Inclusive growth needed to combat hunger: ActionAid India

A more inclusive growth policy targeted at marginalised communities and protection of their basic rights is required to combat hunger in India, international NGO ActionAid said.

“The dark side of India’s economic growth is the fact that the poor have been dispossessed further, leading to malnutrition, hunger and starvation deaths,” Sandeep Chachra, executive director of ActionAid India said here.

The International Food Policy Research Institute has ranked India 67th on the global hunger index, way below its neighbours China and Pakistan.

In a hunger score card released before the Millennium Development Goals Summit at the United Nations headquarters at New York in September, ActionAid said that while India’s per capita income had tripled between 1990 and 2005, the number of chronically hungry had not reduced, standing at a staggering 270 million. At this rate, India cannot halve its number of those starving until 2083, the report said.

“Implementation remains a massive challenge. Food and other entitlements have to be delivered on the ground, which requires greater political will,” Amar Joyti Nayak, thematic head for food rights for ActionAid India, said.

U.N. meeting aims to set species-saving goals

Unless steps are taken to reverse biodiversity loss, scientists warn that the rate of extinction will climb and natural habitats will be degraded or destroyed — contributing to climate change and threatening agricultural production, fish stocks and access to clean water.

An international conference aimed at preserving the planet’s diversity of plants and animals in the face of pollution and habitat loss begins on Monday in Japan, facing some of the same divisions between rich and poor nations that have stalled U.N. climate talks.

Seventeen years after the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity was enacted, it has yet to achieve any major initiative to slow the alarming rate of species extinction and loss of ecosystems despite global goals set in 2002 to make major improvement by this year. Frogs and other amphibians are most at risk of disappearing, coral reefs are the species deteriorating most rapidly and nearly a quarter of all plant species are threatened, according to the convention, which is convening the two-week meeting.

A key task facing delegates will be to hammer out a set of 20 strategic goals for the next decade.Unless steps are taken to reverse the loss of Earth’s biodiversity, scientists warn that the rate of extinction will climb and natural habitats will be degraded or destroyed — contributing to climate change and threatening agricultural production, fish stocks in the oceans and access to clean water.Scientists estimate that the Earth is losing species 100 to 1,000 times the historical average, upsetting the intricately interconnected natural world.

Prominent insect biologist E.O. Wilson at Harvard University argues that a man-made environmental crisis is pushing the Earth toward its sixth big extinction phase, the greatest since the dinosaurs were wiped out 65 million years ago.

However, some battle lines have already formed between developed and developing nations over the convention’s strategic mission statement — whether to take action to halt or simply slow the loss of biodiversity by 2020 — and finding a way to equitably share the benefits of genetic resources, such as plants native to poor countries that have been converted into lucrative drug products in the West.

The convention, which will bring together 8,000 delegates from 193 member nations in Nagoya, 270 km west of Tokyo, was born out of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.

So far, the convention has failed to meet a series of goals set eight years ago to preserve the world’s biodiversity against overfishing, deforestation and pollution. Conservation groups attribute part of that to a lack of political will and funding. They also say that some of the goals until now have been fuzzy, and partly blame their own failure to make a convincing case that action is needed — something they hope to change in Nagoya.

“We haven’t been able to successfully get across a message that our society and economies ultimately depend on this biodiversity,” said Bill Jackson, deputy director-general of the International Union for Conservation of Nature. “We have to fix the problem within the next 10 years.”

Host country Japan, meanwhile, will be looking to this conference as a chance to portray itself as a protector of biodiversity after helping kill off many of the measures at the CITES, or Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, meeting earlier this year that would have limited the trade in tuna, sharks and other marine species.Divisions between rich and poor nations over how to fairly share in the access and benefits of genetic resources could undermine the gathering, observers say.

For example, the rosy periwinkle, a plant native to Madagascar, produces two cancer-fighting substances. Drug companies have grown the plants and profited from them, but little of the money has returned to Madagascar.

Developing countries argue they should receive royalties or a share of the benefits of such natural resources. The convention aims to address this problem by setting up a legal framework by which producers and users can negotiate to reach mutually agreeable terms to ensure equitable sharing of resources and their benefits.

“Developing countries are putting pressure on developed countries and saying if we don’t reach an agreement on this issue, we won’t give you what you want on the strategic plan,” said Patricia Yakabe Malentaqui, international media manager at the environmental group Conservation International. “All the parties are at risk of polarising the debate.” Another contentious goal will be setting a percentage of the Earth’s land and oceans that should be protected by 2020.

Currently, 13 per cent of land and less than 1 per cent of open ocean is protected — which can range from a strict nature reserve to an area managed for sustainable use of natural resources. Those percentages need to be raised to 25 per cent and 15 per cent respectively, Conservation International says.

But even if delegates manage to agree to such targets, carrying them out in real life is another matter. Businesses will likely oppose any limits on their activities and population growth means setting aside such protected areas will become increasingly difficult. Furthermore, the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity has no mechanism for enforcing compliance.

Environmental groups argue that creating protected areas reap huge economic rewards. For example, there is plenty of evidence, says IUCN’s Mr. Jackson, that providing safe havens for fisheries help their populations recover and flourish.

New laser beam can cook tumours in the head

Researchers at Washington University have developed a laser beam that can cook brain tumours.

The feat could help save the lives of people with, until now, inoperable brain tumours, and could soon be extended to destroy other tumours in other parts of the body without resorting to surgery.

“This tool gives us a treatment for patients with tumours that were previously deemed inoperable. It offers hope to certain patients who had few or no options before,” Discovery News quoted Eric Leuthardt, a doctor at Washington University, as saying.

The patient the Missouri doctors operated on had a recurrent and life threatening brain tumour. Because of the prior surgeries, and the location of the tumour deep inside the brain, normal surgery was not an option. Since the surgeons couldn’t cut the tumour out, they decided to cook it to death.

Last month the Washington University surgeons drilled a small burr hole, about the diameter of a pencil, into the patient’s skull. Using the MRI machine to guide them, the surgeons carefully directed the narrow and flexible laser probe through the brain and into the tumour. The laser emerges from the probe at a 90 degree angle, so once it is in the correct position all that the doctor had to do was heat the golf ball-sized tumour, essentially cooking it to death at 140 degrees F. While the tumour cooked, the doctors used the MRI machine to make sure the temperature of the surrounding cells was low enough so the healthy cells survived.

“The patient did pretty well. He went home three days later, instead of spending one to two weeks in the ICU,” said Leuthardt.

Barnes-Jewish Hospital, where the operation took place, is the third hospital in the country to zap brain tumours with lasers. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved lasers for neurosurgery in May 2009.

“This is just the latest use for laser technology,” said Richard Ellenbogen, the chief of neurosurgery at the University of Washington. Ellenbogen has used lasers to treat tumours in children. “The beauty of this technology is that you can bend the light and use it to access areas that you otherwise couldn’t,” said Ellenbogen.

Should we think too much?

Thinking is good, but too much of thinking is hazardous to health and brain.

A new study reveals that, people who are good at thinking, do not reflect their feelings easily. Scientifically a region of the brain for such people is larger than those who do not. Scientists have pointed ample of variation in peoples’ ability to introspect and point outs that the main key phase of human consciousness is a act of thinking about their own thinking.

Geraint Rees, professor from University College London who led the research said, “the volume of gray matter in the front prefrontal cortex of the brain, lies right behind our eyes, is a strong indicator of a person’s introspective ability and found out that some people think too much about life”. These people who think too much on a particular subject gradually looses their memories and also can get easily depressed, which leads to obesity, stroke or serious brain trauma.

However, it remains unclear how this relationship between introspection and the two different types of brain really works.

But then it was discovered that there is a connection between the structure of gray and white matter. The prefrontal cortex has various levels of introspection that individuals might experience. By this way scientists are able to understand how brain injuries affect the individual’s ability to reflect their thoughts and actions. This will help treat patients facing brain injuries appropriately.

Are mobile phones really a health hazard?

Could mobile phones be giving us brain cancer?

Academic and toxicologist Devra Davis, who was in the group that won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, says yes. According to Davis, an eminent American scientist and one of the country’s leading epidemiologists, the mobile phone industry spent years trying to bury scientific evidence — that it harms — to protect its $3 trillion, 4.6 billion customer global business.

With mobile phone use soaring, especially among the young, Davis says a “global public health catastrophe” will be seen in as little as three years if the problem is ignored, the Daily Mail reported.

The most troubling research, she says, threatens male fertility.

Research in seven countries, including the US, China and Australia, suggests that keeping a switched-on mobile phone in a trouser pocket can have a drastic effect on sperm count.

“All the research shows the same thing – if you take young men who are trying to become fathers, those who use mobile phones at least four hours a day have about half the sperm count of others,” Davis says.

“Sperm exposed to mobile phone radiation in the lab is sicker, thinner and less capable of swimming,” she adds.

Mobile phones are low-powered radio frequency transmitters which produce microwave radiation. In a new book provocatively titled “Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What The Industry Has Done To Hide It And How To Protect Your Family,” Davis says the threat from mobile phone radiation has been underplayed for too long.

“Is it possible that the pervasive use of mobile phones is causing a host of subtle, chronic health problems, damaging our ability to have healthy children and creating long-term risks to our brains and bodies,” she asks. Her
work includes supporting research from studies in the US, Sweden, Greece, France and Russia.

For example, a team at the University Of Washington found that just two hours of mobile phone-level radiation splintered the DNA of brain cells in rats, making them similar to cells found in malignant tumours.

Davis, who is a grandmother, is worried about the effect on children, arguing that their thin, pliant skulls make them more vulnerable.

Etiquette tips for the office

Many people spend more time with their colleagues than with members of their own family. That’s reason enough to strive for a good climate in the workplace. Observing a few rules of etiquette is often sufficient to get along with co-workers. There are so many pitfalls between the office kitchen and the conference room.

Gossiping about colleagues, getting too familiar with superiors or wearing a far-too-deeply plunging neckline are perfect ways to earn a dubious reputation on the job. People who want to work in an office with a nice atmosphere should by all means watch their manners while on the job.

Here’s a list of the most important rules guiding office behaviour:

Be punctual and dependable: “Most people become annoyed when someone wastes their time,” said Susanne Helbach-Grosser, a business etiquette trainer in Germany. Employees should ask for help early when they are unable to handle their workload, but they should also be aware that if they constantly complain about stress it can get on their co-workers’ nerves.

Eating at one’s desk: When someone occasionally munches an apple at his or her desk, it is completely acceptable, said Agnes Jarosch of a German organisation dedicated to counselling people about etiquette. “But when I sit at my desk and unpack a steaming hot cutlet that spreads its aroma throughout the bureau, that is inconsiderate toward colleagues,” said Jarosch. It’s better to consume meals like that in the breakroom or at a restaurant.

Heat on or window open?: This is a classic conflict because it’s often the case that the room temperature is too hot for one colleague, but too cold for another. “There’s often a row when a co-worker simply throws a window open or lowers the air conditioning without asking first,” said Helbach-Grosser. There’s no simple solution for this problem. “The colleagues must talk with each other. There’s no way around it.”

Office attire for men: Men have it easier than women when it comes to selecting the right clothing for the office, said style consultant Renate Sperber. Men don’t always have to wear a business suit, however. “It’s important that his clothes are well-groomed. Thanks to its collar, a polo shirt has a completely different effect than a simple T-shirt,” Sperber said. “But a colleague who wears a wrinkled T-shirt to work signals to his colleagues that he doesn’t care what impression he makes on them. That isn’t much appreciated.”

Office attire for women: “Women should uphold the business dress code unfailingly,” said Sperber. Dressing in sexy clothing is taboo. Women can get by with wearing bright colours these days. “But the trend is moving toward neat and preppy. You should also occasionally dress in a solid colour.” She added that discreet makeup is an absolute must.

Mobile phone etiquette: As long as there are not constantly private conversations, using a private mobile phone in the office usually doesn’t cause a problem, said Helbach-Grosser. But be careful with ringtone – those that make the sound of a crying baby or tweeting birds for example are unprofessional, she said.

Ladies first: “Certain chivalrous gestures continue to make a good impression,” said Jarosch. But colleagues should realise that woman can also be polite. When a male colleague carries a huge pile of files, for example, the female colleague should hold the door open for him.

U.S. to resume funding stem cell research for now

The U.S. government has said it is back in the business of funding embryonic stem cell research at least for now after an appeals court temporarily lifted a judge’s ban.

The National Institutes of Health said it is resuming its own research and will again evaluate applications from scientists who are seeking taxpayer money to do the work, a process that has been frozen since late last month.

An appeals court on Thursday temporarily stayed a judge’s preliminary order barring that funding until it could hear full arguments in the next few weeks.

In the meantime, the NIH said it is lifting its suspension of all grants and contracts involving use of the cells.

