Blog

Can Women Save Japan? Needed more career positions & better support for working mothers. Sound familiar?

By Chad Steinberg; Masato Nakane

Summary:

Japan’s potential growth rate is steadily falling with the aging of its population. This paper explores the extent to which raising female labor participation can help slow this trend.

Using a cross-country database we find that smaller families, higher female education, and lower marriage rates are associated with much of the rise in women’s aggregate participation rates within countries over time, but that policies are likely increasingly important for explaining differences across countries.

Raising female participation could provide an important boost to growth, but women face two hurdles in participating in the workforce in Japan. First, few working women start out in career-track positions, and second, many women drop out of the workforce following childbirth.

To increase women’s attachment to work Japan should consider policies to reduce the gender gap in career positions and to provide better support for working mothers.

From the Introduction:

We argue that Japan needs to do two things.

First, it must end the gender gap in hiring and promotion practices. Japan has by far the lowest rate of female managers among advanced economies. Increasing the number of women role models would influence women’s career choices. Second, Japan must do more to support working mothers. A more flexible work environment and better child care facilities
would help stanch the outflow of women from the workforce after childbirth. We think these policies would also be effective in reducing the high incidence of poverty among single mothers.

To achieve these changes, the following measures could be considered: (1)
reallocating public resources away from monetary benefits to in-kind benefits, such as child care facilities, that would help support working mothers; (2) deregulating the child care industry to help increase the number of facilities; (3) extending the duration and broadening the coverage of parental leave policies; (4) eliminating institutional exemptions on spousal income in the social security and tax systems; (5) reducing disparities between part-time and full-time workers; (6) encouraging firms to adopt more flexible work environments; (7) ensuring that current promotion and employment policies are enforced equitably to help increase the number of female career employees; (8) introducing a new, more flexible labor
contract for career employees that would reduce hiring risks for firms; and (9) possibly establishing new rules for the number of female directors on corporate boards.

Free Full Text: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2012/wp12248.pdf

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the Internatinal Monetary Fund or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate

October 17, 2012
New Insights Into How Genetic Differences Among Individuals Influence Breast Cancer Risk from Low-Dose Radiation

Scientists from the US Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory have identified tissue mechanisms that may influence a woman’s susceptibility or resistance to breast cancer after exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation, such as the levels used in full-body CT scans and radiotherapy.

The research could lead to new ways to identify women who have higher or lower risks of breast cancer from low-dose radiation. Such a predictive tool could help guide the treatment of cancer patients who may be better served by non-radiation therapies.

Andy Wyrobek (left) and Antoine Snijders are among a team of Berkeley Lab scientists that is exploring the connection between genetic differences, tissue mechanisms, and women’s susceptibility to breast cancer after exposure to low-dose radiation.

The findings also support the idea that a person’s genes play a big role in determining her risk of breast cancer from low-dose radiation. The current model for predicting cancer risk from ionizing radiation holds that risk is directly proportional to dose. But there’s a growing understanding that this linear relationship doesn’t apply at lower doses. Instead, the health effects of low-dose radiation may vary substantially among people depending on their genetic makeup.

The scientists, led by Andy Wyrobek of Berkeley Lab’s Life Sciences Division, report their research October 15 in the journal PLOS ONE.

They studied mammary tissue from two strains of mice — one that is susceptible to radiation-induced mammary gland cancer and one that is resistant — before and after the mice were exposed to low-dose radiation.

The team then looked for differences between the two strains in how their genes turn on and off. They used a method that scans thousands of genes simultaneously. They found differences in genes that regulate tissue stress response, DNA repair, immune response, cellular proliferation, and other cellular and tissue mechanisms.

They also found that these differences carried over to breast cancer survivability in women. Breast cancer patients with gene expression profiles like the cancer-resistant mice (before radiation exposure) were more likely to survive eight years after diagnosis. Women with gene expression profiles like the cancer-sensitive mice were less likely to survive after eight years.

Based on this, the scientists believe the cellular and tissue mechanisms that control mice’s risk of mammary gland cancer from low-dose radiation are similar to the mechanisms that affect a woman’s chance of surviving breast cancer.

