Glacier Meltdown: Another Scientific Scandal Involving the IPCC Climate Research Group

Global Research, January 23, 2010

Only days after the failed Copenhagen Global Warming Summit, yet a new scandal over the scientific accuracy of the UN IPCC 2007 climate report has emerged. Following the major data-manipulation scandals from the UN-tied research center at Britain’s East Anglia University late 2009, the picture emerges of one of the most massive scientific frauds of recent history.
Senior members of the UN climate project, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have been forced to admit a major error in the 2007 IPCC UN report that triggered the recent global campaign for urgent measures to reduce “manmade emissions” of CO2. The IPCC’s 2007 report stated, “glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world.” Given that this is the world’s highest mountain range and meltdown implies a massive flooding of India, China and the entire Asian region, it was a major scare “selling point” for the IPCC agenda.

As well, the statement on the glacier melt in the 2007 IPCC report contains other serious errors such as the statement that “Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometers by the year 2035." There are only 33,000 square kilometers of glaciers in the Himalayas. And a table in the report says that between 1845 and 1965, the Pindari Glacier shrank by 2,840 meters. Then comes a math mistake: It says that’s a rate of 135.2 meters a year, when it really is only 23.5 meters a year. Now scientists around the world are scouring the entire IPCC report for indications of similar lack of scientific rigor.
It emerges that the basis of the stark IPCC glacier meltdown statement of 2007 was not even a scientific study of melting data. Rather it was a reference to a newspaper article cited by a pro-global warming ecological advocacy group, WWF.
The original source of the IPCC statement, it turns out,

appeared in a 1999 report in the British magazine, New Scientist that was cited in passing by WWF. The New Scientist author, Fred Pierce, wrote then, “The inclusion of this statement has angered many glaciologists, who regard it as unjustified. Vijay Raina, a leading Indian glaciologist, wrote in a paper published by the Indian Government in November that there is no sign of "abnormal" retreat in Himalayan glaciers. India’s environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, accused the IPCC of being "alarmist." The IPCC’s chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, has hit back, denouncing the Indian government report as "voodoo science" lacking peer review. He adds that "we have a very clear idea of what is happening" in the Himalayas.” [1]
The same Pachauri, co-awardee of the Nobel Prize with Al Gore, has recently been under attack for huge conflicts of interest related to his business interests that profit from the CO2 global warming agenda he promotes.[2]

Pearce notes that the original claim made by Indian glaciologist Syed Hasnain, in a 1999 email interview with Pearce, namely that all the glaciers in the central and eastern Himalayas could disappear by 2035, never was repeated by Hasnain in any peer-reviewed scientific journal, and that Hasnain now says the remark was "speculative".
Despite the  lack of scientific validation, the 10-year-old claim ended up in the IPCC fourth assessment report published in 2007. Moreover the claim was extrapolated to include all glaciers in the Himalayas.
Since publication of the latest New Scientist article, the IPCC officially has been forced to issue the following statement: “the IPCC said the paragraph "refers to poorly substantiated estimates of rate of recession and date for the disappearance of Himalayan glaciers. In drafting the paragraph in question, the clear and well-established standards of evidence, required by the IPCC procedures, were not applied properly."

The IPCC adds, "The IPCC regrets the poor application of well-established IPCC procedures in this instance." But the statement calls for no action beyond stating a need for absolute adherence to IPCC quality control processes. "We reaffirm our strong commitment to ensuring this level of performance," the statement said.” [3]
In an indication of the defensiveness prevailing within the UN’s IPCC, Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice-chair of the IPCC, insists that the mistake did nothing to undermine the large body of evidence that showed the climate was warming and that human activity was largely to blame. He told BBC News: "I don’t see how one mistake in a 3,000-page report can damage the credibility of the overall report."

