Museum exhibits tend to be quiet. Not this one.

In “Play It Loud,” an exuberant show that can be heard as well as seen, the Metropolitan Museum of Art takes on the history of rock ‘n’ roll through iconic instruments on loan from some of rock’s biggest names. There are flamboyant costumes worn by Prince and Jimmy Page, videotaped interviews with “guitar gods,” even shattered guitars.

The show runs here from April 8 through Oct. 1 before traveling to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, in Cleveland, where it will be on view from Nov. 20, 2019 through Sept. 13, 2020.

“We’re looking at rock ‘n’ roll instruments as an art. They serve as muses, tools and visual icons, and many of them are hand-painted and lovingly designed,” says Jayson Kerr Dobney, curator in charge of the department of musical instruments at the Met. He organized “Play It Loud: Instruments of Rock and Roll,” with Craig J. Inciardi, curator and director of acquisitions at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

For anyone who ever dreamed of climbing onstage at a rock concert for a closer look, this may be your best shot.

“Instruments are some of the most personal objects connected to musicians, but as audience members we are primarily used to seeing them from far away, up on a stage in performance. This exhibition will provide a rare opportunity to examine some of rock ‘n’ roll’s most iconic objects up close,” says Dobney.

Highlights include Chuck Berry’s ES-350T guitar (at the entrance to the exhibit), John Lennon’s 12-string Rickenbacker 325, an electric 500/1 “violin” bass on loan from Paul McCartney, Keith Moon’s drum set, and the white Stratocaster played at Woodstock by Jimi Hendrix.

Interviewed Monday by The Associated Press, Page, the guitarist and founder of Led Zeppelin, said that when curators approached him and explained their vision of the exhibit — you approach it through the Greco-Roman art galleries and then suddenly come upon Berry’s guitar — he was all in. 

“My guitar was confiscated if I took it to the school field to play,” he says. “That’s the kind of respect given to guitars in those days.

“So to see guitars from people I listen to … it’s absolutely phenomenal. It’s humbling.”

Over 130 instruments are featured in the show, including ones played and beloved by the Beatles, Elvis Presley, Lady Gaga, Joan Jett, Metallica, Steve Miller, The Rolling Stones, Page and other rock ‘n’ roll greats. The collection spans 1939 to 2017. All the instruments are on loan, most by the musicians themselves, although Miller has promised to donate to the Met his 1961 Les Paul TV Special guitar, painted by surfboard artist Bob Cantrell.

The show features its own rock ‘n’ roll soundtrack and is organized in thematic sections.

“Setting the Stage” explores rock’s early days in the American South of the late 1940s and early 1950s, when pianos, saxophones and acoustic guitars were among the instruments of choice. Soon, Berry helped revolutionize the sound, establishing the electric guitar as the genre’s primary voice and visual icon.

Also featured is a setup like that used by the Beatles on The Ed Sullivan Show in 1964. After that performance, “thousands of rock bands were formed using that same lineup: two guitars, a bass and a drum set,” says Dobney.

The “Guitar Gods” section traces that phrase to Eric Clapton’s stardom and a piece of 1966 graffiti in London proclaiming, “Clapton is God.” Others dubbed guitar gods included Page, Jeff Beck, Pete Townsend and Hendrix. All exemplified virtuoso musicianship and awe-inspiring swagger. By the 1970s, women, too, were fronting bands and finding platforms for their own personae and skills, Dobney says.

“The Rhythm Section” explores the sources of the genre’s powerful rhythms, with accented backbeats created using a drum set and electric bass guitar.

Even as guitars were lovingly painted, and sometimes even built by the musicians who played them (like Eddie Van Halen’s red and white “Frankenstein” guitar, featuring a Fender-style body and neck with Gibson electronics), instruments were also famously destroyed by rock stars as part of their act.

“It may be the only musical genre where destruction of instruments became a part of the performance,” Dobney says.

Featured is a fragment of a Hendrix guitar that he set on fire and smashed onstage at the Monterey Pop Festival in 1967; a Gibson SG Special guitar destroyed by Townsend during a photo shoot with Annie Leibovitz for Rolling Stone (and preserved in Lucite); and a modified Hammond L-100 organ used by Keith Emerson as a “stunt instrument,” which he would jump on, pull on top of himself, stick knives in and — in this instrument’s case — set ablaze during performances.

“Expanding the Band” explores the way the classic four-piece rock band was augmented by instruments like dulcimers, sitars and a range of experimental keyboards to expand the sound.

“Creating an Image” opens with an enormous, jagged electric piano housed in acrylic with built-in lights, owned by Lady Gaga. That section also includes Prince’s “Love Symbol” guitar and a dragon-embroidered outfit once worn by Page.

