Explore the vast range of titles available.

The global response to the Covid-19 pandemic is the greatest science policy failure in a generation. We knew this was coming. Warnings about the threat of a new pandemic have been made repeatedly since the 1980s and it was clear in January that a dangerous new virus was causing a devastating human tragedy in China. And yet the world ignored the warnings. Why? In this short and hard-hitting book, Richard Horton, editor of the medical journal The Lancet, scrutinizes the actions that governments around the world took - and failed to take - as the virus spread from its origins in Wuhan to the global pandemic that it is today. He shows that many Western governments and their scientific advisors made assumptions about the virus and its lethality that turned out to be mistaken. Valuable time was lost while the virus spread unchecked, leaving health systems unprepared for the avalanche of infections that followed. Drawing on his own scientific and medical expertise, Horton outlines the measures that need to be put in place, at both national and international levels, to prevent this kind of catastrophe from happening again. We're supposed to be living in an era where human beings have become the dominant influence on the environment, but Covid-19 has revealed the fragility of our societies and the speed with which our systems can come crashing down. We need to learn the lessons of this pandemic and we need to learn them fast because the next pandemic may arrive sooner than we think.

Twelve percent of the Malawian population is HIV infected. Eighteen percent of sexual encounters are casual. A condom is used a third of the time. To analyze the Malawian epidemic, a choice-theoretic general equilibrium search model is constructed. In the developed framework, people select between different sexual practices while knowing the inherent risk. The calibrated model is used to study several policy interventions, namely, ART, circumcision, better condoms, and the treatment of other STDs. The efficacy of public policy depends upon the induced behavioral changes and equilibrium effects. The framework complements the insights from epidemiological studies and small-scale field experiments.

This study examines the sociodemographic divide in early labor market responses to the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic and associated policies, benchmarked against two previous recessions. Monthly Current Population Survey (CPS) data show greater declines in employment in April and May 2020 (relative to February) for Hispanic individuals, younger workers, and those with a high school diploma or some college. Between April and May, the demographic subgroups considered regained some employment. Reemployment in May was broadly proportional to the employment drop that occurred through April, except for Black individuals, who experienced a smaller rebound. Compared to the 2001 recession and the Great Recession, employment losses in the early COVID-19 recession were smaller for groups with low or high (vs. medium) education. We show that job loss was greater in occupations that require more interpersonal contact and that cannot be performed remotely, and that pre-COVID-19 sorting of workers into occupations and industries along demographic lines can explain a sizable portion of the demographic gaps in new unemployment. For example, while women suffered more job losses than men, their disproportionate pre-epidemic sorting into occupations compatible with remote work shielded them from even larger employment losses. However, substantial gaps in employment losses across groups cannot be explained by socioeconomic differences. We consider policy lessons and future research needs regarding the early labor market implications of the COVID-19 crisis.

The global response to the Covid-19 pandemic is the greatest science policy failure in a generation. We knew this was coming. Warnings about the threat of a new pandemic have been made repeatedly since the 1980s and it was clear in January that a dangerous new virus was causing a devastating human tragedy in China. And yet the world ignored the warnings. Why? In this short and hard-hitting book, Richard Horton, editor of the medical journal The Lancet, scrutinizes the actions that governments around the world took - and failed to take - as the virus spread from its origins in Wuhan to the global pandemic that it is today. He shows that many Western governments and their scientific advisors made assumptions about the virus and its lethality that turned out to be mistaken. Valuable time was lost while the virus spread unchecked, leaving health systems unprepared for the avalanche of infections that followed. Drawing on his own scientific and medical expertise, Horton outlines the measures that need to be put in place, at both national and international levels, to prevent this kind of catastrophe from happening again. We're supposed to be living in an era where human beings have become the dominant influence on the environment, but Covid-19 has revealed the fragility of our societies and the speed with which our systems can come crashing down. We need to learn the lessons of this pandemic and we need to learn them fast because the next pandemic may arrive sooner than we think.

We discuss and review literature on the macroeconomic effects of epidemics and pandemics since the late twentieth century. First, we cover the role of health in driving economic growth and well-being and discuss standard frameworks for assessing the economic burden of infectious diseases. Second, we sketch a general theoretical framework to evaluate the trade-offs policy makers must consider when addressing infectious diseases and their macroeconomic repercussions. In so doing, we emphasize the dependence of economic consequences on (i) disease characteristics; (ii) inequalities among individuals in terms of susceptibility, preferences, and income; and (iii) cross-country heterogeneities in terms of their institutional and macroeconomic environments. Third, we study pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical policies aimed at mitigating and preventing infectious diseases and their macroeconomic repercussions. Fourth, we discuss the health toll and economic impacts of five infectious diseases: HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis, influenza, and COVID-19. Although major epidemics and pandemics can take an enormous human toll and impose a staggering economic burden, early and targeted health and economic policy interventions can often mitigate both to a substantial degree.

