Mediaboss Marketing

GENEVA (16 September 2022) Peoples right to privacy is coming under ever greater pressure from the use of modern networked digital technologies whose features make them formidable tools for surveillance, control and oppression, a new UN report has warned. This makes it all the more essential that these technologies are reined in by effective regulation based on international human rights law and standards.

The report the latest on privacy in the digital age by the UN Human Rights Office* looks at three key areas: the abuse of intrusive hacking tools (spyware) by State authorities; the key role of robust encryption methods in protecting human rights online; and the impacts of widespread digital monitoring of public spaces, both offline and online.

The report details how surveillance tools such as the Pegasus software can turn most smartphones into 24-hour surveillance devices, allowing the intruder access not only to everything on our mobiles but also weaponizing them to spy on our lives.

While purportedly being deployed for combating terrorism and crime, such spyware tools have often been used for illegitimate reasons, including to clamp down on critical or dissenting views and on those who express them, including journalists, opposition political figures and human rights defenders, the report states.

Urgent steps are needed to address the spread of spyware, the report flags, reiterating the call for a moratorium on the use and sale of hacking tools until adequate safeguards to protect human rights are in place. Authorities should only electronically intrude on a personal device as a last resort to prevent or investigate a specific act amounting to a serious threat to national security or a specific serious crime, it says.

Encryption is a key enabler of privacy and human rights in the digital space, yet it is being undermined. The report calls on States to avoid taking steps that could weaken encryption, including mandating so-called backdoors that give access to peoples encrypted data or employing systematic screening of peoples devices, known as client-side scanning.

The report also raises the alarm about the growing surveillance of public spaces. Previous practical limitations on the scope of surveillance have been swept away by large-scale automated collection and analysis of data, as well as new digitized identity systems and extensive biometric databases that greatly facilitate the breadth of such surveillance measures.

New technologies have also enabled the systematic monitoring of what people are saying online, including through collecting and analysing social media posts.

Governments often fail to adequately inform the public about their surveillance activities, and even where surveillance tools are initially rolled out for legitimate goals, they can easily be repurposed, often serving ends for which they were not originally intended.

The report emphasises that States should limit public surveillance measures to those strictly necessary and proportionate, focused on specific locations and time. The duration of data storage should similarly be limited. There is also an immediate need to restrict the use of biometric recognition systems in public spaces.

All States should also act immediately to put in place robust export control regimes for surveillance technologies that pose serious risks to human rights. They should also ensure human rights impact assessments are carried out that take into account what the technologies in question are capable of, as well as the situation in the recipient country.

Digital technologies bring enormous benefits to societies. But pervasive surveillance comes at a high cost, undermining rights and choking the development of vibrant, pluralistic democracies, said Acting High Commissioner for Human Rights Nada Al-Nashif.

In short, the right to privacy is more at risk than ever before, she stressed. This is why action is needed and needed now.

Read this article:
Spyware and surveillance: Threats to privacy and human rights growing, UN report warns - OHCHR

Addis Ababa, Durban, Brazzaville, and Stellenbosch, 15 September 2022. A major scientific report from Africa is featured in the journal Science today. This scientific report show how the rapid expansion of genomics surveillance in Africa allowed the continent to describe the introduction and spread of the SARS-CoV-2 variants in African countries in real-time during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The scientific publication includes over 300 authors from Africa and abroad who worked together to describe and analyze over 100,000 genomes and characterize SARS-CoV-2 variants in real-time. This was the largest consortium of African scientists and public health institutions working together to support data-driven COVID-19 response in Africa.

This publication shows how the large investment, collaboration and capacity building in genomic surveillance on the African continent enabled real-time public health response. Particularly it describes the setting up of the Africa Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) Africa Pathogen Genomics Initiative (Africa PGI) and the development of the continental network by the Africa CDC and the Regional Office for the World Health Organization in Africa (WHO) to expand access to sequencing and cover surveillance blind spots, in parallel with the growth of the number of countries that are able to sequence SARS-CoV-2 with in the country.

The publication highlights that sustained investment for diagnostics and genomic surveillance in Africa was needed to not only combat SARS-CoV-2 on the continent, but establish a platform to address the emerging, re-emerging, endemic infectious disease threats, such as Ebola, HIV/AIDS, TB and Malaria. These investments are crucial for pandemic preparedness and response and will serve the health of the continent well into the 21st century. said Dr. Yenew Kebede, Head Division of Laboratory Systems Acting Head for Surveillance and Disease Intelligence at the Africa CDC

This study was led by two labs that setup the network for genomics surveillance in South Africa, the Centre for Epidemic Response and Innovation (CERI) at Stellenbosch University and the KwaZulu Natal Research and Innovation Sequencing Platform (KRISP) at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, in close coordination with the Africa CDC, WHO AFRO and 300 other institutions across the continent.

The enormous leap Africa made in genomic surveillance during the past two years is the silver lining in the COVID-19 pandemic, said Dr Matshidiso Moeti, WHO Regional Director for Africa. The continent is now better prepared to face down both old and emerging pathogens. This is a model of how when Africans are in the driving seat we can come up with lasting change and stay a step ahead of dangerous diseases.

It has been an inspiring experience to share knowledge, support and learn from colleagues in all parts of the continent continuously during the pandemic. We witnessed small

countries with no previous genomics experience become empowered in sequencing and bioinformatics methods, and start to actively participate in regular pathogen genomic surveillance for SARS-CoV-2. I think it will be a real model of how scientists and public health officials across countries can have a unified front against infectious diseases in the future., says Houriiyah Tegally, Bioinformatician at KRISP and CERI and first-author on this publication.

The results also highlight the early warning capacity that genomic surveillance in Africa has had for the rest of the world with the detection of new lineages and variants, the most relevant being the detection of Beta and various Omicron subvariants. The publication highlights that most of the SARS-CoV-2 variants causing epidemic in Africa were introduced from abroad.

The scientists proceeded carefully in analysing genomic and epidemiological data collected in over 50 countries that experienced quite heterogenous epidemics in order to reconstruct transmission dynamics of the virus in the most accurate way. The phylogeographic methods that we employ to investigate the movement of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and its variants into, out of, and within the African continent account for uneven testing and sampling proportions across countries, arising from the realities of doing genomic sequencing in the middle of a pandemic, often in low resourced settings., explains Dr. Eduan Wilkinson, head of bioinformatics at CERI at Stellenbosch University and senior author on this publication.

The initial waves of infections in Africa were primarily seeded by multiple introductions of viral lineages from abroad (mainly Europe). The Alpha variant that emerged in Europe in the end of 2020 ended up causing infections in 43 countries with evidence of community transmission in Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, Gabon and Angola. For Delta, the bulk of introductions was attributed to India (~72%), mainland Europe (~8%), the UK (~5%), and the US (~2.5%). Viral introductions of Delta also occurred between African countries in 7% of inferred introduction. For Omicron the scientific results indicate more reintroductions of the variant back into Africa, at least 69 (95% CI: 60 78) from Europe and 102 (95% CI: 92 112) from North America than from other African countries. This was amplified for Omicron BA.2; the results suggest at least 99 separate introduction or reintroduction events of BA.2 into African countries, ~65% of which are from Europe and ~30% from Asia.

The ironical part of these results is that most of the introductions of variants in Africa were from abroad, but Africa was the most discriminated and penalized continent in the world with travel bans. Instead of unscientific and inappropriate reactions, we should be building on the infrastructure established in Africa so that the continent can rapidly pivot to other epidemics without the fear of being punished said Prof. Tulio de Oliveira, Director of the two institutes, CERI and KRISP, that lead the consortium analysis with the Africa CDC and WHO AFRO.

This study is a testament to Africa CDCs impact in rapidly expanding access to sequencing technologies by African Union Member States, and creating a platform for coordination and collaboration by all stakeholders. said Dr. Ahmed Ogwell, Acting Director of the Africa CDC

About Africa Pathogen Genomic Initiative (Africa PGI)

In 2020, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) launched a multi-sectoral partnership Africa Pathogen Genomics Initiative (Africa PGI) to integrate pathogen genomics and bioinformatics into public health surveillance, outbreak investigations, and improved disease control and prevention in Africa. Africa PGI is a collaboration between the Africa CDC Institute of Pathogen Genomics, ASLM, US CDC, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Microsoft, Illumina Inc, Oxford Nanopore Technologies, and others.

About the Centre for Epidemic Response and Innovation (CERI) at Stellenbosch University.

CERI primary goal is to challenge the status quo on epidemic response and innovation in Africa and allows Africa to control its own epidemics and pandemics. Our vision is to effectively respond to epidemics through pathogen genomic surveillance to enhance biomedical discovery, improve the treatment, diagnosis and prevention of human diseases in Africa. CERI is a centre of Stellenbosch University and its state-of-the-art laboratory are based at the new Biomedical Research Institute Building at the Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences campus.

About the KwaZulu-Natal Research Innovation and Sequencing Platform (KRISP) at University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN).

KRISP has been created by the coordinated effort of the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN), the Technology Innovation Agency (TIA) and the South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC). KRISP is based on a state-of-art building at Nelson R Mandela School of Medicine at UKZN, Durban. KRISP has one of the worlds most advanced genetic sequencing systems in order to enable and support world-class genomics research in Africa. Our objective is to use Next Generation sequencing and bioinformatics to answer scientific questions that are of local, national and international importance.

About World Health Organization (WHO) African Region (WHO AFRO)

World Health Organization contributes to a better future for people everywhere. Good health lays the foundation for vibrant and productive communities, stronger economies, safer nations and a better world. As the lead health authority within the United Nations system, our work touches peoples lives around the world every day. In Africa, WHO serves 47 Member States and works with development partners to improve the health and well-being of all people living here. The WHO Regional Office for Africa is located in Brazzaville, Congo. Learn more at http://www.afro.who.int and follow us on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube

For media enquiries to Africa CDC Africa PGI, please contact:

Dr. Sofonias K TessemaProgram Lead, Africa PGI+251962458542sofoniast@africa-union.org

For media enquiries to CERI and KRISP, please contact:

Paul HarrisCommunication Officer

CERI Centre for Epidemic Response and InnovationStellenbosch UniversityKRISP KZN Research Innovation and Sequencing PlatformNelson R Mandela School of Medicine, UKZN, Durban.+27 31 260 4898+27 82 806 6290paul@htagmedia.co.za

Read the original post:
A continent-wide collaboration on genomics surveillance show the power of African science and how the majority of COVID-19 variants were introduced...

WASHINGTON, D.C. Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) today announced that the House Committee on Oversight and Reform will mark up her District of Columbia Home Rule Expansion Act, which would be the biggest expansion of D.C. home rule since passage of the D.C. Home Rule Act in 1973, at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, September 20, 2022. The bill would give D.C. the exclusive authority to prosecute D.C. crimes, give D.C. the exclusive authority to grant clemency for D.C. crimes, and eliminate the congressional review period for D.C. legislation.

D.C. shouldand willbe a state, Norton said. However, until Congress grants D.C. statehood, which is closer than ever, there is no constitutional or policy reason Congress should not expand D.C.s authority to govern its local affairs. Thank you to Chairwoman Maloney for marking up this important bill.

The D.C. Home Rule Expansion Act would give D.C. the same authority states and territories have over certain local governmental functions. Under the Constitution, Congress has plenary authority over both D.C. and the territories. Congress has already used its plenary authority to give the territories the self-governing authorities this bill would give D.C.

First, the D.C. Home Rule Expansion Act would give D.C. the exclusive authority to prosecute D.C. crimes. Currently, the U.S. Attorney for D.C. has the authority to prosecute most D.C. crimes committed by adults and some by juveniles, while the D.C. Attorney General has the authority to prosecute most D.C. crimes committed by juveniles and some by adults.

Second, this bill would give D.C. the exclusive authority to grant clemency for D.C. crimes. Currently, the president exercises the authority to grant clemency for D.C. crimes.

Finally, this bill would eliminate the congressional review period for D.C. legislation. D.C. legislation takes effect after a congressional review period, unless a joint resolution of disapproval is enacted into law during the review period. The review process imposes significant costs on both D.C. and Congress, but only three D.C. disapproval resolutions have been enacted since passage of the Home Rule Act, and none since 1991.

This Congress, in addition to passing Nortons D.C. statehood bill, the House has twice passed Nortons bill that would give the D.C. mayor control over the D.C. National Guard. The House has also, at Nortons request, twice passed bills that would prohibit the use of federal funds to carry out the provision in the Home Rule Act that authorizes the president to federalize the D.C. police department.

###

Read the original post:
Norton Announces Markup of Her Bill Expanding D.C. Home Rule - House.gov

(eclipse_images/E+ via Getty Images)

Fewer than 30% of older adults who need more intensive treatment for high blood pressure actually get it, new research shows. And the problem may be worsening.

Nearly half of U.S. adults about 116 million people have high blood pressure, also known as hypertension. When not properly controlled, it can lead to serious health problems, including heart attack, stroke and kidney disease.

"We haven't been doing well, despite robust evidence demonstrating the strong benefits of good blood pressure control in older adults," said Dr. Nicholas Chiu, the study's lead author and a clinical fellow at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. "This is a major public health gap that needs to be tackled."

Common in older adults, high blood pressure is a leading cause of preventable death and an under-recognized contributor to premature disability, according to the most recent hypertension care guidelines from the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association.

Since 2017, high blood pressure has been defined by those organizations as a reading of 130 mmHg and higher for systolic blood pressure, the "top" number of a reading, or 80 and higher for the diastolic measurement, or "bottom" number. The old definition was 140/90 and higher.

For the new study, published Friday in the AHA journal Hypertension, researchers looked at a decade of national data from a sampling of adults 60 and older who visited their primary care provider and previously had been diagnosed with high blood pressure. The research team zeroed in on which patients underwent "appropriate antihypertensive intensification," defined as adding an anti-hypertensive drug to their care for high blood pressure.

Based on office blood pressure measurements, treatment intensification was warranted in as many as 7,404 primary care visits captured in the data from 2008 to 2018, representative of up to 293 million visits nationally.

In determining who had high blood pressure, the researchers used three varied blood pressure targets those published by ACC/AHA, the European Society of Cardiology, and the American College of Physicians/American Academy of Family Physicians (ACP/AAFP). The researchers also came up with their own all-inclusive measure that met all three guidelines.

Appropriate intensification of medicine over the study period never exceeded 27.5%. That was according to the most liberal measure, the all-inclusive yardstick, for patients who hadn't previously been taking drugs for high blood pressure. By that same measure, just 15.3% of patients already on hypertension drugs had appropriate intensification.

Under all three of the published sets of targets, the percentage of patients receiving appropriate treatment intensification declined over the study period. Most dramatically, under ACP/AAFP targets, appropriate treatment intensification decreased from nearly 25% of patients in 2008-2009 to about 15% in 2015-2018.

Chiu called for professional societies to use more uniform blood pressure targets. "That could provide a bit more clarity" on what the best treatment strategy might be, he said.

While the study didn't address the reasons behind the low numbers, senior author Dr. Kenneth Mukamal offered several theories, including doctors' concerns that blood pressure-lowering drugs might cause older adults to fall, and patients' reluctance to add more medications that might have more side effects.

He also said it can be difficult for primary care providers to treat high blood pressure aggressively in a typical 15-minute visit.

"We're trying to control not just blood pressure, but cholesterol and diet and weight, and the documentation burdens have grown bigger as well. Speaking from my own experience, it's harder than ever to be a primary care doctor," said Mukamal, associate professor of medicine at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

He said future studies are needed to learn which strategies will motivate medical professionals to better treat high blood pressure among older adults. One strategy, Mukamal said, might involve "tweaking the medical record systems to automatically alert doctors to add a medication when a person's blood pressure is above where we'd like it to be."

Dr. Robert Brook, who was not involved in the new research, called it "an important study (that) highlights the remarkably high rates of treatment inertia in real-world clinical practices."

"There's a need for innovative strategies," said Brook, a professor and director of cardiovascular disease prevention at Wayne State University in Detroit. "Growing evidence supports reducing or eliminating the mandatory role for physicians in the day-to-day management of uncomplicated hypertension. Algorithm-driven care delivered by pharmacists or nurses or trained community health workers has proven to improve blood pressure control in a variety of trials and vanguard programs."

Patients also need to be more proactive, and know their blood pressure levels at home and in the clinic, Brook said. "They should work with their provider and encourage them to make the necessary treatment changes to achieve blood pressure control."

If you have questions or comments about this American Heart Association News story, please email [emailprotected].

Original post:
Many older adults may not get the intensive blood pressure treatment they need - American Heart Association News

Whether we liked it or not, among the kids schoolbooks and the empty takeaway boxes, working from home was the norm for many people during the pandemic. And remote and hybrid working are still in vogue. According to the Office for National Statistics, the proportion of hybrid workers in the UK rose from 13% in early February this year to 24% in May. As many as 14% of British workers were fullyremote.

Of course, these figures include not only employees but also chief executives, traditionally seen as office stalwarts given their position and status. But can the boss really work as effectively in their converted barn or their gardenoffice?

Mark Chaffey of technology talent hub hackajob is one of these hybrid CEOs. If a CEO works remotely, they have a little bit more headspace to shut out the noise and do any deep work which is really important, he says. Remote working forces a culture of output and accountability rather than a culture of presenteeism and micro-management. Ive found it largelypositive.

David Tuck, group chief executive of Kin + Carta Europe, is another hybrid boss who believes this set-up works. Most organisations have a few offices across the country or globe, so CEOs have almost always been hybrid. And working from home enables some focused work, such as strategic initiatives or prepping for board meetings, hesays.

The fundamental question is, what do people want from their CEOs? Their time? Rarely. Its usually their energy. Their energy is what feeds and drives people. Thats best done in person, but it can be done remotelytoo.

But not all CEOs feel the same. Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings has said that he does not see any positives in remote working, and David Solomon, chief executive of Goldman Sachs, famously denounced the practice, declaring it an aberration that were going to correct as soon aspossible.

Their energy is what feeds and drives people. Thats best done in person, but it can be done remotelytoo

Research from global recruiter Robert Walters earlier this year found that 60% of professionals feel disengaged under remote working due to a lack of face time with leaders within their organisation. They claimed that their output and morale were lower as a result of seeing their CEO just once aweek.

The research concluded that remote work was killing company culture, even at the top. There are functional and operational elements of the CEO role that can be done remotely, and there are benefits from having more personal thinking time, says Toby Fowlston, CEO of Robert Walters. But when it comes to the softer aspects of leadership, it requires a high degree of face-to-face interaction. You really need to sit down with them over lunch and have honest and authentic conversations. Younger workers also need to watch and learn from their grey-haired bosses first-hand. Without all of this, you end up with echo-chamber management.

When it comes to the softer aspects of leadership, it requires a high degree of face-to-face interaction

Dan Goman, CEO of digital media supply chain and distribution platform Ateliere, agrees that less visibility, over time, does equal lower morale. This is despite Goman hailing the success of Atelieres move to a hybrid schedule consisting of two days in the office per week. Weve seen higher employee satisfaction, and weve seen higher productivity overall. Retention and engagement rates have been off the charts. And personally, I am connecting differently with staff, via recorded video messages or internal company newsletters. But I do all this from the office. Sometimes I am the only one here, but it is important for me as a leader to be visible. People want to see me here and be ready to give them quick answers, support andfeedback.

Chaffey doesnt see this as an impediment to his leadership role. I work one day a week in the office and the rest from home. I dont see hybrid working as an issue, because we have an all-hands meeting every Wednesday, so the company knows that they will have that interaction with me every week. They can submit anonymous questions in real time, every week, and I make it clear that people can always come to me directly if they ever have any questions or queries, hesays.

Because I outline all this so heavily, people have got more access to me now than they ever have done previously. Employees really value the trust I give them. They feel empowered and supported and I think this is better than me being in the office five days aweek.

Another remote CEO, Simon Waterfall of premium craft soda-maker Soda Folk, says he misses the camaraderie of the office and being able to offer quick support to colleagues struggling professionally or personally. You cant take them for a coffee if theyre 200 miles away. But personally, I enjoy the fewer and more focused meetings and not being dragged into office politics, he says. We try and meet up regularly, particularly when we need creative brainstorming sessions. So, perhaps if youre a creative business, hybrid working may not be the best long-term answer. But really, working as a hybrid CEO is a mindset and its certainly something you could also do in a FTSE 100business.

Anita Williams Woolley, professor of organizational behaviour and theory at Carnegie Mellon Universitys Tepper School of Business, agrees. You can still be a role model if employees have access to you, she says. You dont need to be in a specific physical location. If companies are committed to hybrid working, then it can be more effective if CEOs are also working in the same fashion. It will ensure that all systems and processes work well. It could be an issue for some employees if they see their boss working remotely and they have been denied the option to do so themselves.

It seems that, provided you give your people the choice of hybrid working, it can be a successful model.

The rest is here:
The rise of the hybrid CEO - Raconteur