Category Archives: Human Reproduction

In last weeks column, There is a feminism without abortion, I began to share the interview given to New York Times columnist Ezra Klein by feminist and legal scholar Dr. Erika Bachiochi. She argues in her 2021 book, The Rights of Women: Reclaiming a Lost Vision, that the sexual revolution coupled with hi-tech forms of contraception and easy abortion have been devastating for womens well-being and the cultivation of virtue.

Reflecting on the evolution of feminism, Dr. Bachiochi observes that in capitalism, the market has grown to value women not because they are biological women but when they perform at the workplace like men. The standard has been maleness, undervaluing (indeed ignoring) the roles and functions of women qua women. This is the ultimate patriarchy.

Weve seen women advance in so many ways, except there isnt this concomitant valuing of the work thats done by women in pregnancy, and then the work thats done by both men and women in the home. The modern day womens movement really capitulates to a market logic, where equality is seen in market terms, where instead of women as caregivers and men as breadwinners, both men and women are valued only as breadwinners.

And that really important work of care that women especially but increasingly men too really value, that work of care they do in the home, has not been valued in the market And that has been especially, I think, difficult for poor women.

In capitalism, the market would prefer women to be just like men never getting pregnant, never needing maternity leave. Biological women may get pregnant, requiring absence from work on full pay; someone may have to be paid to backstop. In capitalism, women becoming pregnant is inconvenient, and expensive; this may partially explain why women are often paid less than men for the same work.

According to Dr. Bachiochi, abortion and contraception really serve the needs of capital and the market at the expense of families.

There should be massive realignment where theres a real renewed attention to but support of caregiving. But just the fact that there is a choice [for abortion] means that employers see it as a cheaper choice.

This is exactly why you have employers, corporations states talking about the corporate case for reproductive health its a far cheaper option than accommodations for pregnancy for caregiving. And so when theyre thinking about the bottom line, this is the way theyre going to go.

Suddenly, theres all this talk about autonomy, and theres a very Lockean approach to the way progressives talk about abortion rights and this idea that the child well, they dont [use the word] child the fetus is like a trespasser on their property of their body, the self-ownership of their body, again, in a very Lockean way and they then have this right to dispel anyone who comes through it in kind of an absolute property right, when it seems to me that in the progressive tradition, theres a better understanding of the duties of care we owe one another, that were all interdependent, that theres more of a responsibility for those who are vulnerable and dependent. And the child, who is a human being and is really utterly dependent on his or her mother at that time for those nine months, is the most vulnerable and the most dependent.

Instead of arguing that because the child growing in the womb is vulnerable and dependent upon the mother for life, that very vulnerability is used to argue that the child has no right to live, no right to be called human, because it is not viable outside the womb. Capitalism and the market has no use for the vulnerable the aged, the handicapped, the idle unskilled because they cannot produce, or because they constrain optimal production.

Dr. Bachiochi suggests that the liberal capitalist way of thinking (exemplified by John Locke commonly known as the father of liberalism) may be at the root of a radical individualism masquerading as personal autonomy that is ultimately anti-family and anti-community. This approach to life must be challenged.

In terms of the poor woman by resetting this question the law does teach. By saying that there are all sorts of people, maybe not everyone in the country obviously, who believe that a childs life is taken in an abortion and that we actually owe duties to that child, that it helps reset thinking about sex itself, that I think it ought to help us take sex more seriously.

When we take the natural facts of human reproduction seriously, that there are asymmetrical burdens on women, therefore women should hold men off more and expect more from them.

In the same way, I think that enabling and, again, empowering the poor to take seriously the really important work of the home, of rearing children is basically what the rich already do. And its kind of not fair that the wealthy, the rich, the well-educated see how important it is to prioritize their childrens development, their childrens moral and intellectual development, and then say, oh, well, we shouldnt expect that of the poor.

To me, that is actually more of a flawed way of thinking about the capacities of the poor. And our human equality is not in how much property we own or wealth we have or how much money we make or anything. But its just in our equal human capacity for moral development.

And I think rich and poor both have that and that should be an expectation that our laws have that we all ought to be striving for moral development. We ought not to shield moral responsibility from the poor or the rich, that our laws and our policies should be enabling people to carry out their obligations to one another, because thats how people develop virtuously. And that tends to lead toward both personal and societal happiness.

Engaging in the natural act of sexual intercourse implies moral obligations many seek to avoid. Readily available abortion and contraception assist in this, and lead to a new antinatalism people deciding ex ante that they never want to become parents. This can lead to immature behaviour, and sexual irresponsibility.

People dont realize what theyre missing out on when they make those sorts of determinations well ahead of time. Parenting is profound. And I think for eons and eons, what human beings have seen is that becoming a mother or father really develops the person, requires a great movement away from the focus on self toward another, toward benevolence and in order to then be able to focus on others outside of your family as well, and that maturation process, I think, is most definitely needed in our culture right now on the part of both men and women.

Peter Espeut is a sociologist and a development scientist. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com

Read more:
Peter Espeut | The economics of abortion | Commentary - Jamaica Gleaner

The Department of Justice (DOJ) on Tuesday announced the creation of a new reproductive rights task force aimed at protecting abortion access and enforcing federal laws on reproduction rights in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade.

In a press release, the DOJ said the new task force will bring together representatives from several offices in the department, including the civil rights division, the Office of the Solicitor General and U.S. attorneys offices.

DOJ Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta, who will chair the new task force, said the DOJ is committed to protecting access to reproductive services after the high courts decision last month that cleared the way for states to restrict or ban abortion access.

The Court abandoned 50 years of precedent and took away the constitutional right to abortion, preventing women all over the country from being able to make critical decisions about our bodies, our health, and our futures, Gupta said in a statement.

The DOJ said the reproductive rights task force will monitor state and local laws that infringe on federal protections for reproductive care, impair a womans ability to seek abortion care in states where it is legal, ban federally approved abortion medication or prevent federal employees from accessing abortion care.

The task force is not entirely new but simply formalizes an existing working group and efforts by the Department over the last several months to enforce federal laws and protect abortion access, according to the DOJ.

The news comes after President Biden signed an executive order last week that instructs the Department of Health and Human Services to protect and expand access to abortion through medication shipped by mail.

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has already said he will enforce the protection of abortion medication, which is approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

The Biden administration has so far resisted calls to allow abortion access on federal lands and to declare a public health emergency after several states have taken steps to severely restricted access to abortion.

The presidents resistance has angered progressives who are urging Biden to do more after the Supreme Court ruling. For his part, Biden has pushed for Congress to codify the right to abortion.

See more here:
DOJ creates new reproductive rights task force - The Hill

Sisters Shirley and Marlene Rutherford often leave people rubbing their eyes in confusion and wondering if they are seeing double.

For the identical twin sisters, now in their 70s, have dressed identically all their lives and still love to do so right down to their shoes. Shirley and Marlene share everything, including their home in Willerby, and have been affectionately nicknamed "double trouble" by their neighbours.

Shirley and Marlene have now opened up on their life as a double act. Speaking to BBC Look North, they said they were used to the stares and had no intention of giving up on their identical outfits anytime soon.

Read more: 'I fancied Killing Eve's Jodie Comer and realised I was a lesbian' - Hull mum

The twins are difficult to tell apart, even to those who have known them for decades. "I think if we'd have dressed different, we'd have looked at one another and thought, 'I wish I had that on'," Marleen said.

"Our mum made all our clothes," Shirley said, recalling their childhood days. "She made our bows in our hair, and we used to go to bed with rags in our hair to make it curly," Marleen added.

"I have never seen them not dressed the same," said friend and neighbour Janet Slater, who has known the sisters for more than 20 years. "Coats the same, scarves, hats, gloves, fleeces. Always the same, always in the same shoes."

The sisters are well-known in Willerby. Kerry Robinson, who works in the village Post Office, said she found it so different to tell them apart, sometimes she had to resort to just addressing them as 'ladies'.

"I can [tell them apart], one day, and then the next day I'm confused again," she added. "I'll think, 'that's Marlene' and then I'll say, 'oh no, is it Shirley?' And then I'll confuse myself so I just won't dare say anything."

It's estimated that twins occur in one in every 2050 births, although identical twins are more rare than non-identical. A recent report suggested that the birth rate for twins was increasing, with more twins born than ever in 2021.

According to the Human Reproduction medical journal, the number of twins born is now particularly high in Europe and North America. Worldwide, the figure has risen from nine twins for every 1,000 deliveries to 12. You can watch the full interview with Shirley and Marlene on the BBC website.

For Marlene and Shirley, being twins defines them. "They do say 'there goes the twins', and 'here comes double trouble'," they added, with one appropriately finishing the other's sentence.

READ NEXT:

The rest is here:
The twin sisters from Willerby still dressing identically in their 70s - Hull Live

According to some estimates, theoceans, which contain 97% of the world's water, keep Earth alive. Over a billion people rely on it as their primary source of protein, and we depend on it to control our climate and absorb CO2. It is believed that a large portion ofplasticgarbage that does not go to a landfill or other means of waste disposal ends up in the ocean. A major issue harming the maritime ecosystem is plastic pollution. It endangers the health of the ocean, marine wildlife, human health, food safety and quality, and coastal tourism, and it causesclimate change.

Although it can be difficult to estimate the exact amount of plastic in the ocean, the largest study to date estimates that there are 5 trillion particles of plastic floating in the water. Massive amounts of plastic have collected across the ocean, even in deep-sea regions that were once believed to be undisturbed by people.

North Pacific

2 trillion

Indian

1.3 trillion

North Atlantic

930 billion

South Pacific

491 billion

South Atlantic

297 billion

The amount of plastic pollution in our oceans weighs as much as 268,000 tons, or 38,000African elephants. The plastic was divided into three sizes by ocean researcher Marcus Eriksen and his team:microplastics(4.75 millimeters and less), meso plastics (4.75 to 200mm), and macro plastics (over 200mm). By 2040, 29 million metric tons of plastic rubbish are anticipated to enter the oceans each year, nearly tripling today's level.

The plastic you discard can end up in the ocean, even if you live hundreds of miles from the shore. Once in the ocean, plastic breaks down very slowly, forming microscopic fragments known as microplastics that can enter the marine food chain and do a great deal of harm tomarine species. Around 80% of the plastic pollution in the world is estimated to come from land use, and 20% from marine-going vessels. The plastic is largely scarcely discernible. The minuscule beads used in cosmetic products like toothpaste and face washes are among the most popular ones. Additionally, the plastic you throw away ends up in a landfill. Plastic is frequently blown away when the trash is being delivered to landfills because it is so light. From there, it may eventually clog drains and infiltrate rivers and the sea this way.

At least 800 species are reportedly impacted by marine waste worldwide, and up to 80% of that trash is plastic, according to theUnited Nations. In addition to piling up in the oceans, plastic is the material that does the most harm to marine life.Fish,seabirds, and marine animals are injured or killed by plastic trash in the ocean. Globally, marine plastic pollution has had an impact on at least 267 species, including 86% of allsea turtlespecies, 44% of all seabird species, and 43% of allmammalian species.

Due to the pervasive plastic pollution on many beaches, there is a decrease inturtlereproduction rates due to the altered sand temperature where incubation occurs. Additionally, plastic garbage kills up to a million seabirds yearly. Like sea turtles, seabirds consume plastic, it occupies space in their stomachs and can occasionally result inmalnutrition. Numerous seabirds are discovered deceased with this material still in their stomachs. Scientists predict that by 2050, 99% of all seabird species will have consumed plastic, up from the current estimate of 60%.

In the end, it's about us. Whether we intend to litter or not, there is always a danger that the plastic we discard will end up in the sea. By 2050, scientists project that the weight of ocean plastics will be more than the total weight of all fish in the seas unless immediate action is made to address this important issue. Small steps lead to big changes, and each of us can change the world.

Read the original here:
How Much Plastic Is In The Ocean? - Worldatlas.com

What seems like a sci-fi movie can be turned into reality if Japans technology is to be believed. Humans can travel across different planets on a train in the near future! Yes, you read that right. Japan has laid out plans in a bid to send humans to Mars and the Moon, according to The Weather Channel India.

Japan has made plans to build a glass habitat structure that would copy Earth's gravity, atmosphere and topography to make us feel like home.

Researchers from Japans Kyoto University in collaboration with Kajima Construction are working on this plan that might shake up space travel, the Weather Channel reported. The researchers announced this last week in a press conference, the EurAsian Times reported.

The interplanetary transportation system by Japanese researchers is called 'Hexatrack'. Hexatrack would maintain a gravity of 1G during long-distance travel to lessen the effects of extended exposure to low gravity.

The trains will also have hexagonal-shaped capsules called the 'Hexacapsules' with a moving device in the middle.

According to the proposal of the Japanese researchers, a mini-capsule with a 15-metre radius will link the Earth and the Moon. For connecting moon and Mars, a 30-metre-radius capsule will be needed.

Now, the capsule will employ the kind of electromagnetic technology used by the Maglev trains in Germany and China.

While the station on the moon will use a gateway satellite and will be known as Lunar Station, the train station on Mars will be called Mars Station. It will be situated on the Martian satellite Phobos.

According to the Human Spaceology Centre, the Earth station will be called Terra Station and will be the successor space station to the International Space Station (ISS).

The space train, known as Space Express, would operate on standard gauge track, reported Mashable India.

Most of the space transportation system overlooks the importance of terrestrial natural capital. However, researchers at the Kyoto University plan to build a habitat that would recreate the facilities on Earth.

The researchers aim at building a narrowed living structure in the shape of a champagne flute with artificial gravity, green areas and water bodies, and complete with public transportation. The structure will be known as The Glass.

Low gravity is a major concern as it can affect reproduction. The researchers at the university aim at curbing this concern. The structure will create artificial gravity capable of generating gravity that would be equivalent to Earth's environment by utilising centrifugal force caused by the rotation of moon and Mars in space.

According to Japan's The Asahi Shimbun, the plan might take a century to be a reality. However, researchers are aiming to build a simplified prototype version of the Marsglass and Lunaglass by 2050.

According to the Director of SIC Manned Cosmology Research Center and Graduate School of Advanced Integrated Studies at Kyoto University, Yosuke Yamashiki, what Japan has in store for Space habitation are crucial for ensuring the realisation of human space colonisation in the future.

Yosuke Yamashiki, the Director of SIC Manned Cosmology Research Center and Graduate School of Advanced Integrated Studies at Kyoto University, says that

Through discussions over the past few years, these three pillars that we propose this time are core technologies that are not in the development plans of other countries and are indispensable for ensuring the realization of human space colonization in the future, he said.

--- ENDS ---

Read the original post:
Bullet train to the moon and Mars? Here's how Japan's planning interplanetary travel - India Today

No evidence Omicron BA.5 is more infectious than measles or is 'the most infectious virus known'

No evidence Omicron BA.5 is more infectious than measles or is 'the most infectious virus known'

17 July,2022 10:29 am

(Reuters) - Scientists say there is no evidence that the BA.5 version of the Omicron coronavirus variant is more transmissible than measles, or that it has a basic reproduction number, or R-naught (R0), of 18.6, which would be greater than that of measles. While BA.5 appears to be spreading faster than other Omicrons still circulating, experts say that BA.5 is unlikely to be one of the most infectious viruses known to man, as some have claimed.

Calculations recently published online (here) and (here) suggested that the R0 of BA.5 is 18.6, which would be nearly six times that of the original strain of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that emerged in 2019 and was estimated to have an R0 of about 3.0 to 3.3.

Basic reproduction number, or R0, is an estimate of the "number of secondary cases generated by a typical infectious individual when the rest of the population is susceptible (ie, at the start of a novel outbreak)" (here).

The calculation that BA.5 has an R0 of 18.6 was made by the articles author Adrian Esterman, a professor of biostatistics and epidemiology based in Australia (here), who implies that BA.5 has displaced measles -- with its R0 of 18 -- as the virus with the highest known basic reproduction rate, writing: "This is similar to measles, which until now was our most infectious viral disease."

The claim made its way into online articles (here) , (here), and has been repeated and shared more than 20,000 times on Twitter.

In sharing Estermans result, one Twitter user remarked, "The latest Covid subvariants have an Ro value of 18.6. If you think its over, guess again" (here) and another said, "The Omicron variants #BA4 #BA5 have an R0 of 18.6. In 2020, the R0 was around 1-3 or 4 at its worst. #COVID19 is now the most infectious disease in human history. Buckle up. This is it." (here).

But many Twitter users, including professional biostatisticians and epidemiologists, questioned the result and how it was calculated. "This statement about R0 is almost certainly incorrect and very frustrating to see going viral" (here), said one.

Another said, "Strikes me that there is some misunderstanding about the relationship between R0, growth advantage, and R_eff - and a bit of gen time as well" (here).

A third said, "Still seeing claims that latest COVID variants have R0 (i.e. R in fully susceptible population) of almost 20. But the same logic would lead to (incorrect) conclusion that seasonal flu has an R0 in the hundreds, if not thousands" (here).

More examples can be seen (here) , (here) and (here).

Estermans calculation is based on multiplying two very different types of measurement, scientists said. One is a context-dependent comparison -- BA.5s growth advantage over the BA.2 version of Omicron, or BA.2s growth advantage over BA.1 -- while the other is a more intrinsic property of the virus and how it would behave on a theoretical level playing field.

In his article, Esterman states the R0 for BA.1, the first version of Omicron to spread globally, is 9.5, citing a review of mostly South African studies (here) done soon after Omicrons emergence in that country. In addition to R0, the authors of that study calculated an average effective reproduction rate (R_eff) of 3.4.

Effective reproduction rate is "the expected number of new infections caused by an infectious individual in a population where some individuals may no longer be susceptible," and is considered a better reflection of how fast an epidemic will actually grow in a real setting (here) and (here).

Esterman then writes, "BA.2, which is the dominant subvariant in Australia at the moment, is 1.4 times more transmissible than BA.1, and so has an R0 of about 13.3." He further adds, "a pre-print publication from South Africa suggests BA.4/5 has a growth advantage over BA.2 similar to the growth advantage of BA.2 over BA.1. That would give it an R0 of 18.6," citing an analysis (here) from the period when BA.4 and BA.5 infections were rising in South Africa while BA.2 infections slowed.

Natalie Dean, an associate professor of biostatistics and bioinformatics, and of epidemiology at the Rollins School of Public Health of Emory University, tweeted about the result, "Just because something has a 50% *growth advantage* in a population does not mean it is 50% more *transmissible.* Some (or most) of that growth advantage may come from immune evasion." (here)

"So if each new variant has a 50% growth advantage, it does not mean that R0 keeps increasing by 50%. And while new variants are more transmissible, R0 is not up to 18 (measles territory). The reality is that R0 is tricky to apply to our current situation. Interpret with care!" (here)

Multiple factors can give one variant an advantage over another, Dean told Reuters. They include a change in the virus that makes it inherently more transmissible, but another is that it can evade recognition by the immune system in people who have been exposed to previous variants or to vaccines based on older versions of the virus.

The R0 is just focused on the transmissibility part, but unless you untangle the two, you cant tell how much of the advantage is due to [immune evasion], she explained. With the assorted Omicron lineages, a large chunk of the advantage they have relative to one another and to previous variants comes from immune evasion, she said.

You dont even need an increase in transmissibility to explain the advantage, Dean noted. But in multiplying R0 by relative growth advantage, at each step, youre attributing those advantages [only] to increased transmissibility.

It would be difficult to calculate a true R0 for BA.5 now because the world has such mixed levels of exposure and vaccination, Dean said. If you put BA.5 and the Wuhan strain in the same population, we dont know what would happen. BA.5 might do better, but not six times as much.

VERDICT

False. The basic reproduction number of the BA.5 Omicron variant was miscalculated as 18.6, scientists say, and therefore it is not greater than that of measles, and BA.5 is not the most infectious viral disease known.

' ;var i = Math.floor(r_text.length * Math.random());document.write(r_text[i]);

Continued here:
No evidence Omicron BA.5 is more infectious than measles or is 'the most infectious virus known' - Dunya News