Author Archives: rdmyers75@hotmail.com

February 2022 in Review

Leave a reply

The horrible war in Ukraine is obviously the most frightening and depressing thing going on as of early March 2022, both in terms of human suffering and the risk of nuclear war. But I prefer to avoid commenting too much on fast moving current events. I’ll just say that if the world can get past the acute crisis and maybe start talking seriously about arms control again, that could be a possible silver lining. But it seems like we are months or years away from that point. So I’ll pick something else below.

Most frightening and/or depressing story: Philadelphia police are making an arrest in less than 40% of murders in our city, not to mention other violent crimes. Convictions of those arrested are also down. Some of this could be Covid-era dysfunction. But there is a word for this: lawlessness.

Most hopeful story: “Green ammonia” offers some help on the energy and environmental front.

Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both: I found a 1992 Saturday Night Live skit about the Olympics more entertaining than the actual Olympics. May Phil Hartman rest in peace. I checked on Dana Carvey and he is 66 and doing okay.

“not an inch to the East”

Leave a reply

Here is some more historical background on the promises made by NATO at the end of the cold war. One lesson Trump taught me is that U.S. Presidents don’t feel bound by promises made by their predecessors to foreign parties (examples: Trump pulling out of climate change and nuclear arms control agreements, the W. Bush overthrow of Iraq and Obama of Libya). And the U.S. Congress does not feel bound by promises made by Presidents (examples: the original Kyoto climate change pledge). But this has been going on for a lot longer than the Obama/Trump era, since at least the end of the cold war. And you could go back in history and look at promises made to Native Americans and Mexico among others and conclude that talk has always been cheap. It’s not just the U.S. of course – here is an article about promises made by Russia and others to Ukraine in exchange for giving up the nuclear arsenal it inherited at the end of the cold war. And of course you could go back to promises made by Hitler and Stalin that most likely neither ever intended to keep.

I guess a lesson that could be learned by the political class is that you don’t make deals in exchange for a promise of some future action beyond the political lifetime of the party you are making a deal with. You need something tangible in return in the short term in exchange for whatever you are giving up. It seems like a sad, cynical world sometimes.

Europe, the Baltics, the Caucasus, and NATO geography quiz

Leave a reply

There are lots of point-and-click geography quizzes online. I tried this one and did horribly at 57%. If I manage to find the time, I might take it once a day until I actually know where some of the places I am hearing in the news are. That still won’t help me much when the media uses terms like “the Baltic States” and “the Caucases” (being “Caucasian” doesn’t help me with that last one. I also looked up the map of who is in NATO at this point and what surprised both at some countries that are and some that aren’t.

According to Wikipedia:

The Baltic states is a modern unofficial geopolitical term, typically used to group three so-called Baltic countries: Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. All three countries are members of NATO, the European Union, the eurozone, and the OECD. The three sovereign states on the eastern coast of the Baltic Sea are sometimes referred to as the “Baltic nations”, less often and in historical circumstances also as the “Baltic republics”, the “Baltic lands”, or simply the Baltics.

Wikipedia

The Caucasus (/ˈkɔːkəsəs/), or Caucasia[3][4] (/kɔːˈkeɪʒə/), is a region between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, mainly occupied by Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and parts of Southern Russia. The Caucasus Mountains, including the Greater Caucasus range, have historically been considered a natural barrier between Eastern Europe and Western Asia.[5]

Wikipedia

The NATO members are:

  • ALBANIA (2009)
  • BELGIUM (1949)
  • BULGARIA (2004)
  • CANADA (1949)
  • CROATIA (2009)
  • CZECH REPUBLIC (1999)
  • DENMARK (1949)
  • ESTONIA (2004)
  • FRANCE (1949)
  • GERMANY (1955)
  • GREECE (1952)
  • HUNGARY (1999)
  • ICELAND (1949)
  • ITALY (1949)
  • LATVIA (2004)
  • LITHUANIA (2004)
  • LUXEMBOURG (1949)
  • MONTENEGRO (2017)
  • NETHERLANDS (1949)
  • NORTH MACEDONIA (2020)
  • NORWAY (1949)
  • POLAND (1999)
  • PORTUGAL (1949)
  • ROMANIA (2004)
  • SLOVAKIA (2004)
  • SLOVENIA (2004)
  • SPAIN (1982)
  • TURKEY (1952)
  • THE UNITED KINGDOM (1949)
  • THE UNITED STATES (1949)

new CDC mask guidance

Leave a reply

In my coronavirus trackers and simulations revisited post, I have updated the CDC link o their new “COVID-19 by County” page based on guidance issued Friday, February 26 (it’s 2022 in case you are an anthropologist reading this thousands of years in the future.) The updated recommendation is to mask indoors if new cases in your county are 200,000 per 100,000 population per week, AND if the number of people entering the hospital and/or in the hospital is above certain thresholds. It’s a little hard to find the data and figure out yourself, so if you trust the CDC (and who wouldn’t?) you can just type in your county and they will tell you if it is high/medium/low. My home county of Philadelphia is in the medium category, indicating we don’t need to mask indoors, but the city will be slow to react and the school district will be even slower if they react at all.

heat makes us crazy

Leave a reply

Friday, February 25, 2022: resisting…urge…to…comment…on…current…events…I know…nothing…about… (just to pick a random example, the ongoing war in Ukraine)

Extreme heat not only affects our bodies, which we knew, but it exacerbates mental illness too, according to this study in JAMA.

