Day: November 2, 2022

A landmark deal to allow grain exports from Ukraine, which was back on track Wednesday after being briefly suspended, has played a crucial role in easing a global food crisis sparked by the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Brokered by the United Nations and Turkey and signed by Moscow and Kyiv on July 22, the agreement established a protected sea corridor to allow grain shipments to resume for the first time since the fighting began in February

Here is what we know about the deal, known as the Black Sea Grain Initiative:

Why was it needed?

When Russian troops attacked in late February, Moscow imposed a blockade on Ukraine’s Black Sea ports, halting all agricultural exports from one of the world’s breadbaskets.

The move left 20 million metric tons of grain stranded in Ukraine’s ports, causing food prices to surge worldwide.

Before the war, up to 90% of Ukraine’s wheat, corn and sunflower exports were transported by sea, mostly from Odesa, with many developing countries relying heavily on Kyiv for grain.

Agricultural commodity prices were high before the war because of the post-COVID-19 economic recovery, but the conflict pushed the price of grains such as wheat and corn to levels unsustainable for countries dependent on their import, such as Egypt, Lebanon and Tunisia.

What does the deal cover?

The deal ensures the safe export of grain, foodstuffs and fertilizers, including ammonia, from three Black Sea ports in southwestern Ukraine: Odesa, Chornomorsk and Pivdennyi.

The first grain ship to leave under the U.N.-backed deal set sail on August 1.

According to U.N. figures as of November 1, a total of 9.7 million metric tons of grain and other agricultural products have been transported in the first three months of the initiative, the vast majority involving wheat and corn.

Valid for 120 days, the agreement is up for renewal on November 19 in a process that can be done automatically without further negotiations.

The U.N. says extending the deal is crucial for global food security and is pushing for it to be renewed for one year.

Although the initiative is working well, shipments are about 40-50% lower than what they were before Russia’s invasion, the U.N. says.

How does it work?

According to the U.N.’s website, the agreement establishes a safe corridor between the three Ukrainian ports and an area in Turkish waters where the vessels are inspected before being allowed to continue their journey.

To monitor the agreement, a joint command and control center was set up in Istanbul to oversee smooth operations and resolve disputes.

Known as the Joint Coordination Center (JCC), the JCC has four teams of eight inspectors — two each from Russia, Ukraine, Turkey and the U.N.

These teams inspect outbound vessels carrying grain at the Turkish inspection area to ensure all merchandise is approved.

The teams also examine empty ships returning to Ukraine to ensure they are not carrying any weapons or other unauthorized goods or people.

Safe passage

The deal establishes a buffer zone of 10 nautical miles around each vessel traveling along the corridor with no military ships, equipment or drones allowed within that radius.

All ship movements logged by the JCC are transmitted to the relevant military authorities to prevent any incidents, with any violations or threats to be handled by the JCC.

At the start of the war, Ukraine mined its main Black Sea ports to head off threats of a Russian attack from the sea, but experts said it would take too long to de-mine all these areas.

The deal allows Ukrainians to guide the ships along safe routes that avoid known mine fields and into and out of its territorial waters.

Deal briefly suspended

On October 29, Russia said it was suspending its participation in the deal, accusing Ukraine of using the shipping corridor to launch a drone attack on its Black Sea fleet in Crimea’s Sevastopol port.

After a call between the Russian and Turkish defense ministers, the deal resumed operation at 0900 GMT on November 2 with Moscow saying it had received written guarantees from Kyiv ensuring the corridor would not be used for attacking Russian forces.
…

Europe has warmed more than twice as much as the rest of the world over the past three decades and has experienced the greatest temperature increase of any continent, according to a report by the World Meteorological Organization. 

The report on the state of the climate in Europe follows a summer of extremes. A record-breaking heat wave scorched Britain, Alpine glaciers vanished at an unprecedented rate and a long-lasting marine heat wave cooked the waters of the Mediterranean.  

“Europe presents a live picture of a warming world and reminds us that even well-prepared societies are not safe from impacts of extreme weather events,” WMO secretary-general Petteri Taalas said in a statement.  

From 1991 to 2021, temperatures over Europe warmed at an average of 0.5 degree Celsius per decade, the report said, while the global average was just 0.2 degree C. 

Last year, extreme weather events made worse by climate change — chiefly floods and storms — caused more than $50 billion worth of damage in Europe. 

