[1/3]A woman receives a booster dose of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine against the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Bangkok, Thailand, January 5, 2023. REUTERS/Athit Perawongmetha/File Photo Acquire Licensing Rights
Oct 26 (Reuters) - Pfizer (PFE.N) and German partner BioNTech said on Thursday that their vaccine to prevent flu and COVID-19 generated a strong immune response against strains of the viruses in an early- to mid-stage trial.
The companies said they plan to start a late-stage trial in the coming months.
"This vaccine has the potential to lessen the impact of two respiratory diseases with a single injection and may simplify immunization practices," Annaliesa Anderson, Pfizer's head of vaccine research and development, said in a statement.
In the trial, the vaccine candidates were compared to a licensed influenza vaccine and the companies' updated COVID-19 vaccine given at the same visit.
The data from the trial showed that the flu-COVID vaccine demonstrated robust immune responses to influenza A, influenza B and SARS-CoV-2 strains, the companies said.
(This story has been refiled to fix syntax in the headline)
Reporting by Manas Mishra in Bengaluru; Editing by Savio D'Souza
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
Asking people to wear masks is linked to reduced coronavirus transmission
Richard B. Levine/Alamy
A review of the studies done so far has concluded that wearing masks really does help prevent the spread of covid-19. It is far from the first paper to come to this finding, so why does the issue remain so controversial? The problem is that it isnt easy to carry out individual studies of the highest standard during a pandemic.
That standard is a randomised controlled trial (RCT), in which people are randomly assigned to either get a treatment or intervention, in this case wearing a mask, or not. Because of the practical difficulties, only two RCTs have looked at whether wearing masks prevents the spread of covid-19 outside of healthcare settings.
One, in Denmark, was too small to produce a statistically significant result. The other, in Bangladesh, found that in villages randomly chosen to be supplied with masks, 35 per cent fewer people aged more than 60 years old and 10 per cent fewer people overall got symptomatic infections, compared with villages that werent supplied with masks.
As such, the much-criticised Cochrane review published in January, which looked only at RCTs, said it couldnt draw firm conclusions about the efficacy of masks. Some people then wrongly claimed that this review found that masks dont work.
Many highly effective policies, such as speed limits and the wearing of seatbelts, have never been assessed by RCTs, as pointed out by Shama Cash-Goldwasser at the Resolve to Save Lives initiative in New York. When few RCTs have been done, it is appropriate to look at other kinds of evidence, she and her colleagues write in their review.
To start with, lab studies show that masks help block the relatively large droplets and aerosols that can carry viruses, with higher-quality N95 masks filtering out more than lower-quality masks.
Then there are so-called observational studies, which look back at events and try to work out what effect certain measures may have had. For instance, during an outbreak on a ship called the USS Theodore Roosevelt early in the pandemic, crew members who reported wearing masks were 30 per cent less likely to have been infected than those who reported not wearing them.
The question of whether people who wear masks are less likely to be infected isnt the same as that of whether authorities asking people to wear masks known as a mask mandate reduces infection rates more widely, including among those who dont actually wear masks themselves. In Germany, a study that compared regions that introduced mask mandates at different times found a 45 per cent reduction in infections.
A similar US study found a 25 per cent reduction four weeks after a mask mandate was introduced. Varying levels of adherence mean the effectiveness of mask mandates will vary from place to place and over time, the team notes.
Available evidence strongly suggests that masking in the community can reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the review concludes.
I think theyve got it right, says Christopher Dye at the University of Oxford, whose team has done an even more comprehensive review as part of a Royal Society report. In our review, we found essentially the same results in healthcare settings as in communities, he says.
As observational studies arent randomised, it is difficult to ensure there is no bias, says Dye. However, when many different observational studies all come to the same conclusion, we can have more confidence in the findings.
Cash-Goldwasser and her colleagues also note that no public health intervention is 100 per cent effective and the benefits of masks have to be weighed against any adverse effects. For instance, it has been suggested wearing masks might affect the development of young children.
Authorities need to be clear about the evidence so they can make the best decisions in the event of another pandemic, the review concludes. Masking with the highest-quality masks that can be made widely available should play an important role in controlling whatever pandemic caused by a respiratory pathogen awaits us.
Topics:
Pfizer has priced Paxlovid at $1,390 for the five-day treatment course, the company confirmed to AARP. If all goes according to plan, however, most people will not have to pay that amount, Kates says.
