for the youngest age group after months of delays.
In the latest week, coronavirus cases in the United States decreased 11.3% from the week before, with 702,236 cases reported. With 5.84% of the country's population, New York had 6.47% of the country's cases in the last week.
Across the country, 32 states had more cases in the latest week than they did in the week before.
More on COVID-19 in NY: New York COVID cases up 5%. NYC, Long Island face worst outbreaks as upstate wave recedes
NY nursing homes and COVID: 35,600 nursing home complaints flooded NY amid COVID. Here's what happened to each one
Across New York, cases fell in 58 counties, with the best declines in:
>> See how your community has fared with recent coronavirus cases
New York ranked 7th among states in share of people receiving at least one shot, with 90.2% of its residents at least partially vaccinated. The national rate is 77.7%, a USA TODAY analysis of CDC data shows. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, which are the most used in the United States, require two doses administered a few weeks apart.
In the week ending Wednesday, New York reported administering another 172,494 vaccine doses, including 22,063 first doses. In the previous week, the state administered 215,423 vaccine doses, including 26,428 first doses. In all, New York reported it has administered 39,323,243 total doses.
Within New York, the worst weekly outbreaks on a per-person basis were in:
The Centers for Disease Control says high levels of community transmission begin at 100 cases per 100,000 per week.
Weekly case counts rose in three counties from the previous week. The worst increases from the prior week's pace were in Bronx, Kings and Richmond counties.
In New York, 150 people were reported dead of COVID-19 in the week ending Sunday. In the week before that, 168 people were reported dead.
A total of 5,414,434 people in New York have tested positive for the coronavirus since the pandemic began, and 68,955 people have died from the disease, Johns Hopkins University data shows. In the United States 83,984,644 people have tested positive and 1,004,733 people have died.
>> Track coronavirus cases across the United States
USA TODAY analyzed federal hospital data as of Sunday, May 29.
Likely COVID patients admitted in the state:
Likely COVID patients admitted in the nation:
Hospitals in 34 states reported more COVID-19 patients than a week earlier, while hospitals in 33 states had more COVID-19 patients in intensive-care beds. Hospitals in 35 states admitted more COVID-19 patients in the latest week than a week prior, the USA TODAY analysis of U.S. Health and Human Services data shows.
The USA TODAY Network is publishing localized versions of this story on its news sites across the country, generated with data from Johns Hopkins University and the Centers for Disease Control. If you have questions about the data or the story, contact Mike Stucka at mstucka@gannett.com.
10th District Legislators Introduce Resolution Urging Congress to Reinstate Military Members Discharged for Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine
Senator Jim Holzapfel and Assemblymen Greg McGuckin and John Catalano have introduced a resolution which urges Congress to reinstate U.S. service members who were forcibly discharged from duty in response to COVID-19 vaccine mandates. This resolution comes in response to several Marines from Ocean County who were discharged for opting out of the vaccine which prompted Congressman Chris Smith to introduce H.R. 7570.
Our military service members have given so much to preserve our freedoms and they should not be punished for making a personal medical decision, stated Senator Holzapfel. Our legislation is urging Congress to do the right thing and allow the brave men and women of our nation the opportunity to continue their service while receiving the benefits they rightfully deserve.
COVID-19 vaccinations became mandatory for members of the Armed Forces in 2021.Those service members who did not wish to receive a vaccine were discharged, in some cases with a general discharge under honorable conditions. These discharges may create issues for future employment, interfering with their ability to serve the country and possibly reducing their eligibility for certain benefits.
Enough with the political games that are damaging the livelihoods of our service members, added Assemblyman McGuckin. We can all agree that the promises weve made to the members of our Armed Forces should be upheld and those seeking to be reinstated have the opportunity while maintaining their benefits. In addition, taxpayers have paid billions to train our fully volunteer military branches and we should not just throw away that investment.
This concurrent resolution would reinstate service members to their previous rank and grade, upon their request and change the discharge of an individual to honorable.
We are ashamed at the lack of respect for the men and women who have sacrificed so much for the love of their country, continued Assemblyman Catalano. The vaccine mandates forced upon our Armed Forces are part of a political agenda which have ruined thousands of military careers. Those that are dismissed should be able to honorably continue serving their country and have their records rightfully restored, without question.
(Visited 18 times, 18 visits today)
Sars-CoV-2 continues to infect millions of people worldwide and cause an estimated 10,000 deaths per day, as the US alone approaches one million dead. It is widely expected to become endemic, remaining in circulation for the foreseeable future, and continuing to cause substantial numbers of hospitalisations and deaths, especially among vulnerable groups. Covid kills about tenfold more people than flu, based on historical information, says Penny Ward, professor of pharmaceutical medicine at Kings College London, UK.
Existing vaccines reduce the probability of severe disease, but do not protect against infection. Immunity also wanes within months, particularly against the newest emerging variants. This leaves room for companies to develop more effective antivirals and vaccines in the coming months or even years.
