Archive for 2007

First bird-flu vaccine less effective than thought

Tuesday, February 27th, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) — The nation’s first vaccine against bird flu is even less effective than previously thought, according to Food and Drug Administration documents released Monday.

In clinical trials, the two-shot series appears to provide protection to just 45 percent of adults who received the highest dose of the Sanofi Aventis SA vaccine.

An earlier, interim analysis of the same study of the vaccine suggested it sparked a protective immune response in 54 percent of patients, when measured 28 days after getting the second shot. The New England Journal of Medicine published those results in March 2006.

The FDA released the more recent results, contained in company and agency documents, ahead of a Tuesday meeting where it will ask a panel of outside experts to review the vaccine. The agency isn’t required to follow the advice of its advisory committees, but usually does. The vaccine is the first against the H5N1 influenza strain to seek FDA approval.

More…

070226 – Monday – Letter to a friend

Monday, February 26th, 2007

M,

I do speculate.   Probably everyone does.  Quantum physics and cosmology are both tough areas, though.  As humans, we find it hard to imagine that things might not have a beginning or end; like time and space.  Or that things can work the way they tell us they do at the quantum physical level.  So, I find that my mental machinery is already ‘challenged’ to try to imagine what they are telling me, much less to really grasp it and then imagine on further.

The ultimate question of where did the universe come from assumes a beginning.  The idea that the universe will expand forever, suggests the question of what’s beyond the area it is expanding into.  If you talk to scientists, some will tell you that it is the questions themselves that are wrong.

I used to try to understand how space/time could curve back on itself as Einstein suggested.  That if you went long enough in one direction, you’d end up back in the same place again.   I never got it until someone pointed out the Mobius Strip as a representation of the idea and that being on the surface of a sphere is another.  In both cases, you can start from a place and go in a direction and arrive back in the same place.  With three-dimensional space, it is harder for our brains to wrap themselves around the same idea but, apparently, it is true.   So, there may not be a ‘beyond’ beyond what we see as strange as it might seem.  I’ve read several laymen’s books on Einstein’s theory of Relativity and I still find them tough going.

I guess I’m seeing, as I’m writing, that in these areas I’m not speculating so much as trying to grasp what there already is to know.

The idea of the Big Bang and of what they call The Expansion bugs me.   It doesn’t feel right but that’s about all I can say about it.

And what about quantum physics?   They tell us that as you get smaller and smaller, you finally come to things the size of the Planck limit.   They say that there is nothing smaller.  Well, I find that bizarre just like I find the idea that there’s nothing bigger than the universe or no beginning of time.  But, perhaps that’s just because I inhabit an evolved mammalian brain which has no way to wrap itself around such ideas.

And Schrodering’s Cat is a situation that endless numbers of folks have thought about and gone away baffled and yet quantum physics tells us it is so.   Too weird.

So, where do I like to speculate?  I’m fascinated by the mind and consciousness and what perception really is.  What is awareness and self-awareness and how does the mind ‘model’ the reality around us?   How accurate or inaccurate are our perceptions?   The very tool (the mind) we use to ponder these things has inherent in it distortions and shortfalls that interfere with our ability to see through to the answers clearly.   I think a lot of this interest arose from having meditated for many years and spent a lot of time in inner spaces.

One of the reasons I enjoyed altered states of consciousness years ago was because they gave me an alternative to the normal state.  And it is a truism that you cannot see where you are until you’ve seen it from some alternate place.   The more ‘elses’ you’ve visited, the more perspectives you can get on what is transitory and what is fixed among the different places.

Meditation allows you time to experiment with awareness without words, of being without time, of forming intentions and holding them as feelings and not words.  Of identifying with the nervous system that is centered in your abdomen rather than the one in your head.  Of separating your awareness from the stream of chatter that is ever arising from the mind’s language center.  Of realizing as a direct knowing what creativity is and then coming back into normal consciousness and not being able to say it.

I like to speculate about history and where mankind is going and how this same drama might have played itself out on other planets where intelligent life evolved long ago and what might have become of those creatures if they managed to pass through their technological adolescence without destroying themselves.

I like to aggressively find and separate myself from my unconscious belief systems and replace them with things that I’ve had a good look at and have consciously decided are worth incorporating so that who and what I am is more and more a matter of conscious intentional choice rather than being composed of the flotsam and jetsam that happened to wash through my life during my formative years.  And this connects back into a circle with the stuff I said earlier about trying to understand the foibles and limitations of the human mind.  I highly recommend a book called “A Mind of it Own” by Cornelia Fine in this regard.

I find a lot of this to be hard going.   On every side, the temptation to get sucked into some bogus belief system is there.  Hence, why I cleave so tightly to what science reveals.  Hence why I constantly am taking time to stand away from my own beliefs and challenge them and look at alternatives so that I don’t get sucked into the trap of identifying with them and associated them with my ego and thus ending up defending them – right or wrong.

