Month: July 2024

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

The new leftist British Prime Minister Sir Kier Starmer has on day one of his premiership scrapped a scheme to deport illegal immigrants to Rwanda which was devised by the previous Conservative government but never properly implemented.

Starmer’s Labour party had promised to kill off the ill conceived mess of a ‘solution’ to hordes of small boat migrants washing up on English shores, and he has indeed done so, reports the Telegraph.

The Rwanda scheme was first touted by Boris Johnson’s government, then continued to be bandied around under subsequent Prime Ministers Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak. However, it was proven to be toothless empty rhetoric, with not one single illegal immigrant being deported under the program.

Despite that, British taxpayers were charged to the tune of £270 million… for nothing.

The Labour government’s new Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, has declared that one of the first duties will be to “keep our borders secure” and that she would prioritise creating a new Border Security Command.

No one is holding their breath though, given that the leftist Party is extremely pro immigration.

Still, things surely cannot get any worse than under the last Conservative government, which made Tony Blair’s relaxed immigration policy look positively isolationist.

Labour won the UK election this past week with an estimated vote share of just 34 percent, yet they now have 64 percent of the parliamentary seats under the first past the post political system.

All in all, around 80 per cent of UK citizens did not vote for this Labour government:

*  *  *

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Burberry struggles to revitalize its business through a turnaround plan. The high-end, UK-based luxury clothing company, known for its signature beige check pattern, is failing to resonate with consumers, especially Chinese ones. 

Last week, Goldman’s Louise Singlehurst told clients that the troubled designer has a “lack of catalysts for top-line stability” and remains “Neutral” on the company. 

In mid-June, Singlehurst said that even with Burberry’s leather goods more accessible at entry-level price segments compared to luxury peers, recent price reductions on new handbags and clothing still suggest a challenging sales environment: 

Looking at our pricing analysis, we show that Burberry’s leather goods offer has greater exposure to more entry level price segments when benchmarked versus the luxury peers (it has the largest offer of handbags below €1500). In addition we show the brand is targeting the higher priced segment with new product launches (adding to the €2000+ segment and now the €3,000+) over the past 18 months. However, our pricing tracker shows price reductions on a small selection of new handbag silhouettes (using data from June 5th versus April 30th) which are designs introduced by new Creative Director (Daniel Lee). We have observed only a small selection of price adjustments (5 styles, mainly within the Knight Bag and Rocking Horse designs) with a range of -4% to -16% in Euro and GBP (with the medium-sized Knight Bag in black leather seeing the largest reduction at -16% to £2,090). Whilst this does suggest that Burberry is actively reviewing its product offer and pricing architecture – a positive in our view – it does also suggest the sales environment remains challenging and Burberry is yet to reverse market share losses.

In May, CEO Jonathan Akeroyd told investors, “FY24 financial results underperformed our original expectations.” 

Revenue has been sliding in the Chinese market, and that suggests consumers in the world’s second-biggest economy are giving up on the brand’s overpriced handbags and jackets. 

“The Burberry brand doesn’t have, at the moment, the ability to resonate,” Luca Solca, a senior analyst at Bernstein Autonomous LLP, said, adding, “It either needs to change or it needs to work.”

As The Telegraph reports this weekend, that change involves hundreds of potential job cuts as the turnaround plan falters. 

As many as 400 jobs could be at risk. Here’s more from the report:

Employees were first informed of the restructuring during a Zoom meeting in late June, with affected workers told they were either facing redundancy or having to reapply for their roles. The company has begun a 45-day consultation, signalling that hundreds of roles could be cut.

It is understood that union officials are coordinating redundancy settlements with a select group of employees. The company refused to say how many workers will be affected, but employees fear up to 400 jobs could be at risk.

Bloomberg data shows that Burberry has about 9,200 full-time workers, which provides some context on what the upcoming job cuts mean for the workforce as a whole. 

Solca said, “One can only think that the Burberry reinvention has yet to succeed.”

He noted that Burberry’s low valuation, compared to that of its peers, could attract M&A activity. 

A “buyer could undertake the grisly but arguably necessary measures to stabilize the Burberry brand away from the prying eyes of the public markets,” he said.

Goldman’s Singlehurst told clients last week that Burberry could be ripe for M&A with larger brands:

Small listed brands now in an M&A sweet spot: In the last 15 years, small brands (BRBY, SFER, ZGN) are trading at the largest discount relative to brand scale (12mf EV/GP or EV/Sales basis) vs. larger cap peers. We believe the market has been trading these businesses on standalone profitability, which is under increasing pressure, rather than factoring in M&A risk and earnings at scale. We use Tiffany/LVMH (completed Jan-21) as a case study to see how larger fashion houses can drive operational improvements in standalone businesses (noting recent consolidation e.g. CFR/Vhernier, L Cat./Tods, KER/Creed, KER/ 30% Valentino).

None of this should be surprising, as high inflation and rising interest rates weigh on consumer activity worldwide. 

By John Kemp, senior energy analyst at Reuters

China’s record-breaking deployment of wind and solar capacity has worsened regional power imbalances, forcing the country to idle increasing amounts of renewable generation when it overwhelms local consumption.

New government regulations aim to reduce the amount of renewable generation that has to be abandoned by increasing long-distance transmission links and better coordinating generation plans across provinces.

Since the end of 2018, China’s total generating capacity has increased by 1.137 billion kilowatts (kW), compound annual growth of 9%, according to data from the National Bureau of statistics (NBS).

Thermal capacity, mainly from coal-fired plants but some from gas-fired generators, rose by 257 million kW or 4% per year (“China statistical yearbook”, NBS, 2023).

Most capacity additions, however, have come from what the government calls “new energy sources” – wind farms (277 million kW, 19% per year) and solar generators (517 million kW, 29% per year). Increased penetration of intermittent renewables is making it harder to manage a nationwide transmission system that was already struggling with large regional imbalances between generation and load.

