Wednesday, August 31, 2022

American University and its staffers reach an agreement over pay and benefits

American University and its staffers have reached a settlement agreement to increase pay and benefits of the provost's office, the union said.

Dee Dwyer/Bloomberg via Getty Images

JONATHAN FRANKLIN F
August 27, 2022

Staffers at American University in Washington, D.C., have reached a settlement agreement after they went on strike this week over complaints of unfair working conditions and low wages, the union and the university said on Friday.

The deal increases pay and benefits for staff members of the university's provost office, according to the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 500.

The weeklong strike was authorized after two years of bargaining failed to bring a contract that provided employees with better wages and equity pay.

Currently, there are 550 staff members at the university — ranging from administrative staff, counselors, advisors, technicians and coordinators — who are represented by SEIU 500. More than 91% of American University's staff voted in favor of the week-long strike, according to the union.

An SEIU spokesperson says the agreement provides full-time workers with raises between 7.5% and 13.5% over two years and lowest-paid workers will receive upgrades and additional increases.

The union had filed unfair labor practice charges against the university for what it called the university's "bad faith bargaining." It plans to withdraw all except two charges after the new agreement is ratified.

American University President Sylvia Burwell said in a statement that she was "pleased to announce that we have reached tentative agreements on contracts for both the adjunct faculty and the Provost and Enrollment division staff unit. ... Throughout this process, we negotiated in good faith and worked to reach an agreement. Since these are tentative agreements, further details will be available in the coming days."

Classes for the fall semester begin for students on Monday.

In Permafrost Thaw, Scientists Seek To Understand Radon Risk

The cancer-causing gas is colorless, odorless and tasteless, making it an invisible threat to homes built on permafrost.

By Chris Baraniuk
August 23, 2022 by Undark

Deep in the frozen ground of the north, a radioactive hazard has lain trapped for millennia. But UK scientist Paul Glover realized some years back that it wouldn’t always be that way: One day it might get out.

Glover had attended a conference where a speaker described the low permeability of permafrost — ground that remains frozen for at least two years or, in some cases, thousands. It is an icy shield, a thick blanket that locks contaminants, microbes and molecules below foot — and that includes the cancer-causing radioactive gas radon.

“It immediately occurred to me that, well, if there is radon underground, it will be trapped there by a layer of permafrost,” recalls Glover, a petrophysicist at the University of Leeds in England. “What happens if that layer suddenly isn’t there anymore?” Ever since then, Glover has worked on methods to estimate how much radon — which is released as the element radium decays — might be liberated as climate change causes the permafrost to thaw.

Significant areas of Arctic and sub-Arctic ground contain permafrost — but today it is melting, and the rate of that thaw is accelerating. In a report published in January, Glover and coauthor Martin Blouin, now technical director at the mapping software firm Geostack, used modeling techniques to show that homes with basements built on areas of permafrost could be exposed to high levels of radon gas in the future. “As the permafrost melts, this reservoir of active radon can flood to the surface and get into buildings — and by being in buildings, cause a health hazard,” Glover says.

No one knows exactly how quickly radon diffuses through icy ground, but by using the rate of diffusion of carbon dioxide and adjusting for the properties of radon, Glover came up with a figure that he could use in the model. Based on 40 percent permafrost thaw, the calculations reveal that radon emissions could raise radioactivity levels to more than 200 becquerels per meter cubed (Bq/m3) for a period of more than four years in homes with basements at or below ground level. This happens when the 40 percent thaw occurs in 15 years or less.

According to the World Health Organization, the risk of lung cancer increases by about 16 percent with every 100 Bq/m3 of long-term exposure. Some countries, including the UK, set the safe level of average exposure at 200 Bq/m3. But without testing for radon in areas where the geology suggests it’s present, people will not know whether they are at risk — because the gas is odorless, colorless and tasteless.

Glover stresses that the model in the paper is an early attempt to understand how permafrost thaw could affect people’s exposure to the gas. It doesn’t, for example, account for seasonal variation in the rate of permafrost thaw or the effects of soil compaction when ice within it melts, something which could pump yet more radon to the surface.