Some serious scientists disagree. Georg Kaser, an expert in glaciology with University of Innsbruck in Austria and a lead author for the IPCC, gave a damning different assessment of the implications of the latest scandal affecting the credibility of the IPCC. Kaser says he had warned that the 2035 prediction was clearly wrong in 2006, months before the IPCC report was published. "This [date] is not just a little bit wrong, but far out of any order of magnitude. All the responsible people are aware of this weakness in the fourth assessment. All are aware of the mistakes made. If it had not been the focus of so much public opinion, we would have said ‘we will do better next time’. It is clear now that working group II has to be restructured."[4]
The chairman of the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, has made no personal comment on the glacier claim. It appears he is as well shaken by the wave of recent scandals. He told a conference in Dubai on energy recently, "They can’t attack the science so they attack the chairman. But they won’t sink me. I am the unsinkable Molly Brown (sic). In fact, I will float much higher," he told the Guardian. His remarks suggest more the ‘spirit of Woodstock’ in 1969 than of what is supposed to be the world’s leading climate authority.

F. William Engdahl is the author of Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order

Terror infests Pakistan

UPI Asia.com

Toronto, ON, Canada, — Terror has become a daily affair in Pakistan, which has hit civilians the most due to suicide bombers mingling with them. Such attacks are sometimes a result of the Pashtun tribesmen’s pique at the Pakistani government; other times they are interfaith rivalries between the Sunni and Shiite communities. In addition, they are also “bomb battles” between rival political party activists in big cities.

This all began when Pakistan started training terrorists for attacks in Indian-controlled Kashmir. When this met with immediate success, terror activities were expanded to cover the rest of India. The last attack took place in Mumbai in November 2008.

With every successful explosion terrorists have become more sophisticated, with some using bombs to settle their local grievances. In October last year a Sunni resistance group reportedly carried out a suicide bomb attack on Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards that killed several top commanders.

Pakistani authorities never anticipated that terrorists would turn against them. In 2009, some 6,000 Pakistanis died in terror attacks, making it one of the bloodiest years of domestic violence. Half of those killed were security personnel.

Terror attacks declined considerably in India’s Kashmir region in 2009, partly due to mounting international pressure on Pakistan and partly due to the vigil mounted by Indian security forces. Deaths from terrorist attacks included 55 civilians and 76 security personnel.

Until 2001, Pakistan was untouched by India’s accusations that it was responsible for acts of violence in India. However, the 9/11 terror attacks in the United States changed that. Pakistani security services, although not directly responsible for 9/11, had acted as facilitators to the terror masters in Afghanistan.

This became common knowledge, and the United States mounted pressure on Pakistan to dismantle its terror business completely, offering aid and military hardware in return. But the campaign never succeeded. The Pakistanis pleaded ignorance of terrorist activities, while winking at their organizations and training facilities on their territory.

While Pakistan seemed unconcerned with terror elsewhere, trouble began brewing at home as al-Qaida and the Taliban made the frontier region of Pakistan their new home. That brought the United States into the picture, with its successful drone attacks to eliminate leaders of terrorist groups.

The U.S. action caught al-Qaida and the Taliban by surprise. They pushed the local Pashtun tribes to rebel against the Pakistani government. Some of them did, resulting in the present impasse in Pakistan.

Now the same terrorists are biting the hand that fed them. The United States managed to convince the Pakistani army to go after the terrorists, which was easier said than done. As the Pakistani army entered terror-infested areas in 2009, they suffered heavy causalities. Besides, terrorists relocated themselves to different areas of Pakistan, making the army’s task doubly difficult.

Will terror ever relent in Pakistan? It is highly unlikely. First the United States will have to withdraw from Afghanistan, but even if it does, al-Qaida and the Afghani Taliban will find excuses to continue fighting. Second, no efforts have been made to reform the Pakistani intelligence services that head various terror organizations.

The United States has been on the wrong foot all along in dealing with Pakistan. Prior to 2001, the U.S. and British intelligence services encouraged religious elements within the Pakistani security apparatus. They did it to defeat the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and later encouraged the religious elements to maintain law and order after the Soviets withdrew from the region.

The United States did not realize that it had created a monster in the form of the Taliban. The monster would be unleashed if the Taliban again grabs power in Kabul and invites al-Qaida into its midst.

It was the United States that created Pakistan’s intelligence services, from 1980 to 1988. In addition, the Pakistani army was pampered with modern weapons and even allowed to steal nuclear weapon technology from Europe and the United States. When caught, Pakistani agents were let off lightly. Since 2001 more new weapons were offered in the name of fighting terror. The Pakistanis took the weapons but did nothing to help the United States in return.

