North Liberty Library opens new room for breastfeeding moms – KCRG

Posted on by

NORTH LIBERTY, Iowa (KCRG-TV9) There is the new nursing station for mothers at North Liberty Library.

It's a room designed for mothers who are looking for a private space to nurse.

North Liberty Library started talking about getting the space last Fall.

They say several mothers approached them, asking about a private space to nurse.

North Liberty Library approached Mercy Iowa City and the hospital agreed to donate a space in the library.

The hospital even added artwork around the lactation station.

After taking a look inside the nursing station, Lisa Augspurger, a North Liberty mom told KCRGTV-9 the new space will be perfect for mothers who are nursing.

First times moms especially who like to have the privacy to nurse and it's a really nice comfy space in here and it's well lit which is nice, but private so it's great, says Augspurger.

And North Liberty's Library Director Jennie Garner says this new nursing station will allow moms to be able to stay at their facility longer.

"Takes down that barrier of having a nursing mom being out and then all of a sudden they have to drop everything and leave because baby gets hungry or they need to use the breast pump so that will help them be able to stay longer, says Garner.

North Liberty Library is not the first in the area to get a lactation room.

Iowa City Library and Corallville libraries also offer a space to nurse.

The North Liberty Library unveiled their new space Tuesday morning and they hope it will help mothers in the area.

Read the original:

North Liberty Library opens new room for breastfeeding moms - KCRG

Heritage, Liberty win in Conference 30 semifinals | High School … – Lynchburg News and Advance

Posted on by

Thats a motto the University of North Carolina made popular under legendary coach Dean Smith, who made sharing the basketball a top priority.

Heritage worked it to perfection Tuesday night.

On an evening when its shooting touch was flat in front of a sparse home crowd, the Pioneers made the extra pass in a 63-46 victory over Rustburg in the Conference 30 semifinals.

Jordan Hamlette, Caleb Snead and Keenan Austin combined for 17 assists, and Heritage advanced to Thursdays Conference 30 finals while also locking up a spot in next weeks Region 3A West tournament.

Heritage's Jordan Hamlette drives past Rustburg's Deonta' Jackson during the second half on Tuesday Feb. 14, 2017 in Lynchburg, Va. Photo by Lathan Goumas.

Shoot, I didnt really notice, but thats really good, said Snead, the 6-foot-4 senior forward who led Heritage (16-6) with 15 points. Sharing the ball like that, that means were playing together.

For fourth-seeded Rustburg (10-13), the season came to a close one night after defeating bottom seed Tunstall in the conference play-in game. Deonta Jackson led the way with 15 points on Tuesday. The junior guard knocked down a 3-pointer with 1:50 left in the second quarter to bring Rustburg within two points, 25-23.

But the Pioneers went on a run to close the half, highlighted by the only shot of the game by reserve Philip Bowles, who buried his own 3 just before the buzzer. Between the final minute of the second quarter and the opening minutes of the third, Heritage strung together a 13-0 run.

Rustburg's Kamron Hughes goes up for a shot during the first half on Tuesday Feb. 14, 2017 in Lynchburg, Va. Photo by Lathan Goumas.

Thats the difference, first-year Rustburg coach Charles Davis said. I always stress to them that the last two minutes of the second [quarter] and the first few minutes of the third, thats the difference-maker of the game at any level. Once that happened, youre constantly battling uphill.

Less than one week after scoring his 1,000th career point at HSS, Hamlette finished with 14 points. He also led the way with seven assists and hauled down a team-best 12 rebounds.

Keenan Austin (12 points) had 10 rebounds and five assists, while Snead rounded out the three notable performances with seven rebounds and five assists.

Heritage has won the Conference 30 championship in all three years of the conferences existence. That means Snead and Hamlette have celebrated with that title for their entire varsity careers.

Heritage's Jordan Hamlette drives past Rustburg's Deonta' Jackson during the second half on Tuesday Feb. 14, 2017 in Lynchburg, Va. Photo by Lathan Goumas.

But the last two years, weve lost in the first round of region, Snead said. So this year, we really want to get past that and go far.

Theres still work to be done, though.

We communicate sometimes and sometimes we dont, Hamlette said, referencing something the Pioneers will work on in the coming days.

Snead wasnt surprised by Tuesdays victory, given his teams success each year in the five-team tourney.

We run Conference 30, he said, and weve got to defend it.

Liberty 53, Brookville 44

Liberty clung to a one-point lead with 2:10 remaining when forward Ethan Payne caught an inbounds pass while standing near midcourt. Then Payne saw an opening.

He barreled into the lane, drove all the way to the basket and went up strong to ignite his squad. Liberty needed little motivation from there and pulled away from Brookville for a 53-44 victory.

Liberty (12-11) will play in the Conference 30 championship for the first time in school history and receives an automatic berth into the Region 3A West tourney. The Minutemen are also 10-3 in their last 13 games.

Payne providedTuesday's heads-up, decisive play. The rest of the game belonged to senior guard Raheem Anthony, who poured on a game-high 23 points.

Anthony didnt have to look far for inspiration, either: he simply wasnt ready for his high school career to come to a close. So he put up a performance for the ages, slicing into the lane over and over.

When he was a freshman, Anthony watched LHS suffer a season-ending loss to Brookville. The seniors, he said of that season, cried in the locker room after the loss.

We said, Were not losing to Brookville. Were not going out like those seniors did, Anthony said. So tonight was just all heart and emotion.

Anthony and Brookvilles Tyson Hancock, the Lynchburg areas leading scorer in the regular season, guarded each other throughout the night. Hancock led the Bees (8-16) with 16 points, while forward Sam Slade added 12.

Hes a great player, Anthony said of Hancock. Hes got heart, but I just wanted it more.

The game featured seven ties and a whopping 14 lead changes (eight in the third quarter). Liberty led 45-44 when Payne made that fateful move to the hole and banked in his shot. Payne finished with 15 points, and the Minutemen closed the game on a 9-0 run.

I just saw the lane, that it was open and I drove it in, Payne said.

Then the senior described the moment directly following his basket.

It was a lot of emotion, he said. People jumping up and down, screaming, and my heart was pumping fast, almost out of my chest.

Original post:

Heritage, Liberty win in Conference 30 semifinals | High School ... - Lynchburg News and Advance

Libertarians and Pro-Choice Advocates: Peas in a Pod – Patheos (blog)

Posted on by

Recently somebody posted this on FB:

It sparked a fascinating conversation:

Melody: Jesus was speaking to the individual, NOT the government. If your so concerned about refugees, then YOU need to get off your butt and go help them. Leave the safty of your country and go help them. Im tired of people using Jesus to justify more government control.

Dan: You are incorrect and B16 in his encyclical Caritas in Veritate more than denounces you. Then prior to that, there is PP and Mater et Magistra.

You need to learn your faith.

Melody: I know my Faith, I also know that The Catholic Faith (plus others) teaches that it is the individual NOT the government who is responsible for caring for humanity.

Mary: Melody we dont need to do a thing about abortion. Its an individual choice. Is this what you are saying?

Liz: I came to the same conclusion, Mary.

This is like a little microcosm of the American Church. Melody has absorbed the strange libertarian lie that that state is somehow free to ignore the natural law and do Whatever because the natural law applies only to individuals. She, of course, is thinking only of the gospel commands about care for the least of these. And she relies on the lie that things like food, shelter, and elementary demands of basic justice to human beings are charity. She then proceeds to the lie that since these things are charity they are no business of the state.

But in fact, things like food, shelter, and health care are not charity. They are due human beings in justice and ensuring justice is precisely the task of the state. Therefore it is not either/or, but both/and. We are to personally care for the least of these. We are also to see to it that the state does too.

This is ironically illustrated by Mary, who takes Melody at her word and takes it to the conclusion the anti-abortion-but-not-prolife right ever seems to realize by pointing out that if the state is not supposed to help protect the human right of the least of these, then it follows that the whole point of the prolife struggle to get the state to stop its laissez faire approach to abortion is without foundation.

The great irony here is that Liz, a pro-choice atheist who has been rather shocked to discover she has a lot in common with a bunch of devout, Mass-going Catholics with strong empathy for the Catholic social justice tradition finds herself suddenly in bed with Melody, a libertarian, anti-abortion-but-not-prolife Catholic who mouths all the right wing excuses for ignoring the Church on everything but abortion.

I wrote them both and told them I hope they both feel exquisitely uncomfortable being in bed with one another. Liz, at any rate, has enough of a sense of humor to appreciate the irony of her predicament. Melody I dont know and am not sure if she even realizes that she just made the libertarian case for every pro-choice person on planet Earth. But Liz, I think, must realize that her pro-choice philosophy undergirds the libertarian case for the selfishness Melody is advocatinga selfishness Liz loathes.

The way out of their strange bedfellows dilemma is, of course, embrace of the complete and consistent Catholic ethic of life and rejection of the libertarianism they each selectively embrace.

No idea what will happen next.

Continued here:

Libertarians and Pro-Choice Advocates: Peas in a Pod - Patheos (blog)

I’m a Libertarian Man, and I Support Feminism. – Being Libertarian

Posted on by

Im A Libertarian Man, and I Support Feminism

I want to discuss a topic that I feel all libertarians should be supporters of Feminism! Lets face it, libertarians need to stop being so freaking anti-feminist, once and for all; though I think most libertarians are pro-feminist deep down inside. Feminism in its original meaning is 100% a libertarian/capitalist movement.

First off, lets just say why feminists in the original sense should hate government. Governments used to not allow women to own property or businesses of any kind. Literally setting it up so that (in many states) if a woman was married to a man, and didnt have a male son when the man died, she would likely be forced to give the business to the closest male relative, likely without any compensation for it.

For many years, women were not legally allowed to vote in America. Women were denied access to schools for most of history. Many governments would even be able to shut down a business just for hiring and using women workers, if complained about. Occupational licensing was made difficult to obtain, and women were denied the right to become things such as lawyers, doctors and more. Women were put in many situations where their property and rights werent respected. Up until the 1950s, many states didnt even care if a man casually beat his wife as long as no serious damage was caused.

There was a discriminatory agent around and, holy sh*t, it was the government. The government, being a male created tool which blocked womens rights (they did not have voting rights), created a male only majority that damaged the rights of women. They did this with Jim Crow; they did this to the Native American community; they did it to women; from this, its easy to say women were treated poorly by society and viewed as tools in male oppression.

We cant just say Oh, that was the past, today is what counts; Its called all f*cking history, compared to the last 50 damn years! For most of American history, women had very few rights compared to men. We did live in an anti-female society. In world history, for 99% of the time, women didnt have an equal say. We are living in the [maybe] .3% that they do. This is something I see libertarians pretend isnt the case and that is morally and historically just a total wasteland of wrong. What caused this to end? Well, like most problems, it was the market. Let me list what the market did to help womens rights.

Changes in Labor The movement of manual labor economies to white collar jobs: with the rise of technology, people arent cutting down trees, farming, or doing a lot of other jobs which, from a physical perspective, women arent as capable of doing. More people in the early 20th century moved into jobs where they worked in an office, developed things with their minds, and from that, the door was opened, and women were needed in that pool of the labor market.

Modern Medicine Another was the rise of modern medicine, and women not dying as frequently while giving birth. Everyone having a mom is new to history. If a person lived before the 20th century, there was a good chance their mom died giving birth to them, or giving birth to their siblings. The older women were, the more likely it was to happen. This is why women, for most of history, would be married at a very young age and asked to have children at about 15-18 years old. Modern medicine made it so that giving birth at age 30 isnt a death sentence anymore. This opens options for new career choices.

A Rise in Wealth and Education The rise of women in education and early careers, caused a rise in wealth. People had more money, and America got an expanded labor force, allowing for care services which make parenting while both parents work a real thing and not a financial impracticality. For the first time, it is profitable for both parents to work, even if that requires housekeeping or day care services. The market did something very new when it moved people away from farms and into cities. People came for factory jobs and, as the need for child labor dropped, the rise of public schools began. Women got the invite to join, and for the first time in history, lower, middle, and upper income girls were able to attend schools. This was likely the greatest thing ever to aid in the rise of women in the economy. Birth Control Birth control and the greatness of Roe vs Wade here is a simple fact, being pregnant as a choice rather than it being obligatory, is a great thing!

So where does this bring us?

Why are women still complaining?

Feminists do have a point, these problems exist, and there are two sets of solutions.

The first solution is culture: shows such as Jessica Jones, or Legend of Korra, that are geared towards a male audience but turn women into these non-sexualized, awesome characters (who say what theyd like, have relationships with who they want, and kick-ass) are honestly doing more to change the stigma in how men treat women than any protest has. Culture and actions in media are changing this culture to the benefit of women.

The second solution is capitalism: women make less than men on average due to chosen career paths? Libertarians have a solution for that eliminate government backed student loans. Banks will still loan money, but not to poorly performing majors and people will now financially be forced to pursue higher earning fields such as math or science. In this, they will also see a decline in older, lesser earning majors slowing down the new supply of labor in that pool and opening other options.

Women complain about birth control and abortion rights? Libertarian have a solution for that. Its called deregulation where birth control is easier to obtain and lower FDA times to get approvals on new drugs.

Women complain about men being abusive? Libertarians have a solution for that. Just imagine how much better the police would function without the war on drugs, without so much time/money going to victim-less crimes and more attention going to real abuses.

Libertarians have solutions to female problems, and female problems in culture do indeed exist. Why a woman gets called a slut for having sex with twenty people, but a man gets called awesome is confusing. Why so many parents tell their daughters to marry wealthy men at a young age is genuinely sad. Solutions do exist on both a personal and government level.

Im tired of libertarians failing and failing hard. We are turning our movement into something which sees Milo Yianhoweveryouspellit say women shouldnt pursue science and we go Hahaha thats funny! We are seeing many in the liberty movement casually bash feminist and instead of saying We see your problems as real, and we have answers for you! we stay in this male bubble of bashing women. Its why libertarians dont succeed. When we ignore the problems and just bash the idea that the problems exist we lose a voter! We lose a supporter! We lose a volunteer! We lose a libertarian! We create a communist!

So, I support feminism, and libertarianism is 100% a feminist friendly movement.

This post was written by Charles Peralo.

The views expressed here belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect our views and opinions.

Like Loading...

Read this article:

I'm a Libertarian Man, and I Support Feminism. - Being Libertarian

Japan protests Russia’s naming of 5 islands on the Kuril chain – CNN

Posted on by

"Such moves go against our country's stance and is extremely regrettable," said Japan's chief Cabinet secretary Yoshihide Suga during a press conference Tuesday.

The 56-island Kuril chain has been a sore spot in Japan-Russia relations for the past 72 years.

The chain became part of Russia with the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 but Japan claims four islands it refers to as the "Northern Territories."

The long-standing territorial dispute has prevented both countries from signing a peace treaty to end World War II.

The two leaders also discussed the possibility of joint economic activities on the islands.

Some analysts say Abe's administration is obliged to issue a response to the namings to assuage the right-wing nationalists that prop up the government, however Tokyo is unlikely to want to jeopardize diplomatic relations with Moscow.

"Abe is supported by right-wing nationalists. That means that he can't be weak on this," Atsushi Tago, a professor of international relations at Kobe University, told CNN.

"I think Abe likes to maintain the current agreement over joint Russian-Japanese economic activities, so he does not want to over-politicize this type of issue," added Tago.

The Russians have named the five islands after Andrei Gromyko, a Soviet diplomat, Igor Farkhutdinov, a former governor of the Sakhalin region, Anna Shchetinina, a female captain of a merchant ship, Gen. Kuzma Derevyanko, who signed the Japanese Instrument of Surrender with the Allies in 1945 and Gen. Alexei Gnechko, who led the occupation of the Kuril Islands in the same year, according to TASS, a Russian news agency.

The last two, according to James D Brown, an associate professor at Temple University in Japan, are a particular blow to the Japanese government.

"They're designed to make a political point," said Brown.

Tokyo has been trying to improve Japan-Russia relations and foster great economic relations since May 2016 when Abe visited Putin in Sochi, Russia.

In recent years, Putin has also been looking to shore up ties in Asia as part of what analysts have called Russia's "turn to the east" as US and European sanctions following Russia's annexation of Crimea took a toll.

"The momentum was building," said Brown, citing Putin's visit to Japan in December 2016. "But now Japan feels like their diplomatic efforts have been undermined."

Originally posted here:

Japan protests Russia's naming of 5 islands on the Kuril chain - CNN

New virtual reality tool brings Sisters’ Islands corals to shore – Channel NewsAsia

Posted on by

SINGAPORE: Marine biology students and conservation volunteers can look forward to exploring coral reefs at Sisters' Islands Marine Park without actually having to go underwater with a new interactive virtual reality (VR) underwater simulation.

Eyes on Habitat: Coral Reefs is a collaboration between local start-up Hiverlab, the Infocomm Media Development Authority's (IMDA) PIXEL Labs and DHI Water and Environment.

In a joint press release on Wednesday (Feb 15), the developers said the training tool will enhance the training of marine biologists and reef monitoring volunteers as they learn methods in the assessment and monitoring of coral reefs, orientate themselves on monitoring protocols and practise their identification skills in a virtual settingbefore they embark on actual dives.

The developers added that currently, instructors have to overcome the limited visibility usually experienced in Singapore waters, as well as the limitation of communication to visual cues and hand signals when training large groups of students or volunteers in habitat monitoring of underwater environments.

During the 30-minute "dive", users will be virtually guided along the reef to identify various marine organisms and can submit their answers using their Samsung VR headsets.

The development of the product took five months to complete and is now in its prototype stage.

Moving forward, Hiverlab said it is looking at creating a collaborative platform where 3D scans and photogrammetry of corals and reefs can be crowdsourced to recreational divers, marine biologists and non-governmental organisations. This will allow it to cover more coral reefs around the world and create educational programmes or workshops based on the data, it explained.

A standalone prototype of Eyes on Habitat: Coral Reefs will be made available to the public at PIXEL Labs at National Design Centre and Jurong Regional Library in March.

Read the original here:

New virtual reality tool brings Sisters' Islands corals to shore - Channel NewsAsia

Getting ready for upcoming Islands Race – Scuttlebutt Sailing News

Posted on by

For the eighth year, San Diego Yacht Club will partner with Newport Harbor Yacht Club for the 130nm Islands Race. Beginning on February 24, the popular course departs from the Long Beach Harbor and head west of the Santa Catalina and San Clemente Islands for some of Southern Californias best sailing before they finish the regatta in San Diegos Point Loma.

Over 30 boats are expected to compete, ranging from 33-70 feet in length. The smallest boat entered so far is BAZINGA, a Hobie 33 while two Santa Cruz 70s, Grand Illusion and Holua, and Pyewacket, an Andrews 70, are the largest.

In the multihull division, Mighty Merloe, a 60 foot trimaran, will likely be the first boat to finish the Islands Race. The 2016 course was shortened due to storms throughout Southern California, but if the weather cooperates this year, Mighty Merloe will focus on improving their elapsed time record from 2015, which was a brisk 7 hours, 45 minutes, and 42 seconds.

The overall monohull Islands Race winner for the past two years Varuna, a 46 foot Rogers, skippered by Chris Hemans from Balboa Yacht Club. Varunas corrected time was 6 hours, 55 minutes and 44 seconds on the shortened course.

Skipper Tim Fuller from San Diego Yacht Club has participated in the Islands Race numerous times on his J/125, Resolute. Fuller plans to use the complexities of the Islands Race to prepare for the Transpac in July.

The Islands Race does have its challenges. First is lane positioning on the long drag race from LA around the west end of Catalina Island in a typical westerly breeze. Second is navigating the exclusion zones outside of San Clemente Island, and third is tactically anticipating the wind fill and direction on the last leg to Point Loma.

After narrowly missing the overall title last year by a margin of just one minute, Fuller has his eyes set on the overall title for 2017.

Wayne Terry, SDYC Staff Commodore, is once again co-chairing the race along with Daniel Geissmann from Newport Harbor Yacht Club. The annual Islands Race is a tune-up precursor to this years Cabo and Transpac Races. We hope everyone participating in this years event enjoys a fun, fast and most importantly, safe race.

SDYC will host the award ceremony on the clubhouse main deck at 3pm on Saturday, February 25 with food and drinks for competitors starting at 2pm.

Event details Tracking

Source: Emily Willhoft, SDYC

More here:

Getting ready for upcoming Islands Race - Scuttlebutt Sailing News

Logistical hitches hamper voting in Sangihe Islands – Jakarta Post

Posted on by

Bad weather has obstructed the delivery of election materials to the isolated regency of Sangihe Islands in North Sulawesi, delaying voting in two districts, namely Nusa Tabukan and Marore Islands.

Sangihe Islands General Elections Commission (KPU) head Elsye Sinadia said the Sabuk 51 vessel carrying the equipment and for Nusa Tabukan was predicted to arrive on Wednesday afternoon.

We have received information from the captain that the ship is expected to arrive in Nusa Tabukan at 5 p.m. local time, she said on Wednesday.

Good to go Ballot boxes for regional elections in Sangihe Islands regency are prepared on the deck of a ship, which will carry them to Nusa Tabukan and Marore Islands districts on early Saturday.(JP/Eva Aruperes)

Elsye said that in Marore Islands, Matutuang village was the only one that had not yet received election equipment. Should the logistics arrive in Matutuang by 10 a.m., voting will still be done as scheduled. As for voting in Nusa Tabukan, we will decide about it in a plenary meeting at noon, she went on.

Nusa Tabukan has five villages with nine polling stations for the 2,455 voters registered on its voter list. Meanwhile, four polling stations will be opened for 1,093 registered voters living in three villages across the district of Marore Islands.

Sangihe Islands is one of 101 regions scheduled to hold regional elections on Wednesday. (ebf)

More here:

Logistical hitches hamper voting in Sangihe Islands - Jakarta Post

Scientific Panel Says Editing Heritable Human Genes Could Be OK In The Future – NPR

Posted on by

Editing human genes that would be passed on for generations could make sense if the diseases are serious and the right safeguards are in places, a scientific panel says.

Scientists could be allowed to make modifications in human DNA that can be passed down through subsequent generations, the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine say.

Such a groundbreaking step should only be considered after more research and then only be conducted under tight restrictions, the academies write in a highly anticipated report released Tuesday. Such work should be reserved to prevent serious diseases and disabilities, it says.

The academies determined that new gene-editing techniques had made it reasonable to pursue such controversial experiments down the road, though not quite yet.

"It is not ready now, but it might be safe enough to try in the future," R. Alta Charo, a bioethicist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who co-chaired the committee, said. "And if certain conditions are met, it might be permissible to try it."

That conclusion counters a long-standing taboo on making changes in genes in human sperm, eggs or embryos because such alterations would be inherited by future generations. That taboo has been in place partly because of fears that mistakes could inadvertently create new diseases, which could then become a permanent part of the human gene pool.

Another concern is that this kind of genetic engineering could be used to make genetic modifications for nonmedical reasons.

For example, scientists could theoretically try to create designer babies, in which parents attempt to select the traits of their children to make them smarter, taller, better athletes or to have other supposedly superior attributes.

Nothing like that is currently possible. But even the prospect raises fears about scientists essentially changing the course of evolution and creating people who are considered genetically superior, conjuring up the kind of dystopian future described in movies and books like Aldous Huxley's Brave New World.

"These kinds of scenarios used to be science fiction; they used to be seen as far-off hypotheticals," says Marcy Darnovsky, who runs the Center for Genetics and Society, a genetic watchdog group. "But actually, right now, I think they're urgent social justice questions."

She says, "we're going to be creating a world in which the already privileged and affluent can use these high-tech procedures to make children who either have some biological advantages" or are perceived to have biological advantages. "And the scenario that plays out is not a pretty one."

But Charo says the report clearly states that any attempt to create babies from sperm, eggs or embryos that have had their DNA edited could only be tried someday under very tightly controlled conditions and only to prevent devastating medical disorders.

"We said, 'Use it for serious diseases and serious conditions only period,'" Charo says. "We simply said, 'No enhancement.' "

But Darnovsky is skeptical that line will hold. "I don't think there's any way to keep that genie in the bottle," he says.

The report, however, was praised by many scientists.

"It's important to be extraordinarily cautious on technologies that could leave a permanent mark on the human population for all generations to come," says Eric Lander, who runs the Broad Institute at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University. "But it's important to try to help people. I think they've been very thoughtful about how you should balance those things."

The report acknowledges that it may be difficult in the future to draw a line between using gene-editing to prevent or treat disease and using it for enhancement. Gene-editing designed to prevent or treat the muscle disease muscular dystrophy, for example, could theoretically be used to try to make healthy people stronger.

Prominent Harvard geneticist George Church agrees. "The report is very clearly broad," he says. "It could include a lot of things people consider enhancement. I think it will be case by case and there will be some people will be consider enhancement that some people will consider preventive medicine."

For example, if scientists figure out how to makes changes that boost thinking abilities to stave off dementia in Alzheimer's patients by making them slightly above average or considerably above average, he says, "that might be considered enhancement or it might be considered preventive medicine."

Scientists have been able to edit the DNA in the cells of humans and other creatures for decades. But the academies commissioned the report after scientists developed powerful new gene-editing techniques in recent years, such as CRISPR-Cas9, that make it much easier and faster.

That raised the possibility that gene editing might be used to treat many diseases and possibly even to prevent many devastating disorders from occurring in the first place by editing out genetic mutations in sperm, eggs and embryos. That could potentially prevent a wide range of diseases, including breast cancer, Tay-Sachs, sickle cell anemia, cystic fibrosis and Huntington's disease.

As a result, the academies assembled a 21-member committee of scientists, bioethicists, lawyers, patient advocates, biotech entrepreneurs and others to conduct a far-reaching investigation that involved more than year of study.

The resulting report stresses that because the technology is so new, it would be unsafe for anyone to even begin studies to try to create babies from sperm, eggs or embryos that have had their DNA edited before conducting much more research.

The committee also says no clinical trials of gene editing should be allow unless:

"It would be essential for this research to be approached with caution, and for it to proceed with broad public input," the 261-page report states.

The report notes that the Food and Drug Administration is barred from reviewing "research in which a human embryo is intentionally created or modified to include a heritable genetic modification." Federal funding of such research is also prohibited.

Many other countries have signed an international convention prohibiting this kind of gene editing.

But the report aims to provide guidance for those countries where it's not prohibited or in those where the prohibitions would be lifted. The FDA ban, for example, could expire or be reversed.

Continued here:

Scientific Panel Says Editing Heritable Human Genes Could Be OK In The Future - NPR

Penn gene therapy pioneer teams up with FAST in race … – Newswise – Newswise (press release)

Posted on by

Newswise Downers Grove, Ill. (Feb. 14, 2017) A pioneer on the frontier of genetic medicine and his team at one of the nations top-five medical research schools have joined forces with FAST (Foundation for Angelman Syndrome Therapeutics) to develop a treatment for the rare disorder Angelman syndrome.

Researcher James M. Wilson, M.D., Ph.D., has been working for three decades to develop effective strategies to treat and cure genetic diseases. Wilson directs the Orphan Disease Center (ODC) in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, which focuses on making rare disease research a priority.

The partnership with FAST is a natural.

Angelman syndrome is a neuro-genetic disorder affecting one in every 15,000 individuals, totaling about 490,000 people worldwide. It is often misdiagnosed as autism or cerebral palsy. AS is generally diagnosed in children within their first two years of life and is characterized by debilitating seizures, balance and motor impairments, and a lack of speech. But Angelman syndrome is not a degenerative disease. Rather, it is caused by a lack of function of a single gene, and scientists like Wilson believe that symptoms of the disorder could be reversed using gene therapy.

FAST is a nonprofit organization founded by Paula Evans, an Illinois mother whose daughter was diagnosed with Angelman syndrome. FAST raises money to fuel cutting-edge research and takes an active role in drug development to treat, and ultimately cure, the disorder. Through Evans leadership, FAST has built relationships with researchers at multiple universities. Wilson and Penns Orphan Disease Center is the latest research laboratory to join the FAST team.

FAST will provide funding to Wilson and his team to develop an effective gene therapy strategy for the treatment of Angelman syndrome.

By combining the Orphan Disease Centers experience in novel therapeutics with the tremendous progress made by FAST and its families, caregivers and scientists, Wilson said, we have set the stage for a very aggressive and exciting research and development plan.

FASTs partnership with Wilson and his team is an important milestone for the Angelman community. Wilson has emerged as a leader in the field of gene therapy and continues to be at the forefront of genetic innovation. Two years ago, Wilson was recognized as one of 12 leading pioneers in cell and gene research with the Pioneer Award given by Human Gene Therapy, a peer-reviewed journal of the medical research community. George Dickson of the University of London, Surrey, recently heralded Wilsons work, saying: His unparalleled contributions to the adenoviral and AAV vector fields over more than 25 years have been profound and seminal.

Wilson has focused his lab on the development of novel virus-like particles called vectors that can carry replacement genes into the body, one of which has been used to treat a rare form of pancreatitis and became the first gene therapy product approved in the Western hemisphere. The ODC is currently developing novel gene therapy approaches for more than 20 rare diseases.

Wilsons decision to take on Angelman syndrome as his next project is significant news for the gene therapy community and families affected by Angelman syndrome.

All of the board members of FAST are parents who are working toward breakthrough treatments for our children, said FAST Chief Scientific Officer Dr. Allyson Berent. To have an accomplished visionary researcher developing a potential gene therapy treatment for AS indicates we are closer than ever to our ultimate goal. Dr. Wilson and the team at Penn have such a successful track record in the field of gene therapy, and we are beyond enthusiastic that, for our children, the time is now.

Wilson agrees that there are reasons to be hopeful. We are entering a remarkable era of gene therapy research that will accelerate its development, he said. After 30 years of science, we have the technology and know-how to safely and efficiently transfer genes into human cells. Our goal is to develop a gene therapy for AS to replace the gene in children who are lacking a functional copy.

###

About FAST FAST (Foundation for Angelman Syndrome Therapeutics) is a Section 501(c)(3) nonprofit research organization singularly focused on funding research that holds the greatest promise of treating Angelman syndrome. FAST is the largest, non-governmental funder of Angelman-specific research. Paula Evans, the mother of a young girl with Angelman syndrome, founded FAST in 2008. The foundation is based in Downers Grove, Ill.

The cost of developing gene therapy is significant. FAST has launched an aggressive fundraising campaign to support this development program. Please visit the Cure Angelman Now initiative at CureAngelman.org to see how you can play a role in curing Angelman syndrome.

Angelman Syndrome Angelman syndrome (AS) is a rare neuro-genetic disorder that affects roughly one in 15,000 individuals about 490,000 people worldwide. Individuals with Angelman syndrome generally have balance issues, motor impairment and debilitating seizures. Some people with AS never walk. Most do not speak. Anxiety and disturbed sleep can be serious challenges among those with AS. While individuals with Angelman syndrome have a normal lifespan, they require continuous care and are unable to live independently. Typical characteristics of AS are not usually evident at birth. People with the disorder have feeding difficulties as infants and noticeable delayed development around 6-12 months of age. They need intensive therapies to help develop functional skills. In most cases, Angelman syndrome isn't genetically inherited. AS affects every race and both genders. It is often misdiagnosed as autism or cerebral palsy. For more information about Angelman syndrome, please visit CureAngelman.org.

Read this article:

Penn gene therapy pioneer teams up with FAST in race ... - Newswise - Newswise (press release)

Top Science Organization Cautiously Supports Genetically Engineering Humans – Gizmodo

Posted on by

Human mesenchymal stem cells (Image: Rose Spear/Flickr)

New gene editing methods like CRISPR/Cas9 have given scientists unprecedented potential to edit human DNA. But how should researchers in the field actually use these methods, especially when editing traits that can be passed down to children? Should they be used to cure disease? Should they be used to enhance features that arent necessary for our survival?

Were definitely far from seeing X-men mutants and genetically modified superhumans from whatever dystopian young adult novel you may be reading, especially in the United States where lawmakers passed legislation preventing government money from funding this kind of research. That hasnt stopped researchers in other countries like China from creating gene-edited embryos, which has some scientists very concerned. Today, the National Academies of Sciences and Medicine released a major new report and recommendations to ensure any such research done stateside in the future is performed responsibly and ethically.

The implicit message is that whether we like it or not, a future of gene-edited humans is on its way.

Although scientists have been able to chop up DNA for decades, precise new tools like CRISPR/Cas9 make it easier than ever to experiment with gene-edited livestock, or using gene-edited cells to help fight cancer in humans, for instance. But CRISPRs relative ease of use has caused many to worry about the ethical implications of germline editing, or editing traits in cells that could be passed on to later generations. A commentary published in 2015 in Nature warns that gene editing humans could have unpredictable effects on future generations.

The new National Academies report is an attempt to offer guidance both for germline editing to cure disease, as well as for enhancementmaking stronger, smarter, better humansshould the funding ban in the United States lift.

The Academies ruling on germline editing for curing inherited diseases is basically that scientists need to be very careful. The group recommends only permitting such procedures with lots of oversight, so long as researchers dont have better treatment options, know for a fact the gene theyre editing causes disease, are editing the gene to match the naturally-occurring healthy version, and perform rigorous research including clinical trials and multi-generational follow-up studies. After all, they need to ensure they havent accidentally introduced some dangerous mutation that will harm future humans.

As far as editing germline cells for human enhancement, the Academies said no wayat least, not yet. They hope to see further public discussion to make sure people are okay with what we might be doing to our species. I think its basically a lets buy some time, director of New York Universitys Division of Medical Ethics Arthur Caplan told Gizmodo. Its not inappropriate to buy some time. The techniques are new and we dont know if theyre safe. Plus, the technology isnt even close to making superbabies, although that hasnt stopped ethicists from considering the moral conundrum superbabies pose.

Caplan was concerned that the report didnt more strongly recommend testing any potential gene editing procedures in animals first, or discuss who actually owns the rights to various gene editing methods and how much they will cost. Im very worried about access, he said. Whos keeping an eye on the prices that will be charged? Will this be another repeat of the drug price problems?

Ultimately, the Academies and Caplan hope to see more communication between the scientists and the public about how we as a society feel about gene editing. The reality is the scientific community hasnt really spent enough resources thinking about how to really engage the public, said Caplan. They have to do more surveys, better outreach, use the internet more. The report is quiet about that...Weve gotta get more creative than weve been.

Update 1:55PM: Some are disappointed with the Academies statement, which approves of genetic engineering despite the cautious wording. The Center for Genetics and Society sent Gizmodo a statement including the following quote:

The recommendations and conclusions of this report are unsettling and disappointing, said Marcy Darnovsky, PhD, Executive Director of the Center for Genetics and Society. Although theyre couched in apparently cautionary language, they actually constitute a green light for proceeding with efforts to modify the human germlinethat is, to engineer the genes and traits that are passed on to future children and generations.

In December 2015, the National Academies International Summit on Human Gene Editing concluded with a statement that it would be irresponsible to proceed with human germline modification unless and until a broad societal consensus had been reached. Todays report dispenses with the idea of meaningful public participation in this profoundly consequential decision, Darnovsky said. It calls for `continued public engagement [page 146] with the details, but excludes the public from participation in deciding whether human germline modification is acceptable in the first place.

See the original post:

Top Science Organization Cautiously Supports Genetically Engineering Humans - Gizmodo

Human gene editing therapies are OK in certain cases, panel advises – Science News

Posted on by

Human gene editing to prevent genetic diseases from being passed to future generations may be permissible under certain conditions, a panel of experts says.

Altering DNA in germline cells embryos, eggs, and sperm, or cells that give rise to them may be used to cure genetic diseases for future generations, provided it is done only to correct disease or disability, not to enhance peoples health or abilities, a report issued February 14 by the National Academies of Sciences and Medicine recommends. The decision contradicts earlier recommendations by organizers of a global summit on human gene editing, who concluded that gene editing with molecular scissors such as CRISPR/Cas9 should not be used to produce babies (SN: 12/26/15, p. 12).

Heritable gene editing is not yet ready to be done in people, says Alta Charo, a bioethicist at the University of WisconsinMadison Law School who cochaired the panel. We are not trying to greenlight heritable germline editing. Were trying to find that limited set of circumstances where its use is justified by a compelling need and its application is limited to that compelling need, says Charo. Were giving it a yellow light.

National Academies reports carry no legislative weight, but do often influence policy decisions in the United States and abroad. It will be up to Congress, regulatory agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and state and local governments to implement the recommendations.

Supporters of new genetic engineering technologies hailed the decision.

It looks like the possibility of eliminating some genetic diseases is now more than a theoretical option, says Sean Tipton, a spokesman for the American Society for Reproductive Medicine in Washington, D.C. Thats what this sets up. Diseases such as cystic fibrosis and Huntingtons, which are caused by mutations in single genes, could someday be corrected by gene editing. More complex diseases or disorders caused by changes in multiple genes, such as autism or schizophrenia, probably would not be the focus of genome editing.

Others worry that allowing any tinkering with the germline will inevitably lead to designer babies and other social ills. It raises fears of stigmatization of people with disabilities, exacerbation of inequalities between people who can afford such therapies and those who cant, and even a new kind of eugenics, critics say.

Once you approve any form of human germline modification you really open the door to all forms, says Marcy Darnovsky, executive director of the Center for Genetics and Society in Berkeley, Calif.

Panelist Jeffrey Kahn, a bioethicist at Johns Hopkins University, says the door to heritable gene therapy remains closed until stringent requirements can be met. Its frankly more of a knock on the door, he said at the public presentation of the report.

The report also changes the debate from whether to allow germline editing to instead focus on the line between therapy and enhancement, Darnovsky says. Im feeling very unsettled and disappointed by what they are recommending.

Several clinical trials in the United States, China and other countries are already under way to do gene editing in people who have cancer or other diseases. But those therapies do not involve altering germline cells; instead they fix defects or make alterations to DNA in other body, or somatic, cells. The panel recommended that such somatic cell therapies should also be restricted to treating diseases, not allowing enhancements.

Researchers in the United Kingdom, Sweden and China have already done gene editing on early human embryos in the lab. Recent clinical trials in Mexico and Ukraine to produce three-parent babies are also seen as altering the germline because such children carry a small amount of DNA from an egg donor (SN Online: 10/18/16). But those children dont have modifications of their nuclear DNA, where the genetic instructions that determine traits are stored.

Currently, researchers in the United States are effectively banned from conducting clinical trials that would produce heritable changes in the human genome, either by gene editing or making three-parent babies. The new recommendations could pave the way to allow such experiments.

But the panel lays out a number of hurdles that must be cleared before germline editing could move forward, ones that may be impossible to overcome, says Nita Farahany, a bioethicist at Duke Law School in Durham, N.C. Some people could read into the stringency of the requirements to think that the benefits could never outweigh the risks, she says.

One hurdle is a requirement to follow multiple generations of children who have gotten gene editing to determine whether the therapy has consequences for future generations. Researchers would never be able to guarantee that they could conduct such long-term studies, Farahany says. You cant bind your children and grandchildren to agree to be tracked by such studies.

Distinctions between therapies and enhancements are also vague. Researchers may not be able to convincingly draw lines between them, says George Church, a Harvard University geneticist who has developed CRISPR/Cas9 for a variety of purposes. Virtually everything medicine has accomplished could be considered as enhancing human life, he says. Vaccines are advancements over our ancestors. If you could tell our ancestors they could walk into a smallpox ward and not even worry about it, that would be a superpower.

But the new technology may make it harder to enhance humans than drugs do, says Charo. Gene-editing technologies are so precise and specific that someone who does not carry a disease-causing mutation would probably not benefit from the technology, she says.

See the rest here:

Human gene editing therapies are OK in certain cases, panel advises - Science News

Scarborough’s Futurist loses battle for listing to prevent demolition – The Stage

Posted on by

Campaigners hoping to save the Futurist Theatre in Scarborough from demolition have vowed to fight a decision that prevents the building being listed.

As reported by The Stage in January, campaigners had hoped that an application from the council to make the building immune from listing would be rejected by the government. A certificate of immunity from listing means the venue could not be statutorily listed for a period of five years and could therefore be demolished.

Scarborough Council approved 4 million of funding to demolish the theatre earlier this year. Although there are no plans for a replacement development, theme park Flamingo Land has previously expressed an interest in the site.

Historic England, which oversees the listing of buildings, confirmed to The Stage the government was minded to approve a certificate of immunity from listing for the Futurist in Scarborough on the advice of Historic England.

Nick Bridgland, listing team leader in the north said: We realise that there is much local interest in and affection for the Futurist. We carefully assessed the Futurist for listing and advised that because the building has been extensively altered over the years, it does not have the special historic or architectural interest to meet the criteria for national listing.

There will now be a statutory period of 28 days to allow for review, after which a final decision will be made by the government.

Responding, the Theatres Trust said it was considering appealing the move.

Local support for the building has grown strong over the last few months and campaigners are continuing to battle to save the Futurist. We support the Save the Futurist campaign group and other stakeholders who would like to see the Futurist Theatre restored for cultural use, it said.

It added: [The Futurist] could provide a large-scale theatre for the presentation of musicals, comedy, music and drama in Yorkshire, thanks to its capacity and flytower, and would be an immense cultural and economic benefit to the people of Scarborough.

View post:

Scarborough's Futurist loses battle for listing to prevent demolition - The Stage

Elon Musk: Automation Will Force Governments to Introduce Universal Basic Income – Futurism

Posted on by

Recently, Elon Musk had the chance to share his thoughts onuniversal basic income (UBI)at the World Government Summit in Dubai. At the Summit,Musk had the opportunity to talk about the future, and the challenges the world will face in the next hundred years including artificial intelligence (AI), automation, and the job displacement expected to come with it.

When asked about the challenges civilization is set to face in the near future,Musk beganby noting the threat of artificial intelligences that surpass humanity.

He stated, deep artificial intelligence, or artificial general intelligence, where you can have artificial intelligence that is much smarter than the smartest human on Earth, this is a dangerous situation.

He continued by noting the importance of advancing our research into AI with caution: I think we need to be very careful in how we adopt artificial intelligence and that we make sure that researchers dont get carried away. Sometimes what will happen is a scientist will get so engrossed in their work that they dont really realize the ramifications of what theyre doing.

Musk also relayed concerns thatautonomous technology will impact jobs, and he noted that we will likely have intelligent, massive-scale automation for transportation relatively soonwithin the next few decades, in fact: Twenty years is a short period of time to have something like 12-15 percent of the workforce be unemployed, he said, pointing out the extent of how automation will disrupt car-based transportation specifically.

However, displacement due to automation isnt just limited to transportation, it will sweep across a number of industries, and Musk argues that the government must introduce a UBI program in order to compensate for this. I dont think were going to have a choice, he said. I think its going to be necessary. There will be fewer and fewer jobs that a robot cannot do better.

Musk believes, however, that the issue goes deeper:

As the UBI discussion continues, various nations and institutions have already began their own pilot programs to test the model. Finland, for example, started its pioneering UBI program this year, which was launched by the federal social security institution,Kela. It will give out 560 ($587) a month, tax free, to 2,000 Finns that were randomly selected. Similarly,eBay founder Pierre Omidyars philanthropic investment firm has given $493,000 to help fund a universal basic income program in Kenya.

In a couple of years (or less?), there might be enough data from these experiments for us to consider just how effective a solutionUBI truly isand whether or not Musk is right.

See original here:

Elon Musk: Automation Will Force Governments to Introduce Universal Basic Income - Futurism

DARPA: We’re Moving to Merge Humans and Machines – Futurism

Posted on by

If You Cant Beat Them

Without a doubt, computers and machines are besting humans in many ways thanks to developments in artificial intelligence (AI). AIs have beaten their human counterparts at everything from games likeGoandpokertodriving safelyand treating illnesses. Clearly, intelligent machines are increasingly becoming better than humansat so many things, and as the old saying goes, if you cant beat themmerge with them.

Given that AI is expected to surpass humankind at an unprecedented rate,that just might be the best thing we can do, and itsthe idea behind Elon Musks neural lace, an unconventional and highly controversial brain-computer interface. That were even considering such a device highlights this necessity for a symbiosis between humans and machines. This week, speaking at the World Government Summit in Dubai, the Tesla and SpaceX CEO and founder raised this point once again: I do think there is a path to having some sort of merger of biological intelligence and machine intelligence.

Musk explained:

To some degree, we are already cyborgs. You think of the digital tools that you have, the applications that you have. You can ask a question and instantly get an answer from Google. You already have a digital tertiary layer. I say tertiary because you think of the animal brain or the primal brain, and then the cortex, the thinking brain, and then your digital self as the third layer.

The potential for this human-machine merger isnt lost on DARPA, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Defense. There are a couple of very interesting things happening as we speak facilitating humans and machines working together in a very different way, said Justin Sanchez, director of DARPAs Biological Technologies Office, in an interview with Computer World.

Indeed, we are already seeing this to a certain extent with the latest developments in exoskeleton technology. We now have smart exoskeletons that help paralyzed people walk again or improve the strength and enduranceof the average person.I think the recent science and technology developments were making at DARPA, as well as the embracing of physiology and A.I., is enabling us to set up the conditions for profound changes on how humans and machines can work together, Sanchez added. We are giving our physiology the opportunity to work with machines in a different way.

DARPA researchers are developing implantable devices that can perform computing functions similar to a desktop or laptop computer. Sanchez even noted that they have researchers working on the possibility of a human-computer interface using devices and chips that neednt be implanted in the body. Another potential technology is a pair of smart contact lenses that allow soldiers to see what a drone sees from above.

Of course, while the technological possibilities are already here, there are other things that need to be considered, such as what these enhanced capabilities would mean for humanity in general. We deeply feel that we cant do this work in a vacuum, Sanchez said. We need to consider all aspects the moment we try to even start thinking about science and technology in this space. Theres a responsibility that goes along with this.

Read more here:

DARPA: We're Moving to Merge Humans and Machines - Futurism

Soon, Pig-Free Bacon Might Be on Your Breakfast Plate – Futurism – Futurism

Posted on by

Animal-Free Meat

The day when even vegans can enjoy a crispy slice of baconis closer than ever as a team of researchers just published a paper in the journal Scientific Reports outlining advancements made in lab-grown meat, specifically from pig cells.

Their paper focused on two particular breakthroughs in testing. The first highlightedthe transformation of adult stem cells from livestock into a pluripotent state so that they could be developed into muscle that would be ideal for cooking. The other was learning how to nurture tissue growth without the use of animal serum, the liquidin which blood cells and platelets float. Animal serum was a key ingredient for the development of tissues in other efforts to grow meat in a lab, but these scientists found a way to create a synthetic formula that has similar components.

Both findings increase the feasibility of creatingmeat that is 100 percent animal free.Ideally, we believe that our process can be much more efficient than (feed) consumption by cattle because were only producing the product that the consumer wants muscle, explains Nicholas Genovese, who authored the paper.

Even with lab-grown meats on the horizon, the worlds livestock industry doesnt seem to be the least bit threatened, nor should they. Taste, cost, and a general reluctance on behalf of the general population would likely be the biggest barriers to widespread adoption should these artificially grown slabs of beef and pork ever make it to the market.

However, the goal right now is simply to produce these animal-free cuts; replicating key elements of meat such as flavor, smell, and texture are concerns for a later time, as is finding a way to get the public to accept cultured meat as a preferred alternative to the real deal.

The current consensus is that lab-grown meats will still be more expensive, and it will take at least half a decade before any real benefits of artificially created meat become evident. Once that happens, however, the cost of producing muscle tissue and bringing it to consumers may actually prove to be significantly cheaper than raising animals and getting them to the market. Growing only muscle tissue means minimizing the logistics surrounding maintaining livestock, such as facility use, storage, and transport. It will also require fewer resources, such as water and land, which will translate tolower greenhouse-gas emissions.

Ultimately, as more advancements are made in this field, lab-grown meat might prove to be better for humans. In a few years, we could see nutrition-packed, lab-grown meats that are cleaner, safer, and healthier to eat. Hopefully, by then, theyll also taste just as good as the real thing.

More here:

Soon, Pig-Free Bacon Might Be on Your Breakfast Plate - Futurism - Futurism

President Trump Wants to Send Humans Back to the Moon by 2020 – Futurism

Posted on by

The Economic Development of Space

Former President, Barack Obama is a big advocate of science. During his term, he was a vocal supporter of the burgeoning commercial space industry and supportedprivate and government efforts to send humans to Mars by 2030.

We have set a clear goal vital to the next chapter of Americas story in space: sending humans to Mars by the 2030s and returning them safely to Earth, with the ultimate ambition to one day remain there for an extended time, Obama said in an open letter he wrote last year.

Under Obama, the future of space exploration was bright. So where do all these new policies and initiatives supporting distant space exploration stand under Donald Trumps presidency? Based on a report by Politico, it looks like its back to low-Earth orbit.

In the report, Trump advisers expressed support for sending humans back to the Moon, almost five decades after the US managed to achieve this great feat. The focus, they said, should be the large-scale economic development of space, which means limiting space exploration to the area betweenour planet and the Moon, called the cislunar region.

The direction the administration follows is a more entrepreneurial approach to space, and theyre pretty aggressive about it. Theres a strong focus on leveraging space to create new industries and jobs, with the goal of creating a lucrative space economy, and staking what Trump calls a de-facto claim on the moon.

Trump is bent on dominating space, but his teams approach is centered on privatizing the whole endeavor, calling it the biggest and most public privatization effort America has ever conducted. Following this, theyre targeting private rockets to shuttle civilian astronauts to the Moon by 2020.

While this plan doesnt completely shut down efforts for commercial space flight (in fact, theyre likely to benefit from it), the feasibility of the timeline raises concerns. Two of the biggest private spaceflight companies are barely ready to achieve this goal. Jeff Bezos Blue Origin rockets, scheduled to bring astronauts into space next year, are far from perfect and are already suffering delays. And Elon Musks SpaceX is still reeling from two consecutive rocket explosions. Theres also the matter of the administration wanting to claim property rights on the Moon, which would violate the UN Outer Space Treaty.

All things considered, one glaringly absent element in this whole effort to make America great again in space is the science. This kind of approach to space exploration will be counterintuitive for a scientific field that thrives on continued innovation and discovery. This could ultimately put missions for long term space exploration to a disappointing halt, and put important exploratory initiatives like the James Webb Space Telescope (scheduled for 2018), the next Mars rover (slated for 2020), or sending a lander to Jupiters Europa on the back burner.

Go here to see the original:

President Trump Wants to Send Humans Back to the Moon by 2020 - Futurism

US falls in economic freedom index – The Hill

Posted on by

The United States has slipped to its lowest level in world rankings of economic freedom, according an annual index released Wednesday by the conservative Heritage Foundation.

In the latestreport, the U.S. ranks 17th out of 180 countries with an economic freedom score of 75.1 out of 100. Last year, the U.S. ranked number 11.

Hong Kong, Singapore and New Zealand topped the list, with respective scores of 89.8, 88.6 and 83.7. Other countries that placed ahead of the U.S. included Canada, Taiwan and Britain, among others.

The Heritage report said countries with scores between 80-100 are considered economically free, while countries scores between 70-79.9 are considered mostly free.

Individuals in those countries saw incomes at more than double the average levels in other countries and more than five times higher than the incomes of people living in countries with repressed economies.

The conservative political think tanks report claims the substantial expansion in the size and scope of the U.S. government, increased regulatory and tax burdens in many sectors, and the loss of trust and confidence that has accompanied a growing perception of "cronyism" has severely undermined Americas globalcompetitiveness.

Heritage said a low score could mean less take home pay for Americans, more difficulties for entrepreneurs and greater uncertainty for businesses.

Still, the 2017 index found that 103 countries the majority of which are less developed or emerging economies showed advancements in economic freedom over the past year, with 49 countries achieving their highest economic freedom scores ever, including China and Russia.

But the report said 4.5 billion people 65 percent of the worlds population are still suffering from lack of economic freedom.

More than half of these people live in just two countries, China and India, where advancement toward greater economic freedom has been both limited and uneven, the report says.

In the two most populous economies, structural reforms in a few key sectors have sometimes boosted growth, but the governments have failed to institutionalize open environments that promote broad-based and sustainable improvements in the economic well-being of the population as a whole.

Here is the original post:

US falls in economic freedom index - The Hill