kszz.com , Trend Story: March 2014

Monday, March 31, 2014

Japan's whaling future in balance as ICJ set to rule on hunting in Antarctic

Japan has killed more than 10,000 whales under its scientific whaling programme since 1988, according to Australia. Photograph: Kate Davison/AP

The leading court at the UN will rule on Monday on whether Japan has the right to hunt whales in the Antarctic, an emotive case that activists say is make-or-break for the mammals' future.

Australia took Japan to the international court of justice (ICJ) in The Hague in 2010, accusing Tokyo of exploiting a loophole by hunting whales as scientific research to get around a 1986 ban on commercialwhaling.

Australia has asked the ICJ to order Japan to stop its Jarpa II research programme and "revoke any authorisations, permits or licences" to hunt whales in the Southern Ocean.

During hearings last year, Canberra accused Tokyo of doing nothing more than "cloaking commercial whaling in a labcoat of science".

Norway and Iceland maintain commercial whaling programmes in spite of the 1986 International Whaling Commission (IWC) moratorium, but Japan insists its programme is scientific, while admitting that the resulting meat ends up on plates back at home.

Japan has killed more than 10,000 whales under the programme since 1988, according to Canberra, allegedly putting it in breach of international conventions and its obligation to preserve marine mammals and their environment.

In its application to the ICJ, Australia accused Japan of failing to "observe in good faith the zero catch limit in relation to the killing of whales".

Japanese officials declined to comment on specifics ahead of the ruling, but a fisheries agency official said it maintained the view that "Japan's whaling is purely for the purposes of obtaining scientific data, so that whale resources can be sustainably maintained".

Tokyo has consistently defended the practice of eating whalemeat as a culinary tradition. Its lawyers have said the Japanese have a "proud tradition of living in harmony with nature, and utilising living resources while respecting sustainability".

The country's fisheries minister, Yoshimasa Hayashi, vowed last year that Japan would never stop its "long tradition and culture" of whaling.

Japanese officials have said Tokyo will accept the verdict from the ICJ, set up after the second world war to rule in disputes between countries.

Australia also said it would respect the ruling, but added that its views were clear. "We oppose all commercial whaling, including Japan's so-called 'scientific' whaling."

In April last year, Japan announced its whaling haul from the Southern Ocean was at a record low because of "unforgivable sabotage" by activists from the Sea Shepherd environmental group.

Sea Shepherd has called the ICJ case make-or-break for whales in the Southern Ocean.

"We are still preparing to head down regardless [of the ICJ's decision]," said Jeff Hansen, the organisation's director. Sea Shepherd spends about £2.4m annually on its anti-whaling campaigns.

John Frizell of Greenpeace said a decision in favour of Australia "would place Japan in a very difficult position and present great difficulties for its operation in the Antarctic".

If the court rules in Japan's favour, however, "they will feel vindicated and free to continue their operations, which are becoming increasingly controversial", he said.

http://www.kszz.com/what-a-man-did-with-this-tree-trunk-will-blow-your-mind-whatever-youre-thinkingits-better.html

Rhino horns sold for $92,500 in Sydney

A pair of rhino horns mounted on a wooden plinth has sold for $92,500 in Sydney, surprising the staff at auction house Lawsons.

The price of rhino horn, which is used as an aphrodisiac in Chinese medicine, has skyrocketed over the past few years, as the animal becomes rarer and China’s wealth increases, driving demand.

It is believed the buyer at the auction, held on March 14, was of Asian background, but Lawson’s general manager, Simon Hill, declined to confirm other than to say it was "a private buyer".

“We had several bidders on the phone both here and overseas and some bidders in the room. In the end it went to the bidder in the room," he said.

Mr Hill said it was wrong to assume that the antique horns would end up ground into powder.

"I have Asian Australian clients who have bought them to display as a symbol of wealth and as an investment," he said.

The rising wealth in countries like China and Vietnam has pushed demand for rhino horn, which is used as an

aphrodisiac or sometimes as status symbols to be displayed on the wall of wealthy Asians.

But getting hold of rhino horn is increasingly difficult, as most countries have signed a 1971 treaty which restricts trading in artefacts made from endangered species, including rhinoceros and elephant tusks. But items made before that date can still be traded.

This particular example belonged to an elderly man, who had inherited it from a relative.

"His wife and daughter thought it was hideous and made him keep it under the house. But he knew it was valuable, and his son was getting married so he wanted the money toward the wedding," Mr Hill said.

"It probably dates to the 1920s, perhaps earlier. We had to provide details of its provenance to the Department of the Environment, before we could auction it."

Mr Hill said the buyer had asked about getting an export licence but said this would be quite difficult to obtain.

In January, rhino horns with a street value of more than $6 million were seized by customs officials in Thailand and Singapore, according to a report released by Traffic, the wildlife trade monitoring network.

Almost 44 kilograms of rhino horn were discovered en route to Vietnam, where one kilogram of horn sells for about $120,000.

