Bugle Newspapers 9-29-22

plainfield resident grand prize winner in Brookfield Zoo’s photo contest

More than 700 photos featuring lions, capybaras, butterflies, snakes, penguins, and so many more animals were entered in the Chicago Zoological Society’s 2022 Photo Contest.

A panel of professional photographers judged the photos and selected their top seven choices in the following categories: mammal, bird, and reptile/amphibian/invertebrate/fish. Additionally, they chose their top five picks from all submitted entries to be considered for the grand prize. Then, the public was asked to vote for their favorites in each of the categories. Over 6,000 votes were cast to determine this year’s winners, which can be seen on the zoo’s website at www.CZS. org/PhotoContestWinners.

Hayley Pendergast of Plainfield, won the grand prize—a Brookfield Zoo Family Plus Membership; a Penguin Encounter for two people; an original painting by Leo, the zoo’s red panda; and a

$100 worth of gift certificates that can be used in any of the zoo’s restaurants or gift shops.

Winners in the mammal cat-

egory are Luke Ciancio of Lake Barrington, first place; Mark Holzman of Hoffman Estates, second place; and Steven Tabor of Lyons,

third place.

Winners in the bird category are Nathan Keck of Ottawa, first place; Makenzie Wheat of Chica-

go, second place; and Joseph Andalina of Naperville, third place.

Winners in the reptile/invertebrate/amphibian/fish category are Tricia Rangel of Naperville, first place; Robert Bator of Chicago, second place; and Nicholas McCarney of Sycamore, third place.

In addition to being displayed on the zoo’s website, winning photos can also be seen on monitors located at the zoo’s Hamill Family Nature Plaza, BZ Red Hots, Café del Sol, and Discovery Center through at least October 31, 2022.

Many of the photos entered in this year’s contest will also be featured in a photo mosaic that guests can see at the Café de Sol Plaza beginning this fall. The beautiful image, featuring Whirl, the zoo’s Amur tiger, is 9.5 feet high by 19.5 feet wide and was created using 26,676 1-inch by 1-inch photos.

news from plainfield • Joliet • shorewood • lockport • crest Hill • Bolingbrook • Romeoville • downers grove • Westmont • Woodridge • lisle • niles • Morton grove • park Ridge & more

dupage counTy

pollinator pair win monthly Forest preserve photo contest

If it floats like a butterfly and stings like a bee, it must be the winning photo for August’s portion of the Forest Preserve District of Will County’s Preserve the Moment Photo Contest.

Byron Morgan of Crete snapped the winning picture at Hickory Creek Preserve. The photo, which features an eastern tiger swallowtail on a flower and a bee in midair, received the most votes through public voting on Facebook after being chosen as one of five finalist photos by Forest Preserve judges. Comments on Facebook included: “This photo managed to pair these two wonders of the insect world! Just beautiful.” And also, “It’s like the bee is waiting for the butterfly! Gorgeous.”

Morgan is the fourth monthly winner since the contest began in May.

“I went to Hickory Creek because I always seem to get a good variety of wildlife and landscape pictures for my photography hobby,” Morgan said via email after being notified of his win. “This butterfly found a good resting spot, and I was able to get many pictures before the bee showed up. Thank goodness I was able to get them both together.”

The other finalist photos receiving honorable mentions in August were:

Greg Winkelmann of Romeoville for a statuesque egret at Rock Run Preserve.

Bertrand Leclercq of Naperville for an upside-down praying mantis at Riverview Farmstead Preserve.

Jenny Cain Vocu of Joliet for a land snail slithering across the trail at Rock Run Preserve and also for a garter snake curled up on the forest floor at Goodenow Grove Nature Preserve.

All photo contest entries can be viewed at Flickr.com/WillCoForests.

The contest continues with monthly winners through December. Monthly winners receive $75 Visa gift cards. Overall winners will

be chosen in January with $500, $250 and $150 Visa gift cards for first, second and third place, respectively. For information on con-

test rules and how to submit photos, visit ReconnectWithNature.org.

counTy

edward-elmhurst Health: Why people need a bivalent coVId-19 vaccine booster

Since early 2020, coronavirus variants have evolved that are better able to escape immunity from past infection or vaccination. This has prompted updates to the COVID-19 boosters that better match the components of the vaccine with the circulating omicron subvariants. Updated bivalent COVID-19 boosters are now available.

How well did the original vaccines work to protect against COVID-19?

The original Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines targeted the spike protein from the ancestral strain of SARS-COV-2. Vaccine efficacy was 95% against the early variants that circulated in 2020 and early 2021. The effectiveness declined slightly with the emergence of the delta variant in the summer of 2021.

“A major shift occurred at the end of 2021 with the emergence of the omicron BA1 variant,” says Jonathan Pinsky, M.D., medical director of infection control at Edward Hospital. “The omicron variants contain more than 30 mutations on the spike protein, 15 on the receptor-binding domain.”

The cross protection against omicron BA1 afforded from past vaccination was still better than being unvaccinated: 30% higher effectiveness without a booster, 80% higher with a booster, and more than 90% vaccine effectiveness when counting COVID-19 hospitalizations only.

Since February 2022, omicron subvariants have emerged, most recently the BA4 and BA5 variants. BA4 and BA5 are significantly more immune evasive, even against past infection with omicron BA1. BA4 and BA5 have been circulating as the predominant variants throughout the summer of 2022.

How did the monovalent (original) boosters improve protection?

After a COVID-19 booster, the spike protein is reintroduced to immune cells, leading to an increased repertoire of antibodies that are higher quality and attach better to targets on the spike protein. Even though the original vaccine only partially matched the omicron variant, a booster of the original vaccine improved

vaccine effectiveness to 80% against the omicron variant. As the level of protection diminished after several months, a second booster was found to restore protection for older adults and have a profound effect on reducing COVID-19 hospitalizations.

How is the updated bivalent booster expected to work better?

Instead of just relying on the cross protection from what is still in common between the original variant and the omicron variant, the updated bivalent boosters also provide direct protection against a host of new antigens unique to the BA4 and BA5 spike protein.

The updated boosters made by Pfizer BioNTech and Moderna contain the same mRNA as the original vaccine as well as mRNA shared by the BA4 and BA5 spike protein. With BA4 and BA5 currently circulating, there is a direct match with the updated bivalent booster and the currently circulating virus. With ongoing evolution of omicron subvariants, the updated bivalent booster may

still be a better match to other omicron subvariants as well as previous variants, than the monovalent vaccine.

The original COVID-19 vaccine will still be used for the primary series, and for boosters in children ages 5-11 years, but will no longer be used as a booster for those ages 12 years and older.

Will the updated bivalent booster be a yearly booster, just like the influenza vaccines?

Influenza vaccines are updated yearly to match recent strains and administered in the fall to provide immune protection through the winter while influenza is circulating.

“The updated bivalent COVID-19 boosters given now should provide maximum protection through the fall and winter months when there may be a higher level of virus transmission,” says Pinsky. “Yearly updated COVID-19 vaccines may be needed to restore waning immunity and to match the vaccine components to circulating variants.”

Who can get the updated bivalent boosters?

Adults and children ages 12 years and older can get an updated (bivalent) COVID-19 booster if the following eligibility criteria is met:

• They completed a primary vaccine series of any COVID-19 vaccine more than two months ago – had no boosters or had one or more boosters more than two months ago

• Pfizer-BioNTech bivalent booster is authorized for adults and children ages 12 years and older

• Moderna bivalent booster is authorized for adults ages 18 years and older

Even people who have received two previous monovalent boosters are eligible to receive the bivalent booster if it has been more than two months since their last shot.

If someone is vaccinated and had COVID-19 recently, how long should they wait to get a bivalent booster?

There is no minimum waiting period to get a booster after your infection resolves. Hybrid immunity from a combination of vaccination and infection makes the chance of re-infection low for the first few months. But after three months the risk of re-infection starts to increase due to a combination of waning immunity and evolving immune evasive variants. Waiting a few months may provide a more robust immune response as well as better protection into the spring and summer when immunity may be waning.

Learn more at EEHealth.org/ coronavirus.

Illinois supreme court denies former lawmakers’ claim for back pay

The Illinois Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a lawsuit filed by two former state legislators who sued for back pay they believed they were due for raises that they voted against while in office.

Former Sen. Michael Noland, DElgin, and former Sen. James Clayborne, D-Belleville, argued that the pay reduction measures they voted for violated the legislative salary clause of the Illinois Constitution, which says, “changes in the salary of a member shall not take effect during the term for which he has been elected.”

But in a 6-0 decision, the court declined to rule on the constitutionality aspect, saying the former lawmakers undercut their own case by voting in favor of the measures, touting them to the public and waiting too long to file their claims.

“We conclude that under the facts here, where plaintiffs, former legislators, agreed to, acquiesced in, and voted for the Salary Reduction Laws, plaintiffs cannot now be allowed to challenge the reductions in their salaries during their previous terms in office,” Justice P. Scott Neville wrote for the court.

Chief Justice Anne Burke and Justices Mary Jane Theis, Michael Burke, David Overstreet and Robert Carter concurred. Justice Lisa Holder White, who joined the court in July after oral arguments in the case had already concluded, did not take part in the decision.

Illinois is currently governed by the Compensation Review Act. In 1990, a Compensation Review Board that has since been abolished recommended that legislative salaries be subject to annual cost of living adjustments, or CO-

LAs. The General Assembly approved that recommendation and it remained in effect when the board was abolished.

In 2009, in the wake of a severe recession, lawmakers passed a bill canceling those COLAs for the upcoming fiscal year, and they repeated that policy each year until 2019.

Clayborne served in the General Assembly for 24 years, from 1995 to 2019. Noland served for 10 years, from 2007 to 2017. Noland first filed the suit in Cook County shortly after he left office and Clayborne joined two years later after he had announced he would not run for another term.

The lawsuit sought what’s known as a “writ of mandamus” –an order for a public official to perform a legal duty – against Illinois Comptroller Susana Mendoza.

Clayborne claimed he was owed $104,412.93 in lost pay. Noland sought $71,507.43.

In July 2019, Cook County Judge Franklin Valderrama ruled in their favor, saying the salary freezes were unconstitutional, and a subsequent judge, Allen P. Walker, issued an order in April 2021 for Mendoza to make the payments. But Mendoza appealed directly to the Supreme Court.

During oral arguments, Attorney General Kwame Raoul’s office, representing Mendoza, did not challenge the finding that the legislative acts were unconstitutional, but argued that the former senators had effectively waived their right to any relief by voting in favor of the pay reduction bills.

It also argued that the former lawmakers waited an unreasonable length of time before filing

their claims and that their claims should be barred by the statute of limitations, which is generally five years.

In its ruling Thursday, the Supreme Court agreed with those arguments and did not rule on the constitutionality argument.

“I’m so grateful the Supreme Court said ‘No’ to these two former legislators who voted to forego their raises, then issued news releases praising their self-sacrifice in declining those raises as they asked their constituents to re-elect them,” Mendoza said in a statement. “Years after they left the legislature they shamelessly sued me – and by extension, you, the taxpayers – saying they had no constitutional right to decline those raises and wanted them back.”