Where can you buy zithromax over the counter

Study Design We used a test-negative case–control design to estimate treatment effectiveness against symptomatic buy antibiotics caused by the omicron variant where can you buy zithromax over the counter as compared with the delta variant in persons advice 18 years of age or older.17 The odds of vaccination in persons with symptomatic, PCR-positive cases of antibiotics were compared with those in symptomatic persons who tested negative for antibiotics in England. Data Sources buy antibiotics Testing Data PCR testing for antibiotics in England is undertaken by hospital and public health laboratories (Pillar where can you buy zithromax over the counter 1) as well as by community testing (Pillar 2). Pillar 2 testing is available to anyone with symptoms consistent with buy antibiotics (high temperature, new continuous cough, or where can you buy zithromax over the counter loss or change in sense of smell or taste), anyone who is a contact of a person with a confirmed case, care home staff and residents, and persons with a positive rapid lateral-flow antigen test. Lateral-flow tests are freely available to all members where can you buy zithromax over the counter of the population for regular home testing. Data on all positive where can you buy zithromax over the counter PCR and lateral-flow tests, and on negative Pillar 2 PCR tests from persons with a date of onset of buy antibiotics symptoms after November 25, 2020, were extracted up to January 12, 2022 (Fig.

S1 in the Supplementary Appendix, available where can you buy zithromax over the counter with the full text of this article at NEJM.org). Persons who reported symptoms and were tested in Pillar 2 between November 27, 2021, and January 12, 2022, where can you buy zithromax over the counter were included in the analysis. Any negative tests taken within 7 days after a previous negative where can you buy zithromax over the counter test, and any negative tests for which the symptom-onset date was within the 10 days after a previous symptom-onset date for a negative test, were dropped because these probably represented the same episode. Negative tests taken within 21 days before a subsequent positive test were also excluded because chances were where can you buy zithromax over the counter high that these were false negatives. Positive and where can you buy zithromax over the counter negative tests within 90 days after a previous positive test were also excluded.

However, when participants had later positive tests within 14 days after a positive test, where can you buy zithromax over the counter preference was given to PCR tests and tests from symptomatic persons. For persons who had more than one negative test, one test was selected at random in the study where can you buy zithromax over the counter period. Data were restricted to persons who had reported symptoms and gave a symptom-onset date within the 10 days before testing to account for reduced PCR sensitivity beyond this period in where can you buy zithromax over the counter an event. Only positive tests with sequencing or genotyping information or information on spike gene (S) target–negative status (indicative of probable where can you buy zithromax over the counter omicron ) were included in the final analysis. A small number of positive tests were excluded when sequencing showed neither the delta nor the where can you buy zithromax over the counter omicron variant.

Finally, only samples obtained on November 27, 2021, or after were retained for analysis because this corresponded to the period when S target–negative where can you buy zithromax over the counter status was predictive of the omicron variant. Vaccination Data The National Immunization Management System (NIMS) contains demographic information where can you buy zithromax over the counter on all persons residing in England who are registered with a general practice physician in that country and is used to record all buy antibiotics vaccinations.29 The NIMS was accessed on January 18, 2022, for dates of vaccination and treatment manufacturer, sex, date of birth, race or ethnic group, and residential address. Addresses were used to determine the index of multiple deprivation (a national indication where can you buy zithromax over the counter of level of deprivation that is based on small geographic areas of residence, assessed in quintiles) and were also linked to Care Quality Commission–registered care homes with the use of the unique property-reference number. Data on geographic region (NHS region), clinical risk-group status, status of being in a clinically extremely vulnerable group, and health and where can you buy zithromax over the counter social care worker status were also extracted from the NIMS. Clinical risk groups included a range of chronic conditions as described in the Green Book,30 whereas the clinically extremely vulnerable group included persons who were considered to be at the highest risk for severe buy antibiotics, including those with immunosuppressed conditions and those with severe respiratory disease.31 Booster doses were identified where can you buy zithromax over the counter as a third dose given at least 175 days after a second dose and administered after September 13, 2021.

Persons with four or more doses of treatment, a heterologous primary schedule, or fewer than 19 days between their first dose and second dose were where can you buy zithromax over the counter excluded. Identification of Variants and Assignment to Cases Sequencing of PCR-positive samples was undertaken through a network where can you buy zithromax over the counter of laboratories, including the Wellcome Sanger Institute. Whole-genome sequences were assigned to U.K where can you buy zithromax over the counter. Health Security Agency definitions of variants on the basis of mutations.32,33 S target status on PCR testing is an alternative approach for identifying each variant because the omicron variant has been associated with S where can you buy zithromax over the counter target–negative results on PCR testing with the TaqPath assay, whereas the delta variant almost always has an S target–positive result.26 Approximately 40% of Pillar 2 community testing in England is carried out by laboratories using the TaqPath assay (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Cases were defined as being due to the delta or omicron where can you buy zithromax over the counter variant on the basis of whole-genome sequencing, genotyping, or S target status, with sequencing taking priority, followed by genotyping.

When subsequent positive tests within 14 days included sequencing or genotyping information or information on S target–negative status, this information was used where can you buy zithromax over the counter to classify the variant. A priori, we considered that S target–negative status would be used to define the where can you buy zithromax over the counter omicron variant when the variant accounted for at least 80% of S target–negative cases. Beginning on January 10, 2022, delta cases were identified by sequencing and genotyping only where can you buy zithromax over the counter because the positive predictive value of S target–negative status to identify the delta variant had decreased and could no longer be used. Testing data were linked where can you buy zithromax over the counter to the NIMS on January 18, 2021, through combinations of the unique individual NHS number, date of birth, surname, first name, and postal code with the use of deterministic linkage. A total of 91.8% of where can you buy zithromax over the counter eligible tests could be linked to the NIMS.

Statistical Analysis Logistic regression was used, with the PCR test result as the dependent variable and case participants being those testing positive (stratified in separate analyses as being infected with either the omicron or delta variant) and where can you buy zithromax over the counter controls being those testing negative. Vaccination status was where can you buy zithromax over the counter included as an independent variable, and effectiveness was defined as 1 minus the odds of vaccination in case participants, divided by the odds of vaccination in controls. treatment effectiveness was adjusted in logistic-regression models where can you buy zithromax over the counter for age (18 to 89 years in 5-year bands, then everyone ≥90 years), sex, index of multiple deprivation (quintile), race or ethnic group, history of foreign travel, geographic region, period (day of test), health and social care worker status, clinical risk-group status, status of being in a clinically extremely vulnerable group, and previously testing positive. These factors were all considered potential confounders and so were where can you buy zithromax over the counter included in all models. Analyses were stratified according to primary immunization course (ChAdOx1 where can you buy zithromax over the counter nCoV-19, BNT162b2, or mRNA-1273 treatment).

Any heterologous where can you buy zithromax over the counter primary schedules were excluded. treatment effectiveness was assessed for each primary course in intervals of 2 to 4, 5 to 9, 10 to 14, 15 to 19, 20 to 24, and 25 or more weeks after the second dose where can you buy zithromax over the counter. treatment effectiveness was assessed at 2 to where can you buy zithromax over the counter 4, 5 to 9, and 10 or more weeks after a BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster after a ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 primary course. In addition, the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 booster was assessed after a where can you buy zithromax over the counter ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 primary course in these postvaccination intervals. In persons with an mRNA-1273 primary course, treatment effectiveness was assessed after BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster treatments after 1 week and after 2 to 4 weeks.AbstractBackgroundWhether the use of balanced multielectrolyte solution (BMES) in preference to 0.9% sodium chloride solution (saline) in critically ill patients reduces the risk of acute kidney injury or death is uncertain.Methods Download a PDF of the Research Summary.In a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, we assigned critically ill patients to receive BMES where can you buy zithromax over the counter (Plasma-Lyte 148) or saline as fluid therapy in the intensive care unit (ICU) for 90 days.

The primary where can you buy zithromax over the counter outcome was death from any cause within 90 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes were receipt of new renal-replacement therapy and the maximum increase in the creatinine level during ICU stay.ResultsA total of 5037 patients were recruited from 53 ICUs in Australia and New Zealand — 2515 patients were where can you buy zithromax over the counter assigned to the BMES group and 2522 to the saline group. Death within 90 days after randomization where can you buy zithromax over the counter occurred in 530 of 2433 patients (21.8%) in the BMES group and in 530 of 2413 patients (22.0%) in the saline group, for a difference of −0.15 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], −3.60 to 3.30. P=0.90). New renal-replacement therapy was initiated in 306 of 2403 patients (12.7%) in the BMES group and in 310 of 2394 patients (12.9%) in the saline group, for a difference of −0.20 percentage points (95% CI, −2.96 to 2.56).

The mean (±SD) maximum increase in serum creatinine level was 0.41±1.06 mg per deciliter (36.6±94.0 μmol per liter) in the BMES group and 0.41±1.02 mg per deciliter (36.1±90.0 μmol per liter) in the saline group, for a difference of 0.01 mg per deciliter (95% CI, −0.05 to 0.06) (0.5 μmol per liter [95% CI, −4.7 to 5.7]). The number of adverse and serious adverse events did not differ meaningfully between the groups.ConclusionsWe found no evidence that the risk of death or acute kidney injury among critically ill adults in the ICU was lower with the use of BMES than with saline. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the Health Research Council of New Zealand. PLUS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02721654.)QUICK TAKE VIDEO SUMMARYBalanced Multielectrolyte Solution vs. Saline in ICUs 01:42The authors’ full names and academic degrees are as follows.

Pál Maurovich-Horvat, M.D., Ph.D., M.P.H., Maria Bosserdt, Ph.D., Klaus F. Kofoed, M.D., D.M.Sc., Nina Rieckmann, Ph.D., Theodora Benedek, M.D., Ph.D., Patrick Donnelly, M.D., José Rodriguez-Palomares, M.D., Ph.D., Andrejs Erglis, M.D., Cyril Štěchovský, M.D., Gintare Šakalyte, M.D., Nada Čemerlić Adić, M.D., Matthias Gutberlet, M.D., Ph.D., Jonathan D. Dodd, M.D., Ignacio Diez, M.D., Gershan Davis, M.D., Elke Zimmermann, M.D., Cezary Kępka, M.D., Radosav Vidakovic, M.D., Ph.D., Marco Francone, M.D., Ph.D., Małgorzata Ilnicka-Suckiel, M.D., Ph.D., Fabian Plank, M.D., Ph.D., Juhani Knuuti, M.D., Rita Faria, M.D., Stephen Schröder, M.D., Colin Berry, M.D., Luca Saba, M.D., Balazs Ruzsics, M.D., Ph.D., Christine Kubiak, Ph.D., Iñaki Gutierrez-Ibarluzea, Ph.D., Kristian Schultz Hansen, Ph.D., Jacqueline Müller-Nordhorn, M.D., M.P.H., Bela Merkely, M.D., Ph.D., Andreas D. Knudsen, M.D., Ph.D., Imre Benedek, M.D., Ph.D., Clare Orr, M.D., Filipa Xavier Valente, M.D., Ph.D., Ligita Zvaigzne, M.D., Vojtěch Suchánek, M.D., Laura Zajančkauskiene, M.D., Filip Adić, M.D., Michael Woinke, M.D., Mark Hensey, M.B., B.Ch., B.A.O., Iñigo Lecumberri, M.D., Erica Thwaite, M.D., Michael Laule, M.D., Mariusz Kruk, M.D., Aleksandar N. Neskovic, M.D., Ph.D., Massimo Mancone, M.D., Donata Kuśmierz, M.D., Gudrun Feuchtner, M.D., Mikko Pietilä, M.D., Ph.D., Vasco Gama Ribeiro, M.D., Tanja Drosch, M.D., Christian Delles, M.D., Gildo Matta, M.D., Michael Fisher, M.D., Ph.D., Bálint Szilveszter, M.D., Ph.D., Linnea Larsen, M.D., Ph.D., Mihaela Ratiu, M.D., Ph.D., Stephanie Kelly, B.Sc., Bruno Garcia del Blanco, M.D., Ph.D., Ainhoa Rubio, M.D., Zsófia D.

Drobni, M.D., Birgit Jurlander, M.D., Ph.D., Ioana Rodean, M.D., Susan Regan, B.Sc., Hug Cuéllar Calabria, M.D., Ph.D., Melinda Boussoussou, M.D., Thomas Engstrøm, M.D., D.M.Sc., Roxana Hodas, M.D., Adriane E. Napp, Ph.D., Robert Haase, M.D., Sarah Feger, M.D., Lina M. Serna-Higuita, M.D., Konrad Neumann, Ph.D., Henryk Dreger, M.D., Matthias Rief, M.D., Viktoria Wieske, M.D., Melanie Estrella, Ph.D., Peter Martus, Ph.D., and Marc Dewey, M.D. The authors’ affiliations are as follows. The Heart and Vascular Center (P.M.-H., B.M., B.S., Z.D.D., M.

Boussoussou) and the Department of Radiology, Medical Imaging Center (P.M.-H.), Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary. The Departments of Radiology (M. Bosserdt, E.Z., A.E.N., R. Haase, S.F., M. Rief, V.W., M.E., M.D.) and Cardiology and Angiology (M.L., H.D.), the Institute of Public Health (N.R., J.M.-N.), and the Institute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology (K.N.), Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and DZHK (German Center for Cardiovascular Research) Partner Site Berlin (H.D., M.D.), Berlin Institute of Health and Berlin University Alliance (M.D.), Berlin, the Departments of Radiology (M.G.) and Cardiology (M.W.), University of Leipzig Heart Center, Leipzig, the Department of Cardiology, Alb Fils Kliniken, Göppingen (S.S., T.D.), the Bavarian Cancer Registry, Bavarian Health and Food Safety Authority, Munich (J.M.-N.), and the Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biostatistics, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tübingen (L.M.S.-H., P.M.) — all in Germany.