The present Afghani Taliban, after its demolition by the United States in 2001, was created by Pakistan from 2002 to 2007. The Pakistani army provided weapons and training in civilian garb. Their fundraising has been based on drug smuggling and through Pakistanis living in the Middle East.

All sanctuaries for rest and recreation for the Taliban are in Pakistan. There is a silver lining though – the Pakistanis are not helping the Arab, Uighur and Chechen elements of al-Qaida. They are on their own and suffer the most during U.S.-led drone attacks.

What made the loyal Pashtuns rebel against Pakistan? Pashtuns in the Northwest frontier region are loyal to Pakistan, although their loyalty is under severe test today. The situation changed when convoys escorted by Pakistani security forces came under attack and army personnel were killed. Later, deeply religious Mullahs in the frontier region vowed to expel Pakistanis from the region. They even captured a few districts there to make their point. This led to a larger conflict with the army.

The situation is at an impasse, with the Pashtun loyalty factor under severe strain. Although the Afghani Taliban is not encouraging the Pakistani chapter, it seems both are increasingly driven by a common goal – to drive out the United States and Pakistan from Afghanistan and the frontier region. This may be the beginning of the formation of Pashtunistan, a homeland for Pashtuns. This demand has been in cold storage for a while but can be revived with ease.

What makes Pakistanis confront India so diligently? Kashmir is the face of the Muslim desire to rule over India. Today, they are fighting over Kashmir – it that is resolved they will think of something else. It is their relentless pursuit to rule from New Delhi, which is the crux of the problem.

The British took away power from the Muslims in 1857 and slowly handed it back to the majority Hindus. By 1947, Hindus were ready to rule and had learned to pick up the sword again. When Pakistan invaded Kashmir in 1948, it was beaten. Again in 1965 and in 1971 it was beaten. The Pakistani army’s surrender in 1971 in Dhaka has not sat well with them for the last 40 years. They wish to avenge it and tried in 1998 in Kargil, but lost heavily. Still, they want to keep trying.

Presently, the Pakistani army is being trained to counter India in war. Soldiers are told that one Pakistani soldier equals 30 Indian soldiers, although facts prove otherwise. India with its bigger economy and resources is doing a fine job in keeping its enemies out of its territory. If Pakistan starts a conflict, it could be driven back within 94 hours.

With no way to beat its favorite enemy India, Pakistan has turned to jihadism. It did not count on al-Qaida succeeding spectacularly in its 9/11 attacks. Also, when it encouraged the Afghani Taliban, it did not expect the emergence of the Pakistani Taliban.

Today Pakistan is in a worse shape than it was ten years back. There is no end in sight to its internal fighting. India, for sure, is now beyond its reach.

