With the governments imposing large-scale restrictions on economic activities to halt the spread of coronavirus, the global economy has come to a virtual standstill.&nbsp;

A report by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs has projected that the world economy is set to lose nearly $8.5 trillion over the next 2 years.

UN has predicted that the world economy will contract by 3.2 per cent in 2020 amid the coronavirus crisis, the sharpest contraction since the Great Depression in the 1930s.

But in the worst-case scenario, it said the global economy could contract by a further 0.5 per cent in 2021 if a new wave of infections and lockdowns continues in the third quarter, which ends September 30.

The UN report projects that the economic output of developed countries will plunge to minus 5 per cent and below, meanwhile, the GDP of the developing countries will contract by 0.7 per cent in 2020.

The report also forecast a 15 per cent contraction in world trade in 2020 as a result of sharply reduced global demand and disruptions in global supply chains.&nbsp;

COVID-19 is likely to push more than 34 million people into extreme poverty, the report added.&nbsp;

India’s GDP growth rate dips to 1.2% for FY 2020-21

The UN has slashed India's projected growth rate to 1.2 per cent in 2020, a further deterioration from the already slowed growth of 4.1 per cent in 2019.

However, India, which grew at 6.8 per cent in the fiscal year 2018, is forecast to recover slightly and clock a 5.5 per cent growth rate in 2021.

“The national lockdown in India, for example, is expected to depress economic growth to just 1.2 per cent, much lower than the already disappointing growth in 2019,” the report said.

The abrupt halt of commercial activity threatens to impose economic pain so profound and enduring in every region of the world at once that recovery could take years.

(With inputs from agencies)

With the governments imposing large-scale restrictions on economic activities to halt the spread of coronavirus, the global economy has come to a virtual standstill.

With the governments imposing large-scale restrictions on economic activities to halt the spread of coronavirus, the global economy has come to a virtual standstill. A report by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs has projected that the world economy is set to lose nearly $8.5 trillion over the next 2 years. UN has predicted that the world economy will contract by 3.2 per cent in 2020 amid the coronavirus crisis, the sharpest contraction since the Great Depression in the 1930s. But in the worst-case scenario, it said the global economy could contract by a further 0.5 per cent in 2021 if a new wave of infections and lockdowns continues in the third quarter, which ends September 30. The UN report projects that the economic output of developed countries will plunge to minus 5 per cent and below, meanwhile, the GDP of the developing countries will contract by 0.7 per cent in 2020. The report also forecast a 15 per cent contraction in world trade in 2020 as a result of sharply reduced global demand and disruptions in global supply chains. COVID-19 is likely to push more than 34 million people into extreme poverty, the report added. India’s GDP growth rate dips to 1.2% for FY 2020-21 The UN has slashed India's projected growth rate to 1.2 per cent in 2020, a further deterioration from the already slowed growth of 4.1 per cent in 2019. However, India, which grew at 6.8 per cent in the fiscal year 2018, is forecast to recover slightly and clock a 5.5 per cent growth rate in 2021. “The national lockdown in India, for example, is expected to depress economic growth to just 1.2 per cent, much lower than the already disappointing growth in 2019,” the report said. The abrupt halt of commercial activity threatens to impose economic pain so profound and enduring in every region of the world at once that recovery could take years. (With inputs from agencies)

UN forecasts coronavirus to shrink world economy by 3.2%; India's growth rate projected to slow to 1.2% in 2020

Most of us are stuck inside our home, we can’t hang out with friends, we can’t step out to shop, we can’t plan a get together with cousins. Like responsible people, we are successfully maintaining social distancing - but at a cost - and that price is our digital footprints.&nbsp;

Being locked inside the house, we are exposing ourselves to the online world a lot more.

For instance, we are surfing online more and our search queries directly reflect on our interests which remain documented on the internet.

In fact, by now many of you, must have shown your entire house in various videos and in casual selfies.&nbsp;

Our social media engagement has gone up. These days, we are giving more information about us online, but are we doing that responsibly? Probably, no.

And we have no idea, how and when these online details could be misused by miscreants because digital footprints stay forever.&nbsp;

Therefore, along with social distancing, we need to maintain information distancing as well. But how?&nbsp;Here are some handy tips that can help you achieve that:

1. Be mindful of what you share. Just because there is no limit to what you can post online, doesn’t mean that you should be documenting online everything you do. It’s a big no! Be wise and exercise your judgement so that you don’t end up sharing too much personal details.

2. While recording videos at home or attending a video conference, be wary of what’s in the background. Your home is your personal space and the online world shouldn’t get a virtual tour of your house.

3. For sensitive and confidential information, switch to private browsing. It prevents the browser from remembering your activity. For instance, the browser won't save your search history or permissions you give to websites.&nbsp;

4. Be extra careful when transacting online. Avoid using a browser for banking. Always use native banking apps for internet banking as those apps come from trusted providers. And, therefore, they are more secure.

5. Many of you must have downloaded more games on your mobile during the lockdown. But did you read the permissions before installing those apps? Go back to those apps and check. If these are asking for more permissions than required to play a game, uninstall them.

Be careful of what you share, how you share and when you share. You need to be responsible even when sharing data online. Because data is the new currency. So, stay safe and practice information distancing along with social distancing. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Most of us are stuck inside our home, we can’t hang out with friends, we can’t step out to shop, we can’t plan a get together with cousins. Like responsible people, we are successfully maintaining social distancing - but at a cost - and that price is our digital footprints.

Most of us are stuck inside our home, we can’t hang out with friends, we can’t step out to shop, we can’t plan a get together with cousins. Like responsible people, we are successfully maintaining social distancing - but at a cost - and that price is our digital footprints. Being locked inside the house, we are exposing ourselves to the online world a lot more. For instance, we are surfing online more and our search queries directly reflect on our interests which remain documented on the internet. In fact, by now many of you, must have shown your entire house in various videos and in casual selfies. Our social media engagement has gone up. These days, we are giving more information about us online, but are we doing that responsibly? Probably, no. And we have no idea, how and when these online details could be misused by miscreants because digital footprints stay forever. Therefore, along with social distancing, we need to maintain information distancing as well. But how? Here are some handy tips that can help you achieve that: 1. Be mindful of what you share. Just because there is no limit to what you can post online, doesn’t mean that you should be documenting online everything you do. It’s a big no! Be wise and exercise your judgement so that you don’t end up sharing too much personal details. 2. While recording videos at home or attending a video conference, be wary of what’s in the background. Your home is your personal space and the online world shouldn’t get a virtual tour of your house. 3. For sensitive and confidential information, switch to private browsing. It prevents the browser from remembering your activity. For instance, the browser won't save your search history or permissions you give to websites. 4. Be extra careful when transacting online. Avoid using a browser for banking. Always use native banking apps for internet banking as those apps come from trusted providers. And, therefore, they are more secure. 5. Many of you must have downloaded more games on your mobile during the lockdown. But did you read the permissions before installing those apps? Go back to those apps and check. If these are asking for more permissions than required to play a game, uninstall them. Be careful of what you share, how you share and when you share. You need to be responsible even when sharing data online. Because data is the new currency. So, stay safe and practice information distancing along with social distancing. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Are we leaving more digital footprints during coronavirus lockdown?

To strengthen the <a href="Global Covid-19 cases surge past 4.2 million mark, death toll at 291,981">fight against coronavirus</a>, police and authorities across the globe have started using 'smart helmets' which take only a few seconds to accurately scan people’s temperature.&nbsp;

With quick thermal screenings being considered as one of the options to identify COVID-19 patients, the technology will be particularly useful in restarting the economy and ensuring the safe movement of people in public places.

Dubai police are using the helmets to screen people in densely populated areas, including sealed off neighbourhoods.

The smart helmets, used by the Dubai police, also has facial recognition capabilities, license plate recognition and the ability to scan QR codes. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/covid-19-has-now-begun-to-show-newer-symptoms-and-syndromes-298424">Also read: COVID-19 has now begun to show newer symptoms and syndromes</a>

"The helmet has up to 5 or 6 different modes. It has the temperature reading mode, facial recognition capabilities, plate number recognition, QR code reader and ultimately this all connects together to give you the history of a person," said Managing Director of Global Manufacturing and Industrialisation Summit, Namir Hourani.&nbsp;

Meanwhile,&nbsp;Rome's&nbsp;Fiumicino airport&nbsp;has also started using smart helmets to ramp up its safety measures as airlines begin to resume services again.

"This is a smart helmet, a helmet equipped with a thermal camera capable of detecting the infrared heat emissions of bodies passing through its range and a normal camera. The pictures are then transmitted to a visor inside the augmented reality helmet that projects what the operator sees on his visor," said Sielte Spa senior engineer, Massimiliano Moretto.

Even in the Chinese city of Shenzhen, which shares a border with Hong Kong, police have started inspecting people drivers with the help of these smart helmets.

The helmets help quickly and accurately spot people with abnormal temperatures in crowds.

Chinese company KC Wearable says it has sold more than 1,000 of the temperature scanning helmets and has received orders from the Middle East, Europe and Asia.

While screening devices like the N901 smart helmets have obviously added value in helping businesses and public places reopen more safely.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

To strengthen the fight against coronavirus, police and authorities across the globe have started using 'smart helmets' which take only a few seconds to accurately scan people’s temperature.

To strengthen the fight against coronavirus, police and authorities across the globe have started using 'smart helmets' which take only a few seconds to accurately scan people’s temperature. With quick thermal screenings being considered as one of the options to identify COVID-19 patients, the technology will be particularly useful in restarting the economy and ensuring the safe movement of people in public places. Dubai police are using the helmets to screen people in densely populated areas, including sealed off neighbourhoods. The smart helmets, used by the Dubai police, also has facial recognition capabilities, license plate recognition and the ability to scan QR codes. Also read: COVID-19 has now begun to show newer symptoms and syndromes "The helmet has up to 5 or 6 different modes. It has the temperature reading mode, facial recognition capabilities, plate number recognition, QR code reader and ultimately this all connects together to give you the history of a person," said Managing Director of Global Manufacturing and Industrialisation Summit, Namir Hourani. Meanwhile, Rome's Fiumicino airport has also started using smart helmets to ramp up its safety measures as airlines begin to resume services again. "This is a smart helmet, a helmet equipped with a thermal camera capable of detecting the infrared heat emissions of bodies passing through its range and a normal camera. The pictures are then transmitted to a visor inside the augmented reality helmet that projects what the operator sees on his visor," said Sielte Spa senior engineer, Massimiliano Moretto. Even in the Chinese city of Shenzhen, which shares a border with Hong Kong, police have started inspecting people drivers with the help of these smart helmets. The helmets help quickly and accurately spot people with abnormal temperatures in crowds. Chinese company KC Wearable says it has sold more than 1,000 of the temperature scanning helmets and has received orders from the Middle East, Europe and Asia. While screening devices like the N901 smart helmets have obviously added value in helping businesses and public places reopen more safely. (With inputs from agencies)

Police across the globe use 'smart helmets' to strengthen fight against coronavirus

During a March 15, 2020<a href="https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/twiv-591/"> interview</a>, beginning at the 27:40 time point, Dr Ralph Baric, noted coronavirus scientist at the University of North Carolina, said the following when asked about the animal origin of the human COVID-19 pandemic:

“As far as I know they [the Chinese] have not identified the actual reservoir species. There were reports about pangolins [scaly anteaters] as being potentially being the intermediate host, but pangolins viruses are 88-90% identical to SARS-2 [COVID-19] in comparison civet and racoon dog strains of SARS coronavirus were 99.8 identical to SARS coronavirus from 2003. In other words, you are talking about a handful of mutations between civet strains, racoon dog strains and human strains in 2003. Pangolins have over 3,000 nucleotide changes - no way they are the reservoir species [for COVID-19], absolutely no chance.”

Here is what Dr Baric was saying.

It was logical to conclude that the coronavirus from the human 2003 SARS outbreak could have originated in animals because the coronavirus circulating in the civet and racoon dog populations was 99.8 per cent the same as the coronavirus eventually found in humans. That would, therefore, require only a relative “handful” of naturally-occurring mutations to “jump” to humans.

In contrast, pangolin coronaviruses are only 88-90 per cent the same as COVID-19. The huge number of naturally-occurring mutations required for pangolins to act as a reservoir species and intermediate host for COVID-19 would make it practically impossible.

Despite that, an <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2313-x">article </a>published by scientists from Guangzhou, China on May 7, 2020 in the prestigious journal Nature directly contradicts the comments made by Dr Baric, concluding:

“The isolation of a coronavirus that is highly related to SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] in pangolins suggests that they have the potential to act as the intermediate hosts for SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19].”

The Guangzhou scientists concede that the bat coronavirus RaTG13, which is <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/chinas-narrative-about-the-origin-of-covid-19-is-starting-to-unravel-297737">actually </a>BtCoV/4991, has &nbsp;about a 96 per cent&nbsp;sequence identity to SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] at the whole-genome level and it is reasonable to assume that bats are the native host of SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19].

Agreeing with Dr Baric, the authors admit that, although genetically similar, it is unlikely that coronaviruses usually found in pangolins are directly linked to the outbreak because of their overall substantial sequence differences from COVID-19.

The Guangzhou group states, however, that the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of a pangolin coronavirus is nearly identical to the same structure in COVID-19, having only a single amino acid difference.

The Chinese scientists claim that a pangolin coronavirus appears to have “donated” the RBD to COVID-19, presumably through some type of recombinant event occurring between a bat coronavirus and a pangolin coronavirus inside a pangolin host.

The close identity of COVID-19’s RBD to that of pangolins has been <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9">widely reported</a>, but the recombinant scenario suggested by the Guangzhou research team is purely speculatively for which they provide no supporting data.

China’s own scientists may have inadvertently stumbled upon the truth. A far more likely explanation is that the pangolin RBD was inserted into a bat coronavirus by genetic engineering. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

During a March 15, 2020 interview, beginning at the 27:40 time point, Dr Ralph Baric, noted coronavirus scientist at the University of North Carolina, said the following when asked about the animal origin of the human COVID-19 pandemic: “As far as I know they [the Chinese] have not identified the actual reservoir species.

During a March 15, 2020 interview, beginning at the 27:40 time point, Dr Ralph Baric, noted coronavirus scientist at the University of North Carolina, said the following when asked about the animal origin of the human COVID-19 pandemic: “As far as I know they [the Chinese] have not identified the actual reservoir species. There were reports about pangolins [scaly anteaters] as being potentially being the intermediate host, but pangolins viruses are 88-90% identical to SARS-2 [COVID-19] in comparison civet and racoon dog strains of SARS coronavirus were 99.8 identical to SARS coronavirus from 2003. In other words, you are talking about a handful of mutations between civet strains, racoon dog strains and human strains in 2003. Pangolins have over 3,000 nucleotide changes - no way they are the reservoir species [for COVID-19], absolutely no chance.” Here is what Dr Baric was saying. It was logical to conclude that the coronavirus from the human 2003 SARS outbreak could have originated in animals because the coronavirus circulating in the civet and racoon dog populations was 99.8 per cent the same as the coronavirus eventually found in humans. That would, therefore, require only a relative “handful” of naturally-occurring mutations to “jump” to humans. In contrast, pangolin coronaviruses are only 88-90 per cent the same as COVID-19. The huge number of naturally-occurring mutations required for pangolins to act as a reservoir species and intermediate host for COVID-19 would make it practically impossible. Despite that, an article published by scientists from Guangzhou, China on May 7, 2020 in the prestigious journal Nature directly contradicts the comments made by Dr Baric, concluding: “The isolation of a coronavirus that is highly related to SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] in pangolins suggests that they have the potential to act as the intermediate hosts for SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19].” The Guangzhou scientists concede that the bat coronavirus RaTG13, which is actually BtCoV/4991, has about a 96 per cent sequence identity to SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] at the whole-genome level and it is reasonable to assume that bats are the native host of SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19]. Agreeing with Dr Baric, the authors admit that, although genetically similar, it is unlikely that coronaviruses usually found in pangolins are directly linked to the outbreak because of their overall substantial sequence differences from COVID-19. The Guangzhou group states, however, that the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of a pangolin coronavirus is nearly identical to the same structure in COVID-19, having only a single amino acid difference. The Chinese scientists claim that a pangolin coronavirus appears to have “donated” the RBD to COVID-19, presumably through some type of recombinant event occurring between a bat coronavirus and a pangolin coronavirus inside a pangolin host. The close identity of COVID-19’s RBD to that of pangolins has been widely reported, but the recombinant scenario suggested by the Guangzhou research team is purely speculatively for which they provide no supporting data. China’s own scientists may have inadvertently stumbled upon the truth. A far more likely explanation is that the pangolin RBD was inserted into a bat coronavirus by genetic engineering. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Here's what China's scientists have to say about the origin of COVID-19

India needs labour reforms, not a suspension of labour laws during a pandemic. Some states like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat have suspended key labour laws, which they claim is to facilitate employment and investment. The cruelty of the policy measure is visible in the timing of the decision. When the migrant worker crisis is one of the most visible failures in the fight against COVID-19, this insensitive decision robs our hardworking migrant labourers of the last shred of their dignity. It does not mean that we do not need labour reforms in India. &nbsp;

There are 44 Central laws and more than 200 State Laws which overlap with each other and are primarily skewed against the industry. India is a labour surplus country with 47 million unemployed below the age of 24 years and 12-13 million youths joining the labour market every year. Almost 93 per cent of India’s labour force works in the unorganised sector, the majority are unskilled and poorly educated. &nbsp;

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic raised its ugly head and made our immediate future uncertain, the Indian economy was already slowing down. Before the pandemic, India’s GDP growth in the October-December quarter of 2019 (Q3 of FY20) stood at 4.7 per cent, and in the previous quarter, it was a six-year low at 4.5 per cent. Economic growth was already on a downhill. The pandemic made it worse. Several rating agencies have predicted zero per cent growth in FY 20-21, amidst the lockdown. India’s Investment Rate i.e Gross Fixed Capital Formation (GFCF) as a percentage of GDP has declined by a whopping 9 percentage points between 2011-12 and 2019-20. This means that private investment has plummeted. It is predominantly because India has not been able to scale up manufacturing. Structural reforms in labour laws can boost private investment, but a crisis like the pandemic is hardly a time to do so. Post COVID-19 response to restart economy needs a whole package of big-bang reforms — labour reforms are only a part of it. &nbsp;

In pre-COVID economy, to circumvent the rigorous labour policies, companies either shifted their manufacturing bases to foreign countries or turned capital intensive, reducing their manpower needs. Besides swelling unemployment, these measures also pushed people to the informal sector. Private investment had already slumped. India’s women participation in the labour force remains abysmal. &nbsp;

In the times of lockdown, there is a huge migrant exodus from states as jobless workers are pushed to the corners of depravity by several governments. Critics would argue that doing away with labour laws is a sound policy decision. This may be the silver bullet idea which policymakers and industry lobbies think would attract the labourers back, but this would simply not work. Every policy intervention has a context. Right now, the context is the safety and wellbeing of our people. The recent incident of 26 workers in a pharmaceutical major in Gujarat turning positive is a stark example of how factory workers are not safe. &nbsp;

Least intervention by government is often the best policy measure. The immediate solution to migrant workers leaving their place of work is to give them a return ticket. Yes. That is the solution. If the government or the industry provides them with a return ticket to join work after the pandemic lockdown is over, it is natural that they will get their livelihood back. It is a simple solution rather than some big bang announcement to grab thirty seconds of eyeballs by any PR hungry government. It does not remove the social security net around the workers. Neither, does it take away their human rights. &nbsp;

The long term solution is amending the statutory framework of labour laws. Simplify them. First, we need a meta-structure to deal with ‘labour laws’ being in the concurrent list. A ‘Labour Laws Review Council’ with states, similar to that of GST Council, which meets periodically is needed. &nbsp;Second, consolidation of labour laws in four broad categories as envisaged by successive governments in the past. Third, have uniform definitions of key terms like ‘industry’, ‘worker’, ‘employee’ et al. Most laws have different definitions which result in long drawn disputes and confusion. Fourth, establish a ‘Central Labour Authority’ with representation from states, for self-certification and single consolidated return to ease compliances and multiple inspections of industrial units. &nbsp;

Fifth, amend the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to ensure that post-facto approval from the government to close down industry is not required when any industry employees less than 300 workers or where lay off exceeds one month. A rigorous version of this was first implemented by Rajasthan and the Economic Survey, 2019 cited this as a case study to prove that employment increases if we do this. &nbsp;

Sixth, pass a new labour regulation law for small scale industries employing less than 50 workers with liberal exemptions. Seventh, a separate law to ensure the welfare, facilities and safety of women in the labour force.&nbsp;

Incremental long term reforms are needed to restart the economy. Snatching the rights of workers in a healthcare crisis will only result in high unemployment and no growth. &nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

India needs labour reforms, not a suspension of labour laws during a pandemic. Some states like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat have suspended key labour laws, which they claim is to facilitate employment and investment.

