Pelican Press

Religious sect parents jailed over death of diabetic daughter Religious sect parents jailed over death of diabetic daughter The parents of an eight-year-old diabetic girl in Australia who died after they denied her insulin for almost a week have each been sentenced to 14 years in jail for manslaughter. Elizabeth Struhs had in 2019 been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, and her family was told she would need daily insulin injections. Her parents belonged to a religious sect known as The Saints, who opposed medical care, believing God would heal her. She died from diabetic ketoacidosis, which causes a dangerous build-up of ketones – a type of acid – and blood sugar spikes at her home in Toowoomba west of Brisbane in January 2022. Her father Jason Struhs and mother Elizabeth Struhs, were among 14 people convicted of manslaughter last month. The Saints’ leader Brendan Stevens has been jailed for 13 years by the judge at the Supreme Court of Queensland, who called him a “dangerous, highly manipulative individual”. Eleven other members were handed jail terms of six to nine years. Stevens and the girl’s father had been on trial for ******* but they were convicted of the lesser charge of manslaughter. All had pleaded not guilty. When handing down his almost 500-page verdict last mouth, Justice Martin Burns said that although it was clear Elizabeth’s parents and “every member of the church including all other accused” had adored her, their actions had resulted in her death. “Due to a singular belief in the healing power of God… she was deprived of the one thing that would most definitely have kept her alive.” Elizabeth would have endured vomiting, extreme lethargy, and a loss of consciousness because she was denied medical care, prosecutor Caroline Marco said during the trial, which lasted several months and was heard by a judge sitting alone without a jury. Prosecutors called 60 witnesses and painted a picture of an “intelligent” child who suffered greatly in her final days. The congregation, meanwhile, had prayed and sung for the girl as she laid on a mattress and her condition deteriorated. Believing she could be brought back to life, the sect member made no effort to call a doctor, and authorities were not notified until 36 hours after her death, the court heard. “Elizabeth is only sleeping, and I will see her again,” her father Jason Struhs had earlier told the court. Stevens, 63, had defended the group’s actions as faith-based and described the trial as an act of “religious persecution”. He said that the group was within its “rights to believe in the word of God completely”. Type 1 diabetes is a disorder in which the pancreas fails to produce enough insulin. It is characterised by uncontrolled high blood glucose levels and it can be controlled by injecting insulin. Elizabeth’s sister Jayde Struhs had earlier said she had left the Saints and fled her family home at 16, after coming out as gay, and was now estranged from them. She and other witnesses described the congregation as having strict views, including that mainstream healthcare should be shunned and that both Christmas and Easter were “pagan” or ungodly festivals. The Saints are not affiliated with an established church in Australia and count around two dozen members from three families among its members. Source link #Religious #sect #parents #jailed #death #diabetic #daughter Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

Europe’s leaders are piling pressure on the EU to release $200 billion of frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine Europe’s leaders are piling pressure on the EU to release $200 billion of frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine Europe’s leaders to the East are piling pressure on the EU to release hundreds of billions of dollars worth of frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine’s war effort as relations with the U.S. deteriorate. Leaders from Poland, Estonia, and Finland have in the last week added to growing calls to liquidate Russian central bank reserves, which have been valued between $200 billion and $300 billion. Russian central bank reserves located in Europe—including currency, gold, and government bonds—were seized as part of wide-ranging sanctions against the country when Russia launched its February 2022 invasion of Ukraine. To date, they have stayed put owing to questions over the legality of unlocking the funds, nerves over the ramifications of unlocking them, and their alternative potential as a bargaining tool in peace talks. In July last year, the G7 nations agreed on a landmark deal to use the proceeds from the profits of Russia’s frozen assets to fund Ukraine’s defense effort, which helped fund a €50 billion loan to the country, but that is where progress has stopped. European leaders pile on the pressure The urgency to unlock new avenues for funding has accelerated since Donald Trump’s inauguration in January, after the U.S. president excluded Europe and Ukraine from initial peace talks with Russia and gave early verbal concessions to Putin, spooking Europe. An easy win, as far as the EU’s Eastern and Baltic states are concerned, is to liquidate the central bank reserves assets Russia left behind. Poland’s prime minister, Donald Tusk, posted on X last week: “Enough talking, it’s time to act! Let’s finance our aid for Ukraine from the Russian frozen assets.” In a televised address to the nation on Monday, Czechia Prime Minister Petr Fiala followed suit. “For further military support of Ukraine, we must use money from frozen Russian assets from across the entire Europe,” he said, adding that Trump had “decided to completely transform” U.S. foreign policy. “The speed, thrust, and rhetoric are certainly surprising, but the shift of the United States away from focusing on Europe should not surprise us,” said Fiala. Estonia’s foreign minister, Margus Tsahkna, told Reuters: “The decision to use the windfall profits was a step in the right direction. I see that the time is ripe now to take the next step.” In February last year, former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen marked herself out as an early advocate of liquidating the hundreds of billions of dollars in seized Russian assets. “I believe there is a strong international law, economic, and moral case for moving forward. This would be a decisive response to Russia’s unprecedented threat to global stability,” Yellen said. The latest calls have, however, highlighted a divide in the EU. Germany, France, Italy, and the European Commission have resisted calls to unlock the funds for their own use. The opposition comes from a fear that the seizure of free market assets would alarm international investors and hurt Europe’s legitimacy in the long run. Instead, these countries prefer to view the frozen reserves as a strong bargaining tool in negotiations with Russia, a point French President Emmanuel Macron repeated during a conversation with Trump this week. Some in the Russian administration are reportedly ready to part ways with its reserves, provided the territories by the country stay after the war, with some even suggesting the reserves are used toward payment for this territory. This story was originally featured on Fortune.com Source link #Europes #leaders #piling #pressure #release #billion #frozen #Russian #assets #fund #Ukraine Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content] For verified travel tips and real support, visit: [Hidden Content]

BP to ramp up fossil fuel spending to $10 billion in strategy reset BP to ramp up fossil fuel spending to $10 billion in strategy reset The BP logo is displayed outside a petrol station on January 30, 2025 in Warrington, United Kingdom. Nathan Stirk | Getty Images News | Getty Images British oil major BP on Wednesday announced plans to increase annual oil and gas investment to $10 billion through 2027 in a fundamental strategic reset following sharp profit declines. “Today we have fundamentally reset bp’s strategy,” BP CEO Murray Auchincloss said in a statement. “We are reducing and reallocating capital expenditure to our highest-returning businesses to drive growth, and relentlessly pursuing performance improvements and cost efficiency. This is all in service of sustainably growing cash flow and returns,” he added. The beleaguered energy giant is poised to outline further details of its new direction at its Capital Markets Update on Wednesday afternoon. An investor day presentation, which will be hosted by Auchnicloss and other members of the firm’s leadership team, is scheduled to take place from 1 p.m. London time. This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates. Source link #ramp #fossil #fuel #spending #billion #strategy #reset Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

