Posted on Leave a comment

Tanzania banks on herbal remedy to fight coronavirus

Source: AA
Photos Source: AA
Locals relying on steam therapy infused with herbs, fruit to quash deadly virus

Kizito Makoye   |10.02.2021Tanzania banks on herbal remedy to fight coronavirus

DAR ES SALAAM, Tanzania

As hot steam mistily wafts from a pan, Tumaini Lucas briskly stirs a mix of herbs with a pointed cooking stick.

Soon she creates a tent above her head using a wet towel to let a torrent of vapors bounce on her face.

The 41-year-old entrepreneur, who lives in the Mabwepande area on the outskirts of Dar es Salaam, is one of many in the bustling city who have embraced alternative remedies, including steam therapy, to fight infectious diseases such as the coronavirus.

“Steam therapy is the best way to flush off viral infections. It makes you feel good and fresh,” she said.


Lucas, who is originally from Tanzania’s northern Kilimanjaro region, said her family has always used culinary herbs to treat diseases, eliminate viral infections and keep germs at bay.

“My granny never went to the hospital when she got sick. She simply disappeared into the forest to pick some herbs, boil them and steam herself for half an hour to get the badly needed relief,” Lucas told Anadolu Agency.

As part of efforts to fight the spread of the coronavirus, the Tanzanian government has shunned conventional medicines and is instead touting the use of traditional remedies, including steam inhalation to fight respiratory infections.

The East African country recorded 509 coronavirus infections and 21 deaths last May when authorities halted its testing policy. The move came after President John Magufuli cast doubt on the efficacy of Chinese-made testing kits, which he claimed returned positive results on samples taken on a goat and pawpaw fruit.


No more testing

Magufuli’s decision to stop testing, however, was widely criticized globally by public health experts, including the World Health Organization (WHO) and the African Centre for Infectious Diseases Control, which accused the president of promoting wild conspiracy theories with no scientific basis.

Steam therapy, which entails a concoction of herbs infused with ginger, lemon and neem, among other ingredients, is widely promoted and used in Tanzania as an alternative remedy to fight the highly contagious virus.

As nations worldwide bank on vaccines to fight the deadly virus that has killed more than 2 million people, Tanzania has shunned conventional medicines, and promoted traditional remedies, thus sparking debate about the effectiveness and safety of those remedies.

Magufuli, who is known for his hard-line pan-Africanist stance, provoked criticism when he branded foreign made vaccines “dangerous” while urging Tanzanians to use natural remedies, including steam inhalation.

He has largely eschewed mask-wearing and social distancing and claimed that God eliminated coronavirus in Tanzania, only to be accused by public health experts for contradicting global scientific consensus on best approaches to treat the virus.

Source: AA
Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

False sense of security

But the move to shun conventional medicine has raised the hackles of local and international experts, who believe steam therapy may give a false sense of security to those who are likely to blindly follow instructions from their leaders.

Local experts debunked Magufuli’s bizarre theory, saying it could probably do more harm than good.

“Steam inhalation has undoubtedly been used as a home remedy to treat common colds and upper respiratory tract infections. The assumption that it can treat coronavirus is flawed and simply ridiculous,” said Kitapondya Deus, a public health specialist based in Dar es Salaam.

He said steam inhalation should be only a home remedy and not be used conventionally in hospitals.

Richard Walker, professor of clinical epidemiology at the University of Newcastle in the UK concurs with Kitapondya’s assertions. “Herbal remedies pose many risks, the mixture can be toxic or contaminated, thus interact with prescription drugs,” he told Anadolu Agency.

Power of neem

Not everyone agrees. Lucas, who has developed a deep faith in the healing power of traditional herbs and their ability to dispel conditions such as wheezing and respiratory distress in the elderly, believes there must be a consensus on the use of conventional medicines and traditional herbs.

“I strongly believe in the power of traditional herbs. They shouldn’t be used sparingly, instead they must be adopted as an important part of a treatment plan, along with conventional medicines,” she said.

Neem, known colloquially as Mwarobaini in Swahili and lemongrass, or Mchaichai, is known for its antimicrobial and antiviral properties and can be the best treatment for the coronavirus, according to Lucas.

She said a steam bath infused with lemongrass has the potential to stimulate the circulatory system thus encourage blood flow into the brain to get rid of any headache.

“Lemongrass works so wonderfully to me, it soothes my throat, clears my nose and protects me against any virus,” she said.

To improve the flavor of herbs in the mix, Lucas squeezes lemons and chops fresh ginger while gently tossing them into a boiling pan.

Lemon and ginger have strong antiviral properties that can sweat out a fever and kill the coronavirus, said Lucas.

“I honestly don’t understand why everyone cast doubt on the effectiveness of traditional herbs in treating modern day diseases like coronavirus. We must trust our indigenous knowledge of things,” she said.


Anadolu Agency website contains only a portion of the news stories offered to subscribers in the AA News Broadcasting System (HAS), and in summarized form. Please contact us for subscription options.

Where did the concept come from that drugs or chemicals are the primary source for healing? Alternative and non-western cures have been around for sometime. Indeed even in the west people seek alternative healings or medicine. Will you take the vaccine? If not how will you address COVID 19 and the pandemic?

Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today. All Rights Reserved – Shidonna Raven (c) 2025 – Garden & Cook.

Posted on Leave a comment

Too Many Americans Still Mistrust the COVID-19 Vaccines. Here’s Why

Here’s What’s Behind Americans’ Uneasy Relationship With Vaccines
BY JEFFREY KLUGER  JANUARY 5, 2021 9:36 AM EST
Source: Time

If you’re feeling impatient waiting your turn for a COVID-19 vaccine, here’s a little good news: Angela Padgett will gladly give you her place in line—at least for now. Padgett, president of a day spa in Raleigh, N.C., is under no illusions about the mortal danger the pandemic poses to herself, her family and the world writ large—indeed, she had COVID-19 back in July. But as for the vaccine that is supposed to put an end to all of the suffering at last? Not today.

“I am a little bit hesitant,” she says. “I can appreciate President Trump trying to get this moving fast and I’ve taken pretty much every vaccine [for other diseases]. But I think it was rushed through very early, very quickly. So I would like a little more data.”

Padgett is not alone. According to a December survey undertaken by the Pew Research Center, nearly 40% of Americans say they will definitely not or probably not get the COVID-19 vaccine when it becomes available to them. Gallup polls put the number at 37%. That’s bad news not just for the vaccine refusers themselves but for the public as a whole. Experts including Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, had previously concluded that achieving herd immunity—the point at which a population is sufficiently vaccinated that a spreading virus can’t find enough new hosts—would require anywhere from 60% to 70% of Americans to take the vaccines. But lately, he and others have been inching that number upward, now estimating that herd immunity could require as much as 85% vaccine coverage.

The holdouts have multiple reasons for their reluctance. There are, of course, the dead-enders in the anti-vax community, for whom no vaccine is safe or acceptable. There is, too, a faction peddling conspiracy theories about the COVID-19 vaccines in particular. As one falsely goes, the disease is caused by 5G cell towers, so a vaccine would be useless against it. (The rumor has been repeatedly debunked on Snopes.com and other sites.) Another spuriously claims the vaccines are a plot by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation—or, alternately, Elon Musk—to inject microchips into Americans. That last one—debunked herehere and elsewhere—has gained enough traction in the fever-swamp corners of the Internet that it prompted a rare acknowledgment from Bill Gates himself. “It doesn’t help that there are false conspiracy theories about vaccines, including some that involve Melinda and me,” he wrote in a foundation letter he released on Dec. 22.

But most people in the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy camp are more rational, more measured—informed enough not to believe the crazy talk, but worried enough not to want to be at the head of the line for a new vaccine. “For first responders and for older people with underlying conditions it’s a godsend,” says Padgett. “But I do believe this was rushed. I’m reasonably healthy. Six months to a year just to get more data on it is what I’d need to be vaccinated.”


For all the urgency to get as many vaccines into as many arms as possible, the reluctance of such a large swath of the population to be among the early adopters is not completely without merit.

“I think it’s reasonable to be skeptical about anything you put into your body, including vaccines,” says Dr. Paul Offit, professor of pediatrics at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and director of its Vaccine Education Center. Coming from Offit, a vocal proponent of universal vaccination and a particular boogeyman of the anti-vax camp, that carries particular weight. He goes further still, acknowledging that the speed with which the COVID-19 vaccines were developed can cause people special concern. “The average length of time it takes to make a vaccine is 15 to 20 years,” he says. “This vaccine was made in a year.”

Then too there is a question of effectiveness. Both of the vaccines that have been authorized for emergency use in the U.S., one from Pfizer-BioNTech and one from Moderna, have what Offit calls “ridiculously high efficacy rates—in the 95% range for all [COVID-19] disease and for Moderna’s product 100% for severe disease.” But in the haste to get the vaccine to market, test subjects have been followed up for only two to three months, so it’s impossible to say with any authority how effective the vaccines will remain at six or nine or 12 months.

Finally there are the side effects. Anaphylaxis—or a severe allergic reaction—is possible with any vaccine, though medical protocols call for people who have received the shot to wait 15 minutes before they leave so that they can be treated if they do have a reaction. More troubling are spotty reports of Bell’s palsy—partial facial paralysis—following COVID-19 vaccinations. But those numbers are exceedingly small. One false Facebook posting purported to be from a nurse in Nashville who got the vaccine and suffered Bell’s palsy, but that too has been debunked, as repeated searches have turned up no nurse in the Tennessee health system under that name. All the same, it sparked outsized fear of a real but minimal risk.

“There were four cases of Bell’s palsy within a month or month and a half in the Pfizer trial out of 22,000 recipients,” Offit says. “So that works out to roughly eight per 10,000 per year.” Such a case count may be low, but it does exceed the average background rate of Bell’s palsy in the general population, which is 1.2 per 10,000 per year, Offit says. Other sources put the incidence as a somewhat higher 2.3 per 10,000.

Armed with numbers like that, however, humans are not always terribly good at calculating risk. On the one hand even an eight in 10,000 chance of contracting facial paralysis does sound scary; on the other hand, about one out every 1,000 American was killed by COVID-19 this past year. The mortal arithmetic here is easy to do—and argues strongly in favor of getting the shots.

So too does the way the vaccines were developed—which is actually not as rushed as the calendar would make it seem. The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines both use mRNA—or messenger RNA—to prompt the body to produce a coronavirus spike protein, which then triggers an immune response. That is a novel method for making a vaccine, but the basic research was by no means conducted within the last year.

“The technology for the vaccine has actually been in development for more than a decade,” says Dr. Richard Pan, a pediatrician and a state senator in California. Pan has pushed hard over the years for laws mandating vaccines for children to attend school and, like Offit, has earned the animus of the anti-vax community for his efforts. He is just as big a booster of the COVID-19 vaccine—though he would not propose mandates until there are enough doses for everyone to get a shot—and tries to reassure doubters that no matter how soon they get the vaccine, there are a lot of people who went before them.

“I point out to people that when you get the vaccine you’re definitely not the first,” he says, “because there are tens of thousands of people who have been involved with clinical trials.” Health care workers who are already being vaccinated increase that number dramatically—some 2 million have gotten the shot in the U.S. as of this writing.


Offit’s and Pan’s reassurances will surely not assuage everyone, and here demographics play a role. As with so much else in the U.S., vaccines have become a political issue. The Gallup organization has been tracking vaccine attitudes by party since July and has found Democrats consistently more likely to get vaccinated than Independents or Republicans. In a poll taken at the end of November, 75% of Democrats said they would be willing to take the COVID-19 vaccine, compared to 61% for Independents and 50% for Republicans. Age plays a role too, with willingness to be vaccinated generally tracking susceptibility to the disease. In the December Pew Research Center poll, for example, 75% of adults over 65 reported that they intended to be vaccinated, compared to just 55% under 30.

But nowhere is the difference starker than among racial and ethnic groups, with 83% of Asian-Americans surveyed expressing an intent to be vaccinated, compared to 63% in the Latinx community and 61% among Whites. In Black American respondents, the numbers fall off the table, with just 42% intending to be vaccinated.

This is of a piece with a long history of medical disenfranchisement and much worse. Some of the mistrust goes back as far as the infamous gynecological experiments J. Marion Sims conducted on enslaved women—without anesthetic—in the 19th century; as well the Tuskegee experiment that began in the 1930s and involved decades of studying the progress of syphilis in Black men without informing them that they had the disease or offering them the antibiotics needed to treat it. But the structural inequality and bias continues today.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) the death rate from COVID-19 is 2.8 times higher for blacks than it is for whites and the hospitalization rate is 3.7 times higher. Dr. Ala Stanford, a Philadelphia-based pediatric surgeon and founder of the Black Doctors COVID Consortium sees a lot of reasons for that disparity, not least being that in the neighborhoods in which she works, Blacks and other minorities were being tested for COVID-19 at only one-sixth the rate of white communities, which tended to be higher-income, according to data from Drexel University. “[The tests] had to be scheduled from nine-to-five, when most people were at work,” Stanford says. “There were no evening or weekend hours [and] they weren’t accepting children.”

