Archive for the ‘Science’ Category

The Swiss Menace

Thursday, August 20th, 2009

It was the blooper heard round the world. In an editorial denouncing Democratic health reform plans, Investor’s Business Daily tried to frighten its readers by declaring that in Britain, where the government runs health care, the handicapped physicist Stephen Hawking “wouldn’t have a chance,” because the National Health Service would consider his life “essentially worthless.”

Professor Hawking, who was born in Britain, has lived there all his life, and has been well cared for by the National Health Service, was not amused.

Besides being vile and stupid, however, the editorial was beside the point. Investor’s Business Daily would like you to believe that Obamacare would turn America into Britain — or, rather, a dystopian fantasy version of Britain. The screamers on talk radio and Fox News would have you believe that the plan is to turn America into the Soviet Union. But the truth is that the plans on the table would, roughly speaking, turn America into Switzerland — which may be occupied by lederhosen-wearing holey-cheese eaters, but wasn’t a socialist hellhole the last time I looked.

Let’s talk about health care around the advanced world.

Every wealthy country other than the United States guarantees essential care to all its citizens. There are, however, wide variations in the specifics, with three main approaches taken.

In Britain, the government itself runs the hospitals and employs the doctors. We’ve all heard scare stories about how that works in practice; these stories are false. Like every system, the National Health Service has problems, but over all it appears to provide quite good care while spending only about 40 percent as much per person as we do. By the way, our own Veterans Health Administration, which is run somewhat like the British health service, also manages to combine quality care with low costs.

The second route to universal coverage leaves the actual delivery of health care in private hands, but the government pays most of the bills. That’s how Canada and, in a more complex fashion, France do it. It’s also a system familiar to most Americans, since even those of us not yet on Medicare have parents and relatives who are.

Again, you hear a lot of horror stories about such systems, most of them false. French health care is excellent. Canadians with chronic conditions are more satisfied with their system than their U.S. counterparts. And Medicare is highly popular, as evidenced by the tendency of town-hall protesters to demand that the government keep its hands off the program.

Finally, the third route to universal coverage relies on private insurance companies, using a combination of regulation and subsidies to ensure that everyone is covered. Switzerland offers the clearest example: everyone is required to buy insurance, insurers can’t discriminate based on medical history or pre-existing conditions, and lower-income citizens get government help in paying for their policies.

More…

– research thanks to:  Michael M.

– 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, a friend of mine suggests 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.

Betraying the Planet

Saturday, August 8th, 2009

So the House passed the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill. In political terms, it was a remarkable achievement.

But 212 representatives voted no. A handful of these no votes came from representatives who considered the bill too weak, but most rejected the bill because they rejected the whole notion that we have to do something about greenhouse gases.

And as I watched the deniers make their arguments, I couldn’t help thinking that I was watching a form of treason — treason against the planet.

To fully appreciate the irresponsibility and immorality of climate-change denial, you need to know about the grim turn taken by the latest climate research.

The fact is that the planet is changing faster than even pessimists expected: ice caps are shrinking, arid zones spreading, at a terrifying rate. And according to a number of recent studies, catastrophe — a rise in temperature so large as to be almost unthinkable — can no longer be considered a mere possibility. It is, instead, the most likely outcome if we continue along our present course.

Thus researchers at M.I.T., who were previously predicting a temperature rise of a little more than 4 degrees by the end of this century, are now predicting a rise of more than 9 degrees. Why? Global greenhouse gas emissions are rising faster than expected; some mitigating factors, like absorption of carbon dioxide by the oceans, are turning out to be weaker than hoped; and there’s growing evidence that climate change is self-reinforcing — that, for example, rising temperatures will cause some arctic tundra to defrost, releasing even more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

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, a friend of mine suggests 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.


Is the Climate Problem in Our Heads?

Thursday, August 6th, 2009

– Nice article over on Dot Earth by Andrew Revkin.   He’s writing about a new 225 page report by a task force of the American Psychological Association in which they are examining what aspects of human psychology are tending to make us, as a species, make bad choices about so many things – like the environment.

– It’s a subject near and dear to my heart.   In fact, my desire to chronicle the gathering Perfect Storm is beginning to be overshadowed by my desire to explore questions like these.   Because certainly the first step towards solving a problem must be to understand where the problem is coming from.

– Everyone can, perhaps, go take a moment now and look in the mirror.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

A task force assembled by the American Psychological Association hopes to spur more research on the role of the human mind in shaping the behaviors resulting in rising greenhouse-gas emissions as well as on traits that can impede an effective response to global warming and similar slow-building environmental risks.

The task force has produced a 225-page report on psychology and climate that is being released to coincide with special sessions on climate at the association’s annual meeting in Toronto. (The link to the report has been balky; I’ll update if a better one is created.)