She Lobbied for Formaldehyde. Now She’s at E.P.A. Approving New Chemicals. She Lobbied for Formaldehyde. Now She’s at E.P.A. Approving New Chemicals. Formaldehyde, the chemical of choice for undertakers and embalmers, is also used in products like furniture and clothes. But it can also cause ******* and severe respiratory problems. So, in 2021, the Environmental Protection Agency began a new effort to regulate it. The chemicals industry fought back with an intensity that astonished even seasoned agency officials. Its campaign was led by Lynn Dekleva, then a lobbyist at the American Chemistry Council, an industry group that spends millions of dollars on government lobbying. Dr. Dekleva is now at the E.P.A. in a crucial job: She runs an office that has the authority to approve new chemicals for use. Earlier she spent 32 years at Dupont, the chemical maker, before joining the E.P.A. in the first Trump administration. Her most recent employer, the chemicals lobbying group, has made reversing the Environmental Protection Agency’s course on formaldehyde a priority and is pushing to abolish a program under which the agency assess the risks of chemicals to human health. In recent weeks it has urged the agency to discard its work on formaldehyde entirely and start from scratch in assessing the risks. The American Chemistry Council is also seeking to change the agency’s approval process for new chemicals and speed up E.P.A.’s safety reviews. That review process is a key part of Dr. Dekelva’s purview at the agency. Another former chemistry council lobbyist, Nancy Beck, is back alongside Dr. Dekleva at the E.P.A. in a role regulating existing chemicals. The council’s president, Chris Jahn, told a Senate hearing shortly after the Trump inauguration that his group intended to tackle the “unnecessary regulation” of chemicals in the United States. “A healthy nation, a secure nation, an economically vibrant nation relies on chemistry,” he said. It is not unusual or unlawful for industry groups to seek to influence public policy in the interest of their member companies. The A.C.C. estimates that products using formaldehyde support more than 1.5 million jobs in the United States. What has been extraordinary, health and legal experts said, is the extent of the industry’s effort to block the E.P.A.’s scientific work on a chemical long acknowledged as a carcinogen, and how the architect of the effort was back at the agency as a regulator of chemicals. At the same time, the Trump administration has moved to sharply reduce the federal scientific work force. “They already have a track record of ignoring the science,” said Tracey Woodruff, director of the Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment at the University of California, San Francisco. “Now, they’re in charge of government agencies that decide the rules.” While leading the chemistry council’s fight to limit formaldehyde regulation, Dr. Dekleva called for investigations of federal officials for potential bias. The industry group used freedom of information laws to obtain emails of federal employees and criticized them in public statements for what they had written. It submitted dozens of industry-funded research papers to agencies that minimized the risks of formaldehyde. The A.C.C. also sued both the E.P.A. and the National Academies, which advises the nation on scientific questions, accusing researchers of a lack of scientific integrity. Allison Edwards, a chemistry council spokeswoman, said officials from the group had regularly met with E.P.A. staff members “to share critical science and to try and ensure an assessment of any chemistry is objective, employs rigorous scientific standards, and is reflective of real-world human exposure.” She said, “We’re asking to be one of many stakeholders at the table.” Molly Vaseliou, a spokeswoman for the E.P.A., said the agency would continue to make sure it “ensures chemicals do not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment.” At the same time, the agency would also work to approve “chemicals that are needed to power American innovation and competitiveness,” she said. Formaldehyde’s ******* risk Formaldehyde’s fumes can cause wheezing and a burning sensation in the eyes, especially when they accumulate indoors. That danger was apparent when formaldehyde in plywood used to build temporary trailer homes for victims of Hurricane Katrina sickened dozens of people. And there are longer-term dangers, namely several types of cancers. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on ******* concluded in 2004 that the chemical is a human carcinogen, and the U.S. Department of Health listed it as a human carcinogen in 2011. The chemical is restricted in the workplace, in certain composite wood products, and in pesticides. Yet efforts to strengthen overall regulations in the United States have stalled in the face of industry opposition. President Biden, whose “******* moonshot” program had made reducing ******* deaths a priority, revived in 2021 an E.P.A. assessment of the health effects of the chemical, and published a draft the following year. That effort, under the agency’s Integrated Risk Information System, was the first step toward regulating formaldehyde. The chemistry council led a coalition of industry groups, including the Composite Panel Association and Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturers, arguing that formaldehyde had already been rigorously studied and that strict industry controls were in place. In a half-dozen letters to the E.P.A., Dr. Dekleva, on behalf of a formaldehyde panel at the industry group, raised a list of complaints about the way the agency was carrying out its assessment. She questioned research linking formaldehyde to leukemia, or ******* of the blood, and accused the agency of not relying on the best available science. There was a dose, she said, at which formaldehyde did not cause risk. There was also research, she said, that showed inhaled formaldehyde did not easily travel beyond the nose to cause harm to the body. In light of these issues, Dr. Dekleva wrote, agency’s draft assessment was “flawed and unreliable without significant revision.” To bolster its case, the industry group enlisted experts at consulting firms to submit opinions and studies to the E.P.A. minimizing formaldehyde’s risks. The firms included those previously commissioned by tobacco companies to help defend cigarettes. The A.C.C. also submitted 41 peer-reviewed studies that it said refuted a link between formaldehyde and leukemia. A New York Times review found that the majority of the studies were funded by industry groups, including at least 11 from the Research Foundation for Health and Environmental Effects, an organization established by the American Chemistry Council. David Michaels, an epidemiologist and professor at George Washington University School of Public Health and assistant secretary of labor under President Barack Obama, said the industry strategy was to create the appearance of disagreement among scientists. While it’s true, he said, that inconsistencies can always exist in studies on humans, “there’s little disagreement among independent scientists that formaldehyde causes *******.” Scientists targeted For more than 150 years, the National Academies has advised the U.S. government on science. In 2021, it was asked to weigh in on the E.P.A.’s work on formaldehyde. It became a target of the American Chemistry Council. The industry group used freedom of information laws to obtain internal emails of members and support staff of a panel assessing the E.P.A.’s formaldehyde review, and it accused one staff of showing “bias in favor of disputed research claiming formaldehyde causes leukemia.” The staff member, a former Environmental Protection Agency scientist, had for example described as “wonderful” the news that Congress might try to replicate an influential ******** study that had shown formaldehyde could cause leukemia. Wendy E. Wagner, professor at the University of Texas School of Law and an expert on the use of science by environmental policymakers, said she did not see how the comment reflected bias. “After all, they don’t know what the results will be, do they?” she said. “I would expect all scientists to be enthusiastic about potential future research.” Dr. Dekleva called for investigations at both the E.P.A. and the National Academies, and for the removal of potentially biased panel members and staff. That included scientists who had previously accepted federal research grants. In July 2023, the industry group sued the E.P.A., as well as the National Academies, accusing researchers of a lack of scientific integrity. The chemistry council said that lack of integrity made the use of the National Academies research in regulating formaldehyde “arbitrary, capricious, and unlawful.” “It was relentless, and beyond the pale,” said Maria Doa, a scientist at the E.P.A. for 30 years who is now senior director of chemicals policy at the Environmental Defense Fund. “They really ratcheted up their attacks on federal employees.” The National Academies stood its ground, issuing a report the following month affirming the E.P.A.’s Integrated Risk Information System findings that formaldehyde is carcinogenic and increases leukemia risk. Those conclusions are shared by other global health authorities. Mary Schubauer-Berigan, the evidence-synthesis head at the World Health Organization’s Agency for Research on *******, said there was “sufficient evidence in humans” that formaldehyde causes leukemia as and nasopharynx *******. Mikko Vaananen, a spokesman for the European Chemicals Agency, said that while some questions around specific links to leukemia remained unanswered, evidence was sufficient to classify formaldehyde as a carcinogen. Formaldehyde “cannot in principle be placed on the E.U. market,” he said. In March 2024, a federal judge dismissed the chemistry council’s lawsuit. And early this year, near the end of the Biden administration, the E.P.A. issued a final risk determination, under the Toxic Substances Control Act: Formaldehyde “presents an unreasonable risk of injury to human health.” Mary A. Fox, an expert in chemical risk assessment at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health and a member of a committee that reviewed the E.P.A.’s research on formaldehyde, said agency scientists had accurately reflected the uncertainties around the links between formaldehyde and leukemia. But they had documented many other streams of evidence that indicated that link, Dr. Fox said. “It’s an inevitable progress of science, that as we learn more over time, we generally learn that health effects appear at lower concentrations than we had thought,” she said. Following Mr. Trump’s re-election, the American Chemistry Council signed onto a letter from a range of industry groups calling for broad changes to policy, specifically citing formaldehyde. “We urge your administration to pause and reconsider” the E.P.A. findings on formaldehyde, the Dec. 5 letter said. The E.P.A. “should go back to the scientific drawing board,” chemistry council said in January. The group was particularly concerned about the workplace limits the agency was suggesting, which it said ignored steps companies were already taking to protect workers, like the use of personal protective equipment. The A.C.C. is also supporting a bill from Republican members of Congress that would end the Integrated Risk Information System. Soon after, Trump transition officials said Dr. Dekleva would be returning to the E.P.A. to run a program assessing chemicals for approval. The chemistry council, which has long complained of a backlog, is pushing the agency to speed up approvals. During the first Trump administration, agency whistle-blowers described in an inspector general’s investigation how they had faced “intense” pressure to eliminate the backlog, sometimes at the expense of safety. Shortly after the inauguration, the Trump administration fired the inspector-general who carried out the investigation. On Jan. 20, the A.C.C. welcomed President Trump. “Americans want a stronger, more affordable country,” said Mr. Jahn, the group’s president. “America’s chemical manufacturers can help.” Source link #Lobbied #Formaldehyde #Shes #E.P.A #Approving #Chemicals Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content] For verified travel tips and real support, visit: [Hidden Content]

Ravens call allegations against Justin Tucker ‘serious’ and ‘concerning’ – The Washington Post Ravens call allegations against Justin Tucker ‘serious’ and ‘concerning’ – The Washington Post Ravens call allegations against Justin Tucker ‘serious’ and ‘concerning’ The Washington PostRavens: Allegations against Tucker ‘concerning’ ESPNRavens waiting for NFL to conclude Justin Tucker investigation, but they will scout kickers NBC SportsNFL investigators interviewed some massage therapists who have accused Ravens’ Tucker, report says The Associated PressWithout a ‘defined’ zero-tolerance policy, Ravens say: ‘Each situation stands on its own’ The Baltimore Banner Source link #Ravens #call #allegations #Justin #Tucker #Washington #Post Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

Man remains in custody after woman found dead on board Man remains in custody after woman found dead on board Gardaí (Irish police) are continuing to question a man in connection with the death of a woman on board a ferry sailing from Wales to Ireland. The incident occurred on Tuesday afternoon, on the 14:00 GMT Stena Line sailing from Fishguard to Rosslare in County Wexford. Gardaí and emergency services attended the scene after being alerted to what police described as “an unexplained death” shortly after 17:00 local time. They then boarded the ship, which is currently docked at Rosslare Harbour. The woman was later pronounced dead. Gardaí are currently awaiting the results of a post-mortem. Irish broadcaster RTÉ reported that the ship’s captain made an emergency call about half an hour before the ship docked. On Tuesday evening, the 19:00 outbound Stena sailing from Rosslare to Fishguard was cancelled with passengers being accommodated by Irish ferries on the 20:45 sailing from Rosslare to Pembroke, according to the company. Source link #Man #remains #custody #woman #dead #board Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

WAToday forced to remove article revealing identity of high-profile offender in breach of prohibition order WAToday forced to remove article revealing identity of high-profile offender in breach of prohibition order Nine has been forced to remove an article revealing the identity of a high-profile offender after it was found to be in breach of a prohibition order. Source link #WAToday #forced #remove #article #revealing #identity #highprofile #offender #breach #prohibition #order Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

Book Review: ‘Crush,’ by Ada Calhoun Book Review: ‘Crush,’ by Ada Calhoun CRUSH, by Ada Calhoun The love child of Elizabeth Gilbert’s “Eat Pray Love” and Carrie Bradshaw’s “Sex and the City” column, Ada Calhoun’s debut novel, “Crush,” tells the promising story of an unnamed Gen X woman whose husband, Paul, suggests she kiss a few other men to regain her “sparkle.” Slay, droned my rotted Gen Z brain on reading this. Unfortunately, not so. She spends the rest of the book trying not to cheat on him with a hot, nerdy religion professor named David, and feeling bad about it instead. Which is a shame, because although there is nothing inherently objectionable about a novel describing one woman’s extramarital crisis, it does seem a less inspired choice than a novel about one woman’s midlife experience of peacefully forming a fun little polycule. Nevertheless: We meet our narrator as the sole breadwinner of her house, a successful author contentedly holding down several writing jobs while her husband fails at making art and avoids kissing her for 18 years. “My mother was impressed,” she says, “that I’d built a life where I could have so much, with a man who even cooked.” Divorce is off the table, we are given to understand, because no healthy child has ever been reared in a broken home; besides, she really does love Paul — even though their few meaningful conversations regard seeing other people. Only occasionally do I feel moved to write a review in the first person, usually when I sense that any critique of the book might be outweighed (positively or negatively) by my own unavoidable biases. Here, I’ll admit I may be too generationally estranged from Calhoun’s worldview to understand where she’s coming from. I don’t deny that in the year of our Lord 2025 women still have plenty of obstacles to overcome. But the ones the narrator in “Crush” is battling belong to someone born in 1910, not the late ’70s. “I wanted to send word to my generational cohort,” Calhoun writes. “Don’t we make our own cages? When we rattle the bars don’t we often find that they are made of cardboard?” Frequently, I found myself reminding her of the same thing. “Crushes were how you stayed a little bit in love with the world even though you had a husband,” one line goes. “And how safe a feeling it was inside one relationship to imagine other men stacked around protectively, like sandbags.” To which I found myself in the margins writing, Girl, stand UP! several times over. I lived to regret it. The emotional affair with David starts 40 pages in. The following 100 pages consist of emails so long that six weeks of correspondence totals 182,000 words. These exchanges assuage the illicit nature of the pair’s love by referencing Emerson’s “Friendship.” But also Nietzsche’s amor fati and the 12th-century romance between Abélard and Héloïse. When at last David suggests meeting in person, she hesitates for Paul’s sake, until she learns, in a deus ex machina for the ages, that Paul has had his own affair. “This news was terrible in so many ways, but in at least one it was fantastic,” she thinks. “I was in love with someone else and yet Paul was apologizing to me.” It’s only hard because Paul’s affair, it turns out, lacks the “holiness” of her own. Incredibly, that’s not a joke. And this is the rub. “Crush” is set in a post-pandemic world recent enough for our protagonist to reflect on Taylor Swift’s line “about how she used to grind a cold ax for her exes and now she buys their babies presents,” but not recent enough for her to benefit from Sandra Hüller’s infinitely less pious “Your generosity conceals something dirtier and meaner” speech in 2023’s “Anatomy of a Fall.” Fair enough — except this oversight is presented as a “spiritual path” rather than straight-up farce. “The community loves sacrifice, and you’ve done that well,” a friend advises the narrator. “But no, it’s not honest. Deep down, I think you want more and that you’re angry. And that you’re right to be.” Is she? There’s a thin line between self-care and narcissism. I am all for badly behaved protagonists having morally questionable sex, but some of the mirth and much of the philosophical heft of Calhoun’s setup goes out the window when it’s presented as a Stendhal-quoting, mildly self-righteous treatise on finding yourself, by a bored, middle-class woman with a functioning bank account and a capable brain who is needlessly complicating her mediocre marriage. The novel’s intended comedy does land at unexpected moments, such as when the narrator refers to her sometimes pen pal, the actor Tom Hanks, as “an inspiration, like the poet W.H. Auden”; or when she decides that “to Paul I needed to show appreciation. And so I not only continued to sleep with him, but I also took him on a weekend trip.” It’s difficult to tell whether such lines are rare moments of satire or so sincerely unhinged as to be touched by God, but either way, I’d like to buy Calhoun a drink. “Crush” provoked in me a genuine unease over the astonishingly delusional kind of egotism upon which this contemporary happiness is bred and applauded. “The point was not that I found a man who could please me,” the narrator triumphantly declares at the novel’s end. “The point was that I learned how to accept pleasure.” May that kind of pleasure, as the current parlance goes, never find me. CRUSH | By Ada Calhoun | Viking | 273 pp. | $30 Source link #Book #Review #Crush #Ada #Calhoun Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

