Friday, April 26, 2013

New UN Report Adds To Worries Ahead Of Renewed Iran Talks

A new report released on Thursday by the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed that the growth of Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium has continued apace ahead of renewed negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program.

Since the release of the last report by the IAEA’s Governor-General in November 2012, Iran has increased its stockpile of uranium enriched to a 20 percent level by about 43 kilograms. While Iran has restarted its conversion of some of that stockpile into uranium oxide gas and other forms that are difficult to further enrich to fuel medical research at the Tehran Research Reactor, the associated reduction didn’t counter new enrichment enough to show a decrease in overall levels.

The concern surrounding Iran’s uranium stockpile is not that it’s currently usable in a nuclear weapon — for that it would need to be enriched to 90 percent level, making it highly-enriched. However, the technology required to produce 90 percent enriched uranium is a small step from that required to reach the 20 percent threshold. Approximately 250 kilograms of 90 percent uranium is required to create one nuclear weapon, an amount that Iran has been careful not to reach.

Compounding misgivings about Iran’s nuclear program, however, is the news that its heavy-water reactor based in Arak is slated to become operational in early 2014. Unfortunately, the new reactor has the potential to produce plutonium as a by-product of its usage, which would only add to suspicions about the nature of Iran’s program. Plutonium can still be used in civilian reactors, but lower amounts are necessary to produce simpler — but lower-yield — nuclear weapons than those that utilize uranium. Israeli and U.S. intelligence agencies still believe, however, that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear weapon at this time.

Adding to the unfortunate news contained in the IAEA report, Iran today announced that it has begun installing more advanced centrifuges in its main enrichment facility Nanatz. The Iranian government had previously informed the IAEA of its plans to do so weeks ago, but started the actual work of getting the equipment into place today. However, today’s IAEA report does indicate that the exact same number of centrifuges remain operational at Natanz as in November, despite an increase in the number fully installed.

All of this heightens the pressure upon negotiators from the P5+1 — the United States, United Kingdom, China, France, Russian Federation, and Germany — ahead of their restarted talks with Iran next week in Kazakhstan. Reuters has reported that the group will present Iran with a new package of “substantial and serious” offers to Iran during the negotiations, including eased sanctions on gold and other precious metals.


View the original article here

Press Briefing on the Visit of Prime Minister Abe of Japan

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Via Conference Call

2:35 P.M. EST

MR. RHODES:  Thanks, everybody, for getting on the call.  I have with me Danny Russel, the Senior Director for Asia here at the NSC; and Mike Froman, the Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economics.  We're just going to talk through the agenda for the President’s meeting tomorrow with Prime Minister Abe of Japan.

I would just note a number of things.  As you know, the U.S. focus on Asia has been a priority of the President's since he came into office.  The very first visitor he hosted -- foreign visitor he hosted here at the White House was the Prime Minister of Japan at the time.  He’s had subsequent meetings with his Japanese counterparts on numerous occasions. 

This will be his first opportunity to host Prime Minister Abe, and it underscores the importance of the U.S.-Japan alliance as the foundation of U.S. strategy in Asia, both in terms of our security posture and in terms of our economic relationships in that dynamic and growing region of the world.

So this meeting is a further symbol of the President's commitment to the U.S.-Japan alliance as a cornerstone of U.S. economic and security policy, and as a cornerstone of the U.S.-Asia policy.  And the two leaders will have the chance tomorrow to meet, to speak to the press, and to share a meal together, as well.

With that, I'll hand it over to Danny to speak to the agenda a bit, and then Mike can speak to the economic elements, as well.

MR. RUSSEL:  Thank you very much, Ben.  And thanks to all of you for taking the time to talk through the visit of Prime Minister Abe of Japan with us.

To build out the context that Ben Rhodes just provided, the President has always placed a very high priority on the U.S.-Japan relationship and alliance, which is a key pillar of the President's Asia rebalancing strategy.  And as Ben alluded to, the President has held just in the first term about a dozen meetings with the Japanese Prime Minister.  He's already spoke twice to Prime Minister Abe -- first, shortly after Prime Minister Abe won the election, but also in a substantive discussion in the aftermath of North Korea's nuclear test.

So in some ways, this visit brings us full circle in the sense that, as Ben Rhodes just mentioned, the first leader to be received by the President in the Oval Office in 2009 was the Japanese Prime Minister.  In fact, it was then-Prime Minister Aso, who’s now serving as the Deputy Prime Minister in the Abe government. 

And that took place almost literally four years ago, practically to the day.  The first visit was just weeks after President Obama first took office, just as his visit is a matter of weeks since the President was inaugurated for his second term. In between, in addition to the election held here, Japan has experienced two dramatic changes of government. 

And the context point that I think is worth bearing in mind is the fact that the relationship has remained so steady and grown so strong through these changes is really a testament to the strong bonds and the shared values between us, as nations and between our people.  And it also shows that there is now very strong bipartisan support for the alliance and for the partnership, in both countries. 

So turning to the meetings tomorrow, because we are strong allies and each in our own right major powers, there is naturally a very rich agenda for the two leaders to discuss, first on the security and the diplomatic issues, and then, of course, because we are the world's first and third largest economies, obviously important issues on the economic side, as well.

So there will be, in effect, two meetings tomorrow -- first in the Oval Office, where we expect the agenda to center on a range of security and political, diplomatic issues.  And then, after speaking to the press, the two leaders will continue in a working lunch session where the plan is for them to go through the range of economic issues.

I will, of course, leave the economic issues to my colleague Mike Froman.  But in the first session, I anticipate that President Obama and Prime Minister Abe will compare views on the bilateral relationship, including plans to further develop our strong security alliance.  Obviously, out of necessity, they will talk about North Korea -- the recent events and the overall situation on the Korean Peninsula and in the region.

I expect them to discuss maritime security issues, territorial claims both in the East China Sea and the South China Sea, as well as other Asia Pacific regional issues such as continued coordination in the global fora, like the East Asia Summit. 

They’ll also want to talk about global hotspots; candidate issues, of course, are Iran, Afghanistan, North Africa, and related counterterrorism questions.  And we can be confident that throughout, President Obama will reaffirm to Prime Minister Abe his strong commitment to the alliance and to regional stability and cooperation; his resolve in the face of North Korea's provocation, and, as Ben Rhodes just mentioned, the strategic priority that the President continues to place on the Asia Pacific region, which is so important not only to the global economy but to America's future, as well.

So with that, let me turn it over to Mike Froman.

MR. FROMAN:  Thanks, Danny.  And I would just add very briefly that at the working lunch part of the visit, the leaders are expected to talk about a range of economic issues, including, very importantly, how to create more economic growth and creating jobs in our country. 

Right now, trade investment in Japan already supports a million U.S. jobs, and we expect that the leaders will be discussing ways to deepen and broaden their economic cooperation in a way that’s mutually beneficial for both our countries.  That could include a review of the status of our consultations over Japan's potential interest in joining the Asia Pacific Poartnership.  It's also likely that they’ll touch on energy issues and climate change issues that they share in common.  And it's also possible that they’ll talk about cybersecurity, which is an issue of concern to both countries. 

Japan is a very important economic partner in any number of forums, whether it's the G7, the G8, the G20, APEC.  We work very closely with Japan across a range of plurilateral, multilateral fora.  And this is an opportunity for the leaders to touch base and talk about how best to work together in this arena.

MR. RHODES:  Great.  With that, we'll take your questions. 

Q    Thank you for taking my question.  Mr. Froman, regarding the TPP, does the administration expect any big news from Japan on this?  Namely, do you expect the Prime Minister to officially request to join the consultations -- or, rather, join the negotiations?  And if so, is that something that's even possible, given the administration's stated goal of completing the talks by fall?

MR. FROMAN:  Well, as you know, Prime Minister Abe's predecessor expressed a potential interest in Japan joining TPP back in November of 2011, and there have been a series of consultations since with Japan about what it takes to meet the high standards of the TPP agreement, as well as to address outstanding bilateral issues, including in areas such as motor vehicles and insurance.  So those consultations are ongoing and I think I would expect that the leaders would probably review the status of those consultations at this meeting.

MR. RHODES:  Great.  We’ll take the next question.

Q    Thanks for taking the call.  U.S. automakers are opposed to letting Japan into the TPP talks until they make progress opening their market that they say is essentially closed to U.S. auto exports.  Is the administration willing to allow Japan to enter the talks without any preconditions, and would it also allow Japan to insist on certain tariffs not being part of the TPP talks?

MR. FROMAN:  Well, we’ve made very clear from the start that addressing critical, outstanding issues including those that you referred to in the motor vehicle sector were an important precondition for considering Japan’s interest in joining TPP, and that’s been one of the subjects of consultations over the last -- almost a year now.  So we take those concerns very seriously, and we are in consultations with Japan over those issues.

TPP is intended to be a comprehensive, ambitious, high-standard, 21st-century trade agreement.  And the TPP leaders, back in November 2011, agreed to the outlines of an agreement where they all committed to that kind of outcome, an outcome where everything is on the table and subject to negotiation, and with a goal of a comprehensive agreement.  And that is the goal of TPP, and anybody who joins TPP would be expected to sign on to that goal as well.

MR. RHODES:  Great.  We’ll take the next question.

Q    Thank you very much for Mr. Froman.  In terms of currency, does President Obama have any intention -- does he plan to raise currency with his counterpart specifically what seems to be their easing or their loosening?

MR. FROMAN:  Well, as you might expect, I’m not going to comment on currencies, per se.  I’d simply say that the U.S. and Japan have a shared interest in seeing stronger global growth in the overall economy and we agree that no country should target currencies for competitive purpose or try to grow at the expense of others.

MR. RHODES:  Great, we’ll take the next question.

Q    Thank you very much.  A couple questions.  What, if anything, will the President have to say to his Japanese counterpart about what can be done to calm the tensions between Japan and China, especially on the maritime issues?  And another, separate question -- Japan has made it clear that it would like the ability to import U.S. natural gas.  U.S. exporters need a permit for this and the Energy Department has been studying it, but what is the administration’s view on allowing more exports of U.S. natural gas to Japan?

MR. RUSSEL:  Thanks.  We, like others, are tracking the maritime issues in the East China Sea very closely.  And I’m sure that the President will want to hear Prime Minister Abe’s assessment of the current situation, as well as his read on the diplomacy underway.  There has been an ongoing diplomatic outreach and high-level contact between Tokyo and Beijing, and I believe the President would find it useful to get updated by the Prime Minister.

The President’s focus, as you can imagine, is on the importance of managing these issues in a diplomatic way that lowers the tensions.  This is a region that is so important to the international economy.  It is the driver of growth and dynamism.  Japan and China are important as leaders and as economies.  No one wants to allow tensions to fester or to escalate.  So, as I said, the President, I’m sure, will value hearing the Prime Minister’s assessment and will welcome any and all constructive steps to engage diplomatically and to manage the maritime situation in a way that presents the risk of miscalculation.

MR. FROMAN:  As you may know, the Department of Energy commissioned a couple of reports on natural gas exports to help inform the decision they needed to make on pending applications. Those reports and the applications are out for public comment.  When that public comment and response period is over, the Department of Energy will assess and take into account the comments it has received, and then begin to address the pending applications, and that would include applications from firms that have proposed exporting to Japan.

MR. RHODES:  Great.  Next question.

Q    Thank you very much.  As you know, in December, new Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga indicated that the government of Prime Minister Abe is eager to review a 1993 statement on the issue of comfort women, which was issued by Yohei Kono, Suga's predecessor.  In late January, Abe said his government would shelve their plans to review that statement.  Nevertheless, this issue remains a concern of people in the region and in Congress. 

Today, Steve Israel -- a Democrat from New York -- issued a statement saying, "Japan's government must fully acknowledge, apologize for and increase awareness of its history with comfort women."  And as you know, Hillary Clinton once said that they should not be called “comfort women,” they should be called enforced sex slaves. 

I'm wondering -- my question for you is does the President believe that the Japanese government has done enough to address the issue of comfort women?  Or does the President believe that more should be done?  And is he expected to raise this during his meeting with Prime Minister Abe?  Thank you.

MR. RUSSEL:  Look, President Obama knows full well that there are very sensitive legacy issues from the last century and believes that it's important to take steps to promote healing.  So our position has always been to encourage Japan to take steps that will foster -- better relations that will foster closer relations with all of its neighbors.  And at the same time, we would hope and expect that others would reciprocate to constructive and positive steps that Japanese leaders might take.

Prime Minister Abe will be here and will be addressing the public as part of his own program.  I know that he has expressed his views in Tokyo in connection with what he describes as a future-oriented approach.  Let's hear what he has to say when he visits Washington.

Q    I was wondering if the President, because of the nuclear test by the North Koreans, was planning on making any announcements regarding any naval forces being sent over there, any deployments, anything like that.  Is there anything specific that you're going to announce tomorrow regarding more U.S. forces or anything of that nature?

MR. RHODES:  I would not expect specific announcements of that nature.  What I would say is a couple of things.  First of all, they will certainly be discussing North Korea and its pattern of provocative action, including the recent nuclear tests. 

We believe that, as the President said in his State of the Union, our response to the North Korean nuclear test and its broader pattern of provocative acts must start with very firm U.S. commitments to the security of our allies, Japan and South Korea.  It will have to include close coordination with Japan and South Korea.  It will also include our continued support and investment in missile defense to protect the United States.  It will also include international action so that the U.N. Security Council and the international community is speaking with one voice to make clear to North Korea that there will be consequences for their actions. 

More generally, I think it is important to note that the U.S. maintains a robust defense posture in Northeast Asia.  At the root of that of course is our alliance with Japan.  And we will continue in the future to have very strong defense relationships with Japan, South Korea, and other countries in the region that will include military exercises and a range of other defense cooperation.  And the North Korean provocation only highlights the importance of those defense relationships and the importance of having a strong U.S. presence in Northeast Asia and in the region more broadly.

That, too, is, frankly, a reason why we have prioritized, for instance, in our defense budget strategy the Asia Pacific region in terms of the resources we allocate for our defense strategy.  Yet another reason, frankly, why we would expect and urge Congress to take action to avert the sequester, given the range of defense commitments that we have, including in Northeast Asia, related to the recent North Korean provocation.

With that, we'll take one more question.

Q    Thank you very much.  In the interview with The Washington Post, Prime Minister Abe said on the Diaoyu Island issue, China’s coercion or intimidation will lead to, “losing the confidence of the international community, which will result in less investments in China.  I believe it is fully possible to have China to change their policy once they gain that recognition.”

I'm just wondering what’s the assessment of the White House on his statement, and will the U.S. join the economic fight with China over the Diaoyu Island issue?  Thank you.

MR. RUSSEL:  Well, the President looks forward to hearing Prime Minister Abe’s assessment and views both of the situation in the East China Sea, but also the consultations that are taking place at a political and a diplomatic level between Tokyo and Beijing.

I know that the President believes, and I, frankly, am confident that both leaders believe that constructive bilateral relations with China are important -- are essential, frankly, for regional growth, and that managing differences is an important part of every bilateral relationship.

Sino-Japanese relations have significant impact on all of us and on all the countries in the region, so it’s something that we all pay close attention to.  The East China Sea and, frankly, the broader Asia Pacific region is an area in which stability is in all of our interests.  And the President is very supportive and remains supportive of the peaceful efforts to find diplomatic resolution to outstanding issues of territorial claims and so on, and has been clear in the United States’ opposition to coercive actions or unilateral steps that threaten the stability of the region.

MR. RHODES:  Well, thanks, everybody, for joining the call. We'll continue to take your inquiries here through the next day or so.  And we look forward to a positive meeting tomorrow between the President and Prime Minister Abe.

And with that, thanks again.  And we'll have a transcript of this call around here later this afternoon as well.  Thanks.

END
3:12 P.M. EST

Extending Middle Class Tax Cuts

A Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit

President Obama has already reduced the deficit by over $2.5 trillion, cutting spending by over $1.4 trillion, bringing domestic discretionary spending to its lowest level as a share of the economy since the Eisenhower era.

February 21, 2013 12:53 PM EST

Enter today for a chance to join President Obama and the First Family on the South Lawn for a day of singing, dancing and egg rolling.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Obamacare Wellness Programs Could Raise Health Costs

One part of the Affordable Health Care Act that kicks in with the rest of Obamacare in 2014 is a greater monetary incentive for employers to implement wellness programs.

Worker wellness programs — ways for employees to get healthier through such items as checkups, workout and weight loss programs, smoking cessation as well as vaccinations — have been around for more than 30 years with the associated financial rewards and punishments regulated by the federal government.

And even though it's not a mandatory provision — employers can choose to avoid implementing any worker health program — many more firms are expected to take part in setting up these plans next year in an effort to cut down on health care costs.

What it means economically for workers whose employers do participate can be a mixed bag depending on their habits. There are bigger financial rewards for healthier workers along with more costly punishments — specifically increased insurance premiums — for those who are considered health risks. (Read More: South Carolina Workers Could Pay More for Health Care)

For instance, under the 2014 provisions, health insurers will be able to charge 50 percent more on insurance premiums for someone who smokes. The previous rule, set in 2006, was a top increase of 20 percent. So, a 60-year-old smoker without dependents could end up paying nearly $5,100 more for health insurance each year at work starting next year, instead of around $1,100 now, according to insurance industry estimates.

On the flip side, a reward would offer up to a 30 percent reduction in premiums for someone who takes part in smoking cessation programs or who lowers their cholesterol. Other benefits for better health results could also include rebates and taxable gift cards.

"These wellness programs will be set up by the companies, and they can offer the carrot or the stick or both to get workers involved," said Amy Gordon, an employee benefits lawyer at McDermott Will & Emery.

"There are even rewards if you do almost nothing, such as just taking a diagnostic test and the outcome doesn't matter. It just depends on how the firm sets it up," Gordon said.

Employers can even include workers' children and spouses for the reward and punishments if they are part of a worker's insurance coverage.

"Families tend to drive up the cost of health insurance for a firm as much as workers, so it does make sense to look at a worker's dependents and whether they should be included," Gordon said.

"And a firm can often look at what type of ailments are driving up costs, say diabetes for example, and base their incentive programs on how workers are testing for it," she said.

Wellness programs started in the 1970s as a way for employers to improve worker productivity and cut down on absenteeism. As the U.S. became more health conscious over the years, workers began to ask their firms to include health programs, like gyms and flu shots.

By 2008, according to the Center for Health Affairs, about 88 percent of large companies in the U.S. (more than 200 employees), and about half of small companies (three to 199 workers) offered wellness programs. In 2006, the government established guidance rules for the percentage workers could get for punishments and rewards. (Read More: Report Faults High Fees for Out-of-Network Care)

The standard was up to 20 percent in premium hikes or reductions, or rebates. In 2014, it will be 30 percent top, with smoking penalties up to 50 percent in additional health insurance premium costs.

For employers, the costs of worker habits have become expensive. The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention reports that more than 75 percent of an employer's health care costs and productivity losses are related to employee lifestyle choices.

According to the CDC, workplace alcohol, tobacco and other drug use costs American companies over $100 billion each year and obesity costs $147 billion a year.

"Firms are more aggressive these days on certain health issues like weight loss, smoking or having vaccinations," said Tom Vincz, a spokesman for Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey, which counsels companies on setting up wellness programs. "When we look at a firm, our goal is to set up the best program for the company and the workers."

Vincz said Horizon has seen the benefits of its own wellness program.

"We have some 89 percent of our 5,000 workers involved," he said. "We embraced a weight loss program in 2011 and we've seen the benefits of that with a huge reduction in weight for many workers."

But some companies will likely pass on putting in any wellness program in 2014 they might not have already started, Gordon said.

"Companies are mixed on wellness programs," Gordon said. "Some say it's a great opportunity, while others say it's not their business to regulate the health of our workers." (Read More: Rule Limits Aid to Families Who Can't Afford Employers' HealthCoverage)

While most workers cannot be forced to join a wellness program, many firms have implemented provisions like asking their employees to declare whether they smoke. A yes answer can raise a worker's health insurance premiums purchased through work or even deny coverage.

For example, Scotts Miracle-Gro bans employees on its health insurance policy from smoking, regardless of whether it is done on company or personal time.

Cadmus Community Corp. of Richmond, Va., requires employees and their spouses to submit to health-risk assessments in order to obtain health insurance. Iowa-based Principal Financial Group has a similar policy in which workers must undergo health exams that track things like weight, blood pressure and use of tobacco to qualify for coverage.

Some workers, like members of the Oregon State Police, have filed lawsuits against their wellness program — one that docks them a monthly fee of up to $30 if they don't participate in an online health survey.

Another issue drawing the ire of workers is what constitutes a pre-existing condition — something health insurers cannot deny consumers through Obamacare.

Some workers contend obesity, diabetes and smoking are pre-existing conditions and therefore those who smoke or are overweight can't be denied health insurance coverage or have their premiums raised because of wellness programs.

Many of the lawsuits against the programs are based on regulations under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. Those rules say that employer-sponsored group health plans may not vary premiums or contributions, or provide different discounts or rebates, to similarly situated individuals as a result of a health factor.

Whether any wellness programs are getting people healthier or not is unclear yet, said Gordon.

But In the end, she said it's up to the companies and workers to decide how healthy they want to be.

"I'm a big proponent of wellness programs because I think taking proactive steps is the right thing to do," Gordon said. "If we can drive down medical costs and getting people healthier, I can't see the harm in that."


View the original article here

Letter from the President -- Concerning Niger

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT
TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
AND THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE

February 22, 2013

Dear Mr. Speaker:   (Dear Mr. President:)

On February 20, 2013, the last elements of a deployment of approximately 40 additional U.S. military personnel entered Niger with the consent of the Government of Niger. This deployment will provide support for intelligence collection and will also facilitate intelligence sharing with French forces conducting operations in Mali, and with other partners in the region. The total number of U.S. military personnel deployed to Niger is approximately 100. The recently deployed forces have deployed with weapons for the purpose of providing their own force protection and security.

I directed this deployment of U.S. forces in furtherance of U.S. national security interests, and pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct U.S. foreign relations and as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive.

I am providing this report as part of my efforts to keep the Congress fully informed, consistent with the War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148). I appreciate the support of the Congress in this action.

Extending Middle Class Tax Cuts

A Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit

President Obama has already reduced the deficit by over $2.5 trillion, cutting spending by over $1.4 trillion, bringing domestic discretionary spending to its lowest level as a share of the economy since the Eisenhower era.

February 21, 2013 12:53 PM EST

Enter today for a chance to join President Obama and the First Family on the South Lawn for a day of singing, dancing and egg rolling.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

The Morning Pride: February 22, 2013

Welcome to The Morning Pride, ThinkProgress LGBT’s daily round-up of the latest in LGBT policy, politics, and some culture too! Here’s what we’re reading this morning, but please let us know what stories you’re following as well. Follow us all day on Twitter at @TPEquality.

- A New Mexico House committee voted to kill a bill that would have allowed a state referendum on marriage equality.

- The National Organization for Marriage is unsurprisingly partnering with the Catholic Bishops and Family Research Council to promote their anti-equality march when the Supreme Court hears oral arguments on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8. Of course, equality activists are countering that march.

- Did Harvey Milk have an unofficial “marriage license” contract with Joe Scott Smith to be “lovers from this day on”?

- A woman claims she was fired from the Mars Chocolate candy company for being a lesbian and taking time off for her pregnancy.

- A new study confirms that gay men and straight women really do seem to relate more to each other.

- The freshly re-elected president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, used his acceptance speech on Sunday to apologize to the LGBT community for some offensive comments he made earlier this year.

- An Australian judge has ruled that the country’s ban on same-sex marriage is not sex discrimination.

- The couples challenging Proposition 8 have filed their final brief to the Supreme Court. The brief is a masterpiece of argument; here is a compelling excerpt:

Proponents accuse Plaintiffs (repeatedly) of “re-defining marriage.” But it is Proponents who have imagined (not from any of this Court’s decisions) a cramped definition of marriage as a utilitarian incentive devised by and put into service by the State—society’s way of channeling heterosexual potential parents into “responsible procreation.” In their 65-page brief about marriage in California, Proponents do not even mention the word “love.” They seem to have no understanding of the privacy, liberty, and associational values that underlie this Court’s recognition of marriage as a fundamental, personal right. Ignoring over a century of this Court’s declarations regarding the emotional bonding, societal commitment, and cultural status expressed by the institution of marriage, Proponents actually go so far as to argue that, without the potential for procreation, marriage might not “even . . . exist at all” and “there would be no need of any institution concerned with sex.” Indeed, Proponents’state-centric construct of marriage means that the State could constitutionally deny any infertile couple the right to marry, and could prohibit marriage altogether if it chose to pursue a society less committed to “responsible” procreation.


View the original article here

Thursday, April 25, 2013

New Discoveries May Help Treat Blood Disease That Plagues African-Americans

Scientists may be close to finding a cure for sickle cell anemia, a blood disease that disproportionately affects African-Americans.

One in 500 African descendants born in the United States suffer from sickle cell; one in 12 carry the gene for it. The disease can cause symptoms as minor as fatigue, or as major as organ damage. A person suffering from sickle cell has defective hemoglobin that leads to abnormally shaped red blood cells, which get caught in the veins and cause circulation issues.

But a long-term experiment run out of the University of Michigan Medical School found that doctors might be able to treat these symptoms by using an antidepressant:

Their study, which includes more than 30 years of research, found that the antidepressant tranylcypromine, or TCP, may essentially reverse the effects of the disorder.[...]

But while U-M scientists say it’s too early to test out TCP as a treatment for sickle cell disease, they’re confident their findings hold promise.[...]

The first clinical trial on TCP and its affect on sickle cell is now being planned with researchers at Wayne State University in Detroit. Further information will be available later this year if it receives approval to go forward.

African-Americans disproportionately struggle to access the health care they need. Socioeconomic and environmental reasons — and the root cause, racism — are, of course, the reason for the disparity. Ultimately, the lack of care for back communities might funnel down to the research level. It’s suspected that less funding is awarded for research toward diseases that affect black people at a higher rate than white.


View the original article here

Threshold Pharma shares rise on analyst upgrade

NEW YORK -- Shares of Threshold Pharmaceuticals Inc. rose Wednesday after a Piper Jaffray analyst upgraded the stock as the company prepares to report more clinical trial data for its experimental cancer drug TH-302.

THE SPARK: Analyst Charles Duncan raised his rating to "Overweight" from "Neutral" and doubled his price target to $10 per share from $5. Threshold is getting ready to report clinical trial data for TH-302 as a treatment for soft tissue sarcoma, but Duncan said investors are overlooking earlier-stage clinical trials of the drug as a treatment for leukemia, multiple myeloma, and gastrointestinal tumors and kidney cancer.

THE BIG PICTURE: TH-302 is designed to become active in parts of the body with abnormally low oxygen levels. Threshold said those conditions exist in many types of solid tumors because of the irregular growth of the blood vessels that feed the tumors. Once the drug becomes active, it stops cancer cells from replicating their DNA and dividing. The company said the drug can also attack oxygenated regions of the tumor.

"We believe that near-term data will enhance conviction on the broad applicability of Threshold's hypoxia-activation platform for targeting a wide range of cancer indications with the potential to substantively add/extend efficacy over standard chemotherapy," said Duncan.

Duncan said he is particularly interested in the possibility that TH-302 could be combined with drugs that block the blood vessel growth in tumors.

The South San Francisco, Calif., company is conducting late-stage trials of TH-302 as a treatment for soft tissue sarcoma and pancreatic cancer and early-stage trials in other cancers. It is developing TH-302 through a partnership with German drugmaker Merck KGaA.

SHARE ACTION: Threshold shares rose 45 cents, or 10 percent, to $4.91 in afternoon trading. The stock has traded between $3.30 and $9.28 in the last year, but has lost about half its value since Sept. 17 when it reported disappointing trial results for TH-302 as a treatment for pancreatic cancer.


View the original article here