border chief resigns as migrant children are returned to troubled Texas facility

John Sanders, the acting commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, is resigning amid an outcry over reports that more than 300 children were held in a remote Border Patrol station in unsanitary conditions.

The reports said the children were detained in a facility in Clint, Texas, and left to care for each other with insufficient food and water. The government had reportedly removed most of the children after the news surfaced, but today, a Customs and Border Protection official confirmed that 127 were moved back to the Clint station.

Advertisements

Priscilla Presley reveals why she left Elvis

Priscilla Presley’s marriage to Elvis made her the envy of many, but it wasn’t all glitz and glamour behind closed doors.

In this May 1, 1967, file photo, singer Elvis Presley and his bride, the former Priscilla Beaulieu, appear at the Aladdin Hotel in Las Vegas, after their wedding. Priscilla Presley opened up about her life with Elvis during a Nov. 16, 2016, interview on British chat show, “Loose Women,” on the ITV network explained why she left him.AP

The pair “didn’t go out” and “truly lived in a bubble,” Presley told ITV talk show Loose Women on Wednesday, per the Huffington Post. “I just kind of followed what he did. You lived his life,” continued Presley, who started dating Elvis at age 14 and married him at 21, though he was 10 years her senior.

“You really kind of lost yourself.” Not even alone with Elvis could she be entirely herself. “He taught me, even in having a relationship, about always having a mystique — never revealing everything,” she said, per Yahoo.

For example, not once during six years of marriage did Elvis see his wife without makeup on, says Presley, 71. “He never wanted to see me getting dressed. He wanted to see the result of getting dressed,” she said, as quoted by Country Living.

While her teenage years were “fun,” she didn’t experience them “as a normal girl.” Only when she began attending a dance class did she realize how unusual their relationship was, said Presley, who divorced Elvis in 1973.

I left because … I needed to find out what the world was like,” she said. “I didn’t really know who I was.”

Even then, they still loved each other, she said, and left the courthouse holding hands. (HBO is putting the finishing touches on a new Elvis Presley film.)

USA TODAY

Radiation effects from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster

The radiation effects from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster are the observed and predicted effects as a result of the release of radioactive isotopes from the Fukushima Daiichii Nuclear Power Plant following the 2011 Tōhoku 9.0 magnitude earthquake and tsunami (Great East Japan Earthquake and the resultant tsunami).[3][4] The release of radioactive isotopes from reactor containment vessels was a result of venting in order to reduce gaseous pressure, and the discharge of coolant water into the sea.[5]

 This resulted in Japanese authorities implementing a 30-km exclusion zone around the power plant and the continued displacement of approximately 156,000 people as of early 2013.[4][6] The number of evacuees has declined to 49,492 as of March 2018.[7] Large quantities of radioactive particles from the incident, including iodine-131 and caesium-134/137, have since been detected around the world. Substantial levels have also been seen in California and in the Pacific Ocean.

The World Health Organization (WHO) released a report that estimates an increase in risk for specific cancers for certain subsets of the population inside the Fukushima Prefecture.

A 2013 WHO report predicts that for populations living in the most affected areas there is a 70% higher risk of developing thyroid cancer for girls exposed as infants (the risk has risen from a lifetime risk of 0.75% to 1.25%), a 7% higher risk of leukemia in males exposed as infants, a 6% higher risk of breast cancer in females exposed as infants and a 4% higher risk, overall, of developing solid cancers for females.

Preliminary dose-estimation reports by WHO and the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) indicate that, outside the geographical areas most affected by radiation, even in locations within Fukushima prefecture, the predicted risks remain low and no observable increases in cancer above natural variation in baseline rates are anticipated.[13] In comparison, after the Chernobyl accident, only 0.1% of the 110,000 cleanup workers surveyed have so far developed leukemia, although not all cases resulted from the accident.[14][15][16] 

However, 167 Fukushima plant workers received radiation doses that slightly elevate their risk of developing cancer.[15][17][18] Estimated effective doses from the accident outside of Japan are considered to be below, or far below the dose levels regarded as very small by the international radiological protection community.[19] The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation is expected to release a final report on the effects of radiation exposure from the accident by the end of 2013.[18]

A June 2012 Stanford University study estimated, using a linear no-threshold model, that the radioactivity release from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant could cause 130 deaths from cancer globally (the lower bound for the estimate being 15 and the upper bound 1100) and 199 cancer cases in total (the lower bound being 24 and the upper bound 1800), most of which are estimated to occur in Japan. Radiation exposure to workers at the plant was projected to result in 2 to 12 deaths.[20] 

However, a December 2012 UNSCEAR statement to the Fukushima Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety advised that “because of the great uncertainties in risk estimates at very low doses, UNSCEAR does not recommend multiplying very low doses by large numbers of individuals to estimate numbers of radiation-induced health effects within a population exposed to incremental doses at levels equivalent to or lower than natural background levels.”

Image result for mutated japanese fuku

Health effects

Preliminary dose-estimation reports by the World Health Organization and United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation indicate that 167 plant workers received radiation doses that slightly elevate their risk of developing cancer, however like the Chernobyl nuclear disaster that it may not be statistically detectable.[16] After the Chernobyl accident, only 0.1% of the 110,000 cleanup workers surveyed have so far developed leukemia, although not all cases resulted from the accident[15][17][18] Estimated effective doses from the accident outside Japan are considered to be below (or far below) the dose levels regarded as very small by the international radiological protection community.[17]

According to the Japanese Government, 180,592 people in the general population were screened in March 2011 for radiation exposure and no case was found which affects health.[22] Thirty workers conducting operations at the plant had exposure levels greater than 100 mSv.[23] It is believed that the health effects of the radioactivity release are primarily psychological rather than physical effects. Even in the most severely affected areas, radiation doses never reached more than a quarter of the radiation dose linked to an increase in cancer risk (25 mSv whereas 100 mSv has been linked to an increase in cancer rates among victims at Hiroshima and Nagasaki).[6][24] However, people who have been evacuated have suffered from depression and other mental health effects.[6]

While there were no deaths caused by radiation exposure, approximately 18,500 people died due to the earthquake and tsunami. Very few cancers would be expected as a result of the very low radiation doses received by the public.[25] John Ten Hoeve and Stanford University professor Mark Z. Jacobson suggest that according to the linear no-threshold model (LNT) the accident is most likely to cause an eventual total of 130 (15-1100) cancer deaths, while noting that the validity of the LNT model at such low doses remains the subject of debate.[26] Radiation epidemiologist Roy Shore contends that estimating health effects in a population from the LNT model “is not wise because of the uncertainties”.[27] The LNT model did not accurately model casualties from Chernobyl, Hiroshima or Nagasaki; it greatly overestimated the casualties. Evidence that the LNT model is a gross distortion of damage from radiation has existed since 1946, and was suppressed by Nobel Prize winner Hermann Muller in favour of assertions that no amount of radiation is safe.[28][29][30]

In 2013 (two years after the incident), the World Health Organization indicated that the residents of the area who were evacuated were exposed to little radiation that radiation induced health impacts are likely to be below detectable levels.[31] The health risks in the WHO assessment attributable to the Fukushima radioactivity release were calculated by largely applying the conservative Linear no-threshold model of radiation exposure, a model that assumes even the smallest amount of radiation exposure will cause a negative health effect.[32]

The World Health Organization (WHO) report released in 2013 predicts that for populations living around the Fukushima nuclear power plant there is a 70% higher relative risk of developing thyroid cancer for females exposed as infants, and a 7% higher relative risk of leukemia in males exposed as infants and a 6% higher relative risk of breast cancer in females exposed as infants.[12] With the WHO communicating that the values stated in that section of their report are relative increases, and not representative of the absolute increase of developing these cancers, as the lifetime absolute baseline chance of developing thyroid cancer in females is 0.75%, with the Radiation-induced cancer chance now predicted to increase that 0.75% to 1.25%, with this 0.75% to 1.25% change being responsible for the “70% higher relative risk”:[12]

These percentages represent estimated relative increases over the baseline rates and are not absolute risks for developing such cancers. Due to the low baseline rates of thyroid cancer, even a large relative increase represents a small absolute increase in risks. For example, the baseline lifetime risk of thyroid cancer for females is just (0.75%)three-quarters of one percent and the additional lifetime risk estimated in this assessment for a female infant exposed in the most affected location is (0.5%)one-half of one percent.

The WHO calculations determined that the most at-risk group, infants, who were in the most affected area, would experience an absolute increase in the risk of cancer (of all types) during their lifetime, of approximately 1% due to the accident. With the lifetime risk increase for thyroid cancer, due to the accident, for a female infant, in the most affected radiation location, being estimated to be one half of one percent[0.5%].[12][33] Cancer risks for the unborn child are considered to be similar to those in 1 year old infants.[34]

The estimated risk of cancer to people who were children and adults during the Fukushima accident, in the most affected area, was determined to be lower again when compared to the most at-risk group—infants.[35] A thyroid ultrasound screening programme is currently (2013) ongoing in the entire Fukushima prefecture; this screening programme is, due to the screening effect, likely to lead to an increase in the incidence of thyroid disease due to early detection of non-symptomatic disease cases.[36] About one-third of people (~30%) in industrialized nations are presently diagnosed with cancer during their lifetimes. Radiation exposure can increase cancer risk, with the cancers that arise being indistinguishable from cancers resulting from other causes.[37]

In the general population, no increase is expected in the frequency of tissue reactions attributable to radiation exposure and no increase is expected in the incidence of congenital or developmental abnormalities, including cognitive impairment attributable to in-utero radiation exposure.[38] No significant increase in heritable effects has been found in studies of the children of the survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki or in the offspring of cancer survivors treated with radiotherapy, which indicates that moderate acute radiation exposures have little impact on the overall risk of heritable effects in humans.[39]

As of August 2013, there have been more than 40 children newly diagnosed with thyroid cancer and other cancers in Fukushima prefecture. 18 of these were diagnosed with thyroid cancer, but these cancers are not attributed to radiation from Fukushima, as similar patterns occurred before the accident in 2006 in Japan, with 1 in 100,000 children per year developing thyroid cancer in that year, that is, this is not higher than the pre-accident rate. While controversial scientist Christopher Busby disagrees, claiming the rate of thyroid cancer in Japan was 0.0 children per 100,000 in 2005, the Japan Cancer Surveillance Research Group showed a thyroid cancer rate of 1.3 per 100,000 children in 2005 based on official cancer cases.[30] As a point of comparison, thyroid cancer incidence rates after the Chernobyl accident of 1986 did not begin to increase above the prior baseline value of about 0.7 cases per 100,000 people per year until 1989 to 1991, 3 to 5 years after the accident in both the adolescent and children age groups. Therefore, data from Chernobyl suggests that an increase in thyroid cancer around Fukushima is not expected to begin to be seen until at least 3 to 5 years after the accident[40][41]

According to the Tenth Report of the Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey released in February 2013, more than 40% of children screened around Fukushima prefecture were diagnosed with thyroid nodules or cysts. Ultrasonographic detectable thyroid nodules and cysts are extremely common and can be found at a frequency of up to 67% in various studies.[42] 186 (0.5%) of these had nodules larger than 5.1 mm and/or cysts larger than 20.1 mm and underwent further investigation. None had thyroid cancer. An RT report into the matter was highly misleading.[43] Fukushima Medical University gives the number of children diagnosed with thyroid cancer as of December 2013 as 33 and concluded, “[I]t is unlikely that these cancers were caused by the exposure from 131I from the nuclear power plant accident in March 2011″.[44] Thyroid cancer is one of the most survivable cancers, with an approximate 94% survival rate after first diagnosis. That rate increases to a 100% survival rate with catching it early.[45]

A 2013 article in the Stars and Stripes asserted that a Japanese government study[which?] released in February of that year had found that more than 25 times as many people in the area had developed thyroid cancer compared with data from before the disaster.[46][unreliable source?]

As part of the ongoing precautionary ultrasound screening program in and around Fukushima, (36%) of children in Fukushima Prefecture in 2012 were found to have thyroid nodules or cysts,[47]but these are not considered abnormal.[48] This screening programme is, due to the screening effect, likely, according to the WHO, to lead to an increase in the incidence of the diagnosis of thyroid disease due to early detection of non-symptomatic disease cases.[36] For example, the overwhelming majority of thyroid growths prior to the accident, and in other parts of the world, are overdiagnosed (that is, a benign growth that will never cause any symptoms, illness, or death for the patient, even if nothing is ever done about the growth) with autopsy studies, again done prior to the accident and in other parts of the world, on people who died from other causes showing that more than one third (33%+), of adults technically has a thyroid growth/cancer, but it is benign/never caused them any harm.[49]

Thyroid cancer is one of the most survivable cancers, with an approximate 94% survival rate after first diagnosis, and that rate increases to a 100% survival rate with catching it early.[45] For example, from 1989 to 2005, an excess of 4000 children and adolescent cases of thyroid cancer were observed in those who lived around Chernobyl; of these 4000 people, nine have died so far, a 99% survival rate.[50][51]

what kind of creature is this?

Psychological effects of perceived radiation exposure

A survey by the newspaper Mainichi Shimbun computed that there were 1,600 deaths related to the evacuation, comparable to the 1,599 deaths due to the earthquake and tsunami in the Fukushima Prefecture.[52]

In the former Soviet Union, many patients with negligible radioactive exposure after the Chernobyl disaster displayed extreme anxiety about low level radiation exposure, and therefore developed many psychosomatic problems, including radiophobia, and with this an increase in fatalistic alcoholism being observed. As Japanese health and radiation specialist Shunichi Yamashita noted:

We know from Chernobyl that the psychological consequences are enormous. Life expectancy of the evacuees dropped from 65 to 58 years—not [predominantly] because of cancer, but because of depression, alcoholism and suicide. Relocation is not easy, the stress is very big. We must not only track those problems, but also treat them. Otherwise people will feel they are just guinea pigs in our research.[53]

Findings from the Chernobyl disaster indicated the need for rigorous resource allocation, and research findings from Chernobyl were utilized in the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster response. A survey by the Iitate, Fukushima local government obtained responses from approximately 1,743 people who have evacuated from the village, which lies within the emergency evacuation zone around the crippled Fukushima Daiichi Plant. It shows that many residents are experiencing growing frustration and instability due to the nuclear crisis and an inability to return to the lives they were living before the disaster. Sixty percent of respondents stated that their health and the health of their families had deteriorated after evacuating, while 39.9% reported feeling more irritated compared to before the disaster.[54]

Summarizing all responses to questions related to evacuees’ current family status, one-third of all surveyed families live apart from their children, while 50.1% live away from other family members (including elderly parents) with whom they lived before the disaster. The survey also showed that 34.7% of the evacuees have suffered salary cuts of 50% or more since the outbreak of the nuclear disaster. A total of 36.8% reported a lack of sleep, while 17.9% reported smoking or drinking more than before they evacuated.[54]

Experts on the ground in Japan agree that mental health challenges are the most significant issue. Stress, such as that caused by dislocation, uncertainty, and concern about unseen toxicants, often manifests in physical ailments, such as heart disease. After a nuclear power plant disaster, residents of the affected areas are at a higher risk for mental health illnesses such as depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), medically unexplained somatic symptoms, and suicide.[4][55] These mental health illnesses, among others, have been highly prevalent in the Fukushima residents following the nuclear power plant disaster.

Stressors that were identified as risk factors for these negative mental outcomes include: length of duration of evacuation, house damage, separation from family members, inability to family members and friends after the disaster, watching the earthquake on television, life-threatening experience during the quake and tsunamis, injury, plant explosion, unemployment among middle-aged men, burying loved ones themselves, lack of social support, pre-existing health problems, misunderstanding of radiation exposure risk, lack of clarity regarding benefits, on-going stigma regarding radiation, distrust of government, distrust of public health authorities, distrust of the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) management, burnout among mental health workers, low income, loss of colleagues, and intra-family conflict.[4][56][57][58][59] Poor mental health has been associated with early mortality, disability, and the overuse of medical services.[55] The populations at the highest risk for mental health illnesses following the disaster are the nuclear power plant workers, mothers with infants, children, and middle-aged unemployed males.[3][4][60]

At-risk populations were identified through the implementation of surveys such as the Fukushima Health Management Survey (FHMS). The FHMS began soon after the Fukushima disaster and has tracked health outcomes for several years after the event.[3] The intent and goals of the FHMS surveys was to “monitor the long-term health of residents, promote their future well-being, and confirm whether long-term low-dose radiation exposure has health effects.”[61] The FHMS is a general survey that includes four detailed surveys (thyroid ultrasound exam, comprehensive health check, mental health and lifestyle survey, and pregnancy and birth survey).[61] These surveys, which were given to both children and adults, addressed mental status, physical status, 6-month activities, perception of radiation risk, and experiences during and after disaster.[61] The FHMS surveys are ongoing and are reported out on an annual basis.[3]

According to the FHMS survey, the top three mental health diagnoses (discussed further below) include:

-Depression

-Anxiety

-Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

Depression

The disaster affected all ages of the population, and though adolescents were more likely to develop mental health problems in general, older adults were more likely to develop depression.[56]For evacuees living in temporary housing, depression was more often long-term for these individuals when compared to the general population in Fukushima.[56] Rates of depression were high among mothers who lived in Fukushima and were pregnant when the disaster occurred, and remained high in the months after the baby was born.[60] Depressive symptoms occurred even more so in women who experienced interruption in obstetrical care because of the nuclear disaster and potentially from damaged healthcare buildings.[56][60] About a quarter of the women who were pregnant at the time of the disaster experienced symptoms of depression, and though the proportion of concerned expectant mothers decreased over time, counselling services were still provided in the years following due to the number of women concerned about the potential health effects from the event.[3] Also, one study looking at elderly individuals from Iwanuma City in the Miyagi prefecture found that exercise may help decrease depressive symptoms among older adults who survived the earthquake and tsunami disaster.[62]

Anxiety

One of the most common fears regarding nuclear disasters is radiation exposure. Parental anxiety was one of the reasons for thyroid ultrasound examinations in children after the disaster.[61] In 2015, one study found that in a group of 300,473 children that had undergone a thyroid ultrasound since the Fukushima nuclear disaster, nearly half of this sample had developed nodules or cysts; 116 children from this sample developed nodules that were malignant or otherwise suspicious.[3]

Measures were taken to decrease the amount of radiation exposure due to side effects expected to potentially occur with exposure. For example, restrictions were placed on certain food from the region and internationally; Japanese goods were placed under restrictions by some countries initially after the disaster.[58] Tough restrictions were left in place because the public generally did not have a clear idea of the risks from radiation exposure, and implementing policy changes to reflect less restrictive, but low-risk, levels of radiation received push-back in Japan.[58]

Furthermore, those in the evacuation zone had to wait to return home, and some residents were unable to return home until several years after the event when living restrictions were finally lifted.[4] However, lifting the living restrictions did not always help residents as most were uneasy about returning home due to fears of health hazards as well as the stability of the communities if they were to return home.[4]

Low doses of radiation may not contribute much to create health effects like cancer, and given that such low doses may never lead to disease for most individuals, this raises the question of how evacuation should be handled in a situation like that of Fukushima.[58] Ethical considerations need to be taken regarding the impact on mental health versus the costs of allowing low amounts of exposure.[58] The many ways in which nuclear radiation could affect people in the area, whether through real health consequences or fear, are cause for anxiety; however, it appears that these fears may be settling in the Fukushima population as symptoms of anxiety have become less prevalent over time since the disaster.[3]

PTSD

At least 10% of participants in studies following the Fukushima disaster developed PTSD.[56] Among power plant workers from the event, it is possible that risk for post-traumatic stress disorder increased with age as younger workers tended not to develop this response as often as older workers.[57] After the nuclear disaster, stigmatization and discrimination were issues in general for nuclear power plant workers in the region whether they worked at the Daiichi plant or another plant that was not part of the nuclear disaster.[57] Greater amounts of discrimination and stressors in the first two to three months after the disaster were associated with general psychological distress and PTSD symptoms a year later, according to one study that assessed the mental health impact of slurs and discrimination on power plant workers.[57] Like other mental health problems, the need for support for PTSD symptoms decreased over time; one study found that the percentage of Fukushima Prefecture adult participants needing support was 15.8% in 2013, a nearly 6% decrease compared to what was observed in 2011 after the disaster.[3]

For all mental health needs, support services were provided soon after the disaster and in years following in order to help individuals suffering from symptoms of depression, anxiety, and PTSD; and it appears these services may have been worthwhile as symptoms of these mental health issues decreased in prevalence over time.[3] It should be noted that depression, anxiety, and PTSD were not the only notable mental health concerns that came out of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Other mental health issues that came out of the event include increased suicide risk.

Suicide

One of the most severe long-term effects the survey found is an increase in rates of suicide.[3] In the first few years after the disaster, suicide rates decreased, but after 2013, there was a significant increase in the rate of suicide that surpassed the rate of suicide in the year before the disaster.[3][4] The rate of suicide also increased more rapidly in Fukushima at this time than in surrounding prefectures that were affected by the earthquake and tsunami.[3] There has been suggestion that support services may have helped cause the decrease in rate of suicide for the first few years after the disaster, and the relapse in 2014 may indicate further need for these resources.[4] Overall, the FHMS survey and other research assisted with identifying the barriers to adequate mental health care.

The barriers identified to improving the mental health outcomes of Fukushima residents include: delays and miscommunication of benefits, a decline of health professionals assisting due to “burn out,” rumors and public stigma of radiation, cultural stigma in Japan against mental health disorders (causing affected individuals to be less likely to seek assistance), distrust in authorities (i.e. government and healthcare professionals), and tension with the community health workers due to differences in perceptions of radiation risk.[4][57] Based on these barriers, researchers were able to make recommendations for prevention and treatment of such mental health outcomes.

In order to effectively assist Fukushima residents and reduce the negative mental health outcomes, there needs to be further research to adequately identify the risk factors for mental health disorders. By doing so, efficient programs may be implemented.[4] Programs (including mental health screenings), treatments, and resource distribution should be focused on high-risk groups immediately after the disaster, such as mothers and infants and nuclear power plant workers.[4][57][60] Strategies that aim to reduce the incidence of the negative cultural stigma on mental health disorders in Japan should be implemented.[4] Furthermore, researchers and policymakers should continue to monitor for long-term mental effects as they may not be present right away.[4][57]

Trump threatens use of ‘overwhelming force’ against Iran if it attacks ‘anything American’

DUBAI — President Trump on Tuesday warned Iran that any attack on “anything American” would be met with “great and overwhelming force” after Iranian officials slammed new U.S. sanctions as permanently closing the path to diplomacy amid a spike in tensions in the Persian Gulf. 

Iran’s leadership “doesn’t understand the words ‘nice’ or ‘compassion,’ they never had,” Trump said in a series of tweets

“Sadly, the thing they do understand is Strength and Power,” he said. “Any attack by Iran on anything American will be met with great and overwhelming force. In some areas, overwhelming will mean obliteration!” 

Iranian officials earlier Tuesday criticized new penalties targeting Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, saying that the White House had “become mentally crippled.” In a searing televised address, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani called restrictions against Khamenei “outrageous and idiotic” and said they showed “certain failure” on the part of the Trump administration to isolate Iran. 

Trump called Rouhani’s comments “ignorant and insulting,” saying that they showed that Iran does “not understand reality.” 

“You call for negotiations. If you are telling the truth, why are you simultaneously seeking to sanction our foreign minister?” Rouhani said Tuesday, referring to remarks by U.S. officials suggesting plans to sanction Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif later this month. 

[Pompeo seeks support from allies to monitor Persian Gulf region amid tensions with Iran]

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, during an unannounced trip to Afghanistan on Tuesday, told reporters that Iran’s reaction was “a bit immature and childlike.” He said Tehran should “know that the United States will remain steadfast in undertaking the actions that the president laid out in this strategy to create stability throughout the Middle East, which includes the campaign we have, the economic campaign, the pressure campaign that we have on the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Twitter that the “useless sanctioning” of Khamenei and Zarif, who led Iran’s nuclear negotiations with world powers, “means the permanent closure of the doors of diplomacy.”

“Trump’s government is annihilating all of the established international mechanisms for maintaining world peace and security,” said the spokesman, Abbas Mousavi.

Under the sanctions, any foreign financial institutions that provide significant “financial services” to any of the Iranian officials would face U.S. penalties.

Trump announced the measures Monday, which U.S. officials said came in response to the downing of a U.S. Navy surveillance drone over the Strait of Hormuz last week. The sanctions also targeted senior commanders of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, including those the Treasury Department said were involved in shooting down the drone, a RQ-4A Global Hawk. 

The United States has also blamed Iran for a recent string of attacks on petrochemical tankers in the Persian Gulf region. Iran has denied involvement. 

Rouhani said Tuesday that the sanctions against Khamenei — whom Trump described as “the one who is ultimately responsible for the hostile conduct of the regime” — were futile because the 80-year-old leader does not maintain any financial assets abroad.

“Tehran’s strategic patience does not mean we have fear,” Rouhani said. 

National security adviser John Bolton described the new economic penalties Tuesday as “significant” but said that Trump has also “held the door open to real negotiations” with Iran. 

Iran calls new U.S. sanctions ‘outrageous,’

DUBAI — President Trump on Tuesday warned Iran that any attack on “anything American” would be met with “great and overwhelming force” after Iranian officials slammed new U.S. sanctions as permanently closing the path to diplomacy amid a spike in tensions in the Persian Gulf. 

Iran’s leadership “doesn’t understand the words ‘nice’ or ‘compassion,’ they never had,” Trump said in a series of tweets

“Sadly, the thing they do understand is Strength and Power,” he said. “Any attack by Iran on anything American will be met with great and overwhelming force. In some areas, overwhelming will mean obliteration!” 

Iranian officials earlier Tuesday criticized new penalties targeting Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, saying that the White House had “become mentally crippled.” In a searing televised address, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani called restrictions against Khamenei “outrageous and idiotic” and said they showed “certain failure” on the part of the Trump administration to isolate Iran. 

Trump called Rouhani’s comments “ignorant and insulting,” saying that they showed that Iran does “not understand reality.” 

“You call for negotiations. If you are telling the truth, why are you simultaneously seeking to sanction our foreign minister?” Rouhani said Tuesday, referring to remarks by U.S. officials suggesting plans to sanction Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif later this month. 

[Pompeo seeks support from allies to monitor Persian Gulf region amid tensions with Iran]

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, during an unannounced trip to Afghanistan on Tuesday, told reporters that Iran’s reaction was “a bit immature and childlike.” He said Tehran should “know that the United States will remain steadfast in undertaking the actions that the president laid out in this strategy to create stability throughout the Middle East, which includes the campaign we have, the economic campaign, the pressure campaign that we have on the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Twitter that the “useless sanctioning” of Khamenei and Zarif, who led Iran’s nuclear negotiations with world powers, “means the permanent closure of the doors of diplomacy.”

“Trump’s government is annihilating all of the established international mechanisms for maintaining world peace and security,” said the spokesman, Abbas Mousavi.

Under the sanctions, any foreign financial institutions that provide significant “financial services” to any of the Iranian officials would face U.S. penalties.

Trump announced the measures Monday, which U.S. officials said came in response to the downing of a U.S. Navy surveillance drone over the Strait of Hormuz last week. The sanctions also targeted senior commanders of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, including those the Treasury Department said were involved in shooting down the drone, a RQ-4A Global Hawk. 

The United States has also blamed Iran for a recent string of attacks on petrochemical tankers in the Persian Gulf region. Iran has denied involvement. 

Rouhani said Tuesday that the sanctions against Khamenei — whom Trump described as “the one who is ultimately responsible for the hostile conduct of the regime” — were futile because the 80-year-old leader does not maintain any financial assets abroad.

“Tehran’s strategic patience does not mean we have fear,” Rouhani said. 

National security adviser John Bolton described the new economic penalties Tuesday as “significant” but said that Trump has also “held the door open to real negotiations” with Iran. 

what will tech savvy people will look like in the year 2100 ??

The effects of modern technology on the human body is a subject of fascination for many scientists.

From carpal tunnel syndrome and eye strain to the condition known as “tech neck”, the negative effects of prologued technology use are well documented.

Now one company has created a 3D model of a future human, based on some of these scientific predictions – and the result is truly horrifying.

Dubbed “Mindy”, the human of 2100 has a hunched back, caused by hours sitting in front of a computer monitor at the office and craning her neck to look at smartphones.

READ MORE

Her neck muscles have also grown to limit the damage caused by poor posture due to monitor and smartphone use.

“Spending hours looking down at your phone strains your neck and throws your spine off balance,” said Caleb Backe, a health and wellness expert at Maple Holistics.

“Consequently, the muscles in your neck have to expend extra effort to support your head.

“Sitting in front of the computer at the office for hours on end also means that your torso is pulled out in front of your hips rather than being stacked straight and aligned.”

READ MORE

Mindy’s adaptations don’t stop there. Her skull has thickened, helping to protect her brain from radiofrequency radiation emitted from smartphones – which some believe can have serious health implications.

Her brain has also shrunk, based on the recent scientific theory that a sedentary lifestyle is reducing human brain capacity.

Meanwhile, her hand has permanently molded into a claw-like grip and her elbow is bent to 90 degrees, due to sustained periods spent holding a smartphone.

READ MORE

“The way we hold our phones can cause strain in certain points of contact – causing ‘text claw’ and ’90-degree elbow’ also known as the cubital tunnel syndrome,” said Dr Nikola Djordjevic from Med Alert Help.

“This syndrome is caused by pressure or the stretching of the ulnar nerve which runs in a groove on the inner side of the elbow.

“This causes numbness or a tingling sensation in the ring and little fingers, forearm pain, and weakness in the hands – keeping the elbow bent for a long time.”

Mindy’s final physical change is possibly her most outlandish – she has a second set of eyelids to filter out excessive light emitted from technology devices.

READ MORE

Kasun Ratnayake from the University of Toledo suggests this radical evolutionary development could limit the amount of harmful light our eyes are exposed to.

“Humans may develop a larger inner eyelid to prevent exposure to excessive light, or the lens of the eye may be evolutionary developed such that it blocks incoming blue light but not other high wavelength lights like green, yellow or red,” he said.

While the Mindy model is extreme, and designed to shock, it provides an interesting visual representation of a growing body of scientific research.

READ MORE

“Technology gives us convenience, connectivity, entertainment, and so much more – but there is a trade-off,” said Jason O’Brien, COO of TollFreeForwarding.com, which commissioned the model.

“Overexposure to technology can sometimes come to the detriment of our health.

“While the benefits of technology to individuals and businesses are too great to ignore, it’s worth evaluating your usage to ensure your health isn’t being damaged in the long-term.”

Image result for cyborg