vox--2020-12-02--Singapore is the first country in the world to approve lab-grown chicken products

Currently , farms around the world produce chicken for sale by raising fast-growing chicken breeds in batches of tens of thousands , tightly packed in warehouses that are a public health hazard , a fire hazard , a worker safety hazard , and a hazard to the well-being of the chickens themselves .
What if instead we could grow the meat without the chickens ?
Researchers all over the world have been chasing that dream , of “ lab-grown ” or “ cultured ” meat , for years .
Today , lab-grown meat took one step closer to reality as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of cultured chicken meat grown in bioreactors , becoming the first agency in the world to issue such an approval .
Their sign-off means that chicken bites from the US company Eat Just will be available to consumers in Singapore .
( There are a few other places in the world where you can try lab-grown meat , such as an experimental restaurant in Israel . )
It ’ s a big step forward for a technology that stands to bring a desperately needed change to how the world eats .
Lab-grown chicken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chicken from slaughtered animals .
It ’ s made of genuine chicken cells , but it ’ s grown on a cell-growth scaffold in a factory instead of growing in a live animal .
( This approach differs from plant-based meats like the Impossible Burger or Beyond Meat , which use plant proteins to create products that taste like meat ; plant-based meat often tastes very similar to the meat products it replaces , but it is not identical on a cellular level . )
The same approach can be used for beef @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but for several reasons , chickens are the most appealing place to start .
First , chickens represent most of the animals raised and killed for their meat in the US , and they are raised in particularly appalling conditions — making them a good first target in the effort to coax Americans away from factory-farmed food .
Second , the biggest challenge for lab-grown meat so far has been getting the structure of the meat right : Lab-grown products don ’ t yet have the texture of tissue produced inside an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ steak disappointing , but it ’ s less of a limitation for many chicken products .
To grow a lab-grown product , chicken cells are taken from a real live chicken .
The process doesn ’ t involve killing the animals , so producers hope they can win buy-in from vegetarians and vegans — though the target market for lab-grown meat products is mostly meat-eaters , not vegetarians .
These chicken cells are then immersed in a liquid solution known as a “ growth medium ” that encourages the cells to multiply .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is used as the growth medium , but the product ’ s manufacturers say they hope to switch to a plant-based one .
Inside the bioreactor , the cells grow until they ’ ve produced chicken meat — without the chicken .
“ A new space race for the future of food is underway , ” said Good Food Institute Executive Director Bruce Friedrich in a statement when Singapore announced its approval of Eat Just ’ s chicken .
“ Cultivated meat will mark an enormous advance in our efforts to create a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and sustainable , and Singapore is leading the way on this transition.
” Getting lab-grown meat to consumers would be an enormous win for the climate and for animals .
Proponents believe it might be the most feasible way to end factory farming and make our food production system sustainable .
But there are still substantial barriers to widespread access to lab-grown meat .
The first is that the technical challenges of bringing lab-grown meat to the table are far from solved , despite years of effort and investment .
Getting meat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and structure of muscle on an animal is very difficult .
No one has yet figured out how to imitate , say , a steak — thus the focus on products like chicken bits , where structure is much less important .
Even replacing chicken products with lab-grown chicken products that don ’ t require much internal tissue structure would be an enormous achievement for the world .
But there are still many hurdles to reaching that point .
The existing projects , like Eat Just ’ s in Singapore , are small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of meat for specialty dishes .
The meat industry kills tens of billions of animals annually .
Matching that will be a challenge .
“ With the numbers we have today , ” UC Berkeley ’ s Ricardo San Martin , who studies meat alternatives , told me last year , “ we don ’ t see how [ lab-grown meat ] can scale up and deliver products soon at a competitive price .
Besides all of the technological hurdles , the scaling up can be very complex .
So far , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cultivating these kinds of cells for this purpose .
It ’ s very hard , and with what we know today , maybe it ’ s not the right approach.
” The next challenge — very much related to the challenge of scaling — is cost .
Lab-grown meat is much more expensive than factory farming .
As cell-based products grow , they ’ ll discover new cost savings and benefit from economies of scale .
Factory farming , though , also benefits from the ability to expand and discover new cost efficiencies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ century of optimizations , it has succeeded at making factory-farmed chicken incredibly cheap .
“ The most processed cheap forms of chicken are just insanely cheap , relative to historical standards and relative to other food products on the market , ” Lewis Bollard , who researches animals at the Open Philanthropy Project , told me this August .
“ The chicken industry has managed to cut all their corners , they don ’ t pay their environmental bills , they don ’ t pay for a lot of the public health hazards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ produce a product that is just artificially cheap and hard to compete with.
” But despite the many challenges ahead , today ’ s approval in Singapore is cause for celebration .
The world ’ s food system faces many challenges in the upcoming decades , from feeding a growing middle-class population worldwide that wants to enjoy the same variety of food that Americans enjoy at the same low prices , to tackling climate change , to reducing the dangers factory farming poses to public health .
Progress on lab-grown meat is progress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have .
Sign up for the Future Perfect newsletter and we ’ ll send you a roundup of ideas and solutions for tackling the world ’ s biggest challenges — and how to get better at doing good .

Currently, farms around the world produce chicken for sale by raising fast-growing chicken breeds in batches of tens of thousands, tightly packed in warehouses that are a public health hazard, a fire hazard, a worker safety hazard, and a hazard to the well-being of the chickens themselves.
What if instead we could grow the meat without the chickens?
Researchers all over the world have been chasing that dream, of “lab-grown” or “cultured” meat, for years. Two weeks ago, lab-grown meat took one step closer to reality as the Singapore Food Agency approved the sale of cultured chicken meat grown in bioreactors, becoming the first agency in the world to issue such an approval. Now, not long after the approval, the chicken is on the menu at a Singapore restaurant called 1880 as part of a multi-course dinner, including chicken dishes from China, Brazil and the United States.
Sign up for the Meat/Less newsletter course Want to eat less meat but don’t know where to start? Sign up for Vox’s five-day newsletter full of practical tips — and food for thought — to incorporate more plant-based food into your diet.
There are a few other places in the world where lab-grown meat will soon be available to customers, such as an experimental restaurant in Israel which is closed to the public temporarily under coronavirus restrictions. But the Singapore restaurant marks the first time lab-grown meat has been approved by a regulatory authority for commercial sale.
It’s a big step forward for a technology that stands to bring a desperately needed change to how the world eats.
Lab-grown meat, explained
Lab-grown chicken is meant to be physically identical to chicken from slaughtered animals. It’s made of genuine chicken cells, but it’s grown on a cell-growth scaffold in a factory instead of growing in a live animal. (This approach differs from plant-based meats like the Impossible Burger or Beyond Meat, which use plant proteins to create products that taste like meat; plant-based meat often tastes very similar to the meat products it replaces, but it is not identical on a cellular level.)
The same approach can be used for beef, pork, and other animal products, but for several reasons, chickens are the most appealing place to start. First, chickens represent most of the animals raised and killed for their meat in the US, and they are raised in particularly appalling conditions — making them a good first target in the effort to coax Americans away from factory-farmed food. Second, the biggest challenge for lab-grown meat so far has been getting the structure of the meat right: Lab-grown products don’t yet have the texture of tissue produced inside an animal. That would make a lab-grown steak disappointing, but it’s less of a limitation for many chicken products.
To grow a lab-grown product, chicken cells are taken from a real live chicken. The process doesn’t involve killing the animals, so producers hope they can win buy-in from vegetarians and vegans — though the target market for lab-grown meat products is mostly meat-eaters, not vegetarians. These chicken cells are then immersed in a liquid solution known as a “growth medium” that encourages the cells to multiply. Today, a serum from fetal cows is used as the growth medium, but the product’s manufacturers say they hope to switch to a plant-based one. Inside the bioreactor, the cells grow until they’ve produced chicken meat — without the chicken.
“A new space race for the future of food is underway,” said Good Food Institute Executive Director Bruce Friedrich in a statement when Singapore announced its approval of Eat Just’s chicken. “Cultivated meat will mark an enormous advance in our efforts to create a food supply that is safe, secure, and sustainable, and Singapore is leading the way on this transition.”
Timelines for lab-grown meat
Getting lab-grown meat to consumers would be an enormous win for the climate and for animals. Proponents believe it might be the most feasible way to end factory farming and make our food production system sustainable. But there are still substantial barriers to widespread access to lab-grown meat.
The first is that the technical challenges of bringing lab-grown meat to the table are far from solved, despite years of effort and investment. Getting meat in a lab to imitate the texture and structure of muscle on an animal is very difficult. No one has yet figured out how to imitate, say, a steak — thus the focus on products like chicken bits, where structure is much less important.
Even replacing chicken products with lab-grown chicken products that don’t require much internal tissue structure would be an enormous achievement for the world. But there are still many hurdles to reaching that point. The existing projects, like Eat Just’s in Singapore, are small in scale, producing relatively tiny quantities of meat for specialty dishes. The meat industry kills tens of billions of animals annually. Matching that will be a challenge.
“With the numbers we have today,” UC Berkeley’s Ricardo San Martin, who studies meat alternatives, told me last year, “we don’t see how [lab-grown meat] can scale up and deliver products soon at a competitive price. Besides all of the technological hurdles, the scaling up can be very complex. So far, I haven’t seen a medium-sized operation cultivating these kinds of cells for this purpose. It’s very hard, and with what we know today, maybe it’s not the right approach.”
The next challenge — very much related to the challenge of scaling — is cost. Lab-grown meat is much more expensive than factory farming. As cell-based products grow, they’ll discover new cost savings and benefit from economies of scale. Factory farming, though, also benefits from the ability to expand and discover new cost efficiencies, and through more than half a century of optimizations, it has succeeded at making factory-farmed chicken incredibly cheap.
“The most processed cheap forms of chicken are just insanely cheap, relative to historical standards and relative to other food products on the market,” Lewis Bollard, who researches animals at the Open Philanthropy Project, told me this August. “The chicken industry has managed to cut all their corners, they don’t pay their environmental bills, they don’t pay for a lot of the public health hazards they cause. They have managed to produce a product that is just artificially cheap and hard to compete with.”
But despite the many challenges ahead, the restaurant launch in Singapore is cause for celebration. The world’s food system faces many challenges in the upcoming decades, from feeding a growing middle-class population worldwide that wants to enjoy the same variety of food that Americans enjoy at the same low prices, to tackling climate change, to reducing the dangers factory farming poses to public health. Progress on lab-grown meat is progress toward solving one of the biggest problems we have.
Sign up for the Future Perfect newsletter and we’ll send you a roundup of ideas and solutions for tackling the world’s biggest challenges — and how to get better at doing good.