There are now three drugs to fight the virus directly: two taken orally and one intravenous. Pfizers Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) inhibits a viral protease enzyme, and the tablets can reduce hospitalisation and death by around 60% when taken early. Lagevrio (molnupiravir), from Merck & Co and Ridgeback Therapeutics, mimics an RNA building block and introduces catastrophic errors in viral RNA. It can cut the risk of hospitalisation or death by around 30%.
But both have issues. Paxlovid includes ritonavir, which has pharmacogenetic boosting effects, notes Ward, but is incompatible with medications for heart disease, diabetes and other conditions. Molnupiravir cannot be given to pregnant women or children. Theyre not the perfect antivirals, says Ward. While the third option Gileads Veklury (remdesivir) might lower the risk of hospitalisation or death by 87%, it must be given intravenously. That leaves plenty of scope for new antivirals. Mortality following hospital admission is between 25 and 40%, depending on the frailty of the individual, says Ward. Rapid diagnosis and prescription is also important for the drugs to be effective, which may be problematic as countries cut down access to testing.
There are a few candidate antivirals in development. Atea Pharmaceuticals has a polymerase inhibitor, bemnifosbuvir (AT-537), that it continues to pursue, despite a setback with a phase 2 trial with mild-to-moderate patients that brought a collaboration with Roche to an end in October. They are rejigging the trial design and continuing with development, says Ward. Meanwhile, Japanese biotech Shionogi has a protease inhibitor (S-217622) in phase 2a trials.
I think omicron is going to carry us from pandemic to endemic, but we dont know how much pathogenicity an endemic Sars-CoV-2 will carry
Since antivirals target internal proteins, which do not mutate as much as the spike protein targeted by antibodies, they are expected to hold up well against new variants, and possibly even other coronaviruses. Ward expects strong demand for effective antivirals, to the point where governments would stockpile these treatments, in the same way as flu antivirals. This offers a lucrative market for anyone with large quantities of new, improved antivirals. The US government has bought around 3.1 million courses of molnupiravir, for approximately $2.2 billion, for example.
But supply is likely to continue to be an issue. Molnupiravir is formulated as a powder-filled capsule. There are relatively few capsule filling lines and these have lower production than tablet lines, says Ward. Presently, neither [Merck nor Pfizer] can produce enough of these drugs to be able to supply the world, says Ward. Most governments will retain them for use in the highest risk population.
Although the mRNA vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech have dominated in wealthy countries, the New York Times vaccine tracker lists 12 fully approved vaccines, 19 in early or limited use, and 38 in phase 3 efficacy trials. And there are good reasons for them to continue. There are significant limitations with the current vaccines, says Kingston Mills from Trinity College Dublin in Ireland. They dont produce sterilising immunity, meaning they dont prevent infection. He notes that antibody levels drop after each dose, although some of the vaccines seem to induce stronger long-term T-cell memory responses. There is room for the development of vaccines that have better local immunity and better immune memory, he concludes. He is optimistic that this can be done.
We have vaccines that are very effective against serious disease and stopping people from ending up in hospital and dying, but they arent very good at preventing people from getting infected
Some see the initial slow pace of vaccine coverage to poorer regions as an inevitable result of government decisions. The international Covax initiative to distribute vaccines to lower income countries has faced a barrage of broken promises, delays and logistical difficulties. All policy makers cared about was speed and innovation, says Peter Hotez, vaccinologist at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, US. They got what they paid for: interesting vaccines for smaller populations in the northern hemisphere. Early vaccine shipments went to those willing to pay top dollar. But leaving parts of the world unvaccinated has proven risky. Hotez points to the delta and omicron variants both coming out of unvaccinated populations in India and southern Africa, respectively.
Hotez began a coronavirus vaccine programme almost a decade ago, first for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (Sars) after 2012 and then for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (Mers). When Covid-19 came along, he was ready to develop a vaccine based on the receptor binding domain on the spike. This recombinant protein plus adjuvant vaccine (Corbevax) was licensed to the Indian company Biological E in 2020, and later showed 90% efficacy in phase 3 trials, gaining emergency authorisation in India in late December 2021. It relies on standard yeast fermentation to make its recombinant protein. The technology is similar to that used to make recombinant hepatitis B vaccine, says Hotez, meaning it can be made locally in countries such as India, Bangladesh, Vietnam and Brazil. There are no patents, no strings attached, with ownership transferred to the development country vaccine manufacturer. It should be easier to store than mRNA vaccines and, being an older technology, perhaps reassure people hesitant about newer vaccines, he adds.
Other protein-based vaccines are making progress, with Novavax the first to gain approval. Sanofi and GSK began a phase 3 study of their recombinant protein vaccine last summer, announcing preliminary booster results in December and intention to file for regulatory approval this February. Recombinant protein vaccines have different manufacturing requirements than the viral vector, mRNA or live attenuated viral vaccines, which broadens the range of manufacturing facilities available to make more vaccines.
Other vaccine developers remain confident that their candidates have advantages that will earn them a place in the Covid-19 vaccine market. Canadian company Medicago is growing vaccines in Nicotiana benthamiana a close relative of tobacco. Young plants are inoculated with a modified agrobacterium that induces them to produce the Sars-CoV-2 spike protein. After a few weeks, the plants are processed to harvest virus-like particles from the leaves. They are the same shape, size and exterior appearance as the native virus, which is one of the reasons we think they are so immunogenic, says Brian Ward, medical officer at the company. The finished vaccine, dubbed Covifenz, also includes GlaxoSmithKlines immune response-boosting adjuvant ASO3.