India needs labour reforms, not a suspension of labour laws during a pandemic. Some states like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat have suspended key labour laws, which they claim is to facilitate employment and investment. The cruelty of the policy measure is visible in the timing of the decision. When the migrant worker crisis is one of the most visible failures in the fight against COVID-19, this insensitive decision robs our hardworking migrant labourers of the last shred of their dignity. It does not mean that we do not need labour reforms in India. There are 44 Central laws and more than 200 State Laws which overlap with each other and are primarily skewed against the industry. India is a labour surplus country with 47 million unemployed below the age of 24 years and 12-13 million youths joining the labour market every year. Almost 93 per cent of India’s labour force works in the unorganised sector, the majority are unskilled and poorly educated. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic raised its ugly head and made our immediate future uncertain, the Indian economy was already slowing down. Before the pandemic, India’s GDP growth in the October-December quarter of 2019 (Q3 of FY20) stood at 4.7 per cent, and in the previous quarter, it was a six-year low at 4.5 per cent. Economic growth was already on a downhill. The pandemic made it worse. Several rating agencies have predicted zero per cent growth in FY 20-21, amidst the lockdown. India’s Investment Rate i.e Gross Fixed Capital Formation (GFCF) as a percentage of GDP has declined by a whopping 9 percentage points between 2011-12 and 2019-20. This means that private investment has plummeted. It is predominantly because India has not been able to scale up manufacturing. Structural reforms in labour laws can boost private investment, but a crisis like the pandemic is hardly a time to do so. Post COVID-19 response to restart economy needs a whole package of big-bang reforms — labour reforms are only a part of it. In pre-COVID economy, to circumvent the rigorous labour policies, companies either shifted their manufacturing bases to foreign countries or turned capital intensive, reducing their manpower needs. Besides swelling unemployment, these measures also pushed people to the informal sector. Private investment had already slumped. India’s women participation in the labour force remains abysmal. In the times of lockdown, there is a huge migrant exodus from states as jobless workers are pushed to the corners of depravity by several governments. Critics would argue that doing away with labour laws is a sound policy decision. This may be the silver bullet idea which policymakers and industry lobbies think would attract the labourers back, but this would simply not work. Every policy intervention has a context. Right now, the context is the safety and wellbeing of our people. The recent incident of 26 workers in a pharmaceutical major in Gujarat turning positive is a stark example of how factory workers are not safe. Least intervention by government is often the best policy measure. The immediate solution to migrant workers leaving their place of work is to give them a return ticket. Yes. That is the solution. If the government or the industry provides them with a return ticket to join work after the pandemic lockdown is over, it is natural that they will get their livelihood back. It is a simple solution rather than some big bang announcement to grab thirty seconds of eyeballs by any PR hungry government. It does not remove the social security net around the workers. Neither, does it take away their human rights. The long term solution is amending the statutory framework of labour laws. Simplify them. First, we need a meta-structure to deal with ‘labour laws’ being in the concurrent list. A ‘Labour Laws Review Council’ with states, similar to that of GST Council, which meets periodically is needed. Second, consolidation of labour laws in four broad categories as envisaged by successive governments in the past. Third, have uniform definitions of key terms like ‘industry’, ‘worker’, ‘employee’ et al. Most laws have different definitions which result in long drawn disputes and confusion. Fourth, establish a ‘Central Labour Authority’ with representation from states, for self-certification and single consolidated return to ease compliances and multiple inspections of industrial units. Fifth, amend the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to ensure that post-facto approval from the government to close down industry is not required when any industry employees less than 300 workers or where lay off exceeds one month. A rigorous version of this was first implemented by Rajasthan and the Economic Survey, 2019 cited this as a case study to prove that employment increases if we do this. Sixth, pass a new labour regulation law for small scale industries employing less than 50 workers with liberal exemptions. Seventh, a separate law to ensure the welfare, facilities and safety of women in the labour force. Incremental long term reforms are needed to restart the economy. Snatching the rights of workers in a healthcare crisis will only result in high unemployment and no growth. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

India needs labour law reforms and not its suspension amid coronavirus mayhem

It is now well realised by the world community that COVID-19 originated from Wuhan in China, though Beijing has denied this.

The world community further believes that China has not informed the world about the seriousness of COVID-19 issue when it happened in Wuhan and did not share information about the challenges it faced in dealing with the problem.

Certainly, the rest of the world would have taken some precautions to prevent the spread of COVID-19, if China had forewarned the world.

In this process, China has let down the world community and a number of people seem to think that WHO too has let down the world community, as it has not insisted that it should visit Wuhan region to study the problem. WHO should have visited the Wuhan region and must have taken the initiative to launch world-wide efforts to prevent the spread of virus and develop an appropriate vaccine/drug to treat the disease.

While the world community is suffering due to COVID-19 with loss of thousands of lives and many more thousands of people infected and the numbers going further at an alarming level, China claims that it has solved the problem and is now free of the virus. &nbsp;If it is really so, China should have shared information with the rest of the world, as to how it solved the problem, so that the world community would be benefited. By not doing so, China has exhibited irresponsible behaviour, obviously implying that it has the least concern about the health of the world community.

It appears that China is trying to give an impression that while it has solved the problem, the other countries like the USA and those in Europe and rest of the world have not been able to do so, implying that China is far more advanced in the field of medical science and technology.

Countries like USA, Japan, Singapore and countries in Europe, which are supposed to be technologically and scientifically advanced, certainly feel sad, depressed and diminished, that they are not able to achieve so far, what China claims to have achieved by combating the virus.

The worst scenario is that these advanced countries in Europe, USA do not even have an adequate manufacturing facility for masks, sanitisers, test kits, ventilators etc. and have to face the humiliating situation of having to import personal protection equipment from China.

In such scenario, one cannot but get a feeling that countries in Europe, as well as USA, Japan and others, feel humiliated, even as they are battling the virus without any firm clue as to how to overcome the crisis and when they could do.

 
Like a wounded tiger, European countries, America and Japan are bound to look for ways and means to undo the loss of reputation due to the inability to handle the COVID-19 crisis vis a vis China’s claim that it has sorted out the issue and China implicitly trying to convey an impression that it has superior technical and scientific expertise.

The suspicion is growing not only amongst these “wounded tigers” but also in the rest of the world that China must have enacted a game plan to spread the virus and the virus could have been generated from Wuhan lab, though there is no conclusive evidence to prove this so far.

China seems to be throwing stones sitting in the glasshouse, without realising that it is vulnerable on several fronts to international pressure, in spite of it’s impressive economic and industrial growth achieved during the last few decades and the strength that it has gained in the process.

China seems to be preparing the ground for the scenario of confrontation with several countries in the world, as is evident from its recent moves in the South China Sea, without being concerned about the COVID-19 crisis that has caused serious unrest all over the world.

Though China has systematically gained vice-like grip and sort of control over several weak countries such as Pakistan by extending loan and participating in projects, it is unlikely that such strategies would help China, if and when it would be confronted by several other countries.

It is astonishing that China does not have the wisdom to realise about the need to gain good global image by cooperating with the rest of the world in combating COVID-19 and not creating territorial disputes with the nearby countries like Vietnam, India and others.

It is now realised by many countries that China has expansionist ambition and wants to dominate the world. Therefore, an impression is gaining around the world that China has to be controlled at any cost.

&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

It is now well realised by the world community that COVID-19 originated from Wuhan in China, though Beijing has denied this. The world community further believes that China has not informed the world about the seriousness of COVID-19 issue when it happened in Wuhan and did not share information about the challenges it faced in dealing with the problem.

It is now well realised by the world community that COVID-19 originated from Wuhan in China, though Beijing has denied this. The world community further believes that China has not informed the world about the seriousness of COVID-19 issue when it happened in Wuhan and did not share information about the challenges it faced in dealing with the problem. Certainly, the rest of the world would have taken some precautions to prevent the spread of COVID-19, if China had forewarned the world. In this process, China has let down the world community and a number of people seem to think that WHO too has let down the world community, as it has not insisted that it should visit Wuhan region to study the problem. WHO should have visited the Wuhan region and must have taken the initiative to launch world-wide efforts to prevent the spread of virus and develop an appropriate vaccine/drug to treat the disease. While the world community is suffering due to COVID-19 with loss of thousands of lives and many more thousands of people infected and the numbers going further at an alarming level, China claims that it has solved the problem and is now free of the virus. If it is really so, China should have shared information with the rest of the world, as to how it solved the problem, so that the world community would be benefited. By not doing so, China has exhibited irresponsible behaviour, obviously implying that it has the least concern about the health of the world community. It appears that China is trying to give an impression that while it has solved the problem, the other countries like the USA and those in Europe and rest of the world have not been able to do so, implying that China is far more advanced in the field of medical science and technology. Countries like USA, Japan, Singapore and countries in Europe, which are supposed to be technologically and scientifically advanced, certainly feel sad, depressed and diminished, that they are not able to achieve so far, what China claims to have achieved by combating the virus. The worst scenario is that these advanced countries in Europe, USA do not even have an adequate manufacturing facility for masks, sanitisers, test kits, ventilators etc. and have to face the humiliating situation of having to import personal protection equipment from China. In such scenario, one cannot but get a feeling that countries in Europe, as well as USA, Japan and others, feel humiliated, even as they are battling the virus without any firm clue as to how to overcome the crisis and when they could do. Like a wounded tiger, European countries, America and Japan are bound to look for ways and means to undo the loss of reputation due to the inability to handle the COVID-19 crisis vis a vis China’s claim that it has sorted out the issue and China implicitly trying to convey an impression that it has superior technical and scientific expertise. The suspicion is growing not only amongst these “wounded tigers” but also in the rest of the world that China must have enacted a game plan to spread the virus and the virus could have been generated from Wuhan lab, though there is no conclusive evidence to prove this so far. China seems to be throwing stones sitting in the glasshouse, without realising that it is vulnerable on several fronts to international pressure, in spite of it’s impressive economic and industrial growth achieved during the last few decades and the strength that it has gained in the process. China seems to be preparing the ground for the scenario of confrontation with several countries in the world, as is evident from its recent moves in the South China Sea, without being concerned about the COVID-19 crisis that has caused serious unrest all over the world. Though China has systematically gained vice-like grip and sort of control over several weak countries such as Pakistan by extending loan and participating in projects, it is unlikely that such strategies would help China, if and when it would be confronted by several other countries. It is astonishing that China does not have the wisdom to realise about the need to gain good global image by cooperating with the rest of the world in combating COVID-19 and not creating territorial disputes with the nearby countries like Vietnam, India and others. It is now realised by many countries that China has expansionist ambition and wants to dominate the world. Therefore, an impression is gaining around the world that China has to be controlled at any cost. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

China must be made to pay for its role in coronavirus spread

With the way this pandemic is playing out, India could especially be hit hard simply because we don’t have a sizeable economy to service 1.4 billion people. The last twenty years of economic development in the country has been substantial; we pulled nearly 240 million people out of poverty. Unfortunately, if we do not handle things right in the next two years' time, we may push them straight back below the poverty line. &nbsp;

But in all this, there are bright spots. Without a strong investment from outside the country, we will not have the capability to put the markets and industry back in place and move populations back to their workplaces.&nbsp;

There is a great opportunity for India as the trust that people had in the Chinese economy has been seriously eroded. Already Japan has offered over $500 billion dollars to move their industry out of China, and the United States could do something even more drastic. Over 300 top companies in the world may start partially moving out of China.&nbsp;

India is eminently positioned to benefit if they come here even for partial production. This will need a very determined effort from the industry lobby, the businesses, and the government has to pitch in. We must set up a single-point clearance without any bureaucratic process – for land, electricity, and all clearances. If necessary, pass an Economic Emergency bill to empower states to execute the facilitation of big investments. A billion-dollar-plus investment must be given immunity from PILs and cost litigation for a period of five years. If we do this, we can get the economy buzzing. It all depends on how efficiently and hungrily we grab this opportunity.&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

With the way this pandemic is playing out, India could especially be hit hard simply because we don’t have a sizeable economy to service 1.4 billion people. The last twenty years of economic development in the country has been substantial; we pulled nearly 240 million people out of poverty.

With the way this pandemic is playing out, India could especially be hit hard simply because we don’t have a sizeable economy to service 1.4 billion people. The last twenty years of economic development in the country has been substantial; we pulled nearly 240 million people out of poverty. Unfortunately, if we do not handle things right in the next two years' time, we may push them straight back below the poverty line. But in all this, there are bright spots. Without a strong investment from outside the country, we will not have the capability to put the markets and industry back in place and move populations back to their workplaces. There is a great opportunity for India as the trust that people had in the Chinese economy has been seriously eroded. Already Japan has offered over $500 billion dollars to move their industry out of China, and the United States could do something even more drastic. Over 300 top companies in the world may start partially moving out of China. India is eminently positioned to benefit if they come here even for partial production. This will need a very determined effort from the industry lobby, the businesses, and the government has to pitch in. We must set up a single-point clearance without any bureaucratic process – for land, electricity, and all clearances. If necessary, pass an Economic Emergency bill to empower states to execute the facilitation of big investments. A billion-dollar-plus investment must be given immunity from PILs and cost litigation for a period of five years. If we do this, we can get the economy buzzing. It all depends on how efficiently and hungrily we grab this opportunity. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

To get the  economy buzzing, India should woo foreign industry

The narrative promoted by China as to the origin of COVID-19 and the one quickly adopted by the scientific establishment and the media has always been that COVID-19, while circulating in a bat population, mutated, acquiring the ability to infect humans, which was then transmitted to people either visiting or working in the Wuhan Seafood Market

On February 3, 2020, Chinese researchers led by Zheng-Li Shi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology published an article in the prestigious journal Nature, which became the basis of the naturally-occurring narrative by identifying a previously unknown bat coronavirus, RaTg13, as a close relative to COVID-19.

A month later, using RaTG13 as a linchpin of its argument, Western scientists published “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2,” which became the single most widely-cited article by scientists and the media to support the contention that COVID-19 came from nature.

Thus, originated the “wide scientific consensus” claimed even by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in the United States in its April 30, 2020 statement that COVID-19 “was not manmade or genetically modified.”

It did not take long for doubts about the validity of the RaTG13 argument or even its existence to appear, as the <a href="https://ccnationalsecurity.org/is-bat-coronavirus-4991-a-smoking-gun-in-chinas-covid-19-cover-up/">April 25, 2020 article</a> “Is Bat Coronavirus 4991 a Smoking Gun in China’s COVID-19 Cover-up?” will attest.

We have now learned that RaTG13 existed only on paper. RaTG13 and BtCoV/4991 are the <a href="https://twitter.com/schnufi666/status/1259035090811846661">same virus</a>.

How long has this been known by the scientists involved and has it been part of a deliberate deception?

"Although sequenced earlier, the entire RaTG13 genome was later uploaded to the National Institutes of Health GenBank with an updated timestamp of March 24, 2020 and an accession number <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN996532">MN996532.1</a>."

In that filing, there is no mention of BtCoV/4991.

Yet, in a Chinese virus <a href="http://www.mgc.ac.cn/cgi-bin/DBatVir/main.cgi?func=accession&amp;acc=MN996532">database</a>, dated March 7, 2020 in the <a href="http://www.mgc.ac.cn/DBatVir/update.xml">source code</a>, RaTG13 and BtCoV/4991 are listed as equivalent and links to the NIH GenBank.

What else has China been hiding?

The numerous inconsistencies in the theory that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring are <a href="https://ccnationalsecurity.org/author/lawrence-sellin/">well-documented</a>.

A thorough, objective investigation of the true origin of COVID-19 is long overdue. 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

The narrative promoted by China as to the origin of COVID-19 and the one quickly adopted by the scientific establishment and the media has always been that COVID-19, while circulating in a bat population, mutated, acquiring the ability to infect humans, which was then transmitted to people either visiting or working in the Wuhan Seafood Market On February 3, 2020, Chinese researchers led by Zheng-Li Shi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology published an article in the prestigious journal Nature, which became the basis of the naturally-occurring narrative by identifying a previously unknown bat coronavirus, RaTg13, as a close relative to COVID-19.

The narrative promoted by China as to the origin of COVID-19 and the one quickly adopted by the scientific establishment and the media has always been that COVID-19, while circulating in a bat population, mutated, acquiring the ability to infect humans, which was then transmitted to people either visiting or working in the Wuhan Seafood Market On February 3, 2020, Chinese researchers led by Zheng-Li Shi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology published an article in the prestigious journal Nature, which became the basis of the naturally-occurring narrative by identifying a previously unknown bat coronavirus, RaTg13, as a close relative to COVID-19. A month later, using RaTG13 as a linchpin of its argument, Western scientists published “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2,” which became the single most widely-cited article by scientists and the media to support the contention that COVID-19 came from nature. Thus, originated the “wide scientific consensus” claimed even by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in the United States in its April 30, 2020 statement that COVID-19 “was not manmade or genetically modified.” It did not take long for doubts about the validity of the RaTG13 argument or even its existence to appear, as the April 25, 2020 article “Is Bat Coronavirus 4991 a Smoking Gun in China’s COVID-19 Cover-up?” will attest. We have now learned that RaTG13 existed only on paper. RaTG13 and BtCoV/4991 are the same virus. How long has this been known by the scientists involved and has it been part of a deliberate deception? "Although sequenced earlier, the entire RaTG13 genome was later uploaded to the National Institutes of Health GenBank with an updated timestamp of March 24, 2020 and an accession number MN996532.1." In that filing, there is no mention of BtCoV/4991. Yet, in a Chinese virus database, dated March 7, 2020 in the source code, RaTG13 and BtCoV/4991 are listed as equivalent and links to the NIH GenBank. What else has China been hiding? The numerous inconsistencies in the theory that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring are well-documented. A thorough, objective investigation of the true origin of COVID-19 is long overdue. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

China’s narrative about the origin of COVID-19 is starting to unravel

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has become the articulate, compassionate political face of government competence in fighting a pandemic.

That’s quite an achievement for a man who as late as early March 2020 trumpeted: “Excuse our arrogance as New Yorkers… We think we have the best healthcare system on the planet right here in New York. So, when you’re saying what happened in other countries versus what happened here, we don’t even think it’s going to be as bad as it was in other countries. We are fully coordinated; we are fully mobilised.”

New York was neither fully coordinated, nor was it fully mobilised.

In fact, it became the pandemic’s prime hotspot in the United States, accounting for the highest number of infection cases and the highest mortality rate. Its hospitals were overwhelmed, its stockpiles depleted, its frontline workers perilously exposed to risk of contagion. Many of the deaths could have been prevented had Cuomo opted to lock down the Big Apple earlier.

For now, recent history has largely been forgotten. Cuomo thrives in his element, a rising star on America’s political ferment. His sober but empathetic, fact-based daily briefings project him as a man in command with a mission to ensure the health, safety, and wellbeing of his state.

If Cuomo, a veteran of dealing with the aftermaths of disasters like Hurricane Sandy, learnt anything from his delayed response to the coronavirus pandemic, it was that “an outbreak anywhere is an outbreak everywhere.”

Unlike other epidemics in recent years such as the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome or SARS in the early 2000s, the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in 2012 or the eruption of Ebola in West Africa in 2014, the coronavirus, dubbed COVID-19, left no corner of the globe untouched.

It is a lesson that goes to the heart of all that is wrong with global, regional, and national healthcare governance. It is a lesson that calls into question social and economic policies that have shaped the world for decades irrespective of the political system.

It is also a lesson that goes to the core of the relationship between government and the people. It positions social trust as a pillar of effective healthcare policy in a time of crisis.

In an era of defiance and dissent as a result of a breakdown in confidence in political systems and political leadership that kicked off with Occupy Wall Street and the 2011 Arab popular revolts and led to the rise of populists, mass anti-government demonstrations and in 2019 the toppling of leaders in Algeria, Sudan, Lebanon and Iraq, lack of trust complicated government efforts to counter the virus.

Distrust persuaded many Iranians to initially refuse to heed public health warnings to maintain social distancing, stay at home and install an Android app designed to help people self-diagnose and avoid rushing to the hospital.

Pakistanis put their faith in religious leaders who rejected government demands for a halt to congregational prayers. So did many Russians as bans on mass gatherings split the clergy and threatened to undermine the Russian Orthodox Church’s key support for President Vladimir Putin.

Post-mortems of governments’ handling of the crisis once the coronavirus has been contained could increase the trust deficit.

Moreover, in an indication of pent-up anger and frustration that could explode, the imposition of curfews and stay-at-home orders failed to prevent incidental outbursts, including protests in mid-American states, quarantined Egyptian villages and poorer Tunisian and Moroccan hamlets.

In an echo of the Tunisian vendor who sparked the 2011 Arab revolts, 32-year-old unemployed and physically disabled Hammadi Chalbi set himself alight in a town 160 kilometres southwest of Tunis after authorities’ refused to license him as a fruit seller. In Lebanon, a taxi driver set his vehicle on fire while fruit vendors dumped their goods in the streets in expressions of mounting discontent. The protests suggest a universal corollary with the pandemic: an outbreak anywhere is an outbreak everywhere.

Protesters in 2019 went beyond demanding the fall of a leader. They sought the fall of political elites and radical overhaul of failed political systems. The pandemic called an abrupt halt to the protests. Protesters like the rest of the population went into temporary hibernation.

When they re-emerge, they are likely to put government leaders who prioritised political advantage above their health and economic well-being at a cost that surpasses that of the 1929 Great Depression on par with crimes committed against humanity during times of war.

Social, economic, ethnic, and sectarian fault lines are likely to be hardened in countries like Pakistan and Iraq where militants stepped in with healthcare and other social services to fill voids created by lack of government capacity.

The pandemic further painfully illustrated the economic cost of not only failing to confront a health crisis in a timely fashion but also the risk inherent in policies that do not ensure proper healthcare infrastructure in every corner of the globe, guarantee equal access to healthcare, make sure that people irrespective of income have proper housing and nutrition, turn a blind eye to the destruction of healthcare facilities in conflict situations like Syria, Yemen, Libya, Ukraine, Nagorno-Karabakh, Myanmar, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, tolerate millions of refugees existing in sub-standard living and hygiene conditions, and disregard environmental degradation and climate change.

The pandemic casts a spotlight on the deprivation of populations of proper healthcare as a result of politically motivated discriminatory social and economic policies.

The non-discriminatory nature of the coronavirus forced the Israeli government to ramp up testing in communities of Israeli Palestinians which had been described by public health experts as a ticking time bomb.

The experts warned that Israeli Palestinians, who figured prominently among frontline doctors and nurses treating Jews and Palestinians alike, were an at-risk group, many of whom suffer from chronic diseases, live in crowded conditions, and are socially and economically disadvantaged.

Ramping up testing to prevent the spread of COVID-19 constitutes an immediate effort to stem the tide but does little to structurally prepare Israeli and Palestinian society for the next pandemic.

Pre-dominantly Palestinian “East Jerusalem is gravely neglected in every possible way in terms of the infrastructure. Most neighbourhoods of East Jerusalem don’t have sewage systems. Just about every possible public service you can think of is underbudgeted and lacking in East Jerusalem. The only thing they get a lot of is parking fines and (punitive) housing demolition orders, said” &nbsp;left-wing member of the Jerusalem municipal council Laura Wharton.

A Monopoly board centred on Jerusalem given to her by Moshe Lion, the city’s mayor and a former economic advisor and director-general of prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu’s office, illustrates the political calculus that potentially puts not only Jews and Palestinians but populations elsewhere at risk in a future pandemic.

“You have here the City of David, the Mount of Olives, the Knesset (the Israeli parliament), the Montefiore windmill, the markets, (the ultra-orthodox Jewish neighbourhood of) Mea She’arim. Al Aqsa (the third holiest Muslim site) is not here, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is not here. Basically what you have is a bunch of Jewish sites and various illusions to other things. It’s not a very balanced picture of Jerusalem,” Wharton noted pointing at various landmarks on the board.

African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans tell the story, They have fallen disproportionately victim in the United States to the coronavirus.

US surgeon general Jerome Adams, a 45-year old African American vice admiral in the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, one of America’s eight uniformed services, pulled out his inhaler at a White House press briefing in April 2020, saying he's carried it around for 40 years, "out of fear of having a fatal asthma attack."

Looking fit and trim in his dark uniform, Adams said he also had a heart condition and high blood pressure. "I represent that legacy of growing up poor and black in America. And I, and many black Americans, are at higher risk for COVID."

The surgeon general said that “It's alarming but not surprising that people of colour have a greater burden of chronic health conditions. African Americans and Native Americans develop high blood pressure at much younger ages… and (the virus) does greater harm to their organs. Puerto Ricans have higher rates of asthma and black boys are three times (more) likely to die of asthma than their white counterparts…. People of colour are more likely to live in densely packed areas and multi-generational housing, situations which create a higher risk for the spread of a highly contagious disease like COVID-19. We tell people to wash their hands, but a study shows that 30 per cent of homes of the Navajo Nation don’t have running water, so how are they going to do that?”

What goes for one of the wealthiest nations on earth goes for the rest of the world too, particularly with the last two decades suggesting that pandemics occur more frequently and are likely to do so going forward.

What started in Wuhan in China in December 2019 had, by April 2020, brought the world to a virtual standstill. Millions across the globe were infected, tens of thousands did not survive, economies shut down and the prospects for recovery and return to what was normal seemed a mere hope in a distant future.

Andrew Cuomo may be the exception that confirms the rule. There is little in the response of leaders from China’s Xi Jinping to Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan and US President Donald J. Trump that suggests that the lesson that an outbreak anywhere is an outbreak everywhere has persuaded them to think in terms of structural change.

If the first six months of the coronavirus are anything to go by, the name of the game has been jockeying for political positions, ideology trumps science, and everyone for him or herself in a race to the bottom rather than apolitical banding together globally, regionally and nationally to fight a dangerous and debilitating common enemy.

The response to the pandemic reflected the crumbling of the post-World War II international order that is in the grips of a struggle by big and medium-sized powers to shape global governance in the 21st century.

The struggle has already crippled the United Nations and politicisation of the coronavirus and healthcare threatens to undermine the World Health Organisation, the one, albeit flawed, a structure capable of coordinating a global response.

Complicating the response, was the rise of civilizationalists like Xi, Hungarian prime minister Victor Orban and Trump who think in civilizational rather than national terms.

They conceive of their nations as civilizations in which Hans, Hindus or Christians rule supreme and there is no equal place for minorities rather than nation-states defined by legally recognised borders, population, and language.

Theirs is a world of neglect for international law, increased conflict, political violence, and mass migration that promises to be even less prepared for the next pandemic. It is also a world in which early warning systems are weakened by the muzzling of a free press.

Former US president Barak Obama, in his opening blast against Trump in the run-up to the November presidential election, put his finger on the pulse.

“What we are fighting against is these long-term trends in which being selfish, being tribal, being divided and seeing others an enemy, that that has become a stronger impulse in American life. And by the way, you know, we are seeing that internationally as well. And it’s part of the reason why the response to this global crisis has been so anaemic and spotty… It has been an absolute chaotic disaster when that mindset of what’s in it for me and to heck with everybody else – when that mindset is operationalized in our government,” Obama told a virtual gathering of his former staffers.

The pandemic demonstrates the need for coordinated policies ranging from global, regional, and national stockpiling, international cooperation in medical research and development, conflict mediation, protection of minority rights, environment, absorption of refugees and robust but diversified supply chains.

It also highlights the importance of eradication of poverty and proper social security nets, housing, hygiene, and access to water in a world in which an outbreak anywhere is an outbreak everywhere.

The pandemic positions an approach towards healthcare that is integrated into sustainable social and economic policies as a matter of global and national security on par with regional and national defence and security policies and investments.

It also raises the question of what role major non-governmental institutions like the Clinton Initiative, George Soros and the Gates Foundation can play.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has become the articulate, compassionate political face of government competence in fighting a pandemic. That’s quite an achievement for a man who as late as early March 2020 trumpeted: “Excuse our arrogance as New Yorkers… We think we have the best healthcare system on the planet right here in New York.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has become the articulate, compassionate political face of government competence in fighting a pandemic. That’s quite an achievement for a man who as late as early March 2020 trumpeted: “Excuse our arrogance as New Yorkers… We think we have the best healthcare system on the planet right here in New York. So, when you’re saying what happened in other countries versus what happened here, we don’t even think it’s going to be as bad as it was in other countries. We are fully coordinated; we are fully mobilised.” New York was neither fully coordinated, nor was it fully mobilised. In fact, it became the pandemic’s prime hotspot in the United States, accounting for the highest number of infection cases and the highest mortality rate. Its hospitals were overwhelmed, its stockpiles depleted, its frontline workers perilously exposed to risk of contagion. Many of the deaths could have been prevented had Cuomo opted to lock down the Big Apple earlier. For now, recent history has largely been forgotten. Cuomo thrives in his element, a rising star on America’s political ferment. His sober but empathetic, fact-based daily briefings project him as a man in command with a mission to ensure the health, safety, and wellbeing of his state. If Cuomo, a veteran of dealing with the aftermaths of disasters like Hurricane Sandy, learnt anything from his delayed response to the coronavirus pandemic, it was that “an outbreak anywhere is an outbreak everywhere.” Unlike other epidemics in recent years such as the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome or SARS in the early 2000s, the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in 2012 or the eruption of Ebola in West Africa in 2014, the coronavirus, dubbed COVID-19, left no corner of the globe untouched. It is a lesson that goes to the heart of all that is wrong with global, regional, and national healthcare governance. It is a lesson that calls into question social and economic policies that have shaped the world for decades irrespective of the political system. It is also a lesson that goes to the core of the relationship between government and the people. It positions social trust as a pillar of effective healthcare policy in a time of crisis. In an era of defiance and dissent as a result of a breakdown in confidence in political systems and political leadership that kicked off with Occupy Wall Street and the 2011 Arab popular revolts and led to the rise of populists, mass anti-government demonstrations and in 2019 the toppling of leaders in Algeria, Sudan, Lebanon and Iraq, lack of trust complicated government efforts to counter the virus. Distrust persuaded many Iranians to initially refuse to heed public health warnings to maintain social distancing, stay at home and install an Android app designed to help people self-diagnose and avoid rushing to the hospital. Pakistanis put their faith in religious leaders who rejected government demands for a halt to congregational prayers. So did many Russians as bans on mass gatherings split the clergy and threatened to undermine the Russian Orthodox Church’s key support for President Vladimir Putin. Post-mortems of governments’ handling of the crisis once the coronavirus has been contained could increase the trust deficit. Moreover, in an indication of pent-up anger and frustration that could explode, the imposition of curfews and stay-at-home orders failed to prevent incidental outbursts, including protests in mid-American states, quarantined Egyptian villages and poorer Tunisian and Moroccan hamlets. In an echo of the Tunisian vendor who sparked the 2011 Arab revolts, 32-year-old unemployed and physically disabled Hammadi Chalbi set himself alight in a town 160 kilometres southwest of Tunis after authorities’ refused to license him as a fruit seller. In Lebanon, a taxi driver set his vehicle on fire while fruit vendors dumped their goods in the streets in expressions of mounting discontent. The protests suggest a universal corollary with the pandemic: an outbreak anywhere is an outbreak everywhere. Protesters in 2019 went beyond demanding the fall of a leader. They sought the fall of political elites and radical overhaul of failed political systems. The pandemic called an abrupt halt to the protests. Protesters like the rest of the population went into temporary hibernation. When they re-emerge, they are likely to put government leaders who prioritised political advantage above their health and economic well-being at a cost that surpasses that of the 1929 Great Depression on par with crimes committed against humanity during times of war. Social, economic, ethnic, and sectarian fault lines are likely to be hardened in countries like Pakistan and Iraq where militants stepped in with healthcare and other social services to fill voids created by lack of government capacity. The pandemic further painfully illustrated the economic cost of not only failing to confront a health crisis in a timely fashion but also the risk inherent in policies that do not ensure proper healthcare infrastructure in every corner of the globe, guarantee equal access to healthcare, make sure that people irrespective of income have proper housing and nutrition, turn a blind eye to the destruction of healthcare facilities in conflict situations like Syria, Yemen, Libya, Ukraine, Nagorno-Karabakh, Myanmar, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, tolerate millions of refugees existing in sub-standard living and hygiene conditions, and disregard environmental degradation and climate change. The pandemic casts a spotlight on the deprivation of populations of proper healthcare as a result of politically motivated discriminatory social and economic policies. The non-discriminatory nature of the coronavirus forced the Israeli government to ramp up testing in communities of Israeli Palestinians which had been described by public health experts as a ticking time bomb. The experts warned that Israeli Palestinians, who figured prominently among frontline doctors and nurses treating Jews and Palestinians alike, were an at-risk group, many of whom suffer from chronic diseases, live in crowded conditions, and are socially and economically disadvantaged. Ramping up testing to prevent the spread of COVID-19 constitutes an immediate effort to stem the tide but does little to structurally prepare Israeli and Palestinian society for the next pandemic. Pre-dominantly Palestinian “East Jerusalem is gravely neglected in every possible way in terms of the infrastructure. Most neighbourhoods of East Jerusalem don’t have sewage systems. Just about every possible public service you can think of is underbudgeted and lacking in East Jerusalem. The only thing they get a lot of is parking fines and (punitive) housing demolition orders, said” left-wing member of the Jerusalem municipal council Laura Wharton. A Monopoly board centred on Jerusalem given to her by Moshe Lion, the city’s mayor and a former economic advisor and director-general of prime minister Benyamin Netanyahu’s office, illustrates the political calculus that potentially puts not only Jews and Palestinians but populations elsewhere at risk in a future pandemic. “You have here the City of David, the Mount of Olives, the Knesset (the Israeli parliament), the Montefiore windmill, the markets, (the ultra-orthodox Jewish neighbourhood of) Mea She’arim. Al Aqsa (the third holiest Muslim site) is not here, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is not here. Basically what you have is a bunch of Jewish sites and various illusions to other things. It’s not a very balanced picture of Jerusalem,” Wharton noted pointing at various landmarks on the board. African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans tell the story, They have fallen disproportionately victim in the United States to the coronavirus. US surgeon general Jerome Adams, a 45-year old African American vice admiral in the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, one of America’s eight uniformed services, pulled out his inhaler at a White House press briefing in April 2020, saying he's carried it around for 40 years, "out of fear of having a fatal asthma attack." Looking fit and trim in his dark uniform, Adams said he also had a heart condition and high blood pressure. "I represent that legacy of growing up poor and black in America. And I, and many black Americans, are at higher risk for COVID." The surgeon general said that “It's alarming but not surprising that people of colour have a greater burden of chronic health conditions. African Americans and Native Americans develop high blood pressure at much younger ages… and (the virus) does greater harm to their organs. Puerto Ricans have higher rates of asthma and black boys are three times (more) likely to die of asthma than their white counterparts…. People of colour are more likely to live in densely packed areas and multi-generational housing, situations which create a higher risk for the spread of a highly contagious disease like COVID-19. We tell people to wash their hands, but a study shows that 30 per cent of homes of the Navajo Nation don’t have running water, so how are they going to do that?” What goes for one of the wealthiest nations on earth goes for the rest of the world too, particularly with the last two decades suggesting that pandemics occur more frequently and are likely to do so going forward. What started in Wuhan in China in December 2019 had, by April 2020, brought the world to a virtual standstill. Millions across the globe were infected, tens of thousands did not survive, economies shut down and the prospects for recovery and return to what was normal seemed a mere hope in a distant future. Andrew Cuomo may be the exception that confirms the rule. There is little in the response of leaders from China’s Xi Jinping to Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan and US President Donald J. Trump that suggests that the lesson that an outbreak anywhere is an outbreak everywhere has persuaded them to think in terms of structural change. If the first six months of the coronavirus are anything to go by, the name of the game has been jockeying for political positions, ideology trumps science, and everyone for him or herself in a race to the bottom rather than apolitical banding together globally, regionally and nationally to fight a dangerous and debilitating common enemy. The response to the pandemic reflected the crumbling of the post-World War II international order that is in the grips of a struggle by big and medium-sized powers to shape global governance in the 21st century. The struggle has already crippled the United Nations and politicisation of the coronavirus and healthcare threatens to undermine the World Health Organisation, the one, albeit flawed, a structure capable of coordinating a global response. Complicating the response, was the rise of civilizationalists like Xi, Hungarian prime minister Victor Orban and Trump who think in civilizational rather than national terms. They conceive of their nations as civilizations in which Hans, Hindus or Christians rule supreme and there is no equal place for minorities rather than nation-states defined by legally recognised borders, population, and language. Theirs is a world of neglect for international law, increased conflict, political violence, and mass migration that promises to be even less prepared for the next pandemic. It is also a world in which early warning systems are weakened by the muzzling of a free press. Former US president Barak Obama, in his opening blast against Trump in the run-up to the November presidential election, put his finger on the pulse. “What we are fighting against is these long-term trends in which being selfish, being tribal, being divided and seeing others an enemy, that that has become a stronger impulse in American life. And by the way, you know, we are seeing that internationally as well. And it’s part of the reason why the response to this global crisis has been so anaemic and spotty… It has been an absolute chaotic disaster when that mindset of what’s in it for me and to heck with everybody else – when that mindset is operationalized in our government,” Obama told a virtual gathering of his former staffers. The pandemic demonstrates the need for coordinated policies ranging from global, regional, and national stockpiling, international cooperation in medical research and development, conflict mediation, protection of minority rights, environment, absorption of refugees and robust but diversified supply chains. It also highlights the importance of eradication of poverty and proper social security nets, housing, hygiene, and access to water in a world in which an outbreak anywhere is an outbreak everywhere. The pandemic positions an approach towards healthcare that is integrated into sustainable social and economic policies as a matter of global and national security on par with regional and national defence and security policies and investments. It also raises the question of what role major non-governmental institutions like the Clinton Initiative, George Soros and the Gates Foundation can play.

Coronavirus pandemic is far more than a global health emergency

As the world fights <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/coronavirus-lockdown-may-not-lead-to-a-rise-in-population-says-study-297484">coronavirus pandemic</a>, China is throwing its weight around. Beijing has deployed warships, asserted itself on the high seas and flexed its military muscle on the South China sea.

The developed world, barring a few, hasn't said much about the Chinese military aggression. But, that is not the case with smaller nations.

A report says that Vietnam is close to filing an international arbitration case and settle the South China Sea dispute with Beijing.

Leading countries are indecisive and divided over China. As the world scratches their heads over the right approach, Vietnam's decisiveness is like a breath of fresh air. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/world-leaders-look-for-ways-to-hold-china-accountable-for-spread-of-coronavirus-report-297509">Also read: World leaders look for ways to hold China accountable for spread of coronavirus</a>

Last year, the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam had hosted a conference on the South China Sea. Vietnam's deputy foreign minister had raised the issue of an international case for the first time in nearly five years.

Since then, Vietnam has got more firm with China. Recently, China had announced a fishing ban in the South China Sea until August. However, Vietnam has rejected that decision, calling China's order "unilateral".

Indonesia is standing up to China too. After three Indonesian sailors died in the Pacific, Indonesia summoned the Chinese ambassador. This came after the reports that they were mistreated and exploited, apparently by the Chinese. 
 
Taiwan, considered as a breakaway province by China, has repeatedly called out Beijing over its botched up response to the pandemic.

The coronavirus outbreak has exposed the lack of leadership on the world stage. China is trying to coerce its way to the centre of the world order. When the G20 Summit happened, world leaders had a chance to call out China, but they didn't.

The world needs to closely look at Vietnam, Indonesia and Taiwan, they have decided not to bow to the&nbsp;economic pressures.

As the world fights coronavirus pandemic, China is throwing its weight around. Beijing has deployed warships, asserted itself on the high seas and flexed its military muscle on the South China sea.

As the world fights coronavirus pandemic, China is throwing its weight around. Beijing has deployed warships, asserted itself on the high seas and flexed its military muscle on the South China sea. The developed world, barring a few, hasn't said much about the Chinese military aggression. But, that is not the case with smaller nations. A report says that Vietnam is close to filing an international arbitration case and settle the South China Sea dispute with Beijing. Leading countries are indecisive and divided over China. As the world scratches their heads over the right approach, Vietnam's decisiveness is like a breath of fresh air. Also read: World leaders look for ways to hold China accountable for spread of coronavirus Last year, the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam had hosted a conference on the South China Sea. Vietnam's deputy foreign minister had raised the issue of an international case for the first time in nearly five years. Since then, Vietnam has got more firm with China. Recently, China had announced a fishing ban in the South China Sea until August. However, Vietnam has rejected that decision, calling China's order "unilateral". Indonesia is standing up to China too. After three Indonesian sailors died in the Pacific, Indonesia summoned the Chinese ambassador. This came after the reports that they were mistreated and exploited, apparently by the Chinese. Taiwan, considered as a breakaway province by China, has repeatedly called out Beijing over its botched up response to the pandemic. The coronavirus outbreak has exposed the lack of leadership on the world stage. China is trying to coerce its way to the centre of the world order. When the G20 Summit happened, world leaders had a chance to call out China, but they didn't. The world needs to closely look at Vietnam, Indonesia and Taiwan, they have decided not to bow to the economic pressures.

How smaller neighbours of China are taking on the dragon

The true cost of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/coronavirus-lockdown-may-not-lead-to-a-rise-in-population-says-study-297484">the coronavirus </a>can't be measured, but what we can measure is how much countries are spending, and losing due to the coronavirus.

The global economy will lose at least one trillion dollars. To make the dragon pay, leaders in different countries want to sue China.

There is an avalanche of legal claims against China now. Last month Missouri became the first American state to sue China. The lawsuit says Missouri lost billions of dollars due to the pandemic.&nbsp; 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/how-smaller-neighbours-of-china-are-taking-on-the-dragon-297518">Also read: How smaller neighbours of China are taking on the dragon</a>

There are more lawsuits that target China. US President Donald Trump hasn't ruled out a demand for damages either. Some suggest countries should sue China at international tribunals.

However, international law experts say that may not work because China remains protected by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

Also, Beijing is unlikely to accept the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.

Some argue that China can be booked under international health regulations. Article 6 of the regulations says the WHO must be notified within 24 hours of any event that poses a risk, something that could become an international public health emergency.

While China can be accused of censoring, misrepresenting and suppressing valuable data, that alone, may not be enough.

So far, no national government has announced its intention to sue China for the coronavirus outbreak, but several leaders are looking for ways to up the ante against Beijing.

Making China legally liable and seeking damages is an appealing idea, but world leaders will have to come up with an effective way to do it.

&nbsp;

The true cost of the coronavirus can't be measured, but what we can measure is how much countries are spending, and losing due to the coronavirus. The global economy will lose at least one trillion dollars.

The true cost of the coronavirus can't be measured, but what we can measure is how much countries are spending, and losing due to the coronavirus. The global economy will lose at least one trillion dollars. To make the dragon pay, leaders in different countries want to sue China. There is an avalanche of legal claims against China now. Last month Missouri became the first American state to sue China. The lawsuit says Missouri lost billions of dollars due to the pandemic. Also read: How smaller neighbours of China are taking on the dragon There are more lawsuits that target China. US President Donald Trump hasn't ruled out a demand for damages either. Some suggest countries should sue China at international tribunals. However, international law experts say that may not work because China remains protected by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Also, Beijing is unlikely to accept the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. Some argue that China can be booked under international health regulations. Article 6 of the regulations says the WHO must be notified within 24 hours of any event that poses a risk, something that could become an international public health emergency. While China can be accused of censoring, misrepresenting and suppressing valuable data, that alone, may not be enough. So far, no national government has announced its intention to sue China for the coronavirus outbreak, but several leaders are looking for ways to up the ante against Beijing. Making China legally liable and seeking damages is an appealing idea, but world leaders will have to come up with an effective way to do it.

World leaders look for ways to hold China accountable for spread of coronavirus: Report

By Thomas Strandberg 
 
By the beginning of April 2020, a large proportion of the world’s population was living in some level of isolation as their governments took measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Some countries imposed tight restrictions at an early stage whereas others waited.

Findings from a survey taken at the time suggest that early action was the way to go for governments seeking public support. The public preferred their governments to take action more quickly in the UK and the US – two countries facing criticism for their slowness to act.

People in these two countries were also less trusting of their governments than in Germany and Italy. One reason behind this could be that politicians in both Germany and Italy acted more decisively compared to their two counterparts, almost immediately imposing lockdown measures. Italy was particularly notable for a high level of trust in the government, despite also suffering a high number of deaths.

We asked 2,006 people across four different countries to complete an online survey – 603 from the UK, 504 from the US, 427 from Germany and 472 from Italy. Each answered questions on their attitudes towards the measures taken to contain the spread of the coronavirus.

We found that respondents in the US were significantly less trusting of their government during this crisis than people in other countries. When asked to rate how much of the time they trusted their government on a four-point scale, with 0 being “just about never” and 3 being “just about always”, US respondents came out with an average score of just 0.85. German respondents reported quite a lot of trust, at 1.65, which brings them closer to trusting their government “some” or “most of the time”. In the UK, the trust level was 1.1 and in Italy 1.28.

The significantly different death rates, with Germany standing out with a small number of deaths per capita, in combination with Germany’s and Italy’s earlier responses to the pandemic could partly explain these differences.

There was a similar pattern in media trust, with German respondents having a higher trust (1.49) compared to respondents from the other countries (an average of 1.14).

Faster action needed

When asked what politicians in their country should have done differently, the most common response was to say they should have acted faster. Around three in four answers spoke to this point. This view was particularly prevalent in the UK, where 81% of respondents mentioned it, and in the US, where 74% mentioned it. In Germany, 69% brought it up, and in Italy, where very strict lockdown conditions were introduced, the least number of people (although still 57%) raised the issue.

There was also a strong sense that politicians should have “isolated more”, such as by closing down societal functions, restricting social life and keeping elderly and other risk groups isolated. However, views on this varied between countries. A significant seven out of ten people in the UK thought more isolation would have been preferable but only one in three Germans felt the same. This may also be because German politicians imposed more radical measures at an early stage, whereas UK and US governments have been criticised for reacting late and changing their strategies. However, all in all many respondents from all four countries wanted more isolation.

In the UK and US, the view that politicians should have provided more medical resources (such as hospital beds, personal protective and diagnostic equipment) was twice as common as in Germany and Italy.

Supporting lockdowns 
 
Participants were also asked: “How should the leaders of the world tackle the current situation?”. In response they could either say “open up and only isolate risk groups to save economy and jobs” or “isolate and lock down the whole country as long as needed to reduce the spread of the virus”.

An overwhelming majority (83%) chose isolating and locking down over the option to think more about the economy. However, there was some variation between countries. While 22% of German respondents wanted to open up, only 12% of UK respondents did. In the US, 17% of respondents wanted to open up and in Italy, only 16% did.

