Articles by admin

No Image

Sports May 31, 2019

Catch The Wave: Commonalities Of Surfing And Finances

In recent years, technology, education and government regulation have helped make the sport of surfing and finance less risky. Both have a lot in common and teach us a lot about risk.



STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:

What does surfing have in common with finance? Stumped you, didn’t I? Well, both can bring you a reward. There’s the rush of successfully surfing a big wave and the rush of successfully investing in a stock. Both also, of course, have an element of risk.

Cardiff Garcia and Stacey Vanek Smith, co-hosts of the podcast The Indicator from NPR’s Planet Money, have more.

STACEY VANEK SMITH, BYLINE: Allison Schrager is an unexpected guide to the history of surfing. She is an economist who studies risk.

CARDIFF GARCIA, BYLINE: Have you ever surfed?

ALLISON SCHRAGER: No.

GARCIA: (Laughter) Allison writes about the history of big-wave surfing in her new book, “An Economist Walks Into A Brothel: And Other Unexpected Places To Understand Risk.” To Allison, the history of surfing is about how technologies that are designed to make the world safer and less risky can have the unexpected result of sometimes making it more dangerous, more risky.

SMITH: In the early days of big-wave surfing, surfers had to be really fantastic swimmers.

SCHRAGER: And if they wiped out, they might have to swim three or four miles in really rough surf to get back to shore. So back then, it was a very small, very elite group of people who had these superhuman swimming skills.

GARCIA: But then surfers started using a leash, which attaches their leg to the surfboard. Allison says the leash did make surfing safer, but it also made it more likely that weaker swimmers would take up surfing in the first place.

SMITH: And those weaker swimmers might take more risks because they thought the leash made them safer. Brian Keaulana is a lifelong surfer in Hawaii. He says he sees this every time a new technology makes surfing a little bit safer. He says it happened again after surfers started using jet skis as rescue vehicles.

BRIAN KEAULANA: But technology, for me, is a double-edged sword because without proper training, it also sends a false sense of safety also out in the lineup. So I also see people taking more of a risk because they see the use of the jet skis there, as well as flotation devices.

SMITH: Not only were weaker surfers now getting into big-wave surfing because of the jet ski, but strong surfers were using jet skis to get to bigger and bigger waves, like 80-foot-tall waves.

GARCIA: In other words, these strong surfers were using the jet ski, which was supposed to make surfing safer, to take bigger and bigger risks.

SMITH: And in fact, this is what reminded economist Allison Schrager of financial markets. Just like a jet ski can make it safer to ride a big wave, there are financial products that can make it safer to invest your money because they limit how much money you can lose.

And just the same way a jet ski can be used to take on bigger and bigger waves, those same financial products can also make it easier to take a bigger risk with your investments.

GARCIA: And so the question is, what can be done to make sure that people are taking the right amount of risk, either in surfing or in finance? Education is one way to help people manage risks. Another way is government regulation, which is what’s used in finance. For example, sometimes there are restrictions imposed by the government on what kinds of financial products you can invest in. Now, in surfing, there are some regulations about using jet skis to ride big waves in Hawaii. But Allison says that generally speaking, surfers are opposed to regulation.

SMITH: And Allison’s main point is that whether it is surfing or financial products, these debates are definitely going to continue – because even when people learn how to manage the risk that comes with a new technology, either through education or regulation or just from getting used to a new risk, another technology can come along that introduces new risks. Stacey Vanek Smith.

GARCIA: Cardiff Garcia, NPR News.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

No Image

Business May 30, 2019

Trump Announces New Tariffs On Mexico To Force Cooperation On Illegal Immigration

President Trump has announced plans to impose escalating tariffs on goods imported from Mexico in an attempt to stop migrants from entering the U.S. over the southern border. U.S. Customs and Border Protection released this photo, taken on Wednesday at El Paso, Texas.

AP


hide caption

toggle caption

AP

Updated at 10 p.m. ET

President Trump announced that he will begin imposing tariffs on all goods imported from Mexico beginning June 10 unless that country does more to help reduce illegal immigration from Central America.

In a statement issued late Thursday, the president cited his authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and said the crisis at the southern border requires action.

“Accordingly, starting on June 10, 2019, the United States will impose a 5 percent Tariff on all goods imported from Mexico. If the illegal migration crisis is alleviated through effective actions taken by Mexico, to be determined in our sole discretion and judgment, the Tariffs will be removed. If the crisis persists, however, the Tariffs will be raised to 10 percent on July 1, 2019.”

Trump added that unless the Mexican government takes steps to “dramatically reduce or eliminate” the flow of Central American migrants moving through its country, tariffs will go to 15% on August 1, to 20% on Sept. 1, and to 25% on Oct. 1. “Tariffs will permanently remain at the 25 percent level unless and until Mexico substantially stops the illegal inflow of aliens coming through its territory,” he wrote.

