Monthly Archives: June 2017

Allergy Breakthrough with Gene Therapy – Anti Aging News

Posted on by

Posted on June 6, 2017, 6 a.m. in Allergy Gene Therapy Immune System

Using gene therapy, scientists have been able to 'turn-off' the immune response which causes allergic reaction in animals.

It might soon be possible for a single treatment to provide life-long protection against harsh allergies including asthma. An immunology research team at The University of Queensland led by Professor Ray Steptoe has figured out how to disable the immune response that triggers allergic reactions. The research team operates out of the university's Diamantina Institute. Professor Steptoe's lab is situated at the Translational Research Institute. The research was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Asthma Foundation. The research team's findings are published in JCI Insight.

The Basics of Allergies and Asthma

When an individual has an allergy or a flare-up of asthma, the symptoms he experiences stem from immune cell reactions to proteins within the allergen. Allergies and asthma recur over and over again as the immune cells, referred to as T-cells, gradually create a type of immune memory. As a result, they resist treatments. Steptoe and his research team are now capable of wiping the memories of T-cells in animals. They have successfully done so with gene therapy that desensitizes the immune system to allow for the tolerance of pain.

About the Breakthrough

Steptoe's research team made use of an experimental asthma allergen. They took blood stem cells, inserted a gene that regulates the allergen protein and put it into the recipient. These engineered cells generated new blood cells. The protein is expressed in these new blood cells. Specific immune cells are targeted in order for the allergic response to be turned off.

The experimental asthma allergen worked so effectively that it is possiblethe research could be used to treat those who suffer from traditional allergies to foods. Examples include allergies to nuts, shellfish, bee venom and an array of other substances. Professor Steptoe indicates the findings will soon be subjected to additional pre-clinical investigation. The next step is to replicate the results with human cells in a lab setting.

The Goal of Gene Therapy in the Context of Allergies

Professor Steptoe states the end goal is to make use of single injected gene therapy rather than repeated short-term treatments that attempt to reduce allergy symptoms. Such short-term treatments are successful in some instances and unsuccessful in others.

Professor Steptoe's team has not reached the point where gene therapy is as straightforward as receiving a flu jab yet his group is hard at work on making it as simple and safe as possible. Their aim is for gene therapy to be used on an extensive cross-section of those plagued by allergies and asthma as well as those who endure potentially deadly food allergies. It is possible that a completely safe one-off style gene therapy treatment for traditional allergies, asthma, and food allergies will be available in the near future.

View original post here:

Allergy Breakthrough with Gene Therapy - Anti Aging News

Allergy treatment: Scientists claim breakthrough that could lead to … – The Independent

Posted on by

Scientists in Australia claim to have discovered what could be a life-long cure for potentially fatal allergies to peanuts, shellfish and other food.

The researchers said they had been able to turn off the allergic response in tests on mice using gene therapy to desensitise the bodys immune system, and suggested this could also be used to treat asthma.

They predicted human trials could begin in just five or six years.

Commenting on the study, a leading British expert said scientists had managed to cure allergies in mice before without this leading to an effective human treatment, but added that the new research could lead to the "Holy Grail" of allergy treatment.

He was sceptical about the researchers' claims their technique might be effective against asthma, but Asthma UK said it was "a very exciting step forward".

Allergies occur when the immune system over-reacts to something that is usually harmless. In the journal JCI Insight, the Australian researchers reported they had used genetic techniques to prevent this from happening in mice who were allergic to the protein in egg whites.

In a video about the new research, Professor Ray Steptoe, of Queensland University, said: We can actually turn off the response. What that means is the disease is stopped in its tracks.

What we do is we stop the underlying disease that causes these symptoms. That could revolutionise treatment for severe allergies. It would prevent, we think, some of the life-threatening allergic episodes that occur for people who are allergic to foods for instance.

That would make a huge difference for people with severe allergies what that would mean is they would no longer be in fear of life-threatening incidents if they were to go to a restaurant and be exposed to shellfish and they werent aware that was in the food.

Kids with peanut allergies could go to school without any fear of being contaminated from other kids food.

We envisage in the future, with this approach, that they could go to the doctors rooms, get a single treatment and that would give them permanent protection from future allergic attacks or asthma attacks.

He added that the researchers hoped human trials could begin in five to six years, estimated it would take a similar period after that for the treatment to be available to patients.

Professor Adnan Custovic, an allergy expert at Imperial College London, expressed particular caution about the claim the treatment would be effective against asthma as the condition is caused by a completely different mechanism to the one behind food allergies.

But he added: This is one of the potentially exciting approaches to treating allergies.

Its sort of approach, where you try to switch off the allergic response, is kind of the Holy Grail, but a mouse model is not the same as a human model.

We can cure allergies in mice but we cannot do it in humans the mechanisms are not identical. Only time will tell whether this approach will be a viable one.

And he criticised the degree of optimism about the technique expressed by the Australian team.

My real problem with this sort of bombastic statements like this is people with asthma it gives them hope which very often is not realistic, Professor Custovic said.

However Dr Erika Kennington, head of research at Asthma UK, was more optimistic.

This is potentially a very exciting step forward in asthma research," she said.

"Allergen immunotherapy exposing people to small amounts of an allergen in order to build up tolerance is currently the only disease-altering treatment available for asthma but it can have significant side effects in some people, and every other existing asthma treatment and medication works by reducing or relieving the symptoms.

"These findings suggesting a novel approach to reversing allergic disease are therefore very welcome.

We also know that there are certain allergy triggers that cause asthma flare ups, which makes this research important in possibly reducing the risk of life-threatening asthma attacks."

But Dr Kennington also pointed to the difference between animal and human trials.

A lot more research is needed to see if the same results can be achieved in people before we can say that a cure for asthma is around the corner," she said.

In the study of the allergic mice, the researchers inserted a gene into blood stem cells that controls the immune response to the egg white.

The genetically modified cells were then injected into the mices bone marrow, where they produced new blood cells that were able to turn off the allergic response.

The researchers hope to create a similar form of gene therapy that works on humans after a single injection.

We havent quite got it to the point where its as simple as getting a flu jab, so we are working on making it simpler and safer so it could be used across a wide cross-section of affected individuals, Dr Steptoe said.

Dr Louisa James, British Society for Immunology spokesperson and an immunologistat Queen Mary University of London, said allergies were "far more complex than can be replicated in an animal model".

"Patients with severe allergies often react to several different types of allergen and symptoms can develop over several years," she said.

"Although the results are encouraging and heading in the right direction, it is too early to predict whether this form of therapy could ever be used to treat allergies in humans.

"As the authors state in their paper 'gene-therapy is not yet suitable for clinical application to mild disease in young individuals'.

"There are simply too many open questions around the translation of these findings from animal models into humans.Would the cells engineered to produce allergens produce the same response in humans? How would other immune cells that play a critical role in human allergy be affected? What are the mechanisms that switch off the immune response and are they comparable in humans?

This approach holds promise, and further research is certainly warranted, but claims that a single injection could switch off allergies are over-optimistic at this time.

Read the original post:

Allergy treatment: Scientists claim breakthrough that could lead to ... - The Independent

Futurist urges Lambex sheepmeat producers to not give data away – Sheep Central

Posted on by

Futurist Paul Higgins

DIGITAL transformation data is the answer to connecting with, and generating value from, high margin customers, futurist Paul Higgins told Lambex 2016 conference delegates yesterday.

In his presentation titled The choice is ours farmers or peasants, Mr Higgins said data would be as valuable as the product farmers produce and could be held by farmer-owned co-operatives.

Mr Higgins said data was already being used to influence customers, as evidenced by QR codes under the lid of a can of Australian milk powder, providing provenance details to a Chinese customers. Such points of contact gave the customer information about the producer as well as providing details on what the consumer is interested in, he said.

Citing the example of drones, Mr Higgins raised the opportunity of farm customers being invited to join our drone flight as it goes over and monitors a property.

That you can enter a virtual reality environment that will let you walk in among our flock, that gives experiences and context, and transparency about what is going on and that gives me, the high margin customer, the connection to your product and to your company, and the willingness to pay high margins for that.

Mr Higgins said he had been working with food manufacturer Simplot in a digital transformation project that invited in start-ups to get access to company data, customers and funds to develop a product for them.

Theyre essentially talking about how do we connect to the customer more so they are more connected to our product and our brand.