In Europe there have been more than 60 break-ins at natural history museums since 2010, with the thieves targeting rhino horns. Sometimes they are just snapped off the taxidermied animals. To combat the trade, Europe is establishing a DNA database and some museums have taken the precaution of replacing the real horns with resin replicas.

Rhinos are listed as a critically endangered species and only about 25,000 remain in the wild, a fraction of the 100,000 that roamed Africa in the early 20th century.

According to a South African report, 2013 was the worst year on record for rhino poaching, with 1004 animals killed, a 50 per cent increase on the previous year.

http://www.kszz.com/i-didnt-think-a-murderer-in-prison-could-bring-a-tear-to-my-eye-but-this-did-it.html

Breast cancer screening worthwhile, despite new study

http://www.kszz.com/these-are-the-20-most-unfortunately-hysterical-advertisements-ever-placed-lol-4-had-me-in-stitches.html

A large study on the benefits of breast cancer screening hascast doubt on the value of mammograms in reducing deaths from the disease in women aged 40-49 compared to other methods such as physical examination.

The study, carried out by researchers in Canada and published in the British Medical Journal, found that annual screening did not cut mortality rates and suggested that screenings instead resulted in a large number of cancers being over-diagnosed. It is the third paper from the team, concluding research into mammography begun in 1980.

But the findings from the 25-year study stand in stark contrast to the majority of other investigations into the benefits of breast cancer screening and some experts have called the conclusions into question.

The study compared the incidence of breast cancer and mortality in nearly 90,000 women aged 40-59 – some had received breast cancer screening, while others hadn’t. After a five-year screening period, the women’s health was then tracked for the next 20 years. Over this time the study found that 3,250 women who were screened and 3,133 in a control group who didn’t receive screening were diagnosed with breast cancer and 500 and 505, respectively, died of the disease. The researchers at the University of Toronto concluded that “cumulative mortality from breast cancer was [therefore] similar” between the two.

Over-diagnosis risks

The researchers also said their results implied that over a fifth of screen-detected cancers were “over-diagnosed”. Over-diagnosis happens when tumours that wouldn’t cause problems for a woman in her lifetime if left untreated are detected by a mammogram. This then leads to unnecessary treatment including surgery and in many cases radiotherapy and medication. The problem is that there is currently no way of determining whether or not the cancers that are detected through mammograms will beharmful or not.

Peter Sasieni, professor of biostatistics and cancer epidemiology at Queen Mary University of London, questioned the claim that other methods such as physical examinations were just as effective. “It’s definitely the case that you can find cancers on mammography that you can’t feel, and identifying tumours early on is extremely important for treatment,” he said.

While the problems around mammography sensitivity and potential over-diagnosis aren’t new, the study’s conclusions were called into question by Stephen Duffy, professor of cancer screening at Queen Mary University of London. “For the last 15-20 years, it has been the case that all the breast screening trials except the Canadian ones have shown either a significant or a strongly suggestive reduction in mortality from breast cancer with the offer of mammography screening, ” he said. There were numerous reasons why “the Canada trial results are out of line with the other trials,” Duffy said.

One major reason suggested by Daniel Kopans, professor of radiology at Harvard Medical School, was the screening technology that was used, which he said was of poor quality. In acommentary that accompanied the Canadian study, Kopans said: “Poor quality mammography does not find breast cancers at a smaller size and earlier stage and so would not be expected to reduce deaths.”

Benefits and harms

To weigh up the pros and cons of mammograms, anindependent review was commissioned in 2012. It took into account earlier versions of this latest study (which had similar findings) and recognised the occurrence of over-diagnosis. Despite this, the independent panel concluded that “screening reduces breast cancer mortality” and that the UK breast screening programme “probably prevents about 1,300 breast cancer deaths every year”.

“With the publication of the latest follow-up from the Canadian trials, the situation remains unchanged,” Duffy said.

Mammogram technology has improved significantly since the trial began in the 1980s and experts argue that results are better now than they used to be. But until a sure-fire way is found of determining whether or not cancers that are detected pose a risk to women in their lifetimes, over-diagnosis and treatment will result from screening. In spite of this latest publication, experts are adamant that screening remains worthwhile and key to reducing the number of deaths from breast cancer.

If you have a genetic predisposition to cancer, it’s better to know about it

http://www.kszz.com/what-i-just-discovered-underground-in-europe-blew-my-mind-i-cannot-believe-this-exists-wow.html

Most cancers happen by chance and there is no obvious inherited reason for them. However a small proportion of cancers occur as a result of a genetic predisposition because a gene passed down through generation of a family carries a mutation – this was the reason behind actress Angelina Jolie’s decision to opt for a double mastectomy last year.

People with a strong family history of cancer – especially if many members of their family have been diagnosed with cancer, especially at a young age – may be carrying one of these genes. That is why it is important for everyone to find out their family’s cancer history. It may be difficult to broach the subject with relatives, but talking about cancer among families has the power to prevent later problems, improve access to early treatment and raise awareness. Families with a high incidence of breast and ovarian cancers are one example.

In the 1990s, scientists discovered that germline mutations in the “BReast CAncer” genes (BRCA1 and BRCA2) caused familial breast and ovarian cancer. We now know that mutations in BRCA1 or 2 account for around 10% of all ovarian cancers. Women who carry a BRCA1 gene mutation have up to a 90% lifetime risk of getting breast cancer, and up to 60% risk of ovarian cancer. For BRCA2 the rates are 80% and 30% respectively.

Members of BRCA-mutation carrying families may have developed their cancers at a younger age than the general population (for example when they were under 40). These are usually on one side of the family and can occasionally affect male relatives (causing male breast cancer) also. The mutation is passed down in a Mandelian fashion, which means a parent (either father or mother) who carries the mutation has a 50% chance of passing it to their children.

Fathers may be unaffected clinically but act as carriers and can pass the mutation to their children. The cancer therefore may skip a generation. If a person has breast or ovarian cancer they can have genetic testing in the form of a blood test to see if they carry BRCA gene defects. If a BRCA mutation is identified, other relatives that could potentially have inherited the mutation can be offered tests.

So how does it help to know whether carry a mutation? If you carry a BRCA mutation, you can significantly reduce your risk of getting breast or ovarian cancer by having surgery to remove these organs or have screening for breast cancer for early diagnosis. For example, removal of both ovaries dramatically reduces the risk of developing ovarian cancer. Similarly, a mastectomy is effective in reducing the risk of breast cancer. Deciding whether or not to have these operations is difficult, but knowing one’s genetic status is useful in making an informed choice.

Everyone has a different perception of risk, so some will opt for screening while others prefer surgery. The choices may be wide ranging. If a young woman finds out she has BRCA gene mutation, she may decide to have children at a younger age so that she can have her ovaries and breasts removed afterwards.

Although BRCA gene mutation is much talked about and has had a lot of publicity recently, there are other genetic predispositions that are worth mentioning. For example Lynch Syndrome may be inherited and passed on in families and can result in significant increase in risk of bowel cancer, endometrial cancer and ovarian cancer. There may be effective screening or chemo-preventative measures that can be offered such as colonoscopy for bowel cancer or mammography for breast cancer or use of aspirin in reducing risk of bowel cancer.

But knowing your family history is vitally important and as ovarian cancer awareness month draws to a close, what better time to think about talking to parents and grandparents about your family tree. If a person knows they have a mutation in any of these genes, they have the choice to make informed decisions about their health and future. Most people don’t leave important things to chance, why should we leave our health to chance? When it comes to cancer risk within families, it is definitely good to talk.

Regular Test Able To Rule Out Heart Attacks In The ER

http://www.kszz.com/kids-games-that-would-be-better-as-drinking-games.html

Plenty of people head to the hospital every single day regarding their chest pains, which they should. When it comes to your heart and your chest you can never be too careful, especially since your heart is basically the big pump that lets your body go through its daily functions. A new development has allowed doctors to see if patients are suffering from a heart attack right away at the ER.

This study took place in Sweden, and it figured out that the use of the blood test alongside the usual electrocardiogram of heartbeats were 99% accurate when it came to diagnosing somebody with a heart deficiency. It can easily tell a doctor if they can send a patient home or if they should stay to be looked at some more. The trial consisted of 9,000 (approximately) patients whom were labelled as low risk by the blood test at hand, only 15 of these people went on to suffer a heart attack within the next month, without any fatalities.

“We believe that with this strategy, 20 to 25 percent of admissions to hospitals for chest pain may be avoided,” stated Dr. Nadia Bandstein from the Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden.

Chest pain is probably one of the more common staples when it comes to taking a visit to the ER, around 15 million people in the United States and Europe do so every single year. It usually turns out to be either anxiety, indigestion, or many other less-serious problems that aren’t heart attacks that make these people take the trip, so this test is going to do wonders pertaining to the whole process of determining if the patient is in danger or not.

Sunday, March 30, 2014

Happy Birthday Kim

http://www.kszz.com/what-this-guy-found-in-his-kitchen-is-fuel-for-my-nightmares-i-would-burn-my-house-down.html

These Modern Day Fairy Tales Are Beautiful. Even Better, A Rookie Photographer Did This.

http://www.kszz.com/these-modern-day-fairy-tales-are-beautiful-even-better-a-rookie-photographer-did-this.html

These Modern Day Fairy Tales Are Beautiful. Even Better, A Rookie Photographer Did This.,

A girl just recently startingout in photography created a series called Modern Fairytales, using her friends to portray popular characters from fairy tales. Especially for someone new to photography, the photos are beautiful. Not to mention she has friends who were destined to be models.

Check them out below.

Tinkerbell

Monday, March 31, 2014

Over-diagnosis risks

Benefits and harms

Sunday, March 30, 2014

Friday, March 28, 2014