The group is hoping that the report can also inspire specialists in other fields to collaborate with psychologists. For instance, an effort to shape an initiative for curbing emissions would have a higher chance of success if it considered research showing which messages and incentives cause people to change, or resist change. “We must look at the reasons people are not acting in order to understand how to get people to act,” Janet Swim, a psychology professor at Penn State and the task force leader, said in a statement.

The report reviews research on the behavioral element in every part of the climate problem — from consumer habits to the human tendency to give outsize importance to immediate costs even when confronted with evidence of big long-term risks. In essence, as this report and many previous studies show, the human mind appears to be set up in the worst possible way to grasp and act on global warming, which is one of those problems where the most damaging outcomes are somewhere and someday, not here and now. (My guess is that these tendencies are one reason we need to approach climate change and the energy gap more in the way we treat Medicare insolvency than the traditional environmental problems we grew up with back in the 20th century — sewage in rivers, smog in air — which were literally in your face.)

More…

Connected World Gives Viruses The Edge

Sunday, June 14th, 2009

“The findings also suggest that as human activity makes the world more connected, natural selection will favour more virulent and dangerous parasites.”

– This quote from the article text below is no surprise to me or to anyone who has looked at the logic of how contagious diseases spread.   You pack more and more people together and the situation begins to favors more and more virulent diseases.   The Black Death in Europe was, perhaps, the first concrete demonstration of this.  The world today is ripe and getting riper for this sort of thing.   We’ve been extremely lucky that some of the very nasty things around like Ebola have not thus far gotten loose in a population center.

= = = = = = = = =  * * * = = = = = = = = = = =

That’s one conclusion from a new study that looked at how virulence evolves in parasites. The research examined whether parasites evolve to be more or less aggressive depending on whether they are closely connected to their hosts or scattered among more isolated clusters of hosts.

The research was led by Geoff Wild, an NSERC-funded mathematician at the University of Western Ontario, with colleagues from the University of Edinburgh.

“Our study follows up on some recent findings that suggest that reduced dispersal of parasites across scattered host clusters favours the evolution of parasites with lower virulence – in the case of influenza, for example, a milder, possibly less deadly, case of flu,” said Dr. Wild.

“Some researchers had contended from this that the parasites were evolving to support the overall fitness of the group,” he added. “The argument for adaptation at the group level is that the parasites become more prudent to prevent overexploitation and hence to avoid causing the extinction of the local host population.”

However, Dr. Wild and his colleagues were not convinced that Darwinian theory – so successful in providing explanations based on the notion that adaptation maximizes individual fitness – was ready for such a major makeover.

The researchers decided to move the arguments from words to harder science. Together they developed a formal mathematical model that incorporated variable patch sizes and the host parasite population dynamics. It was then run to determine the underlying evolutionary mechanisms, the results of which were published in the Nature paper.

More…

North Korea would use nuclear weapons in a ‘merciless offensive’

Tuesday, June 9th, 2009

– Ever wondered why the world lets North Korea boast and swagger like they do?

– They starve their own people and worship their ‘great leaders’ like they are gods.    They test fire missiles right over Japan and they develop nuclear weapons right in front of us with an ‘in your face‘ attitude.

– The why has to do with the size of their standing army (700,000 within 90 miles of the South Korean border) … and with the physical location of Seoul, the capital of South Korea.

The layout of the Koreas

The layout of the Koreas

Check the map:

– Seoul is within the range of vast arrays of North Korean artillery and it is far too close to the border to save it if the North Koreans swarmed across en masse.

– In short, for those who oppose North Korea’s insanity, the cards are very badly dealt.   Yes, we could do a full body slam on them and take them down once and for all, but it would inevitably cost us the capital city of a major ally.   NOT a good choice.

– So, we talk to the North Koreans and try to reason with them and we hope that their semi-insane leadership will simply die of stupidity or something soon so saner minds can take over.   We dicker with Russia and China, who love to play the ‘people’s devil’s advocates‘ in such situations – so long as their bacon’s not in the fire.

– And then, China has an additional problem with North Korea that we don’t hear much about here in the west.   And that is unwanted immigration.   The North Korean / Chinese border isn’t much more effective than the U.S. / Mexico border.   And North Korea has a lot of desperate starving people who want to get to the ever so much more affluent China  and the Chinese have a lot on their hand now just dealing with those coming across.   Without the cooperation and good-will of the North Korean authorities, they’d have a lot bigger problem – and they don’t need that.

– So, we cannot act against North Korea without hurting ourselves badly and yet they just cannot be allowed to go on like they are.   It’s that fatal embrace business again.

