Do you remember when you were a child and went through a “fossil” phase? Maybe you’re still in it. Teachers fascinated us with stories about dinosaurs and mammoths and saber-toothed cats, and we would go scrambling about, digging holes in our backyards in hopes of finding a skull of some gigantic prehistoric beast. And then, not really knowing what a fossil looked like, we would dig up some weird pointy rock and excitedly say it was a dinosaur tooth.
Of course, most of us were greatly unsuccessful in this quest for paleolithic remains; however, a graduate student from Ethiopia, Chalachew Seyoum, managed to realize this dream.
In 2013, Seyoum found a human jawbone, with five teeth intact, in the Afar region of Ethiopia, near where Lucy, the famous 3.2 million years old Australopithecus Afarensis, was found. The bone was poking out of the eroded side of a hill. This jawbone is 2.8 million years old, 400,000 years older than scientists first thought the human race was.
Yet, this is not the only reason why this was such a remarkable find; earlier, humans only found fossilized remains of the 3 million year old Australopithecus, and then the remains of the genus Homo, our genus, was found to be 2 million years old- and nothing was found in the gap between. It seemed almost as though Australopithecus just dropped off the face of the planet, and Homo randomly popped in.
Of course, this is never the case; scientists knew that there must have been a transition between the two, but one was never found. Despite the fact that only a jawbone was found, scientists are sure that this marks a transition between the more apelike Australopithecus and the first humans. Brian Villmoare, a paleoanthropologist at the University of Nevada and the leader of the team that made the discovery, states that “…it’s a reduction. It’s becoming ‘less’. The teeth are not these big blocky rectangular things, they become more slender.” In other words, the jaw, although not identical to ours today, was considerably smaller than the jaws of the Australopithecus; somewhere in between the two. What could have caused the reduction in jaw size? Well, scientists theorized that huge, powerful jaws and teeth were made unnecessary by the development of stone tools that grinded up, cut, and pounded the food, making it easier to chew. In the future, we may find even more human remains demonstrating the intriguing transition from the Australopithecus and the Homo.
What was life like on Earth 2.8 million years ago? Well, other than our jaws changing shape and our bodies in general transitioning into the humans we are more familiar with today, it was also towards the end of the Pliocene epoch and the global climate was cooling down. During the Pliocene, the Indian and Eurasian plates were colliding, forming the Himalayan mountain range. The Isthmus of Panama also formed, allowing for creatures in North and South America to mingle. In addition to this, the land was becoming more arid, and analysis of the sediment in which the jawbone was found suggests that the land was dry and grassy, with few trees. It was this very environment that led to the success of bipedal hominids, who could look over the tall grass and walk farther distances while being hands-free to carry things.
Would you take up the opportunity for a one way trip to mars? 100 “Lucky” candidates were pulled from a pool of over 660 people from ages 19 to 60, and these candidates will than have to show their abilities and teamwork skills to be selected for four man (or woman) teams. The Dutch non-profit organization, called Mars One, has set up a ground plan for the trip. The astronauts would arrive in teams of four to rover-built structures on the surface, using plants to produce their oxygen and obtain water from frozen ice on the surface of Mars to get water. These concepts all sound well in good in theory, but they may work out differently in practice. MIT has looked at some of these concepts and said in a study: “For example, if all food is obtained from locally grown crops, as Mars One envisions, the vegetation would produce unsafe levels of oxygen, which would set off a series of events that would eventually cause human inhabitants to suffocate.” This is obviously problematic, and it is made worse by the fact that no technology for removing such oxygen has been successfully developed and tested for use in space. And that’s even if the Mars One teams could get to the red planet. MIT also noticed that the number of rockets estimated for the trip is much less than the number which would be actually needed. “We’re not saying, black and white, [that] Mars One is infeasible,” Said MIT Professor Olivier De Weck, but he definitely thinks that under the concepts he has proposed, this colony on Mars would not last long. Mars One has acknowledged these concerns, but there has been no comments thus far. There have also been reports that Mars One’s precursor robotic missions have stopped (the robots would be setting up the habitats for the colonists), but Mars One again declined to comment. Going to Mars is something that would definitely be a large step for humankind, but if a trip in the next few years would result in one hundred quickly dead astronauts on mars, It would quickly be more symbolic than scientific. If mankind could wait for the technology to keep these people alive and establish a livable and scientifically beneficial colony, Mars One could do a lot more then just be a coffin for the “lucky” 100 first people going to the red planet.
