Photo credit Neil Hewett: Northern Leaf-Tailed Gecko – Saltuarius cornutus (Ogilby, 1892) – Daintree Rainforest – Cooper Creek Wilderness. Buy The Book with the Beautiful things.
[cr note: This is an interesting hypothesis from Leo Goldstein. I’ll add some observations]
We have a sharp surge in the new COVID-19 cases. The main [or just one factor out of several, a contributor ~cr] cause is likely to be the drop in the use of Hydroxychloroquine based treatment, following the FDA Memorandum of June 15. The FDA Memorandum accompanied the revocation of the Emergency Use Authorization for Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine from the National Strategic Stockpile. The FDA Memorandum vilified the drug, falsely alleging that it is not safe and “unlikely to be effective” against COVID-19 – when thousands of doctors have treated hundreds of thousands of patients with it . The National Institutes of Health’s NIH COVID-19 Panel updated its Guidelines to match on the FDA’s opinion the next day.
Although Hydroxychloroquine remains an approved drug and doctors can still prescribe it off-label, the FDA’s and NIH’s opinions have significant influence. State governments and medical boards adhere to the FDA opinion, in their subsequent recommendations. Even when HCQ is not banned outright, such opinion creates a chilling effect on pharmacies, doctors, hospitals, and, especially insurance companies.
Multiple members of AAPS have communicated to AAPS their inability to prescribe hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for a full regimen to treat or prevent COVID-19, including but not limited to physicians in Western Michigan, Georgia, New Jersey, Arizona, and Texas.
…
Numerous physician members of AAPS, including this “Dr. John
Doe,” reasonably fear retaliation against them by state medical boards based on
Defendants’ irrational restrictions on HCQ along with the incorporation of the
directive made to state medical boards by the Federation of State Medical Boards.
(ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS v FDA et al, 1:20-cv-00493, FEDERAL COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN)
HCQ Benefits
It is important to note that early antiviral treatment of patients with COVID-19 symptoms, using HCQ + AZ (+Zn), benefits not only the patient, but the public in general. Such treatment quickly reduces the viral load in the patient and the chances of the further transmission. [While this may be the case, generally evidence at this time only exists for improved outcomes for patients~cr]
Fig. 1. US daily new confirmed COVID-19 cases per day, 7-day rolling average (*)
Fig. 1 shows that the daily number of new cases was declining in April and May, as many states were re-opening, then remained on the same level, despite an increase in testing. Even the riots and demonstrations that started on May 26 did not lead to visible increases. However, after June 15 the daily number of new cases shot up and continues growing.
Fig. 2. US tests per confirmed COVID-19 case, 7-day rolling average (*)
(*) The typical time between the infection and onset of symptoms is 3-5 days. Notice that the graphs are rolling averages, corresponding to central averages of 3-4 days before.
Fig. 2 shows that the number tests per a new case was steadily growing (getting better) from around April 16 to June 16. It has been falling after that.
The Game Changer
Yes, an early stage Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin treatment was the game changer in the fight against COVID-19. Fig. 3-4 shows that COVID-19 has never gotten much traction in Asia, Africa, and Australia, partly because of wide availability and absence of prejudice against CQ/HCQ in those regions. In March, most COVID-19 deaths were happening in Europe, and their number was growing uncontrollably.
Fig. 3. Daily COVID-19 deaths, 7-day rolling average (**)
But on March 16, Dr. Didier Raoult publicized his HCQ+AZ treatment regimen. Doctors in Italy and Spain started to use it, although slowly and only in hospital settings. On March 19, President Donald Trump “touted” it, immediately making this treatment popular in the world. On March 22-23, Dr. Zelenko published his protocol, adding Zinc, and, more importantly, stressing the need to treat early, without waiting for testing or hospital admission. Early HCQ+AZ treatment ramped up in Europe between March 21 and March 28. In Italy, it became the standard of care even for mild cases.
Some of the patients who did not receive HCQ+AZ treatment timely continued dying, with a typical two weeks between closing window for anti-viral treatment and the death. Those who received it, typically recovered. Around March 25, the growing number of new cases was matched by the growing number of HCQ-based treatments. This is reflected by the April 10 peak on the chart, which is an average of recorded deaths from April 3 to April 10. After that, the humans won, and the number of daily deaths went down.
The dynamics in North America was different. Governors of New York and Michigan, suffering from the Trump Derangement Syndrome, rejected the hydroxychloroquine, with heartbreaking consequences.
Fig. 4. Daily COVID-19 cases, 7-day rolling average (**)
(**) If a case outcome is death, this takes place on average 18.5 days after the symptoms appear. Assuming that the window for effective antiviral intervention is 4-5 days, a typical death happens about two weeks after the window closes. There was a significant increase in testing during this period. Notice that the graphs are rolling averages, corresponding to central averages of 3-4 days before.
Prevention of bad outcome of COVID-19 is not the only benefit of HCQ + AZ treatment. It also decreases transmission. COVID-19 patients are most infective within about 4-8 days since symptoms appear. The infected persons who have symptoms show them 3-5 days after the infection. Thus, an untreated “confirmed case” causes more symptomatic or “confirmed” patients 7-11 days later [this is hypothetical and not really known~cr]. This is how it worked until March 20, leading to the averaged peak of about 45 daily cases in the week March 26 – April 2. Then they ramped up the early treatment, immediately decreasing the viral loads and chances of transmission. Around March 25, they were treating enough persons early enough to decrease the transmission coefficient below 1. The continuous drop in the new cases, showing on the chart after April 7, is the evidence to it.
HCQ-based prophylaxis might have been a factor, too. Notice that shutdowns also occurred in the relevant time frame, and, probably, contributed to stopping and reversing the COVID-19 epidemic in Europe.
Texas
States that had low infection levels and used HCQ widely, like Texas and Florida, are especially affected. The daily number of new cases in Texas has quadrupled since June 15! Texas has largely reopened in May. Throughout the May and first half of June, the daily number of cases remained below 2,000. The FDA memo was followed on June 19 by a stronger worded statement from Texas Medical Association. (The current TMA leadership is militantly leftist.) The number of daily new cases went up and exceeded 8,000 on July 1.
Lacking legal authority to prohibit doctors from prescribing FDA-approved non-controlled drugs, some state governments used their ability to regulate pharmacies to cut patients’ access to Hydroxychloroquine. Surprisingly, the Texas State Board of Pharmacy was one of the first to do that. Its order said:
No prescription or medication order for chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, mefloquine, or azithromycin may be dispensed or distributed unless all the following apply: (1) the prescription or medication order bears a written diagnosis from the prescriber consistent with the evidence for its use; (2) the prescription or medication order is limited to no more than a fourteen (14) day supply, unless the patient was previously established on the medication prior to the effective date of this rule; and (3) no refills may be permitted unless a new prescription or medication order is furnished.
This “consistent with the evidence for its use” was interpreted as a permission to dispense hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for COVID-19. It might be that this interpretation has changed to prohibition after June 16.
[Florida does not have such a leftist medical board and has been forging its own path~cr]
Mutations Potential
The high viral load in the population also increases probability of adverse mutations.
On July 3, Dr. Fauci said that the coronavirus mutated into a more transmissible strain. This is something expected when the only measure against it is social distancing. Such mutation might have been more important factor in the growth of cases.
Whatever the cause of the growth in the new daily cases, wider and early use of HCQ+AZ is a solution. [potentially~cr]
The FDA Memo, June 15
On June 15, the FDA revoked Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for HCQ & CQ. This EUA was useless anyway. But it was accompanied by a memorandum, looking as science, but being anything but.
Outright Lies
The FDA memo claimed 347 reports of adverse effects from HCQ in the context, implying these events happened in the US. It was based on HHS internal Review of Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine conducted by CDER Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology and delivered on May 19 (“the OSE Review”). This review was released to the public on July 1. It said that only 97 alleged cases of adverse effect were in the US, while 250 ones were abroad.
