Categories
Business

New York Gov. Cuomo briefs the press on Covid pandemic as outbreak worsens

[The stream is slated to start at 3 p.m. ET. Please refresh the page if you do not see a player above at that time.]

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo will hold a press conference on Wednesday on the coronavirus as Covid-19 hospital admissions hit the levels last reported in early May.

According to the Covid Tracking Project, an independent volunteer organization launched by journalists in the Atlantic, 7,814 patients with Covid-19 were hospitalized in New York on Tuesday. This is the highest number since May 8th.

The increase in sick patients has led the state to prepare to reuse the Javits Center as an emergency Covid-19 field hospital. This emerges from reports in the New York Post quoting Cuomo senior advisor Rich Azzopardi and Northwell Health CEO Michael Dowling. Cuomo has already announced that the state will reopen a field hospital on Staten Island after a surge in hospital stays.

The Democratic governor is also considering new lockdown measures in January if the current surge continues, although new restrictions are not guaranteed, he said. According to a CNBC analysis of data compiled by Johns Hopkins University, the state has reported over 100 daily Covid-19 deaths for over two weeks, a total of more than 37,600 deaths since the pandemic began.

“As we near the New Year and the end of the holiday season, all New Yorkers must remember one simple truth – celebrating smart stop shutdowns,” Cuomo said in a statement Tuesday.

Read CNBC’s live updates for the latest news on the Covid-19 outbreak.

Categories
Business

Jobs, Homes and Cows: China’s Expensive Drive to Erase Excessive Poverty

JIEYUAN VILLAGE, China – When the Chinese government offered free cows to farmers in Jieyuan, villagers in the remote mountain community were skeptical. They feared the officers would ask them to return the cattle later with the calves they could raise.

But the farmers kept the cows and the money they brought. Others received small flocks of sheep. Government workers also paved a road into town, built new houses for the poorest residents of the village, and used an old school as a community center.

Jia Huanwen, a 58-year-old farmer in the village in Gansu Province, received a large cow three years ago that produced two healthy calves. He sold the cow in April for $ 2,900, as much as he makes in two years growing potatoes, wheat, and corn on the terraced, yellow clay slopes nearby. Now he regularly buys vegetables for his family’s table and medication for an arthritic knee.

“It was the best cow I have ever had,” said Mr. Jia.

Jieyuan Village is one of the many achievements of President Xi Jinping’s ambitious pledge to eradicate dire rural poverty by the end of 2020. In just five years, China claims to have lifted more than 50 million farmers out of extreme poverty left behind by China’s breakneck economic growth.

The village, one of six in Gansu visited by the New York Times without government supervision, is also evidence of the significant cost of the ruling Communist Party’s approach to poverty alleviation. This approach relied on massive, potentially unsustainable, subsidies to create jobs and build better homes.

Local cadres fanned out to identify impoverished households – defined as living on less than $ 1.70 a day. They distributed loans, grants and even farm animals to poor villagers. Officials visited residents weekly to check their progress.

“We are fairly certain that China’s eradication of absolute poverty in rural areas has been successful. Given the resources mobilized, we are less certain that it will be sustainable or inexpensive,” said Martin Raiser, World Bank country director for China.

Beijing has poured nearly $ 700 billion in loans and grants into poverty reduction over the past five years – about 1 percent of annual economic output. This excludes large donations from state-owned companies like State Grid, an electricity transmission giant that has invested $ 120 billion in upgrading rural electricity and deployed more than 7,000 people on poverty reduction projects.

The campaign received a new urgency this year as the country was devastated by the coronavirus pandemic and severe flooding. One by one, the provinces announced that they had achieved their goals. In early December, Mr. Xi stated that China had “won a major victory that has impressed the world”.

However, Mr. Xi acknowledged that more efforts are needed to further share the wealth. A migrant worker in a coastal factory town can make as much in a month as a Gansu farmer in a year.

Mr. Xi also urged officials to ensure that newly created jobs and aid to the poor do not fade in the years to come.

Gansu, China’s poorest province, said in late November that it had lifted its last counties out of poverty. A decade ago, poverty was widespread in the province.

Hu Jintao, China’s leader before Mr. Xi, visited people who lived in simple houses with little furniture. Villagers ate so many potatoes that local officials were embarrassed when a young girl initially refused to have another meal with Mr. Hu in front of television cameras because she was fed up with it, according to a cable published by WikiLeaks.

Although many villages are only accessible by single lane roads, they are lined with street lights powered by solar panels. New pig farms, nurseries and small industrial-scale factories have sprung up and have created jobs. Workers build new houses for farmers.