Pfizer has said it will offer a copay program for eligible privately insured patients through 2028, though details of this program, including who might be eligible and how much assistance people can expect to receive, have not been released.
Health & Wellness
Target Optical
Savings on eye exams and eyewear at national retailers
See more Health & Wellness offers >
HHS says it expects there to be commercial coverage for Lagevrio as well. The drugs maker hasnt yet set a price for its pills, but the company told AARP it will be releasing that in the near future.
If you come down with COVID-19 in the next few weeks and need treatment, you may not see a bill at all. During the transition, the government is encouraging health care providers and pharmacies to continue to use federally acquired product until it is depleted or until it expires, at no cost to patients.
You shouldnt have to pay out of pocket for treatment in the next few years if youre uninsured. Pfizer says Paxlovid will remain free for people without health insurance through 2028, and beginning in 2025 it will be free for people who are underinsured, also through 2028. More information will be available soon at paxlovid.com or by calling 1-877-219-7225.
Merck has said that it will have a patient assistance program for eligible patients who, without assistance, could not otherwise afford the product. More information on this program will be available after Nov. 17 at merckhelps.com or by calling 1-800-727-5400.
Its not unusual for transitions to come with a few glitches and hiccups. But any wrinkles are a particular concern when it comes to COVID-19 treatments, health experts say, since timely access to the antivirals is key.
The medications work best when started right away within five days of the onset of symptoms. Any delays due to cumbersome copay programs or confusion over coverage could risk a persons ability to benefit from the treatment, Kates says.
If it creates any holdups or backups, which does happen in the health care system, that could mean the difference between being able to access this medication that is highly important for some people, and not getting it, Kates adds.
In a recent study published in the British Journal of Psychiatry, researchers evaluated mortality in individuals with severe mental illness (SMI) following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection.
People with SMI have a 15-to-20-year reduced life expectancy relative to the general public, which has remained consistently high over decades before the COVID-19 pandemic, regardless of ethnicity and race. Further, reports suggest that individuals with SMI have an excess death risk due to COVID-19 and other causes and, generally, have a higher risk of hospitalization, with concerns that pre-existing conditions might contribute to this (excess) risk.
The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated pre-existing inequalities, especially in relation to ethnicity/race. The intersection of ethnicity/race with SMI on COVID-19 outcomes remains unclear. Moreover, some racial minority groups have a higher prevalence of multimorbidity, and there are concerns that these groups may experience delayed access to testing and vaccination. Further, how SMI in racial minorities contributes to excess mortality risk after COVID-19 remains unknown.
In the present study, researchers investigated whether mortality risk was higher in people with SMI post-COVID-19 and whether multimorbidity and ethnicity/race had any effect on this risk. Data from family practices in Northern Ireland and England were obtained from the Aurum database. Patients in this database broadly represented the United Kingdom (UK) population by age, sex, area-level deprivation, and geographical distribution.
The SMI group included patients aged 5 with an SMI and a definitive infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between February 2020 and March 2021. They defined SMI as having at least one record for bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder, schizophrenia, or other affective disorders with psychosis. The population control group included SARS-CoV-2-positive patients without an SMI diagnosis.
Patients were followed up until death, registration termination, or study end date. Notably, patients with an SMI diagnosis after COVID-19 were excluded to reduce reverse causation risk. The studys outcome was all-cause mortality. Covariate factors used to find determinant factors were demographic factors like age, sex, ethnicity, area deprivation, and geographical regions. Area deprivation was a composite metric of area-level skills, education, income, crime, disability, health, housing, training, and employment.
Data on admission to intensive care unit (ICU), multimorbidity linked with higher COVID-19 risk, and corticosteroid drug and immunological therapy were also included. Clinical variables included body mass index (BMI) and smoking status. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate differences in mortality between SMI and control groups.
The study included 7,146 patients in the SMI group and 653,024 controls. Patients in the SMI group were older than controls; the SMI group had a higher proportion of patients with obesity and multimorbidity, current smokers, and people of Black African/Caribbean ethnicity. The study period spanned two COVID-19 waves.
The SMI group had a higher likelihood of death from COVID-19 than controls. COVID-19 deaths in the UK surged from March/April 2020, and no casualties were observed initially within the first 60 days post-COVID-19. There were fewer deaths within 60 to 90 days post-infection. The researchers observed steeper declines in survival probabilities in the SMI group during both COVID-19 waves, which were reproduced in covariate-adjusted survival probabilities.