Leaving Failed States Alone By Rabbi Jeremy Rosen

5TJT January 15, 2010

I know this is going to sound harsh and unfeeling but we ought to leave failed states alone to stew in their own self-imposed cruelties. It is, in the end, up to their own citizens to either put up or shut up.
I really thought Obama was going to usher in a new era and stop trying to cure those sick parts of the world that do not want to be healed. But it seems his arms dealers, his scaremongers, his political allies and supporters all have a vested interest in keeping armed forces overseas, sending young men and women to their pointless deaths, and throwing away vast sums of money that could better be used improving the fabric of society and infrastructure at home. I remember in my youth the arguments for staying in Vietnam. There was the domino theory that all of Asia would collapse into Communism. The line had to be drawn. Failed states would present a danger to the USA and World Peace. And they all proved to be false.
If you cannot tend to everyone else’s garden, at least you can make sure yours grows properly. And if you put all your energy and resources into trying to help someone who hates gardening to spend time weeding, you will inevitably fail. Have we not yet learnt that no matter how benevolent an occupier is, an occupier is a resented alien who will never be accepted?
I remember vividly the 1967 war in which Israel ejected the Jordanians from the West Bank they had illegally occupied in1948 (though no one in the UN seemed to mind if it was Arab occupying Arab). The Palestinians threw roses at the Israeli tanks as they passed through the villages, so hated were the Jordanians. Unbelievably, the victors simply refused to learn from what their own eyes were telling them–that any occupier comes to be hated, and certainly one who tries to subjugate and disenfranchise. About the only thing to be said in favor of Russia this last century was that she actually did give up on Afghanistan and get out.
So I say cut your losses and get out. Occupation does not work.
Will a failed state become a haven for Al Qaeda terrorists? So isolate that state. Track those who come and go, rather than try to change it from the outside. Any attempt from the outside will be regarded as a crusade, imperialism, or an American Zionist plot. It will only reinforce blind fundamentalism.
In Iraq, the US ended up in league with the very Sunnis it initially booted out of power. The Taliban rulers were ejected from Afghanistan. Yet most analysts now think the only chance of any kind of success is by making a deal with the new Taliban. Meanwhile, they and Al Qaeda are protected within Pakistani territory, because its own political and military system is riddled with fundamentalists and it is a nearly failed state with an already tested nuclear bomb. Look at all the failed states harboring Al Qaeda or other dangerous potential terrorists. Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. And in the case of Somalia the US left with its tail between its legs. The world cannot even deal with Somali pirates.
There is a mindset amongst many moderate Muslims that only outside intervention can rescue then from the oppressive Muslim regimes they live under. That is why it is argued that the USA should reach out to and support moderates in Iran or Saudi Arabia. Not that she will be thanked. Only when a sufficient number of oppressed citizens within a country feel so strongly about it that they are prepared to rebel can there be any hope of regime change. That, for example, is precisely what happened in Honduras, and in time it will happen in Venezuela too. Hopefully Zimbabwe as well. They are not as toxic as Iran and North Korea–two virtual nuclear powers. Yet no one I have heard is arguing that the USA should invade them.
In Iran the oppressive regime murders, tortures, and rapes its own people. That’s the way in the East. No one is making a fuss of Christians killed in Egypt or Malaysia. Who cares if in Abu Dhabi a royal prince gets off scot-free after torturing and maiming another Muslim. We don’t expect justice or freedom in such places. Shall we invade them too?
Thanks to China’s refusal to countenance any interference in the internal affairs of regimes, there is no way to impose universal sanctions or effective restrictions. Free countries have no alternative other than to rely on their own methods of self-protection.
As for locally born terror, stop pretending it is exceptional. Political correctness and appeasement will not protect anyone. Britain still refuses to acknowledge that its universities are centers of recruitment for aggressive Islam, something students have been telling anyone who would listen for years.
America’s decision to require stricter security for visitors from certain Muslim states which harbor terror has been attacked both by American Muslims and Civil Rights campaigners. I hope the USA stands firm (I know Europe won’t). I do feel very sorry for innocent peace-loving Muslims who suffer as a result. But they have it in their own hands either to help change regimes or bring the pressure to bear on those Muslims who give Islam a bad name. ♦

Happy New Year 2010!

Photo: New Year celebration in my hometown Gothenburg, Sweden last night.

 

I wish all of you a Happy New Year! I haven’t posted much during the holidays, but things will return to normal soon enough.

Paterson: ‘New York Has Run Out Of Cash’

Huffington Post DECEMBER 11, 2009

ALBANY, N.Y. — Gov. David Paterson said Wednesday that New York has run out of cash and he’s directing budget officials to reduce state aid payments to schools, local governments and nonprofit service providers until things improve.

Speaking at the Museum of American Finance in Manhattan, Paterson said he’ll probably get sued, but he won’t let the state run out of money on his watch.

"I am directing the Division of the Budget to limit payments so that we will have the cash to pay our debts at the end of December," Paterson said. "I will continue to withhold payments until this economy is leveled off."

"Now New York has run out of cash," he said. "You can’t spend money that you don’t have."

Budget Director Robert Megna said the state faces a shortfall of more than $1 billion in the general fund at the end of December, which would be a first for New York.

Other state funds can be tapped to help close that gap, Megna said, but even using all $1.2 billion of rainy day reserves and delaying a pension fund payment will leave the margin "razor thin."

Rather than risking some setback that would force hasty cuts, Megna said the administration is cutting spending in an orderly fashion. The Budget Division plans to detail temporary cuts this week, he said.

In his executive budget proposal next year, Paterson could propose making them permanent.

"We’ve had a revenue collapse over the last 24 to 36 month period," Megna said. "The state’s cash position is at its weakest point in recent history."