Three years ago, Zhang Jinlu woke up in horror when the rain-weakened mud-brick walls of his house gave way. Half of the roof timbers collapsed with dirt slabs and barely missed him and his mother.

Officials in Youfang Village built a spacious new concrete house with new furniture for her. Mr. Zhang, 69, is now receiving a monthly grant of $ 82 through the Poverty Program. His original house was converted into a storage shed for him.

Updated

Apr. 30, 2020 at 9:23 am ET

“This house used to be dilapidated and it leaked when it rained,” said Mr. Zhang.

The government helps private factories buy equipment and pay salaries when they hire workers who are believed to be impoverished.

At Tanyue Tongwei Clothing & Accessories Company in southeast Gansu, around 170 workers, mostly women, sewed school uniforms, T-shirts, down jackets and face masks. Workers said several dozen employees were receiving additional payments from the poverty reduction program in addition to their salaries.

According to Lu Yaming, the company’s legal representative, Tanyue receives at least $ 26,000 per year in subsidies from poverty reduction programs, of which $ 500 per year was paid to each of the 17 villagers believed to be impoverished.

However, the viability of these factories without ongoing assistance is far from clear. Until the subsidies came in, the factory often had problems paying wages on time, Mr. Lu said.

Inevitable questions arise about whether some families have used personal relationships with local officials to qualify for scholarships. According to official statistics, corruption investigators linked to poverty reduction measures fined 99,000 people across the country last year. Local eateries in communities like Mayingzhen, where a spicy platter of roast donkey meat costs $ 7, the key is who got what and whether they should really have qualified.

While the poverty reduction program has helped millions of poor people, critics point to the campaign’s strict definitions. The program supports people classified as extremely poor from 2014 to 2016, without adding others who may have had tough times since then. It also helps very little poor people in big cities where wages are higher, but workers have to pay much more for food and rent.

The government’s complicated criteria for determining eligibility were excluded from anyone who owned a car, had assets over $ 4,600, or had a new or recently remodeled home. People living just above the government’s poverty line continue to struggle to make ends meet, but are often denied assistance with housing or other services.

Zhang Sumei, a 53-year-old farmer, makes $ 1,500 a year growing and selling potatoes and had to use her savings to build her house out of concrete. She says she should have qualified to help the extremely poor. Farming Gansu’s notoriously barren soil is tough and difficult.

“In this society, poor families are ruled by cadres and we have nothing.” she said bitterly.

The party’s campaign-like approach also fails to address deep-seated issues that disproportionately hurt the poor, including health care costs and other gaps in China’s burgeoning social safety net. Villages offer limited health insurance – for example, only 17 percent of the cost of the arthritis drug is paid for by Mr. Jia. High medical bills can ruin families.

Yang Xiaoling, a 48-year-old worker who works at another government-subsidized factory in Gansu, cried uncontrollably as she described the crippling debt she faced after paying medical fees for her husband, who suffered from kidney failure would have.

Three years ago she borrowed interest-free US $ 7,700 from a Poverty Reduction Bank to invest the money in buying cattle. Instead, she borrowed more money from relatives and then spent all of the money on a kidney transplant and medication for her husband.

Now all of the loan is due and she has no money to pay it back. Medical follow-up treatments for her husband use up all of her salary. The couple and their three children, as well as their husband’s invalid parents, live on monthly state poverty relief payments of less than $ 50 per person.

“I can’t pay it back. I can’t help it, ”Ms. Yang sobbed. “I’ve already borrowed a lot of money and now nobody lends me any more money.”

Despite the challenges, the poverty reduction program may have long-term policy benefits that will help some of it survive. The gratitude for the program seems to strengthen the party’s political power in rural areas.

In Youfang, Mr. Zhang was quick to praise not only the poverty program, but also Mr. Xi, comparing him to Mao.

“It is good for the country to have Xi Jinping,” he said, “and the national politics are good.”

Chris Buckley contributed to the coverage from Sydney. Liu Yi, Amber Wang, and Coral Yang contributed to the research.

Categories
Business

AMC hopes to boost $125 million in recent funding spherical because it fights chapter

People are strolling outside the newly boarded AMC 14th 34th Street movie theater as the city resumes Phase 4 reopening after restrictions were imposed in New York City on September 4, 2020 to slow the spread of the coronavirus.

Noam Galai | Getty Images

The cinema chain AMC hopes to raise $ 125 million in fresh capital by selling 50 million shares in a new round of financing to avert bankruptcy, the company said on Wednesday.

The world’s largest cinema chain raised $ 104 million earlier this month after selling around 38 million of the 200 million available shares. The company is looking to prop up its balance sheet to weather the ongoing economic downturn as the coronavirus pandemic drags into a second year and threatens the viability of the film industry.

