Assorted links

by on December 26, 2013 at 10:45 am in Uncategorized | Permalink

1. “Let them eat cake that looks like ramen.”

2. Dani Rodrik has lots of tweets on what is going on in Turkey.

3. “Spengler” makes claims about China.

4. Is fake knee surgery as good as real knee surgery?  And is the decline of football proceeding?

5. Update on the “auction off the rights to kill a black rhino to save some black rhinos” debate.

6. Michael Nielsen on how Bitcoin protocols really work.

Dave Barnes December 26, 2013 at 10:55 am

How football will die.
Huge lawsuit win -> Lack of insurance.
Slowly.

Finch December 26, 2013 at 11:52 am

Is everybody really convinced that the long-term head injury effects of football are a) real; and b) significantly larger than those in other sports like soccer?

I am not convinced they are not real and large, but I’m kind of underwhelmed by the evidence so far. One keeps seeing articles, most recently a metaanalysis which I can’t find, claiming that the effect doesn’t really exist and football players are healthier and less suicide prone than other males when you make an effort to remove biases in the sampling.

Alexei Sadeski December 26, 2013 at 12:42 pm

The sad thing is that we accept that the existence of health risks is sufficient to kill a sport. The people involved choose to do it. In the case of the NFL, they are rewarded handsomely in cash and respect.

msgkings December 26, 2013 at 1:30 pm

@ Alexei: football players make very little compared to other major sports, outside of a few key positions (QB, left tackle, etc). The average career length is 4 years, the average salary well under $1 mil per year, the salaries are not guaranteed meaning you get hurt, you get cut and lose the money, which after taxes and agents and others take their cuts leaves not much if you get scrambled brains playing. Not to mention all those that get injured playing in college, high school, etc.

I’m not anti-football, and I do understand that it’s voluntary to participate, but the dangers need to be more well known so those who do volunteer are aware of the risk. It’s pretty much modern day Roman gladiators (a bit less so than boxing/MMA).

Alexei Sadeski December 26, 2013 at 5:29 pm

They still make more money than most folks.

The respect they receive is not immaterial.

And Roman gladiators were awesome.

Ray Lopez December 27, 2013 at 1:13 am

Yes, I was surprised to learn surfing the net that head injuries in other sports are as great as in the NFL. Still, Pop Warner peewee football is declining, so perhaps football is falling out of fashion? Will the youngsters take up Track & Field and chess? (my hobbies)

As for Roman gladiators, indeed they were in such high regard by the population that at least one Roman senator became a gladiator, voluntarily, and was killed in the arena.

Z December 26, 2013 at 12:55 pm

There are plenty of reasons to be skeptical. The folks pushing it have been explicit in their aims and rewarded quite handsomely. CTE looks more like a racket than science. Plus, I think it is always wise to be skeptical of anything new in science that comes with its own morality police.

Rich Berger December 26, 2013 at 10:56 am

You are using Hua Hsu as a source for the decline of football? Is this a joke?

albert magnus December 26, 2013 at 11:10 am

#3. – I’m not sure innovation is everything is what we think it is.The Germans were more innovative than the USSR in WWII, but the Soviets were better at focusing their production on important things like warm coats rather than rockets and fancy tanks.

derek December 26, 2013 at 12:22 pm

Worked in Afghanistan. The US got beat by a bunch of uneducated goat herders.

Col. Kurtz December 26, 2013 at 12:37 pm

You’re wrong, Because it’s judgement that defeats us.

derek December 26, 2013 at 12:58 pm

The German army said after WW1 that they were undefeated in the battle field. Sounds like the same story.

No, you guys are running with your tail between your legs, beat by not even a third rate military power. That is what China sees, as well as Russia, the North Koreans, Iran, etc. etc. To beat the Americans requires simply surviving the initial onslaught, then shedding a bit of blood on TV. Wait for a few years, then you win. The Russians won against Napoleon and Hitler by backing up and waiting for winter. In the first case they even lost their capital city. No matter how, they won.

A Definite Beta Guy December 26, 2013 at 3:11 pm

The Soviets did not defeat Hitler by retreating. The first few days of the battle of Moscow saw 500,000 Soviet young men killed or captured. Stalingrad was reduced to rubble with the famous Order 227 (Not a Step Back). Leningrad was under siege for years. Napoleon fought in an interesting era where armies had become “mass” but before advanced logistics had been made, a multi decade effort. Keep in mind that when Napoleon III went to war against Prussia, half of his soldiers got lost on the way to the battlefield. America is way, way better at logistics, than Napoleon or Hitler.

