We could go to Venus tomorrow with the technology we have today , urged a NASA scientific advisory group , and the group 's members would like to get a mission off the ground as soon as possible .\nRepresentatives from the Venus Exploration Analysis Group ( VEXAG ) made a presentation to NASA 's planetary science advisory committee on Sept. 24 , recommending that the agency prioritize a mission to Venus , the second-closest planet to the sun .\nMars is a popular destination for NASA missions , both due to the possibility of life on the planet and because the agency may send astronauts there as soon as the 2030s . That said , NASA does have separate calls for proposals to send missions to other solar system locations . Excluding flybys , Venus has n't been visited by a dedicated NASA spacecraft in 25 years , even though scientists subsequently sent several mission proposals to the agency .\n`` The Mars program has 'followed the water ' and continued to look for evidence of life , but Mars only had liquid water present on its surface for a few hundred million years , [ about ] three billion years ago , '' said Darby Dyar , who made the VEXAG presentation and who is chair of astronomy at Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts , in an email to Space.com .\n`` Moreover , the Mars program has long united around a single goal , '' Dyar added , `` which is to bring samples back from Mars . NASA Headquarters is supporting that goal with planning now . So my feeling is that although many outstanding science questions about Mars remain , they are second order compared to the dire state of knowledge about Venus . ''\nSo VEXAG hopes that NASA 's current call for smaller Discovery missions will bear some fruit . The announcement of opportunity , which closed July 1 , includes at least three Venus proposals . The Step-1 selections should be announced around January 2020 .\nThe Venus proposals include DAVINCI ( Deep Atmosphere Venus Investigation of Noble gases , Chemistry , and Imaging ) to measure the chemical composition of Venus during a descent ; the VERITAS ( Venus Emissivity , Radio Science , InSAR , Topography , and Spectroscopy ) orbiter to examine the surface of Venus in high resolution ; and Hyperspectral Observer for Venus Reconnaissance ( HOVER ) to examine Venus ' clouds , chemistry , dynamics and surface to better understand its climate .\nA pressing question for the Venus community involves finding out how similar the planet may have been to Earth in the planets ' early histories . Venus ' size is similar to Earth 's and its distance to the sun would have put the planet in the `` habitable zone '' — the location where liquid water could exist on the surface — when the sun was younger and dimmer . Although Venus is now a raging inferno , the story for life billions of years ago could be more optimistic .\nVenus scientists want to know whether ( as some suspect ) the planet had liquid water for 3 billion years , what kind of surface geology and rock types it has , the nature of its dormant plate tectonics ( which might be key to sustaining life ) and how similar Venus might be to rocky exoplanets very close to their parent stars .\nTemperatures at the surface of Venus can melt lead under normal circumstances and would cook a lander in moments . Highly shielded Soviet Venera spacecraft made it to the surface in the 1970s and 1980s , generally lasting anywhere from a few minutes to around an hour . But advancements in technology , the VEXAG group said , make it possible for a reasonably priced mission to survive longer today .\nVEXAG 's 15th meeting in 2017 , for example , pointed to NASA 's High Operating Temperature Technology ( HOTTech ) program , which aims to create components in environments that are roughly 900 degrees Fahrenheit ( 500 degrees Celsius ) or higher . A call for proposals cited at that time ( in 2017 ) funded research in technology for solar cells , power generation , electronics ( which can be quite sensitive to temperature fluctuations ) and batteries . The individual projects were expected to complete their current phase of funding between 2018 and 2020 , so results are still being analyzed in some cases .\nSome other technologies are close to maturity , such as NASA 's Heatshield for Extreme Entry Environment Technology ( HEEET ) project , which is designed for environments including Venus . It includes a high-density , all-carbon layer for the entry interface and a lower-density insulating layer to protect delicate spacecraft components . HEEET was testedat NASA 's Ames Research Center and is listed at technology readiness level ( TRL ) 6 . ( A component reaches TRL 7 when it is tested in space , and TRL 8 following tests on the ground and in space . )\nAnother team at NASA 's Glenn Research Center is working on high-temperature electronics designed for Venusian temperatures . These are based on silicon-carbide semiconductors that could last up to 4,000 hours on the surface . In 2016 , engineers tested some of the circuits in the Glenn Extreme Environments Rig ( GEER ) , which simulates the conditions of Venus , for nearly 22 days . ( The test was ended at that time only for scheduling reasons , according to NASA ; similar oscillator circuits have worked for thousands of hours . )\nVEXAG 's recent technology road map ( released along with a technology plan ) indicates that the community could respond to a variety of different NASA opportunities today with viable missions , ranging from orbiters to small satellites to atmospheric entry probes and skimmers . Another possible option could be a short-lived surface platform or some sort of an aerial platform floating in a more temperate climate on Venus , which is to be found at an altitude of 34 miles ( 55 km ) . Longer-lived surface platforms could be ready in the medium term , before 2032 , the community suggested .\nBut VEXAG must also be responsive to available funding , which happens when NASA makes calls for proposals for cheaper Discovery missions , more expensive New Frontiers missions , and ride-along or international opportunities . In its report , the community recommends responding to the predicted proposal cadence before 2022 with orbiters or an atmospheric entry probe . And between 2023 and 2032 , VEXAG recommended adding surface platforms ( long- and short-lived ) and aerial platforms to the wish list .\nNASA 's last Discovery call for proposals was in 2014 , which generated five finalists — including two Venus missions : DAVINCI and VERITAS . According to Dyar , neither Venus mission was selected `` for unclear reasons , '' although both were deemed selectable — meaning that they could have flown immediately . The proposals lost out to Psyche and Lucy , two missions that will study asteroids .\nThe last New Frontiers opportunity was in 2016 , and the community submitted a Venus mission called VOX ( Venus Origins Explorer ) , which would focus on high-resolution topography or altitude maps of the surface . While VOX was deemed selectable , NASA did not choose it as a finalist ; the winner of that opportunity is Dragonfly , which will fly on the surface of Saturn 's moon Titan .\nNASA 's last dedicated mission to Venus was Magellan , which entered orbit in October 1990 and was deorbited four years later . The agency has flown by the planet since with Galileo , Cassini and MESSENGER en route to other planets . Meanwhile , the European Space Agency operated Venus Express at Venus between 2006 and 2014 , and Japan 's Akatsuki mission successfully entered orbit there in 2015 on its second attempt . Akatsuki is the only operational mission at Venus right now .