Earlier this month, AMC received a $ 100 million investment from Mudrick Capital Management, but the financially troubled movie theater chain still needed at least $ 750 million in additional cash through 2021 to fund its cash needs.

The company has reiterated in several SEC filings that bankruptcy is possible if it cannot raise more money.

“We intend to use the net proceeds from the sale of the Class A common shares offered in this prospectus for general corporate purposes, including repayment, refinancing, redemption or repurchase of existing debt or capital, working capital, investments and other investments,” AMC said in the Wednesday filing .

While the Covid-19 crisis has ravaged cinemas since March, perhaps no chain has been hit harder than AMC. The company went into the pandemic with nearly $ 5 billion in debt, which it amassed by adding luxurious seating to its theaters and buying out rivals like Carmike and Odeon.

AMC has focused on fundraising for months. She has already renegotiated her debt to improve her balance sheet this year and is exploring various options for additional liquidity. Attempts are also being made to find ways to increase visitor numbers even if the US outbreak worsens

The company’s shares closed 5.7% on Wednesday and have plummeted 70% since January.

Categories
Business

China Approves Sinopharm’s Covid-19 Vaccine because it Strikes to Inoculate Tens of millions

The Chinese government said on Thursday that it had approved a homegrown coronavirus vaccine after an early analysis of clinical trial results showed that it was effective. The announcements sent a positive signal for the global rollout of Chinese vaccines but lacked crucial details.

The manufacturer, a state-controlled firm called Sinopharm, said on Wednesday that a vaccine candidate made by its Beijing Institute of Biological Products arm had an efficacy rate of 79 percent based on an interim analysis of Phase 3 trials. Sinopharm said it had filed an application with Chinese regulators to allow the vaccine to be used broadly, and on Thursday the government said the vaccine had been granted conditional approval.

If supported, the interim results will bolster claims that Chinese officials have made in recent days that the country’s vaccines are safe and effective. Even before the government issued its official approval, the authorities had already moved ahead with mass vaccinations, defying industry norms. They plan to vaccinate 50 million people in China by mid-February, when hundreds of millions are expected to travel for the Lunar New Year holiday.

But Sinopharm’s announcement provided no breakdown of results and left many questions unanswered, adding to a lack of clarity that has dogged China’s coronavirus vaccine development for months. Wu Yonglin, Sinopharm’s president, said on Thursday that the company would publish details of the trials in major academic journals later.

China’s drive to develop a homegrown vaccine speaks to the country’s technological and diplomatic ambitions. A successful vaccine would support the country’s claim as a peer and rival to the United States and other developed countries in biomedical sciences.

The Sinopharm vaccine’s results show that it is less effective than others that have been approved in other countries. Still, the results are well above the 50 percent threshold that makes a vaccine effective in the eyes of the medical establishment.

Two other coronavirus vaccines, made by Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech, have been shown to have an efficacy rate of about 95 percent. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine has received authorization in more than 40 countries. Moderna’s vaccine has been authorized in the United States, and other countries are evaluating its trial results. Russia has announced that its Sputnik V vaccine has an efficacy rate of 91 percent and has begun a mass vaccination campaign.

Beijing has leaned heavily on the promise of its vaccines to strengthen ties with developing countries deemed vital to China’s interests. Officials have toured the world pledging to provide Chinese vaccines as a “global public good,” a charm offensive that the United States may seek to counter, particularly when the campaign encroaches on its backyard.

The political stakes in the race for a vaccine are particularly high for China’s authoritarian Communist Party, which has been criticized for stifling information and playing down the virus when it first emerged in the city of Wuhan late last year.

A successful vaccine, if quickly made available to the world, could help repair the party’s image globally and that of its leader, Xi Jinping. The Chinese companies have said their vaccine would be cheaper and easier to transport, which if proven could give them significant appeal in the developing world.

Chinese vaccines may still be greeted with other questions. Scientists said that the headline figures released by Sinopharm were encouraging but that the lack of supporting data made it difficult for the results to be independently assessed.

