• Key Attributes That Lead to an Ethical IT Department
    www.informationweek.com
    John Edwards, Technology Journalist & AuthorMarch 19, 20255 Min ReadDenis Putilov via Alamy Stock PhotoArtificial intelligence, video surveillance, facial recognition: Today's IT leaders must struggle with an increasing number of ethical dilemmas. While innovation supports business growth, it also creates opportunities for potential abuse.IT leaders lead because they already have an important combination of procedural knowledge and ethics expertise, states Jonathan Beever, an associate professor of ethics and digital culture at the University of Central Florida. "IT leaders benefit, like we all do, from continued literacy building as new technologies and techniques challenge ethical understanding," he adds in an email interview.An ethical IT department operates with transparency, integrity, and accountability, while balancing the needs of the business and its customers, says Mike Lebron, senior IT director at photography and imaging firm Canon USA. "This involves not only adhering to regulatory standards, but also proactively addressing ethical considerations that may arise from the use of technology," he notes via email. "By fostering an environment where ethical conduct is prioritized, IT departments can help build trust both internally within the organization and externally with customers and partners."First StepsAn important first step is embracing the classical adage of knowing thyself, Beever says. "What values guide you personally?" He explains that values shape decisions implicitly and making values explicit helps leaders understand their own actions and decisions.Related:Beever, who is also the director and co-founder of the UCF Center for Ethics, advises IT leaders to question the values that guide their department. "Are these clear and transparent to all stakeholders?" Also consider what possible conflicts might arise between individual values and department commitments. "Finally, what ethical decision-making strategies can help navigate those possible conflicts."Codes of ethics provide guidance at the organizational level. Yet broader strategies, such as principlism, suggest key ethics principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, respect for autonomy, and justice offers attributes that cut across departments/cultures/disciplines, Beever says. "Since interdisciplinary work is essential for IT departments, maybe now more than ever shared ethics principles can help communication about values across boundaries."Success in the digital era hinges on trust and an ethical approach to all aspects of IT operations fosters this trust, Lebron says. "Trust builds a virtuous cycle that enhances collaboration and strengthens relationships," he explains. When stakeholders, including employees, customers, and partners, feel confident that an organization's IT operations are guided by strong ethical principles, they're more likely to engage positively and collaborate effectively, potentially creating a stable and sustainable path forward.Related:Trust is also the foundation of customer loyalty, and an ethical IT approach is key to maintaining and strengthening that foundation, Lebron advises. "Organizations that embrace ethical practices may experience quicker decision-making, resilience, and long-term sustainability."Leadership ValuesEthically literate individuals are necessary to build ethical cultures, Beever says. "There seems to be a traditional corporate move to train top-down, as if regulations and rules could govern ethical behavior," he observes. Beever notes that professional ethics codes, such as the one created by The Association for Computing Machinery, push against this trend by directing responsible individuals. "But what opportunities do IT departments give their workers to develop the skills required to analyze, understand, and implement the principles of those codes?" he asks. "An ethical IT department would couple procedural literacy to ethics literacy, in support of an ethical culture."Related:Ethical considerations should be factored into every aspect of digital projects, from data privacy and cybersecurity to AI and automation, Lebron says. "Ethical IT practices help ensure that technology is used responsibly and unintended consequences that could negatively impact customers are avoided," he notes. "By doing so, organizations can mitigate risks, enhance their reputation, and drive more meaningful innovation." Lebron believes that the trust that's built from ethical IT practices can move the needle in all aspects within an organization, creating a competitive edge, a true force multiplier.Responsibility and accountability for technology outcomes -- including failures -- are key to building trust between stakeholders and IT, Lebron says. "Ethical vendor selection means you choose partners who align with your organizations ethical standards," he explains. "Accessibility and inclusivity in technology allows you to create products and services that consider people with disabilities so that everyone benefits."Ethics SuccessEthical practices should not come solely from within the IT department, Lebron advises. "They should also be shaped by those whom IT serves and supports." Engaging with a diverse set of stakeholders -- including employees, customers, partners, and community members -- helps ensure that ethical standards reflect a wide range of perspectives and needs.Inclusivity not only builds trust but also helps create more comprehensive and relevant ethical guidelines, Lebron says. Furthermore, open communication channels allow the continuous exchange of ideas, fostering a culture of transparency and mutual respect. "By embracing diverse inclusion and active communication, IT departments can ensure that their transformation efforts are well-informed, equitable, and truly supportive of all stakeholders."About the AuthorJohn EdwardsTechnology Journalist & AuthorJohn Edwards is a veteran business technology journalist. His work has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, and numerous business and technology publications, including Computerworld, CFO Magazine, IBM Data Management Magazine, RFID Journal, and Electronic Design. He has also written columns for The Economist's Business Intelligence Unit and PricewaterhouseCoopers' Communications Direct. John has authored several books on business technology topics. His work began appearing online as early as 1983. Throughout the 1980s and 90s, he wrote daily news and feature articles for both the CompuServe and Prodigy online services. His "Behind the Screens" commentaries made him the world's first known professional blogger.See more from John EdwardsWebinarsMore WebinarsReportsMore ReportsNever Miss a Beat: Get a snapshot of the issues affecting the IT industry straight to your inbox.SIGN-UPYou May Also Like
    0 Comments ·0 Shares ·18 Views
  • Euclid space telescope captures 26 million galaxies in first data drop
    www.newscientist.com
