Age of Mother Affects Child’s Autism Risk

February 8th, 2010

reuters.com

They found that a 40-year-old woman’s risk of having a child later diagnosed with autism was 50 percent greater than that of a woman between 25 and 29.

But being an older father — 40 or older — only contributes significantly to autism risk when the mother is under 30.

“The older the mother, the more the risk that the child will develop autism, regardless of whether the father is young or old,” said Irva Hertz-Picciotto of the University of California Davis MIND Institute, who worked on the study published in the journal Autism Research.

The findings contradict a 2006 study of children born in Israel that suggested paternal age played a much larger role.

“There has been a debate over whether it is maternal or paternal risk. A lot of people were thinking it’s not really mom’s age,” Hertz-Picciotto said in a telephone interview.

Researchers and policymakers are increasingly looking for causes to explain the growing numbers of children diagnosed with autism, which affects 1 percent of U.S. children.

There is no cure for autism, a spectrum of diseases ranging from severe and profound inability to communicate and mental retardation to relatively mild symptoms such as with Asperger’s syndrome.

The current study, which incorporates data on 4.9 million births and 12,159 autism cases in California, helps to clarify the contribution of age from both parents.

“We have such a very large database we were really able to disentangle the mother’s age very well,” Hertz-Picciotto said. This can be a challenge because older mothers and fathers tend to have children together.

“We found it does vary for the father, but not for the mother,” she said.

For example, among babies born to mothers under 25, children whose father was over 40 were twice as likely to develop autism as those whose father was between 25 and 29.

This could be because when both parents are older, the risk conferred by the father is outweighed by the risk from the mother, Hertz-Picciotto said.

OLDER PARENTS

She said the point of the study is not to blame parents, but to gain clues about what is going on in older parents that could increase a child’s risk of developing autism.

Older parents, for example, are more likely to have infertility problems and have used fertility treatments; the mothers are more likely to have autoimmune conditions, including gestational diabetes; and both have accumulated more toxins over their lifetimes, so the sperm and egg are more likely to have some changes that could increase risk.

“We see these age findings as clues for where to look next,” Hertz-Picciotto said.

Autism researchers are looking at a broad range of potential environmental factors, including household products, medical treatments, diet, food supplements and infections.

And the National Institute of Mental Health, one of the National Institutes of Health, is looking at potential genetic causes of autism and has plans to sequence the entire genomes of hundreds of children and their parents to gain a better understanding of the role genes play.

Click here for the full report

Israel Deploys Unmanned Military Vehicles to Battlefield

January 12,2009

Wall Street Journal

By Charles Levinson

Sixty years of near-constant war, a low tolerance for enduring casualties in conflict, and its high-tech industry have long made Israel one of the world’s leading innovators of military robotics.

WSJ’s Charles Levinson reports from Jerusalem to discuss Israel’s development of robotic, unmanned combat systems. He tells Simon Constable on the News Hub how they are deploying unmanned boats, ground vehicles and aerial vehicles.

“We’re trying to get to unmanned vehicles everywhere on the battlefield for each platoon in the field,” says Lt. Col. Oren Berebbi, head of the Israel Defense Forces’ technology branch. “We can do more and more missions without putting a soldier at risk.”

In 10 to 15 years, one-third of Israel’s military machines will be unmanned, predicts Giora Katz, vice president of Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd., one of Israel’s leading weapons manufacturers.

“We are moving into the robotic era,” says Mr. Katz.

Over 40 countries have military-robotics programs today. The U.S. and much of the rest of the world is betting big on the role of aerial drones: Even Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite guerrilla force in Lebanon, flew four Iranian-made drones against Israel during the 2006 Lebanon War.

When the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, it had just a handful of drones. Today, U.S. forces have around 7,000 unmanned vehicles in the air and an additional 12,000 on the ground, used for tasks including reconnaissance, airstrikes and bomb disposal.

