Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE US FEDERAL RESERVE did what investors expected yesterday — saying it would buy Treasury bonds to help the economy.
But stocks fell anyway. The reason? The Fed made it clear that it thinks a full economic recovery is years away.
The Dow Jones industrial average lost 283.82 points, or 2.5 percent, and closed at 11,124.84. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index fell 35.33, or 2.9 percent, to 1,166.76. The Nasdaq composite fell 52.05, or 2 percent, to 2,538.19.
Investors bought Treasury bonds because of concerns about the weak economy. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note fell to a record low of 1.86 percent from late Tuesday’s 1.93 percent.
And the price of oil continued its slide on expectations that there’ll be less demand for energy because of the economy. Crude fell $1 to $85.92 on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
The industries that fell the most Wednesday were the ones that have suffered amid worries about the economy this summer: financial and industrial companies and those that sell non-essentials to consumers. Retailers were among the biggest losers.
Wednesday’s trading recalled the sharp losses the market has suffered this summer as investors feared that the country was heading toward another recession.
The Fed said after a two-day meeting that it would buy long-term bonds and sell short-term ones to help the economy regain momentum. It surprised investors when it said it would include more 30-year bonds in its purchases than expected.
“It’s being viewed as perhaps an admission that this is a longer-term issue that the US economy is facing and not one that’s going to be solved over a couple of years,” said Oliver Pursche, president of Gary Goldberg Financial Services.
The major indexes fluctuated as they often do after major Fed announcements. The losses accelerated in the last hour of trading.
The Fed said it would buy $400 billion in 6-year to 30-year Treasurys by June 2012. Over the same period, it planned to sell $400 billion of Treasurys maturing in 3 years or less. The move is intended to drive down interest rates on long-term government debt, and could lower rates on mortgages and other loans.
Those purchases are intended to send long-term rates down — Treasury yields fall when the bonds are in demand. The inclusion of more 30-year bonds than expected means the Fed saw the need to keep very long-term rates lower for an extended period. And that took investors by surprise, Pursche said.
“When the Fed decides to take this type of action, it’s because things are serious,” Pursche said.
The Fed had some bleak remarks about the state of the economy in the statement that accompanied its decision to buy more bonds. The Fed said the economy has “significant downside risks.” One of those risks is the volatility in financial markets around the world.
It also listed a number of problems that won’t be easily solved: high unemployment, a depressed housing market and consumer spending that is growing only at a slow pace.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
It has since become a profitable source of income of certain NGOs who focus on unaffected children born decades after the disaster rather than adults, who were children at the time, who carry a burden of an increased risk of thyroid cancer.
Though it should be pointed out that thyroid cancer his highly treatable, it has >99% survival rate. It is Ironically that it is often cured with the help of Iodine-131 (the same isotope responsible for thyroid cancer in the first place).
“By 2005, 5,127 cases of thyroid cancer were reported among those exposed in 1986 under the age of 14 years; 6,848 cases have been reported for those who had been under the age of 18 years; 15 cases had proved fatal.”
And a study just published found no increase in mutations in children where one or both parents had either helped clean up the accident site or had to evacuate because they lived close by.
“Study finds no excess germline mutations in children of Chernobyl survivors”
Ref.:
Yeager, M., Machiela, M.J., et al. 2021. Lack of transgenerational effects of ionizing radiation exposure from the Chernobyl accident. Science, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abg2365.
Weiss, W., 2018. Chernobyl thyroid cancer: 30 years of follow-up overview. Radiation protection dosimetry, 182(1), pp.58-61.
@David Jordan: a real eye opener. Thanks for that
@David Jordan: Excellent insight into how the charities around Chernobyl work.
Eye opening stuff
@Marie Mc: sounds like the modus operandi of alot of charities
@David Jordan: Would that be the charity that still claims on their website…
“Scientists feared that a further explosion could occur, producing a force of three to five megatons, and exposing the whole of Europe to enormous radioactive contamination.”
“700,000 men, known as liquidators, risked their lives and exposed themselves to dangerous levels of radiation to contain the situation. At east 40,000 of these men have died and a further 70,000 are disabled”
@Gavin Tobin: “700,000 men, known as liquidators, risked their lives and exposed themselves to dangerous levels of radiation to contain the situation. At east 40,000 of these men have died and a further 70,000 are disabled”
Well they are 35 years older. This is expected for an aging population that was also affected by the collapse of the Soviet Union, that resulted in increased in poverty rates, worsening diet, alcoholism and smoking.
But what about comparing them to others who were not involved in the cleanup, don’t they have relatively higher rates of ill health?
Well, there’s a plausible suggestion that Chernobyl Liquidators’ increased concern for their health resulted in a higher rate of diagnosed medical conditions. They were also offered yearly medical check-ups. Medical care in the Former Soviet Union collapsed, so diagnosis and treatment all too often relied on a patient’s own initiative. There was also a problem with medical record going missing.
So this may give a false impression that Chernobyl Liquidators have higher rates of ill health.
Similar happened in reverse in Iraq, harsh sanctions caused medical care to collapse under Saddam’s rule, as a result cancer and birth defects went undiagnosed, untreated and unrecorded. After 2003, medical care improved and they they started diagnosing cancer again and a reliable record of birth defects was kept. This gives a false impression of an explosion in cancer cases and birth defects.
@David Jordan: the 2021 study you cite has a sample of 130 children. A quantitative study with a sample of 130 born between 1987-2002. Is neither rigorous nor generalisable so I would not take such findings at face value. Further to this, the study does not offer much information on the methodology of the study which also raises questions regarding the validity of the findings
I visited the site 2 yrs ago. Would recommend it to any adult (for safety reasons). Great place for reflection on the human, ecological and historical scale of the sote as mentioned in the article.
Humans: F-up the environment for themselves
Nature: Thanks and dont let the door hit you on the way out
No mention of the horrific effects on children born to people affected by radiation fallout from Chernobel, abandoned and rejected left in orphenenages to be cared for by the state.
@Richard Mccarthy: A study just published found no increase in mutations (abnormalities) in children born to parents who had either helped clean up the accident site or had to evacuate because they lived close by.
“Study finds no excess germline mutations in children of Chernobyl survivors
The study investigated the long-standing question of whether radiation exposure results in genetic changes that can be passed from parent to offspring.
In fact, the number of de novo mutations in these children was similar to those in the general population.
These findings suggest that the ionizing radiation exposure from the accident had a minimal, if any, impact on the health of the subsequent generation.”
Ref.:
Yeager, M., Machiela, M.J., et al. 2021. Lack of transgenerational effects of ionizing radiation exposure from the Chernobyl accident. Science, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abg2365.
@Richard Mccarthy: Because it a myth.
And not one superhero…….
Tragedy disaster Chernobyl power plant melt to blow to everywhere place land radioactive won’t gone next 2,000 years. Should banned power plants all world
@Brian Flavin: An estimated 2,000,000 lives have been saved by nuclear power.
@Brian Flavin: what?
@Brian Flavin: in English?
I believe he said “Tragedy disaster Chernobyl power plant melt to blow to everywhere place land radioactive won’t gone next 2,000 years. Should banned power plants all world”
@Darragh Lynch: I believe he uses some type of speech to text converter due to a disability.
What’s your excuse for being ignorant?
@Darragh Lynch: Brian said that the Chernobyl plant meltdown was a tragedy and a disaster. He said that radiation was blown everywhere and that the land became radioactive. He added that the radiation won’t be gone for the next 2,000 years. He said that power plants (nuclear) should be banned worldwide.
@Gavin Tobin: They’re not worth the risk.
@Ken Loughman: right, there’s about 440 active reactors in the world currently, producing around 10% of all power. What do you replace them with?
@Michal Rozanski: Dirty great big coal fired power stations or giant hydroelectric dams that can flood rain forest, displace towns and villages, and can collapse ,killing thousands.
1975 Banqiao Dam failure
“The dam failure created the third-deadliest flood in history which affected a total population of 10.15 million and inundated around 30 cities and counties of 12,000 square kilometers (or 3 million acres), with an estimated death toll ranging from 85,600 to 240,000 (26,000 according to the Chinese government).”
“Property damage:
62 dams collapsed
30 cities and counties (3 million acres) inundated
6.8 million houses collapsed
10.75 million people affected
Fantastic psvr game
have your say