#her foundation was faulty which transfered to us

[oracleintheshell]

Cybernetic Reproduction

Sarah Franklin

Although Firestone is most well known for her views on cybernetic reproduction and artificial wombs, her interest in fertility was largely based, like Margaret Sanger’s, on a desire to inhibit it.

As we have seen, improvements in contraception were the template on which Firestone imagined the technological achievements of in vitro fertilization, “inovulation,” and gestation. Scientifically, these fields were closely linked. Gregory Pincus, who co-invented the Pill, was also one of the first practitioners of IVF in mammals, succeeding with the rabbit in 1934. His colleagues Min Chueh Chang at the Worcester Institute for Experimental Biology and John Rock at Harvard were also early pioneers of both IVF and contraception. The Ford Foundation, which poured money into population control programs, also funded much of the basic biological research both in the United States and the United Kingdom that yielded many of the most well known discoveries in human medicine, veterinary science, and livestock improvement, including embryo transfer, preimplantation sexing, cryopreservation, sperm capacitation, in-vitro maturation of gametes, and in-vitro fertilization.

In Firestone’s view, these developments were “more efficient means” only—they extended human capacities for biological control, and “in themselves” were essentially benevolent, liberating, progressive, and desirable. In relation to scientific progress in the field of human reproduction, Firestone appeared unequivocal: more progress and more efficient devices were liberating for women.

Like atomic energy, fertility control, artificial reproduction, and cybernation, in themselves, are liberating . . . . Already we have more and better contraception than ever before in history . . . Soon we shall have a complete understanding of the entire reproductive process in all its complexity, including the subtle dynamics of hormones and their full effect on the nervous system. Present oral contraception is at only a primitive (faulty) stage, only one of many types of fertility control now under experiment. Artificial insemination and artificial inovulation are already a reality . . . .

The history of the contraceptive pill in many ways confirms Firestone’s argument, developed in Chapter 9, that the outcomes of scientific research “in themselves” are less revealing than the process of discovery, investment, and prioritization that precedes and determines them. Without doubt the combined oral contraceptive pill that is today used by more than 100 million women worldwide could have been developed much more quickly if efforts to establish it as a political, economic, scientific or medical priority had not met with precisely the “cultural lag and sexual bias” described by Firestone as an irrational and morally retrograde anxiety about allowing women more reproductive choice and control.

It was largely the efforts of social activists such as Margaret Sanger in the United States and Marie Stopes in Britain that catalyzed proper (“pure”) scientific research into human reproduction by internationally recognized experts such as Pincus. Indeed the birth of a new scientific field—reproductive biology—has been described as particularly indebted to Sanger and her vast international network of colleagues and supporters (including prominent scientists and physicians such as Julian Huxley, Robert Dickenson, and Clarence C. Little). As a report on the activities of the Ford Foundation pointed out in the mid-1970s, the successful initiation of research in the reproductive sciences from the 1930s onward was the result of “more than half a century of concerted effort by interested individuals and private organizations, mainly from outside the mainstreams of the biomedical research community.” As medical historian Merrily Borrell summarizes:

The activities of birth control activists and their supporting agencies, and the financial backing of private contributors and foundations, notably the Rockefeller philanthropies, provided an important new stimulus to the development of research on the biology of reproduction in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Biologists were able to claim an enlarged realm of issues for scientific study through their activities as advocates and as investigators for the birth control movement. At the same time they promised as-yet undiscovered possibilities for regulating human reproduction once its physiology was understood.

These new possibilities for reproductive control could only be pursued as part of an “enlarged realm of issues for scientific study” by being shorn of their moral and political connotations, their constitution as a proper scientific study of physiological facts and biological principles was entirely made possible by the networking, persuasion, international organizing efforts, and material support provided by the birth control movement and its supporters. This interplay between social activism, global political priorities, the material support of philanthropic institutions, and “pure” scientific research illustrates well the “dialectical” complexities Firestone sought to convey, much as they led her to employ somewhat contradictory models of both technology and society in the process.

Among other things, the history of birth control demonstrates Firestone’s keen awareness that new reproductive technologies were unlikely to be used to benefit women without a struggle of the kind Sanger, Stopes and their allies waged for the better part of half a century to develop a safe, reliable and freely available contraceptive pill (a goal that still today remains unmet anywhere in the world, and not for reasons of technological incapacity). As Firestone noted of the history of birth control, “the kinds of research [for which] money [is] allocated . . . are only incidentally in the interests of women when at all.”

The anovulatory effects of steroids were discovered in the 1930s by the Penn State research scientist Russell Marker, who synthesized progesterone from sarsaparilla, and later from Mexican yams. Marker was unable to generate support to research contraception from his corporate sponsor, Parke-Davis, and went on to found the Laboratorios Syntex SA in Mexico, which quickly came to dominate the market for therapeutic steroid products. It was not until a decade later that the eminent reproductive physiologist Gregory Pincus met Margaret Sanger, founder of the Planned Parenthood Foundation of America (PPFA), at a dinner party in New York. The PPFA funded Pincus to undertake hormonal contraceptive research, but he too was unable to attract research funding from his corporate partner, G. D. Searle & Co. Not until Sanger interested the independent corporate philanthropist Katharine Dexter McCormick in Pincus’s research could it move forward on a properly funded basis, which it then quickly did, first in animal trials and later in humans. The first clinical trials were initiated in 1954 by recruiting infertile women volunteers from John Rock’s Brookline clinic. The FDA approved the first contraceptive pill in 1960. Within three years more than half a million women had used it. However it was not made legally available to unmarried women in all states until 1972.

As Firestone predicted, both contraceptive and reproductive technology are good places to look for technological “revolutions” that have been constrained in their potential to benefit women as a result of a variety of social attitudes and a large dose of what she described as biological moralism. This remains a crucial aspect of women’s relationship to “reproductive technology” if we include in this phrase (as we should) the ability to restrict fertility as well as its promotion. Access to contraception is still denied to the majority of the world’s women despite the fact that control over reproduction is one of the most significant factors contributing to successful health, development and agriculture policies. It also correlates positively with increased literacy and education rates for women, which in turn yield higher rates of economic independence.

In contrast to the oft-repeated characterization of Firestone’s argument as having put too much faith in the capacity of new reproductive technologies to liberate women, her assessment of their potential precisely anticipated that they would reinforce gender polarity if their use was not accompanied by a radical redefinition of gender, parenthood, and the family. As she presciently warned, “in the hands of our current society and under the direction of current scientists (few of whom are female or even feminist), any attempt to use technology to ‘free’ anybody is suspect.”

Indeed on the topic of the “revolutionary” consequences of new reproductive technologies Firestone is arguably most accurately prescient in her descriptions of their intransigence, as in the case of birth control. Far from naïve, her argument about technology is as focused on its propensity to fail as its potentially transformative capacities, much as later risk society theorists have argued its “dialectic” is defined.

The lessons from Firestone for today’s debates about technology thus remain fully available to the conscientious reader, and may indeed offer some of the most enduring insights from The Dialectic of Sex—at the core of which is a dialectical model of what Raymond Williams called “the technology and the society.” Keeping in mind that a manifesto is formally characterized by compression, and that its rhetoric is inherently hyperbolic, we can read Firestone most instructively by altering her sense of scale. Scaled down to case studies of particular technologies, the essential mechanics of her argument emerge as both cogent and contemporary. Let us conclude, therefore, with two of the cases that most concerned her.