In 2009, for the first time, the U.S. Air Force trained more “pilots” for unmanned aircraft than for manned fighters and bombers.

U.S. and Japanese robotics programs rival Israel’s technological know-how, but Israel has shown it can move quickly to develop and deploy new devices, to meet battlefield needs, military officials say.

“The Israelis do it differently, not because they’re more clever than we are, but because they live in a tough neighborhood and need to respond fast to operational issues,” says Thomas Tate, a former U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who now oversees defense cooperation between the U.S. and Israel.

Among the recently deployed technologies that set Israel ahead of the curve is the Guardium unmanned ground vehicle, which now drives itself along the Gaza and Lebanese borders. The Guardium was deployed to patrol for infiltrators in the wake of the abduction of soldiers doing the same job in 2006. The Guardium, developed by G-nius Ltd., is essentially an armored off-road golf cart with a suite of optical sensors and surveillance gear. It was put into the field for the first time 10 months ago.

In the 2006 Lebanon War, Israeli soldiers took a beating opening supply routes and ferrying food and ammunition through hostile territory to the front lines. In the Gaza conflict in January 2009, Israel unveiled remote-controlled bulldozers to help address that issue.

Israel pioneered the use of aerial drones like the Heron, under construction, above, at Israeli Aerospace Industries.

Within the next year, Israeli engineers expect to deploy the voice-commanded, six-wheeled Rex robot, capable of carrying 550 pounds of gear alongside advancing infantry.

After bomb-laden fishing boats tried to take out an Israeli Navy frigate off the coast off Gaza in 2002, Rafael designed the Protector SV, an unmanned, heavily armed speedboat that today makes up a growing part of the Israeli naval fleet. The Singapore Navy has also purchased the boat and is using it in patrols in the Persian Gulf.

After Syrian missile batteries in Lebanon took a heavy toll on Israeli fighter jets in the 1973 war, Israel developed the first modern unmanned aerial vehicle, or UAV.

When Israel next invaded Lebanon in 1981, the real-time images provided by those unmanned aircraft helped Israel wipe out Syrian air defenses, without a single downed pilot. The world, including the U.S., took notice.

The Pentagon set aside its long-held skepticism about the advantages of unmanned aircraft and, in the early 1980s, bought a prototype designed by former Israeli Air Force engineer Abraham Karem. That prototype morphed into the modern-day Predator, which is made by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc.

Unlike the U.S. and other militaries, where UAVs are flown by certified, costly-to-train fighter pilots, Israeli defense companies have recently built their UAVs to allow an average 18-year-old recruit with just a few months’ training to pilot them.

Military analysts say unmanned fighting vehicles could have a far-reaching strategic impact on the sort of asymmetrical conflicts the U.S. is fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and that Israel faces against enemies such as Hezbollah and Hamas.

In such conflicts, robotic vehicles will allow modern conventional armies to minimize the advantages guerrilla opponents gain by their increased willingness to sacrifice their lives in order to inflict casualties on the enemy.

However, there are also fears that when countries no longer fear losing soldiers’ lives in combat thanks to the ability to wage war with unmanned vehicles, they may prove more willing to initiate conflict.

In coming years, engineers say unmanned air, sea and ground vehicles will increasingly work together without any human involvement. Israel and the U.S. have already faced backlash over civilian deaths caused by drone-fired missiles in Gaza, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Those ethical dilemmas could increase as robots become more independent of their human masters.

Click here to read the full report

Mind-Reading Systems Could Change Air Security

January 8, 2010

My Way

By Michael Tarm

A would-be terrorist tries to board a plane, bent on mass murder. As he walks through a security checkpoint, fidgeting and glancing around, a network of high-tech machines analyzes his body language and reads his mind.

Screeners pull him aside.

Tragedy is averted.

As far-fetched as that sounds, systems that aim to get inside an evildoer’s head are among the proposals floated by security experts thinking beyond the X-ray machines and metal detectors used on millions of passengers and bags each year.