Part of Simplots problem is that the supermarket act as a kind of a gateway for a huge percentage of their products with their consumers theyre trying to get more connected and more transparent with those consumers, he said.

Theyre recognising they cant do that by themselves.

Theyre inviting people in from outside to experiment, create new ideas and ways of connection to do that.

Mr Higgins said technology progressed from its genesis or innovation to being custom-built, to product, to a utility or a service, quoting the example of the invention of motorcar propulsion systems, then multiple car models and now car or taxi services.

I no longer have a need to own a car if I dont want to.

Thats the way technology goes through its cycles, he said.

If you are talking about agriculture, I think there are three key things here.

First of all they have to be useful farmer applications in your hand, Mr Higgins said.

Technology-based systems such as drones need to simple to use and available I dont need to know how it works.

We need industry data platforms and I know MLA is already on these sort of things and the architecture of them, but my view is that data is going to be as valuable as the actual product you produce off your farm, he said.

So data is as important as the meat, as the grain, as the milk that comes off farms data is going to become just as important.

And data problem is that it is more valuable if we share it all rather than keep it for ourselves.

He urged the conference delegates not to give their data away and we want to (be) open so we can do things with it.

Id like a system where I can share my data and I can say, I would love to share it with the researchers, with the marketers, but have control over that process, but there be incentives for me to share that data because the more we do together the more value we all get out of it individually.

Mr Higgins said Australia had a history of farmer-owned co-operatives for marketing farm products.

We need to do the same around data, because we have the capacity to choose the value.

This is where the title about farmers or peasants comes in, he said.

We can go, we can produce companies, we can use this data, we can use it for our own purposes and create our own value, or we can hand it off to other people and allow them to use it and we can come back in 10 years time and whinge that all these people are making money and were not.

Or we can do something about it now and say we are going to invest in these sort of operations to produce value for our own business and for our own farmers, Mr Higgins said.

That is the challenge in my mind for the next three or four years looking at how do we do that and ow do we invest in that just like we invested in all sorts of other areas in agriculture so we can be part of that value creation.

So we need an overall strategic direction that says where do we put these things if we could have a central industry data platform to work from that is under the control of farmers themselves then we can produce value from it.

But it should be competitive, it shouldnt just be supplied to a farmer-owned co-operatives, it should go to who can produce the best value out of the process, Mr Higgins said.

The more competition we have in that process, the more we own it the value, the better of we will be, because the future is going to be driven by new value, new transparency, new information, new margins with customers that you havent thought about before, and we need to get hold of those margins and be part of that, not hand it over to other people.

The people that win in 2036 will be the people that have learned how to turn around how things work, re-think business models and actually get hold of those 20 percent of high margin customers that are more connected and more information and more transparency, and are craving experiences, not just product, he said.

I hope that most of you in the room are in that group.

See more here:

Futurist urges Lambex sheepmeat producers to not give data away - Sheep Central

Business Expert Asserts That Bitcoin is Not Currency – Futurism

Posted on by

In BriefMark Cuban has attacked Bitcoin on Twitter, claiming it is nota currency, it is a bubble, and that the whole system of valuationconcerning it is wrong. But is he right? Mark Cubans Twitterstorm

Mark Cuban has recently raised a series of criticisms of bitcoin on Twitter, which has resulted in the cryptocurrencys exchange rate dropping rapidly illustrating many of the issues with the currency that he discussed in the Tweet themselves.

Mark Cuban rose to wealth by selling his start-up businesses MicroSolutions (a PC company that he sold to CompuServe for $6 Million) and Broadcast.com (which transmitted sports games over the internet, and was subsequently sold to Yahoo for $5.7 Billion) in the 1990s, and rose to prominence by becoming owner of the NBA team the Dallas Mavericks.

Earlier today he took his opinions of Bitcoin toTwitter:

Cuban crucially differentiates between blockchain and Bitcoin: the former being a means of transaction that is more secure, transparent, and distributive, and the latter a cryptocurrency.

However, Cuban likens bitcoin to the religious worship of gold as an asset and describes it as a stock, which is fundamentally different from a currency currencies measure how much of an asset you have. This is why Cuban progresses to state I am not questioning value. Im questioning valuation.

Just because bitcoins exchange rate has reached thousands of dollars, this doesnt mean that anyone would be willing to give you thousands of dollars for your bitcoin. Currencies are universal measures of value in the country you operate which allows anyone to trade with anyone as part of a universal system of value. This is in contrast to assets which you can buy with that value system but not necessarily trade anywhere as easily.

Currencies, in order to operate in this way, need to be relatively stable which Cuban showed bitcoin was not due to the almost instant drop after his tweetstorm. To analogise: can you imagine the dollar, pound, or euro drastically dropping in a matter of hours just because of a few tweets?

On the surface, Bitcoin looks monumentally impressive: it has grown every year apart from 2014, has climbed 141 percent in value this year alone, even peaking at $2,900 this past week. However, the precise reason for this success is the reason for its potential failure it is too turbulent, too successful.

This means that while Bitcoin may seem extremely seductive it has been billed as, among other things, the ultimate investment and a universal currency we must be careful when investing in it (particularly because it is difficult to convert back into dollars), putting faith in it, and being overoptimistic about its potential.

Bitcoin is one particularly famous use of a potentially more promising and widely applicable system called blockchain, which has the potential to revolutionize everything from the music industry to sustainable development and even banking accountability.

According to many, it is blockchain, not bitcoin, that has the potential to revolutionize future transactions: If the internet bought us near instant digital communication, then the blockchain brings us near instant asset transfer, asset movement and security of data movement said Simon Taylor, the previous head of Barclays cryptocurrency division.

Read more:

Business Expert Asserts That Bitcoin is Not Currency - Futurism

The 40-Year Old Mystery of the Wow! Signal Was Just Solved – Futurism

Posted on by

Wow! Messages From Space

In 1977, the sound of extraterrestrials was heard by human ears for the first time or so people at the time thought.The Wow! Signal was detected by astronomer Jerry Ehman using Ohio State Universitys Big Ear radio telescope. It isa radio signal detector that, at the time, was pointed at a group of stars called Chi Sagittariiin the constellation Sagittarius.

When scanning the skies around the stars, Ehmancaptured a 72 second burst of radio waves: He circled the reading and wrote Wow!: next to it, hence the signals name. Over the last 40 years, the signal has beencited as evidence that we are not alone in the galaxy. Experts and laypeople alike believed that, finally, we had evidence of alien life.

However, Professor Antonio Paris, of St Petersburg College, has now discovered the explanation: A pair of comets. The work was published in the Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences.

These comets, known as 266P/Christensen and 335P/Gibbs, have clouds of hydrogen gas millions of kilometers in diameter surrounding them. The Wow! Signal was detected at 1420MHz, which is the radio frequency hydrogen naturally emits. Notably, the team has verified that the comets were within the vicinity at the time, andtheyreport that the radio signals from 266/P Christensen matched those from the Wow! signal.

While this discovery is a disappointment to alien enthusiasts everywhere, as the Wow! Signal is the strongest signal we have ever received from space, it is a testament to our ability to accurately interpret signals and sounds from the cosmos. This gives us hope in our attempt to decode the hundreds of strange, alien signals coming from other stars that have been observed recently.

We have several weapons in our cosmic detection arsenal, most of which are used by the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence Institute (SETI). Their main means of detection is using radio-telescopes, and their most ambitious project to date has been Project Phoenix; the worlds most sensitive and comprehensive search for extraterrestrial intelligence.

For this project, they used three of worlds biggest radio telescopes: the Parkes radio telescope in Australia (210 feet indiameter), the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in West Virginia (140 feet in diameter), and Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico (the worlds largest at 1,000 feet in diameter). They have also built The Allen Telescope Array with financial backing from Paul Allen.

While the technology for detecting alien messages is remaining relatively static, ideas for communicating better with our own satellites is advancing rapidly, with possibilities including communicating by a laser beam and establishing a space satellite network.

More:

The 40-Year Old Mystery of the Wow! Signal Was Just Solved - Futurism

Are Lab-Grown Meats Really the Future of Food? – Futurism

Posted on by

In BriefLab-grown meat prices have dropped by 96% in just four years.Although they are still too costly to be fully scalable, this willsoon change, and lab-grown meats will provide a real solution toenvironmental harm caused by livestock agriculture. Cost Of Cruelty-Free Meat Technology is teaming up with cuisine to provide realistic alternatives to meat, and the first prototype products are starting to interest consumers. Mimicking the taste, texture, look, and smell of meat isnt easy, and creating these first few products demands a significant investment from companies. However, more companies are taking a chance on synthetic meats, hoping for major returns in the long run. In 2016, Beyond Meat became, arguably,the first startup to bring a plant-based meat alternative one that could really stand in for real meat to grocery stores. Impossible Foods, its main competitor, is insteadapproaching restaurants first with the intention of penetrating the grocery market later. Other companies are literally growing synthetic meats, called cellular-agriculture meats, fiber by fiber in labs. These are extremely expensive to produce, but their prices are falling fast. The price of the first lab-grown beef burger, created by Mosa Meats, was equivalent to about $1.2 million per pound, retail. Now, lab-grown hamburger runs forabout $11.36 per pound, similar to the Beyond Meat alternative which goes for about $12 per pound although both are still out of reach for most consumers. In contrast, ground beef retails for around $3.54 per pound on average. Meanwhile, Memphis Meats is currently in the process of growing chicken meat in the lab. Although comparatively, its retail price of $6,000 per pound is much more accessible than $1.2 million, it still has a way to go before it will be attainable for consumers. Kinder To The Environment According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), livestock feed production eats up 26% of the ice-free land on Earth, and 13 billion hectares (32.1 billion acres) of forest are lost to land conversion for pastures or cropland annually. Livestock farming also contributes to about 14.5% of all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. All of this damage could be alleviated by transitioning to lab-grown meats. Scaling the ability to consistently meet demand in a cost-effective way is the main problem holding lab-grown meats back. Although companies are working toward solutions, animal-free meat will not be affordable for average consumers before 2020. Still, Impossible Foods CEO Patrick Brown aims to completely replace the meat industry by producing more realistic meat alternativeswith products like whole turkeys, and companies like Tyson are investing in his idea. For now, thats just a pipe dream, but if lab-made and plant-based meats can prove to be friendlier to the environment, healthier, and cost effective, they might just have a fighting chance.

Follow this link:

Are Lab-Grown Meats Really the Future of Food? - Futurism

China to Reveal Its Autonomous Bus/Train Hybrid in 2018 – Futurism

Posted on by

In Brief A new train that operates autonomously is expected to begin serving a Chinese city next year. The train follows a pre-set route laid out by white dots on the road. The technology provides small and medium-sized cities with a cheaper public transport

The state of public transportation has arrived at an exciting juncture. It seems that technologies have finally advanced to the point that truly never before seen solutions are starting to pop up all around the world. Were seeing the likes of autonomous taxis, flying taxis, and high-speed trains like themag-lev limo concept, which promises to deliver travelers from New York to Beijing in 2 hours time.

Another option is readying itself to transport people around the Chinese city of Zhuzhou as soon as 2018. The smart bus is being developed by Chinese rail transit firm CRRC to combine the economical ease of bus systems with the modularity of subway trains, as well as the convenience and safety of autonomy.

The smart bus, or Autonomous Rail Rapid Transit (ART), will follow a preset path guided by white dots lining the roads picked up by sensors in the trains. ART is an excellent option for smaller to medium sized cities who cannot afford to invest in the infrastructurenecessary to have a subway system.

The three-car trains will be able to hold 300 people along its 6.5 km (4 mile) track. More carriages could be added to allow for a greater numbers of passengers.

This project seems like a stepping stone solution between our current transportation systems and the forthcoming high(er)-tech possibilities.

Read more:

China to Reveal Its Autonomous Bus/Train Hybrid in 2018 - Futurism

One of These Nine Routes Could Be Home to the First European Hyperloop – Futurism

Posted on by

In BriefHyperloop One has released a shortlist of nine proposed routesfor European systems. These routes could potentially connect 75million people via cutting-edge, high-speed transport. Euro-Hyperloop

Europealready enjoys an extensive and diverse system of railways. Still, there is always room for improvement, and an Elon Musk-inspired company is looking to introduce the continent to the next generation of travel.

Hyperloop One has unveiled their shortlist of potential European routes for their high-speed transportation project. Shervin Pishevar, the companys co-founder and executive chairman, told CNBC, Our vision is to, one day, connect all of Europe with our Hyperloop One system, networking the entire continent.

The list was compiled through a global challenge initiated by Hyperloop One to find the cities that would benefit the most from the cutting-edge transportationsystem. According to CNBC,the proposed cities would connect more than 75 million people in 44 cities, spanning 5,000 kilometers (3,100 miles).

The nine finalists range from a 1,991 km (1,237 mile) route through Germany to a 90 km (56 mile) route connecting Estonia to Finland. Other proposed routes would connect parts of Poland, cities in the Netherlands, the islands of Corsica and Sardinia, Spain and the north African country of Morocco, and several points in the United Kingdom.

Hyperloop One shared 11potential locations in the United States for Hyperloop routes a few months ago, and in March, the company announced talks with India, adding yet another country into the fortuitous futuristic fold.

Its no wonder so many countries are eager to welcomethis technology to their regions. If the system can perform as promised, it would revolutionize how we transport not only people but also cargo. At its peak speed, a Hyperloop is expectedto be capable of traveling more than 1,000 kmh (700 mph). The company boasts on its website that a trip between theAustralian cities of Melbourne and Sydney, a distance of 878 km (546 miles), would take only 55 minutes.

A system of Hyperloops would not only make traveling easier, it would also have a positive impact on a regions environment and economy. Ideally, the system will be able to generate more solar power than it consumes, making it an excellent green travel alternative to automobiles, trains, and airplanes. Tickets to ride could also cost as little as $25, often making the clean choice easily the best choice for travelers.

View post:

One of These Nine Routes Could Be Home to the First European Hyperloop - Futurism

Freedom Caucus: Cancel August recess – POLITICO – Politico

Posted on by

We need to work through August recess to get everything done, said Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows. | Getty

The House Freedom Caucus on Tuesday night called on Republican leadership to cancel the August recess to continue work on tax reform and other GOP priorities.

The group of several dozen conservative hardliners during their weekly meeting took the official position to work through the break, which is quickly drawing near as Republicans scramble to pass President Donald Trumps agenda.

Story Continued Below

We need to work through August recess to get everything done, said Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), coming out of the meeting. We believe that we need to stay through August to get through tax reform and get our appropriations done.

The group's request ups the pressure on GOP leaders, who could face the same request from an impatient White House thirsty for legislative victories. Four months into Trumps presidency, Republicans have accomplished very little. The Obamacare repeal effort, stalled in the House for weeks, is slowly working its way through the Senate. And the party is divided over how to overhaul the tax code.

Lawmakers only have seven weeks left before the break. And, once they return, much of the focus will be on funding the government before it expires Sept. 30, and raising the debt ceiling two votes that will suck up a lot of time and energy. Lawmakers really only have until the end of 2017 to finalize their landmark pieces of legislation. Since 2018 is an election year, every vote becomes tougher.

Missing out on the latest scoops? Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning in your inbox.

Go here to read the rest:

Freedom Caucus: Cancel August recess - POLITICO - Politico

In India, Concerns About Media Freedom After Raids on Broadcaster – Voice of America

Posted on by

NEW DELHI

Indias Information and broadcasting minister, M. Venkaiah Naidu has refuted allegations that raids carried out by the countrys main investigative agency on a top broadcaster were an infringement on press freedom.

His comments on Wednesday came in response to widespread concern that the action against the promoters of a TV news channel that has often been critical of the governments policies could undermine press freedom in the worlds largest democracy.

Government action

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) searched several premises of Prannoy and Radhika Roy, the promoters of NDTV news channel, earlier this week after receiving a private complaint that they caused a loss of loss of $7.5 million to a private bank from which they had taken a loan.

The promoters have denied claims of financial wrongdoing and said in a statement that the entire loan amount was paid in full seven years ago. It called the raids a witch hunt and an attack on press freedom.

Minister Naidu defended the action saying the law was taking its course. The management and promoters have to stand scrutiny and answer to the people, he said.

But that has done little to allay the concerns of critics who point out that the complaint which prompted the raids did not even come from the bank which CBI alleges made the losses.

Political move?

Bhaskar Roy, head of the Center of Media Studies in New Delhi, sees a political angle behind the CBI action against the NDTV promoters and says the reasons put out for the raids dont add up. The point I am making is, these are all silly reasons to somehow put them under pressure. It is muzzling independent press, he told VOA.

