Travel Pulse– St. Kitts and Nevis, the two-island nation that is quickly becoming a popular Caribbean cruise destination, has announced plans to ban single-use plastics in the near future.
The island, which thrives on the tourism that its natural beauties both on land and in its waters, will follow in the footsteps of other Caribbean islands like Jamaica, Dominica, Barbados and Turks & Caicos in eliminating all single-use plastics from the island.
The announcement shouldn’t come as a surprise to residents of St. Kitts and Nevis; the islands’ Ministry of Tourism and Sustainable Destination Council, which had been created in 2013, began advocating for the ban of single-use plastics in 2018, beginning a campaign called “Plastics Be Gone,” which aims to reduce St. Kitts and Nevis’ single-use plastics by 30 percent over five years.
It also started an annual initiative called Plastic Free July, advocating residents and businesses not to use single-use plastics during the month while educating them on the ways plastics can threaten the health of the world.
In April 2021, the two-island nation’s Department of Environment began consultations with stakeholders in a series of sessions entitled, “Are you Ready to be Plastic Free?” Representatives from government departments, the Small Business Development Centre, Solid Waste Management Corporation and Ital Creations attended the sessions.
This year, the private sector will be included in the conversation surrounding the plan of action to ban single-use plastics entirely.
“The Ministry of Environment is consulting with relevant stakeholders to implement a ban on single-use plastics, following in the footsteps of several Caribbean countries that have already done so,” said Sharon Rattan, St Kitts and Nevis’ Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Environment and Cooperatives.
“One of the things that the ministry is endeavoring to do is to make sure we have meaningful collaboration so that we can make informed decisions because we are quite aware that such a ban cannot be done overnight,” added Permanent Secretary Rattan.
The islands are also using some of the funds from its Citizen by Investment Program to fund its sustainability initiatives, including its ban on single-use plastics. The program allows sustainably-minded individuals with capital to earn citizenship in the islands by investing in their development, including in their sustainability.
According to UNEP, the world produces about 300 million tons of plastic each year, though Statista has found that just 8.7 percent of the volume of plastic waste generated each year in the United States alone was recycled, indicating that the majority of plastics created get thrown out into landfills, where they can take thousands of years to degrade and risk critical ecosystems.
St. Kitts and Nevis has a special problem with single-use plastics because of its geography. The two islands only have so much land, and many single-use plastics are not recyclable, taking thousands of years to degrade. Large landfills filled with mainly plastics are not sustainable over the long run, and neither are the threats of these plastics to the islands’ natural wildlife.
Ukrainian citizens hold posters during a protest in support of Ukraine in front of the Russian Embassy in Santiago, Chile, on Thursday, Feb. 24, 2022. (MARTIN BERNETTI/AFP)
Tribune News Service — Latin American and Caribbean leaders reacted to the news Thursday of the Russian invasion of Ukraine with a flurry of statements, videos and tweets that ranged from open condemnation to avoiding direct criticism to even backing the aggression, highlighting the increased polarization of the Western Hemisphere.
As President Joe Biden works to build an international coalition to isolate Russian President Vladimir Putin, the issue will likely generate more friction with some of the Latin American governments that so far have issued a half-hearted response to the invasion.
Here are some of the reactions from regional leaders to Russia’s military aggression.
Mexico
Populist President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador is already facing domestic criticism, including from former Mexican diplomats, for what they say is a lukewarm response to Russia’s military attack on Ukraine.
In his daily morning press conference, Lopez Obrador said his government “will continue promoting dialogue, that force is not used, that there is no invasion. We are not in favor of any war.” But he stopped short of explicitly condemning Russia’s incursion into Ukraine.
“Mexico has always supported peace and peaceful solutions,” he said.
Peru
In a similar tone as Mexico, the Peruvian Foreign Ministry rejected the use of force but avoided mentioning Russia in a tweet expressing its “profound concern about the evolving events in Ukraine.” The statement called for ceasing hostilities.
Argentina
Earlier this month, left-leaning Argentine President Alberto Fernández offered his country as Russia’s “gateway to Latin America” during a meeting with Putin. Facing intense criticism, his government quickly issued a statement on Thursday morning lamenting the situation in Ukraine, rejecting the use of force and calling on Russia “to cease its military actions in Ukraine.” But in the afternoon, Fernandez said he was calling “on all parties not to use military force,” triggering again criticism for what some saw as a reluctance to denounce Russia as the aggressor.
Brazil
President Jair Bolsonaro’s trip to Moscow last week, as tensions over Ukraine were escalating, already created discord with the U.S. government. Brazil’s statement Thursday probably did little to improve the state of relations, which have gone colder since former president Donald Trump left the White House.
In the statement, the Brazilian government said it is “deeply concerned about the military operations launched by Russia against Ukraine territory” and called for the cessation of hostilities. But it did not condemn Russia’s actions.
Chile
“Chile condemns Russia’s aggression against Ukraine,” the country’s foreign affairs ministry said in a statement. Clearing doubts about his position, left-leaning president-elect Gabriel Boric said Russia “opted for war.”
“From Chile, we condemn the invasion of Ukraine, the violation of its sovereignty and the illegitimate use of force,” he said on Twitter. “Our solidarity will be with the victims and our humble efforts with peace.”
Colombia
Colombia, a “major non-NATO ally” of the United States, issued a forceful condemnation of Russian actions.
“Colombia categorically rejects the attacks against Ukraine by Russia,” President Ivan Duque said on Twitter early Thursday. “These events threaten the sovereignty of Ukraine and put the lives of thousands of people at risk, in an unquestionable situation contrary to International Law and the UN Charter.”
Caricom
The Caribbean Community organization known as CARICOM, made up of 20 nations, said it “strongly condemns the military attacks and invasion of Ukraine by The Russian Federation and calls for the immediate and complete withdrawal of the military presence and cessation of any further actions that may intensify the current perilous situation in that country.”
In the statement, CARICOM also criticized the recognition by Russia of the Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk as independent, calling it a “violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine.”
Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela
The authoritarian leaders of the three closest allies of Russia in the Americas had no comment on the Russian attacks Thursday. But they have previously expressed their support for Russia’s actions in Ukraine, which the three have justified saying Russia has the right to defend against American and NATO expansion in Eastern Europe.
As Putin was preparing to launch the attack on Ukraine, Cuban leader Miguel Díaz-Canel was meeting with the chairman of the lower house of Russia’s Federal Assembly, Viacheslav Volodin, late Wednesday.
According to Cuban state media, the Cuban leader expressed his “solidarity with the Russian Federation in the face of the imposition of sanctions and the expansion of NATO towards its borders.”
But unlike Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega and Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro, the Cuban leader has avoided referring to Russia’s military incursion in Ukraine and has not publicly endorsed it.
The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) has issued a strong statement condemning Russia’s military attacks in Ukraine, and calls for “intensified diplomatic dialogue” bring about a ceasing of the hostilities.
The following is the full text of the statement issued by CARICOM, today…
The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) strongly condemns the military attacks and invasion of Ukraine by The Russian Federation and calls for the immediate and complete withdrawal of the military presence and cessation of any further actions that may intensify the current perilous situation in that country. The recognition by The Russian Federation of the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk represents a violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine.
The hostilities against Ukraine go counter to the principles of respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity, non-interference in the internal affairs of another sovereign state and the prohibition on the threat or use of force, and the peaceful resolution of disputes, which are the bedrock of this Community.
CARICOM maintains that the principles of universal respect and adherence to these norms and principles of international law are fundamental to the maintenance of the international system and global peace and security.
CARICOM calls on all parties involved to urgently embark on intensified diplomatic dialogue to immediately de-escalate hostilities and work towards a sustainable peace.