On Thursday, in the wake of the Christmas Day bombing attempt over Detroit, President Barack Obama called on Homeland Security and the Energy Department to develop better screening technology, warning: “In the never-ending race to protect our country, we have to stay one step ahead of a nimble adversary.”

The ideas that have been offered by security experts for staying one step ahead include highly sophisticated sensors, more intensive interrogations of travelers by screeners trained in human behavior, and a lifting of the U.S. prohibitions against profiling.

Some of the more unusual ideas are already being tested. Some aren’t being given any serious consideration. Many raise troubling questions about civil liberties. All are costly.

“Regulators need to accept that the current approach is outdated,” said Philip Baum, editor of the London-based magazine Aviation Security International. “It may have responded to the threats of the 1960s, but it doesn’t respond to the threats of the 21st century.”

Here’s a look at some of the ideas that could shape the future of airline security:

MIND READERS

The aim of one company that blends high technology and behavioral psychology is hinted at in its name, WeCU – as in “We See You.”

The system that Israeli-based WeCU Technologies has devised and is testing in Israel projects images onto airport screens, such as symbols associated with a certain terrorist group or some other image only a would-be terrorist would recognize, said company CEO Ehud Givon.

The logic is that people can’t help reacting, even if only subtly, to familiar images that suddenly appear in unfamiliar places. If you strolled through an airport and saw a picture of your mother, Givon explained, you couldn’t help but respond.

The reaction could be a darting of the eyes, an increased heartbeat, a nervous twitch or faster breathing, he said.

The WeCU system would use humans to do some of the observing but would rely mostly on hidden cameras or sensors that can detect a slight rise in body temperature and heart rate. Far more sensitive devices under development that can take such measurements from a distance would be incorporated later.

If the sensors picked up a suspicious reaction, the traveler could be pulled out of line for further screening.

“One by one, you can screen out from the flow of people those with specific malicious intent,” Givon said.

Some critics have expressed horror at the approach, calling it Orwellian and akin to “brain fingerprinting.”

For civil libertarians, attempting to read a person’s thoughts comes uncomfortably close to the future world depicted in the movie “Minority Report,” where a policeman played by Tom Cruise targets people for “pre-crimes,” or merely thinking about breaking the law.

LIE DETECTORS

One system being studied by Homeland Security is called the Future Attribute Screening Technology, or FAST, and works like a souped-up polygraph.

It would subject people pulled aside for additional screening to a battery of tests, including scans of facial movements and pupil dilation, for signs of deception. Small platforms similar to the balancing boards used in the Nintendo Wii would help detect fidgeting.

At a public demonstration of the system in Boston last year, project manager Robert Burns explained that people who harbor ill will display involuntary physiological reactions that others – such as those who are stressed out for ordinary reasons, such as being late for a plane – don’t.

The system could be made to work passively, scanning people as they walk through a security line, according to Burns.

Field testing of the system, which will cost around $20 million to develop, could begin in 2011, The Boston Globe said in a story about the demonstration. Addressing one concern of civil libertarians, Burns said the technology would delete data after each screening.

THE ISRAELI MODEL

Some say the U.S. should take a page from Israel’s book on security.

At Israeli airports, widely considered the most secure in the world, travelers are subjected to probing personal questions as screeners look them straight in the eye for signs of deception. Searches are meticulous, with screeners often scrutinizing every item in a bag, unfolding socks, squeezing toothpaste and flipping through books.

“All must look to Israel and learn from them. This is not a post-911 thing for them. They’ve been doing this since 1956,” said Michael Goldberg, president of New York-based IDO Security Inc., which developed a device that can scan shoes while they are still on people’s feet.

Israel also employs profiling: At Ben-Gurion Airport, Jewish Israelis typically pass through smoothly, while others may be taken aside for closer interrogation or even strip searches. Another distinquishing feature of Israeli airports is that they rely on concentric security rings that start miles from terminal buildings.

Rafi Ron, the former security director at Israel’s famously tight Ben Gurion International Airport who now is a consultant for Boston’s Logan International Airport, says U.S. airports also need to be careful not to overcommit to securing passenger entry points at airports, forgetting about the rest of the field.

“Don’t invest all your efforts on the front door and leave the back door open,” said Ron.

While many experts agree the United States could adopt some Israeli methods, few believe the overall model would work here, in part because of the sheer number of U.S. airports – more than 400, versus half a dozen in Israel.

Also, the painstaking searches and interrogations would create delays that could bring U.S. air traffic to a standstill. And many Americans would find the often intrusive and intimidating Israeli approach repugnant.

PROFILING

Some argue that policies against profiling undermine security.

Baum, who is also managing director of Green Light Limited, a London-based aviation security company, agrees profiling based on race and religion is counterproductive and should be avoided. But he argues that a reluctance to distinguish travelers on other grounds – such as their general appearance or their mannerisms – is not only foolhardy but dangerous.

“When you see a typical family – dressed like a family, acts like a family, interacts with each other like a family … when their passport details match – then let’s get them through,” he said. “Stop wasting time that would be much better spent screening the people that we’ve get more concerns about.”

U.S. authorities prohibit profiling of passengers based on ethnicity, religion or national origin. Current procedures call for travelers to be randomly pulled out of line for further screening.

Scrutinizing 80-year-old grandmothers or students because they might be carrying school scissors can defy common sense, Baum said.

“We need to use the human brain – which is the best technology of them all,” he said.

But any move to relax prohibitions against profiling in the U.S. would surely trigger fierce resistance, including legal challenges by privacy advocates.

Click here for the full report

Was The Attempt To Blow Up Detroit Bound Plane A False Flag?

January 4, 2010

The Palenstine Telegraph

By Pete Eyre

As we have seen so many times in the past conspiracy theories bounce around the world whenever we hear such dramatically presented stories that emanate out of the US and UK media machine. Many times such stories appear to coincide with a political low in a Presidents or Prime Minister career It is at such times that frequently our illustrious leaders, senior advisors or their intelligence organization concoct a diversionary story to attract our attention away from the real issues. Such tactics are well known around the world and unfortunately in some case this becomes the foundation stones for a full on war. The President or Prime Minister will re ignite patriotism as a means off bringing the sheep under the shepherd’s control.

This is normally associated with a massive media campaign to make mountains out of mole hills. In some case our leaders also hide the reasons for going into action as a means of pushing their own flawed foreign policy or to achieve some well orchestrated takeover of someone else’s natural resources. A couple of examples of such tactics were by The Three Stooges (Bush – Rumsfeld – Cheney) when they launched there false flag media campaign on WMD’s in Iraq. Iraq as we know was planned well in advance and had nothing to do with WMD’s or Saddam Hussein but rather control of their massive oil and gas reserves.

Then we had Israel that wanted to get its hands on the vast offshore Gaza reserves and almost nearly pulled it off……talks with British Gas Failed and Hamas came to power. Even their Chief of Defense admitted that Hamas had to be removed before drilling could commence. However, they launched a media campaign with a strong focus on Hamas rocket (fireworks) attack on Southern Israel. This again was a false flag which resulted in the attack on Gaza. Unfortunately in both of the above cases the sheep managed to find the truth behind their lies and their media campaign was a disaster. One can hear the echo’s of Bush on the flight deck of the carrier when he said “Mission Accomplished” Now we have President Nobel Peace Price finally succumbing to severe criticism from his treasured public.

We all were overwhelmed with so much joy and many people had tears in their eyes….the crowds in Chicago and Washington have never been so large and excitable but the sheep eventually woke up that their shepherd was nothing more than a mannequin that had been well groomed by those same elite group that created the well planned Wall Street/World Financial Market Collapse. This same group of international bankers, ex/current senior political, diplomatic and military leaders, Freemason, Christian and Jewish Zionist are all linked into this fanatical grab/control for the world’s natural resources. They are also behind many of these “False Flag” operations. One very good example is that of the US Navy vessel SS Liberty that was attacked by the Israelis in the offshore Gaza area.

As one would expect when such people organize such a large carefully orchestrated operation things do not always work out. In this case the President of the US wanted the Israelis to make sure that there would be no survivors but it didn’t go to plan. Let’s now return to Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit and look at the headlines that appeared on both sides of the pond. BBC: Detroit airliner incident ‘was failed bomb attack’ NY Times: “Terror Attempt Seen as Man Tries to Ignite Device on Jet” CNN: “Explosive device set off aboard airliner” Sky: Us Probes Al Qaeda Link to Jet Bomb Plot Let me ask the sheep what they think of the shepherd’s account of this incident? White House official says Detroit airline incident was attempted act of terrorism and in the meantime Obama was in Hawaii having a game of golf.

Is it possible that this was orchestrated by senior members of US Government in the shepherd’s absence or did Obama already know? It was also very interesting that the devil or all devils, Dick Cheney reared his ugly head to run his own media campaign on this alledged terrorism attack when he made the following statement to the media: “As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war.

He seems to think if he has a low-key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of Sept. 11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war. “He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core Al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, ‘war on terror,’ we won’t be at war. But we are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe.

Why doesn’t he want to admit we’re at war? It doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be the goal of his presidency — social transformation — the restructuring of American society. President Obama’s first object and his highest responsibility must be to defend us against an enemy that knows we are at war.” It so happens that Cheney is very much part of this elite group that is trying to control the world. He himself is definitely on the most wanted list for War Crimes and yet he still actively plays a major role in the countries politics.

To continue reading this report, click here.

Bank of Israel Governer Says World Must Accept Weaker Dollar

December 7, 2009

Reuters

By Daniel Bases

Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer said on Thursday the world has to accept a weaker U.S. dollar in order to ensure the global economy recovers soundly.

“We also have to realize, what is hard to get across, there has to be a global rebalancing. Either the U.S. runs a very long period of recession, which is a really bad idea, or the dollar has to weaken, so that balance of payments can be straightened out,” Fischer said in response to a question during a business breakfast in New York.

“So we have got to accept, as do other people, there has to be appreciation vis-a-vis the American dollar. Most people have kind of accepted that. It is just that when it gets out of line that people get nervous,” he said.

The Israeli shekel ILS= has recently strengthened against the U.S. dollar, trading at around 3.7750 per greenback. In October it hit its best levels in 10 months, trading as strong as 3.67 per U.S. dollar.

In the August through October period the central was intervening heavily in order to stop the shekel from appreciating rapidly against the greenback which would give relief to Israeli exports.

The U.S. dollar index .DXY, which measures the greenback against a basket of major trading-partner currencies, has fallen roughly 16.75 percent since it peaked in early March of this year when global markets hit bottom and investors were seeking a safe haven.

Fischer acknowledged the strong economic connection with the United States and its importance for the global economy but cautioned that heavily export-oriented countries have to move away from relying on the United States to buy their goods and services.

“So I think we’ve all got to accept the fact that the dollar is likely to be weaker and our currencies relative to the dollar are going to be stronger. The U.S. has to reduce its imports… or we won’t get a prosperous global economy,” he said.

“You have at one end the Chinese just not budging. At the other end the Brazilians have massive appreciation… trying to use capital controls and various things,” he said in reference to measures put in place to limit the real’s rise.

NO GOLD

On the issue of inflation, which he reiterated is likely to rise above the current top end of its 1-3 percent target range in the coming months, Fischer said he would not be a buyer of gold.

As recently as Nov. 23, the central bank increased its key lending rate by a quarter of a percentage point to 1 percent, a level it said was still “accommodative” and would support further economic recovery.

Still, given the rising inflation pressures, he said he was not interested in making a move similar to that of India’s central bank which spent $6.7 billion in early November to buy 200 tonnes of gold from the International Monetary Fund.

Spot gold prices touched another record high on Thursday, rising $1,226.10 XAU= before slipping back to $1,214.

“If you really think that the future is high inflation in the world economy then you hold gold. I don’t think that is the future. I don’t see us in a high inflation environment. Without committing, I don’t think we are going into gold any time soon,” he said.

Click here for the full report

Israel to Alert Residents of Attacks By Cell Phone

November 9, 2009

BreitBart

By AFP

Israel is working on a warning system that will calculate the precise location of where a rocket will hit and alert residents in the area using cell phones, a newspaper reported on Sunday.
“The rocket sensor will create a virtual ellipse (of the predicted impact zone) and all phones in that area will receive a warning,” the Jerusalem Post quoted Chilik Soffer, a senior official at the Israeli Home Front Command, as saying.

“We will use communications technology to send the signals and we are now working with the communications ministry to make the alert available,” he said.

The alert will come in as a vibration, audio alert, light flash or text message, he added.

The aim is to make more specific the air raid systems that Israel currently has in communities near the border with Lebanon and Gaza, which have in the past come under regular rocket fire from Hezbollah and Palestinian militant groups.

Click here for the full report.

DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show

August 18, 2009

New York Times

By Andrew Pollack

Scientists in Israel have demonstrated that it is possible to fabricate DNA evidence, undermining the credibility of what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases.

The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.

“You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.”

Dr. Frumkin is a founder of Nucleix, a company based in Tel Aviv that has developed a test to distinguish real DNA samples from fake ones that it hopes to sell to forensics laboratories.

The planting of fabricated DNA evidence at a crime scene is only one implication of the findings. A potential invasion of personal privacy is another.

Using some of the same techniques, it may be possible to scavenge anyone’s DNA from a discarded drinking cup or cigarette butt and turn it into a saliva sample that could be submitted to a genetic testing company that measures ancestry or the risk of getting various diseases. Celebrities might have to fear “genetic paparazzi,” said Gail H. Javitt of the Genetics and Public Policy Center at Johns Hopkins University.

Tania Simoncelli, science adviser to the American Civil Liberties Union, said the findings were worrisome.

“DNA is a lot easier to plant at a crime scene than fingerprints,” she said. “We’re creating a criminal justice system that is increasingly relying on this technology.”

John M. Butler, leader of the human identity testing project at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, said he was “impressed at how well they were able to fabricate the fake DNA profiles.” However, he added, “I think your average criminal wouldn’t be able to do something like that.”

The scientists fabricated DNA samples two ways. One required a real, if tiny, DNA sample, perhaps from a strand of hair or drinking cup. They amplified the tiny sample into a large quantity of DNA using a standard technique called whole genome amplification.

Of course, a drinking cup or piece of hair might itself be left at a crime scene to frame someone, but blood or saliva may be more believable.

The authors of the paper took blood from a woman and centrifuged it to remove the white cells, which contain DNA. To the remaining red cells they added DNA that had been amplified from a man’s hair.

Since red cells do not contain DNA, all of the genetic material in the blood sample was from the man. The authors sent it to a leading American forensics laboratory, which analyzed it as if it were a normal sample of a man’s blood.

The other technique relied on DNA profiles, stored in law enforcement databases as a series of numbers and letters corresponding to variations at 13 spots in a person’s genome.

From a pooled sample of many people’s DNA, the scientists cloned tiny DNA snippets representing the common variants at each spot, creating a library of such snippets. To prepare a DNA sample matching any profile, they just mixed the proper snippets together. They said that a library of 425 different DNA snippets would be enough to cover every conceivable profile.

Nucleix’s test to tell if a sample has been fabricated relies on the fact that amplified DNA — which would be used in either deception — is not methylated, meaning it lacks certain molecules that are attached to the DNA at specific points, usually to inactivate genes.

Click here for the full report from the New York Times