White House: Top scientist resigns over treatment of staff


- Dr. Eric Lander speaks during an event at The Queen theater in Wilmington, Del., Jan. 16, 2021. Lander has resigned after the White House confirmed that an internal investigation found credible evidence that he mistreated his staff. 

(AP Photo/Matt Slocum, File)



ZEKE MILLER
Mon, February 7, 2022, 

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden's top science adviser Dr. Eric Lander resigned Monday, hours after the White House confirmed that an internal investigation found credible evidence that he mistreated his staff.

An internal review last year, prompted by a workplace complaint, found evidence that Lander, the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy and science adviser to Biden, bullied staffers and treated them disrespectfully. The White House rebuked Lander over his interactions with his staff, but initially signaled Monday that he would be allowed to remain on the job, despite Biden’s Inauguration Day assertion that he expected “honesty and decency” from all who worked for his administration and would fire anyone who shows disrespect to others “on the spot.”

But later Monday evening, press secretary Jen Psaki said Biden had accepted Lander’s resignation with “gratitude for his work at OTSP on the pandemic, the Cancer Moonshot, climate change, and other key priorities.”

Lander, in his resignation letter, said, “I am devastated that I caused hurt to past and present colleagues by the way in which I have spoken to them.”

“I believe it is not possible to continue effectively in my role, and the work of this office is far too important to be hindered,” he added.

The White House said Biden did not request Lander’s resignation. It marks the first Cabinet-level departure of the Biden administration.

Earlier Monday, Psaki said senior administration officials had met with Lander about his actions and management of the office, but indicated he would be allowed to stay in the job, saying the administration was following a “process” to handle workplace complaints.

“Following the conclusion of the thorough investigation into these actions, senior White House officials conveyed directly to Dr. Lander that his behavior was inappropriate, and the corrective actions that were needed, which the White House will monitor for compliance moving forward,” she said.

Psaki added, “The president has been crystal clear with all of us about his high expectations of how he and his staff should be creating a respectful work environment."

The White House said Lander and OSTP would be required to take certain corrective actions as part of the review. It also said the review did not find “credible evidence” of gender-based discrimination and that the reassignment of the staffer who filed the original complaint was “deemed appropriate.”

Lander on Friday issued an apology to staffers in his office, acknowledging “I have spoken to colleagues within OSTP in a disrespectful or demeaning way.”

“I am deeply sorry for my conduct,” he added. “I especially want to apologize to those of you who I treated poorly, or were present at the time.”

The White House review was completed weeks ago, but it was confirmed — and Lander apologized — only after reporting by Politico.

Biden's “Safe and Respectful Workplace Policy” was instituted when he took office and was meant to serve as a contrast from the often-demeaning way former President Donald Trump and his aides treated one another and political foes.

Lander's conduct and the White House's initial decision to stand by him sparked some consternation inside the White House and among Biden allies and created an unnecessary distraction from Biden's agenda.

By late Monday, Lander came to believe he was in an untenable position and resigned effective no later than Feb. 18, "in order to permit an orderly transfer.”

In a statement Monday, the American Association for the Advancement of Science said Lander would no longer be invited to speak at its meeting next week, saying he was not conducting himself in a "manner befitting a scientist or scientific leader — much less a cabinet-level leader in the administration.'

“Unfortunately, toxic behavioral issues still make their way into the STEM community where they stifle participation and innovation. OSTP should be a model for a respectful and positive workplace for the scientific community — not one that further exacerbates these issues," the group's leadership said.

Lander, whose position was elevated to Cabinet-rank by Biden, appeared prominently with the president last week when he relaunched his “Cancer Moonshot” program to marshal federal resources behind research and treatment for cancer diseases.

The founding director of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Lander is a mathematician and molecular biologist. He was lead author of the first paper announcing the details of the human genome, the so-called “book of life.”

His confirmation to his role in the Biden administration was delayed for months as senators sought more information about meetings he had with the late Jeffrey Epstein, a disgraced financier who was charged with sex trafficking before his suicide. Lander also was criticized for downplaying the contributions of two Nobel Prize-winning female scientists.

At his confirmation hearing last year, Lander apologized for a 2016 article he wrote that downplayed the work of the female scientists. At the hearing, he also called Epstein “an abhorrent individual.″

Lander said he “understated the importance of those key advances" by biochemists Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna. The two were later awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

Lander’s departure on the grounds of Biden's respectful workplace policy echoed the February 2021 resignation of then-White House deputy press secretary TJ Ducklo, who was suspended and then resigned over threatening conversations with a reporter.

___

Associated Press writer Matthew Daly contributed to this report.

Systems thinking can help end practices that harm women worldwide



Margo Day
Mon, February 7, 2022

It’s been said that many of the world’s harmful practices and problems are too difficult to fight and too complex to end. Often problems like extreme poverty, food insecurity, gender-based violence and other humanitarian crises feel insurmountable. These problems are exacerbated by the existential threat of climate change, which disproportionately affects the world's poor. Among them, children, women, and people with disabilities are the most vulnerable and the least equipped to adapt.

These problems are indeed incredibly complex. But they are not unsolvable.

How do I know? Because I worked with dedicated groups on a project committed to ending female genital mutilation and forced marriage. And in the communities in Kenya we worked with, those harmful practices ended within a generation, sometimes in even less than 10 years.

After more than 30 years in technology, including many years at Microsoft working across multiple industries and in education to help those organizations digitally transform, I sought to take what I had learned and apply it to complex global issues. For over a decade, I’ve been working on gender-based violence issues such as female genital mutilation and child marriage through organizations like World Vision and Global Give Back Circle and, more recently, my own organization, Mekuno Project.

The key to solving many of the world’s biggest problems isn’t by tackling them individually – it’s by approaching them with an interconnected mindset, because the biggest issues don’t exist independently of other problems.

Solving problems in individual communities is one thing. But many solutions can be scaled across regions, continents and even the world. When seeking to solve extremely complex problems, there are some common approaches that can apply to multiple issues.

Some of what I’ve learned in my technology career can be applied to the public sector and the nonprofit space. Here are some insights and tactics that can help organizations, particularly those that seek to improve human rights and end harmful practices.
Understanding and solving multi-faceted problems by applying systems thinking

Those who have worked in technology may be familiar with systems thinking. In the simplest terms, it is an analysis approach that breaks down complex problems into smaller logical parts. The practice involves understanding how a system’s various parts interrelate while perceiving the system as a whole rather than a series of different parts. The goal is to ultimately simplify the complex, which Microsoft applied when it sought to overhaul its internal culture.

When looking at gender-based violence issues in Kenya, for example, systems thinking requires us to think beyond the specific problem of, say, forced marriage, and instead look at the bigger picture and why the problem exists in the first place.

It isn't enough to simply look at the problem – we need to look at the ecosystem in which the problem exists. FGM and child marriage, for instance, do not exist in a vacuum. They are practices that are linked to extreme poverty, cultural norms and high rates of illiteracy, all of which disproportionately affect girls in rural communities. These risk factors have also been exacerbated by climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to a spike in the rates of both harmful practices. This cycle then often continues to the next generation as these underlying causes continue to impact communities.

Removing harmful practices requires a holistic, scalable, intersectional approach on the ground, with help from a coalition of partners. Without this, any intervention cannot bring about sustainable change.

We can begin to eliminate global problems and harmful practices if we understand the reasons they exist. Systems thinking allows us to see the bigger picture and solve these problems.
Empowering communities to thrive through people-inclusive design

Eliminating problems, including gender-based violence, through a holistic community approach not only works in one community, but can be scaled when multiple organizations work together to achieve their goals.

However, there are ways to go about this that do not foster trust in a community, and we must always prioritize success on the communities’ terms. A people-inclusive design approach is rooted in empathy, meaning we must listen with the intent to learn what works for a community to build trust, inclusivity and a shared vision with them.

Empathy applied this way will lead to new innovations that bring about transformative change more quickly. If we don’t build coalitions within the communities we are trying to help, we cannot make sustainable and large-scale changes.

So, engaging local communities, listening with empathy, co-creating solutions, being transparent and communicative, and respecting and prioritizing the needs and concerns of the community are some of the most important aspects of solving complex problems.
Engage faith leaders in the community

This is a critical and often overlooked aspect to solving deeply rooted issues in many communities.

Blessing Omakwu, deputy director at the Gates Foundation, has said that gender equality cannot and will not be achieved without engaging religious partners. Faith leaders are often some of the most trusted figures in a community and can help organizations create a moral framework for engagement with the community. In fact, the World Economic Forum says that faith leaders are an untapped resource in working with communities.

While our problems can seem insurmountable and unsolvable, they are not. The key to solving many of the world’s biggest problems isn’t by tackling them individually – it’s by approaching them with an interconnected mindset, because the biggest issues don’t exist independently of other problems. It’s only in today’s interconnected world that we can begin to solve these problems. And by using a multifaceted strategy, we can begin to create a better world within a generation.

‘This Is Us’ Actress Milana Vayntrub: 

My Abortion Story

Milana Vayntrub
Mon, February 7, 2022,

Photo Illustration by Kristen Hazzard/The Daily Beast/Getty

In May 2020, I injured my ankle so badly I couldn’t move a toe. The slightest twitch sent a paralyzing bolt through my leg—like head-splitting microphone feedback that makes you recoil and cover your ears. That’s what back labor felt like—but in my spine.