“Our studies of genetic differences in radiation sensitivity in mice, and individual variation in breast cancer survival in women, suggest that there are women who, because of their genes, have a higher risk of breast cancer when they’re exposed to low-dose radiation,” says Andy Wyrobek, who conducted the research with Antoine Snijders, Joe Gray, and several other Berkeley Lab scientists.

“This raises the possibility that we can use gene expression profiles to develop simple tests that screen for women who may be sensitive to low-dose radiation versus women who are resistant,” Snijders says.

October 16, 2012
CultureWatch Books: The Hemlock Cup and Train Dreams

In This Issue

Bettany Hughes’ The Hemlock Cup transcends a mere factual recounting of what we know about Socrates; the book makes the fifth century BC as accessible as possible to a modern reader. Denis Johnson’s protagonist in Train Dreams represents a tradition of American men in the developing great West who struggled through to their unnoticed deaths after surviving the first World War.

THE HEMLOCK CUP

Socrates, Athens and the Search for the Good Life

By Bettany Hughes, © 2010

Published in the United States by Alfred A. Knopf; Hardcover: 371 pp.

Socrates Taking Leave of His Family, sculpted by Antonio Canova, 1787 – 02, Gallerie di Piazza Scala. Source: ArtGate Fondazione Cariplo

The author of this book is a woman of considerable accomplishment. Her education includes degrees in ancient and medieval history from Oxford University, and she holds a Research Fellowship at King’s College, London. Her first book, Helen of Troy, has been translated into nearly a dozen languages. She has written documentaries for the BBC, PBS, The Discovery Channel, the History Channel, and National Geographic.

The staggering amount of research that has gone into The Hemlock Cup is the kind of scholarship one would expect from an academic, but Ms. Hughes also possesses a fine story-telling mind.

Her gifts transcend a mere factual recounting of what we actually know about Socrates: they enable her to re-create the sights and sounds of his times, making the 5th century BC as accessible as possible to a modern reader.

Socrates may be the best-known of the Greek philosophers, but he left us no record in his own hand. We know whatever we know about him from the writings of others, his students and/or critics, men like Plato, Xenophon, and Aristophanes. They were, no doubt, reliable eyewitnesses, but they were writing within the context of their own time, i.e. with the supposition that a reader would be familiar with the physical surroundings, as well as the customs, politics, leaders, and religious influences in place during the 5th century BC in Greece.

Inasmuch as few among us have detailed knowledge of those influences, never mind
understanding the plain daily life of that century, we may be most appreciative of Ms. Hughes’ ability to fill us in from just about every conceivable angle, including the oft-neglected status of women (or at least of some women) in ancient Athens. Socrates’ wife, Xanthippe, is mentioned only briefly (but not, to be sure, as disparagingly as she has been pictured by others), but the profile of Aspasia, consort of Pericles, is detailed and quite surprising. Aspasia was one formidable woman, clever and skilled in many arts (including sexual matters). She also seems to have possessed the remarkable gift of the bards, a memory that allowed her to recite long tales and histories verbatim.

October 15, 2012
Eleanor Roosevelt’s Fight for Labor Rights Lives On

Then as now, labor rights and labor’s voice in politics are under heavy attack.

By Brigid O’Farrell

Eleanor Roosevelt and Women’s Trade Union League, 1954. National Archives and Records Administration; Franklin D. Roosevelt Library

This is a good time to reflect on First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt’s values and how she translated those values into action on behalf of ideas and people she supported. Eleanor Roosevelt strongly believed in workers, their unions, and their involvement in the political process. A member of The Newspaper Guild, AFL-CIO for over 25 years, she came to see unions as fundamental to democracy itself. In 1941, she told striking IBEW workers that “it was important that everyone who was a worker join a labor organization.” Under her guidance, the right to join a union was included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yet workers’ rights remain under heavy attack today. Her legacy is still in need of protection and promotion.

