Transitioning Fleet Trucks To Electric Raises Costs By Up To 114 Percent, Report Warns

Transitioning Fleet Trucks To Electric Raises Costs By Up To 114 Percent, Report Warns

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Transitioning conventional truck fleets to electric vehicles (EVs) pushes up annual operational costs, which subsequently increases economic inflation, according to a recent report from transportation and logistics firm Ryder.

Florida-based Ryder analyzed the potential cost of transportation if internal combustion engine trucks are converted to EVs. There is a 5 percent cost increase for light-duty EVs and a 94–114 percent increase for heavy-duty trucks, the May 8 report states. For a fleet of 25 mixed vehicles—light-, medium-, and heavy-duty trucks—costs surge by 56–67 percent.

As transportation costs have a direct bearing on the price of goods sold in markets across the country, Ryder estimates such increases to eventually add about 0.5–1 percent to overall price inflation in the economy.

There are specific applications where EV adoption makes sense today, but the use cases are still limited. Yet we’re facing regulations aimed at accelerating broader EV adoption when the technology and infrastructure are still developing,” said Karen Jones, executive vice president and head of new product development for Ryder.

“Until the gap in TCT [total cost to transport] for heavier duty vehicles is narrowed or closed, we cannot expect many companies to make the transition; and, if required to convert in today’s market, we face more supply chain disruptions, transportation cost increases, and additional inflationary pressure.”

In California, the annual TCT increase for a heavy-duty EV tractor was approximately $315,000, with the number rising to more than $330,000 in Georgia. In both cases, equipment costs were the biggest contributor to the increase, rising by 500 percent.

Ryder noted there were 16.4 million Class 3 to Class 8 commercial vehicles in operation in the United States, out of which only an estimated 18,000 EVs have been deployed.

“Therefore, if companies are required to convert to EVs in the near future, availability and production of EVs may be far less than the vehicles needed to run America’s supply chains,” the report states.

The report points to a statement made by Clean Freight Coalition (CFC) that there is currently no network in the United States where truck drivers can take rest breaks and charge their EV batteries at the same time.

CFC estimates that electrifying the United States’ current commercial vehicle fleet would necessitate a $1 trillion investment.

Moreover, the International Council on Clean Transportation calculates that almost 700,000 chargers will be required to accommodate the 1 million Class 4, 6, and 8 electric trucks expected to be deployed by 2030. This alone will consume 140,000 megawatts of electricity per day, which is equivalent to the daily electricity needs of roughly 5 million U.S. homes.

Ryder’s analysis underscores the reasons EV adoption for commercial vehicles remains in its infancy. In addition to the limited support infrastructure and EV availability, the business case for converting to EV for most payload and mileage applications, is extremely challenging,” the report reads.

Robert Sanchez, chairman and CEO of Ryder, said that although the company is actively deploying EVs and charging infrastructure, it has not seen any “significant adoption” of this technology.

“For many of our customers, the business case for converting to EV technology just isn’t there yet, given the limitations of the technology and lack of sufficient charging infrastructure,” he said.

Stuttering EV Adoption

The Ryder report comes as the Biden administration announced last month that it plans to spend nearly $1.5 billion to make the U.S. freight industry “zero-emissions.”

As part of the program, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will offer $1 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act to cities and states “to replace Class 6 and Class 7 heavy-duty vehicles—which include school buses, trash trucks, and delivery trucks—with zero-emissions vehicles,” the White House said.

“Freight movement continues to represent a significant share of local air pollution, increasing the risk of asthma, heart disease, hospitalization, and other adverse health outcomes for the millions of Americans, especially overburdened communities, who live and work near highways, ports, railyards, warehouses, and other freight routes,” it stated.

The goal to transition to a zero-emissions freight sector “will prioritize actions to address air pollution hot spots and tackle the climate crisis, mobilizing a broad range of government resources, and reflect public participation and meaningful community engagement, furthering the President’s commitment to environmental justice for all.”

A recent report from consulting firm Roland Berger noted that full electrification of the U.S. commercial truck fleet would be an expensive affair. The cost of new electric trucks is twice or three times that of their diesel equivalents. A diesel Class 8 truck costs about $180,000, and a battery-electric truck costs more than $400,000.

Earlier, the EPA finalized the “strongest ever” greenhouse gas standards for heavy-duty vehicles, a move that attracted strong criticism from trucking organizations.

The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association called the standards an “assault on small-business truck drivers,” who make up 96 percent of commercial motor carriers.

On April 30, Nick Nigro, the founder of Atlas Public Policy, testified at a House hearing on fleet electrification efforts, supporting such initiatives. He insisted that such a transition is crucial to protect people’s health.

“We aren’t just racing against foreign nations to lead the development of 21st-century vehicle technology,“ he said. ”We’re also in a race to mitigate the worst effects of climate change on the planet and tailpipe pollution on human health.”

The American Lung Association estimates that transitioning to zero-emission trucks could result in $735 billion in public health benefits by 2050, he noted.

In his testimony at the hearing, Taki Darakos, the vice president of vehicle maintenance and fleet service at PITT OHIO, raised concerns about the high costs involved in electrifying fleets.

The upfront costs of zero-emission vehicles (ZEV) “are much higher than their diesel equivalent, making it difficult for fleets to embrace electrification until they see meaningful year-over-year upfront purchase price declines.”

The company incorporated some EVs in its fleet, and Mr. Darakos said: “Increased vehicle weight from the batteries reduced our payload and limited our usage of haul. These limitations have impacted the company’s timeline on how and when to transition to ZEV.”

The American Transportation Research Institute estimated that electrifying the entire vehicle fleet in the United States will consume 40 percent of the United States’ existing electricity generation while requiring a 14 percent overall increase in energy generation.