Prospective Republican nominee Jeb Bush is facing trouble in Iowa. That trouble is not former president George W. Bush (Jeb’s brother). It’s the governor of the neighboring state of Wisconsin, Scott Walker.
Walker is another potential Republican nominee, and has a record as a “true blue” (or maybe red is a more appropriate color) conservative. He is more popular in Iowa then Bush, both because of his brand of grass-roots Republicanism and because of the proximity of Wisconsin to Iowa, the state where the first presidential caucus is held, and where winning (or at least coming in close second) is seen as essential to having a chance for the nomination.
The Governor is so popular in the state that one of Iowa’s most important pro-Bush workers greets visitors with “welcome to Scott Walker’s Iowa!”
This underdog attitude is factoring into Bush strategy, however. To his advisors, it is not essential for him to win in Iowa. He will probably come in second, and that wouldn’t be a death blow even in a normal campaign. It will be completely understandable if he comes in second in a state sure to be won by Walker, who is a near-favorite son (think of him as a favorite neighbor). The Bush campaign will be far from over in that scenario.
If Bush pulls an upset win over Walker, that will be an even greater victory. Walker’s viability will be damaged as a nominee if he can’t even win the caucus as a favorite neighbor, and Bush will prove his abilities as a campaigner and as a candidate. Should the more moderate Bush win there, it will also prove that one doesn’t have to be an extreme conservative to win Republican primaries. To put it in the words of one important Bush advisor, “If we lose in Iowa, it’s fine… If Walker loses in Iowa, he’s done.”
Basically, many of Bush’s staff view the Iowa race is a win-win. The only losing scenario is if Bush comes in third, which is unlikely in a diverse but mostly amateurish potential Republican nomination field.
The biggest challenge Bush faces in Iowa is deciding how much of his funds to throw into the state. He wouldn’t want to waste precious campaign money by throwing it all away on a state he could lose, but if he spends too little money, it could reduce his chances of a victory or close second. If he skips Iowa altogether, though, it could seem like he’s ignoring the state, which could very well hurt his chances at victory in other states.
So far, the race is far from certain, and if Bush is able to walk the fine line in Iowa, he could very well prove his viability as a national candidate–but if he fails at this stage of the race, he could very well be out for good.
Where can one find the source of the highly lethal superbug whichmakes 10 gastroenterology patients come down with the exact same type of rare bacterial infection?
The answer is surprising–a device called a duodenoscope used to check out intestinal tract located just in Dr. John Allen’s office.
The pseudomonas bacteria had evaded the standard cleaning process causing infection on one patient after another.
This case isn’t the first of its kind. Back to 1987, duodenoscopes caused patients in Minnesota being infected and some of them were dead.
In 2010, safety expert Lawrence Muscarella published an article in the journal Endoscopy calling for special attention to the elevator wire. In 2011, a consortium of medical societies warned that automatic cleaning processes didn’t always effectively disinfect duodenoscopes and so manual cleaning should be performed.
Over the years, the FDA also received dozens of reports about infections from duodenoscopes as well as a million adverse event reports on various devices each year.
The biggest problem being led is: How can we deal with the missed points in medical devices?
People are eager to figure out the solution.But there was significant concern before 2013 that duodenoscopes were difficult if not impossible to clean thoroughly outside the FDA.
Allen, the president of the American Gastroenterological Association said :”This problem has been known since at least 1987,it certainly is disturbing that a fundamental design issue with these scopes would cause problems for this long.”
For the first time, the FDA issued advice to hospitals paying attention to the manufacturer’s cleaning instructions on Thursday Feb.19th. But Rep. Ted Lieu, D-California, questioned the reason “why the FDA didn’t issue this advice until now.”
Though there are many different resources and opinion up till now, but the path of the future is quite clear. Dr. John Greene, an infectious disease expert at the Moffitt Cancer Center who published an article in 2013 on a duodenoscope outbreak in Tampa said. “This is clearly a matter that needs addressing, we really should have done this sooner.”
The 2016 presidential hopefuls have been dogged by lurid scandals this past year. From Chris Christie’s Bridgegate to Scott Walker’s supporters’ voter fraud, these accusations have resulted in media field days and a subsequent fall from grace for their unfortunate victims. So far, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has avoided bad press by literally generating no press, constantly dodging the question of whether or not she’ll run for president in 2016. Nevertheless, her Super PAC, Ready For Hillary, has already raised over $9 million for her “possible” campaign, and it’s expected she will formally announce candidacy later this year.
But even Hillary can’t dodge the media forever, and her current email scandal is generating buzz that may harm her upcoming presidential bid. It was recently revealed that she used a private email account for official government correspondences during her four years as Secretary of State. At the time, this was approved by the State Department. When her term ended, her office identified all work-related emails and turned them over to the state. This came to 30,490 of the 62,320 total emails she sent over her tenure. Republicans are currently claiming that her use of private email both endangered national security and blocked government conspiracy.
In last Tuesday’s press conference, Hillary spoke out about her private email account, stating it was simply for the sake of convenience. She’s asked the State, rather reluctantly, to release all 30,000+ government-related emails to the public. But her accusers wonder what happened to the other half of her emails, which were “private, personal messages” Ms. Clinton deleted before handing everything else over to the State Department. Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, overtly suggested that Hillary wasn’t completely honest: “Because only Hillary Clinton controls her personal email account and admitted she deleted many of her emails, no one but Hillary Clinton knows if she handed over every relevant email.”
But the scandal doesn’t end there. The Associated Press is now levying a lawsuit against the State Department over Clinton’s emails. AP claims the State Department has “failed to respond substantively” to five requests for release of emails relating to the Benghazi terror attacks and Osama bin Laden raid.
Current photography students were given a great opportunity to express their creativity and share their artwork. Approximately 200 students from 24 schools and from here at East had their pictures chosen to be presented at the 30th Annual Storrs All High Photo Show at the Kenan Center.
The students that had pictures on exhibition from East were Brianna Bucello, Arianna Barreca, Shaylynn Skorka, Hannah Christian, Caroline Schnabel, Natalie Marinides, Kaitlin Milks, Kiera Lecavalier, Jenna Staples, and Stephanie Wetzel.
Only 17 awards were given out for several different categories such as best black and white picture, best color picture, best still life, best portrait, best architectural picture, etcetera. Also, one student from each of the schools involved received an award aside from the other categories. The picture “Greenwood, NY” taken by Sophomore Kaitlin Milks won the award. Talented students from other schools received awards for the other categories.
Although no other awards were given out, Shaylynn Skorka’s picture “The Beauty in Bones,” is shown on the Kenan Center’s website and was used to advertise the photo show. The picture itself is a symmetrical shot of rose petals leading up a girl’s back.
The Kenan Center belonged to Mr. and Mrs. William Rand Kenan Jr. It consists of several buildings including the Kenan House, Taylor Theater, Education Building, Kenan Arena, and Kenan Gardens. Each of these facilities serves a different purpose. The programs involved include art, education, and recreation programming. The All High Photo Show is just one of the events that occurs annually.
Slavery is gone, right? Slavery has been officially abolished in every country in the world for over a hundred years, so that means its gone, right? You’d think that’d be true, but in reality there is still slavery in the world, though it goes by a different name—human trafficking.