Exclusive-JPMorgan executive calls for ‘more hustle’ after return to office mandate Exclusive-JPMorgan executive calls for ‘more hustle’ after return to office mandate By Lananh Nguyen and Nupur Anand NEW YORK (Reuters) – A JPMorgan Chase executive told thousands of employees he wanted “more hustle” days after the bank’s CEO Jamie Dimon scorned staff pushback against its five-day return-to-office policy. The memo illustrates the tension between JPMorgan’s emphasis on in-office culture and employees who cite its strong performance while flexible working policies were in place. “We need more hustle and scrappiness,” Rohan Amin, chief product officer of the Chase consumer business, wrote in a memo to more than 25,000 employees last week. He cited a call for feedback on artificial intelligence that prompted fewer than five responses, and gave another example in which internal bureaucracy blocked better results. Some employees balked at Amin’s criticism, according to two sources who declined to be identified discussing personnel matters. By contrast, another source said Amin received an influx of productive feedback in response to the latest memo. “There’s a lot happening—return to office adjustments, open questions, real estate challenges,” Amin wrote. “I also know that uncertainty can be frustrating… That said, I have to ask: where’s the hustle?” Separately, Dimon told CNBC on Monday that he respects employees who don’t want to come into the office five days a week, but said the policy will not change because it is best for clients and the company. “I am not against working from home, I am against where it doesn’t work,” he said, adding that 10% of the bank’s jobs are done remotely. Some employees have sought advice from the Communications Workers of America on how they might set up a labor union, a rare thing in the U.S. finance sector. The petition has received 1,200 signatures, Dimon told CNBC. When asked about the in-person work policy during the a staff meeting earlier this month, Reuters reported exclusively on Dimon’s response: “Don’t waste time on it. I don’t care how many people sign that ******** petition,” he said at the time. On Monday, Dimon told CNBC that he shouldn’t swear in town hall meetings. (Reporting by Lananh Nguyen and Nupur Anand in New York; Editing by Nick Zieminski) Source link #ExclusiveJPMorgan #executive #calls #hustle #return #office #mandate Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

Timothée Chalamet Should Win an Oscar for His Oscar Campaign Timothée Chalamet Should Win an Oscar for His Oscar Campaign Democracy is broken, they say. The wants of the electorate are contradictory and rooted in base emotions rather than rational thought. Viable alternatives are nonexistent, so we treat the ensuing insanity as a spectator sport, posting impotently as the world burns. I could be talking about electoral politics, but in this instance I am actually talking about Oscar campaigns. We as individuals do not cast the ballots that determine the year’s best actor or finest cinematographer or most evocative sound design. That privilege falls to a shadowy elite, who decide these things based on their personal aesthetic judgments — but also, it turns out, based on larger narratives that all of us get to judge, narratives about who has achieved true stardom or whose moment has come. It’s a strange arrangement: The public has no official say, and yet our collective gut-check vibes appear to influence the result just the same. Hence the Oscar campaign, which aims not just to persuade academy voters that a given contender deserves their support, but also to create a good story around it — and, ideally, a culture-wide consensus that the nominee’s victory is nearly inevitable. The 2025 race has been weirder than most. Three campaigns stand out — one weirdly funny, one weirdly disastrous and one weirdly endearing. The funny one involved the movie adaptation of the Broadway musical “Wicked.” An endless promotional push surrounded the film’s November release, and a clear bid for Oscar recognition followed, but the highlight of the whole thing was its strangest moment: a journalist solemnly informing the two lead actresses, Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo, that fans of the film were “holding space” for the lyrics of the breakout song “Defying Gravity.” Erivo was visibly moved by this news; Grande then reached out to hold Erivo’s pointer finger. Both women appeared to be on the verge of tears. The moment was so eerie and absurd that it was rehashed online for weeks. Maybe it helped: Each woman did ultimately secure an Oscar nomination. The disaster involved “Emilia Pérez,” the polarizing Spanish-language French musical crime film about a transgender ******** cartel leader. For a moment, this looked like the film to beat: It won the Jury Prize at the Cannes Film Festival and garnered 13 Oscar nominations, including best picture, best director and best actress. But it was quickly subsumed by a series of controversies. There was criticism, from L.G.B.T.Q. advocates, that the film was “a step backward for trans representation”; there was negative coverage from the ******** press about how the country was portrayed. Most devastating, there were unearthed social media posts by the film’s star, Karla Sofía Gascón, disparaging George Floyd and Islam, among other hot-button topics — most likely torpedoing the chances of the first openly transgender actor nominated for an Oscar. Then there was the third offensive, the one credited with “making Oscar campaigning fun again.” Timothée Chalamet claimed a best-actor nomination, his second, for his lead role in the Bob Dylan biopic “A Complete Unknown” — a film he’s quite good in, especially when he evokes Dylan’s unique blend of mumbly insouciance and magnetic star power. His status as a favorite slipped after he lost out on early awards. But his campaign has been something else: not just fun, but a genuine masterpiece of self-promotion. It has scored so many hits, across so many platforms, that it’s helpful to break them into categories. In October, when Chalamet showed up to a Timothée Chalamet look-alike contest (and later posed with the winner at the Golden Globes), it made for the kind of charming general-interest story that would be shared widely on Facebook. When he appeared in a video with the internet personality Nardwuar and talked about how “I rip Milk Duds” at the movies: That one serviced a slightly different segment, the “extremely online.” Elsewhere he would give special attention to the niche demographic of “Bob Dylan nerds,” to which I personally belong. On Instagram, he posted a video of himself listening to the 1980s outtake “Blind ******* McTell.” Even more specific was a reference to Dylan’s bizarre, bewigged appearance at the 2003 Sundance premiere of his own Dylan movie, “Masked and Anonymous” — Chalamet copied that wardrobe at the New York premiere of “A Complete Unknown,” a gesture that only the most committed Dylanologists would fully appreciate. You have to learn to be yourself, but on purpose. There was also January’s appearance on “Saturday Night Live,” where Chalamet was both the host and, stunningly, the musical guest. He credibly performed three Dylan songs, none of them widely known. He was earnest and self-mocking, keenly aware of the ridiculousness of playacting as an iconic musician but committed to the tactic nonetheless. “I’m so grateful ‘Saturday Night Live’ is still doing weird stuff like this,” he said. Oscar campaigns used to rely on staples like the “revealing” magazine profile or the pretentious “actors’ round table.” This is how narratives are hatched: the film that “saved” Hollywood, the beloved veteran who finally gets her due, the young star anointed as an industry pillar. In a different era, Chalamet might have behaved like Leonardo DiCaprio, a classically aloof and media-averse leading man who embraced the grit and prestige of Martin Scorsese films in order to prove he wasn’t just a pretty-boy movie star. Instead, Chalamet seems to understand that authenticity in the internet age is achieved through different means. To paraphrase Paul Newman in “The Color of Money,” you have to learn to be yourself, but on purpose. This was most apparent during the Chalamet moments that fell into a fourth category: his appeals to the demographic of “dudes who don’t normally care about Timothée Chalamet.” In December, he popped up, improbably, as a guest picker on ESPN’s “College GameDay,” where he provided detailed breakdowns and predictions for the day’s slate of football games, some of them shockingly canny. (He was the only one to correctly call the Ohio Bobcats’ blowout victory in the MAC championship.) Most important, he looked surprisingly comfortable in this environment — just as he did, several days later, on the popular brosphere podcast “This Past Weekend.” None of this has much to do with movie acting, but it has everything to do with authenticity. Watching Chalamet, I’ve thought often about Bradley Cooper, whose own Oscar campaign for 2023’s “Maestro” was considered a debacle. There are parallels between the two: Both were playing real musicians, both made it abundantly known how much actorly preparation went into their craft, both seemed eager to cast off “pretty boy” claims and prove themselves as dramatic heavyweights. But Cooper’s attempts to ingratiate himself with the public were oddly unsuccessful. His crime? He wanted it too badly, too transparently. He was seen, according to Vox, as an inauthentic “try-hard,” overly concerned with awards. Aren’t most people in Hollywood guilty of that? It seems to me that Cooper’s real offense was not grasping the contradictory demands of a modern Oscar campaign: You must care but appear not to care. Your aim is to be taken seriously, but this sometimes must be pursued via unserious means. You put yourself out there, but only so that the voters can feel as though they discovered your greatness on their own. Timothée Chalamet understands this. If he manages an Oscar win, it won’t just be for playing for Bob Dylan. It will also recognize his winning performance as a seemingly relatable, down-to-earth person — the most challenging role for any movie star to pull off. Source photographs for illustration above:​ Phillip Faraone/Getty Images; Rosalind O’Connor/NBC, via Getty Images; Gerald Matzka/Getty Images​. Steven Hyden is the author of six books, including, most recently, “There Was Nothing You Could Do: Bruce Springsteen’s ‘Born in the U.S.A.’ and the End of the Heartland.” He is the cultural critic at UPROXX. Source link #Timothée #Chalamet #Win #Oscar #Oscar #Campaign Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content] For verified travel tips and real support, visit: [Hidden Content]