In trials, Covifenz was around 70% effective against the delta variant in December 2021, and was approved in late February by Health Canada. Medicago sees much of its sales in the booster market and is shortly starting a trial in patients who already received other approved vaccines. However, the World Health Organization decided against accepting it for emergency use, owing to the companys links to the tobacco industry Medicago is 33% owned by Philip Morris International.
If we want to prevent symptomatic disease, then we will have to give boosters very frequently, six-monthly or perhaps even three-monthly
Other companies are also targeting boosters. US biotech firm Arcturus Therapeutics has developed an mRNA vaccine (ARCT-021) that is self-amplifying. Whereas the mRNA in approved Covid-19 vaccines makes spike protein for a day or two, Arcturus mRNA churns out spike for one to two weeks. Chief executive Joseph Payne explains that this means the dose can be significantly reduced, to 5g per dose, compared to 30g for PfizerBioNTech and 50g for Moderna.
A lower dose means less RNA is injected, meaning less of the other ingredients in the formulation as well. The key side effects with vaccines are attributed not to the mRNA but to the [other] ingredients, says Payne, so he hopes to see a more attractive safety profile. Also, production should stretch much further, in theory allowing the firm to manufacture more doses at lower cost than other mRNA vaccines. Arcturus has manufacturing agreements in place in the US, Japan and Europe, and is building a production facility in Hanoi, Vietnam. In late April, the company reported 95% efficacy in preventing severe Covid-19 in trials in Vietnam, and 55% efficacy in preventing symptomatic illness.
We have vaccines that continue to be very effective against serious disease and stopping people from ending up in hospital on ventilators and dying, says Adam Finn, immunologist at the University of Bristol, UK. But they arent very good at preventing people from getting infected. Meanwhile, Moderna and Pfizer and other vaccine companies have developed omicron-specific boosters, but it remains to be seen if these will be effective or necessary. Finn says current vaccines are tuned to the wrong virus, but you could rush to make a vaccine based on the latest variant, and by the time youve manufactured it, it is no longer the relevant variant. It might be that vaccines covering multiple variants will eventually be rolled out.
Immunologists view mixing of vaccines favourably, with the European Medicines Agency noting that combining mRNA and viral vector vaccines produces good levels of antibodies and a higher T-cell response. A booster with another platform will get a better response, says Mills.
Kings Colleges Penny Ward agrees: If we want to prevent symptomatic disease, then we will have to give boosters very frequently, six-monthly or perhaps even three-monthly. She views vaccines at a more efficient way to manage the disease than relying on more expensive antivirals.
Nonetheless, there is some opposition to the idea of continuing to boost significant numbers of people. This is not a tenable path, says Steve Brozak, biotech analyst. The speed of omicron was too fast. We can develop a prototype vaccine, but by the time you actually manufacture it, youre probably three quarters through the infection peak. Even in most wealthy countries, it will not be feasible to continue vaccinating the entire population at regular intervals. Instead of dealing with the virus, deal with the damage it does, Brozak suggests, for example using the cheap steroid, dexamethasone, which can reduce mortality in the severely ill. There are multiple efforts to dampen inflammation in severe Covid-19 with novel drugs.
Paul Offit, a vaccinologist at Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia, US, believes that boosters for young adults are not risk free and that vaccines were never meant to protect against infections or mild illnesses. Offit says that two or three doses of vaccine should suffice for most people. Immunisation can protect against severe disease for a long time, he says. He is critical of vaccine companies alluding to yearly vaccines, since theres no evidence for that yet.
The eventual fate of the Sars-CoV-2 virus remains uncertain. There is a strong suspicion that it will follow a path towards becoming a common cold coronavirus, although how long it would take to reach this destination is unknown. It might become a regular human endemic coronavirus over the next eight to ten years, says Penny Ward, and I think omicron is going to carry us from pandemic to endemic, but we dont know how much pathogenicity an endemic Sars-CoV-2 will carry with it.
Regular boosters of vulnerable groups may be needed for years to come to protect against severe disease, with Covid-19 sticking around to cause cold symptoms amongst healthy adults and severe illness among vulnerable people. Treatments for vulnerable patients will continue to be needed, especially in countries where vaccination and/or infection rates have been relatively low.
Need assistance with covid19 vaccinations? PA Link can help.
The CDC has recently approved and are suggesting that seniors over 60 and those who have underlying medical conditions be given a 2nd booster to protect themselves and their loved ones from covid-19. If you havent been vaccinated, or still need your first booster, its not too late.
If you have a question, need advice, or something more, PA Link is here for you.
PA Link can provide a vaccine location nearest to you and assist in scheduling a vaccine/booster.
PA Link can provide information on transportation options to a vaccine location.
Reach out by calling the PA Link hotline at 1-800-753-8827
Or visit the PA Link to Aging and Disability website.
This has been a paid article submitted by our content partner.
