text:
Diablo Magazine /
December 2007 /
Skater Brian Boitano teams with singer Barry Manilow
Peter Crooks
Hey, fans of men in sequined costumes! You're in for a rare treat this month when Olympic gold medalist Brian Boitano skates to the live accompaniment of '70s music legend Barry Manilow at AT&T Park in San Francisco. Diablo caught up with Boitano to chat about his reverence for Manilow and his East Bay–Olympic connection.
How did this gig with you and Barry Manilow come together?
I've known Barry for a few years, and he has this fantastic new album of songs from the 1970s, so we called him up, and he said he'd love to do it. I'm thrilled because I've been a big fan of Barry Manilow since I was a kid. I went to see him twice in concert when I was in high school. So, to be performing with him singing the songs that I listened to in the '70s should be unreal.
Did you have fun playing yourself in Blades of Glory earlier this year?
So much fun. Will Ferrell is the nicest, down-to-earth guy. The first thing he said to me was, "I'm so sorry we're making fun of figure skating. It's so hard!" I said, "I thought everyone knew it was hard. Didn't we all go to an ice-skating birthday party in the second grade, where we spent the whole time falling down?"
You grew up in the South Bay, and your event is in San Francisco, but you're no stranger to the East Bay.
I trained for the 1988 Olympics at the ice rink in Dublin. It's the best rink to train in. Also, I'm good friends with Kristi Yamaguchi and have dinner at her house [in Alamo] quite a bit—I wish more often. She and her husband [Carolina Hurricanes hockey player Bret Hedican] don't spend all their time here because he's still playing. I would spend a lot more time in Alamo if they were home more.
The Brian Boitano Skating Spectacular with Barry Manilow comes to AT&T Park in San Francisco on December 5, $55–$153, (800) 225-2277 and www.tickets.com.
The performance will be broadcast on NBC on December 22.
Concord: Stronger Together Gala
For the past 18 years, Concord's Monument Impact has been a force in the city, serving its vulnerable immigrant and refugee communities. Recently, the nonprofit center hosted its Stronger Together gala to celebrate the work that volunteers, local businesses, unions, and others have done to support immigrants in the East Bay. Among those honored for their contributions were volunteer English tutor (and onetime San Francisco Giant) Rob Andrews, former board member Margaret Hanlon-Gradie, and John Muir Health.
The Oakland Museum of California's gardens overflowed with more than 250 guests during this yearly fundraising gala. Guest chefs Reem Assil and Barbara Llewellyn provided the scrumptious bites, while the auction offered bidders experiential packages. In keeping with the current Queer California: Untold Stories exhibit, the evening's entertainment featured Oaklash, a drag and queer performance group.
Black and White Ball
In celebration of its six years of providing free transportation to cancer patients in Alameda County, Drivers for Survivors hosted its yearly ball in Pleasanton. The entertainment was top-notch, including Marcie Dodd (previously seen in Wicked on Broadway) and accomplished pianist Carol Weiss; the keynote address was given by Dr. Laura Esserman.
Sparkles and Spurs
Denizens of the East Bay headed to Round Hill Country Club in Alamo and kicked up their heels to support Hospice East Bay at the annual Celebration of Care Gala, raising around $200,000 to aid the nonprofit's programs and services. This year's theme, Sparkles and Spurs, meant that the more than 300 guests came dressed in their cowboy-best, sporting boots, Stetsons, and chunky belt buckles.
Ragin' Cajun
The Sandra J. Wing Healing Therapies Foundation, which offers alternative treatments to patients with cancer, welcomed over 320 sponsors and supporters to its annual Ragin' Cajun event. The Tri-Valley bash featured an African–inspired feast and music.
To celebrate its spring campaign The Art of Travel, Neiman Marcus hosted a fashion show at its Walnut Creek location. Entrepreneur Sheryl Grant and social media influencer Sydel Curry-Lee (whose famous family members in attendance included her brother Stephen Curry) spoke at the event, which featured sips, bites, and the opportunity to shop the latest trends with help from jet-setting fashion experts as well.
Imagine Gala
Opportunity Junction furthered its mission of transforming the lives of low-income families in East Contra Costa with its 2019 fete, which featured gourmet food, drinks, both live and silent bidding, dancing, and inspirational entertainment.
Power of Kindness
Old Hollywood glam met giving back at this special event from Party In-Kindness. With the mission of raising funds for the Katie Nues Foundation for Katie's Clinic at UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital Oakland—which aids patients and their families affected by Rett Syndrome—guests heard from heartwarming speakers and danced to tunes from DJ Lance Callanta.
Fire and Light Soiree
The Crucible's signature fundraiser returned for its 20th year, and the industrial arts center celebrated the occasion with the unveiling of a major piece of collaborative art that incorporated many locally sourced elements, including steel from an old span of the Bay Bridge. There were also cocktails, a catered dinner, and a live art auction.
Night in Havana
San Leandro's Davis Street Family Resource Center raised more than $150,000 at this flamboyant, Cuban-themed evening of dinner and dancing; CEO Rose Padilla Johnson proudly announced that it was the organization's highest-grossing event to date. The funds will help low-income families in the area improve their quality of life through both short- and long-term assistance.
Rock the CASA
ABC7 San Francisco news anchor Dan Ashley returned to the Lesher Center for the Arts in Walnut Creek with his yearly fundraiser for Court Appointed Special Advocates, Friends of Camp Concord, and Big Brothers Big Sisters. Always a star-studded event (Cheap Trick and Melissa Etheridge have performed in the past), the 2019 extravaganza featured "Lady Marmalade" singer Patti LaBelle.
Diablo Magazine

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Great power
Title: Great power
Subject: Superpower, Power (international relations), Middle power, Emerging power, League of Nations
Collection: International Relations, States by Power Status
Great powers are recognized in an international structure such as the United Nations Security Council.[1][2][3] Shown here is the Security Council Chamber.
A great power is a sovereign state that is recognized as having the ability and expertise to exert its influence on a global scale. Great powers characteristically possess military and economic strength, as well as diplomatic and soft power influence, which may cause middle power or small powers to consider the great powers' opinions before taking actions of their own. International relations theorists have posited that great power status can be characterized into power capabilities, spatial aspects, and status dimensions. Sometimes the status of great powers is formally recognized in conferences such as the Congress of Vienna[1][4][5] or an international structure such as the United Nations Security Council (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States serve as the body's five permanent members).[1][2][6] At the same time the status of great powers can be informally recognized in a forum such as the G7 which consists of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America.[7][8][9][10]
The term "great power" was first used to represent the most important powers in Europe during the post-Napoleonic era. The "Great Powers" constituted the "Concert of Europe" and claimed the right to joint enforcement of the postwar treaties.[11] The formalization of the division between small powers[12] and great powers came about with the signing of the Treaty of Chaumont in 1814. Since then, the international balance of power has shifted numerous times, most dramatically during World War I and World War II. While some nations are widely considered to be great powers, there is no definitive list of them. In literature, alternative terms for great power are often world power[13] or major power,[14] but these terms can also be interchangeable with superpower.[15]
Power dimensions 1.1
Spatial dimension 1.2
Status dimension 1.3
Great powers at war 2.1
Great powers at peace 2.2
Aftermath of the Cold War 2.3
Emerging powers 2.4
Hierarchy of great powers 3
List of great powers by date 4
Further reading 8
There are no set or defined characteristics of a great power. These characteristics have often been treated as empirical, self-evident to the assessor.[16] However, this approach has the disadvantage of subjectivity. As a result, there have been attempts to derive some common criteria and to treat these as essential elements of great power status.
Early writings on the subject tended to judge states by the realist criterion, as expressed by the historian A. J. P. Taylor when he noted that "The test of a great power is the test of strength for war."[17] Later writers have expanded this test, attempting to define power in terms of overall military, economic, and political capacity.[18] Kenneth Waltz, the founder of the neorealist theory of international relations, uses a set of five criteria to determine great power: population and territory; resource endowment; economic capability; political stability and competence; and military strength. These expanded criteria can be divided into three heads: power capabilities, spatial aspects, and status.[5]
Power dimensions
Leopold von Ranke was one of the first to attempt to scientifically document the great powers.
As noted above, for many, power capabilities were the sole criterion. However, even under the more expansive tests, power retains a vital place.
This aspect has received mixed treatment, with some confusion as to the degree of power required. Writers have approached the concept of great power with differing conceptualizations of the world situation, from multi-polarity to overwhelming hegemony. In his essay, 'French Diplomacy in the Postwar Period', the French historian Jean-Baptiste Duroselle spoke of the concept of multi-polarity: "A Great power is one which is capable of preserving its own independence against any other single power."[19]
This differed from earlier writers, notably from Leopold von Ranke, who clearly had a different idea of the world situation. In his essay 'The Great Powers', written in 1833, von Ranke wrote: "If one could establish as a definition of a Great power that it must be able to maintain itself against all others, even when they are united, then Frederick has raised Prussia to that position."[20] These positions have been the subject of criticism.[5]
Spatial dimension
All states have a geographic scope of interests, actions, or projected power. This is a crucial factor in distinguishing a great power from a regional power; by definition the scope of a regional power is restricted to its region. It has been suggested that a great power should be possessed of actual influence throughout the scope of the prevailing international system. Arnold J. Toynbee, for example, observes that "Great power may be defined as a political force exerting an effect co-extensive with the widest range of the society in which it operates. The Great powers of 1914 were 'world-powers' because Western society had recently become 'world-wide'."[21]
Other suggestions have been made that a great power should have the capacity to engage in extra-regional affairs and that a great power ought to be possessed of extra-regional interests, two propositions which are often closely connected.[22]
Status dimension
Formal or informal acknowledgment of a nation's great-power status has also been a criterion for being a great power. As political scientist [23]
This approach restricts analysis to the post-Congress of Vienna epoch; it being there that great powers were first formally recognized.[5] In the absence of such a formal act of recognition it has been suggested that great power status can arise by implication, by judging the nature of a state's relations with other great powers.[24]
A further option is to examine a state's willingness to act as a great power.[24] As a nation will seldom declare that it is acting as such, this usually entails a retrospective examination of state conduct. As a result, this is of limited use in establishing the nature of contemporary powers, at least not without the exercise of subjective observation.
Other important criteria throughout history are that great powers should have enough influence to be included in discussions of political and diplomatic questions of the day, and have influence on the final outcome and resolution. Historically, when major political questions were addressed, several great powers met to discuss them. Before the era of groups like the United Nations, participants of such meetings were not officially named, but were decided based on their great power status. These were conferences which settled important questions based on major historical events. This might mean deciding the political resolution of various geographical and nationalist claims following a major conflict, or other contexts.
There are several historical conferences and treaties which display this pattern, such as the Congress of Vienna, the Congress of Berlin, the discussions of the Treaty of Versailles which redrew the map of Europe, and the Treaty of Westphalia.
The Congress of Vienna by Jean-Baptiste Isabey, 1819.
Different sets of great, or significant, powers have existed throughout history; however, the term "great power" has only been used in scholarly or diplomatic discourse since the Congress of Vienna in 1815.[4][5] The Congress established the Concert of Europe as an attempt to preserve peace after the years of Napoleonic Wars.
Lord Castlereagh, the British Foreign Secretary, first used the term in its diplomatic context, in a letter sent on February 13, 1814: "It affords me great satisfaction to acquaint you that there is every prospect of the Congress terminating with a general accord and Guarantee between the Great powers of Europe, with a determination to support the arrangement agreed upon, and to turn the general influence and if necessary the general arms against the Power that shall first attempt to disturb the Continental peace."[11]
The Congress of Vienna consisted of five main powers: the Austrian Empire, France, Prussia, Russia, and the United Kingdom. These five primary participants constituted the original great powers as we know the term today.[5] Other powers, such as Spain, Portugal, and Sweden were consulted on certain specific issues, but they were not full participants. Hanover, Bavaria, and Württemberg were also consulted on issues relating to Germany.
Of the five original great powers recognised at the Congress of Vienna, only France and the United Kingdom have maintained that status continuously to the present day, although France was defeated in the Franco-Prussian War and occupied during World War II. After the Congress of Vienna, the British Empire emerged as the pre-eminent power, due to its navy and the extent of its territories, which signalled the beginning of the Pax Britannica and of the Great Game between Britain and Russia. The balance of power between the Great Powers became a major influence in European politics, prompting Otto von Bismarck to say "All politics reduces itself to this formula: try to be one of three, as long as the world is governed by the unstable equilibrium of five great powers."[25][26][27][28]
Over time, the relative power of these five nations fluctuated, which by the dawn of the 20th century had served to create an entirely different balance of power. Some, such as the United Kingdom and Prussia (as the founder of the newly formed Japan after the Meiji Restoration, and the United States after its civil war. By the dawn of the 20th century, the balance of world power had changed substantially since the Congress of Vienna. The Eight-Nation Alliance was a belligerent alliance of eight nations against the Boxer Rebellion in China. It formed in 1900 and consisted of the five Congress powers plus Italy, Japan, and the United States, representing the great powers at the beginning of 20th century.[31]
Great powers at war
Woodrow Wilson.
Shifts of international power have most notably occurred through major conflicts.[32] The conclusion of the Great War and the resulting treaties of Versailles, St-Germain, Neuilly, Trianon and Sèvres witnessed the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Japan and the United States as the chief arbiters of the new world order.[33] In the aftermath of World War I the German Empire was defeated, the Austria-Hungarian empire was divided into new, less powerful states and the Russian Empire fell to a revolution. During the Paris Peace Conference, the "Big Four"—France, Italy, United Kingdom and the United States—held noticeably more power and influence on the proceedings and outcome of the treaties than Japan. The Big Four were leading architects of the Treaty of Versailles which was signed by Germany; the Treaty of St. Germain, with Austria; the Treaty of Neuilly, with Bulgaria; the Treaty of Trianon, with Hungary; and the Treaty of Sèvres, with the Ottoman Empire. During the decision-making of the Treaty of Versailles, Italy pulled out of the conference because a part of its demands were not met and temporarily left the other three countries as the sole major architects of that treaty, referred to as the "Big Three".[34][35][36][37][38]
The victorious great powers also gained an acknowledgement of their status through permanent seats at the League of Nations Council, where they acted as a type of executive body directing the Assembly of the League. However, the Council began with only four permanent members—Great Britain, France, Italy, and Japan—because the United States, meant to be the fifth permanent member, left because the US Senate voted on 19 March 1920 against the ratification of the Treaty of Versailles, thus preventing American participation in the League.
When World War II started in 1939, it divided the world into two alliances—the Allies (the United Kingdom and France at first in Europe, China in Asia since 1937, followed in 1941 by the Soviet Union, the United States); and the Axis powers consisting of Germany, Italy and Japan.[39][nb 1] During World War II, the United States, United Kingdom, and Soviet Union controlled Allied policy and emerged as the "Big Three". The Republic of China and the Big Three were referred as a "trusteeship of the powerful" [40] and were recognized as the Allied "Big Four" in Declaration by United Nations in 1942.[41] These four countries were referred as the "Four Policemen" of the Allies and considered as the primary victors of World War II.[42] The importance of France was acknowledged by their inclusion, along with the other four, in the group of countries allotted permanent seats in the United Nations Security Council.
The "Big Three" of Europe at the Yalta Conference: Winston Churchill, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph Stalin.
Since the end of the World Wars, the term "great power" has been joined by a number of other power classifications. Foremost among these is the concept of the superpower, used to describe those nations with overwhelming power and influence in the rest of the world. It was first coined in 1944 by William T.R. Fox[43] and according to him, there were three superpowers: the British Empire, the United States, and the Soviet Union. But by the mid-1950s the British Empire lost its superpower status, leaving the United States and the Soviet Union as the world's superpowers.[nb 2] The term middle power has emerged for those nations which exercise a degree of global influence, but are insufficient to be decisive on international affairs. Regional powers are those whose influence is generally confined to their region of the world.
During the Cold War, the Asian power of Japan and the European powers of the United Kingdom, France, and West Germany rebuilt their economies. France and the United Kingdom maintained technologically advanced armed forces with power projection capabilities and maintain large defence budgets to this day. Yet, as the Cold War continued, authorities began to question if France and the United Kingdom could retain their long-held statuses as great powers.[44] China, with the world's largest population, has slowly risen to great power status, with large growth in economic and military power in the post-war period. After 1949, the Republic of China began to lose its recognition as the sole legitimate government of China by the other great powers, in favour of the People's Republic of China. Subsequently, in 1971, it lost its permanent seat at the UN Security Council to the People's Republic of China.
Great powers at peace
According to Joshua Baron – a "researcher, lecturer, and consultant on international conflict" – since the early 1960s direct military conflicts and major confrontations have "receded into the background" with regards to relations among the great powers.[45] Baron argues several reasons why this is the case, citing the unprecedented rise of the United States and its predominant position as the key reason. Baron highlights that since World War Two no other great power has been able to achieve parity or near parity with the United States, with the exception of the Soviet Union for a brief time.[45] This position is unique among the great powers since the start of the modern era (the 16th century), where there has traditionally always been "tremendous parity among the great powers". This unique period of American primacy has been an important factor in maintaining a condition of peace between the great powers.[45]
Another important factor is the apparent consensus among Western great powers that military force is no longer an effective tool of resolving disputes among their peers.[45] This "subset" of great powers – France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States – consider maintaining a "state of peace" as desirable. As evidence, Baron outlines that since the Cuban missile crisis (1962) during the Cold War, these influential Western nations have resolved all disputes among the great powers peacefully at the United Nations and other forums of international discussion.[45]
Referring to great power relations pre-1960, Joshua Baron highlights that starting from around the 16th century and the rise of several European great powers, military conflicts and confrontations was the defining characteristic of diplomacy and relations between such powers.[45] "Between 1500 and 1953, there were 64 wars in which at least one great power was opposed to another, and they averaged little more than five years in length. In approximately a 450-year time frame, on average at least two great powers were fighting one another in each and every year."[45] Even during the period of Pax Britannica (or "the British Peace") between 1815 and 1914, war and military confrontations among the great powers was still a frequent occurrence. In fact, Joshua Baron points out that in terms of militarized conflicts or confrontations Britain lead the way in this period with nineteen such instances against; Russia (8), France (5), Germany/Prussia (5) and Italy (1).[45]
In his 2014 publication Great Power Peace and American Primacy, Joshua Baron considers China, France, Russia, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States as the current great powers.[45]
Aftermath of the Cold War
Great powers with UN P5 membership and recognized nuclear weapons status: China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States.
Great powers without a Security Council veto: Germany and Japan.
China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States are often referred to as great powers by academics due to "their political and economic dominance of the global arena".[46] These five nations are the only states to have permanent seats with veto power on the UN Security Council. They are also the only recognized "Nuclear Weapons States" under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and maintain military expenditures which are among the largest in the world.[47] However, there is no unanimous agreement among authorities as to the current status of these powers or what precisely defines a great power. For example, sources have at times referred to China,[48] France,[49] Russia[50][51][52] and the United Kingdom[49] as middle powers.
Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, its UN Security Council permanent seat was transferred to the Russian Federation in 1991, as its successor state. The newly formed Russian Federation emerged on the level of a great power, leaving the United States as the only remaining global superpower[nb 3] (although some support a multipolar world view).
Japan and Germany are great powers too, though due to their large advanced economies (having the third and fourth largest economies respectively) rather than their strategic and hard power capabilities (i.e., the lack of permanent seats and veto power on the UN Security Council or strategic military reach).[53][54][55][56][57] Germany has been a member together with the five permanent Security Council members in the P5+1 grouping of world powers. Like China, France, Russia and the United Kingdom; Germany and Japan have also been referred to as middle powers.[58][59][60][61][62][63][64]
In addition to those contemporary great powers mentioned above, Zbigniew Brzezinski[65] and Malik Mohan consider India to be a great power too.[66] Although unlike the contemporary great powers who have long been considered so, India's recognition among authorities as a great power is comparatively recent.[66] However, there is no collective agreement among observers as to the status of India, for example, a number of academics believe that India is still emerging as a great power,[67] while some believe that India is a middle power.[68]
With continuing WTO and at G8 and G-20 summits. This is most notable in areas where the European Union has exclusive competence (i.e. economic affairs). It also reflects a non-traditional conception of Europe's world role as a global "civilian power", exercising collective influence in the functional spheres of trade and diplomacy, as an alternative to military dominance.[70] The European Union is a supranational union and not a sovereign state, and has limited scope in the areas of foreign affairs and defence policy. These remain largely with the member states of the European Union, which include the three great powers of France, Germany and the United Kingdom (referred to as the "EU three").[71]
Brazil and India are widely regarded as emerging powers with the potential to be great powers.[1] Political scientist Stephen P. Cohen asserts that India is an emerging power, but highlights that some strategists consider India to be already a great power.[72] Some academics such as Zbigniew Brzezinski and Dr David A. Robinson already regard India as a major or great power.[71][73]
Permanent membership of the UN Security Council is widely regarded as being a central tenet of great power status in the modern world; Brazil, Germany, India and Japan form the G4 nations which support one another (and have varying degrees of support from the existing permanent members) in becoming permanent members. The G4 is opposed by the Italian-led Uniting for Consensus group. There are however few signs that reform of the Security Council will happen in the near future.
Hierarchy of great powers
Acclaimed political scientist, geo-strategist, and former United States National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, appraised the current standing of the great powers in his 2012 publication Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power. In relation to great powers, he makes the following points:
"The United States is still preeminent but the legitimacy, effectiveness, and durability of its leadership is increasingly questioned worldwide because of the complexity of its internal and external challenges. ... The European Union could compete to be the world's number two power, but this would require a more robust political union, with a common foreign policy and a shared defense capability. ... In contrast, China's remarkable economic momentum, its capacity for decisive political decisions motivated by clearheaded and self centered national interest, its relative freedom from debilitating external commitments, and its steadily increasing military potential coupled with the worldwide expectation that soon it will challenge America's premier global status justify ranking China just below the United States in the current international hierarchy. ... A sequential ranking of other major powers beyond the top two would be imprecise at best. Any list, however, has to include Russia, Japan, and India, as well as the EU's informal leaders: Great Britain, Germany, and France."[65]
According to the 2014 report of the Hague centre for strategic studies:
Great Powers... are disproportionately engaged in alliances and wars, and their diplomatic weight is often cemented by their strong role in international institutions and forums. This unequal distribution of power and prestige leads to "a set of rights and rules governing interactions among states" that sees incumbent powers competing to maintain the status quo and keep their global influence. In today's international system, there are four great powers that fit this definition: the United States (US), Russia, China and the European Union (whereby the EU is considered to be the sum of its parts). If we distil from this description of great power attributes and capabilities a list of criteria, it is clear why these four powers dominate the international security debate. The possession of superior military and economic capabilities can be translated into measurements such as military expenditure and GDP, and nowhere are the inherent privileges of great powers more visible than in the voting mechanisms of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), where five permanent members have an overriding veto. The top ten countries ranked on the basis of military expenditures correspond almost exactly with the top ten countries ranked on the basis of GDP with the exception of Saudi Arabia which is surpassed by Brazil. Notably, each country with a permanent seat on the UNSC also finds itself in the top ten military and economic powers. When taken as the sum of its parts, the EU scores highest in terms of economic wealth and diplomatic weight in the UNSC. This is followed closely by the US, which tops the military expenditures ranking, and then Russia and China, both of which exert strong military, economic, and diplomatic influence in the international system.
List of great powers by date
Austria[1][4][5] Austria-Hungary[75] Austria-Hungary[31]
British Empire[1][4][5] British Empire[75] British Empire[31] British Empire[35] United Kingdom[nb 4][39] United Kingdom[1][2][43] United Kingdom[1][2][6][76][45]
China[45] China[39] China[1][2] China[1][2][6][45][77][78]
France[1][4][5] France[75] France[31] France[35] France[39] France[1][2] France[1][2][6][45]
Prussia[1][4][5] Germany[75] Germany[31] Germany[39] Germany[1][6][45]
Italy[79][80][81][82] Italy[31] Italy[35] Italy[39]
Japan[31] Japan[35][nb 5] Japan[39] Japan[1][6][77][83][45]
Ottoman Empire[84][85][86][87] Ottoman Empire[84][85][86][87] Ottoman Empire[87]
Russia[1][4][5] Russia[75] Russia[31] Soviet Union[39] Soviet Union[1][2][43] Russia[1][2][6][77][45]
United States[31] United States[35] United States[39] United States[1][2][43] United States[1][2][6][88][45]
List of ancient great powers
List of medieval great powers
List of modern great powers
Power in international relations
Potential superpowers
^ Even though the book The Economics of World War II lists seven great powers at the start of 1939 (the British Empire, the Empire of Japan, France, the Kingdom of Italy, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and the United States), it focuses only on six of them, because France surrendered shortly after the war began.
^ The 1956 Suez Crisis suggested that the United Kingdom, financially weakened by two world wars, could not then pursue its foreign policy objectives on an equal footing with the new superpowers without sacrificing convertibility of its reserve currency as a central goal of policy. – from superpower cited by
^ The fall of the Berlin Wall and the breakup of the Soviet Union left the United States as the only remaining superpower in the 1990s.
^ After the Statute of Westminster came into effect in 1931, the United Kingdom no longer represented the British Empire in world affairs.
^ "The Prime Minister of Canada (during the Treaty of Versailles) said that there were 'only three major powers left in the world the United States, Britain and Japan' ... (but) The Great Powers could not be consistent. At the instance of Britain, Japan's ally, they gave Japan five delegates to the Peace Conference, just like themselves, but in the Supreme Council the Japanese were generally ignored or treated as something of a joke." from
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l
^ a b c d e f g
^ a b c d e f g h i j k Danilovic, Vesna. "When the Stakes Are High—Deterrence and Conflict among Major Powers", University of Michigan Press (2002), pp 27, 225–228 (PDF chapter downloads) (PDF copy). Archived August 30, 2006 at the Wayback Machine
^ a b c d e f g h Accordingly, the great powers after the Cold War are Britain, China, France, Germany, Japan, Russia, and the United States p.59
^ The Seven-Power Summit as an International Concert
^ The G6/G7: great power governance
^ The role of the G8 in International Peace and security
^ Tables of Science Po and Documentation Francaise: Russia y las grandes potencias and G8 et Chine
^ a b Charles Webster, (ed), British Diplomacy 1813–1815: Selected Documents Dealing with the Reconciliation of Europe, (1931), p307.
^ Toje, A. (2010). The European Union as a small power: After the post-Cold War. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
^ Dictionary - World power
^ Dictionary - Major power
^ Thesaurus - World Power
^ Organski, AFK – World Politics, Knopf (1958)
^ contained on page 204 in: Kertesz and Fitsomons (eds) – Diplomacy in a Changing World, University of Notre Dame Press (1960)
^ Iggers and von Moltke "In the Theory and Practice of History", Bobbs-Merril (1973)
^ Stoll, Richard J – State Power, World Views, and the Major Powers, Contained in: Stoll and Ward (eds) – Power in World Politics, Lynne Rienner (1989)
^ a b Domke, William K – Power, Political Capacity, and Security in the Global System, Contained in: Stoll and Ward (eds) – Power in World Politics, Lynn Rienner (1989)
^ Britain And Germany: from Ally to Enemy Archived October 26, 2007 at the Wayback Machine
^ a b c d e f g h i
^ Power Transitions as the cause of war.
^ Globalization and Autonomy by Julie Sunday, McMaster University.
^ ,See the part:The attitude towards Germany of the "Big Three":"The "Big Three" were David Lloyd George of Britain, Clemenceau of France and Woodrow Wilson of America."
^ a b c d e f
^ Italian delegates return to Paris Peace conference
^ Paris 1919 by Margaret MacMillan has the Council of Five (Britain, France, Italy, Japan and the United States) as the main victors and remaining Great Powers.
^ a b c d e f g h i Harrison, M (2000) The Economics of World War II: Six Great Powers in International Comparison, Cambridge University Press.
^ Hoopes, Townsend, and Douglas Brinkley. FDR and the Creation of the U.N. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997. ISBN 978-0-300-06930-3.
^ *
^ a b c d The Superpowers: The United States, Britain and the Soviet Union – Their Responsibility for Peace (1944), written by William T.R. Fox
^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q
^ Yasmi Adriansyah, 'Questioning Indonesia's place in the world', Asia Times (20 September 2011): 'Though there are still debates on which countries belong to which category, there is a common understanding that the GP [great power] countries are the United States, China, United Kingdom, France and Russia. Besides their political and economic dominance of the global arena, these countries have special status in the United Nations Security Council with their permanent seats and veto rights.'
^ Gerald Segal, Does China Matter?, Foreign Affairs (September/October 1999).
^ a b according to P. Shearman, M. Sussex, European Security After 9/11, Ashgate, 2004, both UK and France were global powers now reduced to middle-power status.
^ Great Powers
^ Asia's Overlooked Great Power, APR 18, 2007
^ Er LP (2006) Japan's Human Security Rolein Southeast Asia
^ "Merkel as a world star - Germany's place in the world", The Economist (November 18, 2006), p. 27: "Germany, says Volker Perthes, director of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, is now pretty much where it belongs: squarely at the centre. Whether it wants to be or not, the country is a Mittelmacht, or middle power."
^ Susanna Vogt, "Germany and the G20", in Wilhelm Hofmeister, Susanna Vogt, G20: Perceptions and Perspectives for Global Governance (Singapore: Oct. 19, 2011), p. 76, citing Thomas Fues and Julia Leininger (2008): "Germany and the Heiligendamm Process", in Andrew Cooper and Agata Antkiewicz (eds.): Emerging Powers in Global Governance: Lessons from the Heiligendamm Process, Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, p. 246: "Germany's motivation for the initiative had been '... driven by a combination of leadership qualities and national interests of a middle power with civilian characteristics'."
^ "Change of Great Powers", in Global Encyclopaedia of Political Geography, by M.A. Chaudhary and Guatam Chaudhary (New Delhi, 2009.), p. 101: "Germany is considered by experts to be an economic power. It is considered as a middle power in Europe by Chancellor Angela Merkel, former President Johannes Rau and leading media of the country."
^ Susanne Gratius, Is Germany still a EU-ropean power?, FRIDE Policy Brief, No. 115 (February 2012), pp. 1, 2: "Being the world's fourth largest economic power and the second largest in terms of exports has not led to any greater effort to correct Germany's low profile in foreign policy ... For historic reasons and because of its size, Germany has played a middle-power role in Europe for over 50 years."
^ a b Strategic Vision: America & the Crisis of Global Power by Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, pp 43–45. Published 2012.
^ Charalampos Efstathopoulosa, 'Reinterpreting India's Rise through the Middle Power Prism', Asian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 19, Issue 1 (2011), p. 75: 'India's role in the contemporary world order can be optimally asserted by the middle power concept. The concept allows for distinguishing both strengths and weakness of India's globalist agency, shifting the analytical focus beyond material-statistical calculations to theorise behavioural, normative and ideational parameters.'
^ Veit Bachmann and James D Sidaway, "Zivilmacht Europa: A Critical Geopolitics of the European Union as a Global Power", Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Jan., 2009), pp. 94–109.
^ "India: Emerging Power", by Stephen P. Cohen, p. 60
^ Why are Pivot states so Pivotal?
^ a b c d e
^ a b c UW Press: Korea's Future and the Great Powers
^ The Washington QuarterlyYong Deng and Thomas G. Moore (2004) "China Views Globalization: Toward a New Great-Power Politics?"
^ Richard N. Haass, "Asia's overlooked Great Power", Project Syndicate April 20, 2007.
^ a b c
Power politics
History and theory
Center of power
Hegemonic stability theory
Historical powers
International relations of the Great Powers (1814–1919)
Philosophy of power
Power transition theory
Second Superpower
Superpower collapse
Superpower disengagement
Composite Index of National Capability
Comprehensive National Power
Organizations and groups by region or regions affected
Union for the Mediterranean
Africa–Asia
Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC)
Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
Union of South American Nations (Unasur)
Asia Cooperation Dialogue (ACD)
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)
China–Japan–South Korea trilateral summits
South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC)
Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO)
Council of Europe (CE)
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)
Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO)
Eurasian Economic Union (EaEU)
Turkic Council
North America–Europe
Africa–Asia–Europe
Australia–New Zealand–United States Security Treaty (ANZUS)
Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG)
Pacific Islands Forum (PIF)
Polynesian Leaders Group (PLG)
Non-regional
Brazil–Russia–India–China–South Africa (BRICS)
Commonwealth of Nations
Colombia–Indonesia–Vietnam–Egypt–Turkey–South Africa (CIVETS)
G8+5
India–Brazil–South Africa Dialogue Forum (IBSA)
Mexico–Indonesia–Nigeria–Turkey (MINT)
Next Eleven (N-11)
Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Uniting for Consensus
Diplomacy of the Great Powers 1871–1913
Great Powers
Austria–Hungary
Triple Alliance (Dual Alliance)
Triple Entente (Franco-Russian Alliance
Entente cordiale
Anglo-Russian Entente)
Anglo-Japanese Alliance
Ottoman Decline (Eastern Question)
Revanchism
New Imperialism (Scramble for Africa)
Pan-Slavism
The Great Rapprochement
Treaty of Frankfurt
League of the Three Emperors
Treaty of Berlin
Reinsurance Treaty
Treaty of Paris
Treaty of Björkö
Taft–Katsura Agreement
Japan–Korea Treaty of 1905
Japan–Korea Annexation Treaty
Racconigi agreement
Congress of Berlin
Berlin Conference
Weltpolitik
German Naval Laws
Anglo-German naval arms race (Dreadnought)
Fashoda Incident
Annexation of Hawaii
First Moroccan Crisis
Algeciras Conference
Agadir Crisis
Bosnian crisis
Russo-Turkish
First Sino-Japanese
Spanish–American
Banana Wars
Philippine–American
Second Boer
Russo-Japanese
Italo-Turkish
WorldHeritage pages with incorrect protection templates
States by power status


MANILA, Philippines — In death as in life, former President Corazon Aquino will be remembered as a simple woman unaffected by the trappings of power.
Six yellow ribbons were tied around two pillars of the Aquino mausoleum, while yellow flowers were placed on top of Mrs. Aquino's tomb early this morning.
Inside the cemetery, yellow ribbons were tied to trees and posts leading to the mausoleum. Loyal supporters of the former President, mostly women, were already seated near the mausoleum as of this posting, where photographers and mediamen await the funeral cortege from the Manila Cathedral.
The Aquino family has opted to have a private funeral for Mrs. Aquino instead of the state honors usually accorded to former presidents.
Full military honors will however be accorded the former chief executive as she is laid to rest at the Manila Memorial Park, including a 21-gun salute – one salvo fired every minute for a 21-minute period – once the casket leaves the cathedral.
This entry was posted in Asia, women in politics and tagged corazon aquino, cory aquino, First woman president, ninoy aquino, women, women in politics, women leaders. Bookmark the permalink.
Women power triumphs in state polls. What next?


text:
Career FDA Leaders Say Science Is Agency's Guide
In an opinion article, FDA leaders commit to applying "the best science" to approval decisions.
Following the release of public statements from representatives of the biotech industry and top executives at bio/pharma companies pressing for adherence to science-based decisions in the development and approval of COVID-19 vaccines, FDA leaders, in a Sept. 11, 2020 opinion column, argued that the agency is committed to such principles, while acknowledging it operates in a political environment.
In the column published on www.USAToday.com, nine senior FDA leaders noted that while the pandemic has presented challenges for the agency, exposing it to controversy and public scrutiny, "protecting the public health is our beacon, and sound science is our guide to navigate controversial waters."
The agency makes decisions on the safety and effectiveness of medical products based on available science, the authors explained in the statement, and criticism from stakeholders is expected. FDA works best when its experts are "free to do what they do best—follow the science to address public health issues and revise policy if the understanding of science changes," the authors wrote.
"If the agency's credibility is lost because of real or perceived interference, people will not rely on the agency's safety warnings. Erosion of public trust will leave consumers and patients doubting our recommendations, less likely to enroll in clinical studies or to use FDA-regulation products when they should to maintain or improve their health," the statement read. "We will work with agency leadership to maintain FDA's steadfast commitment to ensure our decisions will continue to be guided by the best science."
In a poll conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation, more than half of those surveyed said they would not get a free COVID-19 vaccine if one were approved by FDA before the presidential election.
The statement was signed by nine self-described "senior career civil servants" including Janet Woodcock, director at FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER); Peter Marks, director of FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research; Steven Solomon, director of FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine; and Patrizia Cavazzoni, deputy director for CDER.
USA Today
Kaiser Family Foundation
COVID-19 Update | Regulatory Authority Actions | Quality Systems | Industry News | Top News


text:
What is a self-charging hybrid?
Future electric cars
Toyota car news
Toyota fuel cell cars will be on sale in Europe next year, 500 miles on a tank
Luke Edwards | 17 April 2014
Future electric cars: Upcoming battery-powered cars that will be on the roads within the next 5 years
Toyota has officially confirmed that it will begin selling its fuel cell cars in Europe in 2015.
The car will closely resemble the FCV concept shown in the photo and will fit into the mid-sized saloon category, like the current Avensis. Numbers will initially be limited as Toyota tests to see what the public uptake is like. The car will be able to manage 500 miles on a single tank.
Fuel cell cars use hydrogen as fuel and only produce water vapour as an emission.
READ: Honda joins £31m project to make hydrogen fuel cell cars a road-going reality by 2016
Toyota is working with BMW researching together to pioneer the technology. Hydrogen fuel is easy to store, better at capturing renewable energies than batteries and can be produced anywhere.
On why Toyota isn't releasing these cars on a large scale right away Toyota's European president, Didier Leroy said he recognised fuel cell technology would take a while to be adopted: "To help that happen we will bring a reasonable number of cars to Europe. The volume will be limited, but they will be visible on the streets."
Expect to hear more on the fuel cell car from Toyota in the coming months.
READ: World's first mobile hydrogen fuel cell charger, Upp, unveiled
Via: Autocar
Sections Toyota Cars
PopularIn Cars
Hey BMW: Your intelligent voice assistant is actually pretty good
Lotus has an insanely fast electric car, but it costs £2 million
Ford will have a new EV on European roads by 2023, thanks to VW
Hyundai Santa Fe (2019) review: A great, big SUV
Bentley EXP 100 GT reveals its sustainable electric vision of the future


text:
The Road to a Bad Nuclear Deal with Iran
July 28, 2014 Topic: NonproliferationNuclear WeaponsDiplomacy Region: Iran
"This would leave Iran with a legitimized nuclear program, including the potential to break out at will and produce a nuclear explosive device in short order."
by Ephraim Asculai Emily B. Landau
The decision to extend nuclear negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 beyond the July 20 deadline was based on an assessment that despite remaining lack of agreement on key issues, enough progress had been made to justify a four-month extension of the talks. U.S. Secretary of State Kerry announced on July 18 that the term was extended in order to give the parties "time to continue working to conclude a comprehensive agreement…warranted by the progress we've made and the path forward we can envision." For its consent to continue the talks, Iran gained access to an additional $2.8 billion of its restricted assets, the four-month prorated amount of the original Joint Plan of Action (JPOA) commitment. This financial relief will not only ease some of the economic and political pressure on Iran, which is the only leverage the P5+1 has in this difficult negotiation, but also sends a problematic message that not only are there no negative consequences for not reaching a deal by the July 20 deadline, the benefits continue.
Significantly, in a June 30 op-ed in The Washington Post, Kerry stated that the United States would not agree to an extension "merely to drag out negotiations." He complained in the article that Iran's public optimism about the potential outcome of the negotiations had not been matched by the positions Iran had articulated behind closed doors, and that "Iran must show a genuine willingness to respond to the international community's legitimate concerns in the time that remains." If that was the case at the end of June, what had changed by mid-July? With absolutely no indication of any softening of Iran's steadfast intransigence on the nuclear front—if anything, positions have hardened—what could have convinced the Secretary of State that there was suddenly reason to believe that the next four months might see the significant Iranian concessions that had proven elusive in the previous six? This question will no doubt remain a cloud over the coming months of negotiations.
In his July 18 statement, Kerry referred to a preliminary text on the table—with holes, gaps and disagreements—that sets forth the by-now-well-known issues under discussion: the plutonium production capabilities of the heavy water reactor under construction at Arak, the underground uranium-enrichment facility at Fordow, the enrichment capacity of the Natanz facility, and the need for enhanced monitoring and verification measures. From official U.S. statements (including by unnamed officials), and from statements that come from the Iranian side, the situation seems to be as follows: The plutonium production capabilities of the Arak reactor are likely to be limited, but not eliminated, and it is not yet clear whether by physical or administrative means. The Fordow facility is likely to be transformed into a nonnuclear research and development (R&D) facility, but will not be closed down entirely, as had been demanded by the P5+1 back in 2012. A major point of contention remains the uranium-enrichment capacity of Iran, which was exacerbated by Khamenei's statement that the Natanz facility should provide the enriched uranium for Iran's planned nuclear-power program. So instead of indicating a move toward the drastic reduction in Iran's enrichment capacity that the P5+1 demands, Iran is set to pursue a ten-fold increase in its indigenous enrichment capability. Without a severe reduction in Iran's uranium-enrichment program, its potential for an undetected 'breakout' capability and the production of a nuclear explosive device will remain a significant one.
But there are additional critical issues at stake. One regards a probe of the weaponization aspects of Iran's nuclear program—also referred to as the Possible Military Dimensions (PMD)—which is indispensable for understanding Iran's nuclear ambitions, and cannot be ignored. According to recent reports, the IAEA is concerned about Iran's ongoing lack of cooperation in providing answers to hard questions in this regard, and lack of engagement with the Agency's current investigation ahead of a late-August deadline regarding two of the issues at stake.
Another issue of great importance is the 'sunset provision' for the comprehensive deal—namely, for how many years Iran will be under the agreed-upon restrictions before it can go back to being regarded as any other nonnuclear-weapon state party to the NPT. The P5+1 have spoken about twenty years, whereas Iran has mentioned three to five, and no more than seven. This is a provision that was unfortunately included in the JPOA. It is unfortunate, because if Iran is not forced to make a strategic U-turn in the nuclear realm, after having admitted that it violated the NPT for decades by working on a military nuclear program, what is the justification for a sunset provision? This will only enable Iran to go straight back to its previous practice of nuclear deceit after a designated period of time. With that in mind, the P5+1 certainly cannot entertain any time framework that is less than twenty years. And even following this period, the removal of restrictions should be contingent upon the approval of the UN Security Council, which will take into account all relevant factors relating to Iran's behavior in the international arena.
Another point that must be agreed upon is the verification mechanism. Beyond provisions for an upgraded and intensified verification program, this mechanism must include an "anywhere, anytime" clause, without which Iran would be able to carry out a parallel, concealed nuclear program, including the development of a nuclear explosive mechanism. Even with greatly enhanced verification, detecting and dealing in a timely manner with Iranian violations will always face a multitude of problems. As such, verification cannot be the sole basis of a policy of nuclear prevention, nor can it replace the very necessary significant dismantlement of Iran's vast nuclear infrastructure.
Secretary Kerry's July 18 statements seem designed to create the impression that the four-month extension could produce a good deal. But there is ample reason to believe that such an agreement between Iran and the P5+1 will be no more achievable in four months than it was now, especially if Iran is able to withstand the sanctions. The worst possible outcome is a bad deal with Iran that reflects multiple concessions by the P5+1 on different aspects of Iran's nuclear program. This would leave Iran with a legitimized nuclear program, including the potential to break out at will and produce a nuclear explosive device in short order.
But the prospect of no agreement in four months must also be rejected. For Iran, this might seem like a workable plan, as it would leave the Islamic regime in a much better position than before the JPOA, in both technical and economic terms. It might not even spark a crisis if Iran declares its intent to continue to adhere to the technical terms of the JPOA, and to negotiate with the P5+1. The international community cannot enable Iran to continue the interim situation indefinitely in this manner, with a very short breakout time. It must clarify to Iran that this is not an option.
Finally, while the current talks with Iran are rightly focused exclusively on the emerging nuclear threat from Iran, the broader context should not be completely ignored either: not the situation inside Iran—where gross human-rights abuses continue—nor Iran's blatant support for terror. The rocket barrages fired by Hamas over the past weeks at Israel's population centers, with the express aim of killing Israeli civilians are supplied by Iran. And just as a reminder of where the so-called Supreme Leader of Iran stands on this issue, he demands continued armed resistance until Israel is eliminated. "Israel's annihilation is the only real cure", said Khamenei. These words should be uppermost in the minds of the P5+1 negotiators as they move toward the late November deadline.
Ephraim Asculai is a Senior Research Fellow at INSS and a former senior scientist at the Israel Atomic Energy Commission. Emily B. Landau is Head of the Arms Control Program at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), at Tel Aviv University and the author of"Decade of Diplomacy: Negotiations with Iran and North Korea and the Future of Nuclear Nonproliferation."
Image: Iran president website


text:
Connor Blenkinsop
Blockchain Network Takes on Ethereum ERC20 and Claims it is Faster and Cheaper
A new blockchain platform believes it is a "more attractive and accessible destination" for hosting tokens than the likes of Ethereum's ERC20 platform, as it gives developers the support they need to build, market and launch custom tokens successfully.
LindaX says it wants give entrepreneurs an opportunity to sculpt "absolutely unique tokens with exclusive features for designated transactions" – all the while helping them to "navigate the unfamiliar environment of cryptocurrency." According to its white paper, the startup's team would be on hand to help fledgling businesses forge connections with exchanges who can list their token, and offer strategies that would enable them to reach new customers and reap the rewards of blockchain technology.
Another emphasis for LindaX is guaranteeing that all of the tokens hosted on its platform are "credible and trustworthy." Resultantly, it plans to vet the proposals of businesses who are seeking to create a token – scrutinizing them against a list of prerequisites before putting the plans to a vote of "approved community validators." A successful application will pave the way for entrepreneurs seeking to establish tokens which are designed for use in an array of settings – including as currency, proof of membership and international assets.
"An Ethereum fork you won't want to miss"
The team behind LindaX says its platform has already been fully developed – and although it does share some similarities with Ethereum, it aims to be a more cost-effective network by reducing gas fees for participants. In a blog post, the company also claimed that merchants on its platform could see transaction costs decrease by 50 percent when compared with ERC20 – enhancing their bottom line at a time when margins can be tight.
These benefits would also be coupled with the prospect of faster speeds than Ethereum – with LindaX offering the potential to process 179 transactions per second as a starting point. It says Ethereum only manages to clear about 15 transactions per second – with a swelling user base causing increasing numbers of trades to suffer delays.
LindaX's platform operates using a Proof of Authority (PoA) algorithm and relies upon "trusted validators" who have been formally verified on the chain. To show their commitment to the project, these validators will need to hold a set number of LX tokens – which are native to the ecosystem.
According to LindaX executives, its solution is necessary because the security flaws seen with Ethereum are weighing heavily on the minds of many entrepreneurs who have been reluctant to use blockchain technology so far. They wrote: "Data breaches led to millions of dollars in losses. On this platform, many businesses lost everything. After all the security issues, it becomes a huge question whether you should start your ICO on Ethereum or on some alternative platform."
Giving developers a helping hand
LindaX says that, along with its core network for vetted tokens, it is providing a test network that "can be used by developers to try out their contracts or apps at zero cost." Given the massive financial undertaking that can be associated with getting a blockchain-driven service to market, this will likely be music to the ears of startups.
Its team is based in the US, Canada and Australia – and a presale for its initial coin offering commenced back in August.
Looking ahead, the platform has set out several milestones for the future – including the debut of mobile wallets for Apple's App Store and Google Play, which supports Android smartphones and tablets. Beyond that, it hopes to increase its transaction scalability – making it sustainable for the future.
Disclaimer. Cointelegraph does not endorse any content or product on this page. While we aim at providing you all important information that we could obtain, readers should do their own research before taking any actions related to the company and carry full responsibility for their decisions, nor this article can be considered as an investment advice.
South Carolina State Regulators Withdraw Enforcement Actions on Two Blockchain Startups
ETH Co-Founder Gavin Wood's Blockchain Protocol Plans $60 Million Second Token Sale: WSJ
Unconfirmed: Crypto Startup Enjin to Back Rumored Samsung Galaxy S10 Blockchain Wallet
Ana Berman
US Elections Regulator Gives Tentative Go-Ahead to Campaign Token
Max Boddy


On Saturday, March 2, more than 70 Vietnam veterans from Clermont County and surrounding areas were honored in a tribute at the Union Township Public Library.
As a member of both the Clermont County Genealogical Society (CCGS) and the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR), Kathy Payne organized the tribute, which took place during a regular monthly meeting of the CCGS.
Gary Knepp, a Clermont County native and the author of "Beyond the Names, A tribute to Clermont County, Ohio Vietnam War Dead" spoke about his book in advance of the annual commemoration of National Vietnam War Veterans Day March 29.
Wanda Langdon, regent for the Clough Valley chapter of the DAR, gave each veteran a packet of material containing, among other things, an official lapel pin from the U.S. Department of Defense to commemorate their service. Anyone who served in the military between 1955-1975 is considered a Vietnam veteran, regardless of whether they served in Vietnam.
"What an amazing experience," said Langdon. "I was surprised about my own reaction to the topic of the Vietnam War. You can imagine how these Veterans feel, finally getting some recognition and thanks – even 50 years later – for what they were asked to do during their time in the military. We hope this tribute lets them know in some small way how appreciative we are as individuals, and as a country, for their efforts to preserve our freedoms."
The CCGS meets on the first Saturday of most months at 1 p.m. at the Batavia branch library, where guest speakers discuss a variety of genealogical topics. Click here to learn more.
The Clough Valley DAR chapter meets on the third Saturday of each month. Click here to learn more.


HARRISBURG – In an effort to give taxpayers and parents as much information as possible about Pennsylvania's school districts, Rep. Seth Grove (R-Dover) voted in favor of two bills that passed the House this week. Both bills would expand school district fiscal transparency.
Grove is a co-sponsor of House Bill 1411, also known as SchoolWATCH, which would direct the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) to create a searchable online database detailing the revenues and expenditures of traditional, charter and cyber school districts across the Commonwealth.
Grove is also a co-sponsor of House Bill 1741, which would amend the Public School Code to require school boards to provide no less than 48 hours public notice prior to voting upon any proposed collective bargaining agreement or employment contract.
House Bills 1741 and 1411 now move to the Senate for further consideration.


text:
CD: Preliminary Inventory of the General Records of the Department of State: Record Group 59, No. 157
CD: Preliminary Inventory of the General Records of the Department of State: Record Group 59, No. 157 - Daniel T. Goggin and H. Stephen Helton. "Today the responsibilities of the Department of State lie almost entirely in the field of foreign affairs. In this field the Department assists the President to promote and maintain friendly relations with foreign countries. Specifically, it aids in negotiating treaties and other international agreements, in determining measures to be taken to fulfill treaty obligations, in protecting U.S. citizens abroad and U.S. foreign interests, in deciding on the recognition of new governments and determining the status of belligerents, and in receiving foreign diplomatic agents to the United States and issuing exequaturs to foreign consuls. The Department administers the U.S. Foreign Service, conducts the diplomatic and consular correspondence, gathers information of political and economic conditions throughout the world, and carries out the laws and regulations governing alien immigrations, the issuance of passports, and the international traffic in arms, munitions, and implements of war…The Department's domestic duties have varied considerably through the years." Many of these duties have at different times been terminated or passed on to other agencies of the Government. "The inventory is organized in two main parts. Part I describes the central files of the Department of State, 1789-1944; Part II describes subgroups of records created and maintained by past and present administrative units of the Department, records relating to certain functions of the Department, and records relating to certain events, such as the Civil War and the War of 1812-all of which for one reason or another were kept separate from the central files. Because the Department of State has undergone many reorganizations and has lost most of its former domestic duties, it has been impossible to present the records described in Part II according to any pattern of organization or continuing function of the Department. The second part, therefore, has been organized alphabetically by key word in the title of each subgroup of records described."
(1963), 2007, CD, Adobe Acrobat, v6, Graphic Images, PC and Mac, 322 pp.
101-CD4200 ISBN: 0788442007


text:
Dividend Growth / Dividend Stocks / Dividend Growth That Starts With a 7% Yield
Dividend Growth That Starts With a 7% Yield
Dividend Growth Dividend Stocks
It's usually one or the other: Dividend growth and a low yield, or high yield with no dividend growth.
Rare is the company that offers dividend growth with a high starting yield.
Macquarie Infrastructure (NYSE: MIC) is one of the rarities. It offers established dividend growth that starts with an immediate 7% yield.
What's more, we're not talking about dividend growth as an annual event, as is the norm with most dividend growers. For Macquarie, it has been 11 consecutive quarters and 11 consecutive dividend increases. The quarterly dividend was $0.69 per share to start 2013; the quarterly dividend is $1.15 per share to start 2016. That's 18.5% average annualized dividend growth.
So, what does Macquarie do to generate such munificent dividends? Infrastructure, after all, is a broad, inclusive word. For most people, it conjures images of massive road, bridge or utility construction.
Infrastructure doesn't quite work that way for Macquarie. Infrastructure as it applies to Macquarie includes fixed-based operations that cater to airports; bulk liquid storage terminals; natural gas and propane distribution; and power generation, both natural gas and alternative. It's an eclectic mix, but the enterprise is basically led by two divisions.
Atlantic Aviation is one division. It provides fuel, terminal, aircraft hangaring, and other services to owners and operators of general aviation (GA) aircraft. International-Matex Tank Terminals is the other division. It provides bulk liquid storage, handling and other services to third parties at 10 marine terminals in the United States and two in Canada. Together these two divisions accounted for $1.3 billion of Macquarie's $1.6 billion in revenue for 2015.
Macquarie also stands apart by its business formation. For most of its history, Macquarie operated as a limited liability company. It was basically a pass-through entity. Last year, it converted to a regular C-corporation, though it's still run like a pass-through entity.
Macquarie Infrastructure is externally managed by a subsidiary of Macquarie Group. External management is frequently the norm for pass-through entities like MLPs and REITs. Macquarie's mission is also similar to the mission of most pass-through entities. Management's goal is to distribute a significant portion of Macquarie's cash flow – 75% to 85% – to shareholders as dividends.
Because Macquarie acts like a pass-through entity, it should be treated like one. Cash flow, therefore, is the focus. Indeed, because of high depreciation and amortization expenses, Macquarie frequently posts operating losses, not earnings.
If we focus on cash flow – free cash flow in particular – we see impressive growth.
Macquarie ended 2013 with $196.9 million in free cash flow. It ended last year with $398.6 million in free cash flow. Over the same period, shares outstanding increased to 78 million from 51 million. Yes, Macquarie has issued more shares to grow the business, but cash flow per share has risen to $5.11 to end 2015 compared to $3.83 to end 2013.
Free cash flow per share should continue to rise in 2016. Most likely it will post at $6 or higher. Management recently guided to deliver between $5.00 and $5.10 per share in dividends for 2016. At a minimum, investors are looking at a 15.5% year-over-year dividend increase.
Macquarie shares yield 7% on today's price. This time next year, the yield should be closer to 8% on today's price. But I don't see Macquarie shares remaining at today's price indefinitely. I see them moving higher. As most dividend-growth investors are aware, as the dividend goes, so too goes share price.
Three Gold Stocks with High Dividend Growth
Four Dividend Stocks with Better Credit Ratings than the U.S. Treasury
Three Dividend Stocks That Made Big Moves Today


The InBody 570 is NEW at the YMCA and is ready to tell you what you are made of!
Talk to the Wellness Center and make an appointment to learn how to use the InBody to define and track your fitness goals. Call 203 655-8228 ext. 1322 or email wellnesscenter@darien-ymca.org.
InBody 570 assessments are FREE to new members, personal training clients and Lean Machine participants.


text:
MadCap Software Selected as Finalist in 15th Annual AEA High Tech Awards
Leading Content Authoring Company Recognized for Innovation in Architecture, Customer Focus and Continuing Growth
La Jolla, CA, USA – OCTOBER 6, 2008 — MadCap Software, the leader in multi-channel content authoring and a showcase company for Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) Visual Studio 2005 and Microsoft XPS, today announced that it has been selected as a finalist for the 15th Annual AeA High Tech Awards in the highly competitive "Software" category. MadCap will be recognized along with other finalists when the AeA San Diego Council announces its award winners on October 31, 2008.
The San Diego AeA High Tech Awards recognize outstanding local technology companies for their achievements in technological innovation, operational accomplishment, and community contribution. AeA cited MadCap Software's native XML documentation family, which offers unprecedented integration to provide a complete content workflow; the company's ability to double in size while centering its engineering and support teams in La Jolla, CA; and MadCap's campaign to donate funds to the New Orleans Area Habitat for Humanity (NOAHH).
"MadCap's strong growth and profitability, coupled with its innovative NOAHH fundraiser, demonstrate why MadCap Software is a model finalist for the AeA High Tech Awards," said Kevin Carroll, executive director, AeA San Diego Council. "Not only has MadCap tapped the deep bench of talent in San Diego County to build a world-class engineering team and deliver ground-breaking advances in documentation software; it also is showing how companies can give back to customers and the community with fund-raising product promotions that benefit everyone."
"Customers and community are at the center of our founding principals, so it is a great honor to be recognized as a 2008 AeA High Tech Award finalist for our success in building a company based on these important values," said Bjorn Backlund, MadCap co-founder and CTO. "By listening to our customers and continuing to grow our locally based team of content experts, we have been able to expand from our flagship product, Flare, to a comprehensive documentation family supporting a complete content workflow. Thousands of companies—from start-ups to the Global 1000—have responded by choosing our groundbreaking solutions and support as the best in the industry."
Backlund added, "It was very rewarding to run a product promotion with NOAHH to mutually benefit documentation professionals and the many New Orleans neighborhoods being revitalized through NOAHH's efforts. It is an example of how helping customers can help the community, too."
The AeA San Diego Council, the regional part of the nation's largest high-tech trade association, will hold the AeA 15th Annual High Tech Awards luncheon on October 31, 2008 from 11:00 a.m.-1:30 p.m. at the Hilton Torrey Pines, La Jolla. The event traditionally attracts more than 500 technology executives.
AeA, founded in 1943, is a nationwide trade association that represents all segments of the technology industry and is dedicated solely to helping our members' top line and bottom line. We do this in partnership with our small, medium, and large member companies by lobbying governments at the state, federal and international levels, providing access to capital and business opportunities, and offering select business services and networking programs.
MadCap Software, the MadCap Software logo, and MadCap Flare, are trademarks or registered trademarks of MadCap Software, Inc., in the United States and/or other countries.


text:
Volume XVIII | Issue 28 | August 1, 2019
What can you do with pocket change?
Get GrantStation for less than 47 cents a day.
Only $169 for Full Annual Membership
Plus, receive our gift to you, Ann K. Emery's recorded webinar, Visualizing Data for Reports & Slideshows with Word and PowerPoint.
Do you prefer to learn at your own pace and on your own schedule?
Try GrantStation's new Online Education option:
The On Demand Course!
Start with Building a Stellar Grantseeking Committee
Online Workshop: DIY Dashboards—Make Beautiful, Easy to Follow Dashboards for Your Nonprofit's Leaders
National Opportunities
Opportunities throughout the U.S.
Support for Efforts to Adapt to Extreme Events in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico
The Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) facilitates collaboration and public participation to foster conservation, protection, and enhancement of the North American environment.
Skatepark Construction in Low-Income Communities Funded
The Tony Hawk Foundation is dedicated to promoting the construction of new, quality skateparks located in low-income communities throughout the United States.
Grants Encourage Innovative Projects to Enhance the Lives of Young Children
The Caplan Foundation for Early Childhood supports nonprofit organizations throughout the United States that offer programs that will significantly enhance the development, health, safety, education, or quality of life of children from infancy through seven years of age.
Basic Needs Programs in the U.S., East Africa, and Central America Supported
Jewish Helping Hands' Tikkun Olam Grant Program is intended to advance the goal of inspiring and supporting tzedakah, justice, and righteousness throughout the world.
Regional Opportunities
Opportunities for Specific Areas
Funds Promote Employment Options for Floridians With Disabilities
The Able Trust is a key leader in providing Floridians with disabilities opportunities for successful employment.
Grants Engage Colorado Arts Organizations in Social Challenges
The RedLine Contemporary Art Center fosters education and engagement between artists and communities to create positive social change.
Support for Social Change Groups in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina
The Fund for Southern Communities supports nonprofit organizations working to create just and sustainable communities that are free of oppression and that embrace and celebrate all people.
Health Equity Efforts in Kansas Funded
The mission of the Kansas Health Foundation is to improve the health of all Kansans.
Federal Opportunities
Opportunities from the U.S. Government
Funds Support Health Coverage for Native Children
The Connecting Kids to Coverage HEALTHY KIDS American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) program seeks to increase the enrollment and retention of American Indian and Alaska Native children who are eligible for, but not enrolled in, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
Apprenticeship Programs Supported
The Apprenticeships: Closing the Skills Gap program seeks to promote apprenticeships as a significant workforce solution in filling current middle- and high-skilled job vacancies and closing the skills gap between employer workforce needs and the skills of the current workforce.
For 16 More International and Canadian Funding Opportunities:
See This Month's International Insider
GrantStation Announcements
Funding Alerts
GrantStation shares database profiles of Local, National, Canadian, and International grantmakers with upcoming deadlines each week. Check out the current Funding Alerts for more grant opportunities!
TrendTrack
A Look at Giving in 2018, and What It Means for Today
by Kevin Peters
Last month, Giving USA released its report on charitable giving in the United States, Giving USA 2019: The Annual Report on Philanthropy for the Year 2018. The report was researched and written by the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. For the most recent year, giving rose by almost $3 billion from 2017, from $424.74 billion to $427.71 billion. However, when inflation is factored in, this represents a decrease of 1.7%.
Online Workshop: DIY Dashboards—Make Beautiful, Easy to Follow Dashboards for Your Nonprofit's Leaders
Why wait until the end of the year to write a lengthy report when you can share data early and often with dashboards? In this workshop, Ann K. Emery will review the best-bang-for-your-buck data visualization design principles, like using color and text to tell your story. Once you've designed one great graph, it's time to combine multiple graphs together for your report, slide show, or handout. You'll view Ann's real-life examples so that you can see how grids, white space, and visual hierarchies are applied in each setting. You'll also explore the major dashboard types. Ann will share her nine sample dashboards with you and you'll vote on which two or three styles you'd like to create from scratch in Excel. Life is short and Ann is only going to teach you about visualizations that make a difference.
Grantsmanship Training Program
Are you looking to build a strong foundation in grant research and writing skills? The Grantsmanship Center's Grantsmanship Training Program, which will be held from October 7 to 11 in Los Angeles, provides a comprehensive, in-depth experience that gives participants a solid grasp on the world of grants. Topics covered include creating a strong grant application, using a proposal model, researching funders, outlining measurable outcomes, and more.
GrantStation 20th Anniversary
Fly Little Birdie, Fly!
Part four of the history of GrantStation series
There are five stages that all small businesses go through regardless of what they offer. The first stage is the startup phase and it requires a good, solid business idea, a smattering of initial customers, significant cash, and a heck of a lot of stamina. At GrantStation, we had hammered our way through these early startup pains and by 2007 we had moved on to the second stage of business growth. This second stage is all about survival.
This message was sent to tparrish@hcsef.org by tparrish@hcsef.org
600 Sandtree Dr Suite 101, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, 33403
Unsubscribe | Manage Subscription | Forward Email | Report Abuse


text:
China reopens its doors with investment pitch to global elite
DAVOS, Switzerland — China's Vice-Premier Liu He welcomed foreign investment and declared his country open to the world on Tuesday after three years of pandemic isolation.
Mr. Liu's explicit pitch to global leaders gathered in Davos made it clear China wants international investors to play a key role in Beijing's attempts to revive its slowing economy.
"Foreign investments are welcome in China, and the door to China will only open up further," Mr. Liu, a top economic tsar and confidant of President Xi Jinping, said.
His speech to the World Economic Forum's (WEF) annual meeting mentioned "strengthening international cooperation" and "maintaining world peace" 11 times.
Mr. Liu made his speech as the release of new population data sounded an alarm on a demographic crisis with profound implications for the world's second largest economy.
New GDP data also showed economic growth slumped in 2022 to the worst level in nearly half a century.
Mr. Liu's visit to the Swiss ski resort is the first trip abroad by a high-level Chinese delegation since Beijing abruptly began dropping its "zero-COVID" curbs that shielded its 1.4 billion people from the coronavirus last month.
That policy also cut off China from the rest of the world for the past three years, stifling foreign investment.
At Davos, Mr. Liu is sitting down with CEOs of finance, tech, consumer, and industrial companies, a Chinese official familiar with the matter told Reuters. He will also meet other world leaders.
In his speech, Mr. Liu said he had caught up with many old friends, having last attended Davos in 2018. Former US Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers told Reuters he spoke with Mr. Liu on Monday for more than an hour, without giving details.
On Wednesday, Mr. Liu will meet US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen in Zurich for their first in-person meeting, although they have met virtually three times since she took office.
Mr. Liu's speech was another sign of Beijing's increased engagement with other countries in recent weeks. A recent thawing of relations with Australia paved the way for China to resume imports of Australian coal after a three-year halt.
And in November, Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., met on the Indonesian island of Bali where they agreed to follow-ups, including a planned visit to China by Secretary of State Antony Blinken in early 2023.
The visit by the high-level Chinese delegation to Davos also contrasted with the conspicuous absence of Russia, a key ally whose invasion of Ukraine China has refused to condemn.
WILL THE WEST BITE?
China's relations with the US and its allies have grown more tense throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, with Beijing and Washington sparring on issues from technology to Taiwan.
The bosses of global investor Fidelity International and accountancy giant EY on Tuesday were among the business leaders attending Davos who voiced concern about a potential decoupling of the two economies.
Mr. Liu's speech was aimed at addressing investor concerns, said Xingdong Chen, Chief China Economist and Head of BNPP Markets.
"Liu He, on behalf of Xi, wants to clarify the policy confusion and misunderstanding, and to reassure the world China will continue the market-oriented reform and opening."
The speech, he said, explained key concepts the ruling Communist Party has been pushing, such as the Chinese model of modernization and common prosperity.
"It seems the new leaders are reversing leftward policy changes and re-embarking on Deng Xiaoping's line of reform and opening," he added.
Whether global investors and leaders buy into China's new sales pitch remains to be seen.
US Congressman Seth Moulton, also in Davos, said he was highly worried about China's stance on Taiwan. Mr. Moulton, a Democrat, said the shift in tone did nothing to allay his fears.
Earlier, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said Europe must seek to work and trade with China, rather than decouple from it.
But she cautioned that Chinese subsidies were restricting access to the clean tech sector for European companies.
In addition to zero-COVID, the Chinese economy has been squeezed by a crisis in its vast property sector and a wide-ranging regulatory crackdown on sectors from technology to education, which have in turn hit foreign investment sentiment.
Mr. Liu referred to efforts by Chinese authorities to resolve a liquidity crunch in its real estate sector. He also said the country would continue to promote entrepreneurship and support the private sector, echoing recent signals from top Chinese officials that they would ease the crackdown.
Beijing was confident that China's economy would likely return to its normal growth trend in 2023 and was expecting more imports, corporate investment and consumption, he added.
He also called for more international cooperation, saying that more attention should be paid to the negative spillover effect of major countries' rate hikes on emerging markets and developing countries. He did not name the United States or the ECB, which have both hiked interest rates to stem inflation.
Asked about China's current COVID situation, Mr. Liu said that it was now steady and described the speed at which people were recovering as a surprise.
After lifting curbs, China has been hit by a wave of COVID cases that has emptied pharmacies, overwhelmed hospitals in many parts of the country and prompted some countries to impose entry restrictions on travelers from China. — Reuters
Previous article Previous post: Global growth to bottom out this year — IMF's Georgieva
Next article Next post: China's pessimistic Gen Z poses challenge for Xi post-COVID


Metastatic melanoma is a term used when melanoma cells of any kind (cutaneous, mucosal or ocular) have spread through the lymph nodes to distant sites in the body and/or to the body's organs. The most dangerous aspect of melanoma is its ability, in later stages, to spread (or metastasize) to other parts of the body.
Three groups of patients are identified: those with cutaneous, nodal, or gastrointestinal tract metastases; those with isolated pulmonary metastases; and those with liver, brain, or bone metastases.
Melanoma usually starts as a single lesion on the skin or mucous membranes. This lesion can progress to formation of metastases if it is not recognised and treated effectively at its early stages.
The risk of melanoma becoming metastatic is higher in individuals who have advanced primary melanomas, melanomas that are not fully removed or are not removed at all, and those who have suppression of the immune system.
Avoid the sun during the middle of the day. The sun's rays are strongest between about 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. Schedule outdoor activities for other times of the day, even in winter or when the sky is cloudy.
Use a broad-spectrum sunscreen with an SPF of at least 15. Apply sunscreen generously, and reapply every two hours — or more often if you're swimming or perspiring. The American Academy of Dermatology recommends using a broad-spectrum, water-resistant sunscreen with an SPF of at least 30.
Wear protective clothing. Sunscreens don't provide complete protection from UV rays. So cover your skin with dark, tightly woven clothing that covers your arms and legs and a broad-brimmed hat, which provides more protection than a baseball cap or visor does.
Become familiar with your skin so that you'll notice changes. Examine your skin regularly for new skin growths or changes in existing moles, freckles, bumps and birthmarks.
With the help of mirrors, check your face, neck, ears and scalp. Examine your chest and trunk and the tops and undersides of your arms and hands. Examine both the fronts and backs of your legs and your feet, including the soles and the spaces between your toes. Also check your genital area and between your buttocks.
Metastatic melanoma may be diagnosed on the basis of characteristic skin lesions. Other clues are enlarged lymph nodes and/or symptoms related to other organs.
Biopsy: Suspicious skin and subcutaneous lesions can be biopsied and show characteristic features of metastatic melanoma pathology. A sentinel node biopsy is sometimes performed after a primary melanoma is diagnosed. This is a biopsy of a regional lymph node to determine whether there are occult (not palpable) lymph node metastases.
Blood tests: The serum LDH is a marker for progressive metastatic disease at distant sites. When it is elevated it confers a worse prognosis, but often the LDH remains normal even in late-stage metastatic melanoma. Other laboratory tests are not routinely used because their value as pointers to the presence of metastases and/or prognosis is limited.
Chest x-ray: Lung metastases may be visible on chest x-ray, but, as melanoma metastases resemble other types of lung lesion, there are also a significant number of false positives meaning that this is not a very helpful investigation.
Ultrasound scanning: Can reveal liver metastases and lymph node metastases.
CT and MRI: Can show metastatic deposits in most body sites.
Positron emission tomography (PET) scanning: This is an important advance in imaging for metastatic disease. It shows up "hot spots" of tissue that are metabolising faster than normal tissue. It has been found to have good diagnostic accuracy for metastatic melanoma.
Significant progress has been made in the treatment of metastatic melanoma over the past decade.
The prognosis of melanoma depends on the disease staging, which is based around characteristics of the primary tumour, nodal and distant metastases. The prognosis is poorer with higher numbers of involved nodes and with metastases to internal organs and distant sites. The 10-year survival rate for patients with metastatic melanoma is still very low.
In most cases, it is not possible to completely eliminate or cure the cancer. Depending upon where and how big the metastases are, treatment may involve drug treatments, surgery, and/or radiation therapy.
Advances in the use of immunotherapy and targeted therapy have been shown to potentially improve survival and have become the preferred approaches for most patients with metastatic melanoma. Although chemotherapy was widely used in the past, it now has a secondary role for patients whose disease can no longer be controlled with either immunotherapy or targeted therapy.
Immunotherapy: Two different types of immunotherapy have been developed, high dose interleukin-2 (IL-2) and ipilimumab. Both of these have important benefits in some patients, although each can cause significant side effects.
- Interleukin-2 (IL-2): IL-2 is a form of immunotherapy that has been found to help some people with metastatic melanoma when given in high doses. In some people treated with high dose IL-2, the disease may disappear completely or stop growing for a prolonged period in excess of five years. IL-2 is usually given into a vein three times per day for five days twice per month. Treatment is usually completed while you are in the hospital. However, high dose IL-2 can cause serious side effects, including low blood pressure, irregular heart rhythms, accumulation of fluid in the lungs, fever, and rarely death. Because of this, treatment with high dose IL-2 is generally reserved for younger patients who are otherwise healthy and have good heart and lung function.
- Ipilimumab (Yervoy) is a drug that stimulates the body's immune system to react against the melanoma. Ipilimumab is given once every three weeks for a total of four doses. Treatment with ipilimumab may decrease the extent of your melanoma and help you live longer. However, ipilimumab can also cause the body to develop an immune reaction against its own tissues. This can result in a wide range of side effects that may be severe or life threatening. The most important of these include colitis (causing diarrhea, bleeding, or more serious complications), hepatitis, rash or inflammation of the skin, and inflammation of endocrine organs (pituitary, thyroid, or adrenal) leading to diminished hormone production. If this occurs, you might have to stop the ipilimumab and receive additional treatment for the complications. If one takes this drug, it is important to tell their doctor about any side effects they experience, even mild ones. This will help to avoid more serious complications.
Targeted therapy: About one-half of metastatic melanomas contain a specific mutation in one gene (BRAF) that causes the cell to make a particular protein that drives the growth of cancer cells. The melanoma actually becomes addicted to the actions of this protein (oncogene addiction).
Three drugs, vemurafenib (Zelboraf), dabrafenib (Taflinar), and trametinib (Mekinist) block this protein or the pathway it stimulates and cause tumors with this specific mutation in BRAF to shrink. These drugs thus prolong the time until there is disease growth and extend overall survival in patients with BRAF mutant melanoma. However, tumors eventually start to grow again despite continuation of treatment with this targeted therapy. The most significant side effects are the development of other kinds of skin cancers (non-melanoma), which can be managed with routine skin cancer care and do not require interruption of vemurafenib treatment, skin photosensitivity, joint pain, and fatigue.
Chemotherapy: Chemotherapy uses medicines such as dacarbazine or temozolomide to stop or slow the growth of cancer cells by interfering with the ability of cancer cells to divide or reproduce. Because most of an adult's normal cells are not actively growing, they are not affected by chemotherapy, with the exception of bone marrow (where the blood cells are produced), the hair, and the lining of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Effects of chemotherapy on these and other normal tissues result in side effects during treatment. Chemotherapy is less effective than immunotherapy with ipilimumab and targeted therapy with vemurafenib, and it generally is not used as the initial treatment for patients with advanced disease.
Surgery: Resection of distant metastases may also be considered for selected patients in whom a survival benefit might be expected with surgical rather than medical treatment. Surgery may potentially improve outcomes in patients with fully resectable oligometastatic disease. Although surgery alone probably won't cure the cancer, it can help you live longer and have fewer symptoms. Surgery may be recommended if melanoma has spread to one or a very limited number of sites. Surgery may prolong survival or relieve symptoms caused by the melanoma. However, surgery is rarely curative because metastatic melanoma usually spreads to many different places throughout the body. Surgery can also help to relieve pain caused by a metastatic tumor, such as in the lung or brain.
Radiation therapy: These can help some people, depending on the size and location of the cancer. Melanoma is considered a relatively radioresistant tumor, but patients may derive clinical benefit from radiation of symptomatic metastases. Radiation therapy is usually used as an adjunct to the use of systemic therapy. Radiation therapy is especially useful in patients with central nervous system (CNS) metastases, as most systemic therapies have limited penetration into the CNS. Melanoma frequently spreads to the brain. If the spread is limited to one or a very limited number of spots within the brain, surgery may be indicated to remove the tumor. However, if the tumor is in a location in the brain that cannot be easily removed, or if there are several tumors, radiation therapy may be useful to shrink the tumors and prevent the development of additional tumors. Radiation therapy may be given to only the parts of the brain containing tumor, using a technique called radiosurgery (or stereotactic radiation therapy). Alternatively, if more extensive disease is present in the brain, a technique called "whole brain" radiation therapy may be useful. Radiation therapy may also be used in some cases following surgery to destroy any cancer cells that remain in the brain.
Radiation therapy may also have a role in controlling symptoms from a particular site of metastasis, such as bone.
Many novel therapies are currently under investigation. Researchers are studying other drugs that spur the immune system to fight melanoma.
In some people with metastatic melanoma, the disease cannot be cured. Deciding when to stop treating the melanoma can be difficult, and this decision should involve the patient, family, friends, and the healthcare team.
[Leptomeningeal carcinomatosis as a rare metastatic spreading of BRAF-mutated microsatellite stable colon cancer].
ANGPTL4 promotes the progression of cutaneous melanoma to brain metastasis.
microRNA-33a-5p increases radiosensitivity by inhibiting glycolysis in melanoma.
Cutaneous Syncytial Myoepithelioma: A Recently Described Neoplasm Which May Mimic Nevoid Melanoma and Epithelioid Sarcoma.