Descendants of Ukrainian immigrants, who are part of the largest Ukrainian community in Latin America, take part in a demonstration in support of Ukraine, in Prudentopolis city, in Parana state, Brazil February 24, 2022. REUTERS/Pilar Olivares
PRUDENTOPOLIS, Brazil, Feb 24 (Reuters) – More than 12,000 kilometers (7,450 miles) away from the violence of the Russian invasion, some 200 Brazilians of Ukrainian descent gathered on Thursday to pray for peace in a country they still consider their homeland.
They sang and said Catholic mass in Ukrainian, holding flags of a country their ancestors left decades ago.
“God will hear us and Russia will retreat,” said Filomena Procek, a 67-year-old art teacher.
Her grandparents were born in southern Brazil near this town known as “Little Ukraine” because three-quarters of the population is of Ukrainian descent.
Ukrainians who settled in Brazil, some as far back as the late 19th century, mostly emigrated from western Ukraine and brought their culture and religion that they hang onto today.
“The invasion of Ukraine has moved people here very much. They are living in their hearts the suffering of Ukrainians today,” said Bishop Don Meron Mazur, a Ukrainian Brazilian.
“We are praying for peace in Ukraine, that Ukraine can be a sovereign nation free of invasions and above all free of bloodshed,” he told Reuters.
An image of Our Lady of Pochaev, a Byzantine icon of the Virgin Mary v
BOGOTA, Feb 24 (Reuters) – A bombardment carried out by Colombia’s armed forces killed 23 FARC dissidents on Thursday as part of a military offensive to seize control of an area in the northeast of the country which sits on the border with Venezuela, the government said.
Dissident members of the demobilised Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) reject a 2016 peace deal with the government. The dissidents have become a security threat, according to the government, which accuses them of murdering community leaders and civilians.
Military planes and helicopters took part in the bombardment in the municipality of Puerto Rondon, in Colombia’s Arauca province, according to Defence Minister Diego Molano. He said Jorge Eliecer Jimenez, known as Arturo, the FARC dissident commander in Arauca, was among the dead.
“Colombia and Arauca have been liberated from a criminal, from a FARC-dissident leader of the FARC dissidents to bring more security, more peace, and better protect the people of Arauca,” Molano said in a news conference at the site of the operation.
Arauca, which plays an important role in Colombia’s oil and cattle ranching industries, has seen growing violence in which more than 60 people have died so far this year, according to Colombia’s human rights ombudsman.
FARC dissidents allied with the leftist-guerrilla National Liberation Army (ELN) are fighting for control of drug-trafficking in the region against a rival FARC dissident group led by Arturo.
The government in Bogota accuses Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro of harbouring FARC dissidents and members of the ELN who cross the border to launch attacks in Colombia, something Maduro has repeatedly denied.
Reporting by Luis Jaime Acosta; Writing by Oliver Griffin; Editing by Kenneth Maxwell
A court in Nicaragua has found seven critics of the government of President Daniel Ortega guilty of conspiracy in what human rights groups have denounced as a “political trial”.
Among those convicted are three opposition leaders who had planned to run in the 2021 election.
Dozens of government critics were detained in the run-up to the poll, in which Mr Ortega won a fifth term.
The prosecution has asked for sentences ranging between eight and 13 years.
Those convicted are:
Juan Sebastián Chamorro, presidential hopeful
Arturo Cruz, former ambassador to the US and presidential hopeful
Félix Maradiaga, presidential hopeful
José Pallais, former deputy foreign minister
José Adán Aguerri, business leader
Tamara Dávila, activist with opposition group Unamos
Violeta Granera, sociologist and opposition activist
In a trial held at El Chipote prison behind closed doors, the judges found the seven guilty of “conspiracy to undermine [Nicaragua’s] national integrity”.
The rights group Nicaraguan Center for Human Rights said the seven were innocent: “The regime convicted them of crimes they have not committed.”
They are not the first to be convicted in a wave of trials against opponents of the Ortega government.
Earlier this month, two of the most outspoken critics of the president – Dora Téllez and Lesther Alemán – were also found guilty of conspiracy in trials dismissed by rights groups as a “sham”.