Trump Takes Aim at ******** Shipping Amid Widening Trade War Trump Takes Aim at ******** Shipping Amid Widening Trade War The Trump administration has opened a broad new front in its global trade conflict, proposing to affix levies reaching $1.5 million on ********-made ships arriving at American ports. Such fees would apply even on vessels made elsewhere if they are operated by carriers whose fleets include ******** ships — an approach that risks increasing costs on an array of imported cargo, from raw materials to factory goods. Given their potential to increase consumer prices, the levies could collide with President Trump’s promises to attack inflation. Nearly 80 percent of American foreign trade by weight is transported by ship, yet less than 2 percent is carried on American-flagged vessels, according to Gavekal Research. As detailed on Friday by the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the proposal reflects the “America First” credo animating the Trump administration. It is engineered to discourage reliance on ******** vessels in supplying Americans with products, while aiming to spur the revival of a domestic shipbuilding industry after a half-century of veritable dormancy. Taken together with Mr. Trump’s expansive tariffs, the approach to shipping is a rebuke of the trading system constructed by the United States and its allies after World War II. Faith in the view of the world as a teeming marketplace has given way to hostility toward globalization in favor of the pursuit of self-sufficiency. The proposal would advance the mission to isolate China while diminishing American reliance on its industry — a rare area of bipartisan consensus in Washington. The plan was the result of an investigation, started during the Biden administration, into the dominance of the ******** shipping industry, in response to a petition filed by labor unions. Almost one-fifth of container vessels arriving at American ports are made in China, and a far higher share on trading lanes spanning the Pacific, according to ING, the Dutch banking giant. “A significant portion of imports entering the U.S. via ports would be directly subject to hefty fines,” the bank’s researchers concluded in a report published Monday. “These additional expenses would likely be passed on from the carrier to shippers and, ultimately, to importers and exporters.” The administration is fielding comments on the proposal through March 24. Mr. Trump could then impose the levies by executive order. The plan envisions a range of fees on ships unloading at American ports depending on the percentage of ********-made vessels in a carrier’s fleet. In addition to the rate of up to $1.5 million for ********-built ships, it outlines levies reaching $1 million per port call for carriers whose orders for new ships draw heavily on ******** shipping yards. Major carriers typically stop at two or three American ports per route, meaning their levies could exceed $3 million on journeys bringing $10 million to $15 million in revenue, estimated Ryan Petersen, chef executive of Flexport, a global logistics company. “The proposed fees are huge, and they will get rolled into what shippers have to pay, and hence consumers,” said ****** Shih, an international trade expert at Harvard Business School. “It’s a really aggressive move that reflects an administration that is either out of touch with how the world really works or that doesn’t care and wants to cause chaos.” Upheaval may suit the designs of Mr. Trump, who has sought to pressure companies to make their products in the United States. But increased shipping costs could hamper that effort, given that more than one-fourth of American imports are components, parts or raw materials, according to World Bank data. Higher costs on such cargo challenge the economics of making finished goods in the United States. The Trump proposal aims to counter the dominance of the ******** shipbuilding industry, which makes more than half the world’s commercial cargo vessels, up from 5 percent in 1999, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative. At least 15 percent of American exports would have to be shipped on U.S.-flagged vessels within seven years of the new policy, and 5 percent of fleets would have to be built in the United States. “There is no physical way in hell that U.S. shipyards can do that,” said Lars Jensen, chief executive of Vespucci Maritime, a container shipping consultancy based in Copenhagen. “The technical term for this proposal would just be ‘stupid.’” The wait for a new container ship from an existing shipyard already stretches more than three years, he said. An American industry would be starting almost from scratch, requiring billions of dollars and many years. The effort would also require steel — a commodity made more expensive by Mr. Trump’s tariffs. In the meantime, the levies would create fresh opportunities for established shipyards in South Korea and Japan. If enacted, the proposal would scramble international transportation, sowing extra uncertainty for businesses already grappling with Mr. Trump’s various tariff proposals. Importers would most likely reduce their use of American ports by shipping into Mexico and Canada, and then using trucks and rail to deliver to the United States. “Those ports are often congested,” noted Mr. Petersen, the Flexport chief executive. “They won’t be able to absorb much capacity.” Source link #Trump #Takes #Aim #******** #Shipping #Widening #Trade #War Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

The One Idea That Connects Trump’s Recent Actions The One Idea That Connects Trump’s Recent Actions President Trump’s team has embraced the unitary executive theory, a legal ideology that argues that the Constitution prohibiting Congress from placing any limits on the president’s control of the executive branch, including by creating independent agencies or by restricting the president’s ability to fire any government official. Astead W. Herndon, a national politics reporter and Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court, explain Trump’s apparent strategy. Source link #Idea #Connects #Trumps #Actions Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

Trump’s New Crackdown on China Is Just Beginning Trump’s New Crackdown on China Is Just Beginning President Trump’s tough talk on China typically centers on tariffs. But a closer look at the decisions he has made since taking office shows that the president is considering a far wider set of economic restrictions on Beijing, ones that could hasten America’s split from a critical trading partner. The Trump administration has so far proposed expanding restrictions on investments flowing between the United States and China. It has appointed officials who, because of national security concerns, are likely to push for more curbs on ******** investments and technology sales to China. And Mr. Trump has ushered in a 10 percent tariff on ******** imports, a move that he called an “opening salvo.” After years in which officials from both parties gradually pared back America’s economic relationship with China, Mr. Trump’s moves suggest that he is prepared to sever ties more aggressively. Samm Sacks, a senior fellow at Yale Law School’s Paul Tsai China Center, said the investment memorandum that the administration issued on Friday read like “a call to finish the unfinished task of fully unwinding commercial ties with China.” “So far, pragmatists have prevailed in getting a more narrow version of decoupling,” Ms. Sacks said. The pronouncements could be “a bargaining tool” for Mr. Trump to kick off negotiations with the ******** leader, Xi Jinping, Ms. Sacks said. “But should that fall apart or not work out — which is probably most likely — I see this as the blueprint to finish the job of decoupling.” The main wild card in how far the United States will go appears to be Mr. Trump himself. The president is interested in potentially striking a deal with Mr. Xi, in part because of China’s failure to live up to the terms of an agreement the two leaders signed in early 2020. Current and former advisers say Mr. Trump takes a more transactional view to issues like ******** investment than many of his more hawkish advisers, a position that could result in continuing economic ties in exchange for a deal that he feels benefits the United States. Mr. Trump has expressed support for foreign investments in the United States that other Republicans consider national security issues, like a proposal by Japan’s Nippon Steel to invest in U.S. Steel, or a rescue of TikTok. And while campaigning, Mr. Trump said he would welcome ******** companies to build auto plants in the United States as long as they hired locally. “I’ll tell them if they want to build a plant in Michigan, in Ohio, in South Carolina, they can — using American workers, they can,” the president said at a rally in Dayton, Ohio, last March. During his first term, Mr. Trump backed off a plan that would have crippled ZTE, a ******** electronics maker, after Mr. Xi helped secure a meeting between Mr. Trump and President Kim Jong-un of North Korea. Mr. Trump’s advisers say the president could continue to ratchet up pressure on Beijing, since he may see that as way to force ******** officials to make concessions. As a result, trade tensions could rise in the months to come. Mr. Trump, who hit China with tariffs during his first term, imposed an additional 10 percent levy on all ******** imports this month. The reason, he said, was that Beijing was not doing enough to limit the flow of drugs into the United States. China answered with its own tariffs on American imports. It also restricted the export of certain critical minerals and initiated an antimonopoly investigation into Google. A trade memorandum signed by the president on his first day in office directed his advisers to study other significant measures against China, such as revoking the permanent normal trade relations that the United States extended to China before it joined the World Trade Organization. And on Friday, the Office of the United States Trade Representative said it was moving forward with a trade case aimed at protecting the U.S. shipbuilding industry against ******** competition. Mr. Trump’s team is also discussing ways to tighten U.S. export controls, including by patching perceived loopholes in regulations on chips and chip-making equipment. Personnel appointments also point to a stricter stance on ******** investment and technology sales. Within the Commerce Department, which leads the efforts to limit technology sales to China, the Trump administration recently ousted several longtime employees, including Matthew S. Borman, a former deputy assistant secretary for export administration, in favor of new appointments. A nominee for assistant secretary of commerce, Landon Heid, advocated tighter restrictions on sales to ******** technology companies while at the State Department. On investment, Mr. Trump’s directive was a presidential memorandum rather than an executive order, meaning it did not immediately affect any policy. But it told the Treasury Department and other agencies in general terms to establish new rules to stop U.S. companies and investors from making investments that would aid China’s military advances, and stop people affiliated with China “from buying up critical American businesses and assets.” The memorandum said that the Trump administration would create a “fast track process” for investment from U.S. allies, and that the United States would welcome all “passive” investments from foreigners, meaning investments in which they have no controlling stakes or managerial influence. But it proposed harsher restrictions on certain foreign adversaries, like China, that it said were systematically investing in the United States to obtain technology, intellectual property and leverage in strategic industries like agriculture, minerals and shipping. The memo said the Trump administration would expand the authorities of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, a body that reviews incoming investments for national security threats, to include “greenfield investment” — new facilities built from the ground up. It also ordered CFIUS to stop using “mitigation” agreements, in which companies make changes in ownership or technology to try to lessen national security concerns and allow acquisitions to go through. Mr. Trump directed his advisers to consider expanded restrictions on emerging technologies, as well as whether to apply limits to more types of investments, such as pension funds and university endowments. He also ordered them to review the special structure that ******** companies typically use to list on U.S. stock exchanges, which critics say limits ownership rights and protections for U.S. investors. Critics say investment flows between the countries have aided the ******** government and military, including by funding activities contrary to U.S. national security and helping U.S. technology flow to China. The Coalition for a Prosperous America, a trade group that supports protectionist measures, praised the presidential memo. In a statement, it said money from U.S. investors had allowed China “to fund its state-sponsored genocide, military aggression, surveillance state apparatus and other malign activities.” Roger Robinson Jr., a senior adviser to the group, called it “a history-making breakthrough.” “Hopefully, the Congress will do its part in making ******** a number of Wall Street’s reckless and indefensible investment practices benefiting ******** state-controlled corporate bad actors to our detriment,” Mr. Robinson said. But some analysts said that the economic impact could be limited and that the order could be subject to legal challenges. Ling Chen, a professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, said ******** investment in the United States had already fallen sharply since 2017. As a result, she said, she doesn’t expect much fluctuation, or much influence on China. “I do not expect to see any surprising changes in the overall trend,” she said. Jim Secreto, a former counselor for investment security at the Treasury Department, said some of the ideas in the memo, like reviews of greenfield projects, “overstep CFIUS’s existing authorities and could be challenged in court.” “The Trump administration would be wise to proceed carefully to avoid implementation challenges that could end up harming national security,” Mr. Secreto said. Alan Rappeport contributed reporting. Source link #Trumps #Crackdown #China #Beginning Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content] For verified travel tips and real support, visit: [Hidden Content]

At London Fashion Week, Street Style Turned Heads At London Fashion Week, Street Style Turned Heads Leading up to London Fashion Week, the vibes, as the saying goes, were off. More than a few brands scrapped shows they had been planning and others forewent planning them at all. But any doom and gloom as fashion week approached did not deter the most passionate fans, whose eclectic attire in and outside shows nodded to London’s sartorial tradition of bucking convention. Many spectators took inventive approaches to layering that had heads turning. Draping a saturated cable-knit sweater over a dark winter coat, for instance, or sandwiching a collegiate sweater between two button-up shirts. Some of the most interesting layered looks technically involved no layering at all. Instead, they included pieces with unique textures or fabrications that functioned as an optical illusion. As for the clothes on the runways, the tumult surrounding this fashion week season seemed to have instilled in certain designers a motto of “if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it — too much.” Erdem Moralioglu showed the beautiful floral dresses his label is recognized for, along with some spectacularly shimmery creations fabricated with tinsel-like fringe. Simone Rocha’s romantic collection featured all manner of faux furs: some embellished dresses, some were used as scarves and one came in the form of a bra top modeled by Alexa Chung. And Edeline Lee, who is known for presenting her collections in elaborately choreographed performances, had models dueling with weapons that included fists, swords and high-heeled shoes. Source link #London #Fashion #Week #Street #Style #Turned #Heads Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