The Departments of Cardiology (K.F.K., A.D.K., T.E.) and Radiology (K.F.K., A.D.K.), Rigshospitalet, and the Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences (K.F.K., A.D.K., T.E., L.L., B.J.), and the Department of Public Health, Section for Health Services Research (K.S.H.), University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, the Department of Cardiology, Herlev-Gentofte Hospital, Hellerup (L.L.), and the Department of Cardiology, Nordsjaellands Hospital, Hillerod (B.J.) — all in Denmark. The Department of Internal Medicine, Clinic of Cardiology (T.B., R. Hodas), and the Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging (M. Ratiu), George Emil Palade University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Science, and Technology, County Clinical Emergency Hospital Targu Mures (T.B.), and the Center of Advanced Research in Multimodality Cardiac Imaging, CardioMed Medical Center (I.B., I.R.) — all in Targu Mures, Romania. The Department of Cardiology, Southeastern Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast (P.D., C.O., S.K., S.R.), the Departments of Cardiology (G.D.) and Radiology (E.T.), Aintree University Hospital, the Department of Cardiology, Royal Liverpool University Hospital and the Institute for Cardiovascular Medicine and Science, Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital (B.R., M.

Fisher), and the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool (M. Fisher), Liverpool, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk (G.D.), the Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow (C.B., C.D.), and Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Clydebank (C.B.) — all in the United Kingdom. The Departments of Cardiology (J.R.-P., F.X.V., B.G.B.) and Radiology (H.C.C.), Hospital Universitario Vall d’Hebron, Institut de Recerca, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red, Madrid (J.R.-P., F.X.V., B.G.B.), the Departments of Cardiology (I.D., A.R.) and Radiology (I.L.), Basurto Hospital, Bilbao, Basque Foundation for Health Innovation and Research, Barakaldo, and the Basque Office for Health Technology Assessment, Vitoria-Gasteiz (I.G.-I.) — all in Spain. The Departments of Cardiology (A.E.) and Radiology (L. Zvaigzne), Paul Stradins Clinical University Hospital, and the University of Latvia (A.E.) — both in Riga, Latvia.

The Departments of Cardiology (C.Š.) and Imaging Methods (V.S.), Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic. The Department of Cardiology, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, and the Department of Cardiology, Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences (G.Š., L. Zajančkauskiene) — both in Kaunas, Lithuania. The Faculty of Medicine, University of Novi Sad, and the Department of Cardiology, Institute for Cardiovascular Diseases of Vojvodina, Novi Sad (N.Č.A., F.A.), and the Department of Cardiology, Internal Medicine Clinic, Clinical Hospital Center Zemun, and the Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade (R.V., A.N.N.) — all in Serbia. The Departments of Radiology (J.D.D.) and Cardiology (M.H.), St.

Vincent’s University Hospital and School of Medicine, University College Dublin (J.D.D.), Dublin. The National Institute of Cardiology, Warsaw (C. Kępka, M.K.), and the Departments of Cardiology (M.I.-S.) and Radiology (D.K.), Provincial Specialist Hospital in Wroclaw, Wroclaw — both in Poland. The Department of Clinical Internal, Anesthesiologic, and Cardiovascular Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome (M.M.), the Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, and IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital (M. Francone), Milan, and the Department of Radiology, University of Cagliari (L.S.), and the Department of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Brotzu (G.M.), Cagliari — all in Italy.

The Department of Internal Medicine III, the Department of Cardiology (F.P.), and the Department of Radiology (G.F.), Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria. The Turku PET Center (J.K.) and Heart Center (M.P.), Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, and the Administrative Center, Health Care District of Southwestern Finland (M.P.) — all in Turku, Finland. The Department of Cardiology, Centro Hospitalar de Vila Nova de Gaia–Espinho, Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal (R.F., V.G.R.). And the European Clinical Research Infrastructure Network–European Research Infrastructure Consortium, Paris (C. Kubiak).Chronic pancreatitis, often associated with alcohol use, smoking, or genetic risk factors, may be complicated by pseudocysts, biliary strictures, pancreatic insufficiency, bone loss, and pancreatic cancer.

Aspects of management include structural and nonstructural interventions for pain and treatment with pancreatic-enzyme replacement.This content requires an NEJM.org account. Create a free account now. Already have an account?. Sign in. Images in Clinical MedicineFree PreviewList of authors.Naveen Yadav, M.D., and Uday Yanamandra, M.D., D.M.

]]]]]]]]>]]]]]]>]]]]>]]> Select an option below. This content requires an account. Create Account Already have an account?. Sign In A 31-year-old man presented with progressive digital clubbing and bony proliferation of his fingers and toes. Evaluation for secondary causes was negative, and primary hypertrophic osteoarthropathy was diagnosed.Naveen Yadav, M.D.Uday Yanamandra, M.D., D.M.Armed Forces Medical College, Pune, India [email protected] March 3, 2022N Engl J Med 2022.

Zithromax and dairy products

Health Canada has http://cassiausa.com/can-i-buy-ventolin-over-the-counter-in-australia/ conducted zithromax and dairy products the Canadian Cannabis Survey every year since 2017. This is the fifth cycle of the survey. Data for the 2021 survey was collected from April to June 2021. Results of the Canadian Cannabis Survey will zithromax and dairy products be used to evaluate the impact of the Cannabis Act.

Inform policy and program development. And to advance effective public education and awareness activities. This important survey complements Health Canada’s zithromax and dairy products other national substance use surveys, including the Canadian Alcohol and Drugs Survey and the Canadian Student Tobacco, Alcohol and Drugs Survey. Key findings from the 2021 Canadian Cannabis Survey.

Seven in ten Canadians feel they have access to trustworthy information to make informed decisions about their cannabis use. This increases to almost nine in ten among people who used cannabis zithromax and dairy products in the past 12 months. Frequency of daily or almost daily cannabis use among Canadians aged 16 and older who reported use of cannabis in the past 12 months remained virtually unchanged between 2020 (25%) and 2021 (26%). Daily or almost daily use was also unchanged among 16 to 19 year olds (21% vs.

19%) and increased among 20 to 24 year olds (23% in 2020 to 29% zithromax and dairy products in 2021). The percentage of Canadians 16 years of age and older who reported using cannabis in the past 12 months decreased from 27% in 2020 to 25% in 2021. Smoking remains the most common method of consuming cannabis, but it has declined, while vapourizing using a vape pen, drinking, and applying to skin have increased since 2020. More than half of those zithromax and dairy products who use cannabis choose to obtain it through a legal source.

Fifty-three percent reported a legal storefront as their usual source, an increase from 41% in 2020, whereas 11% reported obtaining cannabis from a legal online source. The buy antibiotics zithromax has had some impacts on cannabis use. People who used cannabis in the past 12 months were asked if their cannabis use had changed due the zithromax—49% reported using the same amount of cannabis, a decrease from 56% in 2020, zithromax and dairy products while 29% reported using more (an increase from 22% in 2020) and 22% (unchanged from 2020) reported using less. Changes in amount of cannabis used due to buy antibiotics seemed to primarily affect younger age groups.

Twenty-five percent (25%) of people 25 years and older reported using more cannabis, compared to 46% of those aged 16 to 19 years and 40% aged 20 to 24 years. Driving after cannabis use in the past 12 months (16%) has decreased among those who reported past 12-month cannabis use, as compared to 2020 results (19%)..

Health Canada has conducted the Canadian Cannabis Survey where can you buy zithromax over the counter every year since 2017. This is the fifth cycle of the survey. Data for the 2021 survey was collected from April to June 2021.

Results of the Canadian Cannabis Survey will be used to evaluate where can you buy zithromax over the counter the impact of the Cannabis Act. Inform policy and program development. And to advance effective public education and awareness activities.

This important survey complements Health Canada’s other national substance use surveys, including the Canadian Alcohol and Drugs Survey and the Canadian Student Tobacco, Alcohol and Drugs where can you buy zithromax over the counter Survey. Key findings from the 2021 Canadian Cannabis Survey. Seven in ten Canadians feel they have access to trustworthy information to make informed decisions about their cannabis use.

This increases to almost nine in where can you buy zithromax over the counter ten among people who used cannabis in the past 12 months. Frequency of daily or almost daily cannabis use among Canadians aged 16 and older who reported use of cannabis in the past 12 months remained virtually unchanged between 2020 (25%) and 2021 (26%). Daily or almost daily use was also unchanged among 16 to 19 year olds (21% vs.

19%) and increased among 20 to 24 year olds (23% in 2020 to 29% where can you buy zithromax over the counter in 2021). The percentage of Canadians 16 years of age and older who reported using cannabis in the past 12 months decreased from 27% in 2020 to 25% in 2021. Smoking remains the most common method of consuming cannabis, but it has declined, while vapourizing using a vape pen, drinking, and applying to skin have increased since 2020.

More than half of those who use cannabis where can you buy zithromax over the counter choose to obtain it through a legal source. Fifty-three percent reported a legal storefront as their usual source, an increase from 41% in 2020, whereas 11% reported obtaining cannabis from a legal online source. The buy antibiotics zithromax has had some impacts on cannabis use.

People who used cannabis in the past 12 months were asked if their cannabis use had changed due the zithromax—49% reported using the same amount of cannabis, a decrease from 56% in 2020, while 29% reported where can you buy zithromax over the counter using more (an increase from 22% in 2020) and 22% (unchanged from 2020) reported using less. Changes in amount of cannabis used due to buy antibiotics seemed to primarily affect younger age groups. Twenty-five percent (25%) of people 25 years and older reported using more cannabis, compared to 46% of those aged 16 to 19 years and 40% aged 20 to 24 years.

Driving after cannabis use in the past 12 months (16%) has decreased among those who reported past 12-month cannabis use, as compared to 2020 results (19%)..

What side effects may I notice from Zithromax?

Side effects that you should report to your prescriber or health care professional as soon as possible:

• dark yellow or brown urine;
• difficulty breathing; severe or watery diarrhea;
• skin rash, itching;
• irregular heartbeat, palpitations, or chest pain;
• vomiting;
• yellowing of the eyes or skin

Side effects that usually do not require medical attention (report to your prescriber or health care professional if they continue or are bothersome):

• diarrhea;
• dizziness, drowsiness;
• hearing loss;
• headache;
• increased sensitivity to the sun;
• nausea;
• stomach pain or cramps;
• tiredness;
• vaginal irritation, itching or discharge

This list may not describe all possible side effects.

Zithromax cream

25, 2022 (HealthDay News) Writer Jenny Block and her chiweenie, Aurora, are on a health where to buy cheap zithromax kick zithromax cream. "We walk at least 1 mile and up to 4 miles in the early morning, before it gets too hot," said the Houston-based author. "She needs it, and I need it, so it works out great," said Block, who has shed several pounds and gotten much more toned since adopting Aurora in March 2020. "I love having the company and having her all excited to go gets me excited about it, too! zithromax cream. " Getting fit with Fido (or Aurora, as the case may be) is a win-win for everyone, a new Canadian study finds.

While previous research has shown that dog owners tend to get more exercise than folks without dogs, the new study shows that dogs with more active owners also get more exercise. Obesity in dogs is on the rise, and dogs who are overweight face a number of health problems, such zithromax cream as diabetes and heart disease. "The type of exercise you perform yourself does predict your dog's exercise routine as well," said study author Sydney Banton, a doctoral student at the University of Guelph in Ontario. "Any amount of vigorous exercise in the owner's exercise routine increased the proportion of dogs who also performed vigorous exercise." For the study, researchers analyzed results from a survey of nearly 3,300 dog owners in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. The survey looked at owners' zithromax cream and dogs' diets and exercise routines, along with the owner's perception of their dog's weight.

The bottom line?. Dogs got more exercise if their owners spent more time exercising. More active owners were also more likely to zithromax cream perceive their dog as having an ideal body weight, the survey showed. Vigorous exercise for dogs included running, playing ball or swimming, while moderate exercise was defined as walking, hiking or visiting the dog park. Folks who didn't perform more than 15 minutes of vigorous exercise weekly were less likely to report that their dog performs vigorous exercise, the study showed.

Dog owners who performed moderate exercise for more than five days per week were more likely to exercise their dogs for 60 minutes to 90 minutes or zithromax cream more per day, the study showed. Owners of dogs age 5 and older were less likely to perceive their dog as being an ideal body weight if they had been told their dog was overweight, attempted to control their dog's weight by limiting food intake, or reported giving dogs treats daily. Many owners may attempt to control dogs' body weight through diet, but not exercise, Banton said. "We encourage dog owners to include zithromax cream exercise as part of their dog's daily routine," she said. "If the dog is overweight, starting with smaller bouts of less intense exercise, such as a walk around the block, is a great way to gradually incorporate exercise into your dog's routine." The study is published in the Aug.

24 issue of PLOS ONE. Working out with a pet can be super motivating, said veterinarian Dr zithromax cream. Danielle Clem, hospital director of the San Diego Humane order zithromax over the counter Society. "Aside from the positive cardiovascular benefits, exercise offers important mental wellness for our pets and can help with overall behavior, too," she said. Keeping your dog at a healthy weight zithromax cream involves diet and exercise.

