UAE to participate in International Convention against Doping in Sport in Paris
23 Apr 2025 14:16
ABU DHABI (WAM)The United Arab Emirates will take part in the 10th session of the Conference of Parties to the International Convention against Doping in Sport, scheduled to be held in Paris from October 20 to 22.The UAE will be represented by Dr. Reema Al Hosani, consultant sports medicine and international coordinator of the global research team studying the impact of herbal substances on doping.Al Hosani leads an international team of around 40 experts from various countries under an initiative supported by UNESCO's Fund for the Elimination of Doping in Sport.The initiative aims to explore how traditional herbs affect integrity and values in sports in relation to doping, as part of a plan running from June 2024 to May 2025.Al Hosani said the initiative was launched in response to a growing trend of athletes turning to traditional medicine during the COVID-19 pandemic. She noted that the Executive Committee of the Conference of Parties adopted the proposal, with the Arab group under her leadership selected to head the global team.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Filipino Times
9 hours ago
- Filipino Times
WHO says mpox outbreak still a global health emergency
The World Health Organization (WHO) has confirmed that the mpox outbreak remains a public health emergency of international concern. This is the organization's highest level of alert used for major global health risks. According to a WAM report, WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus made the announcement after reviewing recent data and recommendations from the fourth meeting of its emergency committee. Mpox, which spread from the Democratic Republic of the Congo to nearby countries, continues to cause rising cases worldwide. The emergency status was first declared in August 2024 due to the rapid spread of a new form of mpox. While some countries have made progress in controlling the virus, the overall global situation remains serious. Experts warn that cases may still go undetected in countries outside of Africa. There is also concern about the virus increasing again in parts of West Africa. According to the WHO, challenges like poor disease tracking, limited access to testing, and lack of funds are making it hard for health workers to contain the outbreak. These problems highlight the need for more international help and resources. The health body has issued updated temporary recommendations to guide countries in strengthening their response efforts, especially in hard-to-reach areas.
Al Etihad
10 hours ago
- Al Etihad
AFC men's club competitions' 2025/26 line-ups revealed
10 June 2025 12:23 KUALA LUMPUR (WAM) The Asian Football Confederation (AFC) on Tuesday confirmed the list of participating clubs for the 2025/26 campaigns of its three men's line-ups for the upcoming seasons of the AFC Champions League Elite™ (ACL Elite), AFC Champions League Two™ (ACL Two) and AFC Challenge League™ (ACGL) were determined by the finalised AFC Club Competitions 2025/26 slot allocations and list of licenced of each competition's Preliminary Stage, a total of 85 teams across 37 Member Associations (MAs) will be involved in Continental action, underlining the confederation's determination to stage top-class competitions to elevate the level of Asian Preliminary Stage will be played from August 12-13, 2025. The draws for the ACL Elite League Stage and ACL Two Group Stage will be held on August 15, with the ACGL Group Stage draw to be conducted on August elite men's club tournament will feature 13 teams across six MAs, each from the West and East regions. Each region has 11 clubs entering the League Stage, scheduled for kick-off on September 15, and two indirect slots for entry into the Preliminary ACL Two features the largest cast across the AFC's club competitions and the 2025/26 edition will see 29 sides—14 from the West region and 15 from the East (including the clubs eliminated from the ACL Elite Preliminary Stage of each region)—granted entry to the Group Stage, with six more teams to occupy the indirect slots and do battle in the Preliminary winner of each Preliminary Stage tie will progress to the Group Stage, which comprises 16 teams in each region and starts on September 16; the three losing sides will enter the ACGL 2025/26 Group Stage.A 26-strong cast is slated to contest the ACGL 2025/26, which will see five entries from the West region and three from the East in the Group Stage that begins on October 25. A further 10 indirect entries will be involved in the Preliminary Stage (West), with eight clubs doing likewise in the East; match details will be finalised once all club entries are confirmed.
Gulf Today
a day ago
- Gulf Today
Study finds lifting school mask fueled COVID deaths
Michael Hiltzik, Tribune News Service Someday we Americans may stop quarreling over our response to the COVID-19 pandemic — lockdown orders, social distancing and so forth — but one category of debate may never become immune to second-guessing. That's the impact of anti-pandemic measures on schools and schoolchildren. According to popular opinion, these were almost entirely mistaken or ineffective. A newly published study from data scientists at Michigan State University knocks one pillar out from under this claim. It finds that the abrupt removal in 2022 of mandates that children wear masks in school contributed to an estimated 21,800 COVID deaths that year — a shocking 9% of the total COVID deaths in the US that year. 'We were surprised by that too,' says Scott A. Imberman, a professor of economics and education policy at Michigan State and a co-author of the paper. On reflection, he says, given the mixing of children and staff in the close quarters of a classroom, 'it's pretty easy to see how COVID could propagate to the wider community.' In February 2022, about 50% of public school children, or more than 20 million pupils, were in districts with mask mandates; then, over a period of six weeks, almost all those districts rescinded their mandates. "You can see how that would create a pretty substantial surge in infections." Most of the surge, Imberman told me, was a "spillover effect" in the communities outside the schools themselves. The Michigan State finding undermines several myths and misrepresentations about COVID spread by the right wing. These include the claim that children are virtually impervious to COVID, which has been refuted by the injury and death toll among children. A related misrepresentation was that children can't pass on the infection to adults. In fact, because many children didn't show symptoms of the infection or had only mild, flu-like symptoms, they functioned almost like an undetected fifth column in spreading the virus to adults. Among those who vociferously promoted these myths is Jay Bhattacharya, the former Stanford medical professor who is now director of the National Institutes of Health, a subagency of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s Department of Health and Human Services. In a July 2022 op-ed originally published in the Orange County Register, for example, Bhattacharya and a co-author asserted that 'COVID-19 is less of a threat to children than accidents or the common flu'; that's debatable, and irrelevant, since those are themselves major threats to child health. The article advocated discontinuing mask-wearing for all children, regardless of their vaccination status. But it was self-refuting, since it also acknowledged that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that mask mandates in school had produced 'a roughly 20% reduction in COVID-19 incidence.' The authors also acknowledged that masking in schools could help to shield adults from COVID. But they asked, 'Since when is it ethical to burden children for the benefit of adults?' That was the wrong question. Reducing COVID infections for children was certainly not a "burden" on them, but a sound public health goal. How heavy was that "burden," anyway? Bhattacharya and his co-author posited that "masking is a psychological stressor for children and disrupts learning," and "it is likely that masking exacerbates the chances that a child will experience anxiety and depression." This sounds like guesswork derived from pop psychology, since the authors didn't point to any actual research to validate their conclusions about masking. Nevertheless, they argued that the drawbacks of masking exceeded the benefits. Yet the Michigan State estimate that the removal of mask mandates in the schools contributed to 21,800 deaths in 2022 alone turns the balance of costs and benefits on its head. I asked Health and Human Services for Bhattacharya's response to the study but received no reply. Much of the mythmaking about our pandemic response — indeed, the global pandemic response — is rooted in the absurd conviction that everything we now know about COVID was self-evident from the outset. But COVID was a novel human pathogen. As I wrote in 2022, there was little consensus about how it spread, at what stage of sickness it was most contagious, or who was most susceptible. As a result, most anti-pandemic policies in 2020-22 arose from an excess of caution. Mitigation measures were uncertain, but it did make sense to limit gatherings in small spaces, i.e., classrooms. Many such steps turned out to be effective, including social distancing and, yes, mask-wearing. The subsequent hand-wringing over school closings, accordingly, has the unmistakable smell of hindsight. Not 20/20 hindsight, mind you, but hindsight clouded by ideology, partisan politics and persistent ignorance. For example, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican champion of letting COVID-19 freely rip through his population, crowed that the results "prove that we made the right decision" to keep schools open. Is that so? When Florida reopened its schools in August 2021 and banned remote teaching, child COVID deaths in the state more than doubled. One month into the reopenings, the heightened spread of COVID prompted districts across the state to shut down schools again and impose quarantines affecting thousands of pupils. This is how manifestly deadly decisions get redefined as "the right decision" in the partisan narrative. The Michigan State team documented the speed at which school mask mandates were dropped. The timeline begins in July 2021, when the CDC recommended universal masking in schools to enable a return to in-person instruction rather than fully remote or hybrid classes. The CDC's guidelines, the Michigan State study says, applied to all students whether they were vaccinated or not and all school districts, whatever the levels of COVID infection and transmission within their community. In the fall of 2021, about 65% of all students were subject to a state or local mask mandate. The mask mandates were highly controversial: "Many schools encountered pushback from politicians, parents, and community members" who questioned the efficacy of masking, the study relates. The districts that rejected the mandates tended to be "less urban, less diverse, and more likely to have voted for Trump in the 2020 election." On Feb. 25, 2022, the CDC eliminated its recommendation for universal school masking. Its rationale was that the exceptionally contagious Omicron variant of COVID had passed its peak and thus immunity had increased. But many districts had removed their mandates starting several weeks before the CDC revised its guidance, suggesting that the CDC was following, rather than leading, state and local preferences. The removal of mask mandates ran counter to scientific evidence that masks did indeed reduce the spread of COVID. Indeed, a study from Boston and Chelsea, Mass., found that the removal of mask mandates resulted in an increase of 45 COVID cases per 1,000 students and school staff — nearly 12,000 new cases — over the following four months. But in this particular, as in others related to pandemic policies, politics and ideology trumped the hard evidence, warping the public health response. Bhattacharya's record as an authority on pandemic measures is not encouraging. He was one of the original three authors of the "Great Barrington Declaration," a manifesto for herd immunity published in October 2020. The core of the declaration was opposition to lockdowns. Its solution was what its drafters called "focused protection" — allowing "those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk," chiefly seniors. Focused protection, the drafters wrote, would allow society to achieve herd immunity and return to normality in three to six months.