The fact that US workers have a collective voice in the political process is firmly rooted in the New Deal. Eleanor and Franklin Roosevelt believed that workers had a right to a voice at work as well as a voice in politics. They also saw the two as closely intertwined as they worked with labor to win elections and support their progressive agenda. John L. Lewis, president of the United Mine Workers Union, and Sidney Hillman, president of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers’ Union, led the labor movement in contributing money and getting out the union vote for President Roosevelt’s re-election efforts. Resistance was fierce. Then, as now, they were outspent by anti-union forces. Yet by 1947, Mrs. Roosevelt concluded in her “My Day” column that while “labor today is stronger than it used to be, it is no stronger than organized capital.”

Similar anti-union initiatives continue to this day. Many people in California are members of labor unions, from airplane pilots and grocery store clerks to nurses and teachers, mail carriers and electricians, police officers and fire fighters. Through their unions the pay dues, elect officers, and participate in decisions that affect their pay, benefits, and workplace safety. Should these union members also be allowed to have a collective voice in our political process through their unions?

Proposition 32, on the November ballot in California, says “no.” This proposition exempts powerful corporate interests from the limits on political spending but imposes formidable barriers to unions. Paycheck deductions – money raised through voluntary deductions from workers’ paychecks – could no longer be used for political activities. Only unions, however, not companies or wealthy individuals, rely on voluntary paycheck deductions as their source of funding to support political action.

October 13, 2012
Argo, the Movie and Wired Magazine: How the CIA Used a Fake Sci-Fi Flick to Rescue Americans From Tehran By Joshuah Bearman

“November 4, 1979, began like any other day at the US embassy in Tehran. The staff filtered in under gray skies, the marines manned their posts, and the daily crush of anti-American protestors massed outside the gate chanting, ‘Allahu akbar! Marg bar Amrika!’ “

“Mark and Cora Lijek, a young couple serving in their first foreign service post, knew the slogans — “God is great! Death to America!” — and had learned to ignore the din as they went about their duties. But today, the protest sounded louder than usual. And when some of the local employees came in and said there was “a problem at the gate,” they knew this morning would be different. Militant students were soon scaling the walls of the embassy complex. Someone forced open the front gate, and the trickle of invaders became a flood. The mob quickly fanned across the 27-acre compound, waving posters of the Ayatollah Khomeini. They took the ambassador’s residence, then set upon the chancery, the citadel of the embassy where most of the staff was stationed.”

“At first, the Lijeks hoped the consulate building where they worked would escape notice. Because of recent renovations, the ground floor was mostly empty. Perhaps no one would suspect that 12 Americans and a few dozen Iranian employees and visa applicants were upstairs. The group included consular officer Joseph Stafford, his assistant and wife, Kathleen, and Robert Anders, a senior officer in the visa department.”

“They tried to keep calm, and even to continue working. But then the power went out and panic spread throughout the building. The Iranian employees, who knew the revolutionary forces’ predilection for firing squads, braced for the worst. “There’s someone on the roof,” one Iranian worker said, trembling. Another smelled smoke. People began to weep in the dark, convinced the militants would try to burn down the building. Outside, the roar of the victorious mob grew louder. There were occasional gunshots. It was time to flee.”

Read the rest of the article in the 2007 issue of Wired Magazine. The new movie, Argo, is based on this article and the book by Tony Mendez, The Master of Disguise.

Above: Americans were grateful for Canadian efforts to rescue American diplomats during the Iran hostage crisis. US Department of State photo.

October 12, 2012
Ferida Wolff’s Backyard: Many Mushrooms and Squash, a Fruit and a Vegetable?

Many Mushrooms

My father-in-law took a course in mushroom identification. He would go out into the field with his guidebook looking for specimens. Yet much as he liked to eat mushrooms, I don’t think he ever picked any in the wild. He was a smart man. Wild mushrooms can be dangerous to eat. Some have toxins that can cause digestive or respiratory problems that are uncomfortable, while others are downright life-threatening. But the right kind of mushroom (and there are many varieties to choose from) is delicious.