The solution to variable wind and solar output is to smooth out fluctuations across a larger number of generators spread over much larger areas of the country, which will require more transmission and better scheduling.

Long-Distance Transmission

For decades, the country has been characterized by massive west-to-east electricity transfers from interior areas with surplus generation to the massive load centres on the east and south coasts.  Ten provincial-level areas in the east and south (Liaoning, Hebei, Beijing, Tianjin, Shandong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Zhejiang, Fujian and Guangdong) accounted for 50% of national consumption but only 40% of generation in 2022.

By contrast, six remote and sparsely populated northern and western areas (Inner Mongolia, Xinjiang, Shanxi, Shaanxi, Gansu and Ningxia) accounted for 18% of consumption but 25% of generation.

Chartbook: China regional electricity transfers

In response, China’s State Grid Corporation has constructed a network of ultra-high voltage transmission lines to move power thousands of kilometres from surplus areas in the west and north to deficit areas in the east and south.

In the process, China has become the world leader in ultra-high voltage transmission to move electricity over long distances while minimising line losses and is exporting its expertise around the world.

Inner Asia’s Energy Abundance

China’s northern and western areas are some of the least populated and poorest parts of the country, but rich in energy resources, traditionally coal but now increasingly gas and renewables.

The north and west contains the country’s most important coal deposits and has become a major centre of pit-head generation, with some electricity used locally by heavy industry, and the rest transmitted east and south.

Inner Mongolia, Shanxi, Shaanxi and Xinjiang alone accounted for 81% of coal mine production and 25% of all thermal generation in 2022, according to data from the NBS.

In a quirk of fate, the arid and windswept northern and western plains and deserts are also the best sites for giant wind farms and solar parks.

Inner Mongolia, Shanxi, Shaanxi and Xinjiang together with neighbouring Gansu, Ningxia and Qinghai accounted for 42% of all wind and solar generation last year.

But the addition of so much wind and solar generation in a region already saturated with coal-fired power threatens to overwhelm the transmission system.

During peak periods of wind and solar generation, there is not enough population and industry in these areas to absorb all the output, and not enough long-distance transmission capacity to move the surplus east and south.

More Transmission And Planning

In 2016, the national utilisation rate for new energy sources fell to a record low of 84%, prompting the central government to launch a “Clean Energy Absorption Action Plan” to reduce the waste of renewable resources. The plan focused on improvements in local distribution, long-distance inter-provincial transmission, and energy trading to reduce the curtailment of new energy generation.

By 2023, the utilisation rate for wind power had climbed to a remarkable 97.3% and solar had reached 98%, according to the state-run news agency Xinhua.

With rapid deployment of renewable capacity, however, the problem of abandonment is re-emerging, with wind utilisation down  to 96.1% and solar down to 96% in the first five months of 2024. Sliding utilisation has prompted an alert from the National New Energy Consumption Monitoring and Early Warning Center (“Solving the pain points and difficulties of new energy consumption”, Xinhua, July 1, 2024).

The response is likely to be similar, with renewed emphasis on integrating renewables at local level and more transmission  capacity to move surplus power across provincial boundaries. In the last two years, central government policy statements have repeatedly focused on the need for better coordination of transmission and generation between provinces.

Creating A Truly National System

In a sign of the importance attached to the issue, the Communist Party’s Politburo held a group study session on new energy technology and energy security on February 29, 2024. The session, bringing together top central and regional leaders, included a discussion on boosting “the grid’s capacity capability to integrate, distribute and regulate clean energy.”

President Xi Jinping stressed need for “coordinated development of the energy sector” (“Xi stresses high-quality development of new energy”, CPC International Department, March 2, 2024).

In many ways, China’s long-distance ultra-high voltage transmission system is an extraordinary engineering achievement, likely to be copied in other parts of the world as more and more renewables are connected to grids. It has enabled a remarkable penetration of intermittent renewables, as well as hydroelectric generation, into the national power system while maintaining or improving reliability. As a result, wind and solar producers supplied 15% of all generation in the first five months of 2024, up from 7% in the same period in 2019.

In some ways, however, China is still struggling to forge a truly integrated nationwide system from fragmented provincial-level utilities that pursue their own priorities. If government plans to achieve even higher renewables penetration are to be achieved, there will have to be much closer links and more coordination between different types of generators and across far wider areas.

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

It’s impossible to overstate the importance of the 2024 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) this week in Astana, Kazakhstan. It can certainly be interpreted as the antechamber to the crucial BRICS annual summit, under the Russian presidency, next October in Kazan.

Let’s start with the final declaration. As much as SCO members state “tectonic shifts are underway” in geopolitics and geoeconomics, as “the use of power methods is increasing, with norms of international law being systematically violated”, they are fully engaged to “increase the SCO’s role in the creation of a new democratic, fair, political and economic international order.”

Well, there could not be a sharper contrast with the unilaterally-imposed “rules-based international order”.

The SCO 10 – with new member Belarus – are explicitly in favor of “a fair solution to the Palestinian issue”. They “oppose unilateral sanctions”. They want to create a SCO investment fund (Iran, via acting President Mohammad Mokhber, supports the creation of a SCO common bank, just like the NDB in BRICS).

Additionally, members that “are parties to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty stand for compliance with its provisions”. And crucially, they agree that “interaction within the SCO may become the basis for building a new security architecture in Eurasia.”

The last point is actually the heart of the matter. That’s proof that Putin’s proposal last month in front of key Russian diplomats was fully debated in Astana – following Russia’s strategic deal with the DPRK de facto linking security in Asia as indivisible with security in Europe. That is something that remains – and will continue to remain – incomprehensible for the collective West.

A new Eurasia-wide security architecture is an upgrade of the Russian concept of Greater Eurasia Partnership – involving a series of bilateral and multilateral guarantees and, in Putin’s own words, open to “all Eurasian countries that wish to participate”, including NATO members.

