Friday, September 8, 2006

From September 3 to 8, experts gathered at the 10th International Congress on Obesity in Sydney, Australia, to discuss what they call the worldwide “obesity epidemic”. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 1 billion people in the world today are overweight, and 300 million of those are obese. “Obesity and overweight pose a major risk for serious diet-related chronic diseases, including type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, hypertension and stroke, and certain forms of cancer“, a WHO fact sheet states. According to AP, experts at the conference “have warned that obesity is a bigger threat than AIDS or bird flu, and will easily overwhelm the world’s health care systems if urgent action is not taken”.

Of particular concern is the large number of overweight children. Dr. Stephan Rossner from Sweden’s Karolinska University Hospital, a leading obesity expert who was present at the conference, has warned that as a result of the increasing number of overweight children, “we will have, within a decade or two, a number of young people who are on kidney dialysis. There will not be organs for everybody”. UK-based International Obesity Task Force has said that junk food manufacturers target children, for example, through Internet advertising, chat rooms, text messages, and “advergames” on websites. Politicians are not doing enough to address the problem of obesity, including childhood obesity, the experts said.

According to Wikipedia, examples of junk food include, but are not limited to: hamburgers, pizza, candy, soda, and salty foods like potato chips and french fries. A well-known piece of junk food is the Big Mac. The US version of just one Big Mac burger contains 48% of calories from fat, 47% US Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) of fat, 52% RDA of saturated fat, 26% RDA of cholesterol, 42% RDA of sodium, and little nutritional value. It also has 18% of calories from protein. According to WHO, most people need only about 5% calories from protein. Staples such as rice, corn, baked potatoes, pinto beans, as well as fruits and vegetables such as broccoli, cauliflower, zucchini, oranges, and strawberries, provide more than this required amount of protein without the unhealthy amounts of fats or sodium, without cholesterol, and with plenty of fiber, vitamins, and minerals.

Both WHO and the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) define overweight in adults as a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 25 or above, and obese as a BMI of 30 or above. To combat overweight and obesity, WHO recommends that, among other things, people should be taking the following steps

• eating more fruit and vegetables, as well as nuts and whole grains;
• engaging in daily moderate physical activity for at least 30 minutes;
• cutting the amount of fatty, sugary foods in the diet;
• moving from saturated animal-based fats to unsaturated vegetable-oil based fats.

[edit]

Monday, July 15, 2019

At 4:42 local time on Saturday (2024 Friday, UTC), an earthquake struck Surigao del Sur, Philippines, injuring at least 25 people and damaging churches, houses, and other infrastructure, according to Philippine officials.

Governor Alexander Pimentel told CNN Philippines the towns damaged were primarily Carrascal, Cantilan, Madrid, Carmen, Lanuza, and Cortes.

According to the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology (Phivolcs), the epicenter was located roughly nine kilometers (about six miles) east of Carrascal, 73 km (45 miles) north of Tandag City, the capital of Surigao del Sur. Phivolcs reported the earthquake’s magnitude was 5.5; United States Geological Survey (USGS) reported 5.8.

Madrid District Hospital in the town of Madrid, which sustained cracks on concrete walls with some pieces falling to the ground, treated 25 wounded people who evacuated to the hospital, CNN Philippines reported the governor said.

Earlier this year, northern Philippines suffered a 6.3 magnitude earthquake causing eleven deaths.

Monday, April 19, 2010

One of Cuba’s leading cigar makers, Alejandro Robaina, died at the age of 91 of cancer, with which he was diagnosed last year. His death was announced by Jose Antonio Candia, spokesman for the cigar company Habanos S.A. Robaina was the only Cuban tobacco grower to have a brand of cigars named after him.

Robaina was known as the “Godfather” in Cuba. His face was seen on all sorts of advertising including the packet of Vegas Robaina cigars. Vegas Robaina’s can fetch as much as US$500 internationally.

He lived on his farm in Pinar del Rio and continued to survey his fields until the cancer began to affect him severely. During an interview with CNN in 2008 he said, “The first thing is to love the land, take care of the land.” The farm he grew his tobacco on had been owned by the family since 1845, and with that land Robaina turned the plantation into a successful business with a strong reputation in the Cuban tobacco industry.

As an ambassador for Cuban tobacco, Robaina spoke out against the trade embargo enforced by the United States. He said in an earlier interview that he hoped the embargo would end in his lifetime.

Tuesday, February 21, 2006Tangent Computer, a computer services and hardware company based in Burlingame, California has filed a lawsuit against Microsoft. The lawsuit filed on February 14, 2006 claims that Microsoft continues to breach federal antitrust laws.

Tangent alleges that Microsoft fosters tactics “to prevent and destroy competition” while raising prices of its software to “supra-competitive levels.” Tangent is arguing that the tactics are a violation of section 2 Sherman Antitrust Act, a federal law prohibiting unfair business practices and monopolies.

The lawsuit details legal issues which have faced Microsoft since the 1980s, and requests that an amount of monetary damages to be determined by a jury at a trial.

Tangent is an original equipment manufacturer who has purchased and installed Microsoft operating systems since 1995. In addition to their hardware business, they also provide Internet content monitoring, spam filtering, anti-spyware and adware solutions, network vulnerability assessments, active directory tools and migration services.

Monday, February 11, 2008

On Sunday evening, around 16:30 local time, three armed men wearing ski masks stole four paintings: Claude Monet‘s “Poppy field at Vetheuil,” Edgar Degas‘ “Ludovic Lepic and his Daughter,” Vincent van Gogh‘s “Blooming Chestnut Branches” and Paul Cezanne‘s “Boy in the Red Waistcoat” from Foundation E.G. Bührle museum in Zürich, Switzerland.

The three armed robbers entered the museum half an hour before closing. One man with a pistol forced employees to the ground while the other two men stole the paintings. The whole ordeal lasted only 3 minutes. The men then proceeded to a van and left.

The four paintings are worth a total of 163 million US dollars. It’s said that it would be hard to sell the stolen paintings on the open market due to the popularity of the paintings. There is a reward of 90 thousand US dollars for the artwork.

The robbers, who were still at large, stole the paintings Sunday from the E.G. Bührle Collection, one of Europe’s finest private museums for Impressionist and Post-Impressionist art, police said.

It was the largest art robbery in Swiss history and one of the biggest ever in Europe, said Marco Cortesi, spokesman for the Zürich police. He compared it to the theft in 2004 of Edvard Munch‘s The Scream and Madonna from the Munch Museum in Norway.

Last week, Swiss police reported that two Pablo Picasso paintings were stolen from a Swiss exhibition near Zurich.

Saturday, April 4, 2009

Noam Chomsky is a professor emeritus at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Linguistics and Philosophy. At the age of 40 he was credited with revolutionizing the field of modern linguistics. He was one of the first opponents of the Vietnam War, and is a self described Libertarian Socialist. At age 80 he continues to write books; his latest book, Hegemony or Survival, was a bestseller in non-fiction. According to the Arts and Humanities Citation Index Professor Chomsky is the eighth most cited scholar of all time.

On March 13, Professor Chomsky sat down with Michael Dranove for an interview in his MIT office in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

((Michael Dranove)) I just wanted to know if you had any thoughts on recent NATO actions and the protests coming up at the 60th NATO conference, I know you’re speaking at the counter-conference.

Could be I give so many talks I can’t remember (laughs).

On the NATO conference, well I mean the obvious question is why should NATO exist? In fact you can ask questions about why it should ever have existed, but now why should it exist. I mean the theory was, whether you believe it or not, that it would be a defensive alliance against potential Soviet aggression, that’s the basic doctrine. Well there’s no defense against Soviet aggression, so whether you believe that doctrine or not that’s gone.

When the Soviet Union collapsed there had been an agreement, a recent agreement, between Gorbachev and the U.S government and the first Bush administration. The agreement was that Gorbachev agreed to a quite remarkable concession: he agreed to let a united Germany join the NATO military alliance. Now it is remarkable in the light of history, the history of the past century, Germany alone had virtually destroyed Russia, twice, and Germany backed by a hostile military alliance, centered in the most phenomenal military power in history, that’s a real threat. Nevertheless he agreed, but there was a quid pro quo, namely that NATO should not expand to the east, so Russia would at least have a kind of security zone. And George Bush and James Baker, secretary of state, agreed that NATO would not expand one inch to the east. Gorbachev also proposed a nuclear free weapons zone in the region, but the U.S wouldn’t consider that.

