Turning Back the Clock on Aging Cells

Turning Back the Clock on Aging Cells 

Researchers report that they can rejuvenate human cells by reprogramming them to a youthful state. 

By Nicholas Wade NY Times

Researchers at Stanford University report that they can rejuvenate human cells by reprogramming them back to a youthful state. They hope that the technique will help in the treatment of diseases, such as osteoarthritis and muscle wasting, that are caused by the aging of tissue cells. 

A major cause of aging is thought to be the errors that accumulate in the epigenome, the system of proteins that packages the DNA and controls access to its genes. The Stanford team, led by Tapash Jay Sarkar, Dr. Thomas A. Rando and Vittorio Sebastiano, say their method, designed to reverse these errors and walk back the cells to their youthful state, does indeed restore the cells’ vigor and eliminate signs of aging. 

In their report, published on Tuesday in Nature Communications, they described their technique as “a significant step toward the goal of reversing cellular aging” and could produce therapies “for aging and aging-related diseases.” 

Leonard P. Guarente, an expert on aging at M.I.T., said the method was “one of the most promising areas of aging research” but that it would take a long time to develop drugs based on RNA, the required chemical. 

The Stanford approach utilizes powerful agents known as Yamanaka factors, which reprogram a cell’s epigenome to its time zero, or embryonic state. 

Embryonic cells, derived from the fertilized egg, can develop into any of the specialized cell types of the body. Their fate, whether to become a skin or eye or liver cell, is determined by chemical groups, or marks, that are tagged on to their epigenome. 

In each type of cell, these marks make accessible only the genes that the cell type needs, while locking down all other genes in the DNAs. The pattern of marks thus establishes each cell’s identity. 

As the cell ages, it accumulates errors in the marking system, which degrade the cell’s efficiency at switching on and off the genes needed for its operations. 

In 2006 Dr. Shinya Yamanaka, a stem-cell researcher at Kyoto University, amazed biologists by showing that a cell’s fate could be reversed with a set of four transcription factors — agents that activate genes — that he had identified. A cell dosed with the Yamanaka factors erases the marks on the epigenome, so the cell loses its identity and reverts to the embryonic state. Erroneous marks gathered during aging are also lost in the process, restoring the cell to its state of youth. Dr. Yamanaka shared the 2012 Nobel Prize in medicine for the work. 

But the Yamanaka factors are no simple panacea. Applied to whole mice, the factors made cells lose their functions and primed them for rapid growth, usually cancerous; the mice all died. 

In 2016, Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte, of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in San Diego, found that the two effects of the Yamanaka factors — erasing cell identity and reversing aging — could be separated, with a lower dose securing just age reversal. But he achieved this by genetically engineering mice, a technique not usable in people. 

In their paper on Tuesday, the Stanford team described a feasible way to deliver Yamanaka factors to cells taken from patients, by dosing cells kept in cultures with small amounts of the factors. 

If dosed for a short enough time, the team reported, the cells retained their identity but returned to a youthful state, as judged by several measures of cell vigor. 

Dr. Sebastiano said the Yamanaka factors appeared to operate in two stages, as if they were raising the epigenome’s energy to one level, at which the marks of aging were lost, and then to a higher level at which cell identity was erased. 

The Stanford team extracted aged cartilage cells from patients with osteoarthritis and found that after a low dosage of Yamanaka factors the cells no longer secreted the inflammatory factors that provoke the disease. The team also found that human muscle stem cells, which are impaired in a muscle-wasting disease, could be restored to youth. Members of the Stanford team have formed a company, Turn Biotechnologies, to develop therapies for osteoarthritis and other diseases. 

The study is “definitively a step forward in the goal of reversing cellular aging,” Dr. Izpisua Belmonte said.

Facing eviction as millions shelter in place

Facing eviction as millions shelter in place

Renters are at risk of being forced out of their homes in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic

Jessica Contrera and Tracy Jan  Washington Post

Jill Ferguson, 66, received an eviction notice on Monday in West Allis, Wis. (Darren Hauck/for The Washington Post) 

The landlord was knocking, but Jill Ferguson had made a promise to her children. She was 66 years old with chronic bronchitis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), someone far more likely to die if she contracted the coronavirus. Ferguson had been self-isolating for days inside her Wisconsin duplex, so on Monday, she waited until the knocking stopped before she opened the door. Taped onto it was an eviction notice. 

“Remove from the following described premises on or before April 15,” it read. 

Ferguson slammed the door and rushed to find her inhalers. She felt like she couldn’t breathe. She knew her landlord outside Milwaukee was selling her building and that the new owners might want to take over her unit. But she hadn’t thought it would be this soon. How was she supposed to find a new place if leaving her home meant risking her life? 

As millions of Americans are being told to stay inside their homes, eviction notices are still being issued by landlords across the country. 

President Trump on Wednesday declared that the Department of Housing and Urban Development would be “providing immediate relief to renters and homeowners by suspending all foreclosures and evictions until the end of April." 

But Trump misstated what is actually occurring. 

The federal actions announced last week would protect more than 30 million homeowners from eviction, but they do not cover the nation’s 40 million renters. HUD issued a 60-day moratorium on evictions for homeowners who are unable to pay their federally backed mortgages. The Federal Housing Finance Agency also granted relief to homeowners with loans backed by two government-controlled companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. 

Families are already feeling the pain as they lose their jobs or are furloughed after the coronavirus crisis forced many businesses to shut down.

Some public housing authorities, including New York, the largest in the nation, also imposed moratoriums on evictions, but that reprieve only applies to tenants in federally subsidized apartments. 

While some governors, mayors, city councils and judges are taking action, most state- and municipal-wide moratoriums on evictions last only a few weeks. The day after Ferguson received her eviction notice, a Milwaukee judge ordered that sheriff’s deputies stop serving eviction orders in the county, but only until April 9. 

Without a national moratorium on evictions, housing advocates say, some of the country’s most vulnerable people will lose the homes that could keep them from contracting the virus. Black and Hispanic Americans, who are more likely to be renters and work low-wage jobs, would be disproportionately affected. 

“It’s important that there be a uniform policy that gives everyone in America an assurance that we won’t lose our home in the midst of a public health emergency,” said Diane Yentel, president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition. 

In Congress, lawmakers are beginning to take note of the mass layoffs happening across industries — in restaurants, hotels and retail — that will worsen in coming weeks. But protections from eviction for low-income renters were not included in the first two coronavirus relief bills that have been passed. Senators are meeting at the Capitol this weekend to negotiate a third economic stimulus package. 

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee, unveiled a legislative proposal on Wednesday that would ban all evictions and foreclosures and suspend rental payments for tenants receiving federal housing subsidies. It would also include $100 billion in financial assistance to help people cover rent. Landlords, too, need to be compensated for the lost income to maintain their apartment units, housing advocates say. 

For Ferguson, who paid her rent on time but whose landlord had the right to sell the property, there was no obvious form of relief. After seeing the notice, she picked up the keys to her rusted Honda and headed for Home Depot, breaking her self-isolation. She had $50 in cash left until her next Social Security payment was set to come in early April. 

“I couldn’t get food; I had to get boxes,” she said. “The stress was just overload. It was just too much.” 

The rented home of Jill Ferguson in Milwaukee County. A judge ordered that sheriff's deputies stop serving eviction orders in the county, but only until April 9. (Darren Hauck/for The Washington Post) 

Ferguson has been homeless before after a husband became abusive, injuries became surgeries and medical bills became medical debt. But four years ago, she qualified for a rent assistance voucher. She moved out of her car and into a two-bedroom duplex, where her rent is $290 a month before utilities. She hung Joni Mitchell album covers on the wall and put a lounge chair on the back porch. She bought a toy basketball hoop for the grandchildren she babysits, three rambunctious boys. 

As she drove home from Home Depot, feeling guilty for breaking her promise to stay inside, she started to realize that there was no way to both relocate and self-isolate. She could not move in with one of her children. If she found an apartment that would accept her voucher, she could not go see it. She could not have someone come over and help her pack. 

She emailed a legal aid organization, hoping they might know of a solution. Then her mind started to drift to all the leftover pills she had from her many surgeries. She could end it, she thought, before things got worse. 

“I don’t have the fight in me anymore,” she said. 

With each passing day, those feelings of hopelessness were seeping into homes across the country as the coronavirus pandemic shut down much of the economy. 

The Washington Post spoke with bartenders, home health aides, line cooks, hairdressers and entertainers whose hours have been reduced or who are suddenly without jobs and who are afraid they, too, will soon receive eviction notices. 

The number of Americans applying for unemployment benefits rose 33 percent in one week to 281,000, the Labor Department reported last week. Economists predict more than a million workers are expected to lose their jobs by the end of the month. 

Property owners whose ability to pay their own bills depends on their rental income debated how much of a break they could give their tenants. 

In Greensburg, Pa., Dawn Adair is trying to negotiate a deal with her landlord. 

Adair worked in the stockroom at a Dollar General until she was laid off last year while pregnant. Her fiance was a prep cook at a local university until the school shut down because of the coronavirus. Now she fears their family of five, including an 8-month-old daughter and two teenagers, will soon be homeless. They have been there before — they were evicted last July, days after she gave birth. 

Rent in their new three-bedroom apartment is $1,300 a month. Adair has $383 from her fiance’s final paycheck. 

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has halted evictions statewide until April 3. Still, Adair asked her landlord if they would be evicted next month if they do not pay their rent. 

“She said to come up with half and we can figure out the rest later because, she said, ‘I have bills also,’” Adair said. 

In the absence of federal legislation, courts and governors in more than 20 states issued statewide halts to eviction proceedings. Elsewhere, the solutions are patchwork: Many major cities have taken action, while renters in smaller communities remain at risk. Some sheriff’s departments have made unilateral decisions not to enforce court-ordered evictions; others said they were legally obligated to follow through. 

In Nevada, where the shutdown of casinos and the tourism industry has crippled the economy, at least one judge ordered the eviction process continue through e-filings and phone hearings. 

Courts throughout the state later issued a 30-day halt to evictions, but legal aid groups there and in other states where courts have taken similar action say they are still receiving calls from people who have received eviction notices. 

In Louisiana, one notice arrived on the door of Amanda Hiern, a longtime French Quarter bartender and server turned Uber driver. On Wednesday, days after New Orleans closed eviction court until April 24, Hiern’s landlord ordered her to pay her March rent in full by Monday or “we will initiate eviction proceedings against you.” 

“PLEASE NOTE THAT NO PARTIAL PAYMENTS OR CHECKS WILL BE ACCEPTED!” the note read. 

Tenants being evicted, it added, would be responsible for the $186 in court fees. 

While housing advocates have assured Hiern the city’s and state’s stay on evictions means she will not be thrown out of the apartment where she’s lived for six years, she worries. She is already a month behind on rent because a recent illness prevented her from driving as many hours as she needed. She had counted on picking up more hours during St. Patrick’s Day celebrations, but the city canceled festivities because of coronavirus. 

“I’m a gig worker so how am I supposed to earn this money? I live day to day — not even paycheck to paycheck,” said Hiern, 47. “All my income is dependent on events, tourism, and the bars and restaurants being open. This eviction notice is making me feel like I should go out and risk my life for money.” 

Maxwell Ciardullo, the policy director at the Fair Housing Action Center in New Orleans, said eviction moratoriums are not enough because people such as Hiern will not have a way to catch up on back rent. 

“Moratoriums are only going to put this off for a month or two,” he said. “As soon as courts open up, we are going to see a tsunami of evictions.” 

Bracing for that impact are the legal aid clinics across the country, most of which have closed their doors to walk-ins and are trying to help clients remotely. 

In Wisconsin, attorneys worked from their couches and kitchen tables to respond to Ferguson’s request for help as they advocated for a statewide moratorium on evictions. 

“It’s not that landlord rights don’t matter,” said Christine Donahoe, the housing law priority coordinator for Legal Action of Wisconsin. “It’s that right now, this is a life or death matter." 

The attorneys quickly realized that, at the very least, they could buy Ferguson a few more weeks in her home. They informed her that although the notice taped to her door said April 15 — 28 days from the day she received it — it should have been 28 days after her next rent payment at the end of April. 

What happens to her after that depends on whether the Milwaukee County courts extend the halt on eviction proceedings and whether a uniform state or federal response to evictions is issued. 

On Friday, Ferguson watched the news from safely inside her duplex and worried about how long the coronavirus can live on surfaces. She FaceTimed her grandchildren and told them how much she missed them. And she kept packing. She is not sure what she will do when she runs out of boxes.

 

Why the Economy Is in Great Danger

One Simple Idea That Explains Why the Economy Is in Great Danger

What happens when a major section of machinery that is supposed to run perpetually suddenly grinds to a halt? We are about to find out. 

By Neil Irwin NY Times

To understand why the world economy is in grave peril because of the spread of coronavirus, it helps to grasp one idea that is at once blindingly obvious and sneakily profound. 

One person’s spending is another person’s income. That, in a single sentence, is what the $87 trillion global economy is. 

That relationship, between spending and income, consumption and production, is at the core of how a capitalist economy works. It is the basis of a perpetual motion machine. We buy the things we want and need, and in exchange give money to the people who produced those things, who in turn use that money to buy the things they want and need, and so on, forever. 

What is so deeply worrying about the potential economic ripple effects of the virus is that it requires this perpetual motion machine to come to a near-complete stop across large chunks of the economy, for an indeterminate period of time. 

No modern economy has experienced anything quite like this. We simply don’t know how the economic machine will respond to the damage that is starting to occur, nor how hard or easy it will be to turn it back on again. 

Thanks to government statistical tables, we can understand the sheer size of the economic sectors that appear to be entering a near shutdown. The United States and much of the world are on the verge of a tremendous shrinkage in consumption spending, which in turn will mean less economic output and lower incomes among the people who provide those services. 

The Bureau of Economic Analysis tables of personal consumption expenditures include three categories likely to see very sharp declines in the weeks ahead. Americans spent $478 billion on transportation services in 2019 (which includes things like airfare and train fare but not the purchase of personal automobiles). 

They spent $586 billion on recreation services (think tickets to sports events or gambling losses in a casino). And they spent $1.02 trillion on food services and accommodation (restaurant meals and hotel stays, but not grocery store food brought home). 

That adds up to $2.1 trillion a year, 14 percent of total consumption spending — which appears likely to dry up for at least a few weeks and maybe longer. We don’t know how much those consumption numbers will drop, and for how long, just that it will be by a lot. 

So what might such a collapse in spending in those major categories mean for the other side of the ledger, incomes? 

That revenue from those sectors goes a lot of places. It pays employees for their labor directly. It goes to suppliers. It pays taxes that finance the police and schoolteachers, rent that rewards property owners, and profits that accrue to investors. All of those flows of cash are in danger as consumption spending plunges. 

The five sectors experiencing the most direct and immediate collapse in demand or facing government-mandated shutdowns because of coronavirus are air transportation; performing arts and sports; gambling and recreation; hotels and other lodging; and restaurants and bars. 

Together, they accounted for $574 billion in total employee compensation in 2018, about 10 percent of the total. It was spread among 13.8 million full-time equivalent employees. 

Those numbers represent the share of the economy at most direct risk. These are the industries and workers where revenue is likely to plummet; they will simply not have enough revenue to fulfill their usual obligations. In danger is the $11 billion a week they normally pay their employees, not to mention all those payments for rent, debt service and property taxes. 

It is true that there will be some offsetting effects — more food bought from grocery stores rather than restaurants, for example, and greater health care spending. But the economy can’t adjust on a dime, and the fact that doctors, nurses and grocery store clerks may end up working longer hours won’t make up for millions of waiters, flight attendants and hotel housekeepers who are likely to see their incomes plunge. 

Just the potential initial effects from all those restaurant meals not eaten, hotel rooms sitting empty and aircraft temporarily mothballed are potentially huge. And that’s before accounting for the ways those could ripple into second- and third-order effects. 

What happens if widespread bankruptcies were to cause losses in the banking system and cause a tightening of credit across the economy? In that situation, companies with perfectly sound finances today — which should be able to ride out the crisis — could find themselves unable to carry on simply because of a cash crunch. (That, incidentally, is the kind of ripple effect that the Federal Reserve and the Trump administration are desperately trying to head off). 

Or what if the plunging price of oil (caused by both geopolitical machinations and the global collapse of demand resulting from coronavirus effects) leads to widespread job losses and bankruptcies in energy-producing areas? 

These are hardly fanciful scenarios; the financial markets are signaling that they are quite plausible. But they show that, even as consequential as the initial economic hit from everyone staying at home may be, it might only be the beginning of economic troubles. 

It’s tempting to look at another recent event when much of the economy, especially tied to travel, seemed to dry up overnight. But the more you look at the actual numbers of what happened to key industries after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the milder it looks compared with what is happening now. 

Consider restaurants. Americans spent $26.9 billion at restaurants and bars in August 2001, and $26.2 billion in September 2001, a mere 2.3 percent drop. By December of that year, sales were back above August levels (numbers adjusted for ordinary seasonal variations). 

The cumulative shortfall of restaurant sales that autumn compared with a world where they had held steady at August levels was about $1.2 billion, a trivial amount in what was then a $10.6 trillion economy. Employment in the food service sector reached a trough of 8.4 million jobs in October 2001, only about 16,000 below its August level. 

It seems improbable that the coronavirus shutdown will have such mild effects on that industry. There is a big difference between a slump in business because people are not in the mood to celebrate, and one mandated by citywide shutdowns or other restrictions on business activity. 

For weeks, as the novel coronavirus spread, a common line among economists was that it would cause a “supply shock,” limiting the availability of certain manufactured goods made in China. 

But huge swaths of the economy are starting to experience the biggest demand shock any of us have ever seen. And we’ll soon find out what happens once a mighty economic machine gets a microscopic, yet potent, virus in its gears. 

Neil Irwin is a senior economics correspondent for The Upshot. 

Our Bodies, Their Battlefield

Our Bodies, Their Battlefield by Christina Lamb review – the eternal war against women

Peter Frankopan Observer book of the week History books 

London Guardian

This harrowing account of the thousands of rape victims airbrushed from history is required reading

Yazidi women at a ceremony to commemorate the death of women killed by Islamic State in Iraq, March 2019 . Photograph: Ari Jalal/Reuters

Rape, writes Christina Lamb at the start of this deeply traumatic and important book, is “the cheapest weapon known to man”. It is also one of the oldest, with the Book of Deuteronomy giving its blessing to soldiers who find “a beautiful woman” among the captives taken in battle. If “you desire to take her”, it says, “you may”. 

As the American writer Susan Brownmiller has put it, “man’s discovery that his genitalia could serve as a weapon to generate fear must rank as one of the most important discoveries of prehistoric times along with the use of fire and the first crude stone axe”. And yet, despite the ubiquity of rape across time and in all continents and all settings, almost nothing is written about those who have experienced sexual violence. 

Lamb writes about her discomfort at seeing statues of military heroes in stations and town squares and the names of those who fought in battle in history books. Yet those who have suffered most have done so in silence – unmentioned, glossed over and ignored. 

Advertisement 

Our Bodies, Their Battlefield provides a corrective that is by turns horrific and profoundly moving. Lamb, the chief foreign correspondent of the Sunday Times whom I have known and admired for years, is an extraordinary writer. Her compassion for those she talks to and deep understanding of how to tell their stories makes this a book that should be required reading for all – even though (and perhaps because) it is not an enjoyable experience. 

We meet Munira, a Rohingya who was raped by five Burmese soldiers in quick succession and was then confronted after her ordeal by finding the body of her eight-year-old son who had been shot in the back as he was running towards her. We come across a five-year-old in the Democratic Republic of Congo who had been raped, who kept repeating that they had been taken “because Mummy didn’t close the door properly”. 

Rape has been used as a tool of fear, but also for soldiers to create grotesque bonds of solidarity 

We meet Esther Yakubu, whose teenage daughter Dorcas was kidnapped in 2014 by Boko Haram in Nigeria. When Lamb sees her two years after their first meeting, Esther has aged 10 years. “I can’t sleep, I can’t breathe,” she says. False alarms and raised hopes of her daughter’s release have come to nothing. “I go to church every day and pray for her to come back. I hope one day God will answer.” 

We meet Victoire and Serafina, two Tutsi sisters of extraordinary bravery, who talk about their experiences during and after the Rwandan genocide – where 800,000 were murdered in 100 days in 1994 – while George Michael’s Careless Whisper plays over the radio in the background. 

Rape has been used as a tool of fear and intimidation, a way of devastating communities but also for soldiers and young men to create grotesque bonds of solidarity, trust and loyalty. While Lamb recognises that sexual violence against men has been and is a problem – noting that some estimates suggest that nearly a quarter of men in conflict-affected territories in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo have experienced sexual violence – the focus here is on women. 

No one is safe, as Lamb shows: under the wrong circumstances, in all corners of the world, communities who used to have drinks together and celebrate one another’s children’s birthdays and achievements turn on their friends and neighbours’ wives, sisters and daughters in an orgy of brutal violence. In many cases, it is not coincidental: rape is perpetrated systematically and deliberately, such as in the war in Bosnia where one European council report stated that it was being used in “particularly sadistic ways to inflict maximum humiliation on victims, their families and on the whole community”. 

It was the same in Bangladesh in 1971 and in Argentina under the military junta in 1976-83. And it is the same in the world around us today. As Lamb takes us through the trauma and suffering of women in the Middle East or in Burma, we are chillingly reminded that despite legislation being passed to classify rape and sexual violence (against women and men) as a war crime, the International Criminal Court has not made a single conviction for war rape; that there have been no prosecutions for the abduction of Yazidi women or of young girls in Nigeria. 

Lamb’s disgust at the way victims continue to be treated shames us all. Some of those responsible for what happened in Rwanda walk the streets of London and Paris freely. Amnesties were given to military officers who committed atrocities in Argentina under the junta. A statue commemorating women forced into sexual slavery in the Philippines was taken down (to be “relocated”) after President Duterte was persuaded it was distasteful. A plaque on the wall of the Liberation War Museum in Bangladesh says it all: “There are not many records of this hidden suffering”, referring to the rape of 200,000-400,000 women by soldiers from Pakistan in 1971. 

Nigerian president Muhammadu Buhari poses with released Nigerian schoolchildren who were kidnapped by Boko Haram. Photograph: Philip 

In the modern world, our new technologies sometimes facilitate the suffering, with Facebook being accused of helping incite racial hatred in Burma. Sometimes there is an outcry, such as in Nigeria where the kidnap of the girls from Chibok led the world news, as Michelle Obama and a host of celebrities championed a campaign to “Bring Our Girls Back”. That soon petered out as attentions turned elsewhere, with activism replaced by paralysis. Eighty of the kidnapped girls were spotted by drones in the Sambisa forest, yet remained there for six weeks. As the British high commissioner tells Lamb, when the question was put to Whitehall and Washington about “what to do about them… answer came there none”. The reaction to the address given by Denis Mukwege when he won the Nobel prize for his work to end the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war and armed conflict sums it up. “Everyone applauded,” he said, “but nothing happened.” Back in his clinic in west Africa, he tells Lamb that numbers of young children who have been raped is rising. As for rape and sexual violence: “it never stops.” 

This is a powerful book that not only underlines how women have been written out of history, but how victims of rape have had their suffering enabled, ignored and perpetuated. We cannot understand how the international community and the UN “just stood by and watched us be raped”, Victoire tells the author in Rwanda. And yet, she goes on, “the same things are happening over and over again round the world. We are just simple women, but it’s hard for us to understand.” No one who reads this will finish without reaching the same conclusion. 

Peter Frankopan is professor of global history at the University of Oxford

• Our Bodies, Their Battlefield by Christina Lamb is published by William Collins (£20). To order a copy go to guardianbookshop.com. Free UK p&p over £15

Transphobia Is Everywhere in Britain

Transphobia Is Everywhere in Britain

It’s a respectable bigotry, on the left as well as the right.

By Juliet Jacques NY Times

Ms. Jacques is the author of “Trans: A Memoir.”

LONDON — It must look odd to an outsider. 

The race to replace Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party, after its traumatic defeat in December’s general election, has largely been conducted in the spirit of bury-the-hatchet pragmatism, to the point of tedium. The three candidates have promised, however sincerely, to maintain the general thrust of the party’s policy platform; divisions have mostly been a matter of tone, style and subtle implication. Rancor and controversy have been restrained among the candidates as well as the 500,000-strong membership. Except in one area: trans rights. 

A contentious row began last month, when the Labour Campaign for Trans Rights announced itself with 12 pledges, which ranged from recognizing trans people’s oppression — at risk of hate crime and denied equal access to public services, health care, housing and employment — to supporting the expulsion of members who express transphobic views. Rebecca Long-Bailey, the candidate closest to Mr. Corbyn’s politics, and Lisa Nandy, the one farthest away, supported the campaign. The outcry was immediate: People started the hashtag #expelme on Twitter. Hecklers disrupted leadership hustings. And Tony Blair, a former leader and prime minister, warned of “the cul-de-sac of identity politics.” 

To many, the sight of a center-left party failing to support trans rights without equivocation must be baffling — not least to American Democrats, whose party, divided in many ways, is firmly united in its support for trans and nonbinary people. But really, it’s no surprise. Transphobia, constantly amplified by the country’s mainstream media, is a respectable bigotry in Britain, shared by parts of the left as well as the right. 

There are two main types of British transphobia. One, employed most frequently but not exclusively by right-wing men, rejects outright the idea that gender might not be determined only by biological traits identifiable at birth. This viewpoint can often be found in publications aligned with the Conservative Party, such as The Spectator, The Times and The Telegraph, all of which are looking for a new “culture war” to pursue now that the long, exhausting battle over Brexit has finally been resolved in favor of Leavers. 

The other type, from a so-called radical feminist tradition, argues that trans women’s requests for gender recognition are incompatible with cis women’s rights to single-sex spaces. At its core, such an argument is not at odds with the first type — both rely on the conceit that trans and nonbinary people should not determine their own gender identities — but it is this second strain that is often expressed on the British left, from the communist Morning Star to the liberal New Statesman and The Guardian. Imported from American feminist circles during the 1970s, the argument is largely disowned in the United States. But it remains stubbornly persistent in Britain. 

That is has done so owes much to the longevity of a generation of journalists who established themselves when the argument was orthodox. Many still hold influential roles as columnists or editors and have used their positions to keep the argument in the mainstream, while favoring a younger generation of writers who share their antipathy to trans people. 

Younger trans and nonbinary people and their feminist allies have tried to shift the discussion onto the challenges we face in a transphobic society — with some success, especially in the early 2010s, when Trans Media Watch submitted a report to the Leveson inquiry into abuses of power by the British press. But that provoked an avalanche of commentary insisting that any discussion be returned to the intractable “debate” about whether trans and nonbinary identities (and especially those of trans women) were valid. Trans “activists” — anyone who questioned the terms of this “debate” — were characterized as an abusive mob and accused of silencing their critics, despite the fact that these critics could be heard advancing the same views in all major newspapers, every day, throughout the decade. 

This counteroffensive reached its height in autumn 2018, as the Conservative government held consultations on reforms to the Gender Recognition Act, which had been passed in 2004. In response to demands for the bill to allow self-determination of trans and nonbinary identities, The Guardian — which as the country’s only center-left broadsheet newspaper plays an outsize role in political debate — published an editorial that attempted to find a center ground. But to do so, it took its framing and talking points from organizations implacably opposed to trans rights, as the writer Jules Gleeson noted. Many British trans writers, including me, have since declined to contribute to The Guardian, repeating a pattern played out in the New Statesman several years earlier. 

The reforms to the Gender Recognition Act were shelved, topping off a dispiriting few years: The Leveson inquiry changed nothing, and none of the recommendations in a 2016 parliamentary report on transgender equality were brought in. Effectively excluded from mainstream liberal-left discourse and despairing of the possibilities for change under any Conservative government, trans and nonbinary people turned back to Labour as the only political institution potentially able to change both the conversation and legislation. That seemed especially possible after the narrow electoral defeat in 2017 offered hope that the party could soon take power on a platform of social democratic reform — led by someone who offered vocal, unwavering support for trans rights. 

But John McDonnell, Mr. Corbyn’s long-term ally, was far more equivocal. And Labour’s 2019 manifesto, mostly more radical than two years earlier, included just a few lines on trans issues and hedged its bets about single-sex spaces and gender recognition. Such division and ambivalence isn’t confined to an older, outgoing generation: Laura Pidcock, regarded as a potential successor to Mr. Corbyn until she lost her seat in December, recently caused consternation by calling for “the space to talk about sex and gender, without fear of being ‘no platformed.’” 

The intervention did not go without challenge: Many of Labour’s younger, more left-leaning members rejected the suggestion that trans rights were up for debate. So does much of the left. But the party — and the center-left coalition it contains — is far from united. Keir Starmer, the overwhelming favorite to win the leadership race who has based his campaign around “unity” above all else, tellingly attempted to bridge the divide: He offered rhetorical support for trans and nonbinary people while declining to sign on to the pledges. 

But in the face of Britain’s unreformed and unrepentantly hostile media, and the virulent transphobia it endlessly churns out, calls for unity won’t be enough. Mr. Starmer — and the Labour Party — will have to decide whose support is worth keeping, and pick a side.

Coronavirus rumors and chaos in Alabama

Coronavirus rumors and chaos in Alabama

point to big problems as U.S. seeks to contain virus

Rumor mill, lack of communication by federal officials undermines trust in plan to relocate quarantined patients
By Todd C. Frankel  Washington Post

ANNISTON, Ala. — Not long before local leaders decided, in the words of one of them, that federal health officials “didn’t know what they were doing" with their plan to quarantine novel coronavirus patients in town, a doctor here set out in a biohazard suit to stage a one-man protest along the highway with a sign. “The virus has arrived. Are you ready?” it asked. 

The town didn’t think it was. Residents already were unnerved by strange stories posted on Facebook and shared via text messages about helicopters secretly flying in sick patients, that the virus was grown in a Chinese lab, that someone — either the media or the government — was lying to them about what was really going on. 

The quarantine plan hastily hatched by the federal Department of Health and Human Services was soon scrapped by President Trump, who faced intense pushback from Alabama’s congressional delegation, led by Republican Rep. Mike D. Rogers. Americans evacuated after falling ill aboard the Diamond Princess cruise ship in Japan would not be coming to Anniston, a town of 22,000 people in north-central Alabama, after all. They would remain in the same Texas and California sites where they were taken after leaving the cruise ship. 

What happened here over the past week illustrates how poor planning by federal health officials and a rumor mill fueled by social media, polarized politics and a lack of clear communication can undermine public confidence in the response to the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease named covid-19. The rapidly spreading virus has rattled economies worldwide in recent weeks and caused the deaths of more than 2,900 people, mostly in China. 

The panic and problems that burned through Anniston also provided a preview of what could unfold in other communities, as the spread of the virus is considered by health experts to be inevitable. 

“Their little plan sketched out in D.C. was not thought out,” said Michael Barton, director of the emergency management agency in Calhoun County, where Anniston is located. 

As local officials learned more, Barton added, “We knew then —” 

“We were in trouble,” said Tim Hodges, chairman of the county commission. 

In Anniston, local leaders were stunned to discover serious problems with the federal government’s plan for dealing with patients infected with the virus — starting with how the patients would get to Alabama, according to interviews with county and city officials, along with business leaders who dealt with the federal response. 

“I was shocked,” Anniston Mayor Jack Draper said. “I was shocked by the lack of planning. I was shocked by the manner in which it was presented to us.” 

Two HHS officials — Darcie Johnston, director of intergovernmental affairs, and Kevin Yeskey, principal deputy assistant secretary for preparedness and response — said in a Feb. 23 meeting with local officials that the patients would be flown from California to the Fort McClellan Army Airfield in Anniston, according to multiple local officials. 

The airfield was closed when the Army base was shuttered in 1999. Local officials said they told the HHS officials during the meeting the runway was in bad shape. 

“The more we talked,” Hodges said, “the more holes we found.” 

The HHS plan also called for housing coronavirus patients at the Center for Domestic Preparedness, a FEMA facility on the old Army base and one of several redevelopment projects at the sprawling outpost. 

The center has several brick dormitory buildings — behind tall black fencing — where federal officials planned for the patients to live. Federal officials even picked out the building they wanted to use for the first arrivals: Dorm No. 28, local officials said. A team of federal health workers would care for the patients and U.S. marshals would keep them from leaving the quarantine, local officials said they were told. 

The dorms normally house emergency responders from around the country. 

But the center doesn’t have any special capabilities for handling infectious diseases, local officials said. The center is used for training. It has isolation hospital rooms — located in a former Army hospital building — but they are mostly just props, with fake equipment and light switches that exist only as paint on walls. 

Meanwhile, federal officials never contacted the town’s hospital, Regional Medical Center, about handling covid-19 patients, said Louis Bass, the hospital’s chief executive. 

Yet HHS officials said in a statement released to the public Feb. 22 that patients who become seriously ill would be sent to “pre-identified hospitals for medical care.” 

“We were surprised,” Bass said. 

The hospital does have eight negative-pressure isolation rooms, but patients with serious complications would need to be sent to a larger institution, such as Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, 90 miles away, Bass said. 

The Center for Domestic Preparedness is near a dormitory where the federal government intended to house quarantined passengers from the Diamond Princess cruise ship. (Elijah Nouvelage for The Washington Post) 

Emory University Hospital did not respond to a question about whether it was told about the HHS plan. 

A federal contract for a local ambulance service was secured at the last moment, after HHS had already issued a statement about its plan for Anniston. Details on how to handle other tasks — including patients’ laundry and food — seemed unfinished. 

The preparations for bringing patients to Anniston were handled partly by Caliburn International, a government contractor that previously provided emergency medical services to federal agencies, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Washington Post. 

Former Trump chief of staff John F. Kelly joined the firm based in Reston, Va., as a board member last year. Caliburn is the parent company of Comprehensive Health Services, which has come under scrutiny for its operation of medical services at a detention site for migrant children. 

A Caliburn spokeswoman referred questions about the Anniston operations to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

HHS, through its Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, responded to The Post’s questions about its Anniston operations with a statement noting the office’s staff members “have a long-standing relationship” with the disaster preparedness center and were familiar with its capabilities. The statement also said the federal agency “was considering the facility as a contingency location” and decided during discussions with local officials that “the site would not actually be needed.” 

It was Trump who finally canceled the planned quarantine in Anniston on Feb. 23, according to tweets from Rogers and Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) that referred to their conversations with the president. 

I just got off the phone with the President. He told me that his administration will not be sending any victims of the Coronavirus from the Diamond Princess cruise ship to Anniston, Alabama. Thank you, @POTUS, for working with us to ensure the safety of all Alabamians. 

The news arrived as people attended an emergency meeting of the Calhoun County Commission. Cheers broke out. 

“I guess in our culture today a tweet is considered official,” Barton said. 

Anniston has plenty of experience dealing with unwelcome threats — and learning to live with them. 

It was for years home to the nation’s chemical weapons stockpile, including sarin and mustard gas. Later, it was the location of a chemical weapons incinerator, where those munitions were carefully destroyed. 

The town also deals with the toxic legacy of a former Monsanto plant that for decades polluted the soil and water with PCBs, which were banned in the 1970s amid health concerns. The pollution resulted in a $700 million settlement for 20,000 residents in 2003. 

But the novel coronavirus posed a different kind of challenge. 

Fear that the HHS plan was flawed gave new energy to already circulating rumors and wild theories about the virus. 

Residents didn’t know whom to believe. Trump had said without evidence that CNN and MSNBC were exaggerating the threat. Rush Limbaugh was on the radio saying it was no worse than the regular flu. Facebook posts claimed the outbreak had been foreshadowed by a 1981 Dean Koontz book. And the idea the virus could have been created in a Chinese biochemical lab was floated widely, including by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.). 

The whirlwind caught the attention of Michael Kline, a urologist in Anniston. 

“I don’t think anyone knows what’s going on,” he said. 

So on the weekend of Feb. 22-23, Kline dressed up in a blue biohazard suit with his “the virus has arrived” sign. He stood along the highway and waved to passing vehicles. He wanted to drum up opposition to allowing infected patients in Anniston. But even the plan was abandoned, Kline said he still wasn’t certain patients weren’t being housed at the old Army base. 

Urologist Michael Kline protests a plan to quarantine patients infected with covid-19 at a facility in Anniston. (Todd Frankel/The Washington Post) 

Rumors of black helicopters ferrying infected patients to the training center at night were rampant. The local Home Depot sold out of painting and sanding face masks. Hodges, the commissioner, said he heard often from worried residents. But helicopters were common in the area because of a nearby Army depot and National Guard training center. Only now they were nefarious. Other people talked about mysterious vans driving along county roads. 

Hodges and Draper held emergency news conferences and meetings to try to lessen the panic. But those meetings also allowed for additional rumors to flourish during public comment periods. A commission meeting included one resident tying the coronavirus to a 1992 United Nations document about climate change. 

“That’s how long this has been going on,” he said. 

“The public is going crazy,” said Bobby Foster, a business owner who spoke at the meeting and asked the commissioners to try harder to distribute accurate information. 

Glen Ray, president of the local NAACP, talked about the virus at a Sunday service at Rising Star United Methodist Church on Feb. 23 to try to calm people’s worries. But he was also dismayed that one of the county commissioners wore a red “Make America Great Again” hat to an emergency meeting about the virus. 

“It’s not about Donald Trump,” Ray said later. “A virus is not going to just jump on a Democrat. So at times like this, we need to be coming together. No time for politics.” 

Anniston’s flirtation with the dreaded virus did have one positive effect, officials said. It made them realize they need to prepare — that the virus could come without warning and they shouldn’t rely on outsiders alone for expertise. 

Barton, the emergency management director, helped create a county infectious disease task force. It has already had its first meeting. The focus is not solely on the coronavirus. It will handle the flu and whatever other viruses pop up in the future. 

The public’s interest in the virus hasn’t faded, either. 

Barton gave a talk Thursday to a lunchtime meeting of a civic organization, the Exchange Club. It had been planned months ago but he decided to talk about the aborted plan to bring infected patients to town. 

People peppered Barton with questions about why federal health officials had ever considered the disaster training facility and how much emergency food they should keep at home. They wanted to know how to avoid getting sick. 

Barton suggested hand-washing and keeping a safe distance from sick people. 

As he talked, a lady reached into her purse, squeezed some alcohol sanitizer on her hands and passed the bottle around the table. 

Emma Brown and Beth Reinhard contributed.