“Yet our aging grid can hardly meet current demands,“ Mr. Darakos said. ”In California, where rolling blackouts and brownouts are not uncommon, utilities would need to generate an additional 57 percent beyond their current output to support an electric vehicle fleet.”

He pointed out that a truck driver can refuel a new diesel truck within 15 minutes for a journey of up to 1,200 miles. However, charging an EV truck for two hours provides a range of only about 200 miles.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 05/14/2024 – 05:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/OcfGNJy Tyler Durden

The Tide Turns: Research On COVID Vaccine Harms, Once A Taboo Subject, Now Appearing In Some Medical Journals

The Tide Turns: Research On COVID Vaccine Harms, Once A Taboo Subject, Now Appearing In Some Medical Journals

Authored by Joe Wang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

When COVID-19 took the world by storm in early 2020, I mostly relied on reading Nature Medicine, The Lancet, and a few other medical journals to learn the latest on this new disease.

A health care worker fills a syringe with COVID-19 vaccine in a file image. (Robyn Beck/AFP via Getty Images)

In March 2020, I read an article published in Nature Medicine titled “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2” with great interest. Written by California-based Scripps Institute’s Kristian Andersen and four other well-known professors, it said SARS-CoV-2 binds to human cells much better than any computer programs predicted, and concluded that “SARS-CoV-2 is not the product of purposeful manipulation.”

Having been a scientist with the world’s largest vaccine company for more than 10 years, I took issue with this claim.

In a May 2022 commentary titled “Pandemic Lessons Learned: Scientific Debate Silenced, With Deadly Consequences” I wrote: “If SARS-CoV-2 infects people better than your computer predicts, then the only conclusion you can draw is that your computer sucks. How did these world-renowned scientists get the basic logic so wrong? And how did the prestigious publication Nature Medicine not catch that? Did anyone even read the paper before publishing it, not to mention peer review it?”

The Andersen article’s conclusion, as it turned out, was a complete flip-flop on Andersen’s Jan. 31, 2020, email to Dr. Anthony Fauci, then the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), in which he wrote that “some of the features (potentially) look engineered,” referring to the coronavirus.

The Fauci emails were made public in June 2021 via Freedom of Information Act requests.

Nevertheless, the Nature Medicine paper became the authority on the origin of COVID. It essentially excluded the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and Dr. Fauci from any responsibility for the emergence of the virus. Any attempts to investigate or explore other possibilities were labelled conspiracy theories.

Andersen, and the article itself, were the subject of a U.S. Congressional Hearing by the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic in June 2023. The debate on how COVID originated is still ongoing today.

The Lancet and the Daszak Statement

Andersen and Nature Medicine weren’t the only ones trying to please the CCP and Fauci.

On Feb. 18, 2020, The Lancet, another top medical journal, published a political statement with no science in it. It was organized by Peter Daszak from EcoHealth Alliance, which was the middleman for channeling Fauci’s National Institutes of Health (NIH) funds to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, according to a U.S. Congress report released on May 1 of this year.

The Daszak et al. statement dismissed as a conspiracy theory any suggestion that COVID was not of natural origin.

“We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin,” they wrote. “Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardize our global collaboration in the fight against this virus.”

The Tune Is Set

The Daszak statement, along with the Andersen article, set the tune for the officially accepted narrative. The narrative then expanded from “a natural origin of the virus” to “a COVID vaccine will flatten the curve and save the world.” Scientists, doctors, and journal editors who dared to challenge the narrative were cancelled and/or labelled conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers.

It has been four years and six months since the world first encountered SARS-CoV-2. Despite the claims by famous scientists like Fauci and Andersen, and despite the countless efforts by top virologists and public health professionals, evidence that the virus originated naturally has not been found.

More and more people now believe that the virus was leaked or escaped from a laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which has been doing gain-of-function research on coronaviruses, and published such research in Nature Medicine in 2015, with NIH funding acknowledged.

The lab origin is no longer a conspiracy theory. The U.S. Energy Department and the FBI both now believe that the virus was more likely leaked from a lab than having developed naturally.

Encouraging Developments

Since the pandemic, The Epoch Times and NTD have been publishing documentary films on COVID origin and vaccine injuries. The first such documentary, Joshua Philipp’s “Tracking Down the Origin of the Wuhan Coronavirus,” was viewed over 100 million times on different platforms combined. However, such reports are rarely seen in other legacy media.

It has also been a taboo subject for scientific research and publication, but that may be starting to change.

Recently, I wrote a commentary about a new paper by five Japanese scientists that was published on Cureus, a peer-reviewed medical journal owned by the Springer Nature Group, the same company that owns Nature and Nature Medicine.

The scientists analyzed data collected from the entire 123 million Japanese population and concluded that the majority of the 115,799 excess deaths in 2022 was not due to COVID infection but rather vaccination, in particular the third COVID shot.

I was pleasantly surprised that a once-taboo subject was now published in a peer-reviewed medical journal, especially a member journal of the Springer Nature Group.

In another positive development, this month the International Journal of Biological Macromolecules (IJBM) published a paper titled “Review: N1-methyl-pseudouridine: Friend or foe of cancer?” linking a key ingredient in the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine with cancer development.

IJBM is owned by the Dutch academic publishing company Elsevier, which also owns renowned publications like The Lancet, Cell, and ScienceDirect.

May the Force Be With the Editors-in-Chief

In the spring of 2022, when more scientists started to challenge the accepted narratives and seek the truth, I co-wrote the commentary “May the Force Be With Them: Scientists Fight Back.”

At that time, these brave scientists needed all the help they could get. For example, when a journal published a well-researched, well-written, and fact-based scientific paper on the safety concerns of the mRNA vaccines, the editor-in-chief of that journal was ousted.

The journal was Food and Chemical Toxicology, another Elsevier publication, and the editor-in-chief was Dr. José Luis Domingo.

Two years later, I’m optimistic that the IJBM editors-in-chief won’t face the same treatment as Dr. Domingo.