vox--2020-12-02--Why tens of thousands of farmers are blocking roads into India’s capital city

More than 200,000 Indian farmers and their supporters have occupied the streets of New Delhi for days in protest against three new agriculture reform laws , blocking major highways into the capital city and vowing to remain camped there until the laws are repealed .
The legislation , enacted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi ’ s Bharatiya Janata Party ( BJP ) in late September , aims to deregulate India ’ s agricultural industry in a move the government says will both provide farmers with more autonomy over choosing prices and make the agricultural sector more efficient .
Under the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goods and make contracts with independent buyers outside of government-sanctioned marketplaces , which have long served as the primary locations for farmers to do business .
Modi and members of his party believe these reforms will help India modernize and improve its farming industry , which will mean greater freedom and prosperity for farmers .
Although the government has said it will not drop minimum support prices for essential crops like grain , which the Indian government has set and guaranteed for decades , the farmers are concerned they will disappear .
Without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be at the mercy of large corporations that will pay extremely low prices for essential crops , plunging them into debt and financial ruin .
“ Farmers have so much passion because they know that these three laws are like death warrants for them , ” Abhimanyu Kohar , coordinator of the National Farmer ’ s Alliance , a federation of more than 180 nonpolitical farm organizations across India , told me in an interview .
“ Our farmers are doing this movement for our future , for our very survival.
” The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cause for concern .
A 2018 study by India ’ s National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development found that more than half of farmers in India are in debt .
More than 20,000 farmers in the country died by suicide from 2018 to 2019 , and though there is considerable debate , several studies suggest that farmers ’ indebtedness has been a major factor .
In comments made November 30 from the banks of India ’ s sacred Ganges River , Modi sought to reassure farmers that the new laws would benefit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only served to unshackle our farmers but also have given them new rights and opportunities , ” Modi said .
Modi has blamed India ’ s opposition parties , which have been speaking out strongly against the bills , for agitating the farmers by spreading rumors .
“ I know that decades of falsehood do put apprehensions in the minds of farmers , I want to say this from the bank of Mother Ganga — we are not working with the intention of deceiving .
Our intentions are as holy as the water @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
The farmers , who are mostly from the nearby Punjab and Haryana regions , began marching to New Delhi by the thousands in tractors and cars on November 26 to demand the prime minister repeal the laws .
They were met by large numbers of police in riot gear , who used tear gas , water canons , and batons to keep the protesters at the border of New Delhi and Haryana state .
Protests restarted November 27 , but following the clashes , authorities allowed the farmers to enter New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ location later that evening .
A delegation of farmers held talks on December 1 with BJP officials , including Minister of Agriculture Narendra Singh Tomar , but the negotiations were unsuccessful .
“ The government did not agree to our points and rejected our demands outright , ” Chanda Singh , a member of the farmers ’ delegation , told Al Jazeera , referring to the farmers ’ insistence that the three laws be repealed .
“ We will continue our protest unless our demands are met , ” Singh said .
Tomar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more favorable view of the talks , telling Indian news agency ANI that the meeting went well .
Another round of talks with a greater number of farmers is scheduled for December 3 .
Whether those talks will appease the concerns of the farmers , though , remains to be seen .
“ In Western countries agriculture is a source of business , but in India , agriculture is a source of livelihood , ” Kohar , the National Farmer ’ s Alliance coordinator , told me .
“ In India , crops @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the laws are “ a necessary tough call , ” but farmers aren ’ t convinced Agriculture plays a crucial role in the Indian economy , as nearly 60 percent of India ’ s 1.3 billion people depend on farming for their livelihoods .
But farming is also incredibly unproductive , as the sector accounts for only about 15 percent of India ’ s GDP .
By allowing farmers to sell to whomever they want , the government hopes to attract private business to agriculture , which will benefit some farmers .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” said Sadanand Dhume , a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and an expert on South Asia .
“ This should ’ ve been done 20 years ago .
It ’ s a small part of a much larger and much more complex solution to a problem.
” The problem , Dhume explained , is that there are simply too many farmers in India .
He and others have argued that the country should make a similar transition away from farming to manufacturing , like China did .
But so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to generate the kind of manufacturing growth needed to support millions of farmers in their transition to new work .
Manufacturing accounted for only about 17 percent of India ’ s GDP in 2020 .
As Dhume said , “ If the economy were creating jobs , then there wouldn ’ t be as much anxiety .
In India , because job creation has been so weak , the thought of losing the guarantee is unsettling for farmers.
” Part of the farmers ’ fear is also due to the urgency of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Covid-19 pandemic has made farmers even more alarmed .
The Indian economy shrank 7.5 percent from July to September compared with the same period in 2019 .
A June survey by the All India Manufacturers Organization found that more than a third of small- and medium-sized businesses were making plans to close , despite receiving aid from the government .
The farmers , who have brought enough supplies with them to last for at least six months , are determined to stay until Modi ’ s government repeals the new farm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into law , among other demands .
“ We want everything in writing , ” Kohar said .

More than 200,000 Indian farmers and their supporters have occupied the streets of New Delhi for days in protest against three new agriculture reform laws, blocking major highways into the capital city and vowing to remain camped there until the laws are repealed.
The legislation, enacted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in late September, aims to deregulate India’s agricultural industry in a move the government says will both provide farmers with more autonomy over choosing prices and make the agricultural sector more efficient.
Under the new policies, farmers will now sell goods and make contracts with independent buyers outside of government-sanctioned marketplaces, which have long served as the primary locations for farmers to do business. Modi and members of his party believe these reforms will help India modernize and improve its farming industry, which will mean greater freedom and prosperity for farmers.
A watershed moment in the history of Indian agriculture! Congratulations to our hardworking farmers on the passage of key bills in Parliament, which will ensure a complete transformation of the agriculture sector as well as empower crores of farmers. — Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) September 20, 2020
But the protesting farmers aren’t convinced.
Although the government has said it will not drop minimum support prices for essential crops like grain, which the Indian government has set and guaranteed for decades, the farmers are concerned they will disappear. Without them, the farmers believe they will be at the mercy of large corporations that will pay extremely low prices for essential crops, plunging them into debt and financial ruin.
“Farmers have so much passion because they know that these three laws are like death warrants for them,” Abhimanyu Kohar, coordinator of the National Farmer’s Alliance, a federation of more than 180 nonpolitical farm organizations across India, told me in an interview. “Our farmers are doing this movement for our future, for our very survival.”
The distressed state of farmers in India is cause for concern. A 2018 study by India’s National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development found that more than half of farmers in India are in debt. More than 20,000 farmers in the country died by suicide from 2018 to 2019, and though there is considerable debate, several studies suggest that farmers’ indebtedness has been a major factor.
In comments made November 30 from the banks of India’s sacred Ganges River, Modi sought to reassure farmers that the new laws would benefit them. “These reforms have not only served to unshackle our farmers but also have given them new rights and opportunities,” Modi said.
Modi has blamed India’s opposition parties, which have been speaking out strongly against the bills, for agitating the farmers by spreading rumors.
“I know that decades of falsehood do put apprehensions in the minds of farmers, I want to say this from the bank of Mother Ganga — we are not working with the intention of deceiving. Our intentions are as holy as the water of the river Ganga,” Modi said.
The farmers, who are mostly from the nearby Punjab and Haryana regions, began marching to New Delhi by the thousands in tractors and cars on November 26 to demand the prime minister repeal the laws. They were met by large numbers of police in riot gear, who used tear gas, water canons, and batons to keep the protesters at the border of New Delhi and Haryana state.
Protest against Farm Laws in India. Water canons used against farmers in Haryana India pic.twitter.com/446hbrPBhJ — News Kashmir 24/7 (@newskashmir24) November 26, 2020
Protests restarted November 27, but following the clashes, authorities allowed the farmers to enter New Delhi and peacefully assemble at an approved location later that evening.
Some of the iconic pictures from the organic and massive protests led by Farmers in India today. Even though the central government tried everything to scare them off, the Farmers bravely faced it to register their opposition to the pro-corporate, Farm Bills. pic.twitter.com/04z6jG8e0n — Kawalpreet Kaur (@kawalpreetdu) November 27, 2020
A delegation of farmers held talks on December 1 with BJP officials, including Minister of Agriculture Narendra Singh Tomar, but the negotiations were unsuccessful.
“The government did not agree to our points and rejected our demands outright,” Chanda Singh, a member of the farmers’ delegation, told Al Jazeera, referring to the farmers’ insistence that the three laws be repealed. “We will continue our protest unless our demands are met,” Singh said.
Tomar, however, appeared to have a more favorable view of the talks, telling Indian news agency ANI that the meeting went well. Another round of talks with a greater number of farmers is scheduled for December 3.
Whether those talks will appease the concerns of the farmers, though, remains to be seen.
“In Western countries agriculture is a source of business, but in India, agriculture is a source of livelihood,” Kohar, the National Farmer’s Alliance coordinator, told me. “In India, crops support their living.”
Some experts say the laws are “a necessary tough call,” but farmers aren’t convinced
Agriculture plays a crucial role in the Indian economy, as nearly 60 percent of India’s 1.3 billion people depend on farming for their livelihoods. But farming is also incredibly unproductive, as the sector accounts for only about 15 percent of India’s GDP.
By allowing farmers to sell to whomever they want, the government hopes to attract private business to agriculture, which will benefit some farmers.
“It’s a necessary tough call,” said Sadanand Dhume, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and an expert on South Asia. “This should’ve been done 20 years ago. It’s a small part of a much larger and much more complex solution to a problem.”
The problem, Dhume explained, is that there are simply too many farmers in India. He and others have argued that the country should make a similar transition away from farming to manufacturing, like China did.
But so far, India has not been able to generate the kind of manufacturing growth needed to support millions of farmers in their transition to new work. Manufacturing accounted for only about 17 percent of India’s GDP in 2020.
As Dhume said, “If the economy were creating jobs, then there wouldn’t be as much anxiety. In India, because job creation has been so weak, the thought of losing the guarantee is unsettling for farmers.”
Part of the farmers’ fear is also due to the urgency of the current moment, when the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic has made farmers even more alarmed. The Indian economy shrank 7.5 percent from July to September compared with the same period in 2019. A June survey by the All India Manufacturers Organization found that more than a third of small- and medium-sized businesses were making plans to close, despite receiving aid from the government.
The farmers, who have brought enough supplies with them to last for at least six months, are determined to stay until Modi’s government repeals the new farm bills and enshrines the minimum support price into law, among other demands.
“We want everything in writing,” Kohar said.