As governments decide how to approach the next phase of this crisis, it is clear that their citizens want priority to be given to health issues over economic concerns, which might conflict with politicians’ will to alleviate rising unemployment rates. And, in the longer-term future, some leaders may have some difficult questions to answer about why they didn’t take action sooner.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-us-and-uk-governments-losing-public-trust-137713">original article</a>) &nbsp;

(Thomas Strandberg is PhD candidate, cognitive science, Lund University) 
&nbsp;

By Thomas Strandberg By the beginning of April 2020, a large proportion of the world’s population was living in some level of isolation as their governments took measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

By Thomas Strandberg By the beginning of April 2020, a large proportion of the world’s population was living in some level of isolation as their governments took measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Some countries imposed tight restrictions at an early stage whereas others waited. Findings from a survey taken at the time suggest that early action was the way to go for governments seeking public support. The public preferred their governments to take action more quickly in the UK and the US – two countries facing criticism for their slowness to act. People in these two countries were also less trusting of their governments than in Germany and Italy. One reason behind this could be that politicians in both Germany and Italy acted more decisively compared to their two counterparts, almost immediately imposing lockdown measures. Italy was particularly notable for a high level of trust in the government, despite also suffering a high number of deaths. We asked 2,006 people across four different countries to complete an online survey – 603 from the UK, 504 from the US, 427 from Germany and 472 from Italy. Each answered questions on their attitudes towards the measures taken to contain the spread of the coronavirus. We found that respondents in the US were significantly less trusting of their government during this crisis than people in other countries. When asked to rate how much of the time they trusted their government on a four-point scale, with 0 being “just about never” and 3 being “just about always”, US respondents came out with an average score of just 0.85. German respondents reported quite a lot of trust, at 1.65, which brings them closer to trusting their government “some” or “most of the time”. In the UK, the trust level was 1.1 and in Italy 1.28. The significantly different death rates, with Germany standing out with a small number of deaths per capita, in combination with Germany’s and Italy’s earlier responses to the pandemic could partly explain these differences. There was a similar pattern in media trust, with German respondents having a higher trust (1.49) compared to respondents from the other countries (an average of 1.14). Faster action needed When asked what politicians in their country should have done differently, the most common response was to say they should have acted faster. Around three in four answers spoke to this point. This view was particularly prevalent in the UK, where 81% of respondents mentioned it, and in the US, where 74% mentioned it. In Germany, 69% brought it up, and in Italy, where very strict lockdown conditions were introduced, the least number of people (although still 57%) raised the issue. There was also a strong sense that politicians should have “isolated more”, such as by closing down societal functions, restricting social life and keeping elderly and other risk groups isolated. However, views on this varied between countries. A significant seven out of ten people in the UK thought more isolation would have been preferable but only one in three Germans felt the same. This may also be because German politicians imposed more radical measures at an early stage, whereas UK and US governments have been criticised for reacting late and changing their strategies. However, all in all many respondents from all four countries wanted more isolation. In the UK and US, the view that politicians should have provided more medical resources (such as hospital beds, personal protective and diagnostic equipment) was twice as common as in Germany and Italy. Supporting lockdowns Participants were also asked: “How should the leaders of the world tackle the current situation?”. In response they could either say “open up and only isolate risk groups to save economy and jobs” or “isolate and lock down the whole country as long as needed to reduce the spread of the virus”. An overwhelming majority (83%) chose isolating and locking down over the option to think more about the economy. However, there was some variation between countries. While 22% of German respondents wanted to open up, only 12% of UK respondents did. In the US, 17% of respondents wanted to open up and in Italy, only 16% did. As governments decide how to approach the next phase of this crisis, it is clear that their citizens want priority to be given to health issues over economic concerns, which might conflict with politicians’ will to alleviate rising unemployment rates. And, in the longer-term future, some leaders may have some difficult questions to answer about why they didn’t take action sooner. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Thomas Strandberg is PhD candidate, cognitive science, Lund University)

Coronavirus outbreak: US and UK governments are losing public trust

From historical times, human beings have been surviving despite several types of diseases confronting them. &nbsp;In such conditions, medical science was developed to safeguard human beings from diseases

In ancient India, there were reports of several medicinal practices and development of several types of drugs for the treatment of different types of illness, which were mostly based on natural products and not developed by the synthetic process. Traditionally, such Indian medical practices have been termed as Ayurveda, Siddha etc.

In other countries too, such traditional medical practices have prevailed under various names such as homoeopathy, Unani etc.

In short, the world has been living with diseases from time immemorial and has been responding to the diseases by developing appropriate medical procedures from time to time.

With the changing lifestyle of people, development of synthetic production processes for cosmetics, chemicals, &nbsp;fertilisers, pesticides, etc. and environmental hazards created by industrial operations and transportation, promotion of new food items etc. newer diseases have also been steadily rising.

The medical researchers have not lagged behind and have been developing new drugs and vaccines to treat new and emerging diseases.

COVID-19 is the latest addition to the rest of the diseases in the world.

Huge international efforts have now been taken up to identify the root cause of COVID-19 and develop appropriate drug/vaccine to treat the disease. &nbsp;

Given the past success ratings of medical researchers in handling other diseases, one can be hopeful that appropriate drug/vaccine would also be developed to treat COVID-19 patients.

While medical research has developed phenomenally, it has not been able to prevent the occurrence of the diseases, except in a few cases. Of course, in the case of polio attack, vaccines given to the children at the right time have largely eliminated the polio disease in the world.

However, this cannot be said about several of diseases such as cancer, influenza etc. which continue to occur at a very high level and are being treated.

A similar situation may prevail in future in the case of COVID 19 too, with medical researchers unable to prevent it but only treat it.

While the panicked world is still viewing COVID-19 with great fear and medical researchers are striving hard to develop treatment procedures, certainly, the day will come when the world would reconcile itself to the prevalence of COVID-19, just as it has reconciled itself to the prevalence of diseases like cancer, flu etc. and would also be prepared to treat the disease with appropriate procedures.

Possibly, after six months or so from now, when COVID-19 crisis would settle down, the world community would look back at the COVID-19 crisis and would wonder whether the world had overreacted.

In such circumstances, is it appropriate that the world economy should have been brought down to the level of stagnant or decelerating growth over several months in the year 2020, fearing COVID-19?

Due to such near-global lockdown, billions of poor people have been put to hardships, a large number of people have lost the jobs, many production centres are facing closure and appear that it would take some time for the world to recover from this losses due to lockdown, fearing COVID-19.

Today, it would look odd, if anyone would say that the world has overreacted to COVID-19 and sacrificed it’s social and economic interests.

As the days go by, perhaps, at the beginning of 2021 the world would realise that after all, it could have been a case of overreaction by the world community&nbsp;to the COVID-19 crisis.

In future, the world would add COVID-19 to the list of diseases prevailing in the world, treatment procedures would be evolved and some people would succumb and some people would recover.&nbsp;

The world will move on, &nbsp;just as it has been moving on even as it is confronted with diseases like cancer, flu, heart ailment etc.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

From historical times, human beings have been surviving despite several types of diseases confronting them. In such conditions, medical science was developed to safeguard human beings from diseases In ancient India, there were reports of several medicinal practices and development of several types of drugs for the treatment of different types of illness, which were mostly based on natural products and not developed by the synthetic process.

From historical times, human beings have been surviving despite several types of diseases confronting them. In such conditions, medical science was developed to safeguard human beings from diseases In ancient India, there were reports of several medicinal practices and development of several types of drugs for the treatment of different types of illness, which were mostly based on natural products and not developed by the synthetic process. Traditionally, such Indian medical practices have been termed as Ayurveda, Siddha etc. In other countries too, such traditional medical practices have prevailed under various names such as homoeopathy, Unani etc. In short, the world has been living with diseases from time immemorial and has been responding to the diseases by developing appropriate medical procedures from time to time. With the changing lifestyle of people, development of synthetic production processes for cosmetics, chemicals, fertilisers, pesticides, etc. and environmental hazards created by industrial operations and transportation, promotion of new food items etc. newer diseases have also been steadily rising. The medical researchers have not lagged behind and have been developing new drugs and vaccines to treat new and emerging diseases. COVID-19 is the latest addition to the rest of the diseases in the world. Huge international efforts have now been taken up to identify the root cause of COVID-19 and develop appropriate drug/vaccine to treat the disease. Given the past success ratings of medical researchers in handling other diseases, one can be hopeful that appropriate drug/vaccine would also be developed to treat COVID-19 patients. While medical research has developed phenomenally, it has not been able to prevent the occurrence of the diseases, except in a few cases. Of course, in the case of polio attack, vaccines given to the children at the right time have largely eliminated the polio disease in the world. However, this cannot be said about several of diseases such as cancer, influenza etc. which continue to occur at a very high level and are being treated. A similar situation may prevail in future in the case of COVID 19 too, with medical researchers unable to prevent it but only treat it. While the panicked world is still viewing COVID-19 with great fear and medical researchers are striving hard to develop treatment procedures, certainly, the day will come when the world would reconcile itself to the prevalence of COVID-19, just as it has reconciled itself to the prevalence of diseases like cancer, flu etc. and would also be prepared to treat the disease with appropriate procedures. Possibly, after six months or so from now, when COVID-19 crisis would settle down, the world community would look back at the COVID-19 crisis and would wonder whether the world had overreacted. In such circumstances, is it appropriate that the world economy should have been brought down to the level of stagnant or decelerating growth over several months in the year 2020, fearing COVID-19? Due to such near-global lockdown, billions of poor people have been put to hardships, a large number of people have lost the jobs, many production centres are facing closure and appear that it would take some time for the world to recover from this losses due to lockdown, fearing COVID-19. Today, it would look odd, if anyone would say that the world has overreacted to COVID-19 and sacrificed it’s social and economic interests. As the days go by, perhaps, at the beginning of 2021 the world would realise that after all, it could have been a case of overreaction by the world community to the COVID-19 crisis. In future, the world would add COVID-19 to the list of diseases prevailing in the world, treatment procedures would be evolved and some people would succumb and some people would recover. The world will move on, just as it has been moving on even as it is confronted with diseases like cancer, flu, heart ailment etc. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Is the world overreacting to COVID-19 crisis?

Let me begin by stating what should be obvious.

It may be marginally about health, but the debate about the origin of COVID-19 is really about vast amounts of money, the research programs it supports and the power and prestige that go with them.

It is also about potential complicity or culpability.

On April 30, 2020, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in the United States issued a statement including the following:

“The Intelligence Community also concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified,”

What exactly comprises the “wide scientific consensus?”

If you exclude massive amounts of Chinese propaganda, it is actually based largely on a single, but widely-cited, Nature Medicine article entitled “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2,” and a supporting scientific narrative made by a few Western scientists with possible vested interests in the outcome, linked to a nearly endless regurgitation of the same arguments by the mainstream media.

It appears to be the same formula for artificially creating the “wide scientific consensus” of climate science or COVID-19 epidemiological models, mostly meant to stifle debate by labelling any contrary views as conspiracy theories.

That technique involves stating some scientific facts, but weaving them together in a manner that leads either to an entirely speculative conclusion or a false one, but both sounding definitive.

The truth is that no one yet knows the origin of COVID-19 and to make any categorical statements is misleading.

The naturally-occurring theory claims that coronaviruses circulating in a bat population mutated, acquiring the ability to infect humans, which was then transmitted to people either visiting or working in the Wuhan Seafood Market; &nbsp;

First of all, the initial patients hospitalised between December 1-10, 2019 <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext">had not visited</a> the Wuhan Seafood Market and bats were <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7079563/">not sold </a>there.

According to <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2012-7">data published</a> by Zhengli Shi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the protein sequence of COVID-19 indicates that it most closely resembles the B Lineage of bat beta coronaviruses.

Yet, COVID-19 contains a furin polybasic cleavage site not found in any B Lineage bat beta coronaviruses found in nature.

There may be a scientific explanation for that, which would destroy the naturally-occurring theory of COVID-19.

In nature, B Lineage bat beta coronaviruses may select against the presence of a furin polybasic cleavage site because the biochemical action it induces <a href="https://nerdhaspower.weebly.com/blog/scientific-evidence-and-logic-behind-the-claim-that-the-wuhan-coronavirus-is-man-made#comments">may expose </a>the virus to the more robust immune system of wild animals, especially bats.

Furthermore, the entire naturally-occurring argument made in the much-cited scientific article “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2” rests largely on the sequence of presumed B Lineage bat betacoronavirus RaTG13, which has never been verified outside of China, nor have samples of RaTG13 been provided to independent laboratories for study.&nbsp;

That is, RaTG13 appears to exist only on paper.

It has been reported that early in the COVID-19 outbreak viral samples in the Wuhan Institute of Virology were <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8281085/Wuhan-virus-lab-cover-up.html">destroyed </a>and changes were made in its <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/05/06/what-is-china-covering-up-about-the-coronavirus-devine/">database</a>, allegedly by Zhengli Shi on the evening of December 30th, the day before the World Health Organisation was alerted to the outbreak of a cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan.

Even if RaTG13 exists and the sequence reported by China is accurate, <a href="https://gnews.org/192144/">evidence</a> <a href="https://gnews.org/192144/">suggests</a> that the mutation pattern compared to COVID-19 does not resemble that for similar beta coronaviruses found in nature, indicating that either RaTG13 or COVID-19 is not natural.

It should now be clear even to the dimmest bulbs in Washington that the evidence supporting the naturally-occurring theory of the origin of COVID-19 is questionable and that a broader objective scientific investigation is warranted. 
 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

Let me begin by stating what should be obvious. It may be marginally about health, but the debate about the origin of COVID-19 is really about vast amounts of money, the research programs it supports and the power and prestige that go with them.

Let me begin by stating what should be obvious. It may be marginally about health, but the debate about the origin of COVID-19 is really about vast amounts of money, the research programs it supports and the power and prestige that go with them. It is also about potential complicity or culpability. On April 30, 2020, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in the United States issued a statement including the following: “The Intelligence Community also concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified,” What exactly comprises the “wide scientific consensus?” If you exclude massive amounts of Chinese propaganda, it is actually based largely on a single, but widely-cited, Nature Medicine article entitled “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2,” and a supporting scientific narrative made by a few Western scientists with possible vested interests in the outcome, linked to a nearly endless regurgitation of the same arguments by the mainstream media. It appears to be the same formula for artificially creating the “wide scientific consensus” of climate science or COVID-19 epidemiological models, mostly meant to stifle debate by labelling any contrary views as conspiracy theories. That technique involves stating some scientific facts, but weaving them together in a manner that leads either to an entirely speculative conclusion or a false one, but both sounding definitive. The truth is that no one yet knows the origin of COVID-19 and to make any categorical statements is misleading. The naturally-occurring theory claims that coronaviruses circulating in a bat population mutated, acquiring the ability to infect humans, which was then transmitted to people either visiting or working in the Wuhan Seafood Market; First of all, the initial patients hospitalised between December 1-10, 2019 had not visited the Wuhan Seafood Market and bats were not sold there. According to data published by Zhengli Shi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the protein sequence of COVID-19 indicates that it most closely resembles the B Lineage of bat beta coronaviruses. Yet, COVID-19 contains a furin polybasic cleavage site not found in any B Lineage bat beta coronaviruses found in nature. There may be a scientific explanation for that, which would destroy the naturally-occurring theory of COVID-19. In nature, B Lineage bat beta coronaviruses may select against the presence of a furin polybasic cleavage site because the biochemical action it induces may expose the virus to the more robust immune system of wild animals, especially bats. Furthermore, the entire naturally-occurring argument made in the much-cited scientific article “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2” rests largely on the sequence of presumed B Lineage bat betacoronavirus RaTG13, which has never been verified outside of China, nor have samples of RaTG13 been provided to independent laboratories for study. That is, RaTG13 appears to exist only on paper. It has been reported that early in the COVID-19 outbreak viral samples in the Wuhan Institute of Virology were destroyed and changes were made in its database, allegedly by Zhengli Shi on the evening of December 30th, the day before the World Health Organisation was alerted to the outbreak of a cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan. Even if RaTG13 exists and the sequence reported by China is accurate, evidence suggests that the mutation pattern compared to COVID-19 does not resemble that for similar beta coronaviruses found in nature, indicating that either RaTG13 or COVID-19 is not natural. It should now be clear even to the dimmest bulbs in Washington that the evidence supporting the naturally-occurring theory of the origin of COVID-19 is questionable and that a broader objective scientific investigation is warranted. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Is the COVID-19 naturally-occurring narrative driven by politically-motivated science?

The world today is faced with an unprecedented global crisis that has transcended boundaries and impacted not just the global economy but the daily lives of billions across the world. In the face of the COVID-19 adversity, it is imperative that world leaders exhibit camaraderie and empathy to steer through these testing times together. It is, therefore, heartening to see how some nations are leading the world by cooperating with other countries to combat the pandemic.&nbsp;

In this regard, the G20 group have rallied together to help fulfil the unmet needs of the hour. Under the presidency of Saudi Arabia, virtual conferences are being held frequently by the various sub-committees. The idea of the first virtual summit, for instance, was conceived during a phone call between India and Saudi Arabia last month. While Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been actively interacting with other countries – he spoke to his counterparts in Kuwait, Jordan, UAE, and Bahrain – it is the strategic partnership between Saudi Arabia and India that has been crucial in leading the fight against the pandemic.&nbsp;

India–Saudi ties have been evolving since the inception of Saudi Arabia. Recently, though, the ties have deepened even further. The two countries have been strategic allies and have worked to rapidly deepen trade, economic ties, along with their cultural and energy partnership.

Over the past decade, premiers of both countries have made high-profile visits which have led to enhanced cooperation. The India-Saudi partnership is enriched by sustained people-to-people interaction. Approximately three million Indians reside in Saudi Arabia and send remittances home. Bilateral trade between the countries amounts to approximately $34 billion.&nbsp;

Saudi Arabia is the 15th largest market in the world for Indian exports, with agricultural products being a sizeable export from India.&nbsp;

The two nations have stood together on a number of issues including the security of the region. They stand firmly against terrorism and have founded reputable knowledge sharing platforms. But it is the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak that has really highlighted the strength of the India-Saudi Arabia partnership.

In the face of the pandemic, the two regional powers have united to ensure the health and safety of all. &nbsp;Saudi Arabia recently announced a slew of measures to benefit millions of expatriates living there, including Indians. The Kingdom is providing coronavirus-related medical care free of charge to all expatriates. Saudi Arabia has been quick to launch country-wide awareness campaigns around COVID-19. These are being run in Hindi, Urdu and other languages so as not to leave anyone out.&nbsp;

In what can be termed an act of compassion, Saudi Arabia’s General Directorate of Passports has decided to extend the validity of exit and return visas that expire between February 25 and May 24, 2020, at no charge. And India has recognised Saudi Arabia for these gestures. In a telephonic conversation, India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar thanked Prince Faisal, Finance Minister of Saudi Arabia, for taking care of Indians there.&nbsp;

It is, therefore, not surprising that when it came to setting an agenda to combat COVID 19, both India and Saudi Arabia took the first step. The Extraordinary G20 Leaders’ Summit was one of the first international consultations on the issue. Held under the Saudi presidency, it witnessed participation from Prime Minister Modi. The meeting resulted in a commitment from member countries to overcome the pandemic, along with the World Health Organisation (WHO), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank Group (WBG), United Nations (UN), and other international organisations.

Addressing international trade disruptions and safeguarding the economy were set as immediate priorities. Saudi Arabia has already pledged $500 million to various international organisations to support global efforts in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the second virtual meeting of G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, India’s Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman shared policy measures undertaken by the Indian government and the Reserve Bank of India to support the poor and the most vulnerable during the ongoing crisis. Furthermore, the G20 countries agreed to suspend debt service payments for the world's poorest countries through the end of the year.&nbsp;

At the Extraordinary G20 Energy Ministers’ virtual meeting, India’s Energy Minister Dharmendra Pradhan appreciated the collective efforts of OPEC and OPEC-plus countries. As Saudi Arabia is one of the largest suppliers of crude oil and LPG to India, the recent events have been followed very closely.

The situation today has led to strategic ties being formed in the healthcare sector as well. But it should be said that these ties could not have been formed if there weren’t existing ties between countries already.

The Middle East - and in particular Saudi Arabia &nbsp;- is very important in the Indian context; nearly 40 billion dollars are received in remittances from this region, with a bulk coming from Saudi Arabia. Apart from this, the region has very strong cultural ties to the subcontinent. It is, therefore, imperative that the security of this space be maintained and partnerships be deepened to minimise the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

In this coronavirus-driven scenario, both Saudi Arabia and India have a tall task ahead of them, one that be achieved through co-operation with other players in the region as well.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The world today is faced with an unprecedented global crisis that has transcended boundaries and impacted not just the global economy but the daily lives of billions across the world.

The world today is faced with an unprecedented global crisis that has transcended boundaries and impacted not just the global economy but the daily lives of billions across the world. In the face of the COVID-19 adversity, it is imperative that world leaders exhibit camaraderie and empathy to steer through these testing times together. It is, therefore, heartening to see how some nations are leading the world by cooperating with other countries to combat the pandemic. In this regard, the G20 group have rallied together to help fulfil the unmet needs of the hour. Under the presidency of Saudi Arabia, virtual conferences are being held frequently by the various sub-committees. The idea of the first virtual summit, for instance, was conceived during a phone call between India and Saudi Arabia last month. While Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been actively interacting with other countries – he spoke to his counterparts in Kuwait, Jordan, UAE, and Bahrain – it is the strategic partnership between Saudi Arabia and India that has been crucial in leading the fight against the pandemic. India–Saudi ties have been evolving since the inception of Saudi Arabia. Recently, though, the ties have deepened even further. The two countries have been strategic allies and have worked to rapidly deepen trade, economic ties, along with their cultural and energy partnership. Over the past decade, premiers of both countries have made high-profile visits which have led to enhanced cooperation. The India-Saudi partnership is enriched by sustained people-to-people interaction. Approximately three million Indians reside in Saudi Arabia and send remittances home. Bilateral trade between the countries amounts to approximately $34 billion. Saudi Arabia is the 15th largest market in the world for Indian exports, with agricultural products being a sizeable export from India. The two nations have stood together on a number of issues including the security of the region. They stand firmly against terrorism and have founded reputable knowledge sharing platforms. But it is the ongoing COVID-19 outbreak that has really highlighted the strength of the India-Saudi Arabia partnership. In the face of the pandemic, the two regional powers have united to ensure the health and safety of all. Saudi Arabia recently announced a slew of measures to benefit millions of expatriates living there, including Indians. The Kingdom is providing coronavirus-related medical care free of charge to all expatriates. Saudi Arabia has been quick to launch country-wide awareness campaigns around COVID-19. These are being run in Hindi, Urdu and other languages so as not to leave anyone out. In what can be termed an act of compassion, Saudi Arabia’s General Directorate of Passports has decided to extend the validity of exit and return visas that expire between February 25 and May 24, 2020, at no charge. And India has recognised Saudi Arabia for these gestures. In a telephonic conversation, India’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar thanked Prince Faisal, Finance Minister of Saudi Arabia, for taking care of Indians there. It is, therefore, not surprising that when it came to setting an agenda to combat COVID 19, both India and Saudi Arabia took the first step. The Extraordinary G20 Leaders’ Summit was one of the first international consultations on the issue. Held under the Saudi presidency, it witnessed participation from Prime Minister Modi. The meeting resulted in a commitment from member countries to overcome the pandemic, along with the World Health Organisation (WHO), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank Group (WBG), United Nations (UN), and other international organisations. Addressing international trade disruptions and safeguarding the economy were set as immediate priorities. Saudi Arabia has already pledged $500 million to various international organisations to support global efforts in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic. In the second virtual meeting of G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, India’s Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman shared policy measures undertaken by the Indian government and the Reserve Bank of India to support the poor and the most vulnerable during the ongoing crisis. Furthermore, the G20 countries agreed to suspend debt service payments for the world's poorest countries through the end of the year. At the Extraordinary G20 Energy Ministers’ virtual meeting, India’s Energy Minister Dharmendra Pradhan appreciated the collective efforts of OPEC and OPEC-plus countries. As Saudi Arabia is one of the largest suppliers of crude oil and LPG to India, the recent events have been followed very closely. The situation today has led to strategic ties being formed in the healthcare sector as well. But it should be said that these ties could not have been formed if there weren’t existing ties between countries already. The Middle East - and in particular Saudi Arabia - is very important in the Indian context; nearly 40 billion dollars are received in remittances from this region, with a bulk coming from Saudi Arabia. Apart from this, the region has very strong cultural ties to the subcontinent. It is, therefore, imperative that the security of this space be maintained and partnerships be deepened to minimise the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this coronavirus-driven scenario, both Saudi Arabia and India have a tall task ahead of them, one that be achieved through co-operation with other players in the region as well. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Saudi-India alliance is crucial in the fight against COVID-19

Anyone who, at this juncture, states, categorically, that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring disease that mutated in animal populations, acquiring the ability to infect humans and did so via bats in the Wuhan Seafood Market, has not read or does not understand the scientific literature.

