Appearance and Health

Just because you're thin, doesn't mean you're healthy

Being thin doesn’t mean you can eat unhealthy foods and get away with it. from www.shutterstock.com

Dominic Tran, University of Sydney
According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 63% of Australian adults are overweight or obese.
But it’s much harder to estimate how many are within a healthy weight range but have poor diets or sedentary lifestyles. These can cause significant health problems that will often be missed because the person appears to look “healthy”.

---

Read more: I'm not overweight, so why do I need to eat healthy foods?

---

How do we judge the health of weight?

Obesity statistics often take estimates of body fat using body mass index (BMI). Although BMI isn’t perfectly correlated with body fat percentage, it’s a quick and easy method for collecting data using just the person’s height and weight. If the BMI is higher than 25, a person is considered “overweight”. If it’s above 30, they’re considered “obese”. But BMI doesn’t tell us how healthy someone is on the inside.
Using additional lifestyle measures, such as diet and exercise frequency over the last year, a recent report from the Queensland Health department estimated 23% of those who are not currently overweight or obese are at risk of being so in the future.
These figures indicate that the percentage of unhealthy-weight individuals does not accurately capture the percentage of unhealthy-lifestyle individuals, with the latter number likely to be much higher.

---

Read more: We asked five experts: is BMI a good way to tell if my weight is healthy?

---

If you’re not overweight, does a healthy lifestyle matter?

Many people think if they’re able to stay lean while eating poorly and not exercising, then that’s OK. But though you might appear healthy on the outside, you could have the same health concerns as overweight and obese individuals on the inside.
When considering risk factors associated with heart disease and stroke or cancer, we often think about health indicators such as smoking, cholesterol, blood pressure, and body weight. But poor diet and physical inactivity also each increase the risk for heart disease and have a role to play in the development of some cancers.
So even if you don’t smoke and you’re not overweight, being inactive and eating badly increases your risk of developing heart disease.
Little research has been done to compare the risk diet and exercise contributes to the development of heart disease in overweight versus skinny but unhealthy individuals. However, one study measured the risk of different lifestyle factors associated with complications following acute coronary syndrome – a sudden reduction in blood flow to the heart.
It found adherence to a healthy diet and exercise regime halved the risk of having a major complication (such as stroke or death) in the six months following the initial incident compared with non-adherence.

Unhealthy diets are bad for your body, but what about your brain?

Recent research has also shown overconsumption of high-fat and high-sugar foods may have negative effects on your brain, causing learning and memory deficits. Studies have found obesity is associated with impairments in cognitive functioning, as assessed by a range of learning and memory tests, such as the ability to remember a list of words previously presented some minutes or hours earlier.
Notably, this relationship between body weight and cognitive functioning was present even after controlling for a range of factors including education level and existing medical conditions.
Of particular relevance to this discussion is the growing body of evidence that diet-induced cognitive impairments can emerge rapidly — within weeks or even days. For example, a study conducted at Oxford University found healthy adults assigned to a high-fat diet (75% of energy intake) for five days showed impaired attention, memory, and mood compared to a low-fat diet control group.
Another study conducted at Macquarie University also found eating a high-fat and high-sugar breakfast each day for as little as four days resulted in learning and memory deficits similar to those observed in overweight and obese individuals.
These findings confirm the results of rodent studies showing specific forms of memories can be impaired after only a few days on a diet containing sugar water and human “junk” foods such as cakes and biscuits.
Body weight was not hugely different between the groups eating a healthy diet and those on high fat and sugar diets. So this shows negative consequences of poor dietary intake can occur even when body weight has not noticeably changed. These studies show body weight is not always the best predictor of internal health.
We still don’t know much about the mechanism(s) through which these high-fat and high-sugar foods impair cognitive functioning over such short periods. One possible mechanism is the changes to blood glucose levels from eating high-fat and high-sugar foods. Fluctuations in blood glucose levels may impair glucose metabolism and insulin signalling in the brain.
Many people use low body weight to excuse unhealthy eating and physical inactivity. But body weight is not the best indicator of internal well-being. A much better indicator is your diet. When it comes to your health, it’s what’s on the inside that counts and you really are what you eat.
Dominic Tran, Postdoctoral Research Associate, University of Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

What price do you think bitcoin will reach in the future?

Bitcoin:

After hitting a year high of about USD 20,000/- it is languishing now at about USD 7,000/-. What do experts say about the future price of bitcoin?

In the next 2 years the price of bitcoin could reach USD 1,000,000/- according to some (read below).

Read Frederick Briggs' answer to What price do you think bitcoin will reach in the next 2 years? on Quora

Free Bitcoin:

It is all free, and one can win up to Rs 13000/ hr . No investment required, and no strings attached.

If you want to divert your mind from the daily chores, you must play Freebitco and, at the same time, also earn some bitcoins free! You can share your experience with friends, and earn more by referring this website to them. Just spend 10 minutes an hour or 1 hour a day, and see your free bitcoins grow.

You can have more fun by investing the bitcoins earned in a lottery, every week Sunday. If lucky, your bitcoin will grow multi fold.

People say you cannot become rich by playing in Freebitco. But you can if you persevere, and luck favors you, you can become very rich.

Block chain technology is the technology of the future, and you must be proud to be associated with it. Though it may seem a little puzzling, you will be slowly drawn in to it.