Mexico’s deputy foreign minister for North America, Jesus Seade, said that it would be disastrous if Trump imposed the new tariffs.

Trump’s surprise announcement comes as the administration is urging Congress to approve the pending U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement which is designed to replace the North American Trade Agreement reached in 1994. It is not immediately clear what impact the tariff threat will have on the draft agreement.

Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, in a conference call with reporters, said the trade agreement and tariff threat “are not linked.”

“These are not tariffs as part of a trade dispute,” Mulvaney said. “These are tariffs as part of an immigration problem. USMCA is a trade mattter and completely separate.”

When asked which Mexican imports the administration means to target, Mulvaney replied “all of them.”

Acting Secretary for Homeland Security Kevin McAleenan, in the same conference call, said the border crisis has become “a national emergency.”

“U.S. immigration authorities now have over 80,000 people in custody, a record level that is beyond sustainable capacity with current resources,” he said.

The president’s statement called for action by Mexico:

“Mexico’s passive cooperation in allowing this mass incursion constitutes an emergency and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States. Mexico has very strong immigration laws and could easily halt the illegal flow of migrants, including by returning them to their home countries. Additionally, Mexico could quickly and easily stop illegal aliens from coming through its southern border with Guatemala.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

No Image

Health May 30, 2019

Louisiana Governor Says He Plans To Sign Bill Restricting Most Abortions Into Law

Louisiana is the latest state where lawmakers have voted to ban most abortions with no exceptions for cases of rape or incest. The state’s Democratic governor says he will sign the bill into law.



ARI SHAPIRO, HOST:

Today Louisiana’s governor became the latest to sign a strict abortion ban into law with no exceptions for cases of rape or incest. This is part of a long-term strategy by abortion opponents to get the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider its landmark Roe versus Wade decision legalizing abortion.

NPR’s Debbie Elliott is following this debate and joins us now. Hi. Debbie.

DEBBIE ELLIOTT, BYLINE: Hi, Ari.

SHAPIRO: OK, so the Louisiana Legislature passed this bill yesterday. The governor signed it into law today. What does it do?

ELLIOTT: Well, it outlaws abortion once a heartbeat can be detected by ultrasound. Typically that can be as early as six weeks, in some cases before a woman would even know that she was pregnant. There are exceptions if a woman’s life is threatened or if there’s a serious and irreversible health risk, also if the pregnancy is diagnosed as medically futile. There are no exceptions for cases of rape or incest. Here’s the bill’s House sponsor, Republican State Representative Valarie Hodges.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

VALARIE HODGES: While we have tremendous empathy – tremendous empathy – for women of whatever age, especially for children that have been the victims of rape or incest – and it is a heinous crime – but if anyone should be put to death, it should be the perpetrator of the crime, not the child, not the baby.

ELLIOTT: Republicans lead the Louisiana Legislature, but this bill picked up Democratic support as well. In fact, the Senate sponsor of the bill is a Democrat.

SHAPIRO: And so is the governor who signed the bill this afternoon. What has he said about his decision to sign the bill into law?

ELLIOTT: Well, his position is certainly a break with national Democrats. Edwards was not available for an interview, but in a statement, he described himself as pro-life. He also acknowledged that there are many people who feel just as strongly as he does on the abortion issue and disagree with me, he said. But I respect their opinions. One of the people that disagree with him is the chair of the Louisiana Democratic Party, State Senator Karen Carter Peterson. I spoke with her from Baton Rouge today, and she was very disappointed with the governor.

KAREN CARTER PETERSON: I respect his religious beliefs. I, in fact, share a lot of his religious beliefs. But while I’m in this capitol as I sit right now, a woman’s health is sacred. A woman should have the right to decide with her husband, with her family what she does with her body.

ELLIOTT: The political reality in Louisiana is that Edwards, the lone Democratic governor in the Deep South, is up for re-election this year in a conservative, Republican-leaning state where the abortion issue resonates with voters.

SHAPIRO: OK, well this ban comes as a lot of states are passing new restrictions on abortion. And most of these laws are tied up in court challenges. Take a step back, and tell us about the broader strategy here.

ELLIOTT: Well, the broader strategy is to be in federal court on a path that anti-abortion activists hope will lead to the U.S. Supreme Court. They are emboldened by a conservative majority court now with two appointees from President Trump. And these laws are aimed at challenging Roe v. Wade. Louisiana’s law uses the language unborn human being and defines that as from fertilization. The goal is to get the Supreme Court to overturn Roe and establish human rights for a developing embryo or fetus.