\"In the midst of loss and death and suffering, our charge is to figure out what freedom really means--and how we take steps to get there. The uprising of 2020 marked a new phase in the unfolding Movement for Black Lives. The brutal killings of Ahmaud Arbery, George Floyd, and Breonna Taylor, and countless other injustices large and small, were the match that lit the spark of the largest protest movement in US history, a historic uprising against racism and the politics of disposability that the Covid-19 pandemic lays bare. In this urgent and incisive collection of new interviews bookended by two new essays, Marc Lamont Hill critically examines the \"pre-existing conditions\" that have led us to this moment of crisis and upheaval, guiding us through both the perils and possibilities, and helping us imagine an abolitionist future.\"--Barnesandnoble.com

Since the discovery of the secondary preventive benefits of antiretroviral therapy, national and international governing bodies have called for countries to reach 90% diagnosis, ART engagement and viral suppression among people living with HIV/AIDS. The US HIV epidemic is dispersed primarily across large urban centers, each with different underlying epidemiological and structural features. We selected six US cities, including Atlanta, Baltimore, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, and Seattle, with the objective of demonstrating the breadth of epidemiological and structural differences affecting the HIV/AIDS response across the US. We synthesized current and publicly-available surveillance, legal statutes, entitlement and discretionary funding, and service location data for each city. The vast differences we observed in each domain reinforce disparities in access to HIV treatment and prevention, and necessitate targeted, localized strategies to optimize the limited resources available for each city’s HIV/AIDS response.

A chronicle of the COVID-19 pandemic as it unfolded gathers statements from President Trump and other elected officials, leading journalists, and scientists to offer a portrait of the confusion, drama, and fear that defined the outbreak.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread to nearly every country in the world since it first emerged in China in December 2019. Many countries have implemented social distancing as a measure to \"flatten the curve\" of the ongoing epidemics. Evaluation of the impact of government-imposed social distancing and of other measures to control further spread of COVID-19 is urgent, especially because of the large societal and economic impact of the former. The aim of this study was to compare the individual and combined effectiveness of self-imposed prevention measures and of short-term government-imposed social distancing in mitigating, delaying, or preventing a COVID-19 epidemic. We developed a deterministic compartmental transmission model of SARS-CoV-2 in a population stratified by disease status (susceptible, exposed, infectious with mild or severe disease, diagnosed, and recovered) and disease awareness status (aware and unaware) due to the spread of COVID-19. Self-imposed measures were assumed to be taken by disease-aware individuals and included handwashing, mask-wearing, and social distancing. Government-imposed social distancing reduced the contact rate of individuals irrespective of their disease or awareness status. The model was parameterized using current best estimates of key epidemiological parameters from COVID-19 clinical studies. The model outcomes included the peak number of diagnoses, attack rate, and time until the peak number of diagnoses. For fast awareness spread in the population, self-imposed measures can significantly reduce the attack rate and diminish and postpone the peak number of diagnoses. We estimate that a large epidemic can be prevented if the efficacy of these measures exceeds 50%. For slow awareness spread, self-imposed measures reduce the peak number of diagnoses and attack rate but do not affect the timing of the peak. Early implementation of short-term government-imposed social distancing alone is estimated to delay (by at most 7 months for a 3-month intervention) but not to reduce the peak. The delay can be even longer and the height of the peak can be additionally reduced if this intervention is combined with self-imposed measures that are continued after government-imposed social distancing has been lifted. Our analyses are limited in that they do not account for stochasticity, demographics, heterogeneities in contact patterns or mixing, spatial effects, imperfect isolation of individuals with severe disease, and reinfection with COVID-19. Our results suggest that information dissemination about COVID-19, which causes individual adoption of handwashing, mask-wearing, and social distancing, can be an effective strategy to mitigate and delay the epidemic. Early initiated short-term government-imposed social distancing can buy time for healthcare systems to prepare for an increasing COVID-19 burden. We stress the importance of disease awareness in controlling the ongoing epidemic and recommend that, in addition to policies on social distancing, governments and public health institutions mobilize people to adopt self-imposed measures with proven efficacy in order to successfully tackle COVID-19.