What’s more, Black Americans are disproportionately likely to be front-line or essential workers like home-health aides and are less likely to have the kinds of other jobs that would let them work from home. Less social distancing plus less testing means more sickness and death, which plays into the lived reality for many people that Black lives are valued less than white lives in the U.S. That, in turn, breeds more suspicions of the system as a whole—including of vaccines.

“The main fear I hear [about vaccines] is that someone is injecting coronavirus into my body,” says Stanford. “And I answer in as detailed a way as I can about the mRNA and the protein and how it looks like coronavirus but it’s not.” That kind of clarity, she says, can help a lot.

Offit hears even starker—and more poignant—fears from Blacks. “One particular man did not want to get the vaccine and I asked him why,” Offit says. “He said, ‘because for my race they make a different vaccine.’”

One way Stanford sought to push back against such suspicions was to offer up herself as a living example, getting vaccinated on camera through the Philadelphia Department of Public Health. The local media sent a pool camera and the footage was shown on the evening news. Dr. Brittani James, a professor at the University of Illinois Hospital and executive director of the Institute of Anti-Racism in Medicine, did something similar, streaming her vaccination online.

“I talk until I’m blue in the face,” she says, “but there’s something I think for people to see me or see other Black people getting it that can really do a lot to soothe their fear. Like hey, guess what? If I’m wrong, I’m going down with you.”

Whether that kind of role-modeling and example-setting will work to reduce resistance is impossible to know at the moment, simply because vaccines are still unavailable to the overwhelming share of the population. If you can’t get the shot in the first place, it doesn’t matter how hesitant or receptive you are to it. Offit, who is white, does believe that efforts like James’s, to appeal to members of her own community, can be truly valuable.

“I think if someone like me says something, people are just going to see it as ‘Of course he’d say that,’” Offit says. He cites by way of example the effectiveness of TV ads by the National Medical Association, a professional organization of Black American physicians, showing one Black nurse inoculating another with the COVID-19 vaccine. “It’s subtle,” Offit says, “but they’re trying to create those images.”

Stanford believes Black churches can play a role too. During one of the testing drives she helped organize, church parking lots were used as sites to administer the tests—which helped increase turnout. “We know that in the African-American community, [the church] is a trusted institution,” she says. “Even if you don’t go to church, you know that’s a safe space.”Dr. Ala Stanford receiving her COVID-19 vaccine. Stanford's vaccination was televised in order to promote the safety and efficacy of the shot.Dr. Ala Stanford receiving her COVID-19 vaccine. Stanford’s vaccination was televised in order to promote the safety and efficacy of the shot. Emma Lee
Source: Time
Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

In all communities, it helps too if doctors and other authorities listen respectfully to public misgivings about vaccines, explaining and re-explaining the science as frequently and patiently as possible. But there is a burden on the vaccine doubters themselves to be open to the medical truth. “Questions are fine as long as you listen to the answers,” Pan says. “So talk to your doctor, go to sources like the CDC and our incredible mainstream medical organizations. Those are the ones you should be getting information from.”

Adds Stanford: “My belief is that you don’t coerce or convince, you listen to concerns and you understand the fears and are empathetic with people. Then you educate and allow one to make their own choice.”

Pan also sees a role for social media companies, which must better control misinformation on their platforms. Journalists too must step up, avoiding false equivalency or both-sides-ism; there is no need to give equal time to rumor mongers or conspiracy theorists simply to appear balanced.

Ultimately, no vaccine is perfect, and the COVID-19 vaccines do have more questions associated with them than others, because there hasn’t been that much follow-up time since the study volunteers got their shots. But those questions are less about safety than about just how long the shots will prove protective. The truth is that they work.

Another truth, of course, is that for now, in the early stages of the vaccine rollout, masking and social distancing remain the best methods for protecting ourselves and others—and they will be part of our lives for at least many months to come. But slowly, over time, the vaccines will eliminate that need. What’s required now is trust in the power of the shots or, as Stanford puts it, in “faith and facts over fear.” Pandemics eventually stop raging. It’s vaccines that hasten that end game—and save millions of lives in the process.

WRITE TO JEFFREY KLUGER AT JEFFREY.KLUGER@TIME.COM.

As the article states the average time to actually develop a vaccine or new drug is 15 – 20 years. This vaccine has be developed in under a year. Why do you think people are hesitant around the world to take the COVID 19 vaccine? How often have pharmaceutical companies been fined for the drugs they develop and why? How effective or ineffective has the FDA been in protecting the public at large from predatory drugs and drug epidemics? Why? Why not?

Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today. All Rights Reserved – Shidonna Raven (c) 2025 – Garden & Cook.

Posted on Leave a comment

‘I’m not an anti-vaxxer, but…’ US health workers’ vaccine hesitancy raises alarm

Coronavirus

With up to 40% of frontline workers in LA county refusing Covid-19 inoculation experts warn that understanding and persuasion are needed

Amanda Holpuch

Amanda Holpuch in New York @holpuch
Sun 10 Jan 2021 03.00 EST
Last modified on Sun 10 Jan 2021 10.07 EST
Source: The Guardian

Registered nurse Valerie Massaro administers the second dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine to health care workers at the Hartford HealthCare at the Hartford Convention Center in Hartford, Connecticut on January 4, 2021.
 Registered nurse Valerie Massaro administers the second dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine to health care workers at the Hartford Convention Center in Hartford, Connecticut, this week. Photograph: Joseph Prezioso/AFP/Getty Images
Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

Susan, a critical care nurse based in Alaska, has been exposed to Covid-19 multiple times and has watched scores of people die from the illness. But she did not want to get the vaccination when she learned it would soon be available.

“I am not an anti-vaxxer, I have every vaccine known to man, my flu shot, I always sign up right there, October 1, jab me,” said Susan, who didn’t want to give her last name for fear of retaliation. “But for this one, why do I have to be a guinea pig?”

The two authorized vaccines, made by Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech, are safe according to leading expertsand clinical trials – for one thing they contain no live virus and so cannot give a person Covid – and with tens of thousands of patients, they have had about 95% efficacy. But across the country, health workers with the first access to the vaccine are turning it down.

Misinformation ‘superspreaders’: Covid vaccine falsehoods still thriving on Facebook and Instagram

The rates of refusal – up to 40% of frontline workers in Los Angeles county, 60% of care home workers in Ohio – have prompted concern and in some cases, shaming. But the ultimate failure could be dismissing these numbers at a critical moment in the US vaccination campaign.