Now, similar abortion bans by other states both in the South and in the Midwest have been challenged as unconstitutional. In fact, Louisiana’s law is directly tied to a similar one in Mississippi that has already been blocked by a federal judge. The Louisiana law is written so that it would not take effect unless the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds Mississippi’s law.

SHAPIRO: There have been calls for boycotts of some of these states. Are we already seeing fallout even before the courts weigh in on these laws?

ELLIOTT: Yes. After Alabama passed what was the most restrictive abortion ban in the country, the University of Alabama’s biggest donor, Hugh Culverhouse Jr., called for a boycott of both the state of Alabama and the school. Now, the university attracts a majority of out-of-state students. It says it had nothing to do with the law and was already in a dispute with Culverhouse and may give him back a $21 million donation. That is a big investment to lose.

In Georgia, several media giants including Disney, Netflix and WarnerMedia have indicated that they’re reconsidering doing business in Georgia because of that state’s law that bans abortions once a heartbeat can be detected. So Louisiana – also a place where there is a significant amount of television and film production as well as the music industry there. So that state could face similar pressure.

SHAPIRO: That’s NPR’s Debbie Elliott. Thanks, Debbie.

ELLIOTT: You’re welcome.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

No Image

Sports May 30, 2019

NBA Finals Head To Canada As Raptors Take On Golden State Warriors

For the first time, the NBA Finals will be played in Canada. The Toronto Raptors host the Golden State Warriors on Thursday. NPR’s Audie Cornish talks with Toronto Star sports columnist Bruce Arthur.



AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

Tonight, for the first time ever, the NBA finals are in Canada. The Toronto Raptors host the Golden State Warriors for Game 1. The Warriors are the two-time defending champions, but we’re going to focus on the Raptors because while, yeah, lots of Raptors fans are just happy to have made it this far, Toronto has arguably the best player in the world in Kawhi Leonard. So can Leonard carry them all the way to the title? Even if he doesn’t, has basketball in Canada already won? For that, we turn to Bruce Arthur, sports columnist for the Toronto Star. Welcome to the program.

BRUCE ARTHUR: Thank you, Audie.

CORNISH: So we’ll get to Kawhi Leonard in a moment, but first, we know that Toronto has had, like, several years of good but not great teams. Can you talk about how people are talking about this? I don’t know what the energy is like in the city.

ARTHUR: The level of interest and excitement has never been higher than this – never. And this is a franchise with two and a half decades, almost, of failure. And even when the team was good, the seasons tended to end in humiliation. LeBron James was a big part of that. This is something that I don’t think we’ve ever seen in the city before. You walk around the city now, and you hear people talking about the Raptors. You can hear the sound of the celebration if you’re in one of the condo towers downtown, if you stand out on your balcony. They’ve finally captured the city, and I don’t think this team has ever truly done that before.

CORNISH: Now, Kawhi Leonard was traded to Toronto before the season, right? And it was seen as a big gamble because Leonard, you know, is a free agent next year. He might be eyeing a team in Southern California, where he’s from. Is there a sense that this is kind of now or never, in terms of winning a title?

ARTHUR: There probably should be because the funny thing is, for most players, for most people, you might be able to look at this and say, all this success, the way that the city has embraced him and the team, all of these good things would naturally lead to Kawhi Leonard being more inclined to re-sign in Toronto. And we just don’t know that that’s the case because he’s a famously kind of opaque individual. Nobody knows what Kawhi Leonard is thinking, except Kawhi Leonard, about what he really wants in life and in basketball. The team’s really good; that might not be enough.

CORNISH: People are talking about him as being one of the greats, right? You’re hearing, like, a Michael Jordan comparison being thrown around. Can he really carry the team to a title against the Warriors, though?

ARTHUR: Not alone, I don’t think so. The one thing about this Raptors team that people do underrate is that, defensively, this Raptors team is as good as anybody in basketball right now. It’s a team with versatility, intelligence, a ferocity, defensively. But to beat the Golden State Warriors, they’re going to need more guys to make shots offensively. Kawhi Leonard is great. You need more than one great player to win in any playoff series, much less against a championship outfit like the Warriors.

CORNISH: The NBA has pushed for expansion north for decades. But is the rest of Canada at all interested in this? I mean, is this Canada’s team?

ARTHUR: Well, you say this as someone who is from Vancouver, who was a Vancouver Grizzlies partial season ticket holder and then watched them leave. As a Toronto…

CORNISH: So biased (laughter).

ARTHUR: Yeah. Toronto and Canada are two separate things. We’ve got, I think, about 7 million within the general area of Toronto out of about 35 or 36 million people in the country. It’s the mega city, and it’s different ethnically, culturally, financially, than the rest of Canada, and basketball is a part of that. The fault line does run along those lines in that it is very much a Toronto team. But this is the first time I feel like – and it’s still anecdotal. You can tell a little bit from television ratings. But the team seems to be crossing into the bloodstream of the rest of the country, and this is, I think, what happens when you win, when you make it into a cultural curiosity in addition to being a sporting curiosity.

CORNISH: And does it help to have someone like Drake courtside (laughter)?

ARTHUR: I think for some people it does. I think the power of celebrity is something that is immensely powerful. And he’s someone that just adds to the level of attention that’s happening here. This is going to be the first championship series for a major sport in Canada in the Internet era, and every bit of notoriety helps, and Drake is a part of that.

CORNISH: Bruce Arthur, sports columnist for the Toronto Star. Thank you for talking about the Raptors with us, and best of luck.

ARTHUR: Absolutely. My pleasure. Thank you.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

No Image

Entertainment May 29, 2019

The Month in Movies: What’s in Theaters This June

As we venture forth into the heart of the summer movie season, the month of June brings us more superheroes, more action, some highly anticipated animated features and a plethora of sequels, spin-offs and reboots (some of them a combination of those things). Interestingly, we’re also getting a number of releases involving evil dolls, as well as a couple of musical hits from across the pond.

Below is our guide to all the major titles coming to theaters in June and how to get your tickets now.

June 7:

Dark Phoenix

Starring: Sophie Turner, Jennifer Lawrence, James McAvoy

The latest installment of the X-Men movie franchise (and final sequel in Fox’s main series before the characters enter Disney’s Marvel Cinematic Universe). Dark Phoenix reprises the comic book storyline in which Jean Grey (Sophie Turner) becomes too powerful for her own good, and so she turns bad. Jessica Chastain joins the cast for this follow-up to X-Men: Apocalypse in a mysterious role, while that movie’s X-Men team returns for this 1990s-set blockbuster.

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

Late Night

Starring: Emma Thompson, Mindy Kaling, John Lithgow

One of the biggest hits of this year’s Sundance Film Festival, Late Night is about a legendary talk show host (Thompson) whose long-running show is about to replace her. Kaling (The Office), who plays a last-minute hire for the program’s otherwise all-male writing team, also penned the screenplay for the comedy, which Fandango’s Erik Davis called “very timely” and “whip-smart.” Lithgow is the late night show host’s husband, and Ike Barinholtz plays her potential successor.

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

The Secret Life of Pets 2

Starring (voices): Patton Oswalt, Kevin Hart, Harrison Ford

Welcome back to New York, this animated sequel is waiting for you. And so are the many lovable domestic animals from the original The Secret Life of Pets, which was a huge hit in the summer of 2016. Oswalt takes over the role of Max the dog, whose home life has experienced another major change, while Hart returns as the voice of the cute but tough bunny Snowball and Ford makes his animated feature debut as a farm-dwelling sheepdog named Rooster.

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

June 14:

Men in Black International

Starring: Tessa Thompson, Chris Hemsworth, Liam Neeson

Emma Thompson also appears in this Men in Black spin-off reboot, reprising her character from the 2012 sequel Men in Black 3. The new movie takes the franchise across the pond to the UK HQ of the MIB as Tessa Thompson plays a new recruit to the alien-monitoring, Earth-protecting organization. She teams up with a hot shot agent (Hemsworth), and their mission is to save the planet from one of their own. Kumail Nanjiani co-stars as the voice of an extra-terrestrial sidekick.

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

Shaft

Starring: Jessie T. Usher, Samuel L. Jackson, Richard Roundtreee

What’s the movie franchise where two of the sequels have the same title as the original? (Shaft) Right on. Roundtree is back as the iconic private detective John Shaft from the 1971 Shaft, while Jackson reprises his role as his nephew, John Shaft II, from the 2000 movie also called Shaft. This time the focus is on that man’s son, John Shaft Jr. (Usher), an FBI agent who must team up with his two elder heroes for a murder investigation that takes them into the Harlem underworld.

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

June 21:

Anna

Starring: Sasha Luss, Helen Mirren, Cillian Murphy

From Luc Besson, writer and director of The Fifth Element, La Femme Nikita and Lucy, comes another action movie involving a kick-ass heroine. Newcomer Luss, a Russian supermodel turned actress, is the titular Anna, a Russian supermodel turned secret government assassin, one of the world’s deadliest. Mirren plays her handler, while Murphy and Luke Evans also co-star in what’s being sold as “an electrifying thrill ride” with “startling twists.”

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

Child’s Play

Starring: Aubrey Plaza, Gabriel Bateman, Mark Hamill (voice)

Chucky gets a fresh start with this reboot featuring Luke Skywalker himself, Mark Hamill, as the voice of the deadly doll. Plaza stars in the new version, which takes the franchise back to its horror roots, as a single mother who mistakenly buys her son (Bateman) an evil toy with artificial intelligence. The cast of the remake also includes Brian Tyree Henry (If Beale Street Could Talk), who plays the detective investigating Chucky’s murders, and Tim Matheson as a toy company CEO.

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

Toy Story 4

Starring (voices): Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Tony Hale

While the grown-ups are watching the Child’s Play redo, the kids get their own movie about sentient toys. The fourth installment of Pixar’s flagship franchise follows Woody (Hanks), Buzz (Allen) and the rest of the gang of playthings on an existential adventure, during which they meet a new character called Forky (Hale) made out of a spork and googly eyes. Other additions include Keanu Reeves as a daredevil action figure and Christina Hendricks as a villainous doll.

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

Wild Rose

Starring: Jessie Buckley, Matt Costello, Jane Patterson

Irish singer Jessie Buckley, who broke out on the BBC talent show I’d Do Anything, leads this award-winning drama about a Scottish mother of two who, after being released from prison, travels to America to find fame as a country music star. Harry Potter actress Julie Walters and Game of Thrones actor Jamie Sives also feature in the movie, which has been receiving rave reviews on the film festival circuit since its Toronto premiere last fall.

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

June 26:

Annabelle Comes Home

Starring: Vera Farmiga, Patrick Wilson, Mckenna Grace

For those who haven’t had their fill of evil dolls with Child’s Play and Toy Story 4, this Annabelle sequel rounds out the trio just days later. Farmiga and Wilson reprise their roles as real-life paranormal investigators Lorraine and Ed Warren from other installments of the Conjuring Universe horror franchise, while Captain Marvel‘s Mckenna Grace co-stars as their young daughter, who becomes the target of the Annabelle doll’s terror.

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

June 28:

Yesterday

Starring: Himesh Patel, Lily James, Kate McKinnon

Slumdog Millionare and Trainspotting director Danny Boyle teamed up with Love Actually and Notting Hill writer Richard Curtis for this fantasy comedy about a musician (Patel) who wakes up in an alternate timeline in which The Beatles never existed. But he still remembers their songs and so becomes famous performing such hits as the eponymous “Yesterday.” James co-stars as his best friend, McKinnon plays his agent, and singer-songwriter Ed Sheeran appears as himself.

[embedded content]

Get Tickets

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

No Image

Business May 29, 2019

Uber To Start Banning Passengers With Low Ratings

Uber announced this week that it is changing policies and banning riders with low scores.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Uber has unveiled a new policy that enables the company to kick riders with low ratings to the curb.

For years, Uber allowed passengers to rate drivers on a star system, ultimately allowing customers to influence whether drivers can stay behind the wheel. Internal charts from 2014 published by Business Insider showed that drivers with ratings of 4.6 or below were at risk for the boot.

Though drivers could rate passengers, there was no equivalency in consequences. But now Uber’s drivers will have a greater say about the behavior of passengers.

“Respect is a two-way street, and so is accountability,” Kate Parker, Uber’s head of Safety Brand and Initiatives, said in a statement released Tuesday. Parker added, “While we expect only a small number of riders to ultimately be impacted by ratings-based deactivations, it’s the right thing to do.”

The shift will begin in the United States and Canada, the company said.

Riders will start to see a screen on the app that summarizes community guidelines and then asks them to confirm their understanding of the new terms. They will receive tips on how to increase their scores — suggestions like being polite, taking their trash out of the vehicle and refraining from asking drivers to speed.

Before passengers are deactivated, they will have multiple chances to boost their scores.

Uber didn’t say what the thresholds will be for passengers to lose access to the ride-hailing service.

“Each city has its own minimum threshold which is directly related to the average rider rating in that city,” Uber spokesperson Grant Klinzman told NPR by email.

Anyone can check their rating on the Uber app by visiting the main menu and looking at the number under their username.

Riders will also lose access to Uber’s food delivery app and JUMP, which allows people to rent electric bikes and scooters, Klinzman added.

A spokesperson for the Independent Drivers Guild, which represents more than 65,000 app-based drivers in New York, praised Uber’s announcement as a way to protect drivers in addition to riders.

“While most riders are respectful, banning riders who threaten driver safety, spew racist rants, and disrespect or damage our vehicles is the right thing to do,” spokesperson Moira Muntz said in a statement. “For too long there has been one-sided accountability and this is a positive step toward correcting that.”

Video footage recently showed a Lyft driver being brutally beaten by a rider in Queens.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

No Image

Health May 29, 2019

AIDS Activists Take On The High Price Of HIV Prevention Pill

In the 1980s, AIDS activists demanded action from the U.S. government in a dramatic way, and got results. Now, they have a new goal: more affordable access to an HIV prevention pill.



ARI SHAPIRO, HOST:

In the 1980s and ’90s, a group of AIDS activists called ACT UP demanded action from the U.S. government in a dramatic way.

(SOUNDBITE OF PROTEST)

UNIDENTIFIED PEOPLE: Act up. Fight back. Fight AIDS.

SHAPIRO: This was 1988. AIDS was a national crisis. Activists swarmed the Food and Drug Administration in Rockville, Md. They laid down beside paper gravestones.

(SOUNDBITE OF PROTEST)

UNIDENTIFIED PERSON #1: You’re killing us. You’re killing us.

SHAPIRO: And they got results, including price reductions on HIV drugs that save lives. Now AIDS activists have a new goal – more affordable access to an HIV prevention pill. The pill is called TRUVADA, or PrEP. It’s made by Gilead Sciences and can cost up to $1,800 a month. NPR’s Selena Simmons-Duffin has the story.

SELENA SIMMONS-DUFFIN, BYLINE: A few weeks back at the AIDSWatch conference, Dr. Robert Redfield, who directs the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, spoke.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

ROBERT REDFIELD: In this initiative…

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: He was selling the Trump administration’s plan to end HIV in America by 2030.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

UNIDENTIFIED PERSON #2: People can’t afford it because you don’t enforce it.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: Things got hectic.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

UNIDENTIFIED PERSON #3: The medication we need…

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: Then earlier this month at the Gilead shareholders meeting…

EMILY SANDERSON: Gilead, your price-gouging is killing people.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: A video shows a 20-something woman in the room facing men in suits who exchange looks.

SANDERSON: I’m disgusted by the fact that you would put profiteering ahead of the lives of people like me.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: The group behind these disruptions is called PrEP4All, an offshoot of ACT UP. They’re out in force now because of the activity around the government’s HIV 2030 plan. That goal can only be reached if more people get on PrEP, which stands for pre-exposure prophylaxis. Only a fraction of the 1 million people at risk for HIV are on it.

PrEP4All wants that $1,800 a month for PrEP way lower, more like the $5 a month it costs in other countries. They have two approaches – shame Gilead into voluntarily lowering the price and pressure the government into challenging Gilead’s patent so generic competition forces the price down. Let’s start with Gilead.

SANDERSON: Our goal is to get Gilead Sciences to release the patent on TRUVADA, or PrEP.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: Emily Sanderson is a co-founder of PrEP4All. You heard her confronting Gilead shareholders.

SANDERSON: Gilead has the power to make PrEP available right now for everybody, and they’re not doing it.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: In a statement, the company told NPR it, quote, “respects the work of HIV advocates and has been engaged with the advocate community for decades.” But that price tag remains.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

DANIEL O’DAY: The current list price is $1,780 in the United States.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: That’s CEO Daniel O’Day testifying about this issue on Capitol Hill a few weeks ago. Gilead is the only company making this drug in the U.S. right now. It’s under patent for a limited time, and shareholders want to see profits.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

O’DAY: The pricing as set in the United States takes into account the innovation it brings, the cost of the health care of treating an HIV patient, the ability to invest back in research and development and then also to make sure our access programs are effective.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: Gilead argues the price isn’t the problem. Lack of awareness, stigma and homophobia are the problems. And they say few pay the full list price. Gilead provides the drug at a discount to government programs. They just donated drugs to the CDC to cover some uninsured patients. And people with high deductibles can use its copay assistance program. PrEP4All activists are dismissive of these efforts, in Jake Powell’s case, because of personal experience.

JAKE POWELL: Gilead’s copay assistance program for the first year paid out the full cost of those first few months to the point that my insurance then kicked in.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: And paid full price for TRUVADA. The next year, Powell’s insurer stopped counting Gilead’s payments towards the $5,000 deductible. Powell would have had to pay out of pocket.

POWELL: I was off it for about six months because I couldn’t afford it. It was really frustrating. I was definitely scared in a way that I was used to not having to be scared.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: PrEP4All says to Gilead, you’ve made billions already; just lower the cost of the drug. To the government, PrEP4All says…

SANDERSON: The CDC can come in and reduce the cost of PrEP and provide it at an affordable price.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: That’s Emily Sanderson again. Activists make two points – that the CDC has its own patents for PrEP the agency could be enforcing, something Gilead disputes, and that taxpayer money was used in the studies underlying Gilead’s TRUVADA patent. The government has the power under the Bayh–Dole Act of 1980, they argue, to march in and break Gilead’s patent in the name of public health and let generic competition bring the price down.

SANDERSON: This PrEP pricing issue is a fixable problem. And we can get PrEP to everyone who needs it.

SIMMONS-DUFFIN: Neither the CDC nor Gilead have shown signs of being moved by these arguments. If the activists don’t convince them to act, the 1 million people at risk for HIV will have to wait until Gilead’s TRUVADA patent expires next fall and then wait again for generic competition to possibly lower the price closer to that $5 a month people get in the rest of the world. Selena Simmons-Duffin, NPR News.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

No Image

Sports May 28, 2019

After Deadly Season On Everest, Nepal Has No Plans To Issue Fewer Permits

Eleven people have died climbing Mount Everest so far this year, amid long lines to reach the peak last week. The mountain is seen here on Monday.

Prakash Mathema/AFP/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Prakash Mathema/AFP/Getty Images

Nepal’s tourism board is defending the number of permits it issued to climb Mount Everest for this season in which 11 people have died. And the country says it has no plans to restrict the number of permits issued next year, but rather that it hopes to attract still more tourists and climbers.

“There has been concern about the number of climbers on Mount Everest but it is not because of the traffic jam that there were casualties,” Mohan Krishna Sapkota, secretary at the country’s Ministry of Tourism and Civil Aviation, told the Associated Press. He instead pointed to weather conditions, insufficient oxygen supplies and equipment.

“In the next season we will work to have double rope in the area below the summit so there is better management of the flow of climbers,” he told the news service.

The image of a crowded Everest linked to the death toll was spurred by a viral photo last week that showed climbers in their neon gear, packed in a tight, unforgiving queue to the highest point on Earth.

A long queue of mountain climbers line a path on Mount Everest on May 22. Nepal’s tourist board says weather conditions and other factors, not crowds, were to blame for eight deaths on the peak in two days last week.

Nirmal Purja/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Nirmal Purja/AP

“You essentially have something that looks like people are waiting in line for concert tickets to a sold-out show, only instead of trying to get in to see their favorite artist, they’re trying to reach the top of the world and are running into traffic,” Outside magazine editor at large Grayson Schaffer told NPR’s Weekend Edition.

It’s a traffic jam that can turn fatal. “The danger there is that, at that altitude, the body just can’t survive,” Schaffer said. “They’re breathing bottled oxygen. And when that oxygen runs out because you’re waiting in line, you are at much higher risk for developing high-altitude edemas and altitude sickness — and dying of those illnesses while you’re still trying to reach the summit.”

Everest’s very highest reaches are known as the death zone. And once a climber reaches it, all bets are off.

“Once you get above about 25,000 feet, your body just can’t metabolize the oxygen,” said Schaffer, who has been to Everest but not the death zone. “Your muscles start to break down. You start to have fluid that builds up around your lungs and your brain. Your brain starts to swell. You start to lose cognition. Your decision making starts to become slow. And you start to make bad decisions.”

And that breakdown in cognition is happening to people who have often flown hundreds or thousands of miles and paid significant sums of money to achieve their dream of reaching the top.

“The reason that people try to climb Mount Everest is because it grabs a hold of them and they feel like they just have to make the summit,” Schaffer said. “And so you’ll have some people in distress and not necessarily getting help from the people who are around them. It’s this kind of bizarre thing to be surrounded by hundreds of people, and yet totally alone at the top of the world.”

Nepal’s government doesn’t put a specific limit on permits. This year 381 people were permitted to climb – a number the AP says is the highest ever. Foreign climbers must pay a fee of $11,000 for a spring summit of Everest, and provide a doctor’s note attesting to their fitness.

A few reasons made last week on Everest such a crowded one, in which eight people died in two days. One factor is that China has limited the permits for the Tibetan side of the mountain, driving more people to the Nepalese side.

Another factor is weather. Alan Arnette, a four-time Everest climber, told CNN that bad weather left just five days ideal for reaching the summit. “So you have 800 people trying to squeeze through a very small window,” he said.

Hence the traffic. “There were more people on Everest than there should be,” Kul Bahadur Gurung, general secretary of the Nepal Mountaineering Association, a group comprising all expedition operators in Nepal, told the AP.

Now Nepal’s tourist board finds itself working to counter the narrative of that viral photo. On Tuesday, the tourism board’s social media accounts shared a tweet by Nepali climber Karma Tenzing.

“Everest unfairly trashed via viral image of ‘traffic jam’ on May 22 2019,” he wrote. “Below are REAL photos of my climb to Summit on May 15. Devoid of jams & I spent an HOUR at summit. With only a 3-4 day weather window & ~300 Everest Summiteer annually, jams will exist. Spread the truth!”

#Everest unfairly trashed via viral image of “traffic jam” on May 22 2019. Below are REAL photos of my climb to #Summit on May 15. Devoid of jams & I spent an HOUR at summit.

With only a 3-4 day weather window & ~300 #EverestSummiteer annually, jams will exist. Spread the truth! pic.twitter.com/wwrhSlP5hL

— Karma Tenzing (@karma10zing) May 28, 2019

In a statement Monday, the tourism board expressed condolences to the bereaved family and friends of those who died, and added that it takes the matter seriously and was “disturbed” by the news.

“Nepal recognises the need to work closely with expedition companies and teams to control safety of climber flows in the face of climatic risks and sensitivities,” it said.

Nepal Tourism Board extends deepest condolences for the loss of lives at Everest, 8,848 m, during recent expeditions.
For more: https://t.co/dw9bDb2MrF pic.twitter.com/1zp67wxLI2

— Nepal Tourism Board (@nepaltourismb) May 28, 2019

But it also pushed back on the idea that it was to blame. It said it had limited the number of permits and had issued them under stringent rules.

“As is known, climbing Everest is a hardcore adventure activity, a daunting experience even for the most trained and professional climbers,” it said in the statement. And the tourist board said it had a request for the travel industry, the media, and potential future climbers: “be aware of all the risk factors included in climbing peaks above 8,000 m. Intense training, precautions and attention to every minor detail, are of extreme importance for climbing the Himalayan peaks.”

In other words: no one ever said climbing Everest was safe.

This year has been the deadliest on Everest since 2015. An avalanche in 2014 killed of 16 Sherpas. And the mountain’s most famous tragedy happened in 1996, when eight climbers died in one day, a harrowing event recounted by Jon Krakauer in Into Thin Air.

Since then, little has changed, Schaffer says – except “it’s gotten exponentially worse.”

“In that incident, there was actually a storm that came. And that’s why you had eight people die in that tragedy. Now what we’re seeing and what we will probably see every year forward is eight to 10 people dying just in a routine manner, just because of the sheer number of people trying to fit onto the route.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

No Image

Health May 28, 2019

Missouri Could Soon Be The Only U.S. State Without A Clinic That Provides Abortions

Planned Parenthood says it might have to stop providing abortion services in Missouri. That would make Missouri the first state in the country without a clinic that performs abortions.



ARI SHAPIRO, HOST:

To talk about how Missouri’s fight over abortion fits into the larger national picture, NPR’s Sarah McCammon joins us now. She has been covering the abortion debate across the country.

Hi, Sarah.

SARAH MCCAMMON, BYLINE: Hi there.

SHAPIRO: How unusual is what is happening in Missouri? How close are other states to being in the same situation?

MCCAMMON: Well, abortion is still legal in all 50 states, Ari, but that does not mean it’s accessible or even available. Right now Missouri is one of six states with only one clinic, so abortion rights advocates say any of those six states could find itself in a similar situation. And we should note a couple of hospitals in Missouri could still provide abortions in rare situations like medical emergencies. But this clinic is the only option in the state for most women seeking abortions.

SHAPIRO: These clinics have been closing in a number of states. Explain why.

MCCAMMON: Right. A lot of it does come down to laws and regulations like those in Missouri that make it hard for clinics to stay open. Activists say it’s a strategy – an intentional strategy by anti-abortion rights groups. And it’s happening along with efforts we’ve seen to ban abortion outright. Planned Parenthood says something like 300 abortion restrictions have been introduced in state legislatures this year. And more than half of those involved regulating clinics and doctors, things like hospital-admitting privileges for doctors who perform abortions or transportation agreements with local hospitals in case of an emergency. Medical groups say many of these regulations are excessive and unnecessary.

SHAPIRO: What do groups that oppose abortion say about these new regulations? How are they reacting to them?

MCCAMMON: Right. Well, no surprise, they’re pleased to see that this facility in Missouri might have to stop performing abortions. I heard from Marjorie Dannenfelser with the anti-abortion rights group the Susan B. Anthony List. She said in a statement that this would be good news for health and safety, as she put it. And she says that there is growing momentum around the country to restrict abortion.

SHAPIRO: There’s been a lot of speculation about how the Supreme Court might weigh in on laws that ban specific abortion procedures or ban the procedure at certain stages. What does the Supreme Court said about these other kinds of restrictions on clinics and doctors who perform abortions?

MCCAMMON: So, yeah, the Supreme Court has weighed in on this. About three years ago, there was a case from Texas called the Whole Woman’s Health case. It was a Texas law that required hospital-admitting privileges for doctors and surgical facilities at clinics that provide abortions. In that decision, the court said, basically, that states cannot impose these kinds of health regulations without demonstrating that they’re medically necessary.

Groups like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists say the regulations that could force Missouri’s last clinic to stop offering abortions are unnecessary and interfere with the doctor-patient relationship. There’s another case before the Supreme Court from Louisiana that looks at similar issues, so I’d expect to hear more about this, Ari, along with those – the debate over banning abortion outright.

SHAPIRO: That’s NPR’s Sarah McCammon. Thanks, Sarah.

MCCAMMON: Thank you.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)