Connect with us

Spread & Containment

COP26: what’s the point of this year’s UN climate summit in Glasgow?

Countries are expected to commit to more ambitious targets for 2030, but how they will achieve them is still up for debate.

Published

2 years ago

on

Rafapress/Shutterstock

About 25,000 people are expected to travel to Glasgow this autumn for the annual meeting of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

This will be the 26th Conference of the Parties, also known as COP26, and all 197 states which are parties to the UNFCCC are supposed to be represented. As hosts of COP26, the UK has called for attendees to submit more ambitious emissions reductions targets for 2030 that will help the world reach net zero by mid-century, to raise contributions to climate adaptation and mitigation funds and to finalise the rules which would govern the implementation of the Paris climate agreement made in 2015.

This round of the UN climate talks was originally supposed to take place in 2020, but it was postponed because of the pandemic. Around the main talks, from October 31 to November 12 2021, Scotland’s largest city will host a series of meetings and events between world leaders, scientists and civil society groups.

In a year plagued by catastrophic floods, wildfires and heatwaves, the need to act on climate change has never been more urgent. So what will the negotiators in Glasgow be debating?

Up for discussion

Many of the issues on the table have been left unresolved since the landmark Paris Agreement was concluded. This committed most of the world’s countries to try and limit global warming to well below 2°C, and to aim for 1.5°C.

A persistent source of disagreement concerns how international carbon markets should work – Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. These markets would allow countries to receive credits for reducing emissions in excess of their targets, which could then be sold to countries struggling to meet their own commitments.

Implementing carbon markets is very difficult. Developing countries worry that these markets will allow rich countries to avoid painful emissions reductions at home while making marginal contributions to abate emissions abroad through buying credits. Poor countries argue that developing countries could use the same emission cuts they sell as credits towards their own domestic reduction targets, effectively counting them twice.

Carrying over old credits accumulated under the previous system of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol might also allow emerging economies such as Brazil and India, and carbon-intensive economies such as Australia and Russia, to meet future reduction targets without much additional effort. This clashes with the spirit of the Paris Agreement to increase ambition over time.

Difficult negotiations are also expected over how to support poorer countries to develop sustainably. The Paris Agreement recognised the existential threats to climate-vulnerable countries from mounting floods and droughts. Loss and damage provisions in Article 8 of the Paris Agreement promise poorer countries technical and financial assistance, yet how to put these into practice remains unclear.

Another contentious issue will be the delivery of US$100 billion (£74 billion) annually in climate finance. Developing countries need this money to kickstart a green transition, but rich countries have consistently failed to provide it at the level agreed in 2010. While President Biden’s recent announcement to double US contributions might mobilise other major economies, a substantial shortfall will remain.

A man wades through a flooded street.
Poor countries need financial aid to cope with the effects of climate change. Oluwafemi Dawodu/Shutterstock

Spanners in the works

The list of issues before climate diplomats at COP26 is long, and the stakes are high. But the biggest complications might arise from the context in which the negotiations are taking place.

A lack of vaccines and high travel costs threaten the prospect of an inclusive event in Glasgow. Delegations from poor countries have warned that these issues make it difficult to travel to the climate talks.

Poor attendance is not guaranteed to derail talks, as several details can be ironed out remotely. But it’s disproportionately attendees from poorer countries who will struggle to access the event, potentially resulting in lower scrutiny of the summit’s outcomes.

COP26 also comes at a time when international relations are strained. The fallout from Brexit continues to poison the atmosphere between the UK and the EU. The US and China, accounting for more than 40% of global emissions, are embroiled in a standoff in the South China Sea. The recently negotiated AUKUS security partnership between Australia, the UK and the US, which seeks to counterbalance Chinese power in the Asia-Pacific region and has angered the French, could also dash hopes of cooperation at COP26.

Perhaps the biggest obstacle to progress lies not in Glasgow, but in each nation’s capitals. Each country is fighting a domestic battle that will determine the international credibility of COP26.

