Vatican leaders shared the assessment with Pope John Paul II. But the pope dismissed the allegations after Mr. McCarrick wrote him a letter directly denying them, and he elevated Mr. McCarrick anyway to the Archdiocese of Washington, one of the most prominent positions in the country. “McCarrick’s direct relationship with John Paul II also likely had an impact on the Pope’s decision making,” the report said.The Vatican blames three American bishops for providing misleading information.Pope John Paul II initially requested an investigation into the allegations, but the Vatican now suggests that it was deceived by three bishops in New Jersey, who provided “inaccurate and incomplete information” to the Holy See, the report said.“This inaccurate information appears likely to have impacted the conclusions of John Paul II’s advisors and, consequently, of John Paul II himself,” the report said, shifting some of the blame.- Advertisement – Pope Benedict XVI ousted McCarrick as archbishop of Washington, but declined to investigate him. On Tuesday the Vatican released a massive report investigating how Theodore E. McCarrick, a disgraced former cardinal and archbishop of Washington, rose to the heights of the Catholic Church, despite leaders receiving reports that he had sexually abused minors and adult seminarians over the course of decades.Here are five takeaways from the report:Pope John Paul II knew of allegations of McCarrick’s sexual misconduct.- Advertisement – Pope John Paul II personally made the decision to elevate Mr. McCarrick even after a U.S. cardinal warned that he had been accused of sexual misconduct.In 1999, when Mr. McCarrick was being considered to take over the Archdiocese of New York, Cardinal John O’Connor of New York wrote a six-page letter to the Vatican’s ambassador to the U.S. He raised concerns that Mr. McCarrick had asked young adult men to sleep in his bed with him and that some priests had experienced psychological trauma from Mr. McCarrick’s inappropriate behavior.“I regret that I would have to recommend very strongly against such promotion, particularly if to a Cardinatial See,” Cardinal O’Connor said. “Nevertheless, I subject my comments to higher authority and most particularly our Holy Father.” It is extremely unusual for the Vatican to investigate its highest leaders like this.Pope Francis first promised a “thorough study” of the Vatican’s handling of the McCarrick case in 2018. The long-awaited result is a highly unusual public investigation of abuses and cover-ups spanning decades and reaching to the highest levels of the Vatican’s own ranks.The report will have wide implications for a global church that has been roiled for decades over its mishandling of sexual abuse by clergy.John Paul II is not just a pope — he is also a saint. At his fast-tracked canonization mass in 2014, Pope Francis praised him as “the pope of the family.”The church now has to reckon with the fact that one of its most beloved pontiffs is implicated is one of its most notorious scandals.Sharon Otterman contributed reporting. – Advertisement – Soon after Benedict XVI became pope in 2005, he quickly extended Mr. McCarrick’s tenure as archbishop of Washington.But he reversed course by the end of the year, based on “new details” about allegations against Mr. McCarrick, and “urgently sought” to replace Mr. McCarrick in the role. By Easter 2006, Mr. McCarrick was out.Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, an official in the Holy See’s Secretariat of State, wrote two letters in 2006 and 2008 urging a church investigation of rumors about Mr. McCarrick. Instead of formally investigating the claims, however, Benedict XVI authorized a Vatican official to “appeal to McCarrick’s conscience” and ask him to “maintain a lower profile and minimize travel.” But this request was not a formal command, and Mr. McCarrick continued to freely travel the globe on behalf of Catholic causes and institutions.Archbishop Viganò became the Vatican ambassador to the United States in 2011, and was asked to conduct an inquiry to determine whether the allegations against Mr. McCarrick were credible. The report says that “Viganò did not take these steps.”Pope Francis did nothing until 2017 because he believed the allegations had already been reviewed by Pope John Paul II.Pope Francis was aware there were rumors of wrongdoing, but until 2017, the report said, no one provided him with any documentation of the allegations. Pope Francis believed everything had already been reviewed by Pope John Paul II. He also knew that under his predecessor, Benedict, Mr. McCarrick had remained active, and so he saw no need to alter the church’s approach.In June 2017, the Archdiocese of New York learned of an allegation of sexual abuse by Mr. McCarrick of a minor decades earlier. Soon after, Pope Francis requested Mr. McCarrick’s resignation from the College of Cardinals. The allegations were dismissed as “rumor,” the report said, and “McCarrick’s denial was believed.” The bishops were also asked to keep that inquiry a secret.The report also describes a disturbing account from a New Jersey priest, Msgr. Dominic Bottino, who said he had witnessed two of the New Jersey bishops watch Mr. McCarrick touch a man’s crotch in 1990, and neither informed the pope of that incident. – Advertisement –
Gounder’s comment came after the U.S. hit another record high in daily new cases, reporting more than 150,000 new Covid cases on Thursday, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University. The seven-day average of daily new infections now stands at 131,445, 32% higher than a week ago, according to a CNBC analysis of Hopkins data.Public health officials and infectious disease experts are worried about the next few months of the pandemic. The approaching holidays are setting the country up for a lethal winter and spring since hospitalizations and deaths lag newly diagnosed infections by a few weeks, Dr. Isaac Bogoch, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Toronto, said in a recent interview.“The upcoming holidays of Thanksgiving, Diwali, Christmas, Hanukkah and New Year’s create the potential for innumerable super-spreading events across the country,” he said. “This has the potential to introduce and reintroduce the virus to new areas and to further exacerbate community transmission.”- Advertisement – A member of President-elect Joe Biden‘s coronavirus task force on Friday urged Americans to avoid traveling over Thanksgiving, saying it would only make the pandemic in the United States worse.“Right now we have a fire blazing and to me traveling and spending time with people over the holidays is sort of like pouring gasoline on a fire,” Dr. Celine Gounder, a member of Biden Covid-19 advisory board, said during an interview on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “It’s just not a good idea in the middle of a pandemic, especially at this juncture.”- Advertisement – The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has been warning about the risks of celebrating Thanksgiving this year, saying small household gatherings, especially with people you don’t live with, are an important contributor to the rise in Covid-19 cases. The agency said celebrating virtually or with members of your own household poses the lowest risk for spread.In New York, where cases are on the rise again, Mayor Bill de Blasio has urged all residents to not travel out of the state for the holiday due to the risk of bringing back the disease.Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s leading infectious disease expert, said last month that his kids won’t be coming home for Thanksgiving this year due to fear of possibly spreading the coronavirus.- Advertisement – “My Thanksgiving is going to look very different this year,” he said in an interview with CBS News on Oct. 14. “I would love to have it with my children, but my children are in three separate states throughout the country and in order for them to get here, they would all have to go to an airport, get on a plane and travel with public transportation.”Gounder also said Friday that it’s going to be a while before a vaccine is widely distributed, asking Americans to continue wearing masks, washing their hands and maintaining their distance from others.“Those measures really remain at the center of the response here,” she said.–CNBC’s Will Feuer contributed to this report. – Advertisement –
It was already a record-breaking system, being the 30th named storm of this year’s extraordinarily busy Atlantic hurricane season. Such activity has focused attention on climate change, which scientists say is causing wetter, stronger and more destructive storms.In Honduras, compulsory evacuations began before the weekend and by Sunday evening 63,500 people were reported to be in 379 shelters just in the northern region, while the whole country was on high alert.Nicaraguan officials said that by late Sunday afternoon about 1,500 people, nearly half of them children, had been evacuated from low-lying areas in the country’s northeast, including all the inhabitants of Cayo Misquitos. Authorities said 83,000 people in that region were in danger.- Advertisement – Wind and rain were beginning to be felt Sunday night in Bilwi, a coastal Nicaraguan city where people crowded markets and hardware stores during the day in search of plastic sheeting, nails and other materials to reinforce their homes, just as they did when Hurricane Eta hit on Nov. 3.Several residents of Bilwi expressed concern that their homes would not stand up to Iota, so soon after Eta. Local television showed people being evacuated in wooden boats, carrying young children as well as dogs and chickens.Authorities warned that the risk was high because Iota would probably come ashore over areas where Eta’s torrential rains left the soil saturated with water and more prone to new landslides and floods.Eta already wreaked havoc. It hit Nicaragua as a Category 4 hurricane, killing at least 120 people as torrential rains caused flash floods and mudslides in parts of Central America and Mexico. Then it meandered across Cuba, the Florida Keys and around the Gulf of Mexico before slogging ashore again near Cedar Key, Florida, and dashing across Florida and the Carolinas.Iota was forecast to drop 8 to 16 inches (200 -400 millimeters) of rain in northern Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala and southern Belize, with as much as 30 inches (750 millimeters) in isolated spots. Costa Rica and Panama could also experience heavy rain and possible flooding, the hurricane center said.Eta was the 28th named storm of this year’s hurricane season, tying the 2005 record for named storms. Theta, the 29th, was far out in the eastern Atlantic Ocean, and became a remnant low Sunday.The official end of hurricane season is Nov. 30. – Advertisement – A fast-strengthening Hurricane Iota is sweeping over the western Caribbean and has become a very dangerous Category 4 storm early Monday as it heads for the same part of Central American battered by a similarly powerful Hurricane Eta just over a week ago.Forecasters said Iota continued to show signs of strengthening and could be a catastrophic Category 5 hurricane by the time it reaches Central America.- Advertisement – Evacuations were being conducted from low-lying areas in Nicaragua and Honduras near their shared border, which appeared to be Iota’s likely landfall. Winds and rain were already being felt on the Nicaraguan coast Sunday night.Iota became a hurricane early Sunday and rapidly gained power, and was expected to pass over or near Colombia’s Providencia island during the night. It became a dangerous Category 4 hurricane Monday morning, and the U.S. National Hurricane Center warned it would probably reach the Central America mainland late Monday.The hurricane center said Iota had maximum sustained winds of 145 mph (230 kph) in a 4 a.m. EST advisory. It was centered about 170 miles (275 kilometers) southeast of Cabo Gracias a Dios on the Nicaragua-Honduras border and moving westward at 10 mph (17 kph).- Advertisement –
Nov 15, 2005 (CIDRAP News) – In China, Indonesia, and Vietnam, countries widely seen as ground zero in the global fight against H5N1 avian influenza, efforts to quash the virus are hampered by the lack of a key weapon: money.Organizations such as the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the World Bank have made urgent calls for a quick infusion of aid to Southeast Asia. Yet little of the promised funding has materialized, hobbling the cash-strapped countries’ efforts to contain the virus.The World Bank earlier this month offered up to $500 million to fight avian flu and hoped to have money flowing to needy nations by December, according to a Nov 4 news release. It estimated the potential cost of a human flu pandemic at $800 billion in one year.In addition, the World Bank is seeking contributions from developing countries as well as other donors to create an ongoing funding mechanism to bolster the $500 million, starting next year, said Jim Adams, World Bank vice president for operations policy and country services.Compensating farmers for culled poultry is one key to stemming H5N1, Adams said in the news release.”Obviously for farmers, particularly poor rural farmers, this is their income. If they are properly compensated and paid an appropriate market price for their animals, culling programs will be successful,” Adams said. “If they’re not properly compensated, experience shows, they’ll find another way of getting animals to market and the problem will expand.”Lack of money also endangers surveillance and vaccination efforts, Bernard Vallatt, director general of the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), told Reuters news service in a story published today.”The problem is money. Indonesia and Vietnam are the top priorities which need global help,” Vallatt said.A senior government official in Vietnam told Reuters last week that the country needs about $150 million in international aid, but has received only $10 million to date.Vaccination urged in Southeast AsiaCulling and vaccination efforts in Vietnam have been plagued by financial concerns, among other problems.Officials have told farmers in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City to kill or sell their poultry by Nov 21, CBS reported. They will be paid only half the current market value for poultry destroyed by the deadline. Live birds found after Nov 21 will be culled with no compensation.China will ship 45 tons of avian flu vaccine for poultry, worth $780,000, to Vietnam, CBS news reported today, but vaccine alone doesn’t address all of the financial problems associated with the campaign.Low wages for people giving the vaccinations in Vietnam are hampering the aggressive campaign, the Bangkok Post reported today. About 109 million birds have been vaccinated in Vietnam, but the country still reported outbreaks in 61 communes between Oct 1 and Nov 14, the story said.Indonesia launches plan, seeks grantsIn Indonesia, soldiers and volunteers will go door-to-door starting in the Jakarta area to find H5N1-infected poultry, the government announced yesterday, according to today’s Jakarta Post.”We have to address this problem quickly,” President Susilo Bamban Yudhoyono said yesterday. “There must be an intensive campaign to make the public aware of the virus.”The FAO is assisting Indonesia with surveillance efforts, and the Jakarta Post reports today that the World Bank president has offered help to Indonesia to fund a mass cull.”Stamping out [avian flu] would not be easy as it would need billions of rupiah,” Susilo noted in his response.The Indonesian government’s avian flu plan includes searching door-to-door for infected poultry, designating people to constantly monitor the outbreaks, increasing vaccine and antiviral supplies, ordering state pharmaceutical maker PT Bio Farma to make vaccines, increasing the amount of money allocated to fight avian flu by about US $35 million next year, and seeking grants from international donors.Chinese farmer can’t recoup costsThe containment efforts in China could drastically affect farmers. A story published online today in China Daily offered an example of the impact on poultry farmers in Heishan County in hard-hit Liaoning province.Jiang Lianfu in Yingfang village had 13,000 hens. They appeared healthy, but they were slaughtered in a regional mass cull of 6 million poultry because dead ducks were found near his farm, China Daily reported.Jiang had spent about US $24,700 to establish his henhouse, half of it borrowed.”I planned to pay back the loan at the end of the year and borrow more money to expand the farm,” Jiang told China Daily. Instead, he received about $1.20 for each bird culled, or $15,600, not enough to cover his investment.His family watched the cull, Jiang told the newspaper. “We just stood there and watched as the birds’ necks were wrung.”See also:World Bank news release on global avian flu program
“A confused consumer is a consumer who’s not confident about the safety of the food,” Acheson said. He added that until those details are resolved, the advisory from the FDA remains the same: Don’t eat fresh or raw spinach. At today’s press briefing, Acheson reported that more than half of the HUS cases in this outbreak were in adults. He listed the following age distribution for the HUS patients: younger than 5 years, 7%; 5 to 19, 24%; 20 to 64, 55%, and 65 and older, 14%. The CDC said this week that people who experience diarrhea after eating fresh spinach or salad blends containing fresh spinach should contact their healthcare provider and ask to have a stool sample tested for E coli O157:H7. Officials are intensively discussing allowing spinach from unaffected regions to be sold again, he said. Authorities are working out what labeling should be used and are devising a message to ensure that consumers know the spinach that returns to stores is safe. David Acheson, MD, chief medical officer for the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, said at a news briefing that four more patients developed hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS), a serious complication, bringing HUS cases to 27. Eighty-three people—more than half of those infected—were hospitalized in the outbreak. The death toll remained the same at 1 today. Patricia Griffin, MD, chief of the CDC’s foodborne diseases epidemiology section, said patients with E coli infections have little or no fever. She advised clinicians who have patients with a suspected E coli infection to speak directly with labs before sending in stool samples. “Ask them if they look for O157 in every stool specimen; not all do,” she said. “If they don’t, ask them to add a routine enteric panel.” Concern about high HUS rateAt an E coli update for clinicians today, hosted by the CDC, Phillip Tarr, MD, director of the Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, said the high number of patients (27 of 157, or 17%) who developed HUS, particularly young adults, in the current outbreak was unexpected. Children usually have higher rates of HUS than adults. Tarr said the rate can be as high as 15% in children younger than 10 who have E coli infections. The FDA issued its fresh spinach alert on Sep 14, when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced that 50 patients in eight states had been diagnosed with E coli infections and that fresh or raw spinach was the food most of them had in common. Sep 21, 2006 (CIDRAP News) – Eleven more cases were identified today in a nationwide Escherichia coli O157:H7 outbreak related to fresh spinach, bringing the total to 157, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported. No new recalls were announced today. Three remain in effect: fresh spinach and products that contain fresh spinach produced or distributed by Natural Selections Foods, River Ranch, and RLB Food Distributors. Sep 21 FDA press releasehttp://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/2006/ucm109577.htm Experts share diagnostic, management tipsTarr said two notable symptoms of an E coli O157:H7 infection are watery diarrhea that often turns bloody and abdominal pain that is out of proportion to the diarrhea. He said adults usually have right-sided abdominal tenderness, whereas the tenderness in children is typically more generalized. CIDRAP overview of pathogenic E colihttp://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/fs/food-disease/causes/ecolioview.html The platelet count is a useful barometer of the patient’s risk of developing HUS and should be monitored daily, he said. “Once it starts to rise, the patient is usually out of the woods.” Both Griffin and Tarr said there is no evidence that antibiotics are helpful in treating patients who have E coli O157:H7 infections; in fact, they said antibiotics have been known to increase the production of Shiga toxin. Few new details emerged about investigations on nine farms in California’s greater Salinas Valley that have been possibly linked to a fresh spinach sample that tested positive for E coli O157:H7. The results on the sample, collected from a bag of spinach from the home of a New Mexico patient, were announced yesterday. Acheson said about 10 or 15 more bags of spinach obtained from patients are being tested. Hydration plays a key role in supportive care because of the profound coagulation activation seen in patients with these infections, Tarr said. Admitting patients to the hospital allows patients to receive intravenous isotonic saline solution to maintain kidney perfusion, enables physicians to monitor patients’ platelet counts and other lab values, and prevents patients from spreading the infection to others, he said. Earlier this week, Acheson said it was too early to reach conclusions about the virulence of the involved E coli strain, but he said the number of people who have been hospitalized seemed high. In a typical E coli outbreak, he said, 25% to 30% of patients require hospital treatment, compared with more than half of the patients identified so far in this episode. See also: If the lab says it does test for O157:H7, clinicians should ask what test they use, Griffin said. The sorbitol-MacConkey agar test is preferred, but many labs instead use the more automated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test that screens for Shiga toxin, she said. Labs should hold on to positive samples for further testing and so that isolates can be sent to public health labs.
In the letters, Barry debated with Markel and colleagues whether New York City authorities ever used isolation and quarantine to combat the influenza pandemic in the fall of 1918. Since publication of his book in 2004, Barry has been involved in the preparedness effort and continued to do research on NPIs. Most of this work has expanded on findings in the book, and some of it has caused him to revise views expressed there. Since the Markel publication in JAMA, Barry has raised serious challenges to the data used by Markel’s group to justify their conclusions about the public health actions they reported to have been taken in 2 of the 43 cities (New York City and Chicago). These are the only two cities among the 43 for which Barry did such follow-up research. Barry wrote what I believe to be a convincing and well-supported letter to JAMA with his concerns. Last week his letter and Markel’s response were published in JAMA. Barry acknowledged that City Health Commissioner Royal Copeland told reporters in September 1918 that he would use isolation and quarantine. However, he cited a pair of articles published in an October 1918 issue of the New York Medical Journal by Copeland and his assistant as evidence that these measures were never used. Both articles reported on the epidemic and the city’s response, but neither mentioned isolation, quarantine, or other major NPIs. Further, the city health department’s annual report mentioned no NPIs used in the flu epidemic, according to Barry. John M. Barry holds the position of distinguished visiting scholar at the Center for Bioenvironmental Research of Tulane and Xavier Universities in New Orleans and is the author of several books. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org (link sends e-mail). Nov 27, 2007 (CIDRAP News) This past August, however, Howard Markel of the University of Michigan and colleagues published a study of the public health actions taken in 43 cities during the 1918-19 pandemic and the associated morbidity and mortality in those cites. They concluded that when NPI strategies were employed, they made a difference. This was a very important conclusion, as the results of the Markel study now serve as the core support for the recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations for the use of community mitigation strategies (ie, NPIs) during a pandemic. Is there another explanation for the relatively benign experiences in New York and Chicago? Possibly. Both cities experienced quite definite spring waves of influenza, which may have immunized some of the population. I believe Markel and colleagues did not address the important challenges that Barry presented. In my view, his information raises serious challenges to the scientific integrity of what Markel and colleagues have reported for two cites included in their study, which in turn raises important questions about the overall results of their study. This concern does not disprove that NPIs altered the course of the pandemic. But we in public health will face overwhelming challenges with risk communication and credibility during the next pandemic. While we will surely recommend the use of NPIs at that time, we have an obligation to society to tell exactly what we know and explain the science that supports our conclusions. How will we ever be able to dismiss and even condemn the crazy things that some will try to do during a pandemic if we don’t base recommendations on the strength of our science? We must hold ourselves to that standard now and in the future. I believe John Barry makes a clear and compelling case below that Markel has not met that standard. We must. Chicago’s actions came lateNow to Chicago, which also had a relatively benign experience in the pandemic. According to Markel et al, Chicago tied for the third earliest intervention of the 43 cities he studied, acting on day minus-2, ie, 2 days before the mortality rate exceeded double the baseline rate. We do not know what action Chicago took that day, because the Markel article does not identify any action in any city on any date, nor does it provide any documentation for any of these specific actions. Markel does offer a 1,144-item online bibliography, but the size obscures rather than elucidates, since readers have no way of matching documentation with any particular action. In response, Markel and his colleagues cited news reports from the New York Times and JAMA as evidence that the city did use isolation and quarantine. A story in the Times for Sep 19, 1918, said three New Yorkers had been quarantined the day before, and in a Nov 17 story, Copeland was quoted as saying the city had quarantined arriving ship passengers. In addition, a story in the Sep 28 JAMA said flu patients were “quarantined,” according to Markel et al. They also noted that Barry cited the JAMA story in his own book as evidence of a New York City quarantine. Remarks from CIDRAP Director Michael T. Osterholm, PhD, MPHJohn M. Barry is one of our nation’s most respected historians, and his chronicle of the 1918 pandemic, The Great Influenza: The Story of the Deadliest Pandemic in History, is regarded by many influenza and public health experts as the definitive historical review of that event. To paraphrase the old E.F. Hutton commercial, “When Barry speaks, most of us concerned about our preparedness for the next pandemic listen.” You will find below a commentary from Barry dealing with the important question of the use of nonpharmaceutical measures during the 1918 pandemic. The two articles in the New York Medical Journal—they were reprints of speeches, as Markel says—are primary sources; they are contemporaneous reports to physicians gathered to discuss the outbreak by Copeland and his deputy Louis Harris, head of the department’s Bureau of Preventable Disease. Harris gave the presentation reprinted under the title “Epidemology and Administrative Control of Influenza,” which is one of the items missing from Markel’s bibliography. This is a serious lapse, since the report explicitly addresses what we now call NPIs in New York City and was authored by the person in charge of those interventions, including all department quarantines. Both men recite a long list of actions taken, beginning with some attempt during the summer to monitor a few individual case-patients coming off ships. Policy makers are today considering implementing nonpharmaceutical interventions in the face of a pandemic on the basis of analyses of their historic use in 1918. I support many (though not all) of the proposed interventions, but I do not support analysis based on weak data—especially when those data that are flatly contradicted by better information. Yet that is what could happen in this case. And although my letter to JAMA was limited to New York City, the mistaken data in the article by Markel et al seem to extend at least to Chicago as well. Frankly, our one real hope is that all the other public health tools we have employed in past infectious disease epidemics will make a difference. These tools have largely tried to change individual and community-based behavior to avoid exposure to the infectious agent until after the epidemic has run its course. These are often referred to as nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and include familiar approaches such as isolation, quarantine, and social distancing. While all of us might believe that these measures will work, until recently very little evidence has been available concerning their efficacy in reducing either morbidity or mortality in an influenza pandemic. This is due in part to the infrequency of such pandemics (three in the last century) and an absence of systematic studies during those pandemics of our collective public health actions and their impact. Health commissioner’s veracity in doubtNow let’s consider Markel’s sole source on quarantine: Royal Copeland, who told the New York Times that the city was imposing it. The newspaper no doubt quoted Copeland accurately. But who was Copeland? He was a homeopath, not a medical doctor, who said, “Man is a social animal. . . . Organization is a necessity and my organization is Tammany.” Tammany, the most corrupt political machine in American history, had been out of power for several years but regained control of New York City in early 1918. It promptly began putting loyalists into every available patronage job, and it tried to force qualified civil servants out of jobs that were not strictly patronage. For the health department, Tammany initially chose as director someone else whom it regarded as a loyalist. But as Tammany moved with increasing aggressiveness to replace highly qualified public health officials with unqualified cronies, after a few months on the job, Tammany’s choice for director of the health department quit in protest. When no MD surfaced for the job, Tammany turned to Copeland, not an MD but a true Tammany man. As any reader of this Web site knows, CIDRAP has made pandemic influenza preparedness one of its highest priorities as an infectious disease research and policy organization. I believe the next influenza pandemic, if even moderate in nature, will be one of the most catastrophic public health events in history. I come to this conclusion because of the size of the world’s population today (approximately 6.5 billion, compared with 1.2 billion in 1918), the likelihood that there will be a lack of stockpiled and effective pandemic vaccine at outset of the pandemic, and the existence of the global just-in-time economy, which means we will soon exhaust many critical products and services, like drugs and vaccines, other medical supplies, and even food, in the early days of the pandemic. It is not difficult to establish the facts, but Markel in his reply to my letter to JAMA manages to obscure them. He cites two sources in addition to the New York Times to support his claim that New York City imposed a quarantine. These other sources are a 1918 JAMA article and my own book. Yet in actuality these other citations, as well as the New York Times itself, all circle back to a single person—Royal Copeland, head of the city’s health department—and what he told the Times. Everything the newspaper reported about quarantine, including Markel’s claim that the “next day, 3 New Yorkers were quarantined,” came from a direct quote by Copeland; the newspaper did no independent reporting whatsoever, nor did it quote any other health department or city official, or anyone else, in these stories on quarantine. (More about Copeland later.) The 1918 JAMA citation is not a peer-reviewed article; it is a news item based on Copeland’s published comments. COMMENTARY BY JOHN M. BARRY Finally, it is important to note that the errors in Markel’s article do not disprove the hypothesis that NPIs impacted the course of the pandemic. But any analysis of their historic use must be based on rigorous scholarship. His is not. Copeland and Harris did not, however, lie in the medical journal articles quoted above, which were, as Markel notes, reprints of speeches they made to a meeting of New York City physicians desperate to find ways to alleviate the most lethal disease outbreak in their lives. Copeland would have been scorned out of the room if he had told such lies at such a meeting, to an audience who knew the truth. Therefore they made no mention of quarantine as an action taken during the pandemic. For the sake of argument, let’s say Markel is correct and this summer effort was more robust than I think. That still has nothing to do with what happened during the outbreak itself. It’s one thing to surveil three or four people coming off a ship. It’s another to wait for a case to be reported (and hope cases are in fact being reported) and then try to isolate dozens, then quickly hundreds, then thousands of influenza cases. No wonder Copeland debunked the idea, as he did in the quotation used in my letter to JAMA. Markel accuses me of taking this quote out of context. Rather than argue with him, I will happily fax the articles to anyone who requests them (print quality of the articles prevents including a link here) so readers can judge for themselves. Why would Copeland lie about the use of quarantine? There were specific reasons in this case, beyond just trying to make himself appear in command. The same day that New York made influenza reportable, Jersey City imposed an actual quarantine. The Times reported both actions. It is easy to imagine that this put pressure on Copeland. At any rate, the same day the information about Jersey City was published, he told the Times that New York City was using “strict isolation and quarantine,” in effect calling Jersey City on quarantine and raising it on “strict isolation.” The larger context makes lying more understandable as well. The United States was at war. Every piece of government-released public information—federal, state, and local—was considered from the perspective of how to keep up morale. The official position of the US government’s Committee on Public Information was: “The force of an idea lies in its inspirational value. It matters very little if it is true or false.” Indeed, the pandemic became known as “Spanish influenza” because in all the warring countries, newspapers, which were either censored or intimidated, initially did not report on the disease. Spain was not at war, and its newspapers headlined it. Hence, even though we know the disease appeared in France, Germany, Britain, and the United States before Spain, Spain gave the pandemic its name. Also to maintain morale during the pandemic, national public health officials—people who knew the truth—said, “This is ordinary influenza by another name,” and, “You have nothing to fear if proper precautions are taken,” and, “This is nothing more than ordinary lagrippe or influenza.” Local public health officials all over the country echoed that line. Records don’t mention quarantineMarkel makes much of the city Board of Health’s vote to make influenza a reportable disease on Sep 17. The board did make this decision, but this does not support his argument. Making a disease reportable does absolutely nothing in itself to control that disease. Neither the minutes of the Sep 17 board meeting nor the minutes of other board meetings throughout the pandemic mention quarantine, although they do include discussion of less severe NPIs that were employed. This is a strange omission if quarantine was actually used. Nor do any other department records contain any evidence that the city imposed quarantine. Had there been a quarantine, one would have expected details about how many inspectors were involved, the number of homes visited, the period of quarantine, placards put up, etc. Health departments in cities that did impose quarantine recorded all these data. Yet no such data exist for New York City. Quarantine was not mentioned in the weekly, monthly, or annual reports of the heath department, even though these reports were so detailed that, as I pointed out in my original letter, they recounted how many laboratory flasks were washed. Here are the undisputed facts: The article does explain that it uses only three major actions—quarantine, school closings, and general bans on public gatherings—as metrics for NPIs, so Chicago’s action should have been one of those three. But according to the Chicago health department’s 100-plus-page “Report of an Epidemic of Influenza in Chicago During the Fall of 1918,” which is not in Markel’s bibliography, only two actions were taken on day minus-2: The state banned public funerals and the city issued orders for teachers to inspect schoolchildren. These actions fall far short of the authors’ metrics. The city’s most tangible action actually did not occur until day plus-19 (21 days later) which by coincidence was, quoting from the report, “the day when the epidemic was taking its highest death toll,” ie, at least several days and possibly a week or more after disease spread had peaked. Only then did Chicago close “theaters of all kinds, cabarets, dance halls, athletic meets, and everything of this kind.” But even then, “churches and schools were not closed. Nothing was done to interfere with the morale of the community.” I did not do a systematic review of all 43 cities covered in Markel’s article. By pure happenstance, I am familiar enough with events in New York and Chicago to make a judgment on the quality of his assessment of those two only, and I do not know how valid his findings are in the other 41 cities. But his interpretation of data in Chicago and New York does not inspire faith in the rest of his analysis. And since, according to Markel, New York was the earliest city to act and Chicago was tied for third earliest, one wonders whether, even if everything else in the article is correct, errors here would be enough to drop the findings below statistical significance. According to the New York Medical Journal articles, as the pandemic began and after making the disease reportable, the health department launched a series of initiatives. Harris lists them, and they include but are not limited to public education efforts (which proved disappointing to both Copeland and Harris), enforcement of antispitting ordinances, an attempt to stagger business closings to limit rush-hour crowds, closing of selected unsanitary theaters, and the like. These articles also justified the decisions to keep schools open and not to ban public gatherings, as most other cities did. (School closings, bans on public gatherings, and quarantine were the three chief NPIs Markel tracked.) Neither Copeland nor Harris cites quarantine or isolation as an action taken during the outbreak itself. Harris was explicitly detailing “administrative” public health initiatives to “control” influenza. He was the individual in charge of quarantine. He made no mention of quarantine. Is it plausible, or even conceivable, that he would have made no mention of quarantine if quarantine had actually been imposed? Introductory remarksJohn Barry’s commentary Markel also cited my book. In my book research, I read the same New York Times and JAMA articles that he did, and I initially believed them, as he still does. Hence my book incorrectly stated that New York imposed a quarantine. However, I gave the public health response in New York City only the most cursory consideration in the book. All my focus, and all my digging into primary sources and archival material, lay elsewhere. After my book was published, and as I got involved with the pandemic preparedness effort, the fact that New York City had a relatively benign experience continued to intrigue me. Since New York City did not close schools, I became increasingly curious if its quarantine could have accounted for its experience. So I investigated. New data convinced me that there was no quarantine, and I reversed my position. The footnotes and bibliography to his original article suggest that Markel never learned of these data, some of which are detailed below.
Pierre Formenty, a WHO hemorrhagic fever expert, told the AP that news of a new Ebola strain “is an important discovery for the scientific community.” Nov 30, 2007 (CIDRAP News) – The World Health Organization (WHO) today announced an outbreak of Ebola hemorrhagic fever in Uganda involving a new subtype of the virus that officials suspect was responsible for sickening 51 patients, including 16 who died. CIDRAP overview of viral hemorrhagic fevershttp://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/bt/vhf/biofacts/index.html CDC information about Ebola See also: CDC reports of recent Ebola and other viral hemorrhagic fever outbreakshttp://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/spb/outbreaks/index.htm Nov 30 WHO statementhttp://www.who.int/csr/don/2007_11_30a/en/index.html The Ebola virus is highly contagious and known for its high fatality rate, ranging from about 50% to 90%. Initial symptoms include fever, headache, joint and muscle aches, sore throat, and weakness, followed by diarrhea, vomiting, and stomach pain, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Some patients have internal and external bleeding. There is no vaccine or specific treatment for the disease. Uganda’s last Ebola outbreak occurred in 2000 and involved the Sudan subtype, according to the CDC. In that outbreak, 425 cases and 224 deaths were reported. Analysis of patient samples at the National Reference Laboratories in Uganda and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta have confirmed that a new species of the Ebola virus was involved in the outbreak, the WHO said. Four Ebola subtypes have previously been identified: Zaire, Sudan, Cote d’Ivoire, and Reston. The focus of the outbreak is Bundibugyo district in the western part of the country, the WHO said in a statement today. The reported case-patients include three healthcare workers, one of whom died. Patients are being treated at hospitals in Kikyo and Bundibugyo, the WHO reported. Investigators from Uganda’s health ministry and the WHO said the outbreak might have begun in September, the WHO said. A task force involving the health ministry, the WHO, and international health groups is responding to the outbreak. WHO spokesman Gregory Hartl said the WHO was particularly concerned about the outbreak because patients are presenting with somewhat unusual symptoms for Ebola, such as vomiting, the Associated Press (AP) reported today. “This could be a milder strain of the disease, but we still need additional information to confirm that,” Formenty said. The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) had an Ebola outbreak in the DRC’s Kasai Occidental (West Kasai) province that began in August and involved at least 17 cases and 6 deaths, according to previous reports. The DRC health ministry said on Nov 20 that it had been contained. Nov 20 CIDRAP News story “Congo says Ebola outbreak is contained”
Jun 24, 2008 (CIDRAP News) – Only about 36% of people suffering from asthma received an influenza shot in the 2005-06 flu season, despite their increased risk for flu complications, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).In the first estimate of national flu vaccination coverage in asthma patients, the CDC found that vaccination rates were well below national public health targets for all age-groups, according to an article in the Jun 20 issue of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).The CDC has recommended flu shots for asthma patients ever since 1964, given their risk for complications, the report notes. It says about 22.9 million Americans, including 6.8 million children and 16.1 million adults, were reported to have asthma in 2006.The agency used the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), an ongoing, in-person interview survey of US civilians, to gather data on flu immunization in people with asthma. The 2005-06 flu season marked the first time the NHIS was able to yield an estimate of coverage in people with asthma when there was no shortage of flu vaccine.Of 15,295 participants (aged 2 years and older) in the NHIS, 1,248 had asthma and answered questions about vaccinations. Of these 1,248, 36.2% had received a shot during the flu season, as compared with 23.9% for those with no asthma.For the asthma patients, immunization was most common in the older groups: 48.6% for those aged 50 to 64 and 75.7% for those 65 and older. The coverage for asthma patients of all ages fell well short of the government’s “Healthy People 2010” goals for flu immunization: 60% for people aged 18 to 64 with high-risk conditions and 90% for everyone aged 65 and up.Vaccination coverage varied significantly with healthcare affiliation and insurance coverage. Those who had a “usual place for healthcare” had a coverage rate of 38.7%, versus only 10.4% for those without a regular provider. Similarly, vaccination coverage was 39.9% for those with health insurance, versus 14.5% for those without insurance. Coverage also varied according to income level, but did not differ significantly by race, ethnicity, or history of an asthma exacerbation within the preceding year.Although coverage was higher for asthma patients who had had more healthcare visits in the preceding year, even those with 10 or more visits had only a 50.8% vaccination rate.The findings “emphasize the need for measures to uniformly increase influenza vaccination rates among persons with asthma,” the CDC says. The agency recommends such interventions as automated reminders, standing orders, multi-component educational programs, reduction of travel distance or out-of-pocket vaccine costs, and provider performance feedback.One limitation of the survey is that it did not cover whether children being vaccinated for the first time received a second dose, as recommended by the CDC.CDC. Influenza vaccination coverage among persons with asthma—United States, 2005-06 influenza season. MMWR 2008 Jun 20;57(24):653-6 [Full text]
The CNTB Representation in Germany and the County Tourist Board from the area of Slavonia organized a presentation for the media and tour operators, which took place in the renovated International Press Club in the very center of Munich. The aim of the presentation of Slavonia was to promote the tourist offer and further encourage tour operators to include this tourist region in their programs, which is also one of the strategic marketing goals of overall Croatian tourism.The presentation included a wealth of cultural heritage, so the participants were introduced to the Đakovo Cathedral, Lipizzaner Stables, fortresses in Osijek and Slavonski Brod, castles in Vukovar, Kutjevo and Našice and the Museum of Vučedol Culture. Kopački rit with a rich bird habitat was also mentioned, and UNESCO World Heritage – Bećarac and Geopark Papuk were also discussed, and the possibility of sailing on tourist boats on the Danube was presented.The participants were also reminded of the possibility of arriving by plane from Germany directly to Osijek Airport, and currently you can fly to Osijek with Eurowings from Stuttgart. The participants of the event, about 30 of them in total, had the opportunity to taste various Slavonian gastronomic delicacies from various family farms and top Slavonian wines and to talk directly and create personal contact with representatives of Slavonia who were in Munich. At the end of the workshop, the enogastronomic offer was presented by the Šokci in the original men’s folk costume, thus conveying part of the atmosphere of numerous traditional events in Slavonia.Related news:
Significant increase in tourist arrivals and overnight stays Compared to November 2017, the City of Zagreb had 10,2% more arrivals and 12,2% more tourist nights. Most overnight stays of foreign tourists were realized by tourists from Italy (7,0%) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (6,9%). Tourists in the age group of 35 to 44 realized the most overnight stays, 38 thousand, which is 22,9% of the total number of tourist overnight stays in the City of Zagreb. Domestic tourists realized 13,3% more arrivals and 13,6% more overnight stays in November 2018 compared to November 2017. Foreign tourists realized 25,4% more arrivals and 20,0% more overnight stays compared to November 2017. In the group Hotels and similar accommodation tourists had at their disposal a total of 38 thousand rooms and suites (which is 50,0% of the total number of available rooms and suites) with a total of 74 thousand permanent beds (which is 42,2% of the total number of available permanent bed). The average occupancy of rooms was 33,4%, and permanent beds 27,4%. Source: CBS In the group Hotels and similar accommodation available most rooms and permanent beds Foreign tourists realized 16,4 million arrivals and 82,7 million overnight stays, which is an increase in arrivals by 6,6% and an increase in overnight stays by 3,6%. In the first eleven months of 2018, tourists realized 18,3 million arrivals and 88,9 million overnight stays in commercial accommodation facilities, which is an increase in arrivals by 7,0% and an increase in overnight stays by 3,9% compared to the same period in 2017. The highest number of overnight stays of foreign tourists in November 2018 was realized by tourists from Germany, 65 thousand overnight stays (12,5% of the total overnight stays of foreign tourists) and tourists from Slovenia, with 61 thousand overnight stays of tourists (11,6% of the total overnight stays of foreign tourists tourist). Compared to November 2017, tourists from Germany increased their overnight stays by 48,1%, and tourists from Slovenia increased their overnight stays by 28,4%. In November 2018, more than 372 thousand tourist arrivals and 781 thousand tourist nights were realized in commercial accommodation facilities. Compared to November 2017, there were 21,0% more arrivals and 17,9% more overnight stays. In November 2018, the highest number of tourist nights was realized in hotels, 510 thousand overnight stays, which is 65,2% of the total number of overnight stays. Compared to November 2017, hotels achieved an increase in arrivals by 21,3% and an increase in overnight stays by 17,6%. Source: CBS Most overnight stays of foreign tourists were realized by tourists from Germany (24,1%), Slovenia (8,7%), Austria (8,5%), Poland (7,3%), the Czech Republic (6,2%) and Italy. 6,0%). Most overnight stays of tourists from Germany and Slovenia In November 2018, there were 76 thousand rooms, apartments and camping places available to tourists with a total of 176 thousand permanent beds. The highest number of tourist arrivals and overnight stays in November 2018 was realized by the County of the City of Zagreb, 89 thousand arrivals and 167 thousand overnight stays, which is 24,0% of the total arrivals and 21,3% of the total realized tourist nights, according to data from the Central Bureau. statistics (CBS). In the first eleven months, an increase in tourist arrivals and overnight stays In the first eleven months of 2018, domestic tourists made 10,3% more arrivals and 8,3% more overnight stays than in the same period last year. Most nights spent in hotels This is followed by overnight stays of tourists from Austria (10,5%), Italy (7,9%), Korea, the Republic (5,2%) and the USA (4,8%).
Club Adriatic doo from Makarska operates as part of the Crikvenica hotel group Jadran, which was taken over last year by two mandatory pension funds PBZ Croatia osiguranje dd and Erste plavi dd, entrusted with the management of the new management, and provided around HRK 450 million for the company’s development. Jadran dd manages ten hotels of different categories and three camps in the area of Crikvenica and Makarska. Add to that the pavilions and annexes of some of the hotels, and guests are offered more than 1.600 accommodation units, and more than 1.100 pitches are available in the camps. “It is important that we have completed the fulfillment of the undertaken obligation to all employees of Club Adriatic doo We have provided funds for the payment of salary differences in the past ten years on time, but problems with the documentation we inherited delayed the implementation of this decision. I am glad that we had the understanding of all employees and union representatives in Club Adriatic for the final settlement of these past debts“Pointed out the President of the Management Board of Club Adriatic doo Goran Fabris. The President of the Management Board of the Adriatic Club Goran Fabris started resolving this issue in the spring, but problems with completing the documentation and harmonization with tax and other legal regulations delayed the completion of the calculation of the difference in salaries to employees in the past ten years. In constant communication with the leaders of both unions operating in this Makarska collective, employees were regularly informed about the course of the process. These are 119 employees who were paid a total of around HRK 20 million. This is the result of concluded agreements between the Management Board of Club Adriatic doo and the Trade Union of Tourism and Services of Croatia and the Trade Union of Istria, Kvarner and Dalmatia, as well as a settlement with the workers. For the employees of Club Adriatic doo from Makarska, the multi-year story about the payment of the salary difference for the period from May 1, 2008 to the end of last year, ie the remaining amounts of the salary difference for the past ten-year period, ended today.
In September last year space of Šibenik TEF it finally got the green light for new investments that planned projects such as the construction of hotels and sports facilities and the extension of the beach. Almost exactly a year later, at a meeting at the Ministry of State Property, an agreement was reached on the implementation of the “Batižele” project, among other things related to the convening of the assembly of Batižele, where decisions will be made regarding the recapitalization. an international public tender for the project, the Ministry announced today. Minister of State Property Mario Banožić, Minister of Environment and Energy Tomislav Ćorić, State Secretary Krunoslav Katičić, Assistant Minister Leon Žulj took part in the meeting on the development project “Batižele”, which would put the land of the former TEF in Šibenik into operation. the Mayor of the City of Šibenik Željko Burić, the Director of Hrvatske vode Zoran Đuroković and the Director of the Fund for Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency Dubravko Ponoš with associates and the Director of CERP Milan Plećaš. “After the increase of the share capital of the company Batižele, the share of the City of Šibenik will be 100 percent from the initial 67,95 percent, and the new shareholders will be the Republic of Croatia with 22,64 percent, the Fund for Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency with 8,71 percent and Hrvatske vode with 0,70 percent”, It is stated in the announcement. They reminded that at the session held in May 2019, the Government adopted a decision harmonizing the amounts of receivables of the Republic of Croatia and other legal entities against TEF Šibenik with the aim of increasing the share capital of the newly established company Batižele and determining the final amounts of recapitalization. The issue of TEF land has been a long-standing problem of all city authorities in Šibenik, and the Batižela project includes more than 200 square meters that have been released from all debts, while the state’s claims have been converted into shares. In the area of the former factory, a mixed purpose is planned, where investors would build a new settlement, residential-business, accommodation, cultural and educational capacity on the land worth 350 million kuna, and new catering and tourist capacities with two thousand beds are planned, it is reminded in the announcement. . The total amount of recapitalization of the company Batižele is HRK 148,1 million, of which the City of Šibenik participates with slightly more than HRK 53 million, the state with HRK 67,15 million, the Fund for Environmental Protection and Energy Efficiency with HRK 25,85 million and Hrvatske vode with HRK 2,07 million. The implementation of the “Batižele” project will put into operation the neglected space of the former TEF (former Electrodes and Ferroalloys Factory). “It was agreed that in the next two weeks all activities prior to the convening of the General Meeting of Batižele doo will be completed, which will, among other things, define the share capital and make appropriate decisions regarding the recapitalization. Upon completion of the recapitalization procedure, an international public tender is expected to be announced in accordance with the State Property Management Act. Furthermore, an agreement was reached on the formation of an expert committee that will participate in the preparation and implementation of the optimal model of disposal of shares, which is a key issue in the development project ‘Batižele'”, Point out the Ministry of State Property in a statement. Source / photo: Government of the Republic of Croatia; Šibenik portal
RELATED NEWS: “The Frankfurt-Dubrovnik direct winter air route has been running for the third year in a row within the framework of strategic projects of the Croatian Tourist Board, the Dubrovnik Tourist Board and Croatia Airlines. She added that at the initiative of the Dubrovnik Tourist Board and Croatia Airlines, all open hotels in Dubrovnik participate in winter programs during the winter. Vlašić expressed her satisfaction with the excellent air connections between the two cities and the number of German tourists, who are in 3rd place in the top list of the most numerous guests in Dubrovnik, “she said. Director of the Dubrovnik Tourist Board, Romana Vlašić. More about the program of the event “Magical winter in Dubrovnik”Look HERE By the way, in 2018 there were 77 German guests, 723% more than in the previous year, and they realized 22 overnight stays, 273% more than in 764. At the end of last week, a presentation of Dubrovnik and direct flights Frankfurt – Dubrovnik was held in Frankfurt for about fifty German travel agents and tourist journalists, co-organized by the Dubrovnik Tourist Board, the Croatian national carrier Croatia Airlines and the Croatian Tourist Board. In the Croatian restaurant Damiro Westsite in the center of Frankfurt, the director of the Croatian National Tourist Board in Frankfurt, Romeo Draghicchio, emphasized that the promotion of Dubrovnik in the winter months fits into the strategic plans of Croatian tourism which aim to extend the season in which Dubrovnik Frankfurt and its surroundings are an ideal area for attracting additional guests even in winter due to the direct winter connection. This winter, Dubrovnik will be connected with seven world capitals (Frankfurt, London, Istanbul, Warsaw, Rome, Barcelona and Athens) and with its domestic destination, Zagreb. The director of the Croatia Airlines branch in Frankfurt, Mato Radić, presented the winter flight schedule with an emphasis on the direct flight Frankfurt-Dubrovnik, three times a week during the winter months, while the director of Obzor putovanja in Zagreb, Silvana Turčić, presented the winter package arrangement for Dubrovnik. The Tourist Board of the City of Dubrovnik has designed and printed leaflets about all events during the winter in Croatian, English and German, which will be available to all visitors to the city in the information offices of the Tourist Board. DUBROVNIK EXPECTS OVER HRK 10 MILLION IN REVENUE FROM THE TOURIST FEE FOR CRUISES
Attachment: Statements / Cappelli: TOP 10 OF CROATIAN TOURISM She received the HGK award for marina of the year Olive Island Marina in Sutomišćica, while restaurant of the year Spinnaker in Porec. He was named Camp of the Year Aminess Maravea Camping Resort in Novigrad. DMK is the travel agency of the year Katarina Line in Opatija, while the hotel of the year award went to the hotel Valamar Collection Girandella Resort in Rabac. He received the annual award “Anton Štifanić in the individual category Ivan Sabljic, while the Croatian Tourist Lifetime Achievement Award was presented Frani Skoblaru. The awards ceremony concluded the twelfth edition of the Day of Croatian Tourism in Slavonia, and over a thousand participants from the Croatian tourist system and from business and social life took part in the event. “Today, Croatia is one of the world’s most popular tourist destinations, and this success is the result of the work of all tourism workers, all hosts and those who make tourism better. Therefore, I would like to congratulate everyone, and especially the winners, for making Croatian tourism better, more innovative and more interesting every year. In order to ensure the long-term success of Croatian tourism, we must continuously improve and that is why the Days of Croatian Tourism, as the largest gathering of stakeholders in Croatian tourism, is a great opportunity to look back at previous results, exchange experiences, discuss new ideas and trends in tourism. I believe that through joint action and facing all challenges in the future, we will continue to break records and make Croatian tourism even more competitive, even more open and fulfilling for every visitor, “said the Minister of Tourism.Gari Cappelli when awarding prizes. As part of the traditional tourist event Days of Croatian Tourism, last night in Osijek were awarded tourist awards for the best of the best in tourism, in the following categories: Tourist destination of the year, Sustainable Tourism Award, Beach of the Year, Tourist Event of the Year, DMK Travel Agency of the Year, Restaurant of the Year, Marina of the Year, Camp of the Year, Hotel of the Year, Anton Štifanić Award in the company / institution / association category and individual lifetime achievement and Special recognition for exceptional contribution to tourism of the Republic of Croatia. DHT- 1st evening – list of winners In the category “People in Tourism” of the CNTB, a special award for exceptional contribution to tourism in the Republic of Croatia was presented Vinko Prizmic, and the annual award “Anton Štifanić” for 2018 in the category of company / institution / association Travel agency ID Riva Tours GmbH. The CNTB award for sustainable tourism was presented Papuk Nature Park for “UNESCO Geopark Geo Stories”. It was declared the beach of the year Paradise beach in Lopr. It is the tourist event of the year Renaissance festival, while it was declared the destination of the year Rovinj. “The awards ceremony as part of the Croatian Tourism Day is perhaps the most important part because we further emphasize the importance and contribution of all tourism workers in achieving the results so far that the entire Croatian tourism sector is proud of. Today, our country enjoys the status of a respectable tourist destination that maintains positive growth trends from year to year, which is the result of selfless dedication and work of our people. I extend my sincere congratulations to all the winners and nominees, and I invite all tourism workers to continue this community in our upcoming 2020 tourist year, “he said. HTZ Director Kristjan Stanicic. “I am extremely happy that for the 23rd time we will award the” Tourist Flower – Quality for Croatia “awards, which reward the best of the best in domestic tourism. We determine the winners according to quality and business indicators, but they are the foundation of that quality and success of people. The greatest wealth that our guests bring from Croatia are not photos of natural beauties, but memories of a good time created by you – the hosts. Your hospitality, smile and cordiality make a difference and create an experience of Croatia that no one can compete with. These record numbers that we are happy to brag about every year are the result of your work. That is why I am not afraid for the future of our tourism, because the key to its success is in your hands, and you have always proven yourself as a factor that makes a difference, “he said. President of the Croatian Chamber of Commerce Luka Burilović. Related news: FIRST PART OF AWARDS AT CROATIAN TOURISM DAYS AWARDED
New interesting cooperation and series on the Croatian market. Namely, Uniline has become an exclusive partner of Reboot InfoGamer for the entire region. Jednosmjerni i povratni transferi u organizaciji Unilinea bit će organizirani iz zračnih luka iz Zagreba i Dubrovnika te iz svih većih gradova u Hrvatskoj – Rijeke, Splita, Osijeka, Varaždina i Pule te iz brojnih gradova Adriatic Regije. To su redom Niš, Beograd, Novi Sad, Sarajevo, Banja Luka, Klagenfurt, Maribor, Ljubljana i Pečuh. Osim transfera autobusima posjetiteljima je na raspolaganju i mogućnost privatnih (VIP) transfera osobnim automobilima ili kombijima. “As a leading expert for Croatia and the region, we have the opportunity to offer a complete service for the biggest events, such as Reboot InfoGamer. Our goal is to offer all visitors to the fair, passionate gaming fans, a unique experience of the whole event because we will take over all the logistical details.”, said Kristian Šustar, Development Director at Uniline. Uniline has developed a package of arrangements especially for visitors to Reboot InfoGamer, which includes numerous Zagreb hotels, apartments and hostels, and gamers, in addition to accommodation, have the option of organizing transport to Zagreb and other tourist services such as excursions and car rental services. Uniline, a leading regional destination management company, has partnered with one of the world’s largest trade fairs Gaming industry, Reboot InfoGamer and became the exclusive agency for organizing transportation and accommodation at all Reboot events in Croatia and the region. Reboot InfoGamer gathers more and more guests every year, and this year more than 100.000 fans of computer games and technology are expected. In addition to the opportunity to try some of the latest titles and try out new gaming equipment, visitors will be able to enjoy the finals of the largest regional e-sports competition A1 Adria Liga powered by ESL, which in its second season brings the final clashes of the best regional teams and players. This year’s Zagreb Reboot InfoGamer will be held from November 12 to 17 at the Zagreb Fair, and visitors from this year can easily choose accommodation and transport in one place, a special Uniline’s website.
For example, Donald Trump claimed he couldn’t be anti-Semitic because his son-in-law is Jewish and his daughter converted to Judaism. However, when he didn’t unequivocally condemn the neo-Nazi activities in Charlottesville, Va., he was giving the group his tacit approval.It’s not sufficient to claim that you are a “good person” when you remain silent in the face of injustice.If you don’t speak out against white-supremacists and Neo-Nazis, then you may be giving them comfort. If you don’t clearly separate yourself from a group that supports, or gives a platform to, hate groups, then you are providing assistance to these groups.During these trying times, I want my political leaders to be strong and courageous and to speak out loud and clear in opposition to intolerance.Roberta SteinerNiskayunaMore from The Daily Gazette:EDITORIAL: Thruway tax unfair to working motoristsNiskayuna girls’ cross country wins over BethlehemFoss: Should main downtown branch of the Schenectady County Public Library reopen?EDITORIAL: Beware of voter intimidationEDITORIAL: Find a way to get family members into nursing homes Categories: Letters to the Editor, Opinion During these times, when hate and intolerance are promulgated at the highest levels of government, it’s not enough to say that one’s family is multi-ethnic and multi-religious, and, therefore, you couldn’t be prejudiced against racial and religious minorities.If you don’t speak out against hate and intolerance, it could be interpreted that you endorse hate and intolerance.