“We are pleased with the court’s interim ruling, which will allow promising stem cell research to continue” while the court battle is waged, said the NIH’s statement.

Scientists who already had received NIH grants had been told to continue working until their dollars ran out, but that 22 projects due to get yearly checks in September would have to find other money.

Now the question is whether the NIH will finish the reviews required for those projects during what could be only a temporary reprieve. No matter what, the case is certain to be bouncing around the court system for many months before there’s a final resolution.

“We believe it’s a shame that they would rush to push funding of embryonic stem cell research, and a waste of taxpayer money,” said Steven H Aden, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, which is involved with the lawsuit that challenged the government funding.

Embryonic stem cells are master cells that can turn into any tissue of the body, and researchers hope one day to harness that power in ways that cure spinal cord injuries, Parkinson’s disease and other ailments.

Culling them from embryos left over after fertility treatment kills a days-old embryo. A 1996 law prohibits the use of taxpayer dollars in work that harms an embryo, so batches have been culled using private money.

But those batches can reproduce in lab dishes indefinitely, and government policies say using taxpayer dollars to work with the already created batches is permissible.

Breakthrough: sensors that can convert thoughts into speech

A mind reading machine has edged closer to reality after scientists found a way of converting thoughts into words.

Researchers were able to render brain signals into speech for the first time, relying on sensors attached to the brain surface.

The breakthrough, which is up to 90 percent accurate, will be a boon for paralyzed patients who cannot speak and could help read anyone’s thoughts ultimately, reports the Telegraph.

“We were beside ourselves with excitement when it started working,” said Prof Bradley Greger, bio-engineer at the Utah University who led the project. “It was just one of the moments when everything came together.”

“We have been able to decode spoken words using only signals from the brain with a device that has promise for long-term use in paralyzed patients who cannot speak. I would call it brain reading and we hope that in two or three years it will be available for use for paralyzed patients.”

The breakthrough came when the team attached two button-sized grids of 16 tiny electrodes to an epileptic brain’s speech centers, says the journal of Neural Engineering.

The patient had part of his skull removed for another operation to treat his condition.

Using electrodes, the scientists recorded brain signals in a computer as the patient repeatedly read each of 10 words that might be useful to a paralyzed person: yes, no, hot, cold, hungry, thirsty, hello, goodbye, more and less.

Then they got him to repeat the words to the computer and it was able to match the brain signals for each word 76 percent to 90 percent of the time.

The computer picked up the patient’s brain waves as he talked and did not use any voice recognition software.

Because just thinking a word is enough to produce the same brain signals, Prof. Greger and his team believe that soon they will be able to have translation device and voice box that repeats the word you are thinking.

Besides, the brains of paralyzed people are just as healthy and produce the same signals as those in physically-fit people – it is just they are blocked by injury from reaching the muscle.

Researchers said the method needs improvement, but could lead in a few years to clinical trials on paralyzed people who cannot speak due to so-called ‘locked-in’ syndrome.
“This is proof of concept,” Prof. Greger said adding: “We’ve proven these signals can tell you what the person is saying well above chance.”

Most hazardous occupations in Technology….

As the scope of information technology widens further, some professions are particularly perilous. The dangers differ from psychological stress to physical threat suck as risking the very life.

Elsa Wenzel from PC World lists some of the most dangerous jobs in the field of technology.

1. Internet Content Moderation

The work of Internet content moderators are to filter out that kind of material which might disturb the web users mind such as hate crimes, torture or child abuse from the social network or photo-sharing site. Demand for the work is growing, especially as more Web-based services enable users to post pictures instantly from their mobile devices.

2. Electronics Assembly

Psychological pressure has been a major issue noticed in electronic factories. The number of suicides has been on increase due to the strict safety rules in such factories. Many manufacturers are accused for creating an unbearable, pressure-cooker environment for workers, mostly young migrants from rural areas. Apart from this, labor and human-rights organizations also charge that workers testing microchips and assembling LCDs for Samsung were exposed to radiation that caused cancer. Foxconn, which makes iPhones, iPads, and other electronics from Apple, Dell, and HP, has been accused of fostering “sweatshop” conditions.

3. Fixing Undersea Internet Cables

About 70 vessels around the world are tasked with fiber-optics installation and repairs. Some are on call around the clock. Each has a crew of about 50 people, including cable-installation engineers and controllers of remote-operated vehicles, who spend weeks or months at sea. Robots rather than human divers lay and bury cables in the seabed as deep as 16,000 feet below the water’s surface, but it takes the human hands on deck to haul in, repair, and drop heavy cables. Though they wear rubber gloves, in a worst-case scenario a cable operating with 10,000 volts could become energized. And looking straight into the lasers of a sliced cable can burn out your retinas in a matter of seconds. Members of the crew are also prone to slips, trips, and falls on wet decks.

4. Communications-Tower Climbing

Close to 11,000 people install and fix the communications towers that keep our mobile calls connected. In 2006, 18 of them died on the job. Accident can happen when workers don’t use the right safety gear, when they disconnect just for a moment, or even when the employee takes precautions; a tower can weaken at its base and fall.

5. Unregulated E-Waste Recycling

People involved in the recycling of e-waste come into dangerous contact with lead, cadmium, beryllium, mercury, and brominated flame retardants. Some are exposed to more chemical harm by soaking circuit boards in acid, or burning PVC cabling to retrieve copper.

6. Mining ‘Conflict Minerals’

There are tens of thousands, or by some estimates, hundreds of thousands of people work in appalling conditions to extract those. No tech company has been able to audit and certify that all of its products are “conflict-free,” but some–including Intel and Motorola–are taking steps in that direction.

7. Infrastructure Work in War Zones

Whether building communications infrastructure for civilians or military operations, military personnel and private contractors in the conflict zones of Iraq and Afghanistan risk their lives on a regular basis. It’s unclear exactly how many people doing IT-related work have lost their lives among the 4734 Coalition military deaths in Iraq since 2003, and the 2061 dead in Operation Enduring Freedom since 2001 so far, as counted on the independent iCasualties website.

Scientists Concerned About Environmental Impact of Recycling of E-Waste

Much of the world’s electronic waste is being shipped to China for recycling and the cottage industry that has sprung up there to recover usable materials from computers, cell phones, televisions and other goods may be creating significant health and environmental hazards.

Scientists from China and the United States have identified numerous toxic elements in the emissions from an e-waste recycling workshop in southern China, which uses low-tech methods to separate reusable electronic components from the circuit boards. It is not an isolated case, the scientists point out; such methods are used all over China.

Results of their study have been published in the journal Atmospheric Environment.

“The most immediate problem is the health of the workers and the people who live in the city,” said Bernd R. T. Simoneit, a professor emeritus at Oregon State University and one of the authors of the study. “But this may also be contributing to global contamination. For example, previous studies have found carcinogens in wind-carried dust from Asia.”

Simoneit is a widely published scientist who has been involved in numerous studies identifying chemical “signatures” for emissions, including coal smoke, biomass burning, petroleum-based fuels and even the burning of municipal refuse.

By using mass spectrometers and other sophisticated instrumentation, the researchers can pinpoint the contributions of specific emissions to the atmosphere. Their work in China was conducted in Shantou City, a town of 150,000 people located in southern China’s Guangdong Province.

They collected samples during four working days, when workers were removing the electronic components by heating the circuit boards over grills on stoves burning coal briquettes. The workshop had 24 stoves along three walls, and an estimated five tons of circuit boards stacked along the fourth wall for processing. Workers would use the grills to melt the solder, and then remove reusable portions of the circuitry.

The research team included five Chinese scientists and Simoneit, who has dual appointments in OSU’s College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences and the Department of Chemistry. The researchers found that through this “roasting process,” numerous organic chemicals, heavy metals, flame retardants and persistent organic pollutants (or POPs) were emitted into the air via the smoke. The chemical signature created by this process of roasting or toasting circuit boards “is unmistakable.”

“The next step is to see to what extent this is harming the environment and creating a health hazard for both the workers, and people living in the path of the emissions — either through inhalation, or exposure to the skin,” Simoneit said. “Some of these chemical compounds may be carcinogens; others may be just as harmful because they can act as ‘environmental disruptors’ and may affect body processes from reproduction to endocrine function.”

The Chinese authors of the study are affiliated with the Chinese Academy of Sciences and include lead author Xinhui Bi, with ZhenZhen Wang, Xinming Wang, Guoying Sheng and Jiamo Fu.

Simoneit also is working with scientists in India to identify chemical signatures from the burning of wire and other materials, which is done to recycle copper and other minerals. And he is working in Saudi Arabia on a different problem — helping develop “green chemistry” methods for recycling that country’s massive urban waste to create methane.