Everybody knows shooting deaths go up when it is hot. I always assumed that people tended to be outside interacting more, especially if they don’t have air conditioning, and that young men in particular just have less to do in the summer months. But maybe there is more to it than that.

flu and Parkinson’s

Leave a reply

This article makes a link between flu infection and increased risk of developing Parkinson’s disease later in life. It makes me wonder if a person’s history with viruses and other infections has a more significant effect on the brain than the average person things. There has been so much talk and worry about the effects of Covid-19 on the brain, but I wonder if a lot of viruses have these effects and Covid-19 is just the one we happen to have studied incredibly intensively over the past 2 years. It’s a disturbing thought, but also suggests that vaccines for certain viruses earlier in life could reduce risk of developing dementia later in life.

Chomsky on the U.S., Russia, and Ukraine

Leave a reply

People are wondering why Russia is manufacturing an acute crisis where one does not seem to be necessary. It seems to me that Vladimir Putin has chosen to bring a simmering 30-year issue to a head. There may be no particular reason for the timing, other than Putin getting older and a largely hostile U.S. administration in place. I think there is also the case of a poor, weak but historically powerful country pouring a lot of money into its military to look tough to a domestic audience. Noam Chomsky explains some of the history:

For obvious reasons, German reunification within a hostile military alliance is no small matter for Russia. Nevertheless, Gorbachev agreed to it, with a quid pro quo: No expansion to the East. President George H.W. Bush and Secretary of State James Baker agreed. In their words to Gorbachev: “Not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well, it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction…”

President H.W. Bush pretty much lived up to these commitments. So did President Bill Clinton at first, until 1999, the 50th anniversary of NATO; with an eye on the Polish vote in the upcoming election, some have speculated. He admitted Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic to NATO. President George W. Bush — the lovable goofy grandpa who was celebrated in the press on the 20th anniversary of his invasion of Afghanistan — let down all the bars. He brought in the Baltic states and others. In 2008, he invited Ukraine to join NATO, poking the bear in the eye. Ukraine is Russia’s geostrategic heartland, apart from intimate historic relations and a large Russia-oriented population. Germany and France vetoed Bush’s reckless invitation, but it’s still on the table. No Russian leader would accept that, surely not Gorbachev, as he made clear.

As in the case of deployment of offensive weapons on the Russian border, there is a straightforward answer. Ukraine can have the same status as Austria and two Nordic countries throughout the whole Cold War: neutral, but tightly linked to the West and quite secure, part of the European Union to the extent they chose to be.

truthout.org

The U.S. has effectively told Russia it will not defend Ukraine militarily unless there is an attack on a neighboring NATO country, and saying there will be “severe consequences” in the form of economic sanctions only. It’s hard for the U.S. to back off any further in the midst of the acute crisis. After the crisis passes however, we could slowly back off and just choose to be less threatening. Move troops and weapons away, pull “trainers” and covert operatives out of Ukraine, and eventually make an announcement that NATO expansion is definitively over. Putin won’t live forever, neither will the Clintobushobamabiden dynasty, and if we are lucky maybe the stars will align at some point with leadership on both sides willing to make peace.

Is the U.S. Supreme Court Corrupt? (alternate title considered: Clarence Thomas, You Stink!)

Leave a reply

There has been a lot of focus on voting rights lately, but maybe our democracy is already gone if the Supreme Court has become corrupt. Consider:

  • Bush v. Gore. After 22 years, I still don’t know what to make of Bush v. Gore. The decision ultimately turned on arcane legal arguments that ordinary people are unable to follow, and that is obviously not a case of the people of our nation selecting a leader democratically. I still mostly blame the state of Florida for not having effective procedures in place for people to vote, then to count the vote, then to recount the vote if needed. And I thought at the time that even if the Supreme Court flipped a coin, it was best for them to have the last word on a question of the utmost and obvious national importance. However, Al Gore would have won that election if the votes had been counted accurately, and we would be living in a different world today.

In 2001, the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago, sponsored by a consortium of major United States news organizations, conducted the Florida Ballot Project, a comprehensive review of 175,010 ballots that vote-counting machines had rejected from the entire state, not just the disputed counties that were recounted.[3] The project’s goal was to determine the reliability and accuracy of the systems used in the voting process, including how different systems correlated with voter mistakes. The study was conducted over a period of 10 months. Based on the review, the media group concluded that if the disputes over the validity of all the ballots in question had been consistently resolved and any uniform standard applied, the electoral result would have been reversed and Gore would have won by 60 to 171 votes.

Wikipedia

So blame Florida. Yet, also according to Wikipedia, a majority of legal scholars who have studied the case disagree with the Supreme Court decision. So why did these five particular people (it was a 5-4 vote) have the right to decide our country’s future?

  • Citizens United. This is the worst. The single biggest reason the United States is not a true democracy is not our imperfect voting system. It’s the capture of our government by big business interests, so that money ends up deciding elections rather than votes. This is legalized corruption, and the Supreme Court legalized it. We tend to think they did this for ideological reasons, but what if big business lobbyists are getting to them? It would be hard to say we live in a democracy in that case. I had not considered this possibility until recently.
  • Pollution and Climate Change. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren make this case fairly well in a brief filed in advance of a case where the Supreme Court may throw away our nation’s air quality to line the pockets of the fossil fuel industry.

The industry-funded and industry-promoted arguments made here have been repeatedly rejected by the Court, and would empower and enrich polluting corporations at the expense of public health, welfare, and the environment. The Court should refuse to participate in this industry-driven project. Reversals of precedent that reek of politics, and are advanced by thinly-disguised but highly motivated industry front groups, create a “stench” that is likely to undermine the public’s remaining faith in the Court.

Brief of U.S. Senators Sheldon Whitehouse, Richard Blumenthal, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents
  • Which brings me to Clarence Thomas. There have been a number of news stories recently suggesting that his wife is acting as an unpaid lobbyist for various industry groups, and that he is in regular contact with conservative governors representing special interests. If this is what is determining the outcome of court cases, the court is corrupt and the United States is not a democracy.

There is no higher legal authority in the judicial system that can accuse and find a justice guilty of a crime. That would have to be done by Congress. Impeaching a justice every once in a while might be a good idea to keep the court on notice that there are checks and balances in our country, and Clarence Thomas would be an outstanding candidate. Of course, it is almost impossible to imagine our even more corrupt Congress actually doing this.

Term limits for justices would also obviously be a good idea. The proposal for an 18-year term limit, so that each 4-year presidential term would come with two retirements and two new appointments, seems completely reasonable.

I’m going to agree with Bernie Sanders, as I often do. There is a reek and a stench wafting from the direction of the U.S. Supreme Court, and it is undermining the public’s remaining faith in the institution. If Bush v. Gore happened today, I personally would not be able to accept their decision as having any legitimacy, as I grudgingly did in 2000 even though I hated the outcome.

what’s new with cancer?

Leave a reply

This article is critical of the focus on new treatments for cancer, saying prevention should be more of a focus.

Up to 40% of cancers could be prevented by reducing the consumption of highly processed foods, high-calorie diets, and certain fats, increasing consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables, and getting people to be more physically active. Alcohol consumption increases the risk of several types of cancer and accounts for 19,500 cancer deaths a year. Air pollution is a major cause of lung cancer and may also increase bladder and breast cancer. And one study found that pollution in U.S. drinking water could have caused 100,000 cancer cases between 2010 and 2017…

The human costs of allowing businesses rather than scientists and doctors to shape cancer research are high. By pursuing cancer treatment options that are the most profitable rather than the most effective for the largest number of people, the medical enterprise misses opportunities to make more substantial progress…

By proposing additional measures to make prevention the priority, tackle commercial determinants of cancer, and avoid the technological quick fix suggested by war and moonshot metaphors, those seeking to reduce the burden of cancer can develop more effective and equitable approaches.

STAT

I had the impression that, smoking, air pollution, and lack of sunscreen aside (okay, those are actually three big ones), the causes of cancer were still murky, with a suspected role for various chemicals in consumer products, food, water, and the environment, but not much known for sure and luck still playing a big role. This article seems to suggest a lot more is known about the causes of cancer than I thought. That big business has captured and corrupted our government is not news, however.

QBism

Leave a reply

According to Scientific American, QBism is an idea stemming from quantum physics that objective reality does not exist, and rather the only true reality is that experienced from the point of view of each of our individual minds.

I happen to be reading The Hidden Reality by Brian Greene, which is about parallel universes. One (of many, many) things he talks about is the “anthropic principle”. The anthropic principle says that the answer to the question “why are we here” (humans, on Earth), is that Earth is the one out of countless planets and countless solar systems and galaxies that happens to have the conditions allowing us to be here and ask the question. This goes even farther if we accept the idea of parallel universes, to say that the reason we are here in this universe, which has all the right physical constants etc. for us to exist, is that this is the universe where we are able to exist and ask the questions. In this view, the number of universes is so large that there essentially has to be at least one allowing us to exist.

There is another theory that the entire universe exists inside a multidimensional “super string”, there are many of these floating around in the ether somehow, and two of them can keep colliding and drawing apart in an endless cycle that has no end or beginning – this would be an explanation for the big bang.

So to people who say science can’t answer the “why” questions, you don’t have to accept these answers, but they are at least plausible and possible. They may not be testable with our current knowledge and technology, but they can be investigated by continuing to establish the building blocks that would allow us to test them some day.

And none of this really matters to the daily experience of being inside an individual human mind, which brings us back to where we started.