Category: Corona Virus

Page 11234..1020..»

Man had rare Covid infection that lasted 613 days, showed extensive mutations – South China Morning Post

April 22, 2024

Researchers from the Netherlands have reported an extremely long Covid-19 infection in a man who died last year and warn of the emergence of more dangerous variants of the coronavirus.

The elderly man, who was immunocompromised due to previous illnesses, was admitted to a hospital in Amsterdam in February 2022 with a Covid-19 infection, according to a statement.

He was continuously positive for the coronavirus until his death in October 2023 for a total of 613 days.

Other cases of very long infections in people whose immune systems were unable to adequately fight the virus have previously been reported.

01:29

Like drinking milk tea: China launches worlds first inhalable Covid vaccine

Like drinking milk tea: China launches worlds first inhalable Covid vaccine

The researchers led by Magda Vergouwe from the University of Amsterdam plan to present the results at a congress of the European Society for Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases in Barcelona on April 27-30.

The case is also interesting for researchers because the coronavirus can change particularly strongly in such long-term infected people. This harbours the risk of variants of the virus emerging that can more easily overcome the immune systems of healthy people.

The researchers in the Netherlands repeatedly took samples from the man to analyse the genetic material of the coronavirus. They found a total of more than 50 mutations compared to the Omicron variant BA.1 that was circulating at the time, including those that would allow the virus to evade the immune defence.

Just 21 days after the man had received a certain anti-coronavirus drug, the virus also developed signs of resistance to it.

German with comically large number of Covid jabs 217 had no side effects

The man eventually died from a flare-up of one of his previous illnesses. As far as is known, he had not infected anyone with his mutated version of the coronavirus, also known under its scientific name Sars-CoV-2.

This case highlights the risk of new immune-evasive Sars-CoV-2 variants emerging in immunocompromised patients, the researchers are quoted as saying in the press release.

The extensive development of the virus in a single patient could lead to the emergence of unique variants, they warn.

It is important to closely monitor the evolution of the coronavirus in immunocompromised individuals. There is a risk that variants could emerge and spread in society that are less susceptible to the immune systems of healthy people, they added

Read more:

Man had rare Covid infection that lasted 613 days, showed extensive mutations - South China Morning Post

Takeaways from AP report on how the search for the coronavirus origins turned toxic – The Associated Press

April 22, 2024

BEIJING (AP) The Chinese government froze meaningful efforts to trace the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, despite publicly declaring it supported an open scientific inquiry, an Associated Press investigation has found.

The AP drew on thousands of pages of undisclosed emails and documents, leaked recordings, and dozens of interviews that showed the freeze began far earlier than previously known in the first weeks of the outbreak and involved political and scientific infighting in China as much as international finger-pointing.

Crucial initial efforts were hindered by bureaucrats in Wuhan trying to avoid blame who misled the central government; the central government, which silenced Chinese scientists and subjected visiting U.N. officials to stage-managed tours; and the World Health Organization itself, which may have compromised early opportunities to gather critical information, according to internal materials obtained by AP.

Secrecy clouds the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak. Even the date when Chinese authorities first started searching for the virus origins is unclear. The first publicly known search for the coronavirus took place on Dec. 31, 2019, when Chinese Center for Disease Control scientists visited the Wuhan market where many early COVID-19 cases surfaced.

But WHO officials heard of an earlier inspection of the market on Dec. 25, 2019, according to a recording of a confidential WHO meeting provided to the AP. In the recording, WHOs top virus expert, Peter Ben Embarek, told colleagues that Chinese officials that day were looking at what was on sale in the market, whether all the vendors have licenses (and) if there was any illegal (wildlife) trade.

Ben Embarek said the probe was not routine and WHO would try to figure out what happened. Such a probe has never been publicly mentioned by Chinese authorities or WHO.

WHO said in an email that it was not aware of any investigation on Dec. 25, 2019. Other experts said any visit to the market that day would be significant, especially if animal samples were taken because they could be critical evidence of how COVID-19 jumped to humans.

Zhang Yongzhen was the first scientist to publish a sequence of the COVID-19 virus. One day after he wrote a memo urging health authorities to act quickly, Chinas top health official ordered his lab closed.

They used their official power against me and our colleagues, Zhang wrote in an email provided to AP by Edward Holmes, an Australian virologist.

Among Chinese doctors and scientists, the sense grew that Beijing was hunting for a scapegoat. The government opened investigations into top health officials, according to two former and current China CDC staff and three others familiar with the matter. China CDC staff were encouraged to report colleagues who mishandled the outbreak to the Communist Partys disciplinary bodies, according to two of the people.

As criticism of China grew, the Chinese government deflected blame. Instead of firing health officials, they declared their virus response a success and closed investigations into the officials with few job losses.

There were no real reforms, because doing reforms means admitting fault, said a public health expert in contact with top Chinese health officials who asked that he not be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter.

Early on, Chinese scientists were silenced and politicians took control.

As WHO negotiated with China for a mission to investigate COVID-19 in early 2020, it was Chinas Foreign Ministry, not scientists, that decided the terms. China refused a visa for WHOs Ben Embarek, then the agencys top animal virus expert. The itinerary dropped nearly all the items linked to an origins search, according to draft agendas obtained by AP.

Taking charge of the WHO visit was Liang Wannian, an epidemiologist close to top Chinese officials who was widely seen as pushing the party line, not science-backed policies, according to nine people familiar with the situation who declined to be named due to the sensitivity of the matter. Liang also ordered the Wuhan market disinfected before samples could be collected and promoted an implausible theory that COVID-19 originated from frozen food imported into China.

On a train ride with Dr. Bruce Aylward, a senior adviser to WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Liang lobbied the U.N. agency to praise Chinas response in its public report. The new section was so flattering that colleagues emailed Aylward to suggest he dial it back a bit.

