qtpiebaby.com

Tuesday, April 12, 2005

A National Academy of Sciences report (.pdf) last year said that while the milk and meat from cloned animals would not likely make anyone sick, more research should be performed. Now, a new US-Japan study published in the April 11 online issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences says that milk and meat from cloned cattle does indeed appear to meet industry standards and appears to be safe for human consumption.

As BBC News reports, the scientists, led by Professor Jerry Yang from the University of Connecticut, compared the produce from two beef and four dairy clones, all derived from a single Holstein dairy cow and a single Japanese black bull, with the produce from normal animals of similar age and breed.

The meat was analysed against more than 100 physiological, tissue and cellular components, while the milk was analysed for protein, fat and other variables. No significant differences between the produce of cloned and normal cattle were found. Higher levels of fat and fatty acids were found in the cloned cow meat, but they still fell within beef industry standards.

While the study showed the cloned produce to be within the range approved for human consumption, the scientists stressed that the research was still in its early stages. Their findings, they said, provide “guidelines” for further research with larger numbers of clones from different genetic backgrounds.

Cloning livestock may one day increase yields by copying those animals that are especially productive and especially resistant to disease.

“The milking production levels in the US are three to four times higher than levels in China; maybe even five times or more compared to cows in India and some other countries,” Professor Jerry Yang told BBC News. “Therefore cloning could offer technology for duplicating superior farm animals. However, all the products from these cloned animals must be safe for human consumption. …and it is a major issue for scientists to provide a scientific basis for the data and information to address this question.”

As USA Today reports, there is currently no law governing the sale of meat or milk from the estimated 1,000 to 2,000 cloned farm animals in the USA. But since 2003, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has asked producers to voluntarily keep the meat and milk of these animals, and that of their offspring, out of the food supply.

Wired News reports that companies like ViaGen and Cyagra, which offer livestock-cloning services, have also been waiting for several years for a final say from the FDA.

“For the United States agricultural industry, (cloning) can reduce the number of cows necessary for milking,” said Jerry Yang “They can have a pleasant environment and produce even more milk.” He also said that cloning cattle from the United States, where genetic breeding is more advanced, could save developing countries 50 years of breeding.

The idea of cloning animals for human consumption is not without its critics. First, there are the welfare concerns, as most cloned animals do not make it to term before being born, and many of those that do are born deformed or prone to illness. The Humane Society of the United States has asked for a ban on milk and meat from clones for just this reason. Second, there is still the concern that healthy clones may have subtle defects that could make their food products unsafe to eat.

As the Washington Post reports, some critics are asking why it is necessary to clone cows that produce huge amounts of milk when surpluses, rather than shortages, are the main problem facing the U.S. dairy industry today.

Friday, January 21, 2022

The American Museum of Natural History in New York City removed a statue of the 26th President of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt, on Thursday following over a year of controversy. The statue, officially the “Equestrian Statue of Theodore Roosevelt,” depicts Roosevelt riding a horse flanked by a Native American and an African American at either side on foot.

The statue had stood at the steps of the museum since 1940 as a tribute to the former president who the museum notes “as a devoted naturalist and author of works on natural history”.

The museum requested the statue be removed in June 2020 following global protests over the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. The museum said: “the statue itself communicates a racial hierarchy that the Museum and members of the public have long found disturbing.”

The request for removal was supported by former New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, Roosevelt’s great-grandson Theodore Roosevelt IV and the New York City Public Design Commission (NYCPDC). The NYCPDC resolved to remove and temporarily store the statue.

The New York Young Republican Club has defended the statue. Club leader Gavin Wax told Fox News in 2020: “this was about a cultural revolution engulfing our nation. We need to stand up, we have history on our side.” In November, it was announced that the statue would be moved to the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library in Medora, North Dakota.

Tuesday, October 11, 2005

Former Deputy President of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, has appeared in a Durban court to face corruption charges. Mr Zuma was dismissed by the President, Thabo Mbeki, earlier in the year, following the conviction on fraud charges of his financial advisor, Schabir Shaik.

Friday, January 23, 2009

Wikinews has learned that the internet group known only as “Anonymous” has hacked the website of the No Cussing Club (NCC), nocussing.com, for at least two days in a row. On day one, the group hacked into the website, replacing the content with links to images of alleged e-mail conversations. The e-mails appear to be from the founder’s e-mail account, accusing organization members of forgery and using the site for their own personal financial gains. The website was also replaced with Anonymous’s logo and a message. On January 22, they again attacked the website, by means of a Distributed Denial-of-service attack (DDoS), bringing it offline periodically throughout the day. Anonymous attacked the Scientology website in 2008 with a DDoS attack, taking it off-line for at least two days.