The SCO should become one of the key drivers of this new security arrangement – in total contrast with the “rules-based order” – alongside the CSTO, the CIS and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).

The road map ahead of course includes socio-economic integration and the development of international transportation corridors – from the INSTC (Russia-Iran-India) to the China-supported “Middle Corridor”.

But the two crucial points are military and financial: “To gradually phase out the military presence of external powers” in Eurasia; and to establish alternatives to “Western-controlled economic mechanisms, expanding the use of national currencies in settlements, and establishing independent payment systems.”

Translation: the meticulous process conducted by Russia to deliver a fatal blow to Pax Americana is essentially shared by all SCO members.

Welcome to SCO+

President Putin laid down the basic tenets further on down the road when he confirmed the “commitment of all member states to forming a fair world order based on the central role of the UN and commitment of sovereign states to mutually beneficial partnership.”

He added, “the long-term goals for further expansion of cooperation in politics, economy, energy, agriculture, high technologies and innovation are stated in the project of development strategy of SCO till 2035.”

That’s a quite Chinese approach to long-term strategic planning: China’s five-year plans are already mapped out all the way to 2035.

President Xi doubled down when it comes to the leading Russia-China strategic partnership: both should “strengthen comprehensive strategic coordination, oppose external interference and jointly maintain peace and stability” in Eurasia.

Once again, that’s Russia-China as leaders of Eurasia integration and the drive towards a multi-nodal world (italics mine; nodal with an “n”).

The summit in Astana showed how the SCO has really stepped up the game after incorporating India, Pakistan and Iran – and now Belarus – as new members, plus establishing key players such as Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar and Azerbaijan as dialogue partners, and strategic Afghanistan and Mongolia as observers.

It’s a long way from the original Shanghai Five – Russia, China, plus three Central Asian “stans” – setting up the organization back in 2001, essentially as an anti-terrorism/separatism body. The SCO has evolved into serious geoeconomic cooperation, discussing in detail, for instance, supply chain security issues.

The SCO now goes way beyond a Heartland-focused economic and security alliance, as it covers 80% of the Eurasian landmass; accounts for more than 40% of the world’s population; boasts a 25% share of global GDP – and rising; and generates global trade value of over $8 trillion in 2022, according to Chinese government numbers. Add to it SCO members hold 20% of global oil reserves and 44% of natural gas.

So it’s no wonder that a key development this year at the Palace of Independence in Astana was the first meeting of the SCO +, under the theme “Strengthening Multilateral Dialogue”.

A real who’s who of SCO partners was there, from President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and President of Turkiye Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to member of the Supreme Council of the Emirates Sheikh Saud bin Saqr Al Qasimi, Chairman of the People’s Council of Turkmenistan Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, and SCO Secretary-General Zhang Ming.

Russia’s bilaterals with many of these SCO+ actors were quite substantial.

India’s PM Modi did not go to Astana, sending FM Jaishankar, who maintains fabulous relations with Foreign Minister Lavrov. Modi was re-elected to his third term last month and is up to his neck working the domestic front, with his BJP now commanding a much narrower majority in Parliament. Next Monday he will be in Moscow – and will meet Putin.

Proverbial Divide and Rule hacks seized Modi’s no-show in Astana as proof of a serious India-China rift. Nonsense. Jaishankar, after a bilateral meeting with Wang Yi, stated – in a very Chinese metaphorical way – that “the three mutuals – mutual respect, mutual sensitivity and mutual interest – will guide our bilateral ties.”

That applies to their still unresolved border standoff; to the delicate balance New Delhi has to find to appease the Americans in their Indo-Pacific obsession (no one across Asia uses the term “Indo-Pacific”; it’s Asia-Pacific); and also relates to Indian aspirations when it comes to beinga leader of the Global South compared to China.

China does regard itself as part of the Global South. Wang Yiwei from Renmin University, the author of arguably the best book on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), argues that Beijing welcomes a “sense of identity” provided by the fact it represents the Global South and has been obliged to resist Washington’s hegemony and “deglobalisation” rhetoric.

The New Multi-Nodal Matrix

Astana once again revealed how the main drivers of the SCO are advancing fast on everything from energy cooperation to cross-border transportation corridors. Putin and Xi discussed progress in the construction of the massive Power of Siberia 2 gas pipeline as well as Central Asia’s need to have China as a provider of funds and technology to develop their economies.

China is now Kazakhstan’s largest trading partner (two-way trade at $41 billion, and counting). Crucially, when Xi met Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, he backed Astana’s bid to join BRICS+.

Tokayev was beaming: “Deepening friendly and strategic cooperation with China is an unswerving strategic priority for Kazakhstan.” And that means more projects under BRI.

Kazakhstan – which shares a border of more than 1,700 km with Xinjiang – is absolutely central on all these fronts: BRI, SCO, EAEU, soon BRICS and last but not least, the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route.

That’s the famous Middle Corridor linking China to Europe via Kazakhstan, the Caspian Sea, Georgia, Turkiye and the Black Sea.

Yes, this corridor skips Russia: the key reason is that Chinese and European traders are terrified of American secondary sanctions. Beijing, pragmatically, supports building this corridor as a BRI project since 2022. Xi and Tokayev actually opened what can also be called the China-Europe Trans-Caspian Express via video link; they saw the first Chinese trucks arriving on the road to a Kazakh Caspian Sea port.

Xi and Putin discussed the corridor, of course. Russia understands the Chinese constraints. And after all Russia-China trade uses its own – sanction-proof – corridors.

Once again, Divide and Rule hacks – oblivious to the obvious, not to mention finer points of Eurasia integration – resort to their same old dusty narrative: the Global South is fractured, China and Russia don’t see eye to eye on the role of the SCO, BRI and the EAEU. Nonsense, again.

All fronts are progressing in parallel. The SCO Development Bank was initially proposed by China. The Russian Ministry of Finance – which is a mammoth organization, with 10 vice-Ministers – was not so keen, on the grounds that Chinese capital would flood Central Asia. Now that’s changed, as Iran – which has strategic partnerships with both Russia and China – is quite enthusiastic.

The strategically important China-Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway – a BRI project – developed slowly, but now will be on overdrive, by a mutual Putin-Xi decision. Moscow knows that Beijing – fearing the sanctions tsunami – cannot use the Trans-Siberian as the main overland trade route to Europe.

So the new Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan railway is the solution, reducing the journey to Europe by 900km. Putin personally told Kyrgyz President Sadyr Japarov there’s no Russian opposition; on the contrary, Moscow fully supports interconnected projects launched by BRICS and/or financed by the EAEU.

It’s fascinating to watch the Russia-China dynamic in play at the heart of multilateral organizations such as the SCO. Moscow sees itself as a leader of the coming multipolar order even if it does not consider itself, technically, as a member of the Global South (Lavrov insists on “Global Majority”).

As for Russia’s “pivot to the East”, it actually started in the 2010s, even before Maidan in Kiev, when Moscow started to seriously consolidate relations with, well, the Global South.

It’s no wonder that now Moscow clearly sees the new evolving multi-nodal reality – SCO and SCO+, BRICS 10 and BRICS+, EAEU, ASEAN, INSTC, new trade settlement platforms, the new Eurasian security architecture – as the beating heart in the complex, long-term strategy of meticulously shattering the domination of Pax Americana.

Authored by Lawrence Kadish via The Gatestone Institute,

Democracy and American politics are chaotic, unpredictable, and a mystery to our enemies.

In response to the Biden-Trump presidential faceoff, the Russian media is having a field day, believing that our national conversation over the recent debate reflects democracy’s dry rot. Consider this quote….

The result “is good for us,” stated Dmitri Novikov, a Russian legislator, when being interviewed on state television.

“Destabilization inside an adversary is always a good thing.”

To paraphrase a line from a Warner Brothers character, “He doesn’t know us very well… do he…”

He certainly doesn’t know his history.

The Japanese looked at a raucous Congress in 1940 and discerned a democracy in disarray.

And then the vote to institute the draft was by a razor-thin majority, and the Japanese knew for sure this was a weak, indecisive nation incapable of responding to the might of their fierce Imperial military.

They would be forced to rethink that position as their delegation made its way to the USS Missouri to sign the instruments of surrender in Tokyo Harbor.

Hitler also viewed the United States as incapable of excelling at anything other than automobiles.

In declaring war on America in the wake of the Pearl Harbor attack, he viewed our nation as morally corrupt, riven by racial unrest, and fielding an army smaller than 17 other nations.

Contempt would be the least of his views about a nation that would ultimately accept the Third Reich’s unconditional surrender.

So now the Russians – and likely the Chinese – are looking at our chaotic presidential politics and the vociferous remarks made by political partisans on both sides, and making the same historic mistake committed by our earlier enemies.

They believe we are a nation that is slowly unraveling, making room for their despotic regimes to dominate the globe.

Not a chance.

This is democracy and this is what it looks like.

Raucous, gruff, and even divisive, something unimaginable in countries where freedom is punished with prison.

Or worse. And then, as we celebrate the Fourth of July, our nation comes together as Americans to celebrate not just our independence, but the role freedom has played in celebrating the spirit of mankind.

Enjoy the Fourth, my fellow Americans, for it will confound our enemies and give comfort to all those around the world currently enslaved and who cherish our nation as a beacon of hope.

Nothing says ‘Merica like supermarkets with automated vending machines stocked with ammunition. A select number of supermarkets across Alabama and Oklahoma have these new machines. This means you can leave the store with milk, eggs, and boxes of 9mm and .223 rounds. 

American Rounds installed AI-powered ammunition vending machines in several Alabama and Oklahoma supermarket stores. These vending machines are said to feature built-in AI technology, card scanning capability, and facial recognition software to verify that buyers are 21 or older and match the identity on the license. 

“Our automated ammo dispensers are accessible 24/7, ensuring that you can buy ammunition on your own schedule, free from the constraints of store hours and long lines,” American Rounds notes on its website. 

American Rounds shows six supermarkets, including two Fresh Value stores in Alabama and four Super C Mart stores in Oklahoma, have these new retail automated ammo dispensers. 

In an interview with Newsweek, Grants Magers, CEO of American Rounds, said that the company’s AI-powered ammunition vending machines have recently been expanded to eight across four states. 

“We have over 200 store requests for AARM [Automated Ammo Retail Machine] units covering approximately nine states currently and that number is growing daily,” Magers said. 

He continued by suggesting these vending machines support “law-abiding, responsible gun ownership, adding, “Currently ammunition is sold off the shelf or online. These environments lead to inadvertent sales to underaged purchasers and or, in the case of retail stores, a high theft rate.” 

Magers told local media outlet Oklahoma KOCO-TV that machines will have no ammo restrictions and are restocked weekly. 

Authored by Yuhong Dong M.D., Ph.D. via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

We’re not afraid of the tigers in the zoo because we trust they cannot attack. But what if someone opens the cage?

Many viruses are highly lethal in nature but cannot infect humans. Fear arises when these viruses break the species barrier.

This can happen naturally or through risky research practices, particularly gain-of-function (GOF) research.

What Is GOF?

Just as all substances have functions, specific genes enable viruses to spread rapidly or cause severe diseases. GOF research involves introducing new functioning genes into a virus, enhancing its ability to infect hosts or increasing its virulence.

There are at least three main types of new functions a virus can gain:

• Expanded Host Range GOF research can enable viruses to infect new species that they previously could not. This includes crossing the species barrier to infect humans, which poses significant risks for zoonotic outbreaks and potential pandemics. A 2015 Nature Medicine article provides a pertinent example. A bat-derived SARS-like coronavirus, initially noninfectious to humans, became capable of human infection after GOF studies at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).

• Enhanced Transmission GOF research can result in viruses gaining the ability to spread more efficiently between hosts. This includes changes that allow a virus to be transmitted through new routes or, more effectively, through existing ones. In 2012, GOF research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison significantly transformed the H5N1 bird flu virus. Initially non-airborne, the virus acquired the ability to transmit through the air, demonstrating the profound impact of GOF studies on viral capabilities.
• Increased Virulence Viruses can gain mutations that make them more virulent, meaning they can cause more severe diseases in infected hosts. This can involve an enhanced ability to evade the host’s immune system or increased replication rates within the host. A 2022 preprint paper shows researchers at Boston University created a lethal version of the Omicron variant.

GOF can also be used to generate positive traits in germs. For example, by adding a human insulin gene, a germ gains the new function of producing insulin.

GOF Research of Concern

Because viral genes are relatively easy to edit, GOF studies frequently involve viruses. However, some of these studies carry significant risks and can lead to dire consequences.

The U.S. National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB) defines GOF research of concern as “research that can be reasonably anticipated to generate a pathogen with pandemic potential,” characterized by two attributes:

1. Highly transmissible, with the potential to spread widely and uncontrollably among human populations
2. Highly virulent and likely to cause significant morbidity and/or loss of human life

If accidentally released from a lab into the general population, such pathogens could cause uncontrollable hazards. Additionally, the military application of GOF falls within the scope of bioweapon threats.

Methods of GOF research generally include genetic editing, which involves directly modifying a virus’ genes, and reassortment, which involves combining genetic material from different viral strains to create new variants.

In reality, the scope of GOF research can be much broader. Due to viral genes’ highly variable and adaptable nature, even routine culturing of viruses in cells or animals can lead to unexpected genetic alterations.

Double-Edged Sword

Scientists often conduct GOF research to understand the viruses and develop drugs or vaccines.

While these reasons may sound scientifically justified, the main debate centers on the risks versus the assumed benefits. GOF research can theoretically aid in studying viral mechanisms and provide insights for developing drugs or vaccines. However, the associated risks are significant, particularly the potential to generate dangerous pathogens.

A decade ago, two published studies on bird flu viruses were conducted by a U.S. lab and a Dutch lab, sparking significant discussion.

Both studies were designed to better understand how the viruses’ genes could be modified to make them more transmissible in mammals. The goal was to help people better prepare for a potential future pandemic.

Unexpectedly, after both groups of researchers separately edited the genes of a deadly H5N1 bird flu virus, they produced new strains capable of easily spreading via air droplets between mammals.

The edited virus could spread more easily among mammals and became easier to transmit to humans.

“Why would scientists deliberately create a form of the H5N1 avian influenza virus that is probably highly transmissible in humans?” This critical question was raised in a 2012 Nature article.

Subsequently, in October 2014, U.S. authorities announced a “pause” on funding for 18 GOF studies involving influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses.

The pause was short-lived. In 2018, the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Dutch Healthcare Authority approved funding for further GOF research, sparking another wave of objections. Harvard University epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch expressed concerns in a Science article, stating that scientists are being asked to “trust a completely opaque process where the outcome is to permit the continuation of dangerous experiments.”

Finally, after yielding to public pressure, investigators for the two research studies declined to renew the grants originally submitted for their GOF research. Consequently, such bird flu GOF studies were officially halted in the United States in 2020.

In the United States and most European countries, where scientists can express their opposing opinions, the development of GOF experiments faces multiple regulatory hurdles and ethical reviews.

However, in countries without these safeguards, the pursuit of GOF research could proceed unchecked, potentially putting the world at significant risk.

China’s Bird Flu GOF Research

Risky GOF studies on bird flu viruses in China have been underway since the 2010s.

In a study published in Science in May 2013, a group of scientists at Harbin Veterinary Research Institute in Harbin, China, conducted GOF research by combining the highly lethal but not easily transmissible H5N1 avian influenza virus, with the highly contagious H1N1 swine flu strain, which infected millions of people in 2009.

The resulting hybrid viruses were then tested for their ability to infect mammals, revealing the potential risks associated with such genetic manipulation of pathogens. This research underscored the dual-use nature of gain-of-function studies, highlighting both their potential to inform pandemic preparedness and the significant biosafety and biosecurity concerns they raise.

As a result, the researchers created a new, more virulent virus. An H5N1 hybrid strain, which integrated genes responsible for transmissibility from the H1N1 virus, acquired the capability to easily spread among guinea pigs through respiratory droplets.

In 2021, a collaborative project involving researchers from the United States, the United Kingdom, and China sought to enhance surveillance and vaccine development. While not explicitly labeled as a GOF study, these experiments conducted in a Chinese laboratory involved genetic modifications typical of GOF research.

The experiments used a routine viral laboratory research approach known as “serial passage,” which involves growing the virus from one cell or animal model to another. Viral mutations with greater transmissibility or pathogenicity can often be selected during this process. The animal models were also carefully chosen to reproduce the virus for specific research purposes. We’ve explained this in detail in a previous article.

Nonetheless, the most widely known GOF studies conducted in China involve research on coronaviruses.

Breaking the Barrier

Bats are known carriers or natural reservoirs of many viruses. Bat-hosting coronaviruses typically only infect bats or wild animals, not humans. However, this situation has changed with the advent of GOF research.

In 2015, a team of Chinese scientists conducted GOF studies on a bat coronavirus at the WIV, which is affiliated with the Chinese Academy of Sciences and under the administration and control of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

In this study, the researchers took the gene for spike protein—the spike-shaped structure on the surface of a virus—from a bat SARS-like virus and inserted it into the backbone of a SARS virus, the virus that caused the first pandemic of this century.

The newly created SARS-like virus, coded as SCH-014-MA15, could infect human airway cells and achieve a transmission similar to the SARS virus. It also gained the ability to infect mammals like mice and successfully cause lung diseases.

The WIV has also conducted other GOF research on bat SARS-like viruses with effective results.

According to a leaked 2014 NIH report, WIV researchers experimented on a natural bat coronavirus capable of binding with human ACE2 receptors, significantly increasing its potency. They used this bat virus to engineer three new chimeric coronaviruses.

The results showed that in the lungs of mice, these newly created coronaviruses produced far more virus particles—up to 10,000 times higher than the original virus.

Read more here…

Hurricanes are a fact of life for people living along America’s Atlantic Coast. Of course, the risk of a hurricane making landfall varies depending where people live along that expansive coastline.

This infographic, via Visual Capitalist’s Nick Routley, uses data from the Tropical Cyclone Impact Probabilities database at Colorado State University to show county-level risk (the red parts) of a hurricane impact, along with population centers along the coast (the spikes).

Potential Hurricane Hotspots

While a hurricane can make landfall anywhere along the coast, there are places where the probability of that happening is higher in 2024.

Below is the full list of counties and states, which includes other countries in North America as well, including Mexico (which, at the time of publishing, is being battered by Hurricane Beryl).

State	County	Hurricanes (1880-2020)	Avg Probability of Hurricane Impact (2024)
Alabama		46	43%
Alabama	Baldwin	28	29%
Alabama	Mobile	28	29%
Connecticut		11	13%
Connecticut	Fairfield	9	10%
Connecticut	Middlesex	10	11%
Connecticut	New Haven	11	13%
Connecticut	New London	10	11%
Delaware		9	10%
Delaware	Kent	4	5%
Delaware	New Castle	1	1%
Delaware	Sussex	9	10%
Florida		115	75%
Florida	Bay	26	27%
Florida	Brevard	26	27%
Florida	Broward	36	35%
Florida	Charlotte	26	27%
Florida	Citrus	26	27%
Florida	Collier	34	34%
Florida	Dixie	19	21%
Florida	Duval	22	23%
Florida	Escambia	27	28%
Florida	Flagler	22	23%
Florida	Franklin	21	23%
Florida	Gulf	23	24%
Florida	Hernando	26	27%
Florida	Hillsborough	27	28%
Florida	Indian River	26	27%
Florida	Jefferson	14	16%
Florida	Lee	28	29%
Florida	Levy	22	23%
Florida	Manatee	28	29%
Florida	Martin	27	28%
Florida	Miami-Dade	37	36%
Florida	Monroe	50	46%
Florida	Nassau	20	22%
Florida	Okaloosa	24	25%
Florida	Palm Beach	34	34%
Florida	Pasco	26	27%
Florida	Pinellas	26	27%
Florida	Santa Rosa	25	26%
Florida	Sarasota	26	27%
Florida	St. Johns	23	24%
Florida	St. Lucie	23	24%
Florida	Taylor	16	18%
Florida	Volusia	26	27%
Florida	Wakulla	18	20%
Florida	Walton	26	27%
Georgia		51	46%
Georgia	Bryan	21	23%
Georgia	Camden	18	20%
Georgia	Chatham	22	23%
Georgia	Glynn	15	17%
Georgia	Liberty	22	23%
Georgia	McIntosh	21	23%
Louisiana		68	56%
Louisiana	Cameron	23	24%
Louisiana	Iberia	25	26%
Louisiana	Jefferson	30	31%
Louisiana	Lafourche	33	33%
Louisiana	Orleans	23	24%
Louisiana	Plaquemines	35	35%
Louisiana	St. Bernard	33	33%
Louisiana	St. Mary	27	28%
Louisiana	St. Tammany	24	25%
Louisiana	Terrebonne	34	34%
Louisiana	Vermilion	24	25%
Maine		10	11%
Maine	Cumberland	3	4%
Maine	Hancock	6	7%
Maine	Knox	6	7%
Maine	Lincoln	3	4%
Maine	Sagadahoc	3	4%
Maine	Waldo	3	4%
Maine	Washington	6	7%
Maine	York	5	6%
Maryland		16	18%
Maryland	Anne Arundel	1	1%
Maryland	Baltimore	1	1%
Maryland	Baltimore City	1	1%
Maryland	Calvert	2	2%
Maryland	Cecil	1	1%
Maryland	Dorchester	5	6%
Maryland	Harford	0	0%
Maryland	Kent	0	0%
Maryland	Queen Anne’s	1	1%
Maryland	Somerset	9	10%
Maryland	St. Mary’s	3	4%
Maryland	Talbot	1	1%
Maryland	Wicomico	6	7%
Maryland	Worcester	13	15%
Massachusetts		22	23%
Massachusetts	Barnstable	13	15%
Massachusetts	Dukes	11	13%
Massachusetts	Essex	7	8%
Massachusetts	Nantucket	14	16%
Massachusetts	Norfolk	7	8%
Massachusetts	Plymouth	10	11%
Massachusetts	Suffolk	7	8%
Mississippi		47	43%
Mississippi	Hancock	22	23%
Mississippi	Harrison	26	27%
Mississippi	Jackson	24	25%
New Hampshire		8	9%
New Hampshire	Rockingham	5	6%
New Jersey		10	11%
New Jersey	Atlantic	10	11%
New Jersey	Burlington	8	9%
New Jersey	Cape May	10	11%
New Jersey	Essex	4	5%
New Jersey	Hudson	4	5%
New Jersey	Middlesex	5	6%
New Jersey	Monmouth	9	10%
New Jersey	Ocean	10	11%
New Jersey	Salem	2	2%
New Jersey	Union	4	5%
New York		14	16%
New York	Bronx	7	8%
New York	Kings	6	7%
New York	Nassau	8	9%
New York	New York	9	10%
New York	Queens	8	9%
New York	Richmond	7	8%
New York	Suffolk	12	14%
New York	Westchester	7	8%
North Carolina		68	56%
North Carolina	Beaufort	22	23%
North Carolina	Bertie	15	17%
North Carolina	Brunswick	32	32%
North Carolina	Camden	20	22%
North Carolina	Carteret	46	43%
North Carolina	Chowan	17	19%
North Carolina	Craven	31	31%
North Carolina	Currituck	22	23%
North Carolina	Dare	45	42%
North Carolina	Gates	12	14%
North Carolina	Hertford	11	13%
North Carolina	Hyde	45	42%
North Carolina	New Hanover	32	32%
North Carolina	Onslow	35	35%
North Carolina	Pamlico	31	31%
North Carolina	Pasquotank	19	21%
North Carolina	Pender	35	35%
North Carolina	Perquimans	18	20%
North Carolina	Tyrrell	26	27%
North Carolina	Washington	19	21%
Rhode Island		11	13%
Rhode Island	Bristol	8	9%
Rhode Island	Kent	8	9%
Rhode Island	Newport	10	11%
Rhode Island	Providence	9	10%
Rhode Island	Washington/South	9	10%
South Carolina		48	44%
South Carolina	Beaufort	22	23%
South Carolina	Charleston	33	33%
South Carolina	Colleton	26	27%
South Carolina	Georgetown	27	28%
South Carolina	Horry	32	32%
South Carolina	Jasper	21	23%
Texas		64	54%
Texas	Aransas	16	18%
Texas	Brazoria	25	26%
Texas	Calhoun	20	22%
Texas	Cameron	20	22%
Texas	Chambers	24	25%
Texas	Galveston	29	30%
Texas	Harris	24	25%
Texas	Jefferson	25	26%
Texas	Kenedy	21	23%
Texas	Kleberg	19	21%
Texas	Matagorda	27	28%
Texas	Nueces	21	23%
Texas	Refugio	14	16%
Texas	San Patricio	17	19%
Texas	Willacy	19	21%
Virginia		31	31%
Virginia	Accomack	13	15%
Virginia	Gloucester	7	8%
Virginia	Hampton	12	14%
Virginia	Lancaster	5	6%
Virginia	Mathews	7	8%
Virginia	Middlesex	5	6%
Virginia	Newport News	8	9%
Virginia	Norfolk	12	14%
Virginia	Northampton	13	15%
Virginia	Northumberland	5	6%
Virginia	Poquoson	9	10%
Virginia	Portsmouth	10	11%
Virginia	Suffolk	11	13%
Virginia	Virginia Beach	18	20%
Virginia	York	9	10%
Canada		48	44%
New Brunswick		11	13%
Newfoundland and Labrador		24	25%
Nova Scotia		44	41%
Prince Edward Island		9	10%
Mexico		83	64%
Campeche		33	33%
Quintana Roo		57	50%
Tabasco		8	9%
Tamaulipas		43	41%
Veracruz		32	32%
Yucatan		43	41%
Anguilla		28	29%
Antigua and Barbuda		23	24%
Aruba		7	8%
Bahamas, The		106	72%
Barbados		9	10%
Belize		30	31%
Bermuda		42	40%
Bonaire		5	6%
Cabo Verde		4	5%
Cayman Islands		37	36%
Costa Rica		3	4%
Cuba		102	71%
Curacao		6	7%
Dominica		21	23%
Dominican Republic		61	52%
Grenada		10	11%
Guadeloupe		28	29%
Guatemala		23	24%
Haiti		42	40%
Honduras		46	43%
Jamaica		36	35%
Martinique		17	19%
Montserrat		22	23%
Nicaragua		25	26%
Panama		1	1%
Puerto Rico		38	37%
Saba		23	24%
Saint Kitts and Nevis		32	32%
Saint Lucia		15	17%
Saint Martin		23	24%
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines		13	15%
Sint Eustatius		23	24%
Sint Maarten		23	24%
Trinidad and Tobago		3	4%
Turks and Caicos		32	32%
UK Virgin Islands		35	35%
US Virgin Islands		30	31%

The counties that make up the southern tip of Florida have the highest risk of a major hurricane impact. Monroe County, which includes Key West, has a 46% chance of a hurricane impact, and a 27% chance of a major hurricane impact.

Another potential hurricane hotspot is the Outer Banks region of North Carolina. Three counties that include the Outer Banks find themselves in the top five ranking for hurricane impact risk. Unlike Florida though, the risk of a major hurricane impact is much lower.

The three counties along the coast near Houston, Texas, have between 25–30% risk of a hurricane impact. Galveston is no stranger to hurricane activity. The constant threat of storms making impact was one reason Houston—which is further inland—grew to be the much bigger city.

Authored by Sophie Li via The Epoch Times,

California voters will decide on 10 ballot measures in November, addressing a wide range of issues including the minimum wage, rent control, public safety, taxes, education, and health care.

Each of the initiatives – including three state constitutional amendments and two multibillion-dollar bonds – will need approval from at least 50 percent of voters to pass.

State Constitutional Amendments

Prop. 3: Marriage Equality (ACA 5)

The California Constitution currently states that only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized in the state, but federal law prevents the enforcement of this provision.

A yes vote on this ballot measure means removing this state constitutional rule and establishing marriage as a fundamental right for all individuals.

Prop. 5: Local Taxes to Fund Housing (ACA 1)

This state constitutional amendment, if approved, will make it easier for local governments to approve bonds and special taxes for affordable housing and public infrastructure projects.

A yes vote means the threshold to pass such bonds and taxes would reduce from a two-thirds supermajority to 55 percent.

Prop. 6: Ban Slavery (ACA 8)

A yes vote on this state constitutional amendment would ban forced prison labor by abolishing slavery in any form.

It specifically targets various labor practices involving prison inmates, citing that many are compelled to work in roles such as firefighting and road paving.

The measure would additionally prevent the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation from punishing inmates who refuse to work. It also clarifies the department can still give credits—which can help advance the release date or parole hearing date, depending on the sentence—to inmates who choose to work voluntarily.

Bonds

Prop. 2: Education Bond

Voters will weigh in on a $10 billion education bond designed to allocate state funds for the renovation of school buildings that are 75 years old or older. Additionally, the bond will finance testing and remediation efforts for lead contamination in school water systems.

Should this measure be approved, it would be the first voter-sanctioned education construction bond since Proposition 51 in 2016, which authorized $7 billion for the construction and repair of public school facilities in California.

Prop. 4: Climate Bond

Voters will decide on a $10 billion bond aimed at prioritizing safe and affordable drinking water, wildfire prevention, extreme heat mitigation, sustainable agriculture, and clean, renewable energy.

The proposed bond would allocate at least 40 percent of the $10 billion to disadvantaged communities.

If approved, it will mark the largest climate investment ever made by California and the most substantial climate measure approved by voters in the United States.

Other Ballot Initiatives

Prop. 32: Minimum Wage

Under the Living Wage Act, the state’s minimum wage increased to $16 earlier this year and will rise to $17 in January for businesses with more than 25 employees.

A yes vote on the proposed ballot measure means the minimum wage will continue increasing to $18 in January 2025. Employers with fewer than 25 workers would increase from $16 to $17 in 2025 and then $18 in 2026.

If passed, California’s minimum wage will be the highest in the nation, surpassing the $17 minimum wage of the District of Columbia.

Prop. 33: Rent Control

The proposed measure, titled Justice for Renters Act, seeks to repeal the nearly three-decades-old Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which prevents local governments from setting rent caps on housing built after 1995 and single-family homes.

A yes vote means the local governments will have more authority to regulate rental rates and to expand rent control to properties that were previously exempt.

This marks the third attempt to implement rent limits in California since the state’s Rental Housing Act’s passage in 1995. Similar initiatives in 2018 and 2020 both failed to pass.

Prop. 34: Direct Patient Care

A yes vote on this initiative means certain healthcare providers must spend 98 percent of revenue from a 2000 federal prescription drug discount program on direct patient care. The law, if passed, will apply to providers that spent over $100 million in any 10-year period on anything other than direct patient care, and operated multifamily housing with more than 500 severe violations, according to the ballot summary.

It also permanently authorizes the state to negotiate Medi-Cal drug prices for the whole state, the summary says.

The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that enforcing the measure could increase state government costs by millions annually, due to compliance and enforcement.

Prop. 35: Tax on Medi-Cal Insurance Providers

A yes vote means a current tax on health care insurance providers, originally set to expire in 2026, will be extended indefinitely to fund health care for those covered by the Medi-Cal program.

It also mandates that the tax revenues—collected on monthly enrollments—must only be used for specific Medi-Cal services like primary and specialty care, emergency services, family planning, mental health care, and prescription drugs.

Prop. 36: Reform Prop. 47

Initially passed by voters in 2014, Proposition 47 aimed to lower prison populations by downgrading some felony theft and drug crimes to misdemeanors. Ten years later, Prop. 47 returns to the ballot for voters to decide whether to reform the law amid heightened concerns about public safety across the state.

A yes vote on the reform proposal means strengthening penalties for repeat offenders and allowing prosecutors to charge felonies for certain drug and theft crimes.

The initiative also encourages offenders to join drug rehabilitation programs to avoid prison sentences.

On July 1, Gov. Gavin Newsom and state lawmakers introduced a competing ballot measure that also aims to reform Prop. 47, more moderately. However, he backed out at the last minute and withdrew the effort.

Removed From Ballot

Five initiatives were recently pulled from the ballot due to repetitive bills, moot bills, or compromises in the Legislature, and one because of concern about the costliness of advertising the initiative due to the crowded list of measures now qualified for the ballot.

The initiatives covered such topics as low-income housing projects, tax increases, personal finance courses for high schoolers, workplace justice, and child health care.

A voting threshold initiative, ACA 13, was moved to November 2026.

A new report warns that “the world entered an age of overlapping emergencies” and indicates the need for a new stabilization approach involving a buffer system to mitigate price volatility in essential commodities to promote economic stability and growth. 

“The neoliberal stabilization paradigm of interest rate hikes and austerity left economies around the world unprepared for the shocks to essentials experienced in the overlapping emergencies of war, conflict, climate change, and pandemic,” the lead author, Isabella Weber, of the University of Massachusetts Amherst, wrote in the report. 

Weber said, “More regular supply shocks are likely for food. Extreme weather events are predicted to be frequent and have already affected regional agricultural yields.” 

“We argue that in an age of overlapping emergencies, such a new paradigm requires a refocusing on stabilization policies for essential sectors that have the potential to unleash systemic instabilities when hit by shocks,” she wrote, adding, “We revisit the classic case for public buffer stock systems.”

She noted, “Price volatility in essential commodities can lead to sellers’ inflation because of the interaction with administered prices in the industrial sector and can hamper growth and development prospects.” 

Separately, Bloomberg reported that Norway has initiated a plan to increase its domestic grain stockpiles.

“This is about being prepared for the unthinkable,” Finance Minister Trygve Slagsvold Vedum said last week. 

Norway plans to shield its citizens from commodity price spikes by storing up to 82,500 tons of state-owned grains at private companies. This buffer system will protect citizens for about three months and will be fully operational in 2029. 

The latest data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) shows global food prices increased for the third consecutive month in May.

The FAO Food Price Index on a year-over-year change shows that price acceleration could resume in the near future. 

“Countries are getting more and more nervous,” Chris Hegadorn, adjunct professor of global food politics at Sciences Po in Paris, told Bloomberg. 

Hegadorn said, “Price volatility continues to be a major problem that countries are looking for extra security.”

It’s not just countries that are nervous about another food price spike…

Let’s not forget that elevated food inflation crushes the working poor, leaving governments more suitable to food riots.

Food inflation will by stick this decade. Get use to high supermarket prices.