Some 3.3 million people live on permafrost that will have completely melted away by 2050, according to estimates in a 2021 study. Not all of these people live in areas prone to radon but many do: For example, in parts of Canada, Alaska, Greenland and Russia. And the link between radon exposure and lung cancer is well-established, as is the fact that smoking further increases one’s risk, says Stacy Stanifer, oncology clinical nurse specialist at the University of Kentucky’s College of Nursing. She points to studies suggesting that radon could be behind up to 1 in 10 lung cancer deaths, of which there are 1 million in total worldwide every year.

“Breathing radon is dangerous for everyone, but it’s even more harmful when you also breathe tobacco smoke,” says Stanifer. Smoking is prevalent in Arctic and sub-Arctic communities; for example, a 2012 study reported that nearly two-thirds of Canadian Inuit age 15 and over who live within the Inuit homeland said they smoke cigarettes daily, compared with 16 percent of Canadians overall.

Scientists don’t know how much radon is actually emanating from areas with melting permafrost today, says Nicholas Hasson, a geoscientist and PhD student at the University of Alaska Fairbanks: “I would call this a blank spot.” He notes that, in real life, permafrost layers are complex and irregular, and agrees with Glover that field measurements are essential to validate the model. Instead of a uniform sheet of ice underground, imagine permafrost as more of a higgledy-piggledy Swiss cheese of ice, with some areas much thicker than others and places where groundwater courses through it, exacerbating the thaw.

Hasson and colleagues have studied locations where permafrost is thawing unusually quickly and emitting methane, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide. Similar “chimneys” could be spewing out elevated amounts of radon gas in some places, he suggests.

For human health, what really matters is the amount of radon that gets into people’s homes. Scientists and even homeowners themselves can use radioactivity detectors to assess this. A study published online in February 2022, which is yet to be peer-reviewed, measured levels of radon over the course of a year in more than 250 homes in three towns in Greenland. Out of 59 homes in Narsaq, for instance, 17 were found to have radiation levels above 200 Bq/m3.

Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free

Lead author Violeta Hansen, a radioecologist at Aarhus University in Denmark, stresses that these are early results based on a small number of homes. It would take much more research, she says, before she could evaluate the health risks associated with radon in properties like these across Greenland. She is now leading an international project that will run field experiments and gather radon measurements from homes in various countries, including Canada and Greenland. “We need to come back to the public with low-cost and effective, validated mitigation measures,” Hansen says.

The good news is that there are tried-and-tested methods of lowering levels of radon inside a house once the homeowner knows it is there.

It is important to avoid panicking people without solid data and solutions on hand, says Aaron Goodarzi, a radiobiologist at the University of Calgary in Canada. The good news is that there are tried-and-tested methods of lowering levels of radon inside a house once the homeowner knows it is there. Goodarzi points, for example, to a technique called sub slab depressurization, in which a sealed pipe is inserted below the house and connected to a fan. This sucks any radon out from below the building before blowing it away into the atmosphere. “Think of it simply like a bypass,” he says.

The type of building matters. Glover’s model found that homes built on piles or stilts, and thus separated from the ground, did not experience a boost in radon levels. Fortunately, many homes in the Arctic and sub-Arctic are constructed in this fashion. But for those that aren’t, the cost of mitigating radon could be prohibitive for low-income communities in these regions. “That’s an equity issue that has to be considered, certainly,” says Goodarzi, who notes that the onus might be on social housing administrators in some areas to ensure that the housing they provide is healthy.

A spokesperson for Health Canada says that the government agency currently recommends that homeowners test radon levels in their properties and use certified suppliers to install mitigation technologies if such are required.

Many people may not think about radon very much, given the fact that it is invisible. Glover says that getting informed now, before the permafrost thaw worsens, could save lives.

“We know that people die from it,” he says. “But at the same time, there’s so much that we can do to protect ourselves.”

This article originally appeared in Knowable Magazine, an independent journalistic endeavor from Annual Reviews. Sign up for the newsletter.

Chris Baraniuk is a freelance science journalist and nature lover who lives in Belfast, Northern Ireland. His work has been published by the BBC, the Guardian, New Scientist, Scientific American, and Hakai Magazine, among other publications.

THE TAO IS AND WILL ALWAYS BE
How Sun Tzu theory about war and strategy is applicable in contemporary warfare today?

By Muskan Moazzam
August 22, 2022

Sun Tzu was the famous Chinese war scholar who wrote about war and strategy and war tactics and contributed to the art of war during 5th century. His book the art of war is considered to be one of the most influential books for the modern militants because of its significance that it has been written during the warring era. This book is contributes a lot to the modern warfare tactics and strategies used by the militants in the contemporary warfare era.

Sun Tzu says about war is that the best of the war is that if you know your strategies and your enemy strategies then nobody can defeat you. He states that a general who understands war is minister of people’s fate and arbitrator of nation’s destiny.

For war principal, sun Tzu advocates that highest realization of warfare is attacking enemy plan and to disrupt their alliances and then is to attack their army and afterwards to attack their cities and attacking cities should be perused to last resort.

He says that victorious first win the war and go to the war while the defeater first think and then go to the war to seek the win.

According to the sun Tzu, tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.

The Afghanistan war is an example which can be explained by using the Sun Tzu’s Art of war. The Afghanistan war is divided into 3 phases; the initial removal of Al-Qaeda and Taliban , the efforts to stop their resurgence and reemergence in 2009 and then post 2014 When ISAF forces withdrew.

The first phase of the Afghanistan war started when United States using a small number of forces and air power launched an operation known as enduring freedom and the Taliban regime was ousted in just two months while al Qaeda was thrown out of the country. United States of America used the principal of the art of war described by the Sun Tzu which is that United States won the war by small fighting with a quick speed over the enemy. No one can disagree that these initial operations were not successful but after that united states was not able to capture the leaders of the terrorist organization al Qaeda which later came back to attack the US.

As Sun Tzu stated that

“Your aim must be to take all under heaven intact. Thus your troops are not worn out and your gains will be complete. This is the art of offensive strategy.”

The second phase started when the leaders of al Qaeda and Taliban flew across the border. It was difficult for United States to go and attack against the border of Pakistan so Taliban had time to regroup them and then infiltrate again into the Afghanistan to reconquer the Afghanistan. After that United States established in Afghan government in Afghanistan led by Hamid Karzai as the president of new Afghanistan government but unfortunately this government was inefficient in reaching to the masses of the country and to get their support against it Taliban. The incompetency and insufficiency of the western forces to have control and the inability of the newly formed Afghanistan government left a vacuum which was filled by Taliban on their return. And in addition to this then when US forces could push the terrorists out of the provinces, the insufficient afghan army and police were not able to hold the control of these areas which were again used to be captured by Taliban. It was clear in the second phase that the initial success was not capitalized and the lack of planning and preparation to control the country after initial success didn’t let the fruits of success to be spread across the country. As Sun Tzu argued that;

“To rely on rustics and not prepare is the greatest of crimes to be prepared beforehand for any contingency is the greatest of virtues”.

The problem was further exaggerated by the inability of Afghanistan government which allowed the reemergence of Taliban in Afghanistan. As Sun Tzu stated that;

“Now to win battles and take your objectives but to fail to exploit these achievements is ominous and may be described as wasteful delay.”

In 2009 the Barack Obama assumed the office of president of United States and he wanted to replicate the Bush policy in Afghanistan but later he decided to withdraw some of the international forces from Afghanistan in 2014. Later in the trump era a deal was signed with the Taliban whose purpose was that US and allied forces will withdraw from Afghanistan and later in the Biden’s term the United States withdrew all its forces from Afghanistan. After the withdrawal of US and Allied forces, the US formed government in Afghanistan and Afghan army too collapsed and the Taliban came back in power. The Taliban whom US kicked out initially are again back in power in Afghanistan.

According to the principles of the art of war the initial success was not utilized which led to the failure of US War on Terror in Afghanistan. The objectives such as the nation building were impossible to achieve according to the history and the nature of country and the challenges in Afghanistan. In addition to this along with Iraq war the United States was not able to give maximum attention to honest on war. There was no beforehand knowledge of the Afghan war and this absence of foreknowledge became problematic in later stages. As Sun Tzu stated that

Now the reason the enlightened Prince and the vice general conquered the enemy whenever they move and their achievements surpass those of ordinary men is foreknowledge.

The lack of clear objectives and knowledge about the enemy was cause of failure of US and Allied forces in Afghanistan war. As the Sun Tzu argued that “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle”.

Australian government to prevent prime ministers gaining secret powers

23 August 2022, 08:34

The move came after it emerged that former Australian PM Scott Morrison secretly appointed himself to five ministerial roles from 2020-21.

The Australian government will launch an inquiry aimed at preventing a prime minister from ever again secretly amassing new ministerial powers, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said.

The move came after it emerged his predecessor Scott Morrison secretly appointed himself to five ministerial roles between March 2020 and May 2021, usually without the knowledge of the original minister.

After the revelations, solicitor-general Stephen Donaghue issued legal advice that Mr Morrison had been “validly appointed” in the duplicated portfolios.

But to be appointed without notifying ministers, the parliament or the public was not “consistent with the principle of responsible government”, Mr Donaghue said in his 29-page legal opinion, which Mr Albanese released publicly on Tuesday.

Mr Morrison’s extraordinary power grab is seen as part of a wider trend in Australian politics to concentrate power within a leader’s office at the expense of the British tradition of delegating responsibilities among ministers.

Mr Albanese, who replaced Mr Morrison after elections in May, said his cabinet had been briefed on Mr Donaghue’s advice on Tuesday and agreed to set up an inquiry into how to avoid a repeat of Mr Morrison’s behaviour.

The Prime Minister’s office would immediately discuss with the staff of governor-general David Hurley – who represents the Queen, Australia’s head of state – a plan to publish all future ministerial appointments.

Such publishing could be enshrined in law to ensure it was “not dependent upon the goodwill of the government of the day”, Mr Albanese said.

The Prime Minister told reporters: “What we’re dealing with here wasn’t envisaged. I don’t think anyone in this room, certainly no-one in the current government, sat around and said: ‘I wonder if Scott Morrison has been put in charge of the Department of Industry Science, the Department of Home Affairs or whether he’s made himself Treasurer?'”

Mr Morrison, who is now an opposition legislator, told reporters last week that he usually kept his extra powers secret because they could be misconstrued. The portfolios were health, finance, treasury, resources and home affairs.

The former prime minister said his power grab had been an emergency measure made necessary by the coronavirus crisis, but his only known use of the secret powers had nothing to do with the pandemic.

He overturned a decision by former minister Keith Pitt to approve a contentious gas exploration project north of Sydney that would have harmed his coalition’s re-election chances.

Those who want an Australian president to replace the British monarch as Australia’s head of state in a republic have been critical of the governor-general’s role in the secrecy.

While Mr Hurley was obliged to follow Mr Morrison’s advice in rubber-stamping the then-prime minister’s growing list of portfolios, critics argue a governor-general should have insisted on public disclosure.

Mr Hurley’s office said in a statement: “The governor-general had no reason to believe that appointments would not be communicated.”

By Press Association

BRING ON THE MIDTERMS
Three in Five Americans and Independents are Pro-Choice Following the Recent Referendum in Kansas

Tuesday, August 23, 2022

Download Full Report Download Poll Toplines

Welcome to NAVIGATOR – a project designed to better understand the American public’s views on issues of the day and help advocates, elected officials, and other interested parties understand the language, imagery, and messaging needed to make and win key policy arguments.

Key takeaways

Majorities of Americans identify as pro-choice and support abortion being legal in all or most cases.
Almost half of Americans are hearing about the Kansas vote on abortion, and three in five say they support the results to keep abortion rights in the Kansas state constitution.
Majorities say they would vote to protect abortion rights if their state had a referendum similar to Kansas’, including overwhelming majorities of Democrats and independent women.

Three in Five Are Pro-Choice and Say Abortion Should Be Legal in All or Most Cases

Majorities of Democrats (82%) and independents (61%) describe themselves as pro-choice.