    A sea of galaxies photographed by the Euclid space telescopeESA/Euclid/Euclid Consortium/NASA, image processing by J.-C. Cuillandre, E. Bertin, G. AnselmiExtraordinary images from the Euclid space telescope have captured 26 million galaxies, some as far off as 10.5 billion light years.Euclid was launched by the European Space Agency (ESA) in July 2023 and sent back its first images in November that year. During a six-year mission, it will image about one-third of the sky, building the most detailed 3D map of the cosmos ever created. Once complete, this survey will help to illuminate howdark matter and dark energy behave on cosmic scales. AdvertisementESA has now released the first large-scale data from this mission, beginning with three deep fields areas where the telescope will peer in more detail than in the rest of its survey area. These three spots represent just 63 square degrees of sky, an area equivalent to that covered by the full moon 300 times over. In the coming years, Euclid will pass over these regions between 30 and 52 times, building up an ever more detailed image.Will Percival at the University of Waterloo in Canada says the current batch of images is less than half a per cent of what Euclid will gather over the mission, but there is already plenty for researchers to work with. For a lot of individual galaxies and their properties, theres so much science you can do, and thats because nobody has done a space-based survey in the near infrared and the optical like this before, he says. Its not quite the same quality as HST [the Hubble Space Telescope], but its very close, and were not just pointing and shooting at individual objects were doing a survey.Researchers have already used the Euclid data to find hundreds of strong gravitational lenses. These phenomena are formed when the gravity of an object in the foreground distorts light from a distant galaxy, creating an arc shape or even a full ring. Previously, scientists had to hunt these down individually and get HST to point at them and collect more images. Now astronomers can search the survey data from Euclid and find many at once, which will help gather insights into the evolution of galaxies and the universe.Voyage across the galaxy and beyond with our space newsletter every month.Sign up to newsletterUsing an AI model, researchers were able to find and catalogue 500 galaxies with strong gravitational lensing in this first batch of data alone, doubling the total found to date. The statistics are phenomenal, says Percival. Euclids going to get 200 times this amount of data in the end.The data released so far represents just a single week of images from Euclid, but it adds up to some 35 terabytes the equivalent of 200 days of high-quality video streaming. The next batch of data, due to be released late next year, will be a whole years worth of images covering 2000 square degrees and requiring more than 2000 terabytes of storage space.Looking at each galaxy manually could take over a hundred years, so AI has been used to massively speed up the process, says Mike Walmsley at the University of Toronto. We can ask new questions in weeks, rather than years, he says.Topics:
    0 Comments ·0 Shares ·19 Views
  • Will we soon be able to charge electric cars in minutes?
    www.newscientist.com
    How quickly can a public charging station fill up an electric car?Ralf Hahn/Getty ImagesChinese car firm BYD has announced that its newest ultra-fast charger can refresh electric vehicle batteries in nearly the time it takes to fill a petrol tank. While this is good news for electric car owners in China, the chargers are unlikely to be available internationally in the immediate future.BYD, the worlds largest electric vehicle manufacturer, says its new charger known as the Super E-Platform can
    0 Comments ·0 Shares ·17 Views
  • I'm a dietitian. Here are 5 of my favorite high-protein breakfast ideas.
    www.businessinsider.com
    2025-03-19T13:10:53Z Read in app Greek yogurt bowls are one of my favorite easy ways to get more protein into my diet in the morning. EMS-FORSTER-PRODUCTIONS/Getty Images This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now.Have an account? As a dietitian, I love protein-packed breakfasts and always try to eat protein in the morning.I like having Greek yogurt bowls, overnight oats, or smoothies on when I don't want to cook.Sometimes, I reheat parts of my dinner leftovers for breakfast to hit my protein goals.As a busy dietitian, having protein at breakfast is non-negotiable for me. In fact, I view it the same way as brushing my teeth in the morning.Getting enough protein is important for one's overall health and well-being. It can help with stabilizing blood-sugar levels, building muscle, regulating appetite, and more.Although having protein with every meal is ideal, getting enough of it at breakfast is especially important. By doing so, you can feel more satisfied with your meal and have more energy throughout the day.Here are the easiest ways I incorporate protein into my breakfasts.Greek yogurt is my favorite no-cook food to get enough protein in the morning.Greek yogurt with granola and fruit is an easy breakfast. Rachel Hosie I try to always have Greek yogurt in my fridge to use as a base for a protein-packed breakfast.I usually choose options from the Oikos Pro brand, which has flavored yogurts with at least 20 grams of protein and no added sugar. Sometimes, I even just use a plain, nonfat Greek yogurt.Either way, I top my yogurt with whatever fruit I have on hand, sunflower-seed butter, and a bit of granola. This combination keeps me full for hours.Protein-packed overnight oats are easy to prepare in advance.Overnight oats are easy to customize with different toppings. AnnaPustynnikova/Getty Images Overnight oats are fantastic for fueling me through the day. I like to prepare a few batches at the start of the week so that I can grab them quickly on fast-paced mornings.I make mine with oats, ground flax seeds, milk, Greek yogurt, vanilla, and protein powder. After mixing those ingredients together and allowing them to sit overnight, I top my oats with fruit the next day and enjoy.Loaded cereal is a fun way to practice balance in the morning.I try to buy high-protein cereals that I can add toppings to. Tatiana Maksimova/Getty Images Cereal is rarely filling on its own. Many varieties primarily consist of carbohydrates, which can leave us feeling unsatisfied soon after eating.I don't eat cereal often, but when a craving hits, I try to honor it while packing in protein to prevent a blood-sugar crash later in the day.First, I start with a higher protein cereal. Before adding my milk, I use a frother to mix a scoop of protein powder into it. Then, I top my bowl with fruit and ground flax seeds.I get that nostalgic cereal taste while also providing my body with extra protein and fuel.Smoothies can be surprisingly filling depending on what you put into them.I usually add a scoop of protein powder to my smoothies or use Greek yogurt as my base. Xsandra/Getty Images I wouldn't have a smoothie without protein for breakfast, but the good news is that it's super easy to make sure it's in there. I like using protein powder or Greek yogurt.If you find it hard to eat in the morning yet want to get some nutrition in, try adding more protein to your usual smoothie to make it feel more satisfying.Sometimes, I just repurpose dinner leftovers for breakfast.Last night's dinner could be today's protein-packed breakfast. Luc TEBOUL/Getty Images There's no rule that breakfast needs to be eggs, toast, or other traditional foods many of us associate with the first meal of the day.In my house, it's normal to heat up leftovers from the night before and eat them the next morning. Plus, it's convenient and a nice way to avoid food waste.My typical dinners usually feature chicken, lean beef, or salmon, which makes it super easy for me to hit my protein target.Leftovers can also be easy to customize and turn into a new dish by adding eggs, seasonings, veggies, or hot sauces.