Efficacy
The efficacy of HCQ + AZ, with and without Zn, given early, have been reported by thousands of physicians around the world, and confirmed by more than a dozen of peer reviewed studies. The FDA elected to ignore them. It referred to all COVID-19 treatment regimens, using HCQ, as if they were one treatment. The FDA memo mentioned the British RECOVERY study, in which the researchers gave their patients a toxic dose (2,400 mg/day) of Hydroxychloroquine because they mixed up hydroxychloroquine with hydroxyquinoline. It also referred to the unfinished and not reported ORCHID trial (NCT04332991). This trial repeated old errors – HCQ was given to hospitalized (i.e., likely late stage) patients, with neither Azithromycin nor Zinc.
With the same logic, the FDA performed a literature review. The review was limited to the CDC library, thus omitting all studies not included in it. Even that was not enough. The FDA removed from the review the most valuable part – clinical trials, including randomized clinical trials. It limited the review to observational papers (called “studies of databases” by Dr. Raoult), including the infamous Mehra et al.
Safety
Contrary to the FDA Memo allegations, the OSE Review did not state that HCQ or HCQ+AZ combination is unsafe. The raw numbers suggest extraordinary safety of HCQ+AZ treatment. There were only 97 reports of adverse effects in hundreds of thousands of people treated with it.
QT prolongation was the most reported “adverse effect.” In fact, it is not an adverse effect, but a computed value, providing preliminary warning before an adverse effect, like Torsades de Pointes, arrhythmia, or tachycardia might happen.
The contra-indications for HCQ=AZ (including arrhythmia, tachycardia, and G6PD deficiency), and drug-interactions with strong QT prolongers (including some popular anti-depressants and anti-psychotics) are known and should be respected.
At the late stage, COVID-19 causes cardiac arrest in some of the patients. Apparently, when HCQ+AZ is given at the late stage, there might be negative synergy with the damage from COVID-19 in some patients. But the proper HCQ use is to start the treatment early.
OSE Review acknowledges the following limitations of its data (emphasis is added):
FAERS data have limitations. First, there is no certainty that the reported event was actually due to the product. FDA does not require that a causal relationship between a product and event be proven, and reports do not always contain enough detail to properly evaluate an event. Further, FDA does not receive reports for every adverse event or medication error that occurs with a product. Many factors can influence whether or not an event will be reported, such as the time a product has been marketed and publicity about an event. Therefore, FAERS data cannot be used to calculate the incidence of an adverse event or medication error in the U.S. population.
Conclusion
Doctors and pharmacists should disregard FDA/NIH/AMA/barking-dogs insinuations about Hydroxychloroquine. State governments should remove legal and illegal impediments to use Hydroxychloroquine in early treatment of COVID-19 patients.
[Additional studies are likely needed to develop this hypothesis such as correlating prescriptions per county to any changes to rising case numbers. There are scores of studies not being performed in this hyperpolitical environment, such as:
One: 65 plus year olds who take care of their grandkids vs those who don’t vs those who don’t have grandkids.
Two: studies of household transmission as a function of socioeconomic status, ethnicity, household size, house size.
Three: missed diagnostic procedures for various cancers, eg mammography, colonoscopies. Extrapolate delayed diagnosis to more costs, ie more advanced, and more deaths.
Four: Monthly death rates for the major classes of diseases from January thru now.
Five: adjudicated reviews of a sample of ‘covid deaths’.
This post merely reproduces the open letter from climate alarmists to Facebook.
Facebook Must Stop the Spread of Climate Misinformation
An open letter to Helle Thorning-Schmidt and Facebook’s Oversight Board
July 1, 2020
To: Helle Thorning-Schmidt, Facebook Oversight Board
Cc: Mark Zuckerberg, Afia Asantewaa Asare-Kyei, Evelyn Aswad, Endy Bayuni, Catalina Botero-Marino, Katherine Chen, Nighat Dad, Jamal Greene, Pamela Karlan, Tawakkol Karman, Maina Kiai, Sudhir Krishnaswamy, Ronaldo Lemos, Michael McConnell, Julie Owono, Emi Palmor, Alan Rusbridger, András Sajó, Nicolas Suzor, Nick Clegg
Ms. Thorning-Schmidt,
In the four years you served Denmark as Prime Minister, you saw the effects of CO2 on climate change first hand. You made this dire challenge central to your tenure; you took action and asked other leaders to do the same. You made bold and ambitious commitments to achieve 100% renewable energy. You were celebrated for affirming the urgent necessity of acting to halt climate change.