A Definite Beta Guy December 26, 2013 at 3:36 pm

Anyways, the argument in the article is not that China will defeat us through guerilla warfare but that their military has a variety of wonder-weapons that can defeat us. As if the United States is somehow at a technological disadvantage. China has no direct competitor to the Los Angeles class submarine, the Tomahawk cruise missile or the B-2, let alone the Virgina-class, the F-22, or the SM-3. The real challenge is that India will most likely begin testing nuclear weapons again at some point and China and India will both need to advance their boomer fleet and their intermediate-range missile fleet. Russia is forbidden from using intermediate-range missiles and Putin has already threatned withdrawal from this treaty.

The Anti-Gnostic December 26, 2013 at 8:35 pm

Well, the US military could just kill every male over age 12, open the place up to colonization and turn any village that doesn’t go along with the program into glass. There is no question we have the means to do this. We don’t because it would call too many of our operative principles into question and because Afghanistan is a landlocked toilet that isn’t worth the effort.

Yancey Ward December 26, 2013 at 6:15 pm

You get a +1000 from me just for the allusion.

albert magnus December 26, 2013 at 5:35 pm

In what world has the Taiban or al Qaeda defeated the US? You could argue we aren’t really do anything productive, but lost is a pretty stupid term.

Yancey Ward December 26, 2013 at 6:18 pm

I would call it an unavoidable loss. There is no doubt who is going to be in power in Afghanistan within 5 years after the last US troops depart. This was always going to be the case, so I lay the blame at the feet of Bush and his administration. Obama should have pulled out the first year of his administration

Floccina December 27, 2013 at 9:20 pm

IMHO the US army won the war in a few weeks. The Politicians should have brought the army home then.

Anon. December 26, 2013 at 11:14 am

I groaned at the headline in #1.

Tjamesjones December 26, 2013 at 11:27 am

I thought the decline of football was going to be about football, normally this blog is so international.

Adrian Ratnapala December 26, 2013 at 11:57 am

It is about football. At least for English speakers.

BFB December 27, 2013 at 1:17 am

…except for the ones in England (and every other English-speaking country not named USA or Canada).

Adrian Ratnapala December 27, 2013 at 5:32 am

I was thinking of the USA, Canada and Australia. Perhaps even NZ. The word “football” refers to several sports, and in some places one is so dominant that it needs no other name. The USA is the largest such place. But when I say “football” I usually mean Rugby League.

Tjamesjones December 26, 2013 at 11:30 am

I say this as I have just watched man united beat hull city on TV, in Thailand, commentary in Vietnamese for some reason, so I was thinking what rude health football is in.

chuck martel December 26, 2013 at 11:33 am

Sick as it is, the NFL will be kept afloat for awhile by its consensual sexual relationship with the media, who early on discovered that it was perfect for television programing. Everything followed from that. It literally takes gunfire to get any branch of the media to reflect negatively on football. If there was a disease that crippled as many young men as football does, millions would be spent on seeking a cure. Of course, it’s not just neurological issues, human knees aren’t designed for the rigors of football. The newspapers and television don’t have much to say about career-ending ACL injuries. On the other hand, they’ve been pretty voluble over drugs in pro cycling, an insignificant pastime in the US, while paying scant heed to a genuine drug culture in football.
Ultimately, the sport will be killed by permanent injuries to teenagers. Society is unwilling to let 16 year-old high schoolers buy property or sign contracts for expensive cars or gamble in casinos. How much longer will they be encouraged to gamble their future in the name of high school gate receipts and kisses from the homecoming queen?

anon December 26, 2013 at 2:28 pm

Significant injuries occur more on the NFL level than on the high school level, because the speed of the game and the strength of the players is much less.

You start your post off by saying how evil the NFL is, and then falsely equate the injuries in that league with amateur sports.

Z December 26, 2013 at 11:44 am

The war on football is following along the same path as the rest of the culture war. If the wrong type of whites enjoy it, the Left takes aim. To avoid being honest about their purpose, they smear their moral outrage with the white wash of junk science. Like the rest of the culture war, the Left will win on this eventually. They hate life more than everyone else loves life.

Finch December 26, 2013 at 11:57 am

Yeah, I think there’s a lot of truth to this, although I wouldn’t make the race point, or at least I’d make it quite differently.

But football is definitely popular with the wrong sort of person for our modern world.

Z December 26, 2013 at 12:14 pm

John Derbyshire uses the formulation, “The Cold Civil War.” You have one type of white culture versus another type of white culture. It is not perfect, but it covers a lot of ground. Football is the sort of thing Duck Dynasty viewers think is normal. Soccer is what the viewers of Downtown Abbey think is normal. You could probably reformulate it along class lines, but I don’t think it covers as much ground. Either way, it is one group forcing its values on another group, mostly out of spite, but they call it justice.

ummm December 26, 2013 at 12:33 pm

you got it wrong. football is a sport enjoyed by people of all classes. it’s not a lion prole activity

anon December 26, 2013 at 2:32 pm

I’m a successful lawyer and I love American football. Most of my colleagues love football as well. What culture do I fall into?

In reality, there’s a small group of liberal, academic elites who dislike football, and then there’s everyone else…and we’re all not hicks who live in trailers.

Hutter December 26, 2013 at 12:18 pm

You’re ignoring the other racial angle: the white flight from the NFL and mainstream professional sports. Lots of whites have lost interest in the NFL and don’t follow it anymore because of the increasing black culturalization of the NFL and football generally. This has been more severe in the NBA, so the white flight from the NBA has been greater, but it’s been happening to the NFL as well.

Col. Kurtz December 26, 2013 at 12:42 pm

Which is how we end up with “Extreme” sports (e.g., X games), where expensive equipment or geography bar the undesireables from participation. That worked a long time for golf and tennis until the do-gooders did their thing.

chuck martel December 26, 2013 at 1:09 pm

Izzat why a courtside seat at an NBA game goes for $700?

Hutter December 26, 2013 at 2:46 pm

It’s why NBA attendance and TV ratings have been declining for years. It’s why NASCAR is more popular than the NBA.

msgkings December 26, 2013 at 4:32 pm

Check your latest figures….Nascar ratings and attendance have been way down since the recession and haven’t really picked up yet.

anon December 26, 2013 at 2:34 pm

There are still quite a few white people in prominent positions in the sport, most notably the quarterback position.

Hutter December 26, 2013 at 2:50 pm

Absolutely, and that helps contribute to the NFL’s relative popularity over the NBA, since the QB is the most high profile position in the sport.

BFB December 27, 2013 at 2:02 am

If anything, I would say that interest in the NFL and college football have increased as white people have decreased as a percentage of the overall player population in those sports (not NBA). Your argument seems to rest on the assumption that white people are racists in choosing what sports to watch, but mine rests on $(player and TV contracts, ticket and merchandise sales) and Nielsen ratings, which if I had to guess, are going up, not down, at least for football.

I used to watch a good bit of the NBA, but what turned me off is the inconsistent effort put forth by many of the players, especially on defense- I refuse to believe that is a product of race, as I grew up watching Jordan, Olajuwann (sp?), Barkley, Shaq, etc- all of whom could play serious defense, in addition to being prolific scorers. I seriously doubt the percentage of white players in the NBA has dropped much since the mid 90′s (technically it may have been cut in half, but the % was extremely small already).

Tom January 1, 2014 at 9:53 pm

Basketball is a surprisingly boring sport to watch, and NBA games look vaguely fixed to boot. Maybe the latter is because the rules are not very stringently applied to the ★stars★. Also, for a gang of well-paid pro athletes, everyone is a remarkably poor shot. Initially, I thought baseball would be the nadir, but somehow it wasn’t.

To fix the boredom problem, games might become more interesting if they did, say, quadrupleheaders and had 15 minute games instead. The most exciting part seems to be the final quarter anyway. Or maybe they should have 4 teams meet up and have mini-tournaments of 15-min games.

chuck martel December 26, 2013 at 1:20 pm

Sports come and go. Horse racing and boxing were once the two most popular sports in the US, both are fading from sight. Bowling is in serious decline. Cockfighting, a normal weekend entertainment in many parts of the country not long ago, has, except for a few dedicated poultry enthusiasts, been legislated out of existence. Football is unlikely to keep growing as it has for a number of reasons. Serious injuries to teen-agers. Lack of social skills in many of the players. Drugs. A barely legitimate NFL that keeps extorting the population for new and grander facilities. A draft system that assigns players to employers. Belated recognition that there’s a cancer in the sports and entertainment world isn’t evidence of a culture clash.

anon December 26, 2013 at 2:22 pm

Did you get beat up by the jocks in high school? You sound bitter.

Z December 26, 2013 at 11:55 am

David Goldman is a very bright guy with a lot of useful experience in the world. His book was a great read and offered up some compelling insights into the clash of civilizations. His predictions about China, however, are no more useful than anyone else’s predictions. The one thing about all of them is they are almost always wrong. The reason is they always assume a break with history. There’s not much fun in prognostication if all that ever happens is what’s happening and been happening long before you were around to notice it.

ummm December 26, 2013 at 12:30 pm

yup…a simple google search reveals 1000′s of failed ‘China is doomed/crisis’ predictions

mofo. December 26, 2013 at 12:16 pm

#3 is like a grab-bag of various nationalistic boogeymen. ZOMG! ZOMG! ZOMG! China is building high-tech!!!! That wasnt an under reported story in 2003, let alone in 2013.

john personna December 26, 2013 at 12:37 pm

In another forum I was talking to liberals who still want jobs bills. I said to them, “It should be well known now that this last decade has brought increasing income inequality in the United States and decreasing income inequality in the world.”

Libertarians know that too, or at least on other days, when these arguments aren’t on the table.

If you read all the way down, Goldman prescribes innovation. That might be as good as anything, in a world where this last decade has brought … a transfer of improvement, you might say, favoring China.

mofo. December 26, 2013 at 1:00 pm

“a transfer of improvement, you might say, favoring China.” China joining the rest of the industrialized world in being industrialized isnt really a ‘transfer of improvement, its just improvement.

john personnaj December 26, 2013 at 1:07 pm

So … they bootstrapped with internal sales only? Seriously, dude. You’ve got to deny commerce, and profit from commerce, to deny that a “made in China” sale is a profit for China.

mofo. December 26, 2013 at 1:18 pm

Of course commerce is a profit for China, but they didnt put a gun to anyone’s head to force trade. Trade is beneficial to both sides of the transaction or else it wouldnt happen.

john personna December 26, 2013 at 2:00 pm

Sigh, so you’ve moved the bar completely now. There is no bar.

Just so you remember, Goldman’s piece was about American competitiveness. I noted that the Chinese had been capturing more gains for their working class than we (with their higher rate of income increase).

Now, no one put a gun to anyone’s head so it’s fine? (I understand the intellectual claim that trade is mutually beneficial to all parties, but that just doesn’t jibe with the success of successful export economies. I mean, trade between Greece and Germany is just mutually beneficial?)

john personna December 26, 2013 at 2:01 pm

lol, I think the deal here is that since trade is defined to be mutually beneficial, any actually asymmetries may be discarded.

mofo. December 26, 2013 at 2:29 pm

John, i havnt moved anything, the only one who knows what you are talking about is you, and even that is doubtful. The Goldman article is about China’s rising high-tech prowess which is hardly new. I think you are the target demographic for that sort of pants-wetting ‘China is taking over everything’ article so ill leave you to it.

As for the rest, im not going to try and argue with you about basic economics. Im reminded of the old saying “never argue with a fool, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

john personna December 26, 2013 at 2:37 pm

Am I the only one who sees how Goldman’s article ties into Tyler’s The Average Is Over?

Seriously?

john personna December 26, 2013 at 2:39 pm

Tyler Cowen:

This imbalance in technological growth will have some surprising implications. For instance, workers more and more will come to be classified into two categories. The key questions will be: Are you good at working with intelligent machines or not? Are your skills a complement to the skills of the computer, or is the computer doing better without you? Worst of all, are you competing against the computer? Are computers helping people in China and India compete against you?

If you and your skills are a complement to the computer, your wage and labor market prospects are likely to be cheery. If your skills do not complement the computer, you may want to address that mismatch. Ever more peopl are starting to fall on one side of the divide or the other. That’s why average is over.

ummm December 26, 2013 at 12:27 pm

Poll: This Congress is the Worst Ever
http://swampland.time.com/2013/12/26/poll-this-is-the-worst-congress-ever/?iid=tsmodule

I beg to differ. This congress has done a great job by doing as little as possible and letting the free market run with minimal interference, while negotiating a budget compromise when Obama refused to acquiesce. Stocks have posted the strongest yearly gains since 1995. Look at how great profits & earnings have been. Countries like Turkey and Brazil are rife with corruption and hyperinflation while America enjoys the best business conditions and historically low borrowing costs. e can be thankful that we can count on congress to rise to the ocasion like by passing TARP and declaring war against terrorism following 911.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists

Jason December 26, 2013 at 12:47 pm

The government has intervened quite a bit as your examples show.

The government handed out huge sums of free/cheap money with TARP. It has handed out cheap money by keeping interest rates low, fueling the stock market and speculation. And the “War on Terror” was/is essentially a Keynesian plan that pumps fiscal spending into the defense/security industry and military and police employees.

These aren’t exactly examples of the government “letting the free market run with minimal interference.” They’re examples of the government pumping huge amounts of cash into certain narrow segments of the economy.

ummm December 26, 2013 at 1:01 pm

The govt. helps create enthronements conducive to growth such as repeal of Glass-Steagall , futures modernization act, telecom act, NAFTA, CAFTA, etc. Technically the govt. is interfering but in a way that helps providing a tailwind. It would be best to have less regulation but then you don;t have the coordinated responses to crisis.

Jason December 26, 2013 at 1:09 pm

In other words, the government has intervened and is not “letting the free market run with minimal interference.”

It’s not simply that the government is “technically” intervening, it’s that the parts of the economy you tout – the stock market boom, cheap money, TARP, post-9/11 defense spending – are tied to government monetary and Keynesian intervention.

ummm December 26, 2013 at 1:14 pm

minimal doesn’t mean zero, or as quoted by Einstein a concept should be as simple as possible, but no less.

Jason December 26, 2013 at 1:41 pm

You’re not describing “minimal” interference anyway. Cheap money, TARP, post-9/11 defense spending, etc., have not been “minimal.”

Careless December 27, 2013 at 1:27 am

Does Jason. Not understand what “this Congress” refers to?

RM December 26, 2013 at 12:41 pm

If the NFL declines, does that mean that college football will also decline? The answer seems to be yes to me, which will hurt lots of schools that depend on football to maintain a national profile.

Col. Kurtz December 26, 2013 at 12:44 pm

Like every single school in the SEC ‘cept Vanderbilt?

RM December 26, 2013 at 1:00 pm

I was thinking especially the SEC. Why does the entire state of Alabama exist, except for the U of Alabama – Auburn game?

msgkings December 26, 2013 at 1:36 pm

@ RM: completely true

BFB December 27, 2013 at 1:11 am

Exhibit B

BFB December 27, 2013 at 1:09 am

Yeah, it’s abundantly clear that nothing matters in Alabama except that which happens for 3+ hours on a certain day in November.

All of those commercial forests, Mercedes-Benzes, Hyundais, Toyotas, chickens, catfish, sweet potatoes, peaches, peanuts, rocket scientists, naval ships, etc ONLY exist because of a football game, as does that beautiful white marble in monuments seen all over the mall in DC (Washington momument, the ceiling of the Lincoln, eg).

Thousands upon thousands flock to Alabama’s beaches, rivers, lakes, national forests, and golf courses annually because of an annual football game.

The MBA program that produced the CEO of Apple ONLY exists because of an annual football game, as do all of the NASA engineers, architects, agricultural scientists, pharmacists, veterinarians, etc that came from the same school.

Nat King Cole owed his career to that annual football game (that was not even played during most of his lifetime, BTW), as do Harper Lee and Hank Willams (Sr). Jesse Owens’ gold medals- clearly the result of an annual college football game. Hank Aaron credited the Iron Bowl for his breaking the Babe’s HR record, and it was the reason for Satchel Paige’s longevity as a professional pitcher.

Clearly, there is no reason to live in Alabama except for that one annual football game- ending college football would spontaneously result in the mass suicide of 4.5 million people, as that game is the only reason they have to live.

Seriously, It’s hard to tell if you’re being cute (to use a nice word) or really ignorant. Sure, Alabamians care about college football more than anywhere in the country, but life would go on there without it, as it had for over half of the state’s existence (the game was first played in 1893, but wasn’t played at all for roughly the first half of the 20th century- Alabama became a state in 1819), except without the bad institutions that still, to an extent, serve as its defining characteristics, largely because of smug, narrow-minded people such as yourself.

cthulhu December 26, 2013 at 1:10 pm

In the ’80s and ’90s, the dean of DFW metroplex sportswriters, Blackie Sherrod, promoted changing college football back to single platoon rules. This would demand a much different style of athlete than college or NFL football currently uses. The net result would be that (a) college football diverges substantially from NFL football in style and substance, which would (b) force the NFL to set up its own farm system instead of using the colleges as its de facto farm system. Sherrod felt that both of these changes would cause a re-emphasis on the “student” part of the student-athlete equation, as players would be more well-rounded, and those who were primarily interested in NFL careers would go into the new NFL farm system.

Sure, any kind of change like this (or the NFL declining) will hurt aspects of the colleges, especially when college football and basketball pay for pretty much all of the other sports in a Division 1A school. But it would be an interesting, politically-correct experiment; omlettes and eggs y’know… :-/

mofo. December 26, 2013 at 1:20 pm

Who besides Blackie Sherrod actually wants a “re-emphasis on the “student” part of the student-athlete equation”?

The Anti-Gnostic December 26, 2013 at 8:48 pm

My daughter is in the marching band for a large metropolitan high school. To my observation, football is not going anywhere. This is probably a good thing from a lot of people’s perspective, as football soaks up a lot of tribal energy that would otherwise be expressed very differently.

The institution that I think won’t be around in a decade or so is the NCAA.

AlanW December 26, 2013 at 11:09 pm

I know it looks that way, but in many parts of the country, basketball or other sports play that same role in youth culture. Obviously, football has a huge cultural lead, but I could certainly see that gradually changing if parents become reluctant to let their sons play. It wouldn’t mean those same people wouldn’t watch football on Sunday, but it’s very different if it’s your kid. I think on some level this is what happened to boxing – participation became economically segregated and that led to declining fan interest.

I say that, although soccer offers an obvious counterexample – people have been touting soccer as the sport of the future in the U.S. for decades based on the legions of youth soccer players, but it never seems to materialize.

Jason December 26, 2013 at 12:43 pm

The government has intervened quite a bit, as your examples show.

The government handed out huge sums of free/cheap money with TARP. It has handed out cheap money by keeping interest rates low, fueling the stock market and speculation. And the “War on Terror” was/is essentially a Keynesian plan that pumps fiscal spending into the defense/security industry and military and police employees.

These aren’t exactly examples of the government “letting the free market run with minimal interference.” They’re examples of the government pumping huge amounts of cash into certain narrow segments of the economy.

chuck martel December 26, 2013 at 1:39 pm

Actually, high school sports serve an invaluable but little recognized role in modern society. Eons ago tribal elders sent testosterone-fueled teen-age boys on raiding parties against neighboring tribes. It was part of the maturation process and diverted their energies from messing up their own village. As time went by that was institutionalized, armies all over the world used very young men in roles that they were able to fill, midshipmen, drummer boys and actual soldiers. We’re civilized now but teen-age boys still bubble inside so they’re sent into mock combat with high schoolers from down the freeway. Those that don’t make the team still have to spend their aggression on bystanders with activities we call crime.

Alexei Sadeski December 26, 2013 at 5:45 pm

Crimethought.

Careless December 26, 2013 at 6:08 pm

” Nichole has set up an account on the Gofundme fundraising Web site to try to raise $800,000. She has raised less than $300″

Good luck, moron.

Vern Yahamoto December 27, 2013 at 1:26 am

No one is paying attention to China’s stealth colonization by way of infrastructure projects overseas. Once Chinese settle they don’t leave and only multiple.

Rarely do people mention the foreign element in China’s rise, it’s in fact the largest contributor. Nixon’s trip to China in 1972 to normalize relations and open trade between the US and China was the start of the Chinese boom. Ever since then the entire world has dumped it’s manufacturing in China because it’s cheap and reliable. Before China entered the WTO foreign companies were explicitly told they had to hand over how their products were manufactured in China. The WTO bars countries from explicitly demanding transfers of technology so since 2001 when China entered the WTO it has used various means of extracted that information like spying. China’s rise is due to the vast transfers of technologies it received from across the globe since the 1970s.

John Karlsson December 27, 2013 at 6:27 am

#4: The major point of antrhiscopic knee surgery for meniscus tears is to prevent future knee replacements. The torn cartilage wears into the “cushion” cartilage that you need to stand comfortably. Once a hole develops in that stuff, you’ll need a total knee replacement or good pain tolerance. This study needs a much longer follow-up to have any meaning.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: