The Integrative Biology of Exercise VII – Day 1 [Life Lines]

The opening session was great!

By Tatsuo Yamashita (Flickr: ワンセグで紅白をみます 2012/12/31) [CC BY 2.0 (http://ift.tt/o655VX)], via Wikimedia Commons

Eric Hoffman (Children’s National Medical Center) presented work on chronic inflammatory diseases in children. He mentioned that while diets high in fats and carbohydrates (i.e. Western diets), obesity and sedentary lifestyles are associated with inflammation and related diseases (ex: asthma, type 2 diabetes), another contributor could be hormones. Kids who stay indoors more often have reduced exposure to sunlight and exercise less. This may alter the normal biological clock of these kids because their stress hormone levels stay high all day as opposed to peaking at certain times. This constant exposure to elevated stress hormones may then in turn contribute to the development of inflammation and its associated diseases.

Monika Fleshner (University of Colorado, Boulder) presented research on the relationship between exercise, microbes within the gut, and stress. Not surprisingly, her team found that exercise reduced inflammation and depression. What was interesting was that exercise was also associated with a conversion to populations of gut microbes that are associated with health. Who knew exercise could benefit our gut microbes?

David James (University of Sydney, Australia) presented his work that explored how proteins in the body are affected by exercise.

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2eX63EF

The opening session was great!

By Tatsuo Yamashita (Flickr: ワンセグで紅白をみます 2012/12/31) [CC BY 2.0 (http://ift.tt/o655VX)], via Wikimedia Commons

Eric Hoffman (Children’s National Medical Center) presented work on chronic inflammatory diseases in children. He mentioned that while diets high in fats and carbohydrates (i.e. Western diets), obesity and sedentary lifestyles are associated with inflammation and related diseases (ex: asthma, type 2 diabetes), another contributor could be hormones. Kids who stay indoors more often have reduced exposure to sunlight and exercise less. This may alter the normal biological clock of these kids because their stress hormone levels stay high all day as opposed to peaking at certain times. This constant exposure to elevated stress hormones may then in turn contribute to the development of inflammation and its associated diseases.

Monika Fleshner (University of Colorado, Boulder) presented research on the relationship between exercise, microbes within the gut, and stress. Not surprisingly, her team found that exercise reduced inflammation and depression. What was interesting was that exercise was also associated with a conversion to populations of gut microbes that are associated with health. Who knew exercise could benefit our gut microbes?

David James (University of Sydney, Australia) presented his work that explored how proteins in the body are affected by exercise.

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2eX63EF

Big Dipper bowl points to star Capella

Tonight – or any November evening – if you can see the Big Dipper, use its “pointer stars” to find the brilliant star Capella in the constellation Auriga the Charioteer. The top two bowl stars point toward Capella, as we depict on today’s sky chart.

The phrase spring up and fall down gives you some idea of the Big Dipper’s place in the evening sky. On fall evenings for us in the Northern Hemisphere, the Big Dipper sits way down low in the northern sky.

On northern spring evenings, the Big Dipper shines high above Polaris, the North Star.

From the Southern Hemisphere: Sorry, y’all. These are northern constellations and not easily visible to you … unless you come visit our part of the world!

From the far southern U.S. and similar latitudes: You won’t see the Big Dipper on these November evenings, either. From more southerly latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere, the Big Dipper is below your northern horizon on autumn evenings. Even in the northern states, it’ll be possible to miss the Big Dipper if obstructions block your view of the northern sky. However, the Big Dipper swings full circle around Polaris, the North Star, once a day. Thus, from these latitudes, the Big Dipper will appear fairly high in the northeast sky before morning dawn in November.

Enjoying EarthSky so far? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!

It’s a long jump from the Big Dipper bowl stars to Capella. Our chart at top goes all the way from northwest to northeast. That’s about one-fourth the way around the horizon.

And remember, the Big Dipper and Capella move throughout the night, and throughout the year, but – no matter when and where you see them – they are part of the “fixed” star background … and so always maintain this relationship to one another.

Easily locate stars and constellations during any day and time with EarthSky’s Planisphere.

November 2016 guide to the five visible planets

The bright star Capella and its constellation Auriga the Charioteer as seen in the east-northeast sky. Image via Wikimedia Commons

Bottom line: The Big Dipper’s bowl stars always point in the general direction of Capella, the northernmost first-magnitude star in all the heavens.

2017 EarthSky Lunar Calendar pre-sale…is happening NOW!

Donate: Your support means the world to us

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1qMl25S

Tonight – or any November evening – if you can see the Big Dipper, use its “pointer stars” to find the brilliant star Capella in the constellation Auriga the Charioteer. The top two bowl stars point toward Capella, as we depict on today’s sky chart.

The phrase spring up and fall down gives you some idea of the Big Dipper’s place in the evening sky. On fall evenings for us in the Northern Hemisphere, the Big Dipper sits way down low in the northern sky.

On northern spring evenings, the Big Dipper shines high above Polaris, the North Star.