The real thrill is in referring it to your friends and social circle and will earn you a fair referral commission.

Try it today with an open mind, and in the comfort that there is nothing to loose and all to gain.

Want to help after hurricanes?

Want to help after hurricanes? Give cash, not diapers

Roberto Clemente State Park employees in New York, with donated bottled water bottles bound for Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria. AP Photo/Julie Jacobson

Julia Brooks, Harvard University
Some companies and community groups didn’t wait for Hurricane Florence to make landfall before organizing donation drives.
But as a researcher with the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, an interdisciplinary center at Harvard University dedicated to relieving human suffering in wartime and disasters by analyzing and improving the way professionals and communities respond to emergencies, I wish they would have.
I’ve studied dozens of disasters, from Hurricane Maria and Superstorm Sandy to the South Asian tsunami and one thing is clear: In-kind donations of items such as food, clothing, toiletries and diapers are often the last thing that is needed in disaster-affected areas.
Delivering things that people need on the ground simply doesn’t help disaster-struck communities as much as giving them – and relief organizations – money to buy what they need. What’s more, truckloads of blue jeans and cases of Lunchables can actually interfere with official relief efforts.
If you want to do the greatest good, send money.

---

Read more: Social isolation of Older People

---

What’s wrong with in-kind donations

As humanitarian workers and volunteers have witnessed after disasters like Haiti’s 2010 earthquake and Southeast Asia’s Typhoon Haiyan in 2013, disaster relief efforts repeatedly provide lessons in good intentions gone wrong.
At best, in-kind donations augment official efforts and provide the locals with some additional comfort, especially when those donations come from nearby. When various levels of government failed to meet the needs of Hurricane Katrina victims, for example, community, faith-based and private sector organizations stepped in to fill many of the gaps.
How can in-kind donations cause more harm than good? Donated goods raise the cost of the response cycle: from collecting, sorting, packaging and shipping bulky items across long distances to, upon arrival, reception, sorting, warehousing and distribution.
Delivering this aid is tough in disaster areas since transportation infrastructure, such as airports, seaports, roads and bridges, are likely to be, if not damaged or incapacitated by the initial disaster, already clogged by the surge of incoming first responders, relief shipments and equipment.
This is especially the case in places like the Outer Banks, a string of barrier islands off North Carolina’s coast, where the challenges of bringing relief goods in, and distributing them to people who need supplies, are heightened by geography.

---

Read more: DIY method of Insulin Production in the Future

---

Dumping grounds

At worst, disaster zones become dumping grounds for inappropriate goods that delay actual relief efforts and harm local economies.
After the 2004 South Asian tsunami, shipping containers full of ill-suited items such as used high-heeled shoes, ski gear and expired medications poured into the affected countries. This junk clogged ports and roads, polluting already ravaged areas and diverting personnel, trucks and storage facilities from actual relief efforts.
After the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, many untrained and uninvited American volunteers bringing unnecessary goods ended up needing assistance themselves.
In-kind donations often not only fail to help those in actual need but cause congestion, tie up resources and further hurt local economies when dumped on the market, as research from the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies determined.
Research confirms that a significant portion of aid dispatched to disaster areas is “non-priority,” inappropriate or useless.
One study led by José Holguín-Veras, a Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute expert on humanitarian logistics, found that 50 percent to 70 percent of the goods that arrive during these emergencies should never have been sent and interfere with recovery efforts. After the 2011 Joplin, Missouri, tornado and the Tōhoku, Japan, earthquake, for example, excessive donations of clothing and blankets tied up relief personnel.
Relief workers consider these well-meaning but inconvenient donations as a “second-tier disaster” due to the disruption they cause.

What else can you do?

Instead of shipping your hand-me-downs, donate money to trusted and established organizations with extensive experience and expertise – and local ties.
Give to groups that make it clear where the money will go. Choose relief efforts that will procure supplies near the disaster area, which will help the local economy recover. You can also consult organizations like Charity Navigator that evaluate charities’ financial performance.
Many humanitarian aid organizations themselves have increasingly adopted cash-based approaches in recent years, though money remains a small share of overall humanitarian aid worldwide.
Evaluations of the effectiveness of such programs vary and are context-dependent. Nonetheless, emerging evidence suggests that disbursing cash is often the best way to help people in disaster zones get the food and shelter they need.
What’s more, the World Food Program and the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees say that people affected by disasters tend to prefer cash over in-kind aid due to the dignity, control and flexibility it gives them.

Some exceptions

There are a few notable exceptions to this advice on avoiding in-kind donations.
If you live in or near the affected area, it is helpful to consider dropping the specific items victims are requesting at local food banks, shelters and other community organizations. Just make sure that the items won’t perish by the time they can be distributed. For areas in Hurricane Florence’s path, for instance, the Red Cross has requested blood donations.
Charity is a virtue. Particularly when disaster strikes, the urge to help is admirable. Yet this impulse should be channeled to do the greatest good. So please, if you would like to help from afar, let the professionals procure goods and services. Instead, donate money and listen to what people on the ground say they need.
And don’t stop giving after the disaster stops making headlines. A full recovery will take time and support long after the emergency responders and camera crews have moved on.
This is an updated version of an article originally published on Sept. 4, 2017.
Julia Brooks, Researcher in international law and humanitarian response, Harvard Humanitarian Initiative (HHI), Harvard University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Is a vegetarian diet environmentally friendly?