By the time WHO led a third visit to Wuhan in January 2021, the origins hunt had become highly politicized. Liang, the Chinese official in charge of the first two WHO visits, organized market workers to tell WHO experts no live wildlife was sold and cut recent photos of wildlife at the market from the report.

The WHO team concluded a lab leak was extremely unlikely. But just months later, WHO chief Tedros said all origins hypotheses, including the lab leak theory, remained on the table, infuriating Chinese officials.

China told WHO any future missions to find the origins of COVID-19 should be elsewhere, according to a letter obtained by AP. Since then, global cooperation has ground to a halt.

Chinese scientists are still under heavy pressure, according to 10 researchers, medical experts and health officials. Researchers who published papers on the coronavirus ran into trouble with Chinese authorities. Others were barred from travel abroad for conferences and WHO meetings.

The head of the China CDC Institute of Viral Disease was forced to retire over the release of sensitive market data, according to a former China CDC official who declined to be named, fearing repercussions.

It has to do with the origins, so theyre still worried, the official said. If you try and get to the bottom of it, what if it turns out to be from China?

Cheng reported from Geneva.

Continued here:

Takeaways from AP report on how the search for the coronavirus origins turned toxic - The Associated Press

Dozens of COVID Virus Mutations Arose in Man With Longest Known Case – HealthDay

April 22, 2024

FRIDAY, April 19, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- An immune-compromised man with a year-and-a-half-long COVID infection served as a breeding ground for dozens of coronavirus mutations, a new study discovered.

Worse, several of the mutations were in the COVID spike protein, indicating that the virus had attempted to evolve around current vaccines, researchers report.

This case underscores the risk of persistent SARS-CoV-2 infections in immunocompromised individuals, as unique SARS-CoV-2 viral variants may emerge, said the research team led by Magda Vergouwe. She's a doctoral candidate with Amsterdam University Medical Center in The Netherlands.

The patient in questioned endured the longest known COVID infection to date, fighting with the virus for 613 days before dying from the blood disease that had compromised his immune system, researchers said.

Immune-compromised patients who suffer persistent infections give the COVID virus an opportunity to adapt and evolve, the investigators explained.

For instance, the Omicron variant is thought to have emerged in an immune-compromised patient initially infected with an earlier form of COVID, researchers said.

In this latest report, the man was admitted to Amsterdam University Medical Center in February 2022 with a COVID infection at age 72, after hed already received multiple vaccinations.

He suffered from myelodysplastic and myeloproliferative overlap syndrome, a disease in which the bone marrow makes too many white blood cells, according to the U.S. National Cancer Institute.

Following a stem cell transplant, the man also had developed lymphoma, a cancer of the white blood cells, researchers said.

A drug he took for lymphoma, rituximab, depleted all the immune cells that normally produce antibodies for COVID, they added.

To clear his COVID, the man received a monoclonal antibody cocktail that ultimately proved ineffective.

In fact, gene sequencing showed that the coronavirus started mutating to evade the antibodies hed received, a step that could have potentially undermined the effectiveness of the treatment in others, researchers said.

Gene sequencing of 27 nasal specimens taken from the man revealed more than 50 mutations in the COVID virus, including variants with changes in the spike protein targeted by vaccines.

The prolonged infection has led to the emergence of a novel immune-evasive variant due to the extensive within-host evolution, researchers said.

Such cases pose a potential public health threat of possibly introducing viral escape variants into the community, they added.

However, they noted that there had been no documented transmission of any COVID variants from the man into other people.

The researchers will present their findings at the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases meeting next week in Barcelona. Findings presented at medical meetings should be considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.

More information

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has more about COVID.

SOURCE: European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, news release, April 19, 2024

See the original post here:

Dozens of COVID Virus Mutations Arose in Man With Longest Known Case - HealthDay

Toxic: How the search for the origins of COVID-19 turned politically poisonous – ABC News

April 22, 2024

BEIJING -- The hunt for the origins of COVID-19 has gone dark in China, the victim of political infighting after a series of stalled and thwarted attempts to find the source of the virus that killed millions and paralyzed the world for months.

The Chinese government froze meaningful domestic and international efforts to trace the virus from the first weeks of the outbreak, despite statements supporting open scientific inquiry, an Associated Press investigation found. That pattern continues to this day, with labs closed, collaborations shattered, foreign scientists forced out and Chinese researchers barred from leaving the country.

The investigation drew on thousands of pages of undisclosed emails and documents and dozens of interviews that showed the freeze began far earlier than previously known and involved political and scientific infighting in China as much as international finger-pointing.

As early as Jan. 6, 2020, health officials in Beijing closed the lab of a Chinese scientist who sequenced the virus and barred researchers from working with him.

Scientists warn the willful blindness over coronavirus origins leaves the world vulnerable to another outbreak, potentially undermining pandemic treaty talks coordinated by the World Health Organization set to culminate in May.

At the heart of the question is whether the virus jumped from an animal or came from a laboratory accident. A U.S. intelligence analysis says there is insufficient evidence to prove either theory, but the debate has further tainted relations between the U.S. and China.

Unlike in the U.S., there is virtually no public debate in China about whether the virus came from nature or from a lab leak. In fact, there is little public discussion at all about the source of the disease, first detected in the central city of Wuhan.

Crucial initial efforts were hampered by bureaucrats in Wuhan trying to avoid blame who misled the central government; the central government, which muzzled Chinese scientists and subjected visiting WHO officials to stage-managed tours; and the U.N. health agency itself, which may have compromised early opportunities to gather critical information in hopes that by placating China, scientists could gain more access, according to internal materials obtained by AP.