[meeksimpactlaw]

Atlanta's Finest Car Accident Lawyer, Georgia

It additionally contains two of the most typical causes of Georgia visitors accidents—driving underneath the affect and speeding. Most car accident claims are resolved with out anyone ever going to courtroom. However, when you have been injured in a car accident as a outcome of somebody else’s negligence, you could have the right to sue for the compensation you have car accident lawyers in ga to get well. Our legal professional will work to determine all potentially liable parties and analyze the insurance coverage out there. Although many car accidents are attributable to a careless driver, our investigation could uncover that a faulty auto half or a poorly maintained stretch of street performed an element in your crash.

For instance, if the issue is resolved with out having to go to litigation, they'll charge 33.3%, and if the case goes to court, they'll take 40%. The fee of incidence of accidents in Georgia has been seen to be surprisingly high since there have been 1.53 deaths per 100 million car miles traveled. This is higher than the national average car accident lawyer georgia, which was 1.forty two deaths per a hundred million vehicle miles. One out of six fatalities involved a large truck, and rural counties have a better fatal crash rate. This category of compensation reimburses you for the fact that, because of your accidents, you could not carry out the issues in life that offer you joy.

The lawyers at The Fitzpatrick Firm have been serving to accident victims get the compensation they deserve for over 20 years. We know how to take care of insurance coverage companies and we’re not afraid to take your case to courtroom georgia car accident lawyers if necessary. When you work with the skilled car accident attorneys at DuBose Miller, you degree the enjoying field.

Driving a car is such a vital portion of most people’s lives that we tend to neglect how difficult and delicate a task it is. Safely operating a motorized georgia car accident lawyer vehicle requires constant attention and a firm information of security guidelines. Proven expertise with profitable car accident litigation.

We will gather accident reports, interview witnesses and police officers, and get all the proof we have to build a strong case. This is the foundation we use to struggle towards the big insurance coverage firms and get you the compensation you deserve. This data could be useful as we determine the value of your car accident injury claim to assist you pay your bills and get well financial losses.

In addition, the partner of the injured person is entitled to recuperate for the loss of consortium or companionship of his or her partner. Although a monetary restoration can never restore the damage brought on by a serious car accident, the legal system may help with the burdens many harm victims with face sooner or later. These forms of accidents can lead to severe neck injuries, contact our staff of neck harm attorneys today and get the illustration and compensation you deserve. Many auto accident attorneys utilize a sliding scale for his or her contingency fees, based on the case’s complexity and the size of time it takes to settle.

Drug and alcohol impairment continue to be a serious explanation for car accidents regardless of legal guidelines that give impaired drivers harsher penalties. In 2013, for instance, 297 of Georgia’s accident fatalities have been caused by drunk drivers. According to theGeorgia Department of Transportation, 1,507 individuals died in car accidents within the state of Georgia in 2019. Approximately 76% of the deadly crashes had been caused by unsafe driving behaviors. Seat belt use additionally played a task in whether or not or not the crash was deadly.

Clayton Cain can meet with you personally to discuss your case, answer your questions, and explain your legal options for transferring forward. We can meet with you at our Lawrenceville law workplace, over the phone, or at any location that's handy for you. Georgia’s statute of limitations gives you two years to file a car accident lawsuit. You then have two years to assemble proof, negotiate with the insurance firms, and file a lawsuit when ga car accident lawyer you can’t get the compensation you need. The insurance corporations will in all probability try to drag the process out as lengthy as they will, so you can’t file a lawsuit by the end of the statute of limitations. One issue is that hospitals now routinely file liens and have gotten increasingly aggressive about trying to implement their liens to get reimbursements.

For instance, if the one you love sustained injuries in a truck accident and you're filing a declare, you won't know that you should request the truck driver’s logbook and black box. An order also have to be submitted that requires the trucking firm to preserve any proof. In many cases, there will be multiple events who share some portion of the blame for the accident and accidents. When this happens, they will share a portion of the legal and monetary legal responsibility. It is normal to feel answerable for an harm that occurred, maybe in part as a outcome of your own clumsiness or inattentiveness. After an accident, you could think that you must have seen a slippery walkway in the snow or that you must have been driving a bit slower for the climate circumstances.

[noctomania]

I was an accident!

So was my sister. We were not planned conceptions. I don’t know the exact details, nor do i want to, of our conception except that they were not planned. My mom and dad also were not in a healthy relationship at the time. They stuck it out through my sister’s birth but not for long until after I was born. I don’t remember them being together.

I’m not sure if it was due to my mother’s catholic upbringing, the laws in texas at the time (most likely is my thinkin), or some influence from my dad’s family, but obviously neither of us were aborted. Dad was already working as a lawyer, but mom hadn’t managed to finish her bachelors for whatever reason and I’m not sure what work she had been doing, but I reckon she had to stop to care for my sister and not but 3 yrs after her birth I came along.

My parents separated and mom leaned into alcoholism which resulted in terminal illness from destroying her liver. I watched her die for 13 years before coming across her, on my own, in her last day of life having some kind of episode that resulted in her last trip to the ER and after to Hospice (which is end of life care).

While I know I have done what i can to impart good on other’s (albeit with mistakes along the way and the all too human diagnosis of selfishness in some cases) I would have rather been aborted. I had a childhood of neglect, poverty, and emotional trauma. In my adolescence I had to figure out how to cope with the loss of my mother who was the person i was ever closest with. I learned how different my family life was from others throughout my childhood. I’ve felt apart from every community i’ve ever been in due to various symptoms of the difficulty of a terminally ill alcoholic single impoverished mother trying to raise 2 kids in a red state with little support from family. It’s kind of hard to relate to a vast amount of people after experiences like that. Even relating to my own family who didn’t witness those experiences proves difficult.

I can’t speak for my sister, but I for sure would have supported my abortion. My parents were not stable financially or emotionally, there was already a dependent on their hands, and their in-laws were not even all-in. Their conception of me was a mistake admitted by both of them, and since then I have tried my best to do my best but it’s exhausting.

I’m not saying abortion would have saved my mother, their marriage, or been any kind of miracle. But it would have prevented my own suffering and the suffering of those subjected to the lashings of my mental illness. It would have saved so many resources and perhaps my spirit might have been born into less suffering or not at all awoken. To assume there would have been a void where my life is is all selfish. Someone more deserving would have pursued and finished my degrees, gotten jobs they care about, stayed healthy, and maybe even accomplished the dreams i have.

“Do what you can with what you have”. please be quiet. that may apply for making a meal, but making a life is a hell of a lot more complicated. I’ve accomplished a lot and it amounts to nothing in society’s eyes. No job cares that I did choreographed dance, facial make up, and performed on and off for 2 years as a drag king. no job cares how many cats I have looked after and kept happy and healthy. no job cares that i managed to be a full time student, hold a part time job as a desk receptionist, a full time job as an RA, and also held a position in office for the school’s LGBT club all at once. no jobs care whats in my heart is pure and strong. nobody cares how intuitive i am. no jobs care that i’ve been cutting (and in some cases coloring) my own hair for over a decade. or that i built my own computer. or of any the artwork i’ve made from scratch. or that i’ve kept myself afloat so much with little to no help. or that, with very few interim exceptions, i’ve been employed in some kind of job since i think it was jr yr of high school while i was also taking multiple AP/preAP classes.