Above all, you told the world that climate change is not “an opinion.” It is fact.
Facebook is allowing the spread of climate misinformation to flourish, unchecked, across the globe. Instead of heeding the advice of independent scientists and approved fact-checkers from Climate Feedback, Facebook sided with fossil fuel lobbyists by allowing the CO2 Coalition to take advantage of a giant loophole for “opinion” content. The loophole has allowed climate denial to fester by labeling it “opinion,” and thus, avoiding the platform’s fact-checking processes.
Facebook knows how to take action against misinformation. When COVID-19 denial took hold on the platform, it was forcibly shut down because Facebook understood that the spread of COVID-19 misinformation could cause imminent physical harm to the health and well-being of Facebook users. Climate denial and misinformation are also deadly. By allowing climate misinformation to go unchecked, Facebook is actively putting the health and well-being of our nation’s most vulnerable low-income communities and communities of color at risk.
You and the Oversight Board must step in and enact the same standard for the denial of climate change as you did for COVID-19 misinformation.
The integrity of the Oversight Board is at risk. Mark Zuckerberg has refused to recognize that he must get the facts right on climate, and refused to acknowledge that climate denial on his platform is as dangerous a threat to future generations as any.
We are asking you to lead the charge to fix this. Until Facebook takes a stand, climate denial groups such as the CO2 Coalition will continue to exploit your platform to sow discord and put our nation’s health and security at dire risk.
When you were Prime Minister, you knew for certain that climate change was fact, not opinion, and needs to be treated as such. In your current role as an overseer of Facebook’s dangerous misinformation practice, our plea is grave: please, Ms. Thorning-Schmidt, take action now.
Signed:
Stacey Abrams, Founder, Fair Fight and the Southern Economic Advancement Project
LaTricea Adams, President, Black Millennials 4 Flint
Ken Berlin, President and CEO, Climate Reality Project Action Fund
Carol Browner, Chair, League of Conservation Voters Board; Former EPA Administrator
Dominique Browning, Senior Director and Co-Founder, Moms Clean Air Force
Michael Brune, Executive Director, Sierra Club
Gerald Butts, President, New Climate; former Principal Secretary to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
Alex Cornell du Houx, Co-Founder and President, Elected Officials to Protect America
Abbie Dillen, President, Earthjustice
Ken Kimmell, President, Union of Concerned Scientists
Lori Lodes, Executive Director, Climate Power 2020
Gina McCarthy, President and CEO, NRDC Action Fund; former EPA Administrator
Tamara Toles O’Laughlin, North America President, 350.org
Collin O’Mara, President, National Wildlife Federation
Erich Pica, President, Friends of the Earth
John Podesta, Founder, Center for American Progress
Tom Steyer, Founder, NextGen America; Climate Activist
Robert Wendelgass, President and CEO, Clean Water Action
Experts release a statement on eve of UN talks that calls for the governing of the digital sector to support transformations to a climate-safe, sustainable, and equitable world
FUTURE EARTH
Montreal — On the eve of UN talks to assess progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), an international group of distinguished business, government, and science leaders say we cannot achieve a climate-safe, sustainable, and equitable world without ensuring a secure, safe, and trusted internet for all.
The SDGs set out a transformative agenda that aims to simultaneously end poverty, address environmental decline, and reduce inequalities, all by 2030. But it missed setting a goal for governing perhaps the most powerful force defining humanity’s future: the digital age.
In a joint Montreal Statement on Sustainability in the Digital Age the experts argue that tackling the climate crisis and achieving broader sustainability goals is indivisible from creating a secure, equitable, and trusted digital world; these are all one interconnected agenda. And they outline five near-term, cross-cutting actions that can enable rapid and widespread societal transformations to a low-carbon, secure and equitable future. This lays the foundation for what could define a much needed action agenda for a new SDG on governing the digital world in support of people and planet.
Developed with the support of leading research and philanthropy organizations from four countries – Canada, the UK, France, and the USA – the statement unites voices of digital and sustainability experts working at the intersection of technology, sustainability and policy. It is released as the UN’s high-level political forum prepares to meet virtually July 7-16th to launch a Decade of Action toward the 17 SGDs and assess the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.
The statement will be discussed during a side-event at the forum on July 9, exploring collaborative action for digital capacity building to implement the UN’s 2030 SDG Agenda.
The statement calls for:
Developing a social contract for the digital age, to ensure individual rights, justice and equity, inclusive access, and environmental sustainability;
Ensuring open and transparent access to data and knowledge critical to achieving sustainability and equity;
Building public and private collaborations to develop and manage AI and other technologies in support of sustainability and equity;
Investing in research and innovation that focuses on transdisciplinary challenges and opportunities underlying the systems that are maintaining our unsustainability; and
Promoting targeted communication, engagement and education to advance the social contract.
The statement was conceived and initially formulated at a September 2019 workshop in Montreal, Canada, one of a series on AI & Society, funded by CIFAR in partnership with UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) and France’s Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), organized by Future Earth, the UK Office for AI, the International Observatory on the Societal Impacts of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Technologies (OBVIA), and CNRS.
The need for global cooperation in the digital realm was similarly underlined recently by the UN Secretary-General. In June, António Guterres released a roadmap for filling the digital governance gap, creating a foundation to effectively leverage digital tools to achieve broad sustainability goals, including climate change mitigation.
In parallel, the Montreal Statement is part of a new international initiative – Sustainability in the Digital Age – which seeks to support and strengthen the growing diversity of actors engaging with the interconnected digital and sustainability agendas.
The statement continues to be endorsed by innovators, researchers, and decision makers working at the interface of digital and environmental sustainability, committed to collaborating to drive change.
Endorse the statement here
Approuver la déclaration ici
The statement was developed with funding from:
CIFAR
Fonds de recherche du Québec (FRQ)
UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)
French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS)
Climateworks Foundation
Collaborators:
Future Earth
UN Environment Programme
UN Development Programme
UK Office for AI
German Environment Agency (Umwelt Bundesamt)
The Observatory of Social Impacts on AI and Digital Technology
Element AI
Mila
Barcelona Supercomputing Center
CIO Strategy Council
Endorsements:
International Science Council
DNV GL
Concordia University
Stockholm Resilience Centre
Exponential Roadmap Initiative
Axionable
Collaborators and Endorsers reflect on the Montreal Statement
“Humanity today is interconnected through, and dependent on, both the digital and natural worlds. As a result, tackling the climate crisis and the broader sustainability agenda, and working toward a just equitable digital future are increasingly intertwined agendas. It is time to recognize the need to work toward a new SDG — SDG 18– focused on ensuring that the Digital Age supports people, planet, prosperity, peace, and partnerships.” – Amy Luers, Executive Director, Future Earth. Director, Sustainability in the Digital Age initiative
“We need to bet big on digital technologies, because they provide the kind of exponential transformative power needed to achieve the SDGs. We are making great progress applying digital technologies to help tackle sustainability challenges, but we are still not cooperating enough across the public and private sectors to drive the scale, speed and direction of change we need. The Montreal Statement on Sustainability in the Digital Age outlines areas where we urgently need to take more collaborative action to govern the technology sector and build a digital ecosystem for people and planet.” – David Jensen, Head of Environmental Peacebuilding, UN Environment Programme
“Digital technologies are a major force in driving the changes in both society and environment we need to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). With COVID-19 disrupting economies, exacerbating inequalities and setting back developmental progress, countries with a stronger culture of innovation and more developed digital infrastructure have been able to mitigate the negative impacts of the crisis and set on the path to recovery quicker. Digital technology has shown the potential to be a development catalyst. The Montreal Statement on Sustainability in the Digital Age sets out an important framework for collaboration to enable this important work.” – Robert Opp, Chief Digital Officer, UN Development Programme (UNDP)
“As highlighted in this Montreal Statement, as the power of digital technologies such as AI increases, I believe that it becomes all the more important to set up social norms and encourage efforts towards both a wiser governance – to minimize misuse – and steering technological investments towards betterment of society – AI for social good, e.g. fighting climate change – rather than the additional concentration of wealth, power and inequity which is otherwise likely to follow, at the expense of sustainability and a just society.” – Prof. Yoshua Bengio A.M. Turing Award, 2018; Scientific Director, Mila; Full professor, University of Montreal; Co-Founder, Element AI