vox--2020-12-02--A surprising number of government agencies buy cellphone location data. Lawmakers want to know why.

The Department of Homeland Security ( DHS ) will investigate its own use of location data after it was revealed that Customs and Border Protection ( CBP ) was purchasing cellphone location data from commercial vendors for use in its work .
The DHS ’ s Office of the Inspector General recently informed Sens .
Sherrod Brown , Ed Markey , Brian Schatz , Elizabeth Warren , and Ron Wyden — all Democrats — that it would audit the agency ’ s policies regarding cellphone surveillance .
The OIG ’ s letter comes in response to those senators ’ request @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has refused to reveal much about how it uses the data purchased from commercial vendors other than confirming publicly available information that such contracts with those vendors exist .
The type of location data in question is collected from millions of phones , with most people unaware that their movements are being tracked this way and unable to find out who has access to that information .
There are few laws regulating location data companies , and government agencies have used this to their advantage , spending millions to gain access to this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this practice , and privacy-minded lawmakers have pushed for investigations and laws to regulate it .
Location data purchased from private companies gives government agencies access to potentially enormous amounts of personal data from millions of people who aren ’ t suspected of or involved in any crimes .
While there are few laws regarding private companies ’ collection and use of this data , law enforcement typically has to have a warrant and show cause to get this information on its own .
Obtaining it through a private vendor with no such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those constraints , and currently a legal gray area .
“ If federal agencies are tracking American citizens without warrants , the public deserves answers and accountability , ” Wyden said in a statement sent to Recode .
“ I won ’ t accept anything less than a thorough and swift inspector general investigation that sheds light on CBP ’ s phone location data surveillance program.
” CBP is one of several law enforcement and government agencies that purchase location data from private companies — data they otherwise would not have such easy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may forbid them from obtaining .
The Wall Street Journal reported in February that the DHS ’ s CBP and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) arms used location data from a company called Venntel to locate undocumented immigrants and routes they used to cross the border .
Records show that CBP has given Venntel hundreds of thousands of dollars to access its location database .
“ CBP is not above the law and refused to answer questions about purchasing people ’ s mobile location history without a warrant — including from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Warren added .
“ I ’ m glad that the Inspector General agreed to our request to investigate this potentially unconstitutional abuse of power by the CBP because we must protect the public ’ s Fourth Amendment rights to be free from warrantless searches.
” The agency has maintained that it only uses a limited amount of anonymized data in accordance with its policies , but experts say it ’ s not difficult to identify a device ’ s owner given enough information about where that device has been and when .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how this data is collected that it ’ s doubtful anyone knows for sure if it even follows whatever policies agencies have in place .
Not to be outdone , the American Civil Liberties Union ( ACLU ) announced on Wednesday that it is suing the DHS to force the agency to make its records over phone location data purchases public after the agency ducked its Freedom of Information Act requests .
“ It ’ s critical we uncover how federal agencies are accessing bulk databases of Americans ’ location data and why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ staff attorney with the ACLU ’ s Speech , Technology , and Privacy Project , said in a statement sent to Recode .
“ There can be no accountability without transparency.
” The DHS is not the only government agency to purchase and use Venntel ’ s services .
Venntel also has contracts with the FBI and the DEA .
The Internal Revenue Service also tried Venntel in 2017 and 2018 but apparently didn ’ t find the data useful in its work , the Wall Street Journal reported .
And Venntel is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ works with the government in this way : X-Mode and Babel Street also have deals with government agencies and their contractors .
Other parts of the government are fighting back .
In June , the House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Reform began investigating “ the collection and sale of sensitive mobile phone location data ” to federal agencies for law enforcement purposes .
The IRS is also in the middle of an audit of its use of Venntel , prompted by another request from Wyden and Warren .
In 2018 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States that law enforcement couldn ’ t buy cellphone tower data without a warrant , and the FCC recently issued hundreds of millions of dollars in fines to Verizon , AT & T , and Sprint/T-Mobile for selling tower data to private companies without customer knowledge or consent .
The kind of data Venntel sells , the company says , comes from other means : typically , trackers placed in mobile apps .
But there are other sources as well .
Location data companies also work with other companies that supply this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ app developers , making it hard for anyone — including their own customers — to know exactly what they have and where they got it .
Venntel , for example , is a subsidiary of Gravy Analytics , which says it has data location information from “ tens of thousands of apps ” acquired through “ many different data partners , ” giving it access to “ billions of daily location signals.
” Venntel does provide device owners with a way to “ opt-out ” of having their location data collected by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know their device ’ s mobile identifier ( Venntel suggests downloading an app to find out ) and then making the opt-out request every time that identifier is reset — which Apple and Android devices now allow customers to do as a privacy-preserving measure .
Users must also have cookies enabled on their browser when submitting the request .
It remains to be seen what , if anything , the DHS ’ s investigation of itself will reveal or do , or if the ACLU ’ s lawsuit will be successful .
Either @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sale of our location data gives data brokers a tremendous amount of information about us , which , in turn , can be used in all kinds of ways by all kinds of purchasers — including the government .
Your privacy options , by contrast , are limited .
Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network .
All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists .

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will investigate its own use of location data after it was revealed that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) was purchasing cellphone location data from commercial vendors for use in its work.
The DHS’s Office of the Inspector General recently informed Sens. Sherrod Brown, Ed Markey, Brian Schatz, Elizabeth Warren, and Ron Wyden — all Democrats — that it would audit the agency’s policies regarding cellphone surveillance. The OIG’s letter comes in response to those senators’ request for an investigation last October. CBP has refused to reveal much about how it uses the data purchased from commercial vendors other than confirming publicly available information that such contracts with those vendors exist.
The type of location data in question is collected from millions of phones, with most people unaware that their movements are being tracked this way and unable to find out who has access to that information. There are few laws regulating location data companies, and government agencies have used this to their advantage, spending millions to gain access to this information. Privacy advocates have long decried this practice, and privacy-minded lawmakers have pushed for investigations and laws to regulate it.
Location data purchased from private companies gives government agencies access to potentially enormous amounts of personal data from millions of people who aren’t suspected of or involved in any crimes. While there are few laws regarding private companies’ collection and use of this data, law enforcement typically has to have a warrant and show cause to get this information on its own. Obtaining it through a private vendor with no such restrictions is a way to get around those constraints, and currently a legal gray area.
“If federal agencies are tracking American citizens without warrants, the public deserves answers and accountability,” Wyden said in a statement sent to Recode. “I won’t accept anything less than a thorough and swift inspector general investigation that sheds light on CBP’s phone location data surveillance program.”
CBP is one of several law enforcement and government agencies that purchase location data from private companies — data they otherwise would not have such easy access to and which their own rules may forbid them from obtaining. The Wall Street Journal reported in February that the DHS’s CBP and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arms used location data from a company called Venntel to locate undocumented immigrants and routes they used to cross the border. Records show that CBP has given Venntel hundreds of thousands of dollars to access its location database.
“CBP is not above the law and refused to answer questions about purchasing people’s mobile location history without a warrant — including from shady data brokers like Venntel,” Warren added. “I’m glad that the Inspector General agreed to our request to investigate this potentially unconstitutional abuse of power by the CBP because we must protect the public’s Fourth Amendment rights to be free from warrantless searches.”
The agency has maintained that it only uses a limited amount of anonymized data in accordance with its policies, but experts say it’s not difficult to identify a device’s owner given enough information about where that device has been and when. And there’s so little transparency in how this data is collected that it’s doubtful anyone knows for sure if it even follows whatever policies agencies have in place.
Not to be outdone, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced on Wednesday that it is suing the DHS to force the agency to make its records over phone location data purchases public after the agency ducked its Freedom of Information Act requests.
“It’s critical we uncover how federal agencies are accessing bulk databases of Americans’ location data and why,” Nathan Freed Wessler, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Technology, and Privacy Project, said in a statement sent to Recode. “There can be no accountability without transparency.”
The DHS is not the only government agency to purchase and use Venntel’s services. Venntel also has contracts with the FBI and the DEA. The Internal Revenue Service also tried Venntel in 2017 and 2018 but apparently didn’t find the data useful in its work, the Wall Street Journal reported. And Venntel is not the only location data company that works with the government in this way: X-Mode and Babel Street also have deals with government agencies and their contractors.
Other parts of the government are fighting back. In June, the House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Reform began investigating “the collection and sale of sensitive mobile phone location data” to federal agencies for law enforcement purposes. The IRS is also in the middle of an audit of its use of Venntel, prompted by another request from Wyden and Warren.
In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in Carpenter v. United States that law enforcement couldn’t buy cellphone tower data without a warrant, and the FCC recently issued hundreds of millions of dollars in fines to Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint/T-Mobile for selling tower data to private companies without customer knowledge or consent.
The kind of data Venntel sells, the company says, comes from other means: typically, trackers placed in mobile apps. But there are other sources as well. Location data companies also work with other companies that supply this data or purchase it directly from the app developers, making it hard for anyone — including their own customers — to know exactly what they have and where they got it. Venntel, for example, is a subsidiary of Gravy Analytics, which says it has data location information from “tens of thousands of apps” acquired through “many different data partners,” giving it access to “billions of daily location signals.”
Venntel does provide device owners with a way to “opt-out” of having their location data collected by the company, but it requires users to know their device’s mobile identifier (Venntel suggests downloading an app to find out) and then making the opt-out request every time that identifier is reset — which Apple and Android devices now allow customers to do as a privacy-preserving measure. Users must also have cookies enabled on their browser when submitting the request.
It remains to be seen what, if anything, the DHS’s investigation of itself will reveal or do, or if the ACLU’s lawsuit will be successful. Either way, unregulated and persistent collection and sale of our location data gives data brokers a tremendous amount of information about us, which, in turn, can be used in all kinds of ways by all kinds of purchasers — including the government. Your privacy options, by contrast, are limited.
Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network. All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists.


vox--2020-12-02--China and Australia are in a nasty diplomatic spat over a fake tweet — and real war crimes

A fake image tweeted by a Chinese diplomat has caused a massive rift between Australia and China — and has focused global attention on real war crimes the Australian military committed in Afghanistan .
Zhao Lijian , a Chinese Foreign Ministry official who seems to rejoice in trolling his opponents , tweeted a gruesome picture on Sunday of a grinning Australian soldier holding a knife to an Afghan child ’ s neck .
The child ’ s face was covered by Australia ’ s flag in the image , and below it is the caption : “ Don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bring you peace !
” The doctored , computer-generated image was created by Chinese nationalist artist Wuheqilin , but it was inspired by a real event .
Last month , Australia released the Brereton report , the result of a four-year inquiry into war crimes committed by the nation ’ s elite Special Air Services while fighting in Afghanistan .
Among the report ’ s shocking allegations was that soldiers were involved in the murder of 39 Afghan civilians , none of which occurred during battle .
Senior commanders allegedly prompted junior officers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ blooding , ” and weapons were planted on the dead captives to justify their executions .
The report sent shock waves through the Australian public , but it didn ’ t dominate global news .
That is , until Zhao ’ s trolling tweet turned the subject of Australian war crimes into an international diplomatic spat , forcing the Australian government to respond and launching the story into the global headlines .
“ It is utterly outrageous and it can not be justified on any basis whatsoever , ” Australian Prime Minister @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The Chinese government should be utterly ashamed of this post .
It diminishes them in the world ’ s eyes .
...
It is a false image and a terrible slur on our great defense forces.
” Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne also demanded an apology from Beijing .
That isn ’ t likely to happen .
“ The Australian side has been reacting so strongly to my colleague ’ s tweet , ” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said during a Monday briefing .
“ Why is that ?
Do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Afghan civilians is justified but the condemnation of such ruthless brutality is not ?
Afghan lives matter !
” Of course , China blasting another nation ’ s human rights violations is rather rich , not least because it has imprisoned up to 2 million Uighur Muslims in concentration camps .
Which is why it ’ s best to look at the Twitter-instigated spat less as Beijing expressing genuine concern over war crimes and more as part of a years-long diplomatic and trade fight between China and Australia — one that isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The act by Zhao represents a further escalation in the war of words between Canberra and Beijing , and this is in the context of deteriorating bilateral relations over the last few years , ” said Adam Ni of the China Policy Centre in Australia ’ s capital .
“ It ’ s probably the worst it ’ s been in a long time — in decades , in fact.
” Australia has opposed a rising China .
China doesn ’ t like that .
Australia has never liked China ’ s increased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in its region .
For example , China ’ s military started building artificial islands in the South China Sea in order to assert a territorial claim to the disputed body of water .
Australia , as one of the Asia-Pacific region ’ s most powerful players , didn ’ t take too kindly to that .
Beijing ’ s political aggressiveness also bothered Canberra .
In 2017 , Australia banned all foreign donations to political campaigns after reports showed China had tried to influence the nation ’ s political process .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country to block the Chinese telecommunication giants Huawei and ZTE from its 5G network .
Their relations have only worsened in 2020 .
Australia in April called for an investigation into China ’ s handling of the early days of the coronavirus pandemic , when Beijing obfuscated evidence of a growing problem after the virus originated in Wuhan .
China bristled , with the state-run Global Times newspaper in April accusing Prime Minister Morrison of “ panda bashing ” and blasting the Australian “ government ’ s adventurism to fiddle with this mutually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of rational thought and common sense.
” The following month , China retaliated by slashing Australian beef imports and placing tariffs on more than 80 percent of Australia ’ s barley imports to China .
Then in November , Beijing took it a step further by imposing tariffs up to 200 percent — that ’ s not a typo — on Australian wine .
Some experts expect further trade escalations , with China likely targeting Australian sugar , lobster , coal , and copper ore .
The Australian newspaper this week said Canberra-Beijing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 50 years .
At this moment there ’ s no off-ramp for the increasing strife , but it ’ s clear Australia isn ’ t happy about the situation .
“ There are undoubtedly tensions that exist between China and Australia , ” Morrison said in his Monday statement .
“ But this is not how you deal with them.
” Nevertheless , the latest spat has shined a spotlight on an uncomfortable reality for Australia : the gruesome actions of some members of its military during the war in Afghanistan .
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alleged war crimes says The Brereton report released on November 10 , officially titled the “ Inspector-General of the Australian Defense Force Afghanistan Inquiry Report , ” is chock-full of damning revelations .
Three in particular stand out within the document ’ s 465 pages , many of which are redacted in the public version .
The main allegation is that 25 current or former members of Australia ’ s special forces killed 39 individuals and “ cruelly treated ” two others , in a total of 23 incidents in Afghanistan .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decisions made under pressure in the heat of battle , ” the report reads .
“ The cases in which it has been found that there is credible information of a war crime are ones in which it was or should have been plain that the person killed was a non-combatant.
” One of the incidents — heavily redacted in the document — is “ possibly the most disgraceful episode in Australia ’ s military history , ” per the report .
Another allegation is that there was a culture in the special @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” younger officers , essentially a grisly form of hazing and initiation .
“ There is credible information that junior soldiers were required by their patrol commanders to shoot a prisoner , in order to achieve the soldier ’ s first kill , in a practice that was known as ‘ blooding , ’ ” the report describes .
“ This would happen after the target compound had been secured , and local nationals had been secured as ‘ persons under control.
’ Typically , the patrol commander would take a person under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would then be directed to kill the person under control.
” The third major allegation , related to the second , is that officers placed weapons — known as “ throwdowns ” — on the dead bodies to form part of a cover story for the killing .
That process was “ created for the purposes of operational reporting and to deflect scrutiny .
This was reinforced with a code of silence , ” the report reads .
Clearly , there were larger cultural problems within Australia ’ s elite forces serving in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Australia revealed an actual 2009 photo showing an unnamed soldier drinking out of a dead Taliban member ’ s prosthetic leg in an authorized military bar in Afghanistan .
Another real picture showed two soldiers dancing with the same leg .
While China may be among the worst messengers to lambaste Australia ’ s treatment of Afghans during the war , the horrors Beijing is pointing at are very , very real .

A fake image tweeted by a Chinese diplomat has caused a massive rift between Australia and China — and has focused global attention on real war crimes the Australian military committed in Afghanistan.
Zhao Lijian, a Chinese Foreign Ministry official who seems to rejoice in trolling his opponents, tweeted a gruesome picture on Sunday of a grinning Australian soldier holding a knife to an Afghan child’s neck. The child’s face was covered by Australia’s flag in the image, and below it is the caption: “Don’t be afraid, we are coming to bring you peace!”
The doctored, computer-generated image was created by Chinese nationalist artist Wuheqilin, but it was inspired by a real event.
Last month, Australia released the Brereton report, the result of a four-year inquiry into war crimes committed by the nation’s elite Special Air Services while fighting in Afghanistan.
Among the report’s shocking allegations was that soldiers were involved in the murder of 39 Afghan civilians, none of which occurred during battle. Senior commanders allegedly prompted junior officers to kill prisoners in a process called “blooding,” and weapons were planted on the dead captives to justify their executions.
The report sent shock waves through the Australian public, but it didn’t dominate global news. That is, until Zhao’s trolling tweet turned the subject of Australian war crimes into an international diplomatic spat, forcing the Australian government to respond and launching the story into the global headlines.
“It is utterly outrageous and it cannot be justified on any basis whatsoever,” Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison told reporters on Monday. “The Chinese government should be utterly ashamed of this post. It diminishes them in the world’s eyes. ... It is a false image and a terrible slur on our great defense forces.” Australian Foreign Minister Marise Payne also demanded an apology from Beijing.
That isn’t likely to happen. “The Australian side has been reacting so strongly to my colleague’s tweet,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said during a Monday briefing. “Why is that? Do they think that their merciless killing of Afghan civilians is justified but the condemnation of such ruthless brutality is not? Afghan lives matter!”
Of course, China blasting another nation’s human rights violations is rather rich, not least because it has imprisoned up to 2 million Uighur Muslims in concentration camps. Which is why it’s best to look at the Twitter-instigated spat less as Beijing expressing genuine concern over war crimes and more as part of a years-long diplomatic and trade fight between China and Australia — one that isn’t going away anytime soon.
“The act by Zhao represents a further escalation in the war of words between Canberra and Beijing, and this is in the context of deteriorating bilateral relations over the last few years,” said Adam Ni of the China Policy Centre in Australia’s capital. “It’s probably the worst it’s been in a long time — in decades, in fact.”
Australia has opposed a rising China. China doesn’t like that.
Australia has never liked China’s increased assertiveness in the world, and particularly in its region. For example, China’s military started building artificial islands in the South China Sea in order to assert a territorial claim to the disputed body of water. Australia, as one of the Asia-Pacific region’s most powerful players, didn’t take too kindly to that.
Beijing’s political aggressiveness also bothered Canberra. In 2017, Australia banned all foreign donations to political campaigns after reports showed China had tried to influence the nation’s political process. The following year, Australia became the first country to block the Chinese telecommunication giants Huawei and ZTE from its 5G network.
Their relations have only worsened in 2020.
Australia in April called for an investigation into China’s handling of the early days of the coronavirus pandemic, when Beijing obfuscated evidence of a growing problem after the virus originated in Wuhan. China bristled, with the state-run Global Times newspaper in April accusing Prime Minister Morrison of “panda bashing” and blasting the Australian “government’s adventurism to fiddle with this mutually beneficial comprehensive strategic partnership is in defiance of rational thought and common sense.”
The following month, China retaliated by slashing Australian beef imports and placing tariffs on more than 80 percent of Australia’s barley imports to China. Then in November, Beijing took it a step further by imposing tariffs up to 200 percent — that’s not a typo — on Australian wine. Some experts expect further trade escalations, with China likely targeting Australian sugar, lobster, coal, and copper ore.
The Australian newspaper this week said Canberra-Beijing relations were at their lowest point in 50 years. At this moment there’s no off-ramp for the increasing strife, but it’s clear Australia isn’t happy about the situation. “There are undoubtedly tensions that exist between China and Australia,” Morrison said in his Monday statement. “But this is not how you deal with them.”
Nevertheless, the latest spat has shined a spotlight on an uncomfortable reality for Australia: the gruesome actions of some members of its military during the war in Afghanistan.
What the Australian military’s report on alleged war crimes says
The Brereton report released on November 10, officially titled the “Inspector-General of the Australian Defense Force Afghanistan Inquiry Report,” is chock-full of damning revelations. Three in particular stand out within the document’s 465 pages, many of which are redacted in the public version.
The main allegation is that 25 current or former members of Australia’s special forces killed 39 individuals and “cruelly treated” two others, in a total of 23 incidents in Afghanistan.
“None of these are incidents of disputable decisions made under pressure in the heat of battle,” the report reads. “The cases in which it has been found that there is credible information of a war crime are ones in which it was or should have been plain that the person killed was a non-combatant.”
One of the incidents — heavily redacted in the document — is “possibly the most disgraceful episode in Australia’s military history,” per the report. Another allegation is that there was a culture in the special forces serving in Afghanistan of “blooding” younger officers, essentially a grisly form of hazing and initiation.
“There is credible information that junior soldiers were required by their patrol commanders to shoot a prisoner, in order to achieve the soldier’s first kill, in a practice that was known as ‘blooding,’” the report describes. “This would happen after the target compound had been secured, and local nationals had been secured as ‘persons under control.’ Typically, the patrol commander would take a person under control and the junior member, who would then be directed to kill the person under control.”
The third major allegation, related to the second, is that officers placed weapons — known as “throwdowns” — on the dead bodies to form part of a cover story for the killing. That process was “created for the purposes of operational reporting and to deflect scrutiny. This was reinforced with a code of silence,” the report reads.
Clearly, there were larger cultural problems within Australia’s elite forces serving in Afghanistan. On Tuesday, the Guardian Australia revealed an actual 2009 photo showing an unnamed soldier drinking out of a dead Taliban member’s prosthetic leg in an authorized military bar in Afghanistan. Another real picture showed two soldiers dancing with the same leg.
While China may be among the worst messengers to lambaste Australia’s treatment of Afghans during the war, the horrors Beijing is pointing at are very, very real.


vox--2020-12-02--Congress seems ready to pass a bipartisan $908 billion stimulus — if Mitch McConnell says yes

A bipartisan group of senators and members of the House unveiled a new $ 908 billion plan for emergency Covid-19 relief funding on Tuesday .
Now , 24 hours later , there has been more movement on stimulus negotiations than in the past three months .
In a statement Wednesday , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said the framework — with extended unemployment benefits , state and local aid , and small business loans — should be “ used as the basis for immediate bipartisan , bicameral negotiations ” with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a counterproposal of his own among Republicans . )
“ In the spirit of compromise we believe the bipartisan framework introduced by Senators yesterday should be used as the basis for immediate bipartisan , bicameral negotiations , ” Pelosi and Schumer said .
“ Of course , we and others will offer improvements , but the need to act is immediate and we believe that with good-faith negotiations we could come to an agreement.
” The movement from Democrats is significant ; it comes after months of stalemate on stimulus talks , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis as the US sees another surge in cases heading into the winter .
About 14 million Americans receiving unemployment benefits will see those programs expire at the end of the month unless Congress takes action , and cities and states around the country are also facing massive budget shortfalls .
The plan was spearheaded by Joe Manchin ( D-WV ) , Susan Collins ( R-ME ) , and other senators , and supported by the bipartisan House Problem Solvers Caucus .
It ’ s designed as a short-term extension of federal aid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; the funding would extend benefits until April 1 , when many public health experts expect distribution of a vaccine to be well underway .
“ This is going to get us through the most difficult times , ” Manchin said at a Tuesday press conference announcing the framework .
McConnell , too , has made moves after meeting with White House officials on Tuesday to suss out what President Donald Trump wants to come out of a coronavirus relief deal .
Backed by the White House , McConnell ’ s version of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ providing just a one-month extension of unemployment benefits , rather than the three-month extension in the bipartisan proposal .
Pelosi and Schumer backing a cross-party plan isn ’ t the only significant change from past attempts at a deal .
The plan is supported by a number of Republican senators , including Collins , Lisa Murkowski ( AK ) , Mitt Romney ( UT ) , and Bill Cassidy ( LA ) , so it could weaken McConnell ’ s leverage in upcoming negotiations .
On Wednesday , House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it would be “ optimal ” for leadership to wrap up negotiations on a relief package by the weekend , with the end goal being a bill on the floor by next Wednesday or Thursday .
“ [ McConnell ] and I both agree that it would be optimal , if in fact we get to an agreement by the end of this weekend , get that agreement put on paper and memorialized so that we can consider it as early as Wednesday or Thursday of next week , ” Hoyer said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very optimistic.
” With the November election in the rear-view mirror and coronavirus cases spiking across the country , there seems to be new momentum behind getting a deal done .
But there ’ s still a long way to go , and Trump — who has proved the wild card for many a congressional deal — is still very much in the picture .
This new proposal is a $ 908 billion package that repurposes $ 560 billion in unused funds from the CARES Act , the $ 2.2 trillion stimulus package @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this new proposal adds only $ 348 billion in new spending .
It ’ s much smaller than the $ 2.2 trillion revised HEROES Act that House Democrats passed in October , but larger than the $ 500 billion Senate Republicans were proposing in October .
Two large sticking points in negotiations have been whether there should be another round of stimulus checks ( a priority for Pelosi and Trump ) and liability protections for businesses worried about being sued for exposing customers and workers to Covid-19 ( a priority of McConnell ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top on both of these issues ( at least in this initial proposal ) — stimulus checks are not included in this new bipartisan proposal and the framework provided by Sen. Manchin ’ s office notes that the proposal will “ provide short term Federal protection from Coronavirus related lawsuits with the purpose of giving states time to develop their own response.
” Pelosi and Trump have signaled past support for another round of stimulus payments going out to working Americans .
But both seem more interested in getting a narrower package approved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ getting a bill passed quickly .
Here ’ s what made it into the bipartisan proposal : • $ 160 billion for state , local , and tribal governments .
For context , US cities alone are facing a $ 360 billion shortfall and are being forced to pursue austerity measures to balance their budgets .
As Emily Stewart has reported for Vox , state budget shortfalls could exceed $ 500 billion .
In other words , this money could be a drop in the bucket .
State and local government woes have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of priorities — at one point he suggested that states declare bankruptcy .
• $ 180 billion in unemployment insurance ( UI ) .
The CARES Act gave unemployed Americans a weekly $ 600 lifeline on top of state unemployment insurance , a move widely regarded as staving off catastrophe for the millions of Americans who lost their jobs this year .
As Dylan Matthews has reported for Vox , research has shown that “ the average UI recipient is getting 134 percent of their previous salary , ” and it may have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ program expired in August , so any relief will be welcome for those still unemployed .
Congress originally estimated that the UI program would cost $ 260 billion which the Tax Policy Center viewed as an underestimate , so it ’ s likely this extension wouldn ’ t cover the full cost of unemployed workers ’ needs .
The Washington Post reported that this amount would cover an additional $ 300 a week for four months .
• $ 288 billion in support for small businesses .
This support will partially come through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Economic Injury Disaster Loans .
As Forbes has reported , an August 2020 survey from the US census showed that almost 79 percent of small businesses reported being negatively affected by Covid-19 .
• $ 25 billion in rental assistance .
Notably , the new bipartisan proposal only provides for $ 25 billion in rental assistance even as economists are predicting that tenants could owe nearly $ 70 billion in back rent by year ’ s end .
Vox has reported that policy experts and advocates have been pushing for $ 100 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in order to prevent an eviction crisis that could impact as many as 40 million Americans .
The framework also includes $ 45 billion for transportation including airlines and Amtrak , $ 16 billion for vaccine development and more Covid-19 testing and tracing , $ 82 billion in federal education funding , $ 10 billion for the struggling US Postal Service , and $ 10 billion for child care , among other things .
“ This is emergency relief , this is designed to get us through this next quarter , ” Sen. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We know we have more to do , but ... we can not abandon the American people.
” What ’ s next for this proposal With McConnell and the White House backing a skinnier Republican proposal , and Pelosi , Schumer , and the bipartisan group of lawmakers backing the $ 908 billion proposal , the real negotiations will begin .
McConnell ’ s version of an emergency package he sent to his Republican members on Tuesday contains no funding for state and local aid , no money for rental assistance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of unemployment benefits rather than the bipartisan proposal ’ s three-month extension .
McConnell ’ s bill contains $ 332.7 billion for PPP loans , $ 100 billion for education funding , and $ 47 billion for vaccine distribution and testing and tracing .
In the past , the Senate majority leader has capped his bills at $ 500 billion .
With Democrats coming down from their starting point of $ 2.2 trillion with the HEROES Act , it ’ s yet to be seen whether McConnell will also budge from his position @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more leverage in the Senate , Trump is still president until Biden is sworn in on January 20 , and McConnell told reporters he doesn ’ t want to pass anything that Trump won ’ t sign .
In the coming weeks , Collins , Manchin , and the others will have to reach out to a lot of senators to see if they can increase the support for their plan .
But Democrats are also wary of what Trump — still stinging over his election loss and refusing to concede to Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should it reach his desk .
In short , congressional and White House leaders may be talking , but there ’ s a long way to go in a short amount of time before a final deal can be reached .

A bipartisan group of senators and members of the House unveiled a new $908 billion plan for emergency Covid-19 relief funding on Tuesday. Now, 24 hours later, there has been more movement on stimulus negotiations than in the past three months.
In a statement Wednesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said the framework — with extended unemployment benefits, state and local aid, and small business loans — should be “used as the basis for immediate bipartisan, bicameral negotiations” with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. (McConnell on Tuesday started circulating a counterproposal of his own among Republicans.)
“In the spirit of compromise we believe the bipartisan framework introduced by Senators yesterday should be used as the basis for immediate bipartisan, bicameral negotiations,” Pelosi and Schumer said. “Of course, we and others will offer improvements, but the need to act is immediate and we believe that with good-faith negotiations we could come to an agreement.”
The movement from Democrats is significant; it comes after months of stalemate on stimulus talks, and during a critical time in the Covid-19 crisis as the US sees another surge in cases heading into the winter. About 14 million Americans receiving unemployment benefits will see those programs expire at the end of the month unless Congress takes action, and cities and states around the country are also facing massive budget shortfalls.
The plan was spearheaded by Joe Manchin (D-WV), Susan Collins (R-ME), and other senators, and supported by the bipartisan House Problem Solvers Caucus. It’s designed as a short-term extension of federal aid to see the public through the winter; the funding would extend benefits until April 1, when many public health experts expect distribution of a vaccine to be well underway.
“This is going to get us through the most difficult times,” Manchin said at a Tuesday press conference announcing the framework.
McConnell, too, has made moves after meeting with White House officials on Tuesday to suss out what President Donald Trump wants to come out of a coronavirus relief deal. Backed by the White House, McConnell’s version of an emergency package is more limited, providing just a one-month extension of unemployment benefits, rather than the three-month extension in the bipartisan proposal.
Pelosi and Schumer backing a cross-party plan isn’t the only significant change from past attempts at a deal. The plan is supported by a number of Republican senators, including Collins, Lisa Murkowski (AK), Mitt Romney (UT), and Bill Cassidy (LA), so it could weaken McConnell’s leverage in upcoming negotiations.
On Wednesday, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters that he and McConnell agree it would be “optimal” for leadership to wrap up negotiations on a relief package by the weekend, with the end goal being a bill on the floor by next Wednesday or Thursday.
“[McConnell] and I both agree that it would be optimal, if in fact we get to an agreement by the end of this weekend, get that agreement put on paper and memorialized so that we can consider it as early as Wednesday or Thursday of next week,” Hoyer said, adding, “I know that sounds very optimistic.”
With the November election in the rear-view mirror and coronavirus cases spiking across the country, there seems to be new momentum behind getting a deal done. But there’s still a long way to go, and Trump — who has proved the wild card for many a congressional deal — is still very much in the picture.
What’s in the bipartisan proposal
This new proposal is a $908 billion package that repurposes $560 billion in unused funds from the CARES Act, the $2.2 trillion stimulus package that passed in March, meaning that this new proposal adds only $348 billion in new spending. It’s much smaller than the $2.2 trillion revised HEROES Act that House Democrats passed in October, but larger than the $500 billion Senate Republicans were proposing in October.
Two large sticking points in negotiations have been whether there should be another round of stimulus checks (a priority for Pelosi and Trump) and liability protections for businesses worried about being sued for exposing customers and workers to Covid-19 (a priority of McConnell’s). Republicans came out on top on both of these issues (at least in this initial proposal) — stimulus checks are not included in this new bipartisan proposal and the framework provided by Sen. Manchin’s office notes that the proposal will “provide short term Federal protection from Coronavirus related lawsuits with the purpose of giving states time to develop their own response.”
Pelosi and Trump have signaled past support for another round of stimulus payments going out to working Americans. But both seem more interested in getting a narrower package approved, in the interest of timing and getting a bill passed quickly.
Here’s what made it into the bipartisan proposal:
$160 billion for state, local, and tribal governments. For context, US cities alone are facing a $360 billion shortfall and are being forced to pursue austerity measures to balance their budgets. As Emily Stewart has reported for Vox, state budget shortfalls could exceed $500 billion. In other words, this money could be a drop in the bucket. State and local government woes have been lower on McConnell’s list of priorities — at one point he suggested that states declare bankruptcy.
For context, US cities alone are facing a $360 billion shortfall and are being forced to pursue austerity measures to balance their budgets. As Emily Stewart has reported for Vox, state budget shortfalls could exceed $500 billion. In other words, this money could be a drop in the bucket. State and local government woes have been lower on McConnell’s list of priorities — at one point he suggested that states declare bankruptcy. $180 billion in unemployment insurance (UI). The CARES Act gave unemployed Americans a weekly $600 lifeline on top of state unemployment insurance, a move widely regarded as staving off catastrophe for the millions of Americans who lost their jobs this year. As Dylan Matthews has reported for Vox, research has shown that “the average UI recipient is getting 134 percent of their previous salary,” and it may have temporarily lowered the poverty rate.
This program expired in August, so any relief will be welcome for those still unemployed. Congress originally estimated that the UI program would cost $260 billion which the Tax Policy Center viewed as an underestimate, so it’s likely this extension wouldn’t cover the full cost of unemployed workers’ needs. The Washington Post reported that this amount would cover an additional $300 a week for four months.
$288 billion in support for small businesses. This support will partially come through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and Economic Injury Disaster Loans. As Forbes has reported, an August 2020 survey from the US census showed that almost 79 percent of small businesses reported being negatively affected by Covid-19.
This support will partially come through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) and Economic Injury Disaster Loans. As Forbes has reported, an August 2020 survey from the US census showed that almost 79 percent of small businesses reported being negatively affected by Covid-19. $25 billion in rental assistance. Notably, the new bipartisan proposal only provides for $25 billion in rental assistance even as economists are predicting that tenants could owe nearly $70 billion in back rent by year’s end. Vox has reported that policy experts and advocates have been pushing for $100 billion to be included in stimulus negotiations in order to prevent an eviction crisis that could impact as many as 40 million Americans.
The framework also includes $45 billion for transportation including airlines and Amtrak, $16 billion for vaccine development and more Covid-19 testing and tracing, $82 billion in federal education funding, $10 billion for the struggling US Postal Service, and $10 billion for child care, among other things.
“This is emergency relief, this is designed to get us through this next quarter,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) told reporters. “We know we have more to do, but ... we cannot abandon the American people.”
What’s next for this proposal
With McConnell and the White House backing a skinnier Republican proposal, and Pelosi, Schumer, and the bipartisan group of lawmakers backing the $908 billion proposal, the real negotiations will begin.
McConnell’s version of an emergency package he sent to his Republican members on Tuesday contains no funding for state and local aid, no money for rental assistance, and provides just a one-month extension of unemployment benefits rather than the bipartisan proposal’s three-month extension. McConnell’s bill contains $332.7 billion for PPP loans, $100 billion for education funding, and $47 billion for vaccine distribution and testing and tracing. In the past, the Senate majority leader has capped his bills at $500 billion.
With Democrats coming down from their starting point of $2.2 trillion with the HEROES Act, it’s yet to be seen whether McConnell will also budge from his position. Even though the bipartisan group has more leverage in the Senate, Trump is still president until Biden is sworn in on January 20, and McConnell told reporters he doesn’t want to pass anything that Trump won’t sign.
In the coming weeks, Collins, Manchin, and the others will have to reach out to a lot of senators to see if they can increase the support for their plan. But Democrats are also wary of what Trump — still stinging over his election loss and refusing to concede to Biden — will do with a stimulus package should it reach his desk.
In short, congressional and White House leaders may be talking, but there’s a long way to go in a short amount of time before a final deal can be reached.


vox--2020-12-02--Staying safe this winter means a lot of time outside. Here’s how to stay warm.

This winter is going to suck .
We know this because the rest of this year has sucked , but we also know this because the main respite from the suckiness was summer — for those living in much of the northern hemisphere , warmer weather meant that it was far more pleasant to be outside , where the coronavirus is less likely to spread .
But now , winter is coming , and nobody seems to know what to do about it .
America is in the midst of a third surge of Covid-19 cases in a lame duck @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Local governments are closing schools while keeping bars open in attempts to stave off any further economic collapses .
Restaurants that remain open are building elaborate “ outdoor ” dining spaces that are literally just indoor dining spaces .
What we do know , however , is that if you need to leave your home , it ’ s much safer to be doing activities outside than inside somewhere else .
That means that many Americans are going to need to learn how to deal with , and dress for , cold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who are experts in this particular area , for whom brutally cold environments are just part of the job .
Cathy Geiger is a professor at the University of Delaware , and has studied the behavior of sea ice at both the arctic and Antarctic poles for more than three decades .
Having worked on 10 polar expeditions , Geiger ’ s seen a lot ( including some gross frostbite stuff that involves eyelashes ; we ’ ll get to that ) .
For the sake of clarity , because layering for sub-zero @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information will be distilled via a handy question-and-answer format .
There are a couple main tenets of layering that Geiger adheres to .
The first and most important of them is to wear lots of loose layers — the key word here being “ loose.
” That ’ s because the insulated air that circulates between each layer is what ’ s actually keeping you warm .
The more active you plan to be , the fewer layers you should wear .
Another important tip she stresses is that good body circulation is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re wearing 700 layers and you ’ re like the Michelin man and you can ’ t move , all that padding isn ’ t going to do you any good if you block off your circulation , ” she explains .
“ [ If you wear ] four pairs of socks stuffed in a boot , your toes are going to get frostbite because everything ’ s too tight .
There ’ s no blood down there.
” When Geiger goes on an expedition where temperatures can plunge between 30 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she usually layers about four pairs of oversized long johns in moisture-wicking synthetic fabrics or merino wool , a Dickies bib , a Turtle Fur for her neck and face , and at least three pairs of gloves ( the thinnest layer goes on first , the military surplus ones go on last ) , topped with Carhartt coveralls and knee pads .
Over that , she wears an extra-large L.L .
Bean extreme-weather coat shell .
“ The shell stops the cold from breaking through , so it ’ s just like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a personal shelter .
In really cold weather , you want to wrap your body like you would insulate your house.
” What are the best fabrics to use to shield from wind and cold , and how should I layer them ?
Conventional wisdom says to keep away from cotton , because it has virtually zero moisture-wicking properties .
Instead , Geiger says , make sure that the fabric closest to your skin is made of synthetic fabrics or merino wool .
Why are moisture-wicking fabrics so important ?
“ Sweat is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says .
“ The big thing to do is [ move ] slower than you think .
Once you get into the zero digits , you don ’ t want to start running around and warm up so much that you break a sweat.
” And regardless of how you feel about Canada Goose , they ’ ve done hoods right .
Geiger recommends hoods with fur ( or faux fur ) trim because “ fur creates friction that holds back the wind.
” What ’ s the best way to protect my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always be wearing sunblock on your face , but before heading out into a snowy environment , there ’ s one place that people might miss : the underside of their nose .
“ Snow reflects !
” she warns .
Once you ’ re back inside , go for the usual suspects that promise to moisturize : heavy lotions , balms , and Vaseline .
Yes !
And they require their own layering methods , too .
While you probably won ’ t be wearing goggles during your commute to work , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used by arctic researchers to protect your eyes and face .
“ If you put on a baseball cap and [ then ] a snow hat , the ball cap creates a brim , [ and ] it ’ s amazing how much sun that blocks , ” she says .
“ It ’ s a great wind blocker.
” Another handy use for baseball caps : When you wear sunglasses , the brim traps the heat that would have been lost through the top of the shades .
And now is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me something truly wild ; in order to properly describe it , I have included the full transcript : The eyeball is really a serious place where you do not want things to freeze .
Wait , how do your eyeballs freeze ?
You ’ ll notice it because you ’ ll realize your eyelashes are starting to freeze .
We ’ ve had situations where people have gone , “ Oh my god , what did I just do ?
Please look at me.
” There was a little bit of tearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in your eye you will start to tear , and then that can cause your eyelashes to freeze .
If you try to open [ your eyes ] too fast , you can actually rip the eyelashes out .
That ’ s happened to a friend .
When you ’ re talking -20 , [ you see ] freezing of contact lenses and tearing your eyelashes out because they ’ ve frozen together .
If that happens , the first thing you do is leave your eyes closed .
If you have sunglasses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and put your mittens right over your eyes .
Warm it up before you try to open your eyes and rip your eyelashes off .
My feet get really sweaty if I wear bulky socks .
What ’ s the best way to layer on your feet ?
Remember the thing about loose layers ?
That ’ s important here , too .
“ If you ’ re really , really , really cold , you actually want your feet to be in something so loose that your boot ’ s moving around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She never puts on more than two layers of socks ( any more and your feet will slide around too much ) : a moisture-wicking one closest to the skin , followed by a thicker wool pair .
And obviously , wear a waterproof boot because , once again , “ wet will really kill you.
” What stupid things do people do in the cold that they really shouldn ’ t ?
Strangely enough , one of the worst mistakes people often make is more mental than physical .
“ If you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tense , you ’ re going to block your circulation , ” she says .
Instead , the key is to warm up before you go outside .
“ Saunas exist from northern cultures for a really good reason , ” she explains .
Try drinking warm soup broth before heading out rather than coffee or tea , because “ tea makes you pee.
” How do I know if I ’ m getting frostbite ?
And what do I do about it ?
Your first warning that you ’ re getting too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel , since they ’ re the farthest from your heart .
“ When I was taking students out on the ice , that ’ s the first thing I ’ d ask : ‘ How ’ s everybody ’ s fingers and toes ?
All 10 ?
All 20 ?
’ I wanted them to feel that they can count all 20 digits because they ’ re your remote sensors.
” Geiger stresses that cold extremities need to be tended to immediately .
If your hands and feet are starting to hurt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and warm them up , either by going inside or using the tools available to do so ( there are strategies used by fisherman and the Inupiat people of Alaska that involve using one ’ s own snot and/or pee that hopefully you will never have to use ) .
Any sign of “ bleak white skin , ” she adds , also means that blistering may have already started .
So , uh ... what ’ s happening with the sea ice ?
One of the most shocking things Geiger said was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on sea ice for decades , within the last 10 years it ’ s gotten so thin that it ’ s unsafe to camp there .
“ I ’ ve been on the sea ice since 1984 and in those days it was great .
We just took a boat up there , walked on the ice , and worked on it .
2007 was the last time we could really just camp on the ice .
Since 2007 , the ice is too dangerously thin to go out and just work on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to work on a boat.
” Because her work has been laden with political baggage due to the Trump administration ’ s denial of climate change , polar research has been largely on hold since 2016 .
And yet despite how politicians may feel about the term “ climate change , ” this , unfortunately , does not mean that it is not happening .
Geiger explains that because the planet is warming so quickly , the temperate climates that many people currently inhabit will someday not exist at all .
“ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warmer , things get wavier , and as things get wavier , the tropics and the poles are all that we have left , and we don ’ t have that nice , cozy , temperate , moderate climate , ” she says .
“ And I think , if the news could communicate that , people would say like , ‘ Holy expletive .
There ’ s no temperate zone anymore ?
’ It ’ s like , ‘ Yeah , that ’ s the consequence of the poles warming faster than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ zone .
And once you do that , that really does make life miserable.
” Which is to say , the coronavirus isn ’ t the only extremely depressing part of this winter .

This winter is going to suck. We know this because the rest of this year has sucked, but we also know this because the main respite from the suckiness was summer — for those living in much of the northern hemisphere, warmer weather meant that it was far more pleasant to be outside, where the coronavirus is less likely to spread.
But now, winter is coming, and nobody seems to know what to do about it. America is in the midst of a third surge of Covid-19 cases in a lame duck presidency where little is likely to improve. Local governments are closing schools while keeping bars open in attempts to stave off any further economic collapses. Restaurants that remain open are building elaborate “outdoor” dining spaces that are literally just indoor dining spaces.
What we do know, however, is that if you need to leave your home, it’s much safer to be doing activities outside than inside somewhere else. That means that many Americans are going to need to learn how to deal with, and dress for, cold weather.
Luckily, there are people who are experts in this particular area, for whom brutally cold environments are just part of the job. Cathy Geiger is a professor at the University of Delaware, and has studied the behavior of sea ice at both the arctic and Antarctic poles for more than three decades.
Having worked on 10 polar expeditions, Geiger’s seen a lot (including some gross frostbite stuff that involves eyelashes; we’ll get to that). For the sake of clarity, because layering for sub-zero temperatures is pretty complicated, the following information will be distilled via a handy question-and-answer format.
What’s the best layering method?
There are a couple main tenets of layering that Geiger adheres to. The first and most important of them is to wear lots of loose layers — the key word here being “loose.” That’s because the insulated air that circulates between each layer is what’s actually keeping you warm. The more active you plan to be, the fewer layers you should wear.
Another important tip she stresses is that good body circulation is the key to warmth. “If you’re wearing 700 layers and you’re like the Michelin man and you can’t move, all that padding isn’t going to do you any good if you block off your circulation,” she explains. “[If you wear] four pairs of socks stuffed in a boot, your toes are going to get frostbite because everything’s too tight. There’s no blood down there.”
When Geiger goes on an expedition where temperatures can plunge between 30 degrees and 40 degrees below zero, she usually layers about four pairs of oversized long johns in moisture-wicking synthetic fabrics or merino wool, a Dickies bib, a Turtle Fur for her neck and face, and at least three pairs of gloves (the thinnest layer goes on first, the military surplus ones go on last), topped with Carhartt coveralls and knee pads. Over that, she wears an extra-large L.L. Bean extreme-weather coat shell.
“The shell stops the cold from breaking through, so it’s just like weatherizing your roof: Your body is a personal shelter. In really cold weather, you want to wrap your body like you would insulate your house.”
What are the best fabrics to use to shield from wind and cold, and how should I layer them?
Conventional wisdom says to keep away from cotton, because it has virtually zero moisture-wicking properties. Instead, Geiger says, make sure that the fabric closest to your skin is made of synthetic fabrics or merino wool.
Why are moisture-wicking fabrics so important? “Sweat is what will kill you,” she says. “The big thing to do is [move] slower than you think. Once you get into the zero digits, you don’t want to start running around and warm up so much that you break a sweat.”
And regardless of how you feel about Canada Goose, they’ve done hoods right. Geiger recommends hoods with fur (or faux fur) trim because “fur creates friction that holds back the wind.”
What’s the best way to protect my skin from the elements?
You should always be wearing sunblock on your face, but before heading out into a snowy environment, there’s one place that people might miss: the underside of their nose. “Snow reflects!” she warns. Once you’re back inside, go for the usual suspects that promise to moisturize: heavy lotions, balms, and Vaseline.
Do hats really matter?
Yes! And they require their own layering methods, too. While you probably won’t be wearing goggles during your commute to work, you can still rely on the tenets used by arctic researchers to protect your eyes and face.
“If you put on a baseball cap and [then] a snow hat, the ball cap creates a brim, [and] it’s amazing how much sun that blocks,” she says. “It’s a great wind blocker.” Another handy use for baseball caps: When you wear sunglasses, the brim traps the heat that would have been lost through the top of the shades.
And now is the portion of the conversation where Cathy told me something truly wild; in order to properly describe it, I have included the full transcript:
The eyeball is really a serious place where you do not want things to freeze.
Wait, how do your eyeballs freeze?
You’ll notice it because you’ll realize your eyelashes are starting to freeze.
What?
We’ve had situations where people have gone, “Oh my god, what did I just do? Please look at me.” There was a little bit of tearing because when the wind blows really hard in your eye you will start to tear, and then that can cause your eyelashes to freeze. If you try to open [your eyes] too fast, you can actually rip the eyelashes out.
Oh my god!
That’s happened to a friend. When you’re talking -20, [you see] freezing of contact lenses and tearing your eyelashes out because they’ve frozen together. If that happens, the first thing you do is leave your eyes closed. If you have sunglasses or anything on, take them off and put your mittens right over your eyes. Warm it up before you try to open your eyes and rip your eyelashes off.
So yes, hats matter.
My feet get really sweaty if I wear bulky socks. What’s the best way to layer on your feet?
Remember the thing about loose layers? That’s important here, too. “If you’re really, really, really cold, you actually want your feet to be in something so loose that your boot’s moving around a bit,” says Geiger. She never puts on more than two layers of socks (any more and your feet will slide around too much): a moisture-wicking one closest to the skin, followed by a thicker wool pair. And obviously, wear a waterproof boot because, once again, “wet will really kill you.”
What stupid things do people do in the cold that they really shouldn’t?
Strangely enough, one of the worst mistakes people often make is more mental than physical. “If you’re excited and you’re tense, you’re going to block your circulation,” she says.
Instead, the key is to warm up before you go outside. “Saunas exist from northern cultures for a really good reason,” she explains. Try drinking warm soup broth before heading out rather than coffee or tea, because “tea makes you pee.”
How do I know if I’m getting frostbite? And what do I do about it?
Your first warning that you’re getting too cold is how your fingers and toes feel, since they’re the farthest from your heart. “When I was taking students out on the ice, that’s the first thing I’d ask: ‘How’s everybody’s fingers and toes? All 10? All 20?’ I wanted them to feel that they can count all 20 digits because they’re your remote sensors.”
Geiger stresses that cold extremities need to be tended to immediately. If your hands and feet are starting to hurt, stop what you’re doing and warm them up, either by going inside or using the tools available to do so (there are strategies used by fisherman and the Inupiat people of Alaska that involve using one’s own snot and/or pee that hopefully you will never have to use). Any sign of “bleak white skin,” she adds, also means that blistering may have already started.
So, uh ... what’s happening with the sea ice?
One of the most shocking things Geiger said was that though she’s been working on sea ice for decades, within the last 10 years it’s gotten so thin that it’s unsafe to camp there.
“I’ve been on the sea ice since 1984 and in those days it was great. We just took a boat up there, walked on the ice, and worked on it. 2007 was the last time we could really just camp on the ice. Since 2007, the ice is too dangerously thin to go out and just work on it anymore. You’ve got to work on a boat.”
Because her work has been laden with political baggage due to the Trump administration’s denial of climate change, polar research has been largely on hold since 2016.
And yet despite how politicians may feel about the term “climate change,” this, unfortunately, does not mean that it is not happening. Geiger explains that because the planet is warming so quickly, the temperate climates that many people currently inhabit will someday not exist at all.
“The fact is that as the poles get warmer, things get wavier, and as things get wavier, the tropics and the poles are all that we have left, and we don’t have that nice, cozy, temperate, moderate climate,” she says.
“And I think, if the news could communicate that, people would say like, ‘Holy expletive. There’s no temperate zone anymore?’ It’s like, ‘Yeah, that’s the consequence of the poles warming faster than the tropics — you lose the temperate zone. And once you do that, that really does make life miserable.” Which is to say, the coronavirus isn’t the only extremely depressing part of this winter.