I must continue in the low class because thats just how it is. i’m relentlessly plagued with hopelessness, indirection, confusion, depression, stress, disappointment, indecisiveness, suicidal idealization, anxiety, and dependents i never asked for. I wasn’t raised in an environment where i learned how to handle these things in a healthy way. i’ve slowly been trying to teach myself, but ffs learning how to save yourself as a building is crumbling down on you is not really optimal and not nearly as likely for success. i’m genuinely shocked i’ve not been entirely homeless yet. To think a procedure could have prevented a life of this bullshit, i think it would have been well worth it. Especially since my scenario is not near as bad as it can be by far, but bad enough i all too often have wished i were dead.

Even at my peak moments in life i have held this belief that i wish i hadn’t been born. not worth it. if that hurts anyone’s feelings, tough. It’s not your life. I’m a blip in your existence and me not existing honestly would not have made an impact anyone else couldn’t also have had in your life.

i’d say by all means check back with me when i’m more financially stable and living a happier debt-free life with a house and car and 20 cats but that’s never going to happen so idk what else to say. except that abortion should be legal everywhere and some if not entirely covered by insurance.

you want to make the world a better place? stop subjecting innocents to the shitshow it is now.

[bring-it-all-down]

I think it’s easy to think of Vane’s season one arc as being out of place with the rest of his time on the show, but I’d like to offer an alternative understanding. I think that Vane’s arc is an extremely cohesive examination of Hobbes’s social contract theory that begins with its acceptance and ends with its complete rejection. This is a rather lengthy analysis, but it’s one that people might find interesting if not compelling.

Hobbes’s Social Contract Theory

Central to Hobbes’s conception of political life are four terms: liberty, equality, fear, and power. Liberty for Hobbes is “the absence of external impediments” such as water being enclosed by riverbanks or humans being chained to something (xiv). This conception of liberty is purely physical, detailing a relationship between concrete things. Next, Hobbes understands equality as being the equal ability of one to kill another; there is no natural inequality among human beings as anyone has the power to kill any other person, either through strength of body or of mind, or of some combination of the two. Because everybody has equal power over everyone else’s life and one’s ability to be free, Hobbes states, “they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man” (XIII). This condition necessarily leads to “continual fear, and danger of violent death” (xiii).  

Finally, Hobbes defines power as the ability to acquire some future good. This conception of power stems from the fact that there is no private property in Hobbes’s state of nature: “It is consequent also to the same condition that there be no propriety, no dominion, no mine and thine distinct; but only that to be every man’s that he can get, and for so long as he can keep it” (XIII). Power, according to Hobbes, manifests itself in two ways: natural or instrumental. Natural power is acquisition through using physical characteristics like strength and intelligence, whereas instrumental acquisition requires one to use one’s reputation, friends, good luck, etc. 

It is this fear of death and desire for acquisition that leads us to form political communities, which is our natural end; we are meant to live in communities. These communities form when their members “confer all their power and strength upon one man, or upon one assembly of men, that may reduce all their wills, by plurality of voices, unto one will” (xvii). This singular power, known as the Leviathan, is absolute; it cannot be transferred to another body (no separation of powers) or forfeited, and there is no power above it. The Leviathan enforces this power by tying its subjects through “fear of punishment to the performance of their covenants,” namely their covenant to live peacefully with one another (xvii). 

While the Leviathan’s power is absolute in theory, Hobbes does allow for its dissolution if it becomes too arbitrary or capricious on the ground that it would then plunge a civil society back into the state of nature, from which point they would be allowed to choose a new sovereign. However, because the state of nature is so feared, people are highly unlikely to dissolve the Leviathan’s power. This, then, is how authoritarian states justify their power.

In this account of the social contract theory of government, we see the relationship among liberty, equality, fear, and power. In order for people to fully exercise their liberty and power, their fear must be redirected from one another toward a singular entity. This creation of an unequal civil society is what allows for the development of private property, as well as concepts like justice and morality, which are absent in the state of nature due to the lack of agreed upon definitions. 

Vane’s Season 1 Arc

Initially, Vane appears to embrace a Hobbesian conception of the state of nature. His season 1 arc, I believe, is his embrace of Hobbes’s state of nature through the confrontation of the two people who hold power over him: Eleanor and his enslaver. After Eleanor gets him deposed as captain of the Ranger, he tells Idelle, “No captain on this island's ever known that kind of power. Power that doesn't care how many votes you can tally, who loves you, who hates you, who fears you...none of us have any right to hate her for it. She's strong and we're weak. That's the reality of things here. And no one down there is strong enough to change anything” (1.05). Here, Vane reduces things to power. Eleanor has the power to acquire private property and to cut off pirates from doing the same, and so people––including Vane––fear her. To them, she is a quasi-Leviathan figure. However, Nassau exists more as a state of nature than it does as a civil society, and so the possibility of being her equal remains.

While Eleanor threatens Vane’s power, he doesn’t fear her in the same way he fears his enslaver, Albinus, who threatens his life. This constant fear of Albinus manifests itself in Vane hallucinating Albinus’s presence in Nassau. This vision causes Vane to realize that if he is to become equal to Eleanor, he must first become equals with Albinus. He initially seeks to overtake Albinus through taking away his other slaves. He pitches Nassau to them as a place “where strong men live lives of pleasure, not labor, a place where you could be feared and respected once again” (1.07). For Vane, the pleasure comes through realizing one’s equality and thus one’s ability to instill fear rather than have fear instilled in them. As is typical in the state of nature, Vane’s relationship with Albinus ends first with Albinus believing he killed Vane and then with Vane actually killing Albinus. 

Vane’s conversation with Jack upon his return to Nassau cements his role as a Hobbesian figure. He tells Jack, “In some ways, Jack, it had to come to this, don't you think?...Me deciding if you live or die” (1.08). Over the course of the season, Vane has increasingly reduced relationships to the ability one has to kill the other and the fear such ability instills in people. Following a Hobbesian model, then, we would expect Vane to think the formation of civil society with a Leviathan figure to be good, but this is not where his season 2 and 3 arcs go.

Vane’s Season 2 Arc

Indeed, Vane quite explicitly rejects Hobbesian social contract theory. While Hobbes argues that humans are driven toward society in part because of a natural “desire of such things as are necessary to comfortable living” (xiii), Vane says to Flint, “‘Give us your submission, and we will give you the comfort you need.’ No, I can think of no measure of comfort worth that price” (3.08). For Vane, then, living in the “pre-political” Nassau is better than submitting to the power of the state. This is the case because no such “state of nature” exists; there will always be a state attempting to impose its authority on Nassau.

