Podcast: The power in knowing

first_img 13SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr The right information is knowledge, says Ken Levey, vice president for Kaufman Hall. He focuses on the firm’s Axiom Financial Institutions Software products for credit unions and banks.Levey has more than 30 years of experience in the financial services industry with expertise in analytics, business intelligence, asset/liability management, funds transfer pricing, and enterprise performance management.He spends a lot of time talking about reporting and analytics with credit union leaders.“By enhancing the types of reporting and analytics produced, credit unions can learn to shape their business,” Levey tells the CUNA News Podcast. “There is power in knowing where the [revenue] comes from and what areas need improvement in the credit union.” continue reading »last_img read more

Read Full Article

UHS needs help making masks

first_img They mentioned that all collected masks will be immediately sent to laundry/processing to be prepared for use. On their website they said that their masks are on back-orders due to demand and supply issues. UHS Delaware Valley Hospital: DVH Community Pharmacy, 1 Titus Place, Walton from 8 AM – 8 PM M- F Saturday and Sunday 8 AM- Noon UHS Chenango Memorial Hospital: UHS Occupational Medicine, 54 E. Main Street, Norwich from 1 PM – 4 PM M-F. They say if you want to help make one you can visit their site by clicking here. They say the pattern is courtesy of the The Turban Project, which helps people be able to create medical supplies for hospitals across America. UHS Wilson Medical Center and UHS Binghamton General Hospital: Vestal Orthopedics Building, Vestal Parkway, M-F 9 AM – 5 PM, Saturday 8 AM – 11 AM. (WBNG)- UHS is seeking the public’s assistance in making medical masks for its medical staff. They say that any extra masks will be distributed to other organizations in need. Some of the drop off locations include: For more information, contact [email protected]last_img read more

Read Full Article

Joseph Mariathasan: Nuclear safety, bad science, and climate change

first_imgSource: International Atomic Energy AgencyAn inspector visits the Fukushima Daiichi power plant in 2013The LNT model and ALARA force levels of safety that may appear to be worthwhile, but come at the expense of increased risks elsewhere. The evacuation of the area surrounding the Fukushima nuclear power plant in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake and tsunami in 2011 reportedly killed more people in the prefecture than the natural disasters themselves, according to a Japanese newpaper cited by NBC. However, there appeared to be no evidence that anyone died from exposure to radioactivity.More worryingly, the underlying philosophy in terms of the LNT model could be based on what Calabrese and others claim is fraudulent science.As Calabrese states: “The story of cancer risk assessment as told by regulatory agencies such as the EPA is really a profound example of flawed science – the product of errors, deception, perverse incentives from academic grants, and ideology.”However, the fear of radioactivity is so deeply ingrained in the popular psyche that any attempt to question the assumptions creates controversy itself – as demonstrated in this article by American news website Mother Jones and the Center for Public Integrity. Scientific issues are obscured by political stances that degrade attempts to develop a rational discourse on understanding what actual risks are being faced.It may seem reasonable to say that, until the health risks are fully understood, we should continue to employ the most conservative approach to dealing with exposures to radiation. However, the medical evidence already seems strong – see, for example, this Feburary 2018 paper from physics and health experts, published in the Journal of Nuclear Medicine.Meanwhile, if humanity faces an existential challenge through global warming, there has to be objective assessments based on actual science rather than reinforcing prejudices. This suggests advocates of environmental and sustainable investing approaches would be wise to not reject nuclear power out of hand. Source: Cato Institute“The story of cancer risk assessment as told by regulatory agencies is really a profound example of flawed science – the product of errors, deception, perverse incentives from academic grants, and ideology”Edward Calabrese, University of MassachussettsCurrent approaches to nuclear safety are based on the LNT model, which in turn leads to the objective of ensuring radiation is “As Low as Reasonably Achievable” – abbreviated to ALARA. The adoption of LNT and ALARA as the guiding principles of safety means radiation levels are set within a small fraction of naturally occurring levels.According to Wade Allison, emeritus professor of physics at Oxford University, this measurement is unrelated to any risk. Instead, he argues, it comes from a political wish to say that the effects of radiation have been minimised.Opponents of the LNT model argue that radiation can be a potential source of cancer – although it is actually very small, and it does this by damaging DNA at any given dose of radiation or a given dose over a given time. However, from human and animal studies, we know a given dose of radiation (or a given dose over a given time) below certain levels allows living creatures to repair DNA damage – not just from radiation, but from much greater DNA damage due to a creature’s own metabolism.Some scientists subscribe to the theory that such radiation damage and its repair by the body can actually stimulate decreased DNA damage throughout the body – known as radiation hormesis. More significantly, there are thresholds of radiation dose and dose over a given time, below which no increased cancer incidence can be observed. Allison often argues that life evolved in the presence of radiation and is adapted to its presence in the form of background radiation. What is the impact of low dose radiation on living creatures? This may seem an esoteric question only of interest to medical clinicians and animal rights activists, but the answer has enormous ramifications on the economics of nuclear power – and hence on the ability to successfully reduce the impact of climate change.  Life on Earth arose and evolved in the presence of background radiation. Clearly, all life must be able to tolerate radiation levels below some minimum threshold, or else life would never have evolved. However, public acceptance and the economics of nuclear power are affected by current safety regulations, which in turn are based on what many scientists believe is flawed – and potentially fraudulent – science.In a recent article for the Cato Institute’s Regulation journal, Edward Calabrese, a professor of environmental health sciences at the University of Massachusetts, looks at the origin of the Linear-No-Threshold (LNT) model – the fundamental plank of radiation safety.The LNT model essentially states that a low dosage will cause commensurately less, but still some, damage. It also leads to the conclusion that if millions of people are exposed to radiation, no matter what the level, there is an expectation that there will be a certain number of deaths arising directly from the radiation exposure and the number will be a function of the dose.center_img Calabrese argues that the LNT model is based on the judgment and passion of Hermann Muller. Muller, an American scientist and Nobel Prize winner, was the first to claim that x-rays induced gene mutations. Muller made a momentous breakthrough in 1926 when he found a way to produce alterations in the size, colour, or shape of fruit flies, which he interpreted as being the result of gene mutation.In 1930, he announced that the nature of the dose response for x-ray-induced mutation was linear, all the way down to the smallest dose. That meant, he claimed, there was no safe exposure to radiation.last_img read more

Read Full Article

Logan Paul vs. KSI: Best quotes from the YouTubers’ long-running feud

first_imgWell, KSI and Logan Paul have proven beyond doubt that they can talk big and showed they are not afraid to swap the verbal barbs for physical blows when they fought to a unanimous draw in an amateur bout in August 2018.This time, the warring duo will square off in the professional boxing ranks in a much-hyped rematch at Los Angeles’ Staples Center on Saturday.“The difference in this fight is I’m going to win! I didn’t know what I was doing last time – I’m going to make KSI my bi*ch and turn him into a meme on November 9!” – @LoganPaul #KSILoganPaul2 pic.twitter.com/KoEUcGrq1Q— Matchroom Boxing (@MatchroomBoxing) October 7, 2019An online rivalry that was borne out of KSI calling out fellow YouTube stars after defeating Joe Weller has escalated to a world-wide scale, with a reported 60 million witnessing their first contest.Before the gloves are on, we have taken a look at some of the best taunts and comments from their heated rivalry. It’s fair to say neither man pulled any punches.MORE: Why are Logan Paul and KSI fighting … again? Let us explainI can’t wait to see your bloody face all over the internet!The first contest between the duo ended in a draw, but the fighting talk continued almost immediately after.”I think we have to have a rematch. Let’s do it, that was fun! I can’t wait to see your bloody face all over the internet,” KSI taunted.Paul concurred replying: “I think that’s what the people want. Let’s give them a rematch.”I can’t wait to see the memes after I’ve been the life out of him!Fittingly for YouTube stars, KSI used a quip that will have landed well with the internet generation, albeit with some pretty gruesome additions.”I can’t wait to see the memes of him slumped on the ground after I’ve repeatedly beaten the life out of him. He’s facing a different animal this time. He will soon realise,” he said in September.I’m drinking the blood of the cows!Paul said he was going through some pretty extreme measures ahead of the rematch.”They’re making a machine out of me,” Paul told Business Insider.”I’m eating 80lbs a day. I’m drinking the blood of cows and I’m pushing a lot of weights up in the air and putting them down.””There is no respect there for Logan Paul and I can’t wait to finish him off! In the last fight I was able to see his strengths and weaknesses and all his credibility is going to go out the window! I have the power, he doesn’t!” – @KSIOlajidebt #KSILoganPaul2 pic.twitter.com/ewEbnoyQuC— Matchroom Boxing (@MatchroomBoxing) October 7, 2019I’m going to make you my b—!Paul was greeted to some rather unsavoury chants at a UK media conference in October and was typically inflammatory with his words.”The difference in this fight is I’m going to win! I didn’t know what I was doing last time. I’m going to make KSI my b— and turn him into a meme on November 9!” he said.There’s no respect …Any idea that, despite the heat of battle, underneath it all is a underlying mutual respect was quashed by KSI.He said: “There is no respect there for Logan Paul and I can’t wait to finish him off! In the last fight I was able to see his strengths and weaknesses and all his credibility is going to go out the window! I have the power, he doesn’t!” I’m sparring pros and beating them badlySay what you like about either man there is no lack of confidence, as proven by this line from Paul.”I am sparring professional fighters and I am beating them badly. That does so much for my confidence,” he claimed.”I relied on my athleticism to carry me through the first fight and it almost worked.” To become an internet sensation you naturally have to have an air of confidence about you.Join DAZN to watch Logan Paul vs. KSI live on Nov. 9last_img read more

Read Full Article