“Creating a Sound” explores the technical side of rock music, with the amps, guitars and rigs used by Page, Keith Richards, Van Halen and Tom Morello. Each of the four rigs is accompanied by a videotaped interview with the artist explaining how they created their unique sound.

The show ends with footage of some of rock’s most iconic moments, along with decades of posters advertising groundbreaking concerts.
…

From: MeNeedIt

Museum exhibits tend to be quiet. Not this one.

In “Play It Loud,” an exuberant show that can be heard as well as seen, the Metropolitan Museum of Art takes on the history of rock ‘n’ roll through iconic instruments on loan from some of rock’s biggest names. There are flamboyant costumes worn by Prince and Jimmy Page, videotaped interviews with “guitar gods,” even shattered guitars.

The show runs here from April 8 through Oct. 1 before traveling to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, in Cleveland, where it will be on view from Nov. 20, 2019 through Sept. 13, 2020.

“We’re looking at rock ‘n’ roll instruments as an art. They serve as muses, tools and visual icons, and many of them are hand-painted and lovingly designed,” says Jayson Kerr Dobney, curator in charge of the department of musical instruments at the Met. He organized “Play It Loud: Instruments of Rock and Roll,” with Craig J. Inciardi, curator and director of acquisitions at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

For anyone who ever dreamed of climbing onstage at a rock concert for a closer look, this may be your best shot.

“Instruments are some of the most personal objects connected to musicians, but as audience members we are primarily used to seeing them from far away, up on a stage in performance. This exhibition will provide a rare opportunity to examine some of rock ‘n’ roll’s most iconic objects up close,” says Dobney.

Highlights include Chuck Berry’s ES-350T guitar (at the entrance to the exhibit), John Lennon’s 12-string Rickenbacker 325, an electric 500/1 “violin” bass on loan from Paul McCartney, Keith Moon’s drum set, and the white Stratocaster played at Woodstock by Jimi Hendrix.

Interviewed Monday by The Associated Press, Page, the guitarist and founder of Led Zeppelin, said that when curators approached him and explained their vision of the exhibit — you approach it through the Greco-Roman art galleries and then suddenly come upon Berry’s guitar — he was all in. 

“My guitar was confiscated if I took it to the school field to play,” he says. “That’s the kind of respect given to guitars in those days.

“So to see guitars from people I listen to … it’s absolutely phenomenal. It’s humbling.”

Over 130 instruments are featured in the show, including ones played and beloved by the Beatles, Elvis Presley, Lady Gaga, Joan Jett, Metallica, Steve Miller, The Rolling Stones, Page and other rock ‘n’ roll greats. The collection spans 1939 to 2017. All the instruments are on loan, most by the musicians themselves, although Miller has promised to donate to the Met his 1961 Les Paul TV Special guitar, painted by surfboard artist Bob Cantrell.

The show features its own rock ‘n’ roll soundtrack and is organized in thematic sections.

“Setting the Stage” explores rock’s early days in the American South of the late 1940s and early 1950s, when pianos, saxophones and acoustic guitars were among the instruments of choice. Soon, Berry helped revolutionize the sound, establishing the electric guitar as the genre’s primary voice and visual icon.

Also featured is a setup like that used by the Beatles on The Ed Sullivan Show in 1964. After that performance, “thousands of rock bands were formed using that same lineup: two guitars, a bass and a drum set,” says Dobney.

The “Guitar Gods” section traces that phrase to Eric Clapton’s stardom and a piece of 1966 graffiti in London proclaiming, “Clapton is God.” Others dubbed guitar gods included Page, Jeff Beck, Pete Townsend and Hendrix. All exemplified virtuoso musicianship and awe-inspiring swagger. By the 1970s, women, too, were fronting bands and finding platforms for their own personae and skills, Dobney says.

“The Rhythm Section” explores the sources of the genre’s powerful rhythms, with accented backbeats created using a drum set and electric bass guitar.

Even as guitars were lovingly painted, and sometimes even built by the musicians who played them (like Eddie Van Halen’s red and white “Frankenstein” guitar, featuring a Fender-style body and neck with Gibson electronics), instruments were also famously destroyed by rock stars as part of their act.

“It may be the only musical genre where destruction of instruments became a part of the performance,” Dobney says.

Featured is a fragment of a Hendrix guitar that he set on fire and smashed onstage at the Monterey Pop Festival in 1967; a Gibson SG Special guitar destroyed by Townsend during a photo shoot with Annie Leibovitz for Rolling Stone (and preserved in Lucite); and a modified Hammond L-100 organ used by Keith Emerson as a “stunt instrument,” which he would jump on, pull on top of himself, stick knives in and — in this instrument’s case — set ablaze during performances.

“Expanding the Band” explores the way the classic four-piece rock band was augmented by instruments like dulcimers, sitars and a range of experimental keyboards to expand the sound.