Why? I believe the tide has turned.

A recent New York Times article on COVID vaccine injuries is also an encouraging sign. It cites the Food and Drug Administration’s former acting commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock as saying the injuries are “serious” and “life-changing,” and “should be taken seriously.”

“I’m disappointed in myself,” she added. “I did a lot of things I feel very good about, but this is one of the few things I feel I just didn’t bring it home.”

Among the reported injured is the editor-in-chief of the journal Vaccine, Dr. Gregory Poland. He has been suffering from tinnitus since his first shot. The Centers for Disease Control didn’t take his report on his personal experience seriously. He told the NY Times that he did not “get any sense of movement (from the CDC).”

“If they have done studies (on vaccine injury), those studies should be published,” Dr. Poland added.

The journal Vaccine is also an Elsevier publication, and as the editor-in-chief, Dr. Poland is well positioned to offer his encouragement on vaccine injury studies.

Yes, I believe the tide has turned.

However, as of today, the Daszak statement is still on The Lancet website and the Andersen paper is still on Nature Medicine.

I wonder when the Lancet and Nature Medicine will have the courage to retract them? And when will these two eminent journals start publishing research on COVID vaccine injuries?

References:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/pandemic-lessons-learned-scientifi…

https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/new-email-reveals-what-fauci-knew…

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2021/tony-fauci-ema…

https://www.scripps.edu/news-and-events/press-room/2023/20230404-anders…

https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-to-hold-hearing-with-proxi…

https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0140-6736%2820%2930418-9

https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2024.05.01-SSCP-…

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/expert-on-aluminum-toxicity-forced…

https://www.theepochtimes.com/author/aaron-kheriaty

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/editor-in-chief-of-renowned-scienc…

https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-origin-china-lab-leak-807b7b0a

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/28/politics/wray-fbi-covid-origins-lab-chin…

https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv?utm_source=epochtv

https://www.ntd.com/

https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/the-unseen-crisis-vaccine-stories…

https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/documentary-tracking-down-the-ori…

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/joe-wang-japans-excess-deaths-hit-…

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9012513/

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 05/14/2024 – 05:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/VfqU2X4 Tyler Durden

Mapping All The Countries Where Recreational Cannabis Is Legal

Mapping All The Countries Where Recreational Cannabis Is Legal

In 2024, Germany became the third European Union country to legalize cannabis for personal use, following Malta and Luxembourg.

Here, Visual Capitalist’s Bruno Venditti maps the countries where recreational cannabis use is allowed as of April 2024, based on data from Wikipedia.

Limited to Few Countries

In total, only nine countries have legalized recreational cannabis use nationwide. However, just a few of them have licensed sales.

At the federal level, cannabis is still considered an illegal substance in the United States. That said, individual states do have the right to determine their laws around cannabis sales and usage. Currently, cannabis is allowed in 24 states, 3 territories, and the District of Columbia.

Interestingly, the oldest legal text concerning cannabis dates back to the 1600s—when the colony of Virginia required every farm to grow and produce hemp.

Since then, cannabis use was fairly widespread until the 1930s when the Marihuana Tax Act was enforced, prohibiting marijuana federally but still technically allowing for medical use.

Today, the U.S. cannabis market is a $30 billion business. By the end of the decade, that number is expected to be anywhere from $58 billion to as much as $72 billion.

Similar to the U.S., Australia does not allow the use at the national level, but cannabis can be used legally in the Australian Capital Territory, which includes the capital Canberra.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 05/14/2024 – 04:15

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/L1nEu4S Tyler Durden

Poland’s Border Fortification Buildup Has Nothing To Do With Legitimate Threat Perceptions

Poland’s Border Fortification Buildup Has Nothing To Do With Legitimate Threat Perceptions

Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

Polish Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz announced last week that his country will build bunkers and trenches along its border with Russia and Belarus, which was followed by Prime Minister Donald Tusk confirming that security will be bolstered, including on anti-illegal immigrant pretexts.

The reality though is that this development has nothing to do with legitimate threat perceptions since Russia isn’t going to invade Poland while Tusk’s liberal-globalist coalition government favors illegal immigrants.

The premier has sought to appeal to Polish patriotism since January in order to distract from his country’s domestic political crisis and its comprehensive subordination to Germany under his rule. To that end, he’s hyped up the Ukrainian cause in parallel with fearmongering about World War III, which he predicts could happen through an impending Russian invasion of NATO. What he always dishonestly ignores, however, is that the US has repeatedly reaffirmed its ironclad commitment to Article 5.

Moving along to debunking the illegal immigrant aspect of his justification for Poland’s border buildup, Sejm Speaker Szymon Holownia posed with an illegal immigrant who infiltrated Poland from Belarus under the guise of being a “refugee” during a January photo-op inside the parliamentary chambers. This attitude aligns with his coalition government’s liberal-globalist “values”, which are sold to the public in this context as a means for replacing its aging population and thus keeping the economy competitive.

To be sure, the previous conservative-nationalist government was also hypocritical with respect to the reasons behind its own border buildup, having also dishonestly ignored the US’ commitment to Article 5 and being responsible for legally bringing in 250,000 civilizationally dissimilar migrants to Poland. The first simply saw it hype up the Russian threat like Tusk is doing, while the second concerned the scandal that broke out last summer before the elections and was cynically capitalized upon by the opposition.  

Back to the incumbent government, they hope to rally patriotic Poles behind their leadership as the military-strategic situation continues worsening for the West in Ukraine, with the supplementary objective being to distract some of them from its enthusiastic embrace of illegal immigrants. By pretending to prioritize national defense in spite of surrendering large swaths of Polish sovereignty in this respect to the Anglo-American Axis and Germany, Tusk expects to defuse growing dissent at home.