Is a vegetarian diet really more environmentally friendly than eating meat?

It may be meat-free but you can still think more sustainably. Shutterstock

Wayne Martindale, Sheffield Hallam University
Beef from Brazil, avocados from Mexico, lamb from New Zealand, wines from South Africa and green beans from Kenya – food shopping lists have a distinctly international flavour. And with many questioning the sustainability of importing so much food from so far away, we are beginning to ask if switching to a vegetarian diet to cut emissions caused by meat production is as sustainable as one might think.
The influence of the global trade of food on local diets and cultural choices has exploded over recent years. Food supply chains operate globally and deliver rural produce to nearly 4 billion people now living in cities and towns. It was this principle that established the world’s first agricultural research station some 150 years ago when the founders of Rothamsted saw the potential of the agricultural land surrounding London to supply a growing urban population. In the 21st century, the whole world can be your bread basket.
Many are conscious of what they eat – both from a health and environmental perspective. But what is the impact of this? We’re increasingly encouraged to eat less meat to tackle climate change. And meat consumption, in the European Union at least, has reduced and stabilised at around 42m tonnes over the last 15 years. There are also now new labels for different types of meat eaters: flexitarians (only eat meat sometimes) or the reducetarian (aim to eat less meat) that reflect the ways different groups are trying to cut down.

Just one of the new labels for meat eaters. Shutterstock

But what about all those fruit, vegetable and staples crossing the globe – can we really label them as more sustainable than eating meat? The growth of ethical food purchases now make up close to 10% of grocery purchases in the UK, which is double that of tobacco. But in addition to the impact of air miles, global land and resource use determine the sustainability of the food we eat – food production can destroy or displace natural resources in order to supply growing demand. Changing land use to expand avocado production in Mexico, for example, is displacing the rainforest. Or the devastating impact of non-certificated palm oil, used in food but also a whole host of other products. And then there is the issue of food wastage.

Measuring the sustainability of food

However, the first thing we need to be able to do is measure the environmental impact of the food we eat. We can do this for different food supply chains using carbon footprinting methods. The difficulty is that consumers choose foods based on what they like – and this frequently changes but rarely considers the impact of climate change.
From this we can say that a vegetarian diet does deliver a decreased carbon footprint. But it also shows us that food miles and global distribution can be the least of our problems. This is because food wastage can be up to 20% of food purchases and food losses across the supply chain can be far greater than this. Food waste in turn increases the carbon footprint which counters the positive gains. And perishable fresh fruit and vegetables are more likely to be thrown away than fresh meat and fish.

So is vegetarian really best?

Ultimately, we cannot say that eating a vegan or vegetarian or meat diet is any better for the environment. This is because all can be appropriate if production systems are sustainable, there is no waste and positive health outcomes are achieved. There are clearly trade-offs in choosing foods. Air freighting of green beans from Kenya into the UK was seen as unsustainable because of air miles but it also supports up to 1.5m people and livelihoods in some of the poorest regions of Sub-Saharan Africa.

Not all about meat. Shutterstock

It’s not just meat that increase greenhouse gases. Rice – produced on 163m hectares, around 12% of the global arable area – has one of the greatest plant carbon footprints because it produces a lot of methane. But a fall in production of rice is not only unlikely, it could also disrupt greenhouse gases held in the soil. But there are different ways to do things – draining off paddies at particular times in the growing season, for example. Or using different fertilisers or rice varieties that are less susceptible to the heat.

The best way forward?

Consumers need to understand trade-offs and to keep up to date on information of what is best to buy. It is important to spot food trends, for example, and project any sustainability impacts. The number of gluten-free products available is doubling year-on-year in Europe and the US. This has resulted in an increase in the consumption of plant proteins from beans and lentils. These kinds of foods are arguably more eco-friendly than meat but – whatever your thoughts about gluten-free eating – it will change how protein crops are distributed globally and may divert pulses or increase the price of them for countries such as India that depend of non-livestock proteins.
Sustainability certifications have changed how we shop, giving us guidance on ethical purchases including sustainable fishing, rainforest produce and so on. This is one way to make sure that what you eat is less damaging and/or helps sustain livelihoods and good agricultural practices.
But it is day-to-day food waste – both at home and in supply chains – that can make any diet unsustainable whether you choose to be vegan, vegetarian, a meat eater or a combination of these. Different preservation formats can reduce food waste to zero. In the case of frozen food we know food waste can be halved compared with fresh foods – less of it is thrown away. Despite what you might think, frozen compares well to fresh and can be just as nutritious.
We all choose foods based on what we like, what we can access and what we can afford. But continued surveillance and interest in sustainable production will mean we can buy produce we know has a better supply chain. There isn’t currently a certification that shows food produced with less waste (there should be), but we can aim to cut down our own and keep up with suppliers who show better commitments.
We might have an avocado – but maybe not five in a week. And of course we can source more food locally and seasonally as well as considering preserved options if we want to cut down on air miles. Like eating less meat, there are ways to make your footprint better.
Wayne Martindale, Senior Research Fellow, Corporate Social Responsibility, Sheffield Hallam University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Cryptocurrency entrepreneurs in Puerto Rico, but will it help the locals?

Bitcoin rich kids in Puerto Rico: crypto utopia or crypto-colonialism?

Shutterstock

Larisa Yarovaya, Anglia Ruskin University and Brian Lucey, Trinity College Dublin
Cryptocurrency entrepreneurs have moved to Puerto Rico to build a crypto utopia – initially dubbed Puertopia but now named Sol – where they plan to pay little in taxes.
The crypto expats also hope to demonstrate how the city of the future will look with blockchain methods used for most transactions alongside the development of a new digital cryptocurrency.
But it’s less clear about whose future – the few or the many – will be the driving force for change on the US territory.
Puerto Rico was devastated by last year’s Hurricane Maria and, with inadequate aid from the US, it desperately needs investment to rebuild the island’s infrastructure. Puerto Rico was already facing severe financial difficulty before the calamity. It goes some way to explaining why local authorities are cautiously welcoming the arrival of cryptocurrency entrepreneurs on the island. But at what cost?
The term crypto-colonialism isn’t new. It was coined 18 years ago by Michael Herzfeld, but had nothing to do with cryptocurrencies – the bitcoin network didn’t come into existence until 2009.
Crypto-colonialism originally referred to countries, such as Greece and Thailand, seeking to acquire political independence at the expense of massive economic dependence. And it used the original meaning of the word “crypto” – concealed, hidden or secret. Such countries are nominally independent, but their national culture is refashioned to suit foreign models. The term colonialism in this sense is not overt at the point of a gun, but covert through the subversion of norms and cultures.
Notably, this definition of crypto-colonialism remains applicable to the socioeconomic consequences of crypto utopia.

Crypto land

There is a deep link between libertarianism and the cryptocurrency movement. Cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin rely on a decentralised, extralegal and unregulated approach. But while the crypto billionaires will enjoy their Caribbean playground, poorer locals with little knowledge of the technology will be excluded.
The mostly male entrepreneurs, who moved to Puerto Rico last year and plan to do more than create a cryptocurrency bank, will perhaps bring crypto libertarian ideas to the island. Their vision is similar to another would-be crypto utopia, the Free Republic of Liberland, which claims to be a “micronation” camped on the western bank of the Danube river. It uses bitcoin as its “national” currency.
Back on Sol, the wealthy crypto expats want to use the blockchain system for decentralised elections and even to issue citizenship ID. But we doubt that locals who are fighting poverty will be enthused by these ideas.
This behaviour reeks of disaster capitalism – the use of a natural or economic crisis to reshape and mould a society into one which entrenches a libertarian, hypercapitalistic worldview. When you are without power for months and feel ignored, any offer of help can seem a good lifeline with little thought for the consequences.

Fight the power

Crypto utopias can also cause severe environmental damage. Puerto Rico remains in a deep power crisis after Hurricane Maria, making the idea of Sol simply impractical. One bitcoin transaction consumes 215 kilowatt-hours (KWh), enough power to supply dozens of households on the island when the grid was at full capacity.
The annual electricity consumption for mining bitcoin increased from 9.5 terawatt-hours (TWh) per year to 48 TWh in the last 12 months – 2.5 times higher than Puerto Rico’s total consumption of 19 TWh. Resources and infrastructure, post-Hurricane Maria, are too stretched to support cryptocurrency mining on the island.
Crypto rich kids made their fortune on the rapid growth of cryptocurrency markets – which are problematic due to their idiosyncratic risks. It’s a game for wealthy people who can cash out early and lock in gains, having been the developers of the bubbly product. This is characteristic of any bubble – those who get in early do well, those who cash in late do poorly.

Five months after Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico, 400,000 people are still living without power. Shutterstock

Our recent research shows that cryptocurrency prices are relatively isolated from the shocks transmitted from other assets, such as gold and equities. But cryptocurrency prices are deeply interlinked with each other, so a fall in the price of bitcoin affects other virtual currencies.
If bitcoin can ride out its latest price fall, then it’s likely that crypto-colonialism will slowly spread around the globe. Crypto libertarians – if they follow the Sol model – could focus on those parts of the world that have been ravaged by earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes and economic crises.
But cryptocurrency has also become a panacea for economic recovery. In December, Venezuela announced a creation of a new cryptocurrency – dubbed “petro” – backed up by Venezuelan reserves of precious metals, oil and diamonds. It hopes to use this cryptocurrency to fight US sanctions, high inflation and low oil prices.
However, bitcoin solutions for developing countries – previously known as neo-colonialism – shouldn’t be seen as the ultimate solution for disaster and crisis management. In the transition period, when the potential of cryptocurrencies and applications of blockchain are unexplored, we have to be sceptical of such initiatives as Sol.
Larisa Yarovaya, Lecturer in Accounting and Finance, Anglia Ruskin University and Brian Lucey, Professor of International Finance and Commodities, Trinity College Dublin
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Bitcoin’s history

A history of Bitcoin – told through the five different groups who bought it

GeniusKp/Shutterstock.com

Dave Elder-Vass, Loughborough University
The recent fluctuations in Bitcoin’s value are just the latest in a series of spectacular peaks and troughs since it was created in 2009. (Though its price has been falling recently, it remains five times higher than last April, before the latest major peak began.)
Commentators are often dismissive of Bitcoin buyers, writing them off as naive victims of a fraudulent bubble. But if we look more carefully, we can trace the history of Bitcoin through five key narratives. Each has drawn in a different group of buyers and in doing so contributed to its long-term growth in value.