On October 21 , U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration ( NASA ) Administrator Jim Bridenstine told the House Committee on Science , Space and Technology that he foresees NASA will land astronauts on the moon by 2035 . “ We need to learn how to live and work in another world , ” he told lawmakers . “ The moon is the best place to prove those capabilities and technologies . ”\nThe article that follows comprises the sixth instalment in “ Our Martian Moment , ” a multi-part ███ series in which our authors discuss what kind of society humans should build on Mars if and when we succeed in colonizing the red planet .\nFor science-fiction writers , Mars always has been a blank slate on which to write our hopes and project our fears . Ray Bradbury imagined a Mars settled by farmers who cover the red planet with idyllic midwestern American towns . Robert Heinlein , swept up in 1960s counterculture , imagined a Mars where gnostic aliens teach free love , spiritual wisdom and psychic powers to a hippy messiah . More recently , Kim Stanley Robinson ’ s Red Mars trilogy—science fiction ’ s War and Peace—imagines a Mars strangely like Berkeley , with a gig economy that allows citizens to spend an inordinate amount of time hiking and pursuing other outdoor recreations . Entrepreneurs , too , use Mars as their canvas—including Elon Musk , who imagines a Martian society that features a system of direct democracy stripped of terrestrial bureaucracy .\nIn a distant , idealized future , life on Mars will be normalized , with the dangers inherent in interplanetary colonization having been mitigated by redundant infrastructure , a steady supply of food , water and air , and a growing wealth surplus . At such a time , we can suppose , some utopian project would be possible and even likely . But until such time , Martian lives will depend on delicate and unpredictable technical processes and life-support systems . And so the organization of Martian society will have to be based around a disciplined and rigorously meritocratic technocracy . The political overlay , whose decision-making protocols would be invoked only in regard to non-critical issues , would have to be an extension of our terrestrial government : To experiment with new forms of government during the perilous start-up period would be dangerous .\nHere , the vision of Star Trek is closer to the truth than the writings of Bradbury or Robinson . Star Trek portrays an overarching organization—the United Federation of Planets—which delegates enormous power to Starfleet , a uniformed space force characterized by military discipline and a strong tradition of meritocracy . Civilian administrators assert their primacy in the Star Trek universe , but typically only in contexts where there are no acute military , logistical or environmental risks .\nMars is a harsh world . The atmosphere is so thin that it might as well be a complete vacuum , and temperatures can get low enough to freeze carbon dioxide . There is negligible protection from radiation . Gravitational acceleration on the surface of Mars is only about 40 % of Earth ’ s gravity , which may present long-term dangers to any species that evolved on our planet . It is not at all obvious that Martian soil could ever grow Earth crops . For the first settlers , death by asphyxiation , hypothermia , dehydration and starvation will always be a clear and present danger . And so every aspect of operations will have to be conducted in a way that minimizes risk .\nOur best model for a Martian colonization program is the Apollo program , which landed the first humans on the moon—though even in this case , technical compromises were made in order to keep the program funded . For example , manufacturing and development were spread around the United States during the 1960s as a means to attract the support of federal legislators who might otherwise cut funding . Each stage of the Saturn V rocket had a different manufacturer , complicating integration and assembly . And the tight timeline that John F. Kennedy had demanded entailed unnecessary risks . It required , for instance , an “ all up ” testing strategy for the Saturn V ( as opposed to testing each stage individually and repeatedly ) , a dangerous gamble that fortunately paid off .\nIn other respects , however , the program was run on a technically rigorous basis . NASA required that astronauts be well-educated ( preferably with a degree in engineering ) and have extensive flying experience ( preferably as a test pilot ) . Candidates were expected to have repeatedly demonstrated an extraordinary ability to remain calm under pressure . They also had to be in perfect health . ( Deke Slayton , one of the best performing astronauts , was grounded for years because of an irregular heart rhythm . )\nConsider the pedigree of the most famous of the Apollo astronauts , Neil Armstrong . As a child , he was obsessed with science , engineering and flight . He worked odd jobs to raise enough money to pay for flying lessons in Wapakoneta , Ohio , and hitchhiked to a nearby grass airstrip to take lessons . He earned his junior pilot license at 16 , before he could drive . He served as a pilot in the Korean war , and during one mission over North Korean airspace , lost part of a wing . Armstrong somehow managed to climb from treetop level to 14,000 feet , and fly his crippled F9F Panther back to South Korean airspace before ejecting .\nDuring the Gemini 8 mission , a short circuit caused a yaw thruster to misfire , sending Armstrong ’ s ship into a roll and then a tumble that reached a frequency of one rotation per second . Armstrong ’ s voice was eerily calm as he explained the problem and wrested back control , all the while—as he euphemistically put it later— “ physiological limits were being approached . ”\nReaders can watch on YouTube as Armstrong aborts a 1969 flight on the LLTV ( Lunar Landing Training Vehicle ) , an ungainly machine meant to approximate the experience of piloting the Lunar Landing Module , little more than a jet engine that the pilot balanced atop . On one training flight , Armstrong ’ s LLTV controls failed and the vehicle began to roll over . He ejected at the last possible moment . As the LLTV exploded and burned , Armstrong brushed himself off , answered a few questions , and then drove to the office for a full day ’ s work . The other Apollo astronauts had similarly impressive back stories .\nYet our era has a complicated relationship with the idea of meritocracy , which some now present as an illusion that operates as a mask for privilege . One prominent academic tours the United States advising colleges on their human-resources policies , instructing academics that the words “ I believe the most qualified person should get the job ” comprise a form of “ microagression. ” Other university professors claim that even the articulation of “ objective ” baselines can be seen as part and parcel of “ white supremacy culture . ”\nThis shift in attitude was illustrated by coverage of the fiftieth anniversary of the Apollo landing in the New York Times . Much of the coverage was dedicated to attacking Apollo ’ s lack of diversity . One widely criticized article , for instance , was titled “ How the Soviets Won the Space Race for Equality : The U.S.S.R. sent women and people of color to space years before the U.S . ”\nThe Apollo astronauts were chosen largely from the then-available pool of college-educated test pilots . There were no women and few African Americans contained in that pool . I wish that black test pilot Ed Dwight ( the subject of a lengthy New York Times profile ) had been on Apollo 11 . And I wish there ’ d been a female astronaut with him . But given the fierce competition for these roles , and the lopsided demographics of the pool from which NASA was recruiting , it wasn ’ t surprising that the selected individuals were all white men .\nThe fault lay less with NASA than with the racism and sexism that caused the talent pipeline to be so constrained . And once NASA and related organizations managed to diversify the talent entering that training pipeline , they went on to have a laudable record of diversity . As the Times itself quotes Ed Dwight , “ I don ’ t know any person with determination and will that can ’ t go to space . ”\nIf the Apollo program were organized today , its astronauts would be diverse—not because NASA would artificially skew the selection process to please The New York Times , but because the application of meritocratic principles would yield that result . This is an important distinction : Our modern fixation on diversity is focused on optics , while the integrity of any highly demanding , high-risk technical mission ( of which interplanetary travel is perhaps the ultimate example ) demands a focus on meritocracy , with diversity emerging as a beneficial byproduct .\nIt is often said that the world of Star Trek , like other idealized science-fiction worlds , is based on the conceit of a post-scarcity economy . But we will never be able to take even baby steps to this vision if we embrace a post-competence approach to engineering and project management . A post-competence mindset may be acceptable in rarefied cultural , academic and aesthetic milieus in which success and failure are not applicable concepts . But it would be disastrous in a world where a single mistake can result in the deaths of whole communities .\nThose who travel to Mars will not need to debate free markets , bureaucracy , or state control of the means of production . They will not care about the ethnicity or gender identity of their peers . They will be too busy figuring out how to survive . Someday , they may choose libertarianism or socialism , or they may wade into identity politics , just as we ’ ve done here on earth . But first , they will need the skills to make a lifeless planet bloom .\nCraig DeLancey is a writer and philosopher who teaches at the State University of New York . Follow him on Twitter at @ CraigDeLancey .\nFeatured image : NASA image produced to promote the Artemis moon-landing program .


Most of the responsibility for food safety lies currently with the F.D.A. , which has oversight for about 80 percent of the food that Americans eat , including seafood , vegetables , fruit , dairy products and shelled eggs . The Agriculture Department oversees meat , poultry and processed eggs . But the two agencies perform their inspections duties differently .\nInspectors for the Agriculture Department are stationed at processing plants daily , inspecting carcasses as they pass by on processing lines . By law , meat and poultry plants are not allowed to operate unless an Agriculture Department inspector is present . In contrast , because of the sheer volume of food they must inspect , F.D.A . inspectors visit plants much less frequently , often only when there is a problem .\nThe differences in inspecting food from abroad are even more stark . Countries that want to export meat to the United States are supposed to prove their inspection system is equivalent to the Agriculture Department ’ s programs . But the F.D.A . rarely inspects overseas plants to verify those claims , and F.D.A . food sleuths examine less than 2 percent of the food that arrives at American ports . A law passed in 2010 is supposed to strengthen the F.D.A. ’ s ability to inspect both foreign and domestic foods .\nBut food safety inspectors at the Agriculture Department still see the F.D.A. ’ s program as nowhere near as rigorous as theirs , and they worry that consolidating inspection functions into a single agency would inevitably weaken the Agriculture Department ’ s standards .\n“ This would drag us down to their minuscule standards , ” said Stan Painter , an Agriculture food safety inspector in Alabama , who is president of the inspectors ’ union . “ They don ’ t do inspections . They run in for a visit . ”\nDr. David Acheson , a consultant for food and beverage companies who has worked on food safety at both the Agriculture Department and the F.D.A. , said the two inspection systems could be combined without harming food safety .\n“ It ’ s the way we need to go , ” he said , shrugging off the meat inspectors ’ claims . “ We are burning through dollars where we have F.D.A . and Agriculture Department in the same plants doing different things . ”


The Food and Drug Administration ’ s lethargic regulation of dietary supplements containing a dangerous stimulant described in recent reports in The Times is a classic example of what happens when industry representatives infiltrate the agency that is supposed to regulate them . The worrisome ingredient is BMPEA , a chemical nearly identical to amphetamine that is added to weight-loss and workout products in an effort to enhance their effect . Whether it does so is unclear , since there have never been tests of its effectiveness and safety in humans .\nAs noted in The Times , the F.D.A . was actually the first agency to suspect that BMPEA had been added improperly to supplements that listed among their ingredients a little-known plant called acacia rigidula . Experts say that listings like this are often tip-offs that the manufacturer is trying to disguise a chemical additive as a natural botanical extract . The agency tested 21 popular supplements that listed acacia rigidula on their labels and found that nine of them contained BMPEA .\nThe F.D.A . did not , however , recall the products , name them or issue a health alert . By contrast , in December , Canadian health authorities found the chemical “ a serious health risk , ” issued a public health alert and forced a recall of JetFuel Superburn , which they found to contain BMPEA and another amphetamine-like stimulant .\nMuch of the responsibility for the F.D.A. ’ s sluggish response must fall on Dr. Daniel Fabricant , who left a senior position at the Natural Products Association , a trade group for supplement makers and sellers , to head the F.D.A. ’ s division of dietary supplement programs in early 2011 and who jumped back to the trade association as its chief executive in the spring of 2014 . He has been succeeded at the F.D.A . by several acting directors ; the current one is Cara Welch , from the same trade group . Both dragged their feet on BMPEA .