“Creating an Image” opens with an enormous, jagged electric piano housed in acrylic with built-in lights, owned by Lady Gaga. That section also includes Prince’s “Love Symbol” guitar and a dragon-embroidered outfit once worn by Page.

“Creating a Sound” explores the technical side of rock music, with the amps, guitars and rigs used by Page, Keith Richards, Van Halen and Tom Morello. Each of the four rigs is accompanied by a videotaped interview with the artist explaining how they created their unique sound.

The show ends with footage of some of rock’s most iconic moments, along with decades of posters advertising groundbreaking concerts.
…

From: MeNeedIt

A biopic on Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi by a Bollywood filmmaker that was due to hit the screens on Friday has been postponed as it lands in the midst of a raging political controversy.

Furious opposition parties have slammed the film, which critics say portrays the Indian leader in a larger-than-life, flattering light, as blatant propaganda and questioned why it was planned to be released days before India begins choosing a new government.  

Bollywood’s brush with Indian politics is not new – every election season witnesses a sprinkling of star power as a handful of actors either join politics or use their appeal on the campaign trail. But this is the first time that a film produced by the industry that has an outsized influence on Indian masses, is under the scanner.

From tea seller to PM

Tracing the Indian leader’s journey from a humble tea seller to the country’s top post, one of the most dramatic scenes in the trailer of “PM Narendra Modi” shows him waving a giant Indian flag yelling that “India will not fear terror, terror will fear India.”

These are themes that Modi has been reinforcing on the campaign trail: in the aftermath of recent hostilities with Pakistan he has projected himself as a leader who took a tougher stand on terrorism compared to previous governments and could protect the country.

Denouncing the biopic as a political venture and not an artistic one, the main opposition Congress party said it was meant to get some “extra mileage” in the elections. Although the Election Commission failed to intervene after the opposition said that its release should be deferred, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the plea of a Congress Party leader next week.  

As the controversy swirled, news of the delay came in a tweet from the film’s producer, Sandip Ssingh. “This is to confirm that our film ‘PM Narendra Modi’ is not releasing on 5th April. Will update soon.” The filmmakers gave no reason for its postponement but apparently the Censor Board has still to certify it for release.

No political agenda

Ssingh has denied any political agenda in making the film saying he only wanted to relate an inspirational story. He has also dismissed allegations that it was timed to coincide with elections saying that filmmakers, as businessmen, have the right to choose a suitable date.

Critics however point out that Vivek Oberoi, the actor who portrays Modi is his strong supporter and campaigned for him in 2014.

The Bharatiya Janata Party has told the Election Commission it played no role in the production of the film. “Independent artists, influenced by the lifestyle of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, created the film.” It says that banning the film will infringe on the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression.

Senior BJP leader Arun Jaitley told reporters last week “when articles, writings, TV channels can influence voters, why can’t celluloid? I would like to understand the self-limitation created on free speech today.”

Film critics say it does appear to project Modi in a very favorable light. “By all that one gets to see in the trailer, obviously it is like a hagiography of sorts. You are not going to get like fine analysis of the politics over the years and the controversies that have surrounded the man,” says Namrata Joshi, a film critic with the Hindu newspaper. “And what really riles is the time it is coming. One feels that things are suspect.”

Political observers point to one scene in the trailer in which Modi looks disturbed and despondent in the midst of deadly anti-Muslim riots that gripped his home state Gujarat in 2002 when he was chief minister. Although he has been cleared of any involvement in the riots, critics have accused his administration of not doing enough to stop the violence.

Previous firestorm

This is not the only film to raise a firestorm. In January a movie about Modi’s predecessor Manmohan Singh raised another outcry as critics said it portrayed him in an unflattering light. The lead role was played by an actor who is a supporter of Modi.

Even as controversy dogs Modi’s biopic, the first half of a 10-episode web series based on him released this month on a video streaming platform without much fanfare.  

And Congress Party leader, Rahul Gandhi, seen as Modi’s main opponent, is not being left behind — a biopic on him, “My Name is Raga” plans to show his “inner life.” Its director, Rupesh Paul, said the movie has no intentions to glorify him but is “the story of a coming back of a human being who had been ridiculously attacked.” The biopic however is unlikely to face a challenge as it may not be ready until the polls close in India’s mammoth elections.

The polls open April 11 and continue through May 23.

 
…

From: MeNeedIt

Some of the nation’s top research universities are cutting ties with Chinese tech giant Huawei as the company faces allegations of bank fraud and trade theft.

Colleges including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Princeton University and the University of California, Berkeley, have said they will accept no new funding from the company, citing the recent federal charges against Huawei along with broader cybersecurity concerns previously raised by the U.S. government.

The schools are among at least nine that have received funding from Huawei over the past six years, amounting a combined $10.5 million, according to data provided by the U.S. Education Department. The data, which is reported by schools, does not include gifts of less than $250,000. It’s not uncommon for big companies to provide research dollars to schools in the U.S. and elsewhere.

At MIT, which received a $500,000 gift in 2017, officials announced in a memo Wednesday they will not approve any new deals with the company and won’t renew existing ones. The memo ties the decision to recent Justice Department charges against Huawei, adding that the shift will be revisited “as circumstances dictate.”

Company officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Federal prosecutors in January unsealed two cases against Huawei. One, filed in New York, accuses the company of bank fraud and says it plotted to violate U.S. trade sanctions against Iran. The other, filed in Washington state, accuses Huawei of stealing technology from T-Mobile’s headquarters in Bellevue, Washington. The company pleaded not guilty in both cases.

The U.S. government previously barred federal agencies from buying certain equipment from Huawei and labeled the company a cybersecurity risk.

Just days after the federal cases were unsealed, officials at the University of California, Berkeley, issued a ban on new research funding from Huawei until the charges are resolved.

“UC Berkeley holds its research partners to the highest possible standards of corporate conduct, and the severity of these accusations raises questions and concerns that only our judicial system can address,” Howard Katz, the school’s vice chancellor for research, said in the Jan. 30 directive.

Still, the school is honoring its existing multi-year deals with the company, which amount to $7.8 million. Officials say most of the funding supports research centers rather than specific projects, and Katz’s memo emphasized that “none of these projects involve sensitive technological secrets or knowledge.”

Berkeley officials investigated whether it had any technology provided by Huawei that could pose a cybersecurity threat. Officials removed one off-campus video conferencing set-up donated by the company, but said it had never been used for research. The school’s projects funded by Huawei cover a wide range of science fields, from artificial intelligence and deep learning to wireless technology and cybersecurity.

At Princeton, officials told Huawei in January they would not accept the final $150,000 installment of a gift that supported computer science research. Ben Chang, a Princeton spokesman, said the school had decided last July not to accept new gifts from the company, and has no current projects backed by it.

Cornell University has received more than $5.3 million from Huawei in recent years, by far more than any other U.S. college, according to the Education Department data. Officials there also said they will heed the government’s warnings and bar new funding.

Existing projects were carefully reviewed, according to a statement from the school, “to confirm that appropriate safeguards were in place to address data and information security, to protect the independence of our research and to comply with all federal and state laws and regulations.”

Ohio State University is also opting not to pursue any other funding from Huawei. The school has received $1.2 million for engineering research, according to federal data. School spokesman Ben John said officials are “in the process of closing out the final contract, and are not accepting or pursuing any other gifts or contracts from Huawei.” 
…

From: MeNeedIt

Some of the nation’s top research universities are cutting ties with Chinese tech giant Huawei as the company faces allegations of bank fraud and trade theft.

Colleges including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Princeton University and the University of California, Berkeley, have said they will accept no new funding from the company, citing the recent federal charges against Huawei along with broader cybersecurity concerns previously raised by the U.S. government.

The schools are among at least nine that have received funding from Huawei over the past six years, amounting a combined $10.5 million, according to data provided by the U.S. Education Department. The data, which is reported by schools, does not include gifts of less than $250,000. It’s not uncommon for big companies to provide research dollars to schools in the U.S. and elsewhere.

At MIT, which received a $500,000 gift in 2017, officials announced in a memo Wednesday they will not approve any new deals with the company and won’t renew existing ones. The memo ties the decision to recent Justice Department charges against Huawei, adding that the shift will be revisited “as circumstances dictate.”

Company officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Federal prosecutors in January unsealed two cases against Huawei. One, filed in New York, accuses the company of bank fraud and says it plotted to violate U.S. trade sanctions against Iran. The other, filed in Washington state, accuses Huawei of stealing technology from T-Mobile’s headquarters in Bellevue, Washington. The company pleaded not guilty in both cases.

The U.S. government previously barred federal agencies from buying certain equipment from Huawei and labeled the company a cybersecurity risk.

Just days after the federal cases were unsealed, officials at the University of California, Berkeley, issued a ban on new research funding from Huawei until the charges are resolved.

“UC Berkeley holds its research partners to the highest possible standards of corporate conduct, and the severity of these accusations raises questions and concerns that only our judicial system can address,” Howard Katz, the school’s vice chancellor for research, said in the Jan. 30 directive.

Still, the school is honoring its existing multi-year deals with the company, which amount to $7.8 million. Officials say most of the funding supports research centers rather than specific projects, and Katz’s memo emphasized that “none of these projects involve sensitive technological secrets or knowledge.”

Berkeley officials investigated whether it had any technology provided by Huawei that could pose a cybersecurity threat. Officials removed one off-campus video conferencing set-up donated by the company, but said it had never been used for research. The school’s projects funded by Huawei cover a wide range of science fields, from artificial intelligence and deep learning to wireless technology and cybersecurity.

At Princeton, officials told Huawei in January they would not accept the final $150,000 installment of a gift that supported computer science research. Ben Chang, a Princeton spokesman, said the school had decided last July not to accept new gifts from the company, and has no current projects backed by it.

Cornell University has received more than $5.3 million from Huawei in recent years, by far more than any other U.S. college, according to the Education Department data. Officials there also said they will heed the government’s warnings and bar new funding.

Existing projects were carefully reviewed, according to a statement from the school, “to confirm that appropriate safeguards were in place to address data and information security, to protect the independence of our research and to comply with all federal and state laws and regulations.”

Ohio State University is also opting not to pursue any other funding from Huawei. The school has received $1.2 million for engineering research, according to federal data. School spokesman Ben John said officials are “in the process of closing out the final contract, and are not accepting or pursuing any other gifts or contracts from Huawei.” 
…

From: MeNeedIt

As candidates jostle to head the United Nations’ multibillion dollar food agency, experts called on Thursday for a strong leader to tackling rising hunger and climate change threats.

Levels of hunger have grown for the past three years, with one in nine people — or 821 million — worldwide without enough to eat, due to drought, floods, conflict and economic slowdowns, U.N. figures show.

“We don’t see improvement in terms of poverty and hunger. What we see is degradation and resources that would be lost for future generations. So there’s an emergency,” said Frederic Mousseau, a food policy expert at U.S.-based Oakland Institute.

“Agriculture and the way we produce our food and the way we consume our food has to have a major solution. That’s the key challenge for the new director.”

The Rome-based Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has a budget of $2.6 billion for 2018 and 2019, employs nearly 6,000 people and works in more than 130 countries with governments to reduce rural poverty and hunger.

The four contenders include a European Union-backed French agronomist, who could become the FAO’s first female head of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and an agriculture vice-minister from China, whose global influence is on the rise.

 Georgia and India have also fielded candidates for the June vote by delegates from the FAO’s 194 member states.

“There is very much at stake in an election like this,” said Mousseau, adding that governments are under constant pressure “to expand the corporate-driven model of agriculture that is polluting and unsustainable”.

“We need someone strong enough at the FAO to stand against that and to be able to propose a different path which is about farmers and sustainability,” he added.

Rising populism and nationalism

The elections come at a time of rising populism and nationalism with major powers cutting aid budgets, including the United States — FAO’s largest funder.

The current director-general Jose Graziano da Silva, architect of Brazil’s landmark Zero Hunger program, has overseen a drive to push through ambitious internal reforms. His predecessor, Jacques Diouf, served an 18-year term amid donor criticism about inefficiencies.

Times have changed since FAO was founded in 1945, when hunger was the main concern, said Patrick Caron, chairman of the U.N. High-level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition.

“Food security is no longer only a question of food supply but also of nutrition,” he said, as limited progress is being made to tackle malnutrition, ranging from child stunting to adult obesity.

“Now is time for a new deal … We absolutely need a huge transformation of our food systems.”

France’s Catherine Geslain-Laneelle said her priorities would include boosting sustainable agricultural output to keep pace with population growth, building farmers’ resilience to climate change and creating jobs for young rural Africans.

The former head of the European Food Safety Authority also said she was keen to support women farmers.

“Although they are present everywhere in the food system, sometimes women have difficulties to access land, to water, to the forums where decisions are made,” she told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Davit Kirvalidze, former agricultural minister in Georgia said his experience growing potatoes during the difficult period when Georgia emerged from Soviet rule gave him an insight into the needs of farmers, “especially in times of trouble.”

“Not only did I manage to feed my family but also eventually my community,” said Kirvalidze, who also sits on the board of Washington-based non-profit Cultivating New Frontiers in Agriculture and advises Georgia’s prime minister.

Representatives from the embassies of India and China did not respond to requests to interview their candidates.
…

From: MeNeedIt

As candidates jostle to head the United Nations’ multibillion dollar food agency, experts called on Thursday for a strong leader to tackling rising hunger and climate change threats.

Levels of hunger have grown for the past three years, with one in nine people — or 821 million — worldwide without enough to eat, due to drought, floods, conflict and economic slowdowns, U.N. figures show.

“We don’t see improvement in terms of poverty and hunger. What we see is degradation and resources that would be lost for future generations. So there’s an emergency,” said Frederic Mousseau, a food policy expert at U.S.-based Oakland Institute.

“Agriculture and the way we produce our food and the way we consume our food has to have a major solution. That’s the key challenge for the new director.”

The Rome-based Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has a budget of $2.6 billion for 2018 and 2019, employs nearly 6,000 people and works in more than 130 countries with governments to reduce rural poverty and hunger.

The four contenders include a European Union-backed French agronomist, who could become the FAO’s first female head of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and an agriculture vice-minister from China, whose global influence is on the rise.

 Georgia and India have also fielded candidates for the June vote by delegates from the FAO’s 194 member states.

“There is very much at stake in an election like this,” said Mousseau, adding that governments are under constant pressure “to expand the corporate-driven model of agriculture that is polluting and unsustainable”.

“We need someone strong enough at the FAO to stand against that and to be able to propose a different path which is about farmers and sustainability,” he added.

Rising populism and nationalism

The elections come at a time of rising populism and nationalism with major powers cutting aid budgets, including the United States — FAO’s largest funder.

The current director-general Jose Graziano da Silva, architect of Brazil’s landmark Zero Hunger program, has overseen a drive to push through ambitious internal reforms. His predecessor, Jacques Diouf, served an 18-year term amid donor criticism about inefficiencies.

Times have changed since FAO was founded in 1945, when hunger was the main concern, said Patrick Caron, chairman of the U.N. High-level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition.

“Food security is no longer only a question of food supply but also of nutrition,” he said, as limited progress is being made to tackle malnutrition, ranging from child stunting to adult obesity.

“Now is time for a new deal … We absolutely need a huge transformation of our food systems.”

France’s Catherine Geslain-Laneelle said her priorities would include boosting sustainable agricultural output to keep pace with population growth, building farmers’ resilience to climate change and creating jobs for young rural Africans.

The former head of the European Food Safety Authority also said she was keen to support women farmers.

“Although they are present everywhere in the food system, sometimes women have difficulties to access land, to water, to the forums where decisions are made,” she told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Davit Kirvalidze, former agricultural minister in Georgia said his experience growing potatoes during the difficult period when Georgia emerged from Soviet rule gave him an insight into the needs of farmers, “especially in times of trouble.”

“Not only did I manage to feed my family but also eventually my community,” said Kirvalidze, who also sits on the board of Washington-based non-profit Cultivating New Frontiers in Agriculture and advises Georgia’s prime minister.

Representatives from the embassies of India and China did not respond to requests to interview their candidates.
…

From: MeNeedIt

New data finds women everywhere live on average 4.4 years longer than men because they see the doctor more frequently and generally take better care of their health.

While women outlive men around the world, the World Health Organization’s Statistics Overview 2019 says their life expectancy is sharply reduced because of maternal deaths. It says this highlights the big health gap that still exists between rich and poor countries.

The World Health Organization reports one in 41 women die from maternal causes in poor countries where access to health services are scarce. This compared with one in 3,300 maternal deaths in rich countries.

Samira Asma is WHO assistant director general for data, analytics and delivery. She says men die earlier than women because they do not take as good care of their health as women. Also, they tend to be exposed to greater risks.

“In many circumstances, men use health care less than women. They are less likely to seek care and to continue care once diagnosed of a certain condition. And also, men are more likely to die from preventable and treatable noncommunicable diseases and road traffic accidents,” says Asma.

Leading causes of death

Of the 40 leading causes of death, the report says men have higher death rates than women from 33 of the risk factors. For example, the report says men smoke and drink alcohol much more than women. It finds global suicide mortality rates are 75 percent higher in men than in women.

Asma says noncommunicable diseases are on the rise in most of the low- and middle-income countries, especially in Africa. She tells VOA this is due to the emergence of risk factors such as tobacco use, increase in alcohol consumption and unhealthy diets.

“In terms of leading causes of noncommunicable disease-related deaths, are cardiovascular and ischemic heart disease. And hypertension. Though it is preventable and treatable, a risk factor is not being addressed,” she said.

Asma says statistics on NCD-related deaths underscore the need to prioritize primary health care. She says people in these facilities can receive the medicine and treatment they need for their ailments. She notes that people who seek primary health care are made aware of the risk factors that can cause premature deaths.

 
…

From: MeNeedIt

In the U.S. economic battle with China, the Chinese government is often portrayed as a kingmaker, making large investments in research and paving the way for Chinese companies to thrive.

China, it turns out, is a good foil for U.S. industries as they ask the U.S. government to do more to help them compete globally.

Two new reports out this week, one from the U.S. wireless industry and the other from the U.S. semiconductor industry, show how U.S. companies are looking more to Washington to help them compete with their Chinese counterparts.

CTIA, which represents the U.S. wireless industry, found in its report that the U.S. is now tied with China when it comes to “its 5G readiness.” 5G is the high-speed wireless network that is being built around the world.

Last year, the U.S. was in third place, trailing China and South Korea, respectively, according to CTIA.

​US tied with China in 5G race

What has propelled U.S. firms? Increased industry investment in 5G networks plus “government action to reform infrastructure policies and make more spectrum available to wireless operators,” according to CTIA.

The stakes are said to be high in the global race to 5G. The first nation to the broadest 5G network will attract more investment and create more jobs than countries that lag behind, CTIA research has found. The U.S. was first to 4G deployment, which led to more than $100 billion added to the nation’s gross domestic product, according to CTIA.

But it isn’t clear that first is always best.

The United Kingdom was seen to be behind other countries in its 4G deployment, and the “U.K. operators launched when they needed it, and they were able to capitalize,” said Caroline Gabriel, a principal analyst at Analysys Mason, a telecom research firm.

“I really question if it matters,” she said. “There was a lot of tub-thumping.”

CTIA recommends that an upcoming Trump administration “National Spectrum Strategy” include a “five-year schedule of auctions that puts more high-, mid- and low-band spectrum in the hands of America’s wireless industry.” In November, the FCC launched its high-band spectrum auction for 5G.

​More federal investment urged

For its part, the Semiconductor Industry Association, in its report, called for the U.S. government to increase its investment in semiconductor research and release the cap on green cards for qualified candidates.

The U.S. semiconductor industry is the world leader in semiconductors, commanding nearly half of the $469 billion global market in 2018, the trade association said. But China has increased its investment in semiconductor research as it tries to lessen its reliance on importing semiconductors.

“Overseas governments, such as China’s, are seeking to challenge U.S. leadership by making significant investments to achieve breakthroughs in semiconductor technology, artificial intelligence and quantum computing,” the SIA report said.

SIA calls for tripling federal investment in semiconductor research over the next five years to $5 billion annually and doubling federal funding for semiconductor research to $40 billion annually.

Remove green card caps

It also calls on the U.S. to remove caps on green cards for qualified graduates in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) to meet short-term demand for talent. It also calls for the U.S. to boost its federal funding to $1.5 billion annually for STEM education, a 50 percent increase.

John Neuffer, SIA president and CEO, said in a statement that U.S. semiconductor leadership is thanks to the strength of its research, workforce and its ability to sell its products around the world.

“Congress and the administration should enact policies that reinforce these pillars and keep America at the head of the class in semiconductor technology,” he said.
…

From: MeNeedIt

In the U.S. economic battle with China, the Chinese government is often portrayed as a kingmaker, making large investments in research and paving the way for Chinese companies to thrive.

China, it turns out, is a good foil for U.S. industries as they ask the U.S. government to do more to help them compete globally.

Two new reports out this week, one from the U.S. wireless industry and the other from the U.S. semiconductor industry, show how U.S. companies are looking more to Washington to help them compete with their Chinese counterparts.

CTIA, which represents the U.S. wireless industry, found in its report that the U.S. is now tied with China when it comes to “its 5G readiness.” 5G is the high-speed wireless network that is being built around the world.

Last year, the U.S. was in third place, trailing China and South Korea, respectively, according to CTIA.

​US tied with China in 5G race

What has propelled U.S. firms? Increased industry investment in 5G networks plus “government action to reform infrastructure policies and make more spectrum available to wireless operators,” according to CTIA.

The stakes are said to be high in the global race to 5G. The first nation to the broadest 5G network will attract more investment and create more jobs than countries that lag behind, CTIA research has found. The U.S. was first to 4G deployment, which led to more than $100 billion added to the nation’s gross domestic product, according to CTIA.

But it isn’t clear that first is always best.

The United Kingdom was seen to be behind other countries in its 4G deployment, and the “U.K. operators launched when they needed it, and they were able to capitalize,” said Caroline Gabriel, a principal analyst at Analysys Mason, a telecom research firm.

“I really question if it matters,” she said. “There was a lot of tub-thumping.”

CTIA recommends that an upcoming Trump administration “National Spectrum Strategy” include a “five-year schedule of auctions that puts more high-, mid- and low-band spectrum in the hands of America’s wireless industry.” In November, the FCC launched its high-band spectrum auction for 5G.

​More federal investment urged

For its part, the Semiconductor Industry Association, in its report, called for the U.S. government to increase its investment in semiconductor research and release the cap on green cards for qualified candidates.

The U.S. semiconductor industry is the world leader in semiconductors, commanding nearly half of the $469 billion global market in 2018, the trade association said. But China has increased its investment in semiconductor research as it tries to lessen its reliance on importing semiconductors.

“Overseas governments, such as China’s, are seeking to challenge U.S. leadership by making significant investments to achieve breakthroughs in semiconductor technology, artificial intelligence and quantum computing,” the SIA report said.

SIA calls for tripling federal investment in semiconductor research over the next five years to $5 billion annually and doubling federal funding for semiconductor research to $40 billion annually.

Remove green card caps

It also calls on the U.S. to remove caps on green cards for qualified graduates in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) to meet short-term demand for talent. It also calls for the U.S. to boost its federal funding to $1.5 billion annually for STEM education, a 50 percent increase.

John Neuffer, SIA president and CEO, said in a statement that U.S. semiconductor leadership is thanks to the strength of its research, workforce and its ability to sell its products around the world.

“Congress and the administration should enact policies that reinforce these pillars and keep America at the head of the class in semiconductor technology,” he said.
…

From: MeNeedIt

One in five deaths globally is linked to poor diet, experts said in a study released Thursday, warning that overconsumption of sugar, salt and meat was killing millions of people every year. 

The United Nations estimates that nearly 1 billion people worldwide are malnourished, while nearly 2 billion are “overnourished.”  

But the latest study on global diet trends, published in The Lancet, showed that in nearly every one of the 195 countries surveyed, people were also eating too much of the wrong types of food — and consuming worryingly low levels of healthier produce. 

Sugar, sodium

For example, the world on average consumes more than 10 times the recommended amount of sugar-sweetened beverages, and 86 percent more sodium per person than is considered safe. 

The study, which examined consumption and disease trends between 1990 and 2017, also cautioned that too many people were eating far too few whole grains, fruit, nuts and seeds to maintain a healthy lifestyle. 

Of the 11 million deaths attributed to poor diet, by far the largest killer was cardiovascular disease, which is often caused or worsened by obesity. 

“This study affirms what many have thought for several years — that poor diet is responsible for more deaths than any other risk factor in the world,” said study author Christopher Murray, director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.  

“Our assessment suggests the leading dietary risk factors are high intake of sodium, or low intake of health foods.”  

The report highlighted large variation in diet-related deaths among nations, with the highest-risk country, Uzbekistan, having 10 times the food-based mortality rate of the lowest risk, Israel.  

Earlier report

In January, a consortium of three dozen researchers called for a dramatic shift in the way the world eats. 

The EAT-Lancet report said that the global population must eat roughly half as much red meat and sugar, and twice as many vegetables, fruits and nuts in order to avert a worldwide obesity epidemic and avoid “catastrophic” climate change. 

Authors of Thursday’s study noted that economic inequality was a factor in poor dietary choices in many countries.  

It found that on average, reaching the “five a day” fruit and vegetable servings advocated by doctors cost just 2 percent of household income in rich nations, but more than a half of household income in poorer ones. 

“This study gives us good evidence of what to target to improve diets, and therefore health, at the global and national level,” said Oyinlola Oyebode, associate professor at Warwick Medical School in Coventry, England, who was not involved in the research. 

“The lack of fruit, vegetables and whole grains in diets across the world are very important — but the other dietary factor highlighted by this study is the high intake of sodium,” Oyebode said.
…

From: MeNeedIt

One in five deaths globally is linked to poor diet, experts said in a study released Thursday, warning that overconsumption of sugar, salt and meat was killing millions of people every year. 

The United Nations estimates that nearly 1 billion people worldwide are malnourished, while nearly 2 billion are “overnourished.”  

But the latest study on global diet trends, published in The Lancet, showed that in nearly every one of the 195 countries surveyed, people were also eating too much of the wrong types of food — and consuming worryingly low levels of healthier produce. 

Sugar, sodium

For example, the world on average consumes more than 10 times the recommended amount of sugar-sweetened beverages, and 86 percent more sodium per person than is considered safe. 

The study, which examined consumption and disease trends between 1990 and 2017, also cautioned that too many people were eating far too few whole grains, fruit, nuts and seeds to maintain a healthy lifestyle. 

Of the 11 million deaths attributed to poor diet, by far the largest killer was cardiovascular disease, which is often caused or worsened by obesity. 

“This study affirms what many have thought for several years — that poor diet is responsible for more deaths than any other risk factor in the world,” said study author Christopher Murray, director of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.  

“Our assessment suggests the leading dietary risk factors are high intake of sodium, or low intake of health foods.”  

The report highlighted large variation in diet-related deaths among nations, with the highest-risk country, Uzbekistan, having 10 times the food-based mortality rate of the lowest risk, Israel.  

Earlier report

In January, a consortium of three dozen researchers called for a dramatic shift in the way the world eats. 

The EAT-Lancet report said that the global population must eat roughly half as much red meat and sugar, and twice as many vegetables, fruits and nuts in order to avert a worldwide obesity epidemic and avoid “catastrophic” climate change. 

Authors of Thursday’s study noted that economic inequality was a factor in poor dietary choices in many countries.  

It found that on average, reaching the “five a day” fruit and vegetable servings advocated by doctors cost just 2 percent of household income in rich nations, but more than a half of household income in poorer ones. 

“This study gives us good evidence of what to target to improve diets, and therefore health, at the global and national level,” said Oyinlola Oyebode, associate professor at Warwick Medical School in Coventry, England, who was not involved in the research. 

“The lack of fruit, vegetables and whole grains in diets across the world are very important — but the other dietary factor highlighted by this study is the high intake of sodium,” Oyebode said.
…

From: MeNeedIt