The idealists

Bitcoin arose from a tiny group of cryptographers who were trying to solve the “double spend” problem facing digital money: “cash” held as a digital file could easily be copied and then used multiple times. The problem is easily solved by financial institutions, who use a secure central ledger to record how much everyone has in their accounts, but the cryptographers wanted a solution that was more akin to physical cash: private, untraceable, and independent of third parties like the banks.
Satoshi Nakamoto’s solution was the Bitcoin blockchain, a cryptographically secured public ledger that records transactions anonymously and is kept as multiple copies on many different users’ computers. The first narrative of Bitcoin’s value was built into Nakamoto’s original “white paper”. This claimed that Bitcoin would be superior to existing forms of electronic money such as credit cards, providing benefits like eliminating chargebacks to merchants and reducing transaction fees.

The libertarians

But from an early stage, Nakamoto also marketed Bitcoin to a libertarian audience. He did so by stressing the absence of any central authority and particularly Bitcoin’s independence from both states and existing financial institutions.
Nakamoto criticised central banks for debasing money by issuing increasing amounts of it and designed Bitcoin to have a hard limit on the amount that could be issued. And he stressed the anonymity of Bitcoin transactions: safe, more or less, from the prying eyes of the state. Libertarians became enthusiastic advocates and buyers of Bitcoin, more as an act of rebellion than for financial reasons. They have remained highly influential in the Bitcoin community.

The savvy young

These, however, were small constituencies, and Bitcoin really started to take off in July 2010 when a short article on Slashdot.org (“news for nerds”) spread the word to many young and technically savvy buyers. This community was influenced by the “Californian ideology” – belief in the capacity of technology and entrepreneurs to transform the world.
Many bought small quantities at a low price and were somewhat bemused to find themselves sitting on significant investments when the price multiplied. They became used to huge fluctuations in the price and frequently advocated “hodling” Bitcoin (a mis-spelling of “hold”, first used in a now iconic message posted by an inebriated user determined to resist constant “sell” messages from day traders). The hodlers insisted, half seriously, that Bitcoin was going “to the moon!” (used 178,000 times on the bitcointalk forums), and talked of buying “lambos” (lamborghinis) with their gains. This countercultural levity generated a sense of community and a commitment to holding Bitcoin that helps to sustain its value.

The investors

The last two groups that have contributed to Bitcoin’s history are more conventional. What I consider the fourth group of investors consists of speculators who have been attracted by the volatility and peaks in Bitcoin prices.
On the one hand, we have the day traders, who hope to exploit the volatility of Bitcoin’s price by buying and selling quickly to take advantage of short-term price movements. Like speculators in any other asset, they have no real interest in the larger picture or of questions of inherent value, but only in the price today. Their only narratives are “buy” and “sell”, often employed in an attempt to influence the market.
On the other hand, we have those who are drawn in by news of price bubbles. Ironically, bubble narratives in the press, often designed to deter investors, can have the opposite effect. These investors join what Keynes called a “beauty contest” – they only care what other people might be prepared to pay for a Bitcoin in the short to medium term future.

The portfolio balancers

The final and newest group of Bitcoin buyers are the portfolio balancers: more sophisticated investors who buy Bitcoin to hedge against wider risks in the financial system. According to modern portfolio theory, investors can reduce the riskiness of their portfolios overall by buying some Bitcoin because its peaks and troughs don’t line up with those of other assets, providing some insurance against stock market crashes. This is an emerging group, but one that could significantly raise Bitcoin’s acceptability among mainstream investors.
Bitcoin’s value, then, has been built on an evolving series of narratives which have drawn in successive waves of buyers. While mainstream commentators are often dismissive of Bitcoin as lacking inherent value, all asset market values depend on narrative processes like these.
Bitcoin may well collapse again, but so may any other financial asset. Investing in Bitcoin is neither more nor less risky than investing in the latest technology company launched on the stock market without ever having made a profit.
Dave Elder-Vass, Reader in Sociology, Loughborough University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Child abuse begins with a touch

Child Abuse and You:

A child abuse begins with a touch, normally by a third person. Let us not delve too deep into who the third person could be. Any body other than the parent is a third person. There is no gender or age bias in those who indulge in such perverse act. Studies have shown that 90% of people are sexually harassing children.

A child will reveal any abuse by her action, behavior or words. Parent Protect has given a list of signs to watch out for which could be warning signs in children. A combination of worrying signs could be the time to investigate possible abuse. But, about 75 percent of children do not tell anyone due to fear or threat.

It is no secret that children listen to their parents more than others. So, the first step is teaching them from a very young age the nuances of touch and inappropriate caressing so that they get to know the difference between Good Touch and Bad Touch. 

Developing children in a safe environment, to understand what is good and what is bad is the most important in today's time. Only children of parents who are ignorant of this are victims of sexual abuse.

Your daughter may be subjected to sexual harassment. If you ignore it, it means that you are not a responsible mother or father. If your daughter says in her inimitable style that she doesn't like somebody, give her a patient hearing, investigate immediately and protect her from that person.

If your child is not her self any more, looking glum and silent, not playing or studying as before, be warned. This may be the early sign or warning for you to take a deeper insight into the matter or seek advice.

Do not wait for your child to grow up. Make them understand the nuances of good and bad touch at the earliest. may be from the age of 3.

Facebook has introduced a user trustworthiness score

 – here's why it should go further

Facebook wants to improve trust. Shutterstock

Sharon Coen, University of Salford
Facebook has reportedly started giving users a secret trustworthiness score in its attempt to tackle fake news. According to the Washington Post, the score is partly based on users’ ability to correctly flag and report inaccurate news items on the site. Facebook then takes this score into account when working out how a user’s content should be spread around the network (although it doesn’t tell users what their score is).
Why has Facebook started doing this? Following events such as the supposed role of misinformation on social media during the 2016 US election via and the Brexit campaign, Facebook has been increasingly under pressure to curb the spread of fake news. But the platform is now facing the possibility that the growing awareness of misleading and false information has increased the likelihood that users will report articles as “fake” just because they don’t agree with them.
We can use psychology to explain why this might be happening. And it suggests that the trustworthiness score is a good idea. But I would argue that Facebook should go further and give each user a more comprehensive personal reputation score that they can view to determine the quality and reach of their content.
In psychology, we call the tendency to seek confirmation, and minimise or discard information challenging our own beliefs “confirmation bias”. Research on people in the US and Germany has shown (in line with other studies) that people tend to spend more time reading news consistent with their existing attitudes than stories that highlight a different position. The same study also shows reading news that supports your views strengthens them, while reading stories that show a discrepancy with your attitudes weakens them.
In general, people don’t like to face situations in which their beliefs are challenged. This gives rise to the uncomfortable feeling of cognitive dissonance, the sense of holding two conflicting positions at once. To prevent this, people go to great lengths to prove their original beliefs are right. When exposed to facts that contradict our views, our choice is to either reconsider our position or to challenge the new information. And attacking the credibility of the information or its source can often do the trick.

Only Facebook can currently see user scores. Shutterstock

For example, research by colleagues and me has shown how people who deny the existence of – or the necessity to act upon – climate change go to great lengths to deny the value of the arguments presented. These strategies include denying and disputing the scientific evidence but also arguing that the scientists who produce it, and those trying to address the issue, are dishonest and have ulterior motives.
So it’s not surprising that the extensive media coverage of the issue of fake news (which research suggests was actually exaggerated in relation to the 2016 US election) might have encouraged Facebook users to flag as fake articles that make uncomfortable reading. And this creates a problem.
The idea of a secret trustworthiness score being used mysteriously by Facebook might put people off flagging content. But a publicly available score might be seen as a way to punish people who flagged content “incorrectly” by publicly shaming them. An alternative would be to allow users to see their own personal reputation scores based on what they share as well as what they flag, but not make them available publicly.

Using scores to change our behaviour

While we do have biases in our thinking, most of us want to feel useful and valuable. Studies have now shown how people use social media as a kind of identity laboratory, constructing a particular image of themselves that they present to the world. Our own research shows how Facebook use is associated with our need to feel like we belong to a community and that we are worthy and capable individuals. In a way, introducing reputation scores that users can access would satisfy this need, while also making sure that people do not feel discouraged from flagging content for fear of being profiled and singled out by the platform.
We already know how important authenticity and trust are online. People rely on online reputation scores to decide where to go, what to buy and what to do online. So a personal reputation score based on the quality and reliability of the sources of information we share online (and not only on the content we flag as fake) could be a useful tool for helping us spot actual fake news. Giving feedback on the accuracy of shared or flagged content could help us realise what we can trust and what we should flag, regardless of our wider opinions.
The challenge, of course, would be to figure out how to calculate this reputation score. But given how much data Facebook collects on its users, and on the content shared, perhaps this wouldn’t be too difficult.
Sharon Coen, Senior Lecturer in Media Psychology, University of Salford
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Camel Milk for Autism

A Child's Autism Story:

The early signs of Autism are, when your child,
Avoids making eye contact, such as looking or smiling at you when being smiled at.
Does not respond to his or her name, or to the sound of a familiar voice.
Follow only your gesture when you point things out.
Use other gestures to communicate.

Read this mother's story of how camel milk helped improve her autistic child,

 Amy's Autism Story - Spencer's Journey with Camel Milk https://t.co/MqIZ23ZVLH via @desertfarmsmilk

— Jayaraj (@Sjayaraj1999) August 18, 2018

Click here to buy Camel Milk.


Play freebitco,

கௌரவமான வேலை வாய்ப்பு - ஆயுள் காப்பீடு

ஆயுள் காப்பீடு முகவர்:

பட்டப்படிப்பு முடிந்தபிறகு நீங்கள் ஒரு கௌரவமான வேலை கிடைக்கவில்லை என்ற உண்மையை நினைவில் கொள்ளாதீர்கள்.

உங்கள் சிறந்த நண்பன் (கள்) பணியில் இருப்பதைப் பற்றி கவலைப்படாதீர்கள்.

நீங்கள் சம்பாதிக்க ஒரு படிக்கல்லாக அவர்களை பயன்படுத்திக்கொள்ளுங்கள், உங்கள் கனவு வேலை கிடைக்கும் வரை.

நீங்கள் கோயம்புத்தூர், தமிழ்நாட்டில் வசிப்பவரென்றால், தொடர்பு படிவத்தைப் பயன்படுத்தி மின்னஞ்சல், தொலைபேசி எண்ணையும் பதிவு செய்யுங்கள்.  விரைவில் உங்களை தொடர்புகொள்கிறோம்.

பகுதி நேர ஆயுள் காப்பீட்டு முகவராகுங்கள்.

Design Global, Make Local - an Open Source Design for Machines

<

Design global, manufacture local: a new industrial revolution?

The community of L'Atelier Paysan is building a wheat thresher. Chris Giotitsas/University of Leicester, CC BY-NC-ND

Vasilis Kostakis, Harvard University and Jose Ramos, Victoria University
What if globally designed products could radically change how we work, produce and consume? Several examples across continents show the way we are producing and consuming goods could be improved by relying on globally shared digital resources, such as design, knowledge and software.
Imagine a prosthetic hand designed by geographically dispersed communities of scientists, designers and enthusiasts in a collaborative manner via the web. All knowledge and software related to the hand is shared globally as a digital commons.
People from all over the world who are connected online and have access to local manufacturing machines (from 3D printing and CNC machines to low-tech crafts and tools) can, ideally with the help of an expert, manufacture a customised hand. This the case of the OpenBionics project, which produces designs for robotic and bionic devices.
There are no patent costs to pay for. Less transportation of materials is needed, since a considerable part of the manufacturing takes place locally; maintenance is easier, products are designed to last as long as possible, and costs are thus much lower.

The first version of OpenBionics prosthetic and robotic hands. from www.openbionics.org

Take another example. Small-scale farmers in France need agricultural machines to support their work. Big companies rarely produce machines specifically for small-scale farmers. And if they do, the maintenance costs are high and the farmers have to adjust their farming techniques to the logic of the machines. Technology, after all, is not neutral.
So the farmers decide to design the agricultural machines themselves. They produce machines to accommodate their needs and not to sell them for a price on the market. They share their designs with the world – as a global digital commons. Small scale farmers from the US share similar needs with their French counterparts. They do the same. After a while, the two communities start to talk to each other and create synergies.
That’s the story of the non-profit network FarmHack (US) and the co-operative L’Atelier Paysan (France) which both produce open-source designs for agricultural machines.

With our colleagues, we have been exploring the contours of an emerging mode of production that builds on the confluence of the digital commons of knowledge, software, and design with local manufacturing technologies.
We call this model “design global, manufacture local” and argue that it could lead to sustainable and inclusive forms of production and consumption. It follows the logic that what is light (knowledge, design) becomes global while what is heavy (manufacturing) is local, and ideally shared.
When knowledge is shared, materials tend to travel less and people collaborate driven by diverse motives. The profit motive is not totally absent, but it is peripheral.
Decentralised open resources for designs can be used for a wide variety of things, medicines, furniture, prosthetic devices, farm tools, machinery and so on. For example, the Wikihouse project produces designs for houses; the RepRap community creates designs for 3D printers. Such projects do not necessarily need a physical basis as their members are dispersed all over the world.

Finding sustainability

But how are these projects funded? From receiving state funding (a research grant) and individual donations (crowdfunding) to alliances with established firms and institutions, commons-oriented projects are experimenting with various business models to stay sustainable.

Design is developed as a global digital commons, whereas the manufacturing takes place locally, often through shared infrastructures. Vasilis Kostakis, Nikos Exarchopoulos

These globally connected local, open design communities do not tend to practice planned obsolescence. They can adapt such artefacts to local contexts and can benefit from mutual learning.
In such a scenario, Ecuadorian mountain people can for example connect with Nepalese mountain farmers to learn from each other and stop any collaboration that would make them exclusively dependent on proprietary knowledge controlled by multinational corporations.

Towards ‘cosmolocalism’

This idea comes partly from discourse on cosmopolitanism which asserts that each of us has equal moral standing, even as nations treat people differently. The dominant economic system treats physical resources as if they were infinite and then locks up intellectual resources as if they were finite. But the reality is quite the contrary. We live in a world where physical resources are limited, while non-material resources are digitally reproducible and therefore can be shared at a very low cost.
Moving electrons around the world has a smaller ecological footprint than moving coal, iron, plastic and other materials. At a local level, the challenge is to develop economic systems that can draw from local supply chains.
Imagine a water crisis in a city so severe that within a year the whole city may be out of water. A cosmolocal strategy would mean that globally distributed networks would be active in solving the issue. In one part of the world, a water filtration system is prototyped – the system itself is based on a freely available digital design that can be 3D printed.
This is not fiction. There is actually a network based in Cape Town, called STOP RESET GO, which wants to run a cosmolocalisation design event where people would intensively collaborate on solving such a problem.
The Cape Town STOP RESET GO teams draw upon this and begin to experiment with it with their lived challenges. To make the system work they need to make modifications, and they document this and make the next version of the design open. Now other locales around the world take this new design and apply it to their own challenges.

Limitations and future research

A limitation of this new model is its two main pillars, such as information and communication as well as local manufacturing technologies. These issues may pertain to resource extraction, exploitative labour, energy use or material flows.
A thorough evaluation of such products and practices would need to take place from a political ecology perspective. For example, what is the ecological footprint of a product that has been globally designed and locally manufactured? Or,to what degree do the users of such a product feel in control of the technology and knowledge necessary for its use and manipulation?
Now our goal is to provide some answers to the questions above and, thus, better understand the transition dynamics of such an emerging mode of production.
Vasilis Kostakis, Senior Research Fellow at Tallinn University of Technology, Affiliate at Berkman Klein Center, Harvard University and Jose Ramos, Lecturer, Globalisation Studies, Victoria University
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

What First time home buyers need to know

First time home buyers have to face many challenges, financing is just one of them . There are numerous things to take into consideration, from finding the right house to finding the right lender. Cat's paw.

For first time home buyers, having a good credit score is of utmost importance as this is one of the key factors taken into account by banks when they issue loans. Obtaining your credit score is very easy. Credit bureaus like CIBIL (Credit Information Bureau of India Limited) provide the information to banks about your credit score.

There are more than 50 lenders in India who will be willing to give you a Home Loan . But whom should you choose?

Buying your first home is one of the biggest financial investment of your life with large capital investment and heaps of long-term benefits. Investing in real estate can be tricky. There are a number of factors to consider and analyse.

It is not advisable to take the easy way of taking the loan from whosoever arrives first, but ensure that you get the best home loan offer.

The maximum home loan tenure offered by all major lenders is 30 years, and lower the EMI the longer the tenure. It will be tempting to go for a maximum tenure as the EMI is lowest. However, it is best to take a loan for the shortest tenure you can afford. 

It is always advisable to compare rates from several lenders before you take a loan. This has become easier, thanks to the profusion of loan aggregator websites. With just a click of the mouse you can compare the rates offered by multiple lenders. Convenience and wider choices are not the only benefits, but a gamut of other services. Try here.

Unlike the common perception, every customer need is different and every customer has a different priority. So a one size fits all approach is seldom good. A first time home buyers have some advantages - have access to special loan programs and concessions from the government.

More than 80 percent of millennial renters want to buy a home, but money issues often stand in the way of home ownership. Most of them feel they can't afford due to lack of knowledge of the schemes and the government initiative in this regard.

Consulting a loan facilitator or checking with an aggregator can take your loan knowledge to the next level and help you become the next first home buyer.

    

சுவிட்சர்லாந்தில் இலங்கைத் தமிழ் புலிகளின் நிதியாளர்கள் விசாரணை தொடங்கியது

விடுதலைப் புலிகளுக்கு நிதி :

விடுதலைப் புலிகளுக்கு 15 மில்லியன் சுவிஸ் ஃப்ராங்க்களுக்கு அதிகமாக (15.3 மில்லியன் அமெரிக்க டாலர்கள்) நிதி திரட்டி அனுப்பியதற்காக 13 நிதியாளா்கள் மீது விசாரணை சுவிஸ் பெடரல் குற்றவியல் நீதிமன்றத்தில் திங்களன்று துவங்கியது.

குற்றம் சாட்டப்பட்டவர்கள் சுவிட்சர்லாந்து, ஜெர்மனி மற்றும் ஸ்ரீலங்காவிலிருந்து வந்தவர்கள் என சுவிஸ் செய்தி நிறுவனம் SDA தெரிவித்துள்ளது.

இவா்கள், 1999 மற்றும் 2009 ஆம் ஆண்டுகளுக்கு இடையில், தமிழ் புலம்பெயர்ந்தோரை வங்கியிலிருந்து கடன் பெற நிா்பந்தப்படுத்தி   ஒரு சிக்கலான நிதி திரட்டும் கட்டமைப்பை உருவாக்கினாா்கள்.

பணமோசடி :

இந்த 13 நபர்கள் மீது மோசடி, பொய்யான ஆவணங்கள், பணமோசடி மற்றும் மிரட்டி பணம் பறித்தல் ஆகிய குற்றங்கள் சுமத்தப்பட்டுள்ளது.

சுவிட்சர்லாந்தில் LTTE ஒரு பயங்கரவாத அமைப்பாக அறிவிக்கப்படவில்லை, எனவே இவர்கள் ஒரு பயங்கரவாதக் குழுவுக்கு நிதியுதவி அளித்ததாக கருதப்படமாட்டார்கள்.

" புலம்பெயர்ந்த தமிழா்களை  அச்சுறுத்தியும், அவா்கள் மத்தியில் ஒரு வித பயத்தை தோற்றுவித்தும் பணத்தை சேகரித்து அணுப்பியிருக்கலாம் என்று அரசாங்க வக்கீல்  சந்தேகப்படுகிறாா்" என்று ஒரு நீதிமன்ற ஆவணம் கூறுகிறது.

இப்படி சேகரிக்கபட்ட சுவிஸ் நிதி கூரியா் மூலம் சிங்கப்பூர் மற்றும் துபாய்க்கு அனுபபட்டு விடுதலைப் புலிகளுக்கு ஆயுதங்களை வாங்க பயன்படுத்தியதாக தெரிகிறது. இந்த நிதி அமைப்பு 2009 இல் சரிந்தது.

source: swissinfo