Work with your vet to develop a comprehensive approach to obesity. "It's important to make the time for regular checkups to rule out underlying causes of weight gain and monitor weight fluctuations over time," Clem said. "Your vet can best guide you to a proper nutritional plan, and give you the green light to safely work on an exercise routine that best fits your dog's needs and abilities." Chris Gagliardi is a personal trainer in El Cajon, Calif., and a spokesperson for the American zithromax cream Council on Exercise. He also owns a golden retriever and miniature schnauzer, and tries to include them in his workouts whenever and wherever he can. Make sure that you have the right equipment, Gagliardi recommended.

"A harness or a leash that connects to your waist may be better than a collar if you are going for a run with your zithromax cream dog," he said. Let them do their business before the run. SLIDESHOW When Animal (Allergies) Attack. Pet Allergy Symptoms, Treatment See Slideshow However, "if you and your zithromax cream dog aren't all that physically active, take it slowly and work together so you don't overdo it," Gagliardi added. Not all pets are built for vigorous exercise, he noted.

His golden retriever loves going for hikes and runs, but his miniature schnauzer is more of a guard dog who prefers to meander and bark at other dogs. "Know how zithromax cream your dog behaves around others, as this could be a barrier [to exercising in public]," Gagliardi noted. More information The San Diego Humane Society offers tips on exercising with your dog. SOURCES. Jenny Block, writer, Houston zithromax cream.

Sydney Banton, PhD student, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada. Danielle Clem, DVM, hospital director, San Diego Humane Society. Chris Gagliardi, personal trainer, and spokesperson, American Council on zithromax cream Exercise, El Cajon, Calif.. PLOS ONE, Aug. 24, 2022 Copyright © 2021 HealthDay.

25, 2022 (HealthDay News) Writer Jenny Block and her chiweenie, where can you buy zithromax over the counter Aurora, are on a health kick. "We walk at least 1 mile and up to 4 miles in the early morning, before it gets too hot," said the Houston-based author. "She needs it, and I need it, so it works out great," said Block, who has shed several pounds and gotten much more toned since adopting Aurora in March 2020. "I love where can you buy zithromax over the counter having the company and having her all excited to go gets me excited about it, too!. " Getting fit with Fido (or Aurora, as the case may be) is a win-win for everyone, a new Canadian study finds.

While previous research has shown that dog owners tend to get more exercise than folks without dogs, the new study shows that dogs with more active owners also get more exercise. Obesity in where can you buy zithromax over the counter dogs is on the rise, and dogs who are overweight face a number of health problems, such as diabetes and heart disease. "The type of exercise you perform yourself does predict your dog's exercise routine as well," said study author Sydney Banton, a doctoral student at the University of Guelph in Ontario. "Any amount of vigorous exercise in the owner's exercise routine increased the proportion of dogs who also performed vigorous exercise." For the study, researchers analyzed results from a survey of nearly 3,300 dog owners in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. The survey looked at owners' and dogs' diets and exercise routines, along with the owner's perception of their dog's weight where can you buy zithromax over the counter.

The bottom line?. Dogs got more exercise if their owners spent more time exercising. More active owners were also more likely where can you buy zithromax over the counter to perceive their dog as having an ideal body weight, the survey showed. Vigorous exercise for dogs included running, playing ball or swimming, while moderate exercise was defined as walking, hiking or visiting the dog park. Folks who didn't perform more than 15 minutes of vigorous exercise weekly were less likely to report that their dog performs vigorous exercise, the study showed.

Dog owners who performed moderate exercise for more than five days per week were more where can you buy zithromax over the counter likely to exercise their dogs for 60 minutes to 90 minutes or more per day, the study showed. Owners of dogs age 5 and older were less likely to perceive their dog as being an ideal body weight if they had been told their dog was overweight, attempted to control their dog's weight by limiting food intake, or reported giving dogs treats daily. Many owners may attempt to control dogs' body weight through diet, but not exercise, Banton said. "We encourage dog where can you buy zithromax over the counter owners to include exercise as part of their dog's daily routine," she said. "If the dog is overweight, starting with smaller bouts of less intense exercise, such as a walk around the block, is a great way to gradually incorporate exercise into your dog's routine." The study is published in the Aug.

24 issue of PLOS ONE. Working out with a pet can be super motivating, where can you buy zithromax over the counter said veterinarian Dr. Danielle Clem, hospital director of the San Diego Humane Society. "Aside from the positive cardiovascular benefits, exercise offers important mental wellness for our pets and can help with overall behavior, too," she said. Keeping your dog at a healthy weight involves diet and exercise where can you buy zithromax over the counter.

Work with your vet to develop a comprehensive approach to obesity. "It's important to make the time for regular checkups to rule out underlying causes of weight gain and monitor weight fluctuations over time," Clem said. "Your vet can best where can you buy zithromax over the counter guide you to a proper nutritional plan, and give you the green light to safely work on an exercise routine that best fits your dog's needs and abilities." Chris Gagliardi is a personal trainer in El Cajon, Calif., and a spokesperson for the American Council on Exercise. He also owns a golden retriever and miniature schnauzer, and tries to include them in his workouts whenever and wherever he can. Make sure that you have the right equipment, Gagliardi recommended.

"A harness or a leash where can you buy zithromax over the counter that connects to your waist may be better than a collar if you are going for a run with your dog," he said. Let them do their business before the run. SLIDESHOW When Animal (Allergies) Attack. Pet Allergy Symptoms, Treatment See Slideshow However, "if you and your dog aren't where can you buy zithromax over the counter all that physically active, take it slowly and work together so you don't overdo it," Gagliardi added. Not all pets are built for vigorous exercise, he noted.

His golden retriever loves going for hikes and runs, but his miniature schnauzer is more of a guard dog who prefers to meander and bark at other dogs. "Know how your dog behaves around others, as where can you buy zithromax over the counter this could be a barrier [to exercising in public]," Gagliardi noted. More information The San Diego Humane Society offers tips on exercising with your dog. SOURCES. Jenny Block, where can you buy zithromax over the counter writer, Houston.

Sydney Banton, PhD student, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada. Danielle Clem, DVM, hospital director, San Diego Humane Society. Chris Gagliardi, personal trainer, and spokesperson, American Council on Exercise, El Cajon, where can you buy zithromax over the counter Calif.. PLOS ONE, Aug. 24, 2022 Copyright © 2021 HealthDay.

Buy zithromax pills

Moments of buy zithromax pills existential crisis can turn into opportunities Cheap kamagra supplier uk for bold reform. World War II led to the creation of transformative institutions—the United Nations in 1945 and the World Health Organization in 1948. The birth of the WHO came buy zithromax pills the same year that the U.N. Adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The buy antibiotics zithromax marks just such a moment of crisis.

But instead buy zithromax pills of ushering in significant change, it has fractured global solidarity. That, in turn, has revealed deep-seated fragility in the WHO, the planet’s health leader. The WHO’s binding, governing framework for zithromax response—the International Health Regulations—has failed to serve its purpose in the face of widespread failures by national governments buy zithromax pills to comply. But it is not too late to turn the corner. In fact, this is just the moment to ask what a bold new global public health architecture might look like.

As the buy zithromax pills U.N.’s first specialized agency, the WHO has a constitutional mandate to direct and coordinate international health, which includes advancing work to eradicate epidemic disease. No state acting alone can prevent the worldwide spread of infectious diseases. Only robust international institutions can buy zithromax pills set global norms, promote cooperation and share scientific information needed to respond to disease outbreaks. As a result, the WHO’s role remains indispensable. With vast and growing global interdependency, intercontinental travel and mass migration, the realities of globalization and climate change have fueled a modern era of new diseases.

The list includes three novel antibioticses—SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and antibiotics—and, of course, Ebola buy zithromax pills and Zika. WHO director general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has been the world’s conscience throughout the buy antibiotics crisis by urging global cooperation. But his pleas have largely been ignored by nationalistic leaders taking a stance of “my country first.” Global dysfunction reached a pinnacle when President Donald Trump formally announced the U.S.’s intent to withdraw from the WHO. (President Joe Biden reversed buy zithromax pills this decision on his first day in office.) Yet Trump’s was only one of many dysfunctional nationalistic responses, which ranged from near-total border closures to the hoarding by rich countries of personal protective equipment, oxygen and treatments. The WHO was powerless to stop any of it.

Even the agency’s vaunted scientific expertise came into question, as it was buy zithromax pills embarrassingly late in recommending masks or acknowledging asymptomatic and aerosolized spread of the zithromax. It is tempting to simply create an entirely new international health organization, but that would be a serious mistake. It took a world war to build political consensus to establish a global health agency with vast constitutional powers. Every country on Earth is a member except Liechtenstein and Taiwan (the buy zithromax pills latter left out because of the U.N.’s “One China” policy). The WHO helped to lead the efforts that brought about the eradication of smallpox and the near eradication of polio, among other crowning achievements.

Instead of giving up on the agency, we should use this moment, and what political consensus we have, to prepare the organization for future zithromaxs—and what remains buy zithromax pills of the current one. This goal can be accomplished with robust funding and a bold new international agreement. It has become painfully obvious that there is a major disconnect between what the world expects of the WHO and its capacities and powers. Consider its funding buy zithromax pills. The WHO’s next Biennium Budget (for 2022 and 2023) is $6.12 billion, less than those of some large U.S.

Teaching hospitals and one fifth of the budget of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As long ago as 2011, the WHO’s report on buy zithromax pills the H1N1 influenza zithromax concluded that the agency’s budget is “wholly incommensurate” with its global responsibilities. Yet the money it receives has remained roughly constant in inflation-adjusted dollars for the past three decades. What is worse is that the WHO has control of less than 20 percent of its overall finances buy zithromax pills. That is the percentage of its budget that comes from so-called mandatory assessed contributions.

The rest consists of voluntary contributions, which are mostly earmarked for donors’ pet projects. The WHO cannot set global priorities or even hire for the long term, as voluntary buy zithromax pills funds disappear after a year. A donor then may just shift to another cause. Sustainable funding requires, at buy zithromax pills minimum, doubling the WHO’s total budget over five years, with mandatory assessments making up at least 50 percent of its overall budget. Yet even these modest proposals might not pass muster, because member states insist on calling the shots as to how their contributions are used.

Refrigerated trailers served as makeshift morgues during New York City’s first buy antibiotics wave in May 2020. Credit. Michael Nagle/Redux Pictures Beyond funding, the WHO must have enhanced powers to ensure governments work cooperatively in responding to global health emergencies. Yet the goal of enhancing the agency’s powers involves several challenges. Most countries frowned on Trump’s withdrawal from the WHO, but many agreed that he had a legitimate grievance.

China’s early reporting of buy antibiotics cases was disingenuous, causing a delay of weeks before the world was alerted, and the country later blocked an independent investigation of antibiotics’s proximal origins. But what national leaders did not realize is that the WHO has no power to verify a nation’s reports or gain entry to a state’s territory for scientific investigations. These two structural weaknesses—and many more—are the subject of intense global negotiations to create a bold new zithromax treaty, perhaps taking advantage of the WHO’s power to adopt broad-based, legally defined commitments such as the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. With crisis comes opportunity, and the new zithromax treaty has the potential to be transformative. It should introduce momentous reforms even beyond giving the WHO power to conduct independent investigations.

These provisions should include adopting a “One Health” strategy (a collaborative and transdisciplinary approach to achieving optimal health outcomes) that recognizes the interconnection among people, animals, plants and their shared environments. The most likely origin of antibiotics is a natural zoonotic spillover, the source of more than 60 percent of emerging diseases. Separating animal and human populations could prevent spillovers—a step that could be achieved through land management, reforestation and regulation of wild animal trade and markets. Although antibiotics most likely reached humans through natural means, a laboratory leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology has been posed as an alternative theory for buy antibiotics’s origins. Rigorous regulation and inspection of lab safety, as well as gain-of-function research, could help prevent the unintentional or deliberate release of novel pathogens.

Undoubtedly the rapid development of treatments and therapeutics, including innovative messenger RNA technologies, was the greatest technological success in responding to the zithromax. But open access and sharing of data and tools, such as real-time zithromax samples, genomic sequencing, and results from clinical trials and other research, were often lacking. A new legal instrument negotiated under the auspices of the WHO’s constitution could provide a pipeline for channeling significant research funding to where it is needed while promoting public-private partnerships and scientific cooperation. Perhaps most important, the buy antibiotics zithromax revealed massive divides based on race, ethnicity, sex, disability and socioeconomic status at both international and national levels. High-income countries dominated global markets in diagnostics, protective equipment, therapeutics and, especially, treatments.

The WHO and its partners designed the Access to buy antibiotics Tools (ACT) Accelerator to hasten the development and production of, and equitable access to, buy antibiotics resources. Yet COVAX (the ACT Accelerator’s treatment pillar) has badly underperformed. About 10 percent of Africa was fully vaccinated as of mid-January, compared with roughly 63 percent of the U.S. (the European Union had achieved even better coverage). COVAX could be transformative if it were properly funded and resourced and if its distribution channels were strengthened so that treatments could be stored, transported and administered with speed and without waste.

President Biden has announced the investment of billions of dollars to expand mRNA-treatment manufacturing, aiming for 100 million doses a month for domestic and global use. Yet this charitable-donation model is deeply flawed because donations always seem to come too little, too late. Any new international agreement must go beyond donations to plan for adequate and equitably distributed supplies of medical resources, including by securing supply chains, intellectual-property waivers, knowledge sharing and technology transfers. I have delved into remaking global institutions, but it is obvious that we also must consider domestic public health capacities. The Global Health Security Index ranked the U.S.

As most prepared for a zithromax, but the country was among the world’s worst performers. There are many reasons for this lack of success, including a collapse of public trust and deep political polarization. But the CDC’s guidance and actions—as well as those of state, local and tribal health departments—were, by any measure, weak. That agency and health departments at both state and local levels have lost considerable capacities (surveillance, labs and response) since the post-9/11 anthrax attacks. Buttressing domestic health system capacities is vital.

But the CDC also erred badly in its health communications on topics ranging from asymptomatic and aerosolized spread to guidance on masks, treatments and isolation. Its treatment and mask recommendations, for example, changed three times in a matter of six weeks. We are at a crucial junction in the buy antibiotics zithromax. We could simply return to the unvirtuous cycle of panic to neglect and back again. All too often, rather than building resilience during the zithromax response, we have blamed “the other,” engaging in stereotyping of racial minorities and immersing ourselves in geostrategic battles.

But we could transform this crisis into a historic opportunity for once-in-a-lifetime reforms of our national and global health systems based on science, equity and solidarity.Our tally of strange new worlds just reached 5,000. Astronomers have added the 5,000th alien world to the NASA Exoplanet Archive, officials with the agency’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Southern California announced on Monday (March 21). The milestone comes amid a surge of recent discoveries and the promise of more insights to come, as NASA’s $10 billion James Webb Space Telescope readies for planet-gazing operations in deep space. "The 5,000-plus planets found so far include small, rocky worlds like Earth, gas giants many times larger than Jupiter, and ‘hot Jupiters’ in scorchingly close orbits around their stars," JPL officials said in Monday’s statement. "There are ‘super-Earths,’ which are possible rocky worlds bigger than our own, and ‘mini-Neptunes,’ smaller versions of our system’s Neptune," JPL officials added.

"Add to the mix planets orbiting two stars at once and planets stubbornly orbiting the collapsed remnants of dead stars." The NASA Exoplanet Archive is housed at the California Institute for Technology (Caltech). To be added to the catalog, planets must be independently confirmed by two different methods, and the work must be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The first exoplanets were found in the early 1990s. While telescopes on the ground and in space have done well to get the count to 5,000 since then, Jessie Christiansen, science lead of the NASA Exoplanet Archive, stated on Caltech’s website that the worlds found to date are "mostly in this little bubble around our solar system, where they are easier to find." "Of the 5,000 exoplanets known, 4,900 are located within a few thousand light-years of us," Christiansen added. "And think about the fact that we’re 30,000 light-years from the center of the galaxy.

If you extrapolate from the little bubble around us, that means there are many more planets in our galaxy we haven’t found yet, as many as 100 to 200 billion. It’s mind-blowing." The first confirmed planetary discovery came in 1992, when astronomers Alex Wolszczan and Dale Frail published a paper in the journal Nature. They spotted two worlds orbiting a pulsar (a rapidly rotating, dense star corpse) by measuring subtle changes in the timing of the pulses as the light reached Earth. Ground-based telescopes did the heavy lifting in those early years, and it took several more searches to finally uncover the first planet around a sun-like star in 1995. That world was not hospitable to life as we know it.

It was a scorching-hot gas giant that whipped around its parent star in only four Earth days. Astronomers found these worlds by spotting wobbles (back and forth gravitationally induced motions) of stars as planets tugged upon them. Larger worlds were easier to spot, as they induced bigger wobbles. To find more Earth-sized planets, astronomers said at the time, they would need to try something called the "transit" method. That would assess the light of a star and look for tiny fluctuations as a planet passed across the face.

Astronomer William Borucki helped realize that vision as the principal investigator of NASA’s Kepler space telescope, which launched in 2009 and exceeded its main mission by several years until it finally ran out of fuel in 2018. Kepler has racked up more than 2,700 planet discoveries to date, many of them Earth-sized or smaller worlds, and still has a database generating fresh finds to this day. Many other instruments have joined the planet hunt since Kepler launched. On the ground, the HARPS spectrograph, which is part of the 11.8-foot (3.6-meter) telescope at the European Southern Observatory’s La Silla Observatory in Chile, is an adept planet-hunter of its own. By 2011 (eight years after first light), HARPS had discovered more than 150 exoplanets.

While access has been restricted periodically in latter years due to the antibiotics zithromax, HARPS remains operational and continues to seek new worlds with high precision. In space, numerous observatories also assist with the planet search, among them NASA’s Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), the NASA-European Space Agency (ESA) Hubble Space Telescope, and ESA’s Characterizing Exoplanet Satellite (CHEOPS). Several other huge telescopes under construction on the ground, including the Giant Magellan Telescope and the Extremely Large Telescope in Chile, are scheduled to come online later this decade, adding other powerful eyes to the ongoing search. Webb will help enhance the tally of exoplanets by studying the atmospheres of several relatively nearby worlds in detail. While such work may focus largely on gas giants, scientists say Webb’s observations will be useful for a future generation of observatories with even more high-powered optics ready to see planets closer in size to Earth.

Copyright 2022 Space.com, a Future company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Some years ago I made up a list of things I was tired of reading in profiles of women scientists. How she was the first woman to be hired, say, or to lead a group, or to win some important prize. I had just been assigned a profile of a splendid woman astronomer, and her “firsts” said nothing about the woman and everything about the culture of astronomy.

A hierarchy in which the highest ranks have historically included only scientists who are male, white and protective of their prerogatives. My list evolved into the “Finkbeiner test,” and to abide by it, I pretended we had suddenly leaped into a new world in which gender was irrelevant and could be ignored. I would treat the person I was interviewing like she was just an astronomer. Later, working on another story, I started hearing about a cohort of young women astronomers who were the ones to call if I wanted to talk to the field’s best. If the top of the scientific hierarchy now included large numbers of women, I wondered whether they might live in a post–Finkbeiner test world—that is, whether they were just astronomers, not “women astronomers.” I turned out to be 180 degrees wrong.

True, they are at the top, but they are outspokenly women astronomers, and they are remaking astronomy. Earlier generations of women had worked against the restrictions of the hierarchical culture, but change was glacially gradual, partly because the women were few. With time, however, small changes in their numbers added up and then tipped over, creating a different world. This recent cohort of women, who earned doctoral degrees around 2010, wins prizes, fellowships and faculty positions. Does not suffer foolishness.

And goes outside the established rules to make its own. €œWe create the culture we want,” says Heather Knutson, who won the Annie Jump Cannon Award in 2013. She is a full professor at the California Institute of Technology and studies the properties of exoplanets. €œThere are more of us now, and we have the power to shape it.” One of the rules of their world is that it includes not only women but also people who have been marginalized for other reasons, that is, people of color, disabled people, LGBTQ+ people and those who are nonbinary—people whose numbers in the field are still strikingly unrepresentative. These women astronomers are scientifically and culturally ambitious, and they shine of their own light.

They sparkle. Their world still has restrictions but not as many, and the women react to them more defiantly. €œWe don’t want to change ourselves to fit the mold,” says Ekta Patel, a Miller postdoctoral fellow at the University of California, Berkeley, who simulates the behavior of satellite galaxies. €œI enjoy being a girl,” says Lia Medeiros, a National Science Foundation postdoctoral fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., where she studies black holes. €œAnd I’m going to be a girl all over their physics.

This is my world, too.” Sarah Hörst, a planetary scientist at Johns Hopkins University, studies atmospheric chemistry. Credit. Amanda Andrade-Rhodes Women have been astronomers since forever, but they have needed to be made of iron. Vera C. Rubin, who got her Ph.D.

In 1954, was advised in school to stay away from science. She kept going anyway by telling herself she was just different from other people. She did her graduate studies where her husband’s job took them, raised children and then got a position where she was the only woman. She discovered the first solid evidence of the dark matter that, years later, is still one of cosmology’s biggest mysteries. She was elected to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), won the National Medal of Science and, after she died in 2016, had an ambitious observatory named after her.

One of its missions is to map dark matter. Back in 1965, Rubin confronted the Hale Telescope’s no-women-allowed rule, ostensibly imposed because observing is an all-night process and the observatory had no ladies’ room. Rubin cut a piece of paper into the shape of a woman with a skirt and pasted it on a bathroom door, creating the Hale’s first ladies’ room. Rubin was extraordinary, but her work conditions were dead standard. All women astronomers in her world—those earning doctorates between the mid-1950s and the mid-1980s—had the same stories, which disconcertingly often mention bathrooms.

The women were not admitted, were not allowed, built careers around their families, developed thick shells impervious to aggression and were almost completely isolated. Their best bet was to blend in with the male culture of astronomy. Margaret Burbidge—Ph.D. 1943, co-discoverer of the formation of the universe’s chemical elements, awarded the National Medal of Science and elected to the NAS—refused the women-only Annie Jump Cannon Award because she thought women should be discriminated neither against nor for. A woman astronomer in Rubin’s world was so alone as to be virtually sui generis—one of the few of her kind.

Meg Urry, Israel Munson professor of physics and astronomy at Yale University, says that for her, Rubin was an “existence-proof.” But in the 1960s and 1970s a series of court decisions, affirmative-action policies, laws and executive orders mandated that universities no longer exclude women and minorities for either study or employment. By the time Urry got her Ph.D. In 1984, some constraints on Rubin’s world were illegal, and others were publicly deplored. University of Washington's astronomy department includes (from left) Jessica Werk, Emily Levesque and Sarah Tuttle. Credit.

Annie Marie Musselman By 1987 Urry was working at the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) on active galactic nuclei, unusually bright objects accompanied by light-years-long jets. She found that a subset of these objects were the same creature, eventually shown to be a supermassive black hole embedded in a galaxy and sending out jets. STScI was then only six years old, and of the first 60 scientists it hired, 59 were men. In 1992 Urry organized a series of conferences, eventually run by the American Astronomical Society (AAS), on women in astronomy. That year’s meeting was held in Baltimore.

The resulting advisory, called the Baltimore Charter, pointed out that as long as women were in charge of familial life, their careers were going to look different from men’s. It recommended, among other things, “swift and substantial action” against sexual harassers and implementation of the tenets of affirmative action—including, most radically, Urry says, that hiring shortlists should include at least one woman. But the biggest impact of that first conference, Urry says, “was being in a room with 200 women astronomers. Before that you’d meet three women in the ladies’ room, so this was a huge and shocking thing.” Demographic surveys of Urry’s world—women who got their Ph.D.s roughly between 1985 and 2010—show that in the 1990s women were just under 15 percent of the astronomy postdocs and assistant and associate professors and around 5 percent of the full professors. Given their low numbers, women in this environment still thought it best to blend in with the established culture.

€œIn Meg’s world,” says Nicolle Zellner, Ph.D. 2001, co-chair of the AAS’s Committee on the Status of Women in Astronomy and a full professor at Albion College in Michigan, “women worked hard, fit in and hoped to be rewarded.” Over time the number of women slowly went up to almost enough. In 1999 women were about 16 percent of the assistant and associate professors of astronomy. In 2013 they were around 22 percent. In 1999 women were 7 percent of the full professors.

In 2013 they were 14 percent. These changes in numbers, Urry says, drove changes in policy and practice. Institutions and professional societies increasingly adopted the Baltimore Charter’s ideas, including offering affordable child care and parental leave, adapting tenure deadlines to family circumstances and publishing codes of conduct. Prizes began to allow self-nomination, avoiding some of the bias of the nomination process. Eventually women’s increased numbers and reduced restrictions created widespread conditions for what I think of as sparkle.

Sparkle is a fireworkslike quality, noticeable in talks and conversations, that in earlier generations of astronomers was most obvious in young men. Visible brilliance, intensity, easy confidence and a springy joy. Quantifying sparkle is tricky. Most of its metrics—time on telescopes, named invited talks, citations for papers, leadership of teams—are hard to define and count precisely. But some examples illustrate the point.

See, for instance, the fraction of prizes given to women by either the Kavli Foundation or the AAS for general scientific contributions. From 2001 to 2005 it was 4 percent. 2006 to 2010, 12 percent. 2011 to 2015, 23 percent. 2016 to 2021, 30 percent.

Or the fraction of panel seats granted to women for the NAS’s decadal surveys to decide the future course of astronomy. 1990, 8 percent. 2000, 15 percent. 2010, 27 percent. 2020, 43 percent.

Or look at prestigious postdoctoral fellowships that award research money to be taken to whatever institution one chooses, including the Chandra, Sagan, Einstein and Hubble postdoctoral fellowships. From 1996 to 2010, between 24 and 28 percent went to women. 2011 to 2015, 31 percent. 2016 to 2021, 45 percent. In 2021, of the now merged Sagan Einstein Hubble fellowships, awarded by NASA, women won 58 percent.

Meg Urry is director of the Yale Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics. Credit. Kholood Eid Notably, somewhere around 2015 the lines charting all three metrics took a fast turn to the northeast. Moreover, women in this post-2015 subcohort are visibly “badasses,” says Jessica Werk, Ph.D. 2010, a Hubble fellow and associate professor at the University of Washington who studies the gas in and around galaxies.

€œThey really don’t take people’s shit.” Caitlin Casey, Ph.D. 2010, was a Hubble fellow, won the AAS’s Newton Lacy Pierce Prize and is now an associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin. She studies the lives of early massive galaxies, best observed at many wavelengths and in enormous surveys with teams of hundreds. She leads two teams, one surveying millions of galaxies using the major telescopes in space and on the ground and the other for an upcoming survey, using the James Webb Space Telescope, to look back to a billion years after the beginning of time for young galaxies. When she was a postdoctoral researcher, Casey heard advice from senior scientists about navigating academia.

€œWork extra hard. Take telecons at 4 A.M. Put your head down until you’re safe.” She and her friends, also in junior positions, thought the advice was bad. They told one another, “That’s a load of crap. Why don’t we do our own thing and see if we get hired?.

€ She was hired. As a new faculty member, she was again advised against activism before tenure. €œI worried about that, but I decided to ignore it,” she says. €œI got tenure.” Every time she gets similarly bad advice, she says, “I muster the presence of these other women.” The sparkly cohort knows that its backbone is based on the presence of other women. Sarah Tuttle, Ph.D.

2010, an assistant professor at the University of Washington, builds instruments to study nearby galaxies. €œWhen there are three of us,” she says, “we can spread out the work. There’s more room to throw elbows.” Laura Chomiuk, Ph.D. 2010, a Jansky fellow and associate professor at Michigan State University who studies novae, adds, “I do feel like I have allies. I can always find an ally.” They either join networks or start their own.

They have lunches, meet at conferences, buttonhole departmental women visitors, set up private Facebook pages and Slack channels, and are all over Twitter. €œEvery university I’ve been at has had a women’s group,” says Danielle Berg, Ph.D. 2013, an assistant professor at the University of Texas at Austin who studies the evolution of star-forming galaxies. If you feel a group has your back, you are freer to be your own individual self. €œI don’t want to be a blank-faced robot astronomer,” says Sinclaire Manning, Ph.D.

2021, a Hubble fellow at the University of Massachusetts Amherst who studies brilliant dusty young galaxies. €œI can’t not be a Black woman, and I would never hide that I am.” Berg had purple hair and wore a bright green suit to a job interview, and, she says, “they decided that was a good thing.” With backing, you are also free, like Casey’s friends, to disagree with established culture. Sarah Hörst, Ph.D. 2011, an associate professor at Johns Hopkins University, studies atmospheres around planets and moons. She told me, “My first year here I thought, if I have to sit through this for seven more years [until tenure], what I will be at the end of it is not going to be someone who changes things.

If I had to sit quietly during faculty meetings, I’d have quit.” Some of what they are not sitting quietly through is astronomy’s traditionally sexist, aggressive culture—people on committees saying things like, “Sure, she’s pretty enough to hire,” remembers Laura Lopez, Ph.D. 2011, who was both a Hubble and an Einstein fellow and is now an associate professor at Ohio State University studying the lives and deaths of stars. €œIn the Zoom era, I can immediately message the department chair and say, ‘Speak up right now,’ and he does.” When people in the audience at a presentation ask questions belligerently, Berg responds, “Do you feel better?. Can I continue?. € Catherine Zucker—Ph.D.

2020, a Hubble fellow at STScI who works on the interstellar medium—redirects. €œI just say, ‘Let’s touch base afterward,’ and no one ever does.” Most notably, the new generation of astronomers is not being quiet about sexual harassment, which, in spite of great publicity and its breach of every code of conduct at every institution, is still common. A 2018 NAS report found that 58 percent of women in STEM academia had been sexually harassed, and only 6 percent of them reported it. But a discontinuity may have occurred in 2015 when an ongoing sexual harassment case involving prominent astronomer Geoffrey Marcy was reported by BuzzFeed and then many other major publications. Women now file harassment cases more often and name names, not only in the old whisper networks but also in the news and social media.

Emily Martin, Ph.D. 2018, a 51 Pegasi b fellow at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who builds instruments to study exoplanets, was a graduate student when her lab’s married deputy director repeatedly said he had feelings for her. When she did not reciprocate, he confronted her. Nearing the end of her doctorate and feeling safer from him, she filed for a formal investigation with the Title IX office in charge of enforcing the university’s sexual harassment policies. The office concluded that his behavior did not break policy by hindering her, because she had finished her degree and obtained a postdoctoral position.

So she wrote an account for the Web site Medium, naming him. Hörst reported a man who sexually harassed her to her university, but officials claimed he had done nothing wrong. She had been told that the same man had harassed other women, and because the others, worried about his vindictiveness, did not want to make his name public, Hörst agreed not to name him. She has suggested to conference organizers that the orientation of poster rows in meeting rooms should be changed so that presenters standing by theirs are always publicly visible and cannot be cornered. Kathryne Daniel, Ph.D.

2015, an assistant professor at Bryn Mawr College who works on theoretical galactic dynamics, says when she is sexually harassed, “I let them pretend it didn’t happen, [or] I say, ‘You must be so embarrassed.’ There are no robust ways of reporting that protect the reporter.” Chomiuk has not been harassed, but when a proposed faculty visitor turned out to be an astronomer who was then on leave without pay from Caltech for sexual harassment, she argued against the appointment. This “led to drama,” she says. Others apologized for him. People told Chomiuk “he says he didn’t do it” and “we’d bring him in for the science.” But in the end the department agreed with her. €œI could have just let it go,” she says, “but aaargh, I couldn’t.” Uncertainty about whether your career will go up in flames, cynicism about institutional responses, advocacy on behalf of others and worry about the harassers’ next targets are all standard responses to sexual harassment.

In spite of the difficulties, young women increasingly do not let it go. Casey wrote a chain of tweets listing her own experiences and added, “To all the young folks out there. Document abuse. If you don’t want to share it now, one day you’ll be in a position of greater power/freedom.” The other issue that young women astronomers speak up about is bias, the deep cultural belief that, for instance, women are good at certain things, and science is not one of them. Like sexual harassment, bias, both unconscious and explicit, is widely acknowledged and is covered in every code of conduct.

Where it was once endemic and obvious, it now is slightly less endemic and operates just below the visible level. Urry has been on hiring and promotion committees for the past 30 years and says she still sometimes sees a man presented as a genius when he has not quite “done his genius thing yet,” whereas people question whether a woman with comparable accomplishments did the work on her own. Melodie Kao—Ph.D. 2017, a former Hubble fellow and current Heising-Simons 51 Pegasi b fellow at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who studies the magnetic fields of planets and low-mass stars—says she herself has had to actively resist being harder on women’s proposals. A partial solution, beginning in 2018, has been to implement a system of “dual-anonymous” proposal review, that is, one in which neither the reviewers nor the proposers know the other group’s identities.

The major funding agencies and observatories now use dual-anonymity, and although the results are based on a small sample, the success rates of women’s proposals seem to have gone up, albeit not dramatically. €œWe’re moving from conscious, overt, unapologetic discrimination to unconscious bias,” says Laura Kreidberg, Ph.D. 2016, who won the Annie Jump Cannon Award and is the founding director of the department of atmospheric physics of exoplanets at the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Heidelberg, Germany. €œFor now it’s strong, but I have a huge amount of hope of getting rid of it.” Because bias and sexual harassment seem to have deep, perennial roots, a few young women say that they initially wanted to burn the whole system down. But then they thought that rather than destroy a culture, they could make their own.

€œWe’ve come to know each other in enough numbers,” Daniel says, “[that] we can start to make sure a woman is in every decision-making room.” Kreidberg is creating a wholly new department at her institution. She wants thinking to be more collaborative, “done at a blackboard,” she says. €œI want juniors to speak up and ask questions. And I want people to not have so many responsibilities they can’t be creative—there’s no way around long hours at the cost of other things, but I have a family, I’m a runner, I tango, and without these breaks, I run out of ideas.” Berg leads a 50-person team. €œEveryone knows what’s going on.

No cliques, and no cutting people out.” Casey co-leads a group of more than 200 people whose rules are, “Don’t worry about papers that disagree, address it in a future paper, and don’t be a dick. Respect the human, let the science happen, and it’ll work itself out.” This young cohort of women astronomers is exquisitely aware of earlier generations’ generosity and of its own responsibility to future scientists. €œWe recognize the generations of women who reached down and pulled us up, and a lot of us think now we need to do the same,” Werk says. Urry estimates that she has spent roughly a quarter to a third of her career changing the conditions for women. €œYou have to stay in the field to change things,” Hörst says.

€œIf it had been intolerable for Meg [Urry], I wouldn’t be here.” Most of these young women mentor undergraduate and graduate students who are not necessarily their assigned advisees. Kao teaches workshops that she markets as being on early-career skills but that are also about vulnerability and emotions, “how we know when we need to tend to our boundaries or to take better care of other people.” Others run programs and workshops on the entire constellation of bias issues. They offer classes for children interested in science. They serve on their institutions’ Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) committees, and they note that the DEI work tends to be done mostly by women and minorities. €œI’m trying to think of a woman who is not an activist,” Medeiros says.

Their activism in the past 10 or so years has particularly focused on the demographic populations whose numbers in the field are still too low. €œThings are better for us,” Knutson says, “but ‘us’ is still white”. White people make up 60.1 percent of the U.S. Population and 82 percent of astronomers. Astronomy’s demographics are disturbing.

18.5 percent of Americans are Hispanic or Latino, but 5 percent of astronomers are. 13.4 percent of Americans are Black, but 2 percent of astronomers are. A recent NAS report called the numbers of people of color in astronomy “abysmally low.” “I’m a first-generation woman of color who has to learn a completely new world,” says Melinda Soares-Furtado, Ph.D. 2020, a Hubble fellow at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, who studies stars with odd chemical abundances. €œI can code-switch, but it’s exhausting.” Kao is first-generation Taiwanese-American.

€œFrom day one I’ve struggled to belong in the space I’m in. Half the time I want to change my name.” Lopez says, “I’m Mexican-American and have cerebral palsy, so that’s another set of hurdles.” She once went to a meeting with maybe 40 people whose sexual orientation and race or ethnicity were something other than straight and white, and she was shocked at “how many of us had encountered the [assumption that] our advisers had done our work.” The restrictions that people at these intersections deal with resemble the barriers of Rubin’s world. Being the only one like you in the room means sometimes wondering whether you should even be in that room, and it means the other people in the room sometimes think you are incapable of doing what you have just done. €œI’m never the only woman there, but for sure I’m the only Black woman,” Manning says. €œIsolation is weird—some days it’s ‘Why don’t I go where I’m not being looked at like this,’ and some days it’s ‘No, I need to be here so someone else can see me.’” When I started talking to this bunch of young and sparkly women, I thought they might describe themselves as just astronomers, not women astronomers.

What they have done is more interesting. They have reframed “astronomy” to necessarily include “women”—they have merged “women” into “astronomy.” For instance, those of them offered the Annie Jump Cannon Award that Burbidge rejected have accepted it with pleasure and not as a prize for people who would not otherwise win prizes. The point, they say, is that they are women. They cannot escape it, and they might as well go ahead and have green hair, wear dresses to conferences and win women’s prizes. They have been intelligent, creative and hardworking all along, but now they are also conspicuous.

They have made themselves, as Manning says, seen. They are like Vera Rubin, slapping the lady-shaped icon on the door and telling the rest of their world to get used to it.The White House announced this morning that the U.S. Will rapidly increase exports of liquefied natural gas to Europe as Germany and other E.U. Nations try to diminish their dependence on Russian fossil fuels. The move will ramp up LNG shipments carried by seagoing tankers by 15 billion cubic meters this year, according to a fact sheet released by the White House.

As a comparison, the United States sent 22 bcm of LNG to Europe last year, the highest ever traded between the two continents. The announcement promises to raise concerns about the trajectory of global climate action. The construction of LNG terminals and other infrastructure could put the U.S. And other nations on a path toward using gas for years to come, even as those countries strive to phase out fossil fuels, advocates warn. The White House said American exports of LNG will continue to grow through 2030, by which time the U.S.

Plans to be sending 50 billion cubic meters of gas to Europe annually. €œThis build-out will occur in a way that is consistent with, not in conflict with, the net-zero climate goal that we’re shooting for,” Biden said during a meeting with European officials in Brussels this morning. He called the effort a “catalyst” for doubling down on investments in clean energy. Biden also spoke with European leaders yesterday about ways to accelerate the transition toward clean energy, according to the White House. In addition to working with other countries to bring new sources of LNG to Europe, the effort announced this morning—which will be overseen by a joint U.S.-E.U.

Task force—will involve helping the continent reduce demand for natural gas over the next two winters through energy efficiency measures and the build-out of clean energy. A senior administration official speaking on background to reporters said today’s announcement would help accelerate Europe’s move away from Russian gas. He also said it would advance efforts to phase out gas in the U.S., which has a goal of halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. Energy was a key point of discussion between Biden and other world leaders during urgent talks yesterday about the worsening Russian war in Ukraine. €œTomorrow, together with President Biden, we will present a new chapter in our energy partnership,” said Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission.

€œIt is about additional LNG from the United States for the European Union, thus replacing the Russian LNG we had so far, an important step forward.” The European Union receives 40 percent of its gas and more than a quarter of its oil from Russia. Germany, the bloc’s largest economy, relies on Russia for around half of the coal and gas needed to heat homes and power industry. In a plan announced earlier this month, the E.U. Said it would cut its consumption of Russian gas by two-thirds by the end of 2022, mainly by boosting supplies of gas from countries such as Norway, Azerbaijan, the U.S. And Qatar.

The European Commission put forward a proposal Wednesday that would require member states to fill their gas storage facilities to at least 80 percent of capacity by Nov. 1. That will make securing alternative gas sources increasingly important. Europe has recently increased its gas imports from Russia as it attempts to stockpile fuel. Countries across the 27-member bloc have varying levels of dependence on Russian oil, gas and coal.

That has led some countries to resist efforts to abruptly disband Russian imports. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has warned that Europe’s economy could be thrust into a recession if it acts too quickly. While the Biden administration has encouraged the E.U. To break its dependence on Russia, officials have also said they recognize the challenge Europe faces. In addition to his meeting at the European Council, Biden also gathered with leaders from the Group of 7.

In a statement, they pledged to support countries as they phase out their reliance on Russian energy imports. The G-7 also called on oil- and gas-producing countries to increase deliveries to the world market and singled out OPEC as a key part of that effort. €œWe will work with them and all partners to ensure stable and sustainable global energy supplies,” the leaders wrote. The statement also mentioned clean energy but didn’t include specifics, noting only that the crisis brought on by Russia’s war in Ukraine reinforces the G-7’s determination to limit the rise in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius by accelerating the energy transition. Locking in emissions Increasing LNG supplies to Europe would largely involve redirecting cargoes headed toward other locations, since raising production volumes could take years, according to a note by Goldman Sachs.

U.S. Terminal capacity is currently maxed out. While some of that reallocation has already been happening, sustaining it could prove challenging as next winter approaches. Most of the redirected supply has been driven by European gas prices commanding a premium, rather than by policies, Samantha Dart, head of natural gas research at Goldman Sachs, said in an email. €œAs a result, we think contracting for some of that flexible supply for the remainder of the year would help support European gas supplies,” she said.

Constructing the infrastructure needed to increase natural gas exports over the long term would take several years, according to analysts. But doing so, in addition to securing long-term supply contracts for natural gas, could lock in years of planet-warming emissions. U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm acknowledged those concerns yesterday during a press conference at the International Energy Agency in Paris. €œBut there is also a flipside to this, which is this accelerates the movement away from fossil fuels, at least unabated fossil fuels, and the movement toward technologies that do that,” she said, pointing toward carbon capture and sequestration methods or hydrogen produced with renewable energy.

Those technologies, however, aren’t commercially available. Currently, there’s not enough infrastructure to transport hydrogen at scale, and it could take years to build it, said Lindsey Walter, deputy director for Third Way’s Climate and Energy Program. In a best-case scenario, hydrogen is still years away from substantially replacing Russian gas in Europe. €œWe know the E.U. Has some pretty ambitious goals around hydrogen, as it should because it will be crucial for decarbonizing industry, aviation, freight, all of these applications you can’t easily electrify," she said.

"There needs to be some acknowledgment that we don’t produce clean hydrogen at scale yet today.” Research from Oslo, Norway-based Rystad Energy estimated that Europe would need about 54 million tons of hydrogen by 2030 to replace gas and coal in the continent’s power sector. €œEurope is currently on track to produce 3 million tons of green hydrogen per annum by 2030 so the gap is considerable,” it said. Green groups are concerned that officials from the U.S. And E.U. Are largely focused on increased LNG exports as a response to Russia’s war.

The years it will take to develop new fossil fuel export infrastructure would be better used to build clean energy sources, said Mitch Jones, managing director of policy at Food &. Water Watch. €œPresident Biden should firmly reject any plans to fast track gas export terminals here in the United States,” he said in a statement. €œCorporate polluters are brazenly seizing on this crisis to secure decades of dependence on dirty energy, which will further devastate frontline communities and abandon any hopes for bold climate action.” Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2022.

E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals..

Moments of existential crisis can turn into opportunities for bold where can you buy zithromax over the counter reform. World War II led to the creation of transformative institutions—the United Nations in 1945 and the World Health Organization in 1948. The birth of the WHO came the same where can you buy zithromax over the counter year that the U.N. Adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The buy antibiotics zithromax marks just such a moment of crisis.

But instead of ushering in significant where can you buy zithromax over the counter change, it has fractured global solidarity. That, in turn, has revealed deep-seated fragility in the WHO, the planet’s health leader. The WHO’s binding, governing framework for zithromax response—the International Health Regulations—has failed to serve its purpose in the face of widespread where can you buy zithromax over the counter failures by national governments to comply. But it is not too late to turn the corner. In fact, this is just the moment to ask what a bold new global public health architecture might look like.

As the U.N.’s first specialized agency, the WHO has a constitutional where can you buy zithromax over the counter mandate to direct and coordinate international health, which includes advancing work to eradicate epidemic disease. No state acting alone can prevent the worldwide spread of infectious diseases. Only robust international institutions can set global norms, promote cooperation and share scientific information needed to respond to where can you buy zithromax over the counter disease outbreaks. As a result, the WHO’s role remains indispensable. With vast and growing global interdependency, intercontinental travel and mass migration, the realities of globalization and climate change have fueled a modern era of new diseases.

The list where can you buy zithromax over the counter includes three novel antibioticses—SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and antibiotics—and, of course, Ebola and Zika. WHO director general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has been the world’s conscience throughout the buy antibiotics crisis by urging global cooperation. But his pleas have largely been ignored by nationalistic leaders taking a stance of “my country first.” Global dysfunction reached a pinnacle when President Donald Trump formally announced the U.S.’s intent to withdraw from the WHO. (President Joe Biden reversed this decision on his first day in office.) Yet Trump’s was only one of many dysfunctional nationalistic responses, which ranged from near-total border closures to the hoarding where can you buy zithromax over the counter by rich countries of personal protective equipment, oxygen and treatments. The WHO was powerless to stop any of it.

Even the agency’s vaunted scientific expertise where can you buy zithromax over the counter came into question, as it was embarrassingly late in recommending masks or acknowledging asymptomatic and aerosolized spread of the zithromax. It is tempting to simply create an entirely new international health organization, but that would be a serious mistake. It took a world war to build political consensus to establish a global health agency with vast constitutional powers. Every country on Earth is a member except Liechtenstein and where can you buy zithromax over the counter Taiwan (the latter left out because of the U.N.’s “One China” policy). The WHO helped to lead the efforts that brought about the eradication of smallpox and the near eradication of polio, among other crowning achievements.

Instead of giving up on the agency, we should use this moment, where can you buy zithromax over the counter and what political consensus we have, to prepare the organization for future zithromaxs—and what remains of the current one. This goal can be accomplished with robust funding and a bold new international agreement. It has become painfully obvious that there is a major disconnect between what the world expects of the WHO and its capacities and powers. Consider its where can you buy zithromax over the counter funding. The WHO’s next Biennium Budget (for 2022 and 2023) is $6.12 billion, less than those of some large U.S.

Teaching hospitals and one fifth of the budget of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As long ago as 2011, the WHO’s where can you buy zithromax over the counter report on the H1N1 influenza zithromax concluded that the agency’s budget is “wholly incommensurate” with its global responsibilities. Yet the money it receives has remained roughly constant in inflation-adjusted dollars for the past three decades. What is worse is that the WHO has control of less than 20 percent of its where can you buy zithromax over the counter overall finances. That is the percentage of its budget that comes from so-called mandatory assessed contributions.

The rest consists of voluntary contributions, which are mostly earmarked for donors’ pet projects. The WHO cannot set global priorities or even hire for the where can you buy zithromax over the counter long term, as voluntary funds disappear after a year. A donor then may just shift to another cause. Sustainable funding requires, at minimum, doubling the WHO’s total budget over five years, with mandatory assessments making up at least 50 percent of its overall budget where can you buy zithromax over the counter. Yet even these modest proposals might not pass muster, because member states insist on calling the shots as to how their contributions are used.

Refrigerated trailers served as makeshift morgues during New York City’s first buy antibiotics wave in May 2020. Credit. Michael Nagle/Redux Pictures Beyond funding, the WHO must have enhanced powers to ensure governments work cooperatively in responding to global health emergencies. Yet the goal of enhancing the agency’s powers involves several challenges. Most countries frowned on Trump’s withdrawal from the WHO, but many agreed that he had a legitimate grievance.

China’s early reporting of buy antibiotics cases was disingenuous, causing a delay of weeks before the world was alerted, and the country later blocked an independent investigation of antibiotics’s proximal origins. But what national leaders did not realize is that the WHO has no power to verify a nation’s reports or gain entry to a state’s territory for scientific investigations. These two structural weaknesses—and many more—are the subject of intense global negotiations to create a bold new zithromax treaty, perhaps taking advantage of the WHO’s power to adopt broad-based, legally defined commitments such as the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. With crisis comes opportunity, and the new zithromax treaty has the potential to be transformative. It should introduce momentous reforms even beyond giving the WHO power to conduct independent investigations.

These provisions should include adopting a “One Health” strategy (a collaborative and transdisciplinary approach to achieving optimal health outcomes) that recognizes the interconnection among people, animals, plants and their shared environments. The most likely origin of antibiotics is a natural zoonotic spillover, the source of more than 60 percent of emerging diseases. Separating animal and human populations could prevent spillovers—a step that could be achieved through land management, reforestation and regulation of wild animal trade and markets. Although antibiotics most likely reached humans through natural means, a laboratory leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology has been posed as an alternative theory for buy antibiotics’s origins. Rigorous regulation and inspection of lab safety, as well as gain-of-function research, could help prevent the unintentional or deliberate release of novel pathogens.

Undoubtedly the rapid development of treatments and therapeutics, including innovative messenger RNA technologies, was the greatest technological success in responding to the zithromax. But open access and sharing of data and tools, such as real-time zithromax samples, genomic sequencing, and results from clinical trials and other research, were often lacking. A new legal instrument negotiated under the auspices of the WHO’s constitution could provide a pipeline for channeling significant research funding to where it is needed while promoting public-private partnerships and scientific cooperation. Perhaps most important, the buy antibiotics zithromax revealed massive divides based on race, ethnicity, sex, disability and socioeconomic status at both international and national levels. High-income countries dominated global markets in diagnostics, protective equipment, therapeutics and, especially, treatments.

The WHO and its partners designed the Access to buy antibiotics Tools (ACT) Accelerator to hasten the development and production of, and equitable access to, buy antibiotics resources. Yet COVAX (the ACT Accelerator’s treatment pillar) has badly underperformed. About 10 percent of Africa was fully vaccinated as of mid-January, compared with roughly 63 percent of the U.S. (the European Union had achieved even better coverage). COVAX could be transformative if it were properly funded and resourced and if its distribution channels were strengthened so that treatments could be stored, transported and administered with speed and without waste.

President Biden has announced the investment of billions of dollars to expand mRNA-treatment manufacturing, aiming for 100 million doses a month for domestic and global use. Yet this charitable-donation model is deeply flawed because donations always seem to come too little, too late. Any new international agreement must go beyond donations to plan for adequate and equitably distributed supplies of medical resources, including by securing supply chains, intellectual-property waivers, knowledge sharing and technology transfers. I have delved into remaking global institutions, but it is obvious that we also must consider domestic public health capacities. The Global Health Security Index ranked the U.S.

As most prepared for a zithromax, but the country was among the world’s worst performers. There are many reasons for this lack of success, including a collapse of public trust and deep political polarization. But the CDC’s guidance and actions—as well as those of state, local and tribal health departments—were, by any measure, weak. That agency and health departments at both state and local levels have lost considerable capacities (surveillance, labs and response) since the post-9/11 anthrax attacks. Buttressing domestic health system capacities is vital.

But the CDC also erred badly in its health communications on topics ranging from asymptomatic and aerosolized spread to guidance on masks, treatments and isolation. Its treatment and mask recommendations, for example, changed three times in a matter of six weeks. We are at a crucial junction in the buy antibiotics zithromax. We could simply return to the unvirtuous cycle of panic to neglect and back again. All too often, rather than building resilience during the zithromax response, we have blamed “the other,” engaging in stereotyping of racial minorities and immersing ourselves in geostrategic battles.

But we could transform this crisis into a historic opportunity for once-in-a-lifetime reforms of our national and global health systems based on science, equity and solidarity.Our tally of strange new worlds just reached 5,000. Astronomers have added the 5,000th alien world to the NASA Exoplanet Archive, officials with the agency’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Southern California announced on Monday (March 21). The milestone comes amid a surge of recent discoveries and the promise of more insights to come, as NASA’s $10 billion James Webb Space Telescope readies for planet-gazing operations in deep space. "The 5,000-plus planets found so far include small, rocky worlds like Earth, gas giants many times larger than Jupiter, and ‘hot Jupiters’ in scorchingly close orbits around their stars," JPL officials said in Monday’s statement. "There are ‘super-Earths,’ which are possible rocky worlds bigger than our own, and ‘mini-Neptunes,’ smaller versions of our system’s Neptune," JPL officials added.

"Add to the mix planets orbiting two stars at once and planets stubbornly orbiting the collapsed remnants of dead stars." The NASA Exoplanet Archive is housed at the California Institute for Technology (Caltech). To be added to the catalog, planets must be independently confirmed by two different methods, and the work must be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The first exoplanets were found in the early 1990s. While telescopes on the ground and in space have done well to get the count to 5,000 since then, Jessie Christiansen, science lead of the NASA Exoplanet Archive, stated on Caltech’s website that the worlds found to date are "mostly in this little bubble around our solar system, where they are easier to find." "Of the 5,000 exoplanets known, 4,900 are located within a few thousand light-years of us," Christiansen added. "And think about the fact that we’re 30,000 light-years from the center of the galaxy.

If you extrapolate from the little bubble around us, that means there are many more planets in our galaxy we haven’t found yet, as many as 100 to 200 billion. It’s mind-blowing." The first confirmed planetary discovery came in 1992, when astronomers Alex Wolszczan and Dale Frail published a paper in the journal Nature. They spotted two worlds orbiting a pulsar (a rapidly rotating, dense star corpse) by measuring subtle changes in the timing of the pulses as the light reached Earth. Ground-based telescopes did the heavy lifting in those early years, and it took several more searches to finally uncover the first planet around a sun-like star in 1995. That world was not hospitable to life as we know it.

It was a scorching-hot gas giant that whipped around its parent star in only four Earth days. Astronomers found these worlds by spotting wobbles (back and forth gravitationally induced motions) of stars as planets tugged upon them. Larger worlds were easier to spot, as they induced bigger wobbles. To find more Earth-sized planets, astronomers said at the time, they would need to try something called the "transit" method. That would assess the light of a star and look for tiny fluctuations as a planet passed across the face.

Astronomer William Borucki helped realize that vision as the principal investigator of NASA’s Kepler space telescope, which launched in 2009 and exceeded its main mission by several years until it finally ran out of fuel in 2018. Kepler has racked up more than 2,700 planet discoveries to date, many of them Earth-sized or smaller worlds, and still has a database generating fresh finds to this day. Many other instruments have joined the planet hunt since Kepler launched. On the ground, the HARPS spectrograph, which is part of the 11.8-foot (3.6-meter) telescope at the European Southern Observatory’s La Silla Observatory in Chile, is an adept planet-hunter of its own. By 2011 (eight years after first light), HARPS had discovered more than 150 exoplanets.

While access has been restricted periodically in latter years due to the antibiotics zithromax, HARPS remains operational and continues to seek new worlds with high precision. In space, numerous observatories also assist with the planet search, among them NASA’s Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), the NASA-European Space Agency (ESA) Hubble Space Telescope, and ESA’s Characterizing Exoplanet Satellite (CHEOPS). Several other huge telescopes under construction on the ground, including the Giant Magellan Telescope and the Extremely Large Telescope in Chile, are scheduled to come online later this decade, adding other powerful eyes to the ongoing search. Webb will help enhance the tally of exoplanets by studying the atmospheres of several relatively nearby worlds in detail. While such work may focus largely on gas giants, scientists say Webb’s observations will be useful for a future generation of observatories with even more high-powered optics ready to see planets closer in size to Earth.

Copyright 2022 Space.com, a Future company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Some years ago I made up a list of things I was tired of reading in profiles of women scientists. How she was the first woman to be hired, say, or to lead a group, or to win some important prize. I had just been assigned a profile of a splendid woman astronomer, and her “firsts” said nothing about the woman and everything about the culture of astronomy.

A hierarchy in which the highest ranks have historically included only scientists who are male, white and protective of their prerogatives. My list evolved into the “Finkbeiner test,” and to abide by it, I pretended we had suddenly leaped into a new world in which gender was irrelevant and could be ignored. I would treat the person I was interviewing like she was just an astronomer. Later, working on another story, I started hearing about a cohort of young women astronomers who were the ones to call if I wanted to talk to the field’s best. If the top of the scientific hierarchy now included large numbers of women, I wondered whether they might live in a post–Finkbeiner test world—that is, whether they were just astronomers, not “women astronomers.” I turned out to be 180 degrees wrong.

True, they are at the top, but they are outspokenly women astronomers, and they are remaking astronomy. Earlier generations of women had worked against the restrictions of the hierarchical culture, but change was glacially gradual, partly because the women were few. With time, however, small changes in their numbers added up and then tipped over, creating a different world. This recent cohort of women, who earned doctoral degrees around 2010, wins prizes, fellowships and faculty positions. Does not suffer foolishness.

And goes outside the established rules to make its own. €œWe create the culture we want,” says Heather Knutson, who won the Annie Jump Cannon Award in 2013. She is a full professor at the California Institute of Technology and studies the properties of exoplanets. €œThere are more of us now, and we have the power to shape it.” One of the rules of their world is that it includes not only women but also people who have been marginalized for other reasons, that is, people of color, disabled people, LGBTQ+ people and those who are nonbinary—people whose numbers in the field are still strikingly unrepresentative. These women astronomers are scientifically and culturally ambitious, and they shine of their own light.

They sparkle. Their world still has restrictions but not as many, and the women react to them more defiantly. €œWe don’t want to change ourselves to fit the mold,” says Ekta Patel, a Miller postdoctoral fellow at the University of California, Berkeley, who simulates the behavior of satellite galaxies. €œI enjoy being a girl,” says Lia Medeiros, a National Science Foundation postdoctoral fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., where she studies black holes. €œAnd I’m going to be a girl all over their physics.

This is my world, too.” Sarah Hörst, a planetary scientist at Johns Hopkins University, studies atmospheric chemistry. Credit. Amanda Andrade-Rhodes Women have been astronomers since forever, but they have needed to be made of iron. Vera C. Rubin, who got her Ph.D.

In 1954, was advised in school to stay away from science. She kept going anyway by telling herself she was just different from other people. She did her graduate studies where her husband’s job took them, raised children and then got a position where she was the only woman. She discovered the first solid evidence of the dark matter that, years later, is still one of cosmology’s biggest mysteries. She was elected to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), won the National Medal of Science and, after she died in 2016, had an ambitious observatory named after her.

One of its missions is to map dark matter. Back in 1965, Rubin confronted the Hale Telescope’s no-women-allowed rule, ostensibly imposed because observing is an all-night process and the observatory had no ladies’ room. Rubin cut a piece of paper into the shape of a woman with a skirt and pasted it on a bathroom door, creating the Hale’s first ladies’ room. Rubin was extraordinary, but her work conditions were dead standard. All women astronomers in her world—those earning doctorates between the mid-1950s and the mid-1980s—had the same stories, which disconcertingly often mention bathrooms.

The women were not admitted, were not allowed, built careers around their families, developed thick shells impervious to aggression and were almost completely isolated. Their best bet was to blend in with the male culture of astronomy. Margaret Burbidge—Ph.D. 1943, co-discoverer of the formation of the universe’s chemical elements, awarded the National Medal of Science and elected to the NAS—refused the women-only Annie Jump Cannon Award because she thought women should be discriminated neither against nor for. A woman astronomer in Rubin’s world was so alone as to be virtually sui generis—one of the few of her kind.

Meg Urry, Israel Munson professor of physics and astronomy at Yale University, says that for her, Rubin was an “existence-proof.” But in the 1960s and 1970s a series of court decisions, affirmative-action policies, laws and executive orders mandated that universities no longer exclude women and minorities for either study or employment. By the time Urry got her Ph.D. In 1984, some constraints on Rubin’s world were illegal, and others were publicly deplored. University of Washington's astronomy department includes (from left) Jessica Werk, Emily Levesque and Sarah Tuttle. Credit.

Annie Marie Musselman By 1987 Urry was working at the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) on active galactic nuclei, unusually bright objects accompanied by light-years-long jets. She found that a subset of these objects were the same creature, eventually shown to be a supermassive black hole embedded in a galaxy and sending out jets. STScI was then only six years old, and of the first 60 scientists it hired, 59 were men. In 1992 Urry organized a series of conferences, eventually run by the American Astronomical Society (AAS), on women in astronomy. That year’s meeting was held in Baltimore.

The resulting advisory, called the Baltimore Charter, pointed out that as long as women were in charge of familial life, their careers were going to look different from men’s. It recommended, among other things, “swift and substantial action” against sexual harassers and implementation of the tenets of affirmative action—including, most radically, Urry says, that hiring shortlists should include at least one woman. But the biggest impact of that first conference, Urry says, “was being in a room with 200 women astronomers. Before that you’d meet three women in the ladies’ room, so this was a huge and shocking thing.” Demographic surveys of Urry’s world—women who got their Ph.D.s roughly between 1985 and 2010—show that in the 1990s women were just under 15 percent of the astronomy postdocs and assistant and associate professors and around 5 percent of the full professors. Given their low numbers, women in this environment still thought it best to blend in with the established culture.

€œIn Meg’s world,” says Nicolle Zellner, Ph.D. 2001, co-chair of the AAS’s Committee on the Status of Women in Astronomy and a full professor at Albion College in Michigan, “women worked hard, fit in and hoped to be rewarded.” Over time the number of women slowly went up to almost enough. In 1999 women were about 16 percent of the assistant and associate professors of astronomy. In 2013 they were around 22 percent. In 1999 women were 7 percent of the full professors.

In 2013 they were 14 percent. These changes in numbers, Urry says, drove changes in policy and practice. Institutions and professional societies increasingly adopted the Baltimore Charter’s ideas, including offering affordable child care and parental leave, adapting tenure deadlines to family circumstances and publishing codes of conduct. Prizes began to allow self-nomination, avoiding some of the bias of the nomination process. Eventually women’s increased numbers and reduced restrictions created widespread conditions for what I think of as sparkle.

Sparkle is a fireworkslike quality, noticeable in talks and conversations, that in earlier generations of astronomers was most obvious in young men. Visible brilliance, intensity, easy confidence and a springy joy. Quantifying sparkle is tricky. Most of its metrics—time on telescopes, named invited talks, citations for papers, leadership of teams—are hard to define and count precisely. But some examples illustrate the point.

See, for instance, the fraction of prizes given to women by either the Kavli Foundation or the AAS for general scientific contributions. From 2001 to 2005 it was 4 percent. 2006 to 2010, 12 percent. 2011 to 2015, 23 percent. 2016 to 2021, 30 percent.

Or the fraction of panel seats granted to women for the NAS’s decadal surveys to decide the future course of astronomy. 1990, 8 percent. 2000, 15 percent. 2010, 27 percent. 2020, 43 percent.

Or look at prestigious postdoctoral fellowships that award research money to be taken to whatever institution one chooses, including the Chandra, Sagan, Einstein and Hubble postdoctoral fellowships. From 1996 to 2010, between 24 and 28 percent went to women. 2011 to 2015, 31 percent. 2016 to 2021, 45 percent. In 2021, of the now merged Sagan Einstein Hubble fellowships, awarded by NASA, women won 58 percent.

Meg Urry is director of the Yale Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics. Credit. Kholood Eid Notably, somewhere around 2015 the lines charting all three metrics took a fast turn to the northeast. Moreover, women in this post-2015 subcohort are visibly “badasses,” says Jessica Werk, Ph.D. 2010, a Hubble fellow and associate professor at the University of Washington who studies the gas in and around galaxies.

€œThey really don’t take people’s shit.” Caitlin Casey, Ph.D. 2010, was a Hubble fellow, won the AAS’s Newton Lacy Pierce Prize and is now an associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin. She studies the lives of early massive galaxies, best observed at many wavelengths and in enormous surveys with teams of hundreds. She leads two teams, one surveying millions of galaxies using the major telescopes in space and on the ground and the other for an upcoming survey, using the James Webb Space Telescope, to look back to a billion years after the beginning of time for young galaxies. When she was a postdoctoral researcher, Casey heard advice from senior scientists about navigating academia.

€œWork extra hard. Take telecons at 4 A.M. Put your head down until you’re safe.” She and her friends, also in junior positions, thought the advice was bad. They told one another, “That’s a load of crap. Why don’t we do our own thing and see if we get hired?.

€ She was hired. As a new faculty member, she was again advised against activism before tenure. €œI worried about that, but I decided to ignore it,” she says. €œI got tenure.” Every time she gets similarly bad advice, she says, “I muster the presence of these other women.” The sparkly cohort knows that its backbone is based on the presence of other women. Sarah Tuttle, Ph.D.

2010, an assistant professor at the University of Washington, builds instruments to study nearby galaxies. €œWhen there are three of us,” she says, “we can spread out the work. There’s more room to throw elbows.” Laura Chomiuk, Ph.D. 2010, a Jansky fellow and associate professor at Michigan State University who studies novae, adds, “I do feel like I have allies. I can always find an ally.” They either join networks or start their own.

They have lunches, meet at conferences, buttonhole departmental women visitors, set up private Facebook pages and Slack channels, and are all over Twitter. €œEvery university I’ve been at has had a women’s group,” says Danielle Berg, Ph.D. 2013, an assistant professor at the University of Texas at Austin who studies the evolution of star-forming galaxies. If you feel a group has your back, you are freer to be your own individual self. €œI don’t want to be a blank-faced robot astronomer,” says Sinclaire Manning, Ph.D.

2021, a Hubble fellow at the University of Massachusetts Amherst who studies brilliant dusty young galaxies. €œI can’t not be a Black woman, and I would never hide that I am.” Berg had purple hair and wore a bright green suit to a job interview, and, she says, “they decided that was a good thing.” With backing, you are also free, like Casey’s friends, to disagree with established culture. Sarah Hörst, Ph.D. 2011, an associate professor at Johns Hopkins University, studies atmospheres around planets and moons. She told me, “My first year here I thought, if I have to sit through this for seven more years [until tenure], what I will be at the end of it is not going to be someone who changes things.

If I had to sit quietly during faculty meetings, I’d have quit.” Some of what they are not sitting quietly through is astronomy’s traditionally sexist, aggressive culture—people on committees saying things like, “Sure, she’s pretty enough to hire,” remembers Laura Lopez, Ph.D. 2011, who was both a Hubble and an Einstein fellow and is now an associate professor at Ohio State University studying the lives and deaths of stars. €œIn the Zoom era, I can immediately message the department chair and say, ‘Speak up right now,’ and he does.” When people in the audience at a presentation ask questions belligerently, Berg responds, “Do you feel better?. Can I continue?. € Catherine Zucker—Ph.D.

2020, a Hubble fellow at STScI who works on the interstellar medium—redirects. €œI just say, ‘Let’s touch base afterward,’ and no one ever does.” Most notably, the new generation of astronomers is not being quiet about sexual harassment, which, in spite of great publicity and its breach of every code of conduct at every institution, is still common. A 2018 NAS report found that 58 percent of women in STEM academia had been sexually harassed, and only 6 percent of them reported it. But a discontinuity may have occurred in 2015 when an ongoing sexual harassment case involving prominent astronomer Geoffrey Marcy was reported by BuzzFeed and then many other major publications. Women now file harassment cases more often and name names, not only in the old whisper networks but also in the news and social media.