    0 Comments ·0 Shares ·12 Views
  • Ellen Pompeo said she took her 'Grey's Anatomy' role because she was broke. She really wanted to star in films.
    www.businessinsider.com
    2025-03-19T12:59:43Z Read in app Ellen Pompeo in "Grey's Anatomy" season 21. Anne Marie Fox/Disney This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now.Have an account? Ellen Pompeo said she originally auditioned for "Grey's Anatomy" because she was broke.She said on the "Call Her Daddy" podcast that she really wanted to act in films."Grey's Anatomy" ended up being her breakout role, making her $20 million a year by 2018.Ellen Pompeo said she accepted the lead role in "Grey's Anatomy" for the money after going broke trying to start a movie career."Grey's Anatomy," which debuted in 2005 and is now on its 21st season, was the first series created by Shonda Rhimes and was the foundation of her TV production empire that includes "Scandal," "Bridgerton" and "How To Get Away With Murder."In a new episode of the "Call Her Daddy" podcast, Pompeo said she didn't initially want to join a TV series because she wanted to be a movie star."I had all these people call me and tell me how amazing I am and I should stay on this track. Why are you trying to derail me and put me over here?" Pompeo recalled.At the time, Pompeo had supporting roles in films including "Daredevil" and "Catch Me If You Can," but was yet to get a big break."I was trying to be in good movies with great directors, but they were only really small parts, so I kept doing those. I kept getting cut out of those, and then I had no money left," she said.Pompeo said her agent eventually persuaded her to join "Grey's Anatomy." The agent said she could make money from the pilot episode and the show wouldn't get picked up by a network, meaning she could return to her movie career."Grey's Anatomy" did get picked up and became Pompeo's breakout role and her main acting gig. In 2023, the actor scaled back to a recurring role to do other projects. "Grey's Anatomy" creator Shonda Rhimes and Ellen Pompeo. Frederick M. Brown/Getty Images Pompeo hasn't said what she was paid initially for the show, but by the 2010s Forbes had begun listing the actor as one of the highest-paid actors on TV. In 2018, The Hollywood Reporter said Pompeo had negotiated a new deal to make more than $20 million a year, including a salary of $575,000 per episode.Pompeo said on the "Call Her Daddy" podcast she spoke to Rhimes to get her blessing before asking for the raise, even though Rhimes had no control over the decision."I don't want to come off crazy, and I want to let her know what moves I'm making because I do respect her," Pompeo said. "She was like, 'Yeah, no one's going to give it to you you have to ask for it.'"
    0 Comments ·0 Shares ·10 Views
  • We’ll miss globalism when it’s gone
    www.vox.com
    I have, like I suspect many readers, been in quite a bad mood for the last two months. My go-to joke explaining why which I feel like should land with readers of this newsletter has become: I didnt realize quite how much my overall optimism about the state of the world depended on the fact that Lindsey Graham likes foreign aid.To unpack that a bit: For many years, the US spent tens of billions annually on foreign aid, including billions on vaccinations, preventive gear, and treatments for cheap-to-treat killers like HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis. It did that not because a bunch of bleeding-heart liberals have been in power continuously for decades, but because a critical mass of conservative Republicans like Graham (and former President George W. Bush, and former House foreign affairs chair Michael McCaul, etc.) genuinely supported foreign aid, often out of sincere moral conviction. Aid actually grew dramatically under Bush, and remained roughly constant through President Barack Obamas time in office and during Donald Trumps first term.This story was first featured in the Future Perfect newsletter.Sign up here to explore the big, complicated problems the world faces and the most efficient ways to solve them. Sent twice a week.This, obviously, has not been the story of foreign aid under Trumps second term. Already, his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, acting as the US Agency for International Developments (USAID) interim head, has canceled programs amounting to at least a third of USAIDs annual spending. Some areas were hit even harder: Efforts to improve maternal and child health are in for an 83 percent cut, and pandemic prevention is getting a 90 percent cut. (On Wednesday, a federal judge said that the Trump administrations efforts to close USAID were likely unconstitutional and ordered the government to reinstate USAID systems, though its anyones guess how meaningful that ruling will prove to be.)Despite Elon Musks lies that the cuts in funding havent killed anyone, the lack of funds at HIV clinics caused by Musk, Rubio, and Trump has already led to children dying. Journalist Nick Kristof has some of the names of the dead. Working with the Center for Global Development, he estimates that more than 1.6 million could die within a year without HIV aid and prevention from the US.Graham, to his credit, has been pushing back, particularly in defense of PEPFAR, the USs wildly successful anti-HIV program. So has McCaul. It just hasnt mattered: The administration has seized control of spending from Congress, particularly on foreign aid matters, and so the bipartisan coalition that kept aid programs alive for decades has been largely helpless. Graham liking foreign aid has proved to be a less important positive for the world than I had thought.This is an example of a broader, alarming trend in American politics that has been slowly unfolding over the past 10 or 15 years. At least going back to the 1980s, there was a kind of informal, cross-party consensus in the US around a set of policies that opened the US economy, and sometimes government coffers, to the world. It was an era of elite cosmopolitanism, and that era feels like it is coming, or has come, to a close.The globalist golden yearsThere were, of course, important and significant differences between the parties on a huge variety of issues during the period Im talking about (lets say 1986 to 2016, roughly, though Im not wedded to either specific year). But on many international economic questions, there was broad consensus.Both parties championed free trade. Ronald Reagan negotiated a tariff-reduction pact with Canada, and instead of reversing course, Bill Clinton followed that up with NAFTA and the creation of the World Trade Organization; Bush and Obama followed up with trade deals of their