UCLA COVID 19 and Monkey Pox Discussion

Please write a 3 page paper on COVID-19andMonkeypox. This essay should be written in Times New Roman 12 size font dbl spaced. Do not waste most of your paper citing directly from the text.

#1 ) In your own words summarize

Essay writing service:

• Excellent quality
• 100% Turnitin-safe
• Affordable prices

Order Now

a) Lockdowns and COVID-19 pandemic: what is the endgame?

b) Qualitative insights on alcohol and other drug consumption during COVID-19

c) Describe the signs and symptoms of COVID-19 disease

d) Make sure to write a conclusion paragraph for both summaries, beginning with “In conclusion,“

#1 should be written using these two articles:Lockdowns and COVID 19 pandemic and Alcohol and other drug consumption during COVID 19. ** 1 page for both articles **

#2) Utilizing the articleIs Mokeypox Airbone?, IN YOUR OWN WORDS briefly answer the following questions:

a) Describe the signs and symptoms of Monkeypox

b) Can people get seriously ill or die from Monkeypox

c) How does Monkeypox spread from person to person

#2 should be 1 page Received: 3 July 2022
Accepted: 3 July 2022
DOI: 10.1111/dar.13517
EDITORIAL
Qualitative insights on alcohol and other drug consumption
during COVID-19
The novel coronavirus, COVID-19, identified in January
2020, quickly spread around the world [1]. Measures
adopted to minimise transmission of the virus have varied widely between and within countries, generating a
range of unprecedented social and economic transformations. These have led to abrupt and significant changes to
people’s everyday lives, with profound implications for
health and wellbeing. Of interest, and in some cases concern, to public health commentators and researchers has
been the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on alcohol
and, to a lesser degree, other drug consumption practices.
Since the pandemic began, a substantial body of
scholarly literature on alcohol and other drug (AOD)
consumption during COVID-19 has been published (see,
e.g., Drug and Alcohol Review’s special collection,
‘COVID-19 Research’, available from the journal homepage, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/14653362).
Within the research-focused literature in particular, the
majority has addressed quantitative shifts in consumption at the population level, as evident in a recent
systematic review of empirical studies examining
individual-level changes in consumption in the early
stages of the pandemic [2]. Acuff et al. [2] found 128
quantitative studies from 58 countries, with the authors
concluding that the pandemic differentially affected
drinking based on multiple individual and contextual
level factors. At the time we conceived this special
section (in early 2021) on qualitative insights on AOD
consumption during COVID-19, a Google Scholar search
of ‘(alcohol or drug use) and COVID and qualitative’
yielded only 10 relevant peer-reviewed articles. While the
number of published qualitative research papers on AOD
and COVID-19 has since increased, quantitative research
approaches remain overwhelmingly dominant. This special section was thus driven by a desire to redress the
imbalance between quantitative and qualitative research
on this topic, as well as to extend knowledge on COVID19 and AOD consumption relations and effects (see also
[3, 4]). Moreover, noting the capacity of qualitative studies to provide the depth and nuance required to understand and better govern AOD consumption, we argue
that illuminating complex experiences and providing
context for quantitative observations is vital. Qualitative approaches especially allow us to critically examine
taken-for-granted
assumptions,
unsettling
tendencies and problematisations in ways that reveal
new potentialities, complexities and constraints. As
such, the five articles gathered in this special
section attend to a diverse range of AOD consumption
situations and contexts—drinking occasions, consumption within home settings, parents’ perceptions of their
children’s awareness of drinking, the use of video conferencing services for AOD consumption social events
during lockdowns, and service access for people who
use or inject drugs. Together, these analyses enhance
understanding of the effects of COVID-19 on AOD use,
and the multiple intersecting factors at play in shaping
AOD consumption patterns and effects.
The paper by Caluzzi et al. [5] draws on data from an
Australian study to provide a fine-grained analysis of
transformations in the constitution of drinking occasions
under COVID-19. Social changes brought on by the pandemic, they find, have ‘led to shifts in the temporal
boundaries and contexts that would otherwise shape people’s drinking, meaning drinking practices may be less
bound by structures, norms, settings and rituals’ [5,
p. 1267]. They use these observations to critically interrogate the widely deployed and static epidemiological concept of ‘drinking occasions’ that denotes ‘segmented
period[s] of time where alcohol is consumed’ [p. 1267].
Through the contextual lens of COVID-19, they show
how the conventional constructions of ‘drinking occasions’ are limited in their ability to capture the intricacies
and instabilities of drinking. This permeability of responsibilities, practices and boundaries is echoed throughout
the studies described in this special section. It remains to
be seen whether the transformations revealed by Caluzzi
et al. will continue alongside other changes to routines
and practices wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic, but
their analysis suggests considering drinking as a practice
(following social practice theory) as an interesting avenue
for future research.
© 2022 Australasian Professional Society on Alcohol and other Drugs.
Drug Alcohol Rev. 2022;41:1263–1266.
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/dar
1263
1264
Conroy and Nicholls’ [6] exploration of changing and
enduring drinking practices in the home during the pandemic attends to, and shows how engaging with, assemblages of human and non-human actors can be
generative in (amongst other things) addressing some of
the constraints identified by Caluzzi et al. [5]. Their work
demonstrates the significance, symbolic meanings and
agency of the home—a place where most alcohol is
known to be consumed in societies like present-day
Australia and the United Kingdom [7, 8]. Through analyses of alcohol’s capacity to craft new atmospheres and
environments, Conroy and Nicholls [6] show how human
and non-human assemblages encourage or mitigate different forms of consumption, with alcohol consumption
shaping an array of possibilities within domestic spaces.
They find that the proximity, accessibility and availability
of alcoholic drinks in the home during lockdown
prompted consumption as a means of re-imagining
domestic spaces as pleasurable and social. However,
these same spaces could also be an inescapable reminder
of consumption, encouraging reflection on drinking practices and potential decreases in consumption. As they
suggest, although the COVID-19 pandemic may be a
unique and specific moment in time, these findings are
‘likely to illuminate wider trends’. As researchers give
greater consideration to the affective and spatial affordances of the home, this may better inform future
research and health promotion strategies.
Remaining in the domestic sphere, the paper by Cook
et al. [9] takes an intimate look at the family unit during
the lockdowns across Australia to showcase the intergenerational relations between changing drinking practices
and developing knowledge. Through interviews with parents and carers, the authors explore how COVID-19
influenced environments and situations where children
were exposed to adults’ alcohol consumption, and draw
out the changes to children’s alcohol-related knowledge as a result. This work shows the depth and nuance
of children’s alcohol-related knowledge from young
ages, and how the home, and behaviours within the
home, shape knowledge. Here, as with other papers in
this section, context, space and proximity affect practices and relationships, leading to new observations
and moments of learning for children, and new
moments of reflection for parents. Like Conroy and
Nicholls, Cook et al. [9] highlight the role of materials,
including bottles and glassware, as an important part of
the environment that people observed and interacted
with. A central finding of this work is parents’ concerns
about the normativity and omnipresence of alcohol and
the implications this has for children’s engagements
and knowledge of alcohol—a finding which merits further investigation.
EDITORIAL
Challenging narratives that problematise consumption
while considering the capacity for AOD use to facilitate
pleasure and signal a reprieve from responsibilities is a
unique contribution of several articles in this special section. None more so than the contribution from Duncan
et al. [10], which explicitly calls for ‘research and policy
approaches that are sensitive to the affirmative potentials
of digitally-mediated AOD encounters’ [p. 1293]. Drawing
on data gathered through ‘unfocused group discussions’
with three sets of friendship groups in Melbourne,
Victoria, their analysis explores how video conferencing
services became enmeshed in the making and remaking of
AOD consumption routines under lockdown conditions.
As part of the transformations brought about by social
restrictions, digitally mediated AOD consumption events
emerged as key sites in the (re)production of sociality.
Here, drugs, digital technologies and the home were playfully woven through participants’ efforts to re-connect, foster wellbeing and produce pleasure. Such analysis
foregrounds the affirmative potentials of digitally mediated
AOD consumption while also highlighting the differential
ways in which AOD practices transformed (and were
transformed by) pandemic experiences.
Finally, shifting focus, the paper by Efunnuga et al.
[11] considers the availability and distribution of
resources in the context of COVID-19 for people who
use/inject drugs in Melbourne, Victoria. The authors
observe that restrictions designed to reduce the spread of
COVID-19, in particular restricting travel to within 5km
of home and night-time curfews, had unintended consequences for people who use/inject drugs. These consequences included reduced access to sterile injection
equipment and health services. The authors find that positive effects emerging from restrictions, such as increased
takeaway doses of therapeutic prescriptions, have widereaching potentialities; however, poor or disrupted communication processes emerged as constraints on service
access. Efunnuga and colleagues’ work [11] highlights
variable effects of COVID-19 restrictions on drug consumption patterns, which were intertwined with changing quality of available drugs and financial instabilities.
As with other articles in the special section, the authors
point out lessons to be learnt and applied more broadly
(outside the context of COVID-19), especially in light of
the likelihood of social disruptions and crises in the
future [12].
1 | CONCLUSIONS
Taken together, these contributions provide detailed
accounts of AOD consumption during the pandemic,
extending quantitative studies and contributing to
EDITORIAL
broader conversations on the sociocultural dimensions of
AOD consumption. The research in these papers has
explored the diverse ways AOD consumption has been
implicated in and by the vast social, cultural and economic transformations occurring since the COVID-19
pandemic began. More than a simple adjunct to quantitative research findings, however, the papers assembled
here provide necessary and novel insights into the
shifting dynamics and everyday experiences of AOD
consumption under pandemic conditions. In this, they
push us to conceive of AOD consumption in pluralistic
ways—AOD consumption emerges across these
accounts as an intimately and intensely social practice,
a practice shot through with diverse meanings, affordances and effects. An example of this is alcohol helping to craft new atmospheres and environments in a
time of distress through interactive networks of human
and non-human elements and forces. Such might be
understood as exemplifying the critical contribution
and potential of qualitative research approaches. By
(re)situating AODs within their various social worlds,
such approaches generate new modes of attention and
deliberation. These in turn challenge us to re-think and
re-configure how we problematise, intervene in and
research AOD consumption, both during and beyond
the COVID-19 pandemic.
This body of research adapted to the existing COVID19 social restrictions by making use of technology and
non-traditional methodologies to obtain these insights.
The home is cast as the site of primary focus in several of
the included papers, although, as the studies find, the
material space of the home may be mediated by technologies and relationships and transformed by the affordances offered by AOD use itself. It is worth
acknowledging that the studies on which these papers
are based do not focus on consumption spaces other than
the home, nor do they reflect the experiences of non-consumption/abstinence. They also only draw on experiences of AOD consumption within Australia and the
United Kingdom, and do not explicitly focus on the
implications of policy.
Although restrictions continue to ease and we are
encouraged to ‘return to normal’, the pandemic will
likely have lasting economic, social, environmental and
health effects which may only be exacerbated by future
crises and social disruptions [12]. Qualitative methodologies have a unique capacity to map these transformations
and their implications for how we consume, experience
and govern AOD consumption. Foregrounding these
capacities through the qualitative research gathered here
illustrates the multiple and complex relations and effects
of AOD consumption during this unique period of social
change. We hope that this special section will further
1265
provoke, inspire and cultivate efforts to engage in AOD
knowledge production qualitatively.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
MC led the manuscript writing. CW, GC, TD and RD provided critical feedback and assisted in revising the manuscript for publication.
A C KN O WL ED G EME N T S
Thanks to Professor Robin Room and Dr Michael Savic
for their thoughtful comments on an earlier draft.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.
Megan Cook1
Claire Wilkinson1,2
Gabriel Caluzzi1
Tristan Duncan3,4
Robyn Dwyer1
1
Centre for Alcohol Policy Research, La Trobe University,
Melbourne, Australia
2
Drug Policy Modelling Program, UNSW Sydney, Sydney,
Australia
3
Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University,
Melbourne, Australia
4
Turning Point, Eastern Health, Melbourne, Australia
Correspondence
Megan Cook, Centre for Alcohol Policy Research, La
Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Email: m.Cook@latrobe.edu.au
ORCID
Megan Cook https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0832-4291
Claire Wilkinson https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4815-5840
Gabriel Caluzzi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3203-6123
Tristan Duncan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9804-9301
Robyn Dwyer https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1886-0733
RE FER EN CES
1. World Health Organization (WHO). (2020). Listing of WHO’s
response to COVID-19. [Electronic article, 29 June 2020].
Retrieved from https://www.who.int/news/item/29-06-2020covidtimeline
2. Acuff SF, Strickland JC, Tucker JA, Murphy JG. Changes in
alcohol use during COVID-19 and associations with contextual
and individual difference variables: a systematic review and
meta-analysis. Psychol Addict Behav. 2022;36:1–19.
3. Rehm J, Kilian C, Ferreira-Borges C, Jernigan D, Monteiro M,
Parry CD, et al. Alcohol use in times of the COVID 19: implications for monitoring and policy. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2020;39:
301–4.
1266
4. Wright CJ, Livingston M, Dwyer R, Callinan S. Second, third,
fourth COVID-19 waves and the ‘pancession’: we need studies
that account for the complexities of how the pandemic is
affecting alcohol consumption in Australia. Drug Alcohol Rev.
2022;40:179–82.
5. Caluzzi G, Pennay A, Laslett A-M, Callinan S, Room R,
Dwyer R. Beyond ‘drinking occasions’: examining complex
changes in drinking practices during COVID-19. Drug Alcohol
Rev. 2022;41:1267–74.
6. Conroy D, Nicholls E. ‘When I open it, I have to drink it all’:
push and pull factors shaping domestic alcohol consumption
during the COVID-19 pandemic UK Spring 2020 lockdown.
Drug Alcohol Rev. 2022;41:1275–83.
7. Callinan S, Livingston M, Room R, Dietze P. Drinking contexts
and alcohol consumption: how much alcohol is consumed in different Australian locations? J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2016;77:612–9.
EDITORIAL
8. Foster J, Read D, Karunanithi S, Woodward V. Why do people
drink at home? J Public Health (Oxf). 2010;32:512–8.
9. Cook M, Kuntsche S, Pennay A. “They’re like little police” –
Australian parents’ perceptions of their children’s awareness
of drinking during COVID-19. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2022;41:
1284–92.
10. Duncan T, Dwyer R, Savic M, Pennay A, MacLean S. ‘Super
googs on a zoom, are you kidding me?’: The pleasures and
constraints of digitally-mediated alcohol and other drug consumption. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2022;41:1293–1303.
11. Efunnuga H, Higgs P, Walker S, O’Keefe D. Health service
utilisation and access for people who inject drugs during
COVID-19. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2022;41:1304–10.
12. Schrecker T. Multiple crises and global health: new and necessary frontiers of health politics. Glob Public Health. 2012;7:
557–73.
News
Is monkeypox airborne?
n Cite as: CMAJ 2022 August 22;194:E1121. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.1096013
Posted on cmajnews.com on August 9, 2022.
Debate about whether monkeypox is
airborne has trended on social media
since the early days of the global outbreak, echoing a similar controversy
from the first two years of the COVID-19
pandemic.
It took the World Health Organization
(WHO) until the fall of 2020 to acknowledge
that SARS-CoV-2 could spread through
respiratory droplets, and two years before
the agency quietly updated its website
to state that airborne transmission can
occur.
Critics say WHO’s reluctance to
acknowledge the possibility of airborne
transmission undercut support for
important precautions like masking
and ventilation.
And although public health officials
are less cagey about the possibility of
airborne transmission with monkeypox,
misunderstandings about the difference
between airborne and respiratory transmission have contributed to confusion.
Is airborne transmission of
monkeypox possible?
According to WHO, monkeypox is transmitted through close contact with an
infected person or animal, or contaminated
material like bedding.
That includes contact with the respiratory droplets that people spray when they
talk, cough, or sneeze — although scientists
are still studying how commonly the virus
spreads this way.
Respiratory droplets don’t hang in the
air for long, so transmission this way
© 2022 CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors
usually requires prolonged face-to-face
contact, posing the greatest risk to those
who live with or care for infected people.
Notably, in cases where people with
monkeypox have travelled on airplanes,
no known transmissions occurred to the
people sitting around them.
WHO acknowledged the potential for
respiratory transmission back in June,
as well as for “short-range aerosol
transmission.”
However, it’s unknown whether monkeypox can spread via aerosols. These smaller
viral particles can linger in the air over longer
periods. So far, no cases of long-range
airborne transmission have been reported.
Preprint research from the United
Kingdom suggests it may be possible
for monkeypox to become aerosolized,
particularly during certain activities like
changing contaminated bedding.
According to the Public Health Agency
of Canada (PHAC), evidence of airborne
transmission of smallpox also raises a
concern that monkeypox may spread in a
similar way.
Even so, airborne transmission “does
not appear to be the primary mode of
transmission,” PHAC says.
In Ontario, for example, commonly
reported risk factors for monkeypox
infection include intimate contact with
new sexual partners or multiple partners.
Could masks help prevent the spread
of monkeypox?
PHAC is recommending health care settings adopt precautions against airborne,
CMAJ | August 22, 2022 | Volume 194 | Issue 32
droplet, and contact transmission until
more information is available.
The federal government is also generally
encouraging “good hand hygiene and
respiratory etiquette,” including wearing a
mask or covering coughs, along with limiting sexual partners and practising safer sex.
Other public health authorities have
emphasized avoiding close physical contact
without much reference to spraying droplets
or inhaling aerosols.
The US Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention initially warned travellers to wear face masks to prevent the
spread of monkeypox but later dropped
the recommendation, noting it “caused
confusion.”
Now, the agency only suggests masks
for those in close contact with infected
people.
“For people out and about, or travelling, the individual risk of having any
contact with somebody with monkeypox
remains incredibly low,” Hugh Adler of
the Respiratory Infections Group at the
Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine
told Reuters.
Lauren Vogel, CMAJ
Content licence: This is an Open Access article
distributed in accordance with the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
licence, which permits use, distribution and
reproduction in any medium, provided that the
original publication is properly cited, the use is
noncommercial (i.e., research or educational
use), and no modifications or adaptations are
made. See: https://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
E1121