More than Half of Americans Continue to Disapprove of the Supreme Court Eliminating Federal Protections for Abortion

Republicans remain the only group supportive of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade – other partisan, racial, and ethnic groups disapprove of the decision by double-digit margins.

Nearly Half Have Heard About the Kansas Vote on Abortion, and a Majority Support the Outcome Protecting Abortion Rights

The results of the Kansas referendum on abortion rights – to keep abortion protections in place in the state constitution – are widely supported, with independents supporting the decision to keep abortion rights in place in the state by 36 points.

Nearly Two in Three Americans Say They Would Vote to Protect Abortion Rights on a Referendum Like Kansas’s

Overwhelming majorities of Democrats (including 87% of Democratic men and 85% of Democratic women) and independent women (75%) would vote to protect abortion. Republican women are split (40% would vote to protect, 46% would vote to ban).

Views of the Supreme Court Continue to Be Underwater in the Aftermath of Overturning Roe

Democrats (68%), Hispanic Americans (59%), and Black Americans (48%) are most likely to be unfavorable to the Supreme Court.

About The Study

Global Strategy Group conducted public opinion surveys among a sample of 1,000 registered voters from August 11-August 14, 2022. 106 additional interviews were conducted among Hispanic voters. 78 additional interviews were conducted among Asian American and Pacific Islander voters. 102 additional interviews were conducted among African American voters. 101 additional interviews were conducted among independent voters.

Oklahoma’s Upcoming Execution Spree

Sister Helen Prejean is imploring both church and state to be “pro-life” even for the guilty.

The impact of the Covid vaccine on periods, from increased cramps to pattern disturbances

In the UK nearly 40,000 people had reported a change to their menstrual cycle to the Yellow Card surveillance scheme

Has the vaccine had an impacted on menstrual cycles? Studies are beginning to report data (Photo: Getty Images)

By Marisa Bate

August 22, 2022

The UK has become the first country to approve a dual vaccine, which will tackle both the Omicron variant and the original Covid-19 virus, for use in the autumn.

Described as “a sharpened tool in our armoury as the virus continues to evolve” by Dr June Raine, chief executive of the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, the jab will be offered to the over-50s, health workers, carers over 16, those at clinical risk from the age of five upwards, and those who live with someone with a low immune system.

Currently, there has been no announcement of when or if the dual roll-out will be expanded, but if it were, would everyone take another jab?

Although we know immunity wanes over time, after 33 million people have had three vaccinations, and millions already had a likely Covid infection (there have been a recorded total of 19 million positive tests), should we anticipate greater apathy, or even hesitancy for those who experienced short-term side effects and think they can avoid them?

The NHS says side effects can include a sore arm, feeling tired, headaches, feeling achy, feeling or being sick. You may also get a high temperature. Although these do not impact everyone, and should not last longer than a week. There have also been reports of changes to women’s menstrual cycles: heavy bleeding, increased cramps and disturbance to patterns.

In the UK, by May of this year, nearly 40,000 people had reported a change to their menstrual cycle to the Yellow Card surveillance scheme, the medical regulator scheme, to which healthcare professionals and members of the public can report suspected vaccine side effects. And now, several studies have been published which back up these observations.

An American survey published in the Science Advances journal earlier in August involving 39,000 participants aged 18-80, is the largest study so far. It found that 43 per cent of those with regular cycles noticed heavier bleeding after a vaccination (the majority of the sample received Pfizer and Moderna vaccines). This was reflective of two of the authors’ own experiences.

Dr Katy Clancy of University of Illinois, a biological anthropologist who specialises in reproductive health, shared on Twitter in February 2021: “I’m a week and a half out from dose 1 of Moderna, got my period maybe a day or so early, and am gushing like I’m in my 20s again”. Dr Clancy’s graduate student, Katherine Lee said she had “the worst cramps of my life”.

The survey also revealed that those who didn’t expect to bleed – for various reasons, including being postmenopausal – starting bleeding, known as “breakthrough bleeding”.

“Among respondents who typically do not menstruate, 71 per cent of people on long-acting reversible contraceptives, 39 per cent of people on gender-affirming hormones, and 66 per cent of postmenopausal people reported breakthrough bleeding”, the authors wrote. However, 44 per cent of the nearly 40,000 participants reported no change to their periods at all showing that like other side effects, this does not affect everyone.

In Norway, a study by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health also found that heavy bleeding occurred after vaccination – but in just over 13 per cent. This, Ms Lee explained may be due to the immune responses caused by the vaccine, specifically inflammation. And any side effects experienced are believed to be temporary.

The dual vaccine has been approved for use in the autumn (Photo: Hollie Adams/Getty)

As well as looking at changes to bleeding, other studies have looked at impact on period timings. A smaller US study into the relationship between periods and vaccines, using data from period-tracking app Natural Cycles, found that periods were only a day late, and remained roughly the same length. This study, published in Obstetrics and Gynaecology journal, looked at 2,400 vaccinated individuals and compared their data to 1,500 unvaccinated people.

Last month, Dr Victoria Male, a lecturer in reproductive immunology at Imperial College London published a smaller study. Unlike the US or Norway, the UK government hasn’t provided any funding for research in this area, and instead, Male’s research has been done on a “shoestring”, she wrote in The Guardian.

Regardless, she found a similar pattern; there may be a disturbance to periods, including delays, but it is slight and reversible. Her work also pointed to a potential link between regular periods after vaccination for those on the combined pill.

Dr Male pointed to similar historic examples: “Writing in 1549, the Chinese doctor Wan Chhüan casually mentions that inoculation against smallpox (an early procedure similar to vaccination) was liable to bring on menstruation unexpectedly.

“A report from 1913 noted that when a New York hospital started vaccinating its nurses against typhoid, a number of them noticed post-vaccination differences in their [periods].”

Amy, 28, noticed much heavier bleeding and painful cramps after her Covid jabs. At first, she put it down to the stress of the ongoing pandemic. She went on to have the second vaccine, and booster and noticed a similar shift. But would this change her approach to another vaccination, if it were offered?

“I’d rather not have Covid than a bad period”, she tells i. “If more jabs are coming, it would just be nice if we’d be given a bit more of a heads-up about potential impact instead of worrying [that] something has gone wrong.”

Chantell, 36, experienced a late period and, when it did arrive, it lasted longer than normal. She is more reluctant than Amy, although concedes she would take another vaccine. Chantell has had Covid-19 twice, and each time it was mild. “I’m more annoyed by the inconvenience of it, than worried about how ill I’d be” she says. “Women have always had to endure bad periods, it’s just been part of the course”.

Lily, 24, had a far heavier period post-vaccine than normal but said taking the vaccination is the “responsible thing to do” if she wants to see her grandparents. The women say their periods have subsequently returned to normal.

Dr Clancy, Dr Male, and Ms Lee have all stressed that the surveys and studies are as much an awareness raising exercise as important data collection. Just as many were warned about short-term flu-like symptoms as a vaccine reaction, warning people that periods may be irregular, heavier or more painful prevents unnecessary worry and panic. It can also help take oxygen out of any false and unfounded infertility rumours.

Women are well used to issues around their health being underfunded, under researched and misunderstood. We only need to look at discussions about the risk of blood clotting caused by the AstraZeneca vaccine which meant under 30s were offered an alternative jab, but many women pointed out that the contraceptive pill has much higher risks of thrombosis yet has never received such outcry. That was because, many said, only women took the drug.

Throughout the numerous WhatsApp groups of women I posed the question to, spanning women in their 20s to their 40s, the response was fairly resounding – a difficult period wouldn’t stop them from getting another Covid vaccine, particularly as there was no evidence that the disruption had any link to infertility or long-term problems, one woman pointed out.

Dr Male is keen for these studies not to put women off getting vaccinated: “Would I let these findings put me off getting vaccinated? Well, I got vaccinated while analysing these results, so no! The study results align with others, finding that post-vaccination changes to periods are small and quickly reverse.

“For anyone who is particularly worried about the findings, it is also worth remembering that catching Covid can affect periods, so the most important thing you can do is try to avoid getting Covid”.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment