Cats, charts, and politics
I get the irony and everything, but it is possible to have opposed the Iraq War while supporting the Ukraine War, which is a case of Ukrainians fighting back against an unprovoked invasion. Right?
For that matter, it's entirely possible to have supported both. Or opposed both. The only combination that would make me shake my head is supporting the Iraq War but opposing the Ukraine War. Unless you're Russian or something.
We're on vacation again! This is our first big vacation in five years thanks to this and that and, of course, COVID-19. But everything has gone swimmingly so far on this one. The flight was on time; our driver met us punctually at the airport; the weather is good (a little warm for me, but fine for most people); and we are happily ensconced in our little room. And, obviously, fully connected to the internet.
Needless to say, my sister is house sitting and reports that the cats adore her already. She is trying to get used to working with Hilbert sprawled across the desk.
But where are we?
The BLS released its annual report on foreign-born workers today, so let's celebrate by taking a look at the unemployment rate of native vs. foreign-born workers:
As you can see, foreign-born workers generally have a slightly lower unemployment rate than native-born workers, but during the pandemic they lost their jobs in large numbers and their unemployment rate spiked to two percentage points above native-born workers. However, they've gradually made up the difference, and by mid-2021 both native and foreign-born workers had about the same unemployment rate. In April both were at 3.3%.
Here's a squirrel poking its head above the grass to see if there's anything worth seeing. It was taken along Laguna Canyon Road.
Finland and Sweden formally applied for NATO membership on Wednesday, a move that, if approved, would fundamentally transform the security landscape of Northern Europe and give the alliance a valuable edge against Russia following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.
We can all thank Vladimir Putin, geopolitical master strategist, for this.
This is a Sara Orangetip butterfly, which got bumped from Monday's schedule by our lunar eclipse. So here she is now in all her orange-tipped glory. I've posted a picture of this butterfly before, but this is a much better shot. It's sharp enough that you can see the little black dots on its head.
Consider two ways of saying a similar thing:
Question: Do these seem like pretty much the same thing, with only a modest change in wording in order to appeal to different audiences? Do they express the same facts? Do they express the same sentiment? Can either or both be deemed racist, or are they basically just statements of demographic realities?
Consumers continue to spend, spend, spend:
Retail spending in April wasn't quite as great at the Wall Street Journal says, since they naturally didn't bother adjusting for inflation, but it was still pretty good. Spending in April was up 7% over March on an annualized basis, even though the trendline remains far above the pre-pandemic trend.
On the other hand, retail spending has been pretty flat since the start of 2021:
Growth has plateaued since last March, but the plateau is pretty high. So is this good news or bad? I'd say it's pretty good.
The problems with Abbott's infant formula plant in Sturgis just get mysteriouser and mysteriouser. The New York Times reports that Abbott has finally agreed with the FDA to reopen the Sturgis plant:
The agreement stems from a U.S. Department of Justice complaint and consent decree with the company and three of its executives. Those court records say the F.D.A. found a deadly bacteria, called cronobacter, in the plant in February and the company found more tranches of the bacteria later that month.
According to the complaint, the same Sturgis factory had also produced two batches of formula in the summer of 2019 and 2020 on different production equipment that tested positive for the bacteria.
Abbott staff “have been unwilling or unable to implement sustainable corrective actions to ensure the safety and quality of food manufactured for infants,” leading to the need for legal action, the documents state.
....The agreement said Abbott must hire a qualified expert to oversee a variety of improvements at the Sturgis facility.
The problems at the Sturgis plant appear to have been more severe than we've been led to believe:
Problems at the Abbott Sturgis plant surfaced in September during the F.D.A.’s first routine inspection there since the Covid-19 pandemic began. Inspectors discovered standing water inside the plant and personnel working directly with formula without proper hand hygiene, according to agency documents.
The following month, a whistleblower who worked at the plant filed a complaint under the Food Safety Modernization Act claiming that plant leaders celebrated concealing information from the F.D.A. and omitted key information from official documents.
The F.D.A. returned to the plant on Jan. 31 and discovered persistent problems, including the presence of cronobacter bacteria near production lines, according to agency records.
Obviously there's still information that none of us know. But tentatively, this sure sounds like an Abbott problem, not an FDA problem. Instead of stonewalling, Abbott could have fixed its problems in September—or, for that matter, in 2019 or 2020. But they didn't. Beyond that, they could have agreed to do what the FDA wanted back in February when they were first shut down. But it sounds like instead they argued and argued and argued, finally caving in only when the whole thing started getting lots of media attention.
It may be a while before we get the real story about Abbott's Sturgis factory, but for now all I see is the FDA trying to do its job and Abbott trying to take advantage of the FDA's limited resources in order to avoid having to do anything. Nor does it look like the FDA was being all nitpicky and unreasonable here. Abbott's plant in Columbus appears to be doing fine, after all.
Beyond this, maybe the FDA should deploy the threat of prison time for more than just three QA folks at Sturgis. Perhaps they should set their sights a little higher on the executive food chain?
Good news today. Last month I started a new chemo regimen and my M-protein level has already started to turn around:
This is only a small drop, but what matters is that my M-protein levels have been slowly rising for over a year and now they're headed in the other direction.
In other good news, all my other lab work looks pretty good, too. There were a bunch of miscellaneous items that had suddenly gone above their recommended values, but every one of them is now back in the normal range.
Most spectacular of all is my neutrophil level, which is a proxy for the strength of my immune system. The normal range is roughly 2000-7000, and I've almost never been within that range during the past seven years. On a few occasions I've been as low as 500. But last week's labs pegged me around 3000 and this week's labs have me at 5300. For now, at least, my immune system appears to be back to normal.