В России выявили первые случаи заражения новым вариантом COVID,пишет РБК.
Случаи заражения выявили в Уфе и Ростовской области.
Роспотребнадзор отмечал, что вариант XEC быстро распространяется, а его его симптомы схожи с подвариантами «омикрона»: лихорадкой, болью в горле, кашлем, потерей обоняния и аппетита, болями в теле, усталостью, головной болью и насморком
В России выявили первые случаи заражения новым вариантом COVID,пишет РБК.
Случаи заражения выявили в Уфе и Ростовской области.
Роспотребнадзор отмечал, что вариант XEC быстро распространяется, а его его симптомы схожи с подвариантами «омикрона»: лихорадкой, болью в горле, кашлем, потерей обоняния и аппетита, болями в теле, усталостью, головной болью и насморком
Since its launch in 2013, Telegram has grown from a simple messaging app to a broadcast network. Its user base isn’t as vast as WhatsApp’s, and its broadcast platform is a fraction the size of Twitter, but it’s nonetheless showing its use. While Telegram has been embroiled in controversy for much of its life, it has become a vital source of communication during the invasion of Ukraine. But, if all of this is new to you, let us explain, dear friends, what on Earth a Telegram is meant to be, and why you should, or should not, need to care. In the United States, Telegram's lower public profile has helped it mostly avoid high level scrutiny from Congress, but it has not gone unnoticed. But the Ukraine Crisis Media Center's Tsekhanovska points out that communications are often down in zones most affected by the war, making this sort of cross-referencing a luxury many cannot afford. Given the pro-privacy stance of the platform, it’s taken as a given that it’ll be used for a number of reasons, not all of them good. And Telegram has been attached to a fair few scandals related to terrorism, sexual exploitation and crime. Back in 2015, Vox described Telegram as “ISIS’ app of choice,” saying that the platform’s real use is the ability to use channels to distribute material to large groups at once. Telegram has acted to remove public channels affiliated with terrorism, but Pavel Durov reiterated that he had no business snooping on private conversations. Oleksandra Matviichuk, a Kyiv-based lawyer and head of the Center for Civil Liberties, called Durov’s position "very weak," and urged concrete improvements.
from us