Patients in the SMI group were at a higher risk of all-cause mortality in gender- and age-adjusted models, which was consistent in models with further adjustment for smoking status, BMI, area deprivation, multimorbidity, and ethnicity/race. There were no interactions between ethnicity/race and SMI.
Nonetheless, Black African/Caribbean groups had a higher mortality risk following COVID-19 than White people. The adjusted hazard ratio for all-cause mortality in the SMI group was 1.71 and 1.4 in the first and second waves, respectively, compared to controls. Notably, the researchers observed a statistical interaction between SMI and multimorbidity.
Data indicated that the additional, multiplicative effect of multimorbidity was significant in both groups but greater in controls. Sensitivity analyses, in which SMI and control patients were matched on the number of multimorbid conditions, produced similar results as the primary analysis. Additionally, results were comparable when SMI patients under 18 were excluded.
Taken together, the study demonstrated that SMI patients experienced a substantially greater risk of death from COVID-19. Mortality among SMI patients increased steeply during the first wave of COVID-19 compared to controls. Both groups showed a steep decline in survival probability at about 400 days. Furthermore, the SMI group had a greater and longer risk of all-cause mortality during the second wave than controls.
Black people were at a higher risk of death from COVID-19 than White people. The findings highlighted the effect of multimorbidity on mortality risk in both groups. Overall, the study underscored that SMI patients experienced substantial inequalities in mortality outcomes during COVID-19, magnified by multimorbidity.
WASHINGTON The University of Maryland (UMD) reversed its coercive COVID-19 directive after Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) and all Majority Members opened an investigation into the Universitys policy earlier this month. Under the previous directive, COVID-19 positive students were forced to immediately leave campus and isolate presumably at their own expense at a nearby hotel or by boarding a flight home. Effective November 1, University of Maryland students who test positive for COVID-19 will be allowed to isolate in-place within their residence halls.
Chairman Wenstrup released the following statement on the Universitys policy reversal:
Reinstituting an outdated COVID-19 policy that threatened the well-being of Maryland students was not only counterproductive, but also unscientific. The Select Subcommittee wrote to UMD President Pines to highlight the negative impact of similar, pandemic-era education policies on Americas youth and encourage the University to reconsider its destructive directive. Thankfully the University, within days of receiving the Select Subcommittees letter, changed its quarantine policy to follow science, data, and common sense. The Majority members of the Select Subcommittee appreciate UMDs prompt response to our letter and will continue to investigate any potentially harmful COVID-19 policies reemerging at universities across the country.
Read the University of Marylands response letter here.
Read the Select Subcommittees October 13, 2023 letter to the University of Maryland here.
###
Tobias Arhelger/AdobeStock
Remdesivir treatment is associated with significantly reduced mortality among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen across SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC), report authors of a new study.
Researchers published their findings from the large, multicenter, retrospective cohort study in Open Forum Infectious Diseases, the journal of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.
Although over 3 years have passed since the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, patients critically ill with COVID-19 still face high mortality rates and have limited therapeutic options, wrote corresponding author Robert L. Gottlieb MD, PhD, deputy editor for Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings, and colleagues.
According to investigators, approximately 1 in 2 patients in the US with COVID-19 requiring invasive ventilation have died since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.
It remains essential to continue to evaluate therapeutic options to treat patients throughout the spectrum of COVID-19 disease and VOC periods, stated Gottlieb and coauthors. Remdesivir has maintained effective antiviral activity against all clinically relevant VOC and retains an important role in the management of COVID-19.
Findings from previous randomized controlled trialssuch as the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT-1) and the SOLIDARITY trialshow that remdesivir use improves time to recovery and reduces mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.
It is less clear, however, how effective remdesivir is for patients with COVID-19 who are critically ill, noted researchers. To gain insight, Gottlieb and colleagues matched patients who were hospitalized for COVID-19 between December 2020 and April 2022 and received remdesivir upon admission 1:1 to patients not given remdesivir while hospitalized with the virus.
Analyses were stratified by supplemental oxygen requirement upon admissionlow-flow oxygen (LFO), high-flow oxygen/noninvasive ventilation (HFO/NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation/extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (IMV/ECMO)and VOC periods (pre-Delta, Delta-predominant, and Omicron-predominant).
Cox proportional hazards models were used to derive adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for 14- and 28-day mortality, stated authors.
According to the study, a total of 67 582 patients receiving LFO, 34 857 receiving HFO/NIV, and 4164 receiving IMV/ECMO, all treated with remdesivir, were matched to nonremdesivir-treated participants.
Researchers observed that unadjusted mortality rates were significantly lower for patients treated with remdesivir at 14 days (LFO: 6.4% vs 8.8%; HFO/NIV: 16.8% vs 19.4%; IMV/ECMO: 27.8% vs 35.3%) and 28 days (LFO: 9.8% vs 12.3%; HFO/NIV: 25.8% vs 28.3%; IMV/ECMO: 41.4% vs 50.6%).
In adjusted analyses, remdesivir treatment was associated with a statistically significant reduction in in-hospital mortality at 14 days (LFO: aHR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.79; HFO/NIV: aHR 0.83, 95% CI 0.770.89; IMV/ECMO: aHR 0.73, 95% CI 0.650.82) and 28 days (LFO: aHR 0.79, 95% CI 0.730.85; HFO/NIV: aHR 0.88, 95% CI 0.820.93; IMV/ECMO: aHR 0.74, 95% CI 0.670.82) compared with nonremdesivir treatment.
This lower risk of mortality among patients who received remdesivir was observed across the specified VOC periods, although researchers noted that the association was most pronounced during the Omicron wave.
Where early remdesivir administration is not possible, robust findings from this study demonstrate that remdesivir administration is associated with a survival benefit even when the hyperinflammatory response has already developed as in patients requiring HFO/NIV or IMV/ECMO, concluded Gottlieb et al. Given the growing evidence supporting the clinical and survival benefits associated with remdesivir use in both severe and critically ill COVID-19 patients, clinical guidelines may merit further revisions.
Source: Mozaffari E, Chandak A, Gottlieb RL, et al. Remdesivir is associated with reduced mortality in COVID-19 patients requiring supplemental oxygen including invasive mechanical ventilation across SARS-CoV-2 variants. Open Forum Infect Dis.2023;10(10):ofad482. doi:10.1093/ofid/ofad482.
L.L. Bean has just added a third shift at its factory in Brunswick, Maine, in an attempt to keep up with demand for its iconic boot.
Orders have quadrupled in the past few years as the boots have become more popular among a younger, more urban crowd.
The company says it saw the trend coming and tried to prepare, but orders outpaced projections. They expect to sell 450,000 pairs of boots in 2014.
People hoping to have the boots in time for Christmas are likely going to be disappointed. The bootsare back ordered through February and even March.
"I've been told it's a good problem to have but I"m disappointed that customers not getting what they want as quickly as they want," said Senior Manufacturing Manager Royce Haines.
Customers like, Mary Clifford, tried to order boots on line, but they were back ordered until January.
"I was very surprised this is what they are known for and at Christmas time you can't get them when you need them," said Clifford.
People who do have boots are trying to capitalize on the shortage and are selling them on Ebay at a much higher cost.
L.L. Bean says it has hired dozens of new boot makers, but it takes up to six months to train someone to make a boot.
The company has also spent a million dollars on new equipment to try and keep pace with demand.
Some customers are having luck at the retail stores. They have a separate inventory, and while sizes are limited, those stores have boots on the shelves.
A federal appeals court has ruled that a former Connecticut prison official is not protected from facing accusations in civil court that she improperly allowed incarcerated people to be exposed to the coronavirus.
The decision was issued Tuesday to reject qualified immunity for former Osborn Correctional Institution Deputy Warden Nicole Thibeault and therefore affirm an earlier ruling by the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. Qualified immunity protects officials from liability unless they violate a constitutional right.
The ruling sets the stage for people who were incarcerated at the brunt of the pandemic to take their civil cases to trial, a noteworthy circumstance given the lingering concerns about how the state handled the care of prisoners at the time.
Christopher Nazario, who was incarcerated at Osborn in March and April 2020, filed the lawsuit against Thibeault in 2021, claiming that the former deputy warden violated his Eighth Amendment rights, which prohibit cruel and unusual punishment.
In court filings, Nazario, who worked as a laundry worker while incarcerated at Osborn, says that he and his coworkers were transferred from a cell block with windows and solid metal doors to one with no windows and bar doors that were open to a hallway.
Nazario and his fellow laundry workers claim that they expressed concerns to Thibeault about COVID-19-positive and symptomatic people housed in the cell block they were being transferred to.