Dr Whitney Robinson, an epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina, told the Guardian if these early figures coming from healthcare workers are not addressed: “It could mean after all this work, after all this sacrifice, we could still be seeing outbreaks for years, not just 2021, maybe 2022, maybe 2023.”

Vaccine hesitancy is common – 29% of healthcare workers said they were vaccine-hesitant, according to a survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation published last month. And it’s not exclusive to the US – up to 40% of care workers in the UK might refuse to have the vaccine, the National Care Association said in mid-December.

The numbers coming from hospital and care homes are unique in that they give a more specific picture of who is refusing the vaccine and why. Once vaccines are available to the general public, patterns will be more difficult to identify because the US does not have a centralized system to track vaccinations.

“If we don’t understand the patterns of who is not vaccinated, it will be hard to predict where outbreaks might spring from and how far they might spread,” Robinson said.

It will also leave underfunded public health agencies scrambling to identify and respond to hesitancy in the community.

“We can’t just write off somebody’s decisions and say, well that’s their personal decision,” Robinson said. “Because it’s not just their personal decision, it’s an infectious disease. As long as we have pockets of coronavirus anywhere in the world, until we have mass global vaccination, it’s a threat.”

Some employers and unions are seeing the numbers for what they are: an alarm in need of a response.

In New York City, the firefighters union found last month that 55% of 2,000 firefighter members surveyed said they would not get the vaccine.

But Covid cases are climbing at the FDNY. Twelve members have died and more than 600 were on medical leave in late December.

So, the Uniformed Firefighters Association (UFA) president, Andrew Ansbro, collected questions from some of the roughly 8,200 firefighters his union represents. A virologist friend had been helping Ansbro shape the union’s response to Covid-19 and answered their questions in a recorded video. The 50-minute video has now been viewed about 2,000 times.

“I actually received a couple dozen phone calls and messages from members that said it changed their mind,” said Ansbro, who was vaccinated on 29 December. “I think the vaccination numbers are definitely going to be higher than 45%.”Advertisement

He said people were concerned about how new the vaccine was, had read misinformation online and were worried about long-term effects. In other workplace surveys, people have shared concerns about how it could affect fertility or pregnant women. Some healthcare workers infected with Covid don’t think it’s necessary while they still have antibodies.

Each of these questions can be answered. And national surveys have shown that in general, vaccine hesitancy is decreasing.

But these surveys also suggest action is still needed to address populations more likely to be distrustful because of the country’s history of medical abuse.

Recent surveys show that Black people are the most vaccine-hesitant. In mid-November, 83% of Asian Americans said they would get the vaccine if it was made available to them that day. That sentiment was shared by 63% of Hispanic people, 61% of white people but just 42% of Black people, according to a Pew Research report.

Dr Nikhila Juvvadi, the chief clinical officer at Loretto hospital in Chicago, told NPR that conversations with vaccine-hesitant staff revealed mistrust was an issue among African American and Latino workers.

She said people specifically mentioned the Tuskegee Study, when federal health officials allowed hundreds of Black men with sexually transmitted diseases to go untreated to study disease progression. The study lasted from 1932 to 1972.

“I’ve heard Tuskegee more times than I can count in the past month – and, you know, it’s a valid, valid concern,” Juvvadi said.

Juvvadi, who administered vaccines at the hospital, said one-on-one conversations validating these concerns and answering questions had helped people be more comfortable with the vaccine.

Vaccine hesitancy in healthcare workers has also put pressure on health systems intent on getting doses to as many people as possible, as quickly as possible.

Georgia’s public health commissioner, Kathleen Toomey, announced last week that the state would expand vaccine access to adults 65 and older and first responders because healthcare workers were declining to take it.

Dr Toomey said that while hundreds of healthcare workers were on waiting lists to get the vaccine in the state’s urban center, Atlanta, in rural areas the vaccine was “literally sitting in freezers” because healthcare workers there did not want to take it.

At one of the Texas hospitals hardest hit by the virus, Doctors Hospital at Renaissance in the Rio GrandeValley, workers contacted local EMTs, paramedics and medical workers from outside the hospital to distribute their remaining vaccines because of their limited shelf-life.

Susan, the nurse in Alaska, said her preference would be for her parents to get the vaccine first because they are more vulnerable.

She has made peace with the vaccine and plans to get it the next time it is offered. She said she was ultimately convinced to get it after speaking to other health professionals who did not dismiss her concerns and listened to her questions.

Now, however, there is another hurdle. Susan has declined the vaccine twice because of logistics. She is currently on a temporary crisis assignment in rural Texas and the travel meant both times she was offered the vaccine, she would be in a different state when it was time to take the second dose. Susan said: “I feel terrible I’ve said no.”

Why do you think medical professionals are hesitant to take the vaccine? Shouldn’t one lead by example? If they are unwilling to do it, why should you be willing? Will you take the COVID 19 vaccine?

Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today. All Rights Reserved – Shidonna Raven (c) 2025 – Garden & Cook.

Posted on Leave a comment

India Has Plenty of Coronavirus Vaccines But Few Takers

By Bibhudatta Pradhan and Sudhi Ranjan Sen
January 26, 2021, 4:00 PM EST
Source: Bloomberg

  •  Doctors shun early-stage vaccine, ignore government pleas
  •  India may fall short of plan to vaccinate 300 million by July
A nurse administers a shot of the Covishield vaccine in Mumbai, on Jan. 16.
A nurse administers a shot of the Covishield vaccine in Mumbai, on Jan. 16. Photographer: Dhiraj Singh/Bloomberg
Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

Most of the world is struggling to secure enough vaccines to inoculate their populations. India has the opposite problem: Plenty of shots, but a shortage of people willing to take them.

As India rolls out one of the world’s biggest inoculation programs, some health-care and other frontline workers are hesitating because of safety concerns over a vaccine that has yet to complete phase III trials. As of Monday, only about 56% of people eligible to get the shot have stepped forward in a nation with the world’s second-worst Covid-19 outbreak.

Unless the inoculation rate significantly increases, India will fall far short of its target of inoculating 300 million people — or about a quarter of the population — by July. That will setback global efforts to contain the virus and snuff out optimism that a recovery is taking root in an economy set for its biggest annual contraction in records going back to 1952.

“At least 40% of doctors here are unsure and want to wait,” said Vinod Kumar, a resident doctor at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences of Patna, in the eastern state of Bihar. “Carrying out a vaccine trial on us when India is short of doctors, health-care workers doesn’t make sense.”