Vane’s separation from Hobbesian political thought, then, begins as a matter of practicality. He does not abandon fear of death as the starting point, but he expands his thought beyond himself. It is no longer simply his own fear of death that drives him, but the fear within his fellow pirates of that same death. After he learns that Charlestown has captured and will kill Flint he tells his and Flint’s crew that “Nassau is strongest when she’s feared. And if what promises to happen here tomorrow actually happens, a trophy made of one of her most notorious captains, she may never be feared again” (2.09). He reiterates this point to his quartermaster, who is concerned that his crew will kill Flint’s crew to steal the Man of War: “Tell them if this ship tries to run on a skeleton crew, they’re going to get chased, they’re going to get caught, and they’re going to get killed” (2.10). It is not fear of one another, then, that drives Vane toward a community but rather fear of the authority of the state. While he and Flint are equals, he realizes that neither is equal to the state, England, and if they remain as individuals, the state will kill them one by one.

Flint’s (and then Vane’s) trial stands as an example of a Hobbesian state; the lawmakers are the executors are the jury. All sovereign authority is placed in the hands of one body with no authority above it. When confronted with this example, Vane comes to conceptualize of community as the only means of instilling fear in the state; as the state is unified, so must be the pirates. 

In accord with Flint telling him “we remind them that they were right to be afraid,” he provides a refutation of Hobbesian sovereignty for the audience: “these men convinced you that they speak for you, that the power you’ve given them is used in your interests. That the prisoner before you is your enemy and they your friends. For those of you who live to see tomorrow... know that you had a choice to see the truth and you let yourselves be convinced otherwise” (2.10). He reminds them that they’ve granted the sovereign power on the basis of it working toward their collective good and can thus conceivably revoke said power. He then illustrates that the sovereign cannot fulfill its purpose of providing for their safety against the threat of pirates and therefore the covenant on which the sovereign’s authority is based is inherently faulty. He pokes metaphorical holes in Hobbes’s contract theory of government before he pokes literal holes in Charlestown with his canons.

Vane’s Season 3 Arc

Vane’s season 3 arc offers an alternative foundation for civil society than fear and desire for property: friendship. When Vane confronts Jack in the first episode of the season for lying to Vane about using slave labor to rebuild the fort when Vane stood up for Jack against Flint, Jack lays it out for Vane: “you and I had been through enough shit for you to know that I would do the same for you, that I have done the same for you, and would again without hesitation. I made a commitment to you, with you, to restore this place, to make it strong again...Please know that I meant no slight by it. No lack of respect or friendship. It's quite the opposite” (3.01). Vane is certainly right to be angry about enslaving people, but Jack is correct in reminding him that this new effort to free Nassau has as its basis friendship and mutual respect.

At this point, however, Vane does not yet understand what friendship entails. For that, he needs to confront his understanding of friendship, which he does through the return of Edward Teach to Nassau. The conception of friendship Vane learned from Teach is simply to let people live when you could have killed them. Teach did this for Vane when Vane betrayed him for Eleanor, and he did it for Jack after Jack lost the pearls in the ocean, and it was his offer to Eleanor after she betrayed him by freeing Abigail from him. 

When Teach offers to defend Nassau if afterwards Vane sails with him away from Nassau forever, he outlines what their relationship is: “I do not seek your partnership because I am too weak to defend myself. I don't seek it to protect my things or to increase profit...There is an instinct to leave behind something made in one's own image. Nature has denied me the ability, it would seem, but not the need” (3.03). This understanding of their relationship rejects the fundamental Hobbesian basis for such things––it’s not fear of death or desire for acquisition––and instead points toward a desire for a certain kind of immortality. However, this relationship still fundamentally falls within a Hobbesian conception of the family which is artificially constructed in civil society and which requires the children to obey and honor their fathers. Therefore, this, too, is a relationship not based on friendship.

It is Jack’s conversation with Vane before he leaves with Teach that offers Vane a different kind of friendship. Despite Woodes Rogers’ early arrival ruining their plans to defend Nassau and the target placed not only on Vane but on all pirates close to him, Jack refuses to leave with Vane. His refusal is predicated on the fact that he desires freedom: “Teach respects you...but me, I have no interest in living as a target of his….Nor would I be a ward of yours. I've made something for myself here. I'll make it again somehow, but I've come too far to go back” (3.04). Here, Jack presents friendship as a type of equality predicated on freedom. Friendship must be a choice rather than the obligation to repay a debt, and it must result in some type of good for the parties beyond the acquisition of material goods. Jack refuses to go with Vane because his desire to make something of himself is greater than his desire to live a subservient life.

Flint reiterates this notion of freedom to Vane when he comes to ask him to rejoin the effort to free Nassau from England. Vane tells him “my pledge to him began a long time before I ever knew your name. What I owe him…” (3.06). In response, Flint says this project is too important to be clouded by any of that: “Forget me, forget Teach, forget loyalty, compacts, honor, debts, all of it. The only question that matters is this. Who are you?” (3.06). While Hobbes defines liberty in relation to external impediments, both Jack and Flint understand it as something greater than that, something that points inward and moves beyond the desire for safety or the terms of contracts, be they written or otherwise.

After being presented with this understanding a second time, Vane finally accepts it as true. He leaves with Flint to join the revolution. He allows himself to be arrested in order to free Jack. He does all of this on the basis of this new understanding of friendship. When Jack asks why he came back to Nassau, Vane jokingly tells him, “got worried you two'd be lost without me,” but it’s more sincere than joke (3.08). He is committed fully to liberating Nassau not to return it to the days of Teach but to provide it as a counter to the social contract theory of civil society. His final speech before being hanged reveals this shift in his political thought:

These men who brought me here today do not fear me. They brought me here today because they fear you. Because they know that my voice, a voice that refuses to be enslaved, once lived in you. And may yet still. They brought me here today to show you death and use it to frighten you into ignoring that voice. But know this. We are many. They are few. To fear death is a choice. And they can't hang us all (3.09). 

He has gone from believing the fear of death to be the greatest fear, the motivator for all human action, to somebody choosing to let civilization kill him. He does this because he now knows there are things worse than death and things greater than physical freedom. He does this because he understands that he owes his fellow pirates the chance to obtain this freedom for themselves. He does this because he has come to recognize that friendship is the act of helping people better themselves.

Conclusion

Vane’s arc therefore acts as a critique of Hobbesian social contract theory. He demonstrates that the sovereign’s power is based on an illegitimate conception of human nature that emphasizes the desire to dominate others. But he also illustrates the fundamental problems with living in a pre-political community attempting to exist outside of the sovereign power. Through his arc, then, we are presented with the fact that a legitimate society based on true friendship in achieving the good of all is not only possible but is worth the sacrifice of one’s life.

[dailynewswebsite]

Guilty or innocent? In virtual courtrooms, the absence of non-verbal cues may threaten justice

The COVID-19 pandemic has meant that courtrooms have been compelled to turn out to be digital, however is the long-term adoption of expertise a risk to justice? (Shutterstock)

For the reason that starting of the well being disaster, Canadian courts, like these in different nations, have been making a technological shift. The variety of proceedings filed on-line have elevated and the identical holds for digital trials.

Though their use seems professional through the pandemic, video communications purposes akin to Skype or Zoom are hindering the position of the non-verbal communication in courtrooms.