National withdrawal from the UNFCCC has happened before. Canada’s 2011 exit from the Kyoto Protocol and the US’s temporary 2017 departure from the Paris Agreement had domestic causes, and domestic politics have long been the decisive factor for a country’s climate commitments at COP meetings.

The framework of the Paris Agreement recognises this by allowing governments to make climate pledges that can vary from country to country, as long as national climate action increases in ambition over time. But a 2020 UN report found that current government pledges put the world on track for 3°C of warming. Ambition is nowhere near where it needs to be.

Yet, there is hope. While many government proposals risk being empty words, the latest spike in European gas prices and the recent UK fuel shortages provide incentives for some governments, including the UK as COP host, to fast-track elements of their green growth strategies by electrifying home heating and transport. Similarly, the success of the Green Party in the recent German elections, with 14.8% of votes, sends an important signal of public support for climate action in a major economy.

As much as we should pay close attention to the UN climate talks, we should never forget about the importance of national climate policy and the role of voters’ attitudes for shaping leadership on the world stage.

COP26: the world's biggest climate talks

This story is part of The Conversation’s coverage on COP26, the Glasgow climate conference, by experts from around the world.
Amid a rising tide of climate news and stories, The Conversation is here to clear the air and make sure you get information you can trust. More.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Read More

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

TJ Maxx and Marshalls follow Costco and Target on upcoming closures

Many of these stores have information customers need to know.

Published

2 hours ago

on

March 19, 2024

By

U.S. consumers have come to increasingly rely on the near ubiquity of convenience stores and big-box retailers. 

Many of us depend on these stores being open practically all day, every day, even during some of the biggest holidays. After all, Black Friday beckons retail stores to open just hours after a Thanksgiving Day dinner in hopes of attracting huge crowds of shoppers in search of early holiday sales. 

Related: Walmart announces more store closures for 2024

And it's largely true that before the covid pandemic most of our favorite stores were open all the time. Practically nothing — from inclement weather to bad news to holidays — could shut down a major operation like Walmart  (WMT)  or Target  (TGT) . 

Then the pandemic hit, and it turned everything we thought we knew about retail operations upside down. 

Everything from grocery stores to shopping malls shut down in an effort to contain potential spread. And when they finally reopened to the public, different stores took different precautionary measures. Some monitored how many shoppers were inside at once, while others implemented foot-traffic rules dictating where one could enter and exit an aisle. And almost every one of them mandated wearing masks at one point or another. 

Though these safety measures seem like a distant memory, one relic from the early 2020s remains firmly a part of our new American retail life. 

A woman in a face mask shopping in the HomeGoods kitchen aisle.

Jeff Greenberg/Getty Images

Store closures announced for spring 2024

Many retailers have learned to adapt after a volatile start to this third decade, and in many ways this requires serving customers better and treating employees better to retain a workforce. 

In some cases, the changes also reflect a change in shopping behavior, as more customers order online and leave more breathing room for brick-and-mortar operations. This also means more time for employees. 

Thanks to this, big retailers have recently changed how they operate, especially during holiday hours, with Walmart recently saying it would close during Thanksgiving to give employees more time to spend with loved ones.

"I am delighted to share that once again, we'll be closing our doors for Thanksgiving this year," Walmart U.S. CEO John Furner told associates in a video posted to Twitter in November. "Thanksgiving is such a special day during a very busy season. We want you to spend that day at home with family and loved ones." 

Other retailers have now followed suit, with Costco  (COST) , Aldi, and Target all saying they would close their doors for 24 hours on Easter Sunday, March 31. 

Now, the stores that operate under TJX Cos.  (TJX)  will also shut down during the holiday, including HomeGoods, TJ Maxx and Marshalls. 

Though it closed on Thanksgiving, Walmart says it will remain open for shoppers on Easter. 