While vaccine hesitancy has surfaced in places like Japan and Brazil, and China’s candidates have also faced questions over data, the scale of the problem in India is by far the biggest. The major difficulties facing places like the U.S. and Europe are mostly due to scarce supplies rather than vaccine acceptance, and some countries are turning to New Delhi for help: India says it can produce 500 million shots per month for export, and countries such as the U.K., Belgium and Saudi Arabia have sought to buy them.

India’s domestic vaccine program administers one of two shots: the AstraZeneca Plc vaccine, manufactured by the Serum Institute of India Ltd., or the Covaxin shot developed by Bharat Biotech International Ltd., a private company based in Hyderabad. India’s approval of the Bharat Biotech shot, which was developed with government-backed research groups, was met with widespread criticism from scientists because of the lack of complete data.

“Many in our institute aren’t comfortable with Covaxin because we don’t know how effective it is,” said Adarsh Pratap Singh, a member of the Resident Doctors Association at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences in New Delhi. “To build trust among people the government must come out with the data, evidence of the trials, and encourage free and fair discussions.”

Both the company and the government have defended the shot. Krishna Ella, Bharat Biotech’s chairman, said earlier this month that the company carried out “200% honest clinical trials” and had a track record of producing 16 safe and effective vaccines. “Indian scientists want to bash on other Indian scientists,” he said while dismissing criticisms in a virtual press briefing on Jan. 4. A spokesperson for Bharat Biotech didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The government, meanwhile, has urged health-care workers to get vaccinated. Health Minister Harsh Vardhan has sent tweets imploring “#CoronaWarriors” to take the shot, while dispelling rumors that the vaccine could cause infertility. A federal health ministry spokesperson wasn’t immediately available to comment.

“Vaccine hesitancy among health workers should end — I am pleading on behalf of the government, that please adopt it, because no one knows how this pandemic will take shape in the future,” said V. K. Paul, a member of the planning body Niti Aayog, noting that he’s taken the Covaxin shot without any adverse effects.

A Bitter Vaccine History Means Hurdles for Japan’s Covid Fight

“These two vaccines are safe,” he said. “We have a system to track it and if there is an unusual signal, it will be responded to the way it should be.”

Initial apprehension and doubt at the start of any vaccine rollout is normal, said Preeti Sudan, former secretary at the federal ministry of health and family welfare. India was successful in its polio immunization program, she noted, after launching a massive campaign involving children, mothers and opinion leaders to help dispel vaccine fears.

Low Vaccination Rates

The latest Covid updatesMake sense of the headlines and the outbreak’s global response with the Coronavirus Daily.EmailSign UpBy submitting my information, I agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Service and to receive offers and promotions from Bloomberg.

As of Monday, India distributed about 2 million shots nationwide. In Madhya Pradesh, the largest state in central India, about 75% of enrolled people turned up for vaccination on Jan. 21, while two days later in Bihar the rate was much lower at 51.6%. On Jan. 19, about 55% of those eligible were vaccinated in Rajasthan and 54% in the southern state of Tamil Nadu, according to state government data.

While the hesitation relates to both vaccines, people are most wary about Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin. In Tamil Nadu, for example, only 23.5% of those allocated Covaxin received the shots on Jan. 19, compared with 56% for the Serum Institute’s Covishield, the data show.

Nirmalya Mohapatra, a doctor at Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital in New Delhi, plans to “wait and watch” for more clarity before getting vaccinated with Bharat Biotech’s shot. If given a choice now, he would opt for Covishield, as its efficacy data was reviewed by leading medical journals.

“Covaxin could turn out to be a better vaccine in the future,” said Mohapatra, who is also vice president of the resident doctors’ association at the hospital. “But for now there is some apprehension because of the lack of a complete trial.”

— With assistance by Ganesh Nagarajan

Actually vaccination hesitation is also high in the U.S. although there are efforts to combat the hesitancy. We are uncertain as of yet the hesitancy rate in Great Britain. In fact, in the U.S. and in India the hesitation is very similar: health care professionals and the population at large are also hesitant with many wanting to at least wait until there is more information. The typically clinical trial for a new medicine last about 7 – 8 years in the U.S.? What is the global risk of being wrong about the COVID vaccine? Is rushing a COVID vaccine the only means of addressing the pandemic? What are alternative health and economic solutions

Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today. All Rights Reserved – Shidonna Raven (c) 2025 – Garden & Cook.

Posted on Leave a comment

The End of the Pandemic Is Now in Sight

covid 19 shidonna raven garden and cook

A year of scientific uncertainty is over. Two vaccines look like they will work, and more should follow.
SARAH ZHANG, NOVEMBER 18, 2020
Source: The Atlantic

Editor’s Note: The Atlantic is making vital coverage of the coronavirus available to all readers. Find the collection here.

For all that scientists have done to tame the biological world, there are still things that lie outside the realm of human knowledge. The coronavirus was one such alarming reminder, when it emerged with murky origins in late 2019 and found naive, unwitting hosts in the human body. Even as science began to unravel many of the virus’s mysteries—how it spreads, how it tricks its way into cells, how it kills—a fundamental unknown about vaccines hung over the pandemic and our collective human fate: Vaccines can stop many, but not all, viruses. Could they stop this one?

The answer, we now know, is yes. A resounding yes. Pfizer and Moderna have separately released preliminary data that suggest their vaccines are both more than 90 percent effective, far more than many scientists expected. Neither company has publicly shared the full scope of their data, but independent clinical-trial monitoring boards have reviewed the results, and the FDA will soon scrutinize the vaccines for emergency use authorization. Unless the data take an unexpected turn, initial doses should be available in December.

The tasks that lie ahead—manufacturing vaccines at scale, distributing them via a cold or even ultracold chain, and persuading wary Americans to take them—are not trivial, but they are all within the realm of human knowledge. The most tenuous moment is over: The scientific uncertainty at the heart of COVID-19 vaccines is resolved. Vaccines work. And for that, we can breathe a collective sigh of relief. “It makes it now clear that vaccines will be our way out of this pandemic,” says Kanta Subbarao, a virologist at the Doherty Institute, who has studied emerging viruses.

The invention of vaccines against a virus identified only 10 months ago is an extraordinary scientific achievement. They are the fastest vaccines ever developed, by a margin of years. From virtually the day Chinese scientists shared the genetic sequence of a new coronavirus in January, researchers began designing vaccines that might train the immune system to recognize the still-unnamed virus. They needed to identify a suitable piece of the virus to turn into a vaccine, and one promising target was the spike-shaped proteins that decorate the new virus’s outer shell. Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines both rely on the spike protein, as do many vaccine candidates still in development. These initial successes suggest this strategy works; several more COVID-19 vaccines may soon cross the finish line. To vaccinate billions of people across the globe and bring the pandemic to a timely end, we will need all the vaccines we can get.