The problem could appear easy and innocuous, however in actuality, it isn’t.

Faulty beliefs

The result of lawsuits will not be solely decided by legal guidelines and precedents. Certainly, the looks of witnesses and the way in which they behave can play a figuring out position. Nervousness and hesitation are sometimes related to mendacity, whereas spontaneity, in line with many courtroom judgments, might point out that witnesses are telling the reality.

Nevertheless, analysis on lie detection reveals very clearly that beliefs of this nature — nonetheless in use in 2020 — are inaccurate and haven’t any extra scientific foundation than these used within the Center Ages. Certainly, an trustworthy litigant might hesitate and be excessively nervous. A hardened liar might categorical himself spontaneously. There is no such thing as a gesture, no look, no facial features, no reveal much like Pinocchio’s nostril.

Moreover, as psychologist Judith Corridor and her colleagues level out, “there isn’t a dictionary of non-verbal cue meanings, as a result of contextual components involving encoders’ intentions, their different verbal and non-verbal behaviours, different folks (who they’re and their behaviour), and the setting will all have an effect on which means.”

As courtrooms transfer on-line, the dynamics of courtroom interactions might want to shift drastically. (Shutterstock)

In different phrases, studying to “learn” non-verbal behaviours is fiction reasonably than science. Sadly, as I documented in my grasp of legal guidelines thesis on the non-verbal behaviours of witnesses throughout trials and my doctoral thesis in communication on the detection of false testimony, quite a few judges appear to consider in any other case.

Learn extra: Furtive seems, nervousness, hesitation: How nonverbal communication influences the justice system

Past lie detection

Since utilizing a single look to find out whether or not somebody is mendacity — as depicted within the media — will not be potential, some might consider that the non-verbal behaviour of witnesses, judges and attorneys is of no use. Nevertheless, this is able to be a mistake. Certainly, scientific analysis has been documenting the capabilities of non-verbal communication for many years. Hundreds of peer-reviewed articles have been revealed on the topic by a world group of researchers from totally different disciplines.

Throughout trials, lie detection represents a grain of sand within the ocean of non-verbal behaviour capabilities. Gestures, seems, facial expressions and postures permit witnesses to speak feelings and intentions, judges to foster empathy and belief, and attorneys to raised perceive at any given second the actions and phrases of witnesses and adapt accordingly. All of this largely happens robotically.

The non-verbal side of trials will not be restricted to faces and our bodies. The traits of the atmosphere wherein they happen — the courthouse and the courtroom — contribute to the picture of justice. The situation the place witnesses are questioned and the place individuals are seated influences how trials are performed. For instance, judges are seated greater than others within the courtroom, which may have an effect on the authority given to them by litigants.

How a courtroom is bodily and spatially organized additionally impacts the character of the proceedings, like when judges’ authority is represented by positioning them greater than different courtroom attendees. Right here, attendees await Supreme Court docket of Canada judges to reach within the Manitoba Court docket of Attraction in Winnipeg, in September 2019. THE CANADIAN PRESS/John Woods

Non-verbal communication is an integral a part of trials

In the course of the pandemic, purposes akin to Skype or Zoom allowed for the listening to of pressing instances. Nevertheless, a number of jurisdictions have introduced that digital courtrooms will stay open after the top of the well being disaster. For some, their major profit could be to advertise entry to justice.

Nevertheless, by lowering non-verbal info, digital trials restrict the flexibility of witnesses to be understood, to really feel understood and to know others adequately. For the reason that evaluation of credibility is dependent upon the flexibility of judges to know what witnesses are saying, the influence may be vital, particularly since “[c]redibility is a matter that pervades most trials, and at its broadest might quantity to a choice on guilt or innocence.”

For the reason that conduct of a cross-examination, in flip, is dependent upon the attorneys’ capability to know always the actions and phrases of witnesses, an entry to the courts that restricts non-verbal behaviour to a face on a display, can have far-reaching penalties. Because the Supreme Court docket of Canada wrote: “Efficient cross-examination is integral to the conduct of a good trial and a significant utility of the presumption of innocence.”

The significance of interdisciplinary dialogue

The usage of purposes akin to Skype or Zoom shouldn’t be taken calmly. Along with the consequences on the evaluation of credibility and the conduct of cross-examinations, digital trials may produce other penalties.

These embody dehumanizing victims and defendants, an impact already documented amongst immigrants heard by way of videoconferencing. Digital trials may also amplify the damaging results of facial stereotypes, which may distort the evaluation of proof and the result of trials, even to the purpose of figuring out whether or not an individual must be sentenced to demise.

In view of this, earlier than digital courtrooms turn out to be everlasting or legal guidelines are modified, the position of non-verbal communication in courtrooms must be totally appreciated. So as to maximize the benefits and decrease the disadvantages of the shift to on-line justice, dialogue between the authorized group and researchers working in disciplines like psychology, communication and criminology, is prime.

Vincent Denault is co-founder and co-director of the Middle for Research in Nonverbal Communication Sciences of the Analysis Middle of the Montreal Psychological Well being College Institute. He’s a recipient of a doctoral analysis scholarship from the Quebec Analysis Funds – Society and Tradition (FRQSC).

from Growth News https://growthnews.in/guilty-or-innocent-in-virtual-courtrooms-the-absence-of-non-verbal-cues-may-threaten-justice/ via https://growthnews.in

[gordonwilliamsweb]

New California Coronavirus Case Reveals Problems with U.S. Testing Protocols

Just weeks into the federal government’s efforts to contain the novel coronavirus, a new California case has exposed weaknesses in the testing procedures that could be masking more widespread reach of the disease.

A woman in Solano County, California, who hadn’t traveled abroad or had contact with another known patient with the illness was diagnosed with the virus Wednesday, raising concerns that cases are going undetected because of the federal government’s narrow testing protocols.

The patient sought care at a local hospital before being transferred to UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento because of the severity of her case, according to a letter hospital officials sent to members of the campus community. Suspecting coronavirus, doctors at UC Davis asked public health officials about testing for COVID-19, the name given to the illness believed to have originated in Wuhan, China.

Email Sign-Up

Subscribe to KHN’s free Morning Briefing.

Sign Up

Please confirm your email address below:

Sign Up

But the request did not meet protocols laid out by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: The woman didn’t have a history of travel or contact with a person with a known infection. So no test was administered. The patient continued to receive treatment at UC Davis for four more days, without a diagnosis. Finally, on Sunday, the CDC requested the test, according to the letter.

It came back positive.

Multiple experts interviewed said the case underscores the need for more widespread community testing of the new coronavirus, which has sickened tens of thousands of people in more than 45 nations around the globe. It also highlights how the CDC’s narrow testing protocols, combined with the agency’s continued delays in getting functional coronavirus test kits to state and local public health agencies, have hindered the public health system’s ability to respond to the outbreak.

To date, the CDC has tested fewer than 500 people in the U.S. for the virus. By contrast, South Korea, which is several days into an outbreak, had tested more than 66,000 people and confirmed more than 1,700 cases as of Thursday morning.

Latest Stories On The Coronavirus Outbreak

New California Coronavirus Case Reveals Problems with U.S. Testing Protocols Feb 27

KHN’s ‘What The Health?’: Prepping For A Possible Pandemic Feb 27

As The Coronavirus Spreads, Americans Lose Ground Against Other Health Threats Feb 26

See More Stories

The Northern California case mirrors what some experts have been warning for weeks: that infected people might be circulating undetected in the general population because the testing criteria are too narrow. It’s highly likely the Solano County case is not unique, and that other cases of what is called community transmission are going undetected, said Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at John Hopkins Center for Health Security. He stressed, however, that the risk of infection remains low in the U.S.

Officials declined to provide details about the patient’s age or condition, citing privacy concerns. Some health care workers at the facility have been asked to stay home “out of an abundance of caution,” hospital officials wrote, and public health officials are working to locate others who may have come into contact with the patient over the last couple of weeks.

At a news conference Thursday, California authorities called for the federal government to ramp up testing of the broader population in light of the Solano County case, thought to be the first evidence in the U.S. of community transmission.

“We need to substantially increase access and availability of testing, and we need to do that today,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Newsom noted that more than 8,400 people in California were being monitored for coronavirus and that 28 people still in the state were confirmed to be infected. Newsom said he had received assurances from CDC officials that they would expand testing protocols, which they did later Thursday.

Until Thursday, testing criteria for COVID-19 said the person should have fever and signs of lower respiratory infection, as well as a recent history of travel to mainland China; or a fever or signs of lower respiratory infection and close contact with someone already diagnosed with the virus. On Thursday, those guidelines were expanded to include people who had those symptoms and had recently traveled to Iran, Italy, Japan or South Korea, in addition to China; or people with fever and acute lower respiratory illness that isn’t explained by flu or other viruses.

Like other experts, Adalja believes the testing protocol should be even broader. About 80% of people diagnosed with the virus have only mild symptoms, according to early research out of China, and even under the expanded CDC guidelines, few of those people would qualify for testing.

While the risk to the general population is still believed to be low, finding mild illnesses is the key to understanding how deadly the virus is, and how big a risk it poses.

Given the high rate of travel into and out of the U.S., there’s reason to believe the virus reached the U.S. before there was even a testing protocol in place, Adalja said. He said clinicians need more autonomy to order tests on patients they suspect have the virus.

In addition to the delayed testing in California, news outlets in Hawaii have reported that some tests ordered by physicians there were never processed because they didn’t meet the testing criteria.

And the test kits themselves have had substantial problems. After they were sent to labs three weeks ago, numerous states reported trouble verifying the tests because one component of the kit was flawed. Officials aren’t yet sure of the exact cause of the problem. Meanwhile, all testing has continued to be routed through the CDC in Atlanta, a process that can take several days between packaging, shipping and analyzing.

In the weeks since the faulty kits were sent out, public health agencies have gotten so desperate for a functional test that they took the extraordinary step of asking the FDA to allow them to develop their own. “We are now many weeks into the response with still no diagnostic or surveillance test available outside of CDC for the vast majority of our member laboratories,” the Association of Public Health Laboratories, which coordinates responses from local labs during health emergencies, wrote in a letter to the FDA. The FDA replied, outlining a process for a public health lab-developed test that the APHL plans to use in future outbreaks.

“Next time, we will go straight to the FDA,” said Scott Becker, CEO of the APHL.

Meanwhile, on a call Wednesday with public health labs around the country, the CDC and FDA said that the handful of labs that had verified that the CDC kits they received were fully or largely functional could begin performing tests using those kits. As of Thursday morning, eight labs in seven states fit that category.

California is one of those states. Newsom said that he was concerned by the small number of test kits the state currently had, and that the CDC had assured him more were coming. APHL expects some 40 labs will have testing capabilities by the end of next week, Becker said.

Still, some states flush with international travelers, like New York, have not been able to successfully use the flawed kits. On Wednesday, Gov. Andrew Cuomo called on the federal government to allow testing in New York using a locally developed test that follows CDC protocol.

Too much testing can be a bad thing, which means officials must find an appropriate balance. During the 2009 H1N1 outbreak, local labs were overwhelmed with tests, Becker said, some of which were unnecessary since the virus already was known to be circulating in some communities. “We can’t have every mildly ill person flood the health system.” Newsom echoed this sentiment, urging people to stay calm.

Several weeks ago, the CDC said it would roll out expanded testing through a surveillance network used to test for the flu, but the problems with the tests have delayed the start of the program.

The delays with testing also highlight the need for more consistent funding, so that health departments can be prepared for an outbreak, said Becker. Funding waxes and wanes with epidemics, but public health has to be as ready as your local fire department, he said. “We are that important to the health, safety and economy of the country.”

This KHN story first published on California Healthline, a service of the California Health Care Foundation.

New California Coronavirus Case Reveals Problems with U.S. Testing Protocols published first on https://nootropicspowdersupplier.tumblr.com/

[stephenmccull]

New California Coronavirus Case Reveals Problems with U.S. Testing Protocols

Just weeks into the federal government’s efforts to contain the novel coronavirus, a new California case has exposed weaknesses in the testing procedures that could be masking more widespread reach of the disease.

A woman in Solano County, California, who hadn’t traveled abroad or had contact with another known patient with the illness was diagnosed with the virus Wednesday, raising concerns that cases are going undetected because of the federal government’s narrow testing protocols.

The patient sought care at a local hospital before being transferred to UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento because of the severity of her case, according to a letter hospital officials sent to members of the campus community. Suspecting coronavirus, doctors at UC Davis asked public health officials about testing for COVID-19, the name given to the illness believed to have originated in Wuhan, China.

Email Sign-Up

Subscribe to KHN’s free Morning Briefing.

Sign Up

Please confirm your email address below:

Sign Up

But the request did not meet protocols laid out by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: The woman didn’t have a history of travel or contact with a person with a known infection. So no test was administered. The patient continued to receive treatment at UC Davis for four more days, without a diagnosis. Finally, on Sunday, the CDC requested the test, according to the letter.

It came back positive.

Multiple experts interviewed said the case underscores the need for more widespread community testing of the new coronavirus, which has sickened tens of thousands of people in more than 45 nations around the globe. It also highlights how the CDC’s narrow testing protocols, combined with the agency’s continued delays in getting functional coronavirus test kits to state and local public health agencies, have hindered the public health system’s ability to respond to the outbreak.

To date, the CDC has tested fewer than 500 people in the U.S. for the virus. By contrast, South Korea, which is several days into an outbreak, had tested more than 66,000 people and confirmed more than 1,700 cases as of Thursday morning.

Latest Stories On The Coronavirus Outbreak

New California Coronavirus Case Reveals Problems with U.S. Testing Protocols Feb 27

KHN’s ‘What The Health?’: Prepping For A Possible Pandemic Feb 27

As The Coronavirus Spreads, Americans Lose Ground Against Other Health Threats Feb 26

See More Stories

The Northern California case mirrors what some experts have been warning for weeks: that infected people might be circulating undetected in the general population because the testing criteria are too narrow. It’s highly likely the Solano County case is not unique, and that other cases of what is called community transmission are going undetected, said Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at John Hopkins Center for Health Security. He stressed, however, that the risk of infection remains low in the U.S.

Officials declined to provide details about the patient’s age or condition, citing privacy concerns. Some health care workers at the facility have been asked to stay home “out of an abundance of caution,” hospital officials wrote, and public health officials are working to locate others who may have come into contact with the patient over the last couple of weeks.

At a news conference Thursday, California authorities called for the federal government to ramp up testing of the broader population in light of the Solano County case, thought to be the first evidence in the U.S. of community transmission.

“We need to substantially increase access and availability of testing, and we need to do that today,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Newsom noted that more than 8,400 people in California were being monitored for coronavirus and that 28 people still in the state were confirmed to be infected. Newsom said he had received assurances from CDC officials that they would expand testing protocols, which they did later Thursday.

Until Thursday, testing criteria for COVID-19 said the person should have fever and signs of lower respiratory infection, as well as a recent history of travel to mainland China; or a fever or signs of lower respiratory infection and close contact with someone already diagnosed with the virus. On Thursday, those guidelines were expanded to include people who had those symptoms and had recently traveled to Iran, Italy, Japan or South Korea, in addition to China; or people with fever and acute lower respiratory illness that isn’t explained by flu or other viruses.

Like other experts, Adalja believes the testing protocol should be even broader. About 80% of people diagnosed with the virus have only mild symptoms, according to early research out of China, and even under the expanded CDC guidelines, few of those people would qualify for testing.

While the risk to the general population is still believed to be low, finding mild illnesses is the key to understanding how deadly the virus is, and how big a risk it poses.

Given the high rate of travel into and out of the U.S., there’s reason to believe the virus reached the U.S. before there was even a testing protocol in place, Adalja said. He said clinicians need more autonomy to order tests on patients they suspect have the virus.

In addition to the delayed testing in California, news outlets in Hawaii have reported that some tests ordered by physicians there were never processed because they didn’t meet the testing criteria.

And the test kits themselves have had substantial problems. After they were sent to labs three weeks ago, numerous states reported trouble verifying the tests because one component of the kit was flawed. Officials aren’t yet sure of the exact cause of the problem. Meanwhile, all testing has continued to be routed through the CDC in Atlanta, a process that can take several days between packaging, shipping and analyzing.

In the weeks since the faulty kits were sent out, public health agencies have gotten so desperate for a functional test that they took the extraordinary step of asking the FDA to allow them to develop their own. “We are now many weeks into the response with still no diagnostic or surveillance test available outside of CDC for the vast majority of our member laboratories,” the Association of Public Health Laboratories, which coordinates responses from local labs during health emergencies, wrote in a letter to the FDA. The FDA replied, outlining a process for a public health lab-developed test that the APHL plans to use in future outbreaks.

“Next time, we will go straight to the FDA,” said Scott Becker, CEO of the APHL.

Meanwhile, on a call Wednesday with public health labs around the country, the CDC and FDA said that the handful of labs that had verified that the CDC kits they received were fully or largely functional could begin performing tests using those kits. As of Thursday morning, eight labs in seven states fit that category.

California is one of those states. Newsom said that he was concerned by the small number of test kits the state currently had, and that the CDC had assured him more were coming. APHL expects some 40 labs will have testing capabilities by the end of next week, Becker said.

Still, some states flush with international travelers, like New York, have not been able to successfully use the flawed kits. On Wednesday, Gov. Andrew Cuomo called on the federal government to allow testing in New York using a locally developed test that follows CDC protocol.

Too much testing can be a bad thing, which means officials must find an appropriate balance. During the 2009 H1N1 outbreak, local labs were overwhelmed with tests, Becker said, some of which were unnecessary since the virus already was known to be circulating in some communities. “We can’t have every mildly ill person flood the health system.” Newsom echoed this sentiment, urging people to stay calm.

Several weeks ago, the CDC said it would roll out expanded testing through a surveillance network used to test for the flu, but the problems with the tests have delayed the start of the program.

The delays with testing also highlight the need for more consistent funding, so that health departments can be prepared for an outbreak, said Becker. Funding waxes and wanes with epidemics, but public health has to be as ready as your local fire department, he said. “We are that important to the health, safety and economy of the country.”

This KHN story first published on California Healthline, a service of the California Health Care Foundation.

New California Coronavirus Case Reveals Problems with U.S. Testing Protocols published first on https://smartdrinkingweb.weebly.com/

[dinafbrownil]

New California Coronavirus Case Reveals Problems with U.S. Testing Protocols

Just weeks into the federal government’s efforts to contain the novel coronavirus, a new California case has exposed weaknesses in the testing procedures that could be masking more widespread reach of the disease.

A woman in Solano County, California, who hadn’t traveled abroad or had contact with another known patient with the illness was diagnosed with the virus Wednesday, raising concerns that cases are going undetected because of the federal government’s narrow testing protocols.

The patient sought care at a local hospital before being transferred to UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento because of the severity of her case, according to a letter hospital officials sent to members of the campus community. Suspecting coronavirus, doctors at UC Davis asked public health officials about testing for COVID-19, the name given to the illness believed to have originated in Wuhan, China.

Email Sign-Up

Subscribe to KHN’s free Morning Briefing.

Sign Up

Please confirm your email address below:

Sign Up

But the request did not meet protocols laid out by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: The woman didn’t have a history of travel or contact with a person with a known infection. So no test was administered. The patient continued to receive treatment at UC Davis for four more days, without a diagnosis. Finally, on Sunday, the CDC requested the test, according to the letter.

It came back positive.

Multiple experts interviewed said the case underscores the need for more widespread community testing of the new coronavirus, which has sickened tens of thousands of people in more than 45 nations around the globe. It also highlights how the CDC’s narrow testing protocols, combined with the agency’s continued delays in getting functional coronavirus test kits to state and local public health agencies, have hindered the public health system’s ability to respond to the outbreak.

To date, the CDC has tested fewer than 500 people in the U.S. for the virus. By contrast, South Korea, which is several days into an outbreak, had tested more than 66,000 people and confirmed more than 1,700 cases as of Thursday morning.

Latest Stories On The Coronavirus Outbreak

KHN’s ‘What The Health?’: Prepping For A Possible Pandemic 2:00 PM EST

As The Coronavirus Spreads, Americans Lose Ground Against Other Health Threats Feb 26

Must-Reads Of The Week From Brianna Labuskes Feb 21

See More Stories

The Northern California case mirrors what some experts have been warning for weeks: that infected people might be circulating undetected in the general population because the testing criteria are too narrow. It’s highly likely the Solano County case is not unique, and that other cases of what is called community transmission are going undetected, said Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at John Hopkins Center for Health Security. He stressed, however, that the risk of infection remains low in the U.S.

Officials declined to provide details about the patient’s age or condition, citing privacy concerns. Some health care workers at the facility have been asked to stay home “out of an abundance of caution,” hospital officials wrote, and public health officials are working to locate others who may have come into contact with the patient over the last couple of weeks.

At a news conference Thursday, California authorities called for the federal government to ramp up testing of the broader population in light of the Solano County case, thought to be the first evidence in the U.S. of community transmission.

“We need to substantially increase access and availability of testing, and we need to do that today,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Newsom noted that more than 8,400 people in California were being monitored for coronavirus and that 28 people still in the state were confirmed to be infected. Newsom said he had received assurances from CDC officials that they would expand testing protocols, which they did later Thursday.

Until Thursday, testing criteria for COVID-19 said the person should have fever and signs of lower respiratory infection, as well as a recent history of travel to mainland China; or a fever or signs of lower respiratory infection and close contact with someone already diagnosed with the virus. On Thursday, those guidelines were expanded to include people who had those symptoms and had recently traveled to Iran, Italy, Japan or South Korea, in addition to China; or people with fever and acute lower respiratory illness that isn’t explained by flu or other viruses.

Like other experts, Adalja believes the testing protocol should be even broader. About 80% of people diagnosed with the virus have only mild symptoms, according to early research out of China, and even under the expanded CDC guidelines, few of those people would qualify for testing.

While the risk to the general population is still believed to be low, finding mild illnesses is the key to understanding how deadly the virus is, and how big a risk it poses.

Given the high rate of travel into and out of the U.S., there’s reason to believe the virus reached the U.S. before there was even a testing protocol in place, Adalja said. He said clinicians need more autonomy to order tests on patients they suspect have the virus.

In addition to the delayed testing in California, news outlets in Hawaii have reported that some tests ordered by physicians there were never processed because they didn’t meet the testing criteria.

And the test kits themselves have had substantial problems. After they were sent to labs three weeks ago, numerous states reported trouble verifying the tests because one component of the kit was flawed. Officials aren’t yet sure of the exact cause of the problem. Meanwhile, all testing has continued to be routed through the CDC in Atlanta, a process that can take several days between packaging, shipping and analyzing.

In the weeks since the faulty kits were sent out, public health agencies have gotten so desperate for a functional test that they took the extraordinary step of asking the FDA to allow them to develop their own. “We are now many weeks into the response with still no diagnostic or surveillance test available outside of CDC for the vast majority of our member laboratories,” the Association of Public Health Laboratories, which coordinates responses from local labs during health emergencies, wrote in a letter to the FDA. The FDA replied, outlining a process for a public health lab-developed test that the APHL plans to use in future outbreaks.

“Next time, we will go straight to the FDA,” said Scott Becker, CEO of the APHL.

Meanwhile, on a call Wednesday with public health labs around the country, the CDC and FDA said that the handful of labs that had verified that the CDC kits they received were fully or largely functional could begin performing tests using those kits. As of Thursday morning, eight labs in seven states fit that category.

California is one of those states. Newsom said that he was concerned by the small number of test kits the state currently had, and that the CDC had assured him more were coming. APHL expects some 40 labs will have testing capabilities by the end of next week, Becker said.

Still, some states flush with international travelers, like New York, have not been able to successfully use the flawed kits. On Wednesday, Gov. Andrew Cuomo called on the federal government to allow testing in New York using a locally developed test that follows CDC protocol.

Too much testing can be a bad thing, which means officials must find an appropriate balance. During the 2009 H1N1 outbreak, local labs were overwhelmed with tests, Becker said, some of which were unnecessary since the virus already was known to be circulating in some communities. “We can’t have every mildly ill person flood the health system.” Newsom echoed this sentiment, urging people to stay calm.

Several weeks ago, the CDC said it would roll out expanded testing through a surveillance network used to test for the flu, but the problems with the tests have delayed the start of the program.

The delays with testing also highlight the need for more consistent funding, so that health departments can be prepared for an outbreak, said Becker. Funding waxes and wanes with epidemics, but public health has to be as ready as your local fire department, he said. “We are that important to the health, safety and economy of the country.”

This KHN story first published on California Healthline, a service of the California Health Care Foundation.

from Updates By Dina https://khn.org/news/new-california-coronavirus-case-reveals-problems-with-testing-protocols/

[blessedbygoddesses-blog]

Some times your house might feel like a zoo nevertheless it shouldn't look like ink. Whip your home into shape by following these expert tips and tricks for tidying spaces - your closet, playroom, bathroom, and more - that are notorious for collecting clutter and even your garden or house roof. Your hard work is going to pay above in the long-run. You will notice. No matter if you've a rental home that demands a new tenant or even are transferring house, it's recommended to provide the house of yours a deep pristine. However, this could be a challenging cleaning, plus sometimes it is hard to find out exactly where to begin. We involved with Rebecca Mead, a residential scrubbing clean authority, for the top ideas of her on deep cleansing your home.

one. Faulty electrical - receptive junction bins, amperage mismatches, with no line nuts on wires. The cure: Fix junction boxes; upgrade to at least 100 amps. 2. Poor grading and also drainage - spongy garden soil across the foundation, warning signs of dripping within the basement. The cure: Regrade hence grounds inclines from house for ten feet; eliminate porous information around the foundation. three. Incorrect gutters - bent or clogged gutters, water not directed from home. The cure: Preventive maintenance; gutters of appropriate size, splash pans to divert run off. 4. Cellar dampness - drinking water staining, powdery residue on walls, mildew or mildew. The cure: Repair gutters to channel drinking water away from house; generate waterproof coatings on the basement. five. Roof covering ailments - brittle or even curled shingles; ruined or even losing out on flashings. The cure: Apply brand new shingle, or perhaps tear off if called for (usually after 3 re roofs); replacing flashings, especially near chimneys along with other protrusions. For facts, we advocate you read for getting a home inspection.

If you have cup bath doors in your powder room and don't always watch out for the cleaning, you are able to end up with soap scum really hard that it's just about impossible to clear out. Here is how to thoroughly clean the bathroom of yours more efficiently - bring out the large tools Pick up some sprucing up combo with a home area or perhaps an auto parts retail outlet and make use of an automobile buffer to polish off the offending scum. In case you do not use a buffer, you are able to purchase one for as little as $20 and also borrow one from a gearhead buddy. In case likely, remove the doors and also bring them out to the garage to stay away from messing upwards the powder room. No matter whether it's built up detergent scum along the shower room wall space, ground in dirt and grime on the floors tile for the floor or dried out toothpaste over the vanity top, a miracle Eraser sponge (or additional brands) will help make quick work of it. Just dampen it and therefore run it around the offending wreck. Inside most instances, the jumble will come properly off. These sponges are especially helpful for removing ground in dirt and grime from porous floor tile for the floor and getting some of those irritating nonslip strips in the bottom of your respective bathtub clean.

Ensure you get the spots coming from the rear of the sink and simply in back of the cooker. Do not overlook to add in the overhead air fan. Though luckily, the majority of have gratings that may be cleansed, these can get extremely slimy. Unclip them, and cleanse in accordance with the car maker's directions. Many will be washed in the dishwasher, but you will find it helps to try soaking them in h20 by way of a heavy-duty degreaser in advance. On the other hand, you might make an effort Muc Off degreaser, which is aimed at the motorcycle sector. This particular water-based solution is very good during getting rid of grease. In the end, a rich pristine can make a home search ready and better for its following occupant, although it is likewise great to grab the house ready for the future summer and spring even in case you're not considering proceeding shortly. Deep maintenance your home takes a bit of effort, but with the correct programs and equipment and good groundwork, a great strong pristine just requires one day or so.