- Email: [email protected]
Forget me not
COMMENT
Meeting of minds To further thaw relations on the Korean peninsula, try scientific diplomacy too, says Mark Zastrow THE issue of North Korea’s nuclear weapons has seemed intractable for years. But the current flurry of diplomacy on the peninsula has raised hopes that the weapons will be put aside. South Korean president Moon Jae-in has proven an adept diplomat. His summit with the North’s Kim Jong-un is historic in its own right, just the third between leaders of the nations. It may set the stage for the unprecedented meeting he has brokered between Kim and US president Donald Trump. There have also been symbolic cultural exchanges: North Korean cheerleaders boosting a unified women’s ice hockey team at the PyeongChang winter games and South Korean pop idols Red Velvet playing to a packed audience, including Kim, in the North. There is also potential for scientific exchange. Appreciation
of science is embedded in North Korea’s ideology. Kim extols his nuclear and rocket scientists as heroes and views science as key to economic development. There is precedent for genuine scientific diplomacy, even if most academic visits to the North are stage-managed. Pyongyang University of Science and Technology was founded so that foreigners could teach the children of the North’s elite. And outsiders have been let in to help study the supervolcano Mount Paektu on the border between China and North Korea. Exchanges that produce published papers are rare, but on the rise. Hundreds of papers are published each year by North Koreans, many with international co-authors, on topics ranging from cosmology to fish genetics. These are mostly a result of North Korean postgraduates allowed to
Forget me not There’s a case for a new online right – to be remembered, says Jamais Cascio THE right to be forgotten online gets a lot of attention – witness a recent ruling by a London court that Google must remove links to a businessman’s past conviction. Much less discussed is the power of big tech to unilaterally erase a person’s digital footprint. That power is in no doubt. After an attack at YouTube HQ in 24 | NewScientist | 28 April 2018
have all been cited as grounds for removal. And as online platforms consolidate, the potential arises for an offence on one to lead to exile from many. The biggest fear would be that what is portrayed as fair exclusion based on transgression of clear rules becomes anything but. Banishment could affect more than the ability to share selfies. A digital footprint is beginning to be seen as a core depiction of an individual. Businesses use it in
California by Nasim Aghdam – who shot three people then killed herself – her social media presence and website were gone within hours. Most people would see this as reasonable. “A digital footprint is But I can’t help worrying about the wider use of that power. beginning to be seen as a core depiction of Political opinions, religious an individual” extremism and even brief nudity
recruitment and the US government taps it for border checks. Will signs of a deleted account, and perhaps a lack of a social media presence at all, soon be seen as suspicious? Moreover, blogs, Facebook pages or Twitch videos are potent means of self-representation. It has long been a cornerstone of the argument for the power of the internet that it enables anyone (in most countries) to have a global platform for communication. Removal from one service might be considered akin to shunning. Being removed from most if not all social media services, however, should be seen as more dramatic:
For more opinion articles, visit newscientist.com/opinion
Mark Zastrow is a science journalist based in Seoul
being made a sort of “unperson”. As our digital shadows become fundamental to us, the outright elimination of someone’s online presence may even be considered the loss of their identity. In much of Europe, the right to be forgotten, to request online personal information be deleted, applies. If social media platforms increasingly have the power to unilaterally make individuals digitally disappear, we may want to start thinking about a right to be remembered as well. ■ Jamais Cascio is a distinguished fellow at the Institute for the Future in Palo Alto, California
ANALYSIS Health guidelines
STEFAN KIEFER/VISUM/EYEVINE
study abroad. On their return, some still collaborate via email and meetings in countries such as China. But often, contact ceases. While that is discouraging, the North Korean regime’s hunger for international scientific knowledge is clear: it wants to transfer knowhow from abroad to its students. There is also an interest in links with North Koreans. In 2016, Nobel laureates in science and economics – Aaron Ciechanover, Richard Roberts and Finn Erling Kydland – visited for an academic exchange sponsored by the International Peace Foundation. They found talented students stymied by curbs on internet access and travel. Such engagements shouldn’t paper over human rights abuses. But they can be potent: academic swaps were common ahead of German unification. The docking of US Apollo and Soviet Soyuz craft in orbit in 1975 – known as the handshake in space – was hailed for thawing cold war tensions. If Kim is serious about improving the security and well-being of his nation, he should let his academics work freely – and the rest of the world should embrace them. ■
Blood pressure change could harm, not help Alice Klein
new guidelines recommend lifestyle changes such as eating less salt, drinking less alcohol and exercising more for this relatively low-risk group, many will seek the reassurance of medication, which can have side effects like dizziness and nausea. Moreover, in countries like the US, being diagnosed with a medical condition like high blood pressure can affect insurance coverage and increase premiums. The analysis found that only 9 per cent of newly diagnosed people are likely to benefit. These are individuals with other conditions, such as diabetes
LAST year, millions of people were reclassified overnight as having high blood pressure. The new limits, set by the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology, were intended to alert people to any rising blood pressure at an earlier stage, helping them to get on top of the problem sooner. However, this ignores the potential harms of slapping people with disease labels, according to an analysis published by Australian public-health experts last week. They estimate that up to 80 per cent of those newly “Up to 80 per cent of diagnosed will end up worse off. people newly diagnosed These 80 per cent have less than with high blood pressure a 10 per cent chance of having a heart will end up worse off” attack or stroke in the next decade because they don’t have any other big risk factors besides elevated blood or kidney disease, who are already at pressure. Nevertheless, it will still be a higher risk of having a heart attack or blow to be moved to the new category, stroke. The remaining 11 per cent are with safe limits lowered from a blood expected to have neutral outcomes. pressure of 140/90 to 130/80 mmHg. The goalpost-shifting is part of a Studies have shown that the diagnosis larger trend towards what many see as “too much medicine”. A 2013 study can cause psychological distress. found that the definitions of nine The disease label could also lead to medical conditions had been unnecessary treatment. Although the
expanded since 2000 to make more people eligible for medications. Some people have suggested that this might be down to industry influence. And the 2013 study found that, on average, three-quarters of the people on panels proposing new guidelines had financial ties to drug companies. But the authors pointed out that there is no evidence that these ties have influenced decisionmaking. “Our data do not support any inference industry ties are associated with widening definitions or failure to rigorously assess potential harms of that widening,” they said. For the latest blood pressure guidelines, all authors declared they had no industry ties in the year prior to writing them. Even so, the guidelines have been criticised by other doctors. The American College of Physicians said the guidelines didn’t properly consider potential harms and the American Academy of Family Physicians said they were too heavily based on a single study. This found that intensive blood pressure lowering below 120 mmHg had better cardiovascular outcomes than the traditional 140 mmHg target, but there are concerns that the results may not generalise to the whole population. So while the professionals battle it out, it is probably worth being cautious and remembering that the new guidelines have mainly been designed to encourage healthier lifestyles, not to make you worry. ■ 28 April 2018 | NewScientist | 25
Meeting of minds To further thaw relations on the Korean peninsula, try scientific diplomacy too, says Mark Zastrow THE issue of North Korea’s nuclear weapons has seemed intractable for years. But the current flurry of diplomacy on the peninsula has raised hopes that the weapons will be put aside. South Korean president Moon Jae-in has proven an adept diplomat. His summit with the North’s Kim Jong-un is historic in its own right, just the third between leaders of the nations. It may set the stage for the unprecedented meeting he has brokered between Kim and US president Donald Trump. There have also been symbolic cultural exchanges: North Korean cheerleaders boosting a unified women’s ice hockey team at the PyeongChang winter games and South Korean pop idols Red Velvet playing to a packed audience, including Kim, in the North. There is also potential for scientific exchange. Appreciation
of science is embedded in North Korea’s ideology. Kim extols his nuclear and rocket scientists as heroes and views science as key to economic development. There is precedent for genuine scientific diplomacy, even if most academic visits to the North are stage-managed. Pyongyang University of Science and Technology was founded so that foreigners could teach the children of the North’s elite. And outsiders have been let in to help study the supervolcano Mount Paektu on the border between China and North Korea. Exchanges that produce published papers are rare, but on the rise. Hundreds of papers are published each year by North Koreans, many with international co-authors, on topics ranging from cosmology to fish genetics. These are mostly a result of North Korean postgraduates allowed to
Forget me not There’s a case for a new online right – to be remembered, says Jamais Cascio THE right to be forgotten online gets a lot of attention – witness a recent ruling by a London court that Google must remove links to a businessman’s past conviction. Much less discussed is the power of big tech to unilaterally erase a person’s digital footprint. That power is in no doubt. After an attack at YouTube HQ in 24 | NewScientist | 28 April 2018
have all been cited as grounds for removal. And as online platforms consolidate, the potential arises for an offence on one to lead to exile from many. The biggest fear would be that what is portrayed as fair exclusion based on transgression of clear rules becomes anything but. Banishment could affect more than the ability to share selfies. A digital footprint is beginning to be seen as a core depiction of an individual. Businesses use it in
California by Nasim Aghdam – who shot three people then killed herself – her social media presence and website were gone within hours. Most people would see this as reasonable. “A digital footprint is But I can’t help worrying about the wider use of that power. beginning to be seen as a core depiction of Political opinions, religious an individual” extremism and even brief nudity
recruitment and the US government taps it for border checks. Will signs of a deleted account, and perhaps a lack of a social media presence at all, soon be seen as suspicious? Moreover, blogs, Facebook pages or Twitch videos are potent means of self-representation. It has long been a cornerstone of the argument for the power of the internet that it enables anyone (in most countries) to have a global platform for communication. Removal from one service might be considered akin to shunning. Being removed from most if not all social media services, however, should be seen as more dramatic:
For more opinion articles, visit newscientist.com/opinion
Mark Zastrow is a science journalist based in Seoul
being made a sort of “unperson”. As our digital shadows become fundamental to us, the outright elimination of someone’s online presence may even be considered the loss of their identity. In much of Europe, the right to be forgotten, to request online personal information be deleted, applies. If social media platforms increasingly have the power to unilaterally make individuals digitally disappear, we may want to start thinking about a right to be remembered as well. ■ Jamais Cascio is a distinguished fellow at the Institute for the Future in Palo Alto, California
ANALYSIS Health guidelines
STEFAN KIEFER/VISUM/EYEVINE
study abroad. On their return, some still collaborate via email and meetings in countries such as China. But often, contact ceases. While that is discouraging, the North Korean regime’s hunger for international scientific knowledge is clear: it wants to transfer knowhow from abroad to its students. There is also an interest in links with North Koreans. In 2016, Nobel laureates in science and economics – Aaron Ciechanover, Richard Roberts and Finn Erling Kydland – visited for an academic exchange sponsored by the International Peace Foundation. They found talented students stymied by curbs on internet access and travel. Such engagements shouldn’t paper over human rights abuses. But they can be potent: academic swaps were common ahead of German unification. The docking of US Apollo and Soviet Soyuz craft in orbit in 1975 – known as the handshake in space – was hailed for thawing cold war tensions. If Kim is serious about improving the security and well-being of his nation, he should let his academics work freely – and the rest of the world should embrace them. ■
Blood pressure change could harm, not help Alice Klein
new guidelines recommend lifestyle changes such as eating less salt, drinking less alcohol and exercising more for this relatively low-risk group, many will seek the reassurance of medication, which can have side effects like dizziness and nausea. Moreover, in countries like the US, being diagnosed with a medical condition like high blood pressure can affect insurance coverage and increase premiums. The analysis found that only 9 per cent of newly diagnosed people are likely to benefit. These are individuals with other conditions, such as diabetes
LAST year, millions of people were reclassified overnight as having high blood pressure. The new limits, set by the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology, were intended to alert people to any rising blood pressure at an earlier stage, helping them to get on top of the problem sooner. However, this ignores the potential harms of slapping people with disease labels, according to an analysis published by Australian public-health experts last week. They estimate that up to 80 per cent of those newly “Up to 80 per cent of diagnosed will end up worse off. people newly diagnosed These 80 per cent have less than with high blood pressure a 10 per cent chance of having a heart will end up worse off” attack or stroke in the next decade because they don’t have any other big risk factors besides elevated blood or kidney disease, who are already at pressure. Nevertheless, it will still be a higher risk of having a heart attack or blow to be moved to the new category, stroke. The remaining 11 per cent are with safe limits lowered from a blood expected to have neutral outcomes. pressure of 140/90 to 130/80 mmHg. The goalpost-shifting is part of a Studies have shown that the diagnosis larger trend towards what many see as “too much medicine”. A 2013 study can cause psychological distress. found that the definitions of nine The disease label could also lead to medical conditions had been unnecessary treatment. Although the
expanded since 2000 to make more people eligible for medications. Some people have suggested that this might be down to industry influence. And the 2013 study found that, on average, three-quarters of the people on panels proposing new guidelines had financial ties to drug companies. But the authors pointed out that there is no evidence that these ties have influenced decisionmaking. “Our data do not support any inference industry ties are associated with widening definitions or failure to rigorously assess potential harms of that widening,” they said. For the latest blood pressure guidelines, all authors declared they had no industry ties in the year prior to writing them. Even so, the guidelines have been criticised by other doctors. The American College of Physicians said the guidelines didn’t properly consider potential harms and the American Academy of Family Physicians said they were too heavily based on a single study. This found that intensive blood pressure lowering below 120 mmHg had better cardiovascular outcomes than the traditional 140 mmHg target, but there are concerns that the results may not generalise to the whole population. So while the professionals battle it out, it is probably worth being cautious and remembering that the new guidelines have mainly been designed to encourage healthier lifestyles, not to make you worry. ■ 28 April 2018 | NewScientist | 25