Less than two weeks ago, another jailed opposition leader, Hugo Torres, died while awaiting trial.
Hugo Torres died on 12 February while in detentioOLOLO
Following his death, the regional body Organization of American States (OAS) said it “categorically condemns the persecution and arbitrary detention” of Nicaraguans and urged the immediate release of “all political prisoners”.
The government’s crackdown on the opposition accelerated in the months before November’s election and has not let up since.
At first, those targeted were longstanding political rivals of the president.
However, it did not take long for police to also arrested those who had once been comrades in arms of Mr Ortega but had turned critical of what they said were his “authoritarian tendencies”.
They were detained under a controversial treason law which the government argues protects Nicaragua from “coup-mongers” financed by “imperial powers” aiming to overthrow President Ortega.
Explosions seen inside Kyiv as Ukrainians flee the capital – video
Fighting has reached the outskirts of Kyiv, following a night of missile attacks on Ukraine’s capital to prepare for a major Russian assault on the city.
Heavy gunfire and explosions could be heard in a residential district of the capital on Friday morning and Ukrainian officials have warned that Russian military vehicles are approaching the city from the north-west.
The Ukrainian defence ministry said Russian forces had entered the Obolon district of Kyiv, about six miles from the centre of the city. In a statement posted online, it advised residents to report the movements of Russian troops and to “prepare molotov cocktails in order to neutralise the enemy”.
Two Kyiv apartment buildings were engulfed in flames on Thursday night after they were hit by falling debris from an aircraft that was shot down. Ukraine’s emergencies ministry has also released photographs showing buildings destroyed by shelling in Starobilsk in eastern Ukraine.
The Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, accused Vladimir Putin of targeting civilian as well as military sites.
“They say that civilian objects are not a target for them. It is a lie; they do not distinguish in which areas to operate,” he said.
Zelenskiy made the claim in a televised address early on Friday, in which he vowed to continue to defend his country. “Russia will have to talk to us sooner or later about how to end hostilities and stop this invasion. The sooner the conversation begins, the smaller Russia’s losses will be.”
The president, who also criticised world leaders for “watching from afar”, spoke after large explosions were heard in the capital, and after a warning from US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, that “all evidence suggests that Russia intends to encircle and threaten” the city. Zelenskiy has vowed to stay in the capital.
Zelenskiy said missile strikes resumed at 4am and images soon emerged of damaged and burning tower blocks amid footage containing the sound of air raid sirens. Early on Friday, Ukraine’s military said it had shot down a Russia aircraft over the capital.
The UK defence secretary, Ben Wallace, has said it is the view of British intelligence that Russia intends to invade the whole of Ukraine, but its army failed to deliver on the first day of its invasion.
The international criminal court (ICC) said on Friday it might investigate possible war crimes, though did not provide any further details.
Ukrainian troops are battling Russian forces advancing toward Kyiv as part of the biggest invasion of a European state since the second world war. “We believe Moscow has developed plans to inflict widespread human rights abuses – and potentially worse – on the Ukrainian people,” Blinken told a meeting of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) on Thursday.
Decision to invade Ukraine raises questions over Putin’s ‘sense of reality’
In an earlier overnight video address, Zelenskiy said 137 people had died since Putin launched an invasion by land, air and sea on Thursday, with hundreds of others injured, and claimed that Russia had named him “target number one”.
He warned: “My family is the number two target. They want to destroy Ukraine politically by destroying the head of state. I will stay in the capital. My family is also in Ukraine.”
The Ukrainian president also voiced frustration after speaking to the heads of Nato member states. “We have been left alone to defend our state,” Zelenskiy said. “Who is ready to fight alongside us? I don’t see anyone. Who is ready to give Ukraine a guarantee of Nato membership? Everyone is afraid.”
Asked if he was worried about Zelenskiy’s safety, Blinken told CBS: “To the best of my knowledge, President Zelenskiy remains in Ukraine at his post, and of course we’re concerned for the safety of all of our friends in Ukraine – government officials and others.”
Ukraine announced it had lost control of the Chernobyl nuclear site near the country’s northern border with Belarus hours after Russian troops began an invasion of its neighbour on Thursday, and the White House said it was “outraged” by credible reports that Russian forces were holding facility staff there hostage.
“This unlawful and dangerous hostage-taking, which could upend the routine civil service efforts required to maintain and protect the nuclear waste facilities, is obviously incredibly alarming and gravely concerning,” the US press secretary Jen Psaki said.
The International Atomic Energy Agency said it was following the situation “with grave concern” and appealed for maximum restraint to avoid any action that might put Ukraine’s nuclear facilities at risk.
The west scrambled to respond to Putin’s aggression with a range of new sanctions against Moscow, with the US also announcing it would send 7,000 more troops to Germany to shore up Nato’s eastern borders. But even after the invasion there were divisions on the strength of the response, as Russian forces advanced undeterred by the threats.
The EU faced furious remonstrations from Kyiv after Europe’s leaders looked set to hold back from imposing the potentially most damaging sanction on Russia: blocking Russia from an international payments system through which it receives foreign currency. Ukraine’s foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba, said European and US politicians would have “blood on their hands” if they failed to impose the heaviest toll on Moscow by cutting Russia from the Swift payments system.
The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, said the EU was united after discussions of the five-pillar sanctions package targeting the financial, energy, transport and export industries and visa controls.
She said: “Today’s events are a watershed moment for Europe. Bombs are falling on innocent women, men and children. They fear for their lives and many are dying. All of this happens in 2022 – in the very heart of Europe. President Putin chose to bring back war to Europe.
“Let me stress that these events, indeed, mark the beginning of a new era. We must be very clear in our analysis: Putin is trying to subjugate a friendly European country. And he is trying to redraw the maps of Europe by force. He must, and he will, fail.”
Leaders of the 30 Nato allied nations will meet on Friday, the US president, Joe Biden, confirmed, as they come under pressure to go further than the two rounds of sanctions already announced, after what the British prime minister, Boris Johnson, described as a “dark day in the history of our continent”.
The United Nations security council will also vote on Friday on a draft resolution condemning Russia’s invasion and requiring Moscow’s immediate withdrawal. However, Moscow can veto the measure, and it was unclear how China, which has rejected calling Russia’s move an invasion, would vote.
Looks like non-mRNA vaccines can be as good as Pfizer and Moderna in certain scenarios
by Charles Schmidt
A health worker in Mexico City prepares a Sputnik V dose during a mass vaccination effort against COVID-19. A new study in Mexico shows that non-mRNA vaccines like the Russian version can be as effective as mRNA vaccines like Pfizer if the patient has previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2. Luis Barron/Eyepix Group/Barcroft Media via Getty Images
NPR- More than 20 COVID vaccines are in use globally, each one based on the ancestral coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 that surfaced in Wuhan, China, over two years ago. Among them, mRNA vaccines are believed to offer the best protection against severe disease.
“It’s been clear for quite a while that none of them is as good as the mRNA vaccines that dominate the U.S. landscape,” says Nathaniel Landau, a virologist at NYU Langone Health in New York, referring to the Pfizer and Moderna shots.
But a new preprint study shows that other vaccines can be as effective as mRNA shots when given to people who’ve had a prior SARs-CoV-2 infection.
For these individuals “it doesn’t matter which vaccine they get,” says Theodora Hatziiouannou, a virologist at The Rockefeller University in New York who helped lead the study. “They will likely be protected against [reinfection from] all the current variants.”
During the study, scientists collected blood samples from 197 fully-immunized people in Mexico, where five types of COVID vaccines have been deployed so far. Roughly half these individuals were infected prior to vaccination, and the researchers had records of which type of shot they were each given.
Then the team measured how well immune cells and the molecules they produce in those blood samples could recognize and bind to portions of the SARS-CoV-2 virus — specifically its spike proteins. Spike proteins jut from SARS-CoV-2 like studs on a tire and hook onto human cell receptors to initiate an infection. When the immune components are able to bind to these proteins and block them, the virus is unable to enter a cell and is therefore unable to replicate.
The researchers tested the immune response to spike proteins from the ancestral coronavirus as well from newer variants, including omicron BA.1. The newer omicron BA.2 variant had only recently surfaced when the study began and was not evaluated
To compare how well the vaccines worked to prevent viral spike proteins from binding to cells, the team zeroed in on two of the immune system’s key components.
First, are neutralizing antibodies — they provide a frontline defense that deflect spikes from their human cell target.
Second are antibody-producing B cells that provide long-term reinforcements. These cells retain a memory of the virus’ spike protein and can rapidly generate new and even better antibodies against it long after the front-line neutralizing antibodies have waned.
Analyzing the blood samples revealed two sets of results. In people who hadn’t yet been infected with SARs-CoV-2, mRNA shots elicited the best anti-viral responses from antibodies and memory B cells. But the strength of those responses dwindled a bit more with each successive variant of the virus. And while mRNA retained a consistent lead against the variants, neither the mRNA shots nor the other vaccines could mount appreciable responses to prevent infection by omicron — although according to Moore, other immune components called T cells can provide added protection from severe disease. T cells were not measured in the study.
In people who had been infected with SARs-CoV-2 and were then vaccinated, the outcome was completely different: All the vaccines provided a major immunological boost against re-infection, and the differences between the mRNA shots and the other ones “began to blur,” says John Moore, a virologist at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York who was not involved in the study.
Of the five vaccines tested, four produced nearly identical immune reactions. This group included Pfizer’s mRNA shot as well a shot made by AstraZeneca, the Sputnik V shot made by the Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology in Russia, and one from Cansino, a Chinese company. A fifth vaccine, CoronaVac, made by Sinovac Biotech in China, was the worst performer, though still protective to some degree.
These vaccines work in different ways. Pfizer’s mRNA is a lab-created molecule that teaches cells to recognize and respond to future infections. AstraZeneca’s vaccine, as well as the Sputnik V and Cansino shots, also deliver genetic instructions for responding to the spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2 but in a harmless cold virus.
The Sinovac vaccine, meanwhile, is made of killed SARs-CoV-2 particles.
Paul Bieniasz, a virologist at The Rockefeller University and a corresponding author on the paper, says Pfizer’s mRNA shot performs best among uninfected people because it exposes the immune system to more spike protein than the other vaccines and in a form that neutralizing antibodies can more easily bind to.
But why do the different vaccines perform comparably after an infection? Bieniasz says the explanation lies in how memory B cells prepare for a future viral attack. After an infection, the cells go through a training process (called affinity maturation) that teaches them how to generate better antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 – ones that bind more tightly, not only to the variant that they were first introduced to but also future variants the immune has never seen before. After a previously infected person is vaccinated, “those [trained] B cells spring into action,” Bieniasz says.
The study’s point that vaccinating after a case of COVID provides protection against future infections is supported by a newly-published Israeli study. Researchers found that unvaccinated individuals who had recovered from COVID and were then given the Pfizer vaccine had significantly lowered reinfection risks after getting a Pfizer vaccine.
Summing up the two findings, Moore says “The Israeli paper tells you that vaccinating convalescent people has real-world benefits and the Rockefeller paper tells you the vaccine you use [either mRNA or non-mRNA] is inconsequential — you get the benefits from each.”
Furthermore, “a single vaccine dose was sufficient to confer benefit [in the Israeli study],” Moore says, which suggests that among people who have already been infected, the standard two-dose regime is not necessary. Halving the two-shot regimen for previously infected people “would save a lot of doses and hence needs to be seriously considered,” Moore says.
Evidence that non-mRNA vaccines are powerfully protective for the vast numbers of people with prior infections is welcome news, especially in countries where those shots have been widely adopted. “People are going to wind up having similar immunity by various routes,” Bieniasz says. And these other vaccines have a lot to contribute to how they accumulate that immunity.”
Charlie Schmidt is an award-winning freelance science writer based in Portland, Maine. His work has appeared in Scientific American, Undark, the Atlantic, Science Magazine, Nature and The Washington Post.
A masked commuter heads down an escalator at Waterloo station Photograph: Amer Ghazzal/Rex/Shutterstock
From Feb.24, people who test positive for coronavirus are no longer required to self-isolate by law in England. Free mass testing for the general public in England will end on 1 April.
The change is part of the government’s new “living with Covid” plan, announced earlier this week, which will see the end of all pandemic regulations
Five people share their reactions below.
‘If I knew I had Covid, I would not go out with it’
“I wouldn’t go out if I tested positive for Covid. I’d worry about spreading it to people who could suffer dire consequences. There’s still a high death rate and a lot of people who are compromised, who haven’t got much freedom to be on public transport or in the workplace. So if I knew I had Covid, I would certainly not go out and about with it.
“I have the luxury of taking that view, because my employer would accommodate it and I also have sick pay. It just worries me that other people won’t have that choice.
“I think, by and large, people are trying to be decent and mutually protect each other. In a way, we’re being exhorted to drop that, but I think people will continue to do their best.” Kathy, 59, administrator, London
‘I am worried about people at work testing positive’
“I’ve been shielding for two years, but think I will be returning to the office part-time in the middle of next month. I am worried about people at work testing positive. The current plan is that I will be working a good distance from everyone else at a desk right beside a large window I can open. I will probably remain masked, too. But the problem will be after April, when people won’t know if they are infected.
“My greatest anxiety is about commuting on public transport and being in close contact with unmasked people. I also have to deal with members of the public in my role, but I have been assured that I will not be required to meet them face to face. My employer has been quite understanding so far and if the work from home guidance hadn’t been withdrawn then I think they would have kept me at home. Harry*, 34, working in local government, Durham, who is considered clinically extremely vulnerable
‘I’ve never been testing’
“I’ve not been testing and never have. The only time was when I came back from Spain because I had to in order to travel. I want to stress that I’m not anti-vaxx, as I’ve had all my jabs.
“It’s all madness. This ridiculous desire to test for Covid is insanity and has really affected people’s mental health and should’ve stopped a long time ago. If I’m unwell, whether it’s with Covid or the flu, I will just stay at home until I feel better. It’s the way I’ve done it in the past and I seem to have survived.
“I know asymptomatic transmission of Covid is possible, but it seems to be very, very unlikely. The only time I would really have an issue with it is if someone came out with a streaming cold when they should be at home.” Norma, Cotswolds
‘I wouldn’t want to pass any illness on to anyone else’
“I guess I would fall into the more cautious spectrum, in terms of Covid. And so, I’ve been pretty careful all the way through. I don’t think I’ve had it, and I don’t think I would want to go out if I was ill, let alone the risks to the rest of the population.
“If I contracted Covid, I wouldn’t be wanting to pass it to anyone else. I wouldn’t want to pass any illness on to anyone else now we’ve gone through this.
“I received an email from my work today saying that, even though the rules have changed, the company will continue to follow the guidance. That sort of sensible, head-screwed-on approach is, as I see it, the way forward for the time being until something changes. Ben, 42, Bristol, record label employee
‘People aren’t going to be aware that they’re positive’
“There’s no way I would go out infecting other people, and I think everyone should be supported to make that choice. I just feel that it’s very unfair. We’re in a situation where we had children perhaps later than we would have liked, which meant we’ve been able to pay off our mortgage. We can make decisions that better protect my mother, ourselves and society.
“Others aren’t in that position. Statutory sick pay is just [under] £14 a day. Testing is going to be something that people have to pay for. People aren’t going to be aware that they’re positive, and they’re not going to be able to afford to stay at home even if they want to. The message is ‘Just get on with life. It’s just like the flu.’ It’s clearly not. It’s clearly still causing a lot of damage. It just seems barbaric really.” Sarah, Nottingham, 44, teacher and stay-at-home parent.
The three former Minneapolis police officers who are accused of violating the civil rights of George Floyd, a Black man who died after he was pinned down by a white Minneapolis officer for close to 10 minutes, were found guilty by a jury on Thursday.
The former officers — Tou Thao, J. Alexander Kueng and Thomas Lane — were each charged with deprivation of rights under color of law for depriving the right of medical care to Floyd while he was pinned down by their colleague, officer Derek Chauvin.
Kueng and Thao were also charged with failing to intervene when excessive force was used by Chauvin to stop Floyd.
George Floyd
A sentencing date for the three officers has not yet been set, but, until then, all three will be allowed to remain free on bond, The New York Times reported.
All three could face up to life in prison.
“Today’s verdict recognizes that two police officers violated the Constitution by failing to intervene to stop another officer from killing George Floyd, and three officers violated the Constitution by failing to provide aid to Mr. Floyd in time to prevent his death,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement.
“The Justice Department will continue to seek accountability for law enforcement officers whose actions, or failure to act, violate their constitutional duty to protect the civil rights of our citizens. George Floyd should be alive today,” he continued.
During the encounter between police and Floyd, Floyd’s legs and torso were restrained by Lane and Kueng, according to CNN. Thao testified during the case that he was in a roadway nearby to serve as crowd control.
Chauvin, meanwhile, pinned his knee on Floyd’s neck for nine and a half minutes, killing Floyd. Footage of his death circulated online and sparked protests over criminal justice and police brutality across the United States.
During the trial, prosecutors accused the three of doing nothing to stop Floyd from being killed, saying that officers “directly contributed to [Floyd’s] death and failed to intervene to stop the senseless murder” and citing bystander footage.
Thao testified that while he had heard Floyd say “I can’t breathe,” he said that he could not see what would have stopped Floyd from being able to breathe from his vantage point on the roadway. He also claimed that because officers had not tried to perform CPR on him, he presumed he was not in cardiac arrest.
The former officers’ defenses of their conduct also included the claims that they had deferred to the seniority of Chauvin, having had little experience themselves — both Kueng and Lane were only days into their new job — and that training that had not been consistent, according to CNN.
Civil rights activists applauded the decision on Thursday.
“The convictions of the 3 officers on Federal Civil Rights charges is a huge victory for civil rights and police reform. It sends a clear definitive message to police they cannot cooperate w/ police criminality,” the Rev. Al Sharpton tweeted.
A South Florida grand jury has indicted a veteran police officer from Jamaica for importing cocaine into the United States with the intent to distribute it.
JCF said Shelian Cherine Allen was arrested by members of the Homeland Security Investigation team. She has been charged for alleged wire fraud, mail fraud, and drug trafficking.
According to the Department of Justice, on February 3, 42-year-old Shelian Cherine Allen, a Jamaican, arrived at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport from Montego Bay, Jamaica.
An inspection by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) revealed Allen had a package of cocaine in her vagina and a packet of cocaine in each of her bra cups. Allen also had 90 pellets of packaged cocaine inside her stomach, which she had swallowed. CBP officers took Allen to a local hospital, where she expelled the 90 pellets.
In total, Allen had approximately 1,350 grams of cocaine on or inside her body when she entered the United States: about 234 in her vagina, about 174 grams in her bra, and about 942 grams inside her stomach.
At the time of her arrest, Allen was a law enforcement officer employed by the Jamaica Constabulary Force for the last 18 years. The JCF later issued a statement saying that Allen had been suspended.
The indictment charges Allen with two counts: importation of five hundred (500) grams or more of cocaine and possession with intent to distribute five hundred (500) grams or more of cocaine.
If convicted, she faces up to 40 years in prison on each count.
