Following the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, financial institutions faced regulatory changes due to inherent weaknesses that were exposed by the recession. Within the United States, regulation came via the passing of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in 2010, which was heavily influenced by the internationally focused Basel III accord. A key component to both of these sets of regulations focused on raising the capital requirements for financial institutions, as well as creating capital buffers to help protect solvency during economic downturns in the future. The goal of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of these changes to capital requirements, and to hypothesize as to what would happen if the modern banking system experienced the COVID-19 pandemic recession with the capital and leverage levels of the banking institutions circa 2007. To accomplish this, data from the Federal Reserve describing the capital and leverage ratios of the banking industry will be evaluated during both the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, as well as during the COVID-19 Recession. Specifically, we will look at by how much capital was improved due to Dodd-Frank/Basel III, the resiliency of the capital and leverage ratios during the modern COVID-19 recession, and we will look at the average drop in capital levels caused by the COVID-19 recession and apply these percentage changes to the leverage/capital levels seen in 2007. Given the results, it is clear to see that the change in capital requirements along with the counter-cyclical buffers described in Dodd-Frank and Basel III allowed the banking system to function throughout the COVID recession without approaching insolvency in the slightest, something that ailed many large banks and firms during the Global Financial Crisis. As an answer to our hypothetical, we found that the drop seen affecting the measures of bank capital experienced during the COVID pandemic when applied to values seen at the beginning of the 2007 recession still led to a well-capitalized banking industry as a whole, highlighting the resiliency seen during the COVID recession thanks to the capital buffers put in place, as well as the direct assistance provided by the federal government (via PPP loans and stimulus checks) and the Federal Reserve in keeping the hit on capital to minimal values throughout the pandemic.

Since the start of the COVID 19 pandemic there has undoubtedly been an increase in social distancing orders, isolation, and overall general stress. The current outbreak has been proven to have a heavy impact on issues involving mental health. Social distancing mandates contributed to isolation, which in turn caused a surge in psychiatric disorders, either newly onset or exacerbating preexisting conditions (Torales, et al, 2020). Due to significant alterations in daily life, an increase in physical inactivity has already been proven to lead to deterioration of cardiovascular health (Pecanha et al, 2020). Stay at home orders have prevented otherwise healthy people from keeping up their daily exercise and eating habits, contributing to a heightened amount of mental health and hypertensive related issues.<br/>In addition to these health concerns, the pandemic has put stress upon pharmaceutical management practices. Drug utilization surges have led to an impact on patient care and management which requires careful measures to be taken to reduce the inflow of sick patients (Badreldin and Atallah, 2020). A global drug shortage has been a result of these drug utilizations. Understanding the alterations in the usage of specific medications such as prescription psychotropics, antihypertensive drugs, and antidiabetic agents can aid in population management and drug shortages.

The mental health of ASU students has been negatively affected by the pandemic. Our research looks to prove that COVID-19 has caused an increase in stress levels while uncovering other relationships to stress. We obtained our data by conducting a survey through Google Forms that was exclusively accessible to ASU students. Stress levels were measured with the use of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). We find that the stress of ASU students from before the pandemic to during rises from 15 to 22 points, a 50% increase (n = 228). We discovered that women are more stressed than men before and during the pandemic. We also discovered that there is no difference between stresses among different races. We notice that there is a parabolic relationship between enrollment time and stress levels with the peak occurring during semesters 2-6. We also conclude that students who attended more than 5 events during the pandemic had lower stress scores, and those who had their videos on for at least 3 events had lower stress scores. Furthermore, students who utilized campus resources to manage their stress had higher stress levels than those who did not.

The mental health of ASU students has been negatively affected by the pandemic. Our research looks to prove that COVID-19 has caused an increase in stress levels while uncovering other relationships to stress. We obtained our data by conducting a survey through Google Forms that was exclusively accessible to ASU students. Stress levels were measured with the use of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). We find that the stress of ASU students from before the pandemic to during rises from 15 to 22 points, a 50% increase (n = 228). We discovered that women are more stressed than men before and during the pandemic. We also discovered that there is no difference between stresses among different races. We notice that there is a parabolic relationship between enrollment time and stress levels with the peak occurring during semesters 2-6. We also conclude that students who attended more than 5 events during the pandemic had lower stress scores, and those who had their videos on for at least 3 events had lower stress scores. Furthermore, students who utilized campus resources to manage their stress had higher stress levels than those who did not.

The mental health of ASU students has been negatively affected by the pandemic. Our research looks to prove that COVID-19 has caused an increase in stress levels while uncovering other relationships to stress. We obtained our data by conducting a survey through Google Forms that was exclusively accessible to ASU students. Stress levels were measured with the use of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). We find that the stress of ASU students from before the pandemic to during rises from 15 to 22 points, a 50% increase (n = 228). We discovered that women are more stressed than men before and during the pandemic. We also discovered that there is no difference between stresses among different races. We notice that there is a parabolic relationship between enrollment time and stress levels with the peak occurring during semesters 2-6. We also conclude that students who attended more than 5 events during the pandemic had lower stress scores, and those who had their videos on for at least 3 events had lower stress scores. Furthermore, students who utilized campus resources to manage their stress had higher stress levels than those who did not.

The Covid-19 pandemic has made a significant impact on both the stock market and the<br/>global economy. The resulting volatility in stock prices has provided an opportunity to examine<br/>the Efficient Market Hypothesis. This study aims to gain insights into the efficiency of markets<br/>based on stock price performance in the Covid era. Specifically, it investigates the market’s<br/>ability to anticipate significant events during the Covid-19 timeline beginning November 1, 2019<br/><br/>and ending March 31, 2021. To examine the efficiency of markets, our team created a Stay-at-<br/>Home Portfolio, experiencing economic tailwinds from the Covid lockdowns, and a Pandemic<br/><br/>Loser Portfolio, experiencing economic headwinds from the Covid lockdowns. Cumulative<br/>returns of each portfolio are benchmarked to the cumulative returns of the S&P 500. The results<br/>showed that the Efficient Market Hypothesis is likely to be valid, although a definitive<br/>conclusion cannot be made based on the scope of the analysis. There are recommendations for<br/>further research surrounding key events that may be able to draw a more direct conclusion.

Covid-19 is unlike any coronavirus we have seen before, characterized mostly by the ease with which it spreads. This analysis utilizes an SEIR model built to accommodate various populations to understand how different testing and infection rates may affect hospitalization and death. This analysis finds that infection rates have a significant impact on Covid-19 impact regardless of the population whereas the impact that testing rates have in this simulation is not as pronounced. Thus, policy-makers should focus on decreasing infection rates through targeted lockdowns and vaccine rollout to contain the virus, and decrease its spread.

As 2020 unfolded, a new headline began taking over front pages: “COVID-19”. In the months that followed, waves of fear, sorrow, isolation, and grief gripped the population in the viruses’ wake. We have all heard it, we have all felt it, indeed because we were all there. Trailing a few months behind those initial headlines, more followed that only served to breed misinformation and ludicrous theories. Even with study after study, quality, scientific data about this new virus could not come fast enough. There was somehow both too much information and also not enough. We were scrambling to process the abundance of raw numbers into some semblance of an explanation. After those first few months of the pandemic, patterns in the research are beginning to emerge. These horrific patterns tell much more than just the pathology of COVID-19. As the number of sick, surviving, and deceased patients began to accumulate, it became clear that some populations were left devastated, while others seemed unscathed. The reasons for these patterns were present long before the COVID-19 Pandemic. Disparities in health care were highlighted by the pandemic – not caused by it. The roots of these disparities lie in the five Social Determinants of Health (SDOH): (1) economic stability, (2) neighborhood and built environment, (3) education, (4) social and community context, and (5) health and health care. Minority populations, namely Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, and Pacific Islanders consistently have higher diagnosis rates and poorer patient outcomes compared to their White American and Asian American counterparts. This is partly because minority populations tend to have jobs that pay lower, increase exposure risk, and provide little healthcare. When unemployment increased in the wake of the pandemic, minorities were the first to lose their jobs and their health insurance. In addition, these populations tend to live in densely populated neighborhoods, where social isolation is harder. Higher poverty rates encourage work DISPROPORTIONATE EFFECTS OF COVID-19 ON MINORITY POPULATIONS 3 rather than education, often perpetuating the cycle. The recent racial history and current aggressions towards minority people might produce a social attitude against healthcare Health care itself can be expensive, hard to find, and/or tied to employment, leading to poorly controlled comorbidities, which exacerbate poor patient outcomes in the case of COVID-19 infection. The healthcare delivery system plays little part in the SDOH, instead, public policy must be called to reform in order to fix these issues.

An exploration into the history of the 1918 Influenza Pandemic and the societal impacts associated with it, as well as an analysis of the developing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic today. Based upon these analyses, similarities were drawn between the two pandemics which suggested a lack of innovation in preventative measures over the last century. Given this conclusion a series of proposals were made that should be further explored to give not only the United States, but the world at large, a better chance in the face of the next emerging disease.