But Thibeault warned that if they did not move to the designated cell block, referred to as the E-Block, they would lose their jobs, receive a negative work evaluation, get a ticket for refusing housing, and lose their single cells, according to court documents.
As soon as they arrived at the top tier of E-Block, Plaintiff and five other laundry workers report that they heard and saw other inmates coughing and sneezing on the bottom tier of the unit and in the cells all around the laundry workers, the documents state.
The laundry workers also reported dust, dirt, and trash in the cells, the toilets smelled of urine and feces and the sinks smelled of sewage, and, in one of their cells, there was vomit on the walls near the toilet and the bars were caked with dried food and liquid.
They claim in the lawsuit that while working they were denied personal protective equipment, such as Tyvek suits, shields, N95 masks and boots.
Nazario contracted COVID-19, the lawsuit states. He was transferred to the now-closed Northern Correctional Institution, the facility that the Department of Correction designated for the medical isolation of sick people, and later to a University of Connecticut medical facility.
After experiencing the after effects of the coronavirus, including damage to his heart and circulatory system, Nazario suffered a heart attack at Northern. Following a trip to the ICU at Hartford Hospital, Plaintiffs heart stopped twice, and hospital staff revived him both times, according to court documents. Due to his heart attack, Plaintiff had a pacemaker permanently implanted in his chest.
Thibeault, who is being represented by Connecticut Attorney General William Tongs office, filed a motion for summary judgment, which, if granted, would have prompted the court to decide the case based on the statements and evidence provided without going to trial.
Tongs office sought the motion and qualified immunity on grounds that Nazario couldnt present sufficient evidence demonstrating that the former deputy warden was aware of any risk of harm to Plaintiff by changing his housing assignment, that Plaintiff was deprived of PPE, and that Defendant was personally involved in any constitutional violations.
U.S. District Judge Vanessa L. Bryant denied the motion and request for qualified immunity, which was upheld in Tuesdays ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
This order does not foreclose Thibeault from raising timely legal challenges regarding the sufficiency of the evidence or qualified immunity at a later stage before the district court or on appeal from a final judgment, the ruling says. In sum, we determine only that Thibeault is not entitled to qualified immunity at this time. We have considered Thibeaults remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
In response to an interview request on Wednesday, Elizabeth Benton, director of communications for the Office of the Attorney General, said, We are reviewing the decision and evaluating next steps.
Nazarios lawyer, Alexander T. Taubes, previously unsuccessfully sought to consolidate the case of Nazario currently incarcerated at Cheshire Correctional Institution with others who were incarcerated at Osborn and making similar claims against prison leadership.
Following Tuesdays decision, the New Haven-based civil rights attorney said he plans to renew the request to combine the cases, potentially as a class action lawsuit.
Institutional responsibility for violations of human rights its a relatively new concept. Its a fragile one, Taubes said in an interview with The Connecticut Mirror on Wednesday, adding that he believes Attorney General Tongs extremely broad reading of qualified immunity threatens to ensure that prisons arent held accountable.
But this ruling sets forth precedent that the prisons cannot simply turn their backs and ignore threats invisible, deadly threats within the confines of the big house, Taubes said. And were proud to continue this fight on their behalf.
Sidney Wade, one of the people formerly incarcerated at Osborn who filed a complaint about the prisons conditions during the pandemic, told the CT Mirror that he sees the federal appeals court ruling as just a start.
The world needs to see how people get treated in these prison systems, even the guys that work for the prison and keep things afloat, he said.
The pandemic presented a bevy of concerns and frustrations from lawmakers, advocates and loved ones of incarcerated people, many of whom felt like the state wasnt doing enough to protect those behind bars from sickness.
As COVID-19 raged through the states correctional facilities, Gov. Ned Lamonts administration faced swift criticism for its early refusal to release people nearing the end of their sentences, as states across the country had started doing to combat the spread of the virus.
The ACLU of Connecticut filed a lawsuit at the time to force Lamont and then-DOC Commissioner Rollin Cook to reduce the number of people confined in prisons and jails.
Despite objections from incarcerated people that the consensus wasnt enough, the state and the ACLU agreed to a settlement mandating increased medical monitoring for people who tested positive for the coronavirus and that facilities make a serious effort to return people quarantined for COVID-19 to their prior housing, jobs and programs.
The DOC was also required to provide prisoners with cleaning materials and personal protective equipment. The agreement established a five-member monitoring panel to review the DOCs ongoing responses to the pandemic.
During this years legislative session, lawmakers came up short on a bill that would have allowed a panel under the Board of Pardons and Paroles to grant compassionate release during a major disaster, an emergency declaration by the president of the United States covering any part of the state or an emergency declaration issued by the governor.
If an incarcerated person met the eligibility requirements, the panel would have held the power to grant their release if it found that circumstances exist, such as COVID-19, that pose a higher risk of harm to a person than if the individual remained behind bars, or if the person presented a reduced risk of presenting a danger to society.
The proposal also would have mandated the DOC to award public health emergency release credits during any emergency declaration to certain people whose scheduled release date was within a year of the declaration.
The states ongoing response to the pandemic in correctional facilities has set the framework for the legal battles, spearheaded by the people directly affected by officials decisions, likely to play out in the months and years to come.
Wade, who said he currently lives out of a halfway house, works for a Bloomfield glass company and attends a tractor trailer school, said his and others hope is that people will listen and hear our stories out.
A research team led by Dr. Adam C. Levine, director of the Watson Institute's Center for Human Rights and Humanitarian Studies, and Professor of Sociology and International and Public Affairs Patrick Heller recently published a paper examining the role that civil society organizations (CSOs) played in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic across the Global South.
"The role of civil society organizations (CSOs) in the COVID-19 response across the Global South: A multinational, qualitative study," appeared in the journal PLOS Global Public Health. In addition to Levine and Heller, the Watson research team included Anna Park a 2023 International and Public Affairs and Psychology graduate, Anindita Adhikari and Ieva Zumbyte, who earned Ph.D.s in Sociology in 2023, and current Ph.D. candidates in Sociology Maria F. Lopez-Portillo and Salma Mutwafy.
According to Levine, the effect of the pandemic on the Global South has been understudied. "Part of the problem," he said, "was for most of the pandemic, it was a bit of a black box because almost all of the media coverage focused on the effects of the pandemic in the United States, Europe and other high-income countries of the Global North."
As a result, Levine said, "The standard thinking was that somehow the pandemic had not impacted the Global South as much as it impacted the Global North." "But of course," he added, "we learned later that the pandemic was causing millions of deaths in the Global South. It's just that these were not being recorded because there just wasn't the resources or infrastructure. They didn't even have the tests to know who was infected with COVID-19."
In fact, despite the relative lack of attention paid to it, the Global South experienced a disproportionately high COVID-19 death rate compared to the Global North. Levine noted that research that used statistical modeling to estimate mortality rates published in The Lancet showed that nearly 80% of the 20 million deaths during the first two years of the pandemic occurred in the Global South.
Levine noted that the pandemic had a "double negative" impact on the Global South because some of the remedies that were effective in the Global North such as quarantines and shutting down the economy had more harmful side effects in the South. "It resulted in communities that were already on the edge being pushed into poverty," he said. "Widespread hunger became a huge issue during the pandemic because people were not allowed to leave their homes to go work, and they didn't have the social safety net or the savings built up that we had in the United States and Europe to be able to make it through those months of quarantine."
All these factors coupled with the fact that in many countries in the Global South, the governments lacked the capacity or the will to take the measures necessary to help their populations get through the pandemic created a vacuum that CSOs were forced to step into. Until now, the role of CSOs in the Global South during the pandemic has not been extensively or rigorously documented.
The researchers wanted to study a representative sample of CSOs so they chose high-impact countries from the three main regions of the Global South: Mexico, Kenya, South Africa, India and the Philippines. They then chose 10 CSOs from each country to gather information from. Levine said they wanted to get a representative sample of different types of organizations.
"We tried to make sure they were representative in terms of having a good distribution of local versus national civil society organizations, of having civil society organizations that included religious, secular, academic, professional, all these different types of civil society organizations, and then ones that worked with different types of populations," said Levine.
State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Washington D.C. West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Puerto Rico US Virgin Islands Armed Forces Americas Armed Forces Pacific Armed Forces Europe Northern Mariana Islands Marshall Islands American Samoa Federated States of Micronesia Guam Palau Alberta, Canada British Columbia, Canada Manitoba, Canada New Brunswick, Canada Newfoundland, Canada Nova Scotia, Canada Northwest Territories, Canada Nunavut, Canada Ontario, Canada Prince Edward Island, Canada Quebec, Canada Saskatchewan, Canada Yukon Territory, Canada
Zip Code
Country United States of America US Virgin Islands United States Minor Outlying Islands Canada Mexico, United Mexican States Bahamas, Commonwealth of the Cuba, Republic of Dominican Republic Haiti, Republic of Jamaica Afghanistan Albania, People's Socialist Republic of Algeria, People's Democratic Republic of American Samoa Andorra, Principality of Angola, Republic of Anguilla Antarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S) Antigua and Barbuda Argentina, Argentine Republic Armenia Aruba Australia, Commonwealth of Austria, Republic of Azerbaijan, Republic of Bahrain, Kingdom of Bangladesh, People's Republic of Barbados Belarus Belgium, Kingdom of Belize Benin, People's Republic of Bermuda Bhutan, Kingdom of Bolivia, Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana, Republic of Bouvet Island (Bouvetoya) Brazil, Federative Republic of British Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago) British Virgin Islands Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria, People's Republic of Burkina Faso Burundi, Republic of Cambodia, Kingdom of Cameroon, United Republic of Cape Verde, Republic of Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad, Republic of Chile, Republic of China, People's Republic of Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia, Republic of Comoros, Union of the Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, People's Republic of Cook Islands Costa Rica, Republic of Cote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of the Cyprus, Republic of Czech Republic Denmark, Kingdom of Djibouti, Republic of Dominica, Commonwealth of Ecuador, Republic of Egypt, Arab Republic of El Salvador, Republic of Equatorial Guinea, Republic of Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Faeroe Islands Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Fiji, Republic of the Fiji Islands Finland, Republic of France, French Republic French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon, Gabonese Republic Gambia, Republic of the Georgia Germany Ghana, Republic of Gibraltar Greece, Hellenic Republic Greenland Grenada Guadaloupe Guam Guatemala, Republic of Guinea, Revolutionary People's Rep'c of Guinea-Bissau, Republic of Guyana, Republic of Heard and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras, Republic of Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China Hrvatska (Croatia) Hungary, Hungarian People's Republic Iceland, Republic of India, Republic of Indonesia, Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq, Republic of Ireland Israel, State of Italy, Italian Republic Japan Jordan, Hashemite Kingdom of Kazakhstan, Republic of Kenya, Republic of Kiribati, Republic of Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait, State of Kyrgyz Republic Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon, Lebanese Republic Lesotho, Kingdom of Liberia, Republic of Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein, Principality of Lithuania Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Macao, Special Administrative Region of China Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar, Republic of Malawi, Republic of Malaysia Maldives, Republic of Mali, Republic of Malta, Republic of Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania, Islamic Republic of Mauritius Mayotte Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco, Principality of Mongolia, Mongolian People's Republic Montserrat Morocco, Kingdom of Mozambique, People's Republic of Myanmar Namibia Nauru, Republic of Nepal, Kingdom of Netherlands Antilles Netherlands, Kingdom of the New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua, Republic of Niger, Republic of the Nigeria, Federal Republic of Niue, Republic of Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway, Kingdom of Oman, Sultanate of Pakistan, Islamic Republic of Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama, Republic of Papua New Guinea Paraguay, Republic of Peru, Republic of Philippines, Republic of the Pitcairn Island Poland, Polish People's Republic Portugal, Portuguese Republic Puerto Rico Qatar, State of Reunion Romania, Socialist Republic of Russian Federation Rwanda, Rwandese Republic Samoa, Independent State of San Marino, Republic of Sao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic of Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of Senegal, Republic of Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles, Republic of Sierra Leone, Republic of Singapore, Republic of Slovakia (Slovak Republic) Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia, Somali Republic South Africa, Republic of South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands Spain, Spanish State Sri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic of St. Helena St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Pierre and Miquelon St. Vincent and the Grenadines Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Suriname, Republic of Svalbard & Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland, Kingdom of Sweden, Kingdom of Switzerland, Swiss Confederation Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand, Kingdom of Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of Togo, Togolese Republic Tokelau (Tokelau Islands) Tonga, Kingdom of Trinidad and Tobago, Republic of Tunisia, Republic of Turkey, Republic of Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda, Republic of Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain & N. Ireland Uruguay, Eastern Republic of Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Viet Nam, Socialist Republic of Wallis and Futuna Islands Western Sahara Yemen Zambia, Republic of Zimbabwe