The reason Europe is warming faster than other continents has to do with the fact that a large part of the continent is in the sub-Arctic and Arctic — the fastest-warming region on Earth — as well as changes in climate feedbacks, scientists said. 

For example, fewer clouds over Europe during the summer has meant that more sunlight and heat now reaches the continent, said Freja Vamborg, senior scientist with the Copernicus Climate Change Service. 

Some scientists have called Europe a “heat wave hot spot” as the number of heat waves on the continent has increased faster than in other regions because of changes in atmospheric circulation.  

Although temperatures are rising, the European Union has cut greenhouse gas emissions by 31% between 1990 and 2020, the report said, and it aims to slash emissions by 55% by 2030.  

On November 6, delegates will arrive in Egypt for COP27, the annual U.N. climate summit. 

French President Emmanuel Macron and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen are expected to attend. British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s decision not to attend the COP27 climate summit is being kept under review, his spokesman said Monday.
…

Advocacy groups are welcoming a decision by India’s Supreme Court that bans what is known as a “two-finger” test on rape survivors, calling it a patriarchal and invasive practice and ruling that anyone violating the directive will face misconduct charges.

Medical experts have used the test to determine whether a woman has engaged in regular sexual intercourse.

Calling the practice regressive and unscientific, a two-judge panel said, “the probative value of a woman’s testimony does not depend upon her sexual history. It is patriarchal and sexist to suggest that a woman cannot be believed when she states that she was raped, merely for the reason that she is sexually active.”

New York-based Human Rights Watch said in a statement, “The judgment brings hope that the justice system will finally stop using this unscientific process.”

In the past, the Supreme Court had “deprecated,” or voiced disapproval of, the use of the test in several orders, Justice DY Chandrachud, one of the two judges, noted.

“The so-called test has no scientific basis. It instead re-victimizes and re-traumatizes women and is an affront to their dignity. So, the two-finger or per vaginam test must not be conducted,” Chandrachud said.

“The test is based on an incorrect assumption that a sexually active woman cannot be raped. Nothing can be further from the truth — evidence of a victim’s sexual history is wholly immaterial while adjudicating whether the accused raped her. It is regrettable that it continues to be conducted even today.”

The bench made the observation while restoring conviction in a 2004 case of rape and murder of a woman in the eastern state of Jharkhand. On October 31, the Supreme Court overturned a ruling by the Jharkhand High Court acquitting a man — who had been previously convicted by a lower-level trial court in the state.

The Supreme Court asked the federal and state governments to ensure that the two-finger test is no longer conducted on rape survivors. The court ordered the Indian health ministry to conduct workshops for all health service providers across the country, in order to communicate the proper procedure to examine rape survivors and let them know that in no situation are they to conduct two-finger tests.

The court also ordered the health ministry to ensure that the chapter on two-finger tests is removed from the syllabus of medical education.

Since 2013, the Supreme Court has said the test and its interpretation violate the right of rape survivors to privacy, physical and mental integrity, and dignity. Indrajit Khandekar, a Maharashtra state-based activist and medical doctor, said this is the first time the court has banned it and attached punitive action on doctors found conducting the test.

Khandekar, a forensic expert, filed a public interest litigation in the Bombay High Court in 2010 seeking a ban on the test on the basis of a 258-page report that he prepared following his research on the use of the test.

The attachment of the provision of punishment in Monday’s ruling from the country’s highest court raises hopes the test will finally be eliminated, Khandekar said.

“The two-finger test or the virginity test is an unscientific, inhumane, derogatory, and discriminatory practice that violates a woman’s dignity,” Khandekar told VOA. “The test can be physically, psychologically, and socially devastating to girls or young women. Other people have no right to know whether or not a particular girl is a virgin.”

In several cases, the doctor’s opinion after conducting a two-finger test, and the assumption that a rape survivor had engaged in regular sexual activity, was used to cast a stigma on a young woman’s character, calling her one with bad morals, he said.

“As a result, one might wonder whether this is a trial for rape on a woman or a trial for the victim’s character. Even the insertion of the fingers into the vagina of a female without her consent is nothing but a second assault,” Khandekar said.

Medical doctor Ranjana Pardhi, who has long campaigned against the two-finger test, said that studies published in several medical journals show that the inspection of the hymen cannot give conclusive evidence of vaginal penetration or any other sexual history.

“Abnormal hymenal features such as a hymenal transection, laceration, enlarged opening, or scars are found in females with, as well as without, a history of sexual intercourse. Vaginal laxity and size of introitus [an opening] also is not an indicator of sexual intercourse. There are some other tests to confirm sexual intercourse or penetration,” Nagpur-based Pardhi told VOA.

“The so-called virginity test or two-finger test is medically flawed.”

Pardhi added that activists campaigning against the test are hopeful that their long fight is going to bear fruit but warned that without enforcement, it might not be successful

“We also hope that the law enforcement agencies and the judiciary will strictly penalize the medical professionals for noncompliance. Otherwise, the ban will remain unimplementable and meaningless,” she said.
…

A new U.N. report finds agricultural automation can boost global food production and be a boon for small-scale farmers in developing countries.

The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, FAO, has just released The State of Food and Agriculture 2022 report. The report’s authors said automation is rapidly changing the face of agriculture. New technologies, they say, are quickly leaving behind some of the old larger-type tractors and large machinery in ways that could benefit small holders in developing countries.

Parallels can be drawn with the introduction of cellphones. The World Bank, among other observers, notes African and other developing countries can harness digital technologies to boost their economies by advancing from landlines to smartphones.

FAO said automation can play an important role in making food production more efficient and more environmentally friendly.

Chief FAO economist Maximo Torero said many emerging technologies would have been unimaginable years ago. He cited as examples fruit-picking robots that use artificial intelligence and sensors that monitor plants and animals.

“Automation allows agriculture to be more productive, efficient, resilient, and sustainable and can improve working conditions,” Torero said. “However, as with any technological change, automation also implies disruption to the agricultural systems. The risk is that the automation could exacerbate inequalities if we are not careful on how it is being done and developed and deployed.”

The report looks at 27 case studies from all over the world. They represent technologies at different stages of readiness suitable for large or small agricultural producers of varying levels of income.

Torero said the report investigates the drivers of these technologies and identifies barriers preventing their adoption, particularly by small-scale producers. The report, he said, also looks at one of the most common concerns about automation — that it creates unemployment.

“While it concludes that such fears are overblown, it acknowledges that agricultural automation can lead to unemployment in places where rural labor is abundant, and wages are low,” he said. “It is important to understand that in a continent like sub-Saharan Africa, where there is an enormous amount of youth population, we can build the skill sets of these people to be able to have access to these technologies.”

In areas where cheap labor is abundant, the FAO urges policymakers to avoid subsidizing automation while creating an enabling environment for its adoption. At the same time, the report said governments should provide social protection to the least skilled workers who are likely to lose their jobs during the transition.
…

Ahead of the COP27 climate talks in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh next week, there are concerns that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has reversed progress on tackling climate change. But as Henry Ridgwell reports, some say the war could have a positive impact in the longer term
…

Three of the largest U.S. pharmacy chains — CVS, Walgreens and Walmart — are reported to have tentatively agreed to pay more than $13 billion to settle more than 3,000 state and local lawsuits involving the dispensing of opioid painkillers. 

Sources close to the negotiations report CVS will pay $5 billion over 10 years, Walgreens will pay $5.7 billion over 15 years and Walmart will pay $3.1 billion, mostly up front. The sources remained anonymous as they were not authorized to speak publicly about the agreement. 

In a statement released Wednesday, CVS Health said it has agreed it will pay approximately $5 billion — with $4.9 billion to states and political subdivisions and approximately $130 million to Native American tribes — over the next 10 years beginning in 2023. 

In the statement, CVS Health Chief Policy Officer and General Counsel Thomas Moriarty said, “We are committed to working with states, municipalities and tribes, and will continue our own important initiatives to help reduce the illegitimate use of prescription opioids.”  

The CVS statement included a list of initiatives it has undertaken to fight opioid abuse.  

In the lawsuits, governments said pharmacies were filling prescriptions they should have flagged as inappropriate. 

If the settlement is finalized, it would be the first nationwide deal with retail pharmacy companies and follows nationwide opioid settlements with drugmakers and distributors totaling more than $33 billion. 

Opioids are natural, synthetic, or semi-synthetic chemicals used to reduce the intensity of pain signals and feelings of pain. The class of drugs includes the illegal drug heroin, synthetic opioids such as fentanyl, and pain medications available legally by prescription, such as oxycodone, hydrocodone, codeine, morphine, and many others. 

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that from 1999 to 2020, more than 564,000 people in the U.S. died from an overdose involving an opioid, including prescription and illicit opioids. They report 187 people in the U.S. continue to die from an opioid overdose every day. 

The Associated Press and Reuters provided some information for this report. 

 
…

New research shows vaccinating pregnant women helped protect their newborns from the common but scary respiratory virus called RSV that fills hospitals with wheezing babies each fall.

The preliminary results buoy hope that after decades of failure and frustration, vaccines against RSV may finally be getting close.

Pfizer announced Tuesday that a large international study found that vaccinating moms-to-be was nearly 82% effective at preventing severe cases of RSV in their babies’ most vulnerable first 90 days of life. At age 6 months, the vaccine still was proving 69% effective against serious illness — and there were no signs of safety problems in mothers or babies.

“Moms are always giving their antibodies to their baby,” said virologist Kena Swanson, Pfizer’s vice president of viral vaccines. “The vaccine just puts them in that much better position” to form and pass on RSV-fighting antibodies.

The vaccine quest isn’t just to protect infants. RSV is dangerous for older adults, too, and both Pfizer and rival GSK recently announced that their competing shots also proved protective for seniors.

None of the findings will help this year when an early RSV surge already is crowding children’s hospitals. But they raise the prospect that one or more vaccines might become available before next fall’s RSV season.

“My fingers are crossed,” said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease specialist at Vanderbilt University. “We’re making inroads.”

Tuesday’s data was reported in a press release and hasn’t been vetted by independent experts.

Here’s a look at the long quest for RSV vaccines.

What is RSV?

For most healthy people, RSV, or respiratory syncytial virus, is a cold-like nuisance. But for the very young, the elderly and people with certain health problems, it can be serious, even life-threatening. The virus can infect deep in the lungs, causing pneumonia, and in babies, it can impede breathing by inflaming tiny airways.

In the U.S., about 58,000 children younger than 5 are hospitalized for RSV each year, and several hundred die. Among adults 65 and older, about 177,000 are hospitalized with RSV and 14,000 die annually.

Worldwide, RSV kills about 100,000 children a year, mostly in poor countries.

Why is there no vaccine?

A tragedy in the 1960s set back the whole field. Using the approach that led to the first polio vaccine, scientists made an experimental RSV vaccine by growing the virus in a lab and killing it. But testing in children found not only was the vaccine not protective, youngsters who caught RSV after vaccination fared worse. Two died.

“For a period of 20 years, even though science was advancing, nobody wanted to go near development of an RSV vaccine,” Schaffner said.

Even today’s modern RSV vaccine candidates were tested first in older adults, not children, he noted.

How did development get back on track?

Modern vaccines tend to target the outer surface of a virus — what the immune system sees when a germ invades. For RSV, that target is the so-called F protein that helps the virus latch onto human cells. Again, there was a hurdle: That protein is a shape-shifter, rearranging its form before and after it “fuses” to cells.

It turns out that the immune system only forms effective RSV-fighting antibodies when it spots what’s called the pre-fusion version of that protein, explained structural biologist Jason McLellan of the University of Texas at Austin.

In 2013, McLellan and virologist Barney Graham were working at the National Institutes of Health when they homed in on the correct shape and figured out how to freeze it in that form. That finding opened the way to today’s development of a variety of experimental RSV vaccine candidates.

(That same discovery was key to the hugely successful COVID-19 vaccines, as the coronavirus also is cloaked in a shape-shifting surface protein.)

What’s in the pipeline?

Several companies are creating RSV vaccines, but Pfizer and GSK are furthest along. Both companies recently reported final-stage testing in older adults. The competing vaccines are made somewhat differently but each proved strongly effective, especially against serious disease. Both companies plan to seek regulatory approval in the U.S. by the end of the year, as well as in other countries.

The older-adult data “looks fantastic,” said McLellan, who has closely followed the vaccine development. “I think we’re on the right track.”

And if vaccinating pregnant women pans out, it could be “a win for two individuals instead of just one,” by offering protection to both mom-to-be and baby, said Dr. Wilbur Chen of the University of Maryland School of Medicine.

Pfizer’s maternal vaccine is the same recipe that it tested successfully in older adults — and it also plans to seek Food and Drug Administration approval for those vaccinations by year’s end.

The new study included 7,400 pregnant women in 18 countries, including the U.S., and spanned multiple RSV seasons. Preliminary results reported Tuesday show the vaccine was most effective against severe disease. For milder illness, effectiveness was 51% to 57% — short of the study’s statistical requirements but a result that Pfizer still called clinically meaningful because it could mean fewer trips to the doctor’s office.
…