Recent papers1-3 have demonstrated and confirmed that the omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2, which is now the dominant strain worldwide, is resistant to neutralising vaccinations, and that immunity from two vaccinations is poor.  On the other hand, it increases substantially after a third administration. Garcia-Beltran and his colleagues1 state that, in a study of  239 vaccinees internationally, “…Taken together, our results indicate that two-dose mRNA-based vaccines are effective at inducing neutralizing immunity to SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and Delta variants but suboptimal for inducing neutralizing responses to the Omicron variant”  but that “…recently boosted vaccinees exhibited potent neutralization of Omicron variant pseudovirus that was only moderately decreased relative to wild-type neutralization.”  These conclusions are clearly shown in the published graphs.  A second in an as yet unpublished paper in Nature from France and Belgium shows the same pattern of immune responses of Omicron, and the same conclusions were drawn. The third community based

Atmospheric CO2  concentration is measured in parts per million, total tonnage and “emissions”.  There is a natural carbon cycle because plants can remove CO2 by photosynthesis.  It is suggested that in a “natural” world this cycle would be in equilibrium and that increasing CO2 concentrations are due directly or indirectly to human activity, either by increasing CO2 production (burning fossil fuels etc) or decreasing CO2 adsorption (by deforestation), of which the former is the greater factor.  However, this means that all sources of CO2 emissions need to be measured, and it is to be expected that the direct and indirect effects of human activity will augment climate damage as the global population increases.  I ask here a simple but infrequently asked question: What is the contribution to global carbon dioxide emissions from humans breathing?  This is important because it is not alterable per capita but will increase as populations grow.