My baby was “sunny side up”—a vaguely appetizing term that meant his head was pushing against my spine. Every time I had a contraction, it felt like my back was breaking. The pain felt unfair—like an injustice. Surely, this must be against some law! I thought, followed quickly by, I must call the head of the hospital! As the pain intensified, it became, I need to call the police! Finally, I landed on the president. Actually, scratch that. Kamala. She’d know what to do.

Madam Vice President, if there’s any way you could put in a call to my uterus and ask this kid his ETA? See if he’d consider assuming a more comfortable position? I’m sure you have friends in high places, soooo…

I was in labor for so long I genuinely forgot I was in the hospital to have a baby. The pain had taken over, and I thought my life was just going to be about managing it. The doctors had already tried to give me an epidural, but it didn’t work, so my options were limited: I begged the doctors to try the epidural one more time. (They couldn’t.) I begged my husband to squeeze my hips every time I had a contraction. (He did.) I begged Siri to turn on my “Breathe & Chill” playlist. (She said I had to unlock my phone first. We haven’t spoken since.)

Colbert Goes Off on SCOTUS Over ‘Roe’ Challenge: ‘We Don’t Live in a Democracy’

Just when I believed I was at the very end of my rope, the nurse told me I was ready to push. And I did. For two glorious hours, I pushed like a champion. Between pushes, I cracked jokes. I told the nurses this is how I should record my stand-up special. When else would I get such a captive audience? I was sweaty, exhausted and hilarious—even if only to myself.

My baby arrived slimy, half-covered in his own poop, and heavy as a bowling ball. As the nurse placed his little, loud body on my chest, I remembered why I was there and why I’d gone through all this. I remembered that this was what I had chosen to do. I wanted to create a family. I knew that this was the first of many ginormous sacrifices I would make in my son’s life.

For me, birth was bearable because I had chosen it. I could only manage the nausea, pain, and expenses (financial and emotional) of pregnancy because I wanted a child. Now that I’ve experienced a full-term pregnancy and given birth, I find myself thinking about how imprisoning it would be to go through this if I didn’t choose it. If I was forced into it because laws didn’t give me any other option.

Unfortunately—terrifyingly—this isn’t some far-off dystopian thought experiment. In 2021 alone, 600 abortion restrictions were introduced across the country; 90 were enacted into law. That’s more than any year since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973. And right now, the Supreme Court is deliberating a case that could overturn Roe v. Wade.

This is not a drill, people. All of us with a uterus may soon be stripped of the constitutional right to an abortion. Forced pregnancy and birth sounds medieval—as medieval as secret, unsafe abortions. And yet, here we are.

My life as I know it, and motherhood as I know it, was shaped by my right to make choices about my own body. In that way, my birth story is inseparable from my abortion story.

Ten years ago, I was pregnant for the first time. I was living in an apartment I could barely afford with my first boyfriend out of college. We were doing whatever it took to get by. I was taking random babysitting jobs, working at a smoothie shop, and performing improv in tiny LA theaters as often as anyone would allow me on stage. I accidentally missed a day or two of my birth control, and my period was late. So, I did what countless women have done since pioneer times: I bought a two-pack of pregnancy tests, took them right there in the drug store bathroom, and buried the positive results in the trash underneath some wet paper towels.

I immediately knew the right thing to do was to have an abortion. There was no handwringing, no confusion, no sleepless nights. I’ve always had a strong moral compass—the kind that sets off blaring sirens and flashing red lights in my chest if I feel like I’m doing something wrong. In this case, all was silent. My compass pointed very clearly in the direction of not bringing a child into the world that I did not want and could not care for.

Within two weeks, I had a safe procedure in my doctor’s office, and it was no big deal. My abortion story is uncomplicated and straightforward, based on a decision that was all my own. I understand this is a privilege. I also understand that access to abortion should never be a privilege; it should be a protected right.

Over the past decade, I’ve hardly thought about my abortion, except for when I think of those who may not have access to one. Abortion restrictions disproportionately harm those already most vulnerable in our country—from Black, Latino, and Indigenous communities to young people, immigrants, those living in poverty, and rural areas. This comes as no surprise. Marginalized Americans have always been the most impacted by racist and classist reproductive policies throughout history.

I’m haunted by the prospect of what we all stand to lose. If the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, half of U.S. states could control our personal reproductive decisions by summer. Over 36 million people could be forced to give birth.

Becoming a mother has made me even more adamant about access to safe, legal abortions. I now know how hard it is to carry a bowling ball-sized human to full term. I know the back-breaking will it takes to give birth to a baby. I know the toll of sleepless nights and a torn body, the necessity of support, the pause it puts on your career, relationships, and goals. I cannot fathom the cruelty of enduring all this plus a lifetime of childrearing if you do not want it.

I wouldn’t wish the labor pain I experienced on anyone. Okay, except maybe the politicians who continue to use their power to try to strip us of our rights. But I wish this for them in a benevolent way. Maybe laboring would grow their empathy toward those of us whose bodies they use as talking points in their re-election campaigns.

Activists hold a clothes hanger at a rally in front of the U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 22, 2022, in Washington, D.C.
Anna Moneymaker/Getty

It’s never been more apparent to me that the abortion “debate” is not about life or even policy; it’s about power. And while I don’t have the power to cast a vote in the Supreme Court case, I do have the power to raise my voice as one of the nearly 25 percent of women who will have an abortion in their lifetime. So, as we approach the 49th Anniversary of Roe v Wade, I am telling you all these personal details because I believe in the power of our stories to offer perspective. And more than that, the ability of our actions to create protections for everyone.

Deep down, I think most Americans understand that we should all have the freedom and power to make choices about our bodies, lives, and futures. It’s 2022! I want to shout at my newsfeed. How could we live in a country where people are forced into doing something so life-altering, so personal? But shouting just wakes up the baby and accomplishes little else.

Instead, we need to take action. The Senate will soon vote on the Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA). This is critical legislation that would protect the right to abortion throughout the country. I’m calling my senators and urging them to pass the Women’s Health Protection Act. I hope you’ll join me. We need to get their attention every way we know how—email, letters, calls, protests, and, of course, that one precious vote we each have.

For so many reasons, I am grateful for the beautifully boring abortion I had and the essential health care I received. Mainly because today, I can show up for my little person with open arms knowing I’ve chosen our life together.

Giant Pension Sold Apple, Intel, and Qualcomm Stock. Here’s What It Bought.



One of the world’s largest public pensions by assets made major changes in its investments in large-cap tech stocks as 2021 came to a close.

PGGM of Zeist, Netherlands, cut investments in Apple (ticker AAPL), Intel (INTC), and Qualcomm
(QCOM) stock in the fourth quarter, and initiated a position in Nvidia (NVDA) stock, according to a form it filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

PGGM, which managed $327 billion in assets as of Dec. 31., didn’t comment directly on the stock trades. “PGGM has a passive strategy for listed equities, so we don’t have a specific view on specific companies,” it said in a statement.

The pension sold 1.1 million Apple shares to end 2021 with 3.6 million shares of the iPhone maker. The stock rose 34% in 2021, topping the 27% rise in the

S&P 500 index. So far this year, shares are down 3% while the index is down 5.6%.

Near the end of December, Apple’s market capitalization approached $3 trillion, but it didn’t cross that mark until early January. One analyst saw a path for the company’s market cap to hit $4 trillion. Apple reported a strong fiscal first quarter at the end of January. “Demand for Apple products and services is materially outpacing supply and when the supply chain normalizes then Apple’s sales and margins will only accelerate higher, in our view,” a Citi analyst noted.

Intel stock hasn’t had the upward trajectory that Apple’s has had. The embattled chip giant saw shares gain 3.4% in 2021; so far this year, shares have dropped 6.8%.

Last year, analysts covering Intel had a skeptical take after the company’s spending climbed under new CEO Patrick Gelsinger, who told us in July the company could “triple, quadruple” in value. Gelsinger was among Intel insiders who bought up stock on the open market in October.

Late last year, though, PGGM was selling Intel stock, shedding 205,000 shares to cut its holdings to 1.3 million shares.

The pension also sold 223,317 Qualcomm shares to end the year with 509,533 shares of the maker of wireless chips and technology. Like Intel, Qualcomm underperformed the S&P 500 in 2021, rising 20% So far this year, Qualcomm shares have dropped 1.9%.

In January, CEO Cristiano Amon told us he was bullish on Qualcomm’s long-term outlook. The company is a play on multiple emerging trends, including connected cars, the metaverse, edge computing, wireless fiber, and next-generation laptops. Earnings, reported last week, were strong, but investors weren’t impressed at first.

Unlike the other two chip makers, Nvidia had a boffo 2021, with shares rocketing 125%. So far this year, Nvidia stock has dropped 17%, one of the more-bruised names as the tech sector was socked in a January market slump.

Particular to Nvidia, the company’s deal to acquire microprocessor design house Arm Holdings from SoftBank Group (SFTBY) now seems to have foundered. Other potential Arm buyers including Intel and Qualcomm don’t look likely to clear regulatory hurdles.

AUSTRALIA
Pension Chief Set to Run $164 Billion Buys U.K., Europe Dip

Matthew Burgess
Mon, February 7, 2022


(Bloomberg) -- Whether to buy the dip in stocks is among the most pressing questions in markets. For one big investor the answer is indeed yes -- at least outside the U.S.

Sunsuper Pty.’s Ian Patrick, the chief investment officer set to control Australia’s second-biggest pension pot, is arming his fund for the long haul by scouting for bargains in the U.K. and Europe.

Shares there are cheaper compared to U.S peers and “classic signals” are not pointing to an imminent recession or financial crisis in the region, he said in an interview. His fund is set to merge with larger rival QSuper by the end of this month, when he’ll then oversee about A$230 billion ($163 billion) of assets.

“You could say that we’ve been buying the dip,” said Patrick, who currently oversees A$85 billion at Sunsuper. Markets were lulled into a false sense of what the “new normal” looked like last year “and this is a bit of a return to reality,” he said.

Global equities have been shaken by concerns that faster-than-expected monetary-policy tightening will derail economic growth. MSCI Inc.’s index of world shares is down some 5% this year and the so-called “fear gauge” for U.S. stocks, the Cboe Volatility Index, remains at above-average levels.

Patrick reckons European and U.K. stocks have been weighed down by weaker fundamentals and capital flight to big tech firms, making their valuations more attractive than for U.S. peers.

They’ve also been hit by negative sentiment fueled by demographics, structural economic issues and geopolitical tussles, he said. Sunsuper’s equity bets are currently tilted toward durables and materials over tech.

The fund’s stance is similar to one it took in September 2020, preferring European shares and developed markets outside the U.S. in a bet that vaccine developments would provide a fillip to equities. Since then, the S&P 500 Index has climbed 32%, while the STOXX Europe 600 Price Index gained 27% and the FTSE 100 increased 25%.

Avoiding Value Traps

“We fully anticipate that on a month-by-month basis, or even a half-year by half-year basis, that valuation differential won’t necessarily be realized, but we’re confident in the medium term it is,” Patrick said. “There is absolutely the chance that you could go three years before the position is rewarded.”

Patrick said he avoids so-called value traps by being “very disciplined” on bet sizes, and spreading cash across geographies to ensure no one position is dominant. The strategy saw Sunsuper return 16.5% last year, the nation’s third-best performing pension, beating the industry’s 13.4% median gain.

To protect the portfolio from market shocks, Patrick is shying away from bond markets even as yields jump. The fund is about 1% underweight bonds, particularly European and U.K. debt. Outside stocks, Sunsuper instead prefers private credit, infrastructure and utilities assets with revenue streams not linked to economic growth and foreign currencies, to help cushion any volatility.

“Definitely pricing in bond markets is less extreme than it was, but the conditions for a reversion to previous very low levels don’t appear to be imminent, or part of the medium term horizon,” he said. “There are other ways to set the portfolio up for a desired level of defensiveness.”

Does outer space end – or go on forever?


Jack Singal, Associate Professor of Physics, University of Richmond
Sat, February 5, 2022, 

It can stretch your mind to ponder what's really out there. 

Stijn Dijkstra/EyeEm via Getty Images

Curious Kids is a series for children of all ages. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, send it to curiouskidsus@theconversation.com.

What is beyond outer space? – Siah, age 11, Fremont, California

Right above you is the sky – or as scientists would call it, the atmosphere. It extends about 20 miles (32 kilometers) above the Earth. Floating around the atmosphere is a mixture of molecules – tiny bits of air so small you take in billions of them every time you breathe.

Above the atmosphere is space. It’s called that because it has far fewer molecules, with lots of empty space between them.


Have you ever wondered what it would be like to travel to outer space – and then keep going? What would you find? Scientists like me are able to explain a lot of what you’d see. But there are some things we don’t know yet, like whether space just goes on forever.
Planets, stars and galaxies

At the beginning of your trip through space, you might recognize some of the sights. The Earth is part of a group of planets that all orbit the Sun – with some orbiting asteroids and comets mixed in, too.

A diagram of the solar system, showing the sun and its orbiting planets.

You might know that the Sun is actually just an average star, and looks bigger and brighter than the other stars only because it is closer. To get to the next nearest star, you would have to travel through trillions of miles of space. If you could ride on the fastest space probe NASA has ever made, it would still take you thousands of years to get there.

If stars are like houses, then galaxies are like cities full of houses. Scientists estimate there are 100 billion stars in Earth’s galaxy. If you could zoom out, way beyond Earth’s galaxy, those 100 billion stars would blend together – the way lights of city buildings do when viewed from an airplane.

Recently astronomers have learned that many or even most stars have their own orbiting planets. Some are even like Earth, so it’s possible they might be home to other beings also wondering what’s out there.

An image showing detail of one galaxy, but visually implying there are many more.

You would have to travel through millions of trillions more miles of space just to reach another galaxy. Most of that space is almost completely empty, with only some stray molecules and tiny mysterious invisible particles scientists call “dark matter.”

Using big telescopes, astronomers see millions of galaxies out there – and they just keep going, in every direction.

If you could watch for long enough, over millions of years, it would look like new space is gradually being added between all the galaxies. You can visualize this by imagining tiny dots on a deflated balloon and then thinking about blowing it up. The dots would keep moving farther apart, just like the galaxies are.
Is there an end?

If you could keep going out, as far as you wanted, would you just keep passing by galaxies forever? Are there an infinite number of galaxies in every direction? Or does the whole thing eventually end? And if it does end, what does it end with?

These are questions scientists don’t have definite answers to yet. Many think it’s likely you would just keep passing galaxies in every direction, forever. In that case, the universe would be infinite, with no end.

Some scientists think it’s possible the universe might eventually wrap back around on itself – so if you could just keep going out, you would someday come back around to where you started, from the other direction.

One way to think about this is to picture a globe, and imagine that you are a creature that can move only on the surface. If you start walking any direction, east for example, and just keep going, eventually you would come back to where you began. If this were the case for the universe, it would mean it is not infinitely big – although it would still be bigger than you can imagine.

In either case, you could never get to the end of the universe or space. Scientists now consider it unlikely the universe has an end – a region where the galaxies stop or where there would be a barrier of some kind marking the end of space.

But nobody knows for sure. How to answer this question will need to be figured out by a future scientist.

Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.

And since curiosity has no age limit – adults, let us know what you’re wondering, too. We won’t be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: Jack Singal, University of Richmond.

Read more:

The art of Aphantasia: how ‘mind blind’ artists create without being able to visualise


Why your zodiac sign is probably wrong


Why do people look into space with telescopes but not binoculars?

Jack Singal does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

This Flying Car Is Now Officially Approved to Take to the Skies


Neel V. Patel
Sun, February 6, 2022,

Klein Vision

We’ve been promised flying cars for decades now, yet our four-wheeled vehicles are still stuck in the ground. But a Slovakian company is hoping to change all of that very soon. Klein Vision’s “AirCar” was recently issued a Certificate of Airworthiness by the Slovak Transport Authority—meaning it has the official OK to fly around in its home country.


“AirCar certification opens the door for mass production of very efficient flying cars,” Stefan Klein, the inventor and head of the AirCar development team, as well as the vehicle’s test pilot, said in a press release. “It is official and the final confirmation of our ability to change mid-distance travel forever.”

Mid-range flying vehicles have been in development for decades now, mostly in the form of eVTOLs (short for electric-powered vertical takeoff and landing). While the technology has mostly been restricted to military R&D, many companies as of late have been trying to develop commercial versions of eVTOLS that can act as air taxis, ferrying people dozens or even hundreds of miles in distance on a single charge.


Klein Vision

But the AirCar is much closer to the flying car that sci-fi writers have long imagined. In development since 2017, it’s a chimeric hybrid between car and plane. Literally—the front looks like a slim coupe, while the back has retractable tails and looks like the rear end of a small two-person plane. It’s able to drive around on the road on four wheels like a standard vehicle, but unfolds its wings and jets off into the air using a propeller in the back.

According to Klein Vision, the AirCar is capable of flying 600 miles in a single journey, with a cruising speed of 186 mph and a maximum altitude of 18,000 feet. It runs on an internal combustion engine, which means it can be fueled at any ordinary gas pump. (Not exactly a win for the environment, however.)

Klein Vision

The company is at work developing and testing other versions of the AirCar (including a four-seater, and an amphibious version that can surf on the water like a boat). But right now it’s just the two-seat version that’s approved for flight, following its first inter-city flight last June.

Klein Vision hopes to have an upgraded model approved for flight and ready for commercial production in about a year. If all things go well, it might soon be commonplace for Slovakians to look up at the sky and see an AirCar zipping around.

Germany to return ancestral remains to Hawaii from museums


Mon, February 7, 2022

BERLIN (AP) — The body overseeing Berlin's museums will hand over Hawaiian ancestral remains collected by a German naturalist in the 19th century to authorities in Hawaii.

The Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation said Monday that the remains of 32 individuals, known as “iwi kupuna," will be handed over Friday to a representative of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, a semi-autonomous state agency directed by Native Hawaiians.

“Human remains from colonial contexts have no place in our museums and universities,” Germany's culture minister, Claudia Roth, said a statement. “Their return must be a priority.”

The remains were part of collections that the heritage foundation took over from Berlin's Charite hospital in 2011 and whose provenance it is researching. The foundation said the bones were acquired by collector and naturalist Hermann Otto Finsch around 1880 during a voyage to the South Pacific and were sent to Berlin.

Most of the bones are probably several hundred years old and were collected from a beach at Waimanalo on Oahu island. Two more skulls came from a place in Hawaii that can't be identified precisely, the foundation said.

Discussions about repatriating the remains had been ongoing since 2017. The German foundation has said it will return human remains from “colonial contexts” if the countries and groups they come from are known and their return is desired.

In addition to the human remains, the Berlin foundation plans to return to Hawaii this year funerary items that were removed from burial caves around 1885.

TITHES ARE ANOTHER NAME FOR TAXES
Lawsuit appealed over Mormon church use of donations

Sun, February 6, 2022, 

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — James Huntsman, a member of one of Utah’s most prominent families and brother of a former governor, is persisting in his argument that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints used donations the church solicited for charity for commercial purposes.

Huntsman, a member of one of Utah's most prominent families, filed an appeal Friday with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, The Salt Lake Tribune reported. A federal judge in California dismissed Huntsman's complaint against the church in September, saying no reasonable juror would believe that church leaders made false statements about how funds would be used.

Huntsman, brother of former U.S. diplomat and ex-Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. and son of late billionaire philanthropist Jon Huntsman Sr., said he was defrauded out of millions of dollars during the 24 years he gave 10% of his annual income to the church. He is seeking the return of $5 million.

Contributions to the Utah-based faith known widely as the Mormon church “are used for a broad array of religious purposes, including missionary work, education, humanitarian causes and the construction of meetinghouses, temples and other buildings important in the work of the Church,” spokesperson Eric Hawkins said in a statement after the complaint was filed.

The lawsuit was filed more than a year after a former church investment manager filed a whistleblower complaint with the IRS, saying that the church has misled members and possibly broken federal tax rules for religious organizations by using an affiliated investment arm to set aside about $1 billion a year from the $7 billion that the faith received annually in member donations. The whistleblower lawsuit said the church's investments totaled $100 billion.

The church reported its largest investment fund contained nearly $38 billion at the end of 2019. The report did not detail all of the church's investments.

Huntsman said he planned to give the millions of dollars in damages he is seeking to "organizations and communities whose members have been marginalized by the Church’s teachings and doctrines, including by donating to charities supporting LGBTQ, African-American, and women’s rights.”

Fentanyl kills more young Americans than COVID. The underlying causes should worry us all.


Henna Hundal
Sun, February 6, 2022

This column is part of an ongoing series by USA TODAY Opinion exploring the mental health crisis facing Americans.

Even as we still grapple with COVID-19, an epidemic lurking beneath the surface may be disrupting the lives of young Americans even more.

Based on a recent analysis of Centers for Disease Control data, fentanyl has become the predominant killer for Americans ages 18 to 45. In the past two years, deaths from fentanyl have significantly exceeded deaths from COVID-19 for this age group. The overdoses cut across gender, race, socioeconomic status and geography.

Unfortunately, this trend doesn’t appear that it will be reversed anytime soon. In fact, these deaths are part of a growing crisis of addiction ripping apart the fabric of communities across this country.

And it's a trend we must address. Congress should swiftly deploy resources to support young people contending with drug addiction. Boosting funding for treatment centers and ensuring equitable geographic access to these centers should be a top priority this year.

Besides fentanyl, what's to blame for rising addiction, overdoses?

But while we work to stop the bleeding, we also have to probe its source. Why are thousands of young American lives entangled in such tragedy? What – more upstream than the fentanyl itself – is fueling the uptick in addictions and overdoses?

In an era where, from social activism to scientific research, it’s plain to see how “sharp and astute and tolerant and thoughtful and entrepreneurial our young people are,” as former President Barack Obama once put it, why are overdoses taking a front-row seat?

To find the answer, we know better than to apply the “blame game” paradigms of the 1980s and '90s crack epidemic. In fact, we now know that this strategy of attributing addiction to personal moral failures flies in the face of biology and decades of empirical sociological findings.

Instead, it makes sense to expand our aperture, to examine the policies and processes that should be nurturing young people’s social and economic prospects as well as overall well-being, especially in pandemic times.

And here, unfortunately, we find a consistent pattern of top-down failures.

According to a recent Harvard Institute of Politics survey of more than 2,000 18- to- 29-year-olds, 55% report feeling fearful about the direction of the country and 35% see the U.S. as headed for another civil war soon. A majority of respondents describe “feeling down, depressed or hopeless” and finding “little interest or pleasure in doing things” for at least multiple days.

Perhaps most tellingly, economic issues loom large in young people’s fear about the future, with the surveyed youth naming inflation, the cost of living and economic inequality among their top concerns. This fear bears out in the way the pandemic has even further stratified young Americans’ economic prospects from those of their parents, as mountains of student loan debt make dreams like homeownership a distant reality.

The economy isn’t alone in weighing increasingly heavily on youth’s mental health. A whopping 56% of the survey respondents also cite climate change as having a net impact on their plans for the future — and nearly the same percentage of respondents say the U.S. isn’t doing enough about it.
Eco-anxiety haunts young people

Indeed, climate anxiety is shaping up to be such an onerous concern for young Americans that there’s a term to describe it: eco-anxiety. Therapists across the country are grappling with how to help young clients navigate eco-anxiety amid indications that it’s profoundly shaping a generation’s relationships with each other and the world around them.

The chasm is widening between where young people see their lives headed and what they feel those who could right the course – including their government – are doing to help.

Add to all of this a global pandemic during a time when many people are already saddled with medical debt, and it’s not hard to imagine why America’s youth are hurting.

Young people need support at all levels – in treatment centers for addiction, and in broader policy decisions that are shaping a future for them radically out of step with their dreams.

We need to move swiftly to help young people who are struggling. And rather than dehumanize or reprimand them for their pain, we should listen.

Henna Hundal is a public policy specialist and a researcher at the Stanford University School of Medicine. Follow her on Twitter: @hennahundal.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Fentanyl deaths: Young Americans' fear and depression drive overdoses

Former Biden health policy advisor blames 'all sorts of lies' for U.S. vaccine drive sputtering

Adriana Belmonte

·Senior Editor

Sun, February 6, 2022

Vaccine misinformation has played a huge role in the disappointing U.S. turnout for coronavirus shots, according to a former White House health policy adviser.

“Because of misinformation, because of all sorts of lies that have been propagated out there — like it causes infertility or serious side effects, they’re implanting chips in people’s brains, crazy stuff — we’ve plateaued at about 60% of the population vaccinated,” Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, who advised both the Obama and Biden administrations on health policy, said on Yahoo Finance Live (video above). “That’s not good enough.”

About 63.9% of the U.S. population is fully vaccinated, 41.8% are boosted, while 75.4% have received at least one dose. The nation ranks far behind countries like Denmark, the United Kingdom, Israel, and Germany in administering booster shots.

A recent survey from the Kaiser Family Foundation found that 35% of Americans either believe or are unsure about whether deaths from the COVID vaccine “are being intentionally hidden by the government” while roughly 31% believe or are unsure about if the vaccines “have been shown to cause infertility.” (Data has shown there are no links between the COVID vaccines and infertility.)

The same survey also found that 1 in 4 individuals either believe or were unsure whether vaccines could give you COVID or contain a microchip, and 1 in 5 entertained the idea that the vaccine could change your DNA.

One thing that could help address this worrisome trend, Emanuel said, would be setting the record straight on vaccines and the benefits they provide.

“It’s not the only thing we need to do, but [misinformation is] certainly a major problem and that has caused a major misstep,’ he said.

The politicized pandemic

Emanuel noted that when President Biden took office in January 2021, he began executing a “very good strategic plan” that focused on increasing vaccination turnout.

Unfortunately, however, the politicized nature of the pandemic has meant that many are refusing to get vaccinated, which Emanuel said “hasn’t allowed the country to get behind a unified approach.”

Rather than let things continue as they are, he suggested homing in on three specific areas to increase vaccination numbers.

The first relates to workplace vaccines mandates.

“You can mandate certain employers that have high-risk situations objectively — food processor plants, other high-risk environments like long-term care facilities, correctional facilities — I think the Supreme Court is going to have to accept as critical and a targeted mandate,” Emanuel said.

The Supreme Court recently ruled that Biden’s vaccine mandate for large companies was unconstitutional, but upheld his mandate for health care workers working in institutions that receive Medicare and Medicaid funding, stating that the Department of Health and Human Services has an obligation to "ensure that the health care providers who care for Medicare and Medicaid patients protect their patients’ health and safety."

The second area that could be used to boost vaccination numbers is travel, specifically by airplane and train, which are considered interstate commerce, meaning the federal government has legal authority over it.

There are no vaccine mandates in effect for anyone traveling within the United States, but non-citizens who are entering from another country by air must show proof of vaccination in order to enter.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, Biden's chief medical advisor and a subject of various COVID conspiracy theories, has stated that a vaccine requirement for domestic air travel "seriously should be considered," though he conceded that while it's "on the table, and we consider it ... that doesn't mean it's going to happen."

Dr. Anthony Fauci shows a screengrab of a campaign website during a Senate Health Committee hearing on the federal COVID response, January 11, 2022. Greg Nash/Pool via REUTERS

The third area is around children in schools, "where assistance and help with lots of things to schools can be linked to getting children, staff, and teachers vaccinated,” Emanuel said.

Currently, only four states and the District of Columbia mandate COVID vaccines for students while 17 states have outright banned those mandates. For faculty, 11 states and D.C. mandate COVID vaccines while 11 states have banned the requirement.

“I think those are probably the three areas I would look at for expanding the numbers," Emanuel said. "In addition, getting boosters to the vulnerable immunocompromised people, people over 65, are very important as well.”

Adriana Belmonte is a reporter and editor covering politics and health care policy for Yahoo Finance. You can follow her on Twitter @adrianambells and reach her at adriana@yahoofinance.com.