From the Southern Hemisphere: Sorry, y’all. These are northern constellations and not easily visible to you … unless you come visit our part of the world!

From the far southern U.S. and similar latitudes: You won’t see the Big Dipper on these November evenings, either. From more southerly latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere, the Big Dipper is below your northern horizon on autumn evenings. Even in the northern states, it’ll be possible to miss the Big Dipper if obstructions block your view of the northern sky. However, the Big Dipper swings full circle around Polaris, the North Star, once a day. Thus, from these latitudes, the Big Dipper will appear fairly high in the northeast sky before morning dawn in November.

Enjoying EarthSky so far? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!

It’s a long jump from the Big Dipper bowl stars to Capella. Our chart at top goes all the way from northwest to northeast. That’s about one-fourth the way around the horizon.

And remember, the Big Dipper and Capella move throughout the night, and throughout the year, but – no matter when and where you see them – they are part of the “fixed” star background … and so always maintain this relationship to one another.

Easily locate stars and constellations during any day and time with EarthSky’s Planisphere.

November 2016 guide to the five visible planets

The bright star Capella and its constellation Auriga the Charioteer as seen in the east-northeast sky. Image via Wikimedia Commons

Bottom line: The Big Dipper’s bowl stars always point in the general direction of Capella, the northernmost first-magnitude star in all the heavens.

2017 EarthSky Lunar Calendar pre-sale…is happening NOW!

Donate: Your support means the world to us

from EarthSky http://ift.tt/1qMl25S

Most Recent Polling Shows Tight Race [Greg Laden's Blog]

“Trump’s chance of victory have doubled over the last two weeks,” notes FiveThirtyEight, and this is in accord with what I’ve been saying.

I suggested a few days ago that while Clinton would probably win, there is a nowhere near zero chance that she won’t. FiveThirtyEight came out with an analysis today very similar to mine, suggesting that Trump has abut a 3 in 10 chance of winning. Historically, races tighten near the end, I think FOR THIS REASON mainly, and that has been happening. The actual national difference between Clinton and Trump by Tuesday will probably be about 2.5 percent or so.

Now, before you jump in to tell me that the national number isn’t what counts, yada yada yada, let me note right away that I do know about the Electoral College and stuff.

Anyway, see this for my most recent Electoral College analysis, and I’ll have a new one out in a day or so, though I expect it to be similar.

Meanwhile, here are some notes on some of the more interesting and important races.

No cherry picking here. All of the really recent, high ranked (by FiveThirtyEight) polls in states of interest. All these polls were released over the last few days, though they may cover earlier days. The data are all taken from FiveThirtyEight, but using the original poll numbers, not FiveThirtyEight’s adjustment.

Note: Polls that weight on the basis of motivation seem to favor Trump; his voters say they are more likely to vote.

Arizona, when it isn’t busy shooting something, generally votes for the Republican. There was hope this would not happen this year, but the latest polls suggest otherwise
Arizona CNN/Opinion Trump +5
Arizona Emerson Trump +4
Arizona Google CS Clinton +5

Florida is a very important states, and there are signs of Clinton weakening there, but most indicators suggest a Clinton win. Also, the TargetSmart study (not shown here) indicates that 28% of Republicans who voted early are voting for Clinton.
Florida CNN/Opinion Clinton +2
Florida Google CS Trump +3
Florida Quinnipiac Clinton +1
Florida TargetSmart (Not rated by 538) Clinton +8

People mention Georgia now and then. We’ll be watching Georgia, because if Clinton wins there, the world has changed. But she won’t.
Georgia Emerson Trump +9
Georgia Google CS Trump +9

I’ve been predicting a Clinton win in Iowa, many polls indicate otherwise, the latest Google Consumer Survey suggests a Clinton win.
Iowa Google CS CLinton +7

Nevada. I hear people saying that Clinton has Nevada in the bag. She doesn’t. My model currently has her winning there, but clearly there is ambiguity.
Nevada CNN/Opinion Trump +6
Nevada Google CS Clinton +7

New Hampshire has not been declared a solid sate for anyone, yet many seem to insist it is solid for Clinton. It isn’t, but also, there isn’t much good polling there, so really, we don’t know.
New Hampshire Google CS Trump +1

North Carolina is totally uncertain for many reasons, including polling all over the map, an active voter suppression campaign by the Republican party, and because it is, well, North Carolina.
North Carolina Elon Clinton +1
North Carolina Google CS Trump +6
North Carolina Quinnipiac Clinton +3
North Carolina SurveyUSA Trump +7

Everyone I know who is from Ohio or lives in Ohio loves Ohio and hardly ever shuts up about it. Time to shut up about it! You’all are about to go for Trump, so you suck.
Ohio Google CS Trump +2
Ohio Quinnipiac Trump +5

Pennsylvania seems solidly Clinton, though if I recall, Pennsylvania has sometimes thrown a surprise. But not likely this year.
Pennsylvania CNN/Opinion Clinton +4
Pennsylvania Franklin & Marshall Clinton +11
Pennsylvania Google CS Trump +2
Pennsylvania Monmouth Clinton +4
Pennsylvania Quinnipac Clinton +5
Pennsylvania Susquehanna Clinton +2

We fully expect Clinton to take Virginia.
Virginia Emerson Clinton +4
Virginia Google CS Clinton +5
Virginia Hampton Trump +3
Virginia WaPo Clinton +6

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2eBcXMF

“Trump’s chance of victory have doubled over the last two weeks,” notes FiveThirtyEight, and this is in accord with what I’ve been saying.

I suggested a few days ago that while Clinton would probably win, there is a nowhere near zero chance that she won’t. FiveThirtyEight came out with an analysis today very similar to mine, suggesting that Trump has abut a 3 in 10 chance of winning. Historically, races tighten near the end, I think FOR THIS REASON mainly, and that has been happening. The actual national difference between Clinton and Trump by Tuesday will probably be about 2.5 percent or so.

Now, before you jump in to tell me that the national number isn’t what counts, yada yada yada, let me note right away that I do know about the Electoral College and stuff.

Anyway, see this for my most recent Electoral College analysis, and I’ll have a new one out in a day or so, though I expect it to be similar.

Meanwhile, here are some notes on some of the more interesting and important races.

No cherry picking here. All of the really recent, high ranked (by FiveThirtyEight) polls in states of interest. All these polls were released over the last few days, though they may cover earlier days. The data are all taken from FiveThirtyEight, but using the original poll numbers, not FiveThirtyEight’s adjustment.

Note: Polls that weight on the basis of motivation seem to favor Trump; his voters say they are more likely to vote.

Arizona, when it isn’t busy shooting something, generally votes for the Republican. There was hope this would not happen this year, but the latest polls suggest otherwise
Arizona CNN/Opinion Trump +5
Arizona Emerson Trump +4
Arizona Google CS Clinton +5

Florida is a very important states, and there are signs of Clinton weakening there, but most indicators suggest a Clinton win. Also, the TargetSmart study (not shown here) indicates that 28% of Republicans who voted early are voting for Clinton.
Florida CNN/Opinion Clinton +2
Florida Google CS Trump +3
Florida Quinnipiac Clinton +1
Florida TargetSmart (Not rated by 538) Clinton +8

People mention Georgia now and then. We’ll be watching Georgia, because if Clinton wins there, the world has changed. But she won’t.
Georgia Emerson Trump +9
Georgia Google CS Trump +9

I’ve been predicting a Clinton win in Iowa, many polls indicate otherwise, the latest Google Consumer Survey suggests a Clinton win.
Iowa Google CS CLinton +7

Nevada. I hear people saying that Clinton has Nevada in the bag. She doesn’t. My model currently has her winning there, but clearly there is ambiguity.
Nevada CNN/Opinion Trump +6
Nevada Google CS Clinton +7

New Hampshire has not been declared a solid sate for anyone, yet many seem to insist it is solid for Clinton. It isn’t, but also, there isn’t much good polling there, so really, we don’t know.
New Hampshire Google CS Trump +1

North Carolina is totally uncertain for many reasons, including polling all over the map, an active voter suppression campaign by the Republican party, and because it is, well, North Carolina.
North Carolina Elon Clinton +1
North Carolina Google CS Trump +6
North Carolina Quinnipiac Clinton +3
North Carolina SurveyUSA Trump +7

Everyone I know who is from Ohio or lives in Ohio loves Ohio and hardly ever shuts up about it. Time to shut up about it! You’all are about to go for Trump, so you suck.
Ohio Google CS Trump +2
Ohio Quinnipiac Trump +5

Pennsylvania seems solidly Clinton, though if I recall, Pennsylvania has sometimes thrown a surprise. But not likely this year.
Pennsylvania CNN/Opinion Clinton +4
Pennsylvania Franklin & Marshall Clinton +11
Pennsylvania Google CS Trump +2
Pennsylvania Monmouth Clinton +4
Pennsylvania Quinnipac Clinton +5
Pennsylvania Susquehanna Clinton +2

We fully expect Clinton to take Virginia.
Virginia Emerson Clinton +4
Virginia Google CS Clinton +5
Virginia Hampton Trump +3
Virginia WaPo Clinton +6

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2eBcXMF

One cannot be handcuffed by data on a fundamental moral issue of this kind? [Stoat]

Um, well, yes. What is this stuff? Pointed out to me first by Russell – see-also his Troglodyte narrative. This is about something sent to, or from, John Podesta which has surfaced via the increasingly-suspect Wikileaks. Which is to say MEMORANDUM JANUARY 28, 2014. CLIMATE: A UNIFYINF THEORY TO THE CASE.

An unified theory of climate? Excellent… we’ve all been looking for that.