In a faxed statement, China's Foreign Ministry defended Chinas handling of research into the origins, saying the country is open and transparent, shared data and research, and made the greatest contribution to global origins research. The National Health Commission, China's top medical authority, said the country invested huge manpower, material and financial resources and has not stopped looking for the origins of the coronavirus.

It could have played out differently, as shown by the outbreak of SARS, a genetic relative of COVID-19, nearly 20 years ago. China initially hid infections then, but WHO complained swiftly and publicly. Ultimately, Beijing fired officials and made reforms. The U.N. agency soon found SARS likely jumped to humans from civet cats in southern China and international scientists later collaborated with their Chinese counterparts to pin down bats as SARS natural reservoir.

But different leaders of both China and WHO, Chinas quest for control of its researchers, and global tensions have all led to silence when it comes to searching for COVID-19s origins. Governments in Asia are pressuring scientists not to look for the virus for fear it could be traced inside their borders.

Even without those complications, experts say identifying how outbreaks begin is incredibly challenging and that its rare to know with certainty how some viruses begin spreading.

Its disturbing how quickly the search for the origins of (COVID-19) escalated into politics, said Mark Woolhouse, a University of Edinburgh outbreak expert. Now this question may never be definitively answered.

CLOUDS OF SECRECY

Secrecy clouds the beginning of the outbreak. Even the date when Chinese authorities first started searching for the origins is unclear.

The first publicly known search for the virus took place on Dec. 31, 2019, when Chinese Center for Disease Control scientists visited the Wuhan market where many early COVID-19 cases surfaced.

However, WHO officials heard of an earlier inspection of the market on Dec. 25, 2019, according to a recording of a confidential WHO meeting provided to AP by an attendee. Such a probe has never been mentioned publicly by either Chinese authorities or WHO.

In the recording, WHOs top animal virus expert, Peter Ben Embarek, mentioned the earlier date, describing it as an interesting detail. He told colleagues that officials were looking at what was on sale in the market, whether all the vendors have licenses (and) if there was any illegal (wildlife) trade happening in the market.

A colleague asked Ben Embarek, who is no longer with WHO, if that seemed unusual. He responded that it was not routine, and that the Chinese must have had some reason to investigate the market. Well try to figure out what happened and why they did that.

Ben Embarek declined to comment. Another WHO staffer at the Geneva meeting in late January 2020 confirmed Ben Embareks comments.

The Associated Press could not confirm the search independently. It remains a mystery if it took place, what inspectors discovered, or whether they sampled live animals that might point to how COVID-19 emerged.

A Dec. 25, 2019, inspection would have come when Wuhan authorities were aware of the mysterious disease. The day before, a local doctor sent a sample from an ill market vendor to get sequenced that turned out to contain COVID-19. Chatter about the unknown pneumonia was spreading in Wuhans medical circles, according to one doctor and a relative of another who declined to be identified, fearing repercussions.

A scientist in China when the outbreak occurred said they heard of a Dec. 25 inspection from collaborating virologists in the country. They declined to be named out of fear of retribution.

WHO said in an email that it was not aware of the Dec. 25 investigation. It is not included in the U.N. health agencys official COVID-19 timeline.

When health officials from Beijing arrived in Wuhan on Dec. 31, they decided to disinfect the market before collecting samples, destroying critical information about the virus. Gao Fu, head of the China CDC, mentioned it to an American collaborator.

His complaint when I met him was that all the animals were gone, said Columbia University epidemiologist Ian Lipkin.

Robert Garry, who studies viruses at Tulane University, said a Dec. 25 probe would be hugely significant, given what is known about the virus and its spread.

Being able to swab it directly from the animal itself would be pretty convincing and nobody would be arguing about the origins of COVID-19, he said.

But perhaps local officials simply feared for their jobs, with memories of firings after the 2003 SARS outbreak still vivid, said Ray Yip, the founding head of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention outpost in China.

They were trying to save their skin, hide the evidence, Yip said.

The Wuhan government did not respond to a faxed request for comment.

Another early victim was Zhang Yongzhen, the first scientist to publish a sequence of the virus. A day after he wrote a memo urging health authorities to action, Chinas top health official ordered Zhangs lab closed.

They used their official power against me and our colleagues, Zhang wrote in an email provided to AP by Edward Holmes, an Australian virologist.

On Jan. 20, 2020, a WHO delegation arrived in Wuhan for a two-day mission. China did not approve a visit to the market, but they stopped by a China CDC lab to examine infection prevention and controlprocedures, according to an internal WHO travel report. WHOs then-China representative, Dr. Gauden Galea, told colleagues in a private meeting that inquiries about COVID-19s origins went unanswered.

By then, many Chinese were angry at their government. Among Chinese doctors and scientists, the sense grew that Beijing was hunting for someone to blame.

There are a few cadres who have performed poorly, President Xi Jinping said in unusually harsh comments in February. Some dare not take responsibility, wait timidly for orders from above, and dont move without being pushed.

The government opened investigations into top health officials, according to two former and current China CDC staff and three others familiar with the matter. Health officials were encouraged to report colleagues who mishandled the outbreak to Communist Party disciplinary bodies, according to two of the people.

Some people both inside and outside China speculated about a laboratory leak. Those suspicious included right-wing American politicians, but also researchers close to WHO.

The focus turned to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a high-level lab that experimented with some of the worlds most dangerous viruses.

In early February 2020, some of the Wests leading scientists, headed by Dr. Jeremy Farrar, then at Britains Wellcome Trust, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, then director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, banded together to assess the origins of the virus in calls, a Slack channel and emails.

They drafted a paper suggesting a natural evolution, but even among themselves, they could not agree on the likeliest scenario. Some were alarmed by features they thought might indicate tinkering.

There have (been) suggestions that the virus escaped from the Wuhan lab, Holmes, the Australian virologist, who believed the virus originated in nature, wrote in a Feb. 7, 2020, email. I do a lot of work in China, and I can (assure) you that a lot of people there believe they are being lied to.

American scientists close to researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology warned counterparts there to prepare.

James DeLuc, head of a Texas lab, emailed his Wuhan colleague on Feb. 9, 2020, saying hed already been approached by U.S. officials. Clearly addressing this will be essential, with any kind of documentation you might have, he wrote.

The Chinese government was conducting its own secret investigation into the Wuhan Institute. Gao, the head of the China CDC, and another Chinese health expert revealed its existence in interviews months and years later. Both said the investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing, which Holmes, the Australian virologist, also heard from another contact in China. But Gao said even he hadn't seen further details, and some experts suspect they may never be released.

WHO started negotiations with China for a second visit with the virus origins in mind, but it was Chinas Foreign Ministry that decided the terms.

Scientists were sidelined and politicians took control. China refused a visa for Ben Embarek, then WHOs top animal virus expert. The itinerary dropped nearly all items linked to an origins search, according to draft agendas for the trip obtained by the AP. And Gao, the China CDC head who is also a respected scientist tasked with investigating the origins, was left off the schedule.

Instead, Liang Wannian, a politician in the Communist Party hierarchy, took charge of the international delegation. Liang is an epidemiologist close to top Chinese officials and China's Foreign Ministry who is widely seen as pushing the party line, not science-backed policies, according to nine people familiar with the situation who declined to be identified to speak on a sensitive subject.

Significantly, it was Liang who ordered the Wuhan market disinfected before samples could be collected, according to a Chinese media interview with a top China CDC official that was later deleted. He instead promoted an implausible theory that the virus came from contaminated frozen food imported into China. Liang did not respond to an emailed request for comment.

Most of the WHO delegation was not allowed to go to Wuhan, which was under lockdown. The few who did learned little. They again had no access to the Wuhan Institute of Virology or the wildlife market and obtained only scant details about China CDC efforts to trace the coronavirus there.

On the train, Liang lobbied the visiting WHO scientists to praise Chinas health response in their public report. Dr. Bruce Aylward, a senior adviser to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, saw it as the best way to meet Chinas need for a strong assessment of its response.

The new section was so flattering that colleagues emailed Aylward to suggest he dial it back a bit.

It is remarkable how much knowledge about a new virus has been gained in such a short time, read the final report, which was reviewed by Chinas top health official before it went to Tedros.

As criticism of China grew, the Chinese government deflected blame. Instead of firing health officials, they declared their virus response a success and closed investigations into the officials with few job losses.

There were no real reforms, because doing reforms means admitting fault, said a public health expert in contact with Chinese health officials who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter.

In late February 2020, the internationally respected doctor Zhong Nanshan appeared at a news conference and said that the epidemic first appeared in China, but it did not necessarily originate in China.

Days later, Chinese leader Xi ordered new controls on virus research. A leaked directive from Chinas Publicity Department ordered media not to report on the virus origins without permission, and a public WeChat account reposted an essay claiming the U.S. military created COVID-19 at a Fort Detrick lab and spread it to China during a 2019 athletic competition in Wuhan. Days later, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson repeated the accusation.

The false claims enraged U.S. President Donald Trump, who began publicly blaming China for the outbreak, calling COVID-19 the China virus and the kung-flu.

Chinese officials told WHO that blood tests on lab workers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were negative, suggesting they hadnt been previously infected with bat coronaviruses. But when WHO pressed for an independent audit, Chinese officials balked and demanded WHO investigate the U.S. and other countries as well.

By blaming the U.S., Beijing diverted blame. It was effective in China, where many Chinese were upset by racially charged criticism. But outside China, it fueled speculation of a lab leak coverup.

By the time WHO led a third visit to Wuhan in January 2021, a year into the pandemic, the atmosphere was toxic.

Liang, the Chinese health official in charge of the first two WHO visits, continued to promote the questionable theory that the virus was shipped into China on frozen food. He suppressed information suggesting it could have come from animals at the Wuhan market, organizing market workers to tell WHO experts no live wildlife was sold and cutting recent photos of wildlife at the market from the final report. There was heavy political scrutiny, with numerous Chinese officials who werent scientists or health officers present at meetings.

Despite a lack of direct access, the WHO team concluded that a lab leak was extremely unlikely. So it came as an infuriating surprise to Chinese officials when, months later, WHO chief Tedros said all origins hypotheses, including the lab leak theory, remained on the table.

China told WHO any future missions to find COVID-19 origins should be elsewhere, according to a letter obtained by AP. Since then, global cooperation on the issue has ground to a halt; an independent group convened by WHO to investigate the origins of COVID-19 in 2021 has been stymied by the lack of cooperation from China and other issues.

Chinese scientists are still under heavy pressure, according to 10 researchers and healthofficials. Researchers who published papers on the coronavirus ran into trouble with Chinese authorities. Others were barred from travel abroad for conferences and WHO meetings. Gao, the China CDC director, was investigated after U.S. President Joe Biden ordered a review of COVID-19 data, and again after giving interviews on the virus origins.

New evidence is treated with suspicion. In March 2023, scientists announced that genetic material collected from the market showed raccoon dog DNA mixed with COVID-19 in early 2020, data that WHO said should have been publicly shared years before. The findings were posted, then removed by Chinese researchers with little explanation.

The head of the China CDC Institute of Viral Disease was forced to retire over the release of the market data, according to a former China CDC official who declined to be named to speak on a sensitive topic.

It has to do with the origins, so theyre still worried, the former official said. If you try and get to the bottom of it, what if it turns out to be from China?

Other scientists note that any animal from which the virus may have originally jumped has long since disappeared.

There was a chance for China to cooperate with WHO and do some animal sampling studies that might have answered the question, said Tulane Universitys Garry. The trail to find the source has now gone cold.

___

Cheng reported from Geneva.

Read the original:

Toxic: How the search for the origins of COVID-19 turned politically poisonous - ABC News

UNM research analyzes government intervention and COVID-19 pandemic – UNM Newsroom

April 22, 2024

While theres a strong determination worldwide to return to a new normal in a post-COVID world, the pandemic is nearly impossible to forget. A large amount of data also provides insight we may not want to move past just yethow we handled it.

UNM Political Science Associate Professor and Chair Jami Nelson-Nuez is evaluating COVID policies in a research paper titled, Non-pharmaceutical interventions to combat COVID-19 in the Americas described through daily sub-national data, published

Jami Nelson-Nuez

recently in the journal, Scientific Data, a Nature publication. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, she and an international team of researchers investigated the impact of Latin American governments' actions and plans.

Like in the U.S., politics at national, state and local levels influenced decisions on COVID-19 mitigation around the world impacting cases, deaths, hospitalizations, jobs and education. Nelson-Nuez specifically looked at the cause and effect of policies and politics in Bolivia through months of data.

Bolivia is a really interesting case because they have a system that's mainly decentralized creating a lot of variation across different regions. Our main focus was looking at the effects of policies and how they evolved, Nelson-Nuez said. We were extremely productive on the project and our work shed light on the political intersection of the pandemic in Bolivia and how that spoke to what was happening in several other countries.

This tied into what was going on in the United States. It was a deeply political time in our country.These political patterns were reflected across several countries, making for an interesting comparative study. UNM Political Science Associate Professor Jami Nelson-Nuez

The pandemic occurred at a time of upheaval in national politics in Bolivia. After an already tumultuous fall 2019 election, Bolivias transitional government lacked legitimacy and the country was deeply divided.

There was a conflict that had been bubbling for a while. The country was in a moment of crisis of contested leadership. It was interesting to follow how the dynamics of the pandemic in Bolivia were shaped by these political complexities throughout the country, Nelson-Nuez said.

When the elections were postponed a second time, tens of thousands of Bolivians across the country rushed to the streets and protested for months. Part of those protests in some places included creating blockades so that medical equipment couldn't get through.

Bolivia has always been an outlier when it comes to protest. Its people have always been highly mobilized and able to overcome those collective action problems to mount significant protests, Nelson-Nuez said. There's a history in Bolivia of people marching for days to the central government and then occupying the streets in the capital.

With that unrest,non-pharmaceutical interventions(NPIs) were few and far between. A large governmental response given the challenge of already weak state capacity in health services made it difficult to make and enforce coherent policies.

The central government was trying to figure out how to steer the ship for the whole country, while regional and local actors were contesting these decisions, Nelson-Nuez said. The politics and the dynamics of multi-level governance can render local communities very vulnerable to these types of events.

Even with the NPIs and guidance issued over time, it was too little too late. The hospital system fully collapsed in the summer of 2020.

Additionally, given the state of leadership, although some NPIs were issued, there needed to be more public trust to abide by government policies and enable governments to make and enforce policies.Her colleagues found similar results in other Latin American countries.

Underlying disparities in health are political. Underneath health realities are important political factors, and if we ignore those, we really don't understand how and why pandemics are occurring or why health disparities are emerging in the way that they are, Nelson-Nuez said.

Nelson-Nuez says this research is one of many ways public health and politics are intertwined.

Sometimes people don't understand political science. As a discipline, we study power, which means we study resources and the distribution of those resources, Nelson-Nuez said. Health is a resource, and access to services is a resource. We can see political factors across the world that shape the ability of diseases to spread and how deadline global health emergencies can be.

Read more:

UNM research analyzes government intervention and COVID-19 pandemic - UNM Newsroom

Rare COVID-19 infection lasting 613 days was reported | Daily Sabah – Daily Sabah

April 22, 2024

Researchers from the Netherlands have reported an extremely long COVID-19 infection in a man who died last year and warn of the emergence of more dangerous variants of the coronavirus.

The older man, who was immuno-compromised due to previous illnesses, was admitted to a hospital in Amsterdam in February 2022 with a COVID-19 infection, according to a statement.

He was continuously positive for the coronavirus until his death in October 2023 for a total of 613 days.

Other cases of very long infections in people whose immune systems could not adequately fight the virus have previously been reported.

The researchers, led by Magda Vergouwe from the University of Amsterdam, plan to present the results at a congress of the European Society for Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases in Barcelona on April 27-30.

The case is also interesting for researchers because the coronavirus can change particularly strongly in people who have been infected for a long time. This could lead to variants of the virus emerging that can more easily overcome the immune systems of healthy people.

Researchers in the Netherlands repeatedly took samples from the man to analyze the coronavirus's genetic material. They found more than 50 mutations compared to the Omicron variant BA.1 that was circulating at the time, including those that would allow the virus to evade the immune defense. Just 21 days after the man had received a certain anti-coronavirus drug, the virus also developed signs of resistance to it.

The man eventually died from a flare-up of one of his previous illnesses. As far as is known, he had not infected anyone with his mutated version of the coronavirus, also known under its scientific name SARS-CoV-2.

This case "highlights the risk of new immune-evasive SARS-CoV-2 variants emerging in immuno-compromised patients," the researchers say in the press release.

They warn that the extensive development of the virus in a single patient could lead to the emergence of unique variants.

It is essential to closely monitor the coronavirus's evolution in immunocompromised individuals. They added that variants could emerge and spread in society, which is less susceptible to the immune systems of healthy people.

See the original post here:

Rare COVID-19 infection lasting 613 days was reported | Daily Sabah - Daily Sabah

‘Longest-ever’ COVID-19 case: 72-year-old had infection for 613 days. He died after… | Mint – Mint

April 22, 2024

A 72-year-old man suffered from COVID-19 infection for a record 613 days, Netherlands researchers said in one of their studies. This was the "longest known" case of COVID-19 infection, researchers were quoted by the TIME magazine as saying.

As per the report, the patient succumbed "to an underlying illness" after "incubating a highly mutated novel strain over 613 days". He had a weakened immune system and a blood disorder.

The man got infected with the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19 virus) in February 2022. He had reportedly failed to build a strong immune response to multiple COVID vaccine shots before catching the omicron variant, the report added.

ALSO READ: Omicron variant XBB makes up 63% of covid cases reported in India

Scientists at the University of Amsterdams Centre for Experimental and Molecular Medicine cited a detailed analysis of specimens collected from more than two dozen nose and throat swabs. It found that "the coronavirus developed resistance to sotrovimab a COVID antibody treatment within a few weeks."

The virus later acquired over 50 mutations. Some of those mutations "suggested an enhanced ability to evade immune defences," researchers were quoted as saying.

ALSO READ: The Indian economy's 'long covid' problem

The TIME report mentioned that the mutant virus wasnt known to have infected other people. However, the case "highlights how prolonged infections enable the pandemic virus to accumulate genetic changes, potentially spawning new variants of concern".

ALSO READ: Covid snapshot: Here are 5 things to know about Long Covid now

This case underscores the risk of persistent SARS-CoV-2 infections in immunocompromised individuals," the authors was quoted as saying. They added, "We emphasise the importance of continuing genomic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 evolution in immunocompromised individuals with persistent infections."

There are severe COVID signs and symptoms that can last for months or even years, and its called Long COVID. Many researchers in their study have have investigated a connection between stress and Long COVID in an effort to shed more light on this excruciatingly-persistent illness.

A research had earlier revealed how patients with long COVID were more than twice as likely to experience cardiac complications. Also, a study by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) had found that 18.6% individuals experienced difficulty in breathing (dyspnea), 10.5% reported fatigue, and 9.3% faced mental health issues after being discharged from hospitals.

Unlock a world of Benefits! From insightful newsletters to real-time stock tracking, breaking news and a personalized newsfeed it's all here, just a click away! Login Now!

The rest is here:

'Longest-ever' COVID-19 case: 72-year-old had infection for 613 days. He died after... | Mint - Mint

Toxic: How the search for the origins of COVID-19 turned politically poisonous – Hamilton Spectator

April 22, 2024

BEIJING (AP) The hunt for the origins of COVID-19 has gone dark in China, the victim of political infighting after a series of stalled and thwarted attempts to find the source of the virus that killed millions and paralyzed the world for months.

The Chinese government froze meaningful domestic and international efforts to trace the virus from the first weeks of the outbreak, despite statements supporting open scientific inquiry, an Associated Press investigation found. That pattern continues to this day, with labs closed, collaborations shattered, foreign scientists forced out and Chinese researchers barred from leaving the country.

Already a Subscriber? Sign in

The investigation drew on thousands of pages of undisclosed emails and documents and dozens of interviews that showed the freeze began far earlier than previously known and involved political and scientific infighting in China as much as international finger-pointing.

As early as Jan. 6, 2020, health officials in Beijing closed the lab of a Chinese scientist who sequenced the virus and barred researchers from working with him.

Scientists warn the willful blindness over coronavirus origins leaves the world vulnerable to another outbreak, potentially undermining pandemic treaty talks coordinated by the World Health Organization set to culminate in May.

At the heart of the question is whether the virus jumped from an animal or came from a laboratory accident. A U.S. intelligence analysis says there is insufficient evidence to prove either theory, but the debate has further tainted relations between the U.S. and China.

Unlike in the U.S., there is virtually no public debate in China about whether the virus came from nature or from a lab leak. In fact, there is little public discussion at all about the source of the disease, first detected in the central city of Wuhan.

Crucial initial efforts were hampered by bureaucrats in Wuhan trying to avoid blame who misled the central government; the central government, which muzzled Chinese scientists and subjected visiting WHO officials to stage-managed tours; and the U.N. health agency itself, which may have compromised early opportunities to gather critical information in hopes that by placating China, scientists could gain more access, according to internal materials obtained by AP.

In a faxed statement, Chinas Foreign Ministry defended Chinas handling of research into the origins, saying the country is open and transparent, shared data and research, and made the greatest contribution to global origins research. The National Health Commission, Chinas top medical authority, said the country invested huge manpower, material and financial resources and has not stopped looking for the origins of the coronavirus.

It could have played out differently, as shown by the outbreak of SARS, a genetic relative of COVID-19, nearly 20 years ago. China initially hid infections then, but WHO complained swiftly and publicly. Ultimately, Beijing fired officials and made reforms. The U.N. agency soon found SARS likely jumped to humans from civet cats in southern China and international scientists later collaborated with their Chinese counterparts to pin down bats as SARS natural reservoir.

But different leaders of both China and WHO, Chinas quest for control of its researchers, and global tensions have all led to silence when it comes to searching for COVID-19s origins. Governments in Asia are pressuring scientists not to look for the virus for fear it could be traced inside their borders.

Even without those complications, experts say identifying how outbreaks begin is incredibly challenging and that its rare to know with certainty how some viruses begin spreading.

Its disturbing how quickly the search for the origins of (COVID-19) escalated into politics, said Mark Woolhouse, a University of Edinburgh outbreak expert. Now this question may never be definitively answered.

Secrecy clouds the beginning of the outbreak. Even the date when Chinese authorities first started searching for the origins is unclear.

The first publicly known search for the virus took place on Dec. 31, 2019, when Chinese Center for Disease Control scientists visited the Wuhan market where many early COVID-19 cases surfaced.