“It has come to our attention that the creators of the no cussing club, McKay and Brent Hatch have done so at great personal gain. Their material promotes the organization as the brainchild of their 14-year-old son, when actually the material is written by his parents, who also manage his profitable career while using his speaking events to plug their own material,” said Anonymous on the hacked website. On Encyclopedia Dramatica, a satire Wiki, they claim further responsibility for the hack and exposition saying they managed to break into McKay and Brent Hatch’s email accounts. “[the accounts got] haxx0rd and via this astonishing development passwords were got and a certain website got its shit ruined.”

According to the NCC’s website, it has 20,000 members worldwide, was founded in 2007 by McKay Hatch, a 14-year-old boy, and aims at discouraging swearing in public places such as schools. In 2008, McKay even succeeded in making cussing illegal in his hometown of South Pasadena, California and has appeared on various talk shows such as that of Doctor Phil. However, according to e-mails leaked to Wikinews, allegedly written by the boy’s father Brent, a motivational speaker also owning Dawson Publishing, the parents are allegedly using the site and their son’s material for their own personal financial gain. Anonymous also claims that the parents have forged some of their son’s writings and claim it to be his.

The e-mails allege that Brent along with his publishing company, the name which “nocussing.com” is also registered under, were trying to set up assemblies in the No Cussing Club’s name at schools across the United States for US$1,500.00 per show and would then pocket the money, doing the same for postcards they created for churches and schools.

“McKay spoke last night to a group of 40 people, and at the end of his presentation, there wasn’t a dry eye in the crowd. I know this is going to work because the message is so important. Thanks for all you do and I hope we can work together for a long time, and of course make money in the process,” said Brent in an alleged e-mail conversation on November 25, 2008. Earlier in August 2008, Brent spoke about hoping to reach a “goal” of “2.5 million dollars” by selling thousands of postcards to “schools and churches”.

On January 19, 2009, ABC News.com reported that McKay claimed Anonymous was sending him and his family hate e-mail and death threats, nearly 50,000 per day, “almost all of them filled with obscenities” and spam. On the NCC’s website, McKay calls himself the “most cyberbullied kid on the planet” because of Anonymous’s attacks.

“A lot of people were saying I was taking away their freedom of speech,” said McKay to ABC News on January 16. “All I was trying to do was raise awareness.” He says he formed the club because his schoolmates were sick of hearing people swear in public. Wikinews contacted the NCC to confirm or deny the reports, but would only say that “the FBI is [working] on it [the case]” including “our attorney and we will press charges” against those who are responsible for the crimes.

Anonymous is known to prank and hack websites and e-mail accounts. In September 2008, the group hacked into BillOreilly.com, the official website of Fox News Channel commentator Bill O’Reilly, exposing personal information of the site’s users in a document posted on the internet.

The NCC is located in South Pasadena. According to the California Penal Code §502 part C of the computer hacking laws, depending on the offense if caught, punishments could be a “fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, or two or three years, or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment”.

On October 20, 2008, Dmitriy Guzner, aged 18 from New Jersey, admitted to the charges related to carrying out the DDoS attack on Scientology’s website. He was subsequently charged with computer hacking crimes and faces a maximum sentence of ten years imprisonment.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

The International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, Netherlands has ordered the arrest of the president of the African country of Sudan, Omar Hassan al-Bashir. The warrant was issued by the ICC for seven charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes, in the Darfur region of the country.

In the ruling, the ICC said that al-Bashir was “intentionally directing attacks against an important part of the civilian population of Darfur, Sudan, murdering, exterminating, raping, torturing and forcibly transferring large numbers of civilians and pillaging their property”. The ruling added that there was not enough evidence to charge him with genocide. A few hours after its ruling, the Sudan revoked six foreign aid agency licenses, but did not state why.

The ICC has never before issued an arrest warrant for a head-of-state while they were still in power. In the nearly six-years that the Darfur region has been engaged in battle, over 300,000 people have been killed, or died as a result of the fighting. Countless millions have fled the country, seeking shelter in refugee camps.

During a rally protesting the decision on Wednesday, Al-Bashir spoke, calling the charges worthless and told the ICC to “eat” the warrant. “[It is] not worth the ink it is written on. It is a flawed decision”. Egypt says it is also not in favor of the warrant and the government states it will ask the United Nations Security Council to stop the implementation of it.

The Human Rights Watch, a human rights organization located in the United States, in New York “the International Criminal Court has made Omar al-Bashir a wanted man”, welcoming the warrant.

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

A thirteen-month-old Canadian infant dying from a unknown neurological condition was transferred Sunday night from a Canadian hospital, where he had received treatment since October 2010, to a U.S. hospital. In January, a Canadian Superior Court judge had ruled that the Canadian hospital could remove the infant’s breathing tube against the parents’ wishes and issued a do-not-resuscitate order.

According to court documents, Joseph Maraachli, known as “Baby Joseph”, has been repeatedly diagnosed as in a vegetative state with no hope of recovery after suffering an episode of “seizure activity” at age six months. At that time, an MRI showed “a reduction in brain size associated with cells dying from metabolic stress.” He stopped breathing in October and was hospitalized at Ontario’s London Health Sciences Centre (LHSC) where he remained until Sunday. A panel of five pediatric clinic and three neurology physicians subsequently concluded that “there will be no recovery and no treatment options exist for this progressive neurodegenerative disorder.”

The infant’s parents, Moe Maraachli and Sana Nader, wanted Joseph to receive a tracheotomy, which combined with mechanical breathing devices, would allow him to be transferred home, his family acting as care givers. Several years previously, the Maraachli’s daughter had died of a similar neuro-degenerative condition. They used their daughter, Zina, as an example. After doctors performed a tracheotomy on her, she returned home for several months before returning to die at the hospital. This time hospital refused to perform a tracheotomy on Joseph because there was no hope of recovery. After the judge ruled in the hospital’s favor in January, pressure against the hospital intensified and the hospital received threats.

The case has generated controversy primarily from groups such as the Terri Schiavo organization, Priests for Life (PFL), and the American Center for Law & Justice who represents the parents. The parents transferred the infant to the Cardinal Glennon Children’s Medical Center in St. Louis, Missouri to obtain a second opinion. PFL nation director, Father Pavone, traveled to Canada Sunday night to aid in the transfer. He said in a press release: “After around-the-clock negotiations, this really became a race against time.”

After successfully moving Joseph to the St. Louis hospital, Father Pavena said, “Now that we have won the battle against the medical bureaucracy in Canada, the real work of saving Baby Joseph can begin.”

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

Afflecks Palace, the “iconic, alternative shopping centre” in the Northern Quarter of Manchester in England, United Kingdom, was saved from closure this week after long-running rumours that the market may have to “kick out its traders” due to a dispute between the management of the Afflecks Palace brand and the leaseowner for the building, Bruntwood.

Rumours suggesting that Bruntwood were looking to redevelop the building started early in 2007, when it became apparent that the property developer was not actively seeking to renew the twenty-five year lease that the management of Afflecks Palace had with them concerning the building. These initial fears were added to by news that Bruntwood was looking to redevelop other buildings it owned in the Northern Quarter area, specifically the parking complex opposite Afflecks, with an eye towards taking advantage of the “property boom” in Manchester at the time. There were also fears that if Afflecks did remain open, “rents would rise”.

These initial fears were eventually propagated closer to the end of the year when a letter from the management of Afflecks Palace told individual stall holders that “… management have received no formal response from Bruntwood to a tenancy request notice served in October [2007]”, going on to add that “We can only assume therefore that they do not intend to offer us a new lease”.

Following the release of this letter, public support for Afflecks Palace was quickly made obvious when a 5,000 signature petition was submitted demanding the centre remain open for business. This seemed to prompt talks between Bruntwood and the Afflecks Palace management and, eventually, lead to this week’s news that the market was – indeed – to remain open. The result of the talks was that Bruntwood “bought out” the Afflecks Palace brand.

A joint statement between the management of Afflecks Palace and Bruntwood said: “After 26 years of trading, Afflecks’ management has sold their company to Bruntwood in an agreement that protects the future of Afflecks. Bruntwood will manage Afflecks while they look for a new owner who is skilled in running market style businesses and can bring a similar level of enthusiasm and dedication that the existing management has.”

A spokesperson speaking on behalf of Bruntwood also added that: “Never in our 30 year history have we bought one of our customer’s businesses, but Afflecks is a Manchester icon that we wanted to protect. We aren’t however expert in managing markets, so will look for a suitable long term owner. In the meantime, the most important aspect is that we have arrived at a solution with Afflecks management that protects an independent retail environment and provides the existing stallholders with security.”

Traders from the market celebrated the news by holding a party yesterday.