The Prometheus League
Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Ai
- Alt-right
- Alternative Medicine
- Antifa
- Artificial General Intelligence
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial Super Intelligence
- Ascension
- Astronomy
- Atheism
- Atheist
- Atlas Shrugged
- Automation
- Ayn Rand
- Bahamas
- Bankruptcy
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Big Tech
- Bitcoin
- Black Lives Matter
- Blackjack
- Boca Chica Texas
- Brexit
- Caribbean
- Casino
- Casino Affiliate
- Cbd Oil
- Censorship
- Cf
- Chess Engines
- Childfree
- Cloning
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Corona Virus
- Cosmic Heaven
- Covid-19
- Cryonics
- Cryptocurrency
- Cyberpunk
- Darwinism
- Democrat
- Designer Babies
- DNA
- Donald Trump
- Eczema
- Elon Musk
- Entheogens
- Ethical Egoism
- Eugenic Concepts
- Eugenics
- Euthanasia
- Evolution
- Extropian
- Extropianism
- Extropy
- Fake News
- Federalism
- Federalist
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom
- Freedom of Speech
- Futurism
- Futurist
- Gambling
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Genome
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- Hedonism
- High Seas
- History
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Immortality
- Human Longevity
- Illuminati
- Immortality
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Jacinda Ardern
- Jitsi
- Jordan Peterson
- Las Vegas
- Liberal
- Libertarian
- Libertarianism
- Liberty
- Life Extension
- Macau
- Marie Byrd Land
- Mars
- Mars Colonization
- Mars Colony
- Memetics
- Micronations
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- Nanotech
- National Vanguard
- NATO
- Neo-eugenics
- Neurohacking
- Neurotechnology
- New Utopia
- New Zealand
- Nihilism
- Nootropics
- NSA
- Oceania
- Offshore
- Olympics
- Online Casino
- Online Gambling
- Pantheism
- Personal Empowerment
- Poker
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Polygamy
- Populism
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Posthuman
- Posthumanism
- Private Islands
- Progress
- Proud Boys
- Psoriasis
- Psychedelics
- Putin
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Rationalism
- Republican
- Resource Based Economy
- Robotics
- Rockall
- Ron Paul
- Roulette
- Russia
- Sealand
- Seasteading
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Seychelles
- Singularitarianism
- Singularity
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Spacex
- Sports Betting
- Sportsbook
- Superintelligence
- Survivalism
- Talmud
- Technology
- Teilhard De Charden
- Terraforming Mars
- The Singularity
- Tms
- Tor Browser
- Trance
- Transhuman
- Transhuman News
- Transhumanism
- Transhumanist
- Transtopian
- Transtopianism
- Ukraine
- Uncategorized
- Vaping
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Waveland
- Ww3
- Yahoo
- Zeitgeist Movement
-
Prometheism
-
Forbidden Fruit
-
The Evolutionary Perspective
Monthly Archives: February 2021
If it’s not one thing, it’s another – Tower Timberjay News
Posted: February 6, 2021 at 8:06 am
David Colburn
David Colburn
Well, Jane, it just goes to show you, its always something if its not one thing, its another.Oldsters like me may well recall that classic catchphrase of original Saturday Night Live cast member Gilda Radner in her Weekend Update alter-ego of Roseanne Roseannadanna.She, Roseanne Roseannadanna, would open each skit by reading a thoughtful letter from Richard Feder of Fort Lee, New Jersey, to which she, Roseanne Roseannadanna, would respond. And within perhaps two sentences or less, she, Roseanne Roseannadanna, departed from the topic at hand and went off in strange directions that usually included odd comments about encounters with celebrities and mildly unsettling revelations involving hair, toenails, and other body parts and functions. When Jane Curtin asked her what her rambling rants had to do with Mr. Feders letter, thats when she, Roseanne Roseannadanna, would spring her catch phrase.As a quick aside, note that the repetitious she, Roseanne Roseannadanna is my own little bit of homage to the characters own equally silly habit of saying I, Roseanne Roseannadanna numerous times. The incredibly astute among you may have picked up on that. Having now paid said homage, Im sure youll be relieved to know that to save on space and typing, Ill henceforth refer to her as RR.I believe RR was a character well ahead of her time, because I think she wouldve been a veritable rock star in the world of social media, a world where a simple fact can turn into a full-blown QAnon conspiracy faster than you can say She, Roseanne Roseannadanna. And yes, it just became glaringly obvious that Im quite willing to abandon any prior promise about RR to glibly capitalize on the moment. Go ahead and sue me all I ask is that you use Rudy Giuliani or another 2020 election fraud lawyer so that I have at least a 70-in-one chance of winning my case.Ah, but as youve no doubt become accustomed to by now, I digress. Much like RR, actually. Back on topic.In the vein of if its not one thing, its another, I discovered in a recent scan of my Facebook news feed that there are some conservatives in our neck of the woods in Minnesota who appear concerned about a proposed law in Oregon that would set the stage for governors in all states to have emergency powers beyond all reason. The comments that ensued took the conversation well into the realm of RR, seeing this as a harbinger of long-feared one world government conspiracy theorists. It just goes to show you, its always something if its not one thing, its another.Im quite selective these days about what debunking I try to tackle, but this one seemed pretty straightforward.Rather than breaking dangerous new ground, Oregon is Johnny-come-lately with this particular clarification of its emergency response law. Liberal Oregon meet conservative Texas, which has given its governor essentially the same emergency power since 1975. The particular aspect of a governor commandeering private property during an emergency in return for just compensation has been widely recognized in emergency law for years and draws its support from no less than the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.Armed with research, I plunged into a lengthy comment sharing my view that fears about this sparking a revolution among governors wanting to grab land and power were quite misplaced.I invested the time and research because while the original poster and I are generally on opposite ends of the political spectrum, hes never been one to indulge in name-calling and usually seems to have given some thought to what he posts, even if in my view it seems extreme.A few hours later, sure enough, he replied. He acknowledged my comments, then countered with more detail about the parts of the proposed law that gave him great concern. One part was already part of Oregon law. The other was a proposed change, and after reading his explanation, I found myself agreeing with him to a certain extent. As written, the language was problematic, and I could see how it could be interpreted as allowing for an overreach in the governors authority.Two old guys from Minnesota posting online arent going to change anything in Oregon. And nothings going to change in Oregon either, because after a huge COVID-driven backlash from those railing against that governors emergency pandemic powers, that piece of legislation has been withdrawn. It would be wise to work on language revisions in line with other states before reintroducing it, in my opinion.I relate this story because I am discouraged with how readily people on social media demean and dismiss anyone associated with something thats on the far opposite side of their political beliefs. Certainly, outlandish conspiracy theories deserve to be met with another Roseanne Roseannadanna catch phrase -- What are ya tryin to do, make me sick?! But not all far-right conservatives are Trump zombie deplorables, and not every far-left liberal is a socialist libtard.Here I saw the possibility for exchange about the issue of a governors emergency powers. I did not call the poster a deplorable and he did not call me a libtard. I did not call him a Trump zombie, and he did not call me a George Soros puppet. We laid out our positions respectfully and came to a greater understanding. Its a good start for text-based social media. Its always something if its not one thing, its another. A phrase for todays caustic political social media world thats well suited for RR. Mr. Feder puts up a post, and RR talks back at him, not with him, going off on whatever tangent she feels like. The amount of worthless junk in that arena is indeed enough to make one sick.But if more people would look for opportunities where some thoughtful exchange is possible, perhaps we could have more conversation-like exchanges of substance. Compromises cant happen unless one is willing to make the attempt to understand an opposing viewpoint, something Congress demonstrates its inability to do almost daily.The noise is so loud online that countless numbers of people have just stopped listening. Social media is jammed with Roseanne Roseannadannas, liberal and conservative alike, spouting off whatever they want. Extremism runs rampant and opportunities may be few, but I believe its more important now than ever to look for and take advantage of those moments when at least some possibility of a meaningful exchange exists. We need conversations. RR deserves to be a fond relic of a distant past and not a constant destructive presence in the present.
Read the original:
Comments Off on If it’s not one thing, it’s another – Tower Timberjay News
Save our precious birds – The Age
Posted: at 8:06 am
Re. Labors EV tax set for a rough road (Sunday Age, 31/1). To go to an extreme, if all road-using vehicles were electric, how would public roads be funded? Currently the level of revenue derived from the fuel excise tax is dropping as vehicles become more fuel efficient, so the burden of revenue-raising disproportionately falls to those on lower incomes. Often they live in outer areas with limited public transport and cannot afford the new, more fuel-efficient models or, heaven forbid, an EV. Maybe governments should be looking at scrapping the petrol-diesel excise and using a congestion-style tax that does not unduly penalise those who can least afford it.Josephine Bant, Collingwood
I wonder whether Craig Kelly is auditioning for a role in Clive Palmers next political party Kelly tried to influence experts (The Age, 6/2). Didnt Palmer buy 30 million doses of hydroxychloroquine? This might have been a useful inducement to some voters if Commonwealth Chief Medical Officer Paul Kelly had not said last month there was no evidence to show it or ivermectin should be rolled out to Australians. Now Kelly can promote it along with that other resource of diminishing value, coal.Gill Riley, Doncaster East
I am about to buy some new furniture and wonder whether former export manager and now backbencher Craig Kelly could offer me some advice. In return, I can share my ideas about treatments for COVID-19 with him.John Weston, Melton
Up to 30,000 fans each day, in close proximity, at the Australian Open watching sweaty, yelling, grunting players? What could possibly go wrong?Erica Grebler, Caulfield North
Melbourne has a number of large, Crown-land sites that are partially leased to private clubs for horse racing Flemington, Sandown, Caulfield and Moonee Valley which could be turned into quarantine facilities. These sites are near transport hubs, hospitals and accommodation for the health workers who may staff them for possibly years.
Temporary and airy quarantine quarters could be built on the capacious inner paddocks and outer parking paddocks. Racing could continue on the racing track, or not it earns a great deal for the state. But COVID-19s evolving variants will cost us more. The greater issue is how the publics greater good can be served best at the least cost now.Ian Lang, Flemington
The story of Mostafa Azimitabar (Sunday Age, 31/1) should be required reading for all those who have closed their ears to the plight of refugees. Moz is one of the lucky ones, able now to enjoy the simple pleasures we take for granted, like a walk outdoors and time with friends. However, I still fear for his future, and the many who are locked up in hotels and detention centres, when both sides of the political spectrum refuse to acknowledge the rights of refugees under international laws.Helen Scheller, Benalla
Jon Faines analysis of the honours system (Sunday Age, 31/1) is spot on. Over two decades I have nominated or been a referee for eight people, all very worthy of recognition. All the nominations were successful but the level of order given was in inverse proportion to the degree to which their contribution was done in a voluntary rather than salaried capacity.
Social status is the root of the problem. Wealthy philanthropists should be recognised for giving money to good causes, but why an AC (Companion of the Order of Australia) or AO (Officer of the Order of Australia) when people such as foster carers, who give of themselves to abused and neglected children in a more profound way, never receive more than an OAM (Medal of the Order of Australia), and most are not recognised?
Get rid of the caste system have one honours level for everyone based on service, not status.Dorothy Scott, Macclesfield
So the Liberal Party has replaced an older, white, Catholic conservative male with a younger, white, Catholic conservative male in the seat of Menzies (The Age, 6/2). This in an electorate with a burgeoning multicultural population. Big deal.Dick Davies, North Warrandyte
Jacqueline Maleys assertion that the last federal Labor government delivered nothing real on climate change action (Sunday Age, 31/1) is false. Our government introduced a suite of climate change policies including a carbon price, which abated up to 17 millions of CO2 over two years, the insulation of 1.2 million homes, and 73,000 rebates for solar home hot water systems.
Our most enduring achievement was the Mandatory Renewable Energy Target which legislated a five-fold increase in the share of renewable generation to 20per cent by 2020 a target that was met and exceeded. Through policy and legislation, we created a renewable energy industry with enough critical mass to keep pushing forward with the clean energy transition.
These policies were bitterly opposed by the Liberal Party, first in opposition and subsequently in government. But they resulted in a drop of Australias emissions by about 10per cent in real terms.Kevin Rudd, Brisbane
The Age's editor, Gay Alcorn, writes an exclusive newsletter for subscribers on the week's most important stories and issues. Sign up here to receive it every Friday.
See the article here:
Comments Off on Save our precious birds – The Age
Opinion: Heritage & Housing, the balance we just can’t seem to strike in the GTA | Urbanized – Daily Hive
Posted: at 8:06 am
Written by Vonny Sweetland, community advocate and political news contributor.
Balancing Torontos rich cultured history with housing needs has been an unending game of seesaw. The perfect balance isnt just a desire its crucial to addressing the housing crisis.
