Sunday, October 25, 2020

Earth's Volatile Environment 320,000 Years Ago Helped Make Humans So Adaptable


(lsmart Photography/Moment/Getty Images)
HUMANS


RICHARD POTTS, THE CONVERSATION
24 OCTOBER 2020


People thrive all across the globe, at every temperature, altitude, and landscape. How did human beings become so successful at adapting to whatever environment we wind up in?

Human origins researchers like me are interested in how this quintessential human trait, adaptability, evolved.

At a site in Kenya, my colleagues and I have been working on this puzzle for decades. It's a place where we see big changes happening in the archaeological and fossil records hundreds of thousands of years ago.

But what external factors drove the emergence of behaviors that typify how our species, Homo sapiens, interacts with its surroundings?

We wanted to know if we could connect what was happening in the environment at the time to these shifts in technology and the human species that lived there.

Based on our analysis, published in the journal Science Advances, we conclude that the roots of Homo sapiens' evolutionary adaptations stem from our ability to adjust to environmental change.
Missing time in the archaeological record

Famed prehistoric site Olorgesailie is in southern Kenya. It lies within the Rift Valley, a seismically active area where lakes and streams produced sediments that accumulated over time, burying and preserving fossilized bones and ancient stone tools.

At Olorgesailie, our scientific team has found evidence that's potentially related to the origin of Homo sapiens in the form of a critical transition from one technology to another.

The older technology is typified by large oval cutting implements called handaxes. Typical of what's called Acheulean stone technology, nearly two dozen layers of these handaxes and other Acheulean tools have been unearthed at Olorgesailie.

They span an immense period of about 700,000 years, covering a time when fossil remains show that the hominin species Homo erectus and Homo heidelbergensis inhabited eastern Africa.

The last Acheulean archeological sites at Olorgesailie are 500,000 years old, at which point there is a frustrating 180,000-year gap in these sediments caused by erosion.

The archaeological record starts up again around 320,000 years ago, as sediments began to fill in the landscape.

But the Acheulean was gone. In its place was Middle Stone Age technology, consisting typically of smaller, more easily carried implements than the clunky Acheulean handaxes.

Acheulean handaxes were replaced by smaller weapons. 
(Human Origins Program, Smithsonian)

In other areas of Africa, the Middle Stone Age technology is associated with the earliest African Homo sapiens.

These toolmakers often used sharp-edged black obsidian as a raw material. Archaeologists Alison Brooks, John Yellen, and others chemically traced the obsidian to distant outcrops in several different directions, up to 95 kilometers (59 miles) away from Olorgesailie.

They concluded that the far-off obsidian sources provide evidence of resource exchange among groups, a phenomenon unknown in Acheulean times.

Our Middle Stone Age excavations also contained black and red coloring materials. Archaeologists view pigments like these as signs of increasingly complex symbolic communication.

Think of all the ways people use color – in flags, clothing, and the many other ways people visually claim their identity as part of a group.


So here we had the extinction of the Acheulean way of life as well as its replacement by dramatically new behaviors including technological innovations, intergroup exchange of obsidian, and the use of pigments.

But we had no way to examine what happened in the 180,000-year gap when this transition took place.


We needed to recover that time. We started strategizing how we could unearth sediments from somewhere nearby that would have recorded the environments and survival challenges associated with this shift in early human adaptation.
Turning to geology for clues about early humans

Different types of sediment are laid down in lakes, streams, and soils, and the sediment layers tell the story of changing environments over time. Geologists Kay Behrensmeyer and Alan Deino joined me in the field in southern Kenya to figure out where we might drill for sediments that could fill in the Olorgesailie time gap.

We surmised that the key to understanding the big transition would lie beneath a flat, grassy plain about 24 kilometers south of our Olorgesailie excavations.

Together with colleagues, including René Dommain and collaborators from the National Lacustrine Core Facility, we drilled in September 2012 until we reached the volcanic rock floor of the Rift Valley.

The result was a core 139 meters deep containing a sequence of ancient lake and lake margin habitats and soils, all riddled with volcanic layers we could date to yield the most precisely dated East African environmental record for the past 1 million years.

With advice from geologist Andy Cohen and other colleagues, I assembled an international team of earth scientists and paleoecologists to sample and analyze the core.

We figured out ways to convert many different measures of past environment – microscopic bits of plants, single-celled diatoms from the ancient lake deposits, and various chemical signals – into ecological measures of freshwater availability and vegetation cover.

The newly published study provides our findings.

Environments during the time gap

The sediment record showed that during the era 1 million to 500,000 years ago, when Acheulean toolmakers were busy in the Olorgesailie basin, ecological resources were relatively stable.

Fresh water was reliably available. Grazing zebra, rhinoceros, baboons, elephants, and pigs altered the regional vegetation of wooded grassland to create short, nutritious grassy plains.

And then what happened in the time gap?

The core is very well preserved in the previously mysterious time interval. We determined that right around 400,000 years ago, a critical environmental transition took place.

From a relatively stable setting, we started to see repeated fluctuation in the vegetation, available water, and other ecological resources on which our ancestors and other mammals depend.

According to the anthropological literature, hunter-gatherers today and in recent history respond to periods of uncertain resources by investing time and energy to refine their technology.

They connect with distant groups to sustain networks of resource and information exchange. And they develop symbolic markers that strengthen these social connections and group identity.

Sound familiar? These behaviors resemble how the ancient Middle Stone Age lifestyle at Olorgesailie differed from the Acheulean way of life.

Equally notable, the large grazing species typical of Acheulean times became extinct after 500,000 years ago.

Between 360,000 and 300,000 years ago, ecologically flexible herbivore species smaller in size, less water-dependent, and reliant on both short and tall grass and tree leaves, had replaced the specialized grazers such as now-extinct species of zebras and the huge baboon.

These changes in the animal community reflect the advantage of adaptable diets, a parallel to how our Middle Stone Age ancestors adjusted to environmental uncertainty.

For the past two decades, many human origins researchers have thought of climate as the primary, if not sole, driver of hominin adaptive evolution. Our new study draws attention, though, to several factors in the Acheulean-Middle Stone Age transition in southern Kenya.

Yes, rainfall varied strongly after the environmental transition 400,000 years ago. But the terrain across the region also became fractured by tectonic activity and blanketed with volcanic ash. And big herbivores exerted different influences on the vegetation before and after this transition.

The result was an ecological cascade of changes that included the early humans who practiced the Middle Stone Age way of life. We propose that all of these factors together instigated this critical evolutionary change.

The Middle Stone Age might hold a lesson for today. As humanity now confronts an era of environmental uncertainty on a global scale, is our species sufficiently nimble to engage social networks, new technologies, and reliable sources of information to adjust to the environmental disruptions ahead?

Richard Potts, Director of the Human Origins Program, Smithsonian Institution.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Paul Kruse: Former Blue Bell Creameries CEO faces charges in connection with alleged listeria contamination coverup

By Jazmin Goodwin, CNN Business

A Texas grand jury charged Paul Kruse, Blue Bell Creameries' former CEO and president, was charged with wire fraud and conspiracy in connection with an alleged cover-up of the company's 2015 listeria outbreak, the Department of Justice announced on Wednesday.
© Jamie Squire/Getty Images OVERLAND PARK, KS - APRIL 21: Blue Bell Ice Cream is seen on shelves of an Overland Park grocery store prior to being removed on April 21, 2015 in Overland Park, Kansas. Blue Bell Creameries recalled all products following a Listeria contamination. (Photo by Jamie Squire/Getty Images)

Kruse, who served as the company's CEO and president from 2004 to 2017, was charged with seven counts of wire fraud and conspiracy for an alleged scheme to cover up what the company knew about the listeria contamination in Blue Bell products, according to the Department of Justice.


"We firmly believe the charges will be dismissed because they are untimely," said Chris Flood, who represents Kruse. "We look forward to a jury hearing what really happened in 2015 and Blue Bell's response to the unfortunate events."

Blue Bell said it would be inappropriate for the company to comment on Kruse's legal situation since he is no longer with the company.

According to the indictment, Kruse allegedly directed employees to remove potentially contaminated products from store freezers without notifying retailers or consumers of the real reason. Kruse instructed employees to tell customers who asked about the removed items that there was an "unspecified issue with a manufacturing machine," the indictment alleges.

Blue Bell did not issue an immediate recall of the products nor did the company inform customers about the listeria contamination, according to the indictment.

"US consumers rely on food producers and suppliers to ensure the safety of the nation's food supply.The charges announced today show that if an individual violates food safety rules or conceals relevant information, we will seek to hold them accountable," said Judy McMeekin, associate commissioner for regulatory affairs at the Food and Drug Administration, in a news release."We will continue to investigate and bring to justice those who jeopardize public health."

The ice cream was linked to 10 listeria cases in four states and resulted in three deaths in Kansas. In May, the company pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors for distributing adulterated food products and agreed to pay $19.3 million in fines for shipping contaminated ice cream during the 2015 listeria outbreak. The company shut down all its plants in 2015 cleanings and updates, according to the news release.

Listeriosis is a potentially fatal infection caused by the germ listeria, which is found in soil, water, raw milk and some animals like poultry and cattle. Unlike many other germs, it can grow in the cold temperature of a refrigerator or in a food processing plant.

- Shannon Liao contributed to this report




Medieval Church Ruins Found With 'Witch Marks' Removed For a High-Speed Rail


BRANDON SPECKTOR, LIVE SCIENCE
23 OCTOBER 2020

Learning no lessons from horror films of yore, Britain has plans for a high-speed rail project that will lay tracks over the ruins of a medieval church. And, apparently, the project has run into some trouble with witches and dark spirits.


According to archaeologists working at Stoke Mandeville, a village that lies in the path of the proposed railway, an early excavation of the site's 700-year-old church revealed stone beams etched with strange circular patterns known as "witch marks."

These markings, which look like the spokes of a wheel with a hole drilled into the center, were created to "ward off evil spirits by entrapping them in an endless line or maze," project officials wrote in a statement.

Michael Court, lead archaeologist at HS2 Ltd (the company behind the rail project), said the unusual markings offer a "fascinating insight into the past" at a site that has long been lost to history.

 
Other 'witch mark' found among the ruins of St Mary. (HS2 Ltd)

The church in question, named St. Mary's, was erected around 1070 as a private chapel for the lord of Stoke Mandeville in what is now Buckinghamshire, England, according to the statement. The church building was expanded in the 1340s to accommodate local villagers, then ultimately demolished in the 1860s when a new church popped up closer to town.

Yet during the first excavation of the site, the HS2 team found many sections of the medieval building to be in surprisingly good condition, with walls surviving to a height of almost 5 feet (1.5 meters) and floors intact.


The witch marks were carved into two different stones, one sitting at ground level and the other higher up. Given the location of the ground-level stone, the radial pattern wasn't likely used as a sundial, something that is typically found near the southern doors of medieval churches, the archaeologists said.

Similar witch markings have turned up at medieval sites across the U.K., including a set discovered last year at Creswell Crags, a limestone gorge and cave complex that has been inhabited on and off since the last ice age.

\
CG rendering of what St Mary's looked like 700 years ago. (HS2 Ltd)

The markings are typically etched into stones near doorways, windows, and fireplaces to keep spirits away.

The markings did not save St. Mary's from its ultimate destruction. But with the scrawled stones still intact, modern witches keen on trying the new high-speed train may need to reroute their travels away from Stoke Mandeville.








24-Million-Year-Old Nursery For Baby Megasharks Discovered in South Carolina


LAURA GEGGEL, LIVE SCIENCE
20 OCTOBER 2020

About 24 million years ago, baby shark ancestors of the giant beast called megalodon needed a place to grow big before heading into the open ocean, so they swam around a coastal spot replete with easy-to-catch prey - a nursery in what is now South Carolina, according to new research.

Until now, scientists knew of just two fossil shark nurseries: a 10 million-year-old megalodon nursery in Panama and a 5 million-year great white shark nursery in Chile.

In addition to being the third such nursery, the new discovery is also the first nursery on record for Carcharocles angustidens, a megatoothed shark that lived during the Oligocene epoch (34 million to 23 million years ago), said co-researcher Robert Boessenecker, a research fellow at the Mace Brown Museum of Natural History at the College of Charleston, in South Carolina.

When Boessenecker and his colleague examined one of the shark teeth from the nursery site, they found another surprise; it came from the largest C. angustidens on record, according to an equation that calculates a shark's body length based on its tooth size. The new estimate changes the understanding of how big these ancient carnivores could get.

Previously, the record holder was from a C. angustidens tooth found in New Zealand, which put the now-extinct shark at a maximum length of 27.8 feet (8.47 meters).

"Our recalculated maximum length for C. angustidens is 8.85 meters [29 feet]," said co-researcher Addison Miller, who graduated with a bachelor of science in geology from the College of Charleston in May. "This came out to be slightly larger than the New Zealand specimen."

In comparison, the modern great white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) can reach lengths of 20 feet (6 m), but most are smaller, Live Science previously reported.


The research on the shark teeth found in the nursery, which is not yet published in a peer-reviewed journal, was presented online October 13 at the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology's annual conference, which was virtual this year due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The research "appears to be an ongoing work," but the claim that this may be a paleo-shark nursery is exciting, said Kenshu Shimada, a professor of paleobiology at DePaul University who wasn't involved with the research, but who learned about the project at the conference, told Live Science.

If supported with more evidence, this finding "would indicate that the behavior and adaptive strategy of using nursery areas had already evolved by the Oligocene about 24 million years ago for the megatooth shark lineage."

Sarah Boessenecker helped collect some of the fossils. (Robert Boessnecker)

Collecting shark teeth

The researchers discovered the shark teeth primarily in one rock unit: the fossil-rich Chandler Bridge Formation in the town of Summerville, South Carolina. In total, the researchers examined 87 C. angustidens teeth from this and the neighboring Ashley Formation dating to the late Oligocene.

Because these particular parts of the fossil formation weren't picked over by amateur fossil collectors, the shark teeth collected from these formations are thought to be accurate representations of the sharks that lived there. This is important, because "everybody and their mother goes out and digs up shark teeth and sells them here" in South Carolina, and people usually snag the largest teeth they can find, Boessenecker said.

This can cause headaches for paleontologists, who may find sites with lots of small shark teeth (one indication of a shark nursery) that's not a true representation of the sharks that lived there, because all of the large shark teeth have already been carted away.

To investigate, Miller analyzed the teeth from the two formations. With the new maximum length for C. angustidens, she was able to calculate the approximate body size categories for infant sharks, juveniles and adults. Then, using tooth-to-body-length equations (there is a different equation for each tooth, depending on its position in the mouth), she determined the sharks' corresponding body sizes.

Carcharocles angustidens teeth discovered in South Carolina. (Addison Miller)

In all, Miller found that of the 87 teeth, three (3 percent) were infants, 77 ( 89 percent) were juveniles and seven (8 percent) were adults.

"Our total body length mean was 4.8 meters [15.7 feet], meaning that this was looking more and more like a C. angustidens nursery," Miller told Live Science in an email.

South Carolina's Oligocene waters were also home to easily accessible prey for C. angustidens, including billfish, tuna, mackerel, cheloniid sea turtles, leatherback sea turtles, dolphins, baleen whales, sea cows, and other sharks and rays, Boessenecker said.

In addition, this place was likely a shallow area that would have offered natural protection to young sharks that weren't ready for life in the deep sea, he said.

This article was originally published by Live Science. Read the original article here.
Scientists Just Discovered a Mysterious Organ Lurking in The Centre of The Human Head


(Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek/YouTube

PETER DOCKRILL
20 OCTOBER 2020

Medical researchers have made a surprise anatomical discovery, finding what looks to be a mysterious set of salivary glands hidden inside the human head – which somehow have been missed by scientists (AND DOCTORS) for centuries up until now.

This "unknown entity" was identified by accident by doctors in the Netherlands, who were examining prostate cancer patients with an advanced type of scan called PSMA PET/CT. When paired with injections of radioactive glucose, this diagnostic tool highlights tumours in the body.

In this case, however, it showed up something else entirely, nestled in the rear of the nasopharynx, and quite the long-time lurker.

(Valstar et al., Radiotherapy and Oncology, 2020)

The tubarial glands structure, indicated by blue arrows, alongside other major salivary glands in orange.

"People have three sets of large salivary glands, but not there," explains radiation oncologist Wouter Vogel from the Netherlands Cancer Institute.

"As far as we knew, the only salivary or mucous glands in the nasopharynx are microscopically small, and up to 1,000 are evenly spread out throughout the mucosa. So, imagine our surprise when we found these."

Salivary glands are what produce the saliva essential for our digestive system to function, with the bulk of the fluid produced by the three major salivary glands, known as the parotid, submandibular, and sublingual glands.

There are approximately 1,000 minor salivary glands too, situated throughout the oral cavity and the aerodigestive tract, but these are generally too small to be seen without a microscope.

The new discovery made by Vogel's team is much larger, showing what appears to be a previously overlooked pair of glands – ostensibly the fourth set of major salivary glands – located behind the nose and above the palate, close to the centre of the human head.

"The two new areas that lit up turned out to have other characteristics of salivary glands as well," says first author of the study, oral surgeon Matthijs Valstar from the University of Amsterdam.

"We call them tubarial glands, referring to their anatomical location [above the torus tubarius]."

These tubarial glands were seen to exist in the PSMA PET/CT scans of all the 100 patients examined in the study, and physical investigations of two cadavers – one male and one female – also showed the mysterious bilateral structure, revealing macroscopically visible draining duct openings towards the nasopharyngeal wall.

"To our knowledge, this structure did not fit prior anatomical descriptions," the researchers explain in their paper.


"It was hypothesised that it could contain a large number of seromucous acini, with a physiological role for nasopharynx/oropharynx lubrication and swallowing."

As for how the glands haven't previously been identified, the researchers suggest the structures are found at a poorly accessible anatomical location under the skull base, making them hard to make out endoscopically. It's possible duct openings could have been noticed, they say, but might not have been noticed for what they are, being part of a larger gland system.

The tubarial glands. (The Netherlands Cancer Institute)

Additionally, it's only the newer PSMA-PET/CT imaging techniques that would be able to detect the structure as a salivary gland, going beyond the visualisation capabilities of technologies like ultrasound, CT, and MRI scans.

While the team concedes that additional research on a larger, more diverse cohort will be needed to validate their findings, they say the discovery gives us another target to avoid during radiation treatments for patients with cancer, as salivary glands are highly susceptible to damage from the therapy.

Preliminary data – based on a retrospective analysis of 723 patients who underwent radiation treatment – seem to support the conclusion radiation delivered to the tubarial glands region results in greater complications for patients afterwards: a result that not only could benefit future oncology, but also seems to strengthen the case that these mysterious, overlooked structures really are salivary glands.

"It seems like they may be onto something," pathologist Valerie Fitzhugh from Rutgers University, who wasn't involved with the study, told The New York Times.

"If it's real, it could change the way we look at disease in this region."

The findings are reported in Radiotherapy and Oncology.
Forbes Estimates China Paid Trump At Least $5.4 Million Since He Took Office, Via Mysterious Trump Tower Lease


Dan Alexander Forbes Staff Policy
Senior editor at Forbes, covering Donald Trump's business
















Donald Trump maintained a stake in Trump Tower when he became president, and with it, a financial connection to the Chinese government.

President Donald Trump, who declared “I don’t make money from China” in Thursday night’s presidential debate, has in fact collected millions of dollars from government-owned entities in China since he took office. Forbes estimates that at least $5.4 million has flowed into the president’s business from a lease agreement involving a state-owned bank in Trump Tower.

The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China signed a lease for space in 2008, years before the president took office, paying about $1.9 million in annual rent. Trump is well-aware of the deal. “I’ll show you the Industrial Bank of China,” he told three Forbes journalists touring Trump Tower in 2015. “I have the best tenants in the world in this building.”

Trump moved from the skyscraper to the White House in 2017, but he held onto ownership of the retail and office space in the building, through his 100% interest in an entity called Trump Tower Commercial LLC. That put him in an unusual position, given that government-owned entities in China hold at least 70% of the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China. Suddenly, a routine real estate deal became a conduit for a foreign superpower to pay the president of the United States.


The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China maintained an office space inside President Trump's Fifth Avenue skyscraper. ROBERT ALEXANDER/GETTY IMAGES

The arrangement posed legal concerns, since the U.S. Constitution prohibits federal officials from accepting “any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state” without Congressional approval. Ethics experts, who have often focused on the president’s hotel in Washington, D.C., argued that the president would be in violation of the Constitution’s emoluments clause from the moment he took office.


On January 11, 2017, Trump and his team held a press conference inside Trump Tower, not far from the office of the Chinese bank. Trump’s lawyer, Sheri Dillon, claimed that routine business transactions are not violations of the so-called Emoluments Clause. But she also said the president planned to donate all foreign government profits at his hotel to the U.S. Treasury. The next month, first son Eric Trump, who had just taken over day-to-day operations of his father’s business, told Forbes the donations would come from “all the properties.”

Perhaps Eric Trump meant all hotel properties, because it sure doesn’t seem like the Trump Organization handed over all their profits from the deal with the Chinese. The Trump Organization reportedly donated a total of $343,000 to the U.S. Treasury in 2017 and 2018, Trump’s first two years as president. Yet, a document connected to Trump Tower suggests that over those same two years, the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China was set to pay about $3.9 million in rent. Operating profit margins inside the building are an estimated 42%, which would suggest that the deal yielded $1.6 million of earnings over those two years. Even if you only count roughly 70% of that money as coming from the Chinese government, it still adds up to $1.2 million—or more than three times what the Trump Organization reportedly gave to the Treasury.


President Trump debates Joe Biden in the closing days of the 2020 election. JABIN BOTSFORD/THE WASHINGTON POST

The lease was set to expire on October 31, 2019, according to a debt prospectus filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In 2018, the state-owned bank agreed to a new lease in a different office building nearby, suggesting it might leave Trump Tower. But then, the bank decided to stay in the president’s building anyway. “They are keeping a couple of floors,” Eric Trump confirmed onstage at a business conference in October 2019.

The new arrangement is somewhat murky. Contacted Friday morning, a spokesperson for the Trump Organization initially said that the bank had “consolidated with their other offices in New York.” When told that Forbes might publish that statement, the spokesperson then seemed to confirm that the Chinese bank was in fact maintaining space in the building: “They’ve exited the vast majority of their space in Trump Tower.” The website for the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China still lists an address inside Trump Tower.

Trump has other financial connections to China. The New York Times revealed Tuesday that the U.S. president has a bank account in China. His daughter, Ivanka Trump, received 41 Chinese trademarks from the time she was appointed a White House adviser in March 2017 to April 2019, according to an analysis of documents. The review also showed that the trademarks Ivanka applied for after her father’s inauguration got approved about 40% faster than those she sought out beforehand.



Follow me on Twitter or LinkedIn. Check out some of my other work here
Dan Alexander
I am a senior editor at Forbes, as well as the author of White House, Inc.: How Donald Trump Turned the Presidency into a Business, released Sept. 22, 2020. I write about money in politics, with an emphasis on the businesses of Donald Trump and the people around him.



US Government’s Antitrust Suit Targeting Google Comes Amid An Uneven Track Record Against Big Tech

Michael Bobelian Contributor
Policy
Author of Battle for the Marble Palace

After months of speculation, the Department of Justice and eleven state Attorneys General launched an antitrust suit on Tuesday, accusing Google of stifling competition in the search and advertising sectors through exclusive arrangements with its business partners. “Competition in this industry is vitally important,” Attorney General William Barr said in a statement accompanying the lawsuit, “which is why today’s challenge against Google… is a monumental case.”

Both Republicans and Democrats have railed against the nation’s tech giants in recent years, with Elizabeth Warren and Donald Trump—who reside on polar opposites of the political spectrum—both calling for government agencies to bring antitrust cases against the industry.

Though these rants haven’t quite reached the feverish pitch of Theodore Roosevelt’s trust-busting assault on Standard Oil and the other industrial giants of the Gilded Age, they do harken back two decades to a time when critics cast Microsoft, and its CEO Bill Gates, as villains suffocating the burgeoning Internet sector.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) was mindful of its past standoffs with America’s tech titans in the statement it released announcing the lawsuit. “As with its historic antitrust actions against AT&T in 1974 and Microsoft in 1998,” Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen explained in the statement, “the Department is again enforcing the Sherman Act.”


The problem for the DOJ is that the government’s track record in this arena over the past quarter century has been uneven at best. Despite all the hoopla surrounding the announcement of the lawsuit on Tuesday, unless this case proceeds in unexpected ways, nothing points to a different outcome this time around.


The U.S. Department of Justice building in Washington D.C. (Photo by Ting Shen/Xinhua via Getty) XINHUA NEWS AGENCY/GETTY IMAGES

Previous Government Efforts Haven’t Stopped Big Tech’s Growing Market Power

Despite a series of consent decrees, proscriptions of mergers and acquisitions, and in one instance, the prosecution of a conspiracy to raise the prices of e-books involving Apple, the government’s primary antitrust enforcers—the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the DOJ—haven’t been able to slow down the tech sector’s march towards market concentration or disabled the industry’s biggest players from stifling competition.

As a result, oligopolies control nearly ever segment of the industry. Apple’s iPhone and Google’s Android dominate the smartphone market. The top three computer manufacturers have seen their market share rise in the past decade. By selling everything from common household items to niche products like the Gremlin Chia pet, Amazon accounts for more than a third of all Internet sales in the United States.

Successful antitrust enforcement has been short lived

Despite suffering their biggest defeat in 2004 when, after a lengthy trial, a federal judge approved Oracle’s purchase of PeopleSoft over the Justice Department’s objections, these agencies have seen their greatest success in blocking potential mergers.

In 2008, the Justice Department blocked an advertising arrangement between Google and Yahoo, which at the time had a far larger presence in the online search and advertising market. Three years later, regulators blocked a merger between AT&T and T-Mobile and in 2015, Comcast and Time Warner scuttled their deal in the face of antitrust scrutiny.

These were short lived victories, however. Though the names were reshuffled, consolidation in the tech sector continued unabated, allowing a handful of companies to dominate key markets. Prohibited from joining AT&T, T-Mobile later combined with Sprint, reducing the number of national cell phone carriers to three. Though Comcast’s marriage with Time Warner fell apart, it eventually acquired NBC Universal. Time Warner also found a new suitor when AT&T absorbed it in 2018. Fearing it might be left out, Verizon acquired Yahoo at about the same time.

The social media market played out in a similar fashion. Instead of outperforming its competitors, Facebook simply purchased them, procuring Instagram and WhatsApp to form a social media juggernaut. Together, these entities host three of the nation’s top five social media platforms and with Mark Zuckerberg holding the majority of voting shares, it allows him to dictate how millions of Americans interact with one another online. Even John D. Rockefeller, perhaps the most notorious of the Robber Barons targeted by the trust-busting Roosevelt more than a century ago, never attained this kind of influence over public discourse.


Google's offices in downtown Manhattan. Accusing the company of using anti-competitive tactics to ... [+] GETTY IMAGES

Other than blocking an occasional merger, the FTC and DOJ have largely resorted to consent decrees in their bid to prevent a small cluster of companies from abusing their market dominance. These decrees, which are settlements with companies that aim to reduce anti-competitive behavior, have also fallen short of slowing down the growing market power of the tech titans. In 2010, Intel agreed to reduce its anticompetitive conduct in a deal with the FTC yet it remains one of only two major chip makers in the world. It only began to lose market share to its chief rival, AMD, nine years after its consent decree with the FTC.

Google also faced similar scrutiny nearly a decade ago only to escape unscathed. Since coming to an agreement with the FTC back in 2013, Google’s share of the American online search market has grown, climbing to nearly 90% over the past seven years. It also managed to transfer this dominance from the PC market to cell phones and other mobile devices: almost 95% of the Internet searches conducted on these devices used Google in 2020.

Perhaps no case exemplifies the difficulty of relying on antitrust enforcement to tame the tech sector more than Microsoft. After two years of litigation highlighted by Bill Gates’s testy deposition at the hands of David Boies, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson called for the company’s break-up in 2000.

The government’s euphoria of winning the most consequential antitrust case in a generation didn’t last long. An appellate court overturning Jackson’s order a year later struck the first blow. Then the Bush administration decided to moderate the Justice Department’s demands despite calls from several states that had joined the litigation to press on. The denouement of the lawsuit ended in a whimper: a consent decree prohibited Microsoft from forcing computer makers to exclusively work with its software and required it to share its source code with other software companies so that they could develop applications for Windows, then the dominant operating system.

After the anticipation caused by Judge Jackson’s break-up order, the settlement was both anticlimactic, and to many, like AOL Time Warner, one of Microsoft’s leading rivals at the time, “completely ineffective.” Einer Elhauge, an antitrust professor at Harvard Law School, characterized it at the time as “largely meaningless enforcement,” a sentiment echoed by ten of the eighteen state Attorneys General who refused to sign on to the deal and continued to pursue Microsoft in the courts.

Then again, perhaps the enforcement action did generate some benefits even if it allowed Microsoft to maintain its market dominance. Tim Wu, a professor at Columbia Law School, has since argued that by curbing Microsoft’s monopolistic tendencies, the settlement paved the way for the emergence of upstarts—most notably, Google. Even though it seems like a longshot, it would be ironic if the beneficiary of the last historic antitrust suit was now tamed by the very laws that gave it a lifeline.

Follow me on Twitter. Check out my website or some of my other work here.

Michael Bobelian
I write about the Supreme Court, white-collar crime, and politics. I am the author of Battle for the Marble Palace: Abe Fortas, Earl Warren, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and the Forging of the Modern Supreme Court.


DOJ Antitrust Case Against Google Draws Allusions to Landmark Microsoft and Standard Oil Cases




On October 20, 2020, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and 11 state attorneys general filed an antitrust complaint against Google, alleging Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by unlawfully maintaining monopolies in markets for internet search services and search advertising. This begins the long-awaited enforcement salvo anticipated by those closely following the recent federal, state and congressional antitrust investigations of big tech. The DOJ’s Google case is certainly the most significant antitrust case against an alleged tech monopoly since the DOJ’s win in its case against Microsoft more than two decades ago. The Google case is putting antitrust at the top of news feeds, with many already calling it the modern tech equivalent of the landmark antitrust case against Standard Oil during the heyday of the trustbuster era – framing data as the new oil, with Google as “the gatekeeper for the internet.”

The complaint alleges that Google enters into exclusionary agreements with distributors (such as device manufacturers, wireless carriers, and web browser developers) to maintain Google as their devices’ preinstalled, default search engine. In many cases, the complaint alleges, these agreements prohibit the distributors from dealing with Google’s search engine competitors. Under some agreements, Google search apps are undeletable from Android devices and had to be prominently featured on the device’s home screen.

The complaint alleges that Google induces distributors to enter into these alleged exclusionary agreements by sharing its search advertising revenue and conditioning access to the Google Play app store, an essential product for most mobile distributors, on these agreements preferencing Google search. According to the complaint, the distributors entering into these agreements account for 60% of the search market. Google’s Chrome browser, along with its other owned-and-operated products, delivers Google an additional 20% of the search market.

The complaint not only describes Google’s alleged exclusionary conduct, but explains how Google purportedly obtained monopoly power. In 2007, Google released the code of its Android operating system as open source code, meaning anyone could use it for free and could modify the operating system, a process known as “forking.” This induced device manufacturers and carriers of mobile phones to use Android. But according to the complaint, Google perverted the open source system by providing a proprietary layer of applications, known as Google Mobile Services, that were highly valued by users and not available unless the device manufacturer entered into a Mobile Application Distribution Agreement (“MADA”). The MADAs prohibited forking and required favoring Google search. To entice device manufacturers into MADAs, the complaint alleges, Google offered the Android device manufacturers a share of search revenue.

The agreements are reminiscent of the arrangements that Microsoft imposed on original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”) in order to favor Microsoft’s browser. Microsoft required the OEMs to preinstall Microsoft’s browser along with the Windows operating system. Although users could download a competing browser and make that the default browser, the DOJ argued, users would rarely do that, and given the outcome of that case, the court obviously agreed. The DOJ makes the same argument here: While users could replace Google search with another search application, few actually do.

According to the complaint, Google’s exclusionary practices resulted in anticompetitive harm to both advertisers and users. For advertisers, the complaint alleges that Google’s monopoly power allows it to manipulate advertising supply and artificially inflate rates. Consumers were allegedly harmed by Google’s policies regarding use of their data. But for Google’s exclusionary conduct, search competitors would have offered search options with greater privacy protections.

Not all exclusionary conduct is unlawful under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. To determine whether the conduct is unlawful, courts consider whether the anticompetitive effects of the conduct outweigh the procompetitive effects. In terms of procompetitive effects, the internet search market is unique in how directly a search engine’s scale affects the quality of its service. Google’s search algorithm constantly improves upon itself by learning from user behavior to predict which search results and ads will be most responsive to future queries. Assuming that Google’s exclusionary conduct contributed to Google’s scale, that conduct then contributed to Google’s ability to offer more relevant search results and more effective advertising. The DOJ will have to show that the anticompetitive effects outweigh these procompetitive effects if it is to prevail in its Sherman Act claim. Part of the government’s challenge will be to demonstrate how a 100-year-old statute, written with Standard Oil and U.S. Steel in mind, applies to the extremely dissimilar business models of big tech.

French startup Ynsect to build world's biggest bug farm


By Reuters Staff

DOLE, France (Reuters) - Growing global demand for food is putting a squeeze on available land and one French startup says it has the answer: indoor insect farming.

Ynsect raised $224 million from investors including Hollywood star Robert Downey Jr.’s Footprint Coalition this month to build a second insect farm in Amiens in northern France.

The company breeds mealworms that produce proteins for livestock, pet food and fertilisers, and will use the funds to build what it says will be the world’s largest insect farm.

Due to open in early 2022, it will produce 100,000 tonnes of insect products such as flour and oil annually and conserve land use while creating 500 jobs.




The 40-metre-tall plant spread over 40,000 square metres, will be “the highest vertical farm in the world and the first carbon-negative vertical farm in the world,” Ynsect CEO and co-founder Antoine Hubert told Reuters.

He spoke at the company’s first factory, which it opened in Dole, eastern France in 2016, where conveyor belts carried trays with millions of squirming mealworms.

“It’s important to develop insect sectors today because the world needs more proteins, more food, more feed to feed the animals that will make eventually meat and fish...But beyond this, obviously, human food is a market,” Hubert said.

Saturday, October 24, 2020

British boss of pharma group Indivior is sentenced to six months in a US jail over opioid scandal

By DAILY MAIL CITY & FINANCE REPORTER

PUBLISHED: 23 October 2020

The British former boss of drugs group Indivior has been sentenced to six months in a US jail.

Shaun Thaxter, 53, pleaded guilty in July to a criminal charge related to how the firm marketed best-selling opioid addiction treatment, suboxone. He will also pay £460,000 in fines and forfeitures.

The case was brought by the US government, which accused Indivior of fraudulently marketing the drug.

Jailed: Shaun Thaxter pleaded guilty in July to a criminal charge related to how the firm marketed best-selling opioid addiction treatment, suboxone

It is one of the few corporate prosecutions related to an epidemic blamed for hundreds of thousands of overdose deaths.

Prosecutors claim Indivior made misleading safety claims about the film form of its flagship drug – which could be placed under the tongue and dissolved – to win endorsement from doctors and protect its share of the lucrative market.

Suboxone is used by recovering addicts to ease withdrawal symptoms. But it is a powerful and addictive opioid.

Thaxter led Indivior from 2009 until July 2020, when he left abruptly with a £2.3million exit package and admitted the charge the next day.

He was said to be the person in charge of efforts to get suboxone added to the medicines that could be prescribed under the state of Massachusetts' Medicaid programme in 2012.

Indivior argued the film was safer than tablets because it was less likely to be abused and harder for children to accidentally use but it 'lacked any scientific evidence' to support this, prosecutors said.

The claims led to the drug being prescribed to some patients who had children under six years old. Thaxter's lawyer emphasised that he had no idea that the alleged false claims had been made.


But prosecutors said he 'oversaw and encouraged' the marketing efforts.

Daniel Bubar, first assistant US attorney of the Western District of Virginia, said: 'He was in a position to ensure that doctors, patients, and insurers were dealt with honestly.

Instead, Thaxter failed to prevent efforts to build profits through misleading safety claims, which led to millions of dollars in ill-gotten gains.'

Indivior denies all wrongdoing and said Thaxter's sentencing is not related to the company. In July it agreed to pay £470million over the scandal.

Consumer goods giant Reckitt Benckiser, which used to own Indivior until 2014, has not admitted wrongdoing, but paid £1.1billion to settle claims.

WHO's Tedros says countries on "dangerous track" in pandemic

By Reuters Staff


FILE PHOTO: World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus attends a news conference in Geneva Switzerland July 3, 2020. Fabrice Coffrini/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo

GENEVA (Reuters) - The world is now at a critical juncture in the COVID-19 pandemic and some countries are on a dangerous path, facing the prospect of health services collapsing under the strain, the head of the World Health Organization said on Friday.

“We are at a critical juncture in the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in the Northern hemisphere,” WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told a news conference. “The next few months are going to be very tough and some countries are on a dangerous track.”

“We urge leaders to take immediate action, to prevent further unnecessary deaths, essential health services from collapsing and schools shutting again. As I said it in February and I’m repeating it today: This is not a drill.”

Tedros said too many countries were now seeing an exponential increase in infections, “and that is now leading to hospitals and intensive care units running close or above capacity -- and we’re still only in October”.

He said countries should take action to limit the spread of the virus quickly. Improving testing, tracing of contacts of those infected and isolation of those at risk of spreading the virus would enable countries to avoid mandatory lockdowns.


Writing by Peter Graff; Editing by Kevin Liffey