Finding Love in a Lower Manhattan Courthouse – New York Times

Posted on by

Mr. Lytle quickly denied that accusation and offered his own defense. They were going out eating every day but I was bringing my own lunch, trying to eat healthier, and reading a lot, he said. I guess I was just trying to make the best of the situation, because jury duty is usually never any fun.

But he found out otherwise on May 30, 2014 which happened to be his 27th birthday when he finally accepted one of those lunch offers, and went along with Ms. Nelson and two other jurors to a nearby restaurant/bar.

That day I learned that he has a very funny, subtle and surprising sense of humor, Ms. Nelson said. He notices small quirks in people.

He noticed a lot more than that in Ms. Nelson. She was very attractive and made me laugh, he said. She was also a very intelligent person who knew a lot about science and had a very interesting career.

They began going out for lunch with greater frequency, and one night in June, they went for drinks with four fellow jurors, all of whom disappeared during the course of the evening, leaving Ms. Nelson and Mr. Lytle alone in a social setting for the first time.

Ms. Nelson invited Mr. Lytle back to her apartment to watch an episode of The Bachelor, along with her roommate, and Mr. Lytle accepted. When the show ended, they went dancing at a Manhattan bar.

That was kind of the turning point in our relationship, said Ms. Nelson, who was living on the Upper East Side at the time, while Mr. Lytle lived in Washington Heights.

They were soon dating, and became a more serious item in the days after the trial ended in late July 2014.

The nicest thing about Jordan is that being with him always felt so natural and right, Ms. Nelson said. I met him at a time when I was going on a lot of first dates, and most of them always felt very childish, but Jordan was always kind and considerate and never one to play games. We just seem to balance each other out very well.

Recently, a friend of Ms. Nelsons called to bemoan the fact that she had received a jury duty notice.

It might not be as bad as you think, Ms. Nelson told her. You never know, you might meet your future husband there.

Read the original here:

Finding Love in a Lower Manhattan Courthouse - New York Times

Biology’s Roiling Debate Over Publishing Research Early – WIRED

Posted on by

H(zluT+m$ITfOZPXe1{f?`cd= L"9$ =~g?o+d'y%L8su}xtvD)?vH'$j ;y8+P9Md{| s=cxxWcL;A( s&LvZ]6pl+/X 8Bs9*OR|_#7P%fXE8L7W'FP5;easKn9PaK*w4 j=Ej0?K^'P?f>xkws I@?Y[DCp3o7'

%v/_u*r2C|Vidt|H+Siu~7@3ctwqu-YaeY!R=o>!b VG~Z`?,}8v?}C~prVm<`>zX?t~:R$1B?QB0dJK'0+4}{r+[zvzr??FO^^<9{GoGu:,o.>5f;?..@n&xSNFPjx>FDCS_gIVa)(_ 7izq)r $Y|T+xK{iT#/Y(#m5v$ ZYrVhhHH&/Va@k;in3d}d/[;K"h1D3x+:v_ ~3Pzg*kP4}@7MmTkPGQ"C!Um6s&*!"ZTDYsP-T3 jNBP#$"1O*Ld^MPGV+"h2!EUM#Pm >*Ik/'{|4/dve`S9JuX91 1U"xokSI;kYZmfh:ezxZtaV]%[u`JQqkV kKS}& q`M.m~-=90E 0n&]'Y}dtxnEi3A HFlor257Jaf,M4 Nejr4{NI`{%3-(9k Y8@MffELY$ E,nSgVIiwy{q]n%|Qglf}x|3vhc?iC i4T_`kd?[m4+0j72Y@=s^uVrak]q]V'|SoBX@%tEzOHD>X{%a2Iy<(.AB.LA*l:<`a X x:Dx%.:gf _6_0nn(LS8gVg~vTRrwM.r3{_3?9nTlJ<*"#u#4' y-BTI, hwjy=e8?3,(`gJ{A#Vm~ {809DxFn(,pddB!&t+&{ns&p[@UoaJO] `}T@1fE0KU vbJNmsHGOCy&bihhH q`49c ZdQ}mfKzCIhN5l.lW*[*XU@aX(=w`{nVo3@1{``1_xKzFx`?_%5MkyG5hAg,yErC7lIW+B9v=:02b pd_Y7$3xy-3i [S>g_xK`'ya~%DL(dR,YcbI^{Lx|9,@UA!U~/zSuy{m+v &vo)jE9HoAd8AOK)#^*aQ;|{K+!s%cC=/>jAhM-5 9"F]7HO%S iia@BqbP*M06?_8M3+--=oJ1!/Ed6Vqd6^WuSy~5{zt T(KC>]9ef'OKF?}V>M>I>I/}:.HGfy4:IivY[5;2(KVyZsW~p9O<~9>;CV?W~p:>(Kvy9@op/}v+v?|"qwp/}v}~hWp}Y?su!(K .6Y?6bq?; t@Q,S6KA:@t?vakX^NdMNUZOiO,O]9W)JkaKk' zO_+.B!54=AwUW Cz"K]N#ZO'#E:r { _$S'4;j{YtMVO2W(O.cXW.X^g:gv'IF.:Wju0a^zvp'C%9P^gYORqN2'qIIf]("k]?uqNU4Wv9t/v=LuvuA/_X{]a~zb{tVDy|vp>tbfC@**GXxTl)v40M)so>}}&w-FyPytVqL-H4OQF%ISym5/Tbfu 0'YcIS#l'_i%?]k#u;-+FcEpL=G==@Z=z,KKGjR{64OMXav5iFW G$ZQnN5|nh$F>7@!LvUnZS^guPo>iLQ*}{jDwW }VJsf+BOM'p,RRdlV(EW3( xv";[m!io/ij!%kzbzI5*i/ToVWmXl6vdb]kL,k]Z2XF'_%z?et2~lb]?:XF7XF7wK,LI;&IoXF7nXF7'O,sX>}b2e'O,sX>}b2e'O,sX>}b2e'O,sX>}b2e'O,sX>}b2e'O,sX>}bet2q2M,wJ,r22<- 19,L9FwljOJ$j4pMLz]seY+ldpP _?cBs%4Rb(a( ])1{E;%(t n)3na6|7V-Q1!efNzmH7y=kb7.WVaMggM*#Zn6|MSW*GC<{l)c8s'_DZd0|^)a6%8>ea*eb*.ZPvepohu@> W$|xFX>[KP{ @ s(Cs?tqyc.@T@8vsEHochl*bf7DiEFw %5+90N Er?W G(Q%XhiM6_QR,C4ELG&=(b.F7H!,)hr C?8Qlh)Q0};"^BK K|pbY0;^e53Z"j!&"~6 e;,blP7.Ao,CxF]pFx? #% gLXn{hR"@8"nJ&XA_ZwP;p`TUM-"Zy>0p @O3I]cb baq3 Xf x~5r9$2p3uKZ59>;z%S3D:E|IkV0.eKy?lQK)@t#GPsSP5/ >0~.jM8d8-XHu`ld)@ ^q16D2@$ }JnHJ/K1*pVUjO`aMQFb|% d

See more here:

Biology's Roiling Debate Over Publishing Research Early - WIRED

How to Improve US Health Care – New York Times

Posted on by

MICHAEL L. MILLENSON HIGHLAND PARK, ILL.

The writer is president of Health Quality Advisors.

To the Editor:

I commend Bret Stephens for pointing out the inconvenient truth that both Obamacare and Trumpcare suffer from an insurmountable problem: For-profit health care is a contradiction in terms. Insurance companies are most concerned about profitability, and profits are derived from high co-payments and premiums, discrimination against those with pre-existing conditions, expensive prescription medications (often with adverse side effects), excessive high-tech screening and surgical solutions. These approaches are not affordable for many people and may not produce good health, which frequently depends more on healthy diet and lifestyle choices, which are not profitable.

As Mr. Stephens points out, both Democrats and Republicans are only tinkering with the same unfixable formula. There is a solution to this problem, however, and it is not the H.S.A.s that Mr. Stephens endorses. The solution is a single-payer health care system. Single-payer health care, by eliminating the pursuit of profit, both reduces health care costs and improves health care outcomes. It is a disgrace that the United States pays at least twice as much per capita for health care and yet has some of the worst health care outcomes in the industrialized world.

Why is the United States the only industrialized country without a single-payer health care system? Perhaps the insurance and pharmaceutical company lobbyists have the answer.

BEVERLY BURRIS ALBUQUERQUE

To the Editor:

Bret Stephens is right to point to the importance of medical cost control, but his suggestion that the Obamacare exchanges are fundamentally unworkable is nonsense. In essence, all Obamacare attempted to do was bring the benefits of group insurance, which covers most working-age Americans, to those without employer-sponsored coverage. Thus the core concept had substantial precedent and was perfectly sound.

And it has succeeded. In an April analysis reported on by The Times (Insurers Stem Losses, and May Soon Profit, From Health Law Plans), Standard & Poors showed that Obamacare enrollee medical costs which shot up rapidly during 2014 and 2015 have since fallen back to comparability with group-policy enrollee costs. We have now weathered the start-up storm. The primary remaining threat to stability in this market is uncertainty around potential disruption by the president and Republican-controlled Congress.

STEVE LEOVY, BOULDER, COLO.

To the Editor:

Re Understanding Republican Cruelty (column, June 30):

Paul Krugman rightly laments the gratuitous cruelty of Republicans in their proposed health bill. It didnt used to be this way.

In 1935 in the House of Representatives, 284 Democrats and 81 Republicans voted to pass the Social Security law; 15 Democrats and 15 Republicans voted against.

In the Senate, 60 Democrats and 16 Republicans voted in favor; one Democrat and five Republicans voted nay.

After the House vote on the bill, The New York Times editorialized that the Republicans, who were its chief critics during the debate, wound up by voting for it overwhelmingly. That was before a morally indefensible agenda, in Mr. Krugmans words, became the name of their game.

SUSAN DUNN WILLIAMSTOWN, MASS.

The writer is a professor of humanities at Williams College.

To the Editor:

Paul Krugman attempts, as so many others have, to explain the brutal and inhuman cruelty of opposition to Obamacare by some fellow Americans. We can reduce the difference between the major parties to bumper-sticker length. For Democrats: Help Others. For Republicans: Help Yourself. The difference of a single word can explain a divided nation.

HOWARD SCHAIN, NEW YORK

To the Editor:

Re Going Small on Health Care, by Ross Douthat (column, July 2): The fundamental problem with going small, as well as the current attempt to repeal and replace, is that both do nothing to bend the curve on the growth of health care costs and spending. A braver approach would be to go even bigger.

Rewrite Medicare, Medicaid and our employer health care plans to mandate capitation (a fixed fee per patient) with health care providers. This gives providers more skin in the game vis--vis overall cost. Give foreign drug companies, vaccine manufacturers and device makers easier access to our markets, and have the government negotiate with them directly accepting only prices that are no higher in the United States than in other G-20 countries. Make high-deductible plans with health savings accounts the standard across the board, even if government has to partially fund these accounts to give all health care recipients a stake in the use of medical resources. Democrats and Republicans should either go big or go home.

RACHEL BRONHEIM, NEW YORK

To the Editor:

Ross Douthat nicely summarizes the difficulties both parties faced in attempting unilaterally to solve our national health care problems. And while I am no fan of our new president, he should recognize that he now has a chance to do something positive by forcing a bipartisan approach.

First, a family member must explain to him that both the House and Senate Republican health care bills fail to meet his own requirement of containing a heart. Second, he should announce that he will sign only a health bill that has strong bipartisan support. President Trump has a chance to demonstrate his alleged skill in the art of the deal by helping to solve a real national problem.

LAWRENCE CHRISTMAS OAK PARK, ILL.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

A version of this letter appears in print on July 9, 2017, on Page SR10 of the New York edition with the headline: How to Improve U.S. Health Care.

Continue reading here:

How to Improve US Health Care - New York Times

Feinstein says Senate Democrats ‘very close’ to defeating Republican health care bill – Sacramento Bee

Posted on by

Sacramento Bee
Feinstein says Senate Democrats 'very close' to defeating Republican health care bill
Sacramento Bee
Sen. Dianne Feinstein issued a stinging rebuke Friday to the push by congressional Republicans to repeal and replace Obamacare, condemning her GOP colleagues for advancing a health care bill she said was written in private by 13 white men..
Feinstein revs up the opposition to GOP Senate health care planSFGate
Senator Feinstein Weighs In On The Future Of US Health CareCBS San Francisco Bay Area

all 9 news articles »

Go here to read the rest:

Feinstein says Senate Democrats 'very close' to defeating Republican health care bill - Sacramento Bee

For these moms, the health care debate is personal – Today.com

Posted on by

share

pin

email

By the time Elena Hung's daughter turned 5 months, she'd racked up more than $3 million in medical bills. Xiomara was born fighting for her life, with a rare disorder called tracheobronchomalacia, which causes her trachea to collapse when she breathes.

Her name means "ready for battle."

For Hung, any debate about health care is intensely personal. That's why she and an army of parents have flooded Capitol Hill in recent weeks. They're not paid lobbyists or political insiders, but they're desperate for lawmakers to know their children's stories and to put a human face a child's face on abstract debates about insurance lifetime limits, Medicaid funding and pre-existing conditions.

Elena Hung's daughter Xiomara is medically fragile and relies on Medicaid for much of her medical equipment. Hung has shared her daughter's story on Capitol Hill as senators debate the healthcare bill.

We didnt plan to have kids like ours. It happened. It is not like you can plan to have a million dollars in the bank, said Hung, whose daughter also has chronic lung disease, kidney disease, pulmonary hypertension, and developmental delays. Hung's insurance covers most of Xiomara's medical costs, and she relies on Medicaid to cover much of the expensive medical equipment she needs.

Hung, 39, is a private person. She's not entirely comfortable talking about herself and lobbying lawmakers.

But she is part of a group of unlikely lobbyists parents who were far too busy caring for children with extensive medical needs to meddle much with politics, until the push to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act put their children's needs in the spotlight. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that about 22 million people will lose medical coverage if the health care bill under consideration in the Senate, The U.S. Better Care Reconciliation Act, passes. The bill has stalled in the Senate recently; senators return from their week-long July 4 recess on July 10.

Hung says it feels strange to focus so much outside attention on Xiomara's health when Hung has spent three years fighting to make sure her daughter would not be defined by her medical condition and would get the chance to do "normal kid" things, like go to the zoo and to preschool. Plus, it's exhausting: she stays up until 2 a.m. some nights to work on lobbying plans.

But she thinks it's worth it. If Medicaid cuts affect Xiomara's medical care, it could make it harder for her to go to the playground or enjoy "Sesame Street." When Hung puts it that way, she says she sees a change in lawmakers and congressional staffers.

"This is my life. When you say that a second, third, fourth, and fifth time ... then it gets through," she said. "I felt like it did make a difference and we were heard."

The Morrisons and Hung family have visited Capitol Hill five times and met with seven senators to talk about health care.

Among parents' top concerns is the prospect that the new health care reforms may allow insurance companies to put lifetime caps on health coverage. Before the ACA, insurance often limited lifetime coverage at $1 million.

These kids reach their lifetime maximum before they even come home, said Michelle Morrison, 33. Her son Timmy was born with a rare condition; his medical care in just his first six months of life exceeded $2 million.

Timmys medical needs did not end when he left the hospital. The now 6-year-old boy has been under anesthesia 45 times and travels from home in Maryland to Cincinnati Childrens Hospital for treatment. A recent hospital stay for three nights cost $16,612.77. It costs $1,354.16 a month for his respiratory equipment.

Timmy and his family have been meeting with senators and their staff to talk about the impact of the healthcare bill on medically fragile children.

Morrisons insurance covers much of Timmys expenses but she knows he will reach the deductible half way through the year.

"People refer to kids like Timmy as 'medically fragile,' which, in some ways, is kind of true," Morrison said. But she says her husband likes to call it "medically strong," instead. "Timmy has fought off more than most of us will in a lifetime."

Timmy was born just six days after the ACA eliminated lifetime limits for health insurance. That was a relief to his family. In his first six months, his bills exceeded $2 million.

Hung and Morrison know that their senators from Maryland oppose the new health care bill, so the women identified 10 states Alaska, West Virginia, Maine, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Arkansas which, at that time, had undecided senators. They asked families in those states for stories about their medically fragile children, and have been collecting them on a website. They collected 161 stories from 41 states and spent five days visiting 41 senate offices. They had 19 meetings and shook hands with seven senators. They've tried educating staffers and senators about lifetime limits.

Hung said Xiomara thought her Senate visit was "a very strange play date."

Hung and Morrison are not alone. Some parents have a bigger soapbox late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel revealed in a tearful opening monologue in May that his son was born with a heart defect and nearly died. He noted that before the ACA, congenital heart defects often counted as a "pre-existing condition" that would prevent someone from getting insurance coverage, and he urged lawmakers to think about how their health care changes would affect children.

"If your baby is going to die and it doesn't have to, it shouldnt matter how much money you make," he said. "I think that's something that whether you're a Republican or a Democrat or something else, we all agree on that, right?"

Other parents are sharing their stories on social media.

Ali Chandra tweeted out the bill from her son Ethan's most recent heart surgery. With her insurance, the cost to her was $500. Without insurance (or if her insurance had imposed a lifetime limit on care, which Ethan would have already used up in his short life), the bill would have been $231,115.

Just one of Ethan's procedures costs $231,000.

"A lifetime cap on benefits is the same as saying, "Sorry, you're not worth keeping alive anymore. You're just too expensive," Chandra tweeted. "Tell that to the boy who just tucked a sick firefly into bed with a leaf blanket and told me to keep the light on so he wouldn't be scared."

Ethan was born with heterotaxy, a rare condition that includes heart defects and organs being located in the wrong places. In his short life, Ethan has had four open chest surgeries and eight procedures under anesthesia. At the end of this summer, he will have a heart catheterization and dental work.

Ethan has had four open chest surgeries in his 3 years of life. Mom Ali Chandra has been lobbying to protect healthcare access for other medically fragile children like Ethan.

Because he needs more does that make him less valuable or less worthy of trying to save? I dont think so, said Chandra, 33, of New Jersey.

Between medical procedures, Ethan enjoys playing in the mud and jumping off the couch, like any toddler. Seeing him be a child reminds Chandra of whats at stake.

From the day they are born that is what you are fighting for," she said, "for them to not just live, but to thrive.

Read the rest here:

For these moms, the health care debate is personal - Today.com

Cory Gardner returning to Senate after July 4 recess marked by fireworks over health care – The Denver Post

Posted on by

WASHINGTON U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner returns to Capitol Hill next week after a Fourth of July break in Colorado that was anything but a respite from the contentious debate over Republican plans to dismantle the Affordable Care Act.

Over the roughly week-long recess, Obamacare supporters ramped up their opposition with several ads and protests, including a Denver rally, a demonstration in Colorado Springs and a radio hit by AARP that specifically targeted Gardner, a Republican from Colorado.

Five protesters were cited Thursday at Gardners Denver office; a week earlier 10 demonstrators met a similar fate.

At the same time, a worry has taken root among some conservatives that the health care plan being drafted by Senate Republicans wont go far enough in repealing the ACA.

Gardner took two meetings on health care during the recess: a visit to the Yampa Valley Medical Center in Steamboat Springs and a conference with executives and doctors at the Pioneers Medical Center in Meeker.

What Gardner didnt do, and what he hasnt done since March 2016, is hold a town hall meeting a strategy that has frustrated liberal activists and set off a debate about the duty of elected officials to appear in public to hear their critics.

The total lack of engagement makes it feel like its a broken contract, said Katie Farnan of the anti-Trump group Indivisible Front Range Resistance.

Adding to the tension is the status of Republican efforts to unravel the ACA. Over the last two weeks, Senate Republicans have struggled to craft a bill that can appease enough GOP lawmakers to pass it without Democratic support.

Gardner and his colleagues will return to Washington with the goal of getting it done before Congress adjourns again for its August recess.

What that final product will look like remains an open question, as GOP lawmakers have exchanged several dueling ideas in recent weeks such as one suggestion that Republicans just repeal the ACA and replace it later.

That kind of malleability, activists said, is why its critical for Gardner to hear from his constituents.

They are making these laws that affect us dramatically, and they shouldnt be doing it without input from their constituents, said Chris Diehn, who said he was cited Thursday during a group sit-in at Gardners Denver office.

Beforehand, Diehn said he spoke for about 15 minutes with Gardner, who called the protesters to talk about health care.

We were just talking past each other, said Diehn, who is a member of the Denver chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Though the bills final language remains in flux, there is little doubt in Colorado political circles about where Gardner will stand at the end of the day despite Gardner not taking a public position on the first Senate version when it was released in late June.

In the end Colorado conservatives know that Cory Gardner is going to vote to repeal Obamacare and when there is a final bill Cory Gardner is going to be there, said Guy Short, a political consultant and longtime Colorado delegate to the Republican National Convention.

This week, Gardner spoke optimistically of its progress while downplaying the idea of repealing the ACA without a replacement. You have started to see positive directions from the bill, Gardner said during a Thursday radio interview with KNUS that was posted online by BigMedia.org.

Even so, some conservatives have begun to grouse about the Senate bills direction, with national groups such as FreedomWorks pressing lawmakers to do more to undo Obamacare.

Sometimes its just important to take a stand, said Jim Hendrix, a Republican businessman from Yuma County who said he has known Gardner for about 30 years. You can watch which way the wind is blowing and that may be politically easy but thats not why you get sent to Washington.

He added that he was frustrated that Republicans in Washington hadnt done a better job of preparing to repeal Obamacare once they took power.

Its just disappointing to me, he said.

The latest version of the Senate bill would eliminate a number of ACA rules and taxes including a penalty for consumers who dont buy health insurance and scale back an expansion of Medicaid prescribed by the 2010 health care law.

It would cut the federal deficit by an estimated $321 billion over the next decade but cause 22 million more Americans to go without health insurance than if the ACA remained in place. Among those at risk of losing their insurance are 425,000 Coloradans covered by Medicaid because of Obamacare, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

In response to the criticism about Gardners lack of town hall meetings, Gardner spokesman Casey Contres said the first-term senator has tried to connect with constituents in other ways. Among them: five phone conferences sometimes called tele-town halls with 51,000 constituents.

Over the last few months Sen. Gardner himself or Sen. Gardners health care policy staff have had nearly 400 health care meetings with Coloradans or organizations that are involved in health care and have an impact on the state, Contres said in a statement.

By way of comparison, Democrats point to the 2009 outreach of U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet during the initial crafting of the Affordable Care Act.

That year, the Colorado Democrat held several town hall meetings across the state, including one session in Grand Junction when Bennet appeared alongside President Barack Obama.

Some of these stops were contentious; at one meeting in Burlington, Bennet was accused of talking past constituent concerns on health care. You just keep going on, you dont let anybody speak, said one resident at the time. Youre not listening to people.

Gardner, Democrats have argued, has a similar responsibility to meet with state residents.

The fact that Sen. Gardner refuses to engage with his constituents before voting to take away their health care just shows a fundamental lack of respect for the people hes supposed to be representing, Morgan Carroll, chair of the Colorado Democratic Party, said in a statement.

Bennet has hosted several town hall meetings this year though the current streak follows a long cold spell. For nearly two years, from May 2015 to March 2017, Bennet didnt hold a single one; a time period that overlaps with his 2016 re-election run.

As for the recent July 4 break, a Bennet aide said the Democratic lawmaker didnt schedule a town hall because he was on a congressional trip to Mexico, Honduras and El Salvador.

Owen Loftus, a former spokesman for the state Republican Party, said it makes little sense for Gardner or other lawmakers to hold town hall meetings, given the desire of activists or partisans to create an awkward moment for a future campaign ad.

They are not interested in hearing Cory Gardner talk. They want to shout him down. They want to embarrass him, Loftus said. I would not recommend a politician caving in to the demands of his or her opponents to have an event especially for them when you can have something like a tele-town hall where you can reach more people.

But Farnan, who helped organize a February town hall without Gardner where health care was discussed, said he has a responsibility to stand before his constituents and hear their concerns.

You need to defend your ideas, and you need to do it with your harshest critics, she said. Thats part of being a public servant.

See more here:

Cory Gardner returning to Senate after July 4 recess marked by fireworks over health care - The Denver Post

Why Single-Payer Health Care Saves Money – New York Times

Posted on by

By analogy, suppose that your states government took over road maintenance from the county governments within it, in the process reducing total maintenance costs by 30 percent. Your state taxes would obviously have to go up under this arrangement.

But if roads would be as well maintained as before, would that be a reason to oppose the move? Clearly not, since the resulting cost savings would reduce your county taxes by more than your state taxes went up. Likewise, it makes no sense to oppose single-payer on the grounds that it would require additional tax revenue. In each case, the resulting gains in efficiency would leave you with greater effective purchasing power than before.

Total costs are lower under single-payer systems for several reasons. One is that administrative costs average only about 2 percent of total expenses under a single-payer program like Medicare, less than one-sixth the corresponding percentage for many private insurers. Single-payer systems also spend virtually nothing on competitive advertising, which can account for more than 15 percent of total expenses for private insurers.

The most important source of cost savings under single-payer is that large government entities are able to negotiate much more favorable terms with service providers. In 2012, for example, the average cost of coronary bypass surgery was more than $73,000 in the United States but less than $23,000 in France.

Despite this evidence, respected commentators continue to cite costs as a reason to doubt that single-payer can succeed in the United States. A recent Washington Post editorial, for example, ominously predicted that budget realities would dampen enthusiasm for single-payer, noting that the per capita expenditures under existing single-payer programs in the United States were much higher than those in other countries.

But this comparison is misleading. In most other countries, single-payer covers the whole population, most of which has only minimal health needs. In contrast, single-payer components of the United States system disproportionately cover population subgroups with the heaviest medical needs: older people (Medicare), the poor and disabled (Medicaid) and returned service personnel (Department of Veterans Affairs).

In short, the evidence is clear that single-payer delivers quality care at significantly lower cost than the current American hybrid system. It thus makes no sense to reject single-payer on the grounds that it would require higher tax revenues. Thats true, of course, but its an irrelevant objection.

In addition to being far cheaper, single-payer would also defuse the powerful political objections to the Affordable Care Acts participation mandate. Polls consistently show that large majorities want people with pre-existing conditions to be able to obtain health coverage at affordable rates. But that goal cannot be achieved unless healthy people are required to join the insured pool. Officials in the Obama administration tried, largely in vain, to explain why the programs insurance exchanges would collapse in the absence of the participation mandate.

But the logic of the underlying argument is actually very simple. Most people seem able to grasp it if you ask them what would happen if the government required companies to sell fire insurance at affordable rates to people whose houses had already burned down.

No home insurer could remain in business if each policy it sold required it to replace a house costing several hundred thousand dollars. Similarly, no health insurer could remain in business if each of its policy holders generated many thousands of dollars in health care reimbursements each month.

Thats why the lack of a mandate in the alternative plans under consideration means that millions of people with pre-existing conditions will become uninsurable if repeal efforts are successful. An underappreciated advantage of the single-payer approach is that it sidesteps the mandate objection by paying to cover everyone out of tax revenue.

Of course, having to pay taxes is itself a mandate of a sort, but its one the electorate has largely come to terms with. Apart from fringe groups that denounce all taxation as theft, most people understand that our entire system would collapse if tax payments were purely voluntary.

The Affordable Care Act is an inefficient system that was adopted only because its architects believed, plausibly, that the more efficient single-payer approach would not be politically achievable in 2009. But single-payer now enjoys significantly higher support than it did then, and is actually strongly favored by voters in some states.

Solid majorities nationwide now favor expansion of the existing single-payer elements of our current system, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Medicaid cuts proposed in Congress have been roundly criticized. Perhaps its time to go further: Individual states and, eventually, the entire country, can save money and improve services by embracing single-payer health care.

Robert H. Frank is an economics professor at the Johnson Graduate School of Management at Cornell University. Follow him on Twitter at @econnaturalist.

The Upshot provides news, analysis and graphics about politics, policy and everyday life. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter. Sign up for our newsletter.

A version of this article appears in print on July 9, 2017, on Page BU3 of the New York edition with the headline: Why Single-Payer Health Care Saves Money.

Read more from the original source:

Why Single-Payer Health Care Saves Money - New York Times

Konica Minolta establishing itself as precision medicine player with $1B Ambry Genetics deal – MedCity News

Posted on by

MedCity News
Konica Minolta establishing itself as precision medicine player with $1B Ambry Genetics deal
MedCity News
Together with Ambry, we will have the most comprehensive set of diagnostic technologies for mapping an individual's genetic and biochemical makeup, as well as the capabilities to translate that knowledge into information the medical community can use ...
Konica Minolta acquires Orange County firm Ambry Genetics in deal valued at up to $1 billionLos Angeles Times
Konica Minolta to buy Ambry Genetics, deal worth up to $1 billionReuters
Konica Minolta To Buy US Genetic Testing Firm Ambry Genetics For $1 BlnNasdaq

all 34 news articles »

Continue reading here:

Konica Minolta establishing itself as precision medicine player with $1B Ambry Genetics deal - MedCity News

Congress of Future Medical Leaders inspires tomorrow’s doctors – Fairfield Daily Republic

Posted on by

The Congress of Future Medical Leaders recently took place in Lowell, Massachusetts.

I attended as an observer with my daughter, who is a rising senior, recruitment slang for a high school student entering her senior year.

Organized by the National Academy of Future Physicians and Medical Scientists, this conference attracted thousands of young delegates.

A cross between convention, lecture marathon and group hug, it took place in the cavernous Tsongas Center of the University of Massachusetts.

You may recall Sen. Paul Tsongas as a presidential candidate who ran against Bill Clinton years ago in the Democratic primaries. Despite a storied career of public service, he died at a young age.To this day he remains a favorite son of his hometown of Lowell.

The venue was therefore somewhat inspiring from the get-go.

A parade of Nobel Prize winners spoke, including Sir Richard Roberts, awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine in 1993 for research on the genetic material known as RNA.

Professor Leland Hartwell, 2001 Nobel laureate, described his research on cell biology, derived from yeast cell studies.

Professor Mario Capecchi, 2007 Nobel laureate, performed research on gene manipulation in mice, which may ultimately result in cures for inherited diseases.

Capecchi also described surviving throughout World War II after his Italian mother was taken to a concentration camp. He was only 4 and fending for himself. He was reunited with his mother and moved to America.

Dr. Michael Brown, of Southwestern Medical School, described the nine steps necessary to achieve a Nobel Prize, which he was awarded at age 44 along with collaborator Dr Joe Goldstein in 1985.

The amazing thing was Browns description of his high school years in Philadelphia, spending time building ham radios, playing baseball and rarely studying.

Georgetown University Dean Stephen Ray Mitchell described ongoing efforts to treat diabetes and chronic diseases in our nations capital city.

Dr. Rick Sacra described humanitarian missions to Liberia and his survival after contracting Ebola virus infection. His message emphasized the importance of serving others.

Not all the speakers were doctors.

Larry Hester, the recipient of a bionic eyeretinal implant system called the Argus II Retinal Prosthesis Device, described having partial vision restored after 33 years of blindness.

Carmen Tarleton, one of the worlds first recipients of a full-face transplant, described her road to recovery after being disfigured and blinded in a horrifying attack involving industrial-strength lye.

The stories all carried the theme of surviving and persevering, for doctors, researchers and those facing physical challenges.

Inventor Jack Andraka cooked up a new diagnostic test for pancreatic cancer in his kitchen at age 15. He is now attending college at Stanford.

Similarly, teenager Julian Cantu of Mexico developed noninvasive tests for detecting breast cancer using material from microwave ovens. He is still a teen.

Shree Bose, currently a medical student at Duke, discovered ways to overcome chemotherapy resistance when she was just 17.

Janelle Tam developed cellulose particles that fight aging, although she is herself a youthful graduate of Princeton University.

The last day of the conference included a talk by Dr. Shelley Hwang, a breast cancer surgeon who is pioneering a less invasive treatment approach to that disease.

The students also observed laparoscopic abdominal and chest surgery, broadcast live from an operating theater miles away.

We just scratched the surface of what we saw at the Congress in this brief column.

Master of Ceremonies Richard Rossi periodically appeared on stage, shouting, Energy, baby!

It worked for me. The conference no doubt propelled future medical leaders toward career success. Inspiration, along with perspiration, combine to foster advances in medicine.

Scott T. Anderson, M.D., Ph.D. (email [emailprotected]), is a clinical professor at University of Califoria, Davis Medical School. This column is informational and does not constitute medical advice.

Read the rest here:

Congress of Future Medical Leaders inspires tomorrow's doctors - Fairfield Daily Republic

UK’s chief medical officer calls for gene testing revolution in cancer treatment – Daily Nation

Posted on by

Saturday July 8 2017

Kenyans mark World Cancer Day on February 4, 2016 in Eldoret town. Tiny errors in DNA code can lead to cancer and other illnesses. PHOTO | JARED NYATAYA | NATION MEDIA GROUP

A revolution in the search for cancer treatments has been proposed by Englands chief medical officer.

Prof Sally Davies wants gene-testing to be introduced on a routine basis.

I want the National Health Service to be offering genomic medicine, that means diagnosis of our genes, to patients where they can possibly benefit, she said.

GENETIC TESTS Testing, she said, should be standard across cancer care as well as some other areas of medicine, including rare diseases and infections.

Doctors are already using genetic tests to identify and better treat different strains of the infectious disease, tuberculosis.

Humans have about 20,000 genes, bits of DNA code or instructions that control how our bodies work.

Tiny errors in this code can lead to cancer and other illnesses.

Gene-screening can reveal these errors by comparing tumour and normal DNA samples from the patient.

Professor Davies says in about two-thirds of cases, this information can improve their diagnosis and care.

Doctors can tailor treatments to the individual, picking the drugs most likely to be effective.

Currently, genetic testing in England is done at 25 regional laboratories, as well as some other small centres.

Professor Davies wants to centralise the service and set up a national network to ensure equal access to the testing across the country.

She said one hurdle could be doctors themselves, who dont like change.

Patients should persuade them to move from a local to a national service. *** Joe Furness was in Newcastle upon Tyne when he was invited to a party in London.

A three-hour, one-way train trip would cost him 78.50 (Sh10,517) and a plane flight 106, but Joe, aged 21, is a poor student and didnt have much money.

What he did have however was time. So Joe decided to take a detour via Spain.

CAR HIRE Flying from Newcastle to the Spanish island of Menorca cost him 16.00.

There he hired a car for 7.50 and spent the night in it, while sipping a 4.50 cocktail.

Next morning he flew to London for 11.00, joined the party, then grabbed a lift home with a pal afterwards.

Total cost of 39 was a saving of 39.50 on a train journey from Newcastle and 67 on a flight.

Distance travelled was 2,350 miles, against 290 miles from the North to London. *** Bradley Lowery is a six-year-old boy who won the hearts of the nation by campaigning for his beloved Sunderland Football Club and for its top scorer, Jermaine Defoe.

TV film of Defoe holding a smiling Bradley in his arms before a recent game appeared on nationwide television.

What everyone knows, of course, is that Bradley is dying from the childhood cancer neuroblastoma.

A fund-raising campaign raised money for him and will be used for other sick children when Bradley dies.

Now it seems fraudsters have been setting up pages on the internet claiming to be collecting for the boys cause.

His family have warned against them. Please be vigilant, they said in a message on Facebook.

You have to wonder, how low can some people stoop?

*** Some 400 plastic bottles are sold per second in this country and millions end up, along with other garbage, in the worlds oceans.

In fact, scientists calculate that by 2050, the oceans will contain more plastic by weight than fish.

The opposition Labour party is pressing for the introduction of a money-back return scheme, which has been introduced in many other countries and has proved successful in reducing the scale of littering.

You pay a bit extra for your drink but you get it back if you return the bottle, which the drinks company then recycles.

Coca-Cola, among others, is backing the idea. *** Famous one-liners:

Doctors recommend eight glasses of water per day. Why does this seem impossible when eight glasses of beer is so easy? Anonymous.

If you want to know what God thinks of money, look at the people he gave it to. American writer Dorothy Parker.

The two most beautiful words in the English language are Cheque enclosed. Dorothy Parker.

PLAGIARISM I asked God for a bike but I know He doesnt work that way, so I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness. Internet.

I wouldnt say I was the best football manager in the business, but I was in the top one. Brian Clough, British football manager.

To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism; to steal from many is research. Anonymous

England and America are two countries separated by a common language. Irish writer George Bernard Shaw.

If I agreed with you, then we would both be wrong. Internet.

Scene of crime officers camp at CS's Karen home and Bomas of Kenya.

Interior CS woke up and complained of a sharp chest pain before collapsing in his house.

Original post:

UK's chief medical officer calls for gene testing revolution in cancer treatment - Daily Nation

America’s First Free-Roaming Genetically Engineered Insects Are … – Gizmodo

Posted on by

Diamondback moths may be a mere half-inch in length, but their voracious appetite for Brussels sprouts, kale and cauliflower make them a major pain for farmers. This week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture approved a potential solution: moths genetically engineered to contain a special gene that makes them gradually die off. A field trial slated to take place in a small area of upstate New York will become the first wild release of an insect modified using genetic engineering in the US.

The moths have been engineered by the British biotech firm Oxitec, the same company that last year caused a stir with its plans to release genetically modified, Zika-fighting mosquitoes in the Florida Keys. The diamond back moths take a similar approach to the mosquitoes, modifying male mosquitoes to limit the population over time by passing on a gene to offspring when it mates with wild females that causes female moths to die before they reach maturity.

The technique is a riff on an approach used to manage agricultural pests since the 1950s, known as sterile insect technique. Using radiation, scientists made insects like the screwworm unable to produce viable offspring. By 1982, screwworm was eradicated from the US using this alternative to pesticides. In Silent Spring Rachel Carson suggested this approach was the solution to the dangers of harmful pesticides agricultural producers required to protect their crops. The problem was that it did not work on every insectin many cases, it simply left irradiated insects too weak to compete for mates with their healthier kin.

Diamondback moths are a sizable problem for farmers, and a problem thats growing as the moths develop resistance to traditional pesticides. They do about $5 billion in damage to cruciferous crops worldwide every year. In the upcoming trial, a team at Cornell University will oversee the release of the genetically engineered moths in a 10-acre field owned by Cornell in Geneva, New York.

After a review found that the field trial is unlikely to impact either the environment or humans, the USDA issued a permit that allows for the release of up to 30,000 moths per week over several months. It is caterpillars that damage crops, so the plan to release adult males that produce unviable offspring should not cause any additional crop damage. And any surviving moths will likely be killed off by pesticides or upstate New Yorks frigid winter, according to the report submitted to the USDA.

The plan to release modified mosquitoes in the Keys attracted much local ireafter initially getting the greenlight from the FDA, the project was ultimately stalled by a local vote and forced to find a new location for a trial.

In upstate New York, too, the moths have stirred up a debate over GMOs for the past several years, though the plan has not been met with quite the same level of opposition. The approval process through the USDA rather than the FDA, too, was much swifter.

In laboratory and greenhouse trials, the modified mosquito was reportedly effective in decreasing the overall population. But tests still need to determine how it will fare in open air.

Oxitec has released its engineered mosquitoes Brazil, Grand Cayman, and Panama, and still plans to go ahead with a field trial in the Keys. In December, the company announced plans for field trials of a genetically modified Mediterranean fruit fly in Western Australia. It is also working on genetically engineering several other agricultural pests, including Drosophila suzukii and the Olive fly.

Excerpt from:

America's First Free-Roaming Genetically Engineered Insects Are ... - Gizmodo

Genetically modified food is too advanced for its out-of-date regulations – The Hill (blog)

Posted on by

Last week, the USDA published a series ofquestionsseeking input to establish a National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard, as mandated by amendments to the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 that went into effect in July 2016.

TheNational Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard Actrequires the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture to establish disclosure standards for bioengineered food. The Act preempts state-based labeling laws for genetically modified organisms (GMOs), such as those adopted inVermontlast year.

The USDA is considering public input on the disclosure standards untilJuly 17, 2017. Two key issues are under consideration. The first is whether certain genetic modifications should be treated as though they are found in nature for example, a mutation that naturally confers disease resistance in a crop. The second concerns what types of breeding techniques should be classified as conventional breeding among "conventional breeding" techniques are hybridization and the use of chemicals or radiation to introduce random genetic mutations.

These seemingly mundane questions strike at the heart of GMO controversies and implicate the use of breakthrough CRISPR gene editing technologies. Gene editing allows novel and precise genetic modifications to be introduced into crops and animals intended for human consumption. The answers to the USDA's questions are significant because the Disclosure Standard Act exempts from mandatory disclosure genetic modifications obtained without recombinant DNA (rDNA) techniques that can otherwise be found in nature.

Older genetic engineering methods relying on rDNA technology combine genes from foreign organisms and transfer them into plant or animal cells thus, creating "transgenic" organisms.

However, CRISPR gene editing need not rely on using any foreign DNA and can introduce genetic modifications that mirror those already found in nature. Unlike rDNA and conventional breeding methods, CRISPR technologies introduce genetic changes with far greater accuracy and precision.

In 2016, the USDAdeclined to regulatetwo CRISPR crops a mushroom and a waxy corn under regulations governing traditionalGMOs. But other regulatory agencies, including the FDA and EPA, have not yet made determinations on crops or animals modified with CRISPR technology, and uncertainty looms concerning the regulatory status of this new breed ofGMOs.

Opponents ofGMOs, who commonly argue thatGMOsare harmful to human health, decried the USDA's decision not to regulate CRISPR crops and argued thatpowerful corporations had found ways to circumvent the law through technical loopholes in outdated regulations.

Yet three decades of scientific research suggest that present-dayGMOcontroversies are not grounded in scientific fact. For instance, despite frequent rumors aboutGMO-induced cancers, a scientific consensus has now formed to support the health and environmental safety of genetically modified crops for animal and human consumption. That proposition is supported by investigations of theU.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicineas well as scientific panels including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Medical Association, the European Commission, and National Academies of Science in Australia, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, the United Kingdom, and other countries.

In its rulemaking process, the USDA should rely upon science and facts. With regard to crops and animals with DNA altered through gene editing, rulemakers ought to distinguish among ways that CRISPR technology may be used to edit genes. For instance, CRISPR technology can be used as a DNA construct that is incorporated into the DNA of plant or animal cells, or as a preassembled RNA and protein complex.

How gene editing is carried out matters, because some methods appear to fall within the disclosure requirements while others do not. The law definesbioengineered foodas food that contains genetic material modified through in vitro rDNA techniques. Thus, under the Disclosure Standard Acts statutory constraints, CRISPR food created using DNA constructs that are incorporated into plant or animal cells would likely fall under the mandatory disclosures.

However, food derived from rDNA-free CRISPR gene editing using transient preassembled RNA and protein complexes should be excluded from the bioengineered food definition because such complexes are degraded shortly after gene editing takes place and do not insert themselves into the target organism DNA.

The nuances of ever-evolving biotechnological innovation highlight the complexity of our regulatory system and the need to modernize it. The National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard Act is just one of the latest pieces of that regulatory patchwork to emerge. Rules establishing bioengineered food disclosures should be coherent and science-based. Gene editing that uses no foreign DNA, is more precise than conventional breeding methods, and causes genetic modifications already found in nature should not be subject to onerous disclosure standards.

Paul Enrquez is a lawyer and scientist currently doing research in Structural & Molecular Biochemistry at North Carolina State University. His work focuses on the intersection of science and law and has been featured in both legal and scientific journals. He explores rising legal and regulatory issues concerning genome editing in crop production in depth and makes policy recommendations in his recently published article CRISPRGMOs.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the views of The Hill.

Read more here:

Genetically modified food is too advanced for its out-of-date regulations - The Hill (blog)

China and Japan Are Largely Responsible for the Current Success of Cryptocurrency – Futurism

Posted on by

In BriefThe adoption of digital currencies on both the individual andinstitutional level in China and Japan is propellingcryptocurrencies to ever greater heights. However, some are stillskeptical that they are the finance systems of the future due totheir current volatility. China and Japans Crypto Craze

The age of cryptocurrencies is upon us, and two countries in particular have been instrumental in their stratospheric rise: China and Japan.

Cryptocurrencies have become popular in China due to the governments stringent control of the yuan a power they occasionally exercise by artificially devaluing the currency for trading purposes. With private wealth in China growing, affluent individuals have found a more stable and accessible alternative to the yuan in cryptocurrencies.

Additionally, China has an abundance of cheap energy and hardware, which facilitates crypto mining (the process throughwhich new blocks in the blockchain are created and transactions are verified). Chinese exchanges runmining poolsto generate these blocks, and these efforts constitute 60 percent of Bitcoins total hashrate (the speed at which Bitcoin operations are completed).

Japan got its foot in the cryptocurrency door at the beginning of 2017 when the market in China experienced an institutional and systematic crackdown, with the most potent measure being a ban on all cryptocurrency withdrawals. This caused an increase in Japans trading volume, which grew from one percent to as high as six percent.

Cryptocurrency adoption was further amplified by currency turbulence in the country. Quantitive easing lead to extremely low interest rates, which have occasionally even become negative, meaning that it costs an individual to save money. As in China, cryptocurrencies therefore became viewed as a more stable asset than the native currency, so morepeople have chosen to invest and store their money in them.

The final piece in the cryptocurrency success puzzle for both countries is increasing institutional acceptance. In China, this takes the form of the countrys Royal Mint, which has invested resources and money into digitizing the yuan and promoting blockchain technology. Japan, meanwhile, began accepting payments in stores using cryptocurrencies earlier this year, and its three largest banks MUFJ, Mizuho, and SMBC have all backed the countrys largest Bitcoin exchange, bitFlyer.

The enthusiasm with which China and Japan have embraced cryptocurrency systems has contributed totheir worldwide success. Virtual currencies have become more popular and valuable than the vast majority of people could have anticipated upontheir inception around a decade ago. The value of a single bitcoin has risen from roughly $0.00075 to $2,500, and the market cap for all cryptocurrencies has exceed $100 billion.

The success of cryptocurrencies is also reflected in their increasing adoption by formal institutions. Wall Street is making moves to start using cryptocurrency systems by next year, a Swiss town called Zug has begun to accept payments in bitcoins, and the Gemini Trust in New York has been licensed to trade ether.

However, some worrying news concerning cryptocurrencies has emerged as well. Recently, in spite of claims that the systems are highly secure, hacks have lead to personal information being leakedand exchanges have been robbed, one to the tune of$79 million.

In addition, while cryptocurrencies may be more stable assets than the native currency in Japan and China, they are not absolutely stable. In fact, they are currently far from it, and though prices continue to rise, rapid drops are not uncommon, and public opinion can have a major impact on value.

Mark Cuban illustrated the issue perfectly when he took to Twitter to assert that Bitcoin wasnt a currency, its valuation dropped rapidly. Even more recently, Ethereum lost $4 billion worth of market value when a bogus story that its founder, Vitalik Buterin, had died in a car crash was published on 4chan.

Cryptocurrencies are clearly on the rise, and due to their successes, they can no longer be dismissed as a niche monetary system. The pertinent question is will this rise will lead to the worldwide adoption of an entirely new currency and finance system?

Original post:

China and Japan Are Largely Responsible for the Current Success of Cryptocurrency - Futurism

Study Finds That Human Ethics Could Be Easily Programmed Into Driverless Cars – Futurism

Posted on by

In BriefA study has found that it would be fairly simple to programautonomous vehicles to make similar moral decisions as humandrivers. In light of this, the question becomes whether we wantdriverless cars to emulate us or behave differently. Programming Morality

A new study from The Institute of Cognitive Science at the University of Osnabrck has found that the moral decisions humans make while driving are not as complex or context dependent as previously thought. Based on the research, which has been published inFrontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience,these decisions follow a fairly simple value-of-life-based model, which means programming autonomous vehicles to make ethical decisions should be relatively easy.

For the study, 105 participants were put in a virtual reality (VR) scenario during which they drove around suburbia on a foggy day. They then encountered unavoidable dilemmas that forced them to choose between hitting people, animals, and inanimate objects with their virtual car.

The previous assumption was that these types of moral decisions were highly contextual and therefore beyond computational modeling. But we found quite the opposite, Leon Stfeld, first author of the study, told Science Daily. Human behavior in dilemma situations can be modeled by a rather simple value-of-life-based model that is attributed by the participant to every human, animal, or inanimate object.

Alot of virtual ink has been spilt online concerning the benefits of driverless cars. Elon Musk is in the vanguard, stating emphatically that those who do not support the technology are killing people.His view is that the technology can be smarter, more impartial, and better at driving than humans, and thus able to save lives.

Currently, however, the cars are large pieces of hardware supported byrudimentary driverless technology. The question of how many lives they could save is contingent upon how we choose to program them, and thats where the resultsof this study come into play. If we expect driverless cars to be better than humans, why would we program them like human drivers?

As Professor Gordon Pipa, a senior author on the study, explained, We need to ask whether autonomous systems should adopt moral judgements. If yes, should they imitate moral behavior by imitating human decisions? Should they behave along ethical theories, and if so, which ones? And critically, if things go wrong, who or what is at fault?

The ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) remains swampy moral territory in general, and numerous guidelines and initiatives are being formed in an attempt to codify a set of responsible laws for AI.The Partnership on AI to Benefit People and Society is composed of tech giants, including Apple, Google, and Microsoft, while the German Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure has developed a set of 20 principles that AI-powered cars should follow.

Just how safe driverless vehicles will be in the future is dependent on how we choose to program them, and while that task wont be easy, knowing how we would react in various situations should help us along the way.

Read this article:

Study Finds That Human Ethics Could Be Easily Programmed Into Driverless Cars - Futurism

Physicists May Have Discovered One of the Missing Pieces of Quantum Theory – Futurism

Posted on by

An Alternative to Quantum Entanglement

The quantum world is full of phenomena scientists are still largely grappling with on a theoretical level. One such quantum theory is quantum entanglement. Although there are a number of tests that demonstrate what Einstein called spooky action at a distance, many merelyassume that it happens, without being able to explain how. At least not yet. But two physicists have proposed an alternative that might just be able to explain this quantum effect.

Essentially, quantum entanglement assumes that measurements of quantum properties within thestate of one entangled particle occurs simultaneously withits entangled pair, regardless of how far apart they are. There isnt any known mechanism that would explain that kind of influence, though, which is why physicists Matthew S. Leifer at Chapman University and Matthew F. Pusey at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics have offered an alternative: the team has asserted theidea of retrocausality as a possible explanation for this spooky action. Theirfindings werepublished in the journal Proceedings of The Royal Society Ain June.

There is a small group of physicists and philosophers that think this idea is worth pursuing, including Huw Price and Ken Wharton [a physics professor at San Jos State University], Leifer told Phys.org. There is not, to my knowledge, a generally agreed upon interpretation of quantum theory that recovers the whole theory and exploits this idea. It is more of an idea for an interpretation at the moment, so I think that other physicists are rightly skeptical, and the onus is on us to flesh out the idea.

Simply stated, retrocausality assumes that influences can travel backwards in time. When an experimenter decides how to measure a particle, that choice can influence the properties of that particle or,an entangled particle in the past. This, therefore, makes the action at a distance part of Einsteins definition unnecessary. Instead, the entanglement effect becomes retrocausal influence. That being said, its not the same thing as sending signals back in time.

Retrocausal theory, then, could offer a better quantum theory. The only options seem to be to abandon realism or to break out of the standard realist framework, Leifer explained. Abandoning realism is quite popular, but I think that this robs science of much of its explanatory power and so it is better to find realist accounts where possible. Retrocausality entails a number of assumptions, though:including one that reformulates the idea of time symmetry.

At any rate, Leifer and Pusey think that retrocausality can offer a generalized standard quantum theory. This might be needed to construct the correct theory of quantum gravity, or even to resolve some issues in high-energy physics given that the unification of the other three forces is still up in the air in the light of LHC results, Leifer added. Perhaps it could even help improve quantum computing technology.

Needless to say, as is the case with most everything in the world of quantum physics, the work is largely theoretical. As far as direct experimental tests of retrocausality go, the status is not much different from other things in the foundations of quantum mechanics, Leifer said. We never test one assumption in isolation, but always in conjunction with many others, and then we have to decide which one to reject on other grounds.

More here:

Physicists May Have Discovered One of the Missing Pieces of Quantum Theory - Futurism

Here’s how to respond to religious freedom crises around the world … – Deseret News

Posted on by

Kelsey Dallas

Katrina Lantos Swett, a former commissioner for the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, speaks at BYU's Religious Freedom Annual Review.

PROVO Responding to religious freedom crises around the world starts with strong religious commitment in believers' daily lives, according to law and religion experts gathered at Brigham Young University's Religious Freedom Annual Review.

"We need to be serious believers if were going to convince the world that religious freedom matters," said Kent Hill, executive director of the Religious Freedom Institute, during his remarks Friday afternoon.

He and his fellow panelists admitted it may seem like a simplistic approach in the face of mounting challenges to conscience rights. In 2015, the most recent year for which data is available, 79 percent of the world's population lived in a country with high or very high restrictions on or hostilities toward religious beliefs and practices, the Pew Research Center reported earlier this year.

However, deep personal faith energizes other practical steps toward addressing religious freedom violations, such as contacting policymakers or building understanding through interfaith friendships.

"We're not called to do everything but each of us has a certain capacity to do something," Hill said.

Religious individuals can explore their own traditions for calls for peace and then help others do the same, said W. Cole Durham, founding director of BYU's International Center for Law and Religion Studies.

"Religions should mine their own resources and come to understand them more deeply," he said, noting that Muslim leaders are increasingly undertaking this type of effort in order to counter the message of extremists using their faith to advocate for violence.

People of faith can also contact political leaders about the importance of prioritizing religious freedom in our interactions with leaders of other countries, said Katrina Lantos Swett, a former commissioner for the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom.

Katrina Lantos Swett, a former commissioner for the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, speaks at BYU's Religious Freedom Annual Review. | Kelsey Dallas, Deseret News

"Tell them that you care about religious freedom and think advancing this right is in our national interest," she said.

The panelists said they have seen the value of connecting on an emotional level with people who don't understand or care about religious freedom, rather than relying on general arguments about why related protections benefit everyone.

"We must be ready to show our heart and show the sincerity of our faith when we are trying to share value of religious freedom and tolerance," Swett said. "People are much more likely to consider us credible interlocutors if they get that we have deep beliefs, too."

The panel discussion focused on the best responses to international religious freedom violations, which come in many forms. In dozens of countries across the globe, minority faith groups are forced to register their activities with the government or abandon their houses of worship in the midst of interreligious violence.

"If you look at whats happening day by day, you will see similar kinds of things" everywhere, Durham said.

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom's 2017 Annual Report highlights rising anti-Semitism and Islamophobia, as well as the threat of blasphemy laws, which enable people to be arrested and even put to death for a perceived statement against a dominant religion.

The commission works with the U.S. government to seek solutions, as well as with leaders in the State Department tasked with outreach to religious communities.

The panelists expressed disappointment with the fact that the Trump administration has yet to appoint an ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom.

"This is a tragedy that we dont even think we can do anything enough to get somebody in place with authority to do something," Hill said.

In the midst of a global refugee crisis and the Islamic State's reign of terror, it's understandable that some Americans feel helpless, the panelists said. But by turning to their own faith for spiritual nourishment, they can gain the strength to keep working toward a better world.

"I think the great temptation for people who see a big problem is to despair and to decide that they really can't do anything," Hill said. "I would point out that despair is not a Christian virtue."

The Religious Freedom Annual Review is a two-day conference that brings together leading lawyers, scholars and activists to discuss and debate conscience rights. It's sponsored by the BYU International Center for Law and Religion Studies.

Email: kdallas@deseretnews.com, Twitter: @kelsey_dallas

See original here:

Here's how to respond to religious freedom crises around the world ... - Deseret News

Reflecting on freedom – Concord Monitor

Posted on by

The fireworks have faded, the grill is cold, the parade has marched into the distance and the family has all gone home. With all the hoopla, it is easy to forget that the Fourth of July is actually Independence Day, an event that marks something really meaningful the day, almost two and a half centuries ago, when 13 colonies adopted the Declaration of Independence. It was a time of transition when a young nation forged its own identity from oppressive British rule, a movement that required great resilience and grit.

As I reflect on Independence Day, it evokes thoughts about another kind of independence, that of young people breaking away from their parents. As we settle into summer and anticipate time to relax and ponder, let us consider the opportunities we all have to declare independence in times of transition and identify the skills we need to be successful in doing so.

Helicopter, bulldozer or Velcro parent, tiger mom, not exactly labels that we as parents can celebrate. What is behind this trend to pathologize and disparage our well-intentioned efforts and concern for our children? Those terms dont apply to me, most of us tell ourselves, but could the culture of fear and enmeshment surrounding us be blinding us to a dark reality?

Research, books, seminars and headlines abound about parenting in the 21st century and the ways in which we are damaging our children. It can be overwhelming to imagine even where to start. The growing literature on resilience, grit and anxiety all point towards encouraging independence in young people. If you read three books this summer, make them GRIT The Power of Passion and Perseveranceby Angela Duckworth, Mindset: The New Psychology of Successby Carol S. Dweck and Anxious Kids, Anxious Parents: 7 Ways to Stop the Worry Cycle and Raise Courageous and Independent Childrenby Reid Wilson and Concords own Lynn Lyons.

Needless to say, we must find the balance between engaged parenting and fostering independence. Allow your high school student to make mistakes, take ownership for her learning and advocate for herself. The college admissions process is the perfect opportunity to turn over control. Empower your young person to take the reigns in the college search and application experience, providing support rather than action. If you have a child leaving for college this fall, give her space to navigate the transition on her own. The students who struggle the most and who are the least happy with their college choice are those who talk/text with their parents everyday and rely on mom and dad to resolve every challenge they face.

While you may feel like you are under the oppressive rule of teachers and parents, this is not permission to take a back seat to your life. Do not overlook the proactive ways that you can be independent.

If your parents are managing your college search, then perhaps you are not ready for college.

If you do want to go to college then listen up. I recently met with a group of selective college admission deans who lamented about how often a students parents initiate contact on behalf of their child. Dont be that kid who lets their parents set up all the college visits and then fills out forms for you when you arrive. And definitely do not allow the adults in your life to write your essays, complete your application or dictate all the activities in which you should be involved.

Socrates wrote, to find yourself, think for yourself. In its purist form, high school is about finding yourself and when you rely on friends, family and teachers to think for you, you renounce your independence. Preparation for college is an ideal opportunity to assert your individualism and self-reliance.

Prom, graduation ceremonies and senior parties are behind you and now it is time to look forward to the next phase of your education. For many young people, college is the first time they are able to truly dabble with being independent. Nobody is going to make you go to class, clean your room or eat healthy. The decisions you make and the approach you take toward your college experience are yours and yours alone. This can be a time that is wonderfully liberating when students come into their own and embrace self-advocacy and ownership for their lives, but it can just as easily go the other way.

Students who struggle with this freedom generally fall into two categories those who abuse independence and those who refuse independence. The abusers often skip classes, excessively use alcohol and drugs and make poor decisions in other areas of campus living and learning. Frequently these young people find themselves with low grades, disciplinary issues and a college career cut short. The refusers avoid the opportunity to live autonomously and flounder without the constant support of family and high school friends. These students fail to engage in campus life in meaningful ways and are quick to blame their unhappiness on the institution rather than their inability to be self-reliant.

Increasing independence requires balance and resilience. As Eleanor Roosevelt said, freedom makes a huge requirement of every human being. With freedom comes responsibility. For the person who is unwilling to grow up, the person who does not want to carry his own weight, this is a frightening prospect.

So, carry your own weight and embrace opportunities to be involved on campus. Take risks, be open to failure and acknowledge that being independent can be uncomfortable, and that is alright.

The Fourth of July holiday presents a great opportunity for us all to consider from what we need to declare independence. What is not serving us in our lives? What can we do without? What habits, relationships or ways of thinking keep us stuck in a rut? How are we oppressed by our own thoughts, actions or rules? Even if we do not have any significant transitions in our lives, the pace of summer can provide the ideal space to reflect on ways in which we are dependent. Let us all articulate one change that would allow more liberty.

It is one thing to declare independence, but the difficult work happens when we attempt to live it. How do we best stay dedicated to finding freedom in the areas in which we need it? Remember that independence does not mean isolation and we are often best served to enlist friends and family in our efforts after all, it took 13 colonies to rally against the British Empire. I have committed to a three-day silent mindfulness retreat each summer as a way to reconnect and set intentions for my personal independence. This is not for everyone, but whether in high school, college or life, I encourage us all to identify and celebrate the power we have to liberate ourselves.

See the original post:

Reflecting on freedom - Concord Monitor

Community comes together to help fix vandalized Colorado Freedom Memorial – The Denver Channel

Posted on by

AURORA, Colo. -- Vandalism doesn't defeat patriotism. That was the message sent by hundreds of community members when they attended a fundraiser at the vandalized Colorado Freedom Memorial in Aurora.

"There are 17 years of me in this," said Colorado Freedom Memorial president Rick Crandall. He's behind the creation of the large wall with the names of fallen war veterans etched into the glass.

Crandall believes someone threw a rock at one of the panes of glass, shattering it.

"It made no sense to me at all," said Crandall. "What motivates people to do things?"

On Saturday, hundreds of people showed up for a fundraiser to help fund a fix. Repairs are estimated at more than $50,000.

"I think we should do our part as a community to come out and restore it," said war veteran Douglas Colbert.

Crandall has only one message for the alleged vandal responsible.

"You may have hurt the memorial, but you've only strengthened our resolve."

If you want to donate to the repair of the Colorado Freedom Memorial, click here.

Read the original here:

Community comes together to help fix vandalized Colorado Freedom Memorial - The Denver Channel

Freedom fall to Lake Erie Crushers on their field, 11-5, despite four home runs and a comeback push – User-generated content (press release)…

Posted on by

Despite four home runs and a comeback push in the middle innings, the Florence Freedom could not overcome an early four-run deficit Friday night at Sprenger Stadium and fell to the Lake Erie Crushers by a score of 11-5. With newcomer Eric Gleese (0-1) on the mound for the Freedom (32-17), the Crushers (21-27) rallied for four runs in the first inning. L.J. Kalawaia led off with a bunt single and scored the games first run on a double by Brandon Murray, who later came home on a Cody Lenahan single. Austin OBrien immediately followed with a two-run homer for a 4-0 advantage.

But as Gleese rebounded to hold Lake Erie scoreless for the next three innings, Florence gradually pushed back. Collins Cuthrell led off the second inning with a home run to left field off Crushers starter Juan Caballero (3-1), and Andrew Godbold hit a solo homer in the fourth inning. In the top of the fifth, Austin Wobrock hustled out an infield single and took second on a groundout. Taylor Oldham then walked before Jose Brizuela drove in Wobrock with a bloop single to center field, putting the tying and go-ahead runs on base with the score 4-3. Godbold, however, struck out looking to end the threat. Gleese returned to the mound in the fifth and would serve up a three-run homer to Sean Hurley, re-extending Florences deficit to four runs. In the sixth, the rookie right-hander allowed a double and a single before yielding to Laetten Galbraith. The latter hit Trever Achenbach with a pitch to load the bases, and all runners would score on a triple by Kalawaia, who in turn raced home on a sacrifice fly to center. Gleese gave up a total of nine runs, all earned, on eight hits, but still struck out seven batters in his Freedom debut. Meanwhile, Caballero pitched five innings for the win and struck out five, while Justin Sinibaldi fanned four over three innings of relief before turning the ball over to Manny Arciniega for the ninth. Jose Brizuela and Jordan Brower hit solo homers in the eighth and ninth innings, respectively, giving Florence its final two runs of the evening, but the five total runs on seven hits was not enough against Lake Eries 11-run, nine-hit onslaught. The loss was the Freedoms third straight, and the team has now two of its last seven games. The series continues Saturday with first pitch scheduled for 6:05 p.m. at Sprenger Stadium. Enrique Zamora (1-0) will start for the Freedom against Lake Eries Payton Lobdell (0-3).

See the rest here:

Freedom fall to Lake Erie Crushers on their field, 11-5, despite four home runs and a comeback push - User-generated content (press release)...

New disabled MP accuses Conservatives of ‘eugenics’ policies to … – The Independent

Posted on by

The Conservatives have dismantled the welfare system and introduced a system of eugenicsin an effort to make disabled people suffer and die, according to a newly-elected LabourMP.

Jared OMara, who has cerebral palsy, said the Government hascompletely torn up the welfare system by shutting down the Independent Living Fund and making cuts to disability and social care benefits.

Mr OMara, who ousted former Deputy Prime Minister Nick Cleggfrom his Sheffield Hallamseat,also declared his support for efforts to bring a criminal prosecution against Toryministers over claims that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) fitness to worktests have led to the deaths of benefit claimants.

The former school governorinsisted the policies were making disabled people have suicidal thoughts.

He told Disability News Service(DNS): A lot of people say you cant use that word, but I will do: its eugenics.They want disabled people to suffer and die. Thats literally whats happening.

Disabled people are out there suffering and dying because they have not got the financial means and financial support and nor have they got the legal means to lead an equal life, or even to lead a satisfactory life.

Conservative MP accuses mother of disabled child of lying

He added thatreports that mentally ill people have been asked why they havent committed suicide by independence payment assessors support his claims.

How is that not eugenics? Putting thoughts of suicide into a disabled persons head. Its literally eugenics,he said.

Im not going to shy away from it, people might say I am taking it too far, but as far as I am concerned, what I have seen and what has happened across the board, its been eugenics.

There are people just like me and people who have got conditions that make things even worse for them than mine does, and they are dying and they are suffering.

A DWP spokesperson said: We have a proud record in supporting disabled people, including through the landmark Disability Discrimination Act.

In the last three years, over 500,000 have moved into work and we continue to spend around 50bna year on benefits to support disabled people and those with health conditions more than ever before.

In the wide-ranging interview with DNS, Mr OMaraalso said he absolutelysupported efforts by anti-austerity groups to bring criminal proceedings against former DWP ministers Chris Grayling and Iain Duncan Smith relating to the fitness to work tests.

A disabled activist from the Black Triangle campaign lodged a complaint with Scottish police claiming the pair might be guilty of willful neglect of duty by a public official, but Scottish criminal justice agencies refused to investigate the matter in December.

A DWP spokesperson said at the time: It is important we make sure that people are receiving the right support, and they are not simply written off to a life on benefits.

The Work Capability Assessment has been improved dramatically since 2008 following a number of reviews, including five independent ones.

After a month in his role as Labour MP for Sheffield Hallam, Mr OMara said he has not been able to attend debates in the Commons chamber as he cannot stand for longer than 10minutes.

The 35-year-old MP was diagnosed with cerebral palsy at six months old. The condition leaves him with severe fatigue and the right-hand side of his body is semi-paralysed. Mobility and standing for too long are issues and he needs bannisters on both sides of stairs.

The disability rights campaigner, who compares himself to Forrest Gump, previously said: Im this slightly eccentric, little bit weird disabled guy who keeps stumbling into large achievements.

Read more:

New disabled MP accuses Conservatives of 'eugenics' policies to ... - The Independent