People have been sold into slavery and forced to do all kinds of work for thousands of years. The first recorded use of slavey was in a Sumerian law code in 2000 BC. So the enslavement and exploitation of people is nothing new. But now, instead of slavery of people mainly for work, there is trafficking, which is the illegal trade of people.
There are four main subcategories of human trafficking: trafficking women for sexual explAoitation, trafficking for forced labor, commercial sexual exploitation of children in tourism, and trafficking in organs.
Trafficking women for sexual exploitation is when a woman is abducted or lured into a job that doesn’t exist, and then forced into prostitution. Trafficking for forced labor is when someone is abducted and forced to do hard labor. Commercial sexual exploitation of children is when children are sold off as sex slaves to dirty men. Organ trafficking is a rapidly growing form of crime in which someone is abducted and their organs, usually one of their kidneys, are taken and sold on a black market for huge profits. They are sold to people who are on the incredibly long waiting list for organs.
The fact that these events are going on in the world today is sickening. What’s even more sickening is that people don’t know about this.
The level of awareness of human trafficking is not what it should be. This isn’t a small scale crime. This is a huge crime. Every year 2.4 million people are trafficked. You may say, “Well that only happens in poor countries.” That’s wrong. Over 17,500 people are trafficked across United States borders every year. This isn’t a crime where only a few people or countries are affected. Trafficking happens in every country in the world.
The key to stopping or preventing trafficking is to raise awareness for it. There are many organizations, like the Polaris Project, which try to raise awareness for human trafficking. They do this by holding charity events, doing presentations at schools, and even through the internet. Informing the public on human trafficking is a huge step towards preventing it.
In addition to informing the public about human trafficking, there are also many organizations that work against trafficking in the field. These organizations usually run on donations from the general populous. They combat human trafficking by creating “safe houses” for people who have been trafficked. These safe houses allow those who have been trafficked to assimilate back into society.
The only problem with these “safe house” organizations is that they run on donations from the general public. So the more people that are aware of the problem, and the more people that are willing to do something about the problem, the more safe houses can be built to help rescue people.
Like I said before, 17,500 people are trafficked in the United States every year. This terrible injustice is happening on our doorstep but we aren’t doing anything! What if you were one of those 17,500 people? Would you want people to help then? The public needs to be informed on the subject of human trafficking and how to prevent it. We also need to give more money to help prevent trafficking. All the traffickers care about is money, and since human trafficking is a 38 billion dollar industry, it’s not going to stop until people band together and do something about it.
Everyone needs to look at the topic as if they, themselves are affected, step up, and do something about it.
Part dance-off, cultural gala, and celebration of the arts,Unity in Diversity is East’s alternative to the classic high school talent show. Culminating in an annual school-wide performance, Unity’s mission is to bring together all of East’s different cultures and ethnicities in a show that highlights the uniqueness of each through dance, music, and poetry.
This year’s Unity show kicked off with a very relevant video introduction that commented on society’s viral obsessions with insignificant events like the Great Dress Color Controversy or That One Time Kanye Told Beck He Didn’t Deserve A Grammy. Mired in these saccharine distractions, it’s high time pop culture delivered some entertainment while still being socially aware.
Unity in Diversity does just that. Apart from the typical dances, this year’s show included readings of poems in different languages, one written by an East student, Negin Mahallati, about minority oppression in Iran. This is also the first time in a few years that singing was featured prominently in the Unity Show. Freshman Ananya Chakravarti showed off her Indian classical singing skills while members of Chorale also made appearances, representing Israel and later Ireland.
The dances performed this year were also extraordinary. Spain, led by Nicole Cavanaugh, incorporated scarves and chairs in their stunning opening act. Greece presented a very creative dance that had the audience clapping along to the beat. From Middle Eastern belly dancing to hula-hooping tricks set against dubstep, Unity’s longstanding acts were crowd-pleasers. Speaking of EDM, apparently trap music is also classified as a culture, proven by “Young Prodigy’s” moonwalking and hype skills.
But it wouldn’t be Unity without the fan-favorite Korea and India dance groups. Sugary sweetness becomes an art form with the Korea girls’ well-coordinated, adorable K-pop dances. And no one will ever forget the Korea guys’ electrifying moves, with senior Manjoyt Sandhur literally making it rain dollar bills onstage.
India, by far the largest performance group, featured multiple dances from different regions of the country steeped in centuries of history. Juniors Anjor Khadilkar and Shubhangi Mehra opened with a beautiful classical dance based on a Hindu myth. Next, groups performed Bollywood inspired dances and then Bhangra. India ended the show with a huge, colorful production that filled the stage, featuring a particularly skillful mashup of modern Punjabi music and “Turn Down For What”.
A snapshot of cultural history spanning thousands of years, Unity in Diversity is a much-loved East tradition that combines the beauty of tradition with modern pop performance. This year’s show was one of the best to date, and we look forward to the amazing things Unity has to offer in the future.
Marvel and Sony have recently agreed to jointly use Spider-Man in their creative work. This decision has a host of repercussions for both Marvel and Sony’s superhero-related properties.
For Marvel, this decision means that Spider-Man will appear in their upcoming film Captain America 3: Civil War. The character was an integral part of the comic book Civil War is based off of, so it will be nice to see him in the film. Spider-Man will also be able to appear in Marvel’s TV series like Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. and Agent Carter, which could provide an abundance of interesting material for both series. However, it has been speculated that Sony agreed to the deal only because of The Amazing Spider-Man 2’s lackluster performance, which means that it will be almost impossible for Marvel to acquire the X-Men, whose Fox-owned films have been extremely successful as of late. However, this won’t actually harm Marvel too much, since the X-Men usually don’t interact with the rest of the Marvel characters in the comic book world. Marvel’s ability to acquire the Fantastic Four, a set of characters who, like Spider-Man, are owned by Sony and are an important part of the comic book version of Civil War, will depend entirely on how well their eponymous film (which will be released this August) does.
The consequences of this deal for Sony are far more serious. The next standalone Spider-Man film (which will be a reboot for the franchise) will be co-produced by Marvel and Sony and will be released in July 2017. Andrew Garfield will no longer play Spider-Man; the role will instead go to a younger actor. The Amazing Spider Man series that Garfield helmed is likely no more. The status of Sony’s Spider-Man spinoff movies, such as Sinister Six and Venom, is unknown, but these films will most likely be dropped.
In short, Sony’s superhero presence has almost completely been eradicated, and it will be destroyed completely if Fantastic Four doesn’t do well. Marvel has added a new character to the Marvel Universe with limitless possibilities for guest appearances and insertions into other movies and TV shows thanks to the character’s large and complex web of relationships in the comics. Marvel has also set a precedent for acquiring characters that could help it get the Fantastic Four from Sony. While Fox (which owns the X-Men) wasn’t directly affected by this deal, they will have to be a little more careful with their films as Marvel could potentially get joint custody of their characters if the upcoming X-Men films don’t do well.
When people think of slavery, their minds conjure up images of 18th and 19th century American plantations of the South. Seldom do people think of the enslaved inhabitants of the Democratic Republic of Congo who work every day to provide companies with minerals that are the basis of many essential products.
In Congo, millions of slaves have toiled in the past few decades to produce tin, tantalum, gold, and tungsten ores. All four of these products are widely used in consumer goods today. The militias that control these mines make huge profits off of the readily available cheap labor and the great demand for all of these minerals from around the world. The earnings allow them to continue enslaving their workers and to fight the civil war raging in Congo to retain ownership of these mines.
According to a press release from the African News Service this past September, 240 million cell phones and 100 million laptops, worth a total of $36.1 million, were imported by the European Union. All of these products contained some form of conflict minerals. This import accounts for only a fourth of the total global trade of the four minerals, meaning that the companies that exported all of these products collectively made $144.4 billion through trade last year. A small percentage of these earnings go to militiamen, allowing them to continue violence and abuse of workers.
The workers at the mines are subjected to wretched conditions, alongside little to no compensation in the form of money. Most workers are threatened and forced to work in these mines. These mines are formed after villagers are raped and their homes are pillaged. The workers in these mines have no other option but to follow what the mine owners tell them to do.
Owners of these mines believe that they are above the law and can do whatever they want. As a result, people are often forced to work for 24 hours a time. Miners die because of fatigue. Others die because the mining shafts are very deep and often flood. Men, women and children often carry enormous blocks on their backs as part of their labor.
All of the mines in Congo are very precarious. The only tool that slaves use is a shovel. Evidently, they aren’t well equipped to work in such places. The owners of these mines don’t care about their people, and only worry about profits. If they must coerce people into working in hazardous conditions with the help violence and terrorization to earn their massive profits, they will.
Until recently, many businesses around the world were oblivious to the fact that they were using ores mined by slaves. Fortunately, several have started taking action against conflict minerals. In a survey administered by Raise Hope for Congo, a foundation that is working to end human rights abuse in Congo, twelve companies have made an effort to find out where their minerals come from. Additionally, they have gained access to clean mines where people are treated fairly and are consciously working to end human rights abuses. Yet all of these businesses are a part of the electronic goods sector, meaning that no other industry, on a large scale, has considered looking into where their minerals come from, and whether they are conflict free.
Once countries were aware of this dire situation, the European Union passed a law that allows corporations to voluntarily report whether or not parts of their products come from these mines. This is ineffective because it does not force these companies to make an effort to find out their products’ origins. Instead, businesses take advantage of this law and don’t report anything to consumers.
Currently, a law is also in place in the United States. It requires corporations to disclose whether or not they use conflict minerals in the products they sell. This is a more feasible law since it pressures organizations to investigate the source of their minerals. The issue at hand is that it is difficult to trace elements back to Congo. Some ores that are originally mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo are smuggled to surrounding countries (e.g., Rwanda), and are exported from there. So, companies need to be conscious about where their products are coming from. If they are coming from anywhere in that region of Africa, they should be inspected by officials to make sure that they are conflict free.
Still, this is not enough. Although companies around the world are attempting to fix their practices, this issue has not been publicized enough. Many do not realize that the things they used every day, such as cell phones and cars, contain materials mined by slaves in Congo; this is pitiful. Customers have the right to know where, how and by whom their products are procured and turned into goods. We must take a stand to fight against the injustice that the slaves experience and let people know that this issue even exists.
To bring awareness to this issue, we must start acting on our own. You don’t have to be big to bring about change. I am confident that we, as students, can give rise to change.
Of course, it would be ridiculous to propose that consumers should boycott all products that use conflict minerals. Very few individuals would be austere enough to accomplish this. I know for a fact that many teenagers cannot fathom living without their phones. Instead, consumers must be proactive. We must research which companies are working to reduce their supply of conflict minerals, and then buy from those corporations. Those companies that use conflict minerals will lose money since they will receive fewer customers. As a result, they will decrease the amount of conflict minerals in their products to compete against other businesses in their industry. Eventually, the companies will keep reducing the amount of minerals that they import from conflict-ridden mines to stay on top of the competition, and we will be able to get rid of these minerals from supply chain.
Certain companies may protest this practice because they have to pay more money when they get minerals from conflict free mines, since these owners pay their laborers fair wages. It will also be more expensive for consumers, for costs trickle down the economic hierarchy. But this is a tiny sacrifice that consumers must make to save the lives of the thousands of people that are abused in Congo.
Ridding mines in Congo will be a fairly long and slow process. There is no choice but to persevere. We must end the human rights violations that occur in Congo. Now that businesses have started to investigate their sources for the minerals they receive, consumers must stand up to support the companies that are doing the right thing. This way, we can help end injustice in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
