Day: August 26, 2020

Researchers in Japan have provided more evidence supporting the theory that all life on Earth could have sprung from bacteria that landed on the planet from outer space.The evidence comes from an experiment that was conducted on the International Space Station (ISS), the results of which were published Wednesday in the science journal Frontiers in Biology.The researchers placed bacteria samples in exposure panels outside the ISS and left them there for three years. They said they when the samples were examined, the bacteria at the surface had died off but formed a protective layer for the bacteria beneath the surface, ensuring the survival of the rest.The researchers said that based on the data they collected, a bacterial colony measuring approximately 1 millimeter in diameter could have survived for up to eight years in outer space.If so, then a bacterial colony could theoretically survive the journey from Earth to Mars, or vice versa, which would take several months or years, depending on the trajectory.The study provides important evidence for a theory known as panspermia, which suggests that life didn’t originate on Earth, but instead began elsewhere in the cosmos and was transported to the planet through interstellar objects such as asteroids that smashed into Earth billions of years ago.The researchers said their experiment provided for the first time an estimate of the survival rate of bacteria in outer space. Previous experiments suggested that bacteria might survive in space while being shielded beneath the surface of a meteor or asteroid. But the scientists said this was the first experiment to test bacteria in the form of an aggregate or cluster.They also said the results suggested life might be much more common in the universe than previously thought.
 
…

Tax officials in Africa estimate that government revenues will drop between 10 and 30 percent in 2020 as a result of the economic fallout stemming from the coronavirus pandemic. But while businesses in the hospitality, construction and retail sectors have suffered, digital companies have boomed as more people stay home and conduct their activities online.This is driving talks in Africa about how to make sure big multinationals such as Google and Facebook, which do not always have a physical presence in the countries where they make a profit, can be taxed.Logan Wort, executive secretary of the African Tax Administration Forum, was among government officials, members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and African Union who gathered virtually Wednesday to address the issue.FILE – A worker sorts online orders before they are delivered to customers from a Checkers store, amid a nationwide coronavirus lockdown, in Johannesburg, South Africa, July 14, 2020.Wort said that due to the coronavirus pandemic, businesses in the sectors of e-commerce, online transactions and other digital services have experienced a boom. The e-commerce sector alone is projected to increase its revenues by 41 percent, according to the African Tax Administration Forum.  “Question: Are we collecting better on these transactions? Are we aware of these transactions? Are the businesses doing these transactions, do they have a physical presence in our countries and, if not, do our regulations provide for them to be taxed?” Wort asked.Talks about how to roll out harmonized laws to allocate tax rights in cross-border transactions are currently under way among members of the OECD. This is because governments across the world are concerned there is a misalignment between the location where profits are reported and the location where economic activities occur.Victor Harison, the commissioner of economic affairs for the African Union, said the tax-to-GDP ratio in 26 African countries reporting to the AU is just 17.2 percent, compared to 32.2 percent in developed countries that belong to the OECD.He called on more African countries to participate in talks on a global level about how to tax multinational companies so the profits from their wealth can be shared more equitably. “So far, only 25 African countries are part of this initiative, which is a cause of concern for the African Union,” Harison said. “Corporate income tax is a substantial source of taxation in Africa, amounting to more than 25 percent of total revenues in most countries.”  FILE – A schoolgirl receives online lessons in the district of Port Bouet in Abidjan, Ivory Coast, April 21, 2020.David Masondo, deputy minister of finance of South Africa, said Africa needs a central body within the African Union to speak with one voice on tax policies. “These unified policies should include or focus on improving the allocation of tax rights in cross-border transactions, including the digital transactions of multinational enterprises,” Masondo said.The U.S. has pushed for its companies to be able to opt in and out of the global rules on taxing multinational companies, as long as they adhere to certain basic principles.Annet Oguttu, a member of the high-level panel on financial accountability and transparency, said while Europe was at loggerheads with the U.S. over the matter, African countries also have a role to play in the discussion. “The focus of the discussion seems to be about the U.S. protecting its multinationals and the European countries trying to get the best out of it,” she said. “The question then is, where do we stand as developing countries in Africa? Perhaps coming together under the platform of ATAF could bring together a more united front that could be able to address these issues.” Talks at a global level are due to reconvene in October, now that proposals about how to tax digital multinationals have been shared among governments. 
…

Health experts are expressing alarm over the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s revision of its coronavirus testing guidelines. The CDC announced Monday that people who have been in close contact with someone who has been infected by COVID-19 “do not necessarily need a test” if they are not exhibiting symptoms of the virus. The agency had previously recommended that anyone who has come into close contact — defined as being within 6 feet of an infected person for at least 15 minutes — should be tested for the virus.   No explanation has been given for the sudden change.  Experts are worried the new recommendation could lead to a drop off in testing,    Members with the Washington, D.C. Dept. of Health, prepare to place new signs at their F Street COVID-19 testing location, Aug. 14, 2020, in Washington.Dr. Leena Wen, an emergency physician and a professor of public health at George Washington University, said contract tracing is necessary, since up to 50% of all COVID-19 transmissions are due to people who do not exhibit symptoms of the disease.   The CDC continues to recommend that “vulnerable” people get tested if they come into close contact with someone carrying the virus.  A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services said Tuesday people should consult with their doctor or with public health officials to decide if they need to be tested.One day after U.S. President Donald Trump praised it as “a truly historic announcement,” the head of Food and Drug Administration apologized for apparently overstating the benefits of using convalescent blood plasma from patients who have recovered from COVID-19.   President Donald Trump speaks, accompanied by Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn, center, during a media briefing in the James Brady Briefing Room of the White House, Aug. 23, 2020, in Washington.President Trump on Sunday announced the federal government had issued an emergency authorization for the use of convalescent blood plasma, which is rich in antibodies, and using it to treat people currently suffering from the virus.  During the public announcement, Dr. Stephen Hahn, the FDA commissioner, reaffirmed claims made by Trump and Health and Human Services Alex Azar of a 35% decrease in mortality among those younger than 80 who were not on a respirator, a month after receiving the treatment early in the course of their disease. A “35% improvement in survival is a pretty substantial clinical benefit,” he added. “We’ve seen a great deal of demand for this from doctors around the country.” FILE – Phlebotomist Jenee Wilson talks with Melissa Cruz, an ER technician for Valley Medical Center who has recovered from COVID-19, as she finishes donating convalescent plasma in Seattle, April 17, 2020.But critics say the claim made by the administration was a gross exaggeration of preliminary findings of a study conducted by the prestigious Mayo Clinic, noting that the study lacked a comparison group of untreated COVID-19 patients.   Dr. Hahn conceded this fact in a tweet Monday apologizing for his remarks, saying “The criticism is entirely justified.”  He explained that he should have said that the data shows “a relative risk reduction not an absolute risk reduction.”   That announcement came a day after Trump, on Twitter, declared that “The deep state, or whoever, over at the FDA is making it very difficult for drug companies to get people in order to test the vaccines and therapeutics.” Plasma treatment has been used safely against other diseases, including Ebola and diphtheria, but scientists — including some who work for the U.S. government — are more cautious about it as a treatment for the coronavirus, saying the results are mixed and there is no proof yet that it works against COVID-19. The latest figures from Johns Hopkins University’s coronavirus tracking website says more than 5.7 million people in the United States have been infected with the coronavirus, and more than 178,500 have died — the most of any other country.   
…