Split (1)

train · 4k rows

category stringclasses 191 values	search_query stringclasses 434 values	search_type stringclasses 2 values	search_engine_input stringclasses 748 values	url stringlengths 22 468	title stringlengths 1 77	text_raw stringlengths 1.17k 459k	text_window stringlengths 545 2.63k	stance stringclasses 2 values
Pediatrics	Should children be given multivitamins?	yes_statement	"children" should be "given" "multivitamins".. it is beneficial for "children" to take "multivitamins".	https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vitamins-for-kids	Vitamins for Kids: Do They Need Them (and Which Ones)?	There are several important factors to consider when choosing a supplement for your child. The products featured in this article were selected based on the following criteria: Ingredients: We looked for vitamins that are free of fillers, artificial flavors, food dyes, and preservatives. All products adhere to allowable health claims and labeling requirements, per Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, and are manufactured in facilities that adhere to current good manufacturing practices (CGMPs) established by the FDA. Credibility: We chose products produced by medically credible companies that follow ethical, legal, and industry best standards and that provide objective measures of trust, such as having its supplements validated by third-party labs. Dosage: We included products that are specifically formulated for infants or kids. Supplement form: We included multivitamins in several forms, including liquid, chewable, dissolvable, and gummy. Healthline's review This vitamin brand is third-party lab tested for quality and accuracy. It’s also free of GMOs, synthetic colors, and artificial flavors and is particularly beneficial for children with allergies since it’s free of milk, eggs, nuts, soy, gluten and wheat. What it does contain: 15 essential nutrients, including vitamin D3 for bone and immune health, vitamin B12 for energy, omega-3 EPA and DHA for heart and brain health, iodine for thyroid support, and vitamin E for antioxidant support. This gummy multivitamin is available in several flavors and is recommended for children over 4 years old. The company also offers a gummy supplement that’s suitable for toddlers ages 2 and 3. Just keep in mind that these gummies provide 5 grams (g) of added sugar per serving, which could contribute to excessive sugar intake throughout the day. Healthline's review Designed by parents looking for a lower sugar toddler multivitamin without artificial ingredients, Hiya offers a limited ingredient list and is free of added sugar. Instead, it is naturally sweetened with monk fruit. The multivitamin is also suitable for toddlers as young as 2 years, and it contains 15 essential nutrients your growing child needs, including vitamins A, C, D, and E; B vitamins; and zinc. Hiya vitamins come in eco-friendly refillable jars and are delivered right to your doorstep each month. They are also third-party tested by Eurofins Scientific with Certificates of Analysis (COAs) available upon request. third-party tested sugar-free no artificial additives or preservatives vegan, gluten-free, dairy-free, and non-GMO eco-friendly refillable jar one-a-day formulation expensive not available at local stores not suitable for kids with allergies to ingredients listed in the fruit and vegetable blend OLLY vitamins are also third-party tested by NSF International for purity and potency, so you can rest assured that the product contains the types and amounts of ingredients that it claims on the label. This supplement is recommended for children ages 2 and up. However, keep in mind that the dosage may vary depending on your child’s age, so be sure to read the label carefully. Healthline's review Because breast milk typically doesn’t provide adequate amounts of vitamin D, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends using a vitamin D supplement for breastfed and partially breastfed infants (5). Formula-fed infants are also recommended to take a vitamin D supplement if they’re consuming fewer than 32 ounces (oz), or about 1 liter (L), per day of formula (6). This is our best overall pick for the best vitamin D drops for babies because Nordic Naturals is known for its strict testing standards and this product also provides good value (contains enough for a baby’s full first year). Be sure to talk with a pediatrician if you’re unsure whether your baby needs vitamin D. With 400 IU of vitamin D3 per serving, this liquid supplement is a great option for infants under 12 months to help support bone health and immune function. It also contains just two ingredients and is free of GMOs and fillers to ensure the highest possible quality. If your child follows a restrictive diet, cannot adequately absorb nutrients, or is a picky eater, they may benefit from taking vitamins. Here are some tips on what to look for when selecting a supplement: Third-party testing: To ensure that the contents match the label, look for a product that has been tested by a third party, such as NSF International, United States Pharmacopeia (USP), ConsumerLab.com, Informed Choice, or the Banned Substances Control Group. Kid-specific formulation: Choose vitamins that are specifically made for kids. These products should not contain megadoses that exceed the daily nutrient needs of children. Age-appropriate formulation: Select a product that is formulated for the specific age of your child. While many multivitamins are for kids 4 years and older, there are a few options for younger toddlers. Nutrient needs: Be sure to talk with your child’s pediatrician or registered dietitian to determine which nutrients your kid’s multivitamin should contain. Additives and sugar: When possible, choose a multivitamin that contains minimal amounts of added sugar and artificial additives. Always discuss supplements with a healthcare professional before giving them to your child. In addition to including enough calories, a child’s diet should meet the following Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) (10): Nutrient DRI for ages 1–3 DRI for ages 4–8 calcium 700 mg 1,000 mg iron 7 mg 10 mg vitamin A 300 micrograms (mcg) 400 mcg vitamin B12 0.9 mcg 1.2 mcg vitamin C 15 mg 25 mg vitamin D 600 IU (15 mcg) 600 IU (15 mcg) While the above nutrients are some of the most commonly discussed, they aren’t the only ones kids need. Children need some amount of every vitamin and mineral for proper growth and health, but the exact amounts vary by age. Older children and teens need different amounts of nutrients than younger kids to support optimal health. Do kids have different nutrient needs than adults? Kids need the same nutrients as adults but usually require smaller amounts. As children grow, it’s vital for them to get adequate amounts of nutrients that help build strong bones, such as calcium and vitamin D (11). Moreover, iron, zinc, iodine, choline, and vitamins A, B6 (folate), B12, and D are crucial for brain development in early life (12, 13). Although kids may need smaller amounts of vitamins and minerals than adults do, they still need to get enough of these nutrients for proper growth and development. have a condition that affects the absorption of or increases the need for nutrients, such as celiac disease, cancer, cystic fibrosis, or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have had surgery that affects the intestines or stomach are extremely picky eaters and have trouble eating a variety of foods Plant-based diets may increase the risk of certain nutrient deficiencies In particular, kids who eat plant-based diets may be at risk of deficiencies in calcium, iron, zinc, and vitamins B12 and D — especially if they eat few or no animal products (17). Vegan diets can be particularly dangerous for children if certain nutrients — such as vitamin B12, which is found naturally in animal foods — are not replaced through supplements or fortified foods. Failing to replace these nutrients in children’s diets can lead to serious consequences, such as atypical growth and developmental delays (21). However, it’s possible for children on plant-based diets to get adequate nutrition from diet alone if their parents are incorporating enough plant foods that naturally contain or are fortified with certain vitamins and minerals (17). Certain conditions may affect absorption or increase nutrient needs Children with celiac disease or IBD may have difficulty absorbing several vitamins and minerals, especially iron, zinc, and vitamin D. This is because these conditions cause damage to the areas of the gut that absorb micronutrients (19, 22, 23). On the other hand, kids with cystic fibrosis have trouble absorbing fat and, as a result, may not adequately absorb the fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, and K (18). In addition, children with cancer and other diseases that cause increased nutrient needs may require certain supplements to prevent disease-related malnutrition (24). Picky eaters may not be getting enough vitamins and minerals Finally, some studies have linked picky eating in childhood to low intakes of micronutrients (20, 25). One study in 937 kids ages 3–7 found that picky eating was strongly associated with low intakes of iron and zinc (20). Still, the results indicated that blood levels of these minerals were not significantly different in picky compared to non-picky eaters (20). As a result, if you suspect that your child isn’t meeting their nutritional needs, its best to have them tested for nutritional deficiencies before giving them supplements. What vitamins should I give my child? The type of vitamin supplements your child needs will depend on their age and specific concerns. Consult with your pediatrician to see if your child needs or would benefit from taking vitamins. If a pediatrician recommends that your child take vitamins, look for quality brands that have been tested by a third party and are formulated with the appropriate doses of nutrients for kids (to avoid toxicity). When should kids start taking vitamins? Not all kids need vitamins, but some groups may benefit from them (see below). In particular, breastfed and partially breastfed infants should be given vitamin D supplements shortly after birth (5). Outside of this age group, when you should start giving vitamins to kids depends on when they begin to have needs that warrant vitamins. For instance, a child who has undergone surgery that affects nutrient absorption will likely need to start taking vitamins after the surgery. Discuss with your pediatrician to confirm the best time to give vitamins to your child. Should you give your child vitamins? Children who eat a balanced diet generally do not need to take vitamin supplements. However, some kids may need them if they are at risk of deficiencies. This would include children who follow a vegan or vegetarian diet, have had surgery affecting their intestines, have a medical condition that affects nutrient absorption, or are very picky eaters. Still, vitamin supplements may be necessary for picky eaters, children who have a health condition that affects nutrient absorption or increases nutrient needs, or those following a vegetarian or vegan diet. When providing vitamins to children, be sure to choose high quality brands that contain appropriate doses for kids and stick to the recommended dosage. It’s also best to be cautious of giving your child supplements without documented evidence of a deficiency. To ensure your child is getting enough nutrients, try to offer them a balanced diet that includes a variety of foods and limits sweets and refined foods. Last medically reviewed on January 3, 2023 How we reviewed this article: Our experts continually monitor the health and wellness space, and we update our articles when new information becomes available. Current Version Mar 14, 2023 Written By Lizzie Streit, Rachael Ajmera, MS, RD Edited By Catherine Conelly Copy Edited By Copy Editors Jan 3, 2023 Written By Lizzie Streit, Rachael Ajmera, MS, RD Edited By Kelli McGrane, MS, RD Medically Reviewed By Imashi Fernando, MS, RDN, CDCES Copy Edited By Chris Doka VIEW ALL HISTORY Share this article Evidence Based This article is based on scientific evidence, written by experts and fact checked by experts. Our team of licensed nutritionists and dietitians strive to be objective, unbiased, honest and to present both sides of the argument. This article contains scientific references. The numbers in the parentheses (1, 2, 3) are clickable links to peer-reviewed scientific papers.	It also contains just two ingredients and is free of GMOs and fillers to ensure the highest possible quality. If your child follows a restrictive diet, cannot adequately absorb nutrients, or is a picky eater, they may benefit from taking vitamins. Here are some tips on what to look for when selecting a supplement: Third-party testing: To ensure that the contents match the label, look for a product that has been tested by a third party, such as NSF International, United States Pharmacopeia (USP), ConsumerLab.com, Informed Choice, or the Banned Substances Control Group. Kid-specific formulation: Choose vitamins that are specifically made for kids. These products should not contain megadoses that exceed the daily nutrient needs of children. Age-appropriate formulation: Select a product that is formulated for the specific age of your child. While many multivitamins are for kids 4 years and older, there are a few options for younger toddlers. Nutrient needs: Be sure to talk with your child’s pediatrician or registered dietitian to determine which nutrients your kid’s multivitamin should contain. Additives and sugar: When possible, choose a multivitamin that contains minimal amounts of added sugar and artificial additives. Always discuss supplements with a healthcare professional before giving them to your child. In addition to including enough calories, a child’s diet should meet the following Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) (10): Nutrient DRI for ages 1–3 DRI for ages 4–8 calcium 700 mg 1,000 mg iron 7 mg 10 mg vitamin A 300 micrograms (mcg) 400 mcg vitamin B12 0.9 mcg 1.2 mcg vitamin C 15 mg 25 mg vitamin D 600 IU (15 mcg) 600 IU (15 mcg)	yes
Pediatrics	Should children be given multivitamins?	yes_statement	"children" should be "given" "multivitamins".. it is beneficial for "children" to take "multivitamins".	https://www.parentcircle.com/pros-cons-of-multivitamins-supplements-for-kids/article	Multivitamins For Kids: Pros And Cons Of Vitamin Supplements	Do young children need multivitamins? A look at the risk factors, benefits of multivitamins and nutrition needs of kids Giving children multivitamin pills has become a fad nowadays. But do you know what multivitamins really are? Are there any risks associated with giving multivitamins? Do children really need them? What are multivitamins? Various vitamins and minerals are essential for the growth and development of children. Multivitamins are preparations that contain all the necessary vitamins and minerals in different quantities. They are usually available in different forms such as pills, capsules, liquids or powders. What are the risks? Foods like milk and milk products, and fruits juices are packed with various vitamins and minerals. A child consuming these on a regular basis remains in good health and does not need multivitamin supplementation. Giving such children additional multivitamins can be anything but healthy. It can result in an overdose of nutrients and cause toxicity. When should you give multivitamins to children? Multivitamins should only be given to children when: Their growth and development are delayed. They are suffering from certain chronic diseases and allergies. They are on a restrictive diet, like a vegan diet. They have some chronic ailment. They live in a depressed or deprived environment. Like in, such as an orphanage or broken homes. Parents should always consult a doctor before giving multivitamins to children to get the dose right. Here's a list of the common vitamins and minerals that constitute multivitamins, their natural sources, benefits, daily requirements and deficiency symptoms. Vitamins There are two types of vitamins Fat-soluble Water-soluble Vitamin A Vitamin D Vitamin E Vitamin K Vitamin B complex Vitamin C Fat-soluble vitamins Vitamins A, D, E and K are fat-soluble vitamins, and if given in excess can cause dangerous side effects. Vitamin A: Vitamin A is necessary for the development of proper vision. It is mostly found in yellow and orange-colored fruits and vegetables, cod liver oil and egg yolk. It is not given as a supplement unless there are signs of deficiency like night blindness and dry conjunctiva. It is marketed under the brand name Aquasol A, and is available in the form of injections or capsules. Vitamin D: Deficiency of vitamin D has been reported in the majority of Indian children. This vitamin is essential for calcium metabolism, bone mineralization and normal functioning of hormones like the parathyroid hormone. Egg yolk, fish and tropical plants are good dietary sources of vitamin D. Its deficiency can result in stunted growth and rickets, which is a condition of weak bones. The Indian Academy of Pediatrics recommends daily supplementation of 400 IU/day of vitamin D in children less than one-year-old and 600 IU/day for children above one year of age. The American Academy of Family Physicians also recommends the intake of 400 IU/day of vitamin D by babies who are exclusively breastfed or consume less than 1 liter of fortified milk formula per day. Arbivit, Dsol, D3 Must are a few brand names of vitamin D supplements. Vitamin E: Vitamin E is given only to children with select conditions like prematurity to assist with fat absorption. It is also given along with other vitamins when some diseases of the liver and retina are detected in premature newborns. Vitamin E supplements are available as Evion drops of 50 mg/ml concentration. The daily requirement is 5-15 mg per day, depending on age. Vitamin K: It is essential for normal clotting mechanism, which is necessary to prevent loss of blood due to injuries. It is produced naturally in the intestines by the bacterial flora. But a newborn's intestines cannot produce vitamin K. Hence, it is given as an injection when a baby is born. Green leafy vegetables are a good source of vitamin K. Water-soluble vitamins Vitamins B complex and C are water-soluble vitamins. If taken in excess, these vitamins are expelled from the body with urine. Vitamin B complex: Vitamin B complex consists of eight vitamins that have a range of benefits such as preventing memory loss, reducing stress, ensuring healthy skin and hair, and more. Vitamin B complex is found in cereals, nuts, green leafy vegetables, eggs, lean meat and liver. Its deficiency can cause conditions like beriberi, pellagra, glossitis, stomatitis, diarrhea, anemia, knuckle pigmentation, and in severe cases, convulsions and abnormal behavior like depression, crying spells etc. Vitamin B supplements are available in the form of syrups like Bevon, Polybion and Visyneral. Vitamin C: It is essential for the normal development of bones, strengthening the immune system, and absorption of iron. It is also an antioxidant. The dietary sources of vitamin C are citrus fruits and amla. Its deficiency can cause scurvy, weak bones, recurrent infections and bleeding of gums. Vitamin C supplements are not recommended unless the child shows signs of deficiency, as daily supplementation can lead to the formation of kidney stones. Vitamin C supplements are sold under various brand names such as Limcee tablets. Minerals Calcium and phosphorus These two minerals are necessary for the normal development of bones and teeth, strong muscles and brain, and clotting of blood. They are found in cereals, legumes, fish, nuts, milk and milk products. Babies born prematurely or those with low birth weight, and children who do not drink enough milk suffer from a deficiency of calcium and phosphorus. The daily requirement of calcium is 100 mg/kg/day. To meet a child's calcium needs, various supplements are available with different amounts of elemental calcium like Ostocalcium, Shelcal, Calcimax, etc. These supplements are available both in the form of syrups and tablets. Some calcium supplements may also contain vitamin D. Remember, calcium syrups should not be taken along with iron syrups as this can affect its absorption. Iron Iron is necessary for the formation of hemoglobin, which is essential for transporting oxygen throughout the body, and for various other metabolic processes. Iron deficiency results in anemia, irritability, poor growth and development. In some cases, iron deficiency may also lead to Pica, an eating disorder characterized by the urge to eat inedible items like mud. The natural sources of iron include green leafy vegetables, jaggery, liver, beetroot, etc. The required daily dose is 2-6 mg/kg/day of elemental iron. Various iron supplements are available such as Vitcofol and Orofer. Iron supplements should not be consumed immediately after drinking milk or after eating green leafy vegetables as they inhibit the absorption of iron by the intestine. There is no substitute for a good, balanced diet for your child. It is a myth that multivitamins can replace a healthy meal, as natural food is the best source of all the required nutrients. However, if you notice symptoms of vitamin or mineral deficiency in your child, consult his pediatrician at the earliest. Remember, do not give multivitamins and supplements to your child without consulting a specialist, as doing so may not be without risks.	Do young children need multivitamins? A look at the risk factors, benefits of multivitamins and nutrition needs of kids Giving children multivitamin pills has become a fad nowadays. But do you know what multivitamins really are? Are there any risks associated with giving multivitamins? Do children really need them? What are multivitamins? Various vitamins and minerals are essential for the growth and development of children. Multivitamins are preparations that contain all the necessary vitamins and minerals in different quantities. They are usually available in different forms such as pills, capsules, liquids or powders. What are the risks? Foods like milk and milk products, and fruits juices are packed with various vitamins and minerals. A child consuming these on a regular basis remains in good health and does not need multivitamin supplementation. Giving such children additional multivitamins can be anything but healthy. It can result in an overdose of nutrients and cause toxicity. When should you give multivitamins to children? Multivitamins should only be given to children when: Their growth and development are delayed. They are suffering from certain chronic diseases and allergies. They are on a restrictive diet, like a vegan diet. They have some chronic ailment. They live in a depressed or deprived environment. Like in, such as an orphanage or broken homes. Parents should always consult a doctor before giving multivitamins to children to get the dose right. Here's a list of the common vitamins and minerals that constitute multivitamins, their natural sources, benefits, daily requirements and deficiency symptoms.	no
Pediatrics	Should children be given multivitamins?	yes_statement	"children" should be "given" "multivitamins".. it is beneficial for "children" to take "multivitamins".	https://www.aafp.org/pubs/afp/issues/2018/0815/p227-s1.html	Giving Your Toddler the Best Nutrition \| AAFP	Raising a healthy, active toddler takes work, and parents need to know the best foods to give their children. Feeding toddlers isn't always easy, but knowing about nutrition and eating habits will help you make the best choices for your child. Milk and dairy Milk has protein for strength and growth, calcium for strong bones and teeth, and vitamins A and D for eyes and bones. Babies younger than one year should not drink cow's milk. After they turn one year old, most children should drink whole milk for at least one year. The fat in milk helps children grow and helps their brains to develop. Toddlers should not drink nonfat or skim milk. Some children drink too much milk, especially if they use a bottle instead of a cup. Try to get your child to drink two 8-oz cups of milk each day, then add variety with other healthy dairy foods like yogurt and cheese. Whole-fat versions of these foods can replace milk portions, if necessary. Juice and sugary drinks Toddlers love these drinks, but parents need to limit how much their children get. Too much may cause children to gain weight and get bad teeth. Offer plain water for drinking between meals. Give 100% fruit juice only as a treat, if at all. If you give your toddler juice, limit it to 4 oz per day. Only serve juice in an open cup, and not in a bottle or sippy cup. Try giving your child whole fruit instead of fruit juice. Toddlers should not be given sugary drinks, like fruit drinks, sweetened bottled water, sports drinks, and soda. Multivitamins Most children do not need to take a multivitamin. Your toddler should get plenty of vitamins from fruits, vegetables, milk, meat, and whole grains. Even if your child is a picky eater, he or she is probably getting enough vitamins and minerals. Some children who do not drink enough milk might need to take extra vitamin D. Your doctor also might do a blood test to see if your child needs extra iron. If your child does not eat meat or has a chronic illness, talk to your doctor to see if your child needs extra vitamins. Fats Fats are very important for children's brain development. About one-third of a toddler's calories should come from fats. You should give your toddler healthy fats, like peanut butter, milk, meat, avocados, and eggs. Examples of unhealthy fats are french fries, potato chips, doughnuts, and other junk food. If your child is overweight, the best thing you can do is set a good example by eating healthy foods yourself. Do not eat junk food. Instead, eat fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains, lean proteins, and beans. Do not put your child on a special diet without talking to your doctor first. Eating habits It is hard to know what toddlers will eat. They skip meals, refuse to eat some foods, and sometimes eat only one thing for days at a time. This is normal and is usually nothing to worry about. Your doctor will measure your child's growth every few months and show you the progress on a chart. It is important to keep giving your child different kinds of healthy foods to choose from. You might have to offer a new food 20 or more times before he or she likes it. Children prefer a lot of small meals during the day. It takes many years for children to get used to eating three meals a day. Think of snacks as mini meals rather than treats. For example, a midafternoon snack might be milk, peanut butter on bagel pieces, and carrot sticks. Letting toddlers feed themselves is important, even if it's messy. Children should get to make their own choices from the healthy foods you offer and use their fingers to pick things up. Turn off the television, and sit at the table to eat with your child. This teaches your child good eating habits. Continue Reading More in AFP More in Pubmed This content is owned by the AAFP. A person viewing it online may make one printout of the material and may use that printout only for his or her personal, non-commercial reference. This material may not otherwise be downloaded, copied, printed, stored, transmitted or reproduced in any medium, whether now known or later invented, except as authorized in writing by the AAFP. See permissions for copyright questions and/or permission requests.	Too much may cause children to gain weight and get bad teeth. Offer plain water for drinking between meals. Give 100% fruit juice only as a treat, if at all. If you give your toddler juice, limit it to 4 oz per day. Only serve juice in an open cup, and not in a bottle or sippy cup. Try giving your child whole fruit instead of fruit juice. Toddlers should not be given sugary drinks, like fruit drinks, sweetened bottled water, sports drinks, and soda. Multivitamins Most children do not need to take a multivitamin. Your toddler should get plenty of vitamins from fruits, vegetables, milk, meat, and whole grains. Even if your child is a picky eater, he or she is probably getting enough vitamins and minerals. Some children who do not drink enough milk might need to take extra vitamin D. Your doctor also might do a blood test to see if your child needs extra iron. If your child does not eat meat or has a chronic illness, talk to your doctor to see if your child needs extra vitamins. Fats Fats are very important for children's brain development. About one-third of a toddler's calories should come from fats. You should give your toddler healthy fats, like peanut butter, milk, meat, avocados, and eggs. Examples of unhealthy fats are french fries, potato chips, doughnuts, and other junk food. If your child is overweight, the best thing you can do is set a good example by eating healthy foods yourself. Do not eat junk food. Instead, eat fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains, lean proteins, and beans. Do not put your child on a special diet without talking to your doctor first. Eating habits It is hard to know what toddlers will eat. They skip meals, refuse to eat some foods, and sometimes eat only one thing for days at a time. This is normal and is usually nothing to worry about.	no
Pediatrics	Should children be given multivitamins?	yes_statement	"children" should be "given" "multivitamins".. it is beneficial for "children" to take "multivitamins".	https://www.mackoulpediatrics.com/MythChildrenNeedToTakeMultivitaminsDaily.php	Myth: Children Need To Take Multivitamins Daily	Patience please, on-hold wait times may be long at various times Holiday Hours Myth: Children Need To Take Multivitamins Daily It has been estimated that multivitamins are given daily to 25-50% of children in the United States. This is generally not necessary for most children with an average diet, even if your child is a picky eater. Some children (namely ones that have a poor or restricted diet, liver disease, or other chronic medical problems — especially those that lead to fat malabsorption, such as cystic fibrosis) may need vitamin and mineral supplements to prevent deficiencies. Preterm infants and children who are exclusively breastfed, with either very dark skin or limited exposure to sunlight, may also need vitamin supplements. Although you are free to give your child an age-appropriate multivitamin if you or your local pediatrician feels that your child needs one, it is probably better to try and reach their daily requirements or recommended daily allowance by providing them with a well balanced diet and healthy foods. Pediatricians agree that consuming a diet with at least the minimum number of servings suggested by the “Food Guide Pyramid” will provide your child with the recommended amounts of most vitamins and minerals they need to maintain their health. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the proper nutrition of your child, you should give your local pediatrics office a call. About author MacKoul Pediatrics MacKoul Pediatrics is an amazing local pediatrics office in Cape Coral, FL where caring, compassionate doctors and nurses work with you to keep your children as healthy as possible. MacKoul cares for children from birth to college age, from Cape Coral, Fort Myers, Naples, and beyond. January 9, 2015Myth: Baby Cereal Will Help Your Infant Sleep Through The Night	Patience please, on-hold wait times may be long at various times Holiday Hours Myth: Children Need To Take Multivitamins Daily It has been estimated that multivitamins are given daily to 25-50% of children in the United States. This is generally not necessary for most children with an average diet, even if your child is a picky eater. Some children (namely ones that have a poor or restricted diet, liver disease, or other chronic medical problems — especially those that lead to fat malabsorption, such as cystic fibrosis) may need vitamin and mineral supplements to prevent deficiencies. Preterm infants and children who are exclusively breastfed, with either very dark skin or limited exposure to sunlight, may also need vitamin supplements. Although you are free to give your child an age-appropriate multivitamin if you or your local pediatrician feels that your child needs one, it is probably better to try and reach their daily requirements or recommended daily allowance by providing them with a well balanced diet and healthy foods. Pediatricians agree that consuming a diet with at least the minimum number of servings suggested by the “Food Guide Pyramid” will provide your child with the recommended amounts of most vitamins and minerals they need to maintain their health. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the proper nutrition of your child, you should give your local pediatrics office a call. About author MacKoul Pediatrics MacKoul Pediatrics is an amazing local pediatrics office in Cape Coral, FL where caring, compassionate doctors and nurses work with you to keep your children as healthy as possible. MacKoul cares for children from birth to college age, from Cape Coral, Fort Myers, Naples, and beyond. January 9, 2015Myth:	no
Pediatrics	Should children be given multivitamins?	yes_statement	"children" should be "given" "multivitamins".. it is beneficial for "children" to take "multivitamins".	https://www.bare-soaps.com/blogs/your-impact/14105649-do-multivitamins-work-the-benefits-of-vitamins-in-kaberamaido-uganda	Do Multivitamins Work? The Benefits of Vitamins in Kaberamaido ...	Do Multivitamins Work? The Benefits of Vitamins in Kaberamaido, Uganda Do multivitamins work? The short answer is a definite "YES!" Believe it or not, not everyone has easy access to multivitamins. The benefits of vitamins as we know is clearly effective. Doctors, dermatologists, and nutritionist all recommend some sort of vitamin for us. With the health craze going on, we forget that there are people in the world that lack just the simplest resources like food and water. So how do multivitamins work in Kabermaido, Uganda? How often are children in Kabermaido, Uganda given access to those sweet, chewy multivitamins? At this time, the Carepoint relies on donors to fill their supply of vitamins. Even then, the supply is limited, so the children are only able to take multivitamins at least once a week. Still, the results have been meaningful, and we interviewed Dr. Terri to better understand how the role of multivitamins work on children in developing countries. Dr. Terri has embarked on a few trips to Kaberamaido, Uganda (some along with other medical professionals) to check on the children. Q: How common is malnutrition in Kaberamaido, Uganda? And how do the benefits of vitamins help? Malnutrition is a significant problem in Uganda. In a vitamin study by the World Health Organization (WHO), more than 30% of children up to age 5 years have “stunted” growth in Uganda. Another vitamin study from American Journal Clinical Nutrition finds that 52.5% of all deaths in young children worldwide can be attributed to undernutrition (Caulfield 2004, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition). Being malnourished and/or ill makes it difficult for these children to attend school and meet their learning goals, let alone live a reasonably healthy life. Q: What is the role of the Hopechest CarePoint in combating malnutrition? Because the benefits of vitamins make a significant difference in children’s growth, the feeding program at the Hopechest CarePoint in Kaberamaido, Uganda does tremendous good to combat malnutrition in the children. This one meal each day at the CarePoint, however, is often the only consistent meal many of these children receive. Because we want to give the children as much support as possible to survive, thrive, and achieve, we have started providing children’s multivitamins on a regular basis in addition to the typical feeding program. Q: How do you know if the multivitamins are working? The benefits of vitamins include a noticeable difference in the overall look of health for the children. Their skin and eyes appear healthier, and they complain of fewer significant health problems with each visit since the vitamin program began. This vitamin study indicates that providing access to vitamins to children can prevent the simplest diseases that lead to death. It is our hope that the vitamins, in conjunction with their daily meal, will help them remain as healthy and strong as possible. We aim to give the children a strong foundation, enabling them to succeed in school and life. Q: How did the idea of providing vitamins for the children come about? The idea for the vitamin program started when one of the service teams traveling to Kaberamaido brainstormed ideas about how we could impact the children’s health in real and lasting ways. We knew we could not cure or prevent every case of pneumonia or infectious diarrhea for the children in Kaberamaido. We knew we could not eradicate malaria or HIV in all of Uganda. And we knew we could not quickly increase the number of physicians and other healthcare workers to improve access to medical care for the children and their families. What we could do, however, was to give these children the best nutritional foundation possible so that their bodies are better equipped to fight off illness and disease. We are hopeful that improving their nutritional health will also allow some of the children in the Kaberamaido Hopechest CarePoint to do so well in school that they can pursue careers as physicians or other healthcare providers. Q: What are some common ailments that the children face and what type of care is provided as a result? Children under the age of 5 years in Uganda are almost twice as likely to die compared to the global average (WHO 2011 data). The main conditions that cause death to children under the age of 5 years in Uganda include pneumonia (lung infection), premature birth, malaria, diarrhea, and HIV/AIDS (WHO 2010 data). In Uganda, the number of people with HIV in the population is 8 times higher than the global average, and the number of malaria infections each year is 7 times higher than the global average (WHO 2011 data). These illnesses do affect the children at the Kaberamaido, Uganda Hopechest CarePoint. Each visit I make I see children affected by malaria, pneumonia, HIV, typhoid, and diarrheal illness. Even so, I am very glad to report that none of our CarePoint children have been lost due to illness. The children do sometimes have what we consider severe health problems, but they also deal with health issues like colds and flus, allergies, sore throat, headaches, and stomach aches. Q: How do the medical teams deal with the health issues in Kaberamaido, Uganda? When our medical teams travel to Kaberamaido, Uganda, we deal with the health issues in three main ways. First, we provide education and information about a variety of health topics. We feel this is one of the most powerful tools we have to improve the overall health of the children and their caregivers. So far, we have focued on oral health (brushing teeth), hand-washing to prevent spread of infection, and menstrual hygeine and health. Second, we support recovery from and treat the minor illnesses that we can when they are simple and isolated health problems. Finally, we help the children and their caregivers make connections with the existing health care systems in the area for health issues that are more chronic or serious. We want to support primary care in Uganda and promote good use of the existing system rather than creating an alternative system or avenue for care. Thank you Dr. Terri for taking the time to share your experience with the children in Kabermaido, Uganda! We appreciate you telling us about the benefits of vitamins for the children and answering our questions. What are your thoughts on this? We’d love to hear it!	This one meal each day at the CarePoint, however, is often the only consistent meal many of these children receive. Because we want to give the children as much support as possible to survive, thrive, and achieve, we have started providing children’s multivitamins on a regular basis in addition to the typical feeding program. Q: How do you know if the multivitamins are working? The benefits of vitamins include a noticeable difference in the overall look of health for the children. Their skin and eyes appear healthier, and they complain of fewer significant health problems with each visit since the vitamin program began. This vitamin study indicates that providing access to vitamins to children can prevent the simplest diseases that lead to death. It is our hope that the vitamins, in conjunction with their daily meal, will help them remain as healthy and strong as possible. We aim to give the children a strong foundation, enabling them to succeed in school and life. Q: How did the idea of providing vitamins for the children come about? The idea for the vitamin program started when one of the service teams traveling to Kaberamaido brainstormed ideas about how we could impact the children’s health in real and lasting ways. We knew we could not cure or prevent every case of pneumonia or infectious diarrhea for the children in Kaberamaido. We knew we could not eradicate malaria or HIV in all of Uganda. And we knew we could not quickly increase the number of physicians and other healthcare workers to improve access to medical care for the children and their families. What we could do, however, was to give these children the best nutritional foundation possible so that their bodies are better equipped to fight off illness and disease. We are hopeful that improving their nutritional health will also allow some of the children in the Kaberamaido Hopechest CarePoint to do so well in school that they can pursue careers as physicians or other healthcare providers.	yes
Pediatrics	Should children be given multivitamins?	yes_statement	"children" should be "given" "multivitamins".. it is beneficial for "children" to take "multivitamins".	https://uknow.uky.edu/uk-healthcare/should-your-kids-take-multivitamins-or-supplements	Should your kids take multivitamins or supplements? \| UKNow	Should your kids take multivitamins or supplements? The University of Kentucky Public Relations and Strategic Communications Office provides a weekly health column available for use and reprint by news media. This week's column is by George Fuchs, M.D., pediatric gastroenterologist at Kentucky Children’s Hospital. LEXINGTON, Ky. (Oct. 3, 2022)—Vitamins are one of the most common ways to ensure children receive essential nutrients for growing in the healthiest way possible, but over-the-counter vitamins may be doing more harm than good. Over-the-counter multivitamins are often filled with sugar and additional supplements that may not be necessary in every child’s diet. When these vitamins are taken too often, they can become counterproductive for the health of the child, especially when given in higher doses than recommended by professional sources. Fat-soluble vitamins like A and D are stored in the body and gradually released over time, but the excess consumption and storage can potentially lead to toxic levels. Taking too much vitamin A can lead to vomiting, brain swelling and distorted vision. Too much vitamin D can cause nausea and vomiting, liver damage and extreme levels of calcium in the blood can damage the heart's function. To avoid the risks associated with multivitamins and supplements, you can readily incorporate vitamins A, B, C, D and K into a child’s diet through fresh foods. Here are a few food suggestions to implement into your child’s diet: When a child’s body is still developing, it is best to keep their vitamin intake to natural levels by feeding them a well-balanced diet. Fresh fruits and vegetables are the best source of vitamins because the child can get the most out of the food while the parent knows exactly what the child is ingesting. It may be difficult to incorporate new fresh foods in a child’s diet, especially if they are a picky eater. Make mealtime fun by thinking of creative ways to introduce new flavors. Every child has different dietetic requirements, so talk to your health care provider or dietitian about the best diet for your child. As the state’s flagship, land-grant institution, the University of Kentucky exists to advance the Commonwealth. We do that by preparing the next generation of leaders — placing students at the heart of everything we do — and transforming the lives of Kentuckians through education, research and creative work, service and health care. We pride ourselves on being a catalyst for breakthroughs and a force for healing, a place where ingenuity unfolds. It's all made possible by our people — visionaries, disruptors and pioneers — who make up 200 academic programs, a $476.5 million research and development enterprise and a world-class medical center, all on one campus. In 2022, UK was ranked by Forbes as one of the “Best Employers for New Grads” and named a “Diversity Champion” by INSIGHT into Diversity, a testament to our commitment to advance Kentucky and create a community of belonging for everyone. While our mission looks different in many ways than it did in 1865, the vision of service to our Commonwealth and the world remains the same. We are the University for Kentucky.	Should your kids take multivitamins or supplements? The University of Kentucky Public Relations and Strategic Communications Office provides a weekly health column available for use and reprint by news media. This week's column is by George Fuchs, M.D., pediatric gastroenterologist at Kentucky Children’s Hospital. LEXINGTON, Ky. (Oct. 3, 2022)—Vitamins are one of the most common ways to ensure children receive essential nutrients for growing in the healthiest way possible, but over-the-counter vitamins may be doing more harm than good. Over-the-counter multivitamins are often filled with sugar and additional supplements that may not be necessary in every child’s diet. When these vitamins are taken too often, they can become counterproductive for the health of the child, especially when given in higher doses than recommended by professional sources. Fat-soluble vitamins like A and D are stored in the body and gradually released over time, but the excess consumption and storage can potentially lead to toxic levels. Taking too much vitamin A can lead to vomiting, brain swelling and distorted vision. Too much vitamin D can cause nausea and vomiting, liver damage and extreme levels of calcium in the blood can damage the heart's function. To avoid the risks associated with multivitamins and supplements, you can readily incorporate vitamins A, B, C, D and K into a child’s diet through fresh foods. Here are a few food suggestions to implement into your child’s diet: When a child’s body is still developing, it is best to keep their vitamin intake to natural levels by feeding them a well-balanced diet. Fresh fruits and vegetables are the best source of vitamins because the child can get the most out of the food while the parent knows exactly what the child is ingesting. It may be difficult to incorporate new fresh foods in a child’s diet, especially if they are a picky eater. Make mealtime fun by thinking of creative ways to introduce new flavors.	no
Pediatrics	Should children be given multivitamins?	yes_statement	"children" should be "given" "multivitamins".. it is beneficial for "children" to take "multivitamins".	https://www.centrum.sg/expert-corner/health-blog/multivitamins-important-for-kids/	The Importance of Multivitamins for Kids	By clicking the link(s) below, you will be taken to an external website that is independently operated and not managed by GSK. GSK assumes no responsibility for the content on the website. If you do not wish to leave this website, do not click on the links below. The Importance of Multivitamins for Kids As parents, we want the very best for our children. However, lifestyles have changed and our eating habits with them - including those of our children. The advent of fast food and availability of pre-packed foods has given us more choice than ever before. Kids are bombarded with advertisements for sweets, soft drinks and snack foods. So although we try our hardest to ensure a balanced and healthy diet for them, it's often very difficult to persuade children to eat the foods you think are best for them or foods they really don't like. That's where a supplement can help. A multivitamin supplement provides additional nutrients to complement your child's diet and provides you with the reassurance that you are helping your child get the vitamins and minerals they need. What dietary advice do you have for children? Nutritionists and dieticians recommend that from around the age of 5 years, children should follow a diet that's low in fat, sugar and salt, and high in fibre. Changing dietary behaviour can be a slow process and is as difficult for our children as it is for us; it requires a great deal of patience and encouragement, with parents and adults serving as appropriate role models. Children, like adults, should be eating a varied and balanced diet. This is achieved by offering a range of foods from all the major food groups. This will help to ensure that they are getting the nutrients they need for healthy growth and development. If you have any specific concerns about your child's diet contact your GP or a dietician for specific dietary advice.	By clicking the link(s) below, you will be taken to an external website that is independently operated and not managed by GSK. GSK assumes no responsibility for the content on the website. If you do not wish to leave this website, do not click on the links below. The Importance of Multivitamins for Kids As parents, we want the very best for our children. However, lifestyles have changed and our eating habits with them - including those of our children. The advent of fast food and availability of pre-packed foods has given us more choice than ever before. Kids are bombarded with advertisements for sweets, soft drinks and snack foods. So although we try our hardest to ensure a balanced and healthy diet for them, it's often very difficult to persuade children to eat the foods you think are best for them or foods they really don't like. That's where a supplement can help. A multivitamin supplement provides additional nutrients to complement your child's diet and provides you with the reassurance that you are helping your child get the vitamins and minerals they need. What dietary advice do you have for children? Nutritionists and dieticians recommend that from around the age of 5 years, children should follow a diet that's low in fat, sugar and salt, and high in fibre. Changing dietary behaviour can be a slow process and is as difficult for our children as it is for us; it requires a great deal of patience and encouragement, with parents and adults serving as appropriate role models. Children, like adults, should be eating a varied and balanced diet. This is achieved by offering a range of foods from all the major food groups. This will help to ensure that they are getting the nutrients they need for healthy growth and development. If you have any specific concerns about your child's diet contact your GP or a dietician for specific dietary advice.	yes
Pediatrics	Should children be given multivitamins?	yes_statement	"children" should be "given" "multivitamins".. it is beneficial for "children" to take "multivitamins".	https://www.seattleschild.com/should-your-child-be-taking-supplements/	Should Your Child Be Taking Supplements? \| Seattle's Child	Should Your Child Be Taking Supplements? "It's the bright and colorful section," the clerk at the supplement store said when I asked where I could find the children's area. Colorful, indeed. Rows of multivitamins, fish oils, immune support capsules, calcium tablets and pills to calm children and help them sleep were displayed on the shelf in a rainbow of colors and a variety of shapes from "yummi bears" and dinosaurs to dolphins and kangaroos. Scanning the shelves, you might wonder how many of these supplements your child should be taking. In most cases, the answer is not many – if any at all. The American Academy of Pediatrics does not recommend a daily multivitamin for most children. "Food has what they need," says Claire Kjeld, wellness dietician with the Muliticare Center for Healthy Living in Tacoma. Exceptions are low-income kids, who often don't have access to a good variety of healthy foods, and picky eaters who may be missing whole food groups, as well as those with chronic illnesses such as cystic fibrosis and kidney diseases. "If kids are picky eaters, they absolutely should have a multivitamin," says Lynnwood naturopath David Wood. "Even if they're not, there are a lot of trace minerals that are hard to get in the diet. Multivitamins are a little insurance policy to fill in the gaps." The consensus among researchers for the past 50 years is that multivitamins made for children are harmless. Here are some guidelines from Kjeld, Wood and the Mayo Clinic: • Always dispense the multivitamin to the child, and remind him that they are not candy. • Never give children adult vitamins – even if cut in half – because children's nutritional needs are not the same as adults', especially for Vitamin D, copper and iron. • Potent prenatal vitamins, with their high iron content, are particularly bad for children. • Watch out for binders, including talc, in multivitamin tablets. Liquid vitamins for infants, followed by chewables and then small capsules for older children, are more easily absorbed. • Read labels to see if vitamins have added dyes and sugars. • Wood adds that it's best to pay more for biological, rather than synthetic vitamins, especially for the B-vitamins. About 90 percent of synthetic, petroleum-based B-vitamins are filtered out by the kidneys before the liver has a chance to convert them to usable form – making expensive urine. Even if children do not need a multivitamin, they may need added calcium and Vitamin D. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends calcium levels ranging from 500 mg. a day for 1- to 3-year-olds (two 8-ounce glasses of milk or dairy equivalents) to 1,300 mg. a day for kids ages 9 to 18 (about four 8-oz. glasses of milk). Children who do not get that from their diet should take a supplement. In October 2008, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a new recommendation, increasing the Vitamin D requirement from 200 to 400 international units a day. Breastfed infants and children who drink less than 32 ounces of Vitamin-D fortified milk a day are now advised to take a supplement. Calcium and Vitamin D are often packaged together for maximum absorbency. Most children's vitamins contain 400 iu of Vitamin D. They don't need any more than that, so if your child takes a multivitamin, he won't need a vitamin D supplement as well. However, children who eat a varied and healthy enough diet to not to need multivitamins may need a vitamin D supplement if they don't drink much milk or eat many dairy products. Children who eat no meat or fortified cereals may need an iron supplement, Kjeld says. And those who do not live in areas where water is fluoridated may benefit from a fluoride supplement. For all vitamins and minerals, more is not better, and experts advise against giving children mega-vitamins. "Anything that's marketed to adults shouldn't be given to kids," Kjeld says. The biggest problem is with the fat-soluble vitamins – A, D, E and K. Small quantities are needed for good health, but the body stores the extra amounts in the liver and they can build up toxicity. Vitamin A is often prescribed to boost the immune system, but too much can cause bone loss and liver problems, while too much Vitamin D is toxic to the kidneys. Other Supplements In general, Kjeld says she doesn't think children should be given any supplements, beyond multivitamins, calcium, Vitamin D and occasionally iron. "Very few studies testing the safety and efficacy of herbal supplements for children have been done," she says. "There's no regulation of supplement makers – you don't know that what they say is in the product is actually in there." Cora Breuner, a pediatrician at Seattle Children's Hospital, says she does not generally recommend supplements to children younger than 13 because of the lack of studies. She incorporates naturopathic remedies into her medical practice. She most commonly uses peppermint for irritable bowel, melatonin for sleep disturbances, chamomile for colic and fenugreek to promote lactation in nursing mothers. A recent survey of 9,400 children conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics found that echinacea, fish oil/omega 3 or DHA fatty acids, combination herb pills and flaxseed oil and pills are the most common dietary supplements children take. Echinacea is derived from coneflowers, and some studies have shown that it lowers the risk of catching a cold and shortens the length of a cold. Other studies have shown no significant effect. Wood may prescribe elderberry, echinacea, zinc, beta-carotene and Vitamin C to boost the immune system and fight infections, giving patients a prescription for antibiotics if the supplements do not work. Kjeld notes that there are lots of different plants in the coneflower family, and that there is no guarantee that the ones in a supplement will be the most effective species. Do not give your child echinacea if he is allergic to ragweed, because they are in the same plant family. Fatty acids, especially omega 3's, have been proven to help with brain development. Nutritionists prefer that children get them through food (see our March story, What's Good about Fat? in RELATED STORIES), but supplements are generally thought to be safe. Wood warns parents to get a balanced formula of omega 3 and omega 6 fatty acids. Too much omega 6 (found in plant oils and in evening primrose oil supplements) can cause inflammation in the body and throw off kids' neurochemistry, he explains. Flaxseed, used as a health food for thousands of years, is a current darling among nutritionists for its omega 3 fatty acids, lignans (powerful antioxidants) and fiber. Flaxseed's touted health benefits range from lowering cholesterol and stabilizing blood sugar to reducing inflammation and cancer risk. There have not been studies on flaxseed safety for children, but too much flaxseed, as with any fiber source, has been shown to cause bloating, gas, abdominal pain, diarrhea or constipation in adults. Wood says it is safest to use these and other supplements under the direction of a health care professional, rather than taking them off the shelf, to insure that children are getting the proper balance for their body sizes and individual health needs. Who's Taking Vitamins? Thirty-four percent of American children ages 2 to 17 take multivitamins, according to a recent survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The results of the study were analyzed by Dr. Ulfat Shaikh and her colleagues at the University of California Davis School of Medicine and the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in the February 2009 issue of The Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. Researchers noted that healthy, high-income children with balanced diets who are physically active and have ready access to an array of nutritious foods – in other words those who need vitamins the least – were the most likely to take the supplements. By contrast, low-income children with poor diets, who need the multivitamins the most, are the least likely to take them. Complimentary and Alternative Medicine The use of dietary supplements is part of the larger field known as Complementary and Alternative Medicine, or CAM – treatments used in addition to or instead of traditional Western medical practices. It includes acupuncture, naturopathy, chiropractic, yoga, traditional Chinese medicine and hypnosis. In a review of CAM therapies published in the December 2008 issue of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Pediatrics took a balanced view. It noted that CAM therapies are more often used for children with special health needs, such as asthma, attention deficit disorder, autism, cancer, cerebral palsy, cystic fibrosis, inflammatory bowel disease and juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. "Presently, there is little research on the effectiveness of CAM therapies for many of these conditions," the writers conclude. They also acknowledge that negative studies on supplements and other alternative therapies are usually published in well-known journals, while positive studies are published in lesser-known foreign journals. Most kids treated with CAM therapies also get conventional care, although two-thirds of parents do not inform their child's medical doctor about alternative treatments and supplements. Pediatricians should have "an open, respectful relationship and clear communication with families," the American Academy of Pediatrics report concludes.	"If kids are picky eaters, they absolutely should have a multivitamin," says Lynnwood naturopath David Wood. "Even if they're not, there are a lot of trace minerals that are hard to get in the diet. Multivitamins are a little insurance policy to fill in the gaps. " The consensus among researchers for the past 50 years is that multivitamins made for children are harmless. Here are some guidelines from Kjeld, Wood and the Mayo Clinic: • Always dispense the multivitamin to the child, and remind him that they are not candy. • Never give children adult vitamins – even if cut in half – because children's nutritional needs are not the same as adults', especially for Vitamin D, copper and iron. • Potent prenatal vitamins, with their high iron content, are particularly bad for children. • Watch out for binders, including talc, in multivitamin tablets. Liquid vitamins for infants, followed by chewables and then small capsules for older children, are more easily absorbed. • Read labels to see if vitamins have added dyes and sugars. • Wood adds that it's best to pay more for biological, rather than synthetic vitamins, especially for the B-vitamins. About 90 percent of synthetic, petroleum-based B-vitamins are filtered out by the kidneys before the liver has a chance to convert them to usable form – making expensive urine. Even if children do not need a multivitamin, they may need added calcium and Vitamin D. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends calcium levels ranging from 500 mg. a day for 1- to 3-year-olds (two 8-ounce glasses of milk or dairy equivalents) to 1,300 mg. a day for kids ages 9 to 18 (about four 8-oz. glasses of milk).	yes
Pediatrics	Should children be given multivitamins?	yes_statement	"children" should be "given" "multivitamins".. it is beneficial for "children" to take "multivitamins".	https://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/preschool/nutrition-fitness/Pages/A-Vitamin-a-Day.aspx	A Vitamin a Day - HealthyChildren.org	A Vitamin a Day Do you ever glance despairingly at what goes untouched on your toddler’s plate or consider what never makes it there in the first place and wish you could buy yourself a nutritional safety net to go along with a good book on the subject of food fights? If so, you are not alone. It has been estimated that just over half of all preschoolers are given multivitamins. We’re pretty sure that’s a good bit more than are served broccoli on any given day. And we’re quite sure we can relate to the reasons why. When the going gets tough, it is often a whole lot easier to reach for a quick fix in a bottle of Flintstones vitamins and forget the fight. The fact that there are so many parents who do just that isn’t so much a food fight, per se, but a reflection on the parental feelings that so many share that what we’re feeding our children is nutritionally inadequate. While we can definitely understand the sentiment, it compels us to address the fundamental question: What role should multivitamins play in your child’s diet, and is it you or your child that stands to benefit from them more? Who Needs ‘Em, Anyway? We’ll come right out and say what most nutrition experts have been saying all along: Most children don’t need vitamin supplements at all! Yes, we realize that the perfect, vegetable-loving, cooperative eater we all long for doesn’t exist. But even taking all food fights into consideration, there are nevertheless very few instances in which a child’s diet is likely to leave him truly deficient. If you need further convincing, we suggest you consider the following facts: The amount your child needs to eat to get enough vitamins and minerals from his food alone is probably much smaller than you think. Even for the pickiest of eaters, it doesn’t take more than a very few picks from each of the basic food groups for children to get their recommended daily dose. Many vitamins can be stored in the body. This means that your child doesn’t have to eat each and every one every day—affording you the option of spreading your efforts at achieving a balanced diet out over the course of a week or two without spreading the vitamins too thin. Ironically enough, parents who are most likely to give multivitamins are also those who are most likely to be feeding their children healthy diets in the first place. Vitamins can be found in some unlikely sources. Calcium doesn’t just have to come from cows, since it is contained in both supplements and many nondairy foods ranging from salmon, tofu, spinach, and sardines to rhubarb, baked beans, bok choy, and almonds—admittedly not all of which are an easy sell at the dinner table, but at least you have plenty to choose from! And finally, many foods these days are fortified. That means that even if your child favors foods that do not come naturally loaded with all of the necessary nutrients, all hope is not lost; it’s entirely possible that food manufacturers have added them in for you. Classic examples include the vitamin D fortification of milk, margarine, and pudding, and the calcium contained in kid-friendly foods such as orange juice, cereals, breads, and even Eggo waffles. The information contained on this Web site should not be used as a substitute for the medical care and advice of your pediatrician. There may be variations in treatment that your pediatrician may recommend based on individual facts and circumstances.	A Vitamin a Day Do you ever glance despairingly at what goes untouched on your toddler’s plate or consider what never makes it there in the first place and wish you could buy yourself a nutritional safety net to go along with a good book on the subject of food fights? If so, you are not alone. It has been estimated that just over half of all preschoolers are given multivitamins. We’re pretty sure that’s a good bit more than are served broccoli on any given day. And we’re quite sure we can relate to the reasons why. When the going gets tough, it is often a whole lot easier to reach for a quick fix in a bottle of Flintstones vitamins and forget the fight. The fact that there are so many parents who do just that isn’t so much a food fight, per se, but a reflection on the parental feelings that so many share that what we’re feeding our children is nutritionally inadequate. While we can definitely understand the sentiment, it compels us to address the fundamental question: What role should multivitamins play in your child’s diet, and is it you or your child that stands to benefit from them more? Who Needs ‘Em, Anyway? We’ll come right out and say what most nutrition experts have been saying all along: Most children don’t need vitamin supplements at all! Yes, we realize that the perfect, vegetable-loving, cooperative eater we all long for doesn’t exist. But even taking all food fights into consideration, there are nevertheless very few instances in which a child’s diet is likely to leave him truly deficient. If you need further convincing, we suggest you consider the following facts: The amount your child needs to eat to get enough vitamins and minerals from his food alone is probably much smaller than you think. Even for the pickiest of eaters, it doesn’t take more than a very few picks from each of the basic food groups for children to get their recommended daily dose. Many vitamins can be stored in the body.	no
Bioethics	Should genetically modified organisms (GMOs) be part of our diet?	yes_statement	"genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos) should be included in our "diet".. our "diet" should include "genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos).	https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/will-gmos-hurt-my-body/	Will GMOs Hurt My Body? The Public's Concerns and How ...	Will GMOs Hurt My Body? The Public’s Concerns and How Scientists Have Addressed Them by Megan L. Norris Summary: As the prevalence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) continues to rise, there has been an increasing public interest for information concerning the safety of these products. Concerns generally focus on how the GMO may affect the environment or how it may affect the consumer. One specific concern is the possibility for GMOs to negatively affect human health. This could result from differences in nutritional content, allergic response, or undesired side effects such as toxicity, organ damage, or gene transfer. To address these concerns, there have been over 100 research studies comparing the effects of traditional food to genetically modified food, the results of which have been reviewed in various journals [1], [2]. How these results affect regulation can be found through The Center for Environmental Risk Assessment, which hosts a GM Crop Database that can be searched by the public to find GMO crop history, style of modification, and regulation across the world [3]. Though knowing who to trust and what to believe regarding this topic is an ongoing battle, major health groups, including the American Medical Association and World Health Organization, have concluded from the research of independent groups worldwide that genetically modified foods are safe for consumers [4]. Regarding toxicity, this includes any dangers related to organ health, mutations, pregnancy and offspring, and potential for transfer of genes to the consumer. GMO toxicity: fears and scientific analysis After genetically modified foods were introduced in the United States a few decades ago, people independently reported toxic effects caused by GMOs. One example is an anti-GMO advocacy group called the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT), which reported that rats fed a diet containing a GMO potato had virtually every organ system adversely affected after just ten days of feeding [5]. The IRT stated that the toxicity was the result of genetic modification techniques and not a specific case for that particular potato. They claimed the process of making the GMO caused it to be toxic and thus all GMOs were high risk for toxicity. Scientists across the U.S. and the rest of the world have sought to rigorously test the assertions of the IRT and others to uncover any possible toxicity caused by GMOs. To this end, many different types of modifications in various crops have been tested, and the studies have found no evidence that GMOs cause organ toxicity or other adverse health effects. An example of this research is a study carried out on a type of GMO potato that was genetically modified to contain the bar gene. The product of the bar gene is an enzyme that can detoxify herbicides and thus protects the potato from herbicidal treatment. In order to see if this GMO potato would have adverse effects on consumer health like those claimed by the IRT, a group of scientists at the National Institute of Toxicological Research in Seoul, Korea fed rats diets containing either GMO potato or non-GMO potato [6]. For each diet, they tracked male and female rats. To carefully analyze the rats’ health, a histopathological examination of tissues and organs was conducted after the rats died. Histopathology is the examination of organs for disease at the microscopic level (think pathologist doing a biopsy). Histopathological examinations of the reproductive organs, liver, kidneys, and spleen showed no differences between GMO-eating and non-GMO-eating animals. Three years earlier, a separate group had found the same results for a GMO tomato and a GMO sweet pepper [7]. These researchers had split rats into four diet groups: non-GMO tomato, GMO tomato, non-GMO sweet pepper, and GMO sweet pepper. They fed the rats over 7,000 times the average human daily consumption of either GMO or non-GMO tomato or sweet pepper for 30 days and monitored their overall health. Finally, they carried out histopathology and again found no differences in the stomach, liver, heart, kidney, spleen, or reproductive organs of GMO versus non-GMO fed rats. Despite massive ingestion of GMO potato, tomato, or sweet pepper, these studies demonstrated no differences in the vitality or health of the animals, even at the microscopic level. Experiments like these on humans would be completely unethical. Fortunately, prior to these studies years of work have demonstrated that rodents, like mice and rats, are acceptable models for humans, meaning rodent responses to drugs, chemicals, and foods can predict human response. Rat feeding studies like these, in which rats are fed a potential toxic item and monitored for adverse effects, are considered both specific and sensitive for monitoring toxicity of foods and widely used in the food regulation industry [1]. The test of time: GMOs and their effect on our offspring Although scientists have been able to demonstrate that GMOs are not toxic to the animals that eat them, as described above and elsewhere, what about side effects being passed on to our next generations? To discern whether GMO crops affect fertility or embryos during gestation, a group from South Dakota State University again turned to studies on rats. In this case, the rats were eating a type of GMO corn, more commonly known as Bt corn. Bt stands for Bacillus thuringiensis, a microbe that produces insecticidal endotoxin and has been used as a topical pesticide against insects since 1961 (see this article). To allow corn to directly generate this endotoxin, scientists introduced a gene from Bt into the genetic material (DNA) of corn. To address buildup of toxicity over time, this group monitored the GMO-eating rats not only for the lifetime of one generation, but also three additional generations. For each generation, they tracked the fertility of parents and compared the health of the embryos from parents that ate Bt corn to those with parents that did not [8]. Toxic effects can arise in many places and in many ways, but some organs are more susceptible to damage than others, and monitoring them is a good readout for other difficult-to-see effects. Testes are considered a particularly sensitive organ for toxicity tests because of the high degree of cell divisions and thus high susceptibility to cellular or molecular toxins. To examine the affect of Bt corn on testicular health, the researchers tracked testicular development in fetal, postnatal, pubertal, and adult rats for all four generations. The group found no change in testicular health or litter sizes in any generation. Likewise, ingestion by pregnant mothers had no effect on fetal, postnatal, pubertal, or adult testicular development of her offspring. Other groups have monitored toxicity over time as well. For example, the group studying the bar GMO potato also wanted to see if organs and reproductive health were sensitive to GMOs over long exposure times [5]. To do this, they examined the fertility and gestation periods of GMO-eating mothers compared to non-GMO-eating mothers for five generations. They tracked animal body weight, bone, eye, and thymus development, and general retardation. Like the studies on Bt corn, in all cases, they found no significant differences between the GMO potato and non-GMO potato diets, suggesting that there is no buildup or inheritance of toxicity, even over multiple generations. Figure 1. Work from independent researchers has investigated various aspects of GMO safety, especially concerning consumer health and toxicity. Can GMOs change our genes? Concern has also surrounded the idea that genetically modified DNA would be unstable, causing damage (via unintentional mutations) not only to the crop, but also to whomever would consume it. Mutations in DNA are closely tied to cancer and other diseases, and thus mutagenic substances can have dire effects on human health. The creation of mutations, called mutagenesis, can be measured and compared to known mutation-causing agents and known safe compounds, allowing researchers to determine whether drugs, chemicals, and foods cause increased mutation rates. There are a variety of ways to measure mutagenicity, but the most traditional method is a process pioneered by Bruce Ames at the University of California in Berkeley. His method, now called the Ames test in his honor, is able to track increased rates of mutations in a living thing in response to some substance, like a chemical or food. To directly test the ability of a GMO to cause mutations, a research group from the National Laboratory of Protein Engineering and Plant Genetic Engineering in Beijing, China applied the Ames test to GMO tomatoes and GMO corn [8]. GMO tomatoes and corn express the viral coat protein of cucumber mosaic virus (CMV). Expression of this coat protein confers resistance to CMV, which is the most broadly infectious virus of any known plant virus, thought to infect over 1,200 plant species from vegetable crops to ornamentals. The results of the Ames test demonstrated no relationship between GMO tomatoes or corn and mutations. They repeated their analysis using two additional methods for analyzing mutagenicity in mice and got the same result, allowing them to conclude that genetically modified DNA did not cause increased mutations in consumers. The modified DNA, like unmodified DNA, was not mutagenic. Mutagenicity aside, there are also concerns surrounding the ability of the modified DNA to transfer to the DNA of whomever eats it or have other toxic side effects. Depending on the degree of processing of their foods, a given person will ingest between 0.1 and 1 g of DNA each day [9]; as such, DNA itself is regarded as safe by the FDA [10]. To determine if the DNA from GMO crops is as safe to consume as the DNA from traditional food sources, the International Life Sciences Institute reviewed the chemical characteristics, susceptibility to degradation, metabolic fate and allergenicity of GMO-DNA and found that, in all cases, GMO-DNA was completely indistinguishable from traditional DNA, and thus is no more likely to transfer to or be toxic to a human [9]. Consistent with this, the researchers working on the GMO potato attempted to isolate the bar gene from their GMO eating rats. Despite 5 generations of exposure to and ingestion of the GMO, the researchers were unable to detect the gene in the rats’ DNA [5]. A strong argument for GMO health safety After more than 20 years of monitoring by countries and researchers around the world, many of the suspicions surrounding the effects of GMOs on organ health, our offspring, and our DNA have been addressed and tested (Figure 1). In the data discussed above, alongside many more studies not mentioned here, GMOs have been found to exhibit no toxicity, in one generation or across many. Though each new product will require careful analysis and assessment of safety, it appears that GMOs as a class are no more likely to be harmful than traditionally bred and grown food sources. Megan L. Norris is a Ph.D. candidate in the Molecular, Cellular and Organismal Biology Program at Harvard University. Dr. “Read the Article Before You Say Anything” who do you think is funding Harvard? They don’t get a billion dollar endowment just from tuition fees. Perhaps you should read Dark Money before you say anything. Here’s what you need to understand: you will never truly know what’s “fake news” or not, as literally ANYTHING could be fake news due to make big businesses more wealthy, created by the Illuminati, be part of the programming of the Matrix, etc. It’s ultimately YOUR choice whether you believe something or not, whether it’s science, the government, religion, spaghetti gods, etc. If you decide to be skeptical, that’s your choice, and that’s fine. If you decide to believe university articles, that’s ok, too. Just, please, don’t present your opinions of what’s the “truth” as a “fact” or call other people stupid if they have a different opinion of what’s the “truth” than you. Summary: As the prevalence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) continues to rise, there has been an increasing public interest for information concerning the safety of these products. Concerns generally focus on how the GMO may affect the environment or how it may affect the consumer. One specific concern is the possibility for GMOs to negatively affect human health. This could result from differences in nutritional content, allergic response, or undesired side effects such as toxicity, organ damage, or gene transfer. To address these concerns, there have been over 100 research studies comparing the effects of traditional food to genetically modified food, the results of which have been reviewed in various journals [1], [2]. How these results affect regulation can be found through The Center for Environmental Risk Assessment, which hosts a GM Crop Database that can be searched by the public to find GMO crop history, style of modification, and regulation across the world [3]. Though knowing who to trust and what to believe regarding this topic is an ongoing battle, major health groups, including the American Medical Association and World Health Organization, have concluded from the research of independent groups worldwide that genetically modified foods are safe for consumers [4]. Regarding toxicity, this includes any dangers related to organ health, mutations, pregnancy and offspring, and potential for transfer of genes to the consumer. GMO toxicity: fears and scientific analysis After genetically modified foods were introduced in the United States a few decades ago, people independently reported toxic effects caused by GMOs. One example is an anti-GMO advocacy group called the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT), which reported that rats fed a diet containing a GMO potato had virtually every organ system adversely affected after just ten days of feeding [5]. The IRT stated that the toxicity was the result of genetic modification techniques and not a specific case for that particular potato. They claimed the process of making the GMO caused it to be toxic and thus all GMOs were high risk for toxicity. Scientists across the U.S. and the rest of the world have sought to rigorously test the assertions of the IRT and others to uncover any possible toxicity caused by GMOs. To this end, many different types of modifications in various crops have been tested, and the studies have found no evidence that GMOs cause organ toxicity or other adverse health effects. An example of this research is a study carried out on a type of GMO potato that was genetically modified to contain the bar gene. The product of the bar gene is an enzyme that can detoxify herbicides and thus protects the potato from herbicidal treatment. In order to see if this GMO potato would have adverse effects on consumer health like those claimed by the IRT, a group of scientists at the National Institute of Toxicological Research in Seoul, Korea fed rats diets containing either GMO potato or non-GMO potato [6]. For each diet, they tracked male and female rats. To carefully analyze the rats’ health, a histopathological examination of tissues and organs was conducted after the rats died. Histopathology is the examination of organs for disease at the microscopic level (think pathologist doing a biopsy). Histopathological examinations of the reproductive organs, liver, kidneys, and spleen showed no differences between GMO-eating and non-GMO-eating animals. Three years earlier, a separate group had found the same results for a GMO tomato and a GMO sweet pepper [7]. These researchers had split rats into four diet groups: non-GMO tomato, GMO tomato, non-GMO sweet pepper, and GMO sweet pepper. They fed the rats over 7,000 times the average human daily consumption of either GMO or non-GMO tomato or sweet pepper for 30 days and monitored their overall health. Finally, they carried out histopathology and again found no differences in the stomach, liver, heart, kidney, spleen, or reproductive organs of GMO versus non-GMO fed rats. Despite massive ingestion of GMO potato, tomato, or sweet pepper, these studies demonstrated no differences in the vitality or health of the animals, even at the microscopic level. Experiments like these on humans would be completely unethical. Fortunately, prior to these studies years of work have demonstrated that rodents, like mice and rats, are acceptable models for humans, meaning rodent responses to drugs, chemicals, and foods can predict human response. Rat feeding studies like these, in which rats are fed a potential toxic item and monitored for adverse effects, are considered both specific and sensitive for monitoring toxicity of foods and widely used in the food regulation industry [1]. The test of time: GMOs and their effect on our offspring Although scientists have been able to demonstrate that GMOs are not toxic to the animals that eat them, as described above and elsewhere, what about side effects being passed on to our next generations? To discern whether GMO crops affect fertility or embryos during gestation, a group from South Dakota State University again turned to studies on rats. In this case, the rats were eating a type of GMO corn, more commonly known as Bt corn. Bt stands for Bacillus thuringiensis, a microbe that produces insecticidal endotoxin and has been used as a topical pesticide against insects since 1961 (see this article). To allow corn to directly generate this endotoxin, scientists introduced a gene from Bt into the genetic material (DNA) of corn. To address buildup of toxicity over time, this group monitored the GMO-eating rats not only for the lifetime of one generation, but also three additional generations. For each generation, they tracked the fertility of parents and compared the health of the embryos from parents that ate Bt corn to those with parents that did not [8]. Toxic effects can arise in many places and in many ways, but some organs are more susceptible to damage than others, and monitoring them is a good readout for other difficult-to-see effects. Testes are considered a particularly sensitive organ for toxicity tests because of the high degree of cell divisions and thus high susceptibility to cellular or molecular toxins. To examine the affect of Bt corn on testicular health, the researchers tracked testicular development in fetal, postnatal, pubertal, and adult rats for all four generations. The group found no change in testicular health or litter sizes in any generation. Likewise, ingestion by pregnant mothers had no effect on fetal, postnatal, pubertal, or adult testicular development of her offspring. Other groups have monitored toxicity over time as well. For example, the group studying the bar GMO potato also wanted to see if organs and reproductive health were sensitive to GMOs over long exposure times [5]. To do this, they examined the fertility and gestation periods of GMO-eating mothers compared to non-GMO-eating mothers for five generations. They tracked animal body weight, bone, eye, and thymus development, and general retardation. Like the studies on Bt corn, in all cases, they found no significant differences between the GMO potato and non-GMO potato diets, suggesting that there is no buildup or inheritance of toxicity, even over multiple generations. Figure 1. Work from independent researchers has investigated various aspects of GMO safety, especially concerning consumer health and toxicity. Can GMOs change our genes? Concern has also surrounded the idea that genetically modified DNA would be unstable, causing damage (via unintentional mutations) not only to the crop, but also to whomever would consume it. Mutations in DNA are closely tied to cancer and other diseases, and thus mutagenic substances can have dire effects on human health. The creation of mutations, called mutagenesis, can be measured and compared to known mutation-causing agents and known safe compounds, allowing researchers to determine whether drugs, chemicals, and foods cause increased mutation rates. There are a variety of ways to measure mutagenicity, but the most traditional method is a process pioneered by Bruce Ames at the University of California in Berkeley. His method, now called the Ames test in his honor, is able to track increased rates of mutations in a living thing in response to some substance, like a chemical or food. To directly test the ability of a GMO to cause mutations, a research group from the National Laboratory of Protein Engineering and Plant Genetic Engineering in Beijing, China applied the Ames test to GMO tomatoes and GMO corn [8]. GMO tomatoes and corn express the viral coat protein of cucumber mosaic virus (CMV). Expression of this coat protein confers resistance to CMV, which is the most broadly infectious virus of any known plant virus, thought to infect over 1,200 plant species from vegetable crops to ornamentals. The results of the Ames test demonstrated no relationship between GMO tomatoes or corn and mutations. They repeated their analysis using two additional methods for analyzing mutagenicity in mice and got the same result, allowing them to conclude that genetically modified DNA did not cause increased mutations in consumers. The modified DNA, like unmodified DNA, was not mutagenic. Mutagenicity aside, there are also concerns surrounding the ability of the modified DNA to transfer to the DNA of whomever eats it or have other toxic side effects. Depending on the degree of processing of their foods, a given person will ingest between 0.1 and 1 g of DNA each day [9]; as such, DNA itself is regarded as safe by the FDA [10]. To determine if the DNA from GMO crops is as safe to consume as the DNA from traditional food sources, the International Life Sciences Institute reviewed the chemical characteristics, susceptibility to degradation, metabolic fate and allergenicity of GMO-DNA and found that, in all cases, GMO-DNA was completely indistinguishable from traditional DNA, and thus is no more likely to transfer to or be toxic to a human [9]. Consistent with this, the researchers working on the GMO potato attempted to isolate the bar gene from their GMO eating rats. Despite 5 generations of exposure to and ingestion of the GMO, the researchers were unable to detect the gene in the rats’ DNA [5]. A strong argument for GMO health safety After more than 20 years of monitoring by countries and researchers around the world, many of the suspicions surrounding the effects of GMOs on organ health, our offspring, and our DNA have been addressed and tested (Figure 1). In the data discussed above, alongside many more studies not mentioned here, GMOs have been found to exhibit no toxicity, in one generation or across many. Though each new product will require careful analysis and assessment of safety, it appears that GMOs as a class are no more likely to be harmful than traditionally bred and grown food sources. Megan L. Norris is a Ph.D. candidate in the Molecular, Cellular and Organismal Biology Program at Harvard University. This article is part of the August 2015 Special Edition, Genetically Modified Organisms and Our Food. “The product of the bar gene is an enzyme that can detoxify herbicides and thus protects the potato from herbicidal treatment.” This is the biggest problem with GMOs. It does things like protect the potato from herbicidal treatment, which will lead to increased herbicidal treatment of potatoes. That herbicidal treatment of potatoes will likely harm us. Alas, maybe we can become genetically modified so we, like the potato, can detoxify herbicides! Herbicides like ROUNDUP (glyphosate)! “Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide worldwide. It is a broad spectrum herbicide and its agricultural uses increased considerably after the development of glyphosate-resistant genetically modified (GM) varieties. Since glyphosate was introduced in 1974, all regulatory assessments have established that glyphosate has low hazard potential to mammals, however, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded in March 2015 that it is probably carcinogenic.” Yeah sorry, I’m gonna have to agree with Mason on this one. Can you get me something from anywhere that doesn’t end in a “.com” or without taking something out of context to TRY and prove a point? -Peer reviewed -Government website….. that would “.gov” I mean anything! P.s. Learn how to Cite and Reference, please. Jeremiah 17:5 Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, (the secularists in the government, and other secularists/ man-made, worldly knowledge or wisdom) and maketh flesh (the government or other humanist and antichrist ideology or human strength) his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD. 6 For he shall be like the heath in the desert, and shall not see when good cometh; but shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness, in a salt land and not inhabited. 7 Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose Hope the LORD is. 8 For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and that spreadeth out her roots by the river, and shall not see (suffer) when heat (scorching heat) cometh, but her leaf shall be green; and shall not be careful (anxious) in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit. 9 The (human) heart is deceitful (including self-deception) above all things, and desperately wicked: (sinful) who can know it? 10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to the fruit of his doings. Same Book, Chapter 1:4 Then the Word of the LORD came unto me, saying, Before I (The LORD God of Israel: the Creator of Heaven and earth, the sea, and all that therein dwells) formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I (God the LORD) sanctified (set thee apart for Myself) thee, and ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. 6 Then said I, Ah, Lord God! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child. 7 But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak. 8 Be not afraid of their faces; for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the LORD. 9 Then the LORD put forth His Hand, and touched my mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put My Words in thy mouth. 10 See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant. Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil (sin and the abomination) good, (Marxism/Socialism/Communism; the LGBTQ AGENDA; U.S. Citizens and taxpayers forced to support illegal aliens; the government sanctioning of lawlessness and of defunding of their Police officers; government Officials refusing to prosecute the lawless terrorists groups like ANTIFA and BLM as well as the illegal immigrants who are gang members! and other criminals; including corrupt officials or former government officials such as Hillary Clinton, and the Obama Administration as well as his evil and corrupt deep State officials who continued into the Trump Administration; and to do everything they could to bring down the Trump Administration by Corrupt and Unconstitutional means!) and good (innocent people and also Godly, Bible-believing, Born-again Christians and Messianic Jews who are Bible-believing, Born-again followers of Jesus their Messiah; (Yeshua HaMashiach) evil; that put darkness (Satan’s will and works) for Light, (that which is good and righteous in the sight of the LORD God of Israel and His Holy Word); and light for darkness; ( Satan’s followers present good as evil, and sin as if it were right); that put bitter for sweet, and sweet (the Word of the Living God: which leads us to true salvation and Eternal Life in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior); for bitter! ( sin which is celebrated by the ungodly; the ungodly and unsaved world present God’s Holy Inspired, Inerrant and Infallible Word as though it was an evil and hateful document that only fools who are racist and homophobic believe! They present God’s Holy Word and we who believe in His Word as evil; they are sadly deceiving their own selves! This prophecy is come to pass in our day!! 21 Woe unto them that are wise (with the world’s wisdom) in their own eyes, (conceited and deceived by their own sinful pride and arrogance), and prudent in their own sight! (Again, they are self-deluded by their arrogance and pride, trusting in man’s worldly knowledge, not the LORD’S WISDOM) 22 Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle (mix) strong drink; (alcoholic liquor); 23 Which justify the wicked for reward (bribe) and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him! (steal his honour). 24 Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust; because they have cast away the Law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the Word of the Holy One of Israel. Isaiah 1:4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters; they have forsaken the LORD, They have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward. 5 Why would ye be stricken any more? Ye will revolt more and more; the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. (weak) 6 From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment. 7 Your Country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire; your land, strangers (illegal aliens) devour it in your presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers. (illegal aliens). 8 And the daughter of Zion is left as a cottage in a vineyard, as a lodge in a garden of cucumbers, as a besieged city. 9 Except the LORD of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorah. 10 Hear the Word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the Law of our God, ye people of Gomorah. 11 To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto Me? saith the LORD; I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats. 12 When ye come to appear before Me, Who hath required this at your hand, to tread My courts? 13 Bring no more vain (futile) oblations; incense is an abomination unto Me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. 14 Your new moons and your appointed feasts My Soul hateth: they are a trouble unto Me; I am weary to bear them. 15 And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide Mine Eyes from you; yeah, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of (innocent) blood. (You have the murder of the innocent unborn children on your hands, and your hatred of those who believe in Me and in My Holy Word: hatred =murder of those who trust in Me and who believe My Word); 16 Wash you, make you clean; (Repent of all your sins, believe the Gospel of the Jewish Messiah: Yeshua HaMashiach, and follow Him for ever; and surrender to the Will of God and obey His Word by the power of the Holy Spirit! from Genesis 1:1———– Revelation 22:21KJV) put away the evil (sin) of your doings (sinful lifestyle) from before Mine Eyes; Cease to do evil. (Stop living in your sinful lifestyle; and stop making excuses for your sin and iniquities! Stop celebrating your sinful lifestyle, and stop advocating for a person’s so-called right to live in sin; and stop supporting laws and policies that defend those sins!!); 18 Come now, let us reason together, saith the LORD; though your sins be like scarlet (red), they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. 19 If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land; 20 But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the Mouth of the LORD hath spoken it. Matthew 4:4 But He[ (Yeshua HaMashiach) Jesus Christ] answered and said, It is Written, Man shall not live by bread (physical food for the physical body) alone, but by every Word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. 7 Jesus said unto him, It is Written again, thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. 10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for It is Written, thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve. 17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand. 19 And He saith unto them, Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men. 20 And they straightway left their nets, and followed Him! Hi Mitch, I’d like to piont out a flaw in your comment despite it being quite a bit since. If you check the sources, all but four are government cites. The four that are not government cites are 3, 4, 5, and 7. The third is an article posted by another school, the Center for Environmental Risk, so I’d assume anything on their website should be mostly true at least, but I understand any doubt as I myself am unable to find the quoted article. The fourth is not explicitly stated as having any schooling on the matters and is mostlikely someone against GMOs or atleast is quouted for the reported concern citizens have. The fith is used as a reference for the commonly misinforming study on how rats are negatively affected by GMOs. Lastly, the seventh is referenceing the study by multiple different scientest (all working at Haskell Global Centers for Health and Environmental Sciences), and is simply a synopsis of their findings. I’d also like to advise against passive agressivley asking a student to, quote “learn how to Cite and Refference, please”, as it may hurt their moral. If you must crituqe, at least do it in a positive manner, maybe give advice on it? It’s rather unbecoming of you. I do not intend to come off as angry, attacking, or anything of the sort. However, I do find it insulting that’d youd dismiss this authors hard work with your own incompetince. If you wish to make an argument against something or someone, make sure you have the evidence to back it. I do not appreciate you missinforming anyone who sees your comment into thinking that none of their, for lack of better words, evidence is propper when, compared to your lack thereof, is plenty. “As genetically modified (GM) foods are starting to intrude in our diet concerns have been expressed regarding GM food safety. These concerns as well as the limitations of the procedures followed in the evaluation of their safety are presented. Animal toxicity studies with certain GM foods have shown that they may toxically affect several organs and systems. The review of these studies should not be conducted separately for each GM food, but according to the effects exerted on certain organs it may help us create a better picture of the possible health effects on human beings. The results of most studies with GM foods indicate that they may cause some common toxic effects such as hepatic, pancreatic, renal, or reproductive effects and may alter the hematological, biochemical, and immunologic parameters. However, many years of research with animals and clinical trials are required for this assessment. The use of recombinant GH or its expression in animals should be re-examined since it has been shown that it increases IGF-1 which may promote cancer.” not saying that I agree or disagree but history has shown complicity from science and governments in covering up or in the misdirection of findings from research that is properly conducted relating to many industries; particularly in health related ones. In order for GMO’s to even begin to break into the market they had to appeal to governments that GMO’s would resolve some large humanitarian issues around starvation/disease/nutrition in third world countries. It didn’t take long for it to change focus; biofuels, largely take priority over food (even now) and what gmo food is grown, a significant amount of it is for animal food. So the humanitarian issues are still there. Commercial interests have long trumped the safety and health of the common people (whether there are risks or not). there has been some interesting ideas being lobbied to governments around making it harder and harder for people to obtain seeds/plants that aren’t controlled by these companies. Food and water are the easiest ways of controlling the masses and conservative governments are certainly keen for that. The question isn’t just about whether gmo’s have/not any health risks, it’s also about can it be used to control us? will prices be used to control us? how will it all work commercially/legally/etc. The point of herbicides is to kill the weeds in fields where potatoes are grown not kill the potatoes. Herbicide resistance in potatoes will make them hardier when chemicals are used so they don’t just die and more potatoes are yielded. Herbicide resistance in potatoes will have no effect on the amount that is applied. I think it would “behoove” you some ag experience and some basic knowledge of crops and herbicides before you make comments as such. j, I think you misunderstand. It’s not the hardiness of the potatoes that is a problem, it’s that pesticide proof potatoes will encourage farmers to use more pesticides than they usually would on non-pesticide potatoes. With non-GMO potatoes, the potatoes would die with when given too much pesticide. GMO potatoes (pesticide proof) would be fine when given too much pesticide, so with GMO potatoes, farmers will generally use more pesticide. Pesticide can contaminate many things and has a lot of effects that are bad for the environment. In essence, GMOs increase pesticide use and pesticide use is harmful to the environment. A note to everyone else concerning the authenticity of the article Cynthia provided: the site ScienceDirect is a publishing house for scientific articles, and does not write the articles themselves. According to what I have read, the majority of the articles found there are legitimate and scientific. The actual article is more a warning of possible dangers, and a call for more research on the topic than an actual argument. I agree. Look at the early research on ROUNDUP (glyphosate) and it was determined to be safe. But constant exposure over time (decades) has now shown it to be a real big problem. All of the biological factors mysterious be taken into consideration the most important in this case being concentration (all of us eat many foods with varying levels of chemicals “believed to be non- toxic) and time. What will be the future of our health after decades of exposure to the GMOs? Chemical food additives are also a concern. Since the introduction of processed foods, cancer rates have exploded over time. Is there a connection? I don’t want to take the chance to find out with my body. I totally agreed. Many so called scientist paid by the oil industry has denied for decades Global Warming. This article is ridiculous. Several countries in Europe has banned GMO from food and even for cotton crops that are used to make clothes. I guess they (France, Spain, Sweden) banned GMO’s because they are harmful, right. I have followed a diet of organic food for almost two years and I can report the following: A cyst on my right breast has disappeared . I am going back to a healthy weight with well balanced hormones. I lost 20 pounds. Diabetics Type 2 has been solved (no insulin resistance). If I eat a lot of calories I gain weight that I can lose back easily in two or three days of eating low calorie dishes. My metabolism is working as it should be. I have not eat any GMO since a long time. These are my sources of food: Wild fish Grass feed cow or bison (not any other animal) Organic vegetables (low glycemic index) Organic fruits (low sugar as berries) Organic nuts Organic Almond milk Organic Cheese only from brands that grow their own cows and do not use any kind of hormones to growth (or fatten). Guys, for one article that says that GMO is safe, you will find 5-10 articles that are documented and will tell you exactly the opposite. Do your research and use credible sources. There are many interest involved in the industry. You know that Whole Foods targeted segment is college graduates, health conscious people? Why is that educated people will chose to eat organic and non GMO food? Think about it and look for yourself. I agree with you! Our medical schools and big pharmaceutical industry and likely Monsanto fund many of these studies and schools. I just read a Havard Review saying Coconut oil was not heart healthy! Listen to Sally Fallon Morell’s 2016 Vermont Seminar on YouTube. Part 2 is about bad soy, The Oiling of America and the CHOLESTEROL MYTH. Part 1 is the common sense part on Weston Price Foundation research of long ago and recently, showing Native Cultures ate lots of free range meats and cheeses and non polluted fish, veggies and fruit, fermented soy only and many soaked grains and other organic fermented foods!! They had perfect bones and teeth! Cholesterol is protective and the fat solubility of key vitamins is IGNORED by many! Natives Cultures way back had no cancer and no to very little heart disease. We evolved from Apes eating the big cats who ate our babies! All cultures ate some form of animal products! They were raw, free range and fed/ate organic food/grass! Rancid oils cause oxidation of cholesterol and plaque, thus heart disease. Safe oils to cook or bake with are grass fed LARD, COCONUT OIL, OLIVE OIL OR GRASS FED BUTTER! It’s called the French Paradox but the French are eating non Traditional foods now too! It’s all about profit and even healthfood stores sell bad oils that cause heart DISEASE in many products tho most are non GMO at least! I’m so ashamed of Havard and other schools and our Gov on Nutrition. It’s common sense and backed by other studies. Sally explains how they alter statistical time segments to make graphs appear in favor of old pet theories. GMOs & Veganism is the genocide of our youth and makes many elderly sick! Just as factory farm meat makes us ill. All while others profit. Listen to 2016 entire conference before judging! Otherwise Havard and other schools are mostly informed! I love my high cholesterol and coconut milk or raw dairy milk, but need more $ to stick with this real food diet. Bad oils are CHEAP! We did Not evolve from any other creature! You have been sold the biggest lie of the 19th to the 21st century! There is absolutely No (Zero) proof of any creature turning into another creature in the fossil record! It takes alot more faith to believe in the lie of evolution than the Truth of the Inspired, Inerrant and Infallible Word of the Living God!! The Holy Bible is absolutely Truth! 2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection (LGBTQ AGENDA), trucebreakers, false accusers, (leftists accusing Bible-believing, Born-again believers in Jesus Christ of crimes, racism, and many other false accusations because we don’t celebrate their sinful lifestyles); incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good. 4 Traitors, heady (full of themselves), highminded (arrogant), lovers of pleasures (hedonism) more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness (man-made religion, of which there are thousands or more, including Humanism and Evolution: Atheism, Global Warming, aka. Global Climate Change, etc. there are many, many multiple man-made religions that deny the One True God and Creator of the Heavens, the earth, the seas, and all that therein dwells: the LORD God of Israel and the only begotten Son of God: Jesus Christ! Most every religion is man-made, and denies the One True God! Or they pervert or twist the Word of God to attempt to make it appear to say what they want it to, rather than submitting themselves to Him and His Will, and thus, surrendering to the Truth of God’s Inspired, Inerrant and Infallible Word; and the leading of the Holy Spirit!!!) but denying the power thereof; from such turn away. 6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with various lusts. 7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the Truth. 8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the Truth. men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. 9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was. 10 But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience, 11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me. 12 Yea, and all that will live Godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. 13 But evil men (and women) and seducers shall wax (grow slowly) worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom though hast learned them. 15 And that from a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ (Messiah) Jesus. (Yeshua) 16 All Scripture (the Holy Bible only, not any other religious book!!) is given by Inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, (spiritually mature) throughly furnished unto all good works. 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, Who shall judge the quick (living) and the dead at His appearing and His Kingdom; 2 Preach the Word (of God); be instant (ready) in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; (giving them a feel-good message instead of the Truth of God’s Inspired, Inerrant and Infallible Word: the Holy Bible) 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the Truth, (the Inspired, Inerrant and Infallible Word of the Living God: the Holy Bible) and shall be turned unto fables. (falsehoods such evolution, global warming/global climate change, humanism, Islamism, Atheism, globalism, Roman Catholocism, Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Totalitarianism, LGBTQ AGENDAism, leftism, hinduism, buddhism, zoroastrianism, newageism, Mormonism, Jehoveh’s Witnesses, and many, many other false religions, cults and doctrines that lead people to eternal destruction!!! there is no jesus!!! where is he when he lets children suffer from a meriad of different things. i’m sorry i was raised catholic, alter boy all that bull shit. then i realized its all bull shit. all loveing , all powerful. just more bull shit!!! where is your loveing god??? wake up bible thumper to reality, there is no jesus – bah-jesus!!!!! To Cindy Jantz…You seem like a good person…you really should read the Ramayana, Mahabharata, Book of Mormon, Buddhist scriptures, Book of Arda Viraf (Zoroastrian scriptures), and Quran in their entireties… I’ll bet you your faith in the One God, the Maker of the Universe will increase. Right now you probably don’t understand why God says, Begone you evildoers, I never knew ye…(in response to a “missionary” saying , “Didn’t we cast out many demons and perform many miracles in Your Name?”), n’est-ce pas? Ummmmm. A. Where did evolution come from? This article seemed to imply it, (it is from Harvard so i’m not surprised at all.) but if you are going to try to talk about macroevolution vs. creation, this isn’t really the best place to do it. B. Attempting to prove the Bible to be true, by using the Bible, to people who don’t trust the Bible to be true, most of the time will only encourage exactly what just happened. A better way may be using things agreed upon by most people and from their using it to give make your point. Trust me I also love to rant, and talk about how i know what i’m talking about, and that i’m always right, and that everyone else is stupid. You want to know how many times it has worked? 0. Though yes, you may be able to provide enough evidence to make it seem rediculous that anybody would believe in evolution, but when doing so, i would encourage you to do it in a humble, loving manner (again one of my personal greatest struggles.). (Ephesians 4 (more particularly v.15 but it all applies)). And in the end nobody can prove who or what actually made the universe because nobody was there when it happened. I just finished microbiology and also felt the same way about GMO’s until listening to the science behind it. Unfortunately not everyone even here in American and especially third world countries can afford to eat organic. Even organic farmers have said there is not enough land or money to farm organically and feed the world. He had us watch Food Evolution which became very eye opening. You should check it out. Firstly in the last part simply because cost isn’t a problem so they can afford to get what they wish. I have tried both GMO and non-GMO versions of products and there really isn’t that much of a difference. GMO tend to be modified to have more of certain vitamins. Different bodies react differently to different foods why some people have tried keto diets and are unaffected simply b/c their body does not lose weight on a keto diet. So GMO may affect people differently. That is the most likely reason why you are losing weight. Do you really think that you are God? If so, you are very deceived, and very arrogant! Repent of your sins and believe that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of the Living God! That He left His Home in Glory (the third Heaven), to come into His Own creation, and He was God wrapped in human flesh; He came to die in our place! To be our sin-sacrifice! He paid our sin-debt in-full on the Cross, was placed in a rich man’s tomb; and He was Risen on the third day in fulfillment of the Scriptures Isaiah 52:13-15; 53:1—9, 10–12; 7:14-16; 9:6; Micah 9:9; Psalm 22:1—–31; 9:1-2, 3-4, 5——11, 12-13, 14—-19, 20-22, 23, 24-26, 27; Miss, do you think the possible reason your body is healthier is because you have began to eat healthier rather than the lack of GMO foods in your diet. I mean to say this is the nicest way possible. It is a bit of a slippery slope to say that just cutting out GMO foods from your diet solved all your major health problems. If we were to look at this scientifically, you do not to test anything. You try a new diet, it works, and immediately assume it was GMO that caused all your health problems. If you really wanted to make logical argument, you should create three diets, one focused around GMO, one with both GMO foods and non-GMO foods, and a diet focused around non-GMO food. You should also determine for how long you would try each diet, at least a couple months to allow the body to change, and track your weight, overall health, mood, and any other factors. This is just my opinion though, but I think this would make you argument more compelling. Since I can’t modify my comments, I have to make a new one. Here’s an analysis of 76 studies that say that GMO corn has a higher yield and is safer: https://www.santannapisa.it/sites/default/files/pellegrino_et_al.2018.pdf Now you have to find me at the very least 380 articles that say otherwise. While you’re at it, check the multiple sources in this Kurzgasagt video (there’s 41 credible sources): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TmcXYp8xu4 And look! The number of articles you have to find now to prove your point just increased to 465! Also, since when is Harvard not a credible source? While you look for this obscure amount of articles just to disprove one of the biggest research sites, I’m going to disprove some common theories: No, DNA from GMO plants absolutely cannot transfer to our body. You’d know that if you went to biology class in primary school. Glyphosate resistant crops won’t encourage farmers to use more herbicides. It’s illogical; why would you want to spray your field with more herbicides when you have crops that don’t need that much of it? That’s illogical and doesn’t make sense at all. I’d be happy to see your attempt at providing credible sources. Any other questions? Any other myths you want disproven? expo, I agree completely with you. This entire section is based off the point that HARVARD isn’t a credible source?! Why do people trust reddit threads with 0 citations more than Harvard and FDA studies repeated countless times?? Seriously guys, pay attention in middle school when your teacher tells you about credible sources. P.S. Kurzgasagt is my life 😛 I don’t believe any leftist college like Harvard has any claim to integrity or credibility! Only the Inspired, Inerrant and Infallible Word of the Living God is Truth! Man’s word is usually worthless! The Hebrew prophet Jeremiah speaking the Word of the LORD in Jeremiah 17:9 The (human) heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? 17:5 Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm (strength), and whose heart departeth from the LORD. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