The influential Editors Guild of India has expressed concern and condemned any attempt to muzzle the media. Many journalists have said that the raids raise disturbing questions.

Its very troubling and the answers have not come, said independent political analyst Neerja Chowdhury in New Delhi. For the moment what has come out does not sort of merit a CBI raid.

Broadcaster is defiant

NDTV has said on its website that "We will not succumb to these attempts to blatantly undermine democracy and free speech in India."

The raids took place a day after an argument on television between the spokesman of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, Sambit Patra and a news anchor who asked him to apologize for his comment that the channel had an agenda.

This is not the first time that NDTV has had a brush with the government. Last year, the government imposed an unusual, one-day ban on NDTV Hindi channel saying it had disclosed sensitive information on a terror attack, but following an outcry it revoked the ban.

Message from government

Chowdhury sees the latest action against the channel's promoters as a message from Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu nationalist government to the media: The message would be, dont be critical. I wont even say critical, questioning.

The spotlight on media freedom in India came after this year's World Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders downgraded Indias ranking by three places citing concerns about Hindu nationalists trying to purge all manifestations of anti-national thought from the national debate. Placing India at 136 out of 180 countries, the report said this had resulted in growing self censorship in the mainstream media.

Read this article:

In India, Concerns About Media Freedom After Raids on Broadcaster - Voice of America

Myanmar journalists take fight for freedom of speech to court | Reuters – Reuters

Posted on by

YANGON More than 100 reporters in Myanmar are preparing to protest against laws seen as curbing free speech when two senior journalists go on trial on Thursday, after the military sued them for defamation over a satirical article in their journal.

The rare campaign, in which journalists will wear armbands reading "Freedom of the Press", underscores growing public unease at the laws, after the courts recently took up a raft of similar cases.

Despite pressure from human rights bodies and Western diplomats, the government of Aung San Suu Kyi has retained a broadly worded law that prohibits use of the telecoms network to "extort, threaten, obstruct, defame, disturb, inappropriately influence or intimidate".

The law was adopted by the semi-civilian administration of former generals led by former president Thein Sein which navigated Myanmar's opening to the outside world from 2011 to 2016.

Arrests of social media users whose posts are deemed distasteful have continued under the administration of Nobel Peace Prize winner Suu Kyi.

These include the case that sparked the protest, after the chief editor and a columnist of the Voice, one of Myanmar's largest dailies, were arrested for publishing their take on a film on the army's fight with ethnic rebels.

Myanmar journalists have urged authorities to release the reporters and have set up a Protection Committee for Myanmar Journalists.

"The 66 (d) law should be terminated, because the government and the military have used it to cause trouble for the media and the people," said Thar Lon Zaung Htet, a former editor of the domestic Irrawaddy journal who organized the meeting, referring to a controversial clause in the telecoms law.

He said the journalists would gather in front of the court and march to the Voice office wearing the armbands. The panel will also gather signatures for a petition to abolish the law, to be sent to Suu Kyi's office, the army chief and parliament.

Other recent cases include last weekend's arrest of a man publicly accusing an assistant of Yangon's chief minister, Phyo Min Thein, of corruption, and charges against several people over a student play critical of the military.

Phyo Min Thein's assistant has rejected the accusations in a subsequent media interview.

Besides repressive laws, journalists often face threats and intimidation in Myanmar. One recently received threats after speaking out against nationalist Buddhists. In December, a reporter covering illegal logging and crime in the rugged northwest was beaten to death.

"This law is totally against human rights," said Tun Tun Oo, a land rights activists who was charged for live-streaming the student play via his Facebook account. "The government should think about terminating it as it restores democracy and we will fight until the law is abolished."

(Editing by Clarence Fernandez)

BEIRUT A military alliance fighting in support of President Bashar al-Assad threatened on Wednesday to hit U.S. positions in Syria, warning its "self-restraint" over U.S. air strikes would end if Washington crossed "red lines".

DUBAI/DOHA U.S. President Donald Trump offered on Wednesday to help resolve a worsening diplomatic crisis between Qatar and other Arab powers as the United Arab Emirates invoked the possibility of an economic embargo on Doha over its alleged support of terrorism.

Link:

Myanmar journalists take fight for freedom of speech to court | Reuters - Reuters

OPINION: Let Puerto Rico reap the benefits of economic freedom – The Hill (blog)

Posted on by

The true crisis in Puerto Rico is neither economic nor humanitarian. This is a crisis of leadership. Policymakers, both locally and nationally, have failed to provide a bold vision for a world-class economy, and they have stubbornly refused to implement a proven model that would lead to that. We face the opportunity to mirror best practices of global economic leaders like Hong Kong, or allow left-wing populism to drag us further into the Venezuelan-flavored abyss.

Hong Kong didnt become an economic powerhouse and global financial center by pure happenstance. Despite not possessing any significant natural resources, Hong Kong achieved tremendous prosperity in the latter half of the 20th century. How? Its political leaders implemented a truly universal recipe for success strong private property rights, world-class rule of law and a complete aversion to governmental economic meddling. When the territory became the foremost model for laissez faire economics, prosperity rapidly ensued.

Prosperity and human flourishing are the predictable byproducts of economic freedom. Its time for Puerto Rico to use that knowledge for our own benefit. The hands-off policies of free enterprise are too morally compelling to ignore. Consider that, according to the Cato Institute, the poorest 10 percent of residents in the nations with the most economic freedom enjoy an average income that is double that of their counterparts in the least-free nations. It is time for the people of Puerto Rico to reap the benefits of economic freedom.

The alternative is a slow slide into economic catastrophe. The unfolding crisis in Venezuela again demonstrates the failures of socialism. Central planning, nationalization of industry and insecure property rights have turned what was once the wealthiest nation in South America into a failing state at a social breaking point. Indeed, the socialist model championed by our Latin American peers is the very genesis of Puerto Ricos current problems. It is a model we have tried, and it is a model that has failed us. Puerto Rico must not become another socialist banana republic.

How can Puerto Rico go from being an incipient Venezuela to becoming the Hong Kong of the Caribbean? Action is required at both the federal and local levels. In Puerto Rico, we must stop pretending Band-Aids are a solution and take tough actions that will free us, economically and emotionally, from government dependence. To overcome the stain of failing to make good on constitutionally protected government bonds, we must re-establish our credibility in world markets. This begins with sweeping local tax reform to make Puerto Ricos taxes among the simplest and lowest in the world. We need a drastic downsizing of government, liquidation of the thousands of government-owned properties, from restaurants to empty lots to industrial warehouses, and privatization of government-owned corporations, beginning with the electric power authority.

Some challenges for Puerto Rico can only be dealt with in Washington. Federal policymakers must be sensitive to the differing geographic and economic realities between our Caribbean island and the U.S. mainland. We dont need bailouts, handouts or dependency. We just need policies that allow us to compete at our fullest potential. Saddling Puerto Rico with federal laws that do not recognize the uniqueness of our situation guarantees permanent economic disadvantage. First among these is the Jones Act. Nearly every study of Puerto Ricos economy from the Krueger study to the General Accounting Office findings calls for Jones Act relief. Whether this is a complete exemption, or relief from the shipbuilding and international relay requirements, federal action would be a significant boost to our economy. A minimum wage exemption would allow us to compete regionally. Finally, as tax reform is undertaken in Washington, a return to something similar to the Code 936 law that helped create a booming manufacturing industry in Puerto Rico and brought prosperity throughout the island is in order.

Milligan is the executive vice president of the Puerto Rico-based nonpartisan think tank Fundacin Libertad and resides in San Juan. Blom is the Washington, D.C., director for Fundacin Libertad and resides in Virginia.

More:

OPINION: Let Puerto Rico reap the benefits of economic freedom - The Hill (blog)

Limited ethics waivers reflect new freedom for former lobbyists to join government – Washington Post

Posted on by

By Matea Gold and Juliet Eilperin By Matea Gold and Juliet Eilperin June 7 at 6:17 PM

Federal agencies issued just a handful of waivers exempting political appointees from conflict of interest rules in the first three months of the administration, a reflection in part of how President Trump has made it easier for lobbyists to work in agencies they once sought to influence.

Documents released by the Office of Government Ethics on Wednesday show that through April 30, just 10 Trump appointees who work outside the White House received exemptions from aspects of federal ethics rules.

Although dozens of lobbyists have joined the Trump administration, only one received an ethics waiver addressing his previous lobbying work: Lance Leggitt, the chief of staff for the Department of Health and Human Services.

Thats because an executive order that Trump signed in January did away with a rule laid down by former president Barack Obama banning lobbyists from joining agencies they had lobbied in the previous two years.

Instead, Trumps order allows former lobbyists to enter the administration, but prohibits them for two years from working on a specific issue that they lobbied on during the previous two years.

It was a fundamental change in the ethics executive order, said Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for the watchdog group Public Citizen. It cast some serious questions about whether the Trump administration is serious about draining the swamp.

White House spokeswoman Lindsay E. Walters said that the administration recognized the need for certain expertise while at the same time requiring that appointees abide by a tougher anti-revolving door policy extending the two-year post employment ban on lobbying to five years.

At least 88 former lobbyists have been appointed or nominated to join the administration, including 56 who previously lobbied the agencies that hired them, according to a tally by the liberal group American Bridge.

Among the former lobbyists are four high-level appointees at the White House who received ethics waivers to work on policy issues on which they recently lobbied. They include former Fidelity Investments lobbyist Shahira Knight, now a tax and retirement policy adviser, and Michael Catanzaro, a one-time energy lobbyist now developing domestic energy policy for the administration.

[White House grants ethics waivers to 17 appointees, including four former lobbyists]

At the Department of Health and Human Services, at least five former lobbyists other than Leggitt have been tapped to serve. They include Keagan Lenihan, a senior adviser to Secretary Tom Price who last year lobbied on Medicare and Medicaid issues for McKesson Corporation, a pharmaceutical distributor.

A department spokeswoman declined to comment.

In the case of Leggitt, he previously headed the federal health policy group for the law firm Baker Donelson, where he lobbied for hospitals and other medical clients, disclosures show.

Leggitts waiver allows him to work on issues on which he lobbied, though he still is barred from participating in matters involving former clients.

Another waiver went to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Director Seema Verma, who worked as a health-care consultant on Medicaid reform before joining the administration.

Her firm, Indianapolis-based SVC Inc., had contracts worth nearly $8 million with the state of Indiana, and also consulted for Arkansas, Iowa, Kentucky, Ohio, South Carolina and Virginia.

As a consultant, Verma designed Indianas Medicaid experiment under the Affordable Care Act, under which beneficiaries must chip in toward insurance premiums and are penalized in different ways if they do not.

She also advised several other states on how they could ask CMS for permission to alter their Medicaid programs. One of those requests, from Kentucky, would make that state the first to require people on Medicaid to work a policy Verma favors and is currently pending before her agency.

In an ethics waiver dated March 20, Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price determined that Verma should be allowed to weigh in on decisions affecting her former state clients, saying that excluding her expertise would unduly disadvantage the citizens of your former state clients. However, the waiver does not apply to specific matters that she personally worked on for Kentucky, Indiana and Iowa. Verma has recused herself from those issues.

Loosening federal restrictions on Medicaid under the ACA is a top priority for Price and his deputies. He and Verma have encouraged states to apply for waivers that were denied by the previous administration, providing them with a checklist for how to do it.

The new batch of ethics waivers released Wednesday shows that two members of the Cabinet received exemptions. Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly was granted permission to deal with matters involving Australia, despite the honorarium he received from the Australian government for his participation in a training program for military officers. And Price obtained permission to participate in certain matters involving the state of Georgia, where his wife is a state representative.

The disclosures also included exemptions granted to 13 Obama appointees last year. Among them were National Security Adviser Susan Rice, who received a waiver regarding Canadian financial investments, and Secretary of State John Kerry, who was granted one to contribute to a book of speeches commemorating former president John F. Kennedy.

Oversight activities like this help us assess the consistency of compliance with ethics programs requirements, said Walter M. Shaub Jr., director of the Office of Government Ethics.

Amy Goldstein and Steven Rich contributed to this report.

Read more from the original source:

Limited ethics waivers reflect new freedom for former lobbyists to join government - Washington Post

Freedom to Marry Founder Evan Wolfson on Mobilizing a Queer Revolution – Out Magazine

Posted on by

With the anniversary of same-sex marriage legalization approaching on June 26, a new documentary, The Freedom to Marry, is highlighting the work that went into achieving nationwide equality. Led by Freedom to Marry founder Evan Wolfson and attorney Mary Bonauto, the trailblazing civil rights movement was one of history's most successful, though the road to justice was one met with tremendous resistance.

Related |Watch an Exclusive 1986 Interview with Gay Marriage Crusader Evan Wolfson

The Eddie Rosenstein-directed film is as much a history lesson as it is a relevant blueprint for political resistance today. Throughout the doc,Wolfson and his team of LGBTQ crusadersare shown facing opposition not only from the Supreme Court, but from fiery, homophobic citizens, as well. Deeply suspenseful and inspiring, The Freedom to Marryhighlights the winning combination of strategy and human emotion needed to make the dream of marriage equality a reality.

With Pride month in full swing, OUT caught up with Wolfsonto reflect on the legacy of his triumphant movement and why The Freedom to Marry is so impactful in PresidentTrump's America.

OUT: Watching Freedom to Marry as a young person is especially insightful, because my experience growing up as an LGBTQ person has been so different from the subjects featured.

Evan Wolfson: I actually hope this film will be seen by lots of young people here in the U.S and around the world, because I think it says you can make a difference. It says your voice matters. There are ways to really make the world better, and we need you. I think young people are a key part of how we achieve change, and there is plenty of change needed in the United States and around the world.

Its important for young people to see where the queer community came from.

Thats exactly right, and that change just doesnt happen by itself. Its neither impossible or inevitable. It takes work. Its belief. It takes trust that others will rise if we engage them. I think young people played an important role in our winning the freedom to marry. And with our country so on [the] wrong track and with so many challenges around the world, there are plenty of opportunities for people to get engaged. This film is a good way to start.

Your movement happened just as the Internet was starting to really take off. Do you think it would have had the same effect if it wasnt such a physical movement?

Everything doesnt just happen online. The thing that really drove the change were personal conversations that people had with their friends, families and neighborsand political and legal organizing in the courts and legislatures. Ultimately, it is a balance. But youre absolutely right that the online ways of reaching people, mobilizing people, educating people were terrific tools that we put a lot of effort into learning relatively early. But as my online team always said, their goal was to use their digital expertise and online programs to get people to take action offline.

When you were documenting the movement, did you anticipate the world becoming as LGBTQ-friendly as it is today?

Yes, it is both true that we have seen a tremendous transformation in many parts of the world in hearts, minds and in the law. And also, equally important, there are many parts of the world where things are dire and horrible. We have so much more that we have to do. And actually, there is nowhere that we are finished. In the United States, weve won this enormous transformation and victory. And yet, we have so much more to do for LGBTQ people, let alone for the country as a whole. Thats true all around the world. I always believed that we could change things. I always believed by claiming the vocabulary of marriage that wed be claiming an engine of transformation that would help move things forward. I trusted and believed that if we did the work, we could actually make things better. So yes, I did think wed get to this place, but I fully believe we cant stop here.

Of all the rights you couldve tackled, why do you think fighting for same-sex marriage was a strong first step toward achieving full equality?

Thats a great question. The only thing Id quibble with is the idea of first. I think we actually worked on many things at the same time, and even I, who am identified as much as anyone in the world with marriage, worked on other goals, as well. I argued the boy scout case in the Supreme Court; I worked on AIDS cases; I worked on employment and military cases. I dont think it is a matter of theres only one thing we care about. But at the same time, by claiming this language of marriage we would be claiming this very powerful conversation that would move everything forward. So, for example, the debates and progress weve seen around transgender people in the last two years, in part, reflects the lift that the marriage engagement gave to an aligned goal. Similarly, we can take the power of marriage work and keep pushing for nondiscrimination protections, for safe school, for support for seniors, and for global human rights. I believe by fighting effectively for something like marriage, and I believe that marriage is important and singularly resonant and powerful, we can be harnessing the power we build to the other work ahead.

Related |OUT100: Evan Wolfson

Is there any concrete evidence that legalizing same-sex marriage has positively affected the LGBTQ community?

Just about two months ago, one of the leading medical journals in the United States, The Journal of the American Medical Association Pediatrics JAMA Pediatrics published a study in which they reported that when we won the freedom to marry, teen suicide dropped dramatically. The rate of teen suicide falls when we win marriage. And now that we won the freedom of marriage nationwide, we are going to be saving 130,000 young lives every year. Now why is that? Its not because teens are going out and getting married tomorrow. Its because marriage is not just about marriage. By winning the freedom to marry we send a strong message that society, the government and the culture affirm that young gay people, young trans people and their dreams. I really believe in that power. And its no longer a theory. We now know this is true, and that is why I spend my time advising, sharing and working with other countries like Taiwan, where we just won a big victory.

Youre working with other nations on marriage equality, as well?

Yes, one off the happy consequences of winning is that people want to hear the ideas and lessons that you can share about how we won. So Ive been working with advocates in many countries including Taiwan to keep moving forward globally, even as Im also advising and working with many different causes and organizations, not LGBTQ, here in the U.S.

Related |Taiwan Becomes First Asian Country to Legalize Same-Sex Marriage

How do you feel rulings, like in Taiwan, have a global effect?

I think one of the key things we need to do, and this again is a lesson from the previous American campaign, is build a critical mass of victory in order to move the whole. In the same way that we had to win a critical mass of states and a critical mass of public opinion in order to win national victory in the U.S. We need to be getting what I call the Bs to As around the world. The countries that do believe in human rights, pluralism and democracy and have free press and an independent judiciary, we need to make sure that they live up to true human rights, and the promises they make in their constitutions in order to build a critical mass that will help move the globe forward.

Why do you think releasing this documentary is especially relevant, right now?

Because the lessons that the film captured so dramatically from this campaign are more relevant than ever. If you want to summarize how we won the freedom to marry in three words, the words would be: hope, clarity and tenacity. You need to have hope. You need to believe that you can change things no matter how difficult or bad they are. You need to have clarity. You need to focus on your goals. Focus on strategy, focus on what it takes to win. Focus on the critical mass you need, and dont get distracted by the opponents of the things you can control or dont need. You need to have tenacity. It doesnt happen overnight. You need to stick with your strategy and continue conveying hope, even when you take some inevitable stumbles and disappointments. We did all those things and the film shows that. Those are absolutely the lessons that people need to keep in mind as we work to get our country back on track after that catastrophic election. And as we work to continue advancing human rights and working for all the different communities and values that we believe in.

The Freedom to Marry is available now for instant download online.

Excerpt from:

Freedom to Marry Founder Evan Wolfson on Mobilizing a Queer Revolution - Out Magazine

Appeals judges see no problem with eugenics-compensation cut-off date – Durham Herald Sun

Posted on by

Durham Herald Sun
Appeals judges see no problem with eugenics-compensation cut-off date
Durham Herald Sun
For UNC Center for Civil Rights lawyers and their clients in a eugenics-restitution lawsuit, a March victory in the N.C. Supreme Court turned into a defeat Tuesday in the lower-level state Court of Appeals. Addressing the point on orders from the high ...

View post:

Appeals judges see no problem with eugenics-compensation cut-off date - Durham Herald Sun

Surviving families of eugenics victims lose latest round in court fight to get compensation – News & Observer (blog)

Posted on by

Asheville Citizen-Times
Surviving families of eugenics victims lose latest round in court fight to get compensation
News & Observer (blog)
The North Carolina Industrial Commission oversees payments from $10 million that the General Assembly set aside in 2013 to compensate the people who had been sterilized between 1929 and 1974 under orders from North Carolina's Eugenics Board.
NC court upholds denial of eugenics compensationAsheville Citizen-Times
Judges: No payments for certain heirs of eugenics victimsWinston-Salem Journal
Court of Appeals panel rules heirs of eugenics victims won't be compensatedThe Progressive Pulse
Minneapolis Star Tribune -McClatchy Washington Bureau
all 7 news articles »

See more here:

Surviving families of eugenics victims lose latest round in court fight to get compensation - News & Observer (blog)

This bonkers Star Wars fan theory from 1980 says the Jedi are clones of Jesus – DigitalSpy.com

Posted on by

The return of Star Wars in 2015 kicked off a wave of rampant fan speculation and theorising that feels completely unprecedented.

... But it turns out that the galaxy far, far away is no stranger to bizarre theories that blatantly won't turn out to be true, as demonstrated by a piece from a 1980 edition of Fantastic Films Collectors Edition.

Lucasfilm story group creative executive Pablo Hidalgo posted pictures from the article on Twitter, and things get very strange very quickly (via The Daily Dot).

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Between the frequent misspellings, the theory suggests that Luke and Darth Vader are actually clones created by the Jesus Eugenics Development Institute (or JEDI), and that Boba Fett is Luke's father rather than Vader.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Fett is also suggested to be someone called 'Roberta', although the theory still mostly refers to the character as 'him'. Fett is also supposed to be the "other" (which turned out to be Leia) that Yoda mentions to Obi-Wan Kenobi's ghost.

As for Obi-Wan, it repeats that old favourite theory that he is really OB-1 a designation for a clone. In this case, he is actually a clone of Jesus. Yes, Jesus. This is possible because the Jedi date back to the time of the Roman Republic, which never fell in this alternate reality.

Feeling confused? So are we.

The theory was published half a year after the release of The Empire Strikes Back, so we dread to think what sort of fever pitch was reached before Return of the Jedi arrived in 1983.

Suddenly those theories about Force-sensitive trees and giant eggs don't sound quite so outlandish, do they?

The idea of Luke being a clone actually predicts the storyline in the well-loved novel trilogy by Timothy Zahn published in 1991-93, which featured a cloned copy called Luuke.

As for fan favourite Boba Fett, he turned out to be a complete waste of space.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi will be released on December 14 in the UK and December 15 in the US, hopefully to answer our questions about the Jesus Eugenics Development Institute once and for all.

Want up-to-the-minute entertainment news and features? Just hit 'Like' on our Digital Spy Facebook page and 'Follow' on our @digitalspy Twitter account and you're all set.

Excerpt from:

This bonkers Star Wars fan theory from 1980 says the Jedi are clones of Jesus - DigitalSpy.com

Trump’s Solar-Powered Border Wall Is More Than a Troll – The Atlantic

Posted on by

On Tuesday afternoon, President Donald Trump shared a new idea with congressional Republicans:

His vision was a [U.S.-Mexico border] wall 40 feet to 50 feet high and covered with solar panels so theyd be beautiful structures, the people said. The president said that most walls you hear about are 14 feet or 15 feet tall but this would be nothing like those walls. Trump told the lawmakers they could talk about the solar-paneled wall as long as they said it was his idea.

One person cautioned that the President wasnt presenting the solar-paneled wall as the definite solution, adds Jonathan Swan, the Axios reporter who first reported most of the news.

Despite the presidents insistence on getting credit, this is not the first time someone has suggested swaddling the wall in solar panels. During the governments call for proposals in April, a small, Las Vegas-based construction-supply firm named Gleason Partners suggested a suspiciously similar plan. It proposed building a wall of cement, steel, and solar panels. Each mile of wall would cost $7.5 million, it said, but each mile would also generate two megawatts of electricity. This power could then be sold to utilities on both sides of the border.

Never mind Mexiconow the sun would pay for the wall. (Or as Tom Gleason, the firms founder, told E&E News: The wall pays for itself.)

Gleasons proposal even included a mockup, which hints at how his firm would solve a tricky engineering problem. Solar panels usually go on roofs, not on walls, because the goal is to keep them out of shadow and expose their surface to as much sun as possible through the day. To get around this issue, Gleason angles two rows of panels slightly off the walls perpendicular:

In North America, solar panels also usually face south, toward the equator. So presumably the most expensive hardware on the wall would look toward Mexico.

From Trump, the idea seemed like a politically simplistic troll. Progressives will not magically come to support a divisive mega-project if it also subsidizes renewable firms. Environmental groups that believe the wall will hurt local ecosystems will still oppose the project even if it becomes carbon neutral. As Brett Hartl of the Center for Biodiversity said in a statement on Tuesday: An ecological disaster with solar panels on top is still an ecological disaster. With solar panels on top.

But it is not the first time that immigration restrictionists have borrowed environmental arguments to bolster their appeal. John Hultgren, a professor of environmental politics at Bennington College, filled a book with examples of the overlap between the two groups: the now aptly titled Border Walls Gone Green.

Some contemporary figures in immigration restrictionism began in the environmental movement. John Tanton, who founded three immigration-lobbying groups, including the Federation for American Immigration Reform, began his involvement in politics through environmental activism. He says he once lobbied the Sierra Club to adopt anti-immigration positions; when they demurred, he founded his own network of groups.

Today, the Southern Poverty Law Center calls Tanton the racist architect of the modern anti-immigrant movement. They cite a letter of Tantons held at the University of Michigan, in which he writes: Ive come to the point of view that for European-American society and culture to persist requires a European-American majority, and a clear one at that. (The New York Times covered the relationship between Tanton and the SPLC in April.) Linda Chavez, a veteran of the Reagan administration, has said that Tanton is both anti-Hispanic and anti-Catholic.

Tantons own website describes him as a supporter of population stabilization and environmentally sustainable immigration numbers.

But the connections between pro-nature sentiment and anti-immigration politicsespecially at their most racistare strongest long before the modern era.

Some of the earliest American environmental groups had interesting and important connections to the eugenics movement, Hultgren told me. The most famous of these is Madison Grant, who worked to conserve huge swaths of American wilderness and helped create the national park system.

As Citylabs Brentin Mock wrote last year, Grant was also a eugenicist and white supremacist. His book, The Passing of the Great Race, served as a bedrock of American and European pseudo-scientific racism until the second world war. Hitler quoted often from Grants writing in speeches and allegedly corresponded with him. (F. Scott Fitzgerald also implies Grants work is a favorite of Tom Buchanans in The Great Gatsby.)

But Grants influence was not just theoretical: He had a material and long-lasting influence on U.S. immigration policy. His statistics and expertise informed the quotas of the Immigration Act of 1924, which banned almost all Asians and Arabs from migrating to the United States. It also placed quotas on the entry of southern and eastern Europeans. These rules effectively prevented many Jews from escaping Nazi Germany, and they were not fully repealed until the Immigration Act of 1965.

It may seem a casual coincidence that an American conservationist was also smitten with racism. But Grants views on the environment were inseparable from his adoration for eugenics. When he helped found the Save the Redwoods League, it was out of the same loyalty to the pure.

To Grant, the redwoods were threatened with race suicide in the same ways that whites were, says Hultgren. These folks really saw national purity and natural purity as being interconnected.

This was true also of Theodore Roosevelts nationalist project, which birthed the U.S. National Park Service. In a 1909 government report commissioned by President RooseveltA Report on National Vitality, Its Wastes and Conservationthe economist Irving Fisher spends a full chapter on Conservation by Heredity.

President Roosevelt has pointed out that race suicide is a sign and accompaniment of coming decay, Irving writes. A race that can not hold its fiber strong and true deserves to suffer extinction through race suicide. The decline of our Puritan stock ... need not alarm us if we can replace it with a new influx from the West or from the vigorous stocks of Europe.

Hultgren notes that many environmental groups have now reversed their old anti-immigration positions. In 2013, the Sierra Club, Greenpeace USA, and 350.org all embraced comprehensive immigration reform.

Andof coursemost contemporary advocates of immigration restrictionism do not make racial arguments or share Grants zeal for eugenics.

But the occasional overlap between conservationist and restrictionist rhetoric persists. The Federation for American Immigration Reform and other anti-immigration groups have recently used green-style arguments to push for new legal limits. A magazine ad from the early 2010s argued:

With every new U.S. resident, whether from births or immigration, comes further degradation of Americas natural treasures. Theres not much we can do to reclaim the hundreds of millions of acres already destroyed. But we can do something about whats left.

Stephen Colbert picked up on a TV commercial from the same coalition while in-character on the Report.

Yes, immigrants cause global warming, he said. Saving the planet by demonizing immigrants give liberals and conservatives something they can do together. Now, when a liberal yammers on about the record heat we had this winter, a conservative can say: Lets save the environment by building an electrified border fence that runs on alternative energy.

These Solar Death Panels, as his chyron put it, made for a laugh line in 2012. In 2017, they constitute a serious U.S. policy proposal.

Originally posted here:

Trump's Solar-Powered Border Wall Is More Than a Troll - The Atlantic

The Cryptocurrency Ecosystem – Seeking Alpha

Posted on by

When I was in the middle of writing "Looking Into Ethereum," I had a discussion with a friend who has been interested in cryptocurrency for a long time. His currency of choice, at the moment, is Monero. I decided to look into the currency and write an article for the currency. However, rather than dedicate the article fully to Monero, I am going to compare a few cryptocurrencies, and show why they are different than Bitcoin and how they could compete, or even coexist, with the most well known cryptocurrency, in what might be called the "cryptocoin ecosystem."

Market capitalization and price data is from "CryptoCurrency Market Capitalizations."

Market Cap: $46B Price: $2800

Before I start, here are a few issues with Bitcoin. First, Bitcoin is slow. It takes 10 minutes for a Bitcoin transaction to be confirmed, or even longer, depending on the transaction fee. One of the most powerful features of Bitcoin also makes it problematic if you are truly privacy oriented. Bitcoin's ledger is completely open. Every transaction can be analyzed. Third, Bitcoin's governance, contrary to the original goal, has become highly centralized. Finally, Bitcoin is at risk of a 51% attack. Finally, there is nothing really backing the value of Bitcoin.

Market Cap: $1.5B Price: $30

Litecoin is often described as being to Bitcoin, what silver is to gold. First, the upper cap of how many coins there are in each currency is different. There is a total of 84 million LTC available to mine, as opposed to only 21 million for BTC. One of the main differences between LiteCoin and Bitcoin is that LiteCoin is faster. It takes much less time for a transaction to clear if you are using LTC: about 2.5 minutes, as opposed to the 10 minutes for Bitcoin. Coindesk has a more detailed comparison between the two.

I am interested in the idea of Litecoin overtaking Bitcoin. However, a quick look at the data suggests that it is not going to happen. Aside from a few spikes, the ratio between LTC and BTC has actually been declining.

Source: Litecoin / Bitcoin (LTC/BTC) price chart, alltime, BTC-e

Market Cap: $800M Price: $55

Monero's philosophy is more or less a 180 from Bitcoin's. While Bitcoin is a fully open and public ledger system, Monero is private. While for most transactions, a public ledger is not a problem, people do like their privacy. By public, I do not mean that a person can immediately see who transferred money from whom.

Every individual is pseudo-anonymous, because of the Bitcoin address. However, if someone can link addresses to individuals, then it is indeed possible to see how much money was sent and when. More on the current privacy features and issues with those features can be found in "Monero Successfully Hardforks to Increase Privacy and Anonymity - CryptoCoinsNews."

Market Cap: $1.1B Price: $150

Most blockchains have a centralized governance model. However, for Dash, the governance is built into the blockchain itself. This helps protect against issues like splits during hard forks. A major difference in the architecture between Bitcoin and Dash is that Dash has a concept of a master node.

Masternodes are required to have 1000 Dash collateral, a dedicated IP address, and be able to run 24 hours a day without a more than a 1 hr connection loss. Masternodes get paid 45% of the block reward on every block, which is distributed to masternodes one at a time. Typically, around 2 dash is paid to each masternode every 7 days. (Dash)

This ensures that the masternodes are invested in the longevity of Dash. Budgets, changes to the system, etc are all voted upon by the masternodes. All voting results are public information. Funds to pay those who maintain the software come from a treasury which is controlled by the blockchain itself. This ensures a relatively decentralized, and uniform governance. There are a number of discussions on Dash's governance model including "Why Governance Is Essential in Cryptocurrency - Dash Force News."

Market Cap: $4.2M Price: $0.11

One risk for Bitcoin, and other cryptocurrencies is the 51% attack. If an individual, or group, control 51% of the computational power of the network, they can manipulate the network maliciously. They would have significant control of the public ledger, be able to spend the same bitcoin repeatedly and block other transactions. (Learn Cryptography - 51% Attack)

This is one of the reasons why the Bitcoin network has the BTC currency. If people adding computing power get paid, even if just in these tokens, so long as the tokens have convertible value, and that value is greater than the cost of the computing power that they provide, then it ensures a fair number of unique people, preventing the control of the network. However, as mining has become more difficult, people turn to mining pools, and the number of miners decreases, the risk does become more concerning. (As Bitcoin Halving Approaches, 51% Attack Question Resurfaces - CoinDesk)

GoldCoin uses a different model from Bitcoin to help prevent a 51% attack, relying on a number of rules which can be found here. Admittedly, this model seems to only prevent one kind of attack: reusing coins. Messing with the network is still quite possible. There seems to be a lot of debate, in the cryptocoin community, over the utility of the model.

Not to be confused with GoldCoin, ZenGold, One Gram, OZcoinGold, etc try to remove the issue of a cryptocurrency with no physical backing. I have written a few discussions on why I think gold is superior to BTC, in terms of being a currency. For each of these coins, the value of the coin is backed by physical gold. To me, this is still not the same as buying physical gold, but neither is purchasing shares of (GLD) or other similar ETPs.

Gold backed cryptocurrencies are not likely to skyrocket in the same way that the other cryptocurrencies are, because they are tied to something which already has a fairly consistent value. This actually makes it more useful as a currency. Speculative vehicles are generally held, not spent on day to day transactions. That is not how currency should work. There are a number of ICOs (initial coin offerings) occurring all around the same time, so it is difficult to pick one coin of interest, however One Gram is in ICO right now, so I may pick up a few coins. One Gram is also Sharia compliant, meaning that it is open to the large Islamic population of the world.

The network effect protects internet technologies like Bitcoin. The more users of the currency, the less likely that it will be that something new can come along and replace it. Bitcoin may not be the best cryptocurrency, but it is currently the most popular, by far. It is the highest priced coin, the coin with the largest market cap, and for many exchanges, the one that sees the most trading volume, although ETH trades at high volumes as well, and it does vary from exchange to exchange.

A better cryptocurrency does have the potential to replace Bitcoin. A different cryptocurrency has the potential to coexist in a cryptocoin ecosystem alongside Bitcoin, or whatever replaces it. Litecoin fills almost the exact same role as Bitcoin. It is better, however it needs to be good enough to overpower Bitcoin's network effect, otherwise it will, at best, remain Bitcoin's "silver." Given the decline in the LTC/BTC ratio, LTC does not seem like it has much chance of overcoming BTC.

Monero does fill a very different role from Bitcoin, thanks to the focus on privacy. For that reason, Monero could fit in alongside a public ledger cryptocurrency. Dash has a solution to the centralized governance problem, GoldCoin tries to take on the issue of a 51% attack, and gold backed coins have the potential benefit of price stability. Then of course there is Ethereum, which I addressed in detail in "Looking Into Ethereum." Right now, these cryptocurrencies/blockchain technologies are the ones that I am keeping an eye on the most.

All of the coins that came after Bitcoin are referred to as Altcoins. Once Bitcoin started to become popular, and even moreso after mining bitcoins moved from simple PC mining to dedicated mining rigs, Altcoins took off. However, there are now over 700 different currencies, according to "Map of Coins.", and many of the Altcoins have already fell by the wayside. Many currently used coins have limited support, outside of major crypto-exchanges. Any currency must be easy to use, not just for the tech savvy, but for the average person.

Because of all of the option, it can be very difficult to figure out what coins to add to your portfolio. Nobody wants to be stuck holding the bag. It is important to do a lot of research on each currency, and try to identify those currencies which are likely to fit together in an overall ecosystem, rather than trying to pick a single winner.

Furthermore, the political atmosphere is going to have a major impact on how cryptocurrencies fair in the long term. Japan now recognizes BTC has money. The United States does not. Cryptocoins are considered to be commodities in the United States, and that's problematic. I do not think any government will be able to contain the technology, and it will grow. However it is currently a proof of concept, being used as if it were a final stage product.

Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.

I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Additional disclosure: All market capitalization and prices are approximate and none of this information is a suggestion that any of these specific currencies should be the ones that are added to a portfolio. Whether or not to include cryptocurrencies in a portfolio, and which to include, is only something that can be determined after extensive research on the market and the technologies. I may take a position in one of more of the cryptocurrencies mentioned in this article.

Go here to read the rest:

The Cryptocurrency Ecosystem - Seeking Alpha

Lost ecosystem found buried in mud of southern California coastal waters – UChicago News

Posted on by

Paleontologists investigating the sea bed off the coast of southern California have discovered a lost ecosystem that for thousands of years had nurtured communities of scallops and shelled marine organisms called brachiopods.

These brachiopods and scallops had thrived along a section of coast stretching approximately 250 miles from San Diego to Santa Barbara for at least 4,000 years. But they had died off by the early 20th century, replaced by the mud-dwellling burrowing clams that inhabit this seabed today. Paleontologists Adam Tomaovch of the Slovak Academy of Sciences and Susan Kidwell of the University of Chicago examine the lost ecosystem in a study published online June 7 in the Royal Society Proceedings B.

Evidence indicates that the brachiopod and scallop die-off occurred in less than a century. Because this community disappeared before biologists started sampling the seafloor, its existence was unknown and unsuspected. Only dead shells remain, permitting analysis by paleontologists.

This loss unfolded during the 19th century, thus well before urbanization and climate warming, said Kidwell, the William Rainey Harper Professor in Geophysical Sciences. The disappearance of these abundant filter-feeding animals coincided with the rise of lifestock and cultivation in coastal lands, which increased silt deposition on the continental shelf, far beyond the lake and nearshore settings where we would expect this stress to have an impact.

Continental shelves, the submerged shoulders of the continents, are a worldwide phenomenon. They form a distinct environment separated by a steep slope from the much deeper and vaster expanse of ocean floor beyond, and provide key habitats for biodiversity and fisheries.

The seabed off southern California is one of the most thoroughly studied in the world, but in applying geologic methods to modern biological samples of the sea floor, Kidwell and Tomaovch encountered unsuspected results. Today that seabed consists of soft sediments, where creatures such as segmented worms, crustaceans, molluscs, crabs and urchins feed on organic matter.

This is a fundamentally different ecosystem than the one that preceded it not so long ago, said Tomaovch, who heads the Department of Paleoecology and Organismal Evolution at the Slovak Academy.

The methods applied here provide crucial information on ecosystem response to natural and human pressures over otherwise inaccessible timescales, he said.

In pioneering these methods since the 2000s, Kidwell and her associates have fostered the field of conservation paleobiology. Their work has shown that misfits between live populations and the shells they leave behind on modern sea floors do not signal poor preservation. The differences instead indicate a recent ecological shiftone usually driven by human activities such as pollution or sea-floor dredging.

Tomaovch and Kidwell based their new study on the analysis of samples and data collected from multiple sources. They have conducted their own research on the sea floor off southern California, but theyve also benefited from samples and monitoring data that other scientists have collected from the area since 1954.

Brachiopods and scallops, which prefer cold waters and a gravelly environment, range from the U.S.-Mexico border to the Gulf of Alaska. Tomaovch and Kidwell eliminated climate warming as a likely culprit in their ecosystem collapse, given that large populations of brachiopods persist near Catalina Island, where water temperatures are similar to those of southern Californias mainland coastal waters.

The paleontologists instead pointed to the dramatic changes that southern Californias watersheds have undergone since 1769, after Spanish missionaries introduced cattle, horses and sheep to the area.

The researchers established the age of the brachiopods using a molecular dating technique called amino acid racemization. All of the 190 shells analyzed were more than 100 years old, and most were older than 200 years, indicating that the start of the population die-off coincided with the rise of livestock and cultivation on the nearby mainland.

Brachiopods and scallops have low tolerance for high levels of suspended sediment, leaving them vulnerable to the side effects of a regional economy that focused on cattle production from 1769 to the 1860s. During this time, much of modern-day Los Angeles and Orange counties were subject to unmanaged, open-range grazing. The economy shifted to agriculture in the late 19thcentury, but in the absence of soil conservation methods, the side effects on the coastal ocean would have continued unabated into the early 20thcentury.

The researchers concluded that siltation associated with this prolonged period of unmanaged land use probably drove the collapse of the brachiopod-scallop populations.

Extirpation was complete by the start of 21st-century urbanization, warming, bottom fishing and scientific surveys, Tomaovch and Kidwell reported, emphasizing the value of combining many lines of historical evidence, especially the application of paleobiological methods to present-day ecosystems, to gain a fuller picture of recent biotic changes.

They further concluded that siltation derived from coastal land-use practices is an under-recognized ecological factor on continental shelves around the globe.

Citation: Nineteenth-century collapse of a benthic marine ecosystem on the open continental shelf, by Adam Tomaovch and Susan M. Kidwell, Royal Society Proceedings B, posted online June 7, 2017. http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/284/1856/20170328

Funding: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Science Foundation and the Slovak Grant Agency.

Here is the original post:

Lost ecosystem found buried in mud of southern California coastal waters - UChicago News