Scientists say they’ve discovered why Mars is red – CNN Scientists say they’ve discovered why Mars is red – CNN Scientists say they’ve discovered why Mars is red CNNDetection of ferrihydrite in Martian red dust records ancient cold and wet conditions on Mars Nature.comNASA: New Study on Why Mars is Red Supports Potentially Habitable Past NASAWhat makes Mars the ‘Red’ Planet? Scientists have some new ideas Space.comWe might be wrong about the color of Mars, scientists say The Independent Source link #Scientists #theyve #discovered #Mars #red #CNN Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

She Lobbied for Formaldehyde. Now She’s at E.P.A. Approving New Chemicals. She Lobbied for Formaldehyde. Now She’s at E.P.A. Approving New Chemicals. Formaldehyde, the chemical of choice for undertakers and embalmers, is also used in products like furniture and clothes. But it can also cause ******* and severe respiratory problems. So, in 2021, the Environmental Protection Agency began a new effort to regulate it. The chemicals industry fought back with an intensity that astonished even seasoned agency officials. Its campaign was led by Lynn Dekleva, then a lobbyist at the American Chemistry Council, an industry group that spends millions of dollars on government lobbying. Dr. Dekleva is now at the E.P.A. in a crucial job: She runs an office that has the authority to approve new chemicals for use. Earlier she spent 32 years at Dupont, the chemical maker, before joining the E.P.A. in the first Trump administration. Her most recent employer, the chemicals lobbying group, has made reversing the Environmental Protection Agency’s course on formaldehyde a priority and is pushing to abolish a program under which the agency assess the risks of chemicals to human health. In recent weeks it has urged the agency to discard its work on formaldehyde entirely and start from scratch in assessing the risks. The American Chemistry Council is also seeking to change the agency’s approval process for new chemicals and speed up E.P.A.’s safety reviews. That review process is a key part of Dr. Dekelva’s purview at the agency. Another former chemistry council lobbyist, Nancy Beck, is back alongside Dr. Dekleva at the E.P.A. in a role regulating existing chemicals. The council’s president, Chris Jahn, told a Senate hearing shortly after the Trump inauguration that his group intended to tackle the “unnecessary regulation” of chemicals in the United States. “A healthy nation, a secure nation, an economically vibrant nation relies on chemistry,” he said. It is not unusual or unlawful for industry groups to seek to influence public policy in the interest of their member companies. The A.C.C. estimates that products using formaldehyde support more than 1.5 million jobs in the United States. What has been extraordinary, health and legal experts said, is the extent of the industry’s effort to block the E.P.A.’s scientific work on a chemical long acknowledged as a carcinogen, and how the architect of the effort was back at the agency as a regulator of chemicals. At the same time, the Trump administration has moved to sharply reduce the federal scientific work force. “They already have a track record of ignoring the science,” said Tracey Woodruff, director of the Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment at the University of California, San Francisco. “Now, they’re in charge of government agencies that decide the rules.” While leading the chemistry council’s fight to limit formaldehyde regulation, Dr. Dekleva called for investigations of federal officials for potential bias. The industry group used freedom of information laws to obtain emails of federal employees and criticized them in public statements for what they had written. It submitted dozens of industry-funded research papers to agencies that minimized the risks of formaldehyde. The A.C.C. also sued both the E.P.A. and the National Academies, which advises the nation on scientific questions, accusing researchers of a lack of scientific integrity. Allison Edwards, a chemistry council spokeswoman, said officials from the group had regularly met with E.P.A. staff members “to share critical science and to try and ensure an assessment of any chemistry is objective, employs rigorous scientific standards, and is reflective of real-world human exposure.” She said, “We’re asking to be one of many stakeholders at the table.” Molly Vaseliou, a spokeswoman for the E.P.A., said the agency would continue to make sure it “ensures chemicals do not pose an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment.” At the same time, the agency would also work to approve “chemicals that are needed to power American innovation and competitiveness,” she said. Formaldehyde’s ******* risk Formaldehyde’s fumes can cause wheezing and a burning sensation in the eyes, especially when they accumulate indoors. That danger was apparent when formaldehyde in plywood used to build temporary trailer homes for victims of Hurricane Katrina sickened dozens of people. And there are longer-term dangers, namely several types of cancers. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on ******* concluded in 2004 that the chemical is a human carcinogen, and the U.S. Department of Health listed it as a human carcinogen in 2011. The chemical is restricted in the workplace, in certain composite wood products, and in pesticides. Yet efforts to strengthen overall regulations in the United States have stalled in the face of industry opposition. President Biden, whose “******* moonshot” program had made reducing ******* deaths a priority, revived in 2021 an E.P.A. assessment of the health effects of the chemical, and published a draft the following year. That effort, under the agency’s Integrated Risk Information System, was the first step toward regulating formaldehyde. The chemistry council led a coalition of industry groups, including the Composite Panel Association and Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturers, arguing that formaldehyde had already been rigorously studied and that strict industry controls were in place. In a half-dozen letters to the E.P.A., Dr. Dekleva, on behalf of a formaldehyde panel at the industry group, raised a list of complaints about the way the agency was carrying out its assessment. She questioned research linking formaldehyde to leukemia, or ******* of the blood, and accused the agency of not relying on the best available science. There was a dose, she said, at which formaldehyde did not cause risk. There was also research, she said, that showed inhaled formaldehyde did not easily travel beyond the nose to cause harm to the body. In light of these issues, Dr. Dekleva wrote, agency’s draft assessment was “flawed and unreliable without significant revision.” To bolster its case, the industry group enlisted experts at consulting firms to submit opinions and studies to the E.P.A. minimizing formaldehyde’s risks. The firms included those previously commissioned by tobacco companies to help defend cigarettes. The A.C.C. also submitted 41 peer-reviewed studies that it said refuted a link between formaldehyde and leukemia. A New York Times review found that the majority of the studies were funded by industry groups, including at least 11 from the Research Foundation for Health and Environmental Effects, an organization established by the American Chemistry Council. David Michaels, an epidemiologist and professor at George Washington University School of Public Health and assistant secretary of labor under President Barack Obama, said the industry strategy was to create the appearance of disagreement among scientists. While it’s true, he said, that inconsistencies can always exist in studies on humans, “there’s little disagreement among independent scientists that formaldehyde causes *******.” Scientists targeted For more than 150 years, the National Academies has advised the U.S. government on science. In 2021, it was asked to weigh in on the E.P.A.’s work on formaldehyde. It became a target of the American Chemistry Council. The industry group used freedom of information laws to obtain internal emails of members and support staff of a panel assessing the E.P.A.’s formaldehyde review, and it accused one staff of showing “bias in favor of disputed research claiming formaldehyde causes leukemia.” The staff member, a former Environmental Protection Agency scientist, had for example described as “wonderful” the news that Congress might try to replicate an influential ******** study that had shown formaldehyde could cause leukemia. Wendy E. Wagner, professor at the University of Texas School of Law and an expert on the use of science by environmental policymakers, said she did not see how the comment reflected bias. “After all, they don’t know what the results will be, do they?” she said. “I would expect all scientists to be enthusiastic about potential future research.” Dr. Dekleva called for investigations at both the E.P.A. and the National Academies, and for the removal of potentially biased panel members and staff. That included scientists who had previously accepted federal research grants. In July 2023, the industry group sued the E.P.A., as well as the National Academies, accusing researchers of a lack of scientific integrity. The chemistry council said that lack of integrity made the use of the National Academies research in regulating formaldehyde “arbitrary, capricious, and unlawful.” “It was relentless, and beyond the pale,” said Maria Doa, a scientist at the E.P.A. for 30 years who is now senior director of chemicals policy at the Environmental Defense Fund. “They really ratcheted up their attacks on federal employees.” The National Academies stood its ground, issuing a report the following month affirming the E.P.A.’s Integrated Risk Information System findings that formaldehyde is carcinogenic and increases leukemia risk. Those conclusions are shared by other global health authorities. Mary Schubauer-Berigan, the evidence-synthesis head at the World Health Organization’s Agency for Research on *******, said there was “sufficient evidence in humans” that formaldehyde causes leukemia as and nasopharynx *******. Mikko Vaananen, a spokesman for the European Chemicals Agency, said that while some questions around specific links to leukemia remained unanswered, evidence was sufficient to classify formaldehyde as a carcinogen. Formaldehyde “cannot in principle be placed on the E.U. market,” he said. In March 2024, a federal judge dismissed the chemistry council’s lawsuit. And early this year, near the end of the Biden administration, the E.P.A. issued a final risk determination, under the Toxic Substances Control Act: Formaldehyde “presents an unreasonable risk of injury to human health.” Mary A. Fox, an expert in chemical risk assessment at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health and a member of a committee that reviewed the E.P.A.’s research on formaldehyde, said agency scientists had accurately reflected the uncertainties around the links between formaldehyde and leukemia. But they had documented many other streams of evidence that indicated that link, Dr. Fox said. “It’s an inevitable progress of science, that as we learn more over time, we generally learn that health effects appear at lower concentrations than we had thought,” she said. Following Mr. Trump’s re-election, the American Chemistry Council signed onto a letter from a range of industry groups calling for broad changes to policy, specifically citing formaldehyde. “We urge your administration to pause and reconsider” the E.P.A. findings on formaldehyde, the Dec. 5 letter said. The E.P.A. “should go back to the scientific drawing board,” chemistry council said in January. The group was particularly concerned about the workplace limits the agency was suggesting, which it said ignored steps companies were already taking to protect workers, like the use of personal protective equipment. The A.C.C. is also supporting a bill from Republican members of Congress that would end the Integrated Risk Information System. Soon after, Trump transition officials said Dr. Dekleva would be returning to the E.P.A. to run a program assessing chemicals for approval. The chemistry council, which has long complained of a backlog, is pushing the agency to speed up approvals. During the first Trump administration, agency whistle-blowers described in an inspector general’s investigation how they had faced “intense” pressure to eliminate the backlog, sometimes at the expense of safety. Shortly after the inauguration, the Trump administration fired the inspector-general who carried out the investigation. On Jan. 20, the A.C.C. welcomed President Trump. “Americans want a stronger, more affordable country,” said Mr. Jahn, the group’s president. “America’s chemical manufacturers can help.” Source link #Lobbied #Formaldehyde #Shes #E.P.A #Approving #Chemicals Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content] For verified travel tips and real support, visit: [Hidden Content]

