{"id":4858,"date":"2021-12-02T16:11:22","date_gmt":"2021-12-02T21:11:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/?p=4858"},"modified":"2021-12-02T16:11:22","modified_gmt":"2021-12-02T21:11:22","slug":"dependency","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/2021\/12\/02\/dependency\/","title":{"rendered":"Dependency"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Government is about making you dependant of its infrastructure<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

04-30-15 In A Disaster, This Device Lets People Communicate Without A Cell Signal, Wi-Fi, Or Power<\/strong> A solar-powered device that can survive a flood could help emergency responders connect to each other in the next big disaster https:\/\/www.fastcompany.com\/3045723\/in-a-disaster-this-device-lets-people-communicate-without-a-cell-signal-wi-fi-or-power A team of Danish designers argue that they have a better solution for communication in disasters: A simple solar-powered device that uses a mesh network to send signals person to person even if phone lines and power are cut.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

JOURNAL ARTICLE Lightwaves and Telecommunication: Pulses of light transmitted through glass fibers are lowering costs, increasing speed and capacity, and stimulating new uses of telecommunications systems<\/strong> Stewart E. MillerAmerican ScientistVol. 72, No. 1 (January-February 1984)<\/a>, pp. 66-71 (6 pages)Published By: Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Honor Societyhttps:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/27852440 https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/27852440#<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nanotechnology is ancient history<\/strong> In the antiquities, nanoparticles were used by the Damascans to create swords with exceptionally sharp edges and the Romans to craft iridescent glassware. So were these archaic artisans also nanotechnologists? And what can today’s scientists learn from such historic artefacts? Rosamund DawTue 24 Apr 2012 10.41 BST https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/nanotechnology-world\/nanotechnology-is-ancient-history <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Lycurgus Cup<\/strong> is a 4th-century Roman glass<\/a>cage cup<\/a> made of a dichroic glass<\/a>, which shows a different colour depending on whether or not light is passing through it: red when lit from behind and green when lit from in front.[1]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

[1]<\/sup> British Museum Highlights; Freestone, 270\u2013273; see also this pdf with good images under both lights<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The dichroic effect is achieved by making the glass with tiny proportions of nanoparticles<\/a> of gold and silver dispersed in colloidal<\/a> form throughout the glass material.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/ceramics.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1111\/j.1151-2916.2001.tb00674.x<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Backstage: the relationship between the Rockefeller Foundation and the World Health Organization, Part I: 1940s-1960s<\/strong> A-E Birn. Public Health. 2014 Feb. https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/24412372\/ In recent years, there has been a growing debate about what role foundations should play in global health governance generally, and particularly vis-\u00e0-vis the World Health Organization (WHO). Much of this discussion revolves around today’s gargantuan philanthropy, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and its sway over the agenda and modus operandi of global health. Yet such pre-occupations are not new. The Rockefeller Foundation (RF), the unparalleled 20th century health philanthropy heavyweight, both profoundly shaped WHO and maintained long and complex relations with it, even as both institutions changed over time. This article examines the WHO-RF relationship from the 1940s to the 1960s, tracing its ebbs and flows, key moments, challenges, and quandaries, concluding with a reflection on the role of the Cold War in both fully institutionalizing the RF’s dominant disease-control approach and limiting its smaller social medicine efforts, even as the RF’s quotidian influence at WHO diminished.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Keywords: <\/strong>History of international health; Philanthropy and health; Rockefeller Foundation; World Health Organization.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Copyright \u00a9 2013 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CDC Admits Crushing Rights of Naturally Immune Without Proof They Transmit the Virus<\/strong> After formal demand, the CDC concedes it does not have proof of a single instance of a naturally immune individual spreading the virus. Aaron Siri<\/a>Nov 11383<\/a>288<\/a> https:\/\/aaronsiri.substack.com\/p\/cdc-admits-crushing-rights-of-naturally [t]here are endless documents reflecting cases of vaccinated individuals becoming infected with and transmitting the virus to others.  Such as this study<\/a>.  And this study<\/a>.  And this study<\/a>.  And this study<\/a>.  It goes on and on\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But it gets worse.  The CDC\u2019s excuse for not having a shred of evidence of the naturally immune transmitting the virus is that \u201cthis information is not collected.\u201d  What?!  No proof!  But yet the CDC is actively crushing the rights of millions of naturally immune individuals in this country if they do not get the vaccine on the assumption<\/em> they can transmit the virus.   But despite clear proof<\/em> the vaccinated spread the virus, the CDC lifts restrictions on the vaccinated?!  That is dystopian.