Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2021

The Current Transcript for June 25, 2021

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

We have hit 751unmarked graves. All we ask of all of you listening is that you stand by us. We are not asking for pity, but we are asking for understanding.

MATT GALLOWAY: 751. As Canada enters a new phase in its reckoning with the horror of residential schools, indigenous leaders say this grim discovery is just the beginning. In a moment, what needs to happen next beyond words of support? Also this morning, as restrictions lift and vaccination rates rise, the end of this pandemic feels on the horizon for many Canadians. Not so for those known as covid long hauliers.

SOUNDCLIP

I couldn't remember words. I tried to think of the word for that yellow spring flower. And it was 20 minutes before I remembered they're called daffodils. The brain fog is such a problem. It's like when you wake up in the morning and you're not quite there yet all day.

MG: Scientists are learning more about how covid affects the brain in an hour inside the research that could help those still struggling. Plus, it's the weekend time to get out and explore the great outdoors. Just you, the trees, the grass, the birds and the ticks. In 30 minutes, how climate change has changed the game for the creepy crawlies. But we start on the Cowessess first nation. Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway. This is The Current. A note before we start that we are talking about events that are disturbing and they may be traumatising for some listeners.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Residential school burial searches the 'most important work that I will ever do,' says archeologist

Guests: Heather Bear, Kisha Spernant

SOUNDCLIP

Canada will be known as a nation who tried to exterminate the First Nations. Now we have evidence, evidence of what the survivors of the Indian residential schools have been saying all along for decades, that they were treated with the humanity. They were treating- they were tortured, they were abused, and they seen their classmates die. They even had to dig graves for their own fellow students. Can you imagine that.

MG: The discovery of those 751 remains on the coast as first nation in Saskatchewan has stoked more anger and pain in this country? Just weeks after a similar discovery on residential school grounds in British Columbia. It has again prompted promises of reconciliation from politicians and descendants of those who went to residential schools are vowing those children will not be forgotten. One of the people making that promise is Heather Bear. She is a vice chief of the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations and a member of the Acropolis First Nation in Saskatchewan. Heather Bear is in Prince Albert on treaty territory this morning. Heather Bear, good morning.

HEATHER BEAR: Good morning.

MG: How are you doing?

HEATHER BEAR: Well, you know, we talk about the the events in Marieval [uninteligible]. I thought it was the last thing I thought of when I went to bed in the first thing I thought of this morning, and it's, you know, once again a part of a healing and acknowledgement and of course, looking at, you know, the path forward. And, of course, we'd we look to find the right word, you know, for the understanding, for that to come forth. Not only for survivors, but for our neighbours, the people around us, so.

MG: Can I ask you about those right words we heard Chief Bobbi Cameron just before we started saying that this is a nation that tried to exterminate First Nations. What do you think the right words are to describe the horror that is being documented yesterday and in the weeks before and in the years before we've known about the thousands of children that died in residential schools. So what are the right words to describe this?

HEATHER BEAR: Well, I think, you know, victims, survivors, there's so many words that are right now. I talked to a few of the young folk who live in the community of Cowessess, in the surrounding communities. And, you know, in these moments right now, you know, the shock. It's a horrific shock. You know, the evidence. And it has really brought things into perspective. This really happened. And these aren't just stories, scary stories that we spoke of around the fire and these events really happened. And, you know, it's about carrying somewhat of a load. Today, we mourn for these children. These children were were loved. They were they were children. They had names. They had family. And, you know, we talked about the numbers. They weren't just numbers. And when you think about looking in the classroom, when we walk down the hallways and in our schools and you see the little children and when we talk about humanity and what happens, you know, victims, and then we talk about not only victims but perpetrators. So, all of these things again, once again, are resurfacing. And it's almost like handing it over now for the younger generation to come to an understanding of where we are, why we are here and what we need to do in terms of a better tomorrow. And like I say right now, in this moment, the shock, the horror, that disgust, the disdain, the pain, the agony, all of those things in different levels, there's different layers for different people. You know, the elderly that we still have a generation of the elders that were directly impacted by the residential school. And we do have generations that have been impacted but intergenerationally. So, you know, there's different levels of feelings, I guess. And different levels of understanding, but it is my hope that this will be the last time, but we do need to address those inter general intergenerational impacts of the residential school right now because of the suicide, because of the addictions, drugs, alcohol, and our people are still living in a crisis situation.

MG: What do you think needs to happen next? I mean, you will hear and we've heard it, you know, yesterday members of various levels of government talking about recommitting themselves to reconciliation and members of the community will say that there is a long way to go before that is something that is realised. What needs to happen now? Do you think in the wake of what we have as a nation gone through and what communities have gone through over the last couple of days and weeks?

HEATHER BEAR: Oh, well, I look, there's two tracks here and of course the unearthing of the many little souls that were lost and didn't come home. There's a foundation now for their research and we need to put that issue to bed. I mean, we need closure there. And I know in Saskatchewan, in our region, you know, that is happening but the other track for everyone is it's about healing. Healing is paramount. And I think in order for our partners, non First Nations people, I think they need to do the work, too, in terms of understanding and learning this history. And I think that's part of their responsibility to know and understand and hopefully create some empathy and compassion because racism and discrimination is real in this region. It's real in this country. We see it. We feel it each and every day and it's simply wrong. And like I say, I was offended yesterday, for example, by- and this is an immigrant that has come from another country calling our [unintelligible] office just to say they were offended by, you know, Chief Cameron's remarks yesterday. And I'm like, what is being ralked to, you know, immigrants when they come to this country? You know, the truth is not being told. And never mind the First Nations being offended that they just realise dwe have seven hundred and fifty one unmarked graves. I mean, there needs to be major change, and I just can't stress enough that we have victims and we have, of course, the perpetrators. And when you look at justice, the moral justice, the criminal justice, you know, how do we figure that in the name of healing.

MG: Is part of that calling it what it is? I mean, when when Chief Cameron says that this was an attempt to exterminate the first nation, people who said this is genocide. Is part of that about about naming it?

HEATHER BEAR: Yes, I think it is. And we need to call it what it is in in order to truly address and understand. And we have to stop judging. I mean, we come from wounded nations because of the residential school. We've heard the stories, we've heard the whispers. I was part of the whispers going to residential school in Bay School in Marieval, you know, and it's not the reality of it. These are the scary stories anymore. When you hear there's 751 unmarked graves, there was 215 mass graves in Kamloops. You're looking at a thousand children that did not have a future that died lonely, sad and abused. You know that picture, you know, we have survivors today, but we have ones that never survived and they need to be more. They need to be honoured. They need to have that dignity put back. And, you know, all of those parents, their children falsely thinking that their children are going to learn. They were going to do better by allowing their children to go. And the parents that fought to keep their children back end possibly jailed. I mean, people actually went to jail for holding their children back from residential school. So, like, you know, we need to come to terms of this harsh reality. But I know there's a lot of pain and agony in my voice in this interview. But I really believe in that there is a creator, a merciful creator that, there is hope. There is hope for the future, and I think it's time that we come together and work together in the name of healing and understanding.

MG: This is difficult, but I'm really grateful that you would take the chance to speak with us this morning. Heather Bear, thank you very much.

HEATHER BEAR: And love and prayers to all of our survivors and our people out there who are trying, I guess, to make or come to terms, and I'm really, really sorry that he did come out in a way that's such a shock. But we're strong people. We are resilient people, and we're not alone.

MG: Take care of yourself as well. Heather Baer, thank you very much.

HEATHER BEAR: Thank you.

MG: Heather Baer, vice chief with the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations and a member of the Ochapowace First Nation in Saskatchewan. Kisha Supernant is the director of the Institute of Prarie and Indigenous Archaeology at the University of Alberta. She's mate and works with a small team of researchers using ground penetrating radar to locate the unmarked graves of children. Kisha Supernant. Good morning to you.

KISHA SUPERNANT: Good morning, Matt.

MG: I know that you weren't involved in these findings, but just briefly, how did you react to the discoveries first in British Columbia, now in Saskatchewan?

KISHA SUPERNANT: Well, I think, you know, my reaction to certainly one of heartbreak and devastation at the news, but it wasn't shocking to me as someone who's done this work and listen to the stories and knows that there are many unmarked graves of children and other indigenous relatives all throughout the lands we call Canada.

MG: When you start to this work, I mean, what are the kinds of discussions that take place with the community before you even begin to use the technology?

KISHA SUPERNANT: So we begin really with talking with community about what they want to know. So for us, it's always when communities approach us, which is typically how this type of work has gone. We have a conversation about what is sort of needed for the work to take place, what kind of background work, both in terms of the community figuring out how to best support survivors and families, participate in any kind of ceremonies that are needed, but also to collect the archival and historical documents. And if survivors are willing and able to share some of the stories about where these unmarked graves around residential schools are most likely to be, that then allows us to really target the work in a more direct way, because usually there's areas that are already known in the community as to where these children are and that can allow us to be more successful if we are taking out this technology.

MG: How important is it that this work is a lead or done by indigenous communities?

KISHA SUPERNANT: I think it's essential. I know there's been a lot of calls for scanning every school and doing this kind of work, but I think we you know, it's so essential for communities to lead. And many of these schools have, you know, members of different indigenous nations who went there. And so those nations need the opportunity to come together to make a decision about how they want to proceed with any given school. And in some cases, these locations are still generally known. So it might be that in some some cases, even doing the radar technology is not necessary. And I think listening to the communities and following their lead and helping them build capacity wherever possible to do this work themselves if it doesn't already exist, those are all very important as this journey continues.

MG: I mean, this is really difficult, obviously. And you said at the very beginning that in part you listen to communities to figure out what they want to know. There are communities that, for obvious reasons, don't want to traumatise elders and youth with these sorts of searches. So in that context, what can be done to help those communities?

KISHA SUPERNANT: Well, I think that they're often in those communities. It's not so much about going out and taking out any kind of technology. Sometimes it would be about thinking about commemorating or healing and following that that lead to ensure, you know, I think we heard from the vice chief talking about the need for that healing in communities, that there's so much work to do there. And so for some communities, you know, not not needing to go out and take our ground penetrating radar, but to support them in developing that healing that is needed. I do think that the truth that is coming out is really important because it means that those nations are being supported to to pursue that healing and having the resources that are needed in order for that to take place.

MG: What is it like to do this work? I mean, do you do you remember when you first went to a site that you suspected was a burial ground?

KISHA SUPERNANT: It is extremely difficult. I mean, I can't even imagine what it's like for the survivors, but for those of us who are running the equipment, even, you know, I'm Indigenous myself. I'm a mother. And it certainly hits really close to the heart. But even my colleagues who are neither of those things, still it affects them. And walking across the possible graves of these children is heartbreaking and it is very, very challenging. So whenever possible, you know, we work with the community and if it's appropriate, will participate in ceremony with the community. But I think it's also important to note that as this war continues, there is support needed for everyone involved because it is very, very devastating work.

MG: Why is it important for you to be involved in this work? I mean, you've hinted at this in terms of being indigenous, also being a mother for you. What is driving you in this work?

KISHA SUPERNANT: I think it's that I can put the skills that I've been privileged to learn going through graduate school training as an archaeologist to the best possible use that I could ever put them. This is the most important work that I will ever do to help find the relatives whose grave are lost. I mean, they're remembered in the community, but the actual locations are often not well known and not well protected. And so for me, it's a sense that I couldn't do anything more meaningful with the skills that I've been lucky enough to learn. And I feel really sort of humbled to be able to be involved in such important work and just trying to do the best that I can to support communities, to get the best possible technical advice and ensure that this process is done with care and given the time and resources that it will need, because not every nation is ready now to go out and do this and some nations maybe never will be. But all the resources need to be available for those that are on this journey.

MG: And I mean, given that the fact that, as you said, not every nation is ready for this, how should these sites be honoured? We know I mean, you look at the maps and you'll see that there are know former residential schools across this country. Do we have a sense as to how these sites should be honoured?

KISHA SUPERNANT: I think it will depend on what the communities around any given school decide, I think we'll see a variety of ways in which these landscapes really, which is what they are remembered and commemorated. I know in some cases there's interest in creating sort of one museum or interpretive centre type work where non-indigenous people can come and learn about the history of residential schools. But many of these schools have been either torn down or deliberately burned down. And there's probably different ways to remember those particular places to ensure that this legacy is never forgotten. Even though we want to move forward. It is important not to forget this this history and to really learn the fullness of the impacts of the residential school system on indigenous communities and not just in the past, but in the present.

MG: But as you said a couple of times, I mean, at the heart of that really is listening and listening to those communities about what they what they need and what they want.

KISHA SUPERNANT: Yes, and then acting on what you hear, so I think definitely listening deeply to indigenous communities are so important, but also not taking the pressure off of government and those who are making commitments around resources. So I feel like for non-indigenous people in Canada, it's really important to listen deeply. But then think about the actions that they can take to support communities and particularly putting pressure to ensure that the resources are available and that communities aren't feeling rushed in this process because it's going to be a long journey.

MG: I'm grateful to speak about the work that you're doing. It's incredibly important. And I appreciate your time this morning. Thank you.

KISHA SUPERNANT: Thank you for having me.

MG: Kisha Supernant is the director of the Institute of Prarie and Indigenous Archaeology at the University of Alberta. If you or anyone you know is a residential school survivor, there is support one 866 925 4419. That's a 24 hour crisis line for Indian residential school survivors and family. Again, that number is one 866 925 4419. This is The Current on CBC Radio One. My name is Matt Galloway. The CBC News is next. And we're back in six minutes. Stay with us.

Back To Top »

Protecting your family against ticks this summer

Guests: Dr. Vett Lioyd, Dr. John Sullivan Bolyai

MG: Good morning, I'm Matt Galloway, and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come, forgetfulness, confusion, fatigue, covid-19 is doing some strange things to our brains, in 30 minutes, we check in with a covid long hauler to talk about brain fog, what we know and what we don't. But first, the dangers of a walk in the park.

[Music: Theme]

MG: I feel like I should warn you that if you're grossed out by the eight legged types, this next segment might give you the creepy crawlies. We're not talking about spiders. We're talking ticks. Ticks are increasingly a problem in Canada and in places like Hamilton, Ontario, in particular. Recent sightings have led public health Ontario to designate that city an estimated risk area for Lyme disease The Current. Lara O'Brian took a walk on the beautiful Cootes Paradise Trails at the Royal Botanical Gardens.

SOUNDCLIP

KIMBERLY: My name is Kimberly O'hare. I'm a wildlife toxicologist at Environment and Climate Change Canada. Today we are in Westdale near McMaster and Hamilton, Ontario, and right next to the Royal Botanical Gardens Natural Lands. This is Khiva. She is the one that gets me out in the trails every day. And she's a good tick collector. And we put her on leash because the gravity is here. As a biologist who does field work, I have always been aware of ticks. I've got my first tick down in Arkansas in the late 90s, so I learnt about Lyme disease and deer ticks back then and all the field work I've done in Ontario and B.C. I've never found a deer tick in Hamilton until 2016.

LARA: So what was it?

Caleb's walk. Look at it down here. It's beautiful and it connects to all the South Shore trails at the RBG here by Cootes Paradise. Because we are lucky to live on this beautiful natural area, we see deer all the time. There's migratory birds. We have a lot of mammals. We have coyotes, fox, and they carry ticks and the ticks fall off of animals and birds. So I've had friends who've had ticks just hanging out in Churchill Park. And if the deer, typically when they sleep, they sleep in flat open areas. If they're all sleeping in a field overnight and the next day the kids go and they're kicking around a soccer ball, you get ticks. People are becoming more aware. And my neighbour, her daughter got Lyme disease a few years ago. She had to fight for the test and be the one to tell the physicians that we need to consider Lyme disease. When I had my tick, that was in over 24 hours. I had to tell the resident who was on call what I wanted, which was the doxycycline dose, and he had to call me back and look it up. So people are getting more aware. But I still get calls from friends and neighbours not even knowing how to remove a tick or how to check themselves for ticks.

WINSTON: Hi, this is Winston. I've seen them on the dog and I've also seen them crawling on myself. Yes, but I pay attention when I get home. The dog has his vaccine against the ticks, the Lyme disease, and he also has the medication so that it kills the ticks when they get on them. I've always wondered if I should start taking the dog's medication, but I wouldn't.

LARA: But you thought about it.

WINSTON: Yeah, exactly.

KIMBERLY: So because of the pandemic, public health is no longer accepting ticks and doing testing. So it's unfortunate that there isn't an alternative, especially if you have a deer tick in you for longer than 24 hours. And it would be nice if we got the data from public health to know how many ticks have tested positive for Lyme in our area. There is a tick map that you can access online, but it is very broad. It's basically from Hamilton all the way to Whitby. So it doesn't really indicate what is a hotspot for Lyme disease or not.

MG: more ticks means more Canadians are contracting Lyme disease, over 2600 preliminary cases reported in 2019, compared to just 140 back in 2009, according to the Public Health Agency of Canada. Dr. Vett Lloyd is a biology professor at Mount Allison University in Sackville, New Brunswick. Dr. Vett, good morning.

DR. VETT LLOYD: Good morning.

MG: We just heard about ticks and Hamilton. It's a big urban region. Are we what are we seeing in terms of changes as to where we would find ticks?

DR. VETT LLOYD: Well, what we're seeing in Hamilton is very much the same thing we're seeing across Canada. Tick populations are increasing under the influence of climate change and many other factors. So the ticks are basically moving north. So southern Canada, which is unfortunately where most people live pretty much across the country, has more tick. And a higher rate, increasingly high rate of infection of the Lyme disease bacteria.

MG: Are there specific areas in Canada, along southern Canada in particular, where we would see the biggest growth of ticks,

DR. VETT LLOYD: Nova Scotia, southern Ontario and increasingly the prairie provinces in the south have traditionally been the areas where we're seeing the most ticks and the most, the highest incidence of Lyme disease. But we are seeing the ticks being spread up coasts up large riverways because the ticks are moved around on birds, other mammals, and they tend to follow waterways. So the ticks are going further north and there's really no place where you can have zero chance of finding a tick. It's just more or less, unfortunately more.

MG: Unfortunately, more. Just remind us briefly, I mean, what Lyme disease does.

DR. VETT LLOYD: So Lyme disease is a bacterial infection. What ticks do is they suck blood from wild animals. They can pick up the infection from wild animals. And then if their next meal is on you, your kid, a pet, they can transmit the bacteria that causes Lyme disease. It's a really nasty disease. It poses problems with diagnosis and treatment, spreads throughout the body. If you don't catch it quickly and you become exceedingly ill.

MG: We heard that because of this pandemic, public health in many places is not accepting ticks to be tested for Lyme disease. How concerning is that, especially given the fact that so many of us are now out exploring their doors because of the pandemic?

DR. VETT LLOYD: Yes, and we've had a hard winter. Canadian winters tend to be hard, a pandemic winter that much harder. So it really is important to get out. And there are things we can do to protect ourselves, but protection isn't a 100 percent. So if you do find a tick on you, the information you need is not so much, Hey, 40 percent of the ticks in this region carry Lyme disease. You want to know about your tick. So wherever you are in Canada, there is testing available. Some places it's through public health, some places through the medical system and everywhere it is available privately. So it's not ideal, but there is testing available.

MG: Are all the ticks that we're finding ticks that carry Lyme disease?

DR. VETT LLOYD: No, not every single tick carries Lyme disease. Some species are very much prone to carrying Lyme disease. The deer tick or the black legged tick is the big problem in the east and central Canada. The western black leg tick in the west. Those are the major problems, though, not the exclusive species. That's a problem for Lyme disease. But even with those species, not every individual tick is carrying Lyme disease. They might not have picked it up from their wildlife previous meal, but you can't tell by looking at the tick. The only way to find out is to actually test that tick.

MG: OK, so what should we be looking for if we're out in the wild? The weekend is upon us and people might get out and about what do we need? What do we need to be looking for?

DR. VETT LLOYD: Well, there are things you can do to protect yourself. And a very easy one is bug spray, because it's not just ticks. Mosquitoes are out, too. And really, who wants to feed the mosquitoes? So when you're looking at your bug spray, whether it's commercial or a natural formulation, check to see that it says it's good against ticks and follow the instructions. Another useful thing to do is if you're in an urban setting, if you're on a trail instead of bashing through the woods, that will protect you to some extent. But that's not relevant. And for the people in Canada who live in rural environments or work in the woods, main thing is when you get home, check yourself for ticks, do a tick check. And that means looking in a mirror or getting someone to help minus your clothes because the ticks will hide in your skin. They're hiding in cracks and crevices. So you're looking for a freckle that wasn't there the other day, the previous day, and a freckle that has legs. Those are not good. And you can remove them with a tweezers.

MG: A freckle that has legs is not good. I mean, how small is the freckle with legs that's not good? What specifically would I be looking for?

DR. VETT LLOYD: The immature stages of ticks are quite small. They're both poppy seed sized. The adult stages you get all the way up to a sesame seed. So you are looking for something that's a small to an. Average size freckle. They're easier to see once the tic has been feeding for a while and it pumps up, but that's actually not good because the longer the tic feeds, the more chance it has to pass on disease.

MG: And it's pumped up with your blood.

DR. VETT LLOYD: Yes. Well, that's another reason, just the sheer tick factor. So you do want to get them off quickly. And the basic rule is, if you've been out, if you've been exposed, really important to get out, go hiking, go camping, do stuff. But consider that an exposure. And if you have a look at yourself, most people will shower periodically, that's a good time to take your clothes off and then have a good look at all the nooks and crannies in your body.

MG: In getting the tick off of you, I mean, is there any specific technique to doing that or just brushing it off, just whatever we will do to get it off your body?

DR. VETT LLOYD: Well, getting it off is the key point. There's a certain amount of mythology that's evolved about the best way to do it. The only way not to do it is the Centre for Disease Control in the States actually recommends not putting kerosene on the tick. And if you've done that, definitely not putting a match to it. So I think if you can avoid putting yourself on fire, anything else is fair game. You do want to basically use a tweezers and or tick removal tool. If you have one handy pull, grab it close to the skin and just pull steadily pressure. Or if you're grossd out, get someone else to do it.

MG: Good advice. I'm going to let you go. But before that, climate change, this is happening and it's accelerating in many parts of the world, are we going to have to learn how to develop, you know, ways to to to coexist with these things or develop better treatment or prevention for Lyme disease? Do you think?

DR. VETT LLOYD: Well, we will have to learn how to coexist with them because the ticks are here. They're not going anywhere until we drop into another ice age. So for those people who don't want to wait around for a millennia or a few, we'll have to. Our neighbours to the south have been living with ticks for a long time. In Europe they've been living with ticks. You become more aware. You practise preventative practises. The medical community is seeing more ticks and. That should provide better options for early treatment, which solves a lot of problems with undiagnosed and untreated Lyme disease.

MG: Which leads to our next conversation Dr. Vett Lloyd, I'm really glad to have had the chance to speak with you. Thank you very much.

DR. VETT LLOYD: Thank you very much.

MG: Dr. Vett Lloyd, biology professor at Mount Allison University in Sykesville, New Brunswick, feeling a little itchy right now, thinking about ticks. Fortunately, clinical trials are underway in Nebraska for a pre exposure prophylaxis commonly known as prep injection. This could prevent Lyme disease in humans. Dr. John Sullivan Bolyai is overseeing the injections development. He's deputy director of clinical and regulatory affairs at Mass Biologics, a non-profit manufacturer of biologics and vaccines. It's part of the University of Massachusetts Medical School. He's in New York City this morning. Doctor, good morning to you.

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: Good morning, Mr. Galloway. Thank you for having me on.

MG: Great to have you here. Tell us about the work that you're doing when it comes to trying to prevent Lyme disease, I suppose. How does this prep injection work exactly?

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: So I'll start with the most surprising part, we're actually treating the tick, not the human being. As was described by your previous guests. The bacteria live inside the tick they acquired from wildlife and then they pass it on to you. So the idea behind this is to put a medicine, an antibody into the human blood. When the tick drinks it, it kills the bacteria inside the tick. So it's sort of funny. We're treating ticks, not human beings. The human being is basically the medicine cup. The actual medicine itself is very well characterised, fully human monoclonal antibody. Most people have heard about monoclonal antibodies for diseases like cancer and so on. But this is directed very specifically against the bacteria that causes Lyme disease. So when the tick drinks that it kills the bacterium inside the tick in the bacteria can't be passed on to the human being through the bite.

MG: How soon would someone have to take an injection once they're exposed to a tick?

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: Well, it's pre exposure prophylaxis, so the idea behind this, much like a vaccine, but in a very different time frame, yes, you get your injection and you just go out in the woods because the antibody is already in your body. You do not have to wait for that inject with the vaccine and then the booster and so on. So you can go into the woods right away as opposed to, you know, two or three months from beginning the vaccine series. That's not at all to denigrate the vaccines. This is seen as an adjunct and as a supplement to vaccines. We hope the vaccines will work, but this provides immediate protection, protection, whereas vaccines, you have to wait, obviously.

MG: Well, and there was a vaccine for for Lyme disease a couple of decades ago. What happened to that?

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: It's it was an unfortunate confluence of sort of bad science and worse politics. It really was a very good vaccine, 80 to 90 percent effective, very low side effects. But and that was studied very, very carefully. There were multiple health authority advisory committees. CDC had two advisory committees. I honestly I don't know whether Health Canada looked at that vaccine. I should have researched it. I apologise. But it was really a very good vaccine. But the public acceptance was not there. So it was withdrawn. It was not withdrawn because it didn't work, it had bad side effects or any of that. Hmm.

MG: How far along are your clinical trials for this prophylaxis?

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: So we are in our very first clinical study, it's in healthy human volunteers, and that study is close to completion. We want protection to last. The idea is to have one injection and have protection throughout the the tick season. So that means we have to take blood to see if the antibody is still present in our volunteers up to a year because we'd like six to eight months of in the presence of this antibody to kill the bacterium inside the tick when the tick bites. So we won't be done with the study until sometime next year, but we're pretty much done dosing our very last cohort of volunteers.

MG: Why Nebraska? Why are the clinical trials happening there?

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: Well, that's a that's a terrific question and it's perfect to ask to your previous guest, Nebraska, is a part of the United States where there is not a lot of Lyme disease, if any. For the reasons presumably outlined by your previous guests. So when we asked for volunteers and we want folks who've never had Lyme disease because we're putting in an antibody, and if they already have the antibody to sort out the medicinal antibodies from the naturally occurring antibody after having Lyme disease would be problematic. We'd have to screen a lot of people. So Nebraska was really the perfect location for that to find folks who've never been exposed who can be naive to this antibody. And then the second reason is it's really a very, very good clinical trials unit with whom I personally ever worked before. And there they actually are involved in the vaccine study. So they have experience with this whole disease.

MG: So your understanding would be that we would if we want to get out into the woods, which people do, or into nature, because it's not just the woods. I mean, as we're hearing, climate change is introducing ticks to areas where the ticks haven't been passed, that we would-

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: I find it in my backyard personally.

MG: In your backyard. There you go. So we would take everybody, if they could or wanted to, would take this prophylaxis, you know, once a year or something like that during tick season?

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: That's that's the idea behind it. The idea would be that you would go, here in the U.S., you would go to some very low-key kind of place to get it and maybe not even the doctor's office. He'd go to the pharmacy, you get your injection and you're set to go to mow your lawn or go hiking, and then you would do that year after year. Or ultimately you can get the vaccine.

MG: Well, given the fact that you found the tick in your backyard. I mean, climate change is the cause that we're hearing for the increase in the prevalence of ticks. What sort of urgency do you feel in in making sure that this moves forward in in an expedited way?

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: Well, I think I agree with your previous guest, there is a massive urgency. The prevalence is increasing in the United States. It's obviously also increasing in Canada. So the sooner the better, really. And there have to be multiple shots on goal. Just like with covid, we had mass biologics have a very strong history and continued public health mission. So this was a natural for us to take on.

MG: And if all goes well, when would we be able to get the injection?

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: I think we're aiming for, you know, 2023, its drug development. Hopefully we can do it faster and hopefully we're not going to do it slower.

MG: And are there any side effects to something like this?

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: We've it's been in this first in human study that we're currently doing. It's what we call the drug development business. It's a very clean drug, fully human monoclonal antibodies. There are literally hundreds already have been licenced for various human diseases, some for that have been targeted against bacteria or bacterial toxins. They were very, very, very good safety record. So it will be a major, major surprise to have safety concerns with this. You never know. You never know. It's a new drug, but it will be it will be shocking to have a problem.

MG: Doctor, good to speak with you about this. Will follow your research along. Thank you very much.

DR. JOHN SULLIVAN BOLYAI: Thank you.

MG: Dr. John Sullivan Bolyai deputy director of clinical and regulatory affairs at Mass Biologics, non-profit manufacturer of biologics and vaccines at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. You worried about Tick's? Concerned about mowing the lawn or just getting out for a hike on a trail? Hopefully that means you'll be careful. You know, check yourself, as we were hearing earlier after your next outdoor adventure. It turns out the Pennsylvania Lyme Disease Resource Network has produced a helpful song to guide you through the process. The song is called Tick Check, proof that you can really write a song about anything.

SOUNDCLIP

Check, check, check. One, two, Tick Check.

When you go for a walk in the grass or the woods, you're strolling by ticks who think you taste real good.

A tick, they make you sick pretty quick, but you can make sure their diseases don't stick.

Check for ticks. Check for ticks, check, check for tick.

Don't get sick.

Like vampires, your blood helps them grow. They're drown to damp places on your body.

Ew Gross.

So when you come in from wherever you've been.

Put your clothes in the dryer and check for ticks on your skin.

MG: if that song is stuck in your head six hours from now. Job done, tick. Check the name of that tune coming up after your regional update, forgetting how to spell what that thing you write with is called where you were supposed to be. This morning, we're going to talk about some of the symptoms that covid-19 long hauliers are facing and what we still don't know about the brain post virus. I'm Matt Galloway you're listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

Check your hair. Check your armpits and underwear.

Back To Top »

Long-haul COVID sufferers struggle with persistent symptoms

Guests: Amber Spence, Dr. Andrew Josephson, Inez Jabalpurwala

MG: Hi, I'm Matt Galloway, you're listening to The Current. You forget how to spell, you have trouble typing, it feels like you're in a fog, not really symptoms you would associate with covid-19 unless you are one of those unlucky long hauliers, someone living with the after-effects of the virus for weeks or months on end. We still don't fully understand why or how covid can harm our brains or how long the symptoms will last. Amber Spence is one of the many Canadians who wants those answers. Amber is a 31 year old mother and PhD candidate in Guelph, Ontario. She had covid in April. Amber, good morning.

AMBER SPENCE: Good morning. Hi.

MG: How are you feeling?

AMBER SPENCE: I'm feeling OK today. The brain fog, is it too, too terrible this morning so far? We'll see what the day brings.

MG: When did you start to notice changes, if I can put it that way, and how your brain was working?

AMBER SPENCE: Oh, well, I didn't really register the changes that had happened until after the rest of the kind of physical, more physical symptoms of covid subsided. But now, you know, I haven't had to deal with a lot of the physical symptoms for quite a while. And so and yet the brain fog still persists. And that's kind of when I realised that maybe it was something a little bit different.

MG: What is the brain fog feel like?

AMBER SPENCE: It can come in a few different ways. So, you know, sometimes, for instance, it might just be like a mind blank is what I've kind of started thinking of it as where I will completely not just forget to do something, but completely forget that that situation even existed. So one example would be I was getting my son ready for day-care. And, you know, I grabbed all of my things, grabbed my keys, my mask, the whole thing, got him in the stroller and left thinking that I had to shut my door when in fact I had not. And I left my door wide open and I had absolutely no recollection of just leaving the house at that point. So it can it can show up in those kinds of ways. It can also show up, though, as reading words on a page and not being able to make any sense out of any of them. So it varies, you know, trying to think through a very thick fog, almost like all of your your rational senses are dulled.

MG: I was going to say that's the kind of thing that could feel. I mean, when it starts to happen, could feel really upsetting.

AMBER SPENCE: Absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. And, you know, you start kind of wondering if you're kind of losing it. It's like, you know, if your brain is just stopped working and it's really scary, especially not knowing if you'll ever regain what you've lost. And you mentioned at the outset that I'm a PhD candidate and I'm just putting together my proposal now for my dissertation and I'm in philosophy. And so it's a lot of very heavy reading. There's not a lot of light reading happening there. And so it really makes it challenging to try and do my work. You know, something that would have normally taken me an hour to read is now taking me maybe four or five hours to get through. So it's it's really yeah. It's really a struggle.

MG: What happens when you talk to your doctor about this?

AMBER SPENCE: My doctor she's very supportive. She's always been, you know, done everything that she could to try and make me feel at ease and help me out in all of any reason that I might go and see her. But when it comes to the brain fog, you know, I mentioned it to her during a routine exam. And, you know, she had kind of ,she expressed sympathy and she said, you know, I'm so sorry you have to deal with this. But unfortunately, we don't really know why this happens, what we can do about it. And so just basically monitor it and keep in touch. And that's what I've been doing. So so far, nothing has has happened.

MG: So no. So no treatment or nothing like that.

AMBER SPENCE: Nothing.

MG: When you speak with other people about this and say this is kind of, you know, what I'm going through, are they understanding?

AMBER SPENCE: Sometimes, yeah. And sometimes not so much. So I find that often it gets hand waved away as not really a big deal. So my dad, for instance, worked as a contractor for most of my life. And I liken this to, you know, if he had hurt his hand really badly and was not able to regain full functioning of it, you know, his hands as a contractor are his work. That's his bread and butter. And for me, my brain is my bread and butter. And so if my brain isn't working to its full capacity, that is going to impact my work and, you know, my my career. And so, you know, so I think that it's really easy for people to kind of hand wave away the brain fog as being not a big deal. Especially when you're in a position where you think for a living and you write for a living, you know, it becomes a very big deal. I do have to say, though, that my department and my supervisor have been incredibly supportive and so understanding and I'm so grateful for it.

MG: Just before I let you go, I mean, what are you most concerned about when it comes to this?

AMBER SPENCE: I think I'm most concerned that it's not going to go away. That is a really, really scary prospect for me. And, you know, because part of it feels as though you've kind of lost control of your mind a little bit like. And when I say that, what I mean is, you know, your rational ability to think and function in normal, everyday tasks and, you know, it comes and goes and yeah, it's really scary. And so I think that is my biggest fear. That's my biggest worry, my biggest concern that it's just going to be here. And this is just how things are now.

MG: This is really unsettling. I wish you the very best. I hope that you are back to where you should be sooner rather than later. In the meantime, it's really important to hear from from folks like you. So I appreciate you speaking with us and take care of yourself.

AMBER SPENCE: Thank you so much. Have a great day.

MG: And you. Bye bye. Amber Spence is a PhD candidate in Guelph, Ontario. Dr. Andrew Josephson has been listening in. He is working on getting some of the answers for people like Amber. He's the chair of neurology at the University of California at San Francisco and the editor in chief of JAMA Neurology. Doctor. Good morning to you.

DR. ANDREW JOSEPHSON: Thank you so much.

MG: What struck you about what you just heard from Amber Spence?

DR. ANDREW JOSEPHSON: Well, I think what strikes me is that this is something that unfortunately we're hearing quite a bit, these are folks who are suffering and we at this point probably have more questions than we have answers about not only this syndrome, but the neurologic complications of the virus in general, both in the acute phase and in a convalescent phase, as you hear from your last caller.

MG: Let's work through some of those questions. One is, what do we know at this point about what the covid-19 virus does to the brain?

DR. ANDREW JOSEPHSON: Well, it's a great question, so, you know, we often state, my colleagues and I, that when the virus first emerged in February and March of 2020, we thought this is terrible, but it's not going to affect us as neurologists. This is a respiratory disease, is what we heard. And then early on in April of 2020, just as the virus was ramping up in North America, a report out of Wuhan, China, came out that showed that about a third, one third of people who are hospitalised with Oben were having some sort of neurologic problem. Now, some of those were more mild, were more non-specific, you know, headaches, malaise, et cetera. But some were very concerning, including cognitive problems, acutely and more severe difficulties like stroke and meningitis. And every time a similar study has been done that we see the exact same figure, about a third of people who have the virus, acutely and are hospitalised have a neurologic problem. But now, as your last guest showed us, we're now realising that many of these more long haul are long term or chronic symptoms after the virus have gone away are neuro and neuropsychiatric in nature.

MG: Do we know what's going on there? I mean, has the virus actually gotten inside the brain or something else going on?

DR. ANDREW JOSEPHSON: Well, this is a great question and an area of active research in pathological studies that we have looked at for people who have passed away from severe covid. And so far, most of the studies of people who have covid in their spinal fluid - this fluid that bathes the brain and is often a clue to what's going on inside of the brain - when those have been examined, it is a relative minority of people that we can find the actual virus in the brain as the cause. And so while that may be the cause of a rare syndrome or two people with meningitis, for instance, due to covid or encephalitis, we think that this is probably not due to direct viral invasion or at least persistent direct viral invasion of the brain and nervous system, but rather maybe some sort of antibody or immune attack on the brain, perhaps in response to the body trying to fight off the virus. But this is an area, again, a very active research where we don't have all the answers yet.

MG: There was a study that came out very recently that got a lot of people talking. It hasn't been peer reviewed yet. It showed the MRIs of people's brains pre and post covid and found that there was a change to the grey matter. What did you make of those findings?

DR. ANDREW JOSEPHSON: Well, it certainly did raise eyebrows. I agree. This study, as you said, has not been peer reviewed. So we haven't had a chance to have experts look at it, give feedback to the authors, go through the regular process. So I, I view it as very preliminary. But if confirmed, it suggests that there are a subset of patients who have structural changes to the brain after covid. If that is the case, then that may be a link to why some people are having these persistent problems that you hear about that are, by the way, they're real. They're certainly real. We see them so consistently. And stories like your last guest are so consistent that we think this is some effect of the virus, what it is, how long it will last. Those are the big question.

MG: How important is it that you just said these are real? I mean, Amber talked about going to her doctor and her doctor, you know, has sympathy and acknowledge what's going on, but couldn't offer a lot of answers. You will hear from others who their symptoms are dismissed, not just even by doctors, but by friends, family members, co-workers. How important is it that you, a neurologist, says that this is real?

DR. ANDREW JOSEPHSON: Well, I think it's extraordinarily important. And I hate using the word real because, of course, anything that the patient is experiencing is real. But I made the point for the exact reason that you said I think that some individuals who have this are unfortunately dismissed by medical professionals and their friends, as you stated. And that's always a barrier to rigorous studies that give us the answer to these questions. And so I think we absolutely have to assume, given the consistency of these symptoms in some people, both acutely and in this convalescent phase, that this is a biological phenomenon that we need to understand. And, you know, until we understand it, it's very difficult, as your caller said, to understand how best to treat these individuals. If this is due to the virus itself, then antiviral medications would be appropriate. Of course, we think, as I mentioned, that's unlikely. But if this is due to some immune attack, then an immune modulator drug or an immunosuppressant drug may. Something that needs to go through clinical trials, so we have to study this rigorously so that we can help these individuals who are still suffering from these symptoms.

MG: The big question that Amber had was how long is this going to last? Her concern is that this is the way forward for now or for the long haul. Do we know how long these symptoms will last?

DR. ANDREW JOSEPHSON: Well, we sure don't. And part of the reason, of course, is that there aren't people who had this virus two, three, four years ago. It's a relatively new phenomenon. There are analogies in medicine of symptoms that occur after an injury and could - take concussion as but one example where many people are still having symptoms at two months, three months, six months, but then there's a large portion who then get better over the next year or this could be something that's more persistent. Sure hope that that's not the case. But right now, we just don't have a long enough experience. And it's one of the reasons why we need to have clinics and physicians who are dedicated to seeing these patients, characterising them, you know, with a great amount of rigour and then following cohorts of patients longitudinally so that we can have the answers of this percentage of folks get better after six months or with a certain intervention, and this percentage do not and require additional treatment of some sort.

MG: Just in the last minute or so that we have. What's the biggest question that you have around this?

DR. ANDREW JOSEPHSON: Well, I think the biggest question is, is what we covered, which is whether or not this is due to the virus itself or this is due to some immune response. And there are some wonderful studies going on looking at spinal fluid, looking at pathological studies in a more advanced manner. And we think we're going to have these answers relatively soon, because once we know what's causing this, then that sets the stage for trials of interventions. And I say that broadly, they can be brain exercises ranging from brain exercises to vaccines to immunomodulatory therapies and everything in between that sets the stage for us being able to help these folks who are clearly suffering.

MG: What would you say to Amber who's worried? I mean, she can't concentrate on the reading that she needs to finish her PhD and she worries about, you know, leaving the door wide open when she takes her son to day-care.

DR. ANDREW JOSEPHSON: Well, I would encourage folks like her to at least have hope that in these types of situations, most neurologic problems are ones that get better in this situation. And I have great hope that with further study and there's a lot of smart people working on this, that we're going to have an opportunity to help these individuals over the coming years.

MG: Andy good to speak with you. Thank you very much.

DR. ANDREW JOSEPHSON: Thank you.

MG: Dr. Andy Josephson is chair of neurology at the University of California at San Francisco and editor in chief of JAMA Neurology. Inez Jabalpurwala has been listening in. She's global director of Viral Neuro Exploration or. She is in Montreal and has. Good morning to you.

INEZ JABALPURWALA: Good morning.

MG: Your organisation surveyed more than a thousand Canadians who had covid-19. We'll talk more specifically, but broadly, how do the findings compare to what we've just been talking about?

INEZ JABALPURWALA: So they lined up not just with what we heard, but with studies that are being conducted and have been conducted around the world, including some of the evidence based looking at other viruses and their potential link to neurological and psychiatric conditions. So it's fairly robust. And I would say that one of the most important findings is that women are disproportionately impacted and specifically women in their middle years. And initially the feeling was that, well, this is anecdotal and maybe women are just more likely to seek care or to join groups that have a voice. But in fact, this has been borne out in studies and looking at clinical visits around the world. So it's quite worrisome. And the history of medicine does not really have a good track record for illnesses which are difficult to diagnose that largely impact women. And so I think it's very important that we raise our voices and ensure that women and all those with long haul covid are heard.

MG: And these are women and other people who have been suffering from this as well, who overwhelmingly weren't hospitalised with covid, right?

INEZ JABALPURWALA: Absolutely. And in our survey, we found that 85 percent had not been hospitalised and many are very symptomatic. So we can't just look at hospital settings. And the Wuhan, China study that Dr. Josephson referenced was really looking at hospitalised patients where there may be some other explanations for why there could be some neurological outcomes. But this, in fact, is largely impacting people who were never in hospital.

MG: And the effect of this, I mean, we heard from Amber, but the effect of this in reading the survey is people feel they're saying that they they no longer feel like the person they were before this, that they can't look after themselves. What did you learn about how severe the impact of these symptoms have been?

INEZ JABALPURWALA: So it was not surprising to us, given what we've been seeing around the world, but nonetheless, when you start to look at the economic health and the social costs, that hasn't really been well measured. And for me, you know, one of the things that was the most important was we need to start thinking about how we set research and care priorities that involve people with lived experience, because quality of life impacts are important to track and measure. Whether people live or die doesn't tell the whole story. And it certainly hasn't told the whole story about this pandemic.

MG: What impact are these symptoms having on people's quality of life, particularly? I mean, if you think of, you know, being able to continue work, for example.

INEZ JABALPURWALA: Hmm. So we we looked at the symptoms that had been most reported and we did not provide a list, even though there have been I've seen up to 200 different symptoms that have been reported. We counted about 20 that were most prevalent, cognitive impairment and brain fog was amongst the top reported symptoms, along with fatigue and shortness of breath. And 80 percent of the respondents said they'd been experiencing symptoms for more than three months, with almost half experiencing symptoms for 11 months or more. And half of the respondents had received care for long lasting symptoms in a clinic more than five times, nearly a third, more than 10 times. So when you think about what kind of a strain this is putting on the health care system and 60 percent of respondents had to take a leave from work, nearly 70 percent had to reduce their working hours. And of that, 74 percent by more than half. So these are substantial amounts of time. They'll affect workplaces and government benefit payouts. And one quarter of respondents have had access to disability insurance. But we don't know about the percentage that hasn't been able to access disability insurance, even though they need to be on disability.

MG: Do we have a sense as to how this is playing out around the world? We know that that I mean, the world is being affected by covid, but certainly not in equal ways.

INEZ JABALPURWALA: Yes. And I think that that's one of the big questions around doing cohort studies and gathering data, because I completely aligned with Dr. Josephson about what needs to happen in terms of providing clinics for care and longitudinal studies that will look at cohorts of people with long covid. Unfortunately, most of the clinical trials are conducted in developed countries, so lower and middle income countries are often not counted and that really has to change. We know that there's biological and nonbiological variability. We know that risk factors differ. And so we need to do a better job when we're collecting data, working collaboratively to bring data together and subset cohorts that may have different impacts. And that's only going to happen if we have a more inclusive approach.

MG: I just I mean, briefly tell me more about that. I mean, if you take a look at developing nations, many of which are some of the hardest hit nations in the world with covid, if we aren't doing that research, then what's at stake?

INEZ JABALPURWALA: Well, then they're not counted. They're not counted in terms of priority setting and it is important to talk to people with lived experience in different countries and in different cultural communities because the impacts may be different. So we're missing that part of the equation, but we're also missing the part about not being able to study that there's different biologies or impacts that are different in different countries. And I think that, you know, the research and science community has recognised that this is a big lack in the data that we're collecting. There's such a move now to be able to share data from around the world. But often what that really means is data from countries that have been able to collect data, and that's largely developed countries.

MG: You wrote an op ed in the Globe and Mail a few months ago in which you said that Canada could take a leading effort to help covid long hauliers. What is the role that this country could play in assessing what we've been talking about, but also trying to figure out some sort of strategies for those who have been affected by this?

INEZ JABALPURWALA: So I think one of the one of the hallmarks of Canadian research is that we work well, collaboratively and across disciplines, and that's really important here because we're looking at an area certainly with the brain that intersects virology, immunology and neurology and neuroscience. And in terms of care, we're looking at a multidisciplinary approach. Now, Dr. Josephson has done some really elegant work in this area and looking at the whole human system and understanding that it's interconnected, which is why it's not surprising that when we look at the impacts of a virus that is primarily a respiratory virus, it actually extends throughout the human system in ways that we are trying to understand. So Canada is well situated to take that kind of perspective, both in terms of care and in terms of research. But we need to allocate targeted funding. And I think the first step really is what the U.S. and U.K. have done. They have declared this a public health crisis. The U.S. government, through its Institutes of Health, have allocated 1.15 Billion dollars to long covid research and care. The U.K. government has allocated 18.5 Million pounds for research and another 10 million to fund a network of clinics. Now we have included long covid research in our open calls, but that's not the same as declaring and giving people like Ambre the acknowledgement that this is a public health crisis that we don't understand. There are large numbers of people. By estimates, it's 25 to 35 percent of people with covid will develop long covid symptoms. In Canada, that's between 350000 and more than 490000, as of the latest figures, who may have been living with or are currently living with long covid. That's a significant subset of the population that is not going to be going back to normal, as the rest of us think that, you know, once the vaccine rollout is done, the pandemic is over, so we can't leave them behind, we need to find answers for them. But as Amber said, her physician was very sympathetic. But she said, I don't have any answers. I don't know what to tell you. And I heard that from many clinicians. Some we want to help our patients, but we don't know what to tell them because we don't understand what's happening. We don't know how long. We can't tell them. Well, just hold on for a bit longer. And I agree with Dr. Josephson. In some cases, people are recovering. In some cases, the vaccine seems to have impact. But there's also been relapses. So we really are far from having answers and being able to say that this is going to solve itself. And the only way that we get to answers is with more data. And so we need to do longitudinal trials. We need those trials to be well funded and robust because there are so many different symptoms. We need to arrive at better definitions of long covid. And what are the predominant clinical symptoms. We need to develop appropriate guidelines for diagnostics, for practise, for public health. And we need to study the effect of vaccines both on those who have long covid and for those who haven't and how they might be protected from long covid. I have a feeling this is going to require investment, but we have the capacity in Canada, we have the culture in Canada to do this kind of research and we owe it to the people who are living with these impacts to get the answers. And I would say for the next pandemic, which we hope doesn't happen, let's put ourselves in a better position than after the Russian flu and the Spanish flu when we found ourselves in this pandemic, not having any answers. Let's let's have some answers for the next pandemic.

MG: I have a feeling we'll talk again. In the meantime, we'll leave it there. It's really good to hear about the work that you're doing. Inez. Thank you.

INEZ JABALPURWALA: Thank you so much.

MG: Inez Jabalpurwala is the global director of viral neuro exploration. She was in Montreal. If you're suffering from lung covid symptoms like Amber, we'd love to hear from you what's your experience been like. You can email us thecurrent@cbc.ca. That's The Current for this Friday and for this week. Coming up next on CBC Radio One, it's Q hosted by Tom Power, a Montreal Canadiens fan. Hello, Montreal. Get any sleep last night? It has been ten long years since a Canadian hockey team earned a ticket to the Stanley Cup finals, 28 years since a team actually won that team. Of course, the Montreal Canadiens in 1993. Does it feel like 1993? It should, because the Canadians are on their way to the Stanley Cup final, punched their ticket last night. They're there after their 25th cup in franchise history, hoping to go after that 25th cup. This is Montreal's own Annakin Slayd with his song, It Feels Like 93. Get yourself on the bandwagon, Canada, where you're going all the way, he said as a Leafs fan. But you know, it's Canada's team now. I'm Matt Galloway thanks for listening to The Current. Have a great weekend. We'll talk to you Monday.

SOUNDCLIP

[Song]

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

Friday June 25, 2021 Full Transcript

More Stories Like This