The Food and Drug Administration must go . And salt should be sown where once it stood . This organization is costly , is a gargantuan waste of time and causes needless deaths by slowing down innovation . The sooner is it disbanded , the better .\nThis seems a bit harsh . Ok , excessively severe . Does not the FDA stand between us and pharmaceutical firms that would exploit us but for its heroic efforts ? Does not the FDA ensure the quality of , wait for it , food and drugs ? Does not the FDA serve as an excellent traffic cop in this field ? No , no and no . Rather , this bureaucracy stands in the path of the very assurance with which they presumably provide us .\nTheir mandate is to ascertain that any products brought to market must pass a two stage test . One , they must be safe , and two , they must be effective . Some commentators argue that while the first mandate may be a reasonable one , the second is unnecessary and only slows down the rate of progress . As long as a new offering is safe , it addresses the foundational medical requirement , “ First , do no harm. ” Whether or not it is also effective should be up to the patients and their doctors . To insist upon the second as well as the first necessarily slows down new development .\nThis is all well and good , but we should also question the second test , safety . The FDA is a monopoly . It , and it alone , makes all such determinations . But one of the most basic discoveries of the dismal science it that monopolies lead to extra costs , poor service and lack of accountability .\nHow else , then , can these functions of safety and effectiveness be attained . Milton Friedman hit the nail on the head in his book Capitalism and Freedom ; he proposed , instead , a certification industry . The problem with the FDA is that it constitutes a licensing arrangement . Go ahead without its imprimatur , and you go to jail ( and do not collect that proverbial $ 200 ) . In contrast , without a certification , you may still bring your goods to the consumer , but without official approval . This system works in a myriad of other contexts . There are Certified Public Accountants ; but any old book keeper can help you with your tax returns . For stocks and bonds there are Moodys , Standard and Poor and Fitch . The Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval and Consumers ’ Reports serve similar functions as do commercial testing laboratories . Why not , also , have a group of private firms independently evaluating food and drugs ? We rely on competition as the bulwark of our free economy . Why not here also ?\nNot only is the FDA a monopoly , it is also a governmental institution . That means no matter how many mistakes it makes , it can never , at least not automatically , go out of business . Its employees are human beings , and we are the mistake making animal . At least private monopolies are somewhat subject to market forces . Without bailouts , or the “ too big to fail ” philosophy , it is possible for them to no longer darken our doorsteps . Not so for the FDA ( nor for the Post Office , the Motor Vehicle Bureau , the Departments of Agriculture , Education , etc. ) . Any private certification company approving of Thalidomide ( great for morning sickness , but created birth defects ) would quickly enough be bankrupted .\nThis brings us to Louis Falo and Andrea Gambotto . These gentlemen , both Professors at the University of Pittsburgh , are hot on the trail of a Covid 19 vaccine . The former , a dermatologist , the latter a surgeon , have concocted a medicine called PittCoVac . It is to be administered to the skin via a patch exhibiting 400 tiny needles . One of its benefits is that it need not be continually refrigerated , a consideration very important especially in the underdeveloped world . I asked Dr. Andrea Gambotto for the earliest date on which he concluded he and his team had success with this new drug on mice regarding a disease biologically related to the coronavirus . His response : March 5 , 2018 . My follow up question to him was for the date on which he applied for FDA approval for use on human subjects . He gave me a one word response : “ Confidential. ” I don ’ t know about him , but if I were in his shoes , I would have applied for this permission as soon as Covid 19 reared its ugly head . When was that ? Some date this as of November 2019 . Certainly , it was well entrenched , and recognized as such , by February 2020 .\nDoctors Falo and Gambotto are now only waiting FDA approval for use with human subjects . Let me repeat that : this experimental drug is now waiting FDA approval for use with human subjects . Anyone see anything wrong with that ? The FDA is now fiddling while Rome is burning .\nSurely , there are some people , then at death ’ s door , who would have given their eye teeth and more , to be the first human subjects for PittCoVac . Safety and effectiveness be damned , in their view . They just wanted one last roll of the dice before meeting their mortal coil . Several of them have now passed beyond human care , thanks to the FDA ! It is now not days , not mere weeks , but perhaps several months since Falo and Gambotto have applied for an FDA license for use on human subjects . That is far too long . Is it totally unjust to think of Agency bureaucrats holding up the works as being guilty of manslaughter ? Only if PittCoVac really works , and we will not know that for quite a while yet .\nWith a private certification agency overseeing matters , human beings , on an informed consent voluntary basis might have already determined whether or not PittCoVac would be one of our answers .\nYes , this government bureaucracy has in its power the ability to in effect temporarily cancel its always unwarranted control . Right now , it has given the go-ahead to Remdesivir , a product of Gilead Sciences , under its Emergency Use Authorization policy . Thank goodness for this , as it may well save precious human lives , even though , I suspect , the motivation for this was more political than scientific . At present , some are calling for a packing of the Supreme Court . No one is mentioning setting up a governmental alternative to the FDA , hence in effect “ packing ” it . It is to head off any moves in this direction that might well explain its decision via Remdesivir .\nBut this humane decision undercuts the very case for its existence ! One would think that now with the dire threat of a pandemic we would need the safety and efficiency provided by the FDA even the more . But it now lays down its “ weapons ” when they are presumably needed the most . What would we think of soldiers who disarmed in the face of the enemy ? We would surmise they were not needed . “ Emergencies ” occur all the time . There are always a few patients , with no other options in sight , who would like to take a chance on a non-FDA approved remedy . If the FDA utilized its Emergency Use Authorization in all these cases , there would be in effect no FDA ; it would be converted from a licensing agency into one properly limited to certification .\nSays Michael Milken in this regard : “ We send 19-year-olds into war zones knowing that no matter what we do , some number – greater than zero – will lose their lives or their limbs . But we tell a patient who is going to die not to try something because it could be dangerous . ”\nHenry I. Miller , writing in the Wall Street Journal ( April 23 , 2020 ) , has a very different suggestion in mind to meet this challenge : streamline the FDA process . To wit , he urges :\n* animal studies to be allowed to take place at the same time as Phase I clinical trials\n* lower wait times from 30 to 10 days from application to start of Phase I\n* “ publish a template ‘ master protocol ’ for streamlined Covid 19 vaccine development ”\n* allow approval for only parts of Biologics License Applications\nNone of these proposals are counterproductive . Mr. Miller is to be congratulated for making them . But none have so far been effected by that dinosaur , the FDA . Why is it that in reading this list , “ rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic ” comes to mind ? The reason is that these suggestions leave in charge the very people responsible for not implementing them in the first place . What else can be expected from a governmental bureaucratic monopoly ?


“ To market a product as less harmful than cigarettes is to damn it with faint praise… As stories pile up of sicknesses , side effects , and the potential for long-term consequences , it ’ s clear that ‘ safe ’ and ‘ safer than smoking cigarettes ’ are vastly different things . ”\n“ One in five high school students used e-cigarettes in 2018 , an increase of 78 percent over 2017 . E-cigarette use was up by nearly 50 percent among middle schoolers in the same period . More than three and a half million American children now use e-cigarettes , with 97 percent of users aged 12 to 17 choosing flavored products… E-cigarette companies insist their goal is to help people quit smoking . But 13-year-olds don ’ t start using cotton-candy-flavored pods for Juul devices to kick a cigarette habit . Much more often , e-cigarettes lead kids directly to nicotine addiction…\n“ To those of us on the front lines of the fight against tobacco use , the tactics companies are employing to sell e-cigarettes — flavorings , unfounded health claims and the hiring of celebrity promoters — are all too familiar . They are the same strategies that tobacco companies have long used to get kids to try cigarettes . There ’ s still much we don ’ t know about the connection between lung illness and vaping . But we do know that one Juul pod contains about as much nicotine as an entire pack of cigarettes , and that nicotine harms brain development… Banning flavored e-cigarettes is the most important thing we can do to reduce use among young people . ”\n“ There is no reason vaping products should be available in bubble-gum flavor except to induce young people who are most at risk . The FDA sent a warning letter on Monday to the most popular vaping manufacturer , Juul Labs , complaining the company has made claims in school presentations that its products are less dangerous than tobacco without an appropriate FDA order . The FDA must remain vigilant against marketing to and use of vaping by young people . Overall , this is a complex problem of science , business , technology , culture and public health . Vaping began with very little regulation . Whatever the outcome of the current spate of illness , it is now clear that in the public interest , it must be rigorously scrutinized and controlled . ”\nIt ’ s worth noting that “ evidence that these products help people avoid combustible cigarettes is limited . [ On the other hand ] the fact that they ’ ve introduced a whole new generation of young people to a highly addictive and possibly dangerous habit is indisputable… A ban on flavored products will help curb the teen vaping epidemic , but stricter age restrictions and a more aggressive clampdown on deceptive marketing should follow . Then there ’ s the black market : The devices people are buying on the street and the liquids used in them demand more attention . Finally , this crisis makes it even more clear that marijuana products shouldn ’ t continue to exist in confusing regulatory limbo . ”\nSome point out that “ fifty-three people died from mass shootings in August alone and there have been more than 9,000 gun deaths so far in 2019 . Still , the Trump administration , willing to act fast when it comes to mango-flavored vaping liquid , has backed away several times from the idea of passing universal background checks on gun purchases . Trump wrote in a 2000 book that he supported an assault weapons ban but has n't embraced the idea in office . The Odessa , Texas , shooter who killed seven people in August and wounded 22 others had previously failed a background check and purchased the AR-style rifle used in the attack through a private sale , avoiding a background check… The administration says vaping is a deeply concerning epidemic but is turning a blind eye to another , much more deadly health crisis : gun violence . ”\n“ Trump ’ s defenders will say this evidence is all circumstantial . But circumstantial evidence is not weak evidence : it ’ s simply evidence based on the circumstances in which an act of wrongdoing is committed — such as the license plate of a car that speeds away from a bank just after that bank is robbed . Criminals are convicted on such evidence all the time . They will also say that there ’ s no explicit quid pro quo proposal here . But… ‘ even when a corrupt deal is struck implicitly , the government can still prosecute extortion on a quid pro quo basis . Circumstantial evidence can be enough to prove a criminal exchange. ’ …  “ In the absence of an explicit quid pro quo over restarting aid , the context and circumstances are what will become the focus of the investigation . There is enough here to support impeachment . Whether it is also enough to convince Republicans and lead to removal is another matter . ”


For the first time , the Obama administration posted Tuesday data outlining months of consulting fees , grants , travel expenses and other gifts that companies paid to America ’ s doctors .\nMandated by the health care law , the Open Payments program so far lists $ 3.5 billions in disbursements from pharmaceutical companies and medical device manufacturers to more than 546,000 physicians and 1,360 teaching hospitals from August 2013 to December 2013 .\nBeginning in June , the reports will be published annually and include 12 months of data , the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced .\n“ CMS is committed to transparency and this is an opportunity for the public to learn about the relationships among health care providers , and pharmaceutical and device companies , ” CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner said . “ This initial public posting of data is only the first phase of the Open Payments program . In coming weeks , we will be adding additional data and tools that will give consumers , researchers , and others a detailed look into this industry and its financial arrangements . ”\nThe move is being hailed by some as a win for transparency , as public interest groups warn doctors ’ prescribing behavior could be affected by financial influence by the companies .\nOthers warn , however , the data is incomplete or could be inaccurate in some cases . During testing , some physicians found they had been linked to payments that went to doctors who have the same name .\nCMS said payments do not necessarily signal wrongdoing on the part of doctors and teaching hospitals , and that they did not parse out which payments may be beneficial or imply underhanded dealing .\n“ We are simply making the data available to the public , ” Shantanu Agrawal , deputy administrator and director of CMS ’ s Center for Program Integrity , told reporters in a conference call .\nAmerica ’ s Health Insurance Plans , the main lobby group for insurers , said “ the payments , while not nefarious in every case , are a perfect symbol for the misaligned incentives in our health care system . ”\n“ While most health care stakeholders are working together to find ways to lower costs , drugmakers remain focused on strategies to keep them inflated , ” AHIP spokesman Brendan Buck said .\nAbout 40 percent of the records do not name the people involved in the payments , at least for now , while parties cross-check the information .\nThe agency did not publish more than 190,000 payments , which is stipulated by law because the transactions involved research and disclosure must be withheld for four years or until the product at hand is approved by the FDA , officials said .\nSen. Chuck Grassley , Iowa Republican , spearheaded the movement to release the data through his Physician Payments Sunshine Act , which passed as part of the Affordable Care Act in 2010 .\nIn an op-ed for the Des Moines Register , Mr. Grassley said Tuesday he pushed the legislation because several years ago because “ it started to become clear how little public information exists on the financial relationships between doctors and pharmaceutical and medical device companies . ”\nHe acknowledged that the database was incomplete and would improve over time , as well as the debate around the data ’ s release .\n“ The doctors rightly point out that such payments are perfectly legal , unlike kickbacks to steer prescribers toward certain drugs , ” he wrote . “ But studies have shown that exposure to a prescription drug on the lecture circuit or in the lab leads to more prescriptions for that drug , whether the doctor feels influenced or not . ”


Presidential adviser Kellyanne Conway suggested yesterday that the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) may decide to exempt vape shops from its pending ban on flavored e-cigarettes . There is a certain logic to that , since those shops , unlike other retailers , do not admit minors , and curbing underage vaping is the rationale for the ban . But it 's not clear that approach would be legal . Furthermore , Conway 's assertion that the FDA `` do [ es ] not have jurisdiction over vaping and vape shops '' is puzzling , given how the agency understands its regulatory authority .\nThe FDA derives its authority over vaping products from the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act , which allows it to regulate `` any product made or derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption , including any component , part , or accessory of a tobacco product . '' Although e-cigarettes do not contain tobacco , they typically deliver nicotine that is derived from tobacco , and in 2010 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C . Circuit agreed that is enough to make them subject to FDA regulation .\nBut the Tobacco Control Act also says the FDA may not `` prohibit the sale of any tobacco product in face-to-face transactions by a specific category of retail outlets . '' On its face , that provision means the FDA may not ban sales of flavored vaping products in convenience stores while allowing them in vape shops .\nThat is how the National Association of Convenience Stores reads the law . `` The Tobacco Control Act is clear that the FDA ca n't discriminate against one type of retail outlet , and that 's what they 're trying to do here , '' Doug Kantor , a lawyer for the trade group , told The New York Times when the issue came up last year . `` There is a very good chance this will end up in litigation . ''\nConway seems to be suggesting a way around that obstacle by arguing that the FDA simply does not have jurisdiction over open-system vaporizers ( as opposed to cartridge-based products such as Juul ) and the e-liquids used in them . But that is plainly inconsistent with the way the FDA has interpreted its regulatory authority under the Tobacco Control Act .\nAccording to the FDA , any device that can be used to deliver tobacco-derived nicotine qualifies as a tobacco product , and so do the e-liquids used with such devices . The agency says even a nicotine-free e-liquid ( NFL ) can count as a `` component or part '' of a tobacco product . `` Assuming an NFL is not made or derived from tobacco , '' the FDA says , it is still subject to the agency 's e-cigarette regulations `` if it is 'intended or reasonably expected ' either ' ( 1 ) To alter or affect [ a ] tobacco product 's performance , composition , constituents , or characteristics ; or ( 2 ) To be used with or for the human consumption of a tobacco product ; and is not an accessory . ' '' Hence `` an NFL that is intended or reasonably expected to be mixed with liquid nicotine would qualify as a 'component or part . ' ''\nContrary to Conway 's comments , the FDA plainly believes it does `` have jurisdiction over vaping and vape shops , '' which is consistent with the interpretation upheld by the D.C . Circuit . And if open-system vaping devices and the e-liquids used in them are indeed tobacco products subject to FDA regulation , the Tobacco Control Act seems to preclude a flavor ban that is selectively applied to `` a specific category of retail outlets . ''\nPerhaps what the FDA plans to do is ban flavored cartridges everywhere , based on the premise that Juul-like products are the ones preferred by teenaged vapers , while allowing flavored e-liquids used in open-system devices . But that distinction would not draw a line between different categories of retailers , and it would not rely on a new understanding of the agency 's authority .\nLast year the FDA proposed a rule that would allow sales of flavored e-liquids in stores that do not admit minors ( i.e. , vape shops ) or that put those products in `` a section '' that `` adequately prevents entry of persons under the age of 18 , '' as long as the products `` are not visible or accessible to persons under the age of 18 at any time . '' Although that approach notionally allows convenience stores to continue selling flavored e-liquids , the segregation requirement probably would be prohibitive in practice . It is therefore not clear such a rule would pass muster under the Tobacco Control Act . While allowing adults to continue buying flavored e-liquids from some sources is certainly preferable to a blanket ban , I 'm not sure how that policy can be reconciled with the law .


Alongside perennial concerns like “ work ” and “ money , ” sociocultural issues including mass shootings , access to health care and the 2020 presidential election now cause the most stress for American citizens , according to the annual “ Stress in America ” survey from the American Psychological Association ( APA ) .\nThe survey was conducted between Aug. 1 and Sept. 3 and polled 3,617 adults across the U.S. , according to an APA press release . “ While overall stress levels have not changed significantly over the past few years , the proportion of Americans who say they are experiencing stress about specific issues has risen over the past year , ” the survey explains .\nAmong those surveyed , 56 % of adults said the 2020 election is already a “ significant stressor , ” a year out from Election Day — an increase from the 52 % who said the 2016 presidential election was stressful . ( The election is proving to be a more stressful topic for survey respondents identifying as Democrats , versus those identifying as Republicans , by almost 25 % . ) This year ’ s survey also cites 69 % of adults pointing to health care , specifically the costs thereof , as a notable point of stress . And 71 % cited mass shootings as stressful — the most common source of stress among those surveyed , with a rise of almost 10 % from the APA ’ s 2018 survey .\nRead more : A Third of Americans Avoid Certain Places Because They Fear Mass Shootings\nOther stressful topics cited include climate change , immigration , national security and abortion . These topics presence as “ hot-button ” issues in the news cycle is likely not a coincidence , the APA found — of keeping up with the news cycle in 2019 , 54 % of those surveyed said they “ want to stay informed , ” but that the news is stressful . 39 % of respondents said they have “ taken steps over the past year to reduce their news consumption . ”\nThe impact of discrimination was also deemed stressful by a majority of survey respondents identifying as part of a minority community . 63 % of people of color surveyed said that discrimination has kept them from having a fully productive life . 64 % of LGBT adults surveyed said the same thing .\nStress levels as a whole decreased drastically across respondents categorized by age group , the survey found . Members of the baby boomer generation and “ older adults ” were found to have to “ significantly lower average stress levels ” and their younger Gen X , Gen Z and millennial peers . ( These stress levels were drawn on a scale of 1 to 10 , with Gen X and younger all reporting stress levels above the median point , while boomers and older were below . )\n“ There is a lot of uncertainty in our world right now , ” Arthur C. Evans Jr. , APA ’ s chief executive officer , said in a statement accompanying the survey ’ s release . “ While [ there ] are important societal issues that need to be addressed , the results also reinforce the need to have more open conversations about the impact of stress and stress management , especially with groups that are experiencing high levels of stress , ” Evans said , according to the press statement .\n“ Research shows us that over time , prolonged feelings of anxiety and stress can affect our overall physical and mental health , ” he noted , in correlation with findings that 59 % of those surveyed felt they had not received enough emotional support to mitigate their stress levels .\nAccording to the APA , the best ways to manage stress are to get a good amount of sleep every night , exercise regularly and maintain a healthy network of social support .\nGet our Health Newsletter . Sign up to receive the latest health and science news , plus answers to wellness questions and expert tips . Choose your country United States of America Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Congo , Democratic Republic of Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Faeroe Islands Falkland Islands ( Malvinas ) Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Holy See Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia Monaco Mongolia Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory , Occupied Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania , United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Virgin Islands ( U.S. ) Virgin Islands ( British ) Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Viet Nam Wallis and Futuna Islands Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please enter a valid email address . Please select your country . I can confirm I have read and accept the Terms Of Use . Please check to proceed . Sign Up Now You may unsubscribe from email communication at any time . See our Privacy Policy for further details . Thank you ! For your security , we 've sent a confirmation email to the address you entered . Click the link to confirm your subscription and begin receiving our newsletters . If you do n't get the confirmation within 10 minutes , please check your spam folder .


Yesterday , Georgia Governor Brian Kemp issued an Executive Order striking down mask requirements in at least fifteen local jurisdictions .\nWhile the governor has encouraged Georgians to mask up to prevent the spread of coronavirus , he has called mandates “ a bridge too far. ” So despite growing evidence that masks work , and Kemp ’ s own exhortation that people should mask up if they want to watch college football this fall , the newest order explicitly makes them optional .\n[ A ] ny state , county , or municipal law , order , ordinance , rule , or regulation that requires persons to wear face coverings , masks , face shields , or any other Personal Protective Equipment while in places of public accommodation or on public property are suspended to the extent that they are more restrictive than this Executive Order .\nThe ordinance also caps indoor gatherings at fifty persons and suspends the requirement that Georgians renew their gun permits during the pandemic . So if anyone needs to shoot a virus , they ’ ll be able to do it . Phew !\nNext door in Alabama , Republican Governor Kay Ivey instituted a mask mandate yesterday . Mississippi ’ s governor Tate Reeves tweeted a long thread on dangers of a herd immunity approach , encouraging his constituents to wear masks , and allowing municipalities to enact their own mask regulations . But in Georgia , this abridgment of personal liberty will not stand !\nSavannah Mayor Van Johnson , who was gearing up to enforce his city ’ s mask ordinance with warnings and fines , was outraged .\nIt is officially official . Governor Kemp does not give a damn about us . Every man and woman for himself/herself . Ignore the science and survive the best you can . In # Savannah , we will continue to keep the faith and follow the science . Masks will continue to be available ! — Mayor Van Johnson ( @ MayorJohnsonSAV ) July 16 , 2020\n“ We ’ ve been clear in previous orders and statements that local mask mandates are unenforceable , ” Kemp spokeswoman Candice Broce told the Savannah Morning News yesterday , when the state reported 3,871 new COVID infections . “ The Governor has encouraged Georgians to wear them voluntarily for months now . ”\nBecause Brian Kemp really wants to protect his constituents ’ health and stop this pandemic in its tracks . Just not enough to actually do anything at all about it .\nElizabeth Dye ( @ 5DollarFeminist ) lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics .


Democrat Andrew Yang recently tweeted about something that most national politicians have avoided for years : pornography .\nAs a parent of young kids I believe rampant access to pornography is a real problem . We need to empower families to be able to moderate what our kids see and when . — Andrew Yang ( @ AndrewYang ) September 20 , 2019\nYang is right , despite the protestations of a thousand pornography consumers in his replies . ( RELATED : Andrew Yang : ‘ Rampant Access To Pornography Is A Real Problem ’ )\nJust because neither party has touched this issue on a national level in decades , and civil libertarians have a stranglehold on the debate , doesn ’ t make him any less right . In those decades that national politicians have ignored pornography , the internet pornography industry has grown to tens of billions of dollars , the average age of hardcore pornography exposure in the United States has plummeted , and tens of thousands of young people express serious concerns about pornography addiction .\nPornography undermines the need for and trust in the family at nearly every level – marriage , parental relations , and dating .\nFor the first time in years , acting on pornography is within the Overton Window as even democratic lawmakers at the federal level talk about it and Republican lawmakers at the state level consider declaring it a public health crisis . Serious proponents of pro-family policy can nuke the industry .\nFirst , though , porn is not speech . It is fundamentally different than media protected as speech . When free speech libertarians and the pornography lobby fight back against pro-family policy , pro-family advocates should not cede the free speech ground to them .\nUnlike a Scorsese film or a newspaper , both of which are consumed for artistic enjoyment or enlightenment , pornography is consumed with an outside end in mind : orgasm and masturbation . Its primary purpose is not entertainment ( in any colloquial sense of the word ) or enlightenment . In this sense , pornography is just a tool , like any other product , and can be regulated like any other product .\nDon ’ t let the pornography lobby and libertarians frame this as a free speech issue . It isn ’ t one .\nPornography use is a health and human services issue , not a free speech issue . This is true across the spectrum – for young viewers and older viewers alike , and for viewers and actors alike . Pornography directly undermines the family and the foundation family life lays for mental health and connectedness in society .\nDespite better access to transportation and communication than previous generations , younger Americans are lonelier and more anxious . Increased pornography use is closely associated with increases in loneliness and the myriad mental health issues and addictions that accompany that . Lonelier individuals use more pornography , and pornography use makes people withdraw more from society and feel lonelier . The cycle continues as the individual withdraws more from healthy human interaction and distorts their views on healthy human relationships .\nMarried Americans who begin viewing pornography after getting married are roughly twice as likely to divorce . This is especially true for those who are younger and less religious .\nBoth loneliness and divorce are fundamentally health and human services issues . They ’ re associated with higher risk of “ deaths of despair ” – suicide and drug overdose . And broken families impose greater costs on society as a whole .\nAnd that ’ s to say nothing of the pornography industry ’ s history of manipulating and mistreating actors . Despite the best efforts of the pornography industry to portray its actors as sex-loving nymphomaniacs who are merely asserting their right to individualism , most are young people ( usually women ) motivated by money or fame ( a poor substitute for connection ) .\nFor every one actor saying how great the industry is , there are thousands of sons and daughters , mothers and fathers eaten up and spat out by an industry run by people profiting from our basest desires .\nRashida Jones ’ 2015 documentary “ Hot Girls Wanted ” captures this well . Many of the young women featured in pornography are recruited via Craigslist , flown to Miami or Los Angeles ( without informing their families ) , and paid pennies on the dollar for every shoot . They get pushed into more-and-more perverted performances as audiences get used to them and need greater stimulation to get their dopamine rushes . Most girls burn out quickly . Many admit that they really just were looking for money or fame . Some , like at least 22 young women recruited through Craigslist , are never told they ’ ll be plastered across the Internet . ( RELATED : Mia Khalifa Says She Only Made $ 12,000 In The Porn Industry )\nThese performers are victims of the industry , too , and pro-family policy should be so substantive that they never feel the need to explore acting in pornography . Nobody should have to sacrifice their family ’ s dignity at the altar of the dollar .\nGiven the negative externalities associated with pornography , it looks more like a controlled substance and should be treated like a controlled substance .\nProfessionally produced , with actors who are paid to have sex on camera ;\nThe professional pornography industry is institutionalized prostitution . Should one pay two or more actors ( one of whom is often softly coerced or manipulated into participating ) to have sex without a camera , the payer would be arrested for sex trafficking and prostitution . Introducing a camera and distributing a recording so lonely individuals can vicariously participate online should not atone for the act – it should make it worse .\nRather than setting up jack-booted sting operations , which will be costly in terms of both liquid and human capital , the federal government should take a lesson from the regulation of alcohol sales and deny federal funding to jurisdictions where professional pornography is filmed and distributed ( including where tech companies that host pornography are headquartered or rent server space ) .\nThe Department of Health and Human services can use Medicare funding as a carrot for states to implement pro-family policy regarding pornography . Most pornography is produced in California or Florida , so tying Medicare funding to cracking down on pornography production and distribution would be no small incentive for states with such large aging populations . ( RELATED : Porn Is An Environmental Hazard , Produces As Much CO2 As 72 Countries Combined )\nI want to emphasize that pro-family policy should focus first on helping people , including performers who see few better options than doing pornography . States should seize and liquidate the assets of professional pornography studios and use the funds to support family programs and work assistance helping former performers reintegrate into the workforce .\nShutting down an industry predicated on preying on lust and vulnerable young people should be a bare minimum for pro-family policy . A pro-family regime should not and could not extend the privileges of business to such a sector .\nOf course , that wouldn ’ t stop pornographers overseas or amateur pornographers working out of homes . But just because amateur , fake , and black market pornography would still exist doesn ’ t mean that it shouldn ’ t be combated . A pro-family regime should look to internalize the negative externalities of pornography , from wherever it comes .\nDomestically , this can take the form of placing a massive Value Added Tax on vendors that do business with remnants of the pornography sector . Requiring ISPs to de facto offer internet and data plans that have pornography websites automatically blacklisted would further limit young Americans ’ exposure to pornography and return a semblance of control to the family .\nThe United States Trade Representative can impose punitive tariffs on countries that allow their pornographers to pump family-undermining smut onto the readily accessible Internet . This would likely lead pornography websites to block access from U.S.-based IP addresses .\nPhilosopher Robert Nozick presented a thought experiment in “ Anarchy , State & Utopia ” known as the Experience Machine . If offered the opportunity to , would you choose to plug into a machine that gave you carnal bliss through simulations ?\nNozick believes most people would be appalled at the idea . The point of the thought experiment is to show that we often value more than just carnal hedonism . We value real experiences with real people . We value more than just carnal feelings . We value what it takes to achieve those feelings .\nYet widespread pornography use and the atomization that comes with it shows that Nozick may have been wrong about how people may choose . Many people do choose hedonism , though they may later regret it . Spend any amount of time on r/nofap and you meet hundreds of young men who regret stepping into an early version of the Experience Machine . ( RELATED : Pirates Player Arrested On Charges Of Pornography , Soliciting A Child And Sexual Assault Of A Teen )\nThe global virtual reality pornography market is expected to reach $ 1 billion by 2025 , and pornographers are major investors in the space . Most venture investors voluntarily include sin clauses in their partnership agreements . These clauses prohibit them from investing in drugs , pornography , weaponry , and other vices . With the looming reality of a Nozickian Experience Machine at the fingertips of every curious 15-year-old on the Internet , the Securities and Exchange Commission should consider codifying these sin clauses in law , prohibiting American investors from investing in virtual reality pornography .\nThese are just a few steps that serious pro-family candidates should consider proposing to stem the tide of pornography over the minds of increasingly atomized Americans .\nZak Slayback is a venture capital and private equity professional living in the United States . He tweets at @ zslayback .\nThe views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of ███ .


Get all the latest news on coronavirus and more delivered daily to your inbox . Sign up here .\nIf you ’ re following the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ’ s ( CDC 's ) recently updated guidelines on face masks amid the coronavirus epidemic in the U.S. , you likely already know to wear either a homemade mask , bandanna or some other cloth face covering when running essential errands , namely as a way to protect others from developing a COVID-19 infection .\nBut equally as important as wearing a face covering is cleaning it properly after you ’ re back home . To make sure you ’ re following protocol as recommended by infectious disease and other medical specialists across the nation , read on for a look at some of the tips below .\nThe first and most obvious method of cleaning a facial covering is by throwing it in a washing machine .\n“ A washing machine should suffice in properly washing a face covering , ” says the CDC , noting the mask should be “ routinely washed depending on the frequency of use . ”\nViruses on clothes and fabrics are typically inactivated when washed in water at 140 degrees Fahrenheit , as per the World Health Organization 's ( WHO 's ) guidelines . But most at-home water heaters only reach 120 degrees Fahrenheit . This means it is extra important to use detergent , as well as chlorine or color-safe bleach to help decontaminate the fabric as best as possible , according to Popular Science .\nThen , after washing , make sure to dry to mask at high heat in the dryer .\nPlacing the face mask in boiling water is also an option , namely if a washing machine is not available .\n“ Use a large pot and enough water to make sure it doesn ’ t all evaporate away . Leave the mask in the water for several minutes and swirl it around occasionally with tongs , ” explained Digital Trends .\nIroning the face mask at high heat can also be helpful when attempting to disinfect it , Dimitar Marinov , an assistant professor in the department of hygiene at the Medical University of Varna , told the Huffington Post .\nMAKING A CORONAVIRUS FACE MASK : DERMATOLOGIST OFFERS ADVICE ON BEST MATERIALS , HOW TO SOOTHE IRRITATED SKIN\nHand washing the mask is also a possibility . Lather the fabric with hot water and soap and scrub it vigorously for at least 20 seconds , and use hot air to dry it .


The 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders , 78 , has cancelled campaign events after undergoing a heart procedure .\nMr Sanders was treated in hospital for an arterial blockage after having chest pain at an event in Nevada on Tuesday .\nThe Vermont senator tweeted that he was `` feeling good '' . An aide said Mr Sanders would rest over the next few days .\nIf Mr Sanders were to win the US presidency , he would become the oldest person to hold the office .\nThe presidential hopeful tweeted that he was recovering , taking the opportunity to promote his healthcare policy inspired by Britain 's National Health Service .\nSenior adviser Jeff Weaver said in a statement : `` Following medical evaluation and testing he was found to have a blockage in one artery and two stents were successfully inserted . ''\nMr Weaver said Mr Sanders is `` conversing and in good spirits '' and will be `` resting up over the next few days '' . He is recovering at a hospital in Las Vegas .\nA stent is a small mesh tube used to help keep arteries open . Receiving stents is `` a minimally invasive procedure '' , typically with a short recovery time , the US National Heart , Lung and Blood Institute says .\nMr Sanders ' wife , Jane , released a statement on Thursday saying he was doing well .\n`` Yesterday , he spent much of the day talking with staff about policies , cracking jokes with the nurses and doctors , and speaking with his family on the phone , '' she said .\n`` His doctors are pleased with his progress , and there has been no need for any additional procedures . We expect Bernie will be discharged and on a plane back to Burlington before the end of the weekend . ''\nMrs Sanders also confirmed that he still plans to attend the 15 October Democratic debate .\nPolls show Mr Sanders is third in the Democratic race behind Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and former Vice-President Joe Biden .\nMr Sanders recently announced his campaign raised over $ 25.3m ( £20.5m ) from July through September , the largest of any Democratic candidate in a quarter so far .\nMs Warren and Mr Biden have not released their most recent fundraising totals . But in the previous quarter , April through June , they each raised $ 19.1m and $ 21.5m respectively .\nMr Sanders had been in Las Vegas to participate in a gun safety forum on Wednesday , along with some other 2020 candidates .\nMany of his presidential rivals wished him a `` speedy recovery '' .\nMr Sanders on Tuesday announced a $ 1.3m television advertising purchase in Iowa , but US media report that on Wednesday , his campaign began cancelling the ads . It is unclear why . Iowa hosts the first voting contest in the US presidential race .\nThe senator 's health made headlines last month as well , when he cancelled three events in South Carolina after losing his voice , taking two days to recover .\nMr Sanders labels himself a Democratic socialist , which he has defined as someone who seeks to `` create an economy that works for all , not just the very wealthy '' .\nHe is the longest-serving independent in congressional history , but competes for the Democratic nomination as he says standing as a third-party candidate would diminish his chances of winning the presidency .\nWhen he ran for the Democratic nomination in 2016 , he was Hillary Clinton 's closest rival .\nHis 2020 platform has focused largely on his universal health coverage plan , Medicare for All . The policy has also become a key point of contention between Democrats during the last debates , with moderates like Mr Biden criticising it as unfeasible and too expensive .


Georgia Gov . Brian Kemp is overruling local government mandates requiring people to wear masks in public to stop the spread of COVID-19 , insisting that the state 's less-stringent guidelines take precedence .\nKemp on Wednesday extended the state 's COVID-19 restrictions , which strongly encourage the wearing of masks , but stopped short of requiring them in public , calling such a measure `` a bridge too far . ''\nHis order explicitly rescinds mask orders in such key cities as Atlanta , Savannah , Athens and Augusta , along with more than a dozen other local jurisdictions where similar directives have been issued .\nKemp , a Republican , has been at odds with mayors and city administrators over the issue in recent days . Last week , for instance , Atlanta 's Democratic Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms announced a return to tough measures to control an ongoing spike in coronavirus infections in the capital , but Kemp 's office insisted that her order was `` non-binding and legally unenforceable . ''\nGeorgia on Wednesday reported its second-highest new coronavirus case count to date , with 3,871 new confirmed cases and 37 COVID-19 deaths . Since the start of the pandemic , nearly 128,000 people in Georgia have tested positive for the coronavirus and more than 3,000 have died . Half of all new cases are being reported in Atlanta , the capital and largest city .\nThe @ FultonHealth released their latest # COVID19 epidemiology report on July 13 .\nThe full report ( which includes data for hospitalizations , long-term care facilities , demographics , and maps ) can be found on our @ FultonInfo website at https : //t.co/pqVzMBaLq3 . pic.twitter.com/M52PcPXScY — Atlanta-Fulton EMA ( @ AFCEMA ) July 14 , 2020\nEarlier this month , some 1,400 health care workers signed a letter to Kemp warning that Georgia `` is simply not prepared '' for an upsurge in COVID-19 cases .\nThe letter said the rising number of confirmed infections in the state `` can not be accounted for by increased testing . ''\nKemp 's new order requires people who are most vulnerable to COVID-19 , such as the elderly and those with underlying health conditions , to shelter in place . It also requires restaurants and other businesses to follow social distancing precautions and restricts public gatherings to no more than 50 people .\nBut in their letter , the health care workers called for stricter measures — a statewide mask requirement , reinstating the closing of bars and nightclubs and prohibiting indoor gatherings of more than 25 people , including in churches , synagogues and mosques .\n`` To close down when they need to close down , to mandate masks even if the governor 's not willing to mandate masks . It could make a huge difference , '' Dr. Melanie Thompson , who helped write the letter , said , according to 11Alive News .\nThe governor 's new order , which expires at the end of the month , came on the same day that President Trump visited a UPS hub in Atlanta . The president thanked `` every driver , worker and employee '' who has worked through the pandemic .\nTrump has sought to deflect criticism of his administration 's handling of the crisis , at times using racist , anti-Asian language to describe the coronavirus . In his speech at the UPS facility , the president praised the carrier 's workers and referred to `` our battle against the China virus . ''