“As the international community reflects on how we can respond to the pandemic in a way that puts us on a sustainable recovery track, we are recognizing the central role that the digital world will play. This makes the challenges of access, equity, and trust in the digital sector urgent, if we are to be able to steer its massive potential towards a path that will accelerate SDG achievement. The Montreal Statement provides a guide for collaboration and action to steer the digital revolution in support of human-centred, sustainable development.” – Dirk Messner, President, German Environment Agency (UBA)
“The broader international science community is just beginning to explore the powerful opportunities and profound challenges of the digital age, both for science and for society. At the ISC we have adopted this as one of our four key domains of action. The Montreal Statement on Sustainability in the Digital Age, outlines important areas of work that need to be pursued through the closer engagement of science with partners from policy and wider publics.” – Heide Hackmann, CEO, International Science Council (ISC)
“Here at BSC, we are committed to working with others to respond to this call to action. We are already doing work in several areas highlighted in the Montreal Statement using high performance computing and big data infrastructures to provide reliable climate services leading to resilient societies. We create public-private partnerships to provide stakeholders open and transparent access to data and knowledge.” – Asun Lera St. Clair, Senior Advisor, Barcelona Supercomputing Centre – BSC DNVGL Digital Assurance
“Element AI firmly believes that we have a civic duty to contribute to environmental and social wellbeing, and as such we are proud to collaborate on the Montreal Statement on Sustainability in the Digital Age, and will be active in our commitment to respond to the calls for action.” – Anne Martel, Chief Administrative Officer and Co-Founder, Element AI
“I invite our leaders to take action on the Montreal Statement on Sustainability in the Digital Age, elaborated under the leadership of Future Earth and in collaboration with many international partners. The development of digital innovations such as artificial intelligence, which transform our societies and can bring growth and progress, should be done in conjunction with the achievement of UN’s Sustainable Development Goals to create a climate-safe, sustainable, and equitable world.” – Rémi Quirion, Chief Scientist of Québec
“AI is transforming the way we live and work so it is critical that we act now to find solutions that promote trustworthiness, equity, inclusion and sustainability. Through CIFAR’s AI & Society program, we were pleased to support the international workshop that catalyzed some of the early work in the development of the Montreal Statement.” – Rebecca Finlay, Vice President, Engagement & Public Policy, CIFAR.
“AI technologies have an unavoidable role to play in reducing global contributions to the climate crisis. By embracing the fourth industrial revolution we may consciously create a future for AI development that is fair and equitable for the planet. The Montreal Statement on Sustainability in the Digital Age outlines areas of collaboration needed to achieve this goal. The scale of disruption required to achieve net zero emissions requires a full transformation of our economies and societies, and must be embedded into national strategies if we are to match our words with actions. Having legislated for net zero, the UK is embracing the challenge and we continue on this path as a founding member of the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI), an international and multistakeholder initiative to guide the responsible development and use of AI, grounded in human rights, inclusion, diversity, innovation, and economic growth.” – Sana Khareghani, Deputy Director, Head of Office for Artificial Intelligence, UK
“As a host of Future Earth, Concordia University shares its vision through the work of researchers across a variety of fields who are driven by the conviction that technological innovation should provide opportunities for greater social respect and inclusion while lowering our ecological footprint. This work can play a key role in ensuring a digital future that is both informed by, and continuously advancing sustainable principles. The Montreal Statement is a consolidation of this vision and a welcome call for transformative action now.” – Graham Carr, President, Concordia University
###
Future Earth is an international research organization, collaborating with science and society on solutions to global sustainability challenges. It encompasses nearly 30 research-to-action networks, groups of scientists and practitioners around the world, studying the environmental and human aspects of global change. We help incorporate the latest scientific knowledge into decision-making, with a mission to accelerate transformations to sustainability through research and innovation.
Future Earth is governed by the International Science Council (ISC), the Belmont Forum of funding agencies, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations University (UNU), the World Meteorological Organization, and the Science and Technology in Society (STS) forum.
Iowa Climate Science Education 