Here's a list of stores that are closing for Easter 2024: 

  • Target
  • Costco
  • Aldi
  • TJ Maxx
  • Marshalls
  • HomeGoods
  • Publix
  • Macy's
  • Best Buy
  • Apple
  • ACE Hardware

Others are expected to remain open, including:

  • Walmart
  • Ikea
  • Petco
  • Home Depot

Most of the stores closing on Sunday will reopen for regular business hours on Monday. 

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Gates-backed PhIII study tuberculosis vaccine study gets underway

A large study of an experimental vaccine for the world’s biggest infectious disease has finally kicked off in South Africa.
The Bill & Melinda Gates…

Published

4 hours ago

on

March 19, 2024

By

A large study of an experimental vaccine for the world’s biggest infectious disease has finally kicked off in South Africa.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Medical Research Institute (MRI) will test a tuberculosis vaccine’s ability to prevent latent infections from causing potentially deadly lung disease. Last summer the nonprofit said it would foot $400 million of the estimated $550 million cost of running the 20,000-person Phase III trial.

It’s a pivotal moment for a vaccine whose origins date back 25 years when scientists identified two proteins that triggered strong immunity to the bacterium that causes tuberculosis. A fusion of those proteins, paired with the tree bark-derived adjuvant that helps power GSK’s shingles shot, comprise the so-called M72 vaccine.

Thomas Scriba

After decades of failures in the field, the vaccine impressed scientists in 2018 when GSK found that it was 54% efficacious at preventing lung disease in a 3,600-person Phase IIb study.

But the Big Pharma decided that a full-blown trial was too expensive to conduct on its own. Gates MRI stepped in to license the vaccine in early 2020, right before the Covid pandemic shifted global vaccine priorities towards the coronavirus, further stalling the tuberculosis shot.

“There’s been frustration that it’s taken so long to get this trial up and running,” Thomas Scriba, deputy director of immunology for the South African Tuberculosis Vaccine Initiative, told Endpoints News last summer.

At last, the vaccine is getting a chance to prove itself in a bigger study. If successful, it could lead to the first new shot for tuberculosis in over a century.

Emilio Emini, CEO of the Gates MRI, told Endpoints that the initial results may come in roughly four to six years. “Hopefully this will galvanize a refocus on TB,” he said. “It’s been ignored for many, many years. We can’t ignore it anymore.”

A substantial impact

Even though an existing vaccine helps protect babies and children against severe tuberculosis, the bacterium responsible for the disease still causes roughly 10 million new cases and 500,000 deaths each year.

Emilio Emini

By vaccinating adolescents and adults who test positive for infections but don’t have symptoms of lung disease, the Gates MRI hopes the shot will help prevent mild infections from becoming severe ones, curtail transmission of the bug, which is predominantly driven by people with lung disease, and reduce deaths.

“The impact would be substantial,” Emini said. But he cautioned that the biology behind mild and severe diseases is still mysterious. “The reality is that no one really knows what keeps it under control.”

The study, which will take place at 60 sites across seven countries, will include some people who are not infected with tuberculosis to ensure that the vaccine is safe in that broader population.

“Having to pre-test everybody is not going to make the vaccine easy to deliver,” Emini said. If the vaccine is ultimately approved, it will likely be used in targeted communities with high tuberculosis, rather than across a whole country, he added. “In practice, you would immunize everybody in those populations.”

Emini described the Gates MRI’s rights to the vaccine as “close to a worldwide license.” GSK retained rights to commercialize the vaccine in certain countries but declined to specify which ones.

A spokesperson for GSK said that the company “has around 30 assets under development specifically for global health … none of which are expected to generate significant return on investment.”

“It is not sustainable or practical in the longer term for GSK to deliver all of these alone. So we continue to work on M72, but in partnership with others,” the spokesperson added.

If the shot works, Emini said that the Gates MRI will sublicense it to a manufacturer that will be responsible for making and marketing the vaccine. The details are still being worked out, he noted.