After reading some dodgy websites I think it was sent by Chris Lehane (“a Democratic strategist and Steyer confidant”; or, if you’re RS, one of “K-Street’s famed Masters of Disaster”. I don’t even know what K-Street is) to “longtime Clinton advisor” JP. Do let me know if I’ve got this confused. So, it would appear to be some kind of advisory document of unclear status. Oh, perhaps the email to which the doc was attached makes things clearer. But WTF, I’ll read the doc anyway. One thing worth noting is the statement we have limited visibility on how the Administration is considering climate in the context of the next three years which suggests it was written by outsiders and/or wannabees; not by anyone well connected to the administration.

the goal is to unify policy, politics, and communications to help the Administration best execute an informed plan over a multi-year time period

That’s clear enough,or appears clear: this is a political and policy document. But it is aimed “to help… an informed plan”, and you would hope that would involve rather more than politics: you’d hope it would involve the long-term good of the nation, or even the planet. The doc, written in 2014, talks about a three-year plan to 2016, aimed at the run-up the the Pres elections now peaking in a paroxysm of… I don’t know what. The aim is to “demonstrate that climate is a winning political issue by 2016” which is a bit icky and political for my tastes, but only in order to “thereby mov[e] the body politic to a place where game-changing climate policy is possible” which is a noble ideal indeed.

The next talking point is Make the case that climate must be approached as a challenge of historical social change where progress will depend in part on successfully casting the issue in moral terms of who is right and who is wrong and here you’ll see it coming into the area that I’m interested in, which rather overlaps We Don’t Need a ‘War’ on Climate Change, We Need a Revolution? which is the same kind of thinking, and which I didn’t like: Gw is to become not an issue of scientific right or wrong, but moral right or wrong. This moves it from safe and secure ground – scientifically we know that the IPCC, for example, is right whereas the denialist wackos are wrong – to rather more difficult moral ground. I don’t think you can finesse that by saying “but it is wrong to lie, so the denialists are morally wrong too” because while that is true, it isn’t the interesting argument. There are a disturbingly large number of Republic pols who are prepared to talk nonsense about the science of GW but – and you may call be a naive young innocent here if you like – I think that this is less that they actually believe what they’re saying and more that its a shorthand for “we’re not going to do anything about GW” which returns us to “what are we going to do?” which is then the moral question.

The theme continues. This political social movement must be founded on moral principles with stark definitions of who is right and who is wrong and again, being divisive is perhaps good for pols who want their constituencies but I’m dubious it is a good way of “moving forward” as they say on GW. By pursuing this as a political social movement, President Obama and his Administration will best be able to assure that his legacy includes his unprecedented leadership on climate that initiated the shifting of the country’s political tectonic plates to enable transformative climate change policy, before it was too late. Well, that didn’t work and the constant thinking of “we must do something within X short-term horizon” isn’t good either. This activity in the context of the 2016 presidential cycle will have the consequence of forcing the Republicans, due to pressures within their primaries, to adopt an even more extreme, and therefore politically non-viable general election position. Um, joy. Again, as politics this may be fine but deliberately forcing a block of people off into an extreme position is not good from a viewpoint of solving the problem. it is an interesting insight into how non-bipartisan politics comes about, I suppose. But perhaps hardly novel.

But it is not all bad. while climate is an enterprise threat to humanity, it is not yet understood as such by the public to a point where it is demanding action. Consequently, if we do not now pursue an approach to accelerate the public’s demand for change, by the time the public does demand change because the climate impacts have become so extreme, it will be too late is quite defensible, and noting the opposition includes some of the most powerful, well-resourced, and deeply-entrenched interests seems reasonable. but then the strategy must… be based on… an exercise in political social change. By its very definition, social change means that any approach must at its essence be designed to leverage the inherent moral nature of the issue. And with that, he’s lost me. Why “By its very definition”? So if we were to suppose that we need “social change” – and you could probably argue that agreeing a carbon tax, and its consequences, would need social change, why must that be thought of as moral, rather than simply economic? The two are not orthogonal, of course, but why think of it as in-essence moral?

From ending slavery to women’s suffrage to worker rights to Civil Rights to anti-smoking to gay marriage — the issue was truly joined and decisively won when it became defined not merely as a worthy policy but a moral issue of right and wrong. Um, again. This makes it ever more starkly clear: the issue is to be moral right and wrong, and anyone who doesn’t agree with your policies is a Bad Person and can therefore be ignored. Then comes the offending and slightly ambiguous one cannot be handcuffed by data on a fundamental moral issue of this kind which I really cannot like; but it is all of a piece with the rest.

[I PRESSED POST TO SOON. THIS ISNT FINISHED]

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2fFAj8o

Um, well, yes. What is this stuff? Pointed out to me first by Russell – see-also his Troglodyte narrative. This is about something sent to, or from, John Podesta which has surfaced via the increasingly-suspect Wikileaks. Which is to say MEMORANDUM JANUARY 28, 2014. CLIMATE: A UNIFYINF THEORY TO THE CASE.

An unified theory of climate? Excellent… we’ve all been looking for that.

After reading some dodgy websites I think it was sent by Chris Lehane (“a Democratic strategist and Steyer confidant”; or, if you’re RS, one of “K-Street’s famed Masters of Disaster”. I don’t even know what K-Street is) to “longtime Clinton advisor” JP. Do let me know if I’ve got this confused. So, it would appear to be some kind of advisory document of unclear status. Oh, perhaps the email to which the doc was attached makes things clearer. But WTF, I’ll read the doc anyway. One thing worth noting is the statement we have limited visibility on how the Administration is considering climate in the context of the next three years which suggests it was written by outsiders and/or wannabees; not by anyone well connected to the administration.

the goal is to unify policy, politics, and communications to help the Administration best execute an informed plan over a multi-year time period

That’s clear enough,or appears clear: this is a political and policy document. But it is aimed “to help… an informed plan”, and you would hope that would involve rather more than politics: you’d hope it would involve the long-term good of the nation, or even the planet. The doc, written in 2014, talks about a three-year plan to 2016, aimed at the run-up the the Pres elections now peaking in a paroxysm of… I don’t know what. The aim is to “demonstrate that climate is a winning political issue by 2016” which is a bit icky and political for my tastes, but only in order to “thereby mov[e] the body politic to a place where game-changing climate policy is possible” which is a noble ideal indeed.

The next talking point is Make the case that climate must be approached as a challenge of historical social change where progress will depend in part on successfully casting the issue in moral terms of who is right and who is wrong and here you’ll see it coming into the area that I’m interested in, which rather overlaps We Don’t Need a ‘War’ on Climate Change, We Need a Revolution? which is the same kind of thinking, and which I didn’t like: Gw is to become not an issue of scientific right or wrong, but moral right or wrong. This moves it from safe and secure ground – scientifically we know that the IPCC, for example, is right whereas the denialist wackos are wrong – to rather more difficult moral ground. I don’t think you can finesse that by saying “but it is wrong to lie, so the denialists are morally wrong too” because while that is true, it isn’t the interesting argument. There are a disturbingly large number of Republic pols who are prepared to talk nonsense about the science of GW but – and you may call be a naive young innocent here if you like – I think that this is less that they actually believe what they’re saying and more that its a shorthand for “we’re not going to do anything about GW” which returns us to “what are we going to do?” which is then the moral question.

The theme continues. This political social movement must be founded on moral principles with stark definitions of who is right and who is wrong and again, being divisive is perhaps good for pols who want their constituencies but I’m dubious it is a good way of “moving forward” as they say on GW. By pursuing this as a political social movement, President Obama and his Administration will best be able to assure that his legacy includes his unprecedented leadership on climate that initiated the shifting of the country’s political tectonic plates to enable transformative climate change policy, before it was too late. Well, that didn’t work and the constant thinking of “we must do something within X short-term horizon” isn’t good either. This activity in the context of the 2016 presidential cycle will have the consequence of forcing the Republicans, due to pressures within their primaries, to adopt an even more extreme, and therefore politically non-viable general election position. Um, joy. Again, as politics this may be fine but deliberately forcing a block of people off into an extreme position is not good from a viewpoint of solving the problem. it is an interesting insight into how non-bipartisan politics comes about, I suppose. But perhaps hardly novel.

But it is not all bad. while climate is an enterprise threat to humanity, it is not yet understood as such by the public to a point where it is demanding action. Consequently, if we do not now pursue an approach to accelerate the public’s demand for change, by the time the public does demand change because the climate impacts have become so extreme, it will be too late is quite defensible, and noting the opposition includes some of the most powerful, well-resourced, and deeply-entrenched interests seems reasonable. but then the strategy must… be based on… an exercise in political social change. By its very definition, social change means that any approach must at its essence be designed to leverage the inherent moral nature of the issue. And with that, he’s lost me. Why “By its very definition”? So if we were to suppose that we need “social change” – and you could probably argue that agreeing a carbon tax, and its consequences, would need social change, why must that be thought of as moral, rather than simply economic? The two are not orthogonal, of course, but why think of it as in-essence moral?

From ending slavery to women’s suffrage to worker rights to Civil Rights to anti-smoking to gay marriage — the issue was truly joined and decisively won when it became defined not merely as a worthy policy but a moral issue of right and wrong. Um, again. This makes it ever more starkly clear: the issue is to be moral right and wrong, and anyone who doesn’t agree with your policies is a Bad Person and can therefore be ignored. Then comes the offending and slightly ambiguous one cannot be handcuffed by data on a fundamental moral issue of this kind which I really cannot like; but it is all of a piece with the rest.

[I PRESSED POST TO SOON. THIS ISNT FINISHED]

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2fFAj8o

Location fun [Stoat]

This will be old hat to most people but I’ve discovered two funky new location-type things today.

Number one, after I got a puncture and so needed a taxi back home, was getting a text from the taxi company saying “your driver is 2 mins away; click this to track him” whereupon I did, and got a cute Google map that showed him moving up the Milton road, stopping at all the traffic lights. I haven’t tried Uber; I presume it is similar.

Number two was after I discussed with him how this was done. It is, of course, as I should have guessed but didn’t, not a special hardware fit to the vehicle but just an app on a phone that tells Control where he is. And he pointed out that I could do the same, most easily on Google+. So I turned it on, and lo! Now I can see where my daughter is and she can see where I am.

Don’t worry, the niceness won’t last. Another inflammatory post of a political nature will be along Real Soon Now.

Refs

* Card Game Based on the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma
* America Can Run Trade Deficits Forever

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2eAZvIW

This will be old hat to most people but I’ve discovered two funky new location-type things today.

Number one, after I got a puncture and so needed a taxi back home, was getting a text from the taxi company saying “your driver is 2 mins away; click this to track him” whereupon I did, and got a cute Google map that showed him moving up the Milton road, stopping at all the traffic lights. I haven’t tried Uber; I presume it is similar.

Number two was after I discussed with him how this was done. It is, of course, as I should have guessed but didn’t, not a special hardware fit to the vehicle but just an app on a phone that tells Control where he is. And he pointed out that I could do the same, most easily on Google+. So I turned it on, and lo! Now I can see where my daughter is and she can see where I am.

Don’t worry, the niceness won’t last. Another inflammatory post of a political nature will be along Real Soon Now.

Refs

* Card Game Based on the Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma
* America Can Run Trade Deficits Forever

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2eAZvIW

More news from APHA’s Annual Meeting and Expo in Denver [The Pump Handle]

Kim Krisberg and I are currently in Denver at APHA’s 2016 Annual Meeting and Exposition — the year’s largest gathering of public health professionals. In yesterday’s blog post, Kim recapped just a few of the scientific sessions and events from Sunday and Monday. Below are some highlights from Tuesday and you can read many more courtesy of the APHA Annual Meeting Blog.

How can we reduce gun violence? Less politics, more working together:  The gun violence epidemic in America got worse in 2016. As of October, more than 40 people every day have died in the U.S. by gunfire, according to the nonpartisan research group Gun Violence Archive. That’s three more deaths every day than in 2015 and seven more than in 2014.

At Tuesday’s Annual Meeting session, “Firearm-related injuries,” state and national public health experts tackled the problem’s many layers and shared evidence that solutions hinge on two overarching factors: data and compromise. “I don’t think we’re ever going to eliminate gun ownership in this country, so let’s start from there,” said moderator Linda Degutis, APHA past-president and director at the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine. “We need to truly open up discussions with responsible gun owners. Let’s think about what we can agree on — and that’s how we can get further.” Continue reading

Confronting human trafficking through a public health lens:  Whether it was a Boston-born transgender patient or a Ugandan working in domestic servitude, Hanni Stoklosa has seen a variety of patients who were victims of sex or labor trafficking come through her emergency room. Thankfully, Stoklosa, an emergency medicine physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and many others across the U.S. are working on creating public health responses to address their health needs, some which were outlined in a Tuesday Annual Meeting session on “We’re Making Progress: The Evolving Public Health Response to Human Trafficking in the U.S.” Continue reading

Public health works to increase data on imprisoned mothers:  Imprisonment is connected to a series of public health issues, spanning mental health, chronic disease and re-entry into the community. But being pregnant and imprisoned adds another layer of complexity that has spent little time under the public health microscope. That’s why presenters at Tuesday’s Annual Meeting session on “The Intersection of Maternal and Child Health and the Criminal Justice System” are trying to increase the focus on the health needs of prisoners who enter a correctional facility as a mother or will leave as one.

According to federal statistics, there are over 221,000 women in prison or jail, said Carolyn Sufrin, an assistant professor in the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine’s Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics. In addition, the ACLU estimates that 12,000 pregnant women are in custody annually, with 4 percent of state prisoners and 3 percent of federal prisoners pregnant at admission as of 2004, said presenter Jennifer Bronson, a statistician for the Bureau of Justice Statistics. This doesn’t include jail populations, she noted. Still, there is a dearth of health information about incarcerated pregnant women, Sufrin told attendees. And there’s little being done in terms of prenatal and postpartum care while they’re imprisoned, she added. Continue reading

Let’s get ethical: Expanding the role of ethics education:  APHA’s Ethics Section is reaching out to schools and programs of public health to better understand how ethics are taught in the classroom, and they need your help. “We don’t really have any consensus yet that is obvious about what it is we should be teaching in public health when it comes to ethics,” said Daniel Swartzman during yesterday’s Annual Meeting session on “Expanding the role of ethics in public health education.” Continue reading

Catch up on all the news from the APHA Annual Meeting here.

 

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2eesdhv

Kim Krisberg and I are currently in Denver at APHA’s 2016 Annual Meeting and Exposition — the year’s largest gathering of public health professionals. In yesterday’s blog post, Kim recapped just a few of the scientific sessions and events from Sunday and Monday. Below are some highlights from Tuesday and you can read many more courtesy of the APHA Annual Meeting Blog.

How can we reduce gun violence? Less politics, more working together:  The gun violence epidemic in America got worse in 2016. As of October, more than 40 people every day have died in the U.S. by gunfire, according to the nonpartisan research group Gun Violence Archive. That’s three more deaths every day than in 2015 and seven more than in 2014.

At Tuesday’s Annual Meeting session, “Firearm-related injuries,” state and national public health experts tackled the problem’s many layers and shared evidence that solutions hinge on two overarching factors: data and compromise. “I don’t think we’re ever going to eliminate gun ownership in this country, so let’s start from there,” said moderator Linda Degutis, APHA past-president and director at the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine. “We need to truly open up discussions with responsible gun owners. Let’s think about what we can agree on — and that’s how we can get further.” Continue reading

Confronting human trafficking through a public health lens:  Whether it was a Boston-born transgender patient or a Ugandan working in domestic servitude, Hanni Stoklosa has seen a variety of patients who were victims of sex or labor trafficking come through her emergency room. Thankfully, Stoklosa, an emergency medicine physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and many others across the U.S. are working on creating public health responses to address their health needs, some which were outlined in a Tuesday Annual Meeting session on “We’re Making Progress: The Evolving Public Health Response to Human Trafficking in the U.S.” Continue reading

Public health works to increase data on imprisoned mothers:  Imprisonment is connected to a series of public health issues, spanning mental health, chronic disease and re-entry into the community. But being pregnant and imprisoned adds another layer of complexity that has spent little time under the public health microscope. That’s why presenters at Tuesday’s Annual Meeting session on “The Intersection of Maternal and Child Health and the Criminal Justice System” are trying to increase the focus on the health needs of prisoners who enter a correctional facility as a mother or will leave as one.

According to federal statistics, there are over 221,000 women in prison or jail, said Carolyn Sufrin, an assistant professor in the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine’s Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics. In addition, the ACLU estimates that 12,000 pregnant women are in custody annually, with 4 percent of state prisoners and 3 percent of federal prisoners pregnant at admission as of 2004, said presenter Jennifer Bronson, a statistician for the Bureau of Justice Statistics. This doesn’t include jail populations, she noted. Still, there is a dearth of health information about incarcerated pregnant women, Sufrin told attendees. And there’s little being done in terms of prenatal and postpartum care while they’re imprisoned, she added. Continue reading

Let’s get ethical: Expanding the role of ethics education:  APHA’s Ethics Section is reaching out to schools and programs of public health to better understand how ethics are taught in the classroom, and they need your help. “We don’t really have any consensus yet that is obvious about what it is we should be teaching in public health when it comes to ethics,” said Daniel Swartzman during yesterday’s Annual Meeting session on “Expanding the role of ethics in public health education.” Continue reading

Catch up on all the news from the APHA Annual Meeting here.

 

from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2eesdhv

How RCRA Has Transformed America: A Photo Blog

By Liz Sundin

When I began working at EPA earlier this year, I’ll admit I knew little about the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Solid waste and hazardous waste were huge terms with very specific parameters that I had trouble wrapping my brain around. However, as my time in the Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery grew, I started to see how RCRA’s various programs permeate so many parts of my everyday life. We’ve ensured our country handles, disposes of and recycles waste properly. This includes making sure hazardous waste is safely handled and managed both here in America and when imported from or exported abroad. We’re also leading the collaborative effort to halve food loss and waste in the U.S. by 2030 and making sure communities have a voice in the permitting process of hazardous waste facilities.

Now I see RCRA everywhere I go. I see it when I walk by our local dry cleaner and realize that my neighborhood is safer because RCRA requires strict handling of waste chemicals. When I pass our community garden’s compost barrel and the recycling cans lined up outside every house on trash day, I think of the program’s focus on sustainably managing materials. My life is affected by RCRA every day, I just never knew it until now.

As we celebrate 40 years of RCRA this month, I want to take us on a walk down memory lane to remind everyone what our country looked like before RCRA. In the 1970s, EPA hired photographers to capture images of environmental challenges around our country; the series was called the Documerica Project. Below are some of the amazing photos from the Documerica Project which show snapshots of our country before the passage of RCRA.

America has always been a nation full of beauty and natural wonders worth protecting.

Utah – Canyonlands National Park, May 1972

Rangeley Lake in the Mountains of Western Maine, Seen from Route 4 June 1973

In the years leading up to the passage of RCRA, Americans began to realize the need for better standards for landfills and pollution to keep our environment safe and clean.

Solid Waste Is Dumped Into Trenches at This Sanitary Landfill April 1972

Litter on Gulf Coast Beach, May 1972

Landfill Operation Is Conducted by the City of New York on the Marshlands of Jamaica Bay. Pollution Hazards and Ecological Damage Have Called Out Strong Opposition May 1973

Dimensions of the Littering Problem Are Suggested by This Heap of Cold Drink Cans, Salvaged by Girl Scouts at Islamorada in the Central Florida Keys. (circa 1975)

Seagulls Scavenge at Croton Landfill Operation along the Hudson River August 1973

Dumping Garbage at the Croton Landfill Operation, August 1973

Open Garbage Dump on Highway 112, North of San Sebastian February 1973

The conditions in the images above motivated concerned citizens, forward thinkers, and business leaders to push for regulations and fight for the passage of RCRA.

Along Route 580, near San Francisco. October 1972

Dumping Prohibition Is Ignored on This Hunter’s Point Creek Adjacent to the John F. Kennedy Airport, May 1973

Cleaning Up the Roadside in Onsetm May 1973

Stacked Cars In City Junkyard Will Be Used For Scrap, August 1973

Young People Filling Bags with Litter, May 1972

Children in Fort Smith Are Learning That Protecting the Environment Will Take More Than Awareness, June 1972

On October 21, 1976, President Ford signed RCRA, ushering in a new era of stricter environmental protections in the handling, management and disposal of waste. From that day forward, we worked to protect human health and the environment.

This is the first part in a three part blog series. Be on the lookout for the next blog discussing what RCRA has achieved in the last 40 years.

For more information on RCRA, visit www.epa.gov/rcra

Follow our RCRA 40th Campaign on social media: #ProtectPreventPreserve

About the author: Liz Sundin is a Public Affairs Specialist in EPA’s Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.

from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2fEYPGs

By Liz Sundin

When I began working at EPA earlier this year, I’ll admit I knew little about the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Solid waste and hazardous waste were huge terms with very specific parameters that I had trouble wrapping my brain around. However, as my time in the Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery grew, I started to see how RCRA’s various programs permeate so many parts of my everyday life. We’ve ensured our country handles, disposes of and recycles waste properly. This includes making sure hazardous waste is safely handled and managed both here in America and when imported from or exported abroad. We’re also leading the collaborative effort to halve food loss and waste in the U.S. by 2030 and making sure communities have a voice in the permitting process of hazardous waste facilities.

Now I see RCRA everywhere I go. I see it when I walk by our local dry cleaner and realize that my neighborhood is safer because RCRA requires strict handling of waste chemicals. When I pass our community garden’s compost barrel and the recycling cans lined up outside every house on trash day, I think of the program’s focus on sustainably managing materials. My life is affected by RCRA every day, I just never knew it until now.

As we celebrate 40 years of RCRA this month, I want to take us on a walk down memory lane to remind everyone what our country looked like before RCRA. In the 1970s, EPA hired photographers to capture images of environmental challenges around our country; the series was called the Documerica Project. Below are some of the amazing photos from the Documerica Project which show snapshots of our country before the passage of RCRA.

America has always been a nation full of beauty and natural wonders worth protecting.

Utah – Canyonlands National Park, May 1972

Rangeley Lake in the Mountains of Western Maine, Seen from Route 4 June 1973

In the years leading up to the passage of RCRA, Americans began to realize the need for better standards for landfills and pollution to keep our environment safe and clean.

Solid Waste Is Dumped Into Trenches at This Sanitary Landfill April 1972

Litter on Gulf Coast Beach, May 1972

Landfill Operation Is Conducted by the City of New York on the Marshlands of Jamaica Bay. Pollution Hazards and Ecological Damage Have Called Out Strong Opposition May 1973

Dimensions of the Littering Problem Are Suggested by This Heap of Cold Drink Cans, Salvaged by Girl Scouts at Islamorada in the Central Florida Keys. (circa 1975)

Seagulls Scavenge at Croton Landfill Operation along the Hudson River August 1973

Dumping Garbage at the Croton Landfill Operation, August 1973

Open Garbage Dump on Highway 112, North of San Sebastian February 1973

The conditions in the images above motivated concerned citizens, forward thinkers, and business leaders to push for regulations and fight for the passage of RCRA.

Along Route 580, near San Francisco. October 1972

Dumping Prohibition Is Ignored on This Hunter’s Point Creek Adjacent to the John F. Kennedy Airport, May 1973

Cleaning Up the Roadside in Onsetm May 1973

Stacked Cars In City Junkyard Will Be Used For Scrap, August 1973

Young People Filling Bags with Litter, May 1972

Children in Fort Smith Are Learning That Protecting the Environment Will Take More Than Awareness, June 1972

On October 21, 1976, President Ford signed RCRA, ushering in a new era of stricter environmental protections in the handling, management and disposal of waste. From that day forward, we worked to protect human health and the environment.

This is the first part in a three part blog series. Be on the lookout for the next blog discussing what RCRA has achieved in the last 40 years.

For more information on RCRA, visit www.epa.gov/rcra

Follow our RCRA 40th Campaign on social media: #ProtectPreventPreserve

About the author: Liz Sundin is a Public Affairs Specialist in EPA’s Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.

from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2fEYPGs