Archive by Author

Congress must ease inflation by making housing more affordable

Americans are feeling the impact of historic inflation, and rising rents are a primary driver. The price of housing is by far the largest category in the Consumer Price Index and one of the greatest contributors to the inflationary pressure squeezing all households, especially those with the lowest incomes. In restarting negotiations on a major spending package, Congress and the Biden administration have a crucial opportunity to tackle inflation and ensure that America’s lowest-income and most marginalized people can get and stay stably housed.

Even before the pandemic, millions of households were struggling to keep roofs over their heads, always just one financial shock away from falling behind on rent and being threatened with eviction, and in the worst cases homelessness. Then came COVID-19. By August 2020, according to the best available data, as many as 12 million households were at risk of losing their homes without immediate governmental action. Many were among those already struggling to pay rent when the pandemic brought sudden job losses, reduced work hours, and higher costs for health care, childcare, and the internet. Advocates sounded the alarm, and federal, state, and local governments took heed, providing unprecedented resources and protections to keep tenants housed.  

Emergency rental assistance and eviction moratoriums were essential protections. Yet they offered only a temporary patch for the gaping holes in our social safety net. Now, as pandemic-era renter protections expire and resources are depleted, renters are encountering a housing market upended by soaring inflation. Last year, the cost of rent rose on average 14 percent nationally, with some cities seeing rent increases as high as 40 percent. Rents are expected to rise another 10 percent this year. These price increases affect renters of all incomes but threaten the lowest-income renters most of all. 

Skyrocketing rents are in part a consequence of the severe shortage of affordable homes for renters with the lowest incomes. There is a national shortage of 7 million homes affordable and available to renters with extremely low incomes, and fewer than four affordable and available homes exist for every 10 of the lowest-income households. Not a single state or Congressional district has enough affordable homes to meet the demand. 

Without affordable options, 10 million of the lowest-income households spend over half their incomes on rent, depriving them of the resources needed to put food on the table, purchase medications, and make ends meet. Renters need an annual income of nearly $50,000 — or $23.96 an hour — on average to afford a typical two-bedroom apartment. In many parts of the country, they need to earn much more. For many working families, seniors, and people with disabilities, incomes like these are completely out of reach.

People of color are disproportionately impacted. Black households account for 13 percent of all households but a quarter of all extremely low-income renters and nearly half of people experiencing homelessness. Latino households, who make up 12 percent of the total population, account for 21 percent of extremely low-income renters and 22 percent of people without homes. Native Americans are significantly overrepresented among people experiencing homelessness, and the harms are compounded for women of color. 

The tragic and preventable results of the housing crisis are visible everywhere you look. Eviction filing rates are increasing throughout the country and, in some communities, surpassing pre-pandemic levels. When America’s lowest-income renters lose their homes, they have few options available to them. Most double or triple up with other families in overcrowded homes. Many become homeless and resort to staying in congregate shelters. And on any given night in America, more than 200,000 people are sleeping in tents, cars, and other areas not fit for human habitation.

With rents rising rapidly, homelessness worsening, and millions of families struggling to stay housed, federal investments are desperately needed and long overdue. Congress was close to providing vital funding through the Build Back Better Act passed last year by the House of Representatives. The bill included historic and targeted housing investments, including $25 billion to expand rental assistance to 300,000 new households, $65 billion to preserve public housing for its 2 million residents, and $15 billion to build 150,000 homes affordable to people with the lowest incomes.

In December, however, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) announced his opposition to Build Back Better and effectively killed the bill. Now, the White House, congressional leaders, and Manchin have restarted negotiations over a new, scaled-down spending bill that would increase federal revenues by raising taxes on corporations and high-income earners, create savings by reducing the costs of prescription drugs, and use the resources generated to address the deficit, climate change, and inflation. 

If these members of Congress and the administration are sincere in their desire to bring down inflation, they should ensure the new bill includes robust measures to lower the cost of housing. Congress must retain the essential housing investments included in the Build Back Better Act — in rental assistance, public housing, and the national Housing Trust Fund — in any final reconciliation bill. By doing so, Congress will take an important step toward curbing inflation and ensuring that more of America’s lowest-income and most marginalized people have stable, affordable homes.

Diane Yentel is the president and CEO of the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

Source: TEST FEED1

Black women demand Biden, Harris bring Brittney Griner home

More than 1,000 Black women have signed a letter to President Biden demanding the administration step up its efforts to free WNBA star Brittney Griner from Russian detainment. 

The letter, signed by 1,200 women of all ages and professions, was the work of Win With Black Women, a collective of intergenerational and intersectional Black women across the nation.  

“It’s been more than 134 days and in our opinion that’s just 134 days too many for anyone to be subjected to the conditions [Griner] has been,” said Jotaka Eaddy, founder of Win With Black Women. 

Griner, a center for the Phoenix Mercury and an Olympic gold medalist, was detained by the Russian Federal Customs Service in February for possession of vape cartridges containing hashish oil, a contraband substance in Russia. Her trial began July 1. 

Signers of the letter included Bernice King, CEO of the King Center and daughter of Martin Luther King Jr.; Terri Jackson, executive director of the Women’s National Basketball Players Association; and Dawn Staley, basketball Hall of Famer, three-time Olympic gold medalist and head coach of South Carolina Gamecocks.

In a statement to The Hill, Jackson said the letter helps the organization “raise the alarm and convey a clear message of urgency to the President about our sister.”

“This letter in support of Brittney is an embrace from a powerful group of women that strengthens our resolve and allows us to keep fighting for BG,” Jackson said. “We are not The 144 without her. We need BG back home now with her family.”

The collective’s letter follows Griner’s handwritten note to the president on July 4 begging for a prisoner exchange. In her letter, Griner said she is “terrified” she will be in Russia forever. 

Griner’s wife, Cherelle Griner, has been outspoken about her concerns for the basketball star. 

On Wednesday, Biden and Vice President Harris spoke on the phone with Cherelle Griner to share a draft of a letter the president will send Brittney Griner.

While Biden officials have said they will do all they can to bring Brittney Griner home, the collective’s letter said its members are “concerned that the rhetoric does not appear to align with the actions taken to date.”

“She voted for you and Vice President Kamala Harris,” the letter said. “More than prioritizing her immediate return in word – you must do so in deed and make a deal to bring Brittney home.”

Eaddy said photos of Brittney Griner handcuffed and in court have been “heartbreaking.”

“As an American, as a woman, as a Black woman, to see her face, to hear her own words in her letter, her fear of never being able to come home, that is painful,” she said, her voice breaking.

But it’s also been motivational. The pain is partly what’s driving the collective to call on the administration to “make a deal” and bring Griner home.

“We’re hopeful that our continued advocacy and efforts will send a strong message and make very clear that Black women want to see a deal done to bring Brittney home,” said Eaddy. 

Source: TEST FEED1

With recession looming, the Fed may be doing more harm than good

Hope springs eternal at the Federal Reserve. At a time when all clues point to a recession before year’s end, the Fed clings to the belief that it can slay the inflation dragon while securing a soft economic landing.

This does not bode well for the economic outlook. It likely means that much in the same way as last year the Fed kept monetary policy too loose for too long thereby producing multi-decade high inflation, it will now keep monetary policy too tight for too long. That risks producing an even deeper economic recession to bring inflation back under control.

While Fed Chairman Jerome Powell keeps assuring us that we can avoid a recession, the Atlanta Federal Reserve seems to have a different view. According to its GDP Now economy tracker, which has been a reliable leading economic indicator, the economy contracted by around 1 percent in the second quarter. If that turns out to be the case, we will have had two quarters of negative growth, which is the popular definition of a recession.

Leaving aside how the economy might have done in the last quarter, many indicators suggest that the economy is in for a very rough second half of the year.

The equity market has just closed out its worst first half-year performance since 1970. Together with parallel large declines in the bond and crypto currency markets, since the start of the year around $15 trillion, or 70 percent of GDP, in financial wealth has evaporated. Coupled with multi-decade high inflation, this huge loss in wealth is bound to cause a slump in consumer spending. This is already suggested by a drop in consumer confidence to its lowest level on record.

Another indication of real trouble ahead is the largest increase in long-term mortgage rates in the past 30 years. Since the start of the year, the 30-year mortgage rate has almost doubled from around 3 percent to its present level of 5.5 percent. That has implied a more than 25 percent slump in housing affordability. This must make it only a matter of time before the housing market crumbles.

What’s more, the traded goods sector could inhibit economic growth. The dollar has surged to a 20-year high, and our economic partners are slowing down, which means  we can expect our exports to slump and our imports to boom.

As if all of this were not enough cause for concern, we also have a very different macroeconomic policy setting than we had before. Last year, both budget and monetary policy were highly supportive of economic growth. This year the picture is very different. The March 2021 American Rescue Plan has long since run its course. Meanwhile, the Fed’s zero interest rates and massive bond-buying have given way to 75 basis point interest rate increases and the start of substantial Fed bond selling.

Last year, the Fed kept policy too loose for too long despite the many indications of a strong inflationary surge. This year it seems to be making the same mistake but in reverse. It is putting itself on a substantial monetary policy tightening path at the very time that there are many indications of real trouble ahead.

In the past, Fed Chair Powell has indicated that the Fed should be both humble and nimble. One must hope that he heeds his own advice. If so, he might soon have the Fed do a monetary policy U-turn that might spare us a very hard economic landing.

Desmond Lachman is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. He was formerly a deputy director in the International Monetary Fund’s Policy Development and Review Department and the chief emerging market economic strategist at Salomon Smith Barney.

Source: TEST FEED1

SCOTUS decisions leave little recourse but to try new models of civic engagement

The highly selective recent rulings by the Supreme Court, including to limit the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ability to regulate carbon emissions of power plants, overturning Roe v. Wade and undermining state gun safety laws, places responsibility on individuals in cities and communities without the governmental tools or federal support they have enjoyed in the past. In deferring to Congress, which has failed to address these issues due to high levels of partisan rancor and political dysfunction; the courts are actually pushing the burden onto communities and individuals to navigate a series of disruptive changes. With congressional gridlock, one result of these decisions is a trickle-down responsibility and burden being placed directly onto communities across the country.

The resulting pressure facing individuals in communities will be immense in the following decades. Billions of dollars are already being spent on protecting schools from gun violence from panic buttons to metal detectors. Organizers are already working to figure out how to bring women across state lines for safe reproductive care. States are exploring emergency state ballot measures to try to keep guns off the streets. 

The question arises: What tools exist beyond Congress for local states, cities, communities and governments to shape federal policy and rise to this moment? How can communities effectively deal with these challenges and ameliorate the damage being done?

We need advocacy at the national level and a multi-generational effort to reform democracy and the legislative and judicial branches.

We also need to reform civic space on the local level to respond to the myriad of divisive issues and new responsibilities placed on local governments. 

Are there ways to mitigate this disaster using not only civic activism to change policy but also civic cooperation to affect outcomes for communities by communities? As these policy demands are placed on individuals, cities will need to try experiments with new models of collaborative governance — models of co-governance which put everyday people in direct contact with city officials and staff.

Collaborative governance — also known as “co-governance” —  seeks to disrupt the rigid dichotomy between those “in power” and those “outside of power.” A new name for something that has been emerging in practice over several decades, collaborative governance shifts power and builds trust by enabling government officials and advocates to see each other as collaborators with unique capacities and perspectives that support the other’s interests and positions. By building relationships that can outlast a specific issue, co-governance represents an ongoing democratic process rather than a one-off initiative. It can also highlight the value of “losing forward” in service of a longer-term vision.

Co-governance has been most effective when there is a specific policy dispute where a targeted set of actors from both on-the-ground organizers and those with decision-making power come together. Engagement needs to be well-designed to reach beyond the usual suspects, create clearly defined questions, and produce actionable outcomes which can lead to policy implementation.  An example of this is participatory budgeting — a model for community-driven engagement over budgets that has been recognized by the World Bank and Harvard Innovations Award for democratic engagement being practiced across the United States. It creates a specific opening for communities to make funding decisions by enabling everyday residents to have a say on how a local budget should address community-identified needs such as on education, transportation and safety.

For example, Boston created the city’s first Participatory Budgeting Office and launched the first youth-driven process in the country; a process called “Youth Lead the Change” to empower young people ages 12 to 22 to vote in the city’s budget. It has proven effective at engaging traditionally marginalized voices in the policy process, re-allocate resources to underserved neighborhoods and providing a direct channel to tap hyper-local expertise into the complex process of city budgets. Cities and communities are working to deploy participatory budgeting as one co-governance method.

Co-governance can be applied to a range of pressing policy concerns. For example, on community-driven sensible gun reform, a co-governance model could bring teachers, students, advocates and businesses together to formulate solutions that are responsive to a given community’s history, place and political conditions. It will require a specific policy question where there is a chance for genuine reform and offer a new type of process that is centered on the lived experience of those most affected — including students, teachers, family members and community members in direct dialogue with policymakers. It will require intentional facilitation, design and creating safe spaces for people to thoughtfully disagree but with an eye toward effective community-driven problem-solving. It will require engagement with trusted community intermediaries, which my research has demonstrated are essential for building an inclusive and equitable process community members can trust.

Co-governance is hardly a panacea for the complex governing challenges facing communities across the country. But the recent actions of the Supreme Court have left communities with little recourse but to experiment with new models of civic engagement, advocacy, and community-driven people-centered power.

Hollie Russon Gilman, Ph.D., is a senior fellow at New America and Columbia World Projects and an affiliate fellow at Harvard’s Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation. She is the co-author of “Civic Power: Rebuilding American Democracy in an Era of Inequality” and served in the Obama administration as the White House open government and innovation adviser.

Source: TEST FEED1

Pulse oximeters found to be less accurate for Black vs. white patients

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, calls for increased vigilance when using pulse oximeters to measure blood oxygen levels were common, as research indicated these devices may not be as accurate among individuals with darker skin.

However, some argued the inaccurate readings might be contained to extremely sick individuals in intensive care units and that low blood pressure or other factors may play a role in the discrepancies. 

To better determine the pervasiveness of inaccurate readings, researchers at the University of Michigan conducted a study on patients within the Veterans Health Administration, the nation’s largest integrated health system. Pulse oximeters are used to measure low blood oxygen or hypoxemia, a hallmark of severe COVID-19 and certain lung or heart conditions.

Data from over 100 hospitals revealed that within this system alone, there could have been over 75,000 instances each year where low blood oxygen was missed in a Black veteran, but might have been caught if the devices worked as well as they did in white patients, explained lead study author Valeria Valbuena in a press release. 

America is changing faster than ever! Add Changing America to your Facebook or Twitter feed to stay on top of the news.

Missed hypoxemia is associated with worse disability and higher mortality. “That has to mean something to someone, at the very least to ensure our veterans are getting the care they deserve after serving their country,” Valbuena continued. “It is just not fair that we are using devices that don’t work as well for Black veterans as for white veterans.” 

Researchers compared blood oxygen measurements taken via pulse oximeter with those of arterial oxygen saturation, measured in arterial blood gas, among patients not in intensive care. 

Electronic medical record data from 2013 to 2019 were assessed. Each patient’s readings were taken within 10 minutes of each other.

Overall “Black patients had higher odds than white patients of having occult hypoxemia [unrecognized low oxygen levels] noted on arterial blood gas but not detected by pulse oximetry,” researchers wrote. “This difference could limit access to supplemental oxygen and other more intensive support and treatments for black patients.”

White veterans had a 15.6 percent probability of occult hypoxemia, compared with 16.2 percent in Hispanic or Latino veterans, and 19.6 percent in Black veterans.

In patients who received one reading earlier in the day and an additional reading later, those made in white patients were also more consistent with each other than those from Black patients, suggesting the same trust cannot be placed in pulse oximeter readings over time for Black patients, said co-author Thomas S. Valley in a statement. 

“Even if the pulse [oximeter] agreed with the earlier blood draw, later pulse [oximeter] measurements might miss low blood oxygen levels in Black patients,” Valley added. 

In an effort to address the discrepancies, the FDA plans to hold a meeting of the Medical Devices Committee later in 2022. Currently, increased awareness of the issue among providers remains the only option of mitigating this problem.

Because the Veterans Health Administration uses the same pulse oximeters as commercial hospitals, authors caution results are likely generalizable to the wider public.

Source: TEST FEED1

Biden administration unveils sweeping changes to federal student loan system

The Biden administration on Wednesday announced several new proposed changes to the federal student loan system, including measures that help discharge loans for physically and mentally disabled borrowers, limit interest capitalization rates, and help borrowers working as public service employees to earn forgiveness on their loans.

In a statement unveiling the proposed expansion of student loan discharge programs, the Department of Education said it expected to finalize a full plan by Nov. 1, with the aim to have the changes take effect no later than July 1.

Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona said in the statement that proposed changes “will protect borrowers and save them time, money, and frustration, and will hold their colleges responsible for wrongdoing.”

“We are committed to fixing a broken system. If a borrower qualifies for student loan relief, it shouldn’t take mountains of paperwork or a law degree to obtain it,” Cardona said in a statement. “Student loan benefits also should not be so hard to get that borrowers never actually benefit from them.”

The Biden administration has so far canceled nearly $26 billion for more than 1.3 million borrowers since taking office, much of which included loans obtained by borrowers who were defrauded by their college or had their school close down before they could complete their education.

The changes proposed for the federal student loan system on Wednesday would make it easier for borrowers to file and pursue claims of predatory practices by colleges. The proposed rules would also help students who enrolled in schools 180 days prior to a school closure and who didn’t complete their education to more easily discharge the loans.

In a statement, James Kvaal, the undersecretary of Education, said that “borrowers have had to navigate narrow rules and a needlessly complicated system” when attempting to cancel loans they should be able to easily discharge.

“What’s worse, borrowers whose schools lied to them can’t pursue litigation because restrictive and unfair arbitration requirements and class action bans were foisted on them by their colleges,” Kvaal said. “Borrowers should not have to jump through hoops to get the relief they deserve.”

Since October, the Biden administration has approved about $8.1 billion in student loan relief for 145,000 borrowers after rolling out changes to Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF), which grants loan forgiveness for those serving full time in certain public service positions.

The changes to PSLF include a waiver that bypassed certain program requirements and granted borrowers credit toward loan cancellation, regardless of the type of federal loan. The waiver will expire at the end of October.

Wednesday’s announcement proposes a permanent change to PSLF that would allow more payments to qualify for the program, including partial, lump-sum and late payments. It also would allow particular kinds of deferments and forbearances to count toward PSLF, and it would create a formal reconsideration process for applicants who were denied access to the program.

Other proposals include eliminating interest capitalization rates on loans for borrowers in certain instances, making it easier for permanently disabled borrowers to qualify for loan forgiveness, and giving borrowers an easier path toward loan forgiveness if they were falsely certified and ineligible for a loan.

The Biden administration has also floated the idea of canceling $10,000 per borrower amid calls from progressives to cancel $50,000 or more per borrower.

In May, deputy press secretary Vedant Patel said that “no decisions have been made,” but sources told The Hill in late April that the president had settled on that number and was working on the specifics of providing such debt relief.

Source: TEST FEED1

Democratic drug pricing bill removes insulin cost cap amid bipartisan push

Senate Democrats’ latest bill to lower prescription drug prices removes a provision to cap patients’ insulin costs at $35 per month, legislation that comes amid a push for a separate bipartisan bill on insulin.  

Capping out-of-pocket insulin costs at $35 per month has been a high-profile selling point for Democrats’ economic package and has been touted by President Biden, so removing it carries some risk.    

The provision is part of a separate bipartisan bill from Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), which is moving forward and could get a vote in the Senate this month.

But the Shaheen-Collins bill will require support from at least 10 Republican senators in order to clear a filibuster and pass. By contrast, the Democratic-only drug pricing measure is part of Biden’s economic package, which uses a process known as reconciliation to bypass a GOP filibuster, meaning it can pass with only 50 Democratic votes.  

It is therefore unclear if going the bipartisan route on capping insulin costs will result in the measure being blocked by Republicans and not becoming law.  

Asked about the provision’s removal from the Democratic-only bill, a Shaheen aide pointed to the Shaheen-Collins bill instead. “The Shaheen-Collins bill, including the $35 copay provision, will be handled via regular order, so that’s why you’re not seeing it,” the aide said.  

While Collins is supporting the bipartisan insulin bill, it is far from clear that nine other Republicans will vote for it, and some have voiced concerns about interference in the free market.  

It is also unclear if Democrats would seek to add the insulin cost cap back into the Democratic-only package if the bipartisan approach fails. There is also some question as to whether the insulin cap could pass muster with the complicated Senate rules governing the process for bypassing a GOP filibuster. 

Aside from the insulin provision, Democrats’ drug pricing bill still includes major provisions to allow Medicare to negotiate lower prices on a subset of drugs, in order to to limit drug price increases to the rate of inflation cap Medicare beneficiaries’ out of pocket drug costs at $2,000 per year.  

The fate of that measure still depends on Democrats reaching a broader deal with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) on other parts of the package, like energy and tax policy.  

Source: TEST FEED1

Community colleges can become America’s AI incubators

Millions of students attend community colleges every year, with almost 1,300 schools located in every corner of the United States. With their large student bodies, community colleges are a massive source of potential for expanding the artificial intelligence (AI) workforce, but employers and policymakers alike sorely underestimate their potential. 

If the United States aims to maintain its global lead and competitive advantage in AI, it must recognize that community colleges hold a special spot in our education system and are too important to be overlooked any longer. 

As detailed in a recent study I co-authored as part of Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET), community colleges have the potential to support the country in its mission for superiority in AI. Community colleges could create pathways to good-paying jobs across the United States and become tools for training a new generation of AI-literate workers.  

Instead, the focus today remains squarely on four-year colleges. Employers routinely only consider applicants with a bachelor’s degree, even though one-third of the AI workforce does not have one. This number reflects the broader U.S. labor force, where 60 percent of workers do not have a four-year college degree. Degree requirements also disproportionately affect communities of color, as nearly 70 percent of Black and 80 percent of Latino workers do not have a bachelor’s degree.  

Employers of the AI workforce need to eliminate arbitrary bachelor’s degree requirements. They disenfranchise a wide swath of diverse talent, shrink the talent pool in an already tight labor market and block pathways to quality jobs for workers everywhere. Instead, these public and private employers need to broaden and diversify their workforce by focusing on credentials that signal competency.  

Undervaluing sub-baccalaureate credentials keeps community colleges from leveraging their many strengths. They reach a diverse student population, are affordable and flexible and have a proven track record of education and training in technical fields. The adaptability of their programs allows them to embed stackable credentials that students can accumulate over time, creating entry and exit points into and out of the education system for students while retaining proof of competencies for employment.   

Community colleges offer a place of learning for those who have full-time jobs, must take care of their families, lack the resources to pay for an expensive four-year degree, or face any of the other career-inhibiting burdens shouldered by millions of Americans.   

While community colleges could become a key feature of the AI workforce training pipeline, achieving this potential is no small task. They are beset by a number of long-standing challenges, such as nebulous and inconsistent funding (and many competing priorities for said funds), staff recruitment and retention difficulties, and a student population with many needs not faced by those at four-year colleges. The result of these challenges is persistently low completion rates, particularly in STEM fields. More recently, community colleges have been heavily impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, further taxing their limited resources. 

These problems are well known, and efforts by schools to mitigate them have shown progress. Various community colleges across the country are experimenting with promising ideas like guided pathways to address one or more of these challenges. Workforce training programs in other fields also offer a guide on what to do and not do. As community colleges begin to implement AI and AI-related programs, they should make sure to include best practices from these efforts. 

Schools also need to ensure that AI and related credentials will actually lead to quality jobs. One issue they face is that the current credential landscape remains like the Wild West. There are almost 1 million unique credentials in the United States, and they vary dramatically in caliber. Furthermore, there is currently little demand for AI certifications from employers. This will most likely remain the case until there are industry-accepted standards or some other accreditation effort for AI-related credentials.   

That is where the federal government can help. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), or another suitable government agency, should facilitate the creation of a framework for work roles and competencies for AI jobs. This will help schools design their programs to match them and help industries understand which credentials are valuable. NIST created a similar framework for cybersecurity called the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE) which has been hugely successful. Non-government standards-setting organizations (along with industry stakeholders) could also be leveraged, in partnership with or in place of NIST, to help create something similar for AI.  

Leveraging community colleges offers a way for the United States to outpace its competition, create upward mobility for millions of workers and adapt its workforce for the jobs of the future. But they need help to get there. With the right support from policymakers and buy-in from the many other stakeholders needed, they can turn their potential into reality. 

Luke Koslosky is a research analyst at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET).  

Source: TEST FEED1

Commercial labs to begin monkeypox testing, CDC says

Labcorp, one of the largest commercial laboratory testing networks in the U.S., will begin testing for monkeypox on Wednesday as the recent outbreak continues to spread.

Labcorp will begin conducting tests using orthopoxvirus tests from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Orthopoxvirus is the genus of viruses that includes pathogens like smallpox, cowpox and monkeypox.

The CDC’s tests detect all non-smallpox orthopoxviruses, and Labcorp will eventually have the capacity to conduct around 10,000 daily, according to the company.

Labcorp Chief Medical Officer Brian Caveney said in a statement that all tests will initially be performed in the company’s largest facility in North Carolina and that testing will expand to other locations if the need arises. The company will accept samples from anywhere in the country.

This announcement comes as the number of detected monkeypox cases in the U.S. continues to rise, with many cases almost certainly going underreported due to the lack of testing capabilities.

According to the most recent estimate from the CDC, more than 550 cases have been confirmed across 33 states, D.C. and Puerto Rico.

“The ability of commercial labs to test for monkeypox is a key pillar in our comprehensive strategy to combat this disease,” CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said in a statement.

“This will not only increase testing capacity but will make it more convenient for providers and patients to access tests by using existing provider-to-lab relationships,” Walensky said.

Labcorp said in its announcement that people should go to their health care providers to initiate the sample collection and testing process. The available tests involve polyester dry swabs that are brushed against the base of possible monkeypox lesions, which can cover the face and body of an infected individual.

A national vaccination campaign has been launched in response to the monkeypox outbreak, with the smallpox vaccines ACAM2000 and the newer, preferred Jynneos being offered to at-risk populations in certain locations.

Supply has been severely limited, especially as many local and state governments have shown a preference for the Jynneos vaccine. The Jynneos vaccine is believed to cause fewer side effects than ACAM2000, of which the U.S. has millions of doses in its Strategic National Stockpile.

Local governments have called on the federal government to provide more doses than what has initially been given, with many cities running out of available shots in less than a day of launching their vaccination campaigns.

The administration’s current vaccine strategy involves sending vaccine doses to areas “where transmission is highest and with populations most at risk.”

The White House has ordered additional doses of Jynneos, expected to be delivered within the next few weeks. Last week, the administration announced the delivery of additional smallpox vaccine doses, with roughly 30,000 having been shipped or expected to be shipped so far.

Source: TEST FEED1