DEA Could Reclassify Marijuana To A Less Restrictive Category – A Drug Policy Expert Weighs The Pros And Cons

BY CHRIS MEYERS

ADJUNCT PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY,

GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY

The Drug Enforcement Administration announced in early 2024 that it would act on President Joe Biden’s call to reclassify marijuana, moving it from the tightly controlled Schedule I category that it has been in since 1970 to the less restrictive Schedule III status of the Controlled Substances Act. That triggered a long process of hearings and reviews that will not be completed until after the presidential election in November.

The news drew strong reactions from critics: 25 Republican lawmakers sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland protesting any changes to federal marijuana laws. They argued that the decision “was not properly researched … and is merely responding to the popularity of marijuana and not the actual science.”

As a philosopher and drug policy expert, I focus on assessing arguments and evidence rather than politics or rhetoric. So, what are the arguments for and against rescheduling cannabis?

Scheduling under the Controlled Substances Act

The Controlled Substances Act places each prohibited drug into one of five schedules based on known medical use, addictive potential and safety. Schedule I drugs – which, along with marijuana, also includes heroin, LSD, psilocybin, ecstasy (MDMA) and quaaludes – is the most restrictive category.

Schedule I substances cannot be legally used for any purpose, including medical use or research, though an exception for research can be made with special permission from the DEA. The criteria for inclusion in the Schedule I category is that the substance has a high potential for abuse, is extremely addictive and has “no currently accepted medical use.”

Schedule II, which is slightly less restrictive than Schedule I, includes drugs that are addictive and potentially unsafe but also have some accepted medical use. These include strong opioids such as fentanyl, as well as cocaine, PCP and methamphetamine. Though they are still tightly regulated, Schedule II drugs can be used medically with a prescription or administered by a licensed physician.

Schedule III is much less restrictive and is intended for substances with legitimate medical use and only moderate risk of abuse or dependency. This category includes low-dose morphine, anabolic steroids and ketamine.

Schedule IV – which includes the sedative Valium, the weak opioid tramadol and sleep medicines such as Ambien – is even less restrictive.

The least restrictive category is Schedule V, which includes cough syrups with codeine and calcium channel blockers such as gabapentin and pregabalin. All scheduled drugs require a doctor’s prescription and can be distributed only by licensed pharmacies.

What rescheduling would mean for marijuana

The push to reschedule is largely to make federal laws consistent with state medical marijuana programs that – as of October 2024 – are legal in 38 states plus the District of Columbia.

Moving marijuana to Schedule III would not change its legal status in states where it is banned. It would make marijuana legal at the federal level but only for medical use. Recreational use would still be federally prohibited, even though it is currently legal in 24 states plus Washington.

Rescheduling, however, might not make medical marijuana any easier for patients to access and could even make it much harder for some. Currently, getting a medical marijuana card is quite easy in most states. In Washington D.C., where I live, patients can self-certify.

f marijuana is reclassified as Schedule III, medical marijuana programs will have to start requiring a doctor’s prescription, just like with all other scheduled substances. And it could be distributed only by licensed pharmacies, which would put medical dispensaries that are now selling it without a license from the Food and Drug Administration out of business.

Rescheduling, however, would give medical marijuana legitimacy as a bona fide medicine. And the intent of the move is to increase access, even if it is unclear how rescheduling would achieve that.

So, assuming that rescheduling would have the intended effect of expanding access to medical marijuana, should it be rescheduled?

Medical uses of marijuana

Though there are three criteria for Schedule I in the Controlled Substances Act, the DEA in fact relies on only the medical use criterion. This was the basis of the DEA’s proposal to reschedule marijuana. The fact that almost 75% of Americans live in a state with a medical marijuana program suggests that marijuana has an accepted medical use.

More importantly, Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act already includes dronabinol, which is delta-9 THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. Although dronabinol is synthesized in the lab rather than extracted from the cannabis plant, it is the exact same molecule. The FDA approved THC in the form of dronabinol in 1985 for treating anorexia caused by HIV/AIDS as well as nausea and vomiting due to chemotherapy. Placing marijuana in the same schedule as its primary active ingredient makes a lot of sense.

Another argument in favor of rescheduling is that it would open up new opportunities for medical research into marijuana’s effects, research that is currently hampered by its Schedule I status. This work is critical because the system of cannabinoid receptors through which marijuana causes its therapeutic and psychoactive effects is crucial for almost every aspect of human functioning.

Research has shown that cannabis is effective not only in treating nausea and AIDS but also chronic pain and some symptoms of multiple sclerosis.

There is also good evidence that marijuana can help treat other conditions, including Lou Gehrig’s disease (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS), glaucoma, irritable bowel syndrome, insomnia, migraine, post-traumatic stress disorder and Tourette syndrome. Keeping marijuana in the Schedule I category severely hampers research that might establish more effective treatments for these conditions.

Balancing risks and benefits

Those opposed to rescheduling cite possible health risks associated with marijuana consumption. Heavy use is linked to an increased risk of developing schizophrenia. However, the increased risk of schizophrenia from cannabis use is comparable to that caused by watching excessive television, eating junk food or smoking cigarettes.

Long-term marijuana use can also lead to sleep problems and diminished visuospatial memory. It can also cause gastrointestinal trouble, such as cannabis hyperemesis syndrome, which is characterized by nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain. The symptoms, while extremely unpleasant, are temporary and occur only after consuming marijuana. The condition disappears in people who stop using.

Marijuana use can also be addictive. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about three out of every 10 regular marijuana users meet the diagnostic criteria for cannabis use disorder.

All of the concerns above are legitimate, though it is worth noting that virtually no effective medicine is free from undesirable side effects. And although marijuana can be habit-forming, it is not as addictive as alcohol, tobacco, oxycodone, cocaine, methamphetamine or benzodiazepines. None of those other drugs are categorized as Schedule I, and alcohol and tobacco are not scheduled at all.

Unlike most other prescription medications, marijuana use is associated with many benefits. For example, in states where marijuana has been legalized, worker’s compensation payments have fallen by an average of 21% among people over 40. Researchers think that this is because marijuana helps workers better manage chronic pain. The use of marijuana for pain management also helps to reduce dependency on opioids. One study found that U.S. counties with one or two marijuana dispensaries had an average of 17% fewer opioid-related fatalities compared with counties with no dispensaries.

Research also shows that marijuana use can help to prevent Alzheimer’s by blocking the enzymes that produce amyloid plaques. It also shows promise for reducing a person’s risk of developing Type 2 diabetes by helping the body regulate insulin and glucose levels.

All of these benefits add up to marijuana users having an overall lower rate of premature death than nonusers.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Machine Learning Cracked The Protein-Folding Problem And Won The 2024 Nobel Prize In Chemistry

Demis Hassabis and John Jumper at Google DeepMind on Oct. 9, 2024, after being awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry. AP Photo/Alastair Grant

BY MARC ZIMMER

PROFESSOR OF CHEMISTRY

CONNECTICUTT COLLEGE

The 2024 Nobel Prize in chemistry recognized Demis Hassabis, John Jumper and David Baker for using machine learning to tackle one of biology’s biggest challenges: predicting the 3D shape of proteins and designing them from scratch.

This year’s award stood out because it honored research that originated at a tech company: DeepMind, an AI research startup that was acquired by Google in 2014. Most previous chemistry Nobel Prizes have gone to researchers in academia. Many laureates went on to form startup companies to further expand and commercialize their groundbreaking work – for instance, CRISPR gene-editing technology and quantum dots – but the research, from start to end, wasn’t done in the commercial sphere.

Although the Nobel Prizes in physics and chemistry are awarded separately, there is a fascinating connection between the winning research in those fields in 2024. The physics award went to two computer scientists who laid the foundations for machine learning, while the chemistry laureates were rewarded for their use of machine learning to tackle one of biology’s biggest mysteries: how proteins fold.

The 2024 Nobel Prizes underscore both the importance of this kind of artificial intelligence and how science today often crosses traditional boundaries, blending different fields to achieve groundbreaking results.

The challenge of protein folding

Proteins are the molecular machines of life. They make up a significant portion of our bodies, including muscles, enzymes, hormones, blood, hair and cartilage.

Understanding proteins’ structures is essential because their shapes determine their functions. Back in 1972, Christian Anfinsen won the Nobel Prize in chemistry for showing that the sequence of a protein’s amino acid building blocks dictates the protein’s shape, which, in turn, influences its function. If a protein folds incorrectly, it may not work properly and could lead to diseases such as Alzheimer’s, cystic fibrosis or diabetes.

A protein’s overall shape depends on the tiny interactions, the attractions and repulsions, between all the atoms in the amino acids its made of. Some want to be together, some don’t. The protein twists and folds itself into a final shape based on many thousands of these chemical interactions.

For decades, one of biology’s greatest challenges was predicting a protein’s shape based solely on its amino acid sequence. Although researchers can now predict the shape, we still don’t understand how the proteins maneuver into their specific shapes and minimize the repulsions of all the interatomic interactions in a few microseconds.

To understand how proteins work and to prevent misfolding, scientists needed a way to predict the way proteins fold, but solving this puzzle was no easy task.

In 2003, University of Washington biochemist David Baker wrote Rosetta, a computer program for designing proteins. With it he showed it was possible to reverse the protein-folding problem by designing a protein shape and then predicting the amino acid sequence needed to create it.

It was a phenomenal jump forward, but the shape chosen for the calculation was simple, and the calculations were complex. A major paradigm shift was required to routinely design novel proteins with desired structures.

A new era of machine learning

Machine learning is a type of AI where computers learn to solve problems by analyzing vast amounts of data. It’s been used in various fields, from game-playing and speech recognition to autonomous vehicles and scientific research. The idea behind machine learning is to use hidden patterns in data to answer complex questions.

This approach made a huge leap in 2010 when Demis Hassabis co-founded DeepMind, a company aiming to combine neuroscience with AI to solve real-world problems.

Hassabis, a chess prodigy at age 4, quickly made headlines with AlphaZero, an AI that taught itself to play chess at a superhuman level. In 2017, AlphaZero thoroughly beat the world’s top computer chess program, Stockfish-8. The AI’s ability to learn from its own gameplay, rather than relying on preprogrammed strategies, marked a turning point in the AI world.

Soon after, DeepMind applied similar techniques to Go, an ancient board game known for its immense complexity. In 2016, its AI program AlphaGo defeated one of the world’s top players, Lee Sedol, in a widely watched match that stunned millions.

In 2016, Hassabis shifted DeepMind’s focus to a new challenge: the protein-folding problem. Under the leadership of John Jumper, a chemist with a background in protein science, the AlphaFold project began. The team used a large database of experimentally determined protein structures to train the AI, which allowed it to learn the principles of protein folding. The result was AlphaFold2, an AI that could predict the 3D structure of proteins from their amino acid sequences with remarkable accuracy.

This was a significant scientific breakthrough. AlphaFold has since predicted the structures of over 200 million proteins – essentially all the proteins that scientists have sequenced to date. This massive database of protein structures is now freely available, accelerating research in biology, medicine and drug development.

Designer proteins to fight disease

Understanding how proteins fold and function is crucial for designing new drugs. Enzymes, a type of protein, act as catalysts in biochemical reactions and can speed up or regulate these processes. To treat diseases such as cancer or diabetes, researchers often target specific enzymes involved in disease pathways. By predicting the shape of a protein, scientists can figure out where small molecules – potential drug candidates – might bind to it, which is the first step in designing new medicines.

In 2024, DeepMind launched AlphaFold3, an upgraded version of the AlphaFold program that not only predicts protein shapes but also identifies potential binding sites for small molecules. This advance makes it easier for researchers to design drugs that precisely target the right proteins.

Google bought Deepmind for reportedly around half a billion dollars in 2014. Google DeepMind has now started a new venture, Isomorphic Labs, to collaborate with pharmaceutical companies on real-world drug development using these AlphaFold3 predictions.

For his part, David Baker has continued to make significant contributions to protein science. His team at the University of Washington developed an AI-based method called “family-wide hallucination,” which they used to design entirely new proteins from scratch. Hallucinations are new patterns – in this case, proteins – that are plausible, meaning they are a good fit with patterns in the AI’s training data. These new proteins included a light-emitting enzyme, demonstrating that machine learning can help create novel synthetic proteins. These AI tools offer new ways to design functional enzymes and other proteins that never could have evolved naturally.

AI will enable research’s next chapter

The Nobel-worthy achievements of Hassabis, Jumper and Baker show that machine learning isn’t just a tool for computer scientists – it’s now an essential part of the future of biology and medicine.

By tackling one of the toughest problems in biology, the winners of the 2024 prize have opened up new possibilities in drug discovery, personalized medicine and even our understanding of the chemistry of life itself.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Woodward Book Reveals Trump’s Calls With Putin And Biden’s Private Remarks On Obama And Netanyahu

In this April 29, 20197, file photo journalist Bob Woodard sits at the head-table during the White House correspondent's diner in Washington. (AP Photo/Cliff Owen, File)

BY MICHELLE L. PRICE AND MEG KINNARD

WASHINGTON (THE ASSOCIATED PRESS) — Donald Trump has had as many as seven private phone calls with Vladimir Putin since leaving office and secretly sent the Russian president COVID-19 test machines during the height of the pandemic, Bob Woodward reported in his new book, “War.”

The revelations were made in the famed Watergate reporter’s latest book, which also details President Joe Biden’s frustrations with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ‘s assortment of burner phones. The Associated Press obtained an early copy of the book, which is due out next week.

Trump denied the reporting in an interview with ABC News’ Jonathan Karl. “He’s a storyteller. A bad one. And he’s lost his marbles,” Trump said of Woodward.

Trump had previously spoken to Woodward for the journalist’s 2021 book, “Rage.” Trump later sued over it, claiming Woodward never had permission to publicly release recordings of their interviews for the book. The publisher and Woodward denied his allegations.

Here is more from the new book:

Trump has had multiple calls with Putin since his White House term ended

Woodward reports that Trump asked an aide to leave his office at his Florida resort, Mar-a-Lago, so that the former president could have a private call with Putin in early 2024. The aide, whom Woodward doesn’t name, said there have been multiple calls between Trump and Putin since Trump left office, perhaps as many as seven, according to the book, though it does not detail what they discussed.

Trump senior adviser and longtime aide Jason Miller told Woodward that he had not heard Trump was having calls with Putin and said, “I’d push back on that.” But Miller also said, according to the book, “I’m sure they’d know how to get in touch with each other.”

Steven Cheung, Trump’s communications director, said none of the stories in Woodward’s books are true. In a statement on Tuesday, he called them “the work of a truly demented and deranged man who suffers from a debilitating case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

Trump’s relationship with Putin has been scrutinized since his 2016 campaign for president, when he memorably called on Russia to find and make public missing emails deleted by Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said.

U.S. intelligence agencies later determined that Russia had meddled in the 2016 election to help Trump, though an investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller found no conspiracy between the Trump team and Russia. In 2018, Trump publicly questioned that finding following an in-person meeting with Putin in Helsinki.

In recent years, Trump has criticized U.S. support for Ukraine as it fights off Russia’s invasion. He has said Ukraine should have made concessions to Putin before Russia invaded in 2022. He also previously touted his good relationship with Putin and called the Russian leader “pretty smart” for invading Ukraine.

Trump sent COVID-19 test machines to Putin for his personal use

Woodward reports that Trump sent Putin COVID-19 test machines for his personal use as the virus began spreading in 2020.

Putin told Trump not to tell anyone because people would be mad at Trump over it, but Trump said he didn’t care if anyone knew, according to the book. Trump ended up agreeing not to tell anyone. The book doesn’t specify when the machines were sent but describes it as being when the virus spread rapidly through Russia. It was previously reported by The Associated Press and other agencies that Trump’s administration in May 2020 sent ventilators and other equipment to several countries, including Russia.

Vice President Kamala Harris, in an interview Tuesday with radio host Howard Stern, accused Trump of giving the machines to a “murderous dictator” at a time when “everyone was scrambling” to get tests.

“This person who wants to be president again, who secretly is helping out an an adversary while the American people are dying by the hundreds every day,” said Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate.

Biden’s anger at Netanyahu has boiled over in private

The book also details Biden’s complicated relationship with Netanyahu as well as private moments when the president has been fed up with him over the Israel-Hamas War.

Biden’s “frustrations and distrust” of Netanyahu “erupted” this past spring, Woodward writes. The president privately unleashed a profanity-laden tirade, calling him a “son of a bitch” and a “bad f——— guy,” according to the book. Biden said he felt, in Woodward’s accounting, that Netanyahu “had been lying to him regularly.” With Netanyahu “continuing to say he was going to kill every last member of Hamas.” Woodward wrote, “Biden had told him that was impossible, threatening both privately and publicly to withhold offensive U.S. weapons shipment.”

Biden and Netanyahu have long been acquainted, although their relationship has not been known to be close or overly friendly. Last week, Biden said he didn’t know whether the Israeli leader was holding up a Mideast peace deal in order to influence the outcome of the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Asked about the book’s reporting, White House spokesperson Emilie Simons told reporters Tuesday that “The commitment that we have to the state of Israel is ironclad.”

Simons, when pressed on the details, said she wouldn’t comment on every anecdote that may come out in reporting. She added of Biden and Netanyahu: “They have a long-term relationship. They have a very honest and direct relationship, and I don’t have a comment on those specific anecdotes.”

Biden criticized Obama’s handling of the Russian invasion of Crimea

The book details Biden’s criticism late last year of President Barack Obama’s handling of Putin’s earlier invasion of Ukraine, when Russia seized Crimea and a section of the Donbas in 2014, at a time when Biden was serving as the Democrat’s vice president.

“They f----- up in 2014,” Woodward wrote that Biden said to a close friend in December, blaming the lack of action for Putin’s actions in Ukraine. “Barack never took Putin seriously.”

Biden was angry while speaking to the friend and said they “never should have let Putin just walk in there” in 2014 and that the U.S. “did nothing.”

Biden regrets choosing Garland as attorney general

Woodward reports Biden was privately furious with Attorney General Merrick Garland for appointing a special counsel to investigate Biden’s son Hunter in a tax-and-gun prosecution.

“Should never have picked Garland,” Biden told an associate, according to Woodward. The journalist did not name the associate.

Hunter Biden was convicted in June on federal gun charges and faces sentencing in federal court in Delaware in December. He pleaded guilty to federal tax charges in California and is also set to be sentenced in that case in December.

The Justice Department declined to comment.

Graham says going to Mar-a-Lago is ‘a little bit like going to North Korea’

One of Trump’s longest-term allies, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, blamed Trump’s ongoing false claims that the 2020 election was rigged to a cult of personality in which the former president’s ensconcement at Mar-a-Lago and circle of aides and advisers “constantly feed this narrative,” according to the book.

The weekend after Russia invaded Ukraine, Graham was with Trump at Mar-a-Lago, which the senator characterized as “a little bit like going to North Korea.” Graham added that “everybody stands up and claps every time Trump comes in.”

On politics, Woodward wrote that Graham’s counsel was part of what persuaded Trump to run again for the presidency.

In March, during one of his many visits to the Middle East since Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, Graham told Woodward that he had been meeting with the Saudi crown prince when Graham suggested they call Trump. From “a bag containing about 50 burner phones,” Prince Mohammed “pulled out one labeled ‘TRUMP 45.’” On another trip, Woodward wrote, the Saudi leader retrieved another burner phone, “this time labeled JAKE SULLIVAN ” when the men called Biden’s national security adviser.

Price reported from New York. Associated Press writers Hillel Italie in New York, Eric Tucker and Alanna Durkin Richer in Washington and Aamer Madhani aboard Air Force One contributed to this report.

Accept Our King, Our God − Or Else: The Senseless ‘Requirement’ Spanish Colonizers Used To Justify Their Bloodshed In The Americas

Art from Madrid’s Museo de America depicts enslaved Indigenous people forced to build Mexico City on the ruins of the Aztec capital, Tenochtitlan. Ann Ronan Pictures/Print Collector/Getty Images

BY DIEGO JAVIER LUIS

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF HISTORY,

JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

Across the United States, the second Monday of October is increasingly becoming known as Indigenous Peoples Day. In the push to rename Columbus Day, Christopher Columbus himself has become a metaphor for the evils of early colonial empires, and rightly so.

The Italian explorer who set out across the Atlantic in search of Asia was a notorious advocate for enslaving the Indigenous Taínos of the Caribbean. In the words of historian Andrés Reséndez, he “intended to turn the Caribbean into another Guinea,” the region of West Africa that had become a European slave-trading hub.

By 1506, however, Columbus was dead. Most of the genocidal acts of violence that defined the colonial period were carried out by many, many others. In the long shadow of Columbus, we sometimes lose sight of the ideas, laws and ordinary people who enabled colonial violence on a large scale.

As a historian of colonial Latin America, I often begin such discussions by pointing to a peculiar document drafted several years after Columbus’ death that would have greater repercussions for Indigenous peoples than Columbus himself: the Requerimiento, or “Requirement.”

Catch-22

In 1494, the Treaty of Tordesillas infamously divided much of the world beyond Europe into two halves: one for the Spanish crown, the other for the Portuguese. Spaniards lay claim to almost the entirety of the Americas, though they knew almost nothing about this vast domain or the people who lived there.

In order to inform Indigenous people that they had suddenly become vassals of Spain, King Ferdinand and his councilors instructed colonizers to read the Requerimiento aloud upon first contact with all Indigenous groups.

The document presented them with a choice that was no choice at all. They could either become Christians and submit to the authority of the Catholic Church and the king, or else:
“With the help of God, we shall powerfully enter into your country, and shall make war against you in all ways and manners that we can … we shall take you and your wives and your children and shall make slaves of them … the deaths and losses which shall accrue from this are your fault.”

It was a catch-22. According to the document, Indigenous people could either voluntarily surrender their sovereignty and become vassals or bring war upon themselves – and perhaps lose their sovereignty anyway, after much bloodshed. No matter what they chose, the Requerimiento supplied the legal pretext for forcibly incorporating sovereign Indigenous peoples into the Spanish domain.

At its core, the Requerimiento was a legal ritual, a performance of possession – and it was unique to early Spanish imperialism.

‘As absurd as it is stupid’

But for all of its seeming authority, the reading of the Requerimiento was an absurd exercise. It first occurred at what is now Santa Marta, Colombia, during the expedition led by Pedrarias Dávila in 1513. An eyewitness, the chronicler Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo, stated the obvious: “we have no one here who can help [the Indigenous people] understand it.”

Even with a translator, though, the document – with its lofty references to the Biblical creation of the world and papal authority – would hardly be intelligible to people unfamiliar with the Spaniards’ religion. Explaining the convoluted document would require nothing less than a long recitation of Catholic history.

Oviedo suggested that to deliver such a lecture, you’d have to first capture and cage an Indigenous person. Even then, it would be impossible to verify whether the document had been fully understood.

However, for the Requerimiento’s greatest critic, Bartolomé de las Casas, translation was merely one of many problems. A missionary from Spain, Las Casas criticized the spurious requirement itself: that a people should be expected to immediately convert to a religion they have only just learned exists, and
“swear allegiance to a king they have never heard of nor clapped eyes on, and whose subjects and ambassadors prove to be cruel, pitiless and bloodthirsty tyrants. … Such a notion is as absurd as it is stupid and should be treated with the disrespect, scorn and contempt it so amply deserves.”

Las Casas, who documented abuses against Indigenous people in multiple books and speeches, was one of the most outspoken denouncers of Spanish cruelty in the Americas. While he believed Spaniards had a right and even an obligation to convert Indigenous people to Catholicism, he did not believe that conversion should be done under the threat of violence.

Wars and forced settlement

Indigenous people responded to the Requerimiento in numerous ways. When the Chontal Maya of Potonchan – a Maya capital now part of Mexico – heard the conquistador Hernando Cortés read the document three consecutive times, they answered with arrows. After Cortés captured the town, they agreed to become Christian vassals of Spain on the condition that the Spaniards “leave their land.” When Cortés’ men remained after three days, the Chontal Maya attacked again.

Farther north, Spanish expeditioners Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca and Melchior Díaz used the Requerimiento to forcibly relocate various Indigenous groups.

A bloodthirsty governor of the province, Nuño Beltrán de Guzmán – so violent that the Spanish themselves imprisoned him for abuses of power – had driven Indigenous residents out of the Valley of Culiacan in a series of brutal wars. But in 1536, Cabeza de Vaca and Díaz forced several groups, including the Tahue, to repopulate the valley after convincing them to accept the terms of the Requerimiento.

Resettlement would enable the collection of tribute and conversion to Catholicism. It was simply easier to assign missionaries and tribute collectors to established Hispanic townships than to mobile communities spread out across vast territories.

Cabeza de Vaca encouraged Indigenous leaders to accept the proposition by claiming that their god, Aguar, was the same as the Christians’, and so they should “serve him as we commanded.” In such cases, conversion to Catholicism was just as farcical as the Requerimiento itself.

Violence and colonial legacy

Even when Indigenous people accepted the Requerimiento, however, Las Casas wrote that “they are (still) harshly treated as common slaves, put to hard labor and subjected to all manner of abuse and to agonizing torments that ensure a slower and more painful death than would summary execution.” In most cases, the Requerimiento was simply a precursor to violence.

Dávila, the conquistador of present-day northern Colombia, once read it out of earshot of a village just before launching a surprise attack. Others read the Requerimiento “to trees and empty huts” before drawing their swords. The path to vassalage was paved in blood.

These are the truest indications of what the Requerimiento became on the ground. Soldiers and officials were content to violently deploy or discard royal prerogatives as they pleased in their pursuit of the spoils of war.

And yet, despite the viciousness, many Indigenous peoples survived by stringing their bows like the Chontal Maya, or negotiating a new relationship with Spain like the Tahue of Culiacan. Tactics varied greatly and changed over time.

Many Indigenous nations that exercised them survive today, long outliving the Spanish Empire – and the people who carried the Requerimiento on their crusade across the Americas.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

MicroRNA Is The Nobel-Winning Master Regulator Of The Genome – Researchers Are Learning To Treat Disease By Harnessing How It Controls Genes

BY ANDREA KASINSKI

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF BIOLOGICAL

SCIENCES, PURDUE UNIVERSITY

When Victor Ambros and Gary Ruvkun discovered a new molecule they called microRNA in the 1980s, it was a fascinating diversion from what for decades had been called the central dogma of molecular biology.

Recognized with the 2024 Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine, Ambros and Ruvkun had identified a new kind of genetic material that transformed how researchers understood gene regulation.

Like DNA, RNA is a form of genetic material made from individual nucleotides linked into chains. According to the central dogma, genetic information flows in one direction: DNA is transcribed into RNA, and RNA is translated into proteins. But in one major deviation from the central dogma, some RNAs are never translated or coded into proteins.

MicroRNA is one type of these so-called noncoding RNAs. They’re short stretches of genetic material that, rather than coding for a specific protein themselves, control the RNAs that do code for proteins. In effect, microRNAs turn particular genes on and off.

I dedicated my scientific career to understanding how RNA works, in part because research on RNA has lagged behind other macromolecules like DNA and proteins. The Nobel Prize recognition of microRNA molecules marks both their importance in biology and their promise as potential treatments for various diseases, including cancer.

MicroRNAs and disease

Scientists regard microRNAs as master regulators of the genome due to their ability to bind to and alter the expression of many protein-coding RNAs. Indeed, a single microRNA can regulate anywhere from 10 to 100 protein-coding RNAs. Rather than translating DNA to proteins, they instead can bind to protein-coding RNAs to silence genes.

The reason microRNAs can regulate such a diverse pool of RNAs stems from their ability to bind to target RNAs they don’t perfectly match up with. This means a single microRNA can often regulate a pool of targets that are all involved in similar processes in the cell, leading to an enhanced response.

Because a single microRNA can regulate multiple genes, many microRNAs can contribute to disease when they become dysfunctional.