Speaking from one of the states hardest hit by the opioid epidemic , President Trump on Monday laid out a battle plan that calls for harsher sentences - and even the death penalty - for traffickers .\nTrump called for expanded treatment options for victims in the Manchester , N.H. , speech , but leveled most of his emphasis on beefed-up enforcement . And he heaped plenty of scorn on the people he believes are responsible for as many as 42,000 U.S. deaths per year .\n`` These are terrible people and we have to get tough with those people , '' Trump said of traffickers and dealers . `` This isn ’ t about committees ... this is about winning a very tough problem . ''\n`` The ultimate penalty has to be the death penalty , '' Trump said , before musing , `` maybe our country is not ready for that . ''\nTrump wants Congress to pass legislation reducing the amount of drugs needed to trigger mandatory minimum sentences for traffickers who knowingly distribute certain illicit opioids . The death penalty would be pursued where appropriate under current law . Justice Department says the federal death penalty is available for several limited drug-related offenses , including violations of the `` drug kingpin '' provisions in federal law .\nTrump reiterated an observation he has shared several times before -- that a person in the U.S. can get the death penalty or life in prison for shooting one person , but that a drug dealer whose actions could lead to thousands of overdoses can spend little or no time in jail .\nThe president said the federal government may consider aggressive litigation against pharmaceutical companies deemed complicit in the crisis .\n`` Whether you are a dealer or doctor or trafficker or a manufacturer , if you break the law and illegally peddle these deadly poisons , we will find you and we will arrest you and we will hold you accountable , '' Trump said .\nTrump singled out Mexico and China as main sources of illicit opioids . A Drug Enforcement Administration report last year said : `` Seizures indicated that China supplies lower volumes of high-purity fentanyl , whereas fentanyl seizures from Mexico are higher volume but lower in purity . ''\nSmuggling operations in both countries constantly try to elude U.S. officials by selling through the Internet and sending the substances – which chemists for these traffickers often alter to avoid detection – through the U.S. postal service , U.S. officials have said .\nTrump also announced a nationwide public awareness campaign , as well as increased research and development through public-private partnerships between the federal National Institutes of Health and pharmaceutical companies .\nHe announced a new website , Crisisnextdoor.gov , where people can share their stories about addiction . The hope is that horror stories will scare people away from behavior that could lead to addiction .\nThe Trump administration aims to see the number of filled opioid prescriptions cut by one-third within three years .\nA third part of the plan addresses improving access to treatment and recovery programs that have proven effective . Many health professionals , relatives of those who have died of overdoses and people who have experienced addiction to opioids have been pushing for treatment to be a key component of any campaign to fight the epidemic .\n`` Failure is not an option , '' the president said . `` Addiction is not our future . We will liberate our country from this crisis . ''\nOpioids , including prescription opioids , heroin and synthetic drugs such as fentanyl , killed more than 42,000 people in the U.S. in 2016 , more than any year on record , according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention .\nAnd a recent CDC report said that the number of people checking into the emergency room after overdosing rose by 30 percent between July 2016 and September 2017 .\n`` Drug dealers show no respect for human dignity and put their own greed ahead of the safety and even the lives of others . Drug trafficking is an inherently violent and deadly business : if you want to collect a drug debt , you collect it with the barrel of a gun . As surely as night follows day , violence and death follow drug trafficking , and murder is often a tool of drug traffickers , '' Attorney General Jeff Sessions reacted . `` At the Department of Justice , we have made ending the drug epidemic a priority . We will continue to aggressively prosecute drug traffickers and we will use federal law to seek the death penalty wherever appropriate . ''\n`` We can not arrest our way out of the opioid epidemic—we tried that and ended up with an even bigger addiction problem and the world ’ s largest prison population , '' Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin , R-Ill. , responded . `` The war on drugs didn ’ t work in the 80 ’ s , and it won ’ t work now by reviving failed deterrence measures like the death penalty for drug dealers . We must instead crack down on the over-production and over-prescribing of painkillers , and increase treatment for those suffering from addiction—both of which have bipartisan support in Congress . ''\nLast October , Trump declared the crisis a national public health emergency , short of the national state of emergency sought by a presidential commission he put together to study the issue .\nMeanwhile , Congress plans to weigh a range of bills targeted at curbing the epidemic . The bills cover everything from improving access to treatment to intercepting shipments of illicit opioids en route to the United States .\n`` Our recommendations will be urgent and bipartisan , and they will come very quickly , '' said Sen. Lamar Alexander , R-Tenn. , chairman of the Senate Health , Education , Labor and Pensions Committee , according to published reports .


Gavin Newsom speaks to reporters during his 2018 gubernatorial campaign in San Diego , Calif. ( Mike Blake/Reuters )\nGavin Newsom , the newly inaugurated governor of California , would very much like to be president of the United States someday . It is fitting , then , that Newsom has begun his audition for the role by engaging in the sort of brazen executive overreach that we have become accustomed to seeing from White Houses .\nOn Tuesday , Newsom confirmed that no executions will be performed in California while he is governor . This change , he explained , will be made unilaterally , without reference to either the legislature or the judiciary , by applying his gubernatorial reprieve power on a wholesale basis . There are 737 people on death row in California . Should their execution dates coincide with his tenure , Newsom will automatically grant a commutation . “ I can not , ” Newsom insisted , “ sign off on executing hundreds and hundreds of human beings . ”\nIf that is the case , then Newsom should not have run for governor of California , and nor should he have sworn an oath to “ see that the law is faithfully executed . ”\nThe reprieve power that Newsom wields is intended to be applied on a case-by-case basis , as a final check against judicial error or egregious injustice . It is not intended to be invoked indiscriminately as a means by which to nullify or thwart well-established laws that the executive happens not to like . During his press conference , Newsom repeatedly used the word “ moratorium. ” Perhaps this was an attempt to cast minds back to that brief period in the 1970s during which the death penalty was ruled nationally unconstitutional . But , in truth , Newsom ’ s recalcitrance has little in common with that moment . There exists no pending litigation or constitutional challenge to California ’ s arrangement , and there exists no confusion as to the integrity or meaning of the underlying statute . Newsom just dislikes the status quo and so has resolved to change it by force .\nThe arrogance of his position is remarkable . Californians were asked as recently as 2016 whether they wanted to abolish capital punishment in the state and not only answered “ No ” by a margin of six points but voted to speed up the appeals process in concert with that refusal . It is entirely reasonable for Newsom to have been disappointed by that result ; in California , as everywhere else , the death penalty is a topic of considerable debate . It is not reasonable , however , for Newsom to seek to undermine that result in its entirety . What , Californians might well ask , is the purpose of having a system of legally binding propositions if the executive branch can reverse them on a whim ? What , by the same token , is the California legislature for ? And why convene juries — and guide them in painstaking detail through complex and difficult questions — if their judgment is to be summarily replaced by a single officer in Sacramento ?\nDuring the debate over the merits of the federal Constitution , many prominent anti-Federalists worried that to give the president the power to pardon was , in effect , to make him a king . For most of American history , this fear proved unfounded . In recent years , however , the ghost of Patrick Henry has begun to rattle his chains , as a growing number of executives have begun to transmute their pardon power into a general veto . This is what Barack Obama did in pursuit of DACA ; it is what Governor Terry McAuliffe did , against the will of the Virginia legislature , in order to re-enfranchise felons who he believed had paid their debts to society ; and — perhaps this is where Newsom got the idea ? — it is what former Illinois governor George Ryan did back in 1999 when he responded to the failure of a death-penalty moratorium in the legislature by issuing his own . When Gavin Newsom announced his run for governor , he suggested that “ California has a responsibility and opportunity to show the country and the world what inclusive , progressive government can achieve. ” If this is what he meant , the country should say , “ No , thank you . ”


It 's almost hard to remember how dominant an issue the death penalty was a generation ago .\nCrime and drugs were the top issues for voters in 1994 . Not coincidentally , support for the death penalty peaked that year , at 80 percent , according to Gallup polling .\nOpposition to the death penalty once cost prominent politicians their jobs , from New York Democratic Gov . Mario Cuomo to California Supreme Court Chief Justice Rose Bird .\nBut all that has changed . Contemporary politicians appear to have paid very little price , if any , for supporting recent moratoriums on capital punishment , or for voting to abolish it altogether .\n`` It just has n't been a salient issue here , despite the governor declaring a moratorium on the death penalty , '' says Travis Ridout , a professor of government and public policy at Washington State University , referring to Democratic Gov . Jay Inslee 's announcement earlier this year .\nThe death penalty was a centerpiece of the 1988 presidential campaign . Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis was widely criticized that fall for not reacting emotionally when a debate moderator asked him if he would favor execution if his wife were raped and murdered .\nFour years later , Democratic front-runner and eventual winner Bill Clinton burnished his credibility on the crime issue by returning from the campaign trail to Arkansas and presiding as governor over the execution of Ricky Ray Rector , a cop killer who was brain damaged .\nBut crime has declined steadily and dramatically since the 1990s , when the death penalty peaked both in popularity and in practice . A majority of Americans still favor the death penalty , but its support reached a 40-year low in a Gallup poll conducted last fall .\nAs violent crime and murder rates have dropped over the past couple of decades , so has political support for capital punishment .\nCalifornia voters in 2012 rejected a ballot measure that would have ended the death penalty in that state . It lost by only a 4-percentage-point margin , however — a big change from the 71 percent to 29 percent result when a similar vote took place back in 1978 .\n`` We are at a point today where the number of people in strong support of the death penalty has declined , '' says Elizabeth Theiss Smith , a death penalty expert at the University of South Dakota .\nMeanwhile , the death penalty itself has come to seem more problematic . DNA evidence and other methods have helped exonerate 144 individuals who had been sentenced to death row , according to the Death Penalty Information Center .\nA study released Monday by a team of legal scholars and statisticians found that more than 4 percent of all those condemned to death over the past 40 years had likely been wrongfully convicted .\nThe Supreme Court , with a series of recent decisions , has pretty much limited the death penalty to cases involving murders committed by mentally sound adults . Although many people would like to see the most heinous criminals `` get what they deserve , '' says Smith , statistics show that death sentences have more to do with race , class and the quality of the defense attorneys involved than with the crime itself .\nWhere a life sentence might once have meant a criminal would spend only 15 years behind bars , jurors now know that life without the possibility of parole is a sentence that will stick . They 've increasingly embraced it as an option .\nAs the death penalty has declined in use , some politicians are less convinced of its value as a deterrent . Instead , as states seek to trim their corrections costs , the sheer amount of money spent on death penalty cases has become a concern .\n`` We have a responsibility to stop doing the things that are wasteful and ineffective , '' Democratic Gov . Martin O'Malley said last year as he signed a bill abolishing the practice in Maryland .\nConcerns about this week 's botched execution in Oklahoma will fit with the pragmatic line of argument politicians are now using to oppose the death penalty , says Frank Baumgartner , co-author of The Decline of the Death Penalty and the Discovery of Innocence .\n`` There is a new way a politician can move away from it , '' he says . `` No matter how angry you might be about the horrific crime that occurred , we ca n't trust the government to handle it appropriately . ''\nMaryland was the sixth state to abolish the death penalty in as many years . Inslee 's moratorium in February followed a similar move taken in 2011 by Oregon Gov . John Kitzhaber and a de facto moratorium imposed last year by Colorado Gov . John Hickenlooper .\nAll these politicians are Democrats . The states that are getting rid of the death penalty are blue , while the practice continues most regularly in Republican-dominated states such as Texas , Florida , Ohio and Missouri .\nIt 's no wonder . Opinions about the death penalty , as with so many issues , are split along partisan lines . According to Gallup , 80 percent of Republicans support capital punishment , compared with 47 percent of Democrats .\nSome Republican politicians have sought to make the death penalty an issue when running against abolitionist Democrats . It 's not a strategy that meets with great success anymore .\n`` The people who primarily support the death penalty are Republicans — men , whites and the wealthy , '' says Matt Manweller , a political scientist and GOP state legislator in Washington . `` Those are not groups that vote for Jay Inslee anyway . ''\nThose political dynamics could change , if the murder rate spikes upward and crime becomes more of a concern . Political support for the death penalty has undergone a long decline , but such trends can often reverse themselves .\n`` There is still substantial support for the death penalty , '' says Smith , the South Dakota professor . `` Nobody loses an election by being tough on crime . ''


Drug dealers kill people , destroy families and might deserve the death penalty or life in prison for their crimes , President Trump says .\nTrump , speaking at a rally Saturday in Pennsylvania for congressional candidate Rick Saccone , said he got the idea from the leaders of China and Singapore . The U.S. criminal justice system , Trump said , is too soft on drugs .\n“ You kill 5,000 people with drugs because you ’ re smuggling them in and you are making a lot of money and people are dying . And they don ’ t even put you in jail , ” Trump said . “ That ’ s why we have a problem , folks . I don ’ t think we should play games . ”\nTrump said he recently asked the president of Singapore if that country has a drug problem .\n`` He said 'We have a zero tolerance policy . That means if we catch a drug dealer , death penalty , ' '' Trump said .\nMore : Trump stumps for GOP candidate in Pennsylvania : 'We have to win '\nMore : This week in Trump : The full Nunberg , porn star lawsuit and North Korea\nTrump said he was n't sure whether the nation would be accepting of such a harsh penalty . But he said drug dealers destroy families .\n`` We ca n't just keep setting up blue ribbon committees '' that do nothing but `` talk , talk , talk , '' Trump said .\nTrump has floated the idea before . Less than two weeks ago , Trump suggested `` very strong '' penalties to help address the nation 's growing problem with opioid addiction .\n`` Some countries have a very , very tough penalty — the ultimate penalty , '' Trump said . `` And , by the way , they have much less of a drug problem than we do . ''\nLast May , Trump congratulated Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte for a `` great job '' in his crackdown on drugs . Duterte has boasted about personally shooting and killing at least three crime suspects . Human rights groups and the United Nations have condemned Duterte 's vigilante-style campaign that has left thousands of suspected drug dealers and users dead .\n`` Probably you 'll have some people who say 'Oh , that 's not nice , '' Trump said . `` But we have to do something . ''


Another week , another botched killing under the legal euphemism of capital punishment . After macabre screw-ups in Oklahoma and Ohio , it was Arizona 's turn last week , when double-murderer Joseph Rudolph Wood III took about two hours to die . The specific problem this time around was an apparently unreliable “ cocktail ” of the drugs used in the lethal injection process .\nBut let ’ s face it : There ’ s no good way to kill a person , even one as completely unsympathetic as Wood ( he killed his ex-girlfriend and her father , shooting them at point-blank range ) . As a libertarian , I ’ m not surprised that the state is so incompetent that it can ’ t even kill people efficiently . But I ’ m far more outraged by the idea that anyone anywhere seriously thinks the death penalty passes for good politics or sane policy . It ’ s expensive , ineffective , and most of all , deeply offensive to ideals of truly limited government .\nConsider that between 1980 and 2012 , California spent $ 4 billion administering death penalty cases while actually executing just 13 individuals , according to a study produced by Loyola Marymount Law Professor Paula Mitchell . What ’ s more , Mitchell told Reason TV ’ s Tracy Oppenheimer , when the death penalty is in play , “ the legal costs [ per case ] skyrocket to an extra $ 134 million per year , well above the cost to implement life without possibility of parole. ” Given the severity and finality of the punishment , it makes all the sense in the world to make sure due process was followed in all death penalty cases . I ’ m sure death costs more in California ( everything else does ) than in other states , but there ’ s just never going to be a way to make it less than a huge waste of taxpayer money . And there ’ s no question that innocent people end up Death Row . The Innocence Project has documented that at least 18 innocent people , who served a combined 229 years in prison before being exonerated , have been saved from possible execution over the past 15 years .\nWell , maybe you can ’ t put a price tag on the law and order that is instilled by the death penalty , right ? A 2009 study by University of Colorado scholars published in the Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology concludes flatly “ the consensus among criminologists is that the death penalty does not add any significant deterrent effect above that of long-term imprisonment. ” It ’ s not even close , actually , with fully 88 percent of criminal-justice experts responding to a poll saying the death penalty does not act as a deterrent of murder , a percentage that was up slightly from a similar 1996 survey of scholars and law-enforcement analysts . Michael L. Ladelet and Traci L. Lacock also show how minor tweaks to assumptions embedded in studies that claim to show deterrent effects radically alter the results .\nPart of the reason is that so few executions take place in a given year . Since the Supreme Court re-allowed executions in 1976 , about 1,400 people have been executed ( and never more than 100 in a given year ) , which is just too small a sample from which to draw definitive proof . However , the murder rate per 100,000 residents in non-death-penalty states has been consistently lower than the rate in states with executions .\nThat ’ s because the vast majority of murders aren ’ t planned-out crimes of the century or CSI-style serial killings , but opportunistic tragedies fueled by drugs , booze , and mental illness . “ The threat of execution at some future date is unlikely to enter the minds of those acting under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol , those who are in the grip of fear or rage , those who are panicking while committing another crime ( such as a robbery ) , or those who suffer from mental illness or mental retardation and do not fully understand the gravity of their crime , ” explains Amnesty International .\nSo the death penalty wastes money , has no effect on murder rates , and is sometimes tossed at innocent people . Those three reasons are more than enough to end it once and for all .\nHere ’ s one more that would hold true even if through some miracle the government could make the finances work , guarantee absolute accuracy in convicting only guilty perps , and show that executions significantly deterred crime : The state ’ s first role—and arguably its only one—is protecting the lives and property of its citizens . In everything it does—from collecting taxes to seizing property for public works to incentivizing “ good ” behaviors and habits—it should use the least violence or coercion possible . No matter how despicable murderers can be , the state can make sure we ’ re safe by locking them up behind bars for the rest of their—and our—lives . That ’ s not only a cheaper answer than state-sanctioned murder , it ’ s a more moral one , too .


She should have gone much further and followed other governors and legislatures in banning executions , recognizing that the American administration of death does not function . Mr. Lockett ’ s ordeal , along with the botched deaths of other inmates around the country , showed there is no reliable and humane method of execution . As Gov . John Kitzhaber of Oregon said in 2011 : “ I refuse to be a part of this compromised and inequitable system any longer ; and I will not allow further executions while I am governor . ”\nSeven states have put the death penalty on hold over the last five years because of issues of fairness or methods ; another 11 states are debating the issue . Even in states where the death penalty is applied , the number of executions has fallen sharply since 2009 . Republicans in Oklahoma seemed so eager to buck this tide that they ignored what happened during a January execution , when an inmate named Michael Lee Wilson said “ I feel my whole body burning ” just before the drugs killed him .\nMany drug companies , fearful of political attack , have stopped supplying the means of execution , and states determined to inflict the maximum punishment have turned to questionable sources like compounding pharmacies for lethal chemicals . Oklahoma , among other states , won ’ t say where it is getting the drugs , leading one state judge to say “ I do not think this is even a close call ” that the execution procedures are unconstitutional .\nThe medieval mechanics of death , though , are hardly the only reason that states are abandoning the practice . There is growing evidence that capital sentences are handed out in an arbitrary and racially biased way , often to innocent victims . A new study published by the National Academy of Sciences estimated that more than 4 percent of all death-row defendants are innocent .\nThe authors reached that figure by extrapolating from the growing number of exonerations of death-row inmates . They accused Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court of miscalculating when he wrote in 2007 that convictions in American courts have only a 0.027 percent error rate . “ That would be comforting , if true , ” the study says . “ In fact , the claim is silly. ” Even more disturbing , the report says , is the stark reality for innocent people sentenced to death : most will never be exonerated .