Last week, after lawmakers agreed to cuts of about $2.8 billion, Paterson said it wouldn’t be enough. He warned then of reduced and delayed payments, targeting school aid and funding to hospitals.

Timothy Kremer, executive director of the New York State School Boards Association, said they’ve asked their roughly 700 members to assess the impact if approximately $300 million in school aid is delayed or permanently cut, which Paterson had proposed in November. Lawmakers rejected the cut, which would be a roughly 1.5 percent reduction across the board.

"We think it’s inappropriate and likely illegal for him to unilaterally act in that way," Kremer said. Several organizations, including his association, may seek a court order to block it, he said.

Stephen Acquario, executive director of the New York State Association of Counties, said their reimbursements for providing state-mandated services like public health, mental hygiene and other programs are already lagging by months and in some cases a year or more. "Many counties don’t have the available fund balance to cover the state’s bills," he said.

Gore cancels on Copenhagen lecture – leaves ticketholders in a lurch

Wattsupwiththat.com

It seems the uncertainty about Copenhagen is growing. When Al baby pulls the plug, you know it’s hosed.

From Berlingske: Al Gore cancels lecture during COP15

Former U.S. vice president has canceled his event, more than 3,000 Danes have purchased a ticket. Photo: JOSE MENDEZ

Looks like they will get a refund though. Might be worth more as a collectors item in ten years though.

I wonder how many people have shelled out $1200 to shake Al’s hand? Maybe not enough and he couldn’t cover the expenses for his private jet?

From the Washington Post:

“Have you ever shaken hands with an American vice president? If not, now is your chance. Meet Al Gore in Copenhagen during the UN Climate Change Conference,” notes the Danish tourism commission, which is helping Mr. Gore promote “Our Choice,” his newest book about global warming in all its alarming modalities.

“Tickets are available in different price ranges for the event. If you want it all, you can purchase a VIP ticket, where you get a chance to shake hands with Al Gore, get a copy of Our Choice and have your picture taken with him. The VIP event costs DKK 5,999 and includes drinks and a light snack.”

Wait, what? How much is that in American dollars? The currency conversion says it all, too: 5,999 Danish kroners is equivalent to $1,209.

“If you do not want to spend that much money, but still want to hear Al Gore speak about his latest book about climate challenges, you can purchase general tickets, ranging in price from DKK 199-1,499 depending on where in the room you want to sit,” the practical Danes advise. “There will be large screens, so that everyone will get a good view.”

Yah, such a deal.

MUSLIMS IN 21ST CENTURY AMERICA: ARROGANT, RIGHTEOUS AND DETERMINED

By Frosty Wooldridge
December 3, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

Part 8: Conversion, murders in Seattle, Koran verses advocate violence

As political correctness allows and emboldens Muslims to continue their onslaught into the United States, few Americans see our predicament and fewer still speak up.

While liberals and academics, living in gated communities and ivory towers, shout to the rooftops the wonders of multiculturalism—a not-so-silent war gathers beneath the surface of our seemingly peaceful society.

Today, the U.S. Congress continues importing 100,000 legal immigrants every 30 days. That equals 1.2 million mostly poor, illiterate and unskilled people from third world countries that compete for limited welfare dollars and jobs. At the same time, 14 million U.S. citizens cannot obtain a job, 13.4 million American children live below the poverty line, and finally, 35 million American citizens subsist on food stamps.

Not once will you hear of any debate on the absurdity of adding 100,000 immigrants monthly to our already overwhelmed civilization. As reported in an earlier column, the U.S. suffers 40 million people that cannot read (“America filling up with dumb people” www.newswithviews.com) and 52 million Americans that cannot read past the 4th grade level. Results of poverty and illiteracy:

Unwed mothers birth tens of thousands of babies on public welfare. Black gangs attack white citizens in Denver, Colorado where I live. Hispanic gangs in Los Angeles rule the streets; so much so, police officers do not dare enter gang turf for fear of being executed. As their crimes accelerate, our national prison population, now at 2.3 million inmates, grows commensurately. While in prison, Islam appeals to and converts more and more minorities.

Seattle, Washington police executions this week

“All four Lakewood County police officers had been shot and killed by Maurice Clemmons, an ex-con and alleged member of the Nation of Islam with a long rap sheet of violent crimes,” reported by the Last Crusade. “Clemmons, the Last Crusade has learned from an Arkansas law enforcement official, became a member of the Nation of Islam while serving time in the Cummins Prison.”

This is a true story and the author, Rick Mathes, is a well-known leader in prison ministry. The Muslim religion is the fastest growing religion per capita in the United States , especially in the minority races!!!
“Last month I attended my annual training session that’s required for maintaining my state prison security clearance,” said Mathes. “During the training session there was a presentation by three speakers representing the Roman Catholic, Protestant and Muslim faiths, who explained each of their beliefs.

“I was particularly interested in what the Islamic Imam had to say. The Imam gave a great presentation of the basics of Islam, complete with a video. After the presentations, time was provided for questions and answers.
“When it was my turn, I directed my question to the Imam and asked: “Please, correct me if I’m wrong, but I understand that most Imams and clerics of Islam have declared a holy jihad [Holy war] against the infidels of the world and, that by killing an infidel, (which is a command to all Muslims) they are assured of a place in heaven. If that’s the case, can you give me the definition of an infidel?’
“There was no disagreement with my statements and, without hesitation, he replied, “Non-believers!”
“I responded, “So, let me make sure I have this straight. All followers of Allah have been commanded to kill everyone who is not of your faith so they can have a place in heaven. Is that correct?”
“The expression on his face changed from one of authority and command to that of a little boy who had just been caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
“He sheepishly replied, “Yes.” I then stated, ‘Well, sir, I have a real problem trying to imagine Pope John Paul commanding all Catholics to kill those of your faith or Dr. Stanley ordering all Protestants to do the same in order to guarantee them a place in heaven!
The Imam was speechless!
“I continued, “I also have a problem with being your friend when you and your brother clerics are telling your followers to kill me!”
Needless to say, the organizers and/or promoters of the Diversification

Training seminar were not happy with my way of dealing with the Islamic Imam, and exposing the truth about the Muslims’ beliefs.”

These verses come directly from the Koran:

 

Qur’an (5:33) – "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement."

Qur’an (8:12) – "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them." No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

 

Qur’an (9:5) – "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush.”

Part 9: Muslim incident that happened on an Air Tran flight in November.

Listen to Frosty Wooldridge on Wednesdaysas he interviews top national leaders on his radio show "Connecting the Dots" atwww.themicroeffect.com at 6:00 PM Mountain Time. Adjust tuning in to your time zone.

© 2009 Frosty Wooldridge – All Rights Reserved

Obama’s ‘Christian’ Grandmother Has Arrived In Mecca For The ‘Hajj’

Obama’s ‘Christian’ Grandmother Has Arrived In Mecca For The ‘Hajj’

During the 2008 Presidential Campaign, there were rumors Barack Obama was a Muslim. Obama denied these rumors and claimed he is a Christian. He did attend a Chicago church led by the radical Rev. Wright for 20 years. There was a strong attempt to debunk the "Obama is a Muslim" rumor. During this time period, AP ran a story supporting Obama’s claim to be a Christian and identifying his Paternal Grandmother as a Christian.

Obama’s grandfather had converted to Islam from Roman Catholicism and taken the name Hussein, Sarah Obama said, but his children had inherited only the name, not the religion. Each person should be able to choose how they worshipped, she said.
"In the world of today, children have different religions from their parents," she said. She, too, is a Christian.

Now, we learn Obama’s ‘Christian’ Grandmother has arrived in Saudi Arabia for the ‘Hajj.’ The ‘Hajj’ is a holy pilgrimage to Mecca all Muslims are required to make and is one of the five pillars of Islam.

Mecca, 25 Nov. (AKI) – The grandmother of US president Barack Obama has arrived in Saudi Arabia for the ‘Hajj’ or Islamic pilgrimage to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, a Saudi daily said on Wednesday. Sarah Obama, 87, is being accompanied by a nephew and Obama’s cousin, Omran.
On Wednesday Sarah Obama was in the valley of Mina with an African delegation, according to the Saudi daily Okaz.