In 2002, researchers first identified the role dysfunctional microRNAs play in disease through patients with a type of blood and bone marrow cancer called chronic lymphocytic leukemia. This cancer results from the loss of two microRNAs normally involved in blocking tumor cell growth. Since then, scientists have identified over 2,000 microRNAs in people, many of which are altered in various diseases.

The field has developed a fairly solid understanding of how microRNA dysfunction contributes to disease. Changing one microRNA can change several other genes, resulting in a plethora of alterations that can collectively reshape the cell’s physiology. For example, over half of all cancers have significantly reduced activity in a microRNA called miR-34a. Because miR-34a regulates many genes involved in preventing the growth and migration of cancer cells, losing miR-34a can increase the risk of developing cancer.

Researchers are looking into using microRNAs as therapeutics for cancer, heart disease, neurodegenerative disease and others. While results in the laboratory have been promising, bringing microRNA treatments into the clinic has met multiple challenges. Many are related to inefficient delivery into target cells and poor stability, which limit their effectiveness.

Delivering microRNA to cells

One reason why delivering microRNA treatments into cells is difficult is because microRNA treatments need to be delivered specifically to diseased cells while avoiding healthy cells. Unlike mRNA COVID-19 vaccines that are taken up by scavenging immune cells whose job is to detect foreign materials, microRNA treatments need to fool the body into thinking they aren’t foreign in order to avoid immune attack and get to their intended cells.

Scientists are studying various ways to deliver microRNA treatments to their specific target cells. One method garnering a great deal of attention relies on directly linking the microRNA to a ligand, a kind of small molecule that binds to specific proteins on the surface of cells. Compared with healthy cells, diseased cells can have a disproportionate number of some surface proteins, or receptors. So, ligands can help microRNAs home specifically to diseased cells while avoiding healthy cells. The first ligand approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to deliver small RNAs like microRNAs, N-acetylgalactosamine, or GalNAc, preferentially delivers RNAs to liver cells.

Identifying ligands that can deliver small RNAs to other cells requires finding receptors expressed at high enough levels on the surface of target cells. Typically, over one million copies per cell are needed in order to achieve sufficient delivery of the drug.

One ligand that stands out is folate, also referred to as vitamin B9, a small molecule critical during periods of rapid cell growth such as fetal development. Because some tumor cells have over one million folate receptors, this ligand provides sufficient opportunity to deliver enough of a therapeutic RNA to target different types of cancer. For example, my laboratory developed a new molecule called FolamiR-34a – folate linked to miR-34a – that reduced the size of breast and lung cancer tumors in mice.

Making microRNAs more stable

One of the other challenges with using small RNAs is their poor stability, which leads to their rapid degradation. As such, RNA-based treatments are generally short-lived in the body and require frequent doses to maintain a therapeutic effect.

To overcome this challenge, researchers are modifying small RNAs in various ways. While each RNA requires a specific modification pattern, successful changes can significantly increase their stability. This reduces the need for frequent dosing, subsequently decreasing treatment burden and cost.

For example, modified GalNAc-siRNAs, another form of small RNAs, reduces dosing from every few days to once every six months in nondividing cells. My team developed folate ligands linked to modified microRNAs for cancer treatment that reduced dosing from once every other day to once a week. For diseases like cancer where cells are rapidly dividing and quickly diluting the delivered microRNA, this increase in activity is a significant advancement in the field. We anticipate this accomplishment will facilitate further development of this folate-linked microRNA as a cancer treatment in the years to come.

Many labs are working to develop treatments based on the discoveries new Nobel laureates Ambros and Ruvkun made decades ago. While there’s still considerable work to be done to overcome the hurdles associated with microRNA treatments, it’s clear that RNA shows promise as a therapeutic for many diseases.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

ZIMBABWE: 'Africa Still Feeling Effects Of Brutal Colonial Past'

Zimbabwe's President Emerson Mnangagwa

BY FARIRAI MACHIVENYIKA

SOUTH AFRICA (THE HERALD) -- President Emmerson Mnangagwa has emphasized that Africa continues to feel the effects of its brutal colonial history, a legacy that still hinders its progress today. In a speech read on his behalf by Foreign Affairs and International Trade Minister Ambassador Frederick Shava at the inaugural Africa Peace and Security Dialogue in Johannesburg, South Africa, the President called for renewed efforts to address the neo-colonial challenges the continent faces.

"As Africans, we remain cognisant of the experiences of the brutal colonial period and bemoan the neo-colonial effects which we continue to endure to this day," said President Mnangagwa. "We were robbed of our human and personal integrity; our vibrant African institutions were compromised or destroyed; our value and knowledge systems were either violently suppressed or deliberately undermined."

The President highlighted that Africa's historical trauma is central to the root causes of many conflicts across the continent. He stressed the importance of an African Renaissance to address these challenges, calling for solutions that reflect Africa's unique circumstances.

In his address at the dialogue, which was hosted by the Thabo Mbeki Foundation, President Mnangagwa also pointed to the array of contemporary security issues Africa is grappling with. These include unconstitutional changes of government, inter- and intra-state conflicts, climate change, the debt crisis, weak global governance, transnational organized crime, resource outflows, and terrorism.

"African governments are often blamed for weak political and economic institutions, yet evidence abounds that Africa has and continues to be deliberately made the theatre of political and military conflicts," he noted. "Proxy wars within the context of East-West rivalry and regime change agendas for easy access to Africa's strategic natural resources have characterized this period."

President Mnangagwa expressed concern over the recent military coups in the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) region, with over ten attempts since 2020. He noted that these actions reflect former colonial powers' influence and the growing divide between civilian and military elites.
"The Sahel region has been a bedrock of instability since the fall of Libya in 2011," he said, adding that the jihadist insurgencies and terrorism afflicting the region remain unresolved. "The unconstitutional changes of government in Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger were driven by the military's desire to rid themselves of what they saw as Western-controlled governments."

The President explained that these countries formed a confederation in July 2024 as part of their fight against neo-colonialism, signaling a potential split within ECOWAS. The confederation has since turned to Russia for cooperation, severing ties with the West.

On the conflict in Sudan, President Mnangagwa pointed out how external interference from Russia, the USA, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates has exacerbated the situation since the removal of President Omar Al Bashir in 2019. "The East-West rivalry is, once again, at play," he said, lamenting the millions displaced and the ongoing destruction.

The President underscored the importance of forums like the Africa Peace and Security Dialogue in addressing the continent's challenges, linking these discussions to the wider goals of Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want.

President Mnangagwa also reflected on the global context, noting that the 79th Session of the United Nations General Assembly had recognized the urgency of addressing evolving global peace and security challenges. "The ongoing conflicts and the carnage we witness every day are an affront to our collective efforts towards a peaceful and secure world."

He commended the Thabo Mbeki Foundation for advancing African-led solutions to these issues, stressing that Africa must take charge of its own destiny. He also criticized the global military-industrial complex for perpetuating conflicts to sustain their business interests. "Unfortunately, wars and warfare are big business internationally," he said. "Our responses to the challenges we confront should be informed by this unfortunate fact."

The three-day event in Johannesburg concluded with participation from political leaders, academics, and experts from across the continent. The dialogue aimed to explore pathways toward sustainable peace and security solutions for Africa.

Political Tension In West Africa Puts Vital Climate Action At Risk

BY KEBBA JEFFANG

A wave of military coups in West Africa is reshaping political landscapes and jeopardising a unified response to climate change.

In January, relations within the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) broke down to the point where the junta-led nations of Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger announced they were leaving the regional bloc.

While they are yet to formally do so, the juntas’ trio of chiefs said in July they were “irrevocably” turning their backs on ECOWAS. In September, plans were announced for a new passport to make travel easier between the three countries.

ECOWAS is still hoping to negotiate their return, saying a split would risk regional disintegration and worsen security. It would also pose a serious threat to the bloc’s climate strategy. West Africa is already experiencing severe climate change impacts, including food insecurity and heatwaves.

One of the worst affected areas is the Sahel. Situated along the Sahara Desert’s southern border, the Sahel comprises six Francophone countries – Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger and Senegal – and is home to more than 100 million people.

How is climate change affecting the Sahel?

Temperatures in the Sahel are rising 1.5 times faster than in the rest of the world and droughts are becoming more intense, according to a report by Solidarités International, a non-profit humanitarian agency. Climate change has also brought heavier rains. But with the land too dry to absorb the rainwater, there have been destructive river floods in Mali and Niger.

By 2050, climate change could plunge up to 13.5 million people in the Sahel into poverty and lead to the displacement of up to 32 million across West Africa, according to the World Bank.

Noudéhouénou Gandonou is a US-based climate finance and fragility expert who has researched climate impacts in the Sahel. He says changing rainfall patterns have led smallholder farmers relying on rainfed agriculture to change planting dates, diversify crops and plant drought-resistant varieties.

“However, these adaptations are not enough to counter the escalating severity and frequency of droughts, which have affected approximately 125 million people in the Sahel from 1970 to 2022 alone,” Gandonou tells Dialogue Earth. “The increasing unpredictability and severity of these conditions threaten the region’s livelihoods and food security, exacerbating existing socio-economic vulnerabilities.”

Conflict and climate change in the Sahel

Since 2020, West Africa (home to over 400 million people across 16 countries) has witnessed at least six successful military takeovers and numerous foiled attempts, plunging the region into political insecurity.

The Sahel region has been described as the “epicentre of terrorism”, and in 2022 accounted for 43% of global terrorism deaths. Since the 2000s, more than 2.5 million people have been displaced there, increasing the need for humanitarian interventions. This shift in priorities has made climate adaptation even more difficult.

“Because of climate change, land and water resources have become scarce, and as a result, people fight over these limited resources. That leads to insecurity and general instability,” says the Gambian political and security analyst, Essa Njie.

Njie adds: “Once these challenges are present, we risk having organised crime, competition over scarce resources, violent conflict and terrorist infiltration.”

The future of the bloc’s climate strategy

In 2022, ECOWAS agreed its first ever Regional Climate Strategy (RCS) to fulfil member countries’ obligations under the Paris Agreement.

The bloc’s representatives tell Dialogue Earth that the political instability will severely undermine the solidarity and coordination needed to implement this strategy successfully.

“Climate change is global, but actions are local. The [RCS] is a testament to this,” says a spokesperson for the office of the ECOWAS president, Omar Touray. “National actors, including public actors, civil society and the private sector become the key drivers of implementation. At political level, climate action will be pushed to the back burner, as the struggle for unity and survival of the community is paramount.

“Political instability will surely impact the scope of implementation of our climate strategy. For instance, the transboundary areas and water basins that need regional adaptation actions will not be easily accessible.”

ECOWAS has also made it clear that any country leaving the bloc will lose access to its projects. “The Regional Climate Centre may face some restrictions [in providing] forecast data and information to these Member States,” the spokesperson adds. “Consequently, they may not benefit from some of the best available practices and environmental technologies developed by the other countries and vice versa. This will create vulnerability when it comes to the climate security of the region as a whole.

“In addition, the capacity of the region to capture carbon emissions will be reduced,” the spokesperson says. “We are stronger together.”

Fatou Jeng, a climate change activist and founder of Clean Earth Gambia, says the political instability could shift priorities from climate adaptation to the military, stalling progress and diverting funds from climate projects.

“With some leaders not recognising the authority of ECOWAS, it also means them not accepting and endorsing the strategy, which will significantly impact coordinated responses to climate projects and actions,” she adds.

The ECOWAS strategy “includes low-cost adaptation measures in key sectors such as agriculture and water resources, supported by coordinated actions among governments, the private sector and global climate funds”, Gandonou tells Dialogue Earth.

Belélé Jérôme William Bationo, a climate change researcher from Burkina Faso, says his country lacks the means to implement policies and programmes itself. It would struggle to finance them, and lacks technical capacity, he says.

Maïmouna Adamou, an activist and coordinator of Climate Clock in Benin (another ECOWAS state) stresses that peace and collaboration are essential in the fight against climate change, and fears for the region’s climate response.

“The split within ECOWAS could make matters worse, as coups d’état disrupt environmental policies and projects,” she says. “Climate projects can be delayed or cancelled, harming both governments and populations.”

Charting a way forward

ECOWAS is still hoping to rebuild relationships with Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger; sanctions aimed at restoring democratic rule in the nations have been lifted.

“Lifting those sanctions is meant to mitigate the situation and ensure that actions are taken by the commission to support its member states to fight climate change challenges under the implementation of the RCS,” its spokesperson says.

In May, the Africa Policy Research Institute published a report on climate change adaptation policies and strategies regarding Ghana, Nigeria and Senegal. It stressed the need for capacity building and knowledge sharing among West African countries to address the climate crisis.

“I firmly believe that collaboration and peace are essential in the fight against climate change,” says Maïmouna. “It is the reason we need ECOWAS to act as one force.”

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Foundations Launch New Collaborative Fund To Strengthen Democracy In West Africa

The Ford Foundation, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Luminate, and Open Society Foundations have launched a $20 million West Africa Democracy Fund (WADF) to reimagine, renew and strengthen democracy across the region. The fund, targeted at supporting West African states currently facing various democratic challenges, will, over a period of three years, support activities to increase citizens’ engagement with democratic and political transitions in the respective countries.

Darren Walker, President of Ford Foundation stated, “I am grateful for the collaboration of our philanthropic, civil society, and government partners, as we launch the West Africa Democracy Fund, which follows the lead of the people of West Africa as they work to strengthen the foundations of democracy and build a more resilient future.”

“Research has shown the inextricable link between the rising decline of democracy across West Africa and rising inequality, therefore these issues must be addressed simultaneously. Greater citizen participation in democratic processes is needed to fully realize a peaceful, inclusive democracy that empowers citizens to build a society that is more just, and that contributes to greater prosperity and stable economy.”

“As an organization focused on the advancement of social justice, the Ford Foundation is matching our commitment with action with this Fund, which we envision will propel our collective efforts in expanding democratic and civic spaces for citizens’ voices to be included in defining the norms for the governance of their countries,” Walker added.

“In West Africa, the demand for democracy is not matched by the supply of democracy. Opposition to military rule has weakened across the continent, and citizens bear the brunt of abuses of power by ruling classes,” said Dr. Kole Shettima, Director, Nigeria Office of the MacArthur Foundation. “The new Democracy Fund will support the realization of aspirations of West Africans for ‘democracy dividends’ and a more just, verdant, and peaceful world.”

Brian Kagoro, Managing Director of Programs at the Open Society Foundations, stated, “Democracy in West Africa is an ideal embedded in the traditions and cultures of the people. It is an aspiration ingrained in the vision of the young people. The fight for a more democratic West Africa is a fight for a West Africa that is free from imperial domination, neo-colonial political mortgaging, and external manipulation. True democracy in West Africa requires governments that are accountable to their citizens and systems that deliver equitable outcomes for all. The democracy fund provides an opportunity to leverage the current momentum for democratic advancement in the region.”

According to Dr. ChiChi Aniagolu-Okoye, Regional Director, Ford Foundation Office of West Africa (OWA), “It is important to emphasize that the West Africa Democracy Fund is the result of deep engagement and listening across the region with local leaders and Civil Society Organizations. Therefore, the solutions we seek through this Fund will be homegrown, rooted in the needs and aspirations of the people of the sub-region and driven by the people themselves” she concluded.

Through grantmaking to national consortia, the Fund will support activities that promote a more inclusive approach to democracy including multi-stakeholder dialogues, regional engagements with the Economic Community of West African States and the African Union, joint learning and the strengthening of key state institutions, including the judiciary. Luminate is focusing its contributions on supporting tech accountability efforts.

------------THE FORD FOUNDATION

US Spends A Record $17.9 Billion On Military Aid To Israel Since Last Oct. 7

Destruction left by the Israeli air and ground offensive is seen in Khan Younis, Gaza Strip, Friday, Sept. 13, 2024. (AP Photo/Abdel Kareem Hana)

BY ELLEN KNICKMEYER

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States has spent a record of at least $17.9 billion on military aid to Israel since the war in Gaza began and led to escalating conflict around the Middle East, according to a report for Brown University’s Costs of War project, released Monday on the anniversary of Hamas’ attacks on Israel.

An additional $4.86 billion has gone into stepped-up U.S. military operations in the region since the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks, researchers said in findings first provided to The Associated Press. That includes the costs of a Navy-led campaign to quell strikes on commercial shipping by Yemen’s Houthis, who are carrying them out in solidarity with the fellow Iranian-backed group Hamas.

The report — completed before Israel opened a second front, this one against Iranian-backed Hezbollah militants in Lebanon, in late September — is one of the first tallies of estimated U.S. costs as the Biden administration backs Israel in its conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon and seeks to contain hostilities by Iran-allied armed groups in the region.

The financial toll is on top of the cost in human lives: Hamas militants killed more than 1,200 people in Israel a year ago and took others hostage. Israel’s retaliatory offensive has killed nearly 42,000 people in Gaza, according to the territory’s Health Ministry, which does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its count.

At least 1,400 people in Lebanon, including Hezbollah fighters and civilians, have been killed since Israel greatly expanded its strikes in that country in late September.

The financial costs were calculated by Linda J. Bilmes, a professor at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, who has assessed the full costs of U.S. wars since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and fellow researchers William D. Hartung and Stephen Semler.

Here’s a look at where some of the U.S. taxpayer money went:

Record military aid to Israel

Israel — a protege of the United States since its 1948 founding — is the biggest recipient of U.S. military aid in history, getting $251.2 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars since 1959, the report says.

Even so, the $17.9 billion spent since Oct. 7, 2023, in inflation-adjusted dollars, is by far the most military aid sent to Israel in one year. The U.S. committed to providing billions in military assistance to Israel and Egypt each year when they signed their 1979 U.S.-brokered peace treaty, and an agreement since the Obama administration set the annual amount for Israel at $3.8 billion through 2028.

The U.S. aid since the Gaza war started includes military financing, arms sales, at least $4.4 billion in drawdowns from U.S. stockpiles and hand-me-downs of used equipment.

Much of the U.S. weapons delivered in the year were munitions, from artillery shells to 2,000-pound bunker-busters and precision-guided bombs.

Expenditures range from $4 billion to replenish Israel’s Iron Dome and David’s Sling missile defense systems to cash for rifles and jet fuel, the study says.

Unlike the United States’ publicly documented military aid to Ukraine, it was impossible to get the full details of what the U.S. has shipped Israel since last Oct. 7, so the $17.9 billion for the year is a partial figure, the researchers said.

They cited Biden administration “efforts to hide the full amounts of aid and types of systems through bureaucratic maneuvering.”

Funding for the key U.S. ally during a war that has exacted a heavy toll on civilians has divided Americans during the presidential campaign. But support for Israel has long carried weight in U.S. politics, and Biden said Friday that “no administration has helped Israel more than I have.”

U.S. military operations in the Middle East

The Biden administration has bolstered its military strength in the region since the war in Gaza started, aiming to deter and respond to any attacks on Israeli and American forces.

Those additional operations cost at least $4.86 billion, the report said, not including beefed-up U.S. military aid to Egypt and other partners in the region.

The U.S. had 34,000 forces in the Middle East the day that Hamas broke through Israeli barricades around Gaza to attack. That number rose to about 50,000 in August when two aircraft carriers were in the region, aiming to discourage retaliation after a strike attributed to Israel killed Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Iran. The total is now around 43,000.

The number of U.S. vessels and aircraft deployed — aircraft carrier strike groups, an amphibious ready group, fighter squadrons, and air defense batteries — in the Mediterranean, Red Sea and Gulf of Aden has varied during the year.

The Pentagon has said another aircraft carrier strike group is headed to Europe very soon and that could increase the troop total again if two carriers are again in the region at the same time.

The fight against the Houthis

The U.S. military has deployed since the start of the war to try to counter escalated strikes by the Houthis, an armed faction that controls Yemen’s capital and northern areas, and has been firing on merchant ships in the Red Sea in solidarity with Gaza. The researchers called the $4.86 billion cost to the U.S. an “unexpectedly complicated and asymmetrically expensive challenge.”

Houthis have kept launching attacks on ships traversing the critical trade route, drawing U.S. strikes on launch sites and other targets. The campaign has become the most intense running sea battle the Navy has faced since World War II.

“The U.S. has deployed multiple aircraft carriers, destroyers, cruisers and expensive multimillion-dollar missiles against cheap Iranian-made Houthi drones that cost $2,000,” the authors said.

Just Friday, the U.S. military struck more than a dozen Houthi targets in Yemen, going after weapons systems, bases and other equipment, officials said.

The researchers’ calculations included at least $55 million in additional combat pay from the intensified operations in the region.

Why Heart Patients Have Trouble Sticking To A Healthy Diet, And 3 Things That Help Them Eat Better

AUTHORS:

GABRIELLE GHISI

AFFILIATE SCIENTIST, KITE RESEARCH

INSTITUTE, ADJUNCT PROFESSOR, 

DEPT. OF PHYSICAL THERAPY,

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

CAMILA KUMMEL DUARTE

PROFESSOR DO DEPARTMENTE DE

NUTRICAO, UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE

MINAS GERAIS (UFMG)

Cardiovascular disease remains a leading cause of death worldwide, and managing it effectively requires more than just medical intervention: what you eat plays a crucial role in your heart’s health.

For cardiac patients, following nutritional recommendations isn’t just a suggestion; it’s a lifeline. A heart-healthy diet can help control risk factors like high blood pressure, cholesterol levels and obesity, all of which are key contributors to heart disease.

A healthy diet will help you prevent new heart problems, which is called secondary prevention, and it will help improve functional capacity and quality of life, giving you more independence for daily activities. But for many patients, adhering to these dietary guidelines can be a significant challenge even while they are in a cardiac rehabilitation program. This is especially challenging for those who live in low-resourced settings (areas or communities with few resources and little support for health and wellness).

Cardiac rehab is an interdisciplinary approach focused on interventions for secondary prevention and improving cardiovascular prognosis, to reduce the global impact of cardiovascular disease. We recently conducted a study aimed at understanding the barriers and facilitators that low-resourced patients face when trying to follow nutritional recommendations in cardiac rehab.

The findings underscore how critical, yet complex, it is for patients to maintain a heart-healthy diet. The results of this study are not just informative — they are a call to action for health-care providers, policymakers and communities alike.

The cost of healthy eating

One of the primary barriers we identified is the cost of healthy foods. Many heart-healthy foods — like fresh fruits, vegetables, and lean proteins — can be expensive, especially for individuals or families living on a tight budget. In low-income areas, access to these foods is often limited, with more affordable but less healthy options readily available.

This economic reality makes it difficult for patients to consistently choose foods that support their heart health. In the last few years the cost of healthy food in Canada, a high-income setting, has been rising due to high food inflation. Despite that, the current Canada’s Food Guide is less expensive for adults to follow compared to the previous ones.

Another significant barrier is the complexity of nutritional information. Patients are often bombarded with a wealth of dietary guidelines, which can be confusing and overwhelming. Without proper guidance, including education and individualization, it’s easy for someone to feel lost or discouraged, particularly if they lack basic nutritional knowledge. This can lead to frustration and, ultimately, poor adherence to dietary recommendations.

Cultural factors also play a role. In many cases, traditional diets may not align with the standard dietary guidelines recommended for heart health. Patients may find it challenging to adapt their eating habits without feeling like they are losing an important part of their cultural identity. This disconnect can make it even harder for patients to stick to a heart-healthy diet.

Empowering patients to eat better

Despite these challenges, our study also highlighted several facilitators that can make a significant difference. One of the most effective is community support. Programs that provide affordable access to healthy foods, like food banks or community gardens, can help alleviate some of the financial pressures.

Additionally, accessible information sources that break down complex nutritional advice into simple, actionable steps can empower patients to make healthier choices.

Importantly, incorporating culturally relevant foods into dietary plans can make the transition to a heart-healthy diet more manageable and acceptable. When patients see that their traditional foods can be part of their diet, they are more likely to embrace and maintain the recommended changes.

Our findings emphasize the importance of a tailored approach to nutritional guidance in cardiac rehab, especially for low-resourced patients. It’s not enough to simply tell patients what to eat — health-care providers need to listen and understand the unique challenges patients face and provide practical, sustainable solutions. This means working closely with patients, offering personalized advice that considers their financial situation, providing access to resources and considering cultural preferences.

Making heart-healthy diets accessible

The implications of our research extend beyond individual patient care. They highlight the need for systemic changes that make healthy eating more accessible for everyone. This could include policies that subsidize healthy foods, increase the availability of fresh produce in underserved areas or create educational programs that are accessible to all.

Following nutritional recommendations is vital for managing cardiovascular disease, but it’s not always easy, especially for those with limited resources. Identifying and addressing the specific barriers these patients face can help them make lasting, positive changes to their diet and, ultimately, their heart health.

This research underscores the need for a more equitable approach to health care, one that ensures all patients have the support they need to live healthier, longer lives.

READ ORIGINAL STORY HERE

Don’t Expect Human Life Expectancy To Grow Much More, Researcher Says

FILE- Emma Morano holds a cake with candles marking 117 years on the day of her birthday, Nov. 29, 2016, in Verbania, Italy. (AP Photo/Antonio Calanni)

BY MIKE STOBBE

NEW YORK (AP) — Humanity is hitting the upper limit of life expectancy, according to a new study.

Advances in medical technology and genetic research — not to mention larger numbers of people making it to age 100 — are not not translating into marked jumps in lifespan overall, according to researchers who found shrinking longevity increases in countries with the longest-living populations.

“We have to recognize there’s a limit” and perhaps reassess assumptions about when people should retire and how much money they’ll need to live out their lives, said S. Jay Olshansky, a University of Illinois-Chicago researcher who was lead author of the study published Monday by the journal Nature Aging.

Mark Hayward, a University of Texas researcher not involved in the study, called it “a valuable addition to the mortality literature.”

“We are reaching a plateau” in life expectancy, he agreed. It’s always possible some breakthrough could push survival to greater heights, “but we don’t have that now,” Hayward said.
What is life expectancy?

Life expectancy is an estimate of the average number of years a baby born in a given year might expect to live, assuming death rates at that time hold constant. It is one of the world’s most important health measures, but it is also imperfect: It is a snapshot estimate that cannot account for deadly pandemics, miracle cures or other unforeseen developments that might kill or save millions of people.

In the new research, Olshansky and his research partners tracked life expectancy estimates for the years 1990 to 2019, drawn from a database administered by the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research. The researchers focused on eight of the places in the world where people live the longest — Australia, France, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain and Switzerland.

The U.S. doesn’t even rank in the top 40. But is also was included “because we live here” and because of past, bold estimates that life expectancy in the U.S. might surge dramatically in this century, Olshansky said.

Who lives the longest?

Women continue to live longer than men and life expectancy improvements are still occurring — but at a slowing pace, the researchers found. In 1990, the average amount of improvement was about 2 1/2 years per decade. In the 2010s, it was 1 1/2 years — and almost zero in the U.S.

The U.S. is more problematic because it is harder hit by a range of issues that kill people even before they hit old age, including drug overdoses, shootings, obesity and inequities that make it hard for some people to get sufficient medical care.

But in one calculation, the researchers estimated what would happen in all nine places if all deaths before age 50 were eliminated. The increase at best was still only 1 1/2 years, Olshansky said.

Eileen Crimmins, a University of Southern California gerontology expert, said in an email that she agrees with the study’s findings. She added: “For me personally, the most important issue is the dismal and declining relative position of the United States.”

Why life expectancy may not be able to rise forever

The study suggests that there’s a limit to how long most people live, and we’ve about hit it, Olshansky said.

“We’re squeezing less and less life out of these life-extending technologies. And the reason is, aging gets in the way,” he said.

It may seem common to hear of a person living to 100 — former U.S. President Jimmy Carter hit that milestone last week. In 2019, a little over 2% of Americans made it to 100, compared with about 5% in Japan and 9% in Hong Kong, Olshansky said.

It’s likely that the ranks of centenarians will grow in the decades ahead, experts say, but that’s because of population growth. The percentage of people hitting 100 will remain limited, likely with fewer than 15% of women and 5% of men making it that long in most countries, Olshansky said.