When a demolition crew showed up at Torontos Foundry buildings on the first day of the latest lockdown, it brought out community advocates in droves. The historic industrial Toronto complex was set to become a cultural hub, but citing the need for housing, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Steve Clark, issued a Ministerial Zoning Order clearing the way for development to begin and bypassing the municipal planning regulations of the site.
The Ford governments move has been met with unending disapproval from community members and councillors alike, but its also a key step in resolving Torontos chaotic housing crisis.
The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing issued three MZOs in Torontos West Don Lands on provincially-owned properties to accelerate the creation of nearly 1,000 new affordable units and 17,000 square feet of new community space. I have always said, We must build without erasing, but the truth is this: Toronto is badly in need of more housing and this move will help Toronto achieve its affordable housing targets at a time when it desperately needs it.
Minister Clarks spokesperson, Stephanie Bellotto, provided the following statement: In regards to the Foundry, the Province has been clear that this provincially-owned property which has been largely abandoned for over 40 years and requires demolition to allow for significant environmental remediation will be revitalized to allow for the construction of new affordable housing, market housing, and community space, while respecting heritage elements.
We remain disappointed that the City of Toronto is slowing down the construction of much-needed affordable housing and community space, and environmental remediation in the West Don Lands.
On Friday, an Ontario judge ruled that the province could no longer continue with the Foundry demolition pending a decision next month. This gives the City and Province time to work out its complicated situation.
In December 2019, the City released the HousingTO 2020-2030 Action Plan, a 10-year plan outlining goals for building more affordable housing units in Toronto. The goal is to build 40,000 new affordable housing units over a 10-year period, 18,000 of which are set to be supportive housing combining housing assistance and supports for physical and mental health.
At the time of the plans release, the City asked Ontario to provide over $6 billion in upfront capital and 300 million for on-going operational funding to help actualize the goal.
On one hand, the City wants the Province to pay up and be an active partner in achieving affordable housing in Toronto, but then impedes the process when it attempts to build. Like most things in life, you cant have your cake and eat it too. Protecting culture is extremely important, but its a false dichotomy to suggest this cant be done while building at the same time.
The fact is, the City loses affordable housing at a much faster rate than it creates it. This gridlock is not what we need right now. If the province can commit to doing more community consultation, providing hard numbers on the units they plan to build and working with the City as an equal partner, a result all sides will find satisfactory is more than possible.
Torontonians are out of work, fearful for their health, and emotionally spent due to the pandemic. Political infighting couldnt come at a worse time. Councillors must stop adding fuel to the fire with all of the fiery rhetoric, and try to work with their Provincial counterparts to deliver a mutually agreeable outcome.
Andrea Horwaths NDP has made its position clear after Fridays court order halting the project from becoming complete. Todays win is a direct result of phenomenal community organizing efforts, tweeted MPP Suze Morrison.
The Liberals have remained relatively quiet on the issue prompting one GTA resident to pen, Steven Del Duca, where are you? Its important to note that the new and current Ontario Liberal party leader has his own checkered past when it comes to building and land protections.
In 2019, Del Duca built a large swimming pool in the backyard of his Vaughan home without securing the proper permits. His backyard is pressed against the public parkland thats part of the Humber River watershed. Its considered environmentally sensitive land and is controlled by the TRCA. Del Duca built anyway and created a media storm once the information became public. The gaffe was costly and gave the now Liberal leader an elitist do as I say, and not as I do reputation in the minds of some.
Recent data suggests Premier Ford is still polling far ahead of both Del Duca and Horwath: 44% of polling respondents stated they either approved or mostly approved of the Doug Ford government, 27 % said they had a positive view of the NDP leader, while 38% either didnt know who Steven Del Duca was or didnt know enough about him to form an opinion.
The message is clear: If the election were held today, Ford would still be the Premier. With no signs of a new provincial leader coming any time soon, the Ford administration is one the City of Toronto is going to have to work with for quite some time.
Lets hope both orders of government are able to come together and deliver an outcome that is beneficial to all Torontonians.
Follow VonnySweetland on Twitter.
Link:
Comments Off on Opinion: Heritage & Housing, the balance we just can’t seem to strike in the GTA | Urbanized – Daily Hive
Nanotech Announces Brand Protection Win from Canadian Vita – GlobeNewswire
Posted: at 8:05 am
Figure 1:
Custom Canadian Vita LumaChrome Colour-shifting Authentication Label
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, Feb. 01, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Nanotech Security Corp. (TSXV: NTS) (OTCQX: NTSFF) (Nanotech or the Company), a leader in the development of secure and memorable nano-optic security features used in the government and banknote and brand protection markets, has won new brand protection business with Canadian Vita Corp., Canada's leading ginseng supplier. Nanotech will supply custom LumaChrome colour-shifting labels with printed logos and trackable serial numbers for Canadian Vitas ginseng products. Financial terms have not been publicly disclosed.
Counterfeit ginseng products are a major industry problem that can be very harmful to consumers, said Canadian Vita CEO Hieu Tran. LumaChrome labels will help us fight counterfeit products and ensure our Canadian Vita brand remains as a reliable source of safe, premium ginseng products. The labels will confirm Canadian Vita products are authentic and meet quality standards. This collaboration with Nanotech is a major milestone as it has helped Canadian Vita set higher standards in the ginseng industry.
LumaChrome and our other anti-counterfeiting solutions enable companies like Canadian Vita to secure their products and extend brand awareness through their entire supply chain, said President and CEO Troy Bullock. This consumer-packaged goods win continues to validate our strategy of developing a portfolio of products to address the multi-billion-dollar problem of counterfeit consumer goods. We look forward to a long-running, successful partnership with Canadian Vita.
LumaChrome labels offer straightforward authentication through a crisp colour transition when the viewing angle is changed. It is intuitive to use and easy to recognize at a considerable distance, multiple angles, and variable lighting conditions. These striking colour transitions are extremely difficult to simulate, requiring sophisticated production equipment and specialized knowledge in thin-film optics to produce, making it an ideal anti-counterfeit solution. Besides being proven technology used in the banknote industry for years, new LumaChrome formats easily integrate into track & trace, smart packaging, and brand protection applications.
For LumaChrome samples and pricing, contactinfo@nanosecurity.caorclick here.
A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/9dceeb18-a568-482c-8986-4134dfa86e3d
About Canadian Vita
Canadian Vita is Canada's leading ginseng supplier. Their expertise in ginseng farming and processing has allowed them to craft high quality ginseng products. All products that reach customers have gone through stringent inspections from the harvesting to packing stages, to ensure only the best quality ginseng is distributed. With a vision to help empower lives by improving health through traditional herbal supplements, Canadian Vita continues to develop products that make the consumption of ginseng more enjoyable and efficient. With over 35 years of experience, their dedicated team of farmers and researchers exceed industry standards. For more information, visit https://canadianvita.com/.
About Nanotech
With billions of security features in circulation, Nanotechs products include secure and memorable security labels, stripes, patches, and colour-shifting foils for currency authentication and brand protection.
KolourOptikis a patented visual technology that is exclusive to the government and banknote market and combines sub-wavelength nanostructures and microstructures to create modern overt security features with a unique and customizable optical effect. KolourOptik pure plasmonic colour pixels produce full colour, 3D depth, and movement used in security stripes and threads that are nearly impossible to replicate.
LiveOptik is a patented visual technology that utilizes innovative nano-optics one tenth the size of traditional holographic structures to create next generation overt security features customized to our customers unique requirements. LiveOptik delivers multi-colour, 3D depth, movement, and image switches for secure brand protection stripes, threads, and labels that are nearly impossible to replicate.
Additional information about Nanotech can be found at the Companys website http://www.nanosecurity.ca, the Canadian disclosure filings website http://www.sedar.com or the OTCMarkets disclosure filings website http://www.otcmarkets.com.
Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
Read more from the original source:
Nanotech Announces Brand Protection Win from Canadian Vita - GlobeNewswire
Posted in Nanotech
Comments Off on Nanotech Announces Brand Protection Win from Canadian Vita – GlobeNewswire
Nanotech Powered Mass Testing Now the Key to Unlocking COVID-19 Lockdowns – PRNewswire
Posted: at 8:05 am
LONDON, Feb. 2, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- The World Nano Foundation and pandemic experts say regular use of inexpensive mass lateral flow rapid antigen test kits is the way to beat COVID-19, its variants and future viruses.
As vaccination quickens for vulnerable members of society, the next prize is to get the world's economies moving, with mass frequent testing as the key, using the mantra 'test to suppress', and as an early warning system to protect against new strains and future outbreaks.
These simple-to-manufacture rapid tests have shown a thousand-fold increase in the effectiveness and accuracy of testing with this technology. The kits can produce a positive result even when there are fewer antigens to the virus in the sample vital for finding asymptomatic individuals and 'super-spreaders'.
In what many believe was a game changer in preventing lockdowns across the world, in the UK, community and workplace lateral flow rapid test kits (LFTs) have been mobilised now for door-to-door delivery the UK government has secured more than 400 million of these kits for its "Test to Suppress" strategy as well as to address fears that the South African variant had broken out in areas of the country.
Many other countries and industries are now adopting this technology.
Innova Medical the world's largest manufacturer of rapid lateral flow antigen tests is ramping up to 50 million a day by the spring has also confirmed that its COVID-19 product is effective in detecting variant strains such as the British (Kent), South African, and Brazilian variants, which appear more contagious than the earlier strains.
"As these dangerous strains show signs of increased transmissibility across communities, the global effort to eliminate COVID-19 requires frequent, comprehensive and equitable testing that can detect these emerging strains," said Daniel Elliott, President and CEO of Innova Medical Group.
Elliot added that numerous studies have shown that rapid antigen tests are an important tool for identifying infectious people quickly and equitably, even when they may not have COVID-19 symptoms, in ways not possible with slower, more expensive, centralised lab-based tests.
He said the virus continues to morph its genetic ribonucleic acid (RNA) to generate new and potentially more contagious variants, but Innova's antigen test is effective because it looks for multiple proteins in the virus.
Workplace and community rapid mass testing is already starting to take place to keep economies moving and the entertainment and sports industries are said to be looking at a 'day pass' testing approach using LFT kits, in the same way that temperature checks were made on people using restaurants and pubs between lockdowns.
A trial is already under way in France using a music theatre to give day pass security so that people can start attending mass events again.
World Health Organisation Special Envoy on COVID-19, David Nabarro, had already suggested this approach:
"We've seen it (rapid mass testing) used in many different locations, for example in trying to keep aircraft free of people who've got COVID or looking after major events."
A UK Government initiative offering LFTs in workplaces - healthcare, education, and local authorities, with private companies such as Royal Mail, the DVLA and Tate & Lyle Sugars also adopting frequent rapid testing.
Globally renowned British doctors' journal, The Lancet, backed this approach after publishing an exhaustive study of quarantine and testing measures, and leading UK scientists and clinical experts have added their weight.
Oxford University researchers found the UK Government's most sensitive LFTs detected 83-90% of all infectious cases of COVID-19 and, with the UK investing more than 1.5bn in these test kits so far.
Oxford's Regius Professor of Medicine, Sir John Bell underlined the benefit of these tests removing infectious people from high-risk environments: "They've found 25,000 cases just in healthcare, which may have prevented tens of thousands of cases of the disease."
Tim Peto, Professor of Medicine, Infectious Disease, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, Oxford University addressed the contrasts between PCR (polymerase chain reaction) swab testing and lateral flow kits:
"PCR is very good at telling you've had the virus or got the virus, but it doesn't tell you whether you are infectious or not and the other problem about the swab test is that it takes a day or twoto get the answer back. The LFT has the enormous advantage of giving you an answer in about 30 minutes."
He said this allows immediate self-isolation and individuals can also quickly advise their contacts so, "within a few hours, a local outbreak can be detected. This can't be done with the swab (PCR) tests" adding that LFTs "detect people with high viral loadsthe very people who are infectious."
The World Nano Foundation (WNF) promotes healthcare technology and predicts that mass testing is central to future pandemic protection.
The not-for-profit organisation's Co-founder Paul Sheedy said: "Our research shows how healthcare diagnostics technology will shift dramatically to a more decentralised community early intervention model, against potential epidemics and pandemics.
"Our own COVIDlytics modelling shows that an intensive front line 'Test to Suppress' campaign using rapid test kits available to the individual will allow early detection and immediate isolation, reducing the need for lockdowns.
"And our simulation maps how consecutive daily tests for three days can rapidly identify and isolate infectious people. Weekly testing can then sustain a low infection rate even in a large population.
"A key point previously missed by some experts is that high quality rapid lateral flow tests are not for people who already think they have COVID-19; it's about everyone else testing frequently to check they are not infectious.
"Used alongside vaccines and other preventative methods, these simple tests have been developed from colloidal gold nanoparticle research and are a vital component in the battle to defeat the virus and it's future variants.
"Rapid community testing is simpler, faster, cheaper, more effective and mobilises everyone to help themselves, their relatives, friends, and colleagues, to keep everyone safe.
"As West Africa reeled under the impact of Ebola (2014-16) the world watched with bated breath to see if the 'beast' would go global, but frequent mass rapid testing was deployed at community level multiple times over a few weeks stopping that terrible disease in its tracks.
"With the work that we do, we know that there are even more exciting technologies on the way that will be central to the world's fight for pandemic protection and future healthcare.
"We have already seen the danger from not being on our guard against renewed viral threats. Spanish Flu struck in 1918, killing up to 50 million people in four waves, the last two being most deadly because public health warnings were not adhered to."
This means that there will be a revolution in healthcare in the coming years. Healthcare investment is forecast to grow at a rate of nearly 50% a year towards a market set to be worth $1.333 trillion by 2027*. The acceleration highlights wide recognition that the world cannot afford the human and economic cost of another pandemic.
One international investment platform is a Pandemic Protection alternative investment fund operated by Vector Innovation Fund in Luxembourg focused on limiting the effect of long form Covid-19, insulating the world against the impact of future pandemics, whilst minimising any impact on the global economy and healthcare provision and preparedness.
The Vector Innovation Fund is a Reserved Alternative Investment Fund (RAIF) specialising in support for technology companies able to transform global markets, notably in global healthcare, sustainability and longevity. These transformational technologies come from the nanotechnology, biotech, AI and machine learning, medical devices, therapies and digital health sectors.
The World Nano Foundation is a not-for-profit membership organisation with 75,000 subscribers and users in 40 countries working on international commercialisation of nanoscale technologies in 16 industry sectors and collaborates with a wide variety of partners, maximising support and funding bringing advanced technology to the world and commerce. This is supported by many industry and academic groups developing and creating a legacy for nanotechnology innovation.
SOURCE The World Nano Foundation
View original post here:
Nanotech Powered Mass Testing Now the Key to Unlocking COVID-19 Lockdowns - PRNewswire
Posted in Nanotech
Comments Off on Nanotech Powered Mass Testing Now the Key to Unlocking COVID-19 Lockdowns – PRNewswire
World Cancer Day: From Immunotherapy, vaccines to nanotech, new treatments that show promise against disease – Firstpost
Posted: at 8:05 am
Researchers are also looking into using genetically modified salmonella bacteria to destroy tumours from the inside out where more traditional treatments, notably chemotherapy, cannot penetrate
Representational image. National Cancer Institute/Unsplash
More effective therapies, nanotechnology and even the prospect of vaccinating for certain tumours: battles may slowly be starting to turn in the never-ending war against cancer.
The second leading cause of death globally, cancer accounted for an estimated 9.6 million deaths, or one in six deaths, in 2018.
On World Cancer Day on Thursday, here is a look at some of the more promising developments in treating and preventing the disease.
Immunotherapy breakthroughs
Immunotherapy drugs, which prime the immune system to recognise and destroy cancerous cells, have shown huge promise against previously untreatable cancers over the last decade.
But they vary greatly among different forms of cancer and only work in around a quarter of all patients.
A main focus of research now centres on "increasing the percentage of patients that respond well to immunotherapy," according to Christophe Le Tourneau, director of clinical research at France's Curie Institute.
One promising avenue is the development of antibodies capable of recognising a specific protein found in cancerous cells, "which would help the body to destroy those cells," Axel Kahn, president of the League Against Cancer, told AFP.
He said research had shown that administering medication or toxins helped destroy cancer cells after antibodies discover them.
Research is also ongoing into immunotherapy after chemotherapy, with the initial treatment creating mutations in cancer cells that may render them easier for the immune system to spot and hunt down.
Another technique known as checkpoint inhibitor therapy has also shown promise.
When proteins contained within cancer cells bind with immune cells, they send an "off" signal to the rest of the immune system, disabling the body's natural defences.
Checkpoint inhibitor therapy essentially blocks this binding, allowing killer immune T-cells to seek and destroy the pathogen.
This technique has already significantly improved prognoses for some melanomas and lung cancers, and other trials are underway.
Such treatment may offer also hope to the 10-15 percent of breast cancer sufferers who receive a so-called "triple-negative" prognoses tumours that contain neither hormonal nor HER2 protein receptors.
HER2-positive breast cancer tends to grow more quickly than other forms but it is equally more treatable.
Triple-negative breast cancer is, however, "usually more aggressive (but) the treatment options available today are not sufficiently effective", according to the Arc Foundation cancer research centre near Paris.
One study with the drug durvalumab published this month in Nature Medicine showed that the antibody was somewhat effective at shutting off tumours' ability to evade the immune system.
'Vaccinate' for tumours?
Trials are also underway exploring the efficacy of certain candidate vaccines that can help treat tumours.
The French biotech firm Transgene is developing a treatment combining immunotherapy and a viral vector vaccine a modified virus that delivers anti-cancer instructions to the body.
A similar trial is underway to treat patients with cancer of the ear, nose or throat.
The Oncopole Toulouse cancer treatment centre, conducting the research, said the treatment acts as a kind of "facial recognition service" for the immune system to detect cancerous cells and learn how to destroy them similar to how some vaccines work.
Predicting effective treatment
Analysing the structure and, increasingly, the genetic make-up of cancer plays a major role not only in prognosis how likely it is that a patient will recover but also in what treatment options are available.
"It's really the main issue: it's not worth giving certain treatments to people who won't benefit from them and it's absolutely crucial that those who will benefit receive them, said Eric Solary, scientific director at the Arc Foundation.
A better understanding of certain mutations in cancer cells as well as how immune cells behave are helping doctors make ever-more accurate treatment choices.
Nanotechnology
Another area of growing interest is the possible use of nanocapsules microscopic coatings of metal or fat on existing drug molecules.
The idea according to Solary is to better distribute medicine around the patient's body by allowing it to "go directly into tumour cells and avoiding damaging normal cells".
In the same vein, researchers are also looking into using genetically modified salmonella bacteria to destroy tumours from the inside out where more traditional treatments, notably chemotherapy, cannot penetrate.
Original post:
Posted in Nanotech
Comments Off on World Cancer Day: From Immunotherapy, vaccines to nanotech, new treatments that show promise against disease – Firstpost
Latest water purification technologies – top five – Water Technology
Posted: at 8:05 am
]]]]]]>]]]]>]]> Water Technology lists five of the latest water purification technologies. Image courtesy of People Image Studio/Shutterstock.
Sign up here for GlobalData's free bi-weekly Covid-19 report on the latest information your industry needs to know.
Global water treatment product manufacturers are exploring state-of-the-art water filtration technologies such as carbon nanotubes and advanced membrane systems to better serve their customers.
Water Technology lists five of the latest water purification technologies that are likely to serve as alternatives to existing water purification processes.
Nanotechnology involves several approaches and processes of applying materials on the atomic or molecular scale. Nanotech-based water purification processes are considered to be modular, highly efficient and cost-effective when compared to conventional water purification methods.
The major applications of nanotechnology in water treatment processes include silver, copper and zero-valent iron (ZVI) nanoparticles, nanostructured photocatalysts, nano-membranes, and nanoadsorbents.
The large surface-to-volume ratio of nanoparticles enhances the adsorption of chemical and biological particles, while enabling the separation of contaminants at very low concentrations. Nanoadsorbents feature specific physical and chemical properties for the removal of metallic pollutants from water.
Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are considered to be one of the prominent nanomaterials used in water purification. CNT-based filtration systems can remove organic, inorganic and biological compounds from water.
Global companies such as Alfa Laval, Applied Membranes, DowDuPont, GEA Group, Inopor, and Koch Membrane Systems are involved in the development of membranes that are made of nanomaterials to eliminate pollutants during the treatment.
The acoustic nanotube technology was invented by scientists at Nasas Johnson Space Center. It employs acoustics in place of pressure to direct water through small-diameter carbon nanotubes.
The technology is based on an acoustically driven molecular screen integrated with carbon nanotubes that allow the passage of water molecules while blocking any larger molecules and contaminants. It consumes less power than traditional filtration systems and drives water away from contaminants instead of removing pollutants from water. The process also eliminates the need for flushing the filter system.
The primary applications of acoustic nanotube technology are municipal water plants, medical facilities, laboratories, distilleries, desalination plants, industrial facilities, wastewater treatment plants, and consumer segment. The innovation is scalable with the integration of multiple filters, according to the filtration needs of users.
Nasas patented acoustic nanotube technology is available for the firms to license and evolve into a commercial water purification product offering.
Water treatment using photocatalysis has gained prominence in recent years due to its efficiency in treating contaminated water. The technology utilises photocatalyst and ultraviolet (UV) rays to remove toxic substances from water.
Panasonic developed a technology that binds the photocatalyst (titanium dioxide) to a commercial adsorbent and a catalyst called zeolite, ensuring effective separation and recovery of photocatalysts from the water for reuse. Titanium dioxide can mineralise a range of organic compounds into safe end products. The catalyst uses UV radiation either from sunlight or artificial light to separate substances.
Photocatalysis can break down a range of organic materials, estrogens, pesticides, dyes, crude oil, and microbes such as viruses and chlorine-resistant pathogens, as well as inorganic compounds such as nitrous oxides.
Photocatalytic water treatment systems are suitable for use in water and wastewater treatment facilities and can treat industrial wastewater polluted with high loads of organic substances or metals.
Aquaporin Inside technology from Danish cleantech company Aquaporin is based on the bio-mimetic water treatment membrane design. Aquaporins enable quick and highly selective water transfer across the cell membrane. They allow the cell to regularise its volume and internal osmotic pressure in line with the hydrostatic and osmotic pressure differences.
The aquaporin channels distinct architecture allows the passage of water molecules and blocks all other compounds. The natural bio-mimetic membranes also serve as a basis for the development of artificial bio-mimetic membrane systems. The technology is being used in industrial and household water filtration and purification systems.
The Aquaporin Inside membranes are the only membranes in the market to employ aquaporins to purify drinking water. The membranes are available for both forward osmosis (FO) and reverse osmosis (RO) applications.
The Aquaporin Space Alliance (ASA), a joint venture between Aquaporin and Danish Aerospace Company (DAS) is commercialising the patented Aquaporin Inside technology in space applications and space programmes, in collaboration with European and US-based firms.
Automated Variable Filtration (AVF) technology involves a simple process where upward flow of influent is cleaned by downward flow of filter media. It eliminates the need for any additional process or freshwater for filter media cleaning.
The AVF method employs continuously cleaned descending bed filters embedded in a variable array. The two-stage configuration of the system integrates two sets of media filters that can function either in serial or parallel mode.
The process delivers water with quality equivalent to that of micro-filtration technology and at a fraction of the cost of low-pressure membranes. It features no moving parts and consumes less power, offerings savings on reduced operating and maintenance costs.
AVF systems are suitable for municipal drinking water and wastewater treatment, wastewater recycling and reuse, pre-filtration for membrane processes and desalination applications.
R2O Water Technologies, Process Research ORTECH (PRO), and Eureka Forbes are some of the major companies involved in the development of AVF technology-based products and services.
Read more here:
Latest water purification technologies - top five - Water Technology
Posted in Nanotech
Comments Off on Latest water purification technologies – top five – Water Technology
Free Speech Arguments Against Trump’s Impeachment Dishonor The First Amendment – People For the American Way
Posted: at 8:05 am
As we approach the Senate trial on the impeachment of former President Donald Trump for incitement of insurrection against the Republic he swore to protect on Feb. 9, his lawyers and other defenders have made the astonishing claim that convicting him would somehow violate freedom of speech. Judicial Watchs Tom Fitton even asserted that convicting Trump would be devastating to the First Amendment because it would be a green light to remove others that engage in core political speech that would be criminalized if the Left doesnt like it.
As a constitutional lawyer who has defended the First Amendment for almost forty years, I agree with lawyer Chris Truax that these free speech claims are absurd. First, the First Amendment protects members of the public from having their speech suppressed or punished by the government, and does not shield government officials for accountability for their actions, even if they involve speech. A private citizen would have the First Amendment right to proclaim loyalty to Russia or China or to advocate the secession of Texas from the union. Does anyone seriously contend that free speech allows a U.S. president to violate his oath of office and do the same, and also escape accountability through impeachment for such treasonous acts? Apparently, Trump and his supporters do.
As the House impeachment managers have pointed out, moreover, even if Trumps actions were treated like those of a private citizen, and even if the First Amendment applied to Congressional efforts to hold a president accountable as it does to a criminal prosecution, the free speech defense would still fail. The Supreme Court ruled more than 50 years ago that the First Amendment does not protect speech when it is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to do so. Trumps incendiary remarks just before the Jan. 6 violent insurrection at the Capitol, when he exhorted his followers to go to the Capitol and fight like hell, particularly when combined with evidence of his intent like reports that he was delighted as the riots were happening, could well be enough to warrant even a criminal conviction of Trump by a court. They are clearly enough to justify a conviction on impeachment in the Senate.
I have always believed that the First Amendment is first in our Constitution because, in important ways, free speech and the other rights it safeguards are crucial to protect our democracy. The attempt of a disgraced ex-president and his seditionist collaborators to try to hide behind free speech, as well as similar recent far right efforts to use freedom of speech to justify the violent actions at the Capitol on Jan. 6, truly dishonors our First Amendment.
Posted in Freedom of Speech
Comments Off on Free Speech Arguments Against Trump’s Impeachment Dishonor The First Amendment – People For the American Way
The Wall Street Journal Misreads Section 230 and the First Amendment – Lawfare
Posted: at 8:05 am
When private tech companies moderate speech online, is the government ultimately responsible for their choices? This appears to be the latest argument advanced by those criticizing Section 230 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996sometimes known as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. But upon closer scrutiny, this argument breaks down completely.
In a new Wall Street Journal op-ed, Philip Hamburger argues that the government, in working through private companies, is abridging the freedom of speech. Weve long respected Hamburger, a professor at Columbia Law School, as the staunchest critic of overreach by administrative agencies. Just last year, his organization (the New Civil Liberties Alliance) and ours (TechFreedom) filed a joint amicus brief to challenge such abuse. But the path proposed in Hamburgers op-ed would lead to a regime for coercing private companies to carry speech that is hateful or even downright dangerous. The storming of the U.S. Capitol should make clear once and for all why all major tech services ban hate speech, misinformation and talk of violence: Words can have serious consequencesin this case, five deaths, in addition to two subsequent suicides by Capitol police officers.
Hamburger claims that there is little if any federal appellate precedent upholding censorship by the big tech companies. But multiple courts have applied the First Amendment and Section 230 to protect content moderation, including against claims of unfairness or political bias. Hamburgers fundamental error is claiming that Section 230 gives websites a license to censor with impunity. Contrary to this popular misunderstanding, it is the First Amendmentnot Section 230which enables content moderation. Since 1998, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that digital media enjoy the First Amendment rights as newspapers. When a state tried to impose fairness mandates on newspapers in 1974, forcing them to carry third-party speech, no degree of alleged consolidation of the power to inform the American people and shape public opinion in the newspaper business could persuade the Supreme Court to uphold such mandates. The court has upheld fairness mandates only for one mediumbroadcasting, in 1969and only because the government licenses use of publicly owned airwaves, a form of state action.
Websites have the same constitutional right as newspapers to choose whether or not to carry, publish or withdraw the expression of others. Section 230 did not create or modify that right. The law merely ensures that courts will quickly dismiss lawsuits that would have been dismissed anyway on First Amendment groundsbut with far less hassle, stress and expense. At the scale of the billions of pieces of content posted by users every day, that liability shield is essential to ensure that website owners arent forced to abandon their right to moderate content by a tsunami of meritless but costly litigation.
Hamburger focuses on Section 230(c)(2)(A), which states: No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of ... any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected. But nearly all lawsuits based on content moderation are resolved under Section 230(c)(1), which protects websites and users from being held liable as the publisher of information provided by others. In the 1997 Zeran decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit concluded that this provision barred lawsuits seeking to hold a service provider liable for its exercise of a publishers traditional editorial functionssuch as deciding whether to publish, withdraw, postpone or alter content (emphasis added).
The Trump administration argued that these courts all misread the statute because their interpretation of 230(c)(1) has rendered 230(c)(2)(A) superfluous. But the courts have explained exactly how these two provisions operate differently and complement each other: 230(c)(1) protects websites only if they are not responsible, even in part, for the development of the content at issue. If, for example, they edit that content in ways that contribute to its illegality (say, deleting not in John is not a murderer), they lose their 230(c)(1) protection from suit. Because Congress aimed to remove all potential disincentives to moderate content, it included 230(c)(2)(A) as a belt-and-suspenders protection that would apply even in this situation. Hamburger neglects all of this and never grapples with what it means for 230(c)(1) to protect websites from being treated as the publisher of information created by others.
Hamburger makes another crucial error: He claims Section 230 has privatized censorship because 230(c)(2)(A) makes explicit that it is immunizing companies from liability for speech restrictions that would be unconstitutional if lawmakers themselves imposed them. But in February 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that YouTube was not a state actor and therefore could not possibly have violated the First Amendment rights of the conservative YouTube channel Prager University by flagging some of its videos for restricted mode, which parents, schools and libraries can turn on to limit childrens access to sensitive topics.
Hamburger insists otherwise, alluding to the Supreme Courts 1946 decision in Marsh v. Alabama: The First Amendment protects Americans even in privately owned public forums, such as company towns. But in 2019, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for all five conservative justices, noted that in order to be transformed into a state actor, a private entity must be performing a function that is traditionally and exclusively performed by the government: [M]erely hosting speech by others is not a traditional, exclusive public function and does not alone transform private entities into state actors subject to First Amendment constraints. In fact, Marsh has been read very narrowly by the Supreme Court, which has declined to extend its holding on multiple occasions and certainly has never applied it to any media company.
Hamburger also claims that Big Tech companies are akin to common carriers. Hes right that the law ordinarily obliges common carriers to serve all customers on terms that are fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory. But simply being wildly popular does not transform something into a common carrier service. Common carriage regulation protects consumers by ensuring that services that hold themselves out as serving all comers equally dont turn around and charge higher prices to certain users. Conservatives may claim thats akin to social media services saying theyre politically neutral when pressed by lawmakers at hearings, but the analogy doesnt work. Every social media service makes clear up front that access to the service is contingent on complying with community standards, and the website reserves the discretion to decide how to enforce those standardsas the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit noted recently in upholding the dismissal of a lawsuit by far-right personality Laura Loomer over her Twitter ban. In other words, social media are inherently edited services.
Consider the Federal Communications Commissions 2015 Open Internet Order, which classified broadband service as a common carrier service insofar as an internet service provider (ISP) promised connectivity to substantially all Internet endpoints. Kavanaugh, then an appellate judge, objected that this infringed the First Amendment rights of ISPs. Upholding the FCCs net neutrality rules, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit explained that the FCCs rules would not apply to an ISP holding itself out as providing something other than a neutral, indiscriminate pathwayi.e., an ISP making sufficiently clear to potential customers that it provides a filtered service involving the ISPs exercise of editorial intervention. Social media services make that abundantly clear. And while consumers reasonably expect that their broadband service will connect them to all lawful content, they also know that social media sites wont let you post everything you want.
Hamburger is on surer footing when commenting on federalism and constitutional originalism: [W]hen a statute regulating speech rests on the power to regulate commerce, there are constitutional dangers, and ambiguities in the statute should be read narrowly. But by now, his mistake should be obvious: Section 230 doesnt regulat[e] speech. In fact, it does the opposite: It says the government wont get involved in online speech and wont provide a means to sue websites for their refusal to host content.
Hamburger doubles down by claiming that Section 230 allows the government to set the censorship agenda. But neither immunity provision imposes any agenda at all; both leave it entirely to websites to decide what content to remove. Section 230(c)(1) does this by protecting all decisions made in the capacity of a publisher. Section 230(c)(2)(A) does this by providing an illustrative list of categories (obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing) and then adding the intentionally broad catchall: or otherwise objectionable. Both are coextensive with the First Amendments protection of editorial discretion.
Hamburger argues for a narrow reading of 230(c)(2)(A), which would exclude moderating content for any reason that does not fall into one of those categories or because of its viewpoint. He claims that this will allow state legislatures to adopt civil-rights statutes protecting freedom of speech from the tech companies. And he reminds readers about the dangers of the government co-opting private actors to suppress free speech: Some Southern sheriffs, long ago, used to assure Klansmen that they would face no repercussions for suppressing the speech of civil-rights marchers. This analogy fails for many reasons, especially that those sheriffs flouted laws requiring them to prosecute those Klansmen. That is markedly and obviously different from content moderation, which is protected by the First Amendment.
Ironically, Hamburgers proposal would require the government take the side of those spreading hate and falsehoods online. Under his narrow interpretation of Section 230, the law would not protect the removal of Holocaust denial, use of racial epithets or the vast expanse of speech thatwhile constitutionally protectedisnt anything Hamburger, or any decent person, would allow in his own living room. Nor, for example, would it protect removal of hate speech about Christians or any other religious group. Websites would bear the expense and hassle of fighting lawsuits over moderating content that did not fit squarely into the categories mentioned in 230(c)(2)(A).
Perversely, the law would favor certain kinds of content moderation decisions over others, protecting websites from lawsuits over removing pornography or profanity, but not from litigation over moderating false claims about election results or vaccines or conspiracy theories about, say, Jewish space lasers or Satanist pedophile cannibal cults. But if Hamburgers argument is that Section 230 unconstitutionally encourages private actors to do what the government could not, how does favoring moderation of some types of constitutionally protected speech over others address this complaint? This solution makes sense only if the real criticism isnt of the idea of content moderation, or its constitutionality, but rather that social media platforms arent moderating content according to the critics preferences.
Hamburger is a constitutional originalist, and he invokes the Framers understandings of the First Amendment: Originally, the Constitutions broadest protection for free expression lay in Congresss limited power. But theres nothing remotely originalist about his conclusion. His reading of Section 230 would turn Congress shall make no law... into a way for the government to pressure private media to carry the most odious speech imaginable.
Read more here:
The Wall Street Journal Misreads Section 230 and the First Amendment - Lawfare
Posted in Freedom of Speech
Comments Off on The Wall Street Journal Misreads Section 230 and the First Amendment – Lawfare
After Thomas furore, Bar says to balance free speech and fair trial – Free Malaysia Today
Posted: at 8:05 am
Bar president Salim Bashir says the Tommy Thomas memoirs call for a law on sub judice to be codified.
PETALING JAYA: The Malaysian Bar has called for a law on sub judice and contempt of court to be codified in light of the controversy surrounding the memoirs of former attorney-general Tommy Thomas.
Bar president Salim Bashir said several people had made accusations that the book contained statements that were sub judice or in contempt of court regarding ongoing trials.
Among the cases mentioned were the Cradle Fund murder case in which a former CEOs wife is accused of killing him; the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder case over which former prime minister Najib Razak has filed a defamation suit; and a case involving an arbitration centre chairman.
Several police reports have also been filed against Thomas and the publisher.
Salim said the Bar supports the right to freedom of speech but such freedoms should not prejudice the integrity of court cases or the administration of justice.
With the flurry of spontaneous comments and opinions that are filling social media platforms with regard to ongoing trials and appeals, the public may not fully comprehend where such a line is drawn, said Salim.
Such public comments would be likely to interfere with the fair and impartial disposal of a case in a court of law.
The Malaysian Bar therefore reiterates its calls on the government to codify the law on sub judice comments and contempt of court, and to provide a clear and unequivocal definition of these legal concepts.
Thomas, while still attorney-general, had said in a speech in 2018 that he did not subscribe to the notion of sub judice (the principle which forbids public comments about trials in progress) because Malaysia lacked a jury system.
Salim said that there is a fine but important line between commenting on cases and improperly influencing them, and noted that the rule of law demands that everyone be entitled to a fair trial.
Yesterday, a High Court judge was told that contempt proceedings might be taken against Thomas for comments he made about the Cradle Fund murder case, in which Samirah Muzaffar is accused of killing her husband Nazrin Hassan, the funds chief executive.
Samirahs lawyer, Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, said Thomas had made comments that were sub judice regarding her explanations of the events on the day, and he sought to cite Thomas for contempt of court.
On Tuesday, lawyer Baljit Singh Sidhu said Thomas should not have revealed facts about a case involving his client, former Asian International Arbitration Centre director Sundra Rajoo, as an application for a judicial review was still pending in the Federal Court.
Sundra also said the allegations made against him in the book were untrue and defamatory and were in contempt of legal proceedings.
In his memoirs, entitled My Story: Justice in the Wilderness, Thomas recounts events that took place during his time as attorney-general from June 2018 to February 2020. The book, published on Jan 30, is the subject of an investigation by the home ministry.
Excerpt from:
After Thomas furore, Bar says to balance free speech and fair trial - Free Malaysia Today
Posted in Freedom of Speech
Comments Off on After Thomas furore, Bar says to balance free speech and fair trial – Free Malaysia Today







