Vitamin D Levels May Play a Role in COVID-19 Mortality Rates
Researchers have discovered a correlation between vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 mortality rates. A research team led by Northwestern University has examined data from hospitals in China, France, Germany, Italy, Iran, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, the UK, and the US. The data collected shows that patients from places with high mortality rates (Spain, Italy, the UK) had lower vitamin D levels compared to countries that were less affected by the virus.
While I think it is important for people to know that vitamin D deficiency might play a role in mortality, we don’t need to push vitamin D on everybody. This needs further study, and I hope our work will stimulate interest in this area. The data also may illuminate the mechanism of mortality, which, if proven, could lead to new therapeutic targets.
Backman and his team felt compelled to examine the correlation between death rates and vitamin D levels after noticing “unexplainable differences” in death rates from various countries. They point out that northern Italy, despite its death rate, has one of the best health care systems in the world. Through their research, they found a correlation between lower vitamin D levels and Cytokine storms, a hyperinflammatory condition.
Cytokine storm can severely damage lungs and lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome and death in patients,” Daneshkhah said. “This is what seems to kill a majority of COVID-19 patients, not the destruction of the lungs by the virus itself. It is the complications from the misdirected fire from the immune system.
Celebrities and Scientists Call for Changes After Coronavirus
More than 200 celebrities, Nobel prize winners, and scientists have signed an open letter calling for systematic change rather than a return to normalcy. In the midst of the pandemic, many have talked about what our return to normalcy will look like and when it will arrive. Others, however, have spoken out on the importance of using this opportunity to make the changes our environment needs to survive.
Consumerism has led us to deny life in itself: that of plants, that of animals and that of a large number of humans. Pollution, global warming and the destruction of natural spaces are leading the world to a breaking point. For these reasons, combined with the ever increasing social inequalities, it seems to us unthinkable to “return to normal”.
The letter calls for changes to how we, as humans, consume. They point out that while the pandemic will do damage, it will not compare to the consequences of the damage done to the environment.
It’s important to remember that despite their call for change, these celebrities have directly benefited from our rampant consumerism and that they too are part of the problem. It is easy to speak from a soapbox about change after you have made millions of dollars off the broken system.
You can read the full letter and a list of signees below.
Our Drastic Decrease in CO2 Emissions is Not Enough
Many people have celebrated the fact that in the midst of the global lockdown air quality has improved and emissions have dropped by 5.5%, a decrease greater than the time of the Great Recession, or the drop after WW2. However, an article by grist brings up an important point – 5.5% is not a lot and not enough. Where is the other 95% coming from?
Massive amounts of transportation overall has been cut out and we’re still only expected to see a 5.5% drop, so how are we on an individual level supposed to fix the climate crisis when radically reducing our carbon footprint didn’t make that big a difference? Transportation makes up around 20% of global carbon dioxide emissions (closer to 30% in America) so even if we went completely green without transportation, there’s still a significant amount of greenhouse gas emissions.
“I think the main issue is that people focus way, way too much on people’s personal footprints, and whether they fly or not, without really dealing with the structural things that really cause carbon dioxide levels to go up,”
Electricity and heating make up for 40% of global emissions, while 60% of electricity is still generated from coal, oil, or natural gas. The last 20% of CO2 emissions come from manufacturing industries. Neither manufacturing industries or electricity have seen a significant decrease in emissions during the pandemic.
To combat global warming, emissions need to be cut by 7.6% every year, and we’re not even there with an economic shutdown. Despite clear skies in LA and clear water in Venice, CO2 emissions are invisible and still very much present. This lockdown is proof that humans on an individual level are not responsible for combating climate change alone. In order for significant changes to be made, corporations have to be held accountable for their actions.
Nursing Home Residents and Workers Account for Nearly One-Third of U.S Coronavirus Cases
Nearly one-third of America’s coronavirus deaths are residents or workers of nursing homes. This is according to data compiled by the New York Times. Their findings show that at least 27,600 residents and workers combined have passed from the Coronavirus. More than 150,000 people from nursing homes have been infected, spanning 7,700 different facilities.
While just 11 percent of the country’s cases have occurred in long-term care facilities, deaths related to Covid-19 in these facilities account for more than a third of the country’s pandemic fatalities.
The elderly are more susceptible to the virus than younger people, as people with pre-existing conditions or low immune systems are more susceptible. The elderly frequently fall into those categories. Additionally, the virus is able to spread easily throughout facilities where people live in confined spaces and travel from room to room.
Not every state has released comprehensive data on coronavirus deaths. However, the New York Times has gathered data that is available. You can read their original article down below, where their data is shown for case outbreaks.
Reusable Grocery Bags Are Being Banned as Plastics Industry Takes Advantage of COVID-19
States and cities are rolling back plastic bag bans at the grocery store and enacting bans on reusable grocery bags as the plastics industries ramps up lobbying during the COVID-19 pandemic. San Francisco, the first municipality to ban plastic bags, has banned customers from bringing reusable grocery bags while the state of California has lifted their plastic bag ban for 60 days. Oregon has lifted its plastic bag for the same period, and cities like Bellingham, WA, and Albuquerque, NM have announced they will allow the bags during the pandemic. Massachusetts, Illinois, New Hampshire, and Maryland are among the states that have banned or strongly discouraged the use of reusable grocery bags due to coronavirus fears.
It is critical to protect the public health and safety and minimize the risk of Covid-19 exposure for workers engaged in essential activities, such as those handling reusable grocery bags.”
There is evidence to suggest that efforts to stop the spread of coronavirus by banning reusable bags don’t actually work any better than using plastic bags does. Scientists have found that coronavirus can linger on hard surfaces like stainless steel and plastic, where the novel coronavirus can survive for 2-3 days. Meanwhile, there is no evidence to date that coronavirus can survive on what we wear and most reusable bags lack the hard buttons and zippers that clothes have.
At the grocery store, plastic bags don’t reduce exposure for customers or essential workers any more than reusable bags do. Plastic bags have been received, stocked, and distributed by a person who has likely not been tested for COVID-19 for a multitude of reasons. Cashiers wear gloves, but many haven’t received proper training on how to limit the spread of disease while wearing gloves.
So those workers are constantly touching food, people’s money, people’s hand, carts and touch screens–without cleaning their hands or changing their gloves. But we know that the gloves can carry a bioburden and increases the risk for transfer of germs.”
Your grocery store clerk is touching money, their workstation, the plastic bag carousel, every bag they gave you, and every single item you and everyone else in store give them. Simply using plastic bags doesn’t stop that.
Properly washed reusable bags eliminate points of exposure for everyone. The cashier doesn’t need to touch the bag carousel. The customer isn’t handed bags that have been touched by multiple people. The cashier doesn’t need to touch the plastic bag carousel that has been repeatedly handled and doesn’t even need to touch the reusable bag if the customer holds it open while grocery items are dropped in. Reusable bags are touched by one person and can be washed for reuse immediately upon returning home. So why would governors ban them? The answer lies in the plastics industry.
Influence Infrastructure
Plastics makers have capitalized on coronavirus fears, including heavy pushes from lobbyists to end all plastics bag bans. Groups like Bag the Ban and American Progressive Bag Alliance have been especially active in overturning bans and promoting single-use plastics as a way to maintain public safety. Tony Radoszewski, president and CEO of the Plastics Industry Association, recently penned a letter to Alex Azar, the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
We are asking that the Department of Health and Human Services investigate this issue and make a public statement on the health and safety benefits seen in single-use plastics. We ask that the department speak out against bans on these products as a public safety risk and help stop the rush to ban these products by environmentalists and elected officials that puts consumers and workers at risk.”
Plastic bag sales in the U.S. were projected to reach 1.4 billion dollars this year. Thanks to the lift on bans during the pandemic, those numbers will likely be higher than expected. In addition to the rollback of previously instated bans, pending bans have also taken a hit. A proposed ban of plastic and paper bags and polystyrene food containers in New Jersey died in January. The plastics ban proposed in New York has been held since February by a lawsuit filed by Poly-Pak Industries Inc., Green Earth Food Corp., Green Earth Grocery Store, Francisco Marte, The Bodega, and the Small Business Association. Meanwhile, the plastics recycling industry is seeking a 1 billion dollar bailout due to the coronavirus. The U.S. system is notoriously bad at processing plastics with only 10% of plastics actually being recycled.
Plastics Are Not Here to Make Friends
The plastics industry is having a party, and the American people will be left with both the bill and the cleanup. Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) has proposed the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act.
By asking for a billion-dollar handout, Big Plastic is trying to maintain what already is the status quo: that is, taxpayers funding and taking responsibility for the waste of plastic producers…When we surface from this pandemic, plastic pollution will still be at crisis levels — and matters may be even worse, as industry tries to exploit this pandemic to leverage more marketing for single-use products.”
Elizabeth Warren and Ro Khanna Co-Sponsor Cory Booker’s Farm System Reform Act
Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA) have announced that they will co-sponsor the Farm System Reform Act (FSRA) introduced by Cory Booker (D-NJ). Khanna also introduced companion legislation in the House of Representatives. The FSRA is designed to move the United States agricultural system away from factory farming by immediately stopping the construction of new factory farms, the expansion of existing farms, and phasing out the largest farms by 2040. Booker initially proposed the legislation in December of 2019, and the current pandemic-induced food system woes and COVID-19 have inspired Senator Warren and Representative Khanna to show their support for the legislation.
For years, regulators looked the other way while giant multinational corporations crushed competition in the agriculture sector and seized control over key markets…The COVID-19 crisis will make it easier for Big Ag to get even bigger, gobble up smaller farms, and lead to fewer choices for consumers….”
The Farm System Reform Act also includes a $100 Billion voluntary buyout program for contract farmers who want to move away from factory farming, strengthens family farmer and rancher protections, prohibits the USDA from labeling imported meat as Product of the U.S.A., and reinstitutes mandatory country of origin labeling for beef, pork, and dairy.
Our food system was not broken by the pandemic and it was not broken by independent family farmers…It was broken by large, multinational corporations like Tyson, Smithfield, and JBS that, because of their buying power and size, have undue influence over the marketplace and over public policy.”
New Study Shows Gas Stoves are not Good for your Health
A recent study from the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health has confirmed that gas stoves are bad for you. Gas stoves do not often have the proper ventilation required to filter the air. Data in California shows that 47% of homes had improper ventilation while 7% had no ventilation hoods at all. In California, only an estimated 35% of residents even bother to turn on their hoods. Cooking with gas stoves releases indoor greenhouse gas emissions, in which nitrogen dioxide was the worst. Nitrogen dioxide exceeded the level appropriate level set by California Ambient Air Quality Standards and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. People don’t turn on their hoods often due to the noise. Additionally, people often don’t clean the filters in their hoods because they can be difficult to get to.
Indoor air pollutants included Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxide, Nitrogen Dioxide and particulate matter. Nitrogen Dioxide was the worst, “exceeding the level set by both the chronic California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) ambient annual average limit of 57 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3), and the acute National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS, set by the US EPA) 1-hour limit of 188 μg/m3 or 100 parts per billion (ppb). ”
Gas is much cheaper than electricity, and more people prefer to cook with it. Despite this, numbers show that if everyone switched to clean electric alternatives, we could reduce the number of deaths by 354 a year and reduce the number of acute bronchitis by 596 cases yearly in California alone.