own. Both parties championed immigration. In 1986, Reagan signed a law providing amnesty for undocumented immigrants, and both Bush and Obama supported bipartisan congressional efforts to give legal status to those who came after that year. The foreign aid part of the consensus is more recent. In the 1990s, USAID was hollowed out in terms of both staff and funding, both due to the end of the Cold War (removing a geopolitical reason for it to operate in countries at risk of Communist takeover) and due to a sustained assault from Senate Foreign Relations Chair Jesse Helms (R-NC), a dedicated foreign aid opponent and outspoken racist. But foreign aid got a surprise second act under George W. Bush, who not only created and poured billions into PEPFAR, but also launched the Presidents Malaria Initiative (which became one of the worlds leading anti-malaria funders) and made the US the first country to donate to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, a major multilateral funder. Obama and Joe Biden supported these efforts, and they survived budget cut proposals during the first Trump term due to bipartisan congressional support.Despite the slightly different chronologies, I think lumping these three areas of bipartisan consensus trade, immigration, and aid together makes sense. All of them involve American openness to foreign countries. All of them have benefited from bootleggers and Baptists coalitions combining moralists and baser economic interests.Some activists supported migration on moral grounds, but the US Chamber of Commerce was arguably the biggest booster; reducing trade barriers obviously helped businesses importing tariffed goods or exporting to tariffing nations, but many architects of trade liberalization felt a moral duty to use trade to help poorer countries like Mexico and China to grow; foreign aid serves a national security purpose in boosting US soft power, but Bushs main motive in reviving it, and the main motive of most pro-aid activists I know, was a sense of moral duty.All three issues, then, reflected a kind of light noblesse oblige on the part of US political elites. They were willing to take significant actions to help people born abroad, either staying there trying to survive (aid), staying there and trying to work (trade), or coming to the US (immigration). Their willingness was not purely due to altruism. There were economic and geopolitical motives at work too. But the positive effects on billions of foreign-born people were real nonetheless.Why the consensus fell apartIf this elite cosmopolitanism was able to support large-scale immigration, low trade barriers, and generous foreign aid for decades, why has it not been able to stop the Trump administration from devastating all three?Its not because the public suddenly changed its mind. While the Biden term was a period of historic anti-immigrant backlash, the consensus started fraying in Obamas second and Trumps first terms, when anti-immigrant sentiment was, perhaps surprisingly, at a low ebb. In June 2016, only 38 percent of voters said that immigration should be decreased, compared to 65 percent in 1993 and 55 percent in 2024.But while restrictionists were a minority in 2016, they became a much louder and more influential one. The mass refugee flows from the Syrian civil war meant that the topic had higher salience in the US and especially in Europe. Most importantly, Trump broke basically every social taboo about discussing the topic during his primary run, and not only didnt suffer but won the nomination as a result. It wasnt a majority position Trump would lose the popular vote after all but it was clearly more potent than previously thought.The 2016 race also scrambled the politics of trade. Bernie Sanderss stronger-than-expected challenge to Hillary Clinton led her to come out against Obamas Trans-Pacific Partnership, an anti-China trade pact that she passionately advocated for as secretary of state; she clearly saw in the strength of Sanders, and Trump, evidence that trade restrictionism had become a political imperative. Clintons eventual loss due to Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania led to a folk understanding among professional Democrats that not passing protectionist measures to help Rust Belt states would be electoral suicide. This never made any sense; the shock of competition from China and elsewhere did hurt these places, but its long since over and no policy measures could ever bring manufacturing employment in Detroit back to where it was in 1970. But this conclusion meant that both parties were running away from open trade simultaneously, and as a result, the US as a whole has retreated from free trade over the last decade.It is also possible, as political scientist Margaret Peters has argued, that immigration support has suffered precisely because trade was liberalized in the 1990s and 00s. Historically, nativist forces have been kept at bay because of business lobbies supporting immigration, but the ability to offshore manufacturing to foreign countries provided an alternative for businesses to bringing in foreign laborers to the US. Peters argues that this effect, not just of trade deals but of things like standardized shipping containers, has undermined support for immigration over time by taking business lobbyists off the board. There go the bootleggers.The saddest case, though, is foreign aid. Why did this tiny portion of the federal budget come in for such a beating this year? I dont really have deep structural answers. Foreign aid has never been very popular, and voters routinely overestimate how much the US spends on it. It has always survived on elite, not popular, support, and was in a vulnerable position should someone like Elon Musk go after it. The declining religiosity of American conservatism also weakened the evangelical forces who so strongly supported PEPFAR under Bush.As for why Musk had such a vendetta against foreign aid, the best explanation is that he fell under the influence of rabidly anti-USAID conspiracy theorist Mike Benz. He wouldnt be the first dubious source who Musk decided against all reason to trust absolutely.Put all together, though, and the picture looks bleak for anyone who thinks the US can play an important role in making the lives of people around the world, not just here at home, better. In three different domains, the fragile coalitions supporting that vision have cracked and been beaten back. Im not throwing in the towel just yet. But the game is going very badly.Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:
    0 Comments ·0 Shares ·10 Views
  • More than 1 million people die of tuberculosis every year. They don’t have to.
    www.vox.com
    Humanitys battle against tuberculosis has been one of slow and imperfect progress. The disease no longer kills one in seven people in the US, as it did in the 19th century. But look elsewhere and its burden is still terrible: TB killed more than 1.2 million people in 2023, likely making it once again the deadliest infection on Earth, after it was briefly supplanted by Covid-19 during the pandemic.And as John Green, the YA author, YouTuber, and author of the new book Everything Is Tuberculosis: The History and Persistence of Our Deadliest Infection, told me in an interview: That number is about to go up.As part of its evisceration of US international aid, the Trump administration is ending funding for its global TB programs. The US is the worlds largest single funder of tuberculosis treatment, and the spending cuts quickly interrupted medical care for TB victims. And any delay in treatment can lead to worse outcomes for patients and makes it more likely the bacteria will evolve to resist antibiotics. All of this is a direct result of the decisions made by the US government, Green told me. Allowing tuberculosis to spread unchecked throughout the world is bad news for all humans.There may be as many as 10 million additional TB cases by 2030 because of the cuts, depending on how deep they ultimately are, according to one initial estimate. An additional 2.2 million people could die in that worst-case scenario.Its difficult to know whats happening on the ground, as ongoing lawsuits try force aid funding to resume and the Trump administration itself has given conflicting information at times. One TB program director told The Guardian last week their funding had still not resumed despite receiving a reassurance from the administration that it would.The funding freeze is not only a threat to people in the developing world who live with tuberculosis as an ever-present threat, Green told me it also poses a risk to the US itself. Right now, Kansas has 68 active TB cases, one of the largest US outbreaks in recent history. One estimate from the Center for Global Development finds that US TB cases will rise in parallel with cases in the rest of the world. That wont just increase health care costs it will increase the risk that TB will become more drug-resistant and therefore deadlier to people around the world, including in the US.I spoke with Green about the history of one of humanitys oldest infectious diseases, the threat posed by the Trump administrations cuts, and what concerned people can do in response. Our conversation is below, edited for clarity and length.What is the state of tuberculosis right now? Why do people in the US and other wealthy countries often think of it as a disease of the past, a problem that has been solved?I used to think of it as a disease of the past as well. I thought of TB primarily as the disease that killed John Keats, and then we figured out a solution to it, so now its not a threat anymore. But in fact, tuberculosis is still the worlds deadliest infectious disease. It kills over 1.2 million people per year. That number is about to go up. It sickens about 10 million people per year. Around a quarter of all living humans have experienced a TB infection.Now, the vast majority of those people will never become sick. Theyll have what we call latent TB, where these clumps of white blood cells form what are called tubercles to surround the bacteria and keep it in check. But in about 10 percent of people who experience a TB infection, they will become sick. We understand some of the risk factors for developing active TB disease. They include malnutrition, other health problems like diabetes, or HIV infection. But we dont fully understand why some people develop active TB and others dont. You call the disease weird in your book. What is weird about TB? The weirdest thing about TB is the cell wall that the bacteria builds. It builds this really thick, fatty cell wall. That takes a long time to build, so TB has an extremely slow growth rate compared to other bacteria; in some cases, hundreds of times slower. That means that it sickens us slower because it takes a long time to overwhelm the bodys defenses. This is one of the reasons why tuberculosis used to be a narratively convenient disease, a disease that was the subject of so many books. It was a narratively compelling disease because it tends to take a life slowly over the course of months or years, rather than all at once like a disease like cholera or the black plague.Classically, we understood death as something that occurred very early on in life because about half of people died before the age of 5, or something that occurred late in adulthood, in your 50s or after. Tuberculosis killed so many people in their 20s and 30s that it was called the robber of youth. But it also killed people early in childhood and late in adulthood. It killed indiscriminately. To some extent, it still does. I mean, 218,000 kids are going to die of tuberculosis this year. Whats so frustrating to me is that all of those deaths are unnecessary because weve had a cure since the 1950s.This disease has been with us forever. It was even glamorized to an extent in earlier generations. But then there was a transition when it became more stigmatized it became associated with being dirty and poor. How did that happen?Until 1882, at least in Northern Europe and the United States, it was generally believed that tuberculosis was an inherited genetic condition. But in 1882, the German doctor Robert Koch proved that tuberculosis was in fact caused by bacteria. The moment it became an infectious disease is really the moment that our imagining of the disease changed radically.Instead of being a disease of wealth and civilization, it became a disease of poverty. The implications of this were huge because it meant that we could control tuberculosis by trying to control the bacteria that caused TB. But it also meant that we wanted much more control over the lives of people living with tuberculosis.We started to understand them very differently. We started to see people with tuberculosis as a threat to the social order.At the same time, by the middle of the 20th century, we developed vaccines and cures. How did our perception of TB continued to change and how did race increasingly factor into it?TB had long been understood by Europeans as a racialized disease. It was widely believed in Europe and in the US among white doctors that only white people could get consumption because it was a disease of civilization. To acknowledge that consumption was common among people of color and colonized people would have been to undermine the entire project of colonialism itself.After we understood the disease as infectious, it became racialized in a different way, where it came to be argued that people of color were uncommonly susceptible to tuberculosis. Instead of believing that it was impossible for them to get tuberculosis, people started to argue that their susceptibility to tuberculosis was owing to some factor inherent to race. Now, we knew this was hogwash from the beginning. There were lots of doctors, including African American doctors and researchers, pushing back against this notion. They argued, correctly, that the actual cause of tuberculosis was crowded living and working conditions, poor pay, malnutrition all the stuff that today we know does cause tuberculosis. But the racialization of the disease was so profound that its still shaping who lives and dies of tuberculosis. Today, how does tuberculosis look in the United States versus a place like Sierra Leone, which you cover extensively in your book?Starting in the 1940s, we began to develop treatments for tuberculosis that were very powerful. We created combinations of multiple antibiotics that, given over the course of several months or even years, could cure tuberculosis. This disease that had always been one of the leading human killers suddenly became curable.Unfortunately, we did a really poor job of distributing this cure to the places where it was most needed. As a result, weve seen the development of extensive drug resistance for tuberculosis, and weve seen a huge amount of ongoing suffering from the disease. The Ugandan HIV researcher Dr. Peter Mugyenyi said of HIV drugs in the year 2000: Where are the drugs? The drugs are where the disease is not. And where is the disease? The disease is where the drugs are not. And thats very much the case with tuberculosis as well.If you or I got tuberculosis tomorrow, even if we had a complex drug-resistant case, we would get access to the best personalized, tailored treatments of antibiotic cocktails we would need in order to cure our TB. But for someone like my friend Henry living in Sierra Leone, when he got really sick in 2019 and 2020, those drugs werent available to him.So even though his TB was very curable, his life was at risk not ultimately because of a lack of technology, but because of failure to get the technology to the places where its most needed. In the book you called TB both a form and an expression of injustice. It seems to me that TB is one very striking example of a pattern of injustice that applies across a lot of diseases.Yeah. I think its really important to acknowledge that tuberculosis is not the only disease of injustice. Hepatitis is a disease of injustice. Malaria, HIV, cancer are diseases of injustice. When my brother got cancer, one of the first things he said to me was that there was a 94 percent cure rate if you have access to treatment, and about a 5 percent cure rate if you dont.Its very hard to grapple with the fact that the real cause of a huge percentage of human death is injustice the failures of human-built systems.There are many deaths that we simply dont have the technology or the tools to prevent. But there are many, many, many, many deaths that we do have the technologies and tools to prevent. Its important to understand that as a justice problem, as an equity problem, as a failure to appropriately apportion the resources that we as a human species have developed.It breaks my heart. Its devastating. Im often asked whether I think people are good. Like, at the end of this book, do I think people are good? And I cant answer that question. What I can say is I think people are capable of extraordinary generosity and compassion and sacrifice. When people are proximal to suffering, they show an extraordinary capacity for giving. And when people are not proximal to suffering, when people dont let themselves become close to the suffering of others, they can act monstrously.There has been imperfect progress on global health, but progress nonetheless. But now the US government is pulling back from the global health commitments that have helped make that progress possible. What does this mean for TB specifically?The United States has long been the most generous donor when it comes to fighting TB, and now essentially all tuberculosis-related funding has been cut. Thats catastrophic on a number of levels. To my Republican friends and congressional representatives, I try to compare it to the 2008 financial crisis when the capital markets just froze, and it was very hard to get them to start working again.In many communities, thats whats happening as a result of this sudden, chaotic, very unpredictable, haphazardly rolled out funding freeze. Hundreds of thousands of people have seen their treatment interrupted, and we know thats a catastrophe, not only for those individuals, many of whom will die, perhaps most of whom tragically will die, but also because it means that they will develop drug resistance.Even a couple of weeks without getting access to your medication means a skyrocketing chance of drug resistance. Even if theyre able to get back on treatment, the relatively inexpensive treatment that worked before may no longer work. That means more cases of extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis circulating in communities. Its also a threat to the United States. We have 10,000 cases of active tuberculosis in the US every year. We have a tuberculosis outbreak right now in Kansas. Tuberculosis anywhere is a threat to people everywhere and allowing tuberculosis to spread unchecked throughout the world is bad news for all humans. Its bad news for human health. Weve made so much progress in human health during my lifetime. The year I graduated from high school, 12 million children died under the age of 5. Last year, fewer than 5 million did. Its easy to feel like that progress is inevitable or natural or somehow it was always going to happen. But it wasnt always going to happen. It happened because millions of people worked together to make it happen, because we decided collectively to value childrens lives more and to work hard to protect them. Now what were seeing is the first regression of my lifetime when it comes to overall human health. Were seeing it in the United States where life expectancy has been going down. Were about to see it globally where tuberculosis cases, by one estimate, will increase by 30 percent over the next couple of years, leading to 13 million people getting sick every year instead of 10 million and leading to hundreds of thousands more people dying. All of this is a direct result of the decisions made by the US government. I feel like its hard for people to understand the feedback loop thats potentially in play here that can put our health at risk because diseases are spreading elsewhere. I think its also hard for us to take the long view.Im curious where you think that failure comes from? And have you seen anything thats sort of effective in overcoming that? I think we have to bridge the empathy gap. Theres always an empathy gap between every person, right? I dont know what its like to be you. I dont know about your joys and sorrows. And even when I do, I can only kind of situate them in my own experience. I can only relate to it through my own eyes because those are the only eyes I get to see through for the whole time that Im here.And so theres always an empathy gap, but that empathy gap grows or shrinks based on how close you allow yourself to be to the suffering and joy of others. And so you know when my uncle gets sick, Im going to respond to that very differently than if I hear through the grapevine that someone elses uncle is sick. And for me, the empathy gap is also a social justice gap.The further the rich world feels from someones life, the less likely the rich world is to intervene. So for me, its about shrinking that empathy gap everywhere we can so that we understand that the lives of other people, even other people whose lives may feel distant from ours are just as real and just as important as ours, that their joy and grief and longing and loss is as real and profound as ours is.I try to do that in the book by telling Henrys story because you can talk all day about what a great investment tuberculosis response is, and it is a great long-term financial investment. You can talk all day about how many people are dying of TB every year. All that just boils down to statistics. And the statistics dont decrease the empathy gap, at least for me. And so I wanted to tell a human story at a human scale because I feel like thats what really changes our perspective.What options are available to people like Vox readers, who want to contribute in some small way to making these problems better? It sounds meaningless and everybody says it, but its true. When you reach out to your congressional representatives insofar as youre lucky enough to have some say in your governance, it really matters. What funding weve been able to claw back for USAID is a result of people reaching out to their senators and representatives and those senators and representatives in turn reaching out to Secretary [of State Marco] Rubio and saying, This is ridiculous. This cant happen.Its really, really important that people in power hear that it is unacceptable for the United States to walk away from its long-term commitments to global health and human health, and that its unacceptable for the United States to break its promises. They need to hear its also bad for America. Its bad for farmers who provide food aid. Its bad for overall human health in the United States. Were seeing our own numbers of tuberculosis cases go up every year, and that will accelerate now.Youve read 1 article in the last monthHere at Vox, we're unwavering in our commitment to covering the issues that matter most to you threats to democracy, immigration, reproductive rights, the environment, and the rising polarization across this country.Our mission is to provide clear, accessible journalism that empowers you to stay informed and engaged in shaping our world. By becoming a Vox Member, you directly strengthen our ability to deliver in-depth, independent reporting that drives meaningful change.We rely on readers like you join us.Swati SharmaVox Editor-in-ChiefSee More:
    0 Comments ·0 Shares ·9 Views
  • Assassins Creed: Shadows a historic frolic through feudal Japan
    www.theguardian.com
    Japan, 1581: Iga province is burning down around you. You watch on, injured and helpless as the Oda Nobunaga - the warlord responsible for numerous civil wars and the eventual unification of the country - smirks from a nearby hill. You draw your katana, the blade shining in the flickering light of the flames. This is Assassins Creed: Shadows part exciting ninja game, part history lesson. Its an odd combination but it comes together in a sprawling historical-fiction adventure full of discovery and deception.The tumultuous period that saw the unification of Japan and the fall of Nobunaga in the late 1500s is an ideal setting in which to play around as a sneaky shinobi and a brave samurai. The series science-fictiony framing device is that you, the player, are diving into your ancestors memories to hunt down a mysterious artefact by taking down a group of menacing masked samurai, one at a time. But mostly the game leaves you alone to enjoy feudal Japan.In this fraught time period, there is a sense of constant danger, each conversation like careful steps on a knifes edge. The story is complete fiction of course, but it does weave around actual historical events and figures, and the developers at Ubisoft have clearly gone to great pains to make the settings feel authentic, both landscapes and the people who inhabit them. Youll automatically remove your shoes when entering a building, and famous temples appear as they would have looked then, rather than as the tourist destinations they are now.The world truly is gorgeous, with several provinces to explore in all seasons and weathers, and period-accurate cities including Kyoto and Osaka. Giant temples rise up over busy towns full of stalls and workshops, while mossy shrines are scattered along winding paths through the countryside. Youll see Japan in all colours, too, from the gentle pinks of springs sakura blooms, to the fiery-coloured leaves blanketing the hills in autumn, to the inky darkness of a winters night. Its easy to be distracted by the view mid-mission when youre surrounded by ancient red torii gates, or notice a random puppet performance in the street. Ubisofts Japan feels alive. It also feels totally overwhelming, at times.As much fun as it is to roam the countryside on horseback, scouting out new villages and historic sites, theres just so much of it that its easy to feel lost. There are plenty of missions and side quests that will guide you around the map, but theres a lot of repetition in those tasks. To kill a high-level samurai you will need some help; the person who can help you wants a favour, which involves finding another person who wants you to kill a different samurai, and so on. Over the games long run time, this starts to grate.Important feature: you can pet all the cats (and dogs) in Japan if you want. Photograph: UbisoftThe dual protagonists do help to alleviate the feeling that youre stuck in a repetitive loop. For the first 10 to 15 hours of the game, youll step into the sandals of shinobi Fujibayashi Naoe, a young woman seeking revenge after her home was destroyed, and help her to rebuild her life and set up a network of spies and rebels from a secret mountain base. Then theres Yasuke, a principled black samurai based on the real historical figure of the same name, who appears briefly in the games introduction, then disappears until Naoe gets close to Nobunaga.Naoe is light on her feet, capable of scaling walls and temples with ease, while also melting into shadows to creep around enemies. Her stealthy approach makes for some fun sneaky moments, such as stabbing through paper shoji screen-doors for a surprise attack. That tip-toe approach comes at a cost, though, when shes faced with a brawl. Enemy strikes hit her hard and shell quickly get overpowered in a fight. Yasuke, on the other hand, is brutally strong, and capable of running straight through those screen doors and shrugging off sword strikes like theyre a tickly irritant. He can still assassinate foes like Naoe can, but he does it head-on rather than in the shadows. In a series that has traditionally prioritised stealth, it feels extremely liberating when you bust through a castles gate and face everyone head on. Both characters are viable options to play through most of the game and you can swap between them (mostly) at will.Few other games have done such a good job with this setting Assassins Creed: Shadows. Photograph: UbisoftUnfortunately, no matter whom you play as, youll have to put up with a few niggles in a fight. While dodges and parries feel amazing when you can pull them off in one-on-one scraps, youll often find yourself surrounded as more opponents are alerted to your presence, which makes it really tricky to see where hits are coming from. When youre creeping around castle rooftops and taking your time picking enemies off, springing backwards into the shadows afterwards before scoping out your next kill, everything feels as it should. But the instant you get into a fight on the ground it starts to feel messy and frustrating.While I did find myself getting annoyed running back and forth between quest givers, I still cant stop thinking about Shadows. Excellent performances and emotionally resonant moments, such as Naoes painful recovery after she loses everything she holds dear, mean youll feel every bit of sorrow and anger alongside the games heroes. Events are often troubling, as power struggles between lords often come at a huge cost to locals, and you see the unwelcome effects of your actions on your allies.Few other games have done such a good job with this setting, as you run through lush bamboo forests before scaling ancient castle walls and sneaking inside to steal treasures. These moments of brilliance more than compensate for its weaker points.Assassins Creed: Shadows is released on 20 March; 59.99
    0 Comments ·0 Shares ·9 Views
  • Amazon Is Selling Off Its AirTag Stock, Not Quite Free, But Close
    gizmodo.com
    Losing important items can be a nightmare. Think about ityour wallet packed with credit cards and cash, your luggage when traveling, your keys, or even your car in a massive parking lot. (Come on, weve all done that.) Misplacing things is a frustrating reality, especially for those prone to forgetfulness. Thats where Apple AirTags come in handy, offering a reliable way to keep track of your valuables. Right now, Amazon is offering a fantastic deal on a 4-pack of AirTags for just $69, a 29% discount off the regular $99 price. If you only need one, you can also grab a single AirTag from Amazon for $24, a 17% markdown.See 4-pack AirTags on AmazonSee 1x AirTag at AmazonApple AirTags are among the most effective tracking devices on the market, and they integrate seamlessly with Apples ecosystem. If you use an iPhone, iPad, or MacBook, AirTags provide a level of precision that makes retrieving lost items effortless. With Apples Find My app, you can keep tabs on anything you attach an AirTag to, from backpacks and purses to keys and even pet collars.Just Add TagThere are countless ways to attach an AirTag to your belongings. Apple and third-party manufacturers offer a variety of holders designed for keychains, luggage, wallets, and more. With these accessories, you can securely fasten an AirTag to almost anything and use your Apple device to track it down whenever needed. The Find My app enables real-time tracking, showing you exactly where your item is located. If you dont use an Apple device, the Tracker Detect app allows you to find AirTags as well.See 4-pack AirTags on AmazonPairing an AirTag with your Apple device is incredibly simplejust a single tap, and youre ready to go. For iPhone 11 and later models equipped with the U1 chip (and frankly, if you still have an iPhone older than that, were impressed), AirTags utilize Ultra Wideband technology for Precision Finding. This means your phone can guide you with step-by-step directions, letting you know whether youre getting closer or farther away from your lost item. You can even have the AirTag emit a sound to make locating it even easier.Gotta Track Em AllWhere can you use AirTags? The possibilities are practically endless. Toss one in your wallet or handbag to avoid losing your essentials. Attach one to your keys to eliminate the daily scramble to find them. Keep an AirTag in your luggage to track it during your travels, or place one in your cars glove compartment to locate it in a crowded parking lot. There are even specialized pet collars designed to hold AirTags, providing extra security if your dog or cat ever wanders off.If you want peace of mind knowing your valuables are always within reach, now is the time to grab some AirTags while theyre on sale. Amazons deal on the 4-pack at $70 and the single AirTag at $24 are bargains worth taking advantage of. Whether you need one or several, AirTags ensure that even if your items go missing, they wont stay lost for long.See 4-pack AirTags on AmazonSee 1x AirTag at Amazon
    0 Comments ·0 Shares ·11 Views
  • RFK Jr.s Strategy for the Bird Flu Epidemic: Spread, Baby, Spread
    gizmodo.com
    Since being nominated as Americas new health czar, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has said and done a lot of questionable stuff, the latest of which is to share his disturbing approach to the bird flu epidemic. RFKs strategy for protecting the nations fowl population? Eh, just let the flu cull the herd and see if anything good comes out of it. The New York Times reports that Kennedy has been suggesting that to defeat bird flu, you first have to let it get its groove on. The Times quotes a recent Fox News interview, in which Kennedy told the news channels listeners that America should consider maybe the possibility of letting it run through the flock so that we can identify the birds, and preserve the birds, that are immune to ita notion Kennedy has offered multiple times. Thankfully, as head of the Department of Health and Human Services, Kennedy is only responsible for human health, not bird health (the Department of Agriculture is the point agency for that). Still, its not necessarily super comforting that Kennedys first impulse when he hears about a communicable illness is to just sit back and let it do its thing. Dr. Gail Hansen, a former state veterinarian for Kansas, told the Times that Kennedys plan was a really terrible idea, for any one of a number of reasons, also calling it a recipe for disaster. Experts like Hansen seem to agree that giving the virus a free pass to spread would just allow it to mutate and grow more powerful. Indeed, other current and former federal officials and scientists that the newspaper spoke to all said that stepping back and letting bird flu ravage domestic chicken populations was really only a recipe for lost farm profits and more dead birds. Kennedys strategy (and the apparent worldview that informs it) also seems to hammer home the point that he is, on a fundamental level, unqualified to head the HHS. The Times writes: The strategy means longer quarantine, more downtime, more lost revenue and increased expenses, said a U.S.D.A. scientist who was not authorized to speak to the media. Mr. Kennedy has suggested that a subset of poultry might be naturally immune to bird flu. But chickens and turkeys lack the genes needed to resist the virus, experts said. The way we raise birds now, theres not a lot of genetic variability, Dr. Hansen said. Theyre all the same bird, basically. This seems like yet another good example of whywhen it comes to finding someone to lead the nations most powerful scientific policy and research organizationnominating a guy who self-admittedly isnt a scientist and doesnt know anything about science might have been a stupid idea. But hey, while it seems increasingly unlikely that Kennedy can protect us from easily preventable illnesses like measles, and while hes demonstrated a willingness to cut funding to critically important health research (including cancer treatments), and while he doesnt seem particularly concerned that a nationwide chicken plague has been driving up egg prices, at least hes made America safe for tallow again, right? Yeah, tasty french fries are a good tradeoff for the breakdown of national health policy.
    0 Comments ·0 Shares ·10 Views