Firearms failure

Today is Memorial Day, a day to remember those who gave everything for our country. This post covers a topic that upsets me quickly. Our standard issue rifle in the military is the M4, a shorten version of the M16A2. It uses the standard NATO 5.56x45 mm ammunition or .223 Remington. This rifle is controversial for several reasons.

1. The lack of kill force from the smaller .22 bullet is a problem if the bullet travels at subsonic velocities.
2. Smaller mechanical components often fail to move causing the rifle to jam during combat in dirty conditions
3. Direct-impingement gas operation causes premature aging of the rifle's mechanical components due to excessive heat and fouling from direct exposure to the barrel.

When the initial M16s were given to soldiers in Vietnam, the weapons were a disaster. The inherent flaws mentioned above made the initial design useless to a soldier as they constantly jammed in the hot, humid jungles. After significant redesign (and change in powder), the rifle then became somewhat useful. Fast forward to the 1980's and beyond with the newer updated versions of the M16XX, the A2, A3 and A4. The newer incarnations limited the issues listed above through engineering improvements, but still it is a flawed design in nature. No other current assault rifle uses the direct-impingement system. It is a failed design and should be replaced with a short stroke or long stroke gas operating system. The internal moving parts also should have greater clearances preventing the rifle from jamming due to contamination.

The longer 20 inch barrel makes the NATO 5.56x45 mm ammo useful on the battlefield, but to what degree is still a topic of hot debate. Other countries use this round for their troops, thus it has validity as a reliable munition. Decreasing the barrel to 14.5 inches as in the M4, the velocity decreases to the point it is ineffective. This article reveals the inadequacies of the M4 in our current Afghanistan conflict. The Army even admits at long range,

But a U.S. Army study found that the 5.56 mm bullets fired from M-4s don't retain enough velocity at distances greater than 1,000 feet (300 meters) to kill an adversary. In hilly regions of Afghanistan, NATO and insurgent forces are often 2,000 to 2,500 feet (600-800 meters) apart.

At the end of the article, the expert's opinion rings true,

Martin Fackler, a ballistics expert, also defended the 5.56 mm round, blaming the M-4s inadequate performance on its short barrel, which makes it easier for soldiers to scramble out of modern armored vehicles.

"Unfortunately weapon engineers shortened the M-16's barrel to irrational lengths," Fackler said. "It was meant for a 20-inch barrel. What they've done by cutting the barrel to 14.5 inches is that they've lost a lot of velocity."

When a soldier's rifle fails, he is defenseless. Not only does he become an easy target, others in his company are easier targets for the enemy. This is a serious problem.

There is an easy, intermediate solution. Immediately replace the issued M4 with the M16A4 and it would not cause a large ordinance supply problem. It seems politics rule the day and our soldiers are paying with their lives. Since the M16 was not replaced years ago, it demonstrates who dominates our modern military, the military industrial complex.

Glass of wine for the brain?

Health studies are constantly being completed. The results are sometimes even surprising. This Spanish study links a delay in Alzheimer's disease to moderate drinking in women. The study took into lifestyle considerations while performing the research. Results were conclusive with the alcohol consumption benefiting nonsmoker women the most.

"Our results suggest a protective effect of alcohol consumption, mostly in non-smokers, and the need to consider interactions between tobacco and alcohol consumption, as well as interactions with gender, when assessing the effects of smoking and/or drinking on the risk of Alzheimer's disease," the study's lead author, Ana M. Garcia, from the University of Valencia's department of preventive medicine and public health, said in a news release.

This seems odd when initially thinking about the issue, but not really. Drinking effects the brain's function (ever had a conversation with a rational drunk?) and specially the chemistry. The study's authors point this out.

"Interactive effects of smoking and drinking are supported by the fact that both alcohol and tobacco affect brain neuronal receptors," Garcia explained.

The take home message from this study is scientists may know quite a few things about the human body, but a significant amount of study could still be completed on the things we don't know. The medical field has much to learn and research should be heavily funded.

Good upbringing is warm as apple pie

I occasionally cover health topics on this blog. This study that was recently published supports the nurture side of the nurture versus nature argument. The study examined the blood of 53 individuals from lower socioeconomics status (SES) and examined for genetic markers of inflammation. In layman's terms, they are trying to track potential, chronic illness later in life and correlate it with the factor how close an individual is to their mother. Apparently, chronic illness and inflammation are correlated. Correlations do not mean guarantees, but are higher probabilities. The article puts it simply.

Chronic inflammation is linked to a number of conditions, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, depression and cancer. Cole compared inflammation to a "fertilizer" that feeds disease. For example, in women who have been successfully treated for breast cancer, those who show high levels of inflammation have twice the risk of a recurrence of the cancer, research has shown.

This study found that having a harsh life when young does lead to a greater number of inflammation markers. The environment is activating certain genes. The article states.

Early life experiences can lead to the release of hormones that channel the body into being more or less prone to chronic inflammation, Cole said.

Harsh family life

In another recent study, published online April 29 in Psychological Science, researchers found that adolescent girls who reported having harsh family lives growing up - abusive, neglectful or violent - had increasing markers of inflammation during the 18-month study period compared with girls who came from more stable homes.

Neither an abusive home nor a cool relationship with mom automatically translates into disease later on in life, however. Cole said early family experiences are one factor that shapes the way the body responds to stress. From his research, Cole hopes to develop a checklist of risk factors, including family upbringing, that can guide treatment decisions.

Being a good loving family not only spiritually encourages people, it physically helps. The article gives hope by also stating that coming from a low SES is not a cause for the markers if the family is loving and caring. This gives further hope for those who come from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Europe stops fiddling while Greece burns!

This post is a combination of several other past blog topics. It will cover economics and the stock market.

In March, I discussed the economic crisis in Greece in the post The slippery slope of Greece. In the post, four options to Greece's crisis were presented:

Option 1: EU bails out Greece with emergency loans at low rates and Greece implements austerity budget spending.
Results: If the money comes in from the other EU members, it will give Greece a little breathing room to fix problems. This requires the most powerful EU member's, Germany, blessing. If the money does show, I rather doubt Greece will do more than superficial changes to government spending. Greece has cheated on its obligations in the past, thus, why should it change now? EU members know this. The cash influx would last about 6 months and nothing structurally would have changed. Greece would be where it started. Even if the austerity measures were fully implemented, Greeks make is a national past time to protest. The economy would face a decline in productivity resulting in further economic problems.

Option 2: Bailout from the US Federal Reserve in low rate loans
Results: Same as in option 1. The advantage of this scenario is it could be kept secret. For Europeans, it is the best option since Europe do not have to pay. American taxpayers get the bill when option 4 below occurs.

Option 3: International Monetary Fund (IMF) steps in and gives emergency loans to Greece.
Results: Same as option 1 again. Two negative aspects loom here. One, I believe this would break terms of the EU. Other EU states would retaliate, dumping on Greece in various ways. Greece might get thrown out of the EU. Two, the spending restrictions the IMF imposes during its assistance programs are harsh. Greece will enter into an economic downward spiral as socialist union workers shut the country down from mass protests.

Option 4: Greece defaults on sovereign debt
Results: It is impossible to determine what will occur after the actual fact. Greece would enter into a severe depression though. The key is membership within the EU. Will it remain a full or partial EU member? Will it keep the euro as a currency? I am guessing the IMF would step in here and impose their will. Greece would have to accept a bitter pill.

It appears as if a variation of Option 1 won. The ECB announced last night along with aid from the IMF a $955 billion rescue fund for the entirety of the EU states dependent upon the Euro. The plan is bailing out all of Europe! The intention of the rescue was to defend the value of the Euro. Really, the plan is nothing more than printing money and providing it to banks across Europe. In the long term, it is going to devalue the Euro even further. It does not directly address the crisis in Europe and especially Greece, too much debt.


In two previous posts, Markets and psychology along with Market observations, I present Elliot Wave Theory and how equity markets are driven by investor sentiment. It is time for a Dr. Coffee's Market Update.

In February, I was predicting that we had begun Primary Wave 3, AKA the Ponzi wave. The market had a mind of its own and recovered after the sell off in January and February. It continued on the ever appreciating march to the moon. Primary Wave 2 had not yet finished and had me fooled into a sudden crash as expected in Primary 3.

Well, things have changed. The sudden drop and high volume accompanied with the sell off starting on April 27 is more characteristic of a 3rd wave. Last Thursday had the Dow Jones Industrial Average briefly drop almost a 1000 points! Today, after the European bailout was announced, all of the US indexes shot up over 4%. This is typical of a bear market rally and indicates that Primary 3 has launched. I believe this is where we are at within the wave structure:
Cycle 3 of 5 (Primary wave 3)
Intermediate 1 of 5
Minor 2 of 5

If this is true, expect significant downside to the US stock market. If not, the market may fool me again!! I reserve the right to be wrong.

Oil all over the Gulf

Everyone is talking about that British Petroleum (BP) oil rig that is leaking 200,000 gallons (~40,000 barrels) of oil into the Gulf of Mexico daily. I try to avoid politically charged topics, but this fits into a couple of prior post covering the limited oil available in the world and the current, unrealistic view of alternative energy. I will converge on these ideas near the end. I really see no good side to this mess as the politicos will start spewing hateful, partisan words. No one is willing to accept our society's dependency on oil or is willing to properly invest in an alternative.

First, the oil spill from this oil rig is a disaster. The oil is getting spread everywhere in the Gulf and will find its way onto the Gulf beaches. Most likely the spill will contaminate beautiful beaches for years into the future. Tourism is going to drop. It will also devastate the local fisheries and shrimping industry. My heart goes out to these victims living in the region. BP should pay for every portion of the clean up and also provide a monetary fund for these people. Even if BP pays, it will not make up for the economic damage. Damage is done.

Second, the technological issue comes from the leak source. It appears as if safety mechanisms failed, and the several leaks are hundreds of feed underwater. The high oil pressure is just spraying crude oil into the water uncontrollably. It is difficult working at such depths. BP can't just easily turn off the oil. That is why this incident has turned into such a mess. Whether BP was drilling responsibly or whether they were taking undue risks, we shall never know. Hopefully, what did occur will bring about new equipment or regulations to prevent such a mess in the future (there is some optimist in me).

Third, we would like to ween ourselves off of oil, but no alternative exists. Two factors play into this: 1) partisan politics preventing significant action, 2) those who are proponents of alternative fuel sources are dishonest at the current oil alternative development, years from implementation. This being said, if the oil supply decrease by 50 % or more over night the results would be devastating to the Western world. These events would occur.

1. The economy would suffer a severe slump. Transporting goods and items from factories to stores would cease. Consumers could not reach stores to buy goods. Workers could not go to employment sites. Severe disruption to our daily life would occur.
2. Travel beyond a few miles would cease. No planes, trains or automobiles. Kiss any business or pleasure trip good bye.
3. Mass starvation. Our food sources from agriculture are dependent upon oil. It takes oil to power tractors to plow fields. Oil is required to plant and harvest crops. Modern day nitrogen based fertilizers use oil as the primary feedstock. Even what little food could be harvested, it would not make it to market.
   

Oil is more important than what people realize. This is why we as a society should be investing heavily into research and development towards an ecologically safe, renewable oil alternative. Government and private sources combined. We need to make this a reality in the next few years, not decades as the current path is leading us. It will be a liquid fuel based transportation and not electric vehicles as I argued against (electric cars could contribute in a limited fashion). Potentially, our modern society's future survival depends upon this action.