However, WHO officials heard of an earlier inspection of the market on Dec. 25, 2019, according to a recording of a confidential WHO meeting provided to AP by an attendee. Such a probe has never been mentioned publicly by either Chinese authorities or WHO.

In the recording, WHOs top animal virus expert, Peter Ben Embarek, mentioned the earlier date, describing it as an interesting detail. He told colleagues that officials were looking at what was on sale in the market, whether all the vendors have licenses (and) if there was any illegal (wildlife) trade happening in the market.

A colleague asked Ben Embarek, who is no longer with WHO, if that seemed unusual. He responded that it was not routine, and that the Chinese must have had some reason to investigate the market. Well try to figure out what happened and why they did that.

Ben Embarek declined to comment. Another WHO staffer at the Geneva meeting in late January 2020 confirmed Ben Embareks comments.

The Associated Press could not confirm the search independently. It remains a mystery if it took place, what inspectors discovered, or whether they sampled live animals that might point to how COVID-19 emerged.

A Dec. 25, 2019, inspection would have come when Wuhan authorities were aware of the mysterious disease. The day before, a local doctor sent a sample from an ill market vendor to get sequenced that turned out to contain COVID-19. Chatter about the unknown pneumonia was spreading in Wuhans medical circles, according to one doctor and a relative of another who declined to be identified, fearing repercussions.

A scientist in China when the outbreak occurred said they heard of a Dec. 25 inspection from collaborating virologists in the country. They declined to be named out of fear of retribution.

WHO said in an email that it was not aware of the Dec. 25 investigation. It is not included in the U.N. health agencys official COVID-19 timeline.

When health officials from Beijing arrived in Wuhan on Dec. 31, they decided to disinfect the market before collecting samples, destroying critical information about the virus. Gao Fu, head of the China CDC, mentioned it to an American collaborator.

His complaint when I met him was that all the animals were gone, said Columbia University epidemiologist Ian Lipkin.

Robert Garry, who studies viruses at Tulane University, said a Dec. 25 probe would be hugely significant, given what is known about the virus and its spread.

Being able to swab it directly from the animal itself would be pretty convincing and nobody would be arguing about the origins of COVID-19, he said.

But perhaps local officials simply feared for their jobs, with memories of firings after the 2003 SARS outbreak still vivid, said Ray Yip, the founding head of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention outpost in China.

They were trying to save their skin, hide the evidence, Yip said.

The Wuhan government did not respond to a faxed request for comment.

Another early victim was Zhang Yongzhen, the first scientist to publish a sequence of the virus. A day after he wrote a memo urging health authorities to action, Chinas top health official ordered Zhangs lab closed.

They used their official power against me and our colleagues, Zhang wrote in an email provided to AP by Edward Holmes, an Australian virologist.

On Jan. 20, 2020, a WHO delegation arrived in Wuhan for a two-day mission. China did not approve a visit to the market, but they stopped by a China CDC lab to examine infection prevention and controlprocedures, according to an internal WHO travel report. WHOs then-China representative, Dr. Gauden Galea, told colleagues in a private meeting that inquiries about COVID-19s origins went unanswered.

There are a few cadres who have performed poorly, President Xi Jinping said in unusually harsh comments in February. Some dare not take responsibility, wait timidly for orders from above, and dont move without being pushed.

The government opened investigations into top health officials, according to two former and current China CDC staff and three others familiar with the matter. Health officials were encouraged to report colleagues who mishandled the outbreak to Communist Party disciplinary bodies, according to two of the people.

Some people both inside and outside China speculated about a laboratory leak. Those suspicious included right-wing American politicians, but also researchers close to WHO.

The focus turned to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a high-level lab that experimented with some of the worlds most dangerous viruses.

In early February 2020, some of the Wests leading scientists, headed by Dr. Jeremy Farrar, then at Britains Wellcome Trust, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, then director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, banded together to assess the origins of the virus in calls, a Slack channel and emails.

They drafted a paper suggesting a natural evolution, but even among themselves, they could not agree on the likeliest scenario. Some were alarmed by features they thought might indicate tinkering.

There have (been) suggestions that the virus escaped from the Wuhan lab, Holmes, the Australian virologist, who believed the virus originated in nature, wrote in a Feb. 7, 2020, email. I do a lot of work in China, and I can (assure) you that a lot of people there believe they are being lied to.

American scientists close to researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology warned counterparts there to prepare.

James DeLuc, head of a Texas lab, emailed his Wuhan colleague on Feb. 9, 2020, saying hed already been approached by U.S. officials. Clearly addressing this will be essential, with any kind of documentation you might have, he wrote.

The Chinese government was conducting its own secret investigation into the Wuhan Institute. Gao, the head of the China CDC, and another Chinese health expert revealed its existence in interviews months and years later. Both said the investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing, which Holmes, the Australian virologist, also heard from another contact in China. But Gao said even he hadnt seen further details, and some experts suspect they may never be released.

WHO started negotiations with China for a second visit with the virus origins in mind, but it was Chinas Foreign Ministry that decided the terms.

Scientists were sidelined and politicians took control. China refused a visa for Ben Embarek, then WHOs top animal virus expert. The itinerary dropped nearly all items linked to an origins search, according to draft agendas for the trip obtained by the AP. And Gao, the China CDC head who is also a respected scientist tasked with investigating the origins, was left off the schedule.

Instead, Liang Wannian, a politician in the Communist Party hierarchy, took charge of the international delegation. Liang is an epidemiologist close to top Chinese officials and Chinas Foreign Ministry who is widely seen as pushing the party line, not science-backed policies, according to nine people familiar with the situation who declined to be identified to speak on a sensitive subject.