Yes, coronaviruses have previously “jumped” from animals to humans, but does not mean COVID-19 did.

First of all, it was already known by the end of January 2020 that the initial patients hospitalised between December 1-10, 2019 had <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/is-china-lying-about-the-science-of-covid-19-297002">not visited</a> the Wuhan Seafood Market and by the beginning of February 2020, a scientific report established that there were<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7079563/"> no bats </a>sold in that market.

Those observations alone should have immediately raised doubts within the scientific community about the validity of a naturally-occurring theory for COVID-19. &nbsp;

There is also no evolutionary pathway that conclusively demonstrates that COVID-19 was the product of a natural process.

Questioning the naturally-occurring theory for the origin of COVID-19 is especially warranted given the presence of the unique furin polybasic cleavage site that does not exist in any of the yet-identified coronavirus close relatives.

There are, however, other reasons for scientists to doubt the naturally-occurring theory.

Viruses can change naturally or artificially through mutation, recombination events or both. Given the sophistication of modern techniques, the two can be indistinguishable. Nevertheless, sometimes clues are left behind.

The claim that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring is based nearly entirely on a single, but widely-cited Nature Medicine article entitled “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2,” which compares the structure of COVID-19 to what the authors consider its closest relative found in animal populations, specifically, the bat coronavirus RaTG13.

RaTG13 was isolated by Wuhan Institute of Virology scientists from Yunnan Province bats in July 2013, but, strangely, its sequence was not submitted for publication until January 2020 and was unknown to the scientific community before then.

It does not appear that anyone outside of China has verified the sequence of RaTG13 nor have any independent laboratories had an opportunity to conduct experiments on a strain critical to the naturally-occurring theory. One author <a href="https://nerdhaspower.weebly.com/">suggests</a> the RaTG13 sequence might be fabricated.

For the sake of argument, let’s consider the sequence accurate.

The naturally-occurring theory for the origin of COVID-19, which is entirely based on comparing its structure to RaTG13, begins to unravel when the genome of RaTG13 is examined more closely compared to the amino acid sequence.

<a href="https://nerdhaspower.weebly.com/blog/scientific-evidence-and-logic-behind-the-claim-that-the-wuhan-coronavirus-is-man-made#comments">Comparing the sequences</a> in the S2 portion of the critical spike protein, between positions 647 and 1124, which would ordinarily <a href="https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa203/5780800">tolerate mutations</a>, not a single amino acid changes. Yet, at the gene level, which codes for those amino acids, the two differ 79 times.

Stated simply, the <a href="https://nerdhaspower.weebly.com/blog/scientific-evidence-and-logic-behind-the-claim-that-the-wuhan-coronavirus-is-man-made#comments">statistical probability</a> of that occurring is 1 in 9,526,094, suggesting either COVID-19 or RaTG13 is not natural.

It is clearly premature to say definitively that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring when we do not fully know about what coronaviruses China has isolated, what experiments have been done with them and if the conclusions published by Chinese scientists are accurate, in particular, those conclusions published in 2020.

Since the outbreak began, China has flooded the scientific literature with subtle and sometimes not so subtle messages supporting its narrative that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring.

Despite the enormous number of comments made by Western media and the amount of digital ink expended by its so-called experts, the main evidence presented so far supporting the naturally-occurring theory of the origin of COVID-19 may be, at best, circumstantial or, at worst, completely wrong.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

Anyone who, at this juncture, states, categorically, that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring disease that mutated in animal populations, acquiring the ability to infect humans and did so via bats in the Wuhan Seafood Market, has not read or does not understand the scientific literature.

Anyone who, at this juncture, states, categorically, that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring disease that mutated in animal populations, acquiring the ability to infect humans and did so via bats in the Wuhan Seafood Market, has not read or does not understand the scientific literature. Yes, coronaviruses have previously “jumped” from animals to humans, but does not mean COVID-19 did. First of all, it was already known by the end of January 2020 that the initial patients hospitalised between December 1-10, 2019 had not visited the Wuhan Seafood Market and by the beginning of February 2020, a scientific report established that there were no bats sold in that market. Those observations alone should have immediately raised doubts within the scientific community about the validity of a naturally-occurring theory for COVID-19. There is also no evolutionary pathway that conclusively demonstrates that COVID-19 was the product of a natural process. Questioning the naturally-occurring theory for the origin of COVID-19 is especially warranted given the presence of the unique furin polybasic cleavage site that does not exist in any of the yet-identified coronavirus close relatives. There are, however, other reasons for scientists to doubt the naturally-occurring theory. Viruses can change naturally or artificially through mutation, recombination events or both. Given the sophistication of modern techniques, the two can be indistinguishable. Nevertheless, sometimes clues are left behind. The claim that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring is based nearly entirely on a single, but widely-cited Nature Medicine article entitled “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2,” which compares the structure of COVID-19 to what the authors consider its closest relative found in animal populations, specifically, the bat coronavirus RaTG13. RaTG13 was isolated by Wuhan Institute of Virology scientists from Yunnan Province bats in July 2013, but, strangely, its sequence was not submitted for publication until January 2020 and was unknown to the scientific community before then. It does not appear that anyone outside of China has verified the sequence of RaTG13 nor have any independent laboratories had an opportunity to conduct experiments on a strain critical to the naturally-occurring theory. One author suggests the RaTG13 sequence might be fabricated. For the sake of argument, let’s consider the sequence accurate. The naturally-occurring theory for the origin of COVID-19, which is entirely based on comparing its structure to RaTG13, begins to unravel when the genome of RaTG13 is examined more closely compared to the amino acid sequence. Comparing the sequences in the S2 portion of the critical spike protein, between positions 647 and 1124, which would ordinarily tolerate mutations, not a single amino acid changes. Yet, at the gene level, which codes for those amino acids, the two differ 79 times. Stated simply, the statistical probability of that occurring is 1 in 9,526,094, suggesting either COVID-19 or RaTG13 is not natural. It is clearly premature to say definitively that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring when we do not fully know about what coronaviruses China has isolated, what experiments have been done with them and if the conclusions published by Chinese scientists are accurate, in particular, those conclusions published in 2020. Since the outbreak began, China has flooded the scientific literature with subtle and sometimes not so subtle messages supporting its narrative that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring. Despite the enormous number of comments made by Western media and the amount of digital ink expended by its so-called experts, the main evidence presented so far supporting the naturally-occurring theory of the origin of COVID-19 may be, at best, circumstantial or, at worst, completely wrong. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Is China lying about the science of COVID-19?

You probably saw the huge number of people congregated outside liquor stores. The excitement was around the fact that alcohol would now be available - ‘finally’ was how a friend put it.&nbsp;

We saw long, patient, winding queues outside the liquor stores, some of them stretching out to over a kilometre. We also saw unruly excitable crowds, clamouring over each other for a bottle. Police used batons in Kolkata, shops had to be shut in Delhi, aartis and pujas were performed, and people clapped as customers walked out with their cartons - a wide range of reactions that tell us, a drink was missed.&nbsp;

Alcohol and the human race go back a long way. We officially started brewing liquor around 9000 years ago. The Chinese used rice, honey and fruit to make wine, Babylonians worshipped a wine goddess, grapes were one of the first fruits to be domesticated, and Indian gods themselves drank ‘som ras’. The love of alcohol is universal. It was adopted across continents (except perhaps Antarctica) with great enthusiasm. Every plant with sugar or starch was fermented - apples, grapes, rice, berries, corn, cacti, palms, potatoes. In harsh terrains like Central Asia, where there was no grain or fruit, the nomads used fermented horse milk - there was always a way. There are theories that suggest even as primates, our ancestors figured that overripe, rotting, fermented fruit, lying on the forest floor, had benefits.

It was no surprise that the demand for liquor was one of the topmost requests all through the lockdown, and not just from us. The state governments have also been urging the centre to allow them to open up. The ban on liquor stores was costing the government close to 700 crore rupees a day. For many states, it is a hefty 15-25&nbsp;&nbsp;per cent their tax revenue (except Bihar and Gujarat of course). An RBI report shows that all states and UT’s had budgeted Rs.1,75,501.42 crore from state excise duty on liquor. However, the planned flow of money dried up with the lockdown.

We guzzled 5.4 billion litres in 2016 and were expected to go up to about 6.5 billion litres by the end of 2020.&nbsp;

Alcohol has the power to alter our minds, foster creativity and importantly, releases chemicals that make us feel good, happier, less anxious. However, there exists another side. The intoxicating power of ethanol has always been a matter of concern. Greek literature is full of warnings, Mahabharata has a moral story, and in the present day, we have all the alarming statistics.

Consumption of alcohol is the worlds third-largest risk factor for disease and disability. The impact is not limited to the individual but often extends to family, friends and the extended community. It has a deep impact on a socio-economic level, where a huge percentage of meagre salaries are spent on intoxicants. It often leads to domestic violence, child abuse and neglect. It impacts productivity and increases absenteeism in the workplace. There are millions around the world who are suffering alcoholics, a huge number of people die in accidents due to drunk driving, this list could go on.

Obviously there is much to worry about the increasing acceptability and accessibility of alcohol. The world is drinking much more - a 70 per cent increase between 1990 and 2017. The fear is - it could get worse during a lockdown. There have been studies that indicate a direct correlation between consumption and higher levels of anxiety and stress.

After rice, potatoes and dal, we are now seeing panic buying of liquor. When you’re buying extra, the chances are you will be drinking more than normal too. Stress can be an excuse, or perhaps boredom, making up for lost time, a well-stocked bar at home, there are many reasons to reach out.&nbsp;

We are vulnerable right now.&nbsp;A glass of wine or a tumbler of whiskey can bring a feeling of relief and a sense of celebration, but it can go the other way too. We have to be careful.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

You probably saw the huge number of people congregated outside liquor stores. The excitement was around the fact that alcohol would now be available - ‘finally’ was how a friend put it.

You probably saw the huge number of people congregated outside liquor stores. The excitement was around the fact that alcohol would now be available - ‘finally’ was how a friend put it. We saw long, patient, winding queues outside the liquor stores, some of them stretching out to over a kilometre. We also saw unruly excitable crowds, clamouring over each other for a bottle. Police used batons in Kolkata, shops had to be shut in Delhi, aartis and pujas were performed, and people clapped as customers walked out with their cartons - a wide range of reactions that tell us, a drink was missed. Alcohol and the human race go back a long way. We officially started brewing liquor around 9000 years ago. The Chinese used rice, honey and fruit to make wine, Babylonians worshipped a wine goddess, grapes were one of the first fruits to be domesticated, and Indian gods themselves drank ‘som ras’. The love of alcohol is universal. It was adopted across continents (except perhaps Antarctica) with great enthusiasm. Every plant with sugar or starch was fermented - apples, grapes, rice, berries, corn, cacti, palms, potatoes. In harsh terrains like Central Asia, where there was no grain or fruit, the nomads used fermented horse milk - there was always a way. There are theories that suggest even as primates, our ancestors figured that overripe, rotting, fermented fruit, lying on the forest floor, had benefits. It was no surprise that the demand for liquor was one of the topmost requests all through the lockdown, and not just from us. The state governments have also been urging the centre to allow them to open up. The ban on liquor stores was costing the government close to 700 crore rupees a day. For many states, it is a hefty 15-25 per cent their tax revenue (except Bihar and Gujarat of course). An RBI report shows that all states and UT’s had budgeted Rs.1,75,501.42 crore from state excise duty on liquor. However, the planned flow of money dried up with the lockdown. We guzzled 5.4 billion litres in 2016 and were expected to go up to about 6.5 billion litres by the end of 2020. Alcohol has the power to alter our minds, foster creativity and importantly, releases chemicals that make us feel good, happier, less anxious. However, there exists another side. The intoxicating power of ethanol has always been a matter of concern. Greek literature is full of warnings, Mahabharata has a moral story, and in the present day, we have all the alarming statistics. Consumption of alcohol is the worlds third-largest risk factor for disease and disability. The impact is not limited to the individual but often extends to family, friends and the extended community. It has a deep impact on a socio-economic level, where a huge percentage of meagre salaries are spent on intoxicants. It often leads to domestic violence, child abuse and neglect. It impacts productivity and increases absenteeism in the workplace. There are millions around the world who are suffering alcoholics, a huge number of people die in accidents due to drunk driving, this list could go on. Obviously there is much to worry about the increasing acceptability and accessibility of alcohol. The world is drinking much more - a 70 per cent increase between 1990 and 2017. The fear is - it could get worse during a lockdown. There have been studies that indicate a direct correlation between consumption and higher levels of anxiety and stress. After rice, potatoes and dal, we are now seeing panic buying of liquor. When you’re buying extra, the chances are you will be drinking more than normal too. Stress can be an excuse, or perhaps boredom, making up for lost time, a well-stocked bar at home, there are many reasons to reach out. We are vulnerable right now. A glass of wine or a tumbler of whiskey can bring a feeling of relief and a sense of celebration, but it can go the other way too. We have to be careful. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Liquor shops open: Do we have self-restraint - in queue and at home?

Racism and xenophobia are on the rise in China.

Videos of racism against African expats in China are still doing the rounds. Videos of 'perceived' coronavirus carriers being evicted from hotels. Videos of African citizens sleeping on the streets, being kicked, being spat on and being attacked.

Africa's anger is being&nbsp;fueled by these racist attacks African nationals are facing in China.&nbsp;A group of Nigerian lawyers is suing China. They are demanding $200 billion from Beijing. Now, a Nigerian Senator, Benjamin Kalu, has moved a motion on the 'institutional discrimination against Nigerians in China.'

Nigeria is not the first country in Africa to set the record straight. A number of other African governments have already lodged complaints with their respective Chinese embassies.

Last month, the government of Ghana had summoned the Chinese ambassador to express its disappointment. Uganda and Kenya also summoned the Chinese ambassador over the harassment and mistreatment of their nationals.

The African Union earlier this month expressed its "extreme concern" about the situation in Guangzhou and called on Beijing to take immediate corrective measures. 
 
Reports say thousands of African-origin people have been left homeless after being evicted over fears that they could be spreading the coronavirus. In fact, the outrage against 
 
China crosses continents. Kazakhstan summoned the Chinese ambassador a few weeks back to protest against an article by the Chinese state media.

An article which floated the idea that Kazakhstan was keen to become a part of China.

In April, the French government expressed disapproval over a Chinese diplomat's claims that France had left its older citizens to die.

Moreover, an internal report has warned that global anti-China sentiment is currently at its highest -- ever since the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown.

 
&nbsp;

Racism and xenophobia are on the rise in China. Videos of racism against African expats in China are still doing the rounds. Videos of 'perceived' coronavirus carriers being evicted from hotels.

Racism and xenophobia are on the rise in China. Videos of racism against African expats in China are still doing the rounds. Videos of 'perceived' coronavirus carriers being evicted from hotels. Videos of African citizens sleeping on the streets, being kicked, being spat on and being attacked. Africa's anger is being fueled by these racist attacks African nationals are facing in China. A group of Nigerian lawyers is suing China. They are demanding $200 billion from Beijing. Now, a Nigerian Senator, Benjamin Kalu, has moved a motion on the 'institutional discrimination against Nigerians in China.' Nigeria is not the first country in Africa to set the record straight. A number of other African governments have already lodged complaints with their respective Chinese embassies. Last month, the government of Ghana had summoned the Chinese ambassador to express its disappointment. Uganda and Kenya also summoned the Chinese ambassador over the harassment and mistreatment of their nationals. The African Union earlier this month expressed its "extreme concern" about the situation in Guangzhou and called on Beijing to take immediate corrective measures. Reports say thousands of African-origin people have been left homeless after being evicted over fears that they could be spreading the coronavirus. In fact, the outrage against China crosses continents. Kazakhstan summoned the Chinese ambassador a few weeks back to protest against an article by the Chinese state media. An article which floated the idea that Kazakhstan was keen to become a part of China. In April, the French government expressed disapproval over a Chinese diplomat's claims that France had left its older citizens to die. Moreover, an internal report has warned that global anti-China sentiment is currently at its highest -- ever since the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown.

African nations decry racism in China

Giving it a patriotic spin, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-lashes-out-at-pompeo-calls-his-coronavirus-origin-theory-insane-296778">China</a> is branding its coronavirus victims as martyrs, but at the same time, Beijing is&nbsp;targetting the grieving relatives who want to know the truth about this outbreak.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
People who have lost their loved ones to the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/has-the-us-china-cold-war-now-begun-295905">coronavirus pandemic</a> want explanation and compensation from the Chinese government.

But the government is in no mood to explain, instead, China is clamping down. It is censoring news articles about the outbreak and Wuhan's mourning survivors.&nbsp;

Those who challenged the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/intel-shared-among-us-allies-contradicts-trumps-claims-says-coronavirus-outbreak-more-likely-came-from-market-296696">Communist Party narrative </a>are being singled out. Some residents reached out to an activist, Yang Zhan Qing, seeking help to sue the government.

However, they were silenced just like the whistleblowers, doctors and the journalists. Some Bereaved family members&nbsp;have faced police interrogation. Moreover, lawyers have been warned not to file any suit against the government.

The Communist Party does not want anyone to challenge the official narrative. So, they are making sure that no one raises a question.

Leaders of the US, the UK and Germany believe that the deaths and the destruction of the global economy could have been avoided, had China shared the information about the virus in its early phases. COVID-19 has infected 3,642,068 people worldwide and 252,024 people have been killed due to this pandemic till date. 
&nbsp;

Giving it a patriotic spin, China is branding its coronavirus victims as martyrs, but at the same time, Beijing is targetting the grieving relatives who want to know the truth about this outbreak.

Giving it a patriotic spin, China is branding its coronavirus victims as martyrs, but at the same time, Beijing is targetting the grieving relatives who want to know the truth about this outbreak. People who have lost their loved ones to the coronavirus pandemic want explanation and compensation from the Chinese government. But the government is in no mood to explain, instead, China is clamping down. It is censoring news articles about the outbreak and Wuhan's mourning survivors. Those who challenged the Communist Party narrative are being singled out. Some residents reached out to an activist, Yang Zhan Qing, seeking help to sue the government. However, they were silenced just like the whistleblowers, doctors and the journalists. Some Bereaved family members have faced police interrogation. Moreover, lawyers have been warned not to file any suit against the government. The Communist Party does not want anyone to challenge the official narrative. So, they are making sure that no one raises a question. Leaders of the US, the UK and Germany believe that the deaths and the destruction of the global economy could have been avoided, had China shared the information about the virus in its early phases. COVID-19 has infected 3,642,068 people worldwide and 252,024 people have been killed due to this pandemic till date.

Coronavirus survivors in China want to sue their government: Report

Up to the 17th century, most of the “knowledge/office work” used to happen at home. However, professionals in time realised that they needed a dedicated space to work. Response to a crisis generally changes the ways the world operates. After World War II, Germany was once again looking for ways to rebuild itself. With the advancements in telecommunication, offices could be segregated from factories and warehouses. It was the German concept of Bürolandschaft that has been further tweaked into today’s “office landscape”. &nbsp;

Today the 9-5 office forms a major part of the workforce in the ‘big cities.’ The formal sector economy is hugely concentrated in these major metropolitan cities which in-turn become over crowed areas of the skilled workforce. As per the Boston Consulting Group (BCG), India’s biggest cities may be losing up to $22 billion annually to traffic congestion. The commuters are largely bearing the burden. On average the travellers in Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, and Kolkata spend 1.5 hours more on their daily commutes compared to their counterparts in other Asian cities mitigating traffic during peak hours. Overcrowding of these metro cities also means logistic concerns for the state authorise.&nbsp;

The pandemic, however, forced the authorities to push people to maintain hygiene. One way to arrange it is by providing flexible work condition including work from home, wherever possible. &nbsp;

Coronavirus pandemic has once again propelled the world to change its way of operation. The public health emergency under which globe is reeling had locked downed over 3 billion people by mid-March, 2020. The business has plummeted to its worst crisis since the 2008-09 Lehman debacle. Industries like tourism, fashion and sports have been brought to a complete standstill as ‘contact’ is quintessential for these industries. Amidst the ‘lockdown’, the economy still needs to churn. It is a clarion call that ‘social distancing’ must be accepted as a behavioural change and offices must be encouraged to operate with minimal physical contact. Therefore, one thing that has become concomitant is ‘Work from Home” and it is here to stay.&nbsp;

The Gurugram administration has recently asked its IT companies to allow ‘Work from Home’ facility for their employees till July 2020. Similar steps should be emulated for all companies where human contact can be voluntary, even after the lockdown is over. More industries and sectors must be identified where ‘Work from Home’ is feasible. Obviously the WFH model is not feasible in every industry like manufacturing, hospitality, performing arts, entertainment etc. But many sectors can be identified in which daily physical contact may not be obligatory. For instance, at one point physical presence was considered essential for the function of courts; but with the help of technology, the legal system is also coping with the situation. A similar approach must be identified in other sectors too. &nbsp;

The government sector in India had never, previously, accepted the idea of work from home. But necessity is the mother of innovation and during the lockdown period, many employees have been allowed to continue work from home. Leading PSUs have adopted and even found value in the WFH model.&nbsp;

Even with all its benefits, the WFH model has its own problems, such as improper infrastructure at home. The firewalls required for electronic communication are not as adept at home as at office and necessary precautions have not been taken to protect against data piracy. However, these are temporary micro issues pertaining to generally people involved in the IT sector. If eventually, work from home does become a viable long-term alternative, care would be taken to enhance infrastructure and ensure that data is protected.&nbsp;

Few silver linings have come to light as people worked from home during the ‘lockdown’. Globally, pollution levels have diminished to their lowest in years. Major cities like Beijing, Mumbai, Delhi, etc., have had clear skies and the traffic has been impeccably smooth. The cities had been previously at a breaking point due to over-crowding and pollution but have shown signs of ecological improvement. &nbsp;

This has in turn helped with the quality of life for employees who used to be stranded in traffic for hours damaging the environment as well as causing personal damage to health. It is high time that people find innovative solutions in order to live in harmony along with the ecology.&nbsp;

Concept of Work from Home is also beneficial for employers who can save on real estate with smaller workspaces. Small town industries can pick up when there is a scope of talent joining from anywhere. It shall also curtail over-crowding of the metropolitans if the skilled worker does not have to migrate from their own towns looking for ‘suitable’ job opportunities. &nbsp;

The idea is also in the interest of women who are traditionally in a quandary to maintain a work-life balance. Work from anywhere can attract more women to continue with jobs even after facing difficult life choices like returning to work post-maternity.

Businesses should stop treating ‘work from home’ as an aberration. Tata Consultancy Services with a workforce of 4.5 lakh has announced to adapt the ‘Secure Borderless Model’ where 75 per cent of its employees will be working from home in the longer run. New age dynamics allot marks for working and not for mere physical presence. To boost productivity, one has to ascertain that the workforce is not ‘exhausted’ all the time. Many a time, an employee has to mark his absence from important deliberations because they cannot ‘reach on time’. However if the need to reach on time physically is out of the picture, then everyone may be available on video-call (though at different places). &nbsp;

Work from Home may not supplant, but surely can supplement the traditional way of working. For people fretting at the thought of finding no ‘connection’ or camaraderie in the workplace, many things can be put in place. For instance, there is a concept of ‘virtual water-cooler’ scheduled as ‘cloud-meetings’ of mix groups in offices which promote employees to mingle and have informal conversations and bond over non-work discussions. &nbsp;

As is said, when life gives you lemons, make lemonade! Dealing with a pandemic is tough, but the good lessons can always be adapted.&nbsp; 
 
(The article is co-authored by Tanvi Saran Srivastava. She is Law Officer in MSTC Ltd, CPSU.)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

Up to the 17th century, most of the “knowledge/office work” used to happen at home. However, professionals in time realised that they needed a dedicated space to work.

Up to the 17th century, most of the “knowledge/office work” used to happen at home. However, professionals in time realised that they needed a dedicated space to work. Response to a crisis generally changes the ways the world operates. After World War II, Germany was once again looking for ways to rebuild itself. With the advancements in telecommunication, offices could be segregated from factories and warehouses. It was the German concept of Bürolandschaft that has been further tweaked into today’s “office landscape”. Today the 9-5 office forms a major part of the workforce in the ‘big cities.’ The formal sector economy is hugely concentrated in these major metropolitan cities which in-turn become over crowed areas of the skilled workforce. As per the Boston Consulting Group (BCG), India’s biggest cities may be losing up to $22 billion annually to traffic congestion. The commuters are largely bearing the burden. On average the travellers in Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru, and Kolkata spend 1.5 hours more on their daily commutes compared to their counterparts in other Asian cities mitigating traffic during peak hours. Overcrowding of these metro cities also means logistic concerns for the state authorise. The pandemic, however, forced the authorities to push people to maintain hygiene. One way to arrange it is by providing flexible work condition including work from home, wherever possible. Coronavirus pandemic has once again propelled the world to change its way of operation. The public health emergency under which globe is reeling had locked downed over 3 billion people by mid-March, 2020. The business has plummeted to its worst crisis since the 2008-09 Lehman debacle. Industries like tourism, fashion and sports have been brought to a complete standstill as ‘contact’ is quintessential for these industries. Amidst the ‘lockdown’, the economy still needs to churn. It is a clarion call that ‘social distancing’ must be accepted as a behavioural change and offices must be encouraged to operate with minimal physical contact. Therefore, one thing that has become concomitant is ‘Work from Home” and it is here to stay. The Gurugram administration has recently asked its IT companies to allow ‘Work from Home’ facility for their employees till July 2020. Similar steps should be emulated for all companies where human contact can be voluntary, even after the lockdown is over. More industries and sectors must be identified where ‘Work from Home’ is feasible. Obviously the WFH model is not feasible in every industry like manufacturing, hospitality, performing arts, entertainment etc. But many sectors can be identified in which daily physical contact may not be obligatory. For instance, at one point physical presence was considered essential for the function of courts; but with the help of technology, the legal system is also coping with the situation. A similar approach must be identified in other sectors too. The government sector in India had never, previously, accepted the idea of work from home. But necessity is the mother of innovation and during the lockdown period, many employees have been allowed to continue work from home. Leading PSUs have adopted and even found value in the WFH model. Even with all its benefits, the WFH model has its own problems, such as improper infrastructure at home. The firewalls required for electronic communication are not as adept at home as at office and necessary precautions have not been taken to protect against data piracy. However, these are temporary micro issues pertaining to generally people involved in the IT sector. If eventually, work from home does become a viable long-term alternative, care would be taken to enhance infrastructure and ensure that data is protected. Few silver linings have come to light as people worked from home during the ‘lockdown’. Globally, pollution levels have diminished to their lowest in years. Major cities like Beijing, Mumbai, Delhi, etc., have had clear skies and the traffic has been impeccably smooth. The cities had been previously at a breaking point due to over-crowding and pollution but have shown signs of ecological improvement. This has in turn helped with the quality of life for employees who used to be stranded in traffic for hours damaging the environment as well as causing personal damage to health. It is high time that people find innovative solutions in order to live in harmony along with the ecology. Concept of Work from Home is also beneficial for employers who can save on real estate with smaller workspaces. Small town industries can pick up when there is a scope of talent joining from anywhere. It shall also curtail over-crowding of the metropolitans if the skilled worker does not have to migrate from their own towns looking for ‘suitable’ job opportunities. The idea is also in the interest of women who are traditionally in a quandary to maintain a work-life balance. Work from anywhere can attract more women to continue with jobs even after facing difficult life choices like returning to work post-maternity. Businesses should stop treating ‘work from home’ as an aberration. Tata Consultancy Services with a workforce of 4.5 lakh has announced to adapt the ‘Secure Borderless Model’ where 75 per cent of its employees will be working from home in the longer run. New age dynamics allot marks for working and not for mere physical presence. To boost productivity, one has to ascertain that the workforce is not ‘exhausted’ all the time. Many a time, an employee has to mark his absence from important deliberations because they cannot ‘reach on time’. However if the need to reach on time physically is out of the picture, then everyone may be available on video-call (though at different places). Work from Home may not supplant, but surely can supplement the traditional way of working. For people fretting at the thought of finding no ‘connection’ or camaraderie in the workplace, many things can be put in place. For instance, there is a concept of ‘virtual water-cooler’ scheduled as ‘cloud-meetings’ of mix groups in offices which promote employees to mingle and have informal conversations and bond over non-work discussions. As is said, when life gives you lemons, make lemonade! Dealing with a pandemic is tough, but the good lessons can always be adapted. (The article is co-authored by Tanvi Saran Srivastava. She is Law Officer in MSTC Ltd, CPSU.) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Is work from home the new normal?

Facing COVID 19 crisis, several countries including India placed orders for test kits from China for testing for antibodies to the coronavirus

India ordered from China more than half a million kits to boost its screening.

After receiving the test kits, Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), the top agency dealing with Coronavirus outbreak in India, said that the performance of the test kits received from China is not reliable and therefore, asked all states in India not to use the Chinese test kits anymore.

This decision of ICMR not to use test kits from China has provoked angry reactions from China, which termed &nbsp;Indian decision as unfair and irresponsible. China gave itself self-certification that Chinese authorities have validated the equipment produced by the two Chinese firms namely Guangzhou Wondfo Biotech and Zhuhai Livzon Diagnostics.

Like a typical seller who would like to save his skin after supplying bad quality products, &nbsp;China has virtually accused &nbsp;Indian medical practitioners of not having enough expertise to use the equipment. China said “The tests needed to be carried out in a professional manner to produce accurate results. There are strict requirements for the storage, transportation and use of COVID-19 antibody rapid test kits. Any operation which is not carried out by professionals in accordance with the product specifications will lead to the testing accuracy variations”.

Obviously, with such a statement, China has attempted to humiliate the Indian medical professionals by doubting their competence and knowledge level. This is a negative statement made with the intention of evading from the responsibility of a supplier, which needs to be strongly condemned.

Earlier, when countries like Spain rejected the test kits from China due to quality issues, China responded by offering to replace them. However, when India rejected test kits, China has termed it an irresponsible decision. Does this mean that China has different yardsticks for different countries and views India’s decision with contempt?

It is usual practice for major producers to sub-contract the production to small sub-contractors, &nbsp;if there is a large order beyond the capacity of the producers to supply at the stipulated schedule.

Many people now wonder, that faced with the huge order situation, many small Chinese producers could also have produced the test kits as sub-contractors to the major suppliers from China and the quality of these test kits might not have been subjected to strict quality check and control. This aspect needs to be instigated

In any case, the main producers and the government of China are accountable for the quality of the test kits, particularly when exported.

Instead of merely explaining as to why the test kits have failed to give reliable results in India, Chinese producers should have demonstrated and proved the reliability of the test kits, China has merely called India’s decision as irresponsible. On the other hand, one may not be wrong if he would conclude that only China has been irresponsible.

Today, China stands accused as an unrepentant seller, with least regard for the interest of the buyers. India is certainly entitled to reject the test kits, if it is not be satisfied, which is the legitimate and internationally acceptable practice of buyers.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

Facing COVID 19 crisis, several countries including India placed orders for test kits from China for testing for antibodies to the coronavirus India ordered from China more than half a million kits to boost its screening.

Facing COVID 19 crisis, several countries including India placed orders for test kits from China for testing for antibodies to the coronavirus India ordered from China more than half a million kits to boost its screening. After receiving the test kits, Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), the top agency dealing with Coronavirus outbreak in India, said that the performance of the test kits received from China is not reliable and therefore, asked all states in India not to use the Chinese test kits anymore. This decision of ICMR not to use test kits from China has provoked angry reactions from China, which termed Indian decision as unfair and irresponsible. China gave itself self-certification that Chinese authorities have validated the equipment produced by the two Chinese firms namely Guangzhou Wondfo Biotech and Zhuhai Livzon Diagnostics. Like a typical seller who would like to save his skin after supplying bad quality products, China has virtually accused Indian medical practitioners of not having enough expertise to use the equipment. China said “The tests needed to be carried out in a professional manner to produce accurate results. There are strict requirements for the storage, transportation and use of COVID-19 antibody rapid test kits. Any operation which is not carried out by professionals in accordance with the product specifications will lead to the testing accuracy variations”. Obviously, with such a statement, China has attempted to humiliate the Indian medical professionals by doubting their competence and knowledge level. This is a negative statement made with the intention of evading from the responsibility of a supplier, which needs to be strongly condemned. Earlier, when countries like Spain rejected the test kits from China due to quality issues, China responded by offering to replace them. However, when India rejected test kits, China has termed it an irresponsible decision. Does this mean that China has different yardsticks for different countries and views India’s decision with contempt? It is usual practice for major producers to sub-contract the production to small sub-contractors, if there is a large order beyond the capacity of the producers to supply at the stipulated schedule. Many people now wonder, that faced with the huge order situation, many small Chinese producers could also have produced the test kits as sub-contractors to the major suppliers from China and the quality of these test kits might not have been subjected to strict quality check and control. This aspect needs to be instigated In any case, the main producers and the government of China are accountable for the quality of the test kits, particularly when exported. Instead of merely explaining as to why the test kits have failed to give reliable results in India, Chinese producers should have demonstrated and proved the reliability of the test kits, China has merely called India’s decision as irresponsible. On the other hand, one may not be wrong if he would conclude that only China has been irresponsible. Today, China stands accused as an unrepentant seller, with least regard for the interest of the buyers. India is certainly entitled to reject the test kits, if it is not be satisfied, which is the legitimate and internationally acceptable practice of buyers. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

COVID-19 outbreak: Why China is wrong to blame India for rejecting the 'faulty' test kits

The US government is now claiming that coronavirus came from a virology lab in Wuhan, China.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Sunday that there was "enormous evidence" that the coronavirus pandemic originated in a laboratory in Wuhan.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-claims-hes-seen-evidence-coronavirus-originated-in-chinese-lab-295950">US President Donald Trump</a> too&nbsp;has been publicly blaming China for the global spread of the "invisible enemy". The President has claimed that he had seen evidence that proved the novel coronavirus originated in a laboratory.&nbsp;

However, the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/coronavirus-not-man-made-or-genetically-modified-us-intelligence-community-295906">US intelligence community</a> has ruled out the bio-weapon theory behind coronavirus spread. They say their report is work in progress and is based on public material. "The intelligence community will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was a result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan," the community statement said.

Pompeo said that&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-faces-increasing-global-backlash-over-coronavirus-warns-internal-report-296619">China has a history of infecting</a> the world and of running 'substandard labs'. The fact is, America was funding this very same 'substandard lab'.

Last month, the US National Institute of Health (NIH) gave&nbsp;$3.7 million dollars to this Wuhan lab. The funding has now been blocked, but it does raise questions on why Washington was supporting what it now calls 'substandard labs.'

Meanwhile, the country in question, China, has launched an all-out attack. Beijing has unleashed its entire state media machinery to discredit the Trump administration.

China is backing up its cartoons with harsh and tough statements from the foreign ministry. Broadcasts on the Chinese media are now devoting prime airtime to bash Mike Pompeo.

The state media is publishing one editorial after another to blast at the US Secretary of State. The shrill exchanges only show how bad things are between the United States and China and how much is at stake.

Relations between China and the United States are being seen to be at their worst point in decades.&nbsp;

The US government is now claiming that coronavirus came from a virology lab in Wuhan, China. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Sunday that there was "enormous evidence" that the coronavirus pandemic originated in a laboratory in Wuhan.

The US government is now claiming that coronavirus came from a virology lab in Wuhan, China. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Sunday that there was "enormous evidence" that the coronavirus pandemic originated in a laboratory in Wuhan. US President Donald Trump too has been publicly blaming China for the global spread of the "invisible enemy". The President has claimed that he had seen evidence that proved the novel coronavirus originated in a laboratory. However, the US intelligence community has ruled out the bio-weapon theory behind coronavirus spread. They say their report is work in progress and is based on public material. "The intelligence community will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was a result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan," the community statement said. Pompeo said that China has a history of infecting the world and of running 'substandard labs'. The fact is, America was funding this very same 'substandard lab'. Last month, the US National Institute of Health (NIH) gave $3.7 million dollars to this Wuhan lab. The funding has now been blocked, but it does raise questions on why Washington was supporting what it now calls 'substandard labs.' Meanwhile, the country in question, China, has launched an all-out attack. Beijing has unleashed its entire state media machinery to discredit the Trump administration. China is backing up its cartoons with harsh and tough statements from the foreign ministry. Broadcasts on the Chinese media are now devoting prime airtime to bash Mike Pompeo. The state media is publishing one editorial after another to blast at the US Secretary of State. The shrill exchanges only show how bad things are between the United States and China and how much is at stake. Relations between China and the United States are being seen to be at their worst point in decades.

US-China war of words escalates over COVID-19 origin

There are only three possible origins for the COVID-19 pandemic:

(1) It is a naturally-occurring disease, where coronaviruses circulating in a bat population mutated and acquired the ability to infect humans, which was then transmitted to people either visiting or working in the Wuhan Seafood Market;

(2) A yet unknown and undescribed coronavirus of natural origin, now named COVID-19, was one of the many bat coronaviruses isolated from bat populations by Chinese scientists and leaked from a Wuhan laboratory;

(3) COVID-19 was man-made and leaked from a Wuhan laboratory.

The Chinese government, the media and some scientists are desperately trying to convince the public that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring disease because certain vested interests may be affected, including the potentially devastating political and economic consequences for China, global corporate and private investment in China and an effect on ongoing scientific collaboration and research funding. &nbsp;

Viruses, which can undergo frequent mutation, do “jump” from animals to humans after acquiring an ability to infect humans. That may prove to be the case for COVID-19.

Arguing against that conclusion are the facts that the initial patients hospitalised between December 1-10, 2019 had <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext">not visited </a>the Wuhan Seafood Market, there were <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7079563/">no bats</a> in that market and there is no clear evolutionary pathway yet identified that explains the unique features of COVID-19.

The claim that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring is based nearly entirely on a single, but widely-cited Nature Medicine article entitled “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2,” which compares the structure of COVID-19 to what the authors consider its closest relatives found in animal populations, specifically, the bat coronavirus RaTG13 and a coronavirus from the scaly anteater, called pangolins. &nbsp;

There are, however, inconsistencies that do not fully support that claim.

Although COVID-19 bears a striking structural similarity to the bat coronavirus RaTG13, the critical receptor binding domain, which initiates attachment to human cells, <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340924249_Is_considering_a_genetic-manipulation_origin_for_SARS-CoV-2_a_conspiracy_theory_that_must_be_censored">is closer </a>to that of pangolins.

In addition, there is no explanation for the origin of the furin polybasic cleavage site as represented by the proline-arginine-arginine-alanine (PRRA) amino acid insertion, which does not exist in any of the bat or pangolin close relatives yet identified, a structure that is known to enhance <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6832359/">pathogenicity </a>and <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12250-020-00212-7">transmissibility </a>in coronaviruses.

Alternatively, the inconsistencies of the naturally-occurring argument could be resolved if one assumes that COVID-19 was bioengineered.

There are two US&nbsp;patents related to that type of bioengineering, “Methods and Compositions for Chimeric Coronavirus Spike Proteins” and “Insertion of Furin Protease Cleavage Sites in Membrane Proteins and Uses Thereof,” patent numbers US9884895B2 and US7223390, respectively.

Viruses rely on the biochemical mechanisms of the host cell they invade to bind and fuse with the host cell membrane and replicate inside the cell.

The binding and membrane-fusing capability of COVID-19 resides in a structure called the spike protein, specifically sections of the “S” protein, which contain the receptor-binding domain and the furin polybasic cleavage site.

The bioengineering capabilities to “splice” the receptor-binding domain from one virus to another and to insert a furin polybasic cleavage site are both well-established laboratory techniques for which I provide the following specific examples.

In 2015, Ralph Baric from the University of North Carolina, co-patent holder of US9884895B2, and Zheng-Li Shi, the <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-chinas-bat-woman-hunted-down-viruses-from-sars-to-the-new-coronavirus1/">“bat woman” </a>from the Wuhan Institute of Virology jointly published a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985">scientific article </a>describing the combination of the receptor-binding spike protein from a newly isolated coronavirus (SHC014) and the “backbone” from SARS-CoV, the coronavirus responsible for the 2002-2003 pandemic.

The above experiment produced a novel virus, chimera SHC014-MA15, which showed “robust viral replication both in vitro [cell cultures] and in vivo [animals],” using models adapted to test human infectivity.

In 2013, Chinese scientists <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3823846/">demonstrated</a> the capability to insert a furin polybasic cleavage site, similar to that of COVID-19, into a protein, an article which cited US patent “Insertion of Furin Protease Cleavage Sites in Membrane Proteins and Uses Thereof.”

One of the authors of that 2013 article, Chinese scientist Shibo Jiang, has a joint appointment at the Lindsley F. Kimball Research Institute in New York and Fudan University in Shanghai and is a long-time collaborator of Zheng-Li Shi and Ralph Baric in coronavirus research.

All of the above is not meant to assign complicity or culpability in any way, but to demonstrate that the bioengineering capability to manufacture COVID-19 clearly exists and should be investigated as its possible origin.

 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

There are only three possible origins for the COVID-19 pandemic: (1) It is a naturally-occurring disease, where coronaviruses circulating in a bat population mutated and acquired the ability to infect humans, which was then transmitted to people either visiting or working in the Wuhan Seafood Market; (2) A yet unknown and undescribed coronavirus of natural origin, now named COVID-19, was one of the many bat coronaviruses isolated from bat populations by Chinese scientists and leaked from a Wuhan laboratory; (3) COVID-19 was man-made and leaked from a Wuhan laboratory.

There are only three possible origins for the COVID-19 pandemic: (1) It is a naturally-occurring disease, where coronaviruses circulating in a bat population mutated and acquired the ability to infect humans, which was then transmitted to people either visiting or working in the Wuhan Seafood Market; (2) A yet unknown and undescribed coronavirus of natural origin, now named COVID-19, was one of the many bat coronaviruses isolated from bat populations by Chinese scientists and leaked from a Wuhan laboratory; (3) COVID-19 was man-made and leaked from a Wuhan laboratory. The Chinese government, the media and some scientists are desperately trying to convince the public that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring disease because certain vested interests may be affected, including the potentially devastating political and economic consequences for China, global corporate and private investment in China and an effect on ongoing scientific collaboration and research funding. Viruses, which can undergo frequent mutation, do “jump” from animals to humans after acquiring an ability to infect humans. That may prove to be the case for COVID-19. Arguing against that conclusion are the facts that the initial patients hospitalised between December 1-10, 2019 had not visited the Wuhan Seafood Market, there were no bats in that market and there is no clear evolutionary pathway yet identified that explains the unique features of COVID-19. The claim that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring is based nearly entirely on a single, but widely-cited Nature Medicine article entitled “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2,” which compares the structure of COVID-19 to what the authors consider its closest relatives found in animal populations, specifically, the bat coronavirus RaTG13 and a coronavirus from the scaly anteater, called pangolins. There are, however, inconsistencies that do not fully support that claim. Although COVID-19 bears a striking structural similarity to the bat coronavirus RaTG13, the critical receptor binding domain, which initiates attachment to human cells, is closer to that of pangolins. In addition, there is no explanation for the origin of the furin polybasic cleavage site as represented by the proline-arginine-arginine-alanine (PRRA) amino acid insertion, which does not exist in any of the bat or pangolin close relatives yet identified, a structure that is known to enhance pathogenicity and transmissibility in coronaviruses. Alternatively, the inconsistencies of the naturally-occurring argument could be resolved if one assumes that COVID-19 was bioengineered. There are two US patents related to that type of bioengineering, “Methods and Compositions for Chimeric Coronavirus Spike Proteins” and “Insertion of Furin Protease Cleavage Sites in Membrane Proteins and Uses Thereof,” patent numbers US9884895B2 and US7223390, respectively. Viruses rely on the biochemical mechanisms of the host cell they invade to bind and fuse with the host cell membrane and replicate inside the cell. The binding and membrane-fusing capability of COVID-19 resides in a structure called the spike protein, specifically sections of the “S” protein, which contain the receptor-binding domain and the furin polybasic cleavage site. The bioengineering capabilities to “splice” the receptor-binding domain from one virus to another and to insert a furin polybasic cleavage site are both well-established laboratory techniques for which I provide the following specific examples. In 2015, Ralph Baric from the University of North Carolina, co-patent holder of US9884895B2, and Zheng-Li Shi, the “bat woman” from the Wuhan Institute of Virology jointly published a scientific article describing the combination of the receptor-binding spike protein from a newly isolated coronavirus (SHC014) and the “backbone” from SARS-CoV, the coronavirus responsible for the 2002-2003 pandemic. The above experiment produced a novel virus, chimera SHC014-MA15, which showed “robust viral replication both in vitro [cell cultures] and in vivo [animals],” using models adapted to test human infectivity. In 2013, Chinese scientists demonstrated the capability to insert a furin polybasic cleavage site, similar to that of COVID-19, into a protein, an article which cited US patent “Insertion of Furin Protease Cleavage Sites in Membrane Proteins and Uses Thereof.” One of the authors of that 2013 article, Chinese scientist Shibo Jiang, has a joint appointment at the Lindsley F. Kimball Research Institute in New York and Fudan University in Shanghai and is a long-time collaborator of Zheng-Li Shi and Ralph Baric in coronavirus research. All of the above is not meant to assign complicity or culpability in any way, but to demonstrate that the bioengineering capability to manufacture COVID-19 clearly exists and should be investigated as its possible origin. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

How US expertise may have inadvertently contributed to COVID-19

Nelson Mandela once said, “when people are determined they can overcome anything.”&nbsp;

We truly are faced with an unprecedented public health emergency. But at times like these, more than ever, we can come together and create a meaningful impact in the communities around us.&nbsp;

We need to strongly commit and dedicate ourselves in providing support to communities during these difficult times and salute the sacrifice, perseverance and dedication of all those who are at the forefront of this fight. Our joint commitment to give every possible support to the communities awakens the hope that these consolidated efforts can make a significant difference in these testing times. During the times of a global health crisis, organisations can collaborate with NGO’s which are working extensively to reach out to the affected communities. Providing masks and gloves, creating awareness about the symptoms and precautions, ensuring access to essential commodities are the major intervention areas where the organisations can contribute and extend their support to. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Ensuring the health and well-being of the society at large is something all companies must address. Proper nutrition, good dietary habits, and an active lifestyle are integral to maintaining good health. Therefore, adopting a healthy lifestyle during these critical times ensures healthy living and lesser health issues. &nbsp;

In this regard, companies should leverage the network in communities they have built through their societal initiatives. They can use social media and phone calls in collaboration with NGO partners to educate community members on the steps to be taken to prevent COVID-19. Local influencers can be engaged to ensure that the seriousness of the situation is conveyed adequately and that people are more receptive towards the precautionary measures that are to be taken to flatten the curve. These are the measures we are also taking through our network under the Nestlé Healthy Kids Program and for our beneficiaries as part of our Project Jagriti. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;

While all of us are doing our best to get through this by isolating ourselves and social distancing, few among us are out on the streets trying to keep the society afloat, trying to help our world heal. Our waste workers are also among these front-line fighters. While the collectors are facing the danger of getting infected every day, the scrap dealers and rag pickers are dealing with lack of work and little or no means to earn their livelihood. However, one common problem that engulfs all kinds of daily wage workers is limited or no access to basic essentials. &nbsp;In collaboration with local stakeholders, we can reach out to these waste workers enabling them to face the COVID-19 crisis by providing essentials, creating awareness and equipping them with safety gears.&nbsp;

Alongside communities, companies must also explore ways to help out their external partners like distributors. The front-line sales force who work for distribution partners is the heroes who are heeding to a call of duty to ensure much-needed products are available for the consumers. Companies should ensure their safety and protect them should any unfortunate COVID-19 related event befall them. &nbsp;

We must understand, this pandemic has affected everyone on a personal level. The need of the hour is to work collectively towards adding value to the overall societal effort to combat the impact of the virus. We must be committed towards the human beings around us and be consistent towards ensuring their well-being at this point of time.&nbsp;

&nbsp; 
&nbsp;(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

Nelson Mandela once said, “when people are determined they can overcome anything.” We truly are faced with an unprecedented public health emergency. But at times like these, more than ever, we can come together and create a meaningful impact in the communities around us.

Nelson Mandela once said, “when people are determined they can overcome anything.” We truly are faced with an unprecedented public health emergency. But at times like these, more than ever, we can come together and create a meaningful impact in the communities around us. We need to strongly commit and dedicate ourselves in providing support to communities during these difficult times and salute the sacrifice, perseverance and dedication of all those who are at the forefront of this fight. Our joint commitment to give every possible support to the communities awakens the hope that these consolidated efforts can make a significant difference in these testing times. During the times of a global health crisis, organisations can collaborate with NGO’s which are working extensively to reach out to the affected communities. Providing masks and gloves, creating awareness about the symptoms and precautions, ensuring access to essential commodities are the major intervention areas where the organisations can contribute and extend their support to. Ensuring the health and well-being of the society at large is something all companies must address. Proper nutrition, good dietary habits, and an active lifestyle are integral to maintaining good health. Therefore, adopting a healthy lifestyle during these critical times ensures healthy living and lesser health issues. In this regard, companies should leverage the network in communities they have built through their societal initiatives. They can use social media and phone calls in collaboration with NGO partners to educate community members on the steps to be taken to prevent COVID-19. Local influencers can be engaged to ensure that the seriousness of the situation is conveyed adequately and that people are more receptive towards the precautionary measures that are to be taken to flatten the curve. These are the measures we are also taking through our network under the Nestlé Healthy Kids Program and for our beneficiaries as part of our Project Jagriti. While all of us are doing our best to get through this by isolating ourselves and social distancing, few among us are out on the streets trying to keep the society afloat, trying to help our world heal. Our waste workers are also among these front-line fighters. While the collectors are facing the danger of getting infected every day, the scrap dealers and rag pickers are dealing with lack of work and little or no means to earn their livelihood. However, one common problem that engulfs all kinds of daily wage workers is limited or no access to basic essentials. In collaboration with local stakeholders, we can reach out to these waste workers enabling them to face the COVID-19 crisis by providing essentials, creating awareness and equipping them with safety gears. Alongside communities, companies must also explore ways to help out their external partners like distributors. The front-line sales force who work for distribution partners is the heroes who are heeding to a call of duty to ensure much-needed products are available for the consumers. Companies should ensure their safety and protect them should any unfortunate COVID-19 related event befall them. We must understand, this pandemic has affected everyone on a personal level. The need of the hour is to work collectively towards adding value to the overall societal effort to combat the impact of the virus. We must be committed towards the human beings around us and be consistent towards ensuring their well-being at this point of time. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Coronavirus outbreak: How leading organisations can contribute to the community during a pandemic

A recently published scientific article <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340924249_Is_considering_a_genetic-manipulation_origin_for_SARS-CoV-2_a_conspiracy_theory_that_must_be_censored">states</a>:

“Due to the broad-spectrum of research conducted over almost 20 years on bat SARS-CoV [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronaviruses] justified by their potential to spill over from animal to human, a possible synthetic origin by laboratory engineering of SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] is a reasonable hypothesis.”

China would like that hypothesis erased from the public consciousness.

The Chinese government, the media and some scientists are desperately trying to convince the public that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring disease, which was transmitted from animals to humans in the Wuhan Seafood Market.

If COVID-19 leaked from a laboratory, the political and economic consequences for China are enormous.

If it was man-made and leaked from a laboratory, the implications are too grim for many to imagine.

The argument that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring is based nearly entirely on a single, but widely-cited Nature Medicine article entitled “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2.”

That conclusion stems primarily from a structural analysis comparing COVID-19 with bat and pangolin (scaly anteater) coronaviruses suggesting a natural evolutionary process in which COVID-19 mutated in an animal population and acquired the ability to infect humans.

Such a scenario does occur and it appears to be the origin of a number of animal-borne coronavirus infections in humans.

Based on the evidence provided in the much-cited Nature Medicine article, however, that conclusion is not obvious.

Although COVID-19 bears a striking structural similarity to the bat coronavirus RaTG13, the critical receptor binding domain, which initiates attachment to human cells, is <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340924249_Is_considering_a_genetic-manipulation_origin_for_SARS-CoV-2_a_conspiracy_theory_that_must_be_censored">closer</a> to pangolins.

It is highly unlikely that the bat RaTG13 coronavirus and the pangolin coronavirus combined naturally through a process called reassortment because it would require simultaneous infection of the two viruses in the same animal cell.

It could, however, have been accomplished in a laboratory.

As the recently-published scientific article <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340924249_Is_considering_a_genetic-manipulation_origin_for_SARS-CoV-2_a_conspiracy_theory_that_must_be_censored">notes</a>, a new “chimeric” or combined RaTG13-pangolin coronavirus strain could have been created through an artificial recombinant event, using well-established bioengineering methods.

Another possible indication of genetic manipulation is the presence of a furin polybasic cleavage site in COVID-19 as represented by the PRRA amino acid insertion, which does not exist in any of the bat or pangolin close relatives and is completely “out of frame” compared to the bat RaTG13 and pangolin sequences.

Perhaps not coincidentally, the furin polybasic cleavage site in COVID-19 occurs in the precise location known to enhance pathogenicity and<a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12250-020-00212-7"> transmissibility</a> in viruses.

Methods for the insertion of a polybasic cleavage site in infectious bronchitis coronavirus have been <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6832359/">described</a> by Chinese scientists and that artificial genetic alteration resulted in increased pathogenicity.

In parallel, animal models for the addition of structures important to the function of coronaviruses, called O-linked glycans, have been <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6135831/">used </a>by Chinese scientists at the Chongqing Military Medical University, as well as animal models to specifically select for the human angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 receptor, the entry step for COVID-19 infection.

There is no doubt that China has the knowledge and technology to have created COVID-19. Whether that actually was done is yet to be determined and should be undergoing vigorous scientific investigation.

&nbsp;(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

A recently published scientific article states: “Due to the broad-spectrum of research conducted over almost 20 years on bat SARS-CoV [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronaviruses] justified by their potential to spill over from animal to human, a possible synthetic origin by laboratory engineering of SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] is a reasonable hypothesis.

A recently published scientific article states: “Due to the broad-spectrum of research conducted over almost 20 years on bat SARS-CoV [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronaviruses] justified by their potential to spill over from animal to human, a possible synthetic origin by laboratory engineering of SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] is a reasonable hypothesis.” China would like that hypothesis erased from the public consciousness. The Chinese government, the media and some scientists are desperately trying to convince the public that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring disease, which was transmitted from animals to humans in the Wuhan Seafood Market. If COVID-19 leaked from a laboratory, the political and economic consequences for China are enormous. If it was man-made and leaked from a laboratory, the implications are too grim for many to imagine. The argument that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring is based nearly entirely on a single, but widely-cited Nature Medicine article entitled “The Proximal Origin of SAR-CoV-2.” That conclusion stems primarily from a structural analysis comparing COVID-19 with bat and pangolin (scaly anteater) coronaviruses suggesting a natural evolutionary process in which COVID-19 mutated in an animal population and acquired the ability to infect humans. Such a scenario does occur and it appears to be the origin of a number of animal-borne coronavirus infections in humans. Based on the evidence provided in the much-cited Nature Medicine article, however, that conclusion is not obvious. Although COVID-19 bears a striking structural similarity to the bat coronavirus RaTG13, the critical receptor binding domain, which initiates attachment to human cells, is closer to pangolins. It is highly unlikely that the bat RaTG13 coronavirus and the pangolin coronavirus combined naturally through a process called reassortment because it would require simultaneous infection of the two viruses in the same animal cell. It could, however, have been accomplished in a laboratory. As the recently-published scientific article notes, a new “chimeric” or combined RaTG13-pangolin coronavirus strain could have been created through an artificial recombinant event, using well-established bioengineering methods. Another possible indication of genetic manipulation is the presence of a furin polybasic cleavage site in COVID-19 as represented by the PRRA amino acid insertion, which does not exist in any of the bat or pangolin close relatives and is completely “out of frame” compared to the bat RaTG13 and pangolin sequences. Perhaps not coincidentally, the furin polybasic cleavage site in COVID-19 occurs in the precise location known to enhance pathogenicity and transmissibility in viruses. Methods for the insertion of a polybasic cleavage site in infectious bronchitis coronavirus have been described by Chinese scientists and that artificial genetic alteration resulted in increased pathogenicity. In parallel, animal models for the addition of structures important to the function of coronaviruses, called O-linked glycans, have been used by Chinese scientists at the Chongqing Military Medical University, as well as animal models to specifically select for the human angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 receptor, the entry step for COVID-19 infection. There is no doubt that China has the knowledge and technology to have created COVID-19. Whether that actually was done is yet to be determined and should be undergoing vigorous scientific investigation. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Facts that China is trying to suppress about origin of COVID-19

Every night I begin my show with the death toll. I can tell you there is no joy in doing so. By the time the day ends, and the race to get the news done is over, you’re left with a weight that crushes your spirit. In the news business, we often talk about death. Beyond a point, it’s all statistics. Sometimes it feels personal.

I lost my father two months back. It was so sudden, I’m still processing it. I have still not learned to refer to him in the past tense. I haven’t been home since and I’m not looking forward to it. A fall, an internal injury and gone in 3 days. One moment, he’s scolding me for having left the kids behind to come and see him, the next I’m being asked if we agree to the terms and conditions of him being put on a ventilator. He was a difficult person. And just like that, he went on from being a person to a body. The night he passed, the hospital staff asked me to sign something. In disbelief, I remember nodding, not sure why I was trying to reassure them. I told the nurse to be strong. She returned a sad smile. I remember stroking his arm. It was cold and bloated. I said sorry to him and all the things I couldn’t say when he was alive. He did not encourage conversation. As I said, a difficult person. Body. My father. I saw him as asleep not dead.

Many years ago, I remember lingering around the body of my grandmother, imagining her frowning upon how my parents were carrying out the rituals, punctuating the complaints with her witty one-liners. I almost expected her to swat my hand and order me to get about my business. The whole setting felt like a dismal, sadistic prank. She still lurks in my head, mostly arguing with me. These are the two closest people I’ve lost. I feel their loss deeply, but never felt any fear around what was left of them.

It hasn’t been so in other cases. I’m still ashamed of what happened with a neighbour. An old couple, very caring and kind. The man passed away when I was at work. When I returned home, I saw people gathered. I should have gone too. I did not. I was too scared to face whatever lay on the other side of their door. The gloom of death, the grief, the loss of words and appropriate expressions I struggle with, in situations like these. It was extremely immature of me. The family never spoke to me after that. I left the society a few months later. I couldn’t summon the courage to tell them I’m sorry for their loss and I’m scared. It was awful, still disturbs me.

But nothing can match what’s happening now. There’s a stigma attached to death. The fear of infection. There are no rituals, no final goodbyes. These ceremonies can be taxing, but they serve a purpose. The logistics of managing the event keeps your mind off the sense of loss. A coronavirus death has none of it. No friends to see you off. No one to hold those who are left behind. You die alone in an isolation ward. You grieve alone behind a mask. I cannot even begin to imagine the pain of those who lose their loved ones and must suffer the injustice of being denied the last touch and hug. Is there anything worse than death? It is death infected with fear and devoid of dignity.&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

Every night I begin my show with the death toll. I can tell you there is no joy in doing so. By the time the day ends, and the race to get the news done is over, you’re left with a weight that crushes your spirit.

Every night I begin my show with the death toll. I can tell you there is no joy in doing so. By the time the day ends, and the race to get the news done is over, you’re left with a weight that crushes your spirit. In the news business, we often talk about death. Beyond a point, it’s all statistics. Sometimes it feels personal. I lost my father two months back. It was so sudden, I’m still processing it. I have still not learned to refer to him in the past tense. I haven’t been home since and I’m not looking forward to it. A fall, an internal injury and gone in 3 days. One moment, he’s scolding me for having left the kids behind to come and see him, the next I’m being asked if we agree to the terms and conditions of him being put on a ventilator. He was a difficult person. And just like that, he went on from being a person to a body. The night he passed, the hospital staff asked me to sign something. In disbelief, I remember nodding, not sure why I was trying to reassure them. I told the nurse to be strong. She returned a sad smile. I remember stroking his arm. It was cold and bloated. I said sorry to him and all the things I couldn’t say when he was alive. He did not encourage conversation. As I said, a difficult person. Body. My father. I saw him as asleep not dead. Many years ago, I remember lingering around the body of my grandmother, imagining her frowning upon how my parents were carrying out the rituals, punctuating the complaints with her witty one-liners. I almost expected her to swat my hand and order me to get about my business. The whole setting felt like a dismal, sadistic prank. She still lurks in my head, mostly arguing with me. These are the two closest people I’ve lost. I feel their loss deeply, but never felt any fear around what was left of them. It hasn’t been so in other cases. I’m still ashamed of what happened with a neighbour. An old couple, very caring and kind. The man passed away when I was at work. When I returned home, I saw people gathered. I should have gone too. I did not. I was too scared to face whatever lay on the other side of their door. The gloom of death, the grief, the loss of words and appropriate expressions I struggle with, in situations like these. It was extremely immature of me. The family never spoke to me after that. I left the society a few months later. I couldn’t summon the courage to tell them I’m sorry for their loss and I’m scared. It was awful, still disturbs me. But nothing can match what’s happening now. There’s a stigma attached to death. The fear of infection. There are no rituals, no final goodbyes. These ceremonies can be taxing, but they serve a purpose. The logistics of managing the event keeps your mind off the sense of loss. A coronavirus death has none of it. No friends to see you off. No one to hold those who are left behind. You die alone in an isolation ward. You grieve alone behind a mask. I cannot even begin to imagine the pain of those who lose their loved ones and must suffer the injustice of being denied the last touch and hug. Is there anything worse than death? It is death infected with fear and devoid of dignity. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Dealing with death

On April 30, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence <a href="https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/item/2112-intelligence-community-statement-on-origins-of-covid-19">issued</a> the following US Intelligence Community statement:

“The entire Intelligence Community has been consistently providing critical support to US policymakers and those responding to the COVID-19 virus, which originated in China. The Intelligence Community also concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified.”

There is no justification for making such a statement without providing the evidence to support it and while so much information about the origin of COVID-19 remains unknown.

The US intelligence community has only very limited knowledge about what coronaviruses China has in its laboratories and what experiments Chinese scientists have been conducting on those coronaviruses.

Case in point, “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” the single, most-widely cited article used by media and some scientists as proof that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring outbreak that “jumped” from animals to humans in the Wuhan Seafood Market, identified a bat coronavirus RaTG13 as the closest relative to and the likely evolutionary pathway of COVID-19, being 96 per cent identical to it.

We don’t know, because the US intelligence community has not released the evidence supporting its statement, but it <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/04/30/coronavirus-trump-intelligence-chief-covid-19-not-man-made/3055744001/">appears</a> that the “scientific consensus” to which they refer is based on the conclusions of that single article.

RaTG13 was isolated by Chinese scientists from bats in July 2013 in Yunnan Province, nearly 1,000 miles from Wuhan.

Oddly, RaTG13 was not sequenced until January 2020 and was unknown to the scientific community before then.

Also isolated in July 2013 in Yunnan Province is the bat coronavirus strain BtCoV/4991 (GenBank KP876546), which was partially sequenced in 2016.

In a February 6, 2020 article, scientists at the State Key Laboratory of Virology, Modern Virology Research Center, College of Life Sciences, Wuhan University <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/22221751.2020.1725399">wrote</a> that the partial sequence of bat coronavirus strain BtCoV/4991 was 98.7 per cent identical to COVID-19, more than RaTG13.

Yet, the full sequence of BtCoV/4991, if it exists, remains unpublished.

China is hiding a lot.

Since the outbreak began, China has flooded the scientific literature with subtle and sometimes not so subtle messages supporting its narrative that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring mutation that “jumped” from animals to humans in the Wuhan Seafood Market.

That argument has been buttressed by a relatively small group of Western scientists, who may have a vested interest in one particular outcome and wish to limit the debate.

Make no mistake, huge amounts of research cash could be in jeopardy, if it is shown that COVID-19 resulted from a laboratory leak, or worse, if it was man-made.

The US intelligence community, therefore, may be a clueless or willing victim of herd mentality driven by Chinese propaganda, the media and a handful of, perhaps, biased experts.

Unless the US intelligence community can explain the origin of the PRRAR amino acid structure, unique to COVID-19 and not present in any of the identified close relatives like RaTG13, a structure related to a “gain of function” leading to <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12250-020-00212-7">enhanced transmissibility</a>, there is no reason at this stage to dismiss prematurely a bioengineering explanation for the origin of COVID-19.

The US intelligence community statement brought us no closer to the truth and may have unnecessarily handed China a huge propaganda victory, while simultaneously making it less likely that Beijing will be inclined to open its research records for international inspection.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

On April 30, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued the following US Intelligence Community statement: “The entire Intelligence Community has been consistently providing critical support to US policymakers and those responding to the COVID-19 virus, which originated in China.

On April 30, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued the following US Intelligence Community statement: “The entire Intelligence Community has been consistently providing critical support to US policymakers and those responding to the COVID-19 virus, which originated in China. The Intelligence Community also concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not manmade or genetically modified.” There is no justification for making such a statement without providing the evidence to support it and while so much information about the origin of COVID-19 remains unknown. The US intelligence community has only very limited knowledge about what coronaviruses China has in its laboratories and what experiments Chinese scientists have been conducting on those coronaviruses. Case in point, “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” the single, most-widely cited article used by media and some scientists as proof that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring outbreak that “jumped” from animals to humans in the Wuhan Seafood Market, identified a bat coronavirus RaTG13 as the closest relative to and the likely evolutionary pathway of COVID-19, being 96 per cent identical to it. We don’t know, because the US intelligence community has not released the evidence supporting its statement, but it appears that the “scientific consensus” to which they refer is based on the conclusions of that single article. RaTG13 was isolated by Chinese scientists from bats in July 2013 in Yunnan Province, nearly 1,000 miles from Wuhan. Oddly, RaTG13 was not sequenced until January 2020 and was unknown to the scientific community before then. Also isolated in July 2013 in Yunnan Province is the bat coronavirus strain BtCoV/4991 (GenBank KP876546), which was partially sequenced in 2016. In a February 6, 2020 article, scientists at the State Key Laboratory of Virology, Modern Virology Research Center, College of Life Sciences, Wuhan University wrote that the partial sequence of bat coronavirus strain BtCoV/4991 was 98.7 per cent identical to COVID-19, more than RaTG13. Yet, the full sequence of BtCoV/4991, if it exists, remains unpublished. China is hiding a lot. Since the outbreak began, China has flooded the scientific literature with subtle and sometimes not so subtle messages supporting its narrative that COVID-19 is a naturally-occurring mutation that “jumped” from animals to humans in the Wuhan Seafood Market. That argument has been buttressed by a relatively small group of Western scientists, who may have a vested interest in one particular outcome and wish to limit the debate. Make no mistake, huge amounts of research cash could be in jeopardy, if it is shown that COVID-19 resulted from a laboratory leak, or worse, if it was man-made. The US intelligence community, therefore, may be a clueless or willing victim of herd mentality driven by Chinese propaganda, the media and a handful of, perhaps, biased experts. Unless the US intelligence community can explain the origin of the PRRAR amino acid structure, unique to COVID-19 and not present in any of the identified close relatives like RaTG13, a structure related to a “gain of function” leading to enhanced transmissibility, there is no reason at this stage to dismiss prematurely a bioengineering explanation for the origin of COVID-19. The US intelligence community statement brought us no closer to the truth and may have unnecessarily handed China a huge propaganda victory, while simultaneously making it less likely that Beijing will be inclined to open its research records for international inspection. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

COVID-19: US intelligence community's statement may have given China a huge propaganda victory

With lockdown in place for different zones in the country, the time has come that politicisation of this massive drive must end. Lockdown should not be politicised in India. As expected, India has been divided into three parts and specific rules and procedures for each part have been put into place. The idea is to kickstart activities in the green zone, limited activity in the orange zone and restricted activity in the red zone. Like West, in India too, a lot of people have put the economy before the health of the people. Several&nbsp;experts have made God out of the economy not understanding that without people, the economy has no sense.&nbsp;

Till today, no mass case of hunger has been reported. Indian machinery has worked overtime to provide for people in need. It is not to say that government should not be questioned, or suggestions should not come from the Opposition but politicising an issue like this can have long term consequences. It can break solidarity when required as lockdown cannot be a top-down function. It requires people’s participation. Lockdown also requires cooperation from all segment of the civil society because it cannot be enforced by police action as people need to be convinced by it. The argument that restriction of economic activity would kill the economy also runs on thin ice as COVID-19 can cripple the entire society. India has the example of the United States of America, United Kingdom and Italy in front of it. Absence of lockdown led to thousands dying in a few weeks. The United States is still politically divided and various states are at loggerhead because they do not have political consensus on how the US should come out of the lockdown. On the other hand, Singapore is suffering the second wave of infection because they relaxed the lockdown rules too quickly under public pressure. India must escape both the models to ensure that it can keep a country of billion people shielded from COVID-19 which till today has no cure.

India in the last two weeks has seen an intense debate on lockdown. Many people have equated lockdown with authoritarian state and also linked it with the emergence of a super-state. It would be important to remember that India was conceived as a state with a strong centre. India was never conceived as a state with a weak centre despite the principle of cooperative federalism. There exists a difference with authoritarian centre which does not respect the mandate if states during calamity and a strong centre which works like a guiding beacon. The present government has indeed done a good job in tackling COVID-19. Many argue that the lockdown was late in the day. It may be the case but even opposition did not care much about it and remained focused on CAA protests in Jamia and chose not to raise the issue in the first part of the budget session. But we should let bygone be bygone. Instead of working against each other and using a pandemic to create a public campaign, India must rise and tackle the crisis&nbsp;together.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

With lockdown in place for different zones in the country, the time has come that politicisation of this massive drive must end. Lockdown should not be politicised in India.

With lockdown in place for different zones in the country, the time has come that politicisation of this massive drive must end. Lockdown should not be politicised in India. As expected, India has been divided into three parts and specific rules and procedures for each part have been put into place. The idea is to kickstart activities in the green zone, limited activity in the orange zone and restricted activity in the red zone. Like West, in India too, a lot of people have put the economy before the health of the people. Several experts have made God out of the economy not understanding that without people, the economy has no sense. Till today, no mass case of hunger has been reported. Indian machinery has worked overtime to provide for people in need. It is not to say that government should not be questioned, or suggestions should not come from the Opposition but politicising an issue like this can have long term consequences. It can break solidarity when required as lockdown cannot be a top-down function. It requires people’s participation. Lockdown also requires cooperation from all segment of the civil society because it cannot be enforced by police action as people need to be convinced by it. The argument that restriction of economic activity would kill the economy also runs on thin ice as COVID-19 can cripple the entire society. India has the example of the United States of America, United Kingdom and Italy in front of it. Absence of lockdown led to thousands dying in a few weeks. The United States is still politically divided and various states are at loggerhead because they do not have political consensus on how the US should come out of the lockdown. On the other hand, Singapore is suffering the second wave of infection because they relaxed the lockdown rules too quickly under public pressure. India must escape both the models to ensure that it can keep a country of billion people shielded from COVID-19 which till today has no cure. India in the last two weeks has seen an intense debate on lockdown. Many people have equated lockdown with authoritarian state and also linked it with the emergence of a super-state. It would be important to remember that India was conceived as a state with a strong centre. India was never conceived as a state with a weak centre despite the principle of cooperative federalism. There exists a difference with authoritarian centre which does not respect the mandate if states during calamity and a strong centre which works like a guiding beacon. The present government has indeed done a good job in tackling COVID-19. Many argue that the lockdown was late in the day. It may be the case but even opposition did not care much about it and remained focused on CAA protests in Jamia and chose not to raise the issue in the first part of the budget session. But we should let bygone be bygone. Instead of working against each other and using a pandemic to create a public campaign, India must rise and tackle the crisis together. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Let’s not politicise lockdown

Two years back, the US President Donald Trump began a trade war with China, it led to unavoidable frictions that have now snowballed into a full-blown diplomatic crisis.&nbsp;

The coronavirus pandemic is making it worse with the US President Donald Trump openly pitting America against China.&nbsp;The US&nbsp;President has become relatively consistent, and increasingly sharp in his criticism of China. 
 
According to reports, the US intelligence community has been given specific instructions. The Trump administration has set up task forces and it wants them to probe China and the WHO.

The US President wants investigators to find out the critical information that China failed to share and how much that has cost the world.

Three agencies are said to have received these instructions: The National Security Agency; The Defence Intelligence Agency; The Central Intelligence Agency.

The White House wants the investigators to explore every possible source of information.

On Wednesday, Trump called the WHO a pipe organ for China. "It [the investigation] is coming in and I am getting pieces already and we are not happy about it and we are by far the largest contributor to WHO,...And they misled us. I don't know. They must have known more than they knew because they came after what other people knew that weren't even involved," Trump said.

Pending an investigation, the President has stopped US aid to the WHO. "We can give this money to lots of different incredible groups. There are a lot of groups out there. It doesn't have to go to the WHO. We can give it to groups that are very worthy and get much more bang for your buck, but we're going to make a decision in the not-too-distant future," he added.

Now Donald Trump has his own reasons to go after China and the WHO. The US Presidential election is scheduled&nbsp;in November. And as the coronavirus death toll rises, his ratings will suffer. 
 
Trump said he believes Beijing wants his Democratic opponent, Joe Biden, to win the race to ease the pressure Trump has placed on China over trade and other issues.

Beijing should take the blame for the coronavirus spread, but so should Trump for refusing to take the pandemic seriously.

Trump is upping the ante against Beijing in more ways that one which includes cutting off funding for research in China.

And it's not just the President who is taking on China, other American lawmakers are at it too. The US Congress is mulling a "Counter-China" fund.

A Republican lawmaker is pushing a bill that will create a dedicated defence fund worth $6 billion. The aim of this fund will be to boost America's deterrence against China in the pacific.

Leaders of the US, the UK and Germany believe that the deaths and the destruction of the global economy could have been avoided, had China shared the information about the virus in its early phases.

The virus, which originated in China's Wuhan city in mid-November, has killed more than two lakh people and infected over three million globally.&nbsp;

Two years back, the US President Donald Trump began a trade war with China, it led to unavoidable frictions that have now snowballed into a full-blown diplomatic crisis.

Two years back, the US President Donald Trump began a trade war with China, it led to unavoidable frictions that have now snowballed into a full-blown diplomatic crisis. The coronavirus pandemic is making it worse with the US President Donald Trump openly pitting America against China. The US President has become relatively consistent, and increasingly sharp in his criticism of China. According to reports, the US intelligence community has been given specific instructions. The Trump administration has set up task forces and it wants them to probe China and the WHO. The US President wants investigators to find out the critical information that China failed to share and how much that has cost the world. Three agencies are said to have received these instructions: The National Security Agency; The Defence Intelligence Agency; The Central Intelligence Agency. The White House wants the investigators to explore every possible source of information. On Wednesday, Trump called the WHO a pipe organ for China. "It [the investigation] is coming in and I am getting pieces already and we are not happy about it and we are by far the largest contributor to WHO,...And they misled us. I don't know. They must have known more than they knew because they came after what other people knew that weren't even involved," Trump said. Pending an investigation, the President has stopped US aid to the WHO. "We can give this money to lots of different incredible groups. There are a lot of groups out there. It doesn't have to go to the WHO. We can give it to groups that are very worthy and get much more bang for your buck, but we're going to make a decision in the not-too-distant future," he added. Now Donald Trump has his own reasons to go after China and the WHO. The US Presidential election is scheduled in November. And as the coronavirus death toll rises, his ratings will suffer. Trump said he believes Beijing wants his Democratic opponent, Joe Biden, to win the race to ease the pressure Trump has placed on China over trade and other issues. Beijing should take the blame for the coronavirus spread, but so should Trump for refusing to take the pandemic seriously. Trump is upping the ante against Beijing in more ways that one which includes cutting off funding for research in China. And it's not just the President who is taking on China, other American lawmakers are at it too. The US Congress is mulling a "Counter-China" fund. A Republican lawmaker is pushing a bill that will create a dedicated defence fund worth $6 billion. The aim of this fund will be to boost America's deterrence against China in the pacific. Leaders of the US, the UK and Germany believe that the deaths and the destruction of the global economy could have been avoided, had China shared the information about the virus in its early phases. The virus, which originated in China's Wuhan city in mid-November, has killed more than two lakh people and infected over three million globally.

Has the US-China cold war now begun?

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman may feel that the global pandemic and its economic fallout are the more immediate of his problems as the kingdom gradually lifts restrictions put in place to stymie the spread of the coronavirus.

However, looming large on the horizon is a potential rift with the United States as a result of the kingdom’s price war with Russia that contributed to the collapse of oil markets and an existential crisis for America’s shale industry.

US President Donald Trump is believed to be weighing a ban on import of Saudi oil in a bid to force the kingdom to reroute tankers carrying some 40 million barrels of crude to the United States.

More fundamentally, Prince Mohammed has put the kingdom’s relationship with the United States at risk without having any real alternative options at a time that an agreement among oil producers to cut production amounts to at best a timeout in a price war that is all about market share.

The price war has further strained Saudi Arabia’s ties to the US Congress, already troubled by the war in Yemen, the kingdom’s record of human rights abuse, and the killing and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.

Saudi judiciary reforms in the past week, including abolishing flogging as a legal punishment and death sentences for people who committed crimes as minors, constituted an effort to respond to criticism but were unlikely to turn the tide.

Speaking for Congressmen representing US shale states, North Dakota Senator Kevin Cramer warned that “Saudi Arabia’s next steps will determine whether our strategic partnership is salvageable.”

Salvaging Saudi-US relations may be Prince Mohammed’s only option.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is unlikely to have taken kindly to a reported shouting match in a phone call with the crown prince at the outset of the price war.

Signalling that the production cuts are a ceasefire rather than an end to the war, Saudi Arabia and Russia continue to fight it out on oil markets with the kingdom undercutting Russia with discounts and special offers, according to a Reuters investigation.

Strained relations did not prevent the two countries from moving forward with an agreement on Russian wheat sales to the kingdom. A first Russian shipment of 60,000 tons set sail for Saudi Arabia earlier this month.

Irrespective of the state of Saudi-Russian relations, Russia’s call for replacing the US defence umbrella in the Gulf with a multi-lateral security arrangement that would involve the United States, as well as China, Europe, and India, is a skeleton with no flesh.

Russia has neither the wherewithal nor the will to shoulder responsibility for Gulf security. Nor do others, envisioned by Russia as a participant in a revised Gulf security arrangement.

The proposal, moreover, is a stillborn baby as long as Saudi Arabia refuses to engage with Iran with no pre-conditions. The kingdom has so far used the pandemic to harden fault lines with the Islamic Republic, casting aside opportunities to build bridges with goodwill gestures.

Similarly, China has no appetite for a major military role in the Middle East despite having established its first foreign military base in Djibouti and contributing to anti-piracy operations off the coast of Somalia.

Equally troubling for Prince Mohammed is the fact that he cannot be certain that China would be able to maintain its neutrality if US-Iranian tensions were to explode into an all-out war given that when the chips are down Iran may be of greater strategic significance to Beijing.

Iran’s geography, demography, and highly educated population give it a leg up in its competition with Saudi Arabia for Chinese favour. So does the fact that China and Iran see each other as bookends at both ends of Asia with a civilizational history that goes back thousands of years.

Iran, moreover, plays a pivotal role in Belt and Road-related efforts to link China to Europe by a rail that would traverse Central Asia and the Islamic Republic and end the expensive and time-consuming process of having to transfer goods to ships at one end of the Caspian Sea and loading them back onto a train on the Caspian’s opposite shore.

Prince Mohammed’s maneuvering to strike a balance in securing Saudi Arabia’s place in a world of contentious big power relationships is reflected in coverage by the kingdom’s tightly controlled media of Chinese and US efforts to combat the pandemic.

Andrew Leber, a student of Saudi policymaking, noted that “China’s mixed record in boosting its image in Riyadh is a reminder that soft-power competition is not a zero-sum game. Even as Saudi outlets have grown more willing to air criticisms of China, some have derided the efforts of President Donald Trump and his administration to blame COVID-19 on Beijing.”

Leber’s analysis of Saudi media coverage suggests that Prince Mohammed is seeking to keep all doors open.

It will, however, take a lot more than vacillating media coverage and reform of the kingdom’s penal code to polish Saudi Arabia’s tarnished image in the United States and level the playing field with Iran when it comes to China.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

(First Published on <a href="https://insidearabia.com/saudi-arabias-problems-not-just-a-pandemic-and-economics-but-geopolitics-too/">The Inside Arabia)</a>

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman may feel that the global pandemic and its economic fallout are the more immediate of his problems as the kingdom gradually lifts restrictions put in place to stymie the spread of the coronavirus.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman may feel that the global pandemic and its economic fallout are the more immediate of his problems as the kingdom gradually lifts restrictions put in place to stymie the spread of the coronavirus. However, looming large on the horizon is a potential rift with the United States as a result of the kingdom’s price war with Russia that contributed to the collapse of oil markets and an existential crisis for America’s shale industry. US President Donald Trump is believed to be weighing a ban on import of Saudi oil in a bid to force the kingdom to reroute tankers carrying some 40 million barrels of crude to the United States. More fundamentally, Prince Mohammed has put the kingdom’s relationship with the United States at risk without having any real alternative options at a time that an agreement among oil producers to cut production amounts to at best a timeout in a price war that is all about market share. The price war has further strained Saudi Arabia’s ties to the US Congress, already troubled by the war in Yemen, the kingdom’s record of human rights abuse, and the killing and dismemberment of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018. Saudi judiciary reforms in the past week, including abolishing flogging as a legal punishment and death sentences for people who committed crimes as minors, constituted an effort to respond to criticism but were unlikely to turn the tide. Speaking for Congressmen representing US shale states, North Dakota Senator Kevin Cramer warned that “Saudi Arabia’s next steps will determine whether our strategic partnership is salvageable.” Salvaging Saudi-US relations may be Prince Mohammed’s only option. Russian President Vladimir Putin is unlikely to have taken kindly to a reported shouting match in a phone call with the crown prince at the outset of the price war. Signalling that the production cuts are a ceasefire rather than an end to the war, Saudi Arabia and Russia continue to fight it out on oil markets with the kingdom undercutting Russia with discounts and special offers, according to a Reuters investigation. Strained relations did not prevent the two countries from moving forward with an agreement on Russian wheat sales to the kingdom. A first Russian shipment of 60,000 tons set sail for Saudi Arabia earlier this month. Irrespective of the state of Saudi-Russian relations, Russia’s call for replacing the US defence umbrella in the Gulf with a multi-lateral security arrangement that would involve the United States, as well as China, Europe, and India, is a skeleton with no flesh. Russia has neither the wherewithal nor the will to shoulder responsibility for Gulf security. Nor do others, envisioned by Russia as a participant in a revised Gulf security arrangement. The proposal, moreover, is a stillborn baby as long as Saudi Arabia refuses to engage with Iran with no pre-conditions. The kingdom has so far used the pandemic to harden fault lines with the Islamic Republic, casting aside opportunities to build bridges with goodwill gestures. Similarly, China has no appetite for a major military role in the Middle East despite having established its first foreign military base in Djibouti and contributing to anti-piracy operations off the coast of Somalia. Equally troubling for Prince Mohammed is the fact that he cannot be certain that China would be able to maintain its neutrality if US-Iranian tensions were to explode into an all-out war given that when the chips are down Iran may be of greater strategic significance to Beijing. Iran’s geography, demography, and highly educated population give it a leg up in its competition with Saudi Arabia for Chinese favour. So does the fact that China and Iran see each other as bookends at both ends of Asia with a civilizational history that goes back thousands of years. Iran, moreover, plays a pivotal role in Belt and Road-related efforts to link China to Europe by a rail that would traverse Central Asia and the Islamic Republic and end the expensive and time-consuming process of having to transfer goods to ships at one end of the Caspian Sea and loading them back onto a train on the Caspian’s opposite shore. Prince Mohammed’s maneuvering to strike a balance in securing Saudi Arabia’s place in a world of contentious big power relationships is reflected in coverage by the kingdom’s tightly controlled media of Chinese and US efforts to combat the pandemic. Andrew Leber, a student of Saudi policymaking, noted that “China’s mixed record in boosting its image in Riyadh is a reminder that soft-power competition is not a zero-sum game. Even as Saudi outlets have grown more willing to air criticisms of China, some have derided the efforts of President Donald Trump and his administration to blame COVID-19 on Beijing.” Leber’s analysis of Saudi media coverage suggests that Prince Mohammed is seeking to keep all doors open. It will, however, take a lot more than vacillating media coverage and reform of the kingdom’s penal code to polish Saudi Arabia’s tarnished image in the United States and level the playing field with Iran when it comes to China. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) (First Published on The Inside Arabia)

Saudi Arabia is coping with not just coronavirus pandemic’s economic fallout but geopolitical issues too

More evidence has emerged which support&nbsp;the theory that coronavirus originated in a virology lab in Wuhan in China.

The Washington Times says that the Wuhan lab is the "most likely" source of the coronavirus. This claim is part of an unfinished document which is based on circumstantial evidence that is available in public. This document is part of an investigation which is underway in the United States.

Americans are&nbsp;not&nbsp;alone in saying this. A leading Russian microbiologist made a stunning claim against a Wuhan lab.

Professor Petr Chumakov has said, "In China, scientists at the Wuhan laboratory have been actively involved in the development of various coronaviruses for over ten years. They did absolutely crazy things, in my opinion. "

The Wuhan Institute of Virology, also known as Asia's biggest virus lab, was among the first to receive samples from patients infected by the Wuhan coronavirus.

There are many who claim that this lab is actually the source of this virus.&nbsp;

More than three months after its first cases were reported, the origin of the coronavirus remains unknown.&nbsp;Wuhan, the original epicentre of this pandemic, still remains cut off from the outside world.

China has opposed any idea of an independent investigation into this outbreak, but these attempts to escape scrutiny are only hurting the Communist party.

US President Donald Trump has been publicly blaming China for the global spread of the "invisible enemy" and launched an investigation against it

Leaders of the US, the UK and Germany believe that the deaths and the destruction of the global economy could have been avoided, had China shared the information about the virus in its early phases.

The virus, which originated in China's Wuhan city in mid-November, has killed more than two lakh people and infected over three million globally.&nbsp; 
 
(With inputs from agencies)

More evidence has emerged which support the theory that coronavirus originated in a virology lab in Wuhan in China. The Washington Times says that the Wuhan lab is the "most likely" source of the coronavirus.

More evidence has emerged which support the theory that coronavirus originated in a virology lab in Wuhan in China. The Washington Times says that the Wuhan lab is the "most likely" source of the coronavirus. This claim is part of an unfinished document which is based on circumstantial evidence that is available in public. This document is part of an investigation which is underway in the United States. Americans are not alone in saying this. A leading Russian microbiologist made a stunning claim against a Wuhan lab. Professor Petr Chumakov has said, "In China, scientists at the Wuhan laboratory have been actively involved in the development of various coronaviruses for over ten years. They did absolutely crazy things, in my opinion. " The Wuhan Institute of Virology, also known as Asia's biggest virus lab, was among the first to receive samples from patients infected by the Wuhan coronavirus. There are many who claim that this lab is actually the source of this virus. More than three months after its first cases were reported, the origin of the coronavirus remains unknown. Wuhan, the original epicentre of this pandemic, still remains cut off from the outside world. China has opposed any idea of an independent investigation into this outbreak, but these attempts to escape scrutiny are only hurting the Communist party. US President Donald Trump has been publicly blaming China for the global spread of the "invisible enemy" and launched an investigation against it Leaders of the US, the UK and Germany believe that the deaths and the destruction of the global economy could have been avoided, had China shared the information about the virus in its early phases. The virus, which originated in China's Wuhan city in mid-November, has killed more than two lakh people and infected over three million globally. (With inputs from agencies)

More evidence emerges suggesting coronavirus originated in Wuhan lab