Experter samarbetar med industrin- in Swedish

SVD Publicerad: 30 november 2009, 01.00. Senast ändrad: 30 november 2009, 08.05

PANDEMI. Rader med experter hjälper WHO att hantera hotet från svininfluensan. Men flera av rådgivarna har kopplingar till läkemedels industrin, visar SvD:s granskning. Kommittén som ger råd om själva pandemin är hemlig.

GENÈVE/STOCKHOLM.

En central grupp sedan svininfluensans utbrott i våras är WHO:s ”Emergency Committe”. Baserat på information från denna kriskommittée har WHO:s generaldirektör Margaret Chan fattat beslut om olika pandeminivåer.

Efter kommitténs fjärde möte den elfte juni 2009 drog Margaret Chan slutsatsen att kriterierna för en pandemi uppfyllts.

”Efter rådgivning från kriskommittén beslutar WHO:s generaldirektör Margaret Chan att gå från fas fem till sex”, skrev WHO i ett pressmeddelande.

”WHO har nu nära dialog med tillverkare av influensavaccin, och full kapacitet ska snart vara uppnådd för att försäkra största möjliga tillgång till pandemivaccin inom de närmaste månaderna”, hette det vidare.

Vad är denna kriskommitté vars slutsatser ligger bakom pandemibeslutet som också utlöste storskalig vaccinproduktion?

–Kommittén sammankallas av WHOs generaldirektör vid behov för att ge råd om internationella sjukdomsutbrott. De träffades första gången 25 april i år. Kommittén består av 18 medlemmar och är enbart rådgivande, säger Gregory Hartl, talesman för svininfluensan vid WHO.

Han betonar att WHO-chefen får råd från världens främsta hälsoexperter genom kommittén, men att beslutet att deklarera en pandemi ”helt och hållet är hennes eget”.

Vilka är medlemmarna i kommittén?

–Namnen på medlemmarna i kommittén är hemliga. Man vill inte att de ska kunna utsättas för påtryckningar utifrån. De är valda utifrån sina expertkunskaper om influensa, virusspridning och sjukdomskontroll, säger Hartl.

Varför är namnen hemliga? Vilka slags påtryckningar riskerar medlemmarna?

–Jag kan inte gå in på det. Men det viktiga är att medlemmarna i kommittén inte behöver ta hänsyn till någon eller någonting utanför kommittén i sin rådgivning till WHO:s generaldirektör, säger Gregory Hartl.

Har någon medlem i kommittén koppling till eller samarbete med läkemedelsindustrin?

–Jag vet inte vilka medlemmarna är. Jag tror att kontroller görs om de har kopplingar till läkemedelsindustrin.

Bör inte WHO vara transparent när det gäller hur beslut fattas om sjukdomar som berör miljontals människor?

–I kampen mot denna epidemi måste man samarbeta med många parter. Det inkluderar regeringar, frivilligorganisationer och läkemedelsindustrin. Vi måste hitta de bästa lösningarna för att skydda människors liv. Att rädda liv är allra viktigast för oss, säger Gregory Hartl.

Han tillägger att ”vi frågar om intressekonflikter och får uppgifter om detta”.

Han säger också att det finns flera kommittéer som ger råd om olika aspekter kring svininfluensan och hur man kan bekämpa den.

–Dessa kommittéer undviker intressekonflikter, säger han.

Men en titt på dessa kommittér visar att det inte alltid stämmer. När det gäller influensa och vaccin har WHO bland annat Sage-kommittén samt Ad hoc Policy Advisary Working Group on Influenza A (H1N1) till hjälp.

Tre av Sages femton medlemmar har kontakter med läkemedelsindustrin. Bland annat har de fått pengar och stöd av de ledande vaccinföretagen.

Två oberoende externa experter på Sages möten i Genève har av den danska tidningen Information avslöjats ha fått rådgivarpengar från läkemedelsföretag (se grafik under artikeln).

I Ad Hoc-kommittén sitter också som oberoende expert en professor och världsledande virusforskare som fått kritik i tidskriften Science för att han äger två bioteknikföretag som jobbar med influensavaccin.

När det gäller beslutet att deklarera en pandemi har dock vare sig Ad Hoc-kommittén eller Sage ”spelat någon som helst roll”, säger Gregory Hartl.

–Margaret Chan kan bara ta rådgivning av kriskommittén och medlemsländerna. Men beslutet om en pandemi är enbart hennes, säger han.

Endometriosis may increase the risk of certain cancers, but absolute risk remains low

Endometriosus.org

Epidemiological studies presented at the 23rd annual meeting of ESHRE showed a headline grabbing increased cancer risk among women with endometriosis. But clinicians remind women with endometriosis that in fact this research is reassuring in that there appears to be no overall increased risk of cancer.

LYON, 2 JULY 2007

According to Swedish researchers endometriosis is associated with an increased risk of various cancers, but this risk does not depend on the number of times women with the condition have given birth.

Dr Anna-Sofia Melin, told the 23rd annual meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology today: “Several epidemiological studies have shown an increased cancer risk among women with endometriosis, especially ovarian cancer. Infertility and never having given birth (nulliparity) are also known risk factors for different types of cancer, such as breast and endometrial cancer. However, as far as we know, this is the first study to investigate cancer risk among women with endometriosis that also stratifies for parity.”

Dr Melin and epidemiologists at the Karolinska Institute looked at data from 63,630 women who had been discharged from hospital with a diagnosis of endometriosis between 1969 and 2002. They were identified and followed up via the National Swedish Inpatient Register, the National Swedish Cancer Register and the Swedish Multi-Generation Register.

The researchers identified 3,822 cases of cancer amongst the women with endometriosis. While they found no overall increased risk of cancer, they did find that the women had an elevated risk of certain types of rare cancer, but that there was no significant difference in risk between women who had never given birth and those who had.

“We found that, contrary to what one might expect, endometriosis and nulliparity did not combine to give a higher risk of cancer,” said Dr Melin.

The researchers found that endometriosis increased the risk of developing ovarian cancer by more than a third (37%) above the risk for the normal population of women without endometriosis. There were similar increases in risk for endocrine tumours (38%), kidney cancer (36%) and thyroid cancer (33%). Slightly lower increases were found for brain tumours (27%) and malignant melanoma (23%), and there was a small increased risk of breast cancer (8%). Interestingly, women with endometriosis had a reduced risk of cervical cancer of just under a third (29%).
“There was no significant difference between nulliparous and parous women with endometriosis regarding cancer risk for any of the cancer types. We found a non-significant decrease in ovarian cancer risk the more children a woman had had,” said Dr Melin.

Little is known about the possible mechanisms involved in the increased risk of cancer from endometriosis (or decreased risk, in the case of cervical cancer).

Dr Melin said: “The fact that our study did not show an association between cancer risk and parity increases the possibility that it is the endometriosis disease in itself that causes the cancer and not the infertility issue.

But she said that it was too early to use the results of her study to give advice to doctors about improved treatments for women with endometriosis.

“Our hope is that doctors in general start to view endometriosis as a serious disease that causes a lot of suffering to the patient and also may lead to cancer. We hope that in the future we will be able to identify those women with endometriosis that may have a more aggressive form of disease with more atypical cells, for instance, and that this may lead to better care for the patient and, hopefully, to a early diagnosis if cancer should occur,” she concluded.

Dr Andrew Prentice, Senior Lecturer in Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the University of Cambridge, commented:

"The data from the Karolinska Institute is of great interest to women with endometriosis. It is reassuring that women with endometriosis do not have an overall increased risk of cancer. What is not clear from the information available is the strength of the observations in those cancers where there has been shown to be an increased risk and how many cases these observations are based on from each cancer. It is not clear whether it is endometriosis itself or endometriosis affecting the ovary that increases the risk."

"Until a plausible biological link exists between these cancers and the occurrence of endometriosis or the reduction in cases for other forms of cancer it is not clear how valuable this information is. This research indicates a need for further research to explore possible links and their mechanisms in order that appropriate strategies can be developed for the long term management of women with endometriosis" said Dr Prentice.

SOURCE

Melin A, Sparen P, Bergqvist A. The risk of cancer and the role of parity among women with endometriosis. Human Reprod 2007;22(1):i27-i28.

SEE ALSO

Molecular genetic evidence that endometriosis is a precursor of ovarian cancer

Proliferative activity of early ovarian clear cell adenocarcinoma depends on association with endometriosis

Risk of cancer in endometriosis

RESEARCH in endometriosis