Public health experts in service of journalism.

Rapid responses to health questions for fact-checkers and journalists.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
0
articles

What do we know about new strains of this virus that is more infectious than the first strains?

Scientists are working to better understand the new variants (or versions) of the COVID-19 virus, how they spread, if vaccines will be effective, if the new variants are detectable by viral tests, and whether the variants cause mild or severe disease. Information about new variants of COVID-19 is changing quickly. According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there is no evidence that the new COVID-19 variants cause more severe illness or increased risk of death. However, there is some evidence that suggests that one mutation (D614G) may spread more quickly than other variants. Viruses constantly change as they reproduce in order to keep spreading into more cells. These changes are called "viral mutations." Mutations create a new, updated version of the virus, which we call a "strain" or "variant" (though other similar words include "lineage" and "mutant"). These variants may have different properties than previous versions of the virus and may allow the virus to infect more people or may cause more severe illness. Many variants of COVID-19 have been documented globally, and scientists are continuing to monitor the virus as it changes and spreads around the world. To prevent the spread of COVID-19, international health agencies and the public health community continue to encourage the everyone to wear face masks (the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now recommend wearing a cloth mask over a surgical mask or individual KN95/N95 masks), practice social distancing (maintaining 6 feet/2 meters physical distance), avoid crowds especially in indoor areas, and practice frequent hand washing with soap and warm water. 

How can I protect myself if I am attending a protest or mass gathering?

Attending protests or mass gatherings can increase the risk of catching COVID-19 or spreading the disease. This is especially so given the large amount of people who are infected with COVID-19 but do not have any symptoms (pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic), and may feel well enough to attend a mass gathering like a protest or march. In this context, there are a few steps you can take to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. These include first of all wearing a mask and trying to maintain a certain distance from other people at the protest - 6 feet (or 2 m) where possible. Additionally, wearing heat resistant gloves and eye protection (ex: sunglasses) is also recommended. Since yelling - even through a mask - can increase the spread of respiratory droplets due to the force that pushes them out, it is recommended to choose signs or drums (or similar noise makers) if you want to express a message. To prevent further spread of the virus, it is recommended to stick to a 'buddy group' when participating in protests to keep the number of close contacts low. In the event one person in the group is found to be infected with COVID-19, it will be easier to contact all the people who came into close contact with that person and take the recommended public health measures. Similarly, it is recommended for protesters to get tested if possible after taking part in protests. In the US, some states are offering free testing for protesters. Finally, make sure to carry hand sanitizer to disinfect your hands as much as needed and carry water to keep hydrated.

What can we expect when a population first begins getting vaccinated?

Once vaccine doses are distributed in the millions to a population, we can expect to see cases of COVID-19 dropping in those populations within a few months. Following a decrease in case numbers, we can expect decreases in hospitalization rates (the number of hospitalizations per 100,000 individuals), and then decreases in mortality rates (the number of deaths due to COVID-19 in a population). Importantly, we do not yet know how much we'll see these case numbers drop following the first vaccinations, because we don't yet know how effective the vaccines are outside clinical trials. The decrease could be minuscule or massive — and there's no way of knowing until the vaccines are distributed. The data we have on the most promising vaccines reflect vaccine efficacy, which is different than effectiveness and shows us how well a vaccine works to prevent a particular disease in a controlled, research environment. The data currently shows 95% efficacy for the Pfizer vaccine and 94.5% efficacy for the Moderna vaccine, with efficacy to be announced soon by AstraZeneca. We will not have data on vaccine effectiveness until a vaccine is made available to large populations outside of clinical trials. Given that U.K. Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) authorized the supply of Pfizer and BioNTech’s COVID-19 mRNA vaccine on December 2, we will likely have data on the Pfizer vaccine's effectiveness first. Once we have information on effectiveness, we’ll have a better sense of how the vaccines will impact metrics such as case numbers, test-positive rates, hospitalization rates, mortality rates, and level of disease severity. If vaccine distribution begins in early-mid-December (the Pfizer vaccine is set to begin being distributed in the U.K. on December 8), by mid-March to the highest risk individuals a population may begin to see declining case numbers. Depending on the rate at which a population is vaccinated, and particularly when distribution of the vaccine moves from highest risk individuals to the broader public, a December distribution start date to high-risk individuals followed quickly (within one month or so) by the general public could potentially vaccinate approximately 70% of that population by mid-late summer (within 6-8 months). This level of vaccination in a population would mean the population reaches herd immunity, triggering significant decreases in COVID-19 metrics such as case numbers, hospitalization rates, and mortality rates. However, if the general public in a population does not have access to vaccinations until later than this timeline (for example, April - June), herd immunity may not be reached until the fall or end of 2021 (6-8 months following). It is important to note that these types of timelines are estimates and based on an assumption that mass vaccination production and delivery is efficient. It also typically takes a few weeks for the body to build immunity after vaccination, so as a result, it is still possible for someone to contract COVID-19 just after they receive a vaccine, influencing case numbers. Case numbers, hospitalization rates, and mortality rates following vaccination in a country will depend on a variety of factors. First, different populations within countries suffer from COVID-19 morbidity and mortality differently. Black Americans, for example, have 2.6x higher case numbers, 4.7x higher hospitalization rates, and 2.1x higher mortality rates than white Americans. This will impact how much case numbers, hospitalizations and deaths fall in those populations after the first doses of vaccines get distributed to Americans. The distribution of vaccines is also not guaranteed to be equitable and there are varying degrees of willingness to even take a vaccine in some populations. Finally, some communities within a country may continue to practice recommended preventative guidelines (i.e. masks, social distancing) after the first rounds of vaccination, while others may not. Current projected distribution plans across the two most promising vaccines is for the vaccine to first go to emergency department clinicians, outpatient clinicians, testers at symptomatic sites, other high-risk health care workers, immunocompromised individuals, EMTs, and potentially essential federal employees, followed by the rest of the general population. However, in the case of Pfizer, they are permitting the regions, countries, and states, distributing the vaccines to determine the distribution plans. For instance, in the U.S., distribution plans are by state. In the United States, vaccines are currently intended to be allocated to all 50 states and eight territories, in addition to six major metropolitan areas. Pfizer, which has filed for emergency use authorization (EUA) in the U.S. and is the closest to potential approval, is prioritizing this approach over a plan that would prioritize the hardest-hit areas of the country, which they’ve said was decided due to the rapid wide spread of the virus. This plan will have impacts for the case rates and other metrics, as equal distribution will lead to different outcomes than targeted distribution. Other barriers to vaccine access include, among others, continual access to health care, particularly given that both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine require two doses; cost (the vaccines are free but vaccination providers will be able to charge an administration fee); and potential supply chain challenges.

What do we know about the Regeneron cocktail for COVID-19?

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., an American biotechnology company, recently received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for its COVID-19 antibody cocktail treatment of casirivimab and imdevimab by the United States. The treatment formerly known as REGN-COV2 is the first combination therapy to receive an EUA and can be used to treat mild to moderate cases of COVID-19 in recently diagnosed patients at high risk for severe cases of the virus and/or hospitalization. The treatment can also be used in pediatric patients at least 12 years of age and weighing at least 88.2 pounds or 40kg. It is an experimental drug that is designed to help the body prevent and fight off the virus. The drug is called a 'cocktail' because it mixes a combination of drugs so that it can be more effective and in this case, prevent the virus from becoming resistant to the treatment. This particular drug from Regeneron uses a combination of two "monoclonal antibodies," casirivimab and imdevimab. Antibodies are part of the immune system, and they help fight off infections and foreign invaders like COVID-19 by finding the virus, neutralizing it, and telling the rest of the immune system to begin launching its response. Monoclonal antibodies (which means 'one type of antibody') are antibodies created in a lab that can act as a replacement for the antibodies the body normally creates. These lab-made antibodies are different than the ones that the immune system creates naturally because they're uniquely designed to target and launch an attack against the specific the virus that causes COVID-19. Regeneron believes that individual antibody therapies are likely not strong enough to fight the virus that causes COVID-19, so they have combined two separate antibody treatments into one as a weapon to fight against the virus and prevent any drug resistance that might occur if they virus mutates and escapes the effects of the antibodies (called "viral escape"). Casirivimab and imdevimab are the two monoclonal antibodies in this cocktail which aims to help patients who were recently diagnosed with COVID-19 but have not yet launched their full immune system response, or who have a lot of the virus circulating in their blood. Additionally, this treatment is not authorized for use in people who are hospitalized or who need oxygen; just those with mild to moderate cases who recently tested positive for COVID-19. Regeneron also recently announced that people who received its antibody treatment had a lower number of medical visits for COVID-19 related causes in comparison to those who did not receive the treatment. Patients who received the antibody treatment made roughly 57% fewer visits to seek medical care than patients who received a placebo. In patients at high risk for serious complications from the virus (like those over 50 and people with cardiovascular or lung conditions), the reduction in visits was 72% lower than the group who did not receive the drug. Patients who were given the treatment also demonstrated lower levels of the virus in their blood and less severe symptoms than patients who did not receive the treatment. Though Regeneron's monoclonal antibody treatment has received an EUA, that authorization is only temporary so the cocktail therapy will continue to be evaluated in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials, according to the company. As of November 24, 2020, more than 7,000 people have participated in Regeneron's casirivimab and imdevimab clinical trials. The United States' government began distributing the treatment on November 24, 2020 starting with 30,000 treatment courses and expects to produce enough of the therapy to reach 80,000 patients by the end of November 2020. Regeneron's antibody cocktail is part of the United States' Operation Warp Speed and has received more than $500 million from the government to develop these treatments. This public–private partnership's goal is to create and distribution vaccines, therapies, and diagnostics for COVID-19 rapidly and safely and involves various government agencies and companies.

What do we know about monoclonal antibodies as part of a treatment or vaccine for COVID-19?

Antibodies are tiny proteins created by the immune system to attach to any foreign invaders in the immune system (antigens) and also tell the immune system to begin defending itself from this threat. Monoclonal antibodies (which means 'one type of antibody') are antibodies created in a lab that can act as a replacement for the antibodies the body normally creates. The difference between these lab-made antibodies and those created by the immune system is that the monoclonal types are uniquely designed to target a specific antigen, in this case the virus that causes COVID-19, so it can send it messages, try to destroy it, and even make it easier for the immune system to find the antigen and attack it. Once the antigen is mapped out in the lab and scientists are able to produce monoclonal antibodies to attach to them, the lab then makes a large amount of these antibodies so they can help the immune system in its fight against a threat. COVID-19 is unique because it is characterized by its spikes, which you can see under a microscope. Monoclonal antibodies created in the lab work by targeting and breaking these spikes on the virus, which are critical for the virus to enter our cells and infect us. There is growing interest in their potential for use in both vaccine development, but also treatment for infection. The hope is that these antibodies can work as both a vaccine to prevent infection, and/or as a therapeutic treatment to help reduce severity of illness in patients with COVID-19. It is likely that after rigorous testing for safety and effectiveness, these antibodies would be produced in labs, manufactured in large quantities, and they would be injected into people to prevent infection from the virus. As of now, no monoclonal antibody treatments have been approved for this use and are still being heavily researched. _This entry was updated with new information on August 11, 2020._

What do we know so far about dexamethasone as a potential treatment for COVID-19?

Dexamethasone is a low-cost, anti-inflammatory medication that is part of the corticosteroid family. Corticosteroids function similarly to the cortisol produced in the body's adrenal glands yet they are synthetically made. Corticosteroids are commonly prescribed to suppress the immune system and reduce swelling and itching common to allergic reactions. Dexamethasone has been widely used since the 1960s, but it has recently been part of several studies exploring potential therapies for COVID-19. In the RECOVERY (Randomised Evaluation of Covid-19 Therapy) Trial at Oxford University (UK), the largest COVID-19 drug trial to date, researchers studied the impact of dexamethasone by comparing the roughly 2,000 patients who received the medication with the 4,000 patients who did not receive the medication. They found that the mortality risk was lowered for patients with severe cases of COVID-19 who were on ventilators or receiving oxygen. For patients with mild cases of COVID-19, beneficial effects were not observed. Dexamethasone has not been approved as an official treatment for COVID-19 outside the United Kingdom thus far, and the World Health Organization (WHO) has urged caution since these results are preliminary, have yet to be evaluated through the peer-review process, and represent findings from only one trial. Despite this, the medication is currently being used in several countries as a part of various treatment strategies for COVID-19. The WHO has also recently added dexamethasone and other steroids into its treatment guidelines for COVID-19. In two other recent studies using corticosteroidal medications (including dexamethasone) as potential treatments for COVID-19, one found a reduction in the number of days patients required ventilator support, and the other found that the corticosteroid medications were associated with an increased duration of illness (among other adverse impacts). Corticosteroids, including dexamethasone, are still an unproven treatment for COVID-19.

What do we know so far about COVID-19 and nursing homes?

Long-term care (LTC) facilities, often called nursing homes or assisted living facilities, are uniquely vulnerable to COVID-19 transmission. This is partially because COVID-19, like many other respiratory viruses, can easily be spread between people in enclosed spaces. In addition, since many residents at nursing homes are over the age of 65 and have preexisting conditions (i.e. heart disease, diabetes, or breathing problems) that my affect their immune systems and organ function, they are at a greater risk for severe disease if they do get COVID-19. This is why LTC facilities are considered to be high risk for COVID-19 spread. Though the number of COVID-19 cases in LTC facilities are strongly associated with the number of COVID-19 cases in their surrounding communities, research continues to show that COVID-19 infections spread quickly in LTC facilities among residents and staff. In addition to resident-specific risk factors, other factors that impact how COVID-19 has spread in LTC facilities include staffing shortages, low pay, and poor staffing ratios as well as a lack of resources dedicated to infection prevention, including guidelines to follow, dedicated staff members, and protective equipment. Shared living spaces like cafeterias and group rooms make social distancing difficult and can make it hard to isolate patients who are ill. Though additional funding was allocated to LTC facilities from the US government in May 2020 and new testing requirements for staff and residents were put into place in August 2020, LTC staff and residents have continued to be significantly impacted by the virus. As of early November 2020, the impact of COVID-19 on US LTC facilities, residents, and staff has continued to grow to record highs. According to data from the Kaiser Family Foundation (dated November 6th, 2020), 26,515 LTC facilities had known cases of COVID-19. There have been a total of 728,750 cases with 100,033 deaths associated with LTC facilities, and LTC facility deaths account for 40% of total COVID-19 deaths nationally.

What do we know about the inflammatory syndrome impacting children with COVID-19?

The majority of young people infected have had relatively mild cases of COVID-19. However, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (U.S. CDC) recently identified the more severe multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) as a new syndrome associated with the virus that causes COVID-19. This inflammatory syndrome was first identified in April 2020 and is characterized by inflammation in different body parts, including the heart, lungs, kidneys, brain, skin, eyes, or gastrointestinal organs. While MIS-C is rare, it can be deadly. Symptoms in children include fever, abdominal (gut) pain, vomiting, diarrhea, neck pain, rash, bloodshot eyes, or fatigue. This is a newly identified condition that requires more research, but doctors have observed that symptoms can develop within four weeks of exposure to the novel coronavirus. The inflammation can be managed with medicines that can prevent damage to vital organs. MIS-C occurs in young people under 21, according to its case definition, although it is thought to mostly affect children between the ages of 2 to 15 and is not commonly reported in babies. The U.S. CDC recommends immediately contacting a doctor if your child exhibits any of the symptoms of the inflammatory syndrome. We still do not know why some children experience symptoms, while others do not, and it is unclear if children with particular health conditions are more likely to get MIS-C. At this point, the best prevention measures include taking all precautions to avoid contracting the novel coronavirus, including hand washing, social distancing, avoiding public gatherings, and wearing masks.

Why are there multiple COVID-19 vaccines?

Dozens of countries have now rolled out mass vaccination campaigns using a variety of vaccines. Knowing this, it makes sense to question why more than one or two or these vaccine formulas are necessary. The answer to this is as multi-faceted as populations are diverse, but in short, we will need multiple vaccines to stop the pandemic. No one pharmaceutical or biotechnology company would be able to produce enough product and distribute it to the entire global population fast enough to curb the pandemic. Producing more than one vaccine also means that manufacturing delays become less risky. With the world relying on multiple companies to produce the live-saving products, delivery delays of one vaccine can be offset by the production of other vaccines. For countries with electricity challenges, last mile health outposts, and a lack of roads, it is not always feasible to deliver Pfizer and Moderna's mRNA vaccines, because of the refrigerated temperatures they require for transport. Many countries will likely rely on another vaccine formulation that has a longer shelf life and has no refrigeration requirements. Cost is another reason for multiple vaccines. High resource-countries have pre-purchased millions of different vaccines directly from distributors in order to immunize their populations, which is not possible for some countries. Vaccine prices range from a couple of US dollars per dose to roughly $50, depending on the producer. Many countries do not have the financial resources to spend billions of dollars in addition to their annual health budgets to procure vaccines for their populations. As such, dozens of countries are reliant on programs like COVAX to help them obtain free or low-cost vaccines for their citizens. Lastly, vaccines need to protect diverse groups of people. Every person will respond differently to each vaccine and have a different immune response. So having a variety of vaccine types fill these needs is a more concrete strategy than relying on or or two vaccines alone. We still have many unanswered questions about how long immunity might last, who might have a more robust immune system response than others, or even how effective they might be in children.

Previous
Page
1
of
1
Next

Our mission

Health Desk provides on-demand and on-deadline science information to users seeking to quickly communicate complex topics to audiences.

In-house scientists provide custom explainers for critical science questions from journalists, fact-checkers and others in need of accessible breakdowns on scientific information. Topics range from reproductive health, infectious disease, climate science, vaccinology or other health areas.

Meedan's Health-Desk.org makes every effort to provide health- and science-related information that is accurate and reflects the best evidence available at the time of publication. To submit an error or correction request, please email our editorial team at health@meedan.com. All error or correction requests will be reviewed by the Health Desk Editorial and Science Teams. Where there is evidence of a factual error or typo, we will update the explainer with a correction or clarification and follow up with the reader on the status of the request.

Our scientists, writers, journalists, and experts do not engage in, advocate for, or publicize their personal views on policy issues that might lead a reasonable member of the public to see our team’s work as biased. If you have concerns or comments about potential bias in our work, please contact our editorial team at health@meedan.com.

Our mission

Health Desk provides on-demand and on-deadline science information to users seeking to quickly communicate complex topics to audiences.

In-house scientists provide custom explainers for critical science questions from journalists, fact-checkers and others in need of accessible breakdowns on scientific information. Topics range from reproductive health, infectious disease, climate science, vaccinology or other health areas.

Meedan's Health-Desk.org makes every effort to provide health- and science-related information that is accurate and reflects the best evidence available at the time of publication. To submit an error or correction request, please email our editorial team at health@meedan.com. All error or correction requests will be reviewed by the Health Desk Editorial and Science Teams. Where there is evidence of a factual error or typo, we will update the explainer with a correction or clarification and follow up with the reader on the status of the request.

Our scientists, writers, journalists, and experts do not engage in, advocate for, or publicize their personal views on policy issues that might lead a reasonable member of the public to see our team’s work as biased. If you have concerns or comments about potential bias in our work, please contact our editorial team at health@meedan.com.

Nat Gyenes

Nat Gyenes, MPH, leads Meedan’s Digital Health Lab, an initiative dedicated to addressing health information equity challenges, with a focus on the role that technology plays in mediating access to health through access to information. She received her masters in public health from the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, with a focus on equitable access to health information and human rights. As a research affiliate at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, she studies the ways in which health information sources and outputs can impact health outcomes. She lectures at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health on Health, Media and Human Rights. Before joining Meedan, Nat worked at the MIT Media Lab as a health misinformation researcher.

Megan Marrelli

Megan Marrelli is a Peabody award-winning journalist and the News Lead of Health Desk. She focuses on news innovation in today’s complex information environment. Megan has worked on the digital breaking news desk of the Globe and Mail, Canada’s national newspaper, and on the news production team of the Netflix series Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj. She was a Canadian Association of Journalists finalist for a team Chronicle Herald investigation into house fires in Halifax, Nova Scotia. On top of her role at Meedan Megan works with the investigative journalism incubator Type Investigations, where she is reporting a data-driven story on fatal patient safety failures in U.S. hospitals. She holds a Master of Science from the Columbia Journalism School and lives in New York.

Dr. Anshu Shroff

Anshu holds a Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and a Humanitarian Studies, Ethics, and Human Rights concentrator at the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative. She is a Harvard Voices in Leadership writing fellow and student moderator, Prajna Fellow, and the John C. and Katherine Vogelheim Hansen Fund for Africa Awardee. Anshu’s interests include: systemic issues of emergency management, crisis leadership, intersectoral approaches to climate risk resilience, inclusion and human rights, international development, access and sustainability of global health systems, and socio-economic equity. Anshu has worked at the United Nations, UNDP, UNICEF, Gates Foundation, and the Institute of Healthcare Improvement.

Dr. Christin Gilmer

Dr. Christin Gilmer is a Global Health Scientist with a background in infectious diseases, international health systems, and population health and technology. In the last 15 years, Christin has worked for the WHO, University of Oxford, World Health Partners, USAID, UNFPA, the FXB Center for Health & Human Rights and more, including volunteering for Special Olympics International’s health programs and running health- and technology-based nonprofits across the country. She obtained her Doctor of Public Health Degree at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, her MPH at Columbia, and spent time studying at M.I.T., Harvard Kennedy School, and Harvard Business School. Christin has worked in dozens of countries across five continents and loves running programs and research internationally, but she is currently based in Seattle.

Dr. Jessica Huang

Dr. Jessica Huang is currently a COVID-19 Response and Recovery Fellow with the Harvard Kennedy School’s Bloomberg City Leadership Initiative. Previously, she worked and taught with D-Lab at MIT, leading poverty reduction and humanitarian innovation projects with UNICEF, UNHCR, Oxfam, USAID, foreign government ministries and community-based organizations across dozens of countries. She also co-founded a social enterprise that has provided access to safe drinking water to thousands in India, Nepal and Bangladesh. Formerly trained as an environmental engineer, she earned a Doctorate of Public Health from Harvard and a Master’s in Learning, Design and Technology (LDT) from Stanford. Her projects have won multiple awards, including the top prize in A Grand Challenge for Development: Technology to Support Education in Crisis & Conflict Settings, and led to her being recognized for Learning 30 Under 30. She enjoys being an active volunteer, supporting several non-profits in health, education, environmental sustainability and social justice.

Jenna Sherman

Jenna Sherman, MPH, is a Program Manager for Meedan’s Digital Health Lab, an initiative focused on addressing the urgent challenges around health information equity. She has her MPH from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Social and Behavioral Sciences, with a concentration in Maternal and Child Health. Prior to her graduate studies, Jenna served as a Senior Project Coordinator at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School, where she worked on tech ethics with an emphasis on mitigating bias and discrimination in AI and health misinformation online. Previous experiences include helping to develop accessible drug pricing policies, researching access to quality information during epidemics, and studying the impact of maternal incarceration on infant health.

Nour Sharara

Nour is a Global Health Strategy consultant based in Dakar (Senegal) and specialized in health system strengthening. Most recently, she worked with Dalberg Advisors focusing on Epidemic Preparedness & Response and Vaccination Coverage and Equity across 15 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Her previous work experiences include researching the clinical needs in point-of-care technology in cancer care at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston; and coordinating the implementation of a colonoscopy quality assurance initiative for a colorectal cancer screening program at McGill University in Montreal. Nour has a Master of Public Health from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, a Master of Arts in Medical Ethics and Law from King’s College London, and a Bachelor of Science from McGill University. She is fluent in French and English.

Shalini Joshi

Shalini Joshi is a Program Lead at Meedan and formerly the Executive Editor and co-founder of Khabar Lahariya - India’s only independent, digital news network available to viewers in remote rural areas and small towns. Shalini transformed Khabar Lahariya from one edition of a printed newspaper to an award-winning digital news agency available to over ten million viewers. She has a sophisticated understanding of local media and gender, and the ways in which they can inhibit women from participating in the public sphere in South Asia. Shalini was a TruthBuzz Partner & Fellow with the International Center for Journalists (ICFJ). She is a trainer in journalism, verification and fact-checking. She has designed, implemented and strengthened news reporting & editorial policies and practices in newsrooms and fact-checking organisations. Shalini set up and managed the tipline used to collect WhatsApp-based rumors for Checkpoint, a research project to study misinformation at scale during the 2019 Indian general elections.

Mohit Nair

Mohit Nair currently serves as Partnerships Director at FairVote Washington, a non-profit organisation based in Seattle, WA. Previously, he worked with the Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) Vienna Evaluation Unit and with MSF Operational Centre Barcelona in India. He has conducted research studies on diverse topics, including the drivers of antibiotic resistance in West Bengal and perceptions of palliative care in Bihar. Mohit has also worked as a research consultant with Save the Children in Laos to identify gaps in the primary health system and develop a district-wide action plan for children with disabilities. He holds a Master of Public Health from the Harvard University T.H. Chan School of Public Health and a Bachelor of Science from Cornell University.

Dr. Seema Yasmin

Seema Yasmin is an Emmy Award-winning medical journalist, poet, physican and author. Yasmin served as an officer in the Epidemic Intelligence Service at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention where she investigated disease outbreaks. She trained in journalism at the University of Toronto and in medicine at the University of Cambridge. Yasmin was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in breaking news in 2017 with a team from The Dallas Morning News and received an Emmy Award for her reporting on neglected diseases. She received two grants from the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting and was selected as a John S. Knight Fellow in Journalism at Stanford University iin 2017 where she investigated the spread of health misinformation and disinformation during epidemics.

Dr. Saskia Popescu

Dr. Saskia Popescu is an infectious disease epidemiologist and infection preventionist with a focus on hospital biopreparedness and the role of infection prevention in health security efforts. She is an expert in healthcare biopreparedness and is nationally recognized for her work in infection prevention and enhancing hospital response to infectious diseases events. Currently, Dr. Popescu is an Adjunct Professor with the University of Arizona, and an Affiliate Faculty with George Mason University, while serving on the Coronavirus Task Force within the Federation of American Scientists, and on a data collection subcommittee for SARS-CoV-2 response with the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine. She holds a PhD in Biodefense from George Mason University, a Masters in Public Health with a focus on infectious diseases, and a Masters of Arts in International Security Studies, from the University of Arizona. Dr. Popescu is an Alumni Fellow of the Emerging Leaders in Biosecurity Initiative (ELBI) at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Health Security. She is also an external expert for the European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC), and a recipient of the Presidential Scholarship at George Mason University. In 2010, she was a recipient of the Frontier Interdisciplinary eXperience (FIX) HS-STEM Career Development Grant in Food Defense through the National Center for Food Protection and Defense. During her work as an infection preventionist, she managed Ebola response, a 300+ measles exposure resulting in an MMWR article, and bioterrorism preparedness in the hospital system. More recently, she created and disseminated a gap analysis for a 6-hospital system to establish vulnerabilities for high-consequence diseases, helping to guide the creation of a high-consequence disease initiative to enhance readiness at the healthcare level.

Ben Kertman

Ben Kertman is a behavior change scientist and public health specialist who became a user research consultant to help organizations design experiences that change behaviors and improve human well-being. Impatient with the tendency of behavior change companies to use a single discipline approach (e.g. behavioral economics) and guard their methods behind paywalls, Ben spent the last 7 years developing an open-source, multi-discipline, behavior change framework for researchers and designers to apply to UX. Ben is an in-house SME at Fidelity Investments and consults for non-profits on the side. Ben holds a masters in Social and Behavior Science and Public Health from Harvard.

Dr. Emily LaRose

Emily LaRose is a Registered Dietitian and Nutrition and Global Health Consultant who, in addition to her work with Meedan, currently works as a Technical Advisor for Nutrition for Operation Smile. She has been a dietitian for more than 18 years and, over the past 10 years, she has worked for the World Bank, Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN), Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), PATH, Johnson & Wales University, and Children’s Hospital Los Angeles. In her work, she has conducted analytical research and written specialty reports on infant and young child malnutrition, health misinformation, global human milk banking practices, and innovative food system programs; developed tools and protocols for clinical nutrition care delivery in humanitarian hospitals; taught university-level nutrition courses; and provided nutritional care for critically ill hospitalized patients. Emily earned her Doctor of Public Health (DrPH) degree with a Nutrition and Global Health Concentration at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, her Master of Science in Dietetics at Kansas State University, and her Bachelor of Science in Culinary Arts Nutrition at Johnson & Wales University.

Dr. Bhargav Krishna

Bhargav Krishna is a Fellow at the Centre for Policy Research in Delhi, and adjunct faculty at the Public Health Foundation of India and Azim Premji University. He previously managed the Centre for Environmental Health at the Public Health Foundation of India, leading research and teaching on environmental health at the Foundation. He has been a member of Government of India expert committees on air pollution and biomedical waste, and has led work with Union and State governments on air pollution, climate change, and health systems. His work has been funded by the World Health Organization, Rockefeller Foundation, Packard Foundation, Environmental Defense Fund, and others. He holds bachelors and masters degrees in Biotechnology and Environmental Science respectively, and graduated recently from the Doctor of Public Health program at the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health. Bhargav also co-founded Care for Air, a non-profit working on raising awareness related to air pollution with school children in Delhi.

Dr. Christine Mutaganzwa

Dr. Christine Mutaganzwa is a medical doctor pursuing a Ph.D. program at the Université de Montréal in Biomedical Sciences. She holds a Master of Medical Sciences in Global Health Delivery (MMSc-GHD) from Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, and a Master of Sciences (MSc) in Epidemiology and Biostatistics from the University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. She graduated from the University of Rwanda with a degree in General Medicine and Surgery. Christine has worked with referral hospitals in Kigali, the capital city of Rwanda, during her medical training and after graduation. In addition, she has extensive experience working with rural communities in the Eastern province of Rwanda, where she organized clinical and research activities in active collaboration with colleagues within and outside Rwanda. Her research portfolio cuts across maternal and child health to infectious and chronic diseases. Christine is an advocate for children's healthcare services, especially for underserved populations. She is part of a community of scientists translating scientific findings into understandable and accessible information for the general population. Christine is an avid reader and a lover of classical/contemporary music.

Dr. Ahmad Hegazi

Ahmad is an experienced physician, who earned his medical degree from Cairo University, Faculty of Medicine, in Egypt. He practiced medicine between 2012 and 2017 as a general practitioner where he was involved in primary care, health quarantine services, and radiology. He then taught medicine in Cairo for two years prior to starting his MPH program, at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, where he supplemented his experience with knowledge on epidemiology, health systems and global health issues. Additionally, Ahmad has an interest in nutrition, which started as a personal curiosity to how he can improve his own health, then quickly saw the potential for public health nutrition in the prevention and management of multiple, lifelong diseases. His enrollment at Harvard started his transition towards learning about food, and public health nutrition. Ahmad now combines the knowledge and experience of his medical career, with the learnings of his degree to navigate public health topics in his writing and his career. He is a life-long learner and continues to gather knowledge and experience, and works towards maximizing his impact through combatting misinformation through his work with Meedan.

Dr. Uzma Alam

Dr. Uzma Alam is a global health professional working at the intersection of infectious diseases and healthcare delivery in the international development and humanitarian contexts. She focuses on the use of evidence and innovation to inform strategies and policies. Her work has appeared globally across print and media outlets.She has international experience with roles of increasing responsibility across the science value chain having served with academic, non-profit, corporate, and governmental agencies, including advisory commissions and corporate counsel. Uzma is the former secretary of the Association of Women in Science and editor of the Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics. Currently she serves on the Board of the Geneva Foundation. She also leads the Biomedical and Health Sciences Portfolio of the Developing Excellence, Leadership and Training in Science in Africa program (DELTAS-Africa). A US$100 million programme supporting development of world-class scientific leaders on the continent. Plus heading the African Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) Priorities Programme. A programme that engages Africa’s science and political leaders to identify the top STI priorities for the continent that if addressed, offer the highest return on investment for Africa’s sustainable development.

Contact us

Visit the
Health Desk
website.