But it is no accident or surprise that Moderna and Pfizer are first out of the gate. They both bet on a new and hitherto unproven idea of using mRNA, which has the long-promised advantage of speed. This idea has now survived a trial by pandemic and emerged likely triumphant. If mRNA vaccines help end the pandemic and restore normal life, they may also usher in a new era for vaccine development.

The human immune system is awesome in its power, but an untrained one does not know how to aim its fire. That’s where vaccines come in. They present a harmless snapshot of a pathogen, a “wanted” poster, if you will, that primes the immune system to recognize the real virus when it comes along. Traditionally, this snapshot could be in the form of a weakened virus or an inactivated virus or a particularly distinctive viral molecule. But those approaches require vaccine makers to manufacture viruses and their molecules, which takes time and expertise. Both are lacking during a pandemic caused by a novel virus.

mRNA vaccines offer a clever shortcut. We humans don’t need to intellectually work out how to make viruses; our bodies are already very, very good at incubating them. When the coronavirus infects us, it hijacks our cellular machinery, turning our cells into miniature factories that churn out infectious viruses. The mRNA vaccine makes this vulnerability into a strength. What if we can trick our own cells into making just one individually harmless, though very recognizable, viral protein? The coronavirus’s spike protein fits this description, and the instructions for making it can be encoded into genetic material called mRNA.

Both vaccines, from Moderna and from Pfizer’s collaboration with the smaller German company BioNTech, package slightly modified spike-protein mRNA inside a tiny protective bubble of fat. Human cells take up this bubble and simply follow the directions to make spike protein. The cells then display these spike proteins, presenting them as strange baubles to the immune system. Recognizing these viral proteins as foreign, the immune system begins building an arsenal to prepare for the moment a virus bearing this spike protein appears.

This overall process mimics the steps of infection better than some traditional vaccines, which suggests that mRNA vaccines may provoke a better immune response for certain diseases. When you inject vaccines made of inactivated viruses or viral pieces, they can’t get inside the cell, and the cell can’t present those viral pieces to the immune system. Those vaccines can still elicit proteins called antibodies, which neutralize the virus, but they have a harder time stimulating T cells, which make up another important part of the immune response. (Weakened viruses used in vaccines can get inside cells, but risk causing an actual infection if something goes awry. mRNA vaccines cannot cause infection because they do not contain the whole virus.) Moreover, inactivated viruses or viral pieces tend to disappear from the body within a day, but mRNA vaccines can continue to produce spike protein for two weeks, says Drew Weissman, an immunologist at the University of Pennsylvania, whose mRNA vaccine research has been licensed by both BioNTech and Moderna. The longer the spike protein is around, the better for an immune response.

All of this is how mRNA vaccines should work in theory. But no one on Earth, until last week, knew whether mRNA vaccines actually do work in humans for COVID-19. Although scientists had prototyped other mRNA vaccines before the pandemic, the technology was still new. None had been put through the paces of a large clinical trial. And the human immune system is notoriously complicated and unpredictable. Immunology is, as my colleague Ed Yong has written, where intuition goes to die. Vaccines can even make diseases more severe, rather than less. The data from these large clinical trials from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna are the first, real-world proof that mRNA vaccines protect against disease as expected. The hope, in the many years when mRNA vaccine research flew under the radar, was that the technology would deliver results quickly in a pandemic. And now it has.

“What a relief,” says Barney Graham, a virologist at the National Institutes of Health, who helped design the spike protein for the Moderna vaccine. “You can make thousands of decisions, and thousands of things have to go right for this to actually come out and work. You’re just worried that you have made some wrong turns along the way.” For Graham, this vaccine is a culmination of years of such decisions, long predating the discovery of the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. He and his collaborators had homed in on the importance of spike protein in another virus, called respiratory syncytial virus, and figured out how to make the protein more stable and thus suitable for vaccines. This modification appears in both Pfizer/BioNTech’s and Moderna’s vaccines, as well as other leading vaccine candidates.

The spectacular efficacy of these vaccines, should the preliminary data hold, likely also has to do with the choice of spike protein as vaccine target. On one hand, scientists were prepared for the spike protein, thanks to research like Graham’s. On the other hand, the coronavirus’s spike protein offered an opening. Three separate components of the immune system—antibodies, helper cells, and killer T cells—all respond to the spike protein, which isn’t the case with most viruses.

In this, we were lucky. “It’s the three punches,” says Alessandro Sette. Working with Shane Crotty, his fellow immunologist at the La Jolla Institute, Sette found that COVID-19 patients whose immune systems can marshal all three responses against the spike protein tend to fare the best. The fact that most people can recover from COVID-19 was always encouraging news; it meant a vaccine simply needed to jump-start the immune system, which could then take on the virus itself. But no definitive piece of evidence existed that proved COVID-19 vaccines would be a slam dunk. “There’s nothing like a Phase 3 clinical trial,” Crotty says. “You don’t know what’s gonna happen with a vaccine until it happens, because the virus is complicated and the immune system is complicated.”

Experts anticipate that the ongoing trials will clarify still-unanswered questions about the COVID-19 vaccines. For example, Ruth Karron, the director of the Center for Immunization Research at Johns Hopkins University, asks, does the vaccine prevent only a patient’s symptoms? Or does it keep them from spreading the virus? How long will immunity last? How well does it protect the elderly, many of whom have a weaker response to the flu vaccine? So far, Pfizer has noted that its vaccine seems to protect the elderly just as well, which is good news because they are especially vulnerable to COVID-19.

Several more vaccines using the spike protein are in clinical trials too. They rely on a suite of different vaccine technologies, including weakened viruses, inactivated viruses, viral proteins, and another fairly new concept called DNA vaccines. Never before have companies tested so many different types of vaccines against the same virus, which might end up revealing something new about vaccines in general. You now have the same spike protein delivered in many different ways, Sette points out. How will the vaccines behave differently? Will they each stimulate different parts of the immune system? And which parts are best for protecting against the coronavirus? The pandemic is an opportunity to compare different types of vaccines head-on.

If the two mRNA vaccines continue to be as good as they initially seem, their success will likely crack open a whole new world of mRNA vaccines. Scientists are already testing them against currently un-vaccinable viruses such as Zika and cytomegalovirus and trying to make improved versions of existing vaccines, such as for the flu. Another possibility lies in personalized mRNA vaccines that can stimulate the immune system to fight cancer.

But the next few months will be a test of one potential downside of mRNA vaccines: their extreme fragility. mRNA is an inherently unstable molecule, which is why it needs that protective bubble of fat, called a lipid nanoparticle. But the lipid nanoparticle itself is exquisitely sensitive to temperature. For longer-term storage, Pfizer/BioNTech’s vaccine has to be stored at –70 degrees Celsius and Moderna’s at –20 Celsius, though they can be kept at higher temperatures for a shorter amount of time. Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna have said they can collectively supply enough doses for 22.5 million people in the United States by the end of the year.

Distributing the limited vaccines fairly and smoothly will be a massive political and logistical challenge, especially as it begins during a bitter transition of power in Washington. The vaccine is a scientific triumph, but the past eight months have made clear how much pandemic preparedness is not only about scientific research. Ensuring adequate supplies of tests and personal protective equipment, providing economic relief, and communicating the known risks of COVID-19 transmission are all well within the realm of human knowledge, yet the U.S. government has failed at all of that.

The vaccine by itself cannot slow the dangerous trajectory of COVID-19 hospitalizations this fall or save the many people who may die by Christmas. But it can give us hope that the pandemic will end. Every infection we prevent now—through masking and social distancing—is an infection that can, eventually, be prevented forever through vaccines.

Will you take the vaccine? How do you think the vaccine will impact the pandemic? How has the pandemic impacted you and yours?

Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today. All Rights Reserved – Shidonna Raven (c) 2025 – Garden & Cook.

Posted on Leave a comment

COVID-19 vaccine could be ready for 20 million Americans by December

COVID 19 Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

By Melanie Gray
November 14, 2020 | 9:45am
Source: New York Post
Feature Photo Source: Unsplash, Mustafa Omar

Get ready to roll up your sleeve for a COVID-19 shot.

As many as 20 million Americans could be inoculated against the coronavirus before the end of the year — and the number jumps to 80 million by March — if the government hits the target deadlines of the vaccine campaign’s top scientist, Moncef Slaoui.

Slaoui’s schedule put the number of monthly vaccines at 25 million to 30 million a month, starting in January. At that pace, roughly a fourth of the population could be vaccinated before spring, Business Insider reported.

Earlier predictions by two other top government officials, Dr. Anthony Fauci and Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, had set April as the rollout date.

First in line will be healthcare workers and those highest at risk, such as seniors with pre-existing conditions. An advisory panel to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will determine the specifics of the allocation plan.

Hitting the target dates is only possible if regulators approve two vaccines in the works by pharmaceutical giants Pfizer and Moderna. Slaoui told reporters that he expected both companies to ask the Food and Drug Administration for emergency use authorization by early December.

What do you think of the COVID 19 vaccine? Will you take it? How do you think a vaccine was obtained quicker than officials anticipated?

Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today. All Rights Reserved – Shidonna Raven (c) 2025 – Garden & Cook.

Posted on Leave a comment

White House Blocks New Coronavirus Vaccine Guidelines

1dimitri-houtteman-unsplash Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

Source: The New York Times
Featured Photo Source: Unsplash, Sharon Mccutcheon
The F.D.A. proposed stricter guidelines for emergency approval of a coronavirus vaccine, but the White House chief of staff objected to provisions that would push approval past Election Day.

Sharon LaFraniere
Noah Weiland

By Sharon LaFraniere and Noah Weiland

WASHINGTON — Top White House officials are blocking strict new federal guidelines for the emergency release of a coronavirus vaccine, objecting to a provision that would almost certainly guarantee that no vaccine could be authorized before the election on Nov. 3, according to people familiar with the approval process.

Facing a White House blockade, the Food and Drug Administration is seeking other avenues to ensure that vaccines meet the guidelines. That includes sharing the standards — perhaps as soon as this week — with an outside advisory committee of experts that is supposed to meet publicly before any vaccine is authorized for emergency use. The hope is that the committee will enforce the guidelines, regardless of the White House’s reaction.

The struggle over the guidelines is part of a monthslong tug of war between the White House and federal agencies on the front lines of the pandemic response. White House officials have repeatedly intervened to shape decisions and public announcements in ways that paint the administration’s response to the pandemic in a positive light.

That pattern has dismayed a growing number of career officials and political appointees involved in the administration’s fight against a virus that has claimed more than 209,000 lives in the United States.

The vaccine guidelines carry special significance: By refusing to allow the Food and Drug Administration to release them, the White House is undercutting the government’s effort to reassure the public that any vaccine will be safe and effective, health experts fear.

“The public must have full faith in the scientific process and the rigor of F.D.A.’s regulatory oversight if we are to end the pandemic,” the biotech industry’s trade association pleaded on Thursday, in a letter to President Trump’s health secretary, Alex M. Azar II, asking for release of the guidelines.

The Food and Drug Administration submitted the guidelines to the Office of Management and Budget for approval more than two weeks ago, but they stalled in the office of Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff. Their approval is now seen as highly unlikely.

A main sticking point has been the recommendation that volunteers who have participated in vaccine clinical trials be followed for a median of two months after the final dose before any authorization is granted, according to a senior administration official and others familiar with the situation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Given where the clinical trials stand, that two-month follow-up period would all but preclude any emergency clearance before Election Day.

The conflict began almost as soon as the Food and Drug Administration submitted the guidelines to the White House budget office on Monday, Sept. 21. The next day, Dr. Stephen M. Hahn, the F.D.A. commissioner, briefed Mr. Azar on the matter.

That Wednesday, Mr. Meadows raised a series of concerns, a senior administration official said. He questioned the need for two months of follow-up data, said that stricter recommendations would change the rules in the middle of clinical trials and suggested that Dr. Hahn was overly influenced by his agency’s career scientists. The White House on Monday did not respond to a request for comment.

Speaking to reporters on Sept. 23, Mr. Trump publicly cast doubt on whether the guidance would be approved. “We may or may not approve it,” he said, suggesting that the regulatory action “was a political move more than anything else.”

F.D.A. officials later provided additional justification to the White House, explaining that the two-month follow-up was necessary to identify possible side effects and ensure that a vaccine’s protection against Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, was not short-lived. But they have been unable to break the stalemate.

The White House has the authority to intervene in such nonbinding guidance documents — a step below enforceable regulations — at least partly because of an October 2019 executive order that tightened restrictions over the issuance of such documents. That order asserted that “agencies have sometimes used this authority inappropriately in attempts to regulate the public.” White House officials have cited it to force the Food and Drug Administration and other agencies to submit pandemic-related guidelines to the White House budget office for review before public release.

Staff members at the budget office scrutinize the documents for statements that could undercut the president’s public message that the administration either has the pandemic under control or will soon, according to former and current federal officials.

The testing and release of a vaccine is an issue that has gained wide national attention. Mr. Trump has repeatedly misrepresented how quickly a vaccine might be available to most Americans, promising a major breakthrough in vaccine development as early as this month. No clinical trial in the United States has yet advanced far enough to prove that any vaccine is safe and effective, although Pfizer, one vaccine developer, is hoping for interim results soon from its trial.

The Food and Drug Administration’s new guidelines were intended to assure companies developing vaccines that they were being held to a common standard and to reassure the public. Polls suggest that Americans are increasingly wary about taking a coronavirus vaccine: A survey published last month by the Pew Research Center found that 51 percent of Americans would either probably or definitely take one, down from 72 percent in May.

Dr. Peter Marks, the F.D.A.’s top regulator for vaccines, said last week in an event organized by Friends of Cancer Research that the government had to be transparent about the standards it was using to evaluate experimental vaccines in order to build public trust. He and other health officials have stressed that the companies developing vaccines are already fully aware of the agency’s expectations for products seeking authorization for emergency use.

Mr. Azar on Friday played down the conflict with the White House, telling a House panel that those concerned about its involvement in the guidelines were making “a mountain out of a molehill.”

“What the commissioner is proposing to put out is public emergency use authorization guidance on a vaccine that would be consistent with letters already sent to the manufacturers,” Mr. Azar said. “The F.D.A. has already told the manufacturers what they’re going to look for.”

Some vaccine makers, including Johnson & Johnson, have publicly indicated that they will follow the agency’s recommendations, regardless of the White House’s actions.

At a recent meeting with F.D.A. staff members, Dr. Marks said the agency “may hear more noise in the press” about trouble with the guidance but added that the “goal isn’t to get into fights,” according to people familiar with his comments. He said at the Friends of Cancer Research event that there was no reason “to get all excited” because “we are going to have a transparent advisory committee meeting for each and every emergency use authorization that comes through.”

Privately, Dr. Marks has told colleagues that an angry tweet from Mr. Trump attacking F.D.A. scientists over the guidelines could damage public confidence in a coronavirus vaccine.

The guidance laid out more specific criteria for clinical trial data and recommended that it be reviewed by the advisory committee of independent experts. It is expected to be included in the briefing papers for the committee’s next meeting, scheduled for Oct. 22.

Food and Drug Administration officials hope the committee will consider those standards before giving its blessing to any emergency use authorization for a vaccine. The most likely recipients of any vaccine that wins that authorization will be high-risk populations such as health care workers.

In addition to the two-month follow-up period, the guidelines stated that there should be at least five cases of severe infection in the placebo group as evidence that a vaccine is effective in preventing more than just mild to moderate illness. About 10 percent of Covid-19 cases are considered severe.

The guidelines also laid out the agency’s expectation that vaccine makers would continue to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of the drug, if granted emergency use authorization.

Katie Thomas contributed reporting from Chicago. Kitty Bennett contributed research.

How do you feel about a coronavirus vaccine? What do you think the guidelines will be? Will you take a coronavirus vaccine?

Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today. All Rights Reserved – Shidonna Raven (c) 2025 – Garden & Cook.

Posted on Leave a comment

Trump contracts COVID

Featured Photo Source: Unsplash, Library Of Congress, Jpn Oglajou

After Biden and Trump’s debate at the end of September 2020, it was reported that Trump contracted COVID 19 along with many others in his camp such as Mrs. Trump and Kellyanne Conway. He soon was admitted to Walter Reed and days later returned to the White house to complete his recovery. COVID 19 is indeed the most profound and controversial disease of our lifetime. While some countries have managed the disease fairly well (Japan), others (U.S.) have not. Like most diseases, COVID 19 is no respecter of persons infecting anyone in its path and drawing mixed emotions from across the globe. Some NPR c(National Public Radio) callers are skeptical of the vaccine and believe that such things should be tested on the country’s administrators first and after 2 years the rest of us can follow our hearts. In this instance, this caller just may have gotten her wish.

With the world’s history rife with the experimentation of disease and drugs on unknowing populations, one can see why some might be skeptical and want to weigh all the facts as they bare out. The Tuskegee Airman are a prime example of involuntary medical experimentation, which not only impacted them, it impacted those in their families as well. Disease can be both murky and deadly. Regardless of your thoughts on COVID 19 we encourage our readers to be well informed about the decisions they make regarding their health and to take every precaution to protect yourselves and others from COVID 19.How do you protect yourself and others from COVID 19? What should a national plan look like? How has your area been impacted by COVID 19?

Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today. All Rights Reserved – Shidonna Raven (c) 2025 – Garden & Cook.

Posted on Leave a comment

COVID deaths update

COVID 19 Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

Featured Photo Source: Unspash, Mustafa Omar

The coronavirus pandemic has now killed at least 1 million people worldwide. That’s according to a tally maintained by Johns Hopkins University. This sobering milestone was reached just nine months after the first reported fatality in China last January. And public health experts believe the actual toll – the recorded deaths plus the unrecorded deaths – is much higher. What’s more, in the five worst-off countries, the trend line remains worrisome.

1. United States

Take the United States, which currently leads the world in terms of both total number of dead and total number of infected over the course of the pandemic. While several Northeastern states that were clobbered by the virus early on managed to use social distancing and masking to push down their new cases by early spring, states in other regions then quickly moved to re-open. This fueled an even bigger wave of deaths across wide swaths of the U.S. throughout the summer. Since then many states have managed to bring down their numbers — as well as the overall U.S. daily death count. Yet it remains far higher than it was in July. Also, most recently, daily deaths have actually begun rising again — largely driven by increasing transmission in various states in the Great Plains and the South.

2. Brazil

Brazil, the second-biggest driver of the worldwide death toll, is also once again trouble. Led by a president who repeatedly downplayed the threat from the coronavirus, Brazil’s initial response was chaotic at best, enabling a surge in deaths all through July and August. About a month ago, the daily death count began dropping. But more recently that progress seems to have stalled.

Source: NPR

Where do you live? How has COVID 19 impacted your state? Are your states numbers declining? Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.

Posted on Leave a comment

COVID 19 Vaccine Trails and Ethics

How do we develop a COVID-19 vaccine ethically? | The Stream

Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook
Ethics and a COVID 19 Vaccine
Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

What if you were given a vaccine very soon but it was ineffective? What are your thoughts about a corona virus vaccine? What would you like to see happen? What ethics should be implemented in the vaccine you receive? Would you like to receive a vaccine? Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.