Which brings me to agaricus, a common whitish field mushroom. Button mushrooms fall into this category. I saw some mushrooms that looked sort of like golf balls. They grow on lawns all around my house. Tempting as it was to pick and cook, I limited my appreciation to the visual. Then I went out to my favorite market and bought a carton of safely farmed produce that I can enjoy without worry.

I tend to be casual when I cook and mushrooms are so easy to work with, they make perfect dishes. I like to sauté crimini mushrooms in a little olive oil with chopped basil, garlic, and pine nuts, then sprinkle on a little grated cheese, serve them over pasta and … yum.

Portobello mushrooms are great stuffed with almost anything — rice, ground turkey or beef, tofu, squash, spinach — drizzle a little sauce of your choice over the top and bake. Shitaki mushrooms lend themselves beautifully to dishes with Asian spices. If you want a more precise way to prepare them and favor a world view of mushroom dishes, take a look here:

http://www.mushroominfo.com/recipes?gclid=CMiavaGB8rICFSXNOgodhW8A8Q

If anyone has a favorite mushroom dish, please feel free to share. We mushroom lovers will be delighted. For some mushroom varieties and photos:

http://homecooking.about.com/library/weekly/bl092897b.htm

And for a very basic description of field mushrooms: http://urbanext.illinois.edu/woods/21NN.html

Editor’s Note: When we first moved to California in the 1960s a friend gifted us with A Field Guide to Mushrooms: North America. See the Peterson Field Guide above. That gift revealed that mushroom hunting is an extremely popular hobby in the San Francisco Bay Area as well as in the northwestern part of the country. We have recently learned that the Puget Sound Mycological Society is one of the largest such societies in the United States.

October 11, 2012
Do Objects Surrounding Us Influence Gender Perceptions?

Perception of faces is biased towards the opposite gender after six seconds of exposure to objects associated to one gender

Spending too much time looking at high heels may influence how a viewer perceives the gender of an androgynous face, according to new research published PLOS ONE by Amir Homayoun Javadi of Technische Universität, Dresden and his colleagues. The study sheds new light on how the objects surrounding us may influence our perceptions of gender.

The authors found that when people view objects highly associated with one gender, like high heels for women or electric shavers for men, for a short period of time and are then asked to identify the gender of an androgynous face, they are more likely to identify it as being of the gender opposite to that associated with the stimuli.

Previous studies have demonstrated that continuous exposure to certain visual stimuli causes short and long term adaptations with temporary aftereffects due to repeated stimulation of specific pathways in the brain. For example, after prolonged exposure to a red screen, a viewer is more likely to perceive a white screen as being green (the perceptual opposite of red). This study, though, is the first demonstrating that such adaptation can occur for a more abstract feature like gender perception.

The authors suggest two possible explanations for their results. The first possibility they suggest is that common brain regions may be involved in identifying gender-associated objects and identifying the gender of androgynous faces, so the effect is akin to what occurs in the red screen-white screen example above. Alternately, the researchers suggest that a higher cognitive function of ‘adapting to gender’ may modulate the process of ‘assigning gender’, whether to an object or an androgynous face.

“This study highlights how exposure to objects in our environment can affect our perception of gender in everyday life” says Javadi, lead author of the paper.

Thanks to Public Library of Science for this article. Citation: Javadi AH, Wee N (2012) Cross-Category Adaptation: Objects Produce Gender Adaptation in the Perception of Faces.

October 10, 2012
John B. Gurdon and Shinya Yamanaka, 2012 Nobel Prize for Medicine

The Nobel Prize recognizes two scientists who discovered that mature, specialised cells can be reprogrammed to become immature cells capable of developing into all tissues of the body. Their findings have revolutionised our understanding of how cells and organisms develop.

John B. Gurdon discovered in 1962 that the specialisation of cells is reversible. In a classic experiment, he replaced the immature cell nucleus in an egg cell of a frog with the nucleus from a mature intestinal cell. This modified egg cell developed into a normal tadpole. The DNA of the mature cell still had all the information needed to develop all cells in the frog.

Shinya Yamanaka discovered more than 40 years later, in 2006, how intact mature cells in mice could be reprogrammed to become immature stem cells. Surprisingly, by introducing only a few genes, he could reprogram mature cells to become pluripotent stem cells, i.e. immature cells that are able to develop into all types of cells in the body.

These groundbreaking discoveries have completely changed our view of the development and cellular specialisation. We now understand that the mature cell does not have to be confined forever to its specialised state. Textbooks have been rewritten and new research fields have been established. By reprogramming human cells, scientists have created new opportunities to study diseases and develop methods for diagnosis and therapy.

Life – a journey towards increasing specialisation

All of us developed from fertilized egg cells. During the first days after conception, the embryo consists of immature cells, each of which is capable of developing into all the cell types that form the adult organism. Such cells are called pluripotent stem cells. With further development of the embryo, these cells give rise to nerve cells, muscle cells, liver cells and all other cell types — each of them specialised to carry out a specific task in the adult body. This journey from immature to specialised cell was previously considered to be unidirectional. It was thought that the cell changes in such a way during maturation that it would no longer be possible for it to return to an immature, pluripotent stage.

Frogs jump backwards in development

John B. Gurdon challenged the dogma that the specialised cell is irreversibly committed to its fate. He hypothesised that its genome might still contain all the information needed to drive its development into all the different cell types of an organism. In 1962, he tested this hypothesis by replacing the cell nucleus of a frog’s egg cell with a nucleus from a mature, specialised cell derived from the intestine of a tadpole. The egg developed into a fully functional, cloned tadpole and subsequent repeats of the experiment yielded adult frogs. The nucleus of the mature cell had not lost its capacity to drive development to a fully functional organism.

October 8, 2012
Fall Musings: An On30 scale conversion, cat antics and a Vegas-like bedroom

by Roberta McReynolds

Mike decided that it is time to redo his model railroad. He had filled up every square inch of available space and there was nothing left to keep him occupied. Designing landscape and detailing the models is his real passion, but not so much the actual running of the trains. Besides, his impaired vision makes it too difficult to continue working in HO-scale.

The new scale is called On30. If I understand it correctly, and there’s no guarantee that I do, it is O-scale except that the ‘n’ means narrow-gauge (the equivalent of 30” track on a real narrow-gauge railroad). So, the models are O-scale, but can run on HO-scale track. Something like that … or not. I don’t know. All I do know is that Mike and his buddies are tearing up the inside of the train room.

The ‘deconstruction’ phase is messy. Dust from plaster scenery, sawdust, and everything else is getting tracked into the house. I need to vacuum hourly to keep up, but it isn’t worth the effort. Besides, I’ve discovered a new excuse for having dirty floors.

It’s a fact that most cats don’t appreciate vacuum cleaners to varying degrees. Kiisu doesn’t actually panic until I enter the room she happens to be occupying, waiting until I (and the dreaded mechanical monster) safely clear the doorway so she can make a hasty retreat. She generally dashes for the garage, since she has never seen me vacuum that environment.

Phoebe, on the other hand, prefers to keep the vacuum cleaner in sight. Apparently she believes if she can view it from a respectable distance it can’t possibly sneak up behind her and attack. She follows me from room to room, observing my progress warily, but staying well out of range. It just dawned on me that perhaps she can read and has noticed that the brand name of the vacuum is “Shark” and that she isn’t taking any chances about whether it possesses a set of jaws and sharp teeth!

While preparing to do chores last week I removed the vacuum from the hall closet and rolled it down to the bedroom. I unwound the cord and plugged it into the outlet in the hallway, which is roughly the midpoint of the house and within the full stretch of the electrical cord. My typical routine is to start at one end of the house, work down the hall, and finish up in the living room.

I completed half the bedroom and then turned off the appliance to stop and gather up all the cat toys strewn about. The place tends to look like all eight grandchildren came for a visit at the same, when in reality we live with only two cats. Quite honestly, it’s probably the other way around; the cats run the house and we are their humble servants.

In addition to every conceivable cat-toy on the market, there is also a dish of dry cat food in the room (besides all the available food near the kitchen). It’s a long explanation; for the sake of the story, just accept that it is there … that’s what we have learned to do. I started picking up the dry food that had spilled on the carpet before vacuuming over the area. The Shark has a safety feature that causes it to shut off automatically if it overheats or gets clogged up, and I was making a conscious effort to take the time to remove any potential hazards.

Photograph: A Shay locomotive in On30 scale, based on the Bachmann Industries model, Wikipedia.

October 7, 2012
Our Saddest NPR Moment: The Retirement of the Magliozzi Brothers of Car Talk Fame

Editor’s Note: In the late ’90s, we called Car Talk for Time Magazine’s Notebook section to ask Tom and Ray which ‘retired’ car would they like to see revived. Their producer, Dougie Berman, asked and they replied. But Car Talk was a fixture of our lives, an eagerly-looked- forward-to bright spot on the Saturday morning routine. It still is — but in edited past versions.

But here’s a look back at Click and Clack, the Tappet brothers, and we recommend the NPR Car Talk site — for answers to your automotive questions, that is, if a new administration doesn’t apply the budget-cutting ax to CPB. Keep listening to NPR’s most popular hour-length program and support the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

The History of Car Talk

Including the tale of a tragic mistake by NPR and, for the first time ever, the true story about what happened to that radio trophy that George Peabody gave us.

A lot of folks want to know how we got started.

To answer this, we need to quickly review some basics of biology: in the beginning there was our magnificent mother, Elizabeth Magliozzi, and our esteemed pere, Louis Magliozzi.

Okay, okay, we know — you couldn’t care less about our formative years, when Tommy took apart and rebuilt our dad’s heap over and over again — each time having a few extra parts, until eventually there was nothing left to disassemble.

You want to know about “Car Talk.” You’re probably wondering how two low-life bums like us could end up having a weekly radio show on a prestigious network like NPR. We’re wondering too. We’ve been wondering for years — but it doesn’t stop us from cashing that paycheck that shows up every month.

The truth is, we got a call one day back in 1977, from Vic Wheatman, the Program Director at Boston’s WBUR Radio. Now, this was at the time when WBUR was a tiny little college radio station, with a signal that would get staticy whenever the wind blew.

Anyway, Vic called, asking if Tom and Ray would sit in with four other grease monkeys on a call in talk show about car mechanics. After a few milliseconds of thinking about it, Tom realized he had nothing more meaningful to do with his life, and said, “sure.” (Ray claims he had a hair dressers appointment that day. This is unlikely but plausible, since Ray had hair in those days.) It turned out, Tom was the only one who showed up – all the other mechanics decided not to show their faces — wisely assuming that this “radio show” was probably some kind of Department of Consumer Affairs sting operation. So the panel of five turned out to be a panel of one: Tom. Things went surprisingly well, though: Tom gave out many wrong answers, and misled many callers — but did so with such finesse that he was invited back the following week.

And when Thomas showed up that next time the studio was empty. Vic Wheatman had been fired! There was a letter saying, “You’re on your own, have a good time, and try to watch your language.”

This was an historic moment in Car Talk history, for it was the only time a Program Director was fired before he or she put “Car Talk” on the air!

And the next week, Tom made The Biggest Mistake in the History of Car Talk: he brought along his brother, Ray.

The early days of Car Talk was a time when dinosaurs roamed the earth and people actually worked on their own cars. We answered a lot of questions like, “I’m stuck with my left arm in the transmission, how do I get it out?” and, “I lost a three-eighths hex wrench taking off the cylinder head, but I can’t bend down to pick it up because I have the timing chain in my right hand — could you send your brother over to help me?

We were crammed into a tiny studio. It was the two of us, and an engineer who ran the control board — he had to be damn quiet, or you’d hear him on the air. We’d walked in five minutes before air time, and we always started the show with “Are we on yet? Are we on yet?” Because, the fact was, we never knew for sure when we were on the air.

The show went on in a much more leisurely pace in those days. We were on for an hour and a half, during which time we’d answer approximately three questions. It’s painful to listen to those shows, now. These days, of course, we have a producer and all that stuff. Dougie Berman is always saying things like, “answer the question! answer the damn question!”

October 6, 2012