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aaron Siri is the Managing Partner of Siri & Glimstad LLP and has extensive experience in a wide range of complex civil litigation matters, with a focus on civil rights, class actions, and commercial litigation. https:\/\/fedsoc.org\/contributors\/aaron-siri<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 Infections, Including COVID-19 Vaccine Breakthrough Infections, Associated with Large Public Gatherings – Barnstable County, Massachusetts, July 2021<\/strong> Catherine M Brown et al. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021. During July 2021, 469 cases of COVID-19 associated with multiple summer events and large public gatherings in a town in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, were identified among Massachusetts residents; vaccination coverage among eligible Massachusetts residents was 69%. Approximately three quarters (346; 74%) of cases occurred in fully vaccinated persons (those who had completed a 2-dose course of mRNA vaccine [Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna] or had received a single dose of Janssen [Johnson & Johnson] vaccine \u226514 days before exposure). Genomic sequencing of specimens from 133 patients identified the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in 119 (89%) and the Delta AY.3 sublineage in one (1%). Overall, 274 (79%) vaccinated patients with breakthrough infection were symptomatic. Among five COVID-19 patients who were hospitalized, four were fully vaccinated; no deaths were reported. Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) cycle threshold (Ct) values in specimens from 127 vaccinated persons with breakthrough cases were similar to those from 84 persons who were unvaccinated, not fully vaccinated, or whose vaccination status was unknown (median = 22.77 and 21.54, respectively). The Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 is highly transmissible (1); vaccination is the most important strategy to prevent severe illness and death. On July 27, CDC recommended that all persons, including those who are fully vaccinated, should wear masks in indoor public settings in areas where COVID-19 transmission is high or substantial.* Findings from this investigation suggest that even jurisdictions without substantial or high COVID-19 transmission might consider expanding prevention strategies, including masking in indoor public settings regardless of vaccination status, given the potential risk of infection during attendance at large public gatherings that include travelers from many areas with differing levels of transmission. https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/34351882\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Live virus neutralization testing in convalescent patients and subjects vaccinated against 19A, 20B, 20I\/501Y.V1 and 20H\/501Y.V2 isolates of SARS-CoV-2<\/strong> Carla Saade et al. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2021 Dec. SARS-CoV-2 mutations appeared recently and can lead to conformational changes in the spike protein and probably induce modifications in antigenicity. We assessed the neutralizing capacity of antibodies to prevent cell infection, using a live virus neutralization test with different strains [19A (initial one), 20B (B.1.1.241 lineage), 20I\/501Y.V1 (B.1.1.7 lineage), and 20H\/501Y.V2 (B.1.351 lineage)] in serum samples collected from different populations: two-dose vaccinated COVID-19-naive healthcare workers (HCWs; Pfizer-BioNTech BNT161b2), 6-months post mild COVID-19 HCWs, and critical COVID-19 patients. No significant difference was observed between the 20B and 19A isolates for HCWs with mild COVID-19 and critical patients. However, a significant decrease in neutralization ability was found for 20I\/501Y.V1 in comparison with 19A isolate for critical patients and HCWs 6-months post infection. Concerning 20H\/501Y.V2, all populations had a significant reduction in neutralizing antibody titers in comparison with the 19A isolate. Interestingly, a significant difference in neutralization capacity was observed for vaccinated HCWs between the two variants but not in the convalescent groups. https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/34176436\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Keywords: <\/strong>20B; 20H\/501Y.V2; 20I\/501Y.V1; SARS-CoV-2; humoral response; live virus neutralization test; variant of concern.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Vaccinating people who have had covid-19: why doesn\u2019t natural immunity count in the US<\/strong>? BMJ<\/em> 2021; 374 doi: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.n2101<\/a> (Published 13 September 2021)Cite this as: BMJ<\/em> 2021;374:n2101 The US CDC estimates that SARS-CoV-2 has infected more than 100 million Americans, and evidence is mounting that natural immunity is at least as protective as vaccination. Yet public health leadership says everyone needs the vaccine. Jennifer Block<\/strong> investigates https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/content\/374\/bmj.n2101<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Despite the extensive global spread of the virus, the previously infected population \u201chasn\u2019t been studied well as a group,\u201d says Whelan. Memoli says he is also unaware of any studies examining the specific risks of vaccination for that group. Still, the US public health messaging has been firm and consistent: everyone should get a full vaccine dose.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhen the vaccine was rolled out the goal should have been to focus on people at risk, and that should still be the focus,\u201d says Memoli. Such risk stratification may have complicated logistics, but it would also require more nuanced messaging. \u201cA lot of public health people have this notion that if the public is told that there\u2019s even the slightest bit of uncertainty about a vaccine, then they won\u2019t get it,\u201d he says. For Memoli, this reflects a bygone paternalism. \u201cI always think it\u2019s much better to be very clear and honest about what we do and don\u2019t know, what the risks and benefits are, and allow people to make decisions for themselves.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An error occurred in the table of this article by Jennifer Block (BMJ<\/em> 2021;374:n2101, doi:10.1136\/bmj.n2101<\/a>). The first row of the table includes children aged 0-17 not 5-17. The online version has been corrected. https:\/\/www.bmj.com\/content\/374\/bmj.n2272<\/p>\n\n\n\n

135 Research Studies Affirm Naturally Acquired Immunity to Covid-19: Documented, Linked, and Quoted<\/strong> BY PAUL ELIAS ALEXANDER<\/a>   OCTOBER 17, 2021   PUBLIC HEALTH<\/a>   55 MINUTE READ Public health officials and the medical establishment with the help of the politicized media are misleading the public with assertions that the COVID-19 shots provide greater protection than natural immunity.  CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, for example, was deceptive in her October 2020 published LANCET<\/em> statement<\/a> that \u201cthere is no evidence for lasting protective immunity to SARS-CoV-2 following natural infection\u201d and that \u201cthe consequence of waning immunity would present a risk to vulnerable populations for the indefinite future.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is even strong evidence for the persistence of antibodies<\/a>. Even the CDC recognizes natural immunity for chicken-pox and measles, mumps, and rubella<\/a>, but not for COVID-19. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The vaccinated are showing viral loads (very high) similar to the unvaccinated (Acharya et al<\/a>. and Riemersma et al<\/a>.), and the vaccinated are as infectious. Riemersma et al.<\/a> also report Wisconsin data that corroborate how the vaccinated individuals who get infected with the Delta variant can potentially (and are) transmit(ting) SARS-CoV-2 to others (potentially to the vaccinated and unvaccinated). https:\/\/brownstone.org\/articles\/79-research-studies-affirm-naturally-acquired-immunity-to-covid-19-documented-linked-and-quoted\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Brownstone Institute for Social and Economic Research is a nonprofit organization founded May 2021 (501c3 applied). Its vision is of a society that places the highest value on the voluntary interaction of individuals and groups while minimizing the use of violence and force including  that which is exercised by public authority. This vision is that of the Enlightenment that elevated learning, science, progress, and universal rights to the forefront of public life, and is newly threatened by ideologies and systems that would take the world back before the triumph of the ideal of freedom. https:\/\/brownstone.org\/about\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No Significant Difference in Viral Load Between Vaccinated and Unvaccinated, Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Groups When Infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant<\/strong> Charlotte B. Acharya, John Schrom, Anthea M. Mitchell, David A. Coil, Carina Marquez, Susana Rojas, Chung Yu Wang, Jamin Liu, Genay Pilarowski, Leslie Solis, Elizabeth Georgian, Maya Petersen, Joseph DeRisi, Richard Michelmore, Diane Havlirdoi:<\/strong> https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1101\/2021.09.28.21264262 https:\/\/www.medrxiv.org\/content\/10.1101\/2021.09.28.21264262v2<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant<\/strong> Kasen K. Riemersma, Brittany E. Grogan, Amanda Kita-Yarbro, Gunnar E. Jeppson, David H. O\u2019Connor,  View ORCID Profile<\/a>Thomas C. Friedrich, Katarina M. Grandedoi:<\/strong> https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1101\/2021.07.31.21261387 https:\/\/www.medrxiv.org\/content\/10.1101\/2021.07.31.21261387v1<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Natural immunity works. Better than the vaccines work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reinfection from Covid-19 is rare, severe disease is even rarer, a study of people in Qatar finds<\/strong> By Jen Christensen<\/a>, CNN Updated 1327 GMT (2127 HKT) November 25, 2021 https:\/\/edition.cnn.com\/2021\/11\/24\/health\/covid-19-reinfection-is-rare-severe-disease-rarer\/index.html<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026
https:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMc2108120<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Severity of SARS-CoV-2 Reinfections as Compared with Primary Infections<\/strong> November 24, 2021
DOI: 10.1056\/NEJMc2108120
Metrics<\/a> Using national, federated databases that have captured all SARS-CoV-2\u2013related data since the onset of the pandemic (Section S1 in the Supplementary Appendix<\/a>, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org), we investigated the risk of severe disease (leading to acute care hospitalization), critical disease (leading to hospitalization in an intensive care unit [ICU]), and fatal disease caused by reinfections as compared with primary infections in the national cohort of 353,326 persons with polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR)\u2013confirmed infection between February 28, 2020, and April 28, 2021, after exclusion of 87,547 persons with a vaccination record. Primary infection was defined as the first PCR-positive swab. Reinfection was defined as the first PCR-positive swab obtained at least 90 days after the primary infection. http:\/\/www.nejm.org\/doi\/full\/10.1056\/NEJMc2108120<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Imperfect Vaccination Can Enhance the Transmission of Highly Virulent Pathogens<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Andrew F. Read,<\/a> Susan J. Baigent,<\/a> Claire Powers,<\/a> Lydia B. Kgosana,<\/a> Luke Blackwell,<\/a> Lorraine P. Smith,<\/a> […view 2 more…],<\/a> Venugopal K. Nair<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n