Latest News Clips 2017.10.30

1.      Japan Election Vindicates Shinzo Abe as His Party Wins Big

The New York Times    OCT. 22, 2017

TOKYO — Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan won a commanding majority for his party in parliamentary elections on Sunday, reported NHK, the public broadcaster, fueling his hopes of revising the nation’s pacifist Constitution.

NHK said that Mr. Abe’s governing Liberal Democratic Party and its allies had overcome challenges from upstart rivals to capture two-thirds of the seats in the lower house of Parliament. Final results will be delayed until later on Monday because a typhoon that battered Japan on Sunday prevented votes from being counted in 12 precincts. But with the majority of votes counted, the Liberal Democrats and their coalition partner had won enough seats to reach the two-thirds mark.

Pre-election opinion polls had shown lukewarm support for the prime minister’s policies and competition from a party founded by Tokyo’s popular governor, Yuriko Koike, as well as another new center-left party.

For Mr. Abe, the results were a vindication of his strategy to call a snap election a year earlier than expected, and they raised the possibility that he would move swiftly to try to change the Constitution to make explicit the legality of the Self-Defense Forces, as Japan’s military is known.

The Constitution, in place since 1947, calls for the renunciation of war, and Mr. Abe said in May that it should be amended to remove any doubt about the military’s legitimacy, a view he reiterated on Sunday evening.

Amending the Constitution requires the support of two-thirds of both houses of Parliament. Mr. Abe’s party and its allies had those numbers before Sunday’s elections, but the prime minister’s political woes earlier this year, along with the public’s doubts about a constitutional change, created the possibility that he would lose the supermajority in the lower house.

Even with the votes he needs in Parliament, Mr. Abe now must persuade the public, as any constitutional change needs to be approved by a majority of voters. Polls have shown that voters are split on whether they would approve such a measure.

“I think you’ll see the conversation revolve all around what is doable,” said Sheila A. Smith, a Japan expert at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. “The bargaining is what is interesting.”

Sunday’s parliamentary victory could also embolden Mr. Abe to run next year for a third term as leader of the Liberal Democrats. If he won he would be Japan’s longest-serving prime minister.

But the results were a setback for Ms. Koike, who started her new party, Kibou no To, or Party of Hope, with great fanfare just hours before Mr. Abe called the early election last month. After she decided not to run for office, voters lost interest.

“I would like to clearly say that this is a total defeat,” Ms. Koike said in comments to NHK.

Analysts said Mr. Abe’s victory did not represent an endorsement of his platform so much as a lack of strong alternatives.

“Abe’s reading was right that this was the right timing because the opposition was not ready,” said Ichiro Fujisaki, a former Japanese ambassador to Washington. “People have no other choices, really.”

Mr. Abe’s public approval ratings dipped below 30 percent over the summer as he was dogged by a series of scandals, and opinion polls taken during the campaign found that more voters disapproved of Mr. Abe’s hawkish strategy toward North Korea than approved of it.

 “There is an Abe conundrum,” said Jeff Kingston, the director of Asian studies at Temple University in Tokyo. Mr. Abe is a candidate “who is basically unpopular with voters, whose policies are not particularly popular, who doesn’t get high marks for leadership, and yet he keeps winning in elections,” Mr. Kingston said.

Ms. Koike, after starting her own party, probably helped Mr. Abe by setting off a further split in the opposition. The leading opposition Democratic Party initially offered to free all of its candidates to run under the banner of Ms. Koike’s party. But after she said she would submit candidates to a litmus test and require them to sign a loyalty pledge, the left wing of the Democrats split off and formed yet another new party, the Constitutional Democratic Party, which gained momentum during the campaign.

2.      Does the Flu Provide Better Immunity Than a Flu Shot?

The New York Times    OCTOBER 28, 2016

Is natural immunity better than a flu vaccine?

Is the immunity acquired by having the flu any more beneficial than immunity acquired via a flu shot?

Getting the flu itself can provide much stronger immunity than any flu shot does. But getting the flu is dangerous, so getting a flu shot is a better option.

When a flu virus enters your body, the immune system fights the infection by producing a robust antibody response that can spring into action if the same strain of the virus returns. That protection can in some cases last a lifetime. “The evidence we have is that people who were infected back in the ‘30s still have immunity to those viruses,” says Dr. Alicia Fry, a medical epidemiologist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Studies also show that even when the antibody response wanes, immunity from a natural infection tends to last longer than that from a vaccine. A 2011 study in PLoS One, for example, found that just over half of patients infected with the 2009 H1N1 flu still had an antibody response after six months, while only about a third of vaccinated subjects did.

So why isn’t natural immunity better? For one, natural infection will very likely make you sick. “When people become infected with the flu, they feel terrible. They miss school. They miss work. Some people end up in the hospital, and some people die,” says Dr. Fry. The risks are particularly concerning for older people, those with chronic diseases, pregnant women and young children. Even if you are healthy, you could put your family and others in your community at risk for infection.

Further, natural immunity to one flu virus won’t protect you from most other strains of the virus. “If you were infected with a specific flu virus, your natural immunity would be very good at protecting you against that virus or a similar virus in the future,” says Dr. Fry. But flu viruses evolve quickly and can change from year to year, and several strains of virus typically circulate in any given year. The flu vaccine is updated annually to target the strains most likely to circulate. That, along with its fleeting protection, is why it’s recommended you get a flu shot every year.

Finally, there’s no guarantee you’ll get a robust immune response from infection. It depends on several factors, including your previous exposure to flu viruses, your body’s immune response and how much of the virus you’re exposed to, according to Dr. Suryaprakash Sambhara, an immunologist at the C.D.C.

Flu vaccines use either an inactivated virus or a weakened live virus to mimic infection and spur a controlled immune response — but because the virus is weakened or inactivated, you don’t actually get the flu. Flu vaccines can prevent about 50 to 60 percent of flu infections, according to the C.D.C. Until recently both types of vaccines produced similar results. But over the last few years the live attenuated nasal spray (FluMist), which uses a weakened live virus, has been found to be ineffective and is not currently recommended by the C.D.C.

For perspective, a 2008 study published in Nature found that survivors of the 1918 Spanish flu got lifelong immunity to that flu virus and, as it turned out, protection against the pandemic H1N1 flu in 2009. But the 1918 flu killed 50 million people worldwide. Dr. Eric L. Altschuler, a professor at Temple University and an author of that study, says it would be unwise to expose yourself to one flu virus in the hopes of gaining protection against others. “You might have great immunity to flu x-y-z, but if it's p-d-q, you don’t,” he says.

3.      Can virtual reality help the future of surgery?

Al Jazeera    25 Oct 2017

 

An international team of doctors has worked together to carry out surgery on a woman in a London hospital.

But only one of the doctors was in the room at the time, with the others in India, the US and at another London hospital.

Using virtual reality technology, doctors around the world were able to participate in the consultation.

There are hopes the new resource will allow better access to training for doctors and medical students in every corner of the globe.

4.  The Technological Future of Surgery

The future of surgery offers an amazing cooperation between humans and technology, which could elevate the level of precision and efficiency of surgeries so high we have never seen before.

Will we have Matrix-like small surgical robots? Will they pull in and out organs from patients’ bodies?

The scene is not impossible. It looks like we have come a long way from ancient Egypt, where doctors performed invasive surgeries as far back as 3,500 years ago. Only two years ago, Nasa teamed up with American medical company Virtual Incision to develop a robot that can be placed inside a patient’s body and then controlled remotely by a surgeon.

That’s the reason why I strongly believe surgeons have to reconsider their stance towards technology and the future of their profession.

Surgeons have to rethink their profession

Surgeons are at the top of the medical food chain. At least that’s the impression the general audience gets from popular medical drama series and their own experiences. No surprise there. Surgeons bear huge responsibilities: they might cause irreparable damages and medical miracles with one incision on the patient’s body. No wonder that with the rise of digital technologies, the Operating Rooms and surgeons are inundated with new devices aiming at making the least cuts possible.

We need to deal with these new surgical technologies in order to make everyone understood that they extend the capabilities of surgeons instead of replacing them.

Surgeons also tend to alienate themselves from patients. The human touch is not necessarily the quintessence of their work. However, as technological solutions find their way into their practice taking over part of their repetitive tasks, I would advise them to rethink their stance. Treating patients with empathy before and after surgery would ensure their services are irreplaceable also in the age of robotics and artificial intelligence.

As a first step, though, the society of surgeons has to familiarize with the current state of technology affecting the OR and their job. I talked about these future technologies with Dr. Rafael Grossmann, a Venezuelan surgeon who was part of the team performing the first live operation using medical VR and he was also the first doctor ever to use Google Glass live in surgery.

Latest News Clips2017.10.23

                     

1.      Austria is on the verge of electing a 31-year-old. Does his age matter?

World leaders seem to be getting younger. But whether youthful energy and verve can ever make up for lack of experience remains a vexed question

        

 ‘Four years ago Sebastian Kurz was made foreign minister at the age of 27. Clearly it was time for a new challenge if his career trajectory was to be maintained.’ Photograph: Vladimir Simicek/AFP/Getty Images

The Guardian  16 October 2017 

Grey power this is not. Sebastian Kurz, the 31-year-old leader of the conservative Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP), looks set to become the world’s youngest head of government after Sunday’s elections. The country of elegantly dressed, respectably middle-aged ladies and gentlemen has handed the keys of the Mercedes to a fresh-faced kid.

Kurz may look young but he is not a new figure on the Austrian political scene. Four years ago he was made foreign minister. Clearly it was time for a new challenge if his career trajectory was to be maintained.

Along with Emmanuel Macron, 39, and Justin Trudeau, a boyish 45, Kurz represents a new wave of perky, youthful leaders. In Austria they call him “Wunderwuzzi”, which translates roughly as “whizz kid” or “boy wonder”. The proof of the strudel will be in the eating, of course, but for now Austrian voters are making a big bet on youth.

This is not unprecedented. When Jack Kennedy was elected US president at the age of 43, he and his young family symbolised a break with the past. Present at his inauguration in January 1961 were some distinguished old men: former presidents Harry S Truman and Dwight Eisenhower. And Kennedy made explicit the point about his relative youth: “Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans …”, he said.

In May 1997, Britain elected its own bright young thing, Tony Blair, just short of his 44th birthday. Such was his youthful and bright-eyed demeanour that some critics had dismissed him as “Bambi”. When David Cameron resigned in June 2016 he became a 49-year-old ex-prime minister. Barack Obama, now 56, is hardly over the hill after having served eight years in the White House.

Energy is one thing, however, and experience is another. Leaders need both. If you don’t have first-hand experience yourself, it is wise to draw on those who can provide it. No matter how clever you may be, you can’t have seen everything before the grey hairs start to show. We don’t always know what we don’t know. Someone may have to point this out.

In the euphoria and excitement that surrounded New Labour’s arrival in power, some older, calmer voices were not heeded. Blair could have sought more advice from Jim Callaghan, Denis Healey and Michael Foot, for example, all of whom were still alive for most of his time in office.

There is a telling moment in one of Michael Cockerell’s documentaries with a young prime minister Blair being asked whether he would contemplate holding long cabinet meetings, as Callaghan had done during the IMF crisis in 1976. There is a look of amused disbelief on his face as Blair explains that, no, there shouldn’t be any need for cabinet to meet for such extended periods. But in 2002-03 that might not have been such a bad idea.

Businesses that eject older workers too soon destroy their corporate memory, and deprive themselves of grown-up people who might in the past have dealt with problems that are similar to those being faced today. In a world where more of us will work for longer, managers have to make the multi-generational workplace work. We are facing what Lynda Gratton and Andrew Scott have called The 100-Year Life.

According to some, at 50 you are still a youngster, with half your life ahead of you. But others see you as decrepit

The sharing of experience and perceptions can work both ways, of course. Some companies, including MasterCard, Cisco Systems and Mars have taken to using “reverse mentors” – that is, younger workers who can advise older ones on how to approach the tasks in hand. Inga Beale, the 54-year-old chief executive of Lloyd’s of London, has a 19-year-old “junior mentor” who leaves her “inspired”.

We need to take a more balanced and more generous view of age. Having just turned 50 myself (meaning that I am, for the first and only time, on trend) I have discovered how varied opinions can be. According to some, at 50 you are still a youngster, with so much yet to learn and half your life still ahead of you. But others see you as decrepit and practically on the way out. I prefer answer a).

So good luck to young Herr Kurz as he takes on this daunting responsibility at the age of 31. I trust he’s getting some good advice. Presumably he hopes that his political career is only just beginning. But he should also be aware that sometimes they can be short – or, as they say in German, kurz.

2.      Spain to impose direct rule as Catalonia leader refuses to back down

Madrid will press ahead with suspending autonomy on Saturday after Catalan leader refuses to abandon independence push

The Guardian    19 October 2017

 

The Spanish government is to suspend Catalonia’s autonomy and impose direct rule after the region’s president refused to abandon the push for independence that has led to Spain’s biggest political crisis for 40 years.

The announcement of the unprecedented measure came after the Catalan president, Carles Puigdemont, threatened a unilateral declaration of independence if the Spanish government did not agree to talks on the issue.

In a letter to the Spanish prime minister, Mariano Rajoy, sent on Thursday morning – the deadline set by Madrid for the region to abandon its independence plans – Puigdemont said discussions were the only way to resolve the crisis.

The Catalan president accused Spanish authorities of seeking to repress the independence movement after a national court judge denied two of its leaders this week, and said that using article 155 of the 1978 constitution to impose direct rule from Madrid would force his hand.

 “The suspension [of the independence declaration] is still in place. The [Spanish] state is entitled to decide to apply article 155 if it secures the senate’s approval,” he wrote.

“But despite all our efforts and our desire for dialogue, the fact that the only reply we have been given is that autonomy will be suspended suggests that you do not understand the problem and do not wish to talk.

“If the [Spanish] government persists in hindering dialogue and continues with its repression, the Catalan parliament could, if it deems appropriate, proceed to vote on the formal declaration of independence, which it did not do on 10 October.”

In a statement on Thursday morning, the Spanish government said Puigdemont had again failed to confirm whether independence had been declared. “At an emergency meeting on Saturday, the cabinet will approve measures to be put before the senate to protect the general interest of Spaniards, including the citizens of Catalonia, and to restore constitutional order in the autonomous community,” it said.

Madrid criticised Catalan authorities for “deliberately and systematically seeking institutional confrontation, despite the serious damage it’s causing to coexistence and Catalonia’s economy”.

According to article 155, which has never been used, the Spanish government will need to lodge a formal complaint with Puigdemont, then submit its proposals to the senate for debate and approval. As a result, it will be at least a few days before concrete steps are taken.

A Spanish government spokesman said this week that article 155 had been designed not to remove Catalonia’s autonomy, but to ensure its autonomous government adhered to the law.

“We have envisaged a range of scenarios and will apply 155 accordingly,” he said. “It’s not a question of applying it in its entirety or of taking over every government function or department. Clearly the Catalan government would lose many of its powers, though not all. It’s a case of using a scalpel, not an axe.”

Its application could still be avoided in theory if the Catalan government were to call a snap regional election without confirming independence, but the Catalan foreign minister, Raül Romeva, speaking in Brussels on Wednesday, said: “Elections from our perspective are not an option.”

Senior European officials have so far insisted that the secession issue is an internal matter for Spain, and limited their interventions to calls for dialogue.

Speaking at the European union summit in Brussels on Thursday, however, the French president, Emmanuel Macron, said the event would be “marked by a message of unity around member states amid the crises they could face; unity around Spain”.

Xavier Bettel, the prime minister of Luxembourg, said as he arrived at the summit that the Spanish constitution should be respected. “I hope they are going to find a solution, political, diplomatic and they talk together. No other solution would be good,” he said.

Puigdemont has said the unilateral independence referendum held on 1 October – in which 90% of participants opted for independence – gave his government the mandate to forge a sovereign state, but he has proposed that the effects of an independence declaration be suspended for two months while both sides open dialogue aimed at resolving the standoff.

Rajoy issued a last-minute call on Wednesday for Puigdemont to calm the situation and act in the interests of all Spaniards and Catalans. Speaking in parliament, he asked the Catalan president’s colleagues to persuade him “not to make any more problems” that would “oblige the government to make decisions that would be better never to make”.

3.     Xi Jinping speech: five things you need to know

The Guardian  18 October 2017

Xi Jinping opened a historic Communist party meeting in Beijing with a three hour and 23 minute speech that heralded a “new era” in Chinese politics. A mostly monotone affair, Xi became emotional at several points, and the party faithful in the audience responded with applause at the appropriate pauses. 

Here are the most important points and what to watch during Xi’s next five years as China’s leader:

Xi wants China to rise on the global stage

Xi made several pointed comments directed at the US president, casting himself as the anti-Donald Trump by denouncing isolationism and championing cooperation among nations.

“No country can retreat to their own island, we live in a shared world and face a shared destiny,” he said, making at least one indirect reference to the US leaving the Paris climate accord.

He also mapped out a long-term future for China’s rise on the global stage, predicting that by 2050 the country will “stand proudly among the nations of the world” and “become a leading global power”. Part of that plan includes building a “world-class” military than can fight and win wars.

China has no interest in systems of western democracy

Xi warned the Communist party faced a variety of challenges, most notably corruption, but doubled down on the system, saying China would never copy political systems in other countries. His comments are a clear signal that China’s leaders have no interest in western notions of democracy.

In the past five years, Xi has become known as a strongman, and he did not shy away from the reputation, saying the party would permeate all aspects of life in China, from law to technological innovation.

He also unveiled his theoretical contribution to party thought, the very wonky “Socialism with Chinese characteristics for the new era”. On corruption, he promised new laws to tackle the problem, as graft cases are currently handled by a shadowy internal party process.

Beijing talks tough on regions eyeing independence

Mostly addressing Taiwan – whose government China does not recognise – but also Hong Kong, Xi became visibly animated and received the longest applause for his tough talk on regions with designs to declare formal independence.

“We will not tolerate anyone, using any means, at any time to separate one inch of land from China,” he said. “Blood is thicker than water.”

Distrust of China has been growing in both Taiwan and Hong Kong, and Xi announced propaganda pushes for the regions in order to “strengthen the ranks of patriot who love our country”. Similar overbearing attempts in the past have had little success in swaying the younger generation.

Xi seeks to calm fears over the economy

Xi worked to calm fear of rising home prices that have hit ordinary Chinese particularly hard. Real estate is a preferred investment in a country where the financial system is viewed with distrust.

“Houses are for living, not for speculating,” he said, coining a catchphrase that will no doubt become a mantra.

He also pledged to transform China into a “country of innovators”, focusing on aerospace, cyberspace, transportation. He promised to increase market access for foreign companies and also increase the markets’ role in the financial system and exchange rate, but it remains to be seen if this speech will translate into concrete policies.

The communist party wants a “Beautiful China”

As part of making China great, Xi spent a lot of time tackling environmental issues. He pledge to build a “beautiful China” with a clean environment, high tech companies and responsive government.

The Communist party need to “meet people’s ever-growing demands for a beautiful environment”, Xi said. “Chinese people will enjoy greater happiness and well-being.”

He acknowledged that happiness was more than just material goods, long believed the key to winning the loyalty of the masses, and said the party would fix the toxic levels of air, water and soil pollution that have plagued China for years.