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Choosing over the counter drugs for COVID 19? It’s complicated

COVID-19 illness may include symptoms such as a sore throat, fever, cough and fatigue. In January, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention…

Published

4 hours ago

on

March 19, 2024

By

COVID-19 illness may include symptoms such as a sore throat, fever, cough and fatigue. In January, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued its most recent guidelines for the use of over the counter (OTC) drugs for COVID-19. Specifically, its guidelines state that most people with COVID-19 have mild illness and can recover at home while treating symptoms with OTC medicines such as acetaminophen (Tylenol) or ibuprofen (Motrin, Advil). 

Credit: Florida Atlantic University

COVID-19 illness may include symptoms such as a sore throat, fever, cough and fatigue. In January, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued its most recent guidelines for the use of over the counter (OTC) drugs for COVID-19. Specifically, its guidelines state that most people with COVID-19 have mild illness and can recover at home while treating symptoms with OTC medicines such as acetaminophen (Tylenol) or ibuprofen (Motrin, Advil). 

Researchers from Florida Atlantic University’s Schmidt College of Medicine and academic colleagues say it’s more complicated. They suggest that selecting an OTC medication to alleviate mild symptoms of COVID-19 should be based on the entire benefit-to-risk profile of the patient. Moreover, they say clinical decisions should be made by the health care provider for each of his or her patients.

In a review, published in The American Journal of Medicine, researchers take a closer look at both the potential benefits and risks of acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) – such as ibuprofen, as well as aspirin for the selection of OTC drugs to treat mild symptoms of COVID-19.

Traditional nonspecific NSAIDs such as the shorter acting ibuprofen and longer acting naproxen have been used to treat COVID-19. These widely used OTC drugs reversibly and non-specifically inhibit both cyclooxygenase enzyme isoforms. This results in systematic reduction in the synthesis of prostaglandins resulting in anti-inflammatory and fever-reducing effects. The researchers caution, however, that both ibuprofen and naproxen have similar but greater side effect profiles than aspirin, such as gastroenteritis and peptic ulcers.

Acetaminophen is one of the most frequently used OTC drugs in the U.S. and worldwide as a treatment for fever, allergic symptoms, headaches, myalgia, symptoms of the common cold, and most recently COVID-19. Acetaminophen was originally marketed as an alternative to aspirin for treatment of mild to moderate pain based on reduced mucosal gastrointestinal side effects. The authors caution that even at daily doses of 4,000 milligrams per day, generally accepted as safe for adults, acetaminophen can be toxic to the liver and may result in the onset of acute liver failure. In the U.S., acetaminophen is the leading reason for calls to Poison Control Centers with more than 100,000 cases per year. These circumstances account for more than 2,600 hospitalizations and 450 deaths in the U.S. due to acute liver failure. 

Aspirin, or acetylsalicylic acid, inhibits the production of prostaglandins, which are responsible for mediating pain, inflammation and fever. The authors say that the beneficial effects of aspirin include anti-platelet, analgesic, antipyretic or anti-fever and anti-inflammatory properties. Aspirin is rapidly absorbed when taken orally and has a half-life of around four hours, after which it is mostly metabolized by the kidneys.

The researchers note that the anti-inflammatory benefits of aspirin should provide symptomatic relief of fever and body aches in COVID-19. They underscore, however, that health providers should view these in the context of the increased risks of bleeding, principally gastrointestinal. Further, COVID-19 itself may already predispose individuals to bleeding as well as to clotting abnormalities.

“We believe that health care providers should make individual clinical judgments for each of his or her patients in the selection of OTC drugs to treat symptoms of COVID-19. This judgement should be based on the entire benefit to risk profile of the patient,” said Charles H. Hennekens, M.D., Dr.PH, senior author, first Sir Richard Doll Professor and senior academic advisor in FAU’s Schmidt College of Medicine. “It is our belief that the individual health care provider knows far more about each of his or her patients than anyone, including expert members of guideline committees.”

The authors conclude that when the totality of evidence is complete, health care providers can make the most rational individual clinical judgements for their patients and policymakers for the health of the general public.

The authors believe that, at present, the totality of evidence is incomplete and requires reliable evidence from large- scale randomized trials designed a priori to do so, which is necessary to develop rational guidelines. They also believe that any guidelines should provide only guidance to health care providers. Currently, these considerations pose new clinical challenges for health care providers in prescribing OTC drugs to treat COVID-19. 

“The astute and judicious individual clinical decision making of health care providers for each individual patient based on all these considerations has the potential to do far more good than harm. Finally, guidelines should provide guidance to individual health care providers,” said Hennekens.

Study co-authors are Gage Collamore, a second-year medical student; Mark J. DiCorcia, Ph.D., an associate professor and associate dean for educational affairs and admissions; Yash Nagpal, a second-year medical student; and Larry Fiedler, M.D., a board certified gastroenterologist and an affiliate associate professor, all within FAU’s Schmidt College of Medicine; Michael A. Garone, M.D., a board-certified gastroenterologist and clinical assistant professor at George Washington University Hospital; and David L. DeMets, Ph.D., emeritus Halperin Professor and founding chair of biostatistics and informatics; and Dennis G. Maki, M.D., the Ovid O. Meyer Professor of Medicine; both at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health.

Hennekens and Maki served for two years as lieutenant commanders in the U.S. Public Health Service as epidemic intelligence service (EIS) officers with the CDC. They served under Alexander D. Langmuir, M.D., who created the EIS and directed the epidemiology program at the CDC, as well as Donald A. Henderson, M.D., chief of the Virus Disease Surveillance Program at the CDC. Langmuir and Henderson made significant contributions to the eradication of polio and smallpox using widespread vaccinations and public health strategies of proven benefit and had extraordinary collaborations with local, state, federal and international health authorities.   

– FAU –

About the Charles E. Schmidt College of Medicine:

FAU’s Charles E. Schmidt College of Medicine is one of approximately 157 accredited medical schools in the U.S. The college was launched in 2010, when the Florida Board of Governors made a landmark decision authorizing FAU to award the M.D. degree. After receiving approval from the Florida legislature and the governor, it became the 134th allopathic medical school in North America. With more than 70 full and part-time faculty and more than 1,300 affiliate faculty, the college matriculates 64 medical students each year and has been nationally recognized for its innovative curriculum. To further FAU’s commitment to increase much needed medical residency positions in Palm Beach County and to ensure that the region will continue to have an adequate and well-trained physician workforce, the FAU Charles E. Schmidt College of Medicine Consortium for Graduate Medical Education (GME) was formed in fall 2011 with five leading hospitals in Palm Beach County. The Consortium currently has five Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accredited residencies including internal medicine, surgery, emergency medicine, psychiatry, and neurology.

 

About Florida Atlantic University:
Florida Atlantic University, established in 1961, officially opened its doors in 1964 as the fifth public university in Florida. Today, the University serves more than 30,000 undergraduate and graduate students across six campuses located along the southeast Florida coast. In recent years, the University has doubled its research expenditures and outpaced its peers in student achievement rates. Through the coexistence of access and excellence, FAU embodies an innovative model where traditional achievement gaps vanish. FAU is designated a Hispanic-serving institution, ranked as a top public university by U.S. News & World Report and a High Research Activity institution by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. For more information, visit www.fau.edu.

Journal

The American Journal of Medicine

DOI

10.1016/j.amjmed.2024.03.003

Method of Research

Commentary/editorial

Subject of Research

People

Article Title

Guidance for healthcare providers on newest guidelines for over-the-counter drug treatment of mild symptoms of COVID-19.

Article Publication Date

14-Mar-2024

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending