The European green crab preys on popular shellfish like Eastern oysters and soft-shell clams. It's estimated to cost the U.S. roughly $22 million worth of damage every year.
 



For decades, ecologists have assumed the worst invasive species — such as brown tree snakes and kudzu — have an away-field advantage. They succeed because they do better in their new territories than they do at home. A new study led by the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center reveals that this fundamental assumption is not nearly as common as people might think.

The away-field advantage hypothesis hinges on this idea: Successful invaders do better in a new place because the environment is more hospitable to them. They escape their natural enemies, use novel weapons on unsuspecting natives and generally outcompete natives on their own turf by disrupting the balance of nature in their new ecosystems.

“They’ve been presumed to be good citizens at home and bad citizens away,” said ecologist John Parker, lead author of the paper published in the May issue of the journal Ecology. But when researchers investigated it on a large scale, they discovered the assumption was not true for all, or even most, of the species they looked at.

The research team, which included 24 invasion biologists from the National Science Foundation-funded Global Invasions Network, compiled data on 53 different plant and animal invaders. They pulled 37 from the list of “100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species,” and 16 from an exhaustive search of the published literature. They ended up with a list that included European green crabs, Asian kelp, nutria, brown tree snakes, garlic mustard and other common suspects. After combing through hundreds to thousands of papers to find published demographic data, they were able to do a statistical analysis of whether invaders were bigger, more reproductively successful and thus more abundant in their introduced ranges.

On the surface the assumption seemed to hold true. Across all 53 species, there was a 96 percent probability invaders would do better in their adopted ecosystems. But closer inspection revealed some surprising weaknesses within the paradigm. When they looked at individual species, they discovered a handful of extremely successful invaders were driving up the average. In reality, more than half of the species performed roughly the same at home versus abroad, and a few were even likely to perform worse in foreign territory.

This suggests that the key to a successful invasion depends less on the environment and more on the individual species doing the invading. Plants, for example, were more likely than animals to thrive abroad in this study. But even the plants showed a wide range of variability, with many, like garlic mustard, performing equally well in both their introduced and home ranges.

“The general notion that invasive species are doing something fundamentally different in their new versus their old ranges may be a fair starting point overall, but there is a lot of grey area even for the worst-case invaders,” Parker said. “These findings might also have applications for management. Some species might be invasive regardless of novel conditions, whereas others thrive only because of their new environment. If this new found success is reversible, it’s these latter species that might be our best bet to try and control.”


Chinese army will fight
mock battle with digital arms


China's state news agency says the Chinese army will conduct an exercise next month to test new types of combat forces, including units using digital technology.

Xinhua reported Wednesday the drill marks the first time China's military will focus on digitalized combat forces to be used in informationalized war.

The announcement of the digitalized combat forces comes as U.S. President Barack Obama is expected to talk about cybersecurity next week with Chinese President Xi Jinping, amid fresh reports of cyber attacks on critical American defense systems.

U.S. officials have not commented on the latest reports, but White House spokesman Jay Carney says he is certain cybersecurity will be discussed when President Obama meets with President Xi in California.  Carney calls the issue a key concern for the administration that U.S. officials raise at every level in meetings with Chinese counterparts.

Monday, The Washington Post newspaper published parts of a confidential defense report accusing Chinese cyberspies of compromising some of the most sensitive and advanced U.S. weapons systems.

Classified sections of the report outlined more than two-dozen breaches of missile defense and other weapons systems by Chinese hackers, including many that had not been previously reported.

China firmly denies involvement in the hacking attempts.  It has also returned the accusation, saying U.S.-based hackers have attacked several Chinese military websites.

The defense report says the weapons designs the hackers compromised include the advanced Patriot missile system and the Navy's Aegis ballistic missile defense system.  Vital aircraft and ships, such as the F/A-18 fighter jet, the Black Hawk helicopter and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, are also reported to have been targeted.


Hospital prices out of line
with actual costs, experts say


Americans like to consider their health care the best of the best.  But in the most recent Central Intelligence Agency life expectancy estimates, the U.S. ranks 51st in the world.  And the cost?  Americans pay at least twice as much for their health care than most developed nations, including England and France.  These costs hit uninsured Americans the hardest.  And the charges vary from hospital to hospital.

Rickey Dana is one of millions of Americans living with a long-term illness.

"I would wake up in the middle of the night, vomiting whatever I had eaten, if there was anything left in there.  It was disastrous," said Ms. Dana.

The diagnosis: chronic Lyme disease, a tick-borne bacterial infection.  Her pre-existing condition of depression had already caused insurance companies to either deny her coverage or offer unaffordable policies.  And the bills kept adding up.

"March. March. March. March. These were all due within a week of each other," she said.

Her doctor put her on four different drugs and told her she needed rest.  But all she could think about was how to get by after losing her job and racking up tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills.

"I have to pay rent, and you're charging me $400 for a 30-minute consult.  But you don't want me to have stress in my life," she said.

New data released from the government this month reveal the costs of care vary wildly from hospital to hospital.  For example, the same procedure can cost $12,000 or $37,000 in Arkansas; $35,000 or about $100,000 in different California hospitals; and $14,000 or $32,000 in Virginia. 

Gerard Anderson heads the Johns Hopkins Center for Hospital Finance and Management.  He says hospitals have marked up the charges so much over the past 30 years that they no longer have any ties to actual costs.

"It's not the input prices.  It's not the cost of nurses and labor and those kinds of things.  It is just what they choose to charge," said Anderson.
 
Michelle Katz is a nurse and health care consultant.  She says those pricing practices are unfair.

"There needs to be some sort of regulation, some sort of transparency, where if I go to the hospital I know I'm not going to go into debt because I went into the hospital," said Ms. Katz.

Millions of Americans like Ms. Dana are hoping when a key part of the Obama Administration's health care reform initiative goes into effect next year, it will fix these sky-rocketing costs.  The Affordable Care Act will give tens of millions of Americans new access to health care services.  But Anderson says the wild and inconsistent charges won't be going down.

"It's not bringing them back to a normal, reasonable amount.  It's just constraining the rate of increase," he said.

Ms. Dana applied for financial aid and reduced her bills from $40,000 to $10,000.

"I didn't even have to fight them or anything.  They were great," she said.

But even then, the remaining double-digit cost has placed such a burden on her that she's had no choice but to leave her home for a cheaper place to live.

In another case, Tatyana Schum was at home with her dogs when a burning sensation ripped through her body.

"Unbelievable pain like I've never felt before," said Ms. Schum.
 
The pain was from an inflamed gallbladder that had to be removed in emergency surgery.

And that 90-minute procedure produced about $18,000 in bills. 

"$18,000 seems a little bit crazy," said Ms. Schum. "But then how do you know?"

You don't, according to Anderson at Johns Hopkins.

"If you go to a hospital in the United States and you want to know what you're going to get charged for an MRI or a day in the hospital or anything, they're not going to tell you.  And they're not required to tell you by law," said Anderson.

"That's hard for me to swallow, and I'll tell you why: It's because everybody's going to need a hospital at some point," said Ms. Schum.

Michelle Katz, a nurse and health care consultant. looked at the $18,000 bill.  She's written two books on how to bring down hospital costs.  Ms. Katz says patients can look out for additional charges or errors in bill coding.

"You know when you're typing on your iPhone and you accidentally push "P" instead of "O"?  That happens to people, and unfortunately it may be a code that's $50 compared to a code that's $1,000," said Ms. Katz.

Gallbladder surgery is seen as a moderate problem, or Level 3 in hospital speak.  But Ms. Schum was charged for a hospital stay with a Level 4 or high severity problem, the nurse noted.

Ms. Katz says sometimes a hospital charges a patient under a code that includes things that have already been billed.

"It's kind of like getting the Happy Meal [at McDonald's] and knowing what comes in it, then they charge you for an extra hamburger, and you didn't order it," she said.

"And don't forget the high cost of medication and medical supplies.  These $60 charges?  They're bags of salt water - or saline solution.  You can buy them online for less than $2.50 each."

"And you say, 'but it doesn't cost $60.'  And they say, 'but that's how much it costs in a hospital,'" said Anderson.

Ms. Schum took her bills to the hospital and the doctors to try to reduce her charges.  In all, they agreed to cut her bills from nearly $18,000 to $10,000. 

"It's amazing.  And it's much more manageable," she said.

They even gave Ms. Schum a payment timetable that works with her income.  And she hopes hospitals will start providing more cost transparency to patients so everyone can know they're getting good care at a fair price.


California professor uses
tips from traditional healers


 Many modern medicines have their origin in natural remedies, and some researchers say traditional herbal cures hold clues for modern medicine. A pharmacology professor who studies Native American healing is sharing what he has learned.

Hikers often explore the foothills of the Angeles National Forest, but one group of hikers has a purpose.  They are learning how Native Americans used the local vegetation in their healing, including plants like Yerba Santa, adopted by early Spanish settlers for lung problems.

The hike is led by James Adams, who teaches pharmacology at the University of Southern California.

“The science of pharmacology originally was the science of going out, talking to traditional healers, finding out which plants they used in their healing, and then taking those plants back to the lab to figure out why they work,” Adams said.

Aspirin, for example, was derived in the 19th century from salicylic acid, a long-time remedy for pains and fever found in plants like willow and meadowsweet.  It was developed and marketed by the German company Bayer.

Adams says each society has developed a form of medicine based on plants.

“Of course, in India, they have Ayurvedic medicine.  In China they have traditional Chinese medicine.  In the Arab countries, they have traditional Arabic healing.  The Jews have traditional Judaic healing, on and on.  Everybody has their own traditional healing that depends on plant medicines,” Adams said.

In California, Adams says, the Chumash people learned from experience which plants helped with specific ailments.

“We have, of course, the sagebrush, which makes a very powerful pain-relieving liniment that I think we should all learn how to use, because it is much safer than the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents.  It is much safer than the opioid drugs,” Adams said.

Besides easing aches and pains, Adams says the pleasant aroma of the California sagebrush helps people relax.  He says a plant called Spanish bayonet was used by American Indians for food.  Its leaves and roots produce a kind of soap, and the fiber from the stems can be used as a poultice for wounds, and for making clothing.

The plant called chamise can be used in a balm that helps with skin problems, and the anesthetic qualities of California bay help with toothaches. 

Adams warns that some plants are poisonous, and says knowledge of vegetation is essential.  He learned traditional native healing from a Chumash healer, and sometimes takes plant samples back to his laboratory to learn how they work.

He says modern pharmaceuticals remain important in medicine, but are often overused and can be harmful.

“Certainly if you need a drug that can help you, then you should use that drug.  But the thing that we keep forgetting is first and foremost to balance your health.  Get your body back into balance so that your body can heal itself,” Adams said.

Adams says a good diet and exercise are two keys to a healthy life, and that an educational hike looking for medicinal plants is another good way to keep the body in balance.


Chinese firm seeks to buy
Smithfield pork producer


China's Shuanghui International plans to buy Smithfield Foods Inc for $4.7 billion to feed a growing Chinese appetite for U.S. pork, but the proposed takeover of the world's No. 1 producer has stirred concern in the United States.
 
The transaction, announced on Wednesday, would rank as the largest Chinese takeover of a U.S. company, with an enterprise value of $7.1 billion, including debt assumption.
 
As it stands, the deal is the biggest Chinese play for a U.S. company since CNOOC Ltd. offered to buy Unocal for about $18 billion in 2005. The state-controlled energy company later withdrew that bid under U.S. political pressure.
 
Like similar foreign transactions, the Smithfield deal will face the scrutiny of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, a government panel that assesses national security risks.
 
And at least one member of Congress said the deal raised alarms about food safety, noting Shuanghui was forced to recall tainted pork in the past.
 
“I have deep doubts about whether this merger best serves American consumers and urge federal regulators to put their concerns first,” U.S. Rep. Rose DeLauro, a Democrat from Connecticut, said in a statement.
 
Shuanghui is already majority shareholder of Henan Shuanghui Investment & Development Co., China's largest meat processor. It would join forces with a company that has a worldwide herd of 1.09 million sows, according to industry data compiled by Successful Farming magazine.
 
The CFIUS review process comes at a time of sour relations between the United States and China over cross-border deals. In the latest irritant, a $20.1 billion bid by Japan's SoftBank Corp to control U.S. wireless carrier Sprint Nextel Corp has fanned fears of Chinese cyber attacks against the United States.

Shuanghui offered $34 a share for Smithfield, a 31 percent premium to its closing stock price on Tuesday. The Chinese company will assume $2.4 billion of Smithfield's debt.
 

Caracas Otelevision station
moderates its tone after sale


A flagship Venezuelan TV channel known for its militant opposition to late socialist leader Hugo Chávez has toned down under new owners, depriving the opposition of a favored platform as it fights a new government.
 
During Chavez's tumultuous 14-year rule, Globovision played a controversial and high-profile role: it was derided by officials as a pro-U.S., law-breaking broadcaster but feted in the opposition as a beacon of free speech.
 
Its majority owner, businessman Guillermo Zuloaga, who lives in exile in the United States, sold the station this month. The new bosses have made immediate changes, including stopping live broadcasts of opposition leader Henrique Capriles.
 
“I was told that the new directors gave an order not to show me live,” Capriles said on Twitter this week, arguing the buyers were stooges of recently elected President Nicolas Maduro's government.
 
“My eternal gratitude to the Globovision workers for having provided a window to speak to our people,” added Capriles, who lost last month's presidential election to Maduro by 1.5 percentage points but is disputing the result.
 
Globovision, now owned by three little-known businessmen who are also shareholders of a local insurance company, has denied accusations by some disgruntled workers at the broadcaster that it was kowtowing to the government.
 
“The board of directors has not banned any official or political leader from Globovision,” Globovision said in a statement. “On the contrary, the editorial policy consists in broadening the line of information and opinion to all voices in the country, without any discrimination.”
 
Still, various high-profile contributors, including opposition politician Ismael Garcia, who had a Sunday program, and anchor Francisco “Kico” Bautista, who became a household face of “anti-Chavismo,” are now gone.
 
Though private TV stations were openly anti-Chávez at the start of his tenure, including during a brief 2002 coup against him, one broadcaster later lost its license and others became more moderate in their public programming.
 
So Globovision had been an outlying, aggressive voice for the opposition on television. Its premises were attacked several times, and it faced a battery of legal charges and a multi-million-dollar fine over its coverage of jail violence.
 
Strident opposition to Chávez, and now to his successor Maduro, has continued among a plethora of newspapers and radio stations. One paper, for example, recently ran a front page picture of Maduro mocked up as Hitler.
 
On the other side, a huge array of state media defend the government and vilify Capriles as a fascist.
 
Some government officials have been rubbing their hands in glee over developments at Globovision, which was a constant thorn in their side, though it did also provide a useful argument against criticism they were crushing free speech.
 
“They sold because they ran out of money. They used the station as a political party,” scoffed Diosdado Cabello, the powerful vice president of the ruling Socialist Party.
 
Anti-government activists, glued to Globovision for years, are quickly turning to other venues such as webcasts of Capriles events.
 
Capriles also reaches a huge audience via Twitter: his 3.4 million following is the largest of any other Latin American politician, including heads of state. In fact, only the deceased Chávez beats him, with 4.2 million followers still.
 
“While it is tempting to be frightened by Globovision's demise, it's possible that we may not need it in the end,” wrote pro-opposition blogger Juan Cristobal Nagel. “With the advent of social media, perhaps we're all better off without our Globovision addiction.”
 
Throughout the Chávez years, most Venezuelan media were openly partisan and often caught up in controversy and journalists have stayed in the news under Maduro.
 
Influential state TV commentator Mario Silva, who for years acted as a pugnacious mouthpiece for “Chavismo,” had his nightly program pulled after the opposition released a recording purportedly showing him discussing corruption and conspiracy within state circles with a Cuban intelligence agent.
 
Like Capriles, Maduro has also been complaining of censorship. The president accused private media of ignoring his public announcements of plans to fight crime, and also said U.S. network CNN's Spanish-language channel was backing coup plans.
 
“It's a TV station at the service of destabilization, calling openly for a coup d'etat in Venezuela, distorting the political and social life of our fatherland,” he said this week in his latest dramatic accusations since taking office.