He might also want to precondition the public for the possibility of Poland conventionally intervening in Ukraine, whether unilaterally or together with France and others in a “coalition of the willing”, with the innuendo that it would be driven by national security purposes intended to defend Poland from Russia. It’s premature to say with certainty whether that’ll happen, but it nevertheless can’t be ruled out after Tusk himself just admitted that NATO troops are already there, albeit supposedly in non-combat roles. 

All that can be known for sure is that the justification behind Poland’s latest border buildup, which continues the process that was hypocritically begun by the incumbent liberal-globalist government’s conservative-nationalist predecessor, has nothing to do with legitimate threat perceptions. False pretexts are being concocted to justify these massive investments of a largely, but not entirely, symbolic nature mostly aimed at dishonestly advancing a domestic political agenda.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 05/14/2024 – 03:30

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/OIec5gq Tyler Durden

US Says Putin’s Dramatic Cabinet Reshuffle Smacks Of ‘Desperation’

US Says Putin’s Dramatic Cabinet Reshuffle Smacks Of ‘Desperation’

The Biden administration has reacted to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s significant cabinet shake-up announced Sunday, wherein Putin tapped Andrey Belousov, a former deputy prime minister who specializes in economics, to move into the position of defense minister. Sergei Shoigu meanwhile has been moved to head Russia’s Security Council at the expense of Nikolai Patrushev. Shoigu can be seen as having in essence been given a promotion.

This big shuffle was unexpected, and the surprise has been registered in European capitals and Washington, with the US saying that this shows signs of “desperation” for Moscow sustaining the high costs of the Ukraine invasion.

“Our point of view is that this is further indication of Putin’s desperation to sustain his war of aggression against Ukraine, despite it being a major drain on the Russian economy and the heavy losses of Russian troops, with some estimates as high as 315,000 casualties,” State Department spokesman Vedant Patel said to a press briefing Monday.

Then First Deputy Prime Minister Andrey Belousov meeting with Putin last year.

“The Kremlin’s mobilization of its war of aggression against Ukraine has caused so many families to suffer,” he stated. “Russia started this unprovoked war against Ukraine. Putin could end it at any time by withdrawing his forces from Ukraine.”

To be expected, Britain is also joining in on the US critique, with current and former officials agreeing that Putin’s decision-making shows signs of ‘instability’

Christopher Steele, a former MI6 intelligence officer, said the reshuffle suggested there was “serious instability right in the heart” of Russia’s regime.

He told Sky News that Patrushev being removed from his role as secretary of the Russian Security Council was “astonishing”.

“It’s important to understand that he’s been one of Putin’s closest allies, former head of the FSB and so on for many years… and was rated by people to be probably the second most powerful man in Russia after Putin himself,” he said.

“I think what this indicates is not just a reshuffle along normal governmental lines. It’s really quite serious instability right in the heart of this regime”.

And yet, when it comes to the war itself, there’s clear consensus even in Western press that Russia is advancing deeper into Ukraine.

Below is a statement via Russian state media’s RT revealing some of Belousov’s intended areas of focus as he is soon to take over the Ukraine war as defense minister:

* * *

During his confirmation hearing before the Federation Council on Monday, Belousov pointed out that servicemen fighting in the Ukraine campaign enjoy an adequate level of pay. “Today, the bar has been raised to at least 200,000 rubles ($2,200). In principle, people earn much more there. However, this is not just about cash payments and allowances. We still have work to do.”

…Belousov expressed outrage that veterans of the Ukraine conflict who come home on vacation “are being kicked out of civilian medical facilities and sent to hospitals, which are often overcrowded.”

Another issue is the red tape involved when military personnel seek to access their benefits, the nominee minister continued, adding that, ideally, this should be resolved with the help of electronic systems.

As the hearing wrapped up, the Federation Council’s press service said, as quoted by TASS, that the chamber would not make a public assessment of Belousov’s candidacy and that a letter on the matter would be sent to Putin. The deliberations on the nomination are expected to continue on Tuesday.

However, Valentina Matvienko, the head of the Federation Council, called the president’s pick for defense minister “a very fortunate choice.” She noted Russian senators are well acquainted with Belousov’s work and have interacted with him on numerous occasions.

Matvienko recalled that Russia’s defense spending had more than doubled in the midst of the Ukraine conflict. “Everything that the Defense Ministry orders… must be in line with the capabilities of the economy… The defense minister must be in constant contact with other ministries to organize this process efficiently,” she said, adding that Belousov has a lot of experience in this area.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 05/14/2024 – 02:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/enswM7f Tyler Durden

WHO Makes Key Concessions Ahead Of Pandemic Treaty Vote

WHO Makes Key Concessions Ahead Of Pandemic Treaty Vote

Authored by Kevin Stocklin via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The World Health Organization (WHO) has watered down some provisions of its pandemic agreements ahead of the upcoming World Health Assembly on May 27. Critics in the United States, however, say the changes don’t do enough to address the concerns over the policy.

Provisions in prior drafts of the WHO pandemic treaty and International Health Regulations (IHRs) together aimed to effectively centralize and increase the power of the WHO if it declares a “health emergency.”

The release of the latest draft of the amendments, dated April 17, are the first public update on the IHR draft, which was initially made public early 2023.

In most areas, and for all of those which most concerned us from a legal perspective, the interim draft reflects a major retreat by the WHO Working Group from the text of the original proposals,” write English solicitors Ben and Molly Kingsley in an April briefing paper regarding the new amendments.

Some WHO-watchers remain wary, however.

“Practically all the bad things are still there,” Dr. Meryl Nass, a U.S.-based physician and vocal critic of the WHO agreements, told The Epoch Times.

“The language is gentler, but since there is so much to be decided later it is not clear the gentler language is meaningful,” Dr. Nass said.

My best guess is that they are desperate to get something passed, so the options are likely to be either a vanilla version of the treaty … or a delay. But they fear delay because people are waking up.”

The WHO and its advocates—including celebrities, politicians, and religious groups—have launched a global campaign urging the 194 member states to sign the documents.

“Give the people of the world, the people of your countries, the people you represent, a safer future,” WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said at a May 3 Geneva meeting. “I have one simple request: please, get this done, for them.”

He urged any countries that don’t support the agreements to refrain from encouraging other states to oppose it.

WHO ambassador and former U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown on March 20 lauded “a high-powered intervention by 23 former national presidents, 22 former prime ministers, a former U.N. general secretary, and 3 Nobel Laureates … to press for an urgent agreement from international negotiators on a Pandemic Accord.”

Mr. Brown called for unified global action to “expose fake news disinformation campaigns by conspiracy theorists trying to torpedo international agreement for the Pandemic Accord.”

He refuted criticisms that the pandemic treaty and IHR amendments would cede any sovereignty from member nations to the WHO.

(Top) World Health Organization chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus speaks during a press conference in Geneva on April 6, 2023. (Bottom) People in protective suits spray disinfectant on a street in Shijiazhuang, which was declared a high-risk area for COVID-19 , in northern China’s Hebei Province, on Jan. 15, 2021. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images, STR/CNS/AFP via Getty Images)

Critics Remain Unconvinced

Despite these assurances, however, the efforts to vest more power within the WHO continue to face resistance.

In recent months, Louisiana and Florida passed laws stating that state officials will not obey WHO directives, and other states, such as Oklahoma, are considering similar legislation.

On May 8, attorneys general from 22 states signed a letter to President Joe Biden urging him not to sign the WHO agreements, and stating that they will resist any attempts by the WHO to set public health policy in their states.

“Although the latest iteration is far better than previous versions, it’s still highly problematic,” the attorneys general wrote. “The fluid and opaque nature of these proceedings, moreover, could allow the most egregious provisions from past versions to return.

“Ultimately, the goal of these instruments isn’t to protect public health. It’s to cede authority to the WHO—specifically its director-general—to restrict our citizens’ rights to freedom of speech, privacy, movement (especially travel across borders), and informed consent.”

Amid this recalcitrance, the WHO has stepped back from some of the more controversial measures. The Biden administration is involved in negotiating the WHO treaty and have expressed support for it, but haven’t stated a definite intention to sign.

The Latest Draft

Struck from the latest draft is a provision that member nations “recognize WHO as the guiding and coordinating authority of international public health response” and commit to follow the WHO’s directives during a health emergency. The latest draft also states that WHO recommendations are non-binding.

Read more here…

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/13/2024 – 23:40

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/EG5Kg23 Tyler Durden

South Korea Still Dominates The World With The Highest Density Of Robot Workers

South Korea Still Dominates The World With The Highest Density Of Robot Workers

China’s huge investment in industrial robotics has made it one of the most automated nations on the planet in the space of just a few short years.

As Statista’s Anna Fleck reports, according to the latest study by the International Federation of Robotics (IFR), the number of operational robots in China’s manufacturing industry reached a ratio of 392 units per 10,000 employees in 2022, a robot density now similar to that of Japanese industry.

China currently ranks fifth in the world, behind South Korea (1,012 per 10,000 employees), Singapore (730), Germany (415) and Japan (397).

As the following infographic shows, China and South Korea are the countries that have made the most progress in the race to industrial automation in recent years.

Infographic: The Countries With The Highest Density Of Robot Workers | Statista

You will find more infographics at Statista

In Europe, robot density has seen a pretty big jump in Swiss industry, with the ratio more than doubling between 2017 and 2022 – from 129 to 296 robots per 10,000 employees.

France’s manufacturing industry still had a lower level of robotization than most of its neighboring European industries: 180 robots per 10,000 employees in 2022 – compared, for example, with 216 in Belgium (and Luxembourg) and 219 in Italy.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/13/2024 – 23:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/w0bDUSs Tyler Durden

The Masked And The Super Masked

The Masked And The Super Masked

Authored by Roger L. Simon via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

We live in an era of masks, only not the fun kind you might find at Carnivale in Venice, Italy.

A pro-Palestinian protestor wears a keffiyeh on the West Lawn of Columbia University, in New York, on April 29, 2024. (Timothy A. Clary/AFP via Getty Images)

Something considerably more sinister is going on.

This era began, as almost all of us realize now, with COVID-19 when all of us were told to put on masks or our friends and relatives might die. We might expire ourselves.

How necessary this was has been the subject of much discussion. My “Spidey sense” says no. Others may differ.

Nevertheless, as with all pandemics—real, imagined, or something in between—the need eventually diminished. People were liberated. Sort of.

Only masks are still around us, startlingly so. In some cases they are more around us than ever.

I think it was on Clay Travis and Buck Sexton’s radio show I first heard the masks referred to, ironically, as a “fashion statement.” True enough—they do often tell us where the wearer stands on a whole raft of things—but that was a few months ago. It almost seems like ancient history.

Now masks are upon us with a vengeance—black ones, miscellaneous scarves, and, of course, keffiyehs. The wearers have various intents—to scare us; to hide their identities from the police, college administrators, or potential employers; or simply, pathetically, to be a faddist, part of what they think of as an “in crowd.”

We have seen this song before during Antifa and Black Lives Matter demonstrations. Exercise your right of free speech but don’t tell us who you are. We could call this cowardly, because it is, but it is also quite dangerous as it expands.

In some ways it reminds me of internet trolls, especially paid ones, who turn up virtually everywhere under assumed names, some obvious and some not. Does the First Amendment give you permission—legally, or more importantly, morally—to lie about who you are while exercising your right of free speech? Interesting question.

Many of the masked demonstrators on our campuses, we have been told—and considering the numbers who aren’t students, it is almost certainly true—are also paid for their “work,” not to mention transportation, tents, food, etc.

Who pays?

These are the people I termed in my title the Super Masked. They are the truly nefarious. The masked are their witting or unwitting foot soldiers.

It is the Super Masked who are behind the anti-Americanism, anti-Westernism, anti-free market capitalism, open borders, anti-religion, anti-Semitic, often pro-Chinese communist, gender fluid movements, and so forth.

Someone is paying for the campus chaos across our country. It doesn’t come free.

Who, then, are the Super Masked, and why are they doing this?

Park MacDougald has some answers in his Tablet article “The People Setting America on Fire.” Mr. MacDougald isolates, as have others, three groups as the principal organizers of the protests—Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), and Within Our Lifetime (WOL).

Who is behind them? Mr. MacDougald has interesting details of the various cutouts, but it comes down to many of the “usual suspects”—the Rockefeller Foundation, George Soros in his various guises, and, to a great degree, the Tides Foundation. The author has this to say about Tides:

Tides, you might have noticed, is a name that keeps coming up again and again. The Tides Nexus, of which the Tides Foundation is a part, is one of largest progressive dark-money networks in the country, controlling upward of a billion in assets; its list of major donors is an all-star cast of left-wing billionaires and foundations, including Soros, Peter Buffett and his NoVo Foundation, eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Ford Foundation, and the New Venture Fund, controlled by another Democratic dark-money powerhouse, Eric Kessler’s Arabella Advisors. A pioneer of what critics have called ‘charitable money-laundering’ through the use of fiscal sponsorships to obscure money trails through multiple layers of bureaucracy, Tides, through its donations and fiscal sponsorships, has emerged as a major backer of the anti-Israel protest movement across the country.”

This is, needless to say, not just about anti-Israel activities but about every progressive cause imaginable. Tides might be described as the king of the Super Masked.

One is tempted to channel the immortal words of President Ronald Reagan and say, “Mr. Tides, tear off that mask!”

My intention is to point out the level of often-deliberate obfuscation going on and the amount that people are being used, their ignorance exploited, consciously or unconsciously.

It’s easy to say that the infamous “globalists” are behind all this, and quite possibly it’s true, but I think there is a level at which people of all sorts have been swept up in causes they think are good without stopping to realize what they really are doing. It’s “my team,” and I will do what they say, even if it involves using “dark money.” And hiding my identity behind a mask.

The fight for transparency in our culture has been going on for some time with, unfortunately, little success. Meanwhile, we hear endless blather about preserving “democracy.” But without transparency, there is no democracy or constitutional republic, whichever you prefer.

So, tear off those masks!

End of sermon.

BUT NOT QUITE!

After I wrote the above, the most amazing report came out in the New York Post (May 9) that could break your brain. Black Lives Matter is suing the Tides Foundation? What is going on here?

“A progressive nonprofit that has been shelling out cash to anti-Israel protest groups is being sued by Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation for fraud and withholding more than $33 million in donations, a bombshell lawsuit claims.

“Tides Foundation, which has managed hundreds of millions in donations for progressive groups since it was founded in 1976, has ‘refused to honor its promises and continues to commandeer BLMGNF’s donations,’ according to the 285-page lawsuit filed in California Superior Court, Los Angeles County, on Monday.

“Instead, Tides doled out an undisclosed amount of donations to a radical BLM breakaway group run by anti-police activist Melina Abdullah — who lost a ‘frivolous’ lawsuit against BLMGNF — according to court papers and an attorney for BLMGNF.”

What was it that Sir Walter Scott said? “What a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive!”

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/13/2024 – 23:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/gNoDltw Tyler Durden

Which Countries Have The Highest Infant Mortality Rates?

Which Countries Have The Highest Infant Mortality Rates?

Infant mortality rates are generally regarded as the barometer of an overall population’s health. A higher rate indicates unmet needs of a population, especially with regards to food availability and sanitation.

Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao visualized the top 15 countries with the highest infant mortality rates, according to 2023 estimates from the CIA World Factbook. It is measured as the number of infant deaths under the age of one, per 1,000 live births in a given year.

ℹ️ Comoros has been excluded from the map for visibility reasons.

Ranked: Countries With the Highest Infant Mortality Rates

Afghanistan currently has the highest infant mortality rate in the world at 103 deaths per 1,000 babies born. Decades of conflict have pushed the country to the brink and a prolonged drought since 2021 has made food more scarce.

Meanwhile, the other 14 countries on this list are all from Sub-Saharan Africa. Some of them are also experiencing civil unrest, a breakdown of state machinery, and high undernourishment rates.

While this is concerning, Africa’s infant mortality rate as a whole has improved tremendously in the last seven decades. Between 1950–2024, the continent’s average fell 73% to 41 deaths per 1,000 births.

Expansion of healthcare, improving nutrition, access to clean drinking water, and mass immunization programs are some of the reasons behind this massive decline.

Estimates assume Africa’s infant mortality rate will improve further to 25 per 1,000 live births by 2050—which is roughly the same as Asia today.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/13/2024 – 22:40

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/XoB2Stz Tyler Durden

Go Nuts About Nuts To Help Keep Cancer At Bay

Go Nuts About Nuts To Help Keep Cancer At Bay

Authored by Alexandra Roach via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

In their many variations, nuts are a superfood praised as rich sources of minerals, vitamins, amino acids, proteins, and other bioactive compounds.

(Pavel Kalenik/Unsplash)

Chestnuts are champions for vitamin C, for instance. Pistachios contain the most vitamin A and potassium. Both are high in folic acid. Cashews enrich us with magnesium. The level of vitamin B3 (niacin) is the highest in peanuts, and vitamin E (tocopherol) is found in almonds.

Walnuts are especially high in alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), a neuroprotective omega-3 fatty acid important for normal growth and development. It also has been shown to induce apoptosis (programmed death of cells) in breast cancer cells.

Our bodies cannot produce ALA, hence, nutritional intake is a must, as it is with many other key nutrients.

Research Supports the Benefits of Nuts

A 2023 review published in the journal Foods, found mounting evidence that a nut-rich diet can potentially prevent numerous chronic illnesses.

According to the report, “The ingestion of phytochemicals from nuts and their positive influence on several diseases (cancer, heart disease, stroke, hypertension, birth defects, cataracts, diabetes, diverticulosis, and obesity) are established.”

In addition to the improvement of cardiovascular disease, depression, and cognitive function, nut consumption is correlated with lower cancer incidence and cancer mortality, and decreased all-cause mortality, states a 2021 review.

The Nut/Cancer Health Connection

The World Health Organization predicts a considerable increase in cancer, with a potential of 32.6 million cases worldwide by 2045.

Effective strategies, such as increasing dietary fiber, eating more fruits and vegetables, and physical activity, could potentially reduce cancer risk factors by approximately 42 percent.

The journal Chronic Diseases and Translational Medicine published a 2023 review about the interrelation of nut consumption and different types of cancer, including women-related and gastrointestinal cancers.

Data suggests that eating nuts not only reduces “cancer-related risk and mortality,” but possibly prevents the occurrence of certain types of cancer and its advancement. Nuts contain active anticarcinogenic compounds such as “folate, phytosterols, saponins, phytic acid, isoflavones, ellagic acid, α-tocopherol, quercetin, and resveratrol,” according to the review.

The research points to certain phytochemicals and their mechanisms as preventatives for cancer.

Accordingly, walnuts, pecans, almonds, and pine nuts contain polyphenols, which inhibit carcinogenesis that is chemically induced. Likewise, hazelnuts and brazil nuts hold helpful properties, called isoflavonoids, to balance hormonal mechanisms.

Most nuts are strong antioxidants that counteract oxidative stress and guard our DNA—the health benefits list of nuts is long.

Nuts at a Glance

Walnuts

A review published in the journal Nutrition outlines the cancer-preventative properties of walnuts, as researched in animal studies with mice. It summarizes the following points:

  • A diet enriched with walnuts prevented the increase of “human breast cancers implanted in nude mice by [approximately] 80%.”
  • Mammary gland tumors were reduced by approximately 60 percent through a diet containing walnuts in a mouse model.
  • “Walnuts slowed the growth of prostate, colon, and renal cancers by antiproliferative and antiangiogenic mechanisms.”

Another interesting fact was shared in the review. Comparing the intake of whole walnuts to a diet equally rich in n-3 fatty acids, the reduction of tumors in the mammary gland was greater when ingesting whole nuts. This reinforces the idea that active components in walnuts act synergistically to suppress cancer.

Walnuts also proved their antitumorigenic qualities in an animal study in vivo in mice. Compared to the corn-oil-based control group, the walnut group featured two major improvements—the tumor growth rate was slowed by 27 percent, and the tumor weight was reduced by 33 percent.

Reducing inflammation in the body benefits many health conditions, amongst others cardiovascular disease, obesity, diabetes, and cancer. Walnuts have proven valuable in all.

A randomized controlled trial tested a daily intake of 56 grams of walnuts (366 calories) in 46 overweight adults. Another trial analyzed the same amount on diabetic patients. Both results showed that the increased nut intake improved endothelial function significantly, which is key for healthy blood and lymph vessels. In turn, endothelial cells are needed to protect from vascular malfunctions—the hallmarks of several types of malignant disorders.

Almonds

Contrary to common belief, regular almond intake does not lead to weight gain, although the nuts contain almost 50 percent fat. Instead, almonds “appear to promote weight loss,” affirms a research paper published in the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, which benefits obesity-related illnesses, such as cardiovascular disease and cancer.

However, almonds also contain the highly controversial and much-researched bioactive compound glycoside amygdalin. Highly controversial because its pharmaceutical development as an anti-cancer treatment continues to be a topic of discussion in the pharmaceutical world.

As a commercial drug, amygdalin is distributed under the name Laetrile but has since been shown to have serious side effects, such as damage to nerves and the liver, a lack of oxygen in the blood, and confusion. Furthermore, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not approved Laetrile and has said that the compound shows only little anticancer effect.

In contrast, a review in the Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics praises amygdalin’s few side effects, its low cost, and especially its excellent results in the battle against multidrug resistance. Furthermore, the compound can be easily naturally sourced as it occurs in the kernels of many fruits and is a compound in nuts.

A 2023 comprehensive review published in the International Journal of Molecular Science relates the same hopeful message: “Amygdalin seems to be a promising naturally occurring agent against cancer disease development and progression.”

While Amygdalin has proven its anti-tumor qualities, it is still not recommended as an extensive remedy, as some challenges need to be overcome.

Its correct dosage heavily depends on the type of bacteria present in a person’s gut. Therefore, researchers have not been able to find an across-the-board therapy. “Unfortunately, there is currently no foolproof method for determining the microbial consortium and providing a safe oral dosage for every patient,” researchers state in a 2022 review.

Scientists place their hope in modern nano-technologies as they further explore the qualities of amygdalin in cancer treatment. “There are several pieces of evidence to support the idea that amygdalin can exert anticancer effects against lung, breast, prostate, colorectal, cervical, and gastrointestinal cancers.” The compound “has been reported to induce apoptosis of cancer cells, inhibiting cancer cells’ proliferation and slowing down tumor metastatic spread,” according to the above-mentioned 2023 review.

A 2019 article published in Cancer Medicine that dials in on amygdalin, primarily found in bitter almonds, not only highlights its “antioxidative, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory and immunoregulatory activities,” but investigates the clinical value of the anticancer agent.

The compound introduces cytotoxicity and apoptosis in the body and balances the immune function, which affects especially “solid tumors” such as lung or bladder cancer and renal cell carcinoma.

Despite limiting factors, such as the “primary stage” of both clinical and experimental research and the lack of high-quality publications on the topic, researchers still believe these studies to be promising regarding cancer treatments.

Many may not be surprised that walnuts and almonds provide us with these health benefits. However, the following nut, which botanically speaking, is a legume, often gets a “bad rap” as a common allergen. Nevertheless, research shows its valuable qualities in cancer therapy.

Peanuts

A human study published in the journal Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation showed that “High consumption of peanuts, walnuts, and almonds appears to be a protective factor for the development of breast cancer.”

The study group included 97 female patients suffering from breast cancer, and a control group of 104 healthy women. Researchers analyzed their seed consumption via the Mantel-Haenszel test method and found a correlation between dietary nut intake and the development of breast cancer.

Peanuts once again portrayed their qualities as functional food in a study that investigated phytosterols (PS), a natural compound that lowers cholesterol levels and prevents cardiovascular diseases. This research suggests that their sterol beta-sitosterol, in particular, holds protective anticancer effects against “colon, prostate, and breast cancer.”

With 207 milligrams PS per 100 grams, unrefined peanut oil has the highest concentration of valuable beta-sitosterol—even higher than olive oil. Peanut butter “contains 144-157 mg PS/100 g.” Further refinement of the product results in lower rates of the active compound.

Another healthy property of peanuts is the polyphenol phytochemical resveratrol—the target of a review focused on anticancer agents. In addition to peanuts, sources of resveratrol include grapes, red wine, and other berries.

Researchers point out that people benefit from the consumption of this powerful antioxidant, as it displays “strong anti-tumor activities through inhibiting tumor cell proliferation, inducing cell apoptosis, promoting tumor cell differentiation, preventing tumor invasion and metastasis, and further moderating the host immune system to kill tumor cells.”

In fact, the nickname “French Paradox” was given to resveratrol’s impact on the health of the French people, as it seems that the compound counteracts the French diet, which is often high in fats, and protects consumers from cardiovascular disease and more.

Pistachios

Another inconspicuous nut with plenty of healthy properties comes from the cashew family.

In comparison to other nuts, the health profile of pistachios is even more advantageous. They are low-fat, a good source of vegetable protein, contain a remarkable amount of minerals (potassium) and vitamins (C and E), and are high in dietary fiber.

Both, in vitro and in vivo models have indicated significant regulatory properties in pistachios on oxidative stress, according to a 2022 review. Consequently, eating pistachios also positively affected the risk of chronic diseases, including cancer.

Another 2022 review highlighted resveratrol in pistachios and its favorable role in breast cancer treatment.

Unfortunately, the high cost of this nut often keeps people from regular intake, which would be beneficial to their health.

Diet, Inflammation, and Cancer

It has long been known that lifestyle and diets greatly impact our health.

A 2010 review describes the multistage process of cancer as “initiation, promotion, and progression,” and explains that oxidative stress plays a role in all three phases of tumorigenesis (the formation of cancer), as does chronic inflammation in the body—conditions fought by nuts.

A diet rich in omega-3 fatty acids is beneficial to cancer survival, according to a review published in the Journal of Nutrition that examined several animal studies. In addition, it can lessen side effects that come with chemotherapy and increase the treatment’s efficacy. The review goes as far as stating that the “consumption of omega-3 fatty acids might slow or stop the growth of metastatic cancer cells,” after appropriate cancer treatment.

Walnuts contain the highest amount of omega-3 fatty acids.

Attention to Quality

As phenolic compounds in nuts are highly unstable, they may be impacted by various processing techniques.

Unfortunately, studies are rare, as certain types of nuts also react differently. Research that does exist indicates that thermal treatment negatively impacts nuts, such as hazelnuts, where most of the polyphenol content is found in the skin.

Roasting also alters the profile of nutrients in nuts, which can lead to increased allergenicity and changed protein levels, for instance in peanuts. This processing technique seems to affect almonds and pistachios less—they stay stable or might even slightly benefit from the process. In contrast, the antioxidant profile of hazelnuts and walnuts suffers.

A 2023 overview published in the journal Foods mentions that peanuts blanched in 100 degree Celsius water for 20 minutes were less allergenic. On the other hand, “boiling almonds for 10 min[utes], or cashews and pistachios for 60 min[utes] did not affect their properties.”

Authors of the overview suggest that consumers best educate themselves about the variation of bioactive compounds in nuts and the impact of food processing methods, as well as finding a quality source.

Recommended Daily Intake

A 2020 narrative review highlights the extremely low consumption of nuts and seeds worldwide.

Although nuts are continuously praised as a superfood, and the per-capita consumption in the United States increased to 5.6 pounds per person in 2022, recommended consumption is rarely met.

The Global Burden of Disease Study found in 2017 that “global consumption was only 12 % of the recommended level” of a daily intake of 21 grams. In 2019, the Eat-Lancet Commission upped the recommended everyday consumption to 50 grams of tree nuts and/or peanuts. With an average daily intake of 7 grams of nuts, we do not come even close to that goal.

As a rule of thumb, a 2021 study comes to the conclusions that eating a “handful of nuts” is a practical way of “achieving recommended nut intakes.” Researchers explained that combining various types of nuts in a medium-size handful averages at about 36.3 g, which “resulted in a high proportion of individuals taking at least 80% of the recommended intake of nuts.”

Feel free to mix and match, bake with nuts and seeds, or add them to your salads, lunch, and dinner. Mostly though, just have fun going “nuts about nuts” and assisting your health at the same time.

Alexandra Roach is a board-certified holistic health practitioner, herbalist, and movement teacher who has also worked as a journalist, TV news anchor, and author. She has earned citations from U.S. Army commanders for her work with military personnel and writes with a broad perspective on health.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 05/13/2024 – 22:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/hfADrLP Tyler Durden