Covid-19 Vaccines ›

Answers to Your Vaccine Questions

With distribution of a coronavirus vaccine beginning in the U.S., here are answers to some questions you may be wondering about:

    • If I live in the U.S., when can I get the vaccine? While the exact order of vaccine recipients may vary by state, most will likely put medical workers and residents of long-term care facilities first. If you want to understand how this decision is getting made, this article will help.
    • When can I return to normal life after being vaccinated? Life will return to normal only when society as a whole gains enough protection against the coronavirus. Once countries authorize a vaccine, they’ll only be able to vaccinate a few percent of their citizens at most in the first couple months. The unvaccinated majority will still remain vulnerable to getting infected. A growing number of coronavirus vaccines are showing robust protection against becoming sick. But it’s also possible for people to spread the virus without even knowing they’re infected because they experience only mild symptoms or none at all. Scientists don’t yet know if the vaccines also block the transmission of the coronavirus. So for the time being, even vaccinated people will need to wear masks, avoid indoor crowds, and so on. Once enough people get vaccinated, it will become very difficult for the coronavirus to find vulnerable people to infect. Depending on how quickly we as a society achieve that goal, life might start approaching something like normal by the fall 2021.
    • If I’ve been vaccinated, do I still need to wear a mask? Yes, but not forever. Here’s why. The coronavirus vaccines are injected deep into the muscles and stimulate the immune system to produce antibodies. This appears to be enough protection to keep the vaccinated person from getting ill. But what’s not clear is whether it’s possible for the virus to bloom in the nose — and be sneezed or breathed out to infect others — even as antibodies elsewhere in the body have mobilized to prevent the vaccinated person from getting sick. The vaccine clinical trials were designed to determine whether vaccinated people are protected from illness — not to find out whether they could still spread the coronavirus. Based on studies of flu vaccine and even patients infected with Covid-19, researchers have reason to be hopeful that vaccinated people won’t spread the virus, but more research is needed. In the meantime, everyone — even vaccinated people — will need to think of themselves as possible silent spreaders and keep wearing a mask. Read more here.
    • Will it hurt? What are the side effects? The Pfizer and BioNTech vaccine is delivered as a shot in the arm, like other typical vaccines. The injection into your arm won’t feel different than any other vaccine, but the rate of short-lived side effects does appear higher than a flu shot. Tens of thousands of people have already received the vaccines, and none of them have reported any serious health problems. The side effects, which can resemble the symptoms of Covid-19, last about a day and appear more likely after the second dose. Early reports from vaccine trials suggest some people might need to take a day off from work because they feel lousy after receiving the second dose. In the Pfizer study, about half developed fatigue. Other side effects occurred in at least 25 to 33 percent of patients, sometimes more, including headaches, chills and muscle pain. While these experiences aren’t pleasant, they are a good sign that your own immune system is mounting a potent response to the vaccine that will provide long-lasting immunity.
    • Will mRNA vaccines change my genes? No. The vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer use a genetic molecule to prime the immune system. That molecule, known as mRNA, is eventually destroyed by the body. The mRNA is packaged in an oily bubble that can fuse to a cell, allowing the molecule to slip in. The cell uses the mRNA to make proteins from the coronavirus, which can stimulate the immune system. At any moment, each of our cells may contain hundreds of thousands of mRNA molecules, which they produce in order to make proteins of their own. Once those proteins are made, our cells then shred the mRNA with special enzymes. The mRNA molecules our cells make can only survive a matter of minutes. The mRNA in vaccines is engineered to withstand the cell’s enzymes a bit longer, so that the cells can make extra virus proteins and prompt a stronger immune response. But the mRNA can only last for a few days at most before they are destroyed.

Sinopharm on Wednesday did not disclose the size of the trial population or provide detailed information about any serious side effects, data points that scientists look for in such releases. On Thursday, Mr. Wu, Sinopharm’s president, said at a news briefing that more than 60,000 people had been vaccinated as part of the trials.

“With each of these vaccines we’re dealing with bits and pieces of information, but the Chinese companies have provided even less information than the Russian companies have,” said Dr. Kim Mulholland, a pediatrician at the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute in Melbourne, Australia.

“At least with the Russian vaccines we were told the number of cases and the basis of evidence for why their vaccine was effective,” said Dr. Mulholland, who has been involved in the oversight of many vaccine trials, including ones for a Covid-19 vaccine.

Michael Baker, a professor with the department of global health at the University of Otago in Wellington who is an adviser to the New Zealand government, said that while the initial figures from Sinopharm looked promising, without more information it was difficult to know for sure.

“It’s pretty light on the details,” he said. “One question is: What markets do they propose to use these vaccines in? Because if they want to have a global market, they’re obviously going to have to supply all those details.”

Details about the efficacy of another Chinese vaccine candidate, made by Sinovac, a private Beijing-based vaccine maker, have also been released in a piecemeal fashion.

The absence of detailed information on the safety and efficacy of Chinese vaccines has not stopped officials in the country from administering them to the public. Officials in several provinces and cities say they are focusing on what China calls “key priority groups” — doctors, hotel employees, border inspection personnel and workers in food storage and transportation, as well as travelers — in an ongoing inoculation drive.

Chinese officials and companies had already administered Chinese-made vaccines, mostly made by Sinopharm, to more than a million people in China. The campaign drew criticism from overseas scientists who said they were concerned that the authorities did not closely monitor people after they received injections outside clinical trials.

To China, a vaccine that can help protect its 1.4 billion people is crucial to its plans to revitalize the economy.

The country has largely stamped out the coronavirus with a combination of restrictions on foreign arrivals, mass testing and tight lockdowns of neighborhoods whenever any cases are detected. But officials remain concerned that the winter could bring a new wave of infections and hope that a widely available vaccine can help prepare the country for when regular travel and trade resume.

Already, new local outbreaks were being reported in Beijing and the northern city of Shenyang this week, prompting the imposition of new measures. In Shenyang, officials declared that the city was in “wartime status” as they rolled out restrictions on large-scale gatherings including group meals, training sessions and end-of-year parties.

Sinovac and Sinopharm use inactivated coronaviruses to make their vaccines — a tried-and-true method dating back over 130 years. The companies use chemicals to disable the virus’s genes so that it cannot replicate. Yet the inactivated coronavirus can still cause the body’s immune system to produce antibodies against it. By comparison, Moderna and Pfizer are taking a revolutionary gene-based approach that had never before been approved for widespread use.

Experts say there are drawbacks to inactivated vaccines like the ones being made by Sinovac and Sinopharm. They require starting off with large batches of live coronavirus samples, which can pose a biosecurity risk. Once the live samples are inactivated, it takes an extra manufacturing step to ensure that none of them survive the treatment.

Another advantage of the vaccines produced by Moderna and Pfizer is that they are faster to make and said to be more stable than traditional vaccines. Pfizer projects that it will be able to produce up to 1.3 billion doses in 2021, while Moderna expects to be able to make 500 million to one billion doses.

The Chinese government has promised to produce 610 million doses by the end of the year and expects to make more than one billion doses next year. Several large countries like Brazil and Indonesia, where Chinese companies have been conducting trials, have each received shipments of more than a million doses of Sinovac vaccines. Turkey has ordered 50 million doses.

People who were previously vaccinated in China have said the two-dose regimen costs about $60 to $150. According to people who have received the Sinovac vaccine, the company is charging about $30 a dose. Sinopharm has said the cost of two doses should be lower than $150. Zeng Yixin, the deputy minister of the National Health Commission, said on Thursday that the vaccine would be provided to the Chinese public for free, a reversal of previous statements by Chinese officials.

Reporting and research were contributed byElsie Chen, Claire Fuand Amber Wang.

Categories
Business

defend your privateness in case you win Mega Tens of millions or Powerball

MARK RALSTON | AFP | Getty Images

There is a chance that at least a few people in 2020 will be far richer than most of us.

With no ticket matching all six numbers drawn in Mega Millions on Tuesday, the jackpot for the Friday night drawing rose to $ 401 million. Powerball’s grand prize is not far behind at $ 363 million for the Wednesday night draw.

If you’re lucky enough to be the next big winner, experts say that part of protecting your windfall is protecting your identity when you can.

“Four hundred million dollars would attract a lot [attention]”said Attorney Kurt Panouses, founder of the Panouses Law Group in Indialantic, Florida and an expert in helping lottery winners.

Keeping your win calm will protect you from strangers and scammers who want a part of the prize.

However, states don’t always make data protection easy: only a handful allow winners to remain completely anonymous. In other cases, you may be able to claim the award through a trust or limited liability company or LLC that does not have your name on it. However, you need to plan for this.

Here are tips for big lottery winners trying to protect their privacy.

Handling your ticket

The standard advice is to sign the back of your ticket. However, if you find yourself in a state where a trust or LLC can claim the prize, hold back with this signature if privacy is important to you.

“Of course you want to protect the ticket, but whatever name is on the back of the ticket is identified as the payee,” said Panouses. “The back of the ticket is important for data protection reasons.”

In most states, he said, if you use an LLC or trust to claim the money, you can bypass disclosing your name.

More from Personal Finance:
Avoid these mistakes when splitting assets in a divorce
These are three of my worst money mistakes
Covid makes it harder to get into a top college

Panousas said he has also created trusts whose beneficiaries are sub-trusts instead of the winners. This adds an extra layer of data protection.

stay calm

While you might want to share your exciting news, experts say the fewer people know, the better.

“Keep the circle of people who don’t know or tell anyone about it,” said Panouses.

For example, if you are claiming the profit in conjunction with other family members, i.e. through a trust or LLC as a joint prize, then all parties involved should sign non-disclosure agreements, Panouses said.

Money management

In addition to choosing experienced professionals to help you tackle the windfall, it may also be wise to avoid the professionals in your hometown if you are concerned about the news that your profits will be lost.

“Someone in this office might say, ‘Oh, this is the lottery winner,'” Panouses said. He relies on a large investment and trust company that has a proven record of serving wealthy households.

“If I open accounts with them, I know the information won’t be made public,” said Panouses.

Plan an escape

Skipping town a bit after claiming your prize is probably a good idea.

“We make sure the winners have a plan to go somewhere for a week or so after they claim,” Panouses said. “When people find out you won, they may show up at your home.”

It’s also worth changing the cell phone number, he said. If you have a landline, this should also be changed.

You may also want to close your social media accounts if you cannot remain anonymous.

Categories
Business

Life With out Amazon (Effectively, Virtually)

“Ten years ago we didn’t order toilet paper from Amazon,” said Smalls. “Maybe it’ll take you so long to get over it.”

Harold Pollack, a professor at the University of Chicago, was interviewed by the New York Times in a 2012 story about customers who left Amazon. Dr. Pollack, who teaches public health, said at the time, “I don’t feel like they’re doing the way I want to support them with my consumer dollars.” He has since written critically about Amazon, including a 2018 comment titled “Better Chances for Jeff Bezos to Spend $ 131 Billion” recommending Mr. Bezos to allocate his “profits” to philanthropy rather than space. (In 2020 that number would be somewhere north of $ 180 billion.)

Dr. Pollack, reached by phone, said his criticism of Amazon had both broadened and deepened, but he was also a frequent customer now. “It’s chastening,” he said when asked to reconsider his attitude. “I use Amazon more in my life than I am comfortable with. It’s part of the infrastructure of my life just like the infrastructure of other people’s lives is, especially during Covid. “

Dr. Pollack then offered a new analysis that tried to include, or at least acknowledge, his ambivalence. “I think my own development is a symbol of why there needs to be public order solutions,” he said, citing concerns about antitrust law, Amazon’s wider role in the economy and, like its 2012 focus, the well-being of the company’s workforce. Amazon, he said, posed “an enormous collective action problem”.

The company has invaded his life inexorably. Using Amazon makes it easy to get work reimbursements. Amazon gift cards have become the de facto standard incentive for study participants (despite the concerns of some colleagues). In addition, Dr. Pollack like most people is busy.

“Amazon offers consumers tremendous value that enables us to look beyond many things,” he said. Going forward, he plans to “do the simple things that will allow me to minimize my trust in Amazon and feel good about it, but basically I won’t do the things that are less easy. And if I’m being honest, you can’t rely on me to discipline the company. “

Mr. Smalls, the former warehouse worker, offered clients like Dr. Pollack adopts a gentle, practiced attitude: Using Amazon could be like an addiction, or at least something that requires weaning. However, in an interview earlier this year, he may have been more open to the company’s habitual consumers. “Do you think you need Amazon?” he said in April, shortly after his release. “OK, what did you do a few years ago?”

Categories
Business

Oxford researcher says future strains might be protected towards

Sir John Bell, a professor at Oxford University in the UK, told CNBC on Wednesday that he was confident that Covid-19 vaccines could be upgraded to provide effective protection against future coronavirus mutations.

Bell’s comments on “Closing Bell” come as global attention is focused on a strain of the virus that is widespread in the UK and that may spread more easily than previous variants. It has since been discovered in Colorado and California.

“This is going to be a game of cat and mouse,” said Bell, who worked with AstraZeneca to oversee vaccine development at Oxford. The UK government approved emergency vaccine use on Wednesday after granting limited approval for Pfizer and BioNTech’s vaccine earlier this month.

Studies are currently underway to officially determine whether Oxford-AstraZeneca’s vaccine will protect against the new strain of the virus, Bell said. “We think they probably can, but we just want to be absolutely sure.”

“Given the level of disease in the UK with the new variant … we will have many examples of people who have had the vaccine and are exposed to the virus and we will be able to report fairly quickly on whether the vaccine actually protects against this strain,” added Bell added.

In addition to the coronavirus variant found in Great Britain, a separate strain has come into focus, which was first found in South Africa. Officials at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Wednesday it may also be floating around in America.

Bell told CNBC that he believes the variant discovered in South Africa has mutations that make it “a little more worrying” than the UK’s predominant strain. Still, Bell expressed confidence in how scientists will deal with virus mutations that escape the protection of existing vaccines.

“If we need to make new vaccines, now that we’ve done the first work, we can make them. I’m sure our friends can do the same with the RNA vaccines,” said Bell. Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines were developed using messenger RNA technology, a new approach that uses genetic material to trigger an immune response. Oxford-AstraZeneca’s viral vector vaccine uses a weakened version of a cold virus that causes infections in chimpanzees.

“We are ready if we need to make another vaccine to get closer,” added Bell. He also noted that the vaccine update development process is unlikely to require the same large-scale clinical trials conducted this year, just immunogenicity studies to ensure that an immune response is elicited.

According to Dr. It is not uncommon for viruses to mutate, Scott Gottlieb, a former Food and Drug Administration commissioner who serves on Pfizer’s Board of Directors. “Some viruses like the flu develop their surface proteins very quickly, so we need a different flu vaccine every season,” he told CNBC earlier this month.

Gottlieb said at the time that he also believed the vaccines in place will protect against the strain of virus transmitted in the UK, as the vaccines target the entire spike protein of the coronavirus.

“We are developing antibodies against many different regions of this protein. Even if part of this protein were mutated and some antibodies no longer recognized it, there would be antibodies against other parts of this protein,” he said. “That probably won’t bypass our vaccines that easily, but at some point we’ll have to update the vaccines.”

Disclosure: Scott Gottlieb is a CNBC employee and a member of the boards of directors of Pfizer, the genetic testing startup Tempus, and the biotech company Illumina. Gottlieb is also co-chair of Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings and Royal Caribbean’s Healthy Sail Panel.

Categories
Business

How Heather Cox Richardson Grew to become a Breakout Star on Substack

Dr. Richardson confuses many of the media’s assumptions about the moment. She has built a large and dedicated fan base on Facebook that is widely and often viewed in media circles as a home to misinformation and where most journalists do not see their personal pages as useful channels for their work.

Economy & Economy

Updated

Dec. Dec. 23, 2020 at 8:59 p.m. ET

It also contradicts the stereotype of Substack, which has become synonymous with new opportunities for individual writers to transform their social media following into careers outside of the big media, and seems at times to be the place where cleaned up ideological factions regroup . That goes for Never Trump Republicans, ousted from conservative media, whose publications The Dispatch and The Bulwark are the biggest brands on the platform (just above and below Dr. Richardson’s sales, respectively). And it applies to left-wing writers who have bitterly broken with elements of the mainstream liberal consensus, be it race or national security, from Intercept co-founder Glenn Greenwald to Vox co-founder Matthew Yglesias to arsonist Matt Taibbi, the Dr . Richardson broke from the top seat in late August.

Dr. Richardson got into this media business boundary by accident. When readers on Facebook started suggesting that she write a newsletter, she realized she didn’t want to pay hundreds of dollars a month for a commercial platform, and she jumped to Substack because it allowed her to send her or her free emails she could send readers. Substack makes its money as a percentage of the authors’ subscription income. She felt guilty that the company’s support team wasn’t getting paid to fix her recurring problem: her bulky footnotes were triggering her readers’ spam filters. She found it very uncomfortable to talk about the money her work brings in.

“When you start doing things for the money, you are no longer authentic,” she said, adding that she knew it was both a professorship privilege and an “old Puritan view of things.”

Like the other Substack authors, Dr. Richardson succeeds because it offers something you can’t find in the mainstream media that many editors would find too boring to assign. But unlike the others, it’s not her politics per se: she views her politics as a Lincoln-era Republican, but she’s a pretty conventional liberal these days, disrupted by President Trump and his attacks on America’s institutions. She is a historian who studied with the great Harvard Lincoln scholar David Herbert Donald, and her work on 19th century political history seems particularly relevant right now. That spring she published her sixth book, How the South Won the Civil War: Oligarchy, Democracy, and the Continuing Struggle for the Soul of America, “an extensive assault on the kind of nostalgia that enlivens Mr. Trump’s struggle to preserve the Confederate symbols . The face of the south in Dr. Richardson’s book is a bitterly racist and sexually abusive planter and Senator from South Carolina, James Henry Hammond, who mentioned Jefferson’s idea that all men are equally “ridiculously absurd.”

What is unusual is to include a historian’s confident context in the secular politics of the day. She relied on Senator Hammond when Rep. Kevin McCarthy and other Republican leaders signed a lawsuit in Texas to overturn the presidential election, comparing Republican action to moments in American history when lawmakers made the idea of ​​democracy explicit questioned.

“Ordinary men, Hammond said, shouldn’t have a say in politics because they want a greater share of the wealth they produce,” she wrote.

Categories
Business

CDC says new Covid pressure in U.S. may stress ‘closely burdened’ hospitals

CDC headquarters in Atlanta

Elijah Nouvelage | Bloomberg via Getty Images

Officials with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Wednesday that a new strain of Covid-19 now circulating in the United States could further strain hospitals already overwhelmed with coronavirus patients.

Colorado health officials announced Tuesday that they had discovered the first known case of the new and contagious strain of the virus, which was first discovered in the UK. A second separate new strain, identified for the first time in South Africa, could already be in circulation in the US, CDC officials said.

“As the variants spread faster, they could lead to more cases and put even more strain on our already stressed health systems,” said Dr. Henry Walke, the agency’s Covid Incident Manager, in a conference call with reporters.

This is the latest news. You can find updates here.

Categories
Business

U.Okay. Parliament Set to Approve Put up-Brexit Commerce Deal

LONDON – The approval of a trade agreement between the UK and the European Union was rushed through the UK Parliament in just one day on Wednesday. This was a hasty conclusion to a Brexit saga that has divided the British and rocked their politics for more than four years.

The House of Commons approved the Brexit trade deal overwhelmingly by 521 votes to 73 and sent it to the House of Lords, the second chamber of Parliament, where ratification is also expected later in the day.

Legislators, who were called back from their vacation for the job, agreed to the deal after examining more than 1,200 pages of dense legal text that will shape the relationship between Britain and continental Europe for decades to come and the biggest change in the country’s trade relations in recent times will make history.

Despite the lack of time for scrutiny, the ease with which the agreement went through the House of Commons stood in stark contrast to many razor-sharp votes held ahead of last year’s general election when Parliament was stalled over Brexit.

The trade deal, signed by Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Thursday, came about after eleven months of lengthy negotiations and provides the UK with duty-free access to European markets. It should come into force on Friday.

At that point, Britain will leave the European Union’s internal market and customs union, breaking off economic integration with the bloc forged in the last few decades as part of a huge trading zone. Britain officially stepped out of the bloc’s political structures in January but opted to remain under its economic rules until the end of the year pending a trade deal.

Conservative lawmakers, including a group of die-hard Brexit supporters, have rallied behind the deal signed by Mr Johnson, who won a landslide election victory last December after promising a relatively distant economic relationship with the bloc and prioritizing national sovereignty .

Even the opposition Labor Party ordered its lawmakers to back the deal on the grounds that it was better than nothing, despite several saying they would refuse to vote for an agreement that would create new trade barriers for European nations.

Critics note that Mr Johnson’s deal secures little for the vital UK service sector and creates additional bureaucracy for UK companies exporting to continental Europe and having to file millions of additional customs declarations.

But Mr Johnson achieved his political goal by improving the country’s ability to exercise its sovereignty and make decisions without being constrained by European Union institutions such as the Court of Justice.

“After we regained control of our money, our borders, our laws and our waters by leaving the European Union on January 31st, we are using this moment to forge a fantastic new relationship with our European neighbors based on free trade and friendly cooperation. Said Mr Johnson as he opened the debate in Parliament.

Some lawmakers are angry at the speed with which they have been asked to take a decision on Brexit – a policy designed to restore the power of the UK Parliament.

But on Wednesday Parliament was effectively given the choice of take-it-or-leave-it. Labor leader Keir Starmer described Mr Johnson’s deal as a “thin deal” with many flaws, but added that “a thin deal is better than no deal”.

A vote against it would result in a chaotic break with the bloc by the end of the week, while support for the deal would provide a foundation for building a better relationship, he added.

The agreement has been provisionally approved by the European Union and a vote in the European Parliament is expected next month. The deal was signed by Mr Johnson on Wednesday afternoon, so a move by Parliament not to approve the document would put the country in legal limbo.

If approved by the House of Lords, the process is expected to be completed around midnight.

The agreement has many critics. Representatives from trawler fleets have accused Mr Johnson of giving in to the European Union on fishing rights and business leaders are annoyed at the added cost and administrative burden of the deal and the little achieved for the service sector – about four Fifth of the UK economy.

While the European Union exports more goods to the UK than it imports, the opposite is true for services.

Among those who said they would support the deal, but with reservations, was Theresa May, the former prime minister, who lost her job after failing to convince parliament on several occasions to support her plan to get Britain out of the bloc.

Ms. May attacked the Labor Party for defying its 2019 blueprint, pointing to loopholes in Mr. Johnson’s agreement.

“We have a trade deal that benefits the EU, but not a service deal that would benefit the UK,” she said.

Ian Blackford, the chairman of the Scottish National Party’s legislature in the UK Parliament, said the deal would mean “mountains of bureaucracy” for exporters.

But Brexit supporters praised the prime minister and focused more on sovereignty than economy.

William Cash, a conservative lawmaker who has spent his career against European integration, described the deal as a “real turning point in our history” and said that Mr Johnson “saved our democracy”.