Public health experts in service of journalism.
Health Desk
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.
Rapid responses to health questions for fact-checkers and journalists.
Physicians and scientists are learning more about how COVID-19 impacts organs outside of the respiratory system, such as the brain. The emerging evidence has revealed that some COVID-19 patients experience neurological symptoms in the brain, spinal cord, nerves, and ganglia (cell bodies that relay nerve signals). In early March 2020, observational data from 58 patients in France indicated the presence of neurological symptoms such as agitation, confusion, disorientation, and encephalopathy (brain damage). In April 2020, a study was published on 214 COVID-19 patients in China with "severe infection," where over a third were reported to experience neurological symptoms, including acute cerebrovascular diseases and impaired consciousness. In July 2020, another study on over 40 British patients provided additional evidence about neurological symptoms, ranging from brain inflammation and delirium to nerve damage and stroke. Some of these patients reported severe symptoms, such as strokes and paralysis resulting from nerve damage, while others experienced more minor symptoms like breathlessness and fatigue. Most of the cases with brain inflammation were diagnosed with acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM), which is a rare illness involving inflammation of the brain and spinal cord that results from viral infections. Data from London indicated an increase in ADEM cases for this study period during the pandemic, as the number of reported cases would typically have been expected over a 5-month period rather than a 5-week period in the city. SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was not detected in the cerebrospinal brain fluid of any of the British patients tested, which may suggest that the virus did not directly attack the brain and that the symptoms could have occurred post-infection. Vanderbilt University Medical Center launched a study in July 2020 that will study delirium, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and depression in patients who have been hospitalized with COVID-19. These disabling impacts are also known as post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), and previous studies of intensive care patients similar to COVID-19 patients suggest that 33-50% experience dementia, 10-20% experience PTSD, and 33% experience major depression. Researchers are also studying whether COVID-19 patients with brain inflammation are at higher risk of autoimmune disorders like demyelination, where the protective coating of nerve cells is attacked by the immune system and may lead to weakness, numbness and difficulty with daily activities. With the increasing evidence of neurological symptoms, which have not been found to occur as commonly as respiratory symptoms, researchers and health care practitioners are continuing to observe patients around the world to learn more about how COVID-19 impacts on the brain. The long-term implications are still unclear, since COVID-19 is a new disease and there has not been enough time to observe the development of symptoms in patients over long periods of time.
Projection modeling is a mathematical way to use data to help predict a range of important COVID-19 outcomes, such as hospitalizations, infections and deaths. Modeling can also help determine how vaccinations or school closures, and the timing of these factors, may impact the disease outcomes. Modeling researchers use datasets, mathematical approaches, and other parameters to predict the spread and dynamic of infectious diseases. Models can to help predict the number of future virus cases and the peaks and curves that are part of the course of the outbreak. Modeling is a great tool to help support decision-making but models are not able to predict the future, and they can fluctuate based on interventions like the use of social distancing and wearing face masks, in the case of COVID-19. It is a helpful resource but should not be the sole source of information for guiding policy or interventions.
While there are historical uses for these herbal treatments, peer-reviewed studies to support the use of rhodiola, forsythia, or other tradtional Chinese medicines (TCM) for COVID-19 are limited. However, the limited evidence that does exist suggests that TCM used as a supplement with other treatments, such as antiviral medications and antibiotics is promising. One systematic review found that TCM could potentially help eliminate pathogens in the early stage of the virus; control inflammation and strengthens body resistance to the virus in the intermediary stage; and relieve depletion during the late stage of COVID‐19. However, more research is needed to confirm these results. Rhodiola is often used for stress, but has not been proven effective in treating COVID-19. Following the announcement from a Chinese official regarding approval of three herbal supplements for treatment, there was widespread concern regarding the lack of rigorous studies to support their use. More empirical research is needed to understand the role of TCM as a supplementary treatment for COVID-19. While there have now been a number of approvals of treatments for emergency use for COVID-19 approved in the U.S. and elsewhere, it is crucial to note that no COVID-19 treatment has been formally recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), and more research is needed on larger samples and long-term to understand the impacts of TCM and other potential COVID-19 treatments.
Maternal COVID-19 infection during pregnancy may be a risk factor for premature birth. In November 2020, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released outcomes data for infants born to birth givers who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 during pregnancy. The data was collected between March and October of 2020 and included a total of 3,912 infants. Incidence of prematurity in study participants was higher than average, which suggests that maternal COVID-19 infection acquired pregnancy (not in general) may be a risk factor for prematurity. This report found that 12.9% of infants born to individuals who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 during pregnancy were born prematurely (<37 weeks gestation), which is greater than the national estimate of 10.2%. In the U.S., COVID-19 has not impacted all communities equally; non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic communities have been unduly impacted by the virus. Racial and ethnic disparities also exist in overall health outcomes and impact maternal morbidity, mortality, and adverse birth outcomes. In this study, non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic women were disproportionately represented, and the authors note that further observation and analysis of outcomes by race and ethnicity is needed. Another study published in the Lancet in October 2020 found that the incidence of preterm births went down in the Netherlands after the implementation of COVID-19 pandemic mitigation policies. The authors suggest that some of the observed decrease in preterm births could be related to reductions in maternal exposure to air pollution and reductions in pregnant women seeking obstetric care that induces preterm birth. While the impact of COVID-19 on pregnancy outcomes remains under investigation, the CDC continues to encourage pregnant people to attend prenatal care appointments; practice handwashing, social distancing, and mask wearing (preferably a cloth mask over a surgical mask); and avoid crowds especially in indoor areas to prevent COVID-19 infection. They also suggest that providers counsel pregnant individuals on steps to prevent COVID-19 infection.
Getting infected with COVID-19 through the ear is not as likely as getting infected through the nose, mouth, and eyes. Experts believe this is because the surface of the outer ear canal is more like the skin on the rest of our bodies, which acts as a protective barrier that makes it more difficult for the SARS-CoV-2 virus, causing COVID-19, to enter. In contrast, the tissues lining the surface of the nose, mouth, and eyes are mucous membranes (or a thin lining of cells that secrete mucus), which are an easier way for SARS-CoV-2, the virus causing COVID-19, to enter. Like the nose, mouth, and eyes, ears are connected to the upper part of the throat and respiratory tract. Doctors and researchers are currently looking into the risks of COVID-19 transmission when patients have open ear injuries or are getting invasive ear procedures (ex. surgery), as both the patients and the healthcare providers should be adequately protected from exposure. For the average person, ears remain a less likely pathway for getting COVID-19. There are currently not specific recommendations for preventing transmission through ears. Preventative public health recommendations remain focused on face coverings over the nose and mouth, eye protection for people who may be at higher risk of exposure (ex. frontline workers), hand hygiene (ex. avoid touching the face, clean hands with soap and water or alcohol-based sanitizers), and physical distancing.
Testing provides several benefits during a pandemic, including early diagnosis, contact tracing, prevention, and surveillance. Viral testing identifies if an individual is currently infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. At the individual level, it allows infected individuals who were potentially experiencing symptoms to be diagnosed and access the care they need. At the community level, viral testing prevents further infections since an infected individual can take all necessary precautions to not infect other people. It also allows public health experts to identify new cases and track the spread of the virus through contact tracing by following the chain of transmission. Viral testing is commonly used to test people who have symptoms of COVID-19 as well as caregivers, essential workers, travelers, and others who may not show active symptoms. Serology tests - also called antibody tests - are useful to find out if an individual has been previously infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. These kinds of tests look for antibodies in the blood, which determine if there was a previous infection. It allows public health experts to find out how many COVID-19 infections have occurred in the past, and to track what percentage of the population has been infected over time, which has important implications for surveillance. At a policy level, serology testing can guide social distancing or quarantine guidelines. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control use a serology surveillance strategy to better understand the spread of the virus by testing in different locations, at different points of time, and within different populations (ex. across age, ethnic and socioeconomic groups) in the United States. However, it's important to note that the evidence surrounding serology testing and its link to immunity (protection) is still evolving. We do not understand fully if prior infection is evidence of immunity, know how long antibodies can protect the body, or whether patients can get infected again after a previous infection.
Historically, there are four main types of vaccines: - Live-attenuated vaccines - Inactivated vaccines - Subunit, recombinant, polysaccharide, and conjugate vaccines - Toxoid vaccines Vaccine designs are based on how our immune systems respond to germs, who in the population (children, adults) needs to be vaccinated against the germ, and the best approach and technology available to create the vaccine. This is why there are different vaccine types to respond to different germs. Live-attenuated vaccines use a weaker - also called 'attenuated' - form of a living germ, which would normally cause a disease in stronger forms but is almost completely harmless in a vaccine because the virus has been weakened. Some of these live-attenuated vaccines are used to protect against diseases like measles, mumps, rubella; rotavirus; smallpox; chicken pox; and yellow fever. Inactivated vaccines use the killed or inactive version of the germ, so they are not as capable at helping humans develop some immunity to a germ** **as live-attenuated vaccines and can't provide immunity for as long. These vaccines protect against diseases like hepatitis A, influenza, polio, and rabies. Subunit, recombinant, polysaccharide, and conjugate vaccines use particular pieces of the germ, like its protein or sugars, to create a strong immunity to specific parts of the germ. Some illnesses these vaccines focus on are hepatitis B, HPV, whooping cough, shingles, and meningococcal disease. Toxoid vaccines use a harmful product called a 'toxin' that is made by the germ. A toxin is a living organism that can normally cause harm to parts of the body like tissues when they come into contact with them. However, toxins in vaccines are harmless because they have been very weakened in laboratories as their only job is to teach the immune system how to fight the germ. They create immunity by focusing on the specific parts of the germ that cause illness instead of the entire germ. These vaccines target illnesses like diptheria and tetanus. Researchers trying to develop COVID-19 vaccines are using many of these types of approaches to vaccine design. Two new types of vaccines are gaining attention in the scientific world. One of these vaccine types use the genes of the COVID-19 vaccine called 'DNA' and 'RNA' to create a strong immune system response. The other new type of approach to vaccine development uses a platform base called 'recombinant vector vaccines' which act like how infections would impact your body normally. As we learn more about the virus and how to create immunity in people through vaccines, we will learn if any of these vaccine types can successfully prevent COVID-19 infection in people.
According to the Mayo Clinic in the U.S., children of all ages can catch the virus that causes COVID-19, but they do not become physically sick as often as adults. They are also less susceptible to experiencing severe side effects from the virus in comparison to older adults. However, some children do develop complications from COVID-19, such as multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C), which 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 and remains poorly understood based on current research. Some evidence suggests that children may be less likely to contract the novel coronavirus, but it is still unclear whether this effect is due to limited interactions between children and hence fewer opportunities for transmission, or whether they are truly less susceptible to contracting the virus. The World Health Organization (WHO) does not see a clear trend in the data yet, but large scale serological studies (studies that look at antibody presence in the blood) are currently underway and are likely to provide more clarity. Previous studies from Wuhan, China indicated that the virus was milder in children and transmission was fairly limited: a study of more than 72,000 cases by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention indicated that children under the age of 10 represented less than 1% of all cases. However, studies are ongoing to assess the level of susceptibility among children, and the evidence is still evolving.
Research suggests that diagnostic testing is more accurate a few days after symptoms start, or around a week after exposure to a person who is infected with COVID-19. Testing more than once can confirm negative results, when appropriate, and when tests are available. During the wait for test results, it is essential for people who suspect they have COVID-19 or have been exposed to COVID-19, to take precautions and self-isolate when possible. It is also important to consider what type of test is being used to check for a COVID-19 infection, as this will likely impact how accurate the test is and how long it will take to get results. Molecular tests are among the most accurate diagnostic tests currently available for detecting whether someone has an active COVID-19 infection. Molecular tests use methods such as RT-PCR (reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction) to detect genetic material from SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in respiratory samples such as nose and throat swabs. Molecular tests have a higher risk of false negatives in the earliest days after exposure and symptom onset, according to an August 2020 publication in the Annals of Internal Medicine by researchers at John Hopkins University who reviewed 7 published studies on the performance of RT-PCR molecular tests. The researchers found that on average, the false negative rate was lowest around day 8 of an infection or 3 days after symptom onset (symptom onset is typically several days after an infection starts), with the false negative rate rising again as the infection continues. False negative test results in the early stages of infection are concerning, because other research (including studies published in Nature and the American Journal of Pathology) have found that COVID-19 patients can be most infectious to others in the early days of infection, when test results may be more likely to come back as false negatives. Some testing policies recommend that people get tested twice to confirm a negative result. Repeat testing to confirm negative results can be particularly important for people who may interact with high-risk populations (ex. healthcare workers, caretakers), people who may interact with many others outside of their household (ex. an employee going back to the office, a student returning to in-person classes), and people who may need medical care for COVID-19 (e.g. elderly patients with underlying conditions). Molecular tests are a relatively accurate type of diagnostic testing, and they have a lower chance of false negatives when conducted a few days after symptoms start, or approximately a week after exposure. A lower chance of false negatives does not mean there is no chance of inaccurate test results, so repeat testing may be recommended to confirm test results in certain situations. With all the ongoing research and development work on COVID-19 tests, pandemic testing guidelines may continue to evolve.
The majority of cancer survivors, who have been cancer-free for at least five years, are likely to have normal immune system functions and are not at an increased risk for COVID-19. However, every body is different so every cancer survivor should speak with a doctor who knows their full medical history and can discuss their personal risks with them. For some cancer survivors, their previous treatments might impact their risk of getting COVID-19 or having a severe form of the disease, as these treatments can have long term effects on the immune system and cause the survivor to have preexisting conditions that may put them at a higher risk for viral infection. For example, patients who have undergone a bone marrow transplant (also known as a 'stem cell transplant') might not regain a completely functional immune system as the transplant depletes their white blood cell system (which the body then replaces). Some patients who have undergone bone marrow transplants are no longer immune to illnesses they had become immune to before the procedure. These patients can be at risk for a number of infections, including COVID-19, but the longer it has been since treatment, the more time your body's immune system has had to improve. Despite not having a higher risk of becoming infected with the virus than the general population, it should be noted that cancer survivors do have a higher risk of complications if they become infected with COVID-19. This group is also more likely to be hospitalized if they are infected, compared to people who have never had cancer before. To protect themselves from the virus, just like the general population, cancer survivors should use protective measures like wearing cloth masks over surgical masks, maintaining at least six feet of distance, staying home when they can, and washing hands thoroughly and often.
Obesity is a key risk factor for severe cases and death from COVID-19. Hospitalization, intensive care needs and death from COVID-19 is more common among obese individuals. However, as per the recent pre-print of a study that looked at the association between obesity and SARS-CoV-2 infection rates, COVID-19 symptoms, and change in immune response among non-severe cases, obesity, was not linked with increased risks of getting infected with SARS-COV-2. Obese individuals showed more pronounced symptoms, including fever as compared to non-obese people. In the non-severe cases studied, the immune response of obese individuals to the infection was not significantly different from the immune response of non-obese individuals.
As of now, there is no consensus about whether or not tears can accurately detect the virus in an infected person, but early study results have shown a lower amount of the virus in tears than in other bodily fluids. Some researchers believe parts of the virus might be able to spread from a person's nasal cavity into their eyes, and eventually into tears in the inner corner of the eyes. Whether or not this type of testing will work is still uncertain as scientists have been testing many bodily fluids like semen, saliva, urine, and tears to determine whether or not the virus can be detected in them and if it can, how much. Humans produce tears in the back of their eye sockets, which is close to the nasal cavity where most COVID-19 tests are being done now. The nasal cavity is located at the back of the nose and is where the COVID-19 virus starts reproducing in people exposed to the virus. Nasal swab tests are designed to collect samples from the nasal cavity that have some genetic material of the virus (DNA and RNA). Tear tests for COVID-19 would try to focus on this similar area of the head as there is a small, thin layer of tissue called the 'conjuctiva' that acts as a bridge between the nasal cavity and the eye socket.
The Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is a different standard than FDA Approval. FDA Approval from the US Food and Drug Agency is an independent, scientifically reviewed approval for medical products, drugs and vaccines. Based on substantial clinical data and evidence, the product is deemed safe, effective and able to be produced within federal quality standards. The process for an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is different than an FDA approval. EUA is a mechanism used by the FDA to facilitate making products available quickly during a public health emergencies (like the current COVID-19 pandemic), when there is no other adequate and approved medical product available. Emergency Use Authorization allows for the use of medical products that are not yet formally approved, so that in the midst of an emergency, the products can be used to diagnose, treat or prevent serious illness or conditions. In order to give the authorization, FDA evaluates the potential risks and benefits of the products based on the scientific evidence that is available at that time. EUAs end when the emergency declaration ends. They can also be revised or revoked as more data is made available.
COVID-19 vaccines are being developed to prevent people from getting the disease, not to treat or cure patients who already have the disease. Many experts continue to caution that a vaccine may not be widely available until 2021, which would already be record-breaking timing for vaccine development, manufacturing and distribution. In the summer of 2020, Russia's Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University announced human clinical trials of a COVID-19 vaccine, with 18 people vaccinated on June 18 and 20 people vaccinated on June 23. Russia's initial announcements of their human clinical trials were accompanied by projections that the vaccine could be distributed in August and mass produced by private corporations in September 2020. Health experts responded with cautions about how there are many challenges in scaling up from a vaccine that has been tested on just a few dozen people in one country to a commercially available vaccine that is available and suitable for millions of diverse people around the world. In August 2020, President Vladimir V. Putin announced that Russia approved its first COVID-19 vaccine, although global health authorities warned that the vaccine has not yet completed important late-stage clinical trials with larger numbers of people to determine the vaccine's safety and effectiveness. The first approved Russian vaccine, called Gam-COVID-Vac Lyo, was registered by the Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology at the Health Ministry of the Russian Federation for a combined phase 1 and 2 trial. Public health experts have been concerned that skipping phase 3 clinical trials and rushing vaccine approval can potentially endanger people. Russia's first approved vaccine is now being offered outside of trials in small quantities to people at higher risk of infection, such as healthcare workers. In September 2020, the head of Rospotrebnadzor, a Russian agency regulating health care, announced that Russian researchers have completed early clinical trials of a second vaccine, which uses proteins that mimic those in the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. This differs from the first approved vaccine in Russia, which uses common cold viruses. Beyond the Russian vaccine trials, there are several human clinical trials for COVID-19 vaccine candidates happening around the world, with some trials involving hundreds or thousands of people over observation periods of many months. Rigorous clinical trials are important to understand whether vaccine candidates are safe and without major negative side effects, as well as whether vaccine candidates are effective and can actually provide immunity for long periods of time.
Wearing only a face shield to prevent COVID-19 infection or spread is not recommended. Face shields alone have not been shown to protect the person wearing the shield from spreading or being infected with the virus. COVID-19 can spread through the air in small droplets. The droplets can go around face shields at the sides or bottom and enter the nose, mouth, or eyes. Clear face shields, goggles, or other eye coverings may be used together with a face mask for protection.
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.
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, 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 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.
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 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 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, 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 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 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 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.
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 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 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.
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.
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 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.
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 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.