– If you doubt what I’m saying here, then just read the following article:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

North Korea today said it would use nuclear weapons in a “merciless offensive” if provoked — its latest bellicose rhetoric apparently aimed at deterring any international punishment for its recent atomic test blast.

The tensions emanating from Pyongyang are beginning to hit nascent business ties with the South: a Seoul-based fur manufacturer became the first South Korean company to announce Monday it was pulling out of an industrial complex in the North’s border town of Kaesong.

The complex, which opened in 2004, is a key symbol of rapprochement between the two Koreas but the goodwill is evaporating quickly in the wake of North Korea’s nuclear test on May 25 and subsequent missile tests.

Pyongyang raised tensions a notch by reviving its rhetoric in a commentary in the state-run Minju Joson newspaper today.

“Our nuclear deterrent will be a strong defensive means…as well as a merciless offensive means to deal a just retaliatory strike to those who touch the country’s dignity and sovereignty even a bit,” said the commentary, carried by the official Korean Central News Agency.

It appeared to be the first time that North Korea referred to its nuclear arsenal as “offensive” in nature. Pyongyang has long claimed that its nuclear weapons program is a deterrent and only for self-defense against what it calls US attempts to invade it.

More…

– Research thanks to Charles P.

Green Shoots, Red Ink, Black Hole

Saturday, June 6th, 2009

– This article says what I’ve been saying for some time.   And, it’s got a lot of good data to support its points.  U.S. and multinational corporations in their obsessive quests for maximum profits have gutted this country’s ability to be a net wealth generator.  And now we’re locked into a fatal embrace with China in which we have to borrow ever more to maintain the facade that we’re solvent and they have to keep loaning it to us least our failure compromises what they’ve already lent us.   Now, who in their right mind thinks that can go on forever?  Nice eh?

– Give this article a good read all the way through – if you care about knowing which way the wind’s blowing – and about your future.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Truly terrifying data about the real state of the U.S. economy.

By Eliot Spitzer

I have an unfortunate sense that the “green shoots” in the economy that everyone is talking about are nothing but dandelions. Sure, forcing $1 trillion of taxpayer money—in direct capital, guarantees, and diminished cost of borrowing—into the banking sector has permitted the major banks to claim solvency for the moment. Yet we should not forget that this solvency has come not through a much needed deleveraging of the banking sector but rather from a massive transfer of the obligations of private banks to the public, with the debt accruing to future generations. And overall loan quality at U.S. banks is still the worst in 25 years and deteriorating at the fastest pace ever.

It’s a terrible mistake to confuse the momentary solvency of the financial sector and the long-term health of our economy.

While we have addressed the credit collapse, we have not begun to tackle the far more daunting, and more significant, structural problems in the economy. Instead of focusing on the green shoots, let’s examine the macro data that will determine our national prosperity in the next generation. These data are terrifying.

Start with the job front. Long term, nothing is more fundamental than good jobs to creating the middle-class wealth that must drive the economy. The creation of true middle-class jobs was the great success of our economy from 1950s through the mid-1990s. Consider the job data, in aggregate and by sector, from the past decade. (All data are from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.)

Unemployment Rate by Industry
Year Unemployment rate Manufacturing Jobs
(in millions)
Serv. Jobs Gov’t. Jobs Total Jobs Population
1999 4.3 18.48 102.23 20.09 133 272
2004 5.6 14.3 108.64 21.5 138.38 292
2009 8.9 12.4 113.82 22.54 141.57 305

One-third of our manufacturing jobs have disappeared in a decade! And while population grew 12.1 percent over the decade, jobs grew by only 6.4 percent. The unemployment number, moreover, doesn’t count those who are “marginally attached to the labor force,” because even though they want to work and are available to do so, they have not sought a job in the past four weeks. In raw numbers, the total number of individuals counted as currently unemployed and those who are marginally attached is a staggering 15.8 million. That is an enormous mountain of job creation to climb.

More…

– Thanks to Rolf A. for research

US CO2 goals ‘to be compromised’

Sunday, May 31st, 2009

US Energy Secretary Steven Chu says the US will not be able to cut greenhouse emissions as much as it should due to domestic political opposition.

Prof Chu told BBC News he feared the world might be heading towards a tipping point on climate change.

This meant the US had to cut emissions urgently – even if compromises were needed to get new laws approved.

Environmentalists said Prof Chu, a Nobel physicist, should be guided by science not politics.

The American political system is in the throes of a fierce battle over climate policy. President Barack Obama says he wants cuts in greenhouse gases but has left it to Congress to make the political running.

The House of Representatives is debating a climate and energy bill but even if it passes it may be rejected by senators, many of whom are funded by the energy industry.

Prof Chu is a Nobel prize-winning physicist and a world expert on clean energy. But he said it was impossible to ignore political reality.

“With each successive year the news on climate change has not been good and there’s a growing sensation that the world and the US in particular has to get moving,” he said.

More…

Pakistan Is Rapidly Adding Nuclear Arms, U.S. Says

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

– Well, this sure makes me feel better.    Everyone’s worried if we can all keep Pakistan’s nuclear materials out of the hands of the Islamic Fundamentalists and Pakistan’s response is to build more as fast as it can.

– You know these weapons are not intended to be used to defend themselves against the fundamentalists because those folks are scattered in a guerrilla insurgency.   No, this stuff is all about Pakistan’s rivalry with India.   National sized egos is what we’re talking here.   Scary stuff.

– Not scared?   Go back and read the earlier stories: , and

– Oh yeah, and don’t forget this one…

=======================

WASHINGTON — Members of Congress have been told in confidential briefings that Pakistan is rapidly adding to its nuclear arsenal even while racked by insurgency, raising questions on Capitol Hill about whether billions of dollars in proposed military aid might be diverted to Pakistan’s nuclear program.

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the assessment of the expanded arsenal in a one-word answer to a question on Thursday in the midst of lengthy Senate testimony. Sitting beside Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, he was asked whether he had seen evidence of an increase in the size of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.

“Yes,” he said quickly, adding nothing, clearly cognizant of Pakistan’s sensitivity to any discussion about the country’s nuclear strategy or security.

Inside the Obama administration, some officials say, Pakistan’s drive to spend heavily on new nuclear arms has been a source of growing concern, because the country is producing more nuclear material at a time when Washington is increasingly focused on trying to assure the security of an arsenal of 80 to 100 weapons so that they will never fall into the hands of Islamic insurgents.

More…

More on Blood Pressure medicines

Wednesday, May 20th, 2009

oopsI’ve published twice ( and ) now on Big Pharma, Blood Pressure medicines and the ALLHAT Study that has shown (and been replicated) that cheap diuretic pills are equal or superior to the expensive blood pressure medicines Big Pharma is pushing.

Well, the other day, I went in to see my GP and I carried along a copy of the most recent study replicating the 2002 ALLHAT Study’s conclusions.   I wanted to talk with him about this because he’s prescribed one of these blood pressure medicines for me (Diovan).

He agreed that if the measure is just how much the pills lower one’s blood pressure, then diuretic pills may, indeed, be equal or superior to Big Pharma’s products.  But, he also said that there was more to the big picture than just looking at the blood pressure values.

The blood pressure medicine he prescribes for me, Diovan, is part of the class of blood pressure medicines called Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers (ARB).   Other drugs in this class are: candesartan (ATACAND), eprosartan (TEVETAN), irbesartan (AVAPRO), telmisartan (MYCARDIS), valsartan (DIOVAN), and losartan (COZAAR).

He said that long term studies had been done that had showed that folks that take ARBs tend to live longer and have less cardiovascular problems – quite independant from how much the drugs lower one’s blood pressure numbers.

So, as in many things, there’s more to the story than first meets the eye.

Alarm Sounded On Social Security

Saturday, May 16th, 2009

– Social Security will be broke by 2037 and Medicare by 2017.  Those are today’s best guesses.   And, if our economic problems continue to worsen, which they show every sign of doing, then these figures will get worse and the time between now and when these systems go broke will get shorter.

– At 61 years old, it is conceivable that Social Security’s bankruptcy could impact me, but I doubt it.   And Medicare will be irrelevant to me because I will have been in New Zealand long before then.   But, my wife’s nine years younger than I am and my boys are 29 and 40 now.

– As Americans, the younger you are, the higher the likelihood that you will see and be impacted by the failures of these systems.   Congress has known about this problem  for literally decades and they could not find the will to fix it in the good times.   What do you think the chances are that they are going to fix it in the midst of a recession?   Un-hum, that’s what I thought too.

= = = = = = = – – – – – – – = = = = = = = – – – – – – – = = = = = = =

Report Also Warns Of Medicare Collapse

The financial health of the Social Security system has eroded more sharply in the past year than at any time since the mid-1990s, according to a government forecast that ratchets up pressure on the Obama administration and Congress to stabilize the retirement system that keeps many older Americans out of poverty.

The report, issued yesterday by the trustees who monitor the government’s two main forms of help for the elderly, shows that Medicare has become more fragile as well and is at greater risk than Social Security of imminent fiscal collapse. Starting eight years from now, the report says, the health insurance program will be unable to pay all its hospital bills.

The findings put a stark new face on the toll the recession has taken on the two enormous entitlement programs. They also intensify a political debate, gathering strength among Democrats and Republicans, over how quickly President Obama should tackle Social Security when health-care reform is his administration’s most urgent domestic priority.

More…