Photo, left: 
 
JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW
 
Hour One
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 1, Block A: James Aloysius McTague, Barron’s Washington, in re: Half of the Federal Reserve’s dual mandate is to help bring the economy to full employment. With Friday’s jobs report, it may be getting very close to achieving that goal.
But that alone may not be enough for the central bank to start lacing up its hiking boots.
The July employment report was strong all around. The economy added 255,000 jobs—better than the 179,000 economists were looking for—with upward revisions to previous months. The unemployment rate held steady, but only because more people entered the labor force. Average hourly earnings picked up by 0.3% from May, putting them 2.6% above their year-earlier level.  http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-jobs-wont-jolt-the-fed-1470414157
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 1, Block B:  Liz Peek, Fiscal Times and Fox News, in re: Donald Trump needs to “do a deal” with Gary Johnson, the former Republican governor of New Mexico and current Libertarian candidate. Support for Johnson, past CEO of a marijuana marketer, is surging. He won’t win the presidency as a third-party candidate, but if he continues to attract voters unhappy with Trump and Clinton, he could almost certainly decide the race. The Libertarian does not align perfectly with the GOP candidate, but he has more in common with Trump than with Clinton.  A Trump-Johnson partnership – either private or public -- would almost certainly win. At the least, they could double-team Hillary Clinton during the debates
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 1, Block C:  Ann Marlowe, Hudson Institute and Weekly Standard, in re: Not long ago, being president demanded a measure of decorum. But that was when Americans expected more from their politicians (and from their celebrities). Yes, Ronald Reagan and Nancy Reagan were actors. But they conducted themselves, on screen and off, in ways that made their transition to the Oval Office relatively seamless. Can you imagine a young Nancy Reagan posing nude? Or a youthful Betty Ford, then a model and ballet dancer? Or, for that matter, former first lady Hillary Clinton?
At the same age that Melania was primping for those photographs, Hil­lary Rodham was finishing Yale Law School. Michelle Robinson Obama had just graduated from Harvard Law. Laura Welch Bush was teaching elementary school in Houston and preparing to get a master's degree in library science at the University of Texas. Many attractive women have more on their minds than their bodies.
Are we holding women to a higher standard than men? No. Anthony Weiner, a gifted politician, was savaged for sending inappropriate images to female admirers. And he never sold them or intended them to become public.  http://www.weeklystandard.com/of-modesty-and-melania/article/2003692  ;  https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/08/05/former-modeling-agent-says-got-melania-trump-visa/Ouej0xpuLyt6mnjHpGqW7H/story.html
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 1, Block D:  Henry I Miller, M.D., Hoover, in re:   Zika. http://www.wsj.com/articles/theres-no-panacea-for-the-zika-epidemic-1470179431
 
Hour Two
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 2, Block A:  Michael E Vlahos, Johns Hopkins, in re:  The United States has refused to adopt a no-first-use policy, saying that it "reserves the right to use" nuclear weapons first in the case of conflict. The U.S. doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons was revised most recently in the Nuclear Posture Review, released April 6, 2010.[29] The 2010 Nuclear Posture review reduces the role of U.S. nuclear weapons, stating that
"The fundamental role of U.S. nuclear weapons, which will continue as long as nuclear weapons exist, is to deter nuclear attack on the United States, our allies, and partners."
The U.S. doctrine also includes the following assurance to other states:
"The United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations."
For states eligible for this assurance, the United States would not use nuclear weapons in response to a chemical or biological attack, but states that those responsible for such an attack would be held accountable and would face the prospect of a devastating conventional military response. Even for states not eligible for this assurance, the United States would consider the use of nuclear weapons only in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its allies and partners. The Nuclear Posture Review also notes:
"It is in the U.S. interest and that of all other nations that the nearly 65-year record of nuclear non-use be extended forever."
This supersedes the doctrine of the Bush Administration set forth in "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations" and written under the direction of Air Force General Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The new doctrine envisions commanders requesting presidential approval to use nuclear weapons to preempt an attack by a nation or a terrorist group using weapons of mass destruction.[30] The draft also includes the option of using nuclear weapons to destroy known enemy stockpiles of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons.
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 2, Block B:  Michael E Vlahos, Johns Hopkins, in re:  “Three times he asked at one point if we had them why can’t we use them,” Scarborough said, as the panel seated around him fell silent.
And it’s only Wednesday, y’all.
Listen. We know most of you out there are well aware of the dangers and lasting effects of nuclear weapons. And, of course, it’s possible this is all a misunderstanding (the Trump campaign didn’t respond to WIRED’s request for comment). But this report, combined with other comments Trump has made about nuclear war in the past, form a rough—and terrifying—outline of what a potential Trump nuclear doctrine would be.
Like so many of Trump’s statements on thorny national security issues, his public pronouncements on nuclear weapons have often been contradictory. He has, in the same breath, said he is against nuclear proliferation, and that “it’s going to happen, anyway.”  http://www.wired.com/2016/08/dear-donald-trump-nuclear-weapons-bad/
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 2, Block C:   Hotel Mars, episode n.  James,Logan, former NASA Chief of Flight Medicine, & David Livingston, The Space Show, @SpaceShow.; in re: Lunar Astronauts & Heart Disease Mortality.   As multiple spacefaring nations contemplate extended manned missions to Mars and the Moon, health risks could be elevated as travel goes beyond the Earth’s protective magnetosphere into the more intense deep space radiation environment. The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether mortality rates due to cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, accidents and all other causes of death differ in (1) astronauts who never flew orbital missions in space, (2) astronauts who flew only in low Earth orbit (LEO), and (3) Apollo lunar astronauts, the only humans to have traveled beyond Earth’s magnetosphere. Results show there were no differences in CVD mortality rate between non-flight (9%) and LEO (11%) astronauts. However, the CVD mortality rate among Apollo lunar astronauts (43%) was 4–5 times higher than in non-flight and LEO astronauts. To test a possible mechanistic basis for these findings, a secondary purpose was to determine the long-term effects of simulated weightlessness and space-relevant total-body irradiation on vascular responsiveness in mice. The results demonstrate that space-relevant irradiation induces a sustained vascular endothelial cell dysfunction. Such impairment is known to lead to occlusive artery disease, and may be an important risk factor for CVD among astronauts exposed to deep space radiation.  http://www.nature.com/articles/srep29901  (Photo: John W. Young on the Moon during Apollo 16 mission. Charles M. Duke)  (1 of 2)
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 2, Block D:  Hotel Mars, episode n. James,Logan, former NASA Chief of Flight Medicine, & David Livingston, The Space Show, @SpaceShow.; in re: Lunar Astronauts & Heart Disease Mortality.   As multiple spacefaring nations contemplate extended manned missions to Mars and the Moon, health risks could be elevated as travel goes beyond the Earth’s protective magnetosphere into the more intense deep space radiation environment. The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether mortality rates due to cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, accidents and all other causes of death differ in (1) astronauts who never flew orbital missions in space, (2) astronauts who flew only in low Earth orbit (LEO), and (3) Apollo lunar astronauts, the only humans to have traveled beyond Earth’s magnetosphere. Results show there were no differences in CVD mortality rate between non-flight (9%) and LEO (11%) astronauts. However, the CVD mortality rate among Apollo lunar astronauts (43%) was 4–5 times higher than in non-flight and LEO astronauts. To test a possible mechanistic basis for these findings, a secondary purpose was to determine the long-term effects of simulated weightlessness and space-relevant total-body irradiation on vascular responsiveness in mice. The results demonstrate that space-relevant irradiation induces a sustained vascular endothelial cell dysfunction. Such impairment is known to lead to occlusive artery disease, and may be an important risk factor for CVD among astronauts exposed to deep space radiation.  http://www.nature.com/articles/srep29901  (Photo: John W. Young on the Moon during Apollo 16 mission. Charles M. Duke)  (2 of 2)
Hour Three
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 3, Block A:  Karl Rove,  The Triumph of William McKinley: Why the Election of 1896 Still Matters.  A fresh look at President William McKinley from New York Times bestselling author and political mastermind Karl Rove—“a rousing tale told by a master storyteller whose love of politics, campaigning, and combat shines through on every page” (--Doris Kearns Goodwin, Pulitzer Prize–winning author of Team of Rival)s.
The 1896 political environment resembles that of today: an electorate being transformed by a growing immigrant population, an uncertain economy disrupted by new technologies, growing income inequality, and basic political questions the two parties could not resolve. McKinley’s winning presidential campaign addressed these challenges and reformed his party. With “a sure touch [and] professional eye” (--The Washington Post), Rove tells the story of the 1896 election and shows why McKinley won, creating a governing majority that dominated American politics for the next thirty-six years.
McKinley, a Civil War hero, changed the arc of American history by running the first truly modern presidential campaign. Knowing his party needed to expand its base to win, he reached out to diverse ethnic groups, seeking the endorsement of Catholic leaders and advocating for black voting rights. Running on the slogan “The People Against the Bosses,” McKinley also took on the machine men who dominated his own party. He deployed campaign tactics still used today, including targeting voters with the best available technology. Above all, he offered bold, controversial answers to the nation’s most pressing problem—how to make a new, more global economy work for every American—and although this split his own party, he won the White House by sticking to his principles, defeating a champion of economic populism, William Jennings Bryan
Rove “brings to life the. drama of an electoral contest whose outcome seemed uncertain to the candidate and his handlers until the end” (The New York Times Book Review) in a “lively and…rigorous book” (The Wall Street Journal) that will delight students of American political history.  https://www.amazon.com/Triumph-William-McKinley-Election-Matters/dp/1476752966/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1470439624&sr=1-1&keywords=mckinley+rove  (1 of 4)
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 3, Block B:  Karl Rove,  The Triumph of William McKinley: Why the Election of 1896 Still Matters (2 of 4)
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 3, Block C:  Karl Rove,  The Triumph of William McKinley: Why the Election of 1896 Still Matters (3 of 4)
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 3, Block D:  Karl Rove,  The Triumph of William McKinley: Why the Election of 1896 Still Matters (4 of 4)
 
Hour Four
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 4, Block A:  J D Polk, NASA Office of Chief Medical Examiner, in re: VIIP – vision changes among astronauts after they return from ISS after a month or two of orbit. “Stretch marks”: the fluid usu in lower extremities moves upward into head and thorax under light gravity. Leaks through veins and cavities, causes edema and presses against the back of the eye. Diopter change.  Cosmonauts have some of these problems; discovering every  more with vastly more sophisticated  medical analytical equipment today. Idiopathic . . . hypertension . .  .   https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/the-mysterious-syndrome-impairing-astronauts-eyesight/2016/07/09/f20fb9a6-41f1-11e6-88d0-6adee48be8bc_story.html
1.     What is the nature of the vision problem?   Rigorous testing followed. Phillips got MRIs, retinal scans, neurological tests and a spinal tap. The tests showed that not only had his vision changed, but his eyes had changed as well.
The backs of his eyes had gotten flatter, pushing his retinas forward. He had choroidal folds, which are like stretch marks. His optic nerves were inflamed. Phillips’s case became the first widely recognized one of a mysterious syndrome that affects 80 percent of astronauts on long- ­duration missions in space. The syndrome could interfere with plans for future crewed space missions, including any trips to Mars.
2.  IS VIIP widespread in the Astronaut corps, in the Cosmonaut Corps? Has it been noticed with high-performance aircraft pilots who experience disruptive g-forces?  Visual impairment intracranial pressure syndrome (VIIP) is named for the leading theory to explain it. On Earth, gravity pulls bodily fluids down toward the feet. That doesn’t happen in space, and it is thought that extra fluid in the skull increases pressure on the brain and the back of the eye.  VIIP has now been recognized as a widespread problem, and there has been a struggle to understand its cause — and even to study it.
3.  What is like VIIP in on Planet Earth? Does IIH it have a correction? Here on Earth, the most similar condition is idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). Patients with this condition have increased pressure in their heads and experience visual changes. Another condition, papilledema, involves optic nerve swelling
But they are not perfect models for the astronauts’ disorder. IIH comes with a deluge of other symptoms, including nausea, dizziness and severe headaches, that astronauts with VIIP do not experience. And the medication for papilledema, optic-nerve swelling, does not work on VIIP.
4.  How can it be studied on Earth?    Karina Marshall-Goebel at the Institute of Aerospace Medicine in Germany is trying to study VIIP using a head-down tilt test, in which participants’ bodies are tilted slightly to simulate the fluid shift in space. But the test is still affected by gravity, and researchers cannot keep people tilted for as long as astronauts live in space. “It’s a unique environment; you can’t replicate it without going into space,” she said.
Other researchers are searching for less-invasive ways to assess brain health on Earth and, potentially, in space. Devices being developed use sound waves and radio waves to attempt to measure the brain at its different access points: the skull, ears and eyes. One estimates brain pressure by pushing on an anesthetized eye until a vein flattens, sort of like stepping on a gardening hose.
“So far, none of the noninvasive technologies is accurate enough to replace the invasive measurement, but I think within the next few years there is a good chance there will be,” said Eric Bershad, an intensive-care neurologist at the Baylor College of Medicine, who is working on a way to measure brain pressure using an ultrasound test on an eye artery.
5.  What are the risks of testing intracranial pressure in space? Will animal studies serve the same purpose (mice, hominids?)  Michael Barratt, an astronaut and the former head of NASA’s human research program, was on a six-month mission on the space station in 2009 when he noticed his vision deteriorating. He and a crewmate, Bob Thirsk, were both medically trained.
“We’re thinking to ourselves, ‘Are we not physicians?’ ” Barratt said. “So we did ophthalmoscopic exams on one another.” They both found hints of a swollen optic nerve. After NASA sent up more imaging equipment, they discovered the classic VIIP syndrome — the flattening of the eye shape and optic-disc edema — in each other.
Barratt thinks that solving the puzzle of VIIP is going to require testing intracranial pressure in space, even if that means an invasive procedure. One option is an intracranial probe that would be surgically implanted months before flight and allow pressure to be measured at different points during spaceflight.
“This is one of those times I think aggressive science is extremely warranted,” Barratt said.
6.  Must VIIP be solved before Mars?  Before Moon colonies?   VIIP could be the first sign of greater dangers to the human body from microgravity. “We’re seeing the visual and neural, ophthalmic manifestations of it,” Barratt said. “I’m fairly certain this is a bit more global than that.”
Richard Williams, the chief health and medical officer at NASA, agrees that what we do not know about VIIP still poses the biggest threat. Ironically, one of the only ways to get more knowledge is spend more time in microgravity. “The longer we stay in space, the more we’re going to learn,” Williams said.
7.  Is VIIP acceptable risk.  Wearing glasses is the downside?  Or worse?   It took about six months back on Earth, but Phillips’s vision did improve a little. It went from 20/100 to 20/50, and it has remained there for the past 11 years. He cannot pass a DMV eye exam without glasses.
But he and other astronauts say that they would not trade their time in space to get back the lost acuity. Astronaut Michael Lopez-Alegria holds the U.S. record for the most time spent doing spacewalks. He called being in microgravity “magical.” He wears contacts with a +2.5 correction.
Phillips now considers himself just another 65-year-old with glasses. But before his trip in 2005, he was always used to being the guy with the best vision, the first one in the car to read a street sign. “So that era was over,” he said.  (1 of 2)
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 4, Block B:  J D Polk, NASA Office of Chief Medical Examiner, in re: VIIP  (2 of 3)
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 4, Block C: Michael J. Listner,  www.spacelawsolutions.com, in re:  Space Law & Policy Solutions (1 of 2)
Friday  5 August  2016 / Hour 4, Block D: Michael J. Listner,  www.spacelawsolutions.com, in re:  Space Law & Policy Solutions (2 of 2)
..  ..  ..