So you thought you knew everything about racial bias?

The medical fraternity discovering yet another form of racial bias – this time in the structure of its research databases.

EukekaAlert!, 11 October 2016:

A national group of researchers has confirmed for the first time that two of the top genomic databases, which are in wide use today by clinical geneticists, reflect a measurable bias toward genetic data based on European ancestry over that of African ancestry. The results were published in the latest issue of Nature Communications.

The research team was led by Timothy O'Connor, assistant professor at the University of Maryland School of Medicine (UM SOM) and a faculty member of the school's Institute for Genomic Sciences. He is also a specialist in the areas of Human Evolutionary Genomics, Genotype/Phenotype Architecture, and Computational Biology. Other members of the study included researchers from UM SOM's Department of Medicine and the Program in Personalized and Genomic Medicine, and from the Johns Hopkins University, the University of Colorado, and the Henry Ford Health System.

This deficit in African ancestry genomic data was identified during an 18-month long study conducted under the auspices of the larger Consortium on Asthma among African-Ancestry Populations in the Americas (CAAPA). To create a benchmark for comparison to current database results, the researchers first created the largest, high-quality non-European genome data set ever assembled. Genetic samples of 642 subjects from the African diaspora, including representatives from US, African, and Afro-Caribbean populations, were sequenced in order to produce this unique data set. Then, when compared with current clinical genomic databases, researchers found a clearer preference in those databases for European genetic variants over non-European variants.

"By better understanding the important role of African ancestry in clinical genetics, we can begin to actually identify a disease that has been forgotten or is not part of an individual's self-identification," says O'Connor. "For example, if an African-American patient walks in the door, he might have 20 percent European ancestry, while another might have 20 percent African ancestry. That difference will dramatically change how many variants are found in their genome, and what disease risks they might encounter. That's why we need to expand these databases to include a broader range of ancestries, in order to produce more accurate medical genetic diagnoses."

O'Connor also points out that this shortfall in genomic data also comes at a financial cost. "If you translate the review time it takes for each one of these variants to be sequenced in terms of cost in a clinical setting, you're looking at a difference of about $1,000 more to analyze an African American's genome than a European American's genome--and you still receive less accurate results," he notes.

"This groundbreaking research by Dr. O'Connor and his team clearly underscores the need for greater diversity in today's genomic databases," says UM SOM Dean E. Albert Reece, MD, PhD, MBA, who is also Vice President of Medical Affairs at the University of Maryland and the John Z. and Akiko Bowers Distinguished Professor at UM SOM. "By applying the genetic ancestry data of all major racial backgrounds, we can perform more precise and cost-effective clinical diagnoses that benefit patients and physicians alike."

Commonwealth Solicitor-General Gleeson decides he has had enough of Attorney-General Brandis' unedifying antics and resigns

One for the history books.

A forceful letter of resignation from the second law office of the Commonwealth of Australia tendered at the end of an unedifying power grab by Attorney-General and Liberal Senator for Queensland George Brandis, who is considered by many to be one of the less illustrious members of the legal profession. 

This letter was delivered on the same day that the legal profession is:

Celebrating 100Years of the Commonwealth Solicitor-General

Venue: Banco Court, Level 13, Law Courts Building, Queens Square, Sydney

Organisation: Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law and the Australian Association of Constitutional Law

Time: 6.00 pm - 7.30 pm

Date: Mon, 2016-10-24

This event celebrates 100 years since the passage of the 1916 Act.

Opening remarks will be given by Sir Anthony Mason AC KBE QC, former Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia and Commonwealth Solicitor-General, 1964-1969. A panel of the former Commonwealth Solicitors-General will discuss and debate the history, legal position and practice of the office.

The panel will be chaired by Dr Gabrielle Appleby, Associate Professor UNSW Law, Co-Director of the Judiciary Project, Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law.

Justin Gleeson SC's resignation takes effect on 7 November 2016.

Resignation letter sent to Australian Attorney-General George Brandis by Solicitor-General of the Commonwea... by clarencegirl on Scribd

https://www.scribd.com/document/328676245/Resignation-letter-sent-to-Australian-Attorney-General-George-Brandis-by-Solicitor-General-of-the-Commonwealth-Justin-Gleeson-SC

GOOGLE INC: Being Evil Is Now Our Corporation Policy

Google Inc quietly dropped its original motto “Don’t Be Evil” some time ago, then it dropped its corporate name, became the new holding company Alphabet Inc and a new weak and watery motto surfaced - “Do The Right Thing”.

Now Alphabet Inc has just as quietly announced another change. One that allows this Internet giant to build a complete portrait of a user by name, based on everything they write in email, every website they visit and the searches they conduct without the informed consent of said users.

Pro Publica, 21 October 2016:

When Google bought the advertising network DoubleClick in 2007, Google founder Sergey Brin said that privacy would be the company’s “number one priority when we contemplate new kinds of advertising products.”

And, for nearly a decade, Google did in fact keep DoubleClick’s massive database of web-browsing records separate by default from the names and other personally identifiable information Google has collected from Gmail and its other login accounts.

But this summer, Google quietly erased that last privacy line in the sand – literally crossing out the lines in its privacy policy that promised to keep the two pots of data separate by default. In its place, Google substituted new language that says browsing habits “may be” combined with what the company learns from the use Gmail and other tools.

The change is enabled by default for new Google accounts. Existing users were prompted to opt-in to the change this summer.

The practical result of the change is that the DoubleClick ads that follow people around on the web may now be customized to them based on your name and other information Google knows about you. It also means that Google could now, if it wished to, build a complete portrait of a user by name, based on everything they write in email, every website they visit and the searches they conduct.

The move is a sea change for Google and a further blow to the online ad industry’s longstanding contention that web tracking is mostly anonymous. In recent years, Facebook, offline data brokers and others have increasingly sought to combine their troves of web tracking data with people’s real names. But until this summer, Google held the line.

“The fact that DoubleClick data wasn’t being regularly connected to personally identifiable information was a really significant last stand,” said Paul Ohm, faculty director of the Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law.

“It was a border wall between being watched everywhere and maintaining a tiny semblance of privacy,” he said. “That wall has just fallen.”…..

Young Libs at play in 2016, Sydney University

To be filed in the “Now I’ve Heard Everything” cabinet…….

The Sydney Morning Herald, 20 October 2016:

A male staffer for a Liberal MP attempted to identify himself as a woman as part of a sneaky factional deal to win a $12,000 executive position in a student election.

Alex Fitton, who works for New South Wales state MP Mark Taylor, vowed he was not a cisgender male in order to become joint general secretary of the University of Sydney Students' Representative Council on Wednesday night.

A cisgender male is a man whose gender identity matches the sex they were assigned at birth. The SRC's affirmative action policy stipulates the coveted council position can be shared by two people, but only if one of them identifies as a woman or a non-cisgender male.

Chair of the SRC standing legal committee, Cameron Caccamo, said Mr Fitton was now in the process of proving his identity, but had thus far fallen short of the legal requirements.

"I have received confirmation that [Mr] Fitton has attempted to notify the RO [returning officer] of his/their gender identity, it has been deemed insufficient, so [Mr] Fitton has the rest of the day to fix that," he told Fairfax Media on Thursday…….

A senior Liberal Party source familiar with Mr Fitton said the move, whether or not it ultimately succeeded, reflected an "immature culture" within the Young Liberals and "desperation" in the ailing centre-right faction of NSW.

"He ran for an affirmative action position by pretending to be a woman," the source said. "He is incredibly blokey. Plays AFL. They all call each other 'the boys'. It's got no basis at all in fact."…..

This is not the first time SRC antics have made headlines. Police had to be called to last year's executive elections due to allegations of a stolen mobile phone (it was later found inside a bin). The meeting erupted into chaos after student politicians reneged on a factional deal, and was even plunged into darkness after somebody cut power to the room.

On Wednesday night, students also elected to their executive a candidate with the policy: "All triplets on campus will be forced to wear large, novelty pirate hats so that they can be identified at all times and from a distance."

Self-published book by discredited political scientist costs Australian taxpayers $4,475 per page

Defunded by the Danish Government in 2012, rejected by the University of Western Australia and then Flinders University in 2015, discredited political scientist  Bjørn Lomborg went on to finally be rejected by the Abbott Government – but not before that federal government had handed Lomborg a cheque for $640,000 taken from the Dept of. Education budget.

Apparently unable to find a reputable publisher after 2010 Lomborg self-published this little 143-page tome with Australian taxpayer’s money – costing the nation $4,475 per page in a year where the budget deficit stood at $35.1 billion.

Published by Copenhagen Consensus Center USA, Inc.

Paperback Edition only – April 20, 2015, price $65.99   

New Paperback Edition – November 1, 2015, price $11.99

Amazon.com

This is what Lomborg says of his book…..

Copenhagen Consensus Center:

Nobel Laureates Guide to Smarter Global Targets to 2030

Copenhagen Consensus Center has published 100+ peer-reviewed analyses from 82 of the world’s top economists and 44 sector experts along with many UN agencies and NGOs. These have established how effective 100+ targets would be in terms of value-for-money. These analyses take into account not just the economic, but also health, social and environmental benefits to the world.

An Expert Panel including two Nobel Laureates has reviewed this research and identified 19 targets that represent the best value-for-money in development over the period 2016 to 2030, offering social good worth more than $15 back on every dollar invested.

Reaching these global targets by 2030 will do more than $15 of good for every dollar spent.

In a Hurry and interested in the 19 most bang-for-the-buck post-2015 sustainable development targets? Download our project overview PDF here.

This is what the Senate thought……

The Australian, 21 October 2016:

Taxpayers contributed $640,000 to a book edited, written and published by Bjorn Lomborg and his Copenhagen Consensus Centre which was ridiculed in Senate Estimates on Thursday as “vanity publishing”.

The book, The Nobel Laureates Guide to the Smartest Targets in the World, also came under attack for receiving special purpose funding without having to undergo normal peer review processes of Australian researchers….

Bureaucrat Virginia Hart initially told Senator O’Neill the money had been used to support “extensive consultations through youth forums, media discussions, meeting with world leaders, including interactions with Australian dignitaries and officials, a number of papers that were commissioned from academics in areas that were relevant to the millennial development goals”.

But it was unclear which academics contributed to the book — none appear to be attributed — or what they produced. It is also unclear about the other activities under the funding…..

Senate Estimates also heard that the $640,000 was a contribution to the book with the rest coming from the CCC, but the Education Department did not know the total cost of the project.

Senator O’Neill also asked Senator Birmingham why the project received money under special purpose funding.

“The purpose was that the then Prime Minister and Mr Pyne had initiated a process that sought to establish an Australian Copenhagen Consensus Centre and bring its approach and methodology to Australia. Certain works were commenced while the discussions commenced as to how and where such a centre may be housed. In the end, the government made the decision not to proceed,” Senator Birmingham replied…..

While Senate Estimates was told the book was freely available on the internet, it appears it is only available for purchase. Amazon lists the book at $US11.99.

Australia and New Zealand ask International Whaling Commission to curb Japan's 'scientific' whaling program

Southern Minke Whale and calf

International Whaling Commission (IWC):

The International Whaling Commission is an Inter-governmental Organisation whose purpose is the conservation of whales and the management of whaling.  The legal framework of the IWC is the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling.  This Convention was established in 1946, making it one of the first pieces of international environmental legislation.  All member countries of the IWC are signatories to this Convention.  The IWC has a current membership of 88 Governments from countries all over the world.

The Guardian, 21 October 2016:

Australia has thrown its weight behind a bid to outlaw large-scale commercial and so-called “scientific” whaling at a summit next week.

The International Whaling Commission meeting in Slovenia follows Japan’s recent slaughter of more than 300 minke whales, many of them pregnant, when they resumed so-called scientific whaling after a hiatus because the International Court of Justice ruled the hunts were not scientific and should cease.

Australia has put forward a resolution to the conference that would require Japan to get approval from the IWC for its “scientific” quotas.

Japan is also expected to again face criticism from other countries for its whaling in the Southern Ocean, in defiance of the court ruling….

This year marks the 30th anniversary of the global moratorium on commercial whaling and 70 years since the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling was made.

In 2008 the Australian federal court found Japanese whaling in the Australian Whale Sanctuary to be in breach of Australian law and Japanese whaling company Kyodo was fined $1m in 2015. Attempts to recover the money have so far failed.

Kitty Block, the vice-president of the Humane Society International, which was part of the Australian legal action, said: “Japan’s unilateral resumption of its so-called ‘scientific’ hunt in the Southern Ocean last year is a slap in the face not just for the International Whaling Commission but also for the rule of law, as the international court of justice clearly ruled Japan’s previous Antarctic ‘research’ program to be illegal.”……

The Sydney Morning Herald, 18 October 2016:

Japan last year partially withdrew from the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice at The Hague to prevent any further challenge on whaling, and issued new guidelines that Tokyo claims justify killing more than 4000 whales in the next decade.

Conservation groups are urging the Turnbull government to send a patrol vessel to the Southern Ocean in the coming months to monitor Japan's whaling fleet.

International Whaling Commission - Draft Motion on Improving the Review Process for Whaling Under Special P... by clarencegirl on Scribd

https://www.scribd.com/document/328369267/international-whaling-commission-draft-motion-on-improving-the-review-process-for-whaling-under-special-permit-pre