Most of the WHO delegation was not allowed to go to Wuhan, which was under lockdown. The few who did learned little. They again had no access to the Wuhan Institute of Virology or the wildlife market and obtained only scant details about China CDC efforts to trace the coronavirus there.

On the train, Liang lobbied the visiting WHO scientists to praise Chinas health response in their public report. Dr. Bruce Aylward, a senior adviser to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, saw it as the best way to meet Chinas need for a strong assessment of its response.

The new section was so flattering that colleagues emailed Aylward to suggest he dial it back a bit.

It is remarkable how much knowledge about a new virus has been gained in such a short time, read the final report, which was reviewed by Chinas top health official before it went to Tedros.

As criticism of China grew, the Chinese government deflected blame. Instead of firing health officials, they declared their virus response a success and closed investigations into the officials with few job losses.

There were no real reforms, because doing reforms means admitting fault, said a public health expert in contact with Chinese health officials who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter.

In late February 2020, the internationally respected doctor Zhong Nanshan appeared at a news conference and said that the epidemic first appeared in China, but it did not necessarily originate in China.

Chinese officials told WHO that blood tests on lab workers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were negative, suggesting they hadnt been previously infected with bat coronaviruses. But when WHO pressed for an independent audit, Chinese officials balked and demanded WHO investigate the U.S. and other countries as well.

By the time WHO led a third visit to Wuhan in January 2021, a year into the pandemic, the atmosphere was toxic.

Liang, the Chinese health official in charge of the first two WHO visits, continued to promote the questionable theory that the virus was shipped into China on frozen food. He suppressed information suggesting it could have come from animals at the Wuhan market, organizing market workers to tell WHO experts no live wildlife was sold and cutting recent photos of wildlife at the market from the final report. There was heavy political scrutiny, with numerous Chinese officials who werent scientists or health officers present at meetings.

Despite a lack of direct access, the WHO team concluded that a lab leak was extremely unlikely. So it came as an infuriating surprise to Chinese officials when, months later, WHO chief Tedros said all origins hypotheses, including the lab leak theory, remained on the table.

China told WHO any future missions to find COVID-19 origins should be elsewhere, according to a letter obtained by AP. Since then, global cooperation on the issue has ground to a halt; an independent group convened by WHO to investigate the origins of COVID-19 in 2021 has been stymied by the lack of cooperation from China and other issues.

Chinese scientists are still under heavy pressure, according to 10 researchers and healthofficials. Researchers who published papers on the coronavirus ran into trouble with Chinese authorities. Others were barred from travel abroad for conferences and WHO meetings. Gao, the China CDC director, was investigated after U.S. President Joe Biden ordered a review of COVID-19 data, and again after giving interviews on the virus origins.

New evidence is treated with suspicion. In March 2023, scientists announced that genetic material collected from the market showed raccoon dog DNA mixed with COVID-19 in early 2020, data that WHO said should have been publicly shared years before. The findings were posted, then removed by Chinese researchers with little explanation.

The head of the China CDC Institute of Viral Disease was forced to retire over the release of the market data, according to a former China CDC official who declined to be named to speak on a sensitive topic.

It has to do with the origins, so theyre still worried, the former official said. If you try and get to the bottom of it, what if it turns out to be from China?

Other scientists note that any animal from which the virus may have originally jumped has long since disappeared.

There was a chance for China to cooperate with WHO and do some animal sampling studies that might have answered the question, said Tulane Universitys Garry. The trail to find the source has now gone cold.

Cheng reported from Geneva.

Continued here:

Toxic: How the search for the origins of COVID-19 turned politically poisonous - Hamilton Spectator

The WHO updates terminology for COVID-19 and airborne diseases – Quartz

April 22, 2024

It took over a hundred scientists from around the world two years to finally get on the same pageregarding the best language to use when talking about airborne and respiratory viruses.

TSMC beat on Q2 sales expectations driven by AI boom, Nvidia, and Apple

The World Health Organization said on Thursday that these viruses, which include COVID-19, influenza, measles, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and tuberculosis, will now be called pathogens that transmit through the air.

The international health agency said in a report that it consulted hundreds of experts in various scientific fields from 2021 to 2023 following a lack of common language used in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

During the pandemic, the terms airborne, airborne transmission, droplets and aerosols were used in different ways, by different stakeholders, which contributed to confusion in communicating how this pathogen was transmitted in human populations, the report said.

These discrepancies resulted in very real consequences.

For example, the WHO did not immediately recommend the use of masks early in the pandemic. In a social media post from March 2020, the organization said FACT: #COVID19 is NOT airborne. The #coronavirus is mainly transmitted through droplets generated when an infected person coughs, sneezes or speaks.

In the new report, the WHO now discourages the differentiation between aerosols, smaller infectious respiratory particles, and larger droplets.

The WHO says these particles exist on a continuous spectrum of sizes, and no single cut off points should be applied to distinguish smaller from larger particles.

The terminology experts use for diseases, especially names, can have wide-ranging implications.

So much so that the WHO in 2015 issued a best practices guidance for naming new diseases.

The use of names such as swine flu and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome has had unintended negative impacts by stigmatizing certain communities or economic sectors, said then-WHO Assistant Director-General for Health Security Dr Keiji Fukuda.

He added that disease names have previously sparked backlashes against certain religious and ethnic communities

In the guidance, the WHO recommended that geographic locations, peoples names, animals, and food should not be used to name a disease. Instead, new names should use more generic and descriptive terms based on symptoms, causes, and pathogens.

See the article here:

The WHO updates terminology for COVID-19 and airborne diseases - Quartz

Takeaways from AP report on how the search for the coronavirus origins turned toxic – Hamilton Spectator

April 22, 2024

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

Postal 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

View post:

Takeaways from AP report on how the search for the coronavirus origins turned toxic - Hamilton Spectator

Page 11234..1020..»