Reflections on the CNN Healthcare Debate – Townhall

|

Posted: Feb 13, 2017 10:48 AM

The CNN healthcare debate between Senators Ted Cruz & Bernie Sanders on February 7 was dubbed a success by the network, ranking first in its cable time slot. With healthcare once again thrust into the headlines, and with two big personalities squaring off, this was certainly the marquee event, as was advertised. It turned out to be what one would have expected; a clash of ideologies, but a deeper look into what was said, and specifically what wasnt, turned out to be most revealing.

Senator Sanders positions contained very little substance as he clung to his talking points which reflected his belief that healthcare was a right and that the government needed to provide it for everyone. Senator Cruz countered with several lines of attack, first giving an explanation regarding his interpretation of the definition of rights, maintaining that government giving something to individuals, in this case healthcare, did not constitute a right. He asked why would we want to give the government MORE control over Americans healthcare, when they have done such a miserable job managing things up to this point? Cruz concluded with the point that individuals are better at making healthcare decisions for themselves than the government. When the government does so, as in socialized countries, it leads to rationing- the government deciding what kind of care a patient may receive.

It was interesting that both men agreed that a big part of the problem stemmed from greed and excessive influence of special interests. Insurance and pharmaceutical companies were specifically singled out. Where they differed was their approach to solving this problem, retreating to their respective corners of the ring, with government control on one side versus a free market solution on the other.

The Senators missed the biggest problem in healthcare however, which is not surprising because everyone else has as well - the high cost of care. The healthcare reform debate has focused exclusively on insurance coverage and access. What plan will the GOP create to replace Obamacare? Although a market based approach to healthcare insurance as is being offered by the GOP will result in substantial savings, the current cost of healthcare is unnecessarily high and will continue to be a strain on the American economy. There is a way out of this, but it does not appear to be on anyones radar.

The third major special interest, which went unmentioned in this debate is the hospital industry. Obamacare accelerated a trend which was to drive healthcare into the hospitals- the costliest place of delivery. It is folly to believe that taking an approach which focuses only on making insurance more affordable without doing something about the high costs of the healthcare itself, will have a significant impact on overall costs. Why should services be 5-10 times as expensive in the hospital as they would in free standing facilities? It defies logic.

There are many other factors that contribute to the high cost of healthcare that also need to be addressed. The third party payer system hides the true cost of healthcare, which really is not expensive when all of the overhead created by government and insurance bureaucracy is removed. Medical malpractice and frivolous lawsuits has created an adversarial relationship between doctors and patients giving rise to the practice of defensive medicine- performing an extra test or procedure, just in case something rare could have been missed. This practice results in annual costs between $200- $600 billion of mostly unnecessary spending that could be returned to patients.

The other major disappointment with this debate were the questions from the audience. CNN undoubtedly had an agenda in the selection of the questions and those chosen to ask them. It appeared that they wished to showcase typical victims the ones who would lose their coverage if Obamacare is repealed. While this is understandably a concern for millions, and people are nervous, it might have been more illuminating to hear questions about other problems that are damaging our healthcare system and how Washington plans to deal with these issues. CNN squandered an opportunity to bring a doctor into the debate; one who was sitting in the first row and happens to be an expert in healthcare information technology and its problems. He was prepared with an important and insightful question but CNN thought otherwise.

In this latest round of the healthcare fight in America, a prudent person would realize that the so-called experts on healthcare- the policy wonks, the politicians, the healthcare economists, didnt do so well the last time. To go back to what Senator Cruz said in this debate- why would we want to give them another chance at it? It is time to hear from the real experts in healthcare; those who have had to deal with the misery created by these faux experts. It is astounding how once again, the medical community has been excluded from this debate. CNN had a chance to begin to change the conversation by bringing a doctor into the discussion, but chose not to. They simply blew it.

Trump White House Files Paperwork For En Banc Hearing At Ninth Circuit Over Executive Order

Go here to see the original:

Reflections on the CNN Healthcare Debate - Townhall

Vatican Updates Health Care Charter – National Catholic Register

Vatican | Feb. 13, 2017

New versions purpose is to remove question marks from modern ethical concerns.

VATICAN CITY The Vatican has issued an updated version of their charter for health care workers, removing question marks from modern ethical concerns such as euthanasia and the creation of human-animal chimeras by offering a clear set of guidelines.

In the past 20 years, there have been two situations, two events that have made the production of a new health care charter necessary, professor Antonio Gioacchino Spagnolo told CNA Feb. 6.

The first, he said, is scientific progress. In these 20 years, there has been a lot of scientific progress in the field of the beginning of life as well as in the phase of the end of life, in the context of living.

But alongside advancements in science, the Churchs magisterium has also produced several texts dealing with new and current issues, offering an authoritative take on how they should be handled.

The charter, he said, encompasses a sort of collection of the various positions there have been, the various pronouncements, keeping the progress of biomedicine in mind.

Spagnolo, director of the Institute of Bioethics and Medical Humanities at the Faculty of Medicine and Surgery at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Rome, spoke to journalists at the Feb. 6 presentation of the new charter and played a key role in drafting the new text.

A first edition of the charter was published in 1994, but in the wake of broad scientific advancements and various updates in the Churchs magisterium, the Holy See, last Monday, rolled out the new version of the charter for health care workers.

Released to coincide with the annual World Day of the Sick celebrations taking place in Lourdes, France, the updated charter includes all magisterial documents published since 1994 and will be sent to bishops conferences around the world.

At roughly 150 pages, including the index, the charter is structured much like the old edition and is divided into three parts: Procreation, Life and Death

The section on procreation covers everything from contraception, in vitro fertilization and the scientific use of embryos, including freezing them, as well as newer topics such as the mixing of human and animal gametes, the gestation of human embryos in animal or artificial wombs, cloning, asexual reproduction and parthenogenesis.

In the Life section, topics covered are all of the health events that are in some way connected to living, Spagnolo said, including vaccinations, preventative care, drug testing, transplants, abortion and anencephalic fetuses, as well as gene therapy and regenerative medicine.

The social part of the charter also covers areas specifically linked to poverty, such as access to medicines and the availability of new technologies in developing countries or countries that are politically and economically unstable. Rare and neglected diseases are also covered in the new text.

In his comments to CNA, Spagnolo commented on recent cases the updated charter covers, including the creation of human-pig chimeras, as well as the case of an elderly woman with dementia who was held down by her family while being euthanized.

The first case refers to the recent high-level scientific research project that culminated in the creation of chimeras, or organisms made from two different species.

While the project initially began by conducting the experiment on rats and mice, at the end of January, it culminated with the human-pig mix, marking the first time a case had been reported in which human stem cells had begun to grow inside another species.

In the experiment, which appeared in the scientific journal Cell, researchers from various institutes, including Stanford and the Salk Institute in California, injected pig embryos with human stem cells when they were just a few days old and monitored their development for 28 days to see if more human cells would be generated.

Human cells inside a number of the embryos had begun to develop into specialized tissue precursors; however, the success rate of the human cells was overall low, with the majority failing to produce human cells.

Commenting on the case, Spagnolo said this type of hybridization between human and animal cells was primarily done to garner more scientific information, but cautioned that science cannot be indifferent to how the information is used.

If a scientist decides to mingle human cells with those of another species in order to create some sort of hybrid being, this is, of course, something that cant be accepted, because in some way it means using the generation of a life as an instrument to reach ones own ends.

However, if its done for a purpose other than generating alternate beings, such as growing human organs for transplant, Spagnolo said this would be acceptable.

One thing thats already being proposed, he said, is the possibility of xenografts, i.e., tissue grafts or organ transplants from a donor that is a different species than the recipient.

The idea of doing this, Spagnolo said, is to inoculate pigs with human cells, allowing the organs of the pig to receive human antigens, so when a transplant were done with a liver or heart from the pig inside a (human being), there wouldnt be the rejection that there is normally doing it with other species.