Emily Martin, Ph.D. 2018, a 51 Pegasi b fellow at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who builds instruments to study exoplanets, was a graduate student when her lab’s married deputy director repeatedly said he had feelings for her. When she did not reciprocate, he confronted her. Nearing the end of her doctorate and feeling safer from him, she filed for a formal investigation with the Title IX office in charge of enforcing the university’s sexual harassment policies. The office concluded that his behavior did not break policy by hindering her, because she had finished her degree and obtained a postdoctoral position.

So she wrote an account for the Web site Medium, naming him. Hörst reported a man who sexually harassed her to her university, but officials claimed he had done nothing wrong. She had been told that the same man had harassed other women, and because the others, worried about his vindictiveness, did not want to make his name public, Hörst agreed not to name him. She has suggested to conference organizers that the orientation of poster rows in meeting rooms should be changed so that presenters standing by theirs are always publicly visible and cannot be cornered. Kathryne Daniel, Ph.D.

2015, an assistant professor at Bryn Mawr College who works on theoretical galactic dynamics, says when she is sexually harassed, “I let them pretend it didn’t happen, [or] I say, ‘You must be so embarrassed.’ There are no robust ways of reporting that protect the reporter.” Chomiuk has not been harassed, but when a proposed faculty visitor turned out to be an astronomer who was then on leave without pay from Caltech for sexual harassment, she argued against the appointment. This “led to drama,” she says. Others apologized for him. People told Chomiuk “he says he didn’t do it” and “we’d bring him in for the science.” But in the end the department agreed with her. €œI could have just let it go,” she says, “but aaargh, I couldn’t.” Uncertainty about whether your career will go up in flames, cynicism about institutional responses, advocacy on behalf of others and worry about the harassers’ next targets are all standard responses to sexual harassment.

In spite of the difficulties, young women increasingly do not let it go. Casey wrote a chain of tweets listing her own experiences and added, “To all the young folks out there. Document abuse. If you don’t want to share it now, one day you’ll be in a position of greater power/freedom.” The other issue that young women astronomers speak up about is bias, the deep cultural belief that, for instance, women are good at certain things, and science is not one of them. Like sexual harassment, bias, both unconscious and explicit, is widely acknowledged and is covered in every code of conduct.

Where it was once endemic and obvious, it now is slightly less endemic and operates just below the visible level. Urry has been on hiring and promotion committees for the past 30 years and says she still sometimes sees a man presented as a genius when he has not quite “done his genius thing yet,” whereas people question whether a woman with comparable accomplishments did the work on her own. Melodie Kao—Ph.D. 2017, a former Hubble fellow and current Heising-Simons 51 Pegasi b fellow at the University of California, Santa Cruz, who studies the magnetic fields of planets and low-mass stars—says she herself has had to actively resist being harder on women’s proposals. A partial solution, beginning in 2018, has been to implement a system of “dual-anonymous” proposal review, that is, one in which neither the reviewers nor the proposers know the other group’s identities.

The major funding agencies and observatories now use dual-anonymity, and although the results are based on a small sample, the success rates of women’s proposals seem to have gone up, albeit not dramatically. €œWe’re moving from conscious, overt, unapologetic discrimination to unconscious bias,” says Laura Kreidberg, Ph.D. 2016, who won the Annie Jump Cannon Award and is the founding director of the department of atmospheric physics of exoplanets at the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Heidelberg, Germany. €œFor now it’s strong, but I have a huge amount of hope of getting rid of it.” Because bias and sexual harassment seem to have deep, perennial roots, a few young women say that they initially wanted to burn the whole system down. But then they thought that rather than destroy a culture, they could make their own.

€œWe’ve come to know each other in enough numbers,” Daniel says, “[that] we can start to make sure a woman is in every decision-making room.” Kreidberg is creating a wholly new department at her institution. She wants thinking to be more collaborative, “done at a blackboard,” she says. €œI want juniors to speak up and ask questions. And I want people to not have so many responsibilities they can’t be creative—there’s no way around long hours at the cost of other things, but I have a family, I’m a runner, I tango, and without these breaks, I run out of ideas.” Berg leads a 50-person team. €œEveryone knows what’s going on.

No cliques, and no cutting people out.” Casey co-leads a group of more than 200 people whose rules are, “Don’t worry about papers that disagree, address it in a future paper, and don’t be a dick. Respect the human, let the science happen, and it’ll work itself out.” This young cohort of women astronomers is exquisitely aware of earlier generations’ generosity and of its own responsibility to future scientists. €œWe recognize the generations of women who reached down and pulled us up, and a lot of us think now we need to do the same,” Werk says. Urry estimates that she has spent roughly a quarter to a third of her career changing the conditions for women. €œYou have to stay in the field to change things,” Hörst says.

€œIf it had been intolerable for Meg [Urry], I wouldn’t be here.” Most of these young women mentor undergraduate and graduate students who are not necessarily their assigned advisees. Kao teaches workshops that she markets as being on early-career skills but that are also about vulnerability and emotions, “how we know when we need to tend to our boundaries or to take better care of other people.” Others run programs and workshops on the entire constellation of bias issues. They offer classes for children interested in science. They serve on their institutions’ Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) committees, and they note that the DEI work tends to be done mostly by women and minorities. €œI’m trying to think of a woman who is not an activist,” Medeiros says.

Their activism in the past 10 or so years has particularly focused on the demographic populations whose numbers in the field are still too low. €œThings are better for us,” Knutson says, “but ‘us’ is still white”. White people make up 60.1 percent of the U.S. Population and 82 percent of astronomers. Astronomy’s demographics are disturbing.

18.5 percent of Americans are Hispanic or Latino, but 5 percent of astronomers are. 13.4 percent of Americans are Black, but 2 percent of astronomers are. A recent NAS report called the numbers of people of color in astronomy “abysmally low.” “I’m a first-generation woman of color who has to learn a completely new world,” says Melinda Soares-Furtado, Ph.D. 2020, a Hubble fellow at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, who studies stars with odd chemical abundances. €œI can code-switch, but it’s exhausting.” Kao is first-generation Taiwanese-American.

€œFrom day one I’ve struggled to belong in the space I’m in. Half the time I want to change my name.” Lopez says, “I’m Mexican-American and have cerebral palsy, so that’s another set of hurdles.” She once went to a meeting with maybe 40 people whose sexual orientation and race or ethnicity were something other than straight and white, and she was shocked at “how many of us had encountered the [assumption that] our advisers had done our work.” The restrictions that people at these intersections deal with resemble the barriers of Rubin’s world. Being the only one like you in the room means sometimes wondering whether you should even be in that room, and it means the other people in the room sometimes think you are incapable of doing what you have just done. €œI’m never the only woman there, but for sure I’m the only Black woman,” Manning says. €œIsolation is weird—some days it’s ‘Why don’t I go where I’m not being looked at like this,’ and some days it’s ‘No, I need to be here so someone else can see me.’” When I started talking to this bunch of young and sparkly women, I thought they might describe themselves as just astronomers, not women astronomers.

What they have done is more interesting. They have reframed “astronomy” to necessarily include “women”—they have merged “women” into “astronomy.” For instance, those of them offered the Annie Jump Cannon Award that Burbidge rejected have accepted it with pleasure and not as a prize for people who would not otherwise win prizes. The point, they say, is that they are women. They cannot escape it, and they might as well go ahead and have green hair, wear dresses to conferences and win women’s prizes. They have been intelligent, creative and hardworking all along, but now they are also conspicuous.

They have made themselves, as Manning says, seen. They are like Vera Rubin, slapping the lady-shaped icon on the door and telling the rest of their world to get used to it.The White House announced this morning that the U.S. Will rapidly increase exports of liquefied natural gas to Europe as Germany and other E.U. Nations try to diminish their dependence on Russian fossil fuels. The move will ramp up LNG shipments carried by seagoing tankers by 15 billion cubic meters this year, according to a fact sheet released by the White House.

As a comparison, the United States sent 22 bcm of LNG to Europe last year, the highest ever traded between the two continents. The announcement promises to raise concerns about the trajectory of global climate action. The construction of LNG terminals and other infrastructure could put the U.S. And other nations on a path toward using gas for years to come, even as those countries strive to phase out fossil fuels, advocates warn. The White House said American exports of LNG will continue to grow through 2030, by which time the U.S.

Plans to be sending 50 billion cubic meters of gas to Europe annually. €œThis build-out will occur in a way that is consistent with, not in conflict with, the net-zero climate goal that we’re shooting for,” Biden said during a meeting with European officials in Brussels this morning. He called the effort a “catalyst” for doubling down on investments in clean energy. Biden also spoke with European leaders yesterday about ways to accelerate the transition toward clean energy, according to the White House. In addition to working with other countries to bring new sources of LNG to Europe, the effort announced this morning—which will be overseen by a joint U.S.-E.U.

Task force—will involve helping the continent reduce demand for natural gas over the next two winters through energy efficiency measures and the build-out of clean energy. A senior administration official speaking on background to reporters said today’s announcement would help accelerate Europe’s move away from Russian gas. He also said it would advance efforts to phase out gas in the U.S., which has a goal of halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. Energy was a key point of discussion between Biden and other world leaders during urgent talks yesterday about the worsening Russian war in Ukraine. €œTomorrow, together with President Biden, we will present a new chapter in our energy partnership,” said Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission.

€œIt is about additional LNG from the United States for the European Union, thus replacing the Russian LNG we had so far, an important step forward.” The European Union receives 40 percent of its gas and more than a quarter of its oil from Russia. Germany, the bloc’s largest economy, relies on Russia for around half of the coal and gas needed to heat homes and power industry. In a plan announced earlier this month, the E.U. Said it would cut its consumption of Russian gas by two-thirds by the end of 2022, mainly by boosting supplies of gas from countries such as Norway, Azerbaijan, the U.S. And Qatar.

The European Commission put forward a proposal Wednesday that would require member states to fill their gas storage facilities to at least 80 percent of capacity by Nov. 1. That will make securing alternative gas sources increasingly important. Europe has recently increased its gas imports from Russia as it attempts to stockpile fuel. Countries across the 27-member bloc have varying levels of dependence on Russian oil, gas and coal.

That has led some countries to resist efforts to abruptly disband Russian imports. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has warned that Europe’s economy could be thrust into a recession if it acts too quickly. While the Biden administration has encouraged the E.U. To break its dependence on Russia, officials have also said they recognize the challenge Europe faces. In addition to his meeting at the European Council, Biden also gathered with leaders from the Group of 7.

In a statement, they pledged to support countries as they phase out their reliance on Russian energy imports. The G-7 also called on oil- and gas-producing countries to increase deliveries to the world market and singled out OPEC as a key part of that effort. €œWe will work with them and all partners to ensure stable and sustainable global energy supplies,” the leaders wrote. The statement also mentioned clean energy but didn’t include specifics, noting only that the crisis brought on by Russia’s war in Ukraine reinforces the G-7’s determination to limit the rise in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius by accelerating the energy transition. Locking in emissions Increasing LNG supplies to Europe would largely involve redirecting cargoes headed toward other locations, since raising production volumes could take years, according to a note by Goldman Sachs.

U.S. Terminal capacity is currently maxed out. While some of that reallocation has already been happening, sustaining it could prove challenging as next winter approaches. Most of the redirected supply has been driven by European gas prices commanding a premium, rather than by policies, Samantha Dart, head of natural gas research at Goldman Sachs, said in an email. €œAs a result, we think contracting for some of that flexible supply for the remainder of the year would help support European gas supplies,” she said.

Constructing the infrastructure needed to increase natural gas exports over the long term would take several years, according to analysts. But doing so, in addition to securing long-term supply contracts for natural gas, could lock in years of planet-warming emissions. U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm acknowledged those concerns yesterday during a press conference at the International Energy Agency in Paris. €œBut there is also a flipside to this, which is this accelerates the movement away from fossil fuels, at least unabated fossil fuels, and the movement toward technologies that do that,” she said, pointing toward carbon capture and sequestration methods or hydrogen produced with renewable energy.

Those technologies, however, aren’t commercially available. Currently, there’s not enough infrastructure to transport hydrogen at scale, and it could take years to build it, said Lindsey Walter, deputy director for Third Way’s Climate and Energy Program. In a best-case scenario, hydrogen is still years away from substantially replacing Russian gas in Europe. €œWe know the E.U. Has some pretty ambitious goals around hydrogen, as it should because it will be crucial for decarbonizing industry, aviation, freight, all of these applications you can’t easily electrify," she said.

"There needs to be some acknowledgment that we don’t produce clean hydrogen at scale yet today.” Research from Oslo, Norway-based Rystad Energy estimated that Europe would need about 54 million tons of hydrogen by 2030 to replace gas and coal in the continent’s power sector. €œEurope is currently on track to produce 3 million tons of green hydrogen per annum by 2030 so the gap is considerable,” it said. Green groups are concerned that officials from the U.S. And E.U. Are largely focused on increased LNG exports as a response to Russia’s war.

The years it will take to develop new fossil fuel export infrastructure would be better used to build clean energy sources, said Mitch Jones, managing director of policy at Food &. Water Watch. €œPresident Biden should firmly reject any plans to fast track gas export terminals here in the United States,” he said in a statement. €œCorporate polluters are brazenly seizing on this crisis to secure decades of dependence on dirty energy, which will further devastate frontline communities and abandon any hopes for bold climate action.” Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2022.

E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals..