Letters: Coroner's report into homeless man's death must be followed by action
One such article tells the story of Raphaël André, the Innu man who froze to death overnight next to a closed homeless shelter and the subsequent coroner's inquest.
The recent 75-page report by coroner Stéphanie Gamache, which analyzes the circumstances surrounding the death and offers recommendations to prevent future homeless tragedies, must be implemented.
Gamache paraphrased the powerful message by the victim's mother by telling the inquiry that on Jan. 16, 2021 — in a city with more than a million doors — all were closed that night.
Let us always have doors that are accessible to those in need.
Meanwhile, as Gamache noted, a warming tent placed in Cabot Square in André's honour has been used by over 108,000 people in the 14 months it was open.
Shloime Perel, Côte-St-Luc
Medical specialists deserve gratitude
An expression of profound gratitude is extended to Dr. Vincent Oliva, whose voice on behalf of Quebec's medical specialists — in a full-page ad in the May 20 Gazette — has vowed to continue to care for Quebecers despite the policies of the CAQ government that have created 'untenable conditions' for the venerable profession.
It is reassuring to know that our doctors will respect their Hippocratic Oath.
Vivianne M. Silver, Côte-St-Luc
A few proposals by special delivery
With the rise of email, text messages and social media, home mail delivery is not as essential as it was 30 years ago.
However, completely eliminating it would create challenges, especially for seniors and people with special needs.
Reducing home delivery to two days per week, instead of five, could reduce costs while still allowing mail carriers to make their rounds and potentially notice overflowing mailboxes of seniors, suggesting a welfare check by authorities is needed.
For people who still prefer home delivery over a P.O. box or a community mailbox, it could be offered for a monthly fee of, say, $20 per home address, but free for seniors and people with special needs.
Ragnar Radtke, Beaconsfield
Blame belongs with aggressor
Re: ' Trump says Russia-Ukraine ceasefire talks will begin 'immediately'' (NP Montreal, May 20)
It is morally reprehensible and factually inaccurate when Donald Trump and his administration appear to assign equal culpability to both sides of the Kremlin-orchestrated war against Ukraine.
Threatening to 'walk away' and let them thrash it out fails to take into account that one side is the powerful aggressor and the other the greatly outnumbered victim.
Painting Volodymyr Zelenskyy as 'difficult,' as Trump has done in public comments, suggests the U.S. president now expects Ukraine's capitulation to achieve his dream of being a 'peacemaker.'
Natalie Turko-Slack, Pierrefonds
Submitting a letter to the editor
Letters should be sent by email to letters@montrealgazette.com
We prioritize letters that respond to, or are inspired by, articles published by The Gazette.
If you are responding to a specific article, let us know which one.
Letters should be sent uniquely to us. The shorter they are — ideally, fewer than 200 words — the greater the chance of publication.
Timing, clarity, factual accuracy and tone are all important, as is whether the writer has something new to add to the conversation.
We reserve the right to edit and condense all letters. Care is taken to preserve the core of the writer's argument.
Our policy is not to publish anonymous letters, those with pseudonyms or 'open letters' addressed to third parties.
Letters are published with the author's full name and city or neighbourhood/borough of residence. Include a phone number and address to help verify identity; these will not be published.
We will not indicate to you whether your letter will be published. If it has not been published within 10 days or so, it is not likely to be.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
4 days ago
Breaking down how a massive U.S. funding cut could impact future mRNA vaccines
The Trump administration says it is pulling half a billion dollars from U.S. government-funded research projects to create new mRNA vaccines. In a statement this week, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime vaccine critic, announced a co-ordinated wind-down amounting to the cancellation of $500 million worth (new window) of mRNA vaccine development under the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA). The technology itself was hailed as recently as the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2023, the Nobel Prize in (new window) Physiology or Medicine (new window) was awarded to two scientists whose mRNA discoveries made it possible to create COVID-19 vaccinations. The committee credited mRNA technology with helping to save millions of lives, prevent severe COVID-19, reduce disease burden and enable societies worldwide to reopen. The loss of research funding has dismayed infectious disease experts who note that mRNA technology allows faster production of shots than older vaccine-production methods, buying precious time if another pandemic virus were to emerge. Here's how medical experts in Canada and the U.S. are reacting to the funding cut and what they say it could mean. WATCH | The U.S. is ending mRNA vaccine funding: What is mRNA vaccine technology and why is it exciting? Vaccines train our immune system to respond to pathogens. Traditionally, vaccines have used inactive or weakened versions of a pathogen that isn't enough to make a person ill, but does kickstart the body's immune response. Messenger RNA (mRNA), discovered in 1961, is a natural molecule that serves as a recipe for the production of proteins in the body. In mRNA vaccines, the approach starts with a snippet of genetic code that carries instructions for making proteins. Scientists pick the protein to target, inject that blueprint into the body's cells, which then make just enough of the proteins to trigger an immune response — essentially producing its own vaccine dose. Scientists are mainly excited about the speed with which mRNA vaccines can get protection into arms. Enlarge image (new window) Dr. Drew Weissman and Katalin Karikó, PhD, struck up a working relationship when they met at the University of Pennsylvania in the 1990s. Together, he, an immunologist, and she, a biochemist, together won the 2023 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine for the development of mRNA technology in Pfizer's and Moderna's COVID-19 vaccines. Photo: Peggy Peterson Photography/Penn Medicine/University of Pennsylvania Michael Osterholm, an expert on pandemic preparation with the University of Minnesota, says using older vaccine technology to target a pandemic flu strain would take 18 months to make enough doses to vaccinate only about one-fourth of the world. He says using mRNA technology to make a flu vaccine could change that timeline dramatically. By the end of the first year, we could vaccinate the world. Besides the advantage of how quickly mRNA vaccines can be made, Dr. Allison McGeer, an infectious diseases specialist in Toronto, says they're also easier to standardize. "It has a whole lot of other flexibilities that if you know it works, makes it a really exciting addition" to older technologies used to make vaccines. LISTEN | How mRNA vaccines went from medical miracle to political football (new window) What mRNA vaccine research is going on now? Beyond COVID vaccines, mRNA vaccine technology is in a Health Canada approved vaccine for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). An mRNA vaccine for influenza has also reached Phase 3 clinical trial, the last step before manufacturers submit to regulators to release a vaccine to market. There have also been more than 100 clinical trials (new window) to assess the potential of mRNA vaccine technology to treat various cancers including lung, breast, prostate, melanoma and, more recently, pancreatic cancer (new window) . Dr. Peter Hotez, a professor of pediatrics and molecular virology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, says there's concern that cancelling funding for mRNA vaccine research will have negative consequences for research on other diseases. The mRNA technology is looking really exciting for next-generation cancer immunotherapeutics, said Hotez, who also works at Texas Children's Hospital Center for Vaccine Development. So will this throw cold water on a whole big effort that we're pursuing as well to develop next-generation cancer vaccine? That's an unknown question. Other research teams are testing potential mRNA-based vaccines to fight HIV (new window) and to treat autoimmune diseases (new window) . These are in early stage clinical trials or animal-stage studies. Enlarge image (new window) The technology used in mRNA vaccines, like the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine seen being produced at the Allergopharma plant in Germany in April 2021, means they can be adapted to different diseases or variants. Infectious disease experts say this technology allows faster production of shots. Photo: AFP/Getty Images / Christian Charisius Could other countries pick up the slack? Though there are other countries working on mRNA vaccine technology, Hotez called the U.S. the single largest vaccine market. He says the announcement that funding was being cut could dissuade pharmaceutical companies from pursuing the vaccine technology if they believe it won't sell there. He says it's unclear whether other industrialized countries could pool their support to make up the $500 million US cut. Are there safety issues with mRNA vaccines as RFK Jr. suggested? In a video (new window) on the social media platform X, Kennedy claimed that mRNA vaccines were unsafe and ineffective. He said that after reviewing the science and consulting top U.S. experts, the department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has determined that mRNA technology poses more risk than benefits against these respiratory viruses. In the video, Kennedy also claimed that mRNA vaccines paradoxically encourage new mutations and can actually prolong pandemics as the virus constantly mutates to escape the protective effects of the vaccine. Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan, says Kennedy is wrong about what prolongs pandemics. WATCH | What RFK Jr. gets wrong on mRNA vaccines: Viruses mutate when they replicate, and they replicate when they spread through a population of people, Rasmussen said. The best way to prevent a virus from spreading through a population of people is to make sure those people are protected against the virus by vaccination. In a news release (new window) on Tuesday, Kennedy also referred to COVID and flu as upper respiratory infections, which Hotez notes is incorrect. Unlike the common cold, he says, COVID-19 and influenza are lower respiratory tract infections with significant cardiovascular and other health effects. That's part of the disinformation machine … to downplay the severity of these illnesses, said Hotez. Will lack of funding hurt access to existing flu vaccines? Rasmussen says influenza vaccines won't be affected in the U.S. as they're manufactured using the inactivated virus method, not mRNA. In the video posted to social media, Kennedy said the U.S. supports safe, effective vaccines for every American who wants them. But many infectious disease experts have noted that mRNA vaccines themselves are also safe and effective. The mRNA technology has been proven to be highly effective, Hotez said. By some estimates, 3.2 million American lives were saved by COVID mRNA vaccines during the pandemic. Amina Zafar (new window) · CBC News · Journalist Amina Zafar covers medical sciences and health care for CBC. She contributes to CBC Health's Second Opinion, which won silver for best editorial newsletter at the 2024 Digital Publishing Awards. She holds an undergraduate degree in environmental science and a master's in journalism. With files from CBC's Anand Ram and The Associated Press
Winnipeg Free Press
5 days ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Harvard scientists say research could be set back years after funding freeze
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) — Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio's research is literally frozen. Collected from millions of U.S. soldiers over two decades using millions of dollars from taxpayers, the epidemiology and nutrition scientist has blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers within the university's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The samples are key to his award-winning research, which seeks a cure to multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. But for months, Ascherio has been unable to work with the samples because he lost $7 million in federal research funding, a casualty of Harvard's fight with the Trump administration. 'It's like we have been creating a state-of-the-art telescope to explore the universe, and now we don't have money to launch it,' said Ascherio. 'We built everything and now we are ready to use it to make a new discovery that could impact millions of people in the world and then, 'Poof. You're being cut off.'' Researchers laid off and science shelved The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding at Harvard has meant that some of the world's most prominent researchers are laying off young researchers. They are shelving years or even decades of research, into everything from opioid addiction to cancer. And despite Harvard's lawsuits against the administration, and settlement talks between the warring parties, researchers are confronting the fact that some of their work may never resume. The funding cuts are part of a monthslong battle that the Trump administration has waged against some the country's top universities including Columbia, Brown and Northwestern. The administration has taken a particularly aggressive stance against Harvard, freezing funding after the country's oldest university rejected a series of government demands issued by a federal antisemitism task force. The government had demanded sweeping changes at Harvard related to campus protests, academics and admissions — meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Research jeopardized, even if court case prevails Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, accusing the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university. In the lawsuit, it laid out reforms it had taken to address antisemitism but also vowed not to 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' 'Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus,' the university said in its legal complaint. 'But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the demands were sent in April. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel federal contracts for policy reasons. The funding cuts have left Harvard's research community in a state of shock, feeling as if they are being unfairly targeted in a fight has nothing to do with them. Some have been forced to shutter labs or scramble to find non-government funding to replace lost money. In May, Harvard announced that it would put up at least $250 million of its own money to continue research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' ahead. Ascherio said the university was able to pull together funding to pay his researchers' salaries until next June. But he's still been left without resources needed to fund critical research tasks, like lab work. Even a year's delay can put his research back five years, he said. Knowledge lost in funding freeze 'It's really devastating,' agreed Rita Hamad, the director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, who had three multiyear grants totaling $10 million canceled by the Trump administration. The grants funded research into the impact of school segregation on heart health, how pandemic-era policies in over 250 counties affected mental health, and the role of neighborhood factors in dementia. At the School of Public Health, where Hamad is based, 190 grants have been terminated, affecting roughly 130 scientists. 'Just thinking about all the knowledge that's not going to be gained or that is going to be actively lost,' Hamad said. She expects significant layoffs on her team if the funding freeze continues for a few more months. 'It's all just a mixture of frustration and anger and sadness all the time, every day.' John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology and bioinformatics at the School of Public Health, has spent the past few months enduring cuts on multiple fronts. In April, a multimillion dollar grant was not renewed, jeopardizing a study into the role sex plays in disease. In May, he lost about $1.2 million in federal funding for in the coming year due to the Harvard freeze. Four departmental grants worth $24 million that funded training of doctoral students also were cancelled as part of the fight with the Trump administration, Quackenbush said. 'I'm in a position where I have to really think about, 'Can I revive this research?'' he said. 'Can I restart these programs even if Harvard and the Trump administration reached some kind of settlement? If they do reach a settlement, how quickly can the funding be turned back on? Can it be turned back on?' The researchers all agreed that the funding cuts have little or nothing to do with the university's fight against antisemitism. Some, however, argue changes at Harvard were long overdue and pressure from the Trump administration was necessary. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist who lost funding to create a free, parent-focused training to prevent teen opioid overdose and drug use, said she's happy to see the culling of what she called 'politically motivated social science studies.' White House pressure a good thing? Madras said pressure from the White House has catalyzed much-needed reform at the university, where several programs of study have 'really gone off the wall in terms of being shaped by orthodoxy that is not representative of the country as a whole.' But Madras, who served on the President's Commission on Opioids during Trump's first term, said holding scientists' research funding hostage as a bargaining chip doesn't make sense. 'I don't know if reform would have happened without the president of the United States pointing the bony finger at Harvard,' she said. 'But sacrificing science is problematic, and it's very worrisome because it is one of the major pillars of strength of the country.' Quackenbush and other Harvard researchers argue the cuts are part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration that puts the country's reputation as the global research leader at risk. Support for students and post-doctoral fellows has been slashed, visas for foreign scholars threatened, and new guidelines and funding cuts at the NIH will make it much more difficult to get federal funding in the future, they said. It also will be difficult to replace federal funding with money from the private sector. 'We're all sort of moving toward this future in which this 80-year partnership between the government and the universities is going to be jeopardized,' Quackenbush said. 'We're going to face real challenges in continuing to lead the world in scientific excellence.'
Winnipeg Free Press
5 days ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump once hailed mRNA vaccines as a ‘medical miracle.' Now RFK Jr. is halting advancement
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump hailed as a 'medical miracle' the mRNA vaccines developed to combat the deadly COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Now, his health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is effectively halting the vaccine technology's advancement. Kennedy announced Tuesday that the federal government is canceling $500 million worth of mRNA research development contracts, putting an end to U.S.-backed hopes for the vaccine technology to prevent future pandemics, treat cancer or prevent flu infections. It's a sharp pivot from how Trump and top officials described the technology during his first term. Here's a look at what Trump and some of his closest advisers have said about mRNA vaccines that were credited with slowing the pandemic five years ago. Robert Redfield, Trump's director of the Center's for Disease Control 'A COVID-19 vaccine is the thing that will get Americans back to normal everyday life,' said Redfield, in a Sept. 16, 2020 statement. Americans were still donning face masks as one of the few ways of protecting themselves from a virus that had killed nearly 200,000 in just over six months. Redfield promised that the new vaccines — developed for the first time using mRNA technology — would offer a return to normalcy. Trump wanted to make sure Biden didn't get credit 'Don't let Joe Biden take credit for the vaccines … because the vaccines were me, and I pushed people harder than they've ever been pushed before .. The vaccines are — there are those that say it's one of the greatest things. It's a medical miracle.' Trump said on Nov. 26, 2020 said during a news conference in the White House. Weeks earlier, Trump had lost the election in a bitter race against Democrat Joe Biden. As the Republican grappled with leaving Washington and continued to plan for the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines, he reminded reporters that he oversaw the development of the new shots. 'They say it's somewhat of a miracle and I think that's true,' Trump said on Dec. 8, 2020 during a speech at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. The event celebrated 'Operation Warp Speed,' the government-funded project that accelerated vaccine development with pharmaceutical companies. Trump was promoting the shots as the government prepared to offer them to frontline health workers. Trump's first-term health secretary, Alex Azar 'It's clear that many Americans are learning these vaccines are safe and extraordinarily effective,' Azar said on Dec. 16, 2020 at a news conference. The government was shipping out mRNA vaccines to states, preparing to distributed it to the masses. Azar noted that a vast majority of Americans — between 70% to 80%, according to polls — intended to get the new COVID-19 vaccine that would be available to the public in the coming months. Gen. Gusave Perna, Trump's chief operating officer for pandemic response 'It takes somewhere between five and 10 years to put a vaccine on the street. Look what we did. Now, that's because of the great work of the scientists who had done the research on mRNA vaccines and others because of industry working on this, they just didn't wake up one day and start working on it,' Perna said during a podcast interview that aired on May 9, 2023. Reflecting in an interview about his time overseeing 'Operation Warp Speed,' Perna credited the mRNA technology with the government's ability to get shots in arms mere months after the pandemic started claiming lives in the U.S. in 2020. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. Trump supporters boo his vaccine accomplishments 'Take credit because we saved tens of millions of lives. Take credit. Don't let them take that away from you,' Trump said on Dec. 19, 2021 during a live interview with former Fox News host Bill O'Reilly. Daily COVID-19 deaths had ticked down to 1,500 compared to 3,000 from a year earlier after Americans began receiving their first doses of the mRNA vaccines. Trump revealed to O'Reilly and the audience that he had just gotten a COVID-19 booster. The crowd booed.