Spagnolo said that using the hybrid cells for organ or tissue transplant is acceptable because to transfer a human cell to a pig doesnt mean creating a life.

Rather, it allows the pig to have a genetic patrimony similar to that of a human being to then be able to use the organs to help people, he said, emphasizing the fact that its not pig cells being injected into human beings, but vice versa.

So to make a good, informed decision involves first of all seeing what type of experiments are being done, deciding from that whether its acceptable or not, then looking at what one intends to produce, what are the objectives one intends to reach.

Pointing to the case of an elderly woman in her 80s who was held down by her relatives as her doctors euthanized her.

The woman was not consulted and woke up as the doctor was trying to give the injection. When she fought the procedure, her family members were asked to hold her down while the injection was completed.

When medicine no longer does what it should, [it] completely alters the doctor-patient relationship, Spagnolo said.

He pointed to a bill that is currently on the table in Italy that would effectively legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide, requiring doctors to act on the advanced statements of their patients in this regard, and prohibiting them from conscientious objection.

This bill, as well as the case of the woman in the Netherlands, illustrates the difficulty of advance statements, Spagnolo said, explaining that if someone makes an advance statement and later decides against it, the fact of having said it before is used and is done (by) drugging the patient.

See original here:

Vatican Updates Health Care Charter - National Catholic Register

Healthcare industry, or consumer health industry? – Healthcare IT News

Editor's note: This is part one of a four-part series that will be published throughout the week.

Consumer behavior has dramatically changed with the introduction of digital and mobile mediums. This is a change that has affected many industries and, while healthcare has been slower to adapt than others, were now shifting our focus to embrace consumerism.

Traditionally, healthcare has relied on connections among healthcare providers, payers, pharmaceutical or medical device companies and other auxiliary players, while still requiring the patient to manage their own care. The fragmentation of care caused by this delivery model has led to high-cost treatment rather than the prevention of disease through systematic, patient-specific interventions.

Legislation such as the Affordable Care and HITECH acts, as well as MACRA and increasing global sensitivities to a fragmented healthcare culture, have contributed to the shift toward value-based, consumer-focused care.

Under these initiatives, the healthcare industry has officially shifted focus to the patient while establishing a coordinated, cohesive effort among all health industry players to deliver more effective and efficient care. This model also transfers some responsibility of healthcare back to the patient, enabling them to make decisions for their own healthcare across various touchpoints. The high-level motivation behind granting patients access to their health information is the idea that involving them will make them more aware of their health risks and enable them to become more invested in improving their health.

Projections of global healthcare spend based off historical and current trends indicate an increase from 6 percent of a countrys GDP to almost 9 percent in 2030 and even 14 percent by 2060. The industry cant sustain that forecast, and providers, vendors and payers alike are being forced to find new ways to manage cost and mitigate risk.

Our industry is diligently working to understand and address the evolution of the healthcare consumer. However, it is still a reactive response. Instead, we need to proactively and strategically prepare for and manage the evolution.

The proliferation of smart devices, apps and wearables have the potential to empower individuals to manage their health before intervention is needed. Looking at the demographics of the U.S. market today, millennials have surpassed baby boomers as the nations largest living generation, making up nearly a quarter of the U.S. population.

Millennials are also changing their healthcare consumption habits: 41 percent said they view a doctor as the best source of health information, compared with 68 percent of respondents from other generations, according to a new survey by GHG/Greyhealth Group and Kantar Health. This generation has an appetite for digital resources and consumer-oriented apps that connect their transactions to their personal health journey in real-time.

While nearly the entire acute care market is live on an electronic health record system, government entities are also investing in digital records and contributing to the advancement of the consumer-oriented healthcare industry. The U.S. Department of Defense selected Cerners EHR to connect the health information of servicemembers across the world. This relationship will help Cerner enhance our offering for global consumers and identify opportunities to enhance data exchange among devices that undergo intermittent periods of connectivity.

Health systems are augmenting their strategies, too. Many are opening retail clinics in local community centers, building micro-hospitals and additional outpatient centers or incorporating new service lines heavily predicated on community involvement like sports medicine outreach.

As payment reform places a greater emphasis on patient satisfaction and value-based outcomes, many healthcare systems have reacted by adding C-suite executives who are solely focused on the patient experience. The emerging roles in health systems covering this important topic Chief Patient Officer, Chief Experience Officer, Chief Strategy Officer are charged to better connect with their patient populations by adopting best practices from other consumer-facing sectors like electronics and the hospitality industry.

Were seeing major consumer companies such as Apple, Google and Amazon investing in healthcare, national shopping chains opening retail clinics, health systems opening grocery stores and pharmaceutical companies developing apps for patients to track symptoms and improve compliance. These are just a few of the marketplace innovations and evolutions established as a result of this great consumer behavior shift.

Were still at the forefront of healthcares consumer evolution. To address our evolving regulatory environment, changing patient expectations and the onset of value-based care, health systems need to continue to adapt and engage with their patients as consumers and understand that consumers in this space will be empowered to dictate what constitutes as value going forward.

Read the original:

Healthcare industry, or consumer health industry? - Healthcare IT News

Health care notes: Saint Thomas names women/children VP – Nashville Post (subscription)

Health Care Feb 13, 2017 Share

Also: Cumberland House sets up patient assistance fund

authors Geert De Lombaerde

The top executives of Saint Thomas Health have picked the leader of their group in charge of acquisitions, physician recruitment and development to oversee a new push coordinating women and childrens health programs.

Kristen Toth (pictured) joined Saint Thomas in early 2014 as executive director of Saint Thomas Health Alliance after a dozen years in the pharmaceutical sector. In that role, she helped craft the regional health systems business development, partnerships and service line program development. Her new title is vice president of program development for women and children and will have her oversee the planning, services, clinical processes and business practices for that line of business.

Saint Thomas runs nine hospitals as well as a network of affiliated joint ventures, medical practices, clinics and rehabilitation facilities that cover a 68-county area. The system employs more than 8,000 people.

Alcohol and drug addiction treatment provider Cumberland Heights has created a fund to help patients pay for services, courtesy of a former patient with Music Row ties.

Cumberland Heights, which treats about 2,500 people annually, set up The Timothy Cotton Fund for Patient Assistance with the proceeds of the recent $285,000 sale Cottons home on Setliff Place in East Nashville. Cotton was a longtime driver for many musical acts, including Tim McGraw, Alan Jackson and Lonestar. He died early last year and will his home to Cumberland Heights.

Tim Cotton was a generous soul who loved caring for others, said Cumberland Heights CEO Jay Crosson. His incredible donation and the Timothy Cotton Fund for Patient Assistance will help many, many people recover life from drug and alcohol addiction. Tims memory will live on at Cumberland Heights in perpetuity.

The $285,000 fund is part of Cumberland Heights endowment and will help patients unable to afford treatment or without insurance to cover its costs. Bill Branch of Life Style Real Estate Advisors brokered the sale of Cottons home and donated his commission to Cumberland Heights.

See original here:

Health care notes: Saint Thomas names women/children VP - Nashville Post (subscription)

Genetic testing provides writer, doc in-depth info – Times Record News

John Ingle , Times Record News 1:49 p.m. CT Feb. 12, 2017

Times Record News business/metro editor John Ingle, left, asks questions as Dr. Jeremy Johnson of Olney Family Clinic explains the results of Ingle's GeneMed pharmacogenetic screening. The test helps determine which medications or combinations of medications can be most effective for a patient or which to avoid, based on their specific DNA.(Photo: Torin Halsey/Times Record News)Buy Photo

Well, the good news is my prescribed medications for diabetes and high blood pressure are genetically effective for my body's make-up.

Back in January, I agreed to undergo a simple pharmacogenetic screening at Olney Family Clinic in Olney, a relatively new tool physicians there are using to aid in the treatment oftheir patients more effectively. The procedure included sharing my medical history with Dr. Jeremy Johnson at the clinic, as well as that of my parents; I provided a list of my prescribed medications; and a mouth swab was done to collect the sample.

The screening is able to determine how well, if at all, medications metabolize in my body. If they break down too fast, they'll be absorbed well before they reach their active stage. If I don't have a specific enzyme required to break down the medication, it won't work at all.

"All of your risk assessments, you got a check mark on," said Johnson, a graduate of the John Peter Smith Family Medicine Residency program in Fort Worth. "I really don't have any recommendations to change your medicine, I just have information in case you ever have any situations."

In addition to determining the effectiveness of the medications I'm on, Johnson was also able to get information of what will and won't work in eight different drug categories including antiplatelets, muscle relaxants, opiods, anti-addictives, anti-ADHD, anti-convulsants, antidepressants and antipsychotics. The results provided specific medications that would work the best in each category.

A GeneMed pharmacogenetic screening shows genetically which medications a patient can or cannot metabolize well which can greatly increase the effectiveness of different treatments.(Photo: Torin Halsey/Times Record News)

For example, the pharmacogenetic testing revealed that I would have a reduced response to Plavix, but said Effient or Brilinta would work. The test also showed that I would respond better to the muscle relaxers Flexeril, Robaxin, Skelaxin or Soma instead of Zanaflex.

"It's cool information," Johnson said. "It gives your practitioner so much more information."

The screening also looked at other risks including hyperlipidemia and atherosclerosis (hardening and narrowing of arteries); thrombophilia (blood clotting); and hyperhomocysteinemia (a marker for heart disease). The results indicated I did not have an increased risk for those.

Johnson said test results for some of his patients have prompted him to alter their medications for more effective treatment of their illnesses. He said there have been no negative side effects for those patients. Physicians are trained in medical school and through national organizations courses of treatment for different illnesses. For example, he said, the first medication typically prescribed for a new diabetic is Metformin, not knowing if it will be compatible with that person's genetic make-up.

"You can go with your best information and do evidence-based research -- they tested this and said this is the perfect medicine," he said. "Well, now we've got anotherlevel (of knowledge). For his genetics, he can't take Metformin because he doesn't metabolize it correctly. Even though the book tells you to put them on that medicine, you can't because it's not right for him. So, we're doing more patient-specific therapies based on this GeneMed testing."

Johnson said he is hopeful pharmacogenetic testing will be something more physicians use and pharmaceutical and insurance companies push for so patients can get the most effective care from the very beginning of their treatment. While my results showed the medications I'm currently on fit my genetic disposition, the outcome also produced information that can be used years down the road.

"Prevention is what I'm supposed to be doing here," he said. "I'm not only supposed to be healing sick people, but really what insurance companies want and what longitudinal care you get with primary care doctors is prevention. We need to try to do prevention ... and this is another way of preventing illness."

Follow John Ingle on Twitter at @inglejohn1973.

Read or Share this story: http://wtrne.ws/2l4dBZW

Link:

Genetic testing provides writer, doc in-depth info - Times Record News

China aims for share of precision medicine – Arkansas Online

When Nisa Leung was pregnant with her first child in 2012, her doctor in Hong Kong offered her a choice. She could take a prenatal test that would require inserting a needle into her uterus, or pay $130 more for an exam that would draw a little blood from her arm.

Leung opted for the simpler and less risky test, which analyzed bits of the baby's DNA that had made its way into her bloodstream. Then Leung went on to do what she often does when she recognizes a good product: look around for companies to invest in.

The managing partner at Qiming Venture Partners decided to put money into Chinese genetic testing firm Berry Genomics, which eventually entered into a partnership with the Hong Kong-based inventor of the blood test. Over the next few months, Berry is expected to be absorbed into a Chinese developer in a $625 million reverse merger. And Leung's venture capital firm would be the latest to benefit from a boom in so-called precision medicine, an emerging field that includes everything from genetic prenatal tests to customizing treatments for cancer patients.

China has made the precision medicine field a focus of its 13th five-year plan, and its companies have been embarking on ambitious efforts to collect a vast trove of genetic and health data, researching how to identify cancer markers in blood, and launching consumer technologies that aim to tap potentially life-saving information. The push offers insight into China's growing ambitions in science and biotechnology, areas where it has traditionally lagged developed nations like the U.S.

"Investing in precision medicine is definitely the trend," said Leung, who's led investments in more than 60 Chinese health-care companies in the past decade. "As China eyes becoming a biotechnology powerhouse globally, this is an area we will venture into for sure and hopefully be at the forefront globally."

New Chinese firms like iCarbonX and WuXi NextCode that offer consumers ways to learn more about their bodies through clues from their genetic make up are gaining popularity. Chinese entrepreneurs and scientists are also aiming to dominate the market for complex new procedures like liquid biopsy tests, which would allow for cancer testing through key indicators in the blood.

Such research efforts are still in early stages worldwide. But doctors see a future beyond basic commercial applications, aiming instead for drugs and treatment plans tailored to a person's unique genetic code and environmental exposure, such as diet and infections.

Isaac Kohane, a bioinformatics professor at Harvard University, says when it comes to precision medicine, the science community has "Google maps envy." Just as the search engine has transformed the notion of geography by adding restaurants, weather and other locators, more details on patients can give doctors a better picture on how to treat diseases.

For cancer patients, for example, precision medicine might allow oncologists to spot specific mutations in a tumor. For many people with rare ailments like muscle diseases or those that cause seizures, it allows for earlier diagnosis. Pregnant women, using the kind of tests that Leung used, could also learn more about the potential for a child to inherit a genetic disease.

The global interest in the field comes as the cost of sequencing DNA, or analyzing genetic information, is falling sharply. But a number of hurdles remain. Relying on just genes isn't enough, and there must also be background information on a patient's lifestyle and medication history.

Precision medicine applications also require heavy investment to store large amounts of information. A whole genome is more than 100 gigabytes, according to an e-mailed response to questions from Edward Farmer, WuXi NextCode's vice president of communications and new ventures. "So you can imagine that analyzing thousands or hundreds of thousands of genomes is a true big data challenge."

WuXi NextCode was formed after Shanghai-based contract research giant WuXi AppTec Inc. acquired genomic analysis firm NextCode Health, a spin-off from Reykjavik, Iceland-based Decode Genetics, which has databases on the island's population. Wuxi NextCode continues to have an office in Iceland, where the population is relatively homogenous and therefore good for gene discovery.

"Genomics today is like the computer industry in the '70s," said Hannes Smarason, WuXi NextCode's co-founder and chief operating officer. "We've made great progress but there's still a long way to go."

In China, Wuxi NextCode now offers consumers genetic tests that cost between about $360 and $1,160, providing more details on rare conditions a child might be suffering from or even the risk of passing on an inherited disease.

China is diverse, and with 1.4 billion people, the planet's most populous nation. WuXi NextCode announced a partnership with Huawei Technologies Co., China's largest telecommunications equipment maker, in May to enable different institutions and researchers to store their data.

The goal is to use that deep pool of information -- which ranges from genome sequences to treatment regimens -- to find more clues on tackling diseases. WuXi says that "this will in many instances enable the largest studies ever undertaken in many diseases."

Another Chinese player, iCarbonX, which received a $200 million investment from Tencent Holdings Ltd. and other investors in April, is valued at more than $1 billion. It announced last month that it had invested $400 million in several health data companies to enable the use of algorithms to analyze reams of genomic, physiological and behavioral data to provide customized medical advice directly to consumers through an app.

The global precision medicine market was estimated to be worth $56 billion in revenue at the end of 2016, with China holding about 4 percent to 8 percent of the global market, according to a December report from Persistence Market Research.

Encouraging interventions for some patients too early, even before they have life-threatening diseases, comes with risks and ethical questions, Laura Nelson Carney, an analyst at Sanford C Bernstein, wrote in a Jan. 6 note. Still, precision medicine research has many benefits, and some in China see the country's push as a significant opportunity "to scientifically leapfrog the West," she said.

In the U.S., universities, the National Institutes of Health and American drugmakers are part of a broad march into precision medicine.

Amgen Inc. bought Icelandic biotechnology company DeCode Genetics for $415 million in 2012, to acquire its massive database on Iceland's population. U.S.-based Genentech Inc. is collaborating with Silicon Valley startup 23andMe to study the genetic underpinnings of Parkinson's disease.

"Humans are computable," said Wang Jun, the chief executive officer of China's iCarbonX. "So we need a computable model that we can use to intervene and change people's status, that's the whole point."

SundayMonday Business on 02/13/2017

View post:

China aims for share of precision medicine - Arkansas Online

Diabetes in your DNA? Scientists zero in on the genetic signature of risk – University of Michigan Health System News (press release)

ANN ARBOR, MI Why do some people get Type 2 diabetes, while others who live the same lifestyle never do?

For decades, scientists have tried to solve this mystery and have found more than 80 tiny DNA differences that seem to raise the risk of the disease in some people, or protect others from the damagingly high levels of blood sugar that are its hallmark.

But no one Type 2 diabetes signature has emerged from this search.

Now, a team of scientists has reported a discovery that might explain how multiple genetic flaws can lead to the same disease.

Theyve identified something that some of those diabetes-linked genetic defects have in common: they seem to change the way certain cells in the pancreas read their genes.

The discovery could eventually help lead to more personalized treatments for diabetes. But for now, its the first demonstration that many Type 2 diabetes-linked DNA changes have to do with the same DNA-reading molecule. Called Regulatory Factor X, or RFX, its a master regulator for a number of genes.

The team reporting the findings in a new paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences comes from the University of Michigan, National Institutes of Health, Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, University of North Carolina, and the University of Southern California.

They report that many diabetes-linked DNA changes affect the ability of RFX to bind to specific locations in the genomes of pancreas cell clusters called islets. And that in turn changes the cells ability to carry out important functions.

Islets contain the cells that make hormones, including insulin and glucagon, which keep blood sugar balanced in healthy people. In people with diabetes, that regulation goes awry leading to a range of health problems that can develop over many years.

We have found that many of the subtle DNA spelling differences that increase risk of Type 2 diabetes appear to disrupt a common regulatory grammar in islet cells, says Stephen C.J. Parker, Ph.D., an assistant professor of computational medicine and bioinformatics, and of human genetics, at the U-M Medical School. RFX is probably unable to read the misspelled words, and this disruption of regulatory grammar plays a significant role in the genetic risk of Type 2 diabetes.

Parker is one of four co-senior authors on the paper, which also includes Michael Boehnke, Ph.D., of the U-M School of Public Healths Department of Biostatistics, Francis Collins, M.D., Ph.D., director of the National Institutes of Health, and Michael L. Stitzel, Ph.D. of the Jackson Laboratory.

Prior to their current faculty positions Parker and Stitzel worked in Collins lab at the National Human Genome Research Institute. Parkers graduate student, Arushi Varshney, is one of the papers co-first authors with Laura Scott, Ph.D., and Ryan Welch, Ph.D., of the U-M School of Public Healths Department of Biostatistics and Michael Erdos, Ph.D., of the National Human Genome Research Institute.

They performed an extensive examination of DNA from islet samples isolated from 112 people. They characterized differences not just in DNA sequences, but also in the way DNA was packaged and modified by epigenetic factors, and the levels of gene expression products that indicated how often the genes had been read and transcribed.

This allowed them to track the footprints that RFX and other transcription factors leave on packaged DNA after they have done their job.

RFX and other factors dont bind directly to the part of a gene that encodes a protein that does a cellular job. Rather, they bind to a stretch of DNA near the gene a runway of sorts.

But when genetic changes linked to Type 2 diabetes are present, that runway gets disrupted, and RFX cant bind as it should.

Each DNA change might alter this binding in a different way, leading to a slightly different effect on Type 2 diabetes risk or blood sugar regulation. But the common factor for many of these changes was its effect on the area where RFX is predicted to bind, in the cells of pancreatic islets.

So, says Parker, this shows how the genome the actual sequence of DNA -- can influence the epigenome, or the factors that influence gene expression.

The researchers note that a deadly form of diabetes seen in a handful of babies born each year may be related to RFX mutations. That condition, called Mitchell-Riley syndrome, involves neonatal diabetes and malformed pancreas, and is known to be caused by a rare autosomal recessive mutation of one form of RFX.

In addition to co-senior and co-first authors listed above, the studys authors include a range of researchers from several institutions. The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health (HL127984, DK062370, HG000024, DK099240, DK092251, DK093757, DK105561, DK072193, ZIA HG000024).Parker is a 2014 recipient of the American Diabetes Associations Pathway to Stop Diabetes grant, a type of grant awarded annually by the American Diabetes Association to provide up to $1.625 million to each scientist over a five- to seven-year grant term to spur breakthroughs in clinical science, technology, diabetes care and potential cures. Since launching in 2013 Pathway has awarded more than $36 million to 23 leading scientists.

Reference: PNAS, http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1621192114

Read the rest here:

Diabetes in your DNA? Scientists zero in on the genetic signature of risk - University of Michigan Health System News (press release)

Deaf mice able to hear ‘whispers’ after gene therapy – BioNews

An improved gene-therapy technique using a synthetic virushas restored the hearing of deaf mice up to the level of a whisper.

This technique might eventually be used to treat fetuses affected by Usher syndrome, a genetic condition responsible for three to six percent of childhood deafness, preventing them from being born deaf.

Last week, researchers at Harvard Medical School partially restored the hearing of genetically deaf mice using a separate gene therapy technique (see BioNews 887). Those mice were able to hear sounds at around 7080 decibels some mice in the present study could hear sounds as quiet as 2530 decibels.The treatment also restored the mice's balance, which is affected by the condition.

'Now, you can whisper, and they can hear you,' said Dr Gwenalle Gloc at Boston Children's Hospital, who led the study, which was published in Nature Biotechnology.

The mice were genetically engineered to have a mutation in the Ush1c gene, the same gene that causes Usher syndrome. The gene normally produces a protein called harmonin, without which the hair cells in the ear deteriorate.

Previous gene therapy techniques had only been able to penetrate the inner hair cells, but in a separate study in the same issue of Nature Biotechnology, scientists at Harvard demonstrated that they could penetrate 8090 percent of both inner and outer hair cells, using a synthetic virus to deliver a functional Ush1c gene into the cells.

Using this improved technique, Dr Gloc was able to treat the deaf mice. 'This strategy is the most effective one we've tested,' she said. 'Outer hair cells amplify sound, allowing inner hair cells to send a stronger signal to the brain. We now have a system that works well and rescues auditory and vestibular function to a level that's never been achieved before.'

After treatment the hair cells grew normally, and the effects persisted for at least six months. The mice had to be treated straight after birth or the therapy was not effective. The therapeutic window in humans would likely be in the uteruswhile the cochlea is still developing.

'This is a very encouraging result but it is only in a mouse model. One of the biggest risks is that the new synthetic viral vector has not been given to humans yet,' said Professor Alan Boyd, president of the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Medicine, who was not involved in the study. He estimates that human trials are at least three years away.

The researchers say that this approach could be effective for more than 100 genetic disorders that affect hearing in people.

Excerpt from:

Deaf mice able to hear 'whispers' after gene therapy - BioNews

Brighton date for London’s futurist duo The Alpines – Chichester … – Chichester Observer

10:05 Monday 13 February 2017

Londons futurist duo The Alpines Bob Matthews and Catherine Pockson describe their music as a meeting in the middle between them.

We have been together since 2010, says Catherine as they head out on a tour which takes them to The Prince Albert, Brighton on February 22. We actually met at a wedding of a mutual friend of ours. Bob was playing in the band at the wedding. He was part of an indie band before we became The Alpines. I was doing a lot of my own stuff at the time, solo stuff, and we wrote some stuff together. We got quite a lot of interest after one or two shows in London, and we got signed quite quickly after that. Its funny how it works out.

As for the name: One of the first trips we did was taking a road trip down to the Alps. We made a lot of CDs and mix tapes and put them in the car and discussed a lot of music and influences. It was quite a formative thing for us. And the Alps are just one of the most beautiful places. We wanted a good name, and Alpines are plants that grow on the higher reaches of mountains and are pretty hardy. We thought it would be a good name. We come from very different musical backgrounds. I come from a more soul, jazz, r n b upbringing, and Bob was more indie, electronic and rock. One of his favourite bands is The Beatles, so our music is like a merging of our quite different backgrounds. I would describe it as intimate and quite soulful, but with quite a wide soundscape. There is width to it. We wanted to make music that was emotional and honest.

Bob agrees: But what I think we both have in common is that we both love pop music and classic song-writing. Thats the foundation of everything we do, and the rest of it just comes through our influences. Mine are more ambient and avant-garde. Hers are more soul and the music of the 90s.

Another River, their second album, came out last October: It went well. We have got a few good reviews, and people felt there was a progression from the first album. We wanted to make sure that we kept moving forwards and did something that was different to the first one. Rather than forcing it, I think we just let it happen. It was more like the shackles coming off. This time we wanted to do the music that we wanted to do and not worry about what other people thought. I think that created its own progression, and we were also two to three years older.

Catherine agrees: Partly also it is confidence. And experience. If you let yourself worry too much about the charts and what is popular, you lose sight of what you are trying to do. I think it is important to remember what you are about. You have got to remember your purpose, and you have got create something new, to push the boundaries. We were really, really pleased with it. We wrote nearly a hundred songs for it. It went back and forth. There are ten on the album.

Don't miss out on all the latest breaking news where you live.

Here are four ways you can be sure you'll be amongst the first to know what's going on.

1) Make our website your homepage

2) Like our Facebook page

3) Follow us on Twitter

4) Register with us by clicking on 'sign in' (top right corner). You can then receive our daily newsletter AND add your point of view to stories that you read here.

And do share with your family and friends - so they don't miss out!

Always the first with your local news.

Be part of it.

See the article here:

Brighton date for London's futurist duo The Alpines - Chichester ... - Chichester Observer

Harvard’s Remarkable New Battery Can Run For More Than a Decade – Futurism

In Brief

Researchers have discovered a way to make the promising flow battery much more practical. Flow batteries store energy in liquid-filled tanks. Prior to this most recent discovery, flow batteries, after a number of charge-discharge cycles, would suffer from rapid storage capacity degradation.

In order to overcome the degradation hurdle, the researchers from the Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS) modified the structure of molecules in the solution to make them water soluble. This allowed for the electrolytes to be dissolved in neutral water, creating a battery that only loses one percent of its storage capacity every 1000 cycles. According to the officialpress release, the battery is able to run for ten years with only a minimum amount of upkeep.

Unlike other battery liquids, the solution in this new flow battery is both non-toxic as well as non-corrosive. Spilling it on skin or on the floor causes no injury or property damage.

Any innovations in energy storage will only continue to help renewable energy to become as, if not more, of a viable power source. The US Department of Energy (DOE) has stated that building a battery with the capacity to store energy for less than $100 per kWh would make clean energy from sources like the sun and wind on par with traditional power plants. Imre Gyuk of the DOE stated, I expect that efficient, long duration flow batteries will become standard as part of the infrastructure of the electric grid.

Better batteries are a key component in realizing the full potential of renewable energy. As can be seen with the opening of the first Powerpack station in California, battery storage can help ease the burden of demand on a grid during peak usage times. Developments like this that improve batteries will lead to the use of fewer fossil fuels and decrease overall dependence on environmentally damaging sources of power generation.

Read more from the original source:

Harvard's Remarkable New Battery Can Run For More Than a Decade - Futurism

Lockheed’s F-35 Fighter Jet Just Demolished the Competition – Futurism

Multiple Threats in Modern Warfare

Each year at the Red Flag exercise organized by the United States Air Force Warfare Center (USAFWC), the air forces of several NATO countries gather at the Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada for a series of advanced aerial combat training exercises. This year, one fighter plane took center stage at the event, according to a report by Aviation Week.

Lockheed Martins F-35 Lightning IIstole the show, outperforming its competition with a ratio of 15 kills for every one F-35 that was downed and it all happened in an increased threat environment. In the past, the non-kinetic effects were not fully integrated into the kinetic fight, Air Force Cyber Forward director Col. Robert Cole explained in a statement.

This integration in an exercise environment allows our planners and warfighters to understand how to best integrate these, learn their capabilities and limitations, and become ready to use [these combined resources for maximum] effect against our adversaries, he added.

Lockheed Martins latest fighteris different from those that preceded it precisely because its meant to face multiple threats at a time and react to increasingly complex warfare scenarios. The F-35 is the most advanced multi-role fighter combining advanced stealth capabilities with fighter aircraft speed and agility, fully-fused sensor information, network-enabled operations, and advanced logistics and sustainment, according to Lockheed Martin.

This means that its not just capable of taking on conventional threats and enemy surveillance, it can also deal with cyberthreats and electronic warfare. Before, where we would have one advanced threat and we would put everything we had F-16s, F-15s, F-18s, missiles, we would shoot everything we had at that one threat just to take it out now we are seeing three or four of those threats at a time, Lt. Col. George Watkins told Aviation Week. Just between [the F-35] and the [F-22] Raptor, we are able to geolocate them, precision-target them, and then we are able to bring the fourth-generation assets in behind us after those threats are neutralized.

In short, the F-35s advanced capabilities make it the fighter jet of the future, ready to take on more modern threats. As Watkins said, Its a whole different world out there for us now.

Go here to read the rest:

Lockheed's F-35 Fighter Jet Just Demolished the Competition - Futurism

Elon Musk’s SpaceX is Launching a Superbug Into Space – Futurism

In Brief

In a rather unromantic gesture, on February 14, SpaceX will be launching an antibiotic-resistant superbug into space. The bug will be living in microgravity aboard the International Space Station (ISS). The bacterium that will be shot into space will be the, often feared, MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus).

Even so much as the mention or MRSA send shivers down the spines of many. MRSA is an antibiotic-resistant staph infection that can represent itself in the human body in the skin as painful, swollen, red bumps; but the infection can also travel further into the body, wreaking havoc on bones, joints, even the blood. This potentially life-threatening infection kills more Americans than HIV/AIDS, Parkinsons disease, emphysema, and violence combinedevery year.

So, why would scientists launch this dangerous bacterium into space and bring it aboard the ISS? Well, not for any nefarious or dastardly reason. The purpose of this project is toaccelerate the mutations of the bacterium, allowing the scientists to watch the progression of the bug quicker than its progression on Earth, getting information ahead of those of us back home.

According to lead researcher Anita Goel, CEO of biotech company Nanobiosym, We will leverage the microgravity environment on the ISS to accelerate the Precision Medicine revolution here on Earth. In other words, using information from this study of the sped up life cycle of a MRSA bacterium, these scientists will be able to understand how bacteria change and mutate at a much faster rate than we would on Earth.

This information could be extrapolated to bacteria besides MRSA, and allow scientists to better understand how MRSA (and, in the future, other infections) travel through the body and mutate throughout their lives. This objective could lead to a medical future where even the most formidable antibiotic-resistant bacteria are no longer a fatal threat.

See the rest here:

Elon Musk's SpaceX is Launching a Superbug Into Space - Futurism

NASA Discovers an Organism That Can Survive 16 Months in Outer Space – Futurism

In Brief

Scientists aboard the International Space Station (ISS) recently ran an experiment where they let algae loose into the vacuum of space for a full 16 months. And, surprisingly enough, the simple plants survived the harrowing journey. Despite extreme temperature variations, UV radiation, cosmic radiation, and incredible length of time, the algae were brought back aboard still alive.

The researchers aboard the ISS are currently running experiments as part of the Biology and Mars Experiment (BIOMEX) project. Within this experimental algae portion of the project, they tested the durability of algae species that are known to love freezing temperatures. Since the mixture of extreme conditions found in space is impossible to replicate in a laboratory environment exactly, the crew on the ISS used their location to put these cold-loving species to the test. However, despite knowing what these plants will endure on Earth, the scientists were astonished at how much they can really take.

Post-experiment, the researchers aboard the ISS will send these algae samples back to Earth. There, they will be rigorously tested to see the actual extent that the temperatures and combined radiation impacted them. This information could be crucial to future human missions to Mars. It could help to ensure the safety of humans and any plant-based food to be consumed.

However, beyond the positive benefits that this research could have on future missions of humans in space, it could also potentially tell us a little bit more about alien life. According to many, including famed astrophysicist Neil Degrasse Tyson, thinking that we are somehow the only living creatures in the universe would be inexcusably egocentric. And, while previously, few would have thought that any plants could survive such an extended stay in space, we now know better. And so, while certain environments in space may seem inhospitable, we now know that life could exist in places we never before would have suspected.

See the original post here:

NASA Discovers an Organism That Can Survive 16 Months in Outer Space - Futurism

NASA Finally Has a Computer That Can Survive on Venus – Futurism

The Warmest Planet

Even though Mercury is closer to the Sun, Venus is the hottest planet in the Solar System.It has surface temperatures of about 460 degrees Celsius (860 degrees Fahrenheit) coupled with a carbon dioxide-rich air that has an atmospheric pressure about 90 times that ofEarths. As such, surface exploration has been virtually impossible in the past, as this extreme heat and pressure woulddestroy scientific equipment. Thatsabout to change.

NASAsGlenn Research Center team has developed extremely durable silicon carbide semiconductor integrated circuits that are tough enough to withstand the harsh conditions on Venus surface far better than any existing tech.

We demonstrated vastly longer electrical operation with chips directly exposed no cooling and no protective chip packaging to a high-fidelity physical and chemical reproduction of Venus surface atmosphere, said lead electronics engineer Phil Neudeck. And both integrated circuits still worked after the end of the test.

This technology, which was only recently demonstrated by NASA, was detailed in the journal AIP Advancesin December 2016.

During the test conducted at NASAs Glenn Extreme Environments Rig (GEER), the engineers were able to prove that their integrated circuits could work under conditions similar to those found on Venus. The chips lasted for 521 hours more than 100 times longer than other electronics previously designed for a Venus exploration.

With further technology development, such electronics could drastically improve Venus lander designs and mission concepts, enabling the first long-duration missions to the surface of Venus, said Neudeck. Though many are making preparations to go to Mars, some researchers suggest Venus as a potential option for human colonization, assuming it could be terraformed.These long-overdue missions would be the first step to exploring that possibility.

The applications of this chip, however, arent just limited to Venus exploration missions. According toGary Hunter, principle investigator for Venus surface electronics development, This work not only enables the potential for new science in extended Venus surface and other planetary exploration, but it also has potentially significant impact for a range of Earth relevant applications, such as in aircraft engines to enable new capabilities, improve operations, and reduce emissions.

View original post here:

NASA Finally Has a Computer That Can Survive on Venus - Futurism

New Tech Can Send Data 10 Times Faster Than 5G – Futurism

Record-Breaking Speeds

What are called the5G or fifth-generation mobile networks are set to become available by 2020, with promises of improved connections and faster data transfer rates. But, what if we could get speeds faster than 5G before 2020? Thats the subject of a paper that was delivered this week at the International Solid-State Circuits Conference (ISSCC) held in San Francisco, California.

The paper talks about a terahertz (THz) transmitter developed by the National Institute of Information and Communications Technology, Panasonic Corporation, and Hiroshima University. This transmitter operates using a frequency range from 290 GHz to 315 GHz and is capable of transmitting digital data at a rate of 105 gigabits per second which is a communication speed thats at least 10 times as fast as 5G networks. The transmitter uses a frequency that falls within a currently unallocated range of 275 GHz to 450 GHz. Its use will be covered in the 2019 World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) under the International Telecommunication Union Radiocommunication Section (ITU-R).

The researchers were able to reach the speed levels described in the paper by using quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM), which enhances the speed of a wireless link in the 300GHz band. These researchers managed to, for the first time, reach speeds exceeding 100 gigabits per second with an integrated circuit-based transmitter.

Most modern data transfer technologies, especially the fast ones, rely on fiber optics. This is where this new research differs. This development explores the potentials of truly wireless technology that pushes past current sluggish speeds.

Minoru Fujishima from the Department of Semiconductor Electronics and Integration Science at Hiroshima University explained:

Today, we usually talk about wireless data-rates in megabits per second or gigabits per second. But I foresee well soon be talking about terabits per second. Thats what THz wireless technology offers. Such extreme speeds are currently confined in optical fibers. I want to bring fibre optic speeds out into the air, and we have taken an important step towards that goal. We plan to develop receiver circuits for the 300GHz band, as well as modulation and demodulation circuits that are suitable for ultra high-speed communications.

However, as much as this study shows promising speeds, the researchers did not cover just how much distance the technology could reach. It wasnt also mentioned at what distance they were able to transmit at 105 gigabits per second. Speed matters, of course, but distance is equally important.

Either way, this development is still an incredible achievement and a notable stepping stone to future technologies. Perhaps, while achievingspeeds faster than existing fiber optics is a monumental challenge, the future of network communications is in wireless transmission.

See the original post here:

New Tech Can Send Data 10 Times Faster Than 5G - Futurism

Religious Freedom Still Isn’t License to Discriminate – National Review

Last week, in response to a piece at Salon, I wrote a short post about the reality of religious-freedom legislation in America, which, I argued, is narrowly tailored to protect the consciences of those who believe that marriage is rightly understood as being between one man and one woman. My broad point was that no example of this legislation licenses discrimination against LGBT individuals.

Rushing to the defense of the author of the Salon piece a former colleague of hers writer Sunnivie Brydum has published a response to me. In this response, Brydum makes a number of errors, the most salient of which she shares with the piece that kicked off the debate: the mischaracterization of both the content and the practical effects of religious-freedom legislation.

To serve as her most prominent example, Brydum selects the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), a much-maligned piece of legislation that, by all rights, shouldnt even be necessary. The fact that lawmakers needed to introduce such a bill hints at the problem here; without this additional protection, a subset of religious Americans can be punished by the federal government for their religious beliefs.

And thats all the bill protects against. Contrary to Brydums assertion that FADA would license a whole slate of anti-LGBT actions, the bills stated goal is simple: to protect from government retaliation Americans who believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, a belief that is held by plenty of people other than conservative Christians.

Rather than licensing discriminatory behavior, the bill would, if passed, forbid the federal government from retaliating against institutions or persons who act upon a belief in heterosexual marriage. In practice, this means that, for example, a religious university could not have its tax-exempt status revoked or its accreditation denied because it advocates heterosexual marriage or believes that a persons sex is based on immutable biology. The idea that such a bill weaponizes religious freedom is absurd.

But even setting aside the specifics of FADA and sidestepping for the moment the details of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Trump administrations draft executive order on religious liberty the fundamental point is this: A proper understanding of religious freedom protects all Americans, whether Christian or otherwise, from being coerced into condoning behavior he believes is immoral, in this case same-sex marriage.

Tellingly, Brydum is forced to concede this point; as she puts it, it is true there is no federal or state law that says its OK to turn away the gays if God said you could. (She goes on to argue that LGBT people also need affirmative laws protecting them from discrimination. Thats an argument that Brydum and I could discuss in a separate conversation.) But here she attacks a strawman. I never argued that LGBT people dont need federal protections. I argued that religious-freedom legislation in the realm of marriage doesnt permit discrimination against LGBT individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation, and I made that argument in my original post precisely because progressives continue to incorrectly depict religious-freedom legislation as a blanket license for religious people to deny service to LGBT people on the basis of their identity. Until both sides are willing to admit the importance of the competing rights at stake here (religious-freedom rights on one side and the dignity of LGBT people on the other) this public debate will continue to languish.

Read more:

Religious Freedom Still Isn't License to Discriminate - National Review

No 10 denies plans would curb freedom of journalists and whistleblowers – The Guardian

A spokesman for Theresa May said: It is not, never has been and never will be the policy of the government to restrict the freedom of investigative journalism or public whistleblowing. Photograph: Andrew Parsons / i-Images/Photoshot/Avalon/Avalon

Downing Street has insisted the freedom of investigative journalists and whistleblowers will not be restricted, after the Law Commission published plans suggesting that maximum jail terms for those leaking information should rise from two years to 14.

No 10 said it was incorrect to suggest that either group would face greater threat of prosecution as a result of the new proposals, which have been condemned by prominent whistleblowers and civil rights groups.

Theresa Mays official spokesman said: Ive seen the way this has been reported and it is fundamentally wrong. It is not, never has been and never will be the policy of the government to restrict the freedom of investigative journalism or public whistleblowing.

One of the points of this review is to consider whether more safeguards are required to protect public sector whistleblowers and journalists.

Asked whether journalists could face jail for reporting leaked information, he said: We will not do anything to restrict the freedom of journalists.

The governments legal advisers were accused of launching a full-frontal attack on whistleblowers on Sunday over the proposals, which recommend radically increasing prison sentences for revealing and handling state secrets.

Draft recommendations from the legal advisers say the maximum prison sentence for leakers should be raised, potentially from two to 14 years, and the definition of espionage should be expanded to include obtaining sensitive information, as well as passing it on.

Media organisations and civil rights groups have also expressed alarm at the Law Commissions assertion that they were consulted over the plans, when they say no substantial discussions took place.

The Guardian, the human rights group Liberty and campaign body Open Rights Group are among a series of organisations listed by the Law Commission as having been consulted on the draft proposals, but all three say they were not meaningfully involved in the process.

The Law Commission says on its website that in making the proposals, it met extensively with and sought the views of government departments, lawyers, human rights NGOs and the media. The law commissioner, Prof David Ormerod QC, said: Weve scrutinised the law and consulted widely with ... media and human rights organisations.

But Liberty said that while a meeting was held, it was not on the understanding that this was a consultation. A source said: Liberty do not consider themselves to have been properly consulted. And we will be responding in detail to the [public] consultation.

Cathy James, the chief executive of Public Concern at Work, was also surprised to see her the whistleblowing charity listed as being involved.

She said: I didnt actually know we were listed in the document as we have been working our way through it so it is a big surprise to me. I believe my colleague met with them initially but we were not consulted in the normal sense of the word consultation. That is not what happened.

We are very worried about the extent of the provision in the recommendations both for whistleblowers and public officials. Its a huge backward step and we are very worried.

A Law Commission spokesman told the Guardian: We are currently conducting an open public consultation on the protection of official data, including the Official Secrets Acts.

We are seeking views on how the law could meet 21st-century challenges while also ensuring people dont inadvertently commit serious offences. Our provisional proposals make a number of suggestions to improve the current laws around the protection of official data, and we welcome views.

View post:

No 10 denies plans would curb freedom of journalists and whistleblowers - The Guardian

Game developers show political solidarity with Humble Freedom Bundle – TechCrunch

The Humble Bundle is a reliable source of good deals on games, usually organized around some theme or another. This weeks bundle, however, is not only one of the best gaming deals of all time, but all proceeds are going to support charities that work with immigrants and refugees.

For $30 you get dozens of titles, many of which could comprise a sort of whos who of indie gaming: The Witness, Stardew Valley, Subnautica, Nuclear Throne, Invisible Inc., Super Meat Boy, Guacamelee, The Stanley Parable, The Swapper the list goes on and on. There are also a number of books and graphic novels you might have heard of, thrown in for good measure.

Its the Humble Freedom Bundle, and the company isnt shy about the motivation behind it:

We humbly remember that the United States is a nation of immigrants, and we proudly stand with developers, authors, and charities that champion liberty and justice for all.

Your money goes to the ACLU, Doctors Without Borders and the International Rescue Committee, divided however you choose. Humble pledged to match up to $300,000, and hit that goal long ago in fact, they hit $600,000 in donations just as I hit publish, with plenty more to come over the week remaining in the bundle.

If you like games, and you like freedom, this is the best deal on both youre likely to see any time soon.

Read the original here:

Game developers show political solidarity with Humble Freedom Bundle - TechCrunch

Sorry, National Review: Religious Freedom Bills Do Permit Bigotry – Religion Dispatches

National Review writer Alexandra Desanctis on Wednesday published a piecepurporting to explain how recent conservative efforts to defend religious freedom arent really about discriminating against LGBT Americans. Since she used aSalon piece written a day earlier by a former colleague of mine, Nico Lang, to illustrate how liberals are maliciously mischaracteriz[ing] FADA and other religious-freedom protections, it seems only fair to issue a point-by-point response to the specious claims made in theNational Review.

It is deeply ironic to claim, in the pieces opening argument, that Lang is deliberately mischaracterizing these legislative and executive efforts, when Desanctis goes on to misrepresentalmost every legislative and executive action she discusses.I cant speak to any malicious intent of the author, but a cursory examination of her contemporaries reveals a lopsided tendency to use religion to justify anti-LGBT discrimination,then fall eerily silent when the religious freedom of non-Christians is threatened.

Desanctis complains that Lang betrays his biases immediately, by putting the phrase religious freedom in quotes. But Lang, a seasoned reporter Ive worked with in my former capacity as managing editor of The Advocate,is on solid journalistic ground here.The weaponizedkind of religious freedom at issue in President Trumpsdraft executive order is preciselythe modern mutation ofthis foundational principle,which undoubtedlydeserves to be placed in scare quotes, as publications ranging from New York magazine to the Wall Street Journal do.

The authors complaints about Lang willfully misrepresenting the facts are particularly laughable in the face of the outright falsehoods Desanctis offers in response. Most immediately and demonstrably, Desanctis impliesthat religious freedom bills and the executive order are concerned only withmarriage. And while the Supreme Courts 2015 ruling inObergefell v. Hodges did directly deal with marriage equality (tossing a single sentence in Justice Kennedys masterful opinion to the anti-equalityconcerns of religious objectors), nearly every legislative effort billed as a protection of religious liberty since then has reached far beyond the county clerks office.

Desanctis herself mentions the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) as one prominent example of legislation introduced to protect religious Americans who believe in heterosexual marriage. Apart from neglecting to note that FADA does not protect religious Americans who believe in marriage equality(because they do exist), Desanctis declines to mention that the bill, as introduced last year, included provisions that would allow faith-based discrimination against LGBT people, single mothers, and people of minority faiths.

Given that Texas senator and Tea Party favorite Ted Cruz has already promised to reintroduce FADA, and like-minded legislators are in turn salivating at the friendliness of the new administration to their concerns,its dishonest to suggest that any future iteration of FADA would be more limited in scope than the sweeping bill introduced last year.

Desanctis claims that religious-liberty legislation offers First Amendment protections to those Americans who hold a different view of marriage from that of the government, which is, in a limited sense, true. But these bills pointedly do notprovide First Amendment protections for those Americans whose faith-informed view of marriage differs from the government in, say, the number of spouses a person should be allowed to have, or with respect to the gender, age, or religious affiliation of the betrothed.

Similarly, Desanctis argument falls apart when she tries to follow the claim to its logical end. Certainly, she contends, it should be legal for a Christian baker to refuse to bake acake for a same-sex wedding, but that same baker should be required to bake a birthday cake for the same client.

But what if the birthday cake is for a child with same-sex parents? Under the draft executive order, a baker would be entirely within his right to refuse to bake that childs cake because the child did not emerge from the particular type of union that the baker finds morally acceptable.

Not only doreligious freedom bills in general concern themselves with more than justmarriage, buteven the leaked draft order does so as well,explicitly targetingthe validity of transgender identities by claiming that gender is an immutable characteristic defined by biology, anatomy, and a doctors declaration at birth. Bydefinition, the Americans who reject this biological essentialism are those who have experience with someone (or perhaps are themselves someone) whose gender identity differs from that which they were assigned at birth. Everyone elseindeed, the vast majority of Americansare unlikely to critically analyze this provision, since most peoples sex assigned at birth corresponds with their internal sense of gender identity. This fact, however, has no bearing on the continued existence of trans people in America.

The draft order goes even further to enshrine what is essentially conservative Christian ideology into federal policy when it declares that life begins at conception. This is, of course, a well-worn argumentused by anti-abortion advocates, butthere isnt anything even close to scientific consensus on this question. Once again, the executive order carves out protections for Americans who hold this particular religious belief about the beginning of life, but offers no accommodation for Americans whohave differing and sincerely held religious convictions about the point when life begins.

Its hard to single out one particular claim that emerges as the most absurd in the piece, but the allegation that the truth has been obfuscated by the left may well take the cake(just not to a gay wedding, of course). After directly equatingreligious Americans and religious voiceswith the voices of conservative Christian Americans, Desanctis performs an impressive bit of rhetorical acrobatics.

These supposed social-justice warriors will never admit the truth, she writes. That there isnt a single U.S. law permitting discrimination against individuals based on sexual orientation.

Talk about obfuscation. It is true there is no federal or state lawthat says its OK to turn away the gays if God saidyou could, but theres also no federal lawprotecting LGBT people from discrimination in the workplace, in housing, in healthcare, or in public accommodations. That bears repeating, since nearly70 percent of Americans believe its already illegal to fire someone for being LGBT.

But in reality, there is no federal law thatbarsemployers, landlords, or business-owners from refusing to hire, rent to, serve, or promote someone based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. Some states and localities have passed laws and ordinances that prohibit discrimination based on those characteristics, but those have faced stark opposition and backlashmost notably in the case of North Carolinas transphobic House Bill 2, which was drafted and passed in direct response to Charlottes city council updating its nondiscrimination ordinance to include LGBT people.

To be clear: in 30 states, it is expressly legal to fire someone because they are transgender. In 28 states, an employee could marry their same-sex spouse on Sunday, then be fired on Monday for putting a wedding photo on their desk. These arent hypothetical dilemmasreal people lose their livelihood every year because a supervisor didnt approve of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

So while Desanctis points out that there is currently no law directly approving anti-LGBT discrimination, the policies shes advocating for in her piece would change all that. The draft executive order, FADA, and similar religious liberty efforts nationwide would create a blanket license to discriminate, provided one claims their sincerely held religious belief has been offended. But even here, its important to note that the word religious is intended to mean conservative Christian.

Read the original post:

Sorry, National Review: Religious Freedom Bills Do Permit Bigotry - Religion Dispatches

Remembering Minnesota’s Freedom Riders – MinnPost

Courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society

The Minnesota Freedom Riders on July 26, 1961, after their return to Minnesota. Pictured are (left to right) Marvin Davidov, Zev Aelony, David Morton, Eugene Uphoff (with guitar), Claire O'Connor, and Robert Baum. Photographed by the St. Paul Pioneer Press.

The Freedom Rides of 1961 began with thirteen riders traveling on two buses through the South. Their goal was to end race segregation in interstate bus travel. The Rides grew to over fifty journeys and other actions, and attracted 436 Riders; six of them were from Minnesota.

On June 11, 1961, six young Minnesotans took a Greyhound bus from Memphis to Jackson, Mississippi. All were white, but at the Jackson bus terminal they went straight to the waiting room marked colored. Police arrested them at the lunch counter inside on a charge of breach of peace. After staying in jail overnight, they were tried, convicted, fined, and sentenced to four months in jail.

They were Freedom Riders, part of the project led by the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), to take nonviolent action against racial segregation in the South. The Freedom Rides had their origin in the Journey of Reconciliation led by CORE and Bayard Rustin in 1947. Rustin and company took a bus journey through the Upper South, disobeying Jim Crow laws and customs.

Then cameBrown v. Board of Education(1954), the Montgomery bus boycott (1956), the Greensboro lunch counter sit-in (1960), and many similar events. In 1961, CORE, now led by James Farmer, decided to try again.

They started with an experiment: thirteen people traveling by bus from Washington, D.C. to New Orleans, May 417. In Alabama, that journey exploded, with the bus set afire, riders beaten, and mobs abetted by the local police. The violence did not produce the desired effect; instead, the Freedom Rides multiplied.

The Minnesota Freedom Riders were part of a second, expanded stage of the effort. Four were students at the University of Minnesota: Zev Aelony (the organizer and the one most deeply read in the theory and practice of non-violence), Claire OConnor, Robert Baum, and Eugene Uphoff. Marvin Davidov, twenty-nine, was beginning a long career as an activist. The sixth Minnesotan was David Morton, whom Aelony called the universitys resident beatnik.

CORE had made Jackson, a crucial Southern state capital, a special target. Fourteen groups of Freedom Riders had preceded the Minnesotans to Jacksonnine by bus, five more by air and rail. All 104 of those Riders had been arrested. They were foot soldiers in a battle of attrition between Freedom Ride leadership and the State of Mississippi. The organizers hoped to overwhelm local law enforcement with numbers. In this case, the authorities answered not with violence but with process: trials, maximum sentences, jail terms, appeals bonds, and court dates.

After a few days in jail, the Minnesota men were transferred to the state penitentiary at Parchman, a prison famous for its harshness. They were held at first in maximum security, two to a six-by-nine cell, with no exercise, no visitors, and only Bibles to read. When it was hot, there was no ventilation; on cool nights the guards chilled them with fans. When they sang, the wardens took away their mattresses. Later, as more Riders were arrested, prison authorities moved them to dormitories.

OConnor spent about two weeks in jail. She was then transferred to Parchmans womens section, where she endured verbal abuse and a body-cavity search. She was released on July 3, the Minnesota men on July 24. All appealed their convictions and posted appeal bonds to pursue the strategy of stressing the Mississippi justice system. To stress them back, the court in Jackson required all Riders (by now 186) to return for new trialstwo a day, starting August 15. A long standoff seemed likely.

For the organizers, salvation of a sort came on September 21, 1961, when the Interstate Commerce Commission issued an order forbidding race discrimination on interstate buses and supporting facilities. This was victory; but it came from Washington, not Jackson. The Freedom Rides shifted focus to North Carolina (where Baum and Morton participated briefly) and ended in early December.

The Minnesotans got on with their lives and educations. Uphoff eventually became a physician, OConnor a community organizer, Aelony a businessman, and Baum a University of Minnesota bus driver. Davidov continued working as a political activist. Morton, according to Davidov, became Minnesotas first hippie.

For more information on this topic, check outthe original entry on MNopedia.

Original post:

Remembering Minnesota's Freedom Riders - MinnPost