The ego is a big obstacle to clarity.   Cognitive dissonance is a big obstacle.  Assumptions are a problem.  The very way the mind works is a problem.  And yet, someplace behind all of these shifting sands of illusion and misperception, is the bedrock reality we find ourselves within – even though each of us will give a different description of it.

I could go on for while like this.

Dennis

The Stuff Sam Nunn’s Nightmares Are Made Of

Sunday, February 25th, 2007

By now we can too readily imagine the horror of terrorists exploding a nuclear weapon in a major American city: the gutted skyscrapers, the melted cars, the charred bodies. For Sam Nunn, however, a new terror begins the day after. That’s when the world asks whether another bomb is out there. “If a nuclear bomb went off in Moscow or New York City or Jerusalem, any number of groups would claim they have another”, Nunn told me recently. These groups would make steep demands as intelligence officials scrambled to determine which claims were real. Panic would prevail. Even after the detonation of a small, crude weapon that inflicted less damage than the bomb at Hiroshima, Nunn suggested, “The psychological damage would be incalculable. It would be a slow, step-by-step process to regain confidence. And the question will be, Why didn’t we take steps to prevent this? We will have a whole list of things we wish we’d done.“

Nunn thinks of those things every time he picks up a newspaper. When, for instance, he reads about the arrest of a Russian man who, in a sting operation, tried to sell weapons-grade uranium – a reminder of a possible black market in nuclear materials and of the poor security at facilities in the former Soviet Union. Or when he sees news about Iran’s efforts to build a nuclear bomb, which could set off a wave of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East and thus significantly raise the possibility that terrorists will someday acquire a bomb. And despite the apparent diplomatic breakthrough with North Korea earlier this month, in which the North Koreans agreed to begin dismantling their nuclear facilities in return for fuel and other aid, Nunn, who finds the deal encouraging, remains concerned since North Korea’s unpredictable, cash-starved dictatorship still retains perhaps half a dozen nuclear bombs, and the ingredients to make more.

More…

– This article is from the NY Times and they insist that folks have an ID and a PW in order to read their stuff. You can get these for free just by signing up. However, recently, a friend of mine suggested the website bugmenot.com :arrow: as an alternative to having to do these annoying sign ups. Check it out. Thx Bruce S. for the tip.

– Research thx to Tony B.

Net Neutrality – A major big deal

Sunday, February 25th, 2007

– I’m convinced these folks are right. We need to maintain Net Neutrality. Big corporations control TV, Radio and Newspapers. Virtually all the news we get is through a one-way pipe; from them to us. And that news has the spin they want to put on it for their good – not ours. Remember, in the end, corporations are entities which exist only to maximize the profits of their stock holders.

– The Internet is the one thing that has happened in recent history wherein media has been recreated as a two-way street available for all of us to use. Big corporations want to take over control of this new media to (1) profit from it by forcing us to pay them for their services and access and (2) to better control the news and information we receive for their benefit.

– We cannot afford to let them do this. Support Net Neutrality and contact your respresentatives and tell them that you do.


Save the Internet | Rock the Vote

Companies Lay Out Global Framework to Fight Climate Change

Friday, February 23rd, 2007

– This, on the surface, seems very good news. A large group of major companies from around the world signing onto an agreement endorsing the fact that we should do something about climate change.

– But let’s remember that corporations are entities which exist to make profit. Once they’ve grown beyond the mom and pop Ben and Jerry’s stage, they become single-minded in this pursuit. Indeed, it is their very reason for existing. Note at the end of the opening sentence, in the article below, the following phrase, “creating sustainable energy systems necessary for achieving economic growth“. The implication is that they are on-board – so long as continued growth is part of the solution.

– Unfortunately, increasing growth is central to the problems we’re facing. Our foot-print on the earth now is far larger than it can sustain without serious and increasing instabilities in the global climate. We can make more efficient cars, we can change to energy efficient light bulbs, we can recycle our waste more intelligently – we can do all of that and if we continue to grow in population and consumption, we will have only delayed the inevitable.

– Perhaps, if we push it all off to our grandchildren rather than to our children, it will be more palatable?

-I’m suspicious and cynical about these ‘business alliances’. They live for growth. They understand PR. They know there are years and years of good stock reports ahead if they can deflect the social forces which might try to throttle back our runaway growth – if they can give the appearance of action so the concerned will be lulled back to sleep.

– Like the article I posted on the Brazilian Rainforest earlier , we need real action, not more talk.

——————————————————

February 20, 2007 — As a significant step toward tackling climate change, an unprecedented group of companies and organizations from around the world have endorsed a bold post-Kyoto framework for affecting change at the levels of policy and industry, particularly in regard to creating sustainable energy systems necessary for achieving economic growth.

Signatories of The Path to Climate Sustainability: A Joint Statement by the Global Roundtable on Climate Change hail from a range of sectors and industries, including air transport, energy, technology, insurance, banking, and many others, from across the globe.

The statement — endorsed by Allianz, Bayer, Citigroup, DuPont, General Electric, Volvo, and many others — calls on governments to set scientifically informed targets for greenhouse gases and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. The agreement also urges governments to place a price on carbon emissions and to set forth policies aimed at addressing energy efficiency and de-carbonization in all sectors. Calling climate change “an urgent problem,” the statement lays out a proactive framework for global action to mitigate risks and impacts while also meeting the global need for energy, economic growth and sustainable development. It outlines cost-effective technologies that exist today and others that could be developed and deployed to improve energy efficiency and help reduce CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases in major sectors of the global economy.

“Leaders from key economic sectors and regions of the world have reached a consensus on the path forward to reduce human-made climate change,” said Jeffrey D. Sachs, Chair of the Global Roundtable on Climate Change and Director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University. “This initiative points the way to an urgently needed global framework for action. I congratulate the Roundtable signatories, and thank them for their bold leadership and contribution to global progress on this critical issue.”

The Climate Change Statement released today has received endorsements from critical stakeholders and independent experts including leading corporations from all economic sectors; smaller firms with very different perspectives and concerns; an array of civil, religious, environmental, research and educational institutions; and a distinguished list of world-leading experts from the fields of climate science, engineering, economics and policy studies.

More…

 

Mountain Glaciers Melting Faster Than Ever, Expert Says

Friday, February 23rd, 2007

Mountain glaciers are melting faster than ever, a leading climate expert announced yesterday, and eerie effects of the thaw are being seen from the summits of South America to the highest peak in Africa.

In Peru alone, ice fields are disappearing so quickly that giant lakes have formed where meadows recently stood.

And retreating glaciers are exposing ancient plants that haven’t been seen in 5,000 years.

Lonnie Thompson, an expert in ancient climates at Ohio State University, announced his findings yesterday at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Francisco, California.

Thompson’s latest research has focused on measuring glaciers in the Andes mountain range, which spans seven South American countries, and on Mount Kilimanjaro in eastern Africa.

“One of the things that’s very clear … is that the climate changes in those areas are unusual—unprecedented—in the thousands of years of history that we can look at in these places,” Thompson said.

Kilimanjaro’s glaciers are melting so quickly, he said, that the mountain lost nearly a quarter of its ice from 2000 to 2006.

Meanwhile, some glaciers in the Andes are melting ten times faster than they did just 20 years ago.

The massive melts are among the most provocative evidence yet that the world is getting too warm too fast to be the result of natural forces alone, Thompson said.

“If you look at what’s happened to these glaciers, they’re not just retreating, they’re accelerating [their retreat],” he said. “And it raises the question of whether this might be a fingerprint of [human-caused global] warming.”

More…

– One essential point that this article failed to mention is how very many people depend on glaciers and high mountain snow packs for their summer water. Most people in northern India south of the Himalayas, most people on the western side of the Andes up and down South America and many people in the dry United States southwest. As the glaciers vanish and the winter snow packs lessen and melt off sooner, water is going to be in ever shorter supply. Eventually, it will go way past critical. Social breakdown and chaos will result as millions of water refugees move to areas with more water. Just part of the coming Perfect Storm.

Warming Climate, Cod Collapse, Have Combined To Cause Rapid North Atlantic Ecosystem Changes

Friday, February 23rd, 2007

Science Daily Ecosystems along the continental shelf waters of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean, from the Labrador Sea south of Greenland all the way to North Carolina, are experiencing large, rapid changes, reports a Cornell oceanographer in the Feb. 23 issue of Science.

While some scientists have pointed to the decline of cod from overfishing as the main reason for the shifting ecosystems, the article emphasizes that climate changes are also playing a big role.

“It is becoming increasingly clear that Northwest Atlantic shelf ecosystems are being tested by climate forcing from the bottom up and overfishing from the top down,” said Charles Greene, director of the Ocean Resources and Ecosystems Program in Cornell’s Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences. “Predicting the fate of these ecosystems will be one of oceanography’s grand challenges for the 21st century.”

More…

Acid Oceans Threatening Marine Food Chain, Experts Warn

Friday, February 23rd, 2007

The world’s oceans are turning acidic due to the buildup of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, and scientists say the effects on marine life will be catastrophic.

In the next 50 to 100 years corrosive seawater will dissolve the shells of tiny marine snails and reduce coral reefs to rubble, the researchers say (coral photos, facts, more).

Four leading marine experts delivered this grim prognosis yesterday at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Francisco, California.

The scientists stressed that increased ocean acidity is one of the gravest dangers posed by the buildup of atmospheric CO2.

“Ocean chemistry is changing to a state that has not occurred for hundreds of thousands of years,” said Richard Feely of Seattle’s Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory.

“Shell-building by marine organisms will slow down or stop. Reef-building will decrease or reverse.”

Already, Feely said, ocean acidity has increased about 30 percent since industrialization began spurring harmful carbon emissions centuries ago. Unless emissions are reduced from current levels, an increase of 150 percent is predicted by 2100.

Such an increase would make the oceans more acidic than they’ve been at any time in the last 20 million years, he added.

More…

Whither the World’s Last Forest?

Friday, February 23rd, 2007

– Read the second paragraph in the article, below, and think about it for a bit. I high-lighted the part that I think is key. And it is just this kind of talk-talk-talk while Rome burns that is so unbelievable. Some time, in not too many years, everyone will be up in arms to know why nothing was done and we’ll look back on stuff like this as absolute crimes – that we gave away this Eden through dithering.
————————————————————

The Amazon is not, and never has been, a pristine wilderness that could be fenced and preserved as an intact ecosystem. Increasingly, it is proving to be a resource-rich region of a continent that desperately needs to grow. Brazil, which contains most of the Amazon basin, is under particular pressure as it tries to reconcile its great disparities between rich and poor. And there’s a voracious market for the goods, whether it’s the Chinese buying steel or the Europeans buying soybeans. At the same time, the vast basin of freshwater and forest is a global feature of such magnitude that its destruction will only help tip a fragile global climate further over the edge. The hard question facing the various governments and organizations with a stake in the outcome is whether some development can prevent a lot of deforestation.

Every year a chunk of forest equivalent to an average-size U.S. state disappears from the Amazon. In the year ending August 2004, 16,236 square miles, about twice the size of Massachusetts, were deforested. According to Conservation International, that represents between 1.1 billion and 1.4 billion trees of 4 inches or more in diameter. This deforestation took place during a time of heightened environmentalism in Brazil, during a robust return to democracy when a comprehensive body of laws protecting the Amazon had been enacted and supported by broad enforcement powers-though often, not the enforcement itself. The reaction of the Brazilian government and nongovernmental organizations to these annual figures can be summarized by the Yogi Berra quote, “It’s like déjà vu all over again.” The so-called experts annually express “shock and surprise” at the figures. The shock subsides, then reappears the following spring. Fingers point at the culprit du jour-the cattle ranchers in some years, or the soy farmers, or the migration of small families clearing homesteads. Loggers, miners, and ranchers get denounced regularly. And in response, the government usually sets aside another national park equivalent in size to a small American state. A federal department’s budget gets increased by more than $100 million, at least publicly. A government official sometimes resigns. Nongovernmental organizations use the statistics in their annual pleas for contributions. The New York Times writes an editorial reminding Brazil that “the rain forest is not a commodity to be exploited for private gain.” The Economist chides Brazil for its institutions, which are “weak, poorly coordinated, and prone to corruption and influence-peddling.” But from one year to another, the process repeats itself and the Amazon shrinks. When we first traveled here in 1980, about 3 percent had been deforested. Today, more than 20 percent is gone.

More (if you really need any more)…

The Big Chill

Friday, February 23rd, 2007

– One of the blogs I read regularly is Jim Kunstler’s .  He’s the author of The Long Emergency: Surviving the End of Oil, Climate Change, and Other Converging Catastrophes of the Twenty-First Century.

– He’s insightful and direct which I like. In this piece, he expresses his doubts about all of the hoopla being raised about Ethanol and how it is going to save us from the coming energy crises. Like me, he thinks people are just looking for easy answers so they don’t have to confront the really hard problems which are approaching.

—————————————–

One of the farmers who organized the Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture’s annual meeting put it nicely: “The ethanol craze means that we’re going to burn up the Midwest’s last six inches of topsoil in our gas-tanks.”

The American public is in chill mode in more ways than one. We are finally freezing our asses off in the Northeast after a supernaturally mild December and January, and the heating oil trucks are once again making the rounds of the home furnaces (and running down their inventories). But we’re also chillin’ on the concept that there is an energy problem per se. The public is convinced that we are one IPO away from attaining the sovereign rescue remedy that will permit us to continue running our Happy Motoring utopia.

The public is bombarded daily with feel-good news about new bio-engineered bacteria that can turn sawmill refuse into high-test gasoline, cornucopias of miracle diesel beans, lithium batteries that will take you from Hackensack to Chicago on a single charge, and still (despite all the evidence against feasibility) hydrogen-powered SUVs. The public is convinced that we will enter a nirvana of “energy independence” just-in-time — the same way that WalMart miraculously restocks it’s shelves.

More…