Americans Brace for Inflation as Trump’s Tariffs Start to Take Effect Americans Brace for Inflation as Trump’s Tariffs Start to Take Effect Fresh off the worst inflation shock in decades, Americans are once again bracing for higher prices. Expectations about future inflation have started to move up, according to metrics closely watched by officials at the Federal Reserve. So far, the data, including a consumer survey from the University of Michigan and market-based measures of investors’ expectations, does not suggest that price pressures are perceived to be on the verge of spiraling out of control. But the recent jump has been significant enough to warrant attention, stoking yet more uncertainty about an economic outlook already clouded by President Trump’s ever-evolving approach to trade, immigration, taxation and other policy areas. On Tuesday, a survey from the Conference Board showed that consumer confidence fell sharply in February and inflation expectations rose as Americans fretted about the surging price of eggs and the potential impact of tariffs. If those worries persist, it could be a political problem for Mr. Trump, whose promise to control prices was a central part of his message during last year’s campaign. It would also add to the challenge facing policymakers at the Fed, who are already concerned that progress against inflation is stalling out. “This is the kind of thing that can unnerve a policymaker,” Jonathan Pingle, who used to work at the Fed and is now chief economist at UBS, said about the overarching trend in inflation expectations. “We don’t want inflation expectations moving up so much that it makes the Fed’s job harder to get inflation back to 2 percent.” Most economists see keeping inflation expectations in check as crucial to controlling inflation itself. That’s because beliefs about where prices are headed can become a self-fulfilling prophecy: If workers expect the cost of living to rise, they will demand raises to compensate; if businesses expect the cost of materials and labor to rise, they will increase their own prices in anticipation. That can make it much harder for the Fed to bring inflation to heel. That’s what happened in the 1960s and 1970s: Years of high inflation led consumers and businesses to expect prices to keep rising rapidly. Only by raising interest rates to a punishing level and causing a severe recession was the Fed able to bring inflation fully back under control. When prices began rising rapidly in 2021 and 2022, many forecasters feared a repeat of that scenario. Instead, inflation expectations remained relatively docile — rising only modestly, and falling quickly once inflation began to ease — and the Fed was able to bring down inflation without causing a big increase in unemployment. “The No. 1 reason why that scenario didn’t play out was that, even though inflation went up quite a bit, expected inflation by most measures only went up a little bit,” said Laurence Ball, an economist at Johns Hopkins University. “That’s the big difference between the 1970s and the 2020s.” Now, though, there are hints that Americans are anticipating higher inflation in the years ahead. Persistent price pressures driven in part by a surge in the costs of eggs and energy-related expenses coupled with concerns about the impact of tariffs are among the factors to have pushed consumers’ expectations for inflation over the next 12 months to their highest level in more than a year, according to the long-running survey from the University of Michigan. More concerning to economists, consumers’ expectations for inflation in the longer run — which tend to be more stable over time — experienced their biggest one-month jump since 2021 in February. The increase cut across age and income levels, suggesting inflation fears are widespread. Expectations in the Michigan survey have risen before, only to fall back in subsequent months. And the recent results have shown a huge partisan split — inflation expectations have risen sharply among Democrats since the election, but have fallen among Republicans — leading some economists to discount the results. Inflation expectations have also risen among political independents, however — a significant development because their assessment of the economy is typically more stable, said Joanne Hsu, who leads the Michigan survey. But economists said that the longer inflation remained elevated, the greater the chances that consumers and businesses would start to readjust their expectations. What central banks fear most is if those expectations become “unanchored,” or move enough to suggest little confidence that over time inflation will return to the 2 percent target. That risk appears more prominent now than it did a few months ago. Progress on inflation has stalled in recent months and President Trump has pursued policies that many economists believe are likely to push prices higher, such as imposing tariffs and restricting immigration. “The data does show that inflation expectations appear to be well anchored, but if I were at the Fed, I wouldn’t assume that or take that for granted,” said Richard Clarida, a former Fed vice chair who is now at Pimco, an investment firm. Officials at the central bank have so far downplayed concerns about inflation expectations. Austan Goolsbee, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, said the latest survey from the University of Michigan “wasn’t a great number,” but reflected just one month’s worth of data so far. “You need at least two or three months for that to count,” Mr. Goolsbee, who casts votes on policy decisions this year, said on Sunday. Alberto Musalem, president of the St. Louis Fed and a voting member, was also emphatic that inflation expectations were under control while talking to reporters last week. Mr. Musalem described the Michigan data as “one metric amongst a variety of metrics that has shown a little uptick.” Despite this confidence, the Fed has put additional interest rate cuts on hold for the time being. Officials not only want more evidence that inflation is in retreat but have also said a solid economy affords them time to wait and see how Mr. Trump’s plan will affect the trajectory for consumer prices, the labor market and growth more broadly. Minutes from the most recent policy meeting in January showed that policymakers expected some impact on consumer prices from Mr. Trump’s policies. But how the central bank should respond remains a big point of debate. Some, like the Fed governor Christopher J. Waller, have argued that the central bank can “look through” the economic impact of policies like tariffs. But that stance hinges on a number of factors, most crucially that such levies lead to only a one-off increase in prices and that expectations across businesses and households remain in check. But according to Charles Evans, who retired as president of the Chicago Fed in 2023, that could be a risky strategy, especially in light of the inflation surge that followed the Covid-era economic shock. “That’s the same transitory story the Fed and everybody was saying in 2021,” he said. “You would think that policymakers would be a little more reluctant to lean on that.” Already, Mr. Evans said that seeing inflation expectations move up somewhat made him “a little nervous,” especially in light of his concerns that businesses might be more inclined than in the past to pass along higher prices to their customers. For those reasons, he expects the Fed to stay “cautious” about further interest rate cuts this year. John Roberts, who most recently served as a top staff member in the division of research and statistics at the Fed before joining Evercore ISI, added that the central bank might be inclined to forgo cuts entirely this year if inflation expectations did not improve from current levels. At this point, he already sees “a little bit of unanchoring here.” After the release of the latest University of Michigan data on Friday, economists at LHMeyer, a research firm, pushed back their timing for the next Fed cut from June to September. There is also another risk: If Mr. Trump moves to erode the Fed’s independence, or threatens to do so, that could undermine confidence in the central bank’s ability to bring inflation under control, leading inflation expectations to rise. Last week, Mr. Trump sought to expand his reach over the Fed as part of a broader effort to wrest greater control of congressionally designated independent agencies. The executive order targeted the central bank’s supervision and regulation of Wall Street and carved out its decisions on monetary policy. But the expansive nature of the order stoked concerns about how much further Mr. Trump’s encroachment on the Fed’s independence could eventually go. “That’s the most dangerous scenario,” Mr. Ball said, adding that even the threat of political interference could make the Fed’s job more difficult. “The Fed’s ability to control expectations could be impeded not only by the Trump administration taking over, but also by the fear that might happen.” Source link #Americans #Brace #Inflation #Trumps #Tariffs #Start #Effect Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

Books About Russia, Ukraine and the World Order Under Donald Trump Books About Russia, Ukraine and the World Order Under Donald Trump Defending a democratic Ukraine is crucial to the project of global freedom, he contends, and Putin’s influential brand of illiberalism cannot be confronted on friendly terms. Despite his book’s title, Vindman, a self-described neo-idealist and admirer of Tallis, spends much of “The Folly of Realism” criticizing old-school idealists. The American foreign policy establishment, he writes, must reject “a sentimental faux idealism” that is “comfortable imagining adversaries as potentially cooperative.” In hindsight, some American leaders did seem overly effusive about the prospect of bringing Putin into the fold. In 2001, President George W. Bush notoriously said that looking into Putin’s eyes gave him a sense of his soul, finding the Russian leader “very straightforward and trustworthy.” President Clinton, in his 2004 autobiography “My Life,” concluded that more than a billion dollars in American aid to dismantle nuclear weapons, among other objectives, was a lot cheaper than a Cold War rerun. Plus, Clinton recalled, “Putin was compact and extremely fit from years of martial arts practice,” suggesting that the new Russian president was tough enough to manage the country’s “turbulent political and economic life.” The United States Agency for International Development, which the Trump administration is busy dismantling, was a main vehicle for funneling American help to Russia. But this support began to crater after Russia’s financial crisis in 1998, a time when many impoverished Russians began to sour on democratic reforms. Washington considered one of the most important developments during those years to be the departure of two trains from Ukraine to Russia on May 31, 1996, carrying away the last of the country’s strategic nuclear warheads. This move was part of a treaty signed with the promise of security guarantees from Russia, the United States, Britain and, later, China and France. Source link #Books #Russia #Ukraine #World #Order #Donald #Trump Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content] For verified travel tips and real support, visit: [Hidden Content]

Trump’s New Crackdown on China Is Just Beginning Trump’s New Crackdown on China Is Just Beginning President Trump’s tough talk on China typically centers on tariffs. But a closer look at the decisions he has made since taking office shows that the president is considering a far wider set of economic restrictions on Beijing, ones that could hasten America’s split from a critical trading partner. The Trump administration has so far proposed expanding restrictions on investments flowing between the United States and China. It has appointed officials who, because of national security concerns, are likely to push for more curbs on ******** investments and technology sales to China. And Mr. Trump has ushered in a 10 percent tariff on ******** imports, a move that he called an “opening salvo.” After years in which officials from both parties gradually pared back America’s economic relationship with China, Mr. Trump’s moves suggest that he is prepared to sever ties more aggressively. Samm Sacks, a senior fellow at Yale Law School’s Paul Tsai China Center, said the investment memorandum that the administration issued on Friday read like “a call to finish the unfinished task of fully unwinding commercial ties with China.” “So far, pragmatists have prevailed in getting a more narrow version of decoupling,” Ms. Sacks said. The pronouncements could be “a bargaining tool” for Mr. Trump to kick off negotiations with the ******** leader, Xi Jinping, Ms. Sacks said. “But should that fall apart or not work out — which is probably most likely — I see this as the blueprint to finish the job of decoupling.” The main wild card in how far the United States will go appears to be Mr. Trump himself. The president is interested in potentially striking a deal with Mr. Xi, in part because of China’s failure to live up to the terms of an agreement the two leaders signed in early 2020. Current and former advisers say Mr. Trump takes a more transactional view to issues like ******** investment than many of his more hawkish advisers, a position that could result in continuing economic ties in exchange for a deal that he feels benefits the United States. Mr. Trump has expressed support for foreign investments in the United States that other Republicans consider national security issues, like a proposal by Japan’s Nippon Steel to invest in U.S. Steel, or a rescue of TikTok. And while campaigning, Mr. Trump said he would welcome ******** companies to build auto plants in the United States as long as they hired locally. “I’ll tell them if they want to build a plant in Michigan, in Ohio, in South Carolina, they can — using American workers, they can,” the president said at a rally in Dayton, Ohio, last March. During his first term, Mr. Trump backed off a plan that would have crippled ZTE, a ******** electronics maker, after Mr. Xi helped secure a meeting between Mr. Trump and President Kim Jong-un of North Korea. Mr. Trump’s advisers say the president could continue to ratchet up pressure on Beijing, since he may see that as way to force ******** officials to make concessions. As a result, trade tensions could rise in the months to come. Mr. Trump, who hit China with tariffs during his first term, imposed an additional 10 percent levy on all ******** imports this month. The reason, he said, was that Beijing was not doing enough to limit the flow of drugs into the United States. China answered with its own tariffs on American imports. It also restricted the export of certain critical minerals and initiated an antimonopoly investigation into Google. A trade memorandum signed by the president on his first day in office directed his advisers to study other significant measures against China, such as revoking the permanent normal trade relations that the United States extended to China before it joined the World Trade Organization. And on Friday, the Office of the United States Trade Representative said it was moving forward with a trade case aimed at protecting the U.S. shipbuilding industry against ******** competition. Mr. Trump’s team is also discussing ways to tighten U.S. export controls, including by patching perceived loopholes in regulations on chips and chip-making equipment. Personnel appointments also point to a stricter stance on ******** investment and technology sales. Within the Commerce Department, which leads the efforts to limit technology sales to China, the Trump administration recently ousted several longtime employees, including Matthew S. Borman, a former deputy assistant secretary for export administration, in favor of new appointments. A nominee for assistant secretary of commerce, Landon Heid, advocated tighter restrictions on sales to ******** technology companies while at the State Department. On investment, Mr. Trump’s directive was a presidential memorandum rather than an executive order, meaning it did not immediately affect any policy. But it told the Treasury Department and other agencies in general terms to establish new rules to stop U.S. companies and investors from making investments that would aid China’s military advances, and stop people affiliated with China “from buying up critical American businesses and assets.” The memorandum said that the Trump administration would create a “fast track process” for investment from U.S. allies, and that the United States would welcome all “passive” investments from foreigners, meaning investments in which they have no controlling stakes or managerial influence. But it proposed harsher restrictions on certain foreign adversaries, like China, that it said were systematically investing in the United States to obtain technology, intellectual property and leverage in strategic industries like agriculture, minerals and shipping. The memo said the Trump administration would expand the authorities of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, a body that reviews incoming investments for national security threats, to include “greenfield investment” — new facilities built from the ground up. It also ordered CFIUS to stop using “mitigation” agreements, in which companies make changes in ownership or technology to try to lessen national security concerns and allow acquisitions to go through. Mr. Trump directed his advisers to consider expanded restrictions on emerging technologies, as well as whether to apply limits to more types of investments, such as pension funds and university endowments. He also ordered them to review the special structure that ******** companies typically use to list on U.S. stock exchanges, which critics say limits ownership rights and protections for U.S. investors. Critics say investment flows between the countries have aided the ******** government and military, including by funding activities contrary to U.S. national security and helping U.S. technology flow to China. The Coalition for a Prosperous America, a trade group that supports protectionist measures, praised the presidential memo. In a statement, it said money from U.S. investors had allowed China “to fund its state-sponsored genocide, military aggression, surveillance state apparatus and other malign activities.” Roger Robinson Jr., a senior adviser to the group, called it “a history-making breakthrough.” “Hopefully, the Congress will do its part in making ******** a number of Wall Street’s reckless and indefensible investment practices benefiting ******** state-controlled corporate bad actors to our detriment,” Mr. Robinson said. But some analysts said that the economic impact could be limited and that the order could be subject to legal challenges. Ling Chen, a professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, said ******** investment in the United States had already fallen sharply since 2017. As a result, she said, she doesn’t expect much fluctuation, or much influence on China. “I do not expect to see any surprising changes in the overall trend,” she said. Jim Secreto, a former counselor for investment security at the Treasury Department, said some of the ideas in the memo, like reviews of greenfield projects, “overstep CFIUS’s existing authorities and could be challenged in court.” “The Trump administration would be wise to proceed carefully to avoid implementation challenges that could end up harming national security,” Mr. Secreto said. Alan Rappeport contributed reporting. Source link #Trumps #Crackdown #China #Beginning Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content] For verified travel tips and real support, visit: [Hidden Content]

12 things we spotted from Ariana Grande to Timothée Chalamet 12 things we spotted from Ariana Grande to Timothée Chalamet Steven McIntosh Entertainment reporter AMPAS Ariana Grande, Timothée Chalamet and Demi Moore were among the Oscar nominees who gathered in Los Angeles on Tuesday for the annual class photo. Ahead of the Academy Awards on Sunday (2 March), the nominees from all categories were invited to mingle over dinner and cocktails as an eventful awards race reaches its conclusion. The class photo is usually taken much earlier in awards season, at the nominees luncheon, but that event was cancelled this year due to the LA wildfires. Here are 12 things we spotted in this year’s class photo: 1. Ariana and Cynthia held space on the front rowAMPAS Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande have spent the last few months crying, holding space and ********* each other’s fingers as they promoted the screen adaptation of Wicked. The two actresses have redefined the film press tour in recent weeks thanks to their absolute adoration for each other – an energy they will have to recreate later this year when they do it all again for the release of part two. Before the photo was taken, instead of saying cheese, Erivo shouted: “Everyone say ‘Oscar nominee!'” Last week, it was confirmed the pair will perform a medley of songs from the film during the Oscars ceremony which will last a reported 10 minutes long. Wicked is the closest thing the Oscars have this year to a box office smash in the shape of last year’s Barbie, and they’ll be hoping the medley will recreate the energy of Ryan Gosling’s viral performance of I’m Just Ken last year. 2. We absolutely need this woman’s jumperAMPAS We’re aware the weather is getting warmer and the sun is rising earlier as we hurtle towards Spring, but we are nevertheless always on the lookout for a colourful cosy jumper and we need to investigate the origin of this one as an urgent priority. The woman with the impeccable sweater selection in the class photo is Maya Gnyp – a producer of I Am Ready, Warden – which is nominated for best documentary short. The film follows Texas death row inmate John Henry Ramire in his final days. 3. A-listers packed out the front rowAMPAS Joining Ariana and Cynthia on the front row were fellow acting nominees Zoe Saldaña, Mikey Madison and Monica Barbaro. Saldaña is almost certain to win best supporting actress for Emilia Pérez, having taken the trophy at a string of precursor events including the Baftas, SAG Awards and Golden Globes. As a result, her fellow category nominees such as Barbaro, who plays Joan Baez in Bob Dylan biopic A Complete Unknown, have had to practice their best “I’m just happy to be nominated” faces this year. Madison, however, is a co-frontrunner in a tight race for leading actress. The Anora star is up against Demi Moore for The Substance in a category seen as a dead heat. 4. James Mangold turned up just in timeAMPAS James Mangold, nominated this year for A Complete Unknown, is one of Hollywood’s most respected and loved directors. So why is he sitting on an aisle seat in the second-back row, away from all his pals, looking sheepish? It’s probably because he only just made the class photo by the skin of his teeth, arriving late to the event to an affectionate collective groan followed by cheers from his fellow nominees. Despite a distinguished Hollywood career, Mangold is a first-time nominee in the best director category, as are his fellow nominees Coralie Fargeat, Sean Baker, Brady Corbet and Jacques Audiard. 5. We’d like to be the fifth member of this gangAMPAS In a year where disappointingly few of the stars pulled funny faces or made eye-catching hand gestures while the photo was being taken, we applaud the team from ****** Box Diaries for joining hands and celebrating. They are the film’s director Shiori Ito (second left), editor Ema Ryan Yamazaki (far right) and producers Hanna Aqvilin and Eric Nyari. The movie, nominated in the documentary feature category, examines a ******* assault investigation in Japan. 6. The biggest stars were in the back rowAMPAS Sitting in the back row, so far from the photographer that their faces are somewhat blurry and out of focus, are three of the biggest stars in this year’s awards race. In the centre is The Substance star Demi Moore, nominated for playing an ageing aerobics instructor who takes a ******-market drug to create a younger, more beautiful version of herself. She is joined on either side by supporting actor nominees Guy Pearce (left), who is recognised for his role in The Brutalist, and Edward Norton, who is nominated for playing Pete Seeger in A Complete Unknown. 7. Bernie and Brandi appeared without EltonAMPAS Also hanging out in the front row were songwriter Bernie Taupin and singer-songwriter Brandi Carlile. The pair are nominated in the best original song category for writing Never Too Late, the title track from Sir Elton John’s recent documentary. Sir Elton himself wasn’t there, however, despite co-writing the song with the pair. It’s likely he will attend the Oscars on Sunday, but he won’t be singing his song as the Academy has done away from having the original song nominees perform during the ceremony this year. Instead, Doja Cat, Lisa from Blackpink, Queen Latifah and Raye will be among the other performers during the ceremony alongside the Wicked medley. 8. Timothée Chalamet looked a little lonelyAMPAS Timothée Chalamet joined his fellow nominees just days after springing a surprise win at the SAG Awards for A Complete Unknown. In his speech, the actor talked about his desire to be “one of the greats” of Hollywood. However, the actor has not been campaigning as aggressively as frontrunner Adrien Brody, and for the class photo, Chalamet took an aisle seat, leaned out and put his fist to his chest. Seated just in front of him are Anora’s director Sean Baker and his producer wife Samantha Quan. 9. The leading actors led from behindAMPAS Adding further star power to the blurry back row were best actor contenders Adrien Brody, Colman Domingo and Sebastian Stan. Brody is the frontrunner to win, for his role in the Brutalist as a Hungarian architect who moves to the US after World War Two and is taken under the wing of a wealthy businessman. Sing Sing star Domingo plays a prison inmate who joins a performing arts programme, while Stan is nominated for portraying a young Donald Trump. 10. Ralph represented for the BritsAMPAS The Brits nominated in the acting categories this year are The Brutalist’s Felicity Jones, Wicked’s Cynthia Erivo, and Conclave’s Ralph Fiennes. The actor was on Fiennes form, sitting in the back row alongside Sing Sing’s John “Divine G” Whitfield. Fiennes is unlikely to win best actor, but if Conclave wins the top Oscar, he’ll become the first actor ever to have appeared in four best picture winners. 11. Some nominees were conspicuous by their absenceGetty Images Understandably, not every nominee was available to attend the dinner – best supporting actor frontrunner Kieran Culkin was among the stars missing from the class photo. But others were conspicuous by their absence, most notably Emilia Pérez star Karla Sofía Gascón. The actress is persona non grata in Hollywood at the moment, after some historic tweets she posted resurfaced in recent weeks, severely damaging the film’s awards chances in many categories. However, it’s been confirmed she will attend the Oscars ceremony itself on Sunday – although it remains to be seen if she will walk the red carpet and sit with her co-stars. 12. Clarence Maclin knows what time it isAMPAS Sing Sing star Clarence Maclin was widely considered the most notable absence in the best supporting actor category this year. But he is still nominated at the Oscars thanks to his story credit on the film, which means he is recognised in the best adapted screenplay category. Maclin was one of the real-life inmates at the Sing Sing jail, after being sentenced to 17 years in jail for robbery, aged 29, and was a member of the prison’s Rehabilitation Through the Arts (RTA) programme. In the class photo, Maclin, who plays a version of himself in Sing Sing, is either checking his watch or possibly about to sneeze. Source link #spotted #Ariana #Grande #Timothée #Chalamet Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

Mass Federal Firings May Imperil Pets, Cattle and Crops Mass Federal Firings May Imperil Pets, Cattle and Crops Shortly after taking office for the second time, President Trump began making deep cuts to agencies and programs that play critical roles in human health, slashing funding for medical research, halting global health aid and firing scores of workers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But the campaign to downsize government, which has been led by Mr. Trump and Elon Musk, has also hollowed out agencies and programs devoted to protecting plant and animal health. The recent wave of mass firings hit federal workers responding to the nation’s growing bird flu outbreak, protecting crops from damaging pests and ensuring the safety of **** food and medicine, among other critical duties. Although the government has since rescinded some of these firings, the terminations — combined with a federal hiring freeze and buyout offers — are depleting the ranks of federal programs that are already short on employees and resources, experts said. The damage could be long-lasting. Workers whose jobs were spared said that the upheaval had left them eyeing the exits, and graduate students said they were reconsidering careers in the federal government. The shrinking work force could also have far-reaching consequences for trade and food security and leave the nation unequipped to tackle future threats to plant and animal health, experts said. “These really were indiscriminate firings,” said John Ternest, who lost his job at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, where he was preparing to conduct studies on honeybee health and crop pollination. “We don’t know what we’ve lost until it’s potentially too late.” Plant and animal inspectors The most recent wave of firings focused on the roughly 200,000 “probationary” employees across the federal government, who had fewer job protections because they were relatively new to their positions. (For some roles, the probationary ******* can be as long as three years, and it can also reset when longtime employees are promoted.) The exact size and scope of the job losses remain unclear, and the U.S.D.A. did not answer questions about the number of workers who had been terminated or reinstated at several of its agencies. But in an emailed statement, a U.S.D.A. spokesman said that Brooke Rollins, the new secretary of agriculture, “fully supports President Trump’s directive to optimize government operations, eliminate inefficiencies and strengthen U.S.D.A.’s ability to better serve American farmers, ranchers and the agriculture community.” Reports suggest that the department has lost thousands of employees. That includes roughly 400 people who worked in its Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, according to one U.S.D.A. official who asked not to be named for fear of retaliation. The plant protection and quarantine program within APHIS was especially hard hit, losing more than 200 employees, including agricultural inspectors, entomologists, taxonomists and even tree climbers who surveyed for pests, the official said. Some of the fired workers were responsible for combating invasive, plant-killing insects, such as the Asian long-horned beetle, within the nation’s borders. Others worked to ensure that agricultural products entering and exiting the country were free of pests and pathogens. Exotic fruit flies pose a particular risk to American agriculture, including the citrus and berry industries. The terminations are already causing import delays at the nation’s ports, according to the U.S.D.A. official. Over the longer term, if agricultural pests and pathogens found their way into the country, they could infest the nation’s homegrown crops, threatening food security and reducing demand for American agricultural products abroad. “If the United States gets a reputation for having dirty products, does that mean other countries will also, you know, step in and say, ‘Hey, we don’t want to buy your goods’?” the official said. The firings also hit the agency’s veterinary services program, which inspects imported livestock for disease and plays a key role in the nation’s bird flu response, said Dr. Joseph Annelli, the executive vice president of the National Association of Federal Veterinarians. The U.S.D.A. has quickly rehired some of the employees who were involved in the bird flu response, suggesting that their firings had been a mistake. But even before the recent terminations, the government was short on veterinarians, Dr. Annelli said. “There has not been adequate staffing for at least 10 years,” he said. “We need more veterinarians, not less.” The agency was in the midst of hiring additional people to assist with the bird flu response, Dr. Annelli said, but the federal hiring freeze put that process on hold. The workers who remain are nervous about the long-term stability of their jobs. “I’m not very optimistic,” said one current veterinary services employee, who requested anonymity to avoid retaliation and has already applied for another position outside the U.S. government. Agricultural scientists Roughly 800 people, including the leaders of laboratories, were also fired across the Agricultural Research Service, the in-house scientific agency at the U.S.D.A, according to a department official who was not authorized to discuss the matter and spoke on the condition of anonymity. The firings brought a wide range of research projects to an abrupt halt and left the technicians and the students who worked in these labs in limbo. One New York lab was in the middle of investigating a potential outbreak of late blight, a potato disease, when the lead scientist was fired, said Isako Di Tomassi, a graduate student at Cornell University who worked in the lab. Potato samples from a large, commercial farm are now locked up in the shuttered lab, “untouched and untested,” Ms. Di Tomassi said. Scientists and statisticians working in the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center in Nebraska, which studies livestock genetics and breeding, were also terminated, including those working on research projects in food safety and salmonella testing. The firings have led to objections from Nebraskas’s Republican congressional delegation and industry groups. “We understand and respect the federal government’s desire to cut wasteful spending, but the truth of the matter is, U.S. MARC does not fall in that category,” the Nebraska Cattlemen Association said in a statement. The work being done at the center, the statement continued, “has potential to reduce costs for the beef industry long term and improve food safety for consumers.” Some — but not all — of the agency’s scientists were reinstated this week. Still, the mass firings could do lasting reputational damage to the agency, they said. “I think that people that want to earnestly do science are going to be viewing and remembering these decisions and how scientists are being treated,” said one agricultural researcher who was fired and then rehired and requested anonymity to protect the job. In interviews, several graduate students in agricultural science said that they were no longer sure whether they could build research careers in the federal government. “My future as a scientist seems very uncertain right now,” Ms. Di Tomassi said. “Getting a federal scientist position is a big deal,” she added. “It’s not easy to do, and all of that investment is now being let go.” Animal health regulators Although the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention primarily concerns itself with human health, the agency also aims to prevent zoonotic diseases, including by regulating the entry of animals — particularly those than can carry pathogens — into the United States. For example, the agency does not permit dogs that have recently been in countries with a high prevalence of rabies to enter the United States unless they have been vaccinated against the disease. C.D.C. officers also examine animals at port stations, and isolate or quarantine those exposed to dangerous pathogens. But the Trump administration recently dismissed about half of the C.D.C. employees at the agency’s 20 port health stations, leaving some stations entirely unattended. Calls to the port station in San Juan, P.R., last week were rerouted to the station in Miami, where a C.D.C. employee who declined to be identified said that no one would be at the San Juan post “for a very long time.” Workers were also fired from the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Veterinary Medicine. Among those affected were employees reviewing data on novel animal medicines and working to ensure that **** food and animal feed were free of contaminants. Those teams were already short-staffed, said two fired employees, who asked not to be identified because they are appealing their terminations. They worried that the losses could slow down the approval of new animal drugs and even cause dangerous products to fall through the cracks. “It’s a gap in the safety structure,” one of the employees said. “They’re big challenges and there’s no one else to take it on. That’s the job of government.” Linda Qiu contributed reporting. Source link #Mass #Federal #Firings #Imperil #Pets #Cattle #Crops Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content] For verified travel tips and real support, visit: [Hidden Content]

Southwest Airlines flight abruptly rises to avoid another plane crossing Chicago runway Southwest Airlines flight abruptly rises to avoid another plane crossing Chicago runway Pilots on a Southwest Airlines flight attempting to land at Chicago’s Midway Airport were forced to climb back into the sky to avoid another aircraft crossing the runway on Tuesday morning. Southwest Flight 2504 safely landed “after the crew performed a precautionary go-around to avoid a possible conflict with another aircraft that entered the runway,” an airline spokesperson said in an email. Source link #Southwest #Airlines #flight #abruptly #rises #avoid #plane #crossing #Chicago #runway Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content] For verified travel tips and real support, visit: [Hidden Content]

Horoscope for Wednesday, 2/26/25 by Christopher Renstrom – SFGATE Horoscope for Wednesday, 2/26/25 by Christopher Renstrom – SFGATE Horoscope for Wednesday, 2/26/25 by Christopher Renstrom SFGATELove & Dating Horoscope for February 26, 2025 The Times of IndiaAries Daily Horoscope Today, Feb 26, 2025 predicts business expansion Hindustan TimesYour Daily Horoscope by Madame Clairevoyant: February 25, 2025 The CutTarot Card Predictions February 26, 2025: Tarot Card Reading for All Zodiac Signs India Today Source link #Horoscope #Wednesday #Christopher #Renstrom #SFGATE Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

IoT and SaaS will underpin government legislation introduced to protect rivers IoT and SaaS will underpin government legislation introduced to protect rivers The use of internet of things (IoT) technology, combined with a software as a service (SaaS) platform, will help water companies stay on the right side of government rules on the quality of water in England’s rivers. Rules coming into force this year mean it will no longer be the easy option for water companies to simply pay fines rather than fix the problem, with the cap on fine limits removed and the threat of prison for water company directors who break the rules introduced. Not-for-profit Additive Catchments has teamed up with Capgemini in a 10-year agreement that will see the IT services giant build a river quality monitoring service with the scale needed to support water companies in England and beyond. Additive Catchments’ catchment monitoring as a service (CMaaS) uses sensors in rivers, which feed data and artificial intelligence-driven insights to a cloud-based software platform used by water companies, environment regulators and even the public. The CMaaS project also includes the University of Plymouth, digital infrastructure from Siemens and monitoring consultancy from AtkinsRéalis, as well as an ecosystem of installation and maintenance companies in the ***. This type of technology is a necessity for water companies and those monitoring their activity after section 82 of the 2021 Environment Act comes into effect this year. It requires all water companies in the *** to implement continuous monitoring upstream and downstream of discharge points, and has created a massive environmental monitoring programme. Rob Passmore, CEO and co-founder at Additive Catchments, said the three-year-old organisation has a mission to improve river health in the *** and eventually internationally. He said Section 82 means water companies can be fined heavily, and senior directors could even face prison sentences for serious failures. “It’s significant and the legislation has teeth,” Passmore told Computer Weekly. “It will no longer be easier just to pay the fines, and as a result, all water companies are mobilising projects around this.” Under the rules, water companies must have 25% of their storm overflow discharge points monitored by 2030 and 100% by 2035. The regulators and public will be able keep an eye on river water quality through the platform. “Fundamentally, we don’t really understand what’s happening in our rivers because we haven’t got the data points necessary to really understand where there are problems, where we’re doing things well, where we’re doing things terribly and how to design interventions in a way that are effective and cost effective,” said Passmore. The partnership with Capgemini gives the organisation the delivery capability required to scale the platform nationally and internationally. ”This is the largest environmental monitoring project in the world. It’s huge,” said Passmore. “We give information to all river catchment stakeholders, including the government, agriculture, water companies, etc.” Operations technology The CMaaS uses IoT connectivity to send readings from rivers every 15 minutes. According to Passmore, “from an IT and operations technology (OT) perspective, it’s enormous”. He said the legislation has only just come into effect, and water companies now need to put sensors and monitoring capabilities in place or face heavy fines. “We are actively engaging with all of the English water companies, who are actively procuring to address this,” said Passmore. There is a commercial pilot of CMaaS already underway with Anglian Water. The work will see Capgemini support the building of the platform, running the service at a national and international scale, as well as research and development looking at new opportunities like Earth observation and machine learning capabilities that can be integrated into the service in the future. Paul Haggerty, head of *** energy and utilities at Capgemini, said there is demand for the service from outside the ***. “We are a global organisation and conversations are in place beyond the ***, in countries such as France, Belgium, Australia and Dubai,” he said. “There’s climate change, which is putting all sorts of pressure on water, and there’s significant population growth going on, and in our view, business as usual is not going to cut it,” Haggerty told Computer Weekly. “You can’t expect a different outcome if you’re faced with those challenges and those numbers by doing the same thing again.” Source link #IoT #SaaS #underpin #government #legislation #introduced #protect #rivers Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]

Champions Trophy: England’s Jofra Archer takes two early wickets against Afghanistan Champions Trophy: England’s Jofra Archer takes two early wickets against Afghanistan England’s Jofra Archer takes the early wickets of Rahmanullah Gurbaz and Sediqullah Atal in their must-win tie against Afghanistan in the Champions Trophy. READ MORE: Archer’s two wickets put England on top against Afghanistan Available to *** users only. Source link #Champions #Trophy #Englands #Jofra #Archer #takes #early #wickets #Afghanistan Pelican News View the full article at [Hidden Content]