Okay, so that was the basis on which then shortly after the Soviet Union collapsed. Well, Clinton came into office what did he do? Well one of the first things he did was to back down on the promise of not expanding NATO to the east. Well that’s a significant threat to the Soviet Union, to Russia now that there was no longer any Soviet Union, it was a significant threat to Russia and not surprisingly they responded by beefing up their offensive capacity, not much but some. So they rescinded their pledge not to use nuclear weapons on first strike, NATO had never rescinded it, but they had and started some remilitarization. With Bush, the aggressive militarism of the Bush administration, as predicted, induced Russia to extend further its offensive military capacity; it’s still going on right now. When Bush proposed the missile defense systems in Eastern Europe, Poland and Czechoslovakia, it was a real provocation to the Soviet Union. I mean that was discussed in U.S arms control journals, that they would have to regard as a potential threat to their strategic deterrent, meaning as a first strike weapon. And the claim was that it had to do with Iranian missiles, but forget about that.

Take say on Obama, Obama’s national security advisor James Jones former Marine commandant is on record of favoring expansion of NATO to the south and the east, further expansion of NATO, and also making it an intervention force. And the head of NATO, Hoop Scheffer, he has explained that NATO must take on responsibility for ensuring the security of pipelines and sea lanes, that is NATO must be a guarantor of energy supplies for the West. Well that’s kind of an unending war, so do we want NATO to exist, do we want there to be a Western military alliance that carries out these activities, with no pretense of defense? Well I think that’s a pretty good question; I don’t see why it should, I mean there happens to be no other military alliance remotely comparable — if there happened to be one I’d be opposed to that too. So I think the first question is, what is this all about, why should we even be debating NATO, is there any reason why it should exist?

((Michael Dranove)) We’ve seen mass strikes all around the world, in countries that we wouldn’t expect it. Do think this is a revival of the Left in the West? Or do you think it’s nothing?

It’s really hard to tell. I mean there’s certainly signs of it, and in the United States too, in fact we had a sit down strike in the United States not long ago, which is a very militant labor action. Sit down strikes which began at a significant level in the 1930’s were very threatening to management and ownership, because the sit down strike is one step before workers taking over the factory and running it and kicking out the management, and probably doing a better job. So that’s a frightening idea, and police were called in and so on. Well we just had one in the United States at the Republic Windows and Doors Factory, it’s hard to know, I mean these things are just hard to predict, they may take off, and they may take on a broader scope, they may fizzle away or be diverted.

((Michael Dranove)) Obama has said he’s going to halve the budget. Do you think it’s a little reminiscent of Clinton right before he decided to institute welfare reform, basically destroying half of welfare, do you think Obama is going to take the same course?

There’s nothing much in his budget to suggest otherwise, I mean for example, he didn’t really say much about it, about the welfare system, but he did indicate that they are going to have to reconsider Social Security. Well there’s nothing much about social security that needs reconsideration, it’s in pretty good financial shape, probably as good as it’s been in its history, it’s pretty well guaranteed for decades in advance. As long as any of the famous baby boomers are around social Security will be completely adequate. So its not for them, contrary to what’s being said. If there is a long term problem, which there probably is, there are minor adjustments that could take care of things.

So why bring up Social Security at all? If it’s an issue at all it’s a very minor one. I suspect the reason for bringing it up is, Social Security is regarded as a real threat by power centers, not because of what it does, very efficient low administrative costs, but for two reasons. One reason is that it helps the wrong people. It helps mostly poor people and disabled people and so on, so that’s kind of already wrong, even though it has a regressive tax. But I think a deeper reason is that social security is based on an idea that power centers find extremely disturbing, namely solidarity, concern for others, community, and so on.

The fundamental idea of Social Security is that we care about whether the disabled widow across town has food to eat. And that kind of idea has to be driven out of people’s heads. If people have a commitment to solidarity, mutual aid, support, and so on, that’s dangerous because that could lead to concern for other things. Like, it’s well known, for example, that markets just don’t provide lots of options, which today are crucial options. So for example, markets today permit you to buy one brand of car or another. But a market doesn’t permit you to decide “I don’t want a car, I want a public transportation system”. That’s just not a choice made available on the market. And the same is true on a wide range of other issues of social significance, like whether to help the disabled widow across town. Okay, that’s what communities decide, that’s what democracy is about, that’s what social solidarity is about and mutual aid, and building institutions by people for the benefit of people. And that threatens the system of domination and control right at the heart, so there’s a constant attack on Social Security even though the pretexts aren’t worth paying attention to.

There are other questions on the budget; the budget is called redistributive, I mean, very marginally it is so, but the way it is redistributive to the extent that it is, is by slightly increasing the tax responsibility to the extremely wealthy. Top couple of percent, and the increase is very marginal, doesn’t get anywhere near where it was during the periods of high growth rate and so on. So that’s slightly redistributive, but there are other ways to be redistributive, which are more effective, for example allowing workers to unionize. It’s well known that where workers are allowed to unionize and most of them want to, that does lead to wages, better working conditions, benefits and so on, which is redistributive and also helps turn working people into more of a political force. And instead of being atomized and separated they’re working to together in principle, not that humans function so wonderfully, but at least it’s a move in that direction. And there is a potential legislation on the table that would help unionize, the Employee Free Choice Act. Which Obama has said he’s in favor of, but there’s nothing about it in the budget, in fact there’s nothing in the budget at all as far as I can tell about improving opportunities to unionize, which is an effective redistributive goal.

And there’s a debate right now, it happens to be in this morning’s paper if Obama’s being accused by Democrats, in fact particularly by Democrats, of taking on too much. Well actually he hasn’t taken on very much, the stimulus package; I mean anybody would have tried to work that out with a little variation. And the same with the bailouts which you can like or not, but any President is going to do it. What is claimed is that he’s adding on to it health care reform, which will be very expensive, another hundreds of billions of dollars, and it’s just not the time to do that. I mean, why would health care reform be more expensive? Well it depends which options you pick. If the healthcare reforms maintain the privatized system, yeah, it’s going to be very expensive because it’s a hopelessly inefficient system, it’s very costly, its administrative costs are far greater than Medicare, the government run system. So what that means is that he’s going to maintain a system which we know is inefficient, has poor outcomes, but is a great benefit to insurance companies, financial institutions, the pharmaceutical industry and so on. So it can save money, health care reform can be a method of deficit reduction. Namely by moving to an efficient system that provides health care to everyone, but that’s hardly talked about, its advocates are on the margins and its main advocates aren’t even included in the groups that are discussing it.

And if you look through it case after case there are a lot of questions like that. I mean, take unionization again, this isn’t in the budget but take an example. Obama, a couple of weeks ago, wanted to make a gesture to show his solidarity with the labor movement, which workers, well that’s different (chuckles) with the workers not the labor movement. And he went to go visit an industrial plant in Illinois, the plant was owned by Caterpillar. There was some protest over that, by human rights groups, church groups, and others because of Caterpillar’s really brutal role in destroying what’s left of Palestine. These were real weapons of mass destruction, so there were protests but he went anyway. However, there was a much deeper issue which hasn’t even been raised, which is a comment on our deep ideological indoctrination. I mean Caterpillar was the first industrial organization to resort to scabs, strikebreakers, to break a major strike. This was in the 1980’s, Reagan had already opened the doors with the air controllers, but this is the first in the manufacturing industry to do it. That hadn’t been done in generations. In fact, it was illegal in every industrial country except apartheid South Africa. But that was Caterpillar’s achievement helping to destroy a union by calling in scabs, and if you call in scabs forget about strikes, in other words, or any other labor action. Well that’s the plant Obama went to visit. It’s possible he didn’t know, because the level of indoctrination in our society is so profound that most people wouldn’t even know that. Still I think that it’s instructive, if you’re interested in doing something redistributive, you don’t go to a plant that made labor history by breaking the principle that you can’t break strikes with scabs.

((Michael Dranove)) I live out in Georgia, and a lot of people there are ultra-right wing Ron Paul Libertarians. They’re extremely cynical. Is there any way for people on the left to reach out to them?

I think what you have to do is ask, what makes them Ron Paul Libertarians? I don’t happen to think that makes a lot of sense, but nevertheless underlying it are feelings that do make sense. I mean the feeling for example that the government is our enemy. It’s a very widespread feeling, in fact, that’s been induced by propaganda as well.

So pretty soon it will be April 15th, and the people in your neighborhood are going to have to send in their income taxes. The way they’re going to look at it, and the way they’ve been trained to look at it is that there is some alien force, like maybe from Mars, that is stealing our hard earned money from us and giving it to the government. Okay, well, that would be true in a totalitarian state, but if you had a democratic society you’d look at it the other way around You’d say “great, it’s April 15th, we’re all going to contribute to implement the plans that we jointly decided on for the benefit of all of us.” But that idea is even more frightening than Social Security. It means that we would have a functioning democracy, and no center of concentrated power is ever going to want that, for perfectly obvious reasons. So yes there are efforts, and pretty successful efforts to get people to fear the government as their enemy, not to regard it as the collective population acting in terms of common goals that we’ve decided on which would be what have to happen in a democracy. And is to an extent what does happen in functioning democracies, like Bolivia, the poorest country in South America. It’s kind of what’s happening there more or less. But that’s very remote from what’s happening here.

Well I think Ron Paul supporters can be appealed to on these grounds, they’re also against military intervention, and we can ask “okay, why?” Is it just for their own security, do they want to be richer or something? I doubt it, I think people are concerned because they think we destroyed Iraq and so on. So I think that there are lots of common grounds that can be explored, even if the outcomes, at the moment, look very different. They look different because they’re framed within fixed doctrines. But those doctrines are not graven in stone. They can be undermined.

• Additional comments

• On the elite’s view of the poor

• On Fromm‘s alienation of man

Friday, March 28, 2008

2008 Taipei International Cycle Show (Taipei Cycle) & Taipei International Sporting Goods Show (TaiSPO) not only did a best reunion with conjunctions of the launch of Taipei World Trade Center Nangang Exhibition and the concurrent cycling race of 2008 Tour de Taiwan but also provide opportunities and benefits for sporting goods, bicycle, and athlete sports industries to establish the basis of the sourcing center in Asia and notabilities on the international cycling race.

Although the Taipei cycle was split from the TaiSPO since 1988, but the trends of sporting good industry in Taiwan changed rapidly and multiply because of modern people’s lifestyles and habits. After the “TaiSPO Innovation Award” was established since 2005, the fitness and leisure industries became popular stars as several international buyers respected on lifestyle and health.

For example, some participants participated Taipei Cycle and TaiSPO with different product lines to do several marketing on bicycle and fitness equipments, this also echoed the “Three New Movements” proposed by Giant Co., Ltd. to make a simple bicycle with multiple applications and functions. As of those facts above, Wikinews Journalist Rico Shen interviewed Ideal Bike Corporation and Gary Silva, designer of “3G Steeper” to find out the possibilities on the optimizations between two elements, fitness and bicycle.

Monday, May 31, 2010

Scottish IndyCar driver Dario Franchitti won his second Indianapolis 500 in four years today after leading 155 laps, which is the fourth most in the 99-year history of the race. Franchitti, aged 37, also won a rain-shortened race in 2007, when the race was stopped after 166 laps due to the inclement weather and he was declared the winner.

The conditions at this race were far different, with the National Weather Service reporting temperatures of 88° F (31° C) at the track at race time. This temperature made the race the second hottest to the 1932 race, which reached 92° F.

After a failed attempt to race in the NASCAR Sprint Cup series in 2008, Franchitti returned to the IndyCar series to race for Chip Ganassi Racing. With this victory, owner Chip Ganassi became the first team owner in racing history to have their drivers win both the Daytona 500 of the Sprint Cup (won by Jamie McMurray) and the Indianapolis 500 in the same year.

“The milk tastes just as good the second time around here,” said Franchitti, referring to the ceremonial winner’s milk drink following the race. “I just needed to know what the other guys were doing with fuel. There was a gap behind them and a lot of confusion. This means so much after coming back when I went away for a year in 2008 and to come back win a championship and win the Indianapolis 500,” he added in an interview in the winner’s circle.

Franchitti won the race on less than a tenth of a gallon of fuel, after he and his team decided to not pit during the final laps of the race. The race ended on a caution after a massive crash between drivers Mike Conway and Ryan Hunter-Reay, when Conway’s car got caught onto Hunter-Reay’s left outside wheel and was sent airborne. Conway’s car then hit the track’s retaining wall and landed on its front side. Medics took Conway out of the car, and he was taken to the hospital with a leg injury.

Finishing behind Franchitti in second place was British driver Dan Wheldon of Partner Racing. This was Wheldon’s second straight second place finish. In third place was Marco Andretti, who started in sixteenth position.

See external links for a full list of results.

Monday, May 19, 2008

The last remaining members of the Russian doomsday group True Russian Orthodox Church emerged from a cave outside Penza Friday, after enduring the toxic stench of rotting corpses from two deceased members of their group. Interfax quoted authorities who said that fumes from the corpses in the cave threatened the nine remaining members of the group with poisoning and intoxication. Members entered the cave in November 2007 under instruction from their leader Pyotr Kuznetsov, and were under the belief that the world was coming to an end in May of this year.

Thirty-five members of the group entered the underground cave, 650km (400 miles) south-east of Moscow, in November in order to wait for the end of the world. The group members threatened mass suicide by igniting gasoline canisters if authorities attempted to intervene and remove them.

When Russian Orthodox priests were brought in to negotiate in November, the group members refused to speak with them. The group’s leader Kuznetsov, a trained engineer, instructed his followers not to listen to the radio or watch television. True Orthodox Church is a splinter group of the Russian Orthodox Church. Members believe that bar codes are Satanic symbols and refuse to eat processed food.

In November Kuznetsov, 43, was arrested and charged with setting up a religious organization associated with violence. In March, Kuznetsov attempted to commit suicide by banging his head with a log, after the spiritual leader realized he was wrong about his prophecy of apocalypse. After undergoing a psychiatric evaluation, Kuznetsov was determined to be schizophrenic. “It was an attempted suicide. Pyotr put his head on a tree stump and started hitting his head with a log,” said Oleg Melnichenko, deputy goveror of the Penza region. According to local prosecutor Grigori Zhitenev, Kuznetsov attempted to commit suicide because “the end of the world has not come”.

When the roof collapsed approximately a month ago, 24 members including four children left the cave. A male member of the group who had previously left the cave told Russia Today TV that one female member died of malnutrition while fasting, and another female member died of cancer. Both of their bodies were buried in a hole in the cave. Emergency workers discovered the bodies while trying to shore up supports in the cave which previously underwent partial cave-ins due to melting snow. The bodies of the two dead women were exhumed after the nine members of the group left the cave, and forensic tests were conducted on the bodies.

“We could smell the stench through ventilation holes. As we pulled out the dead bodies, we suggested the others leave and they agreed,” said local official Vladimir Provotorov in a statement quoted by Interfax. Provotorov said authorities believed the remaining members of the group would be poisoned by the toxic fumes of the decomposing bodies of the two dead females. There was “a real threat of poisoning from toxic corpse fumes,” said Provotorov. Oleg Melnichenko said the stench of the corpses drove the remaining members out of the cave. According to the International Herald Tribune, the Penza regional Prosecutor General’s Office confirmed the Interfax report.

A physician is examining the eight women and one man that emerged from the cave on Friday, and prosecutor’s office spokeswoman Tatyana Ostrovskaya said authorities are in the process of deciding whether or not to pursue criminal charges related to the two dead women. “We are examining the bodies to see if we will open a criminal case,” said Ostrovskaya. The majority of the members of the True Russian Orthodox Church still believe that the world will soon end, and await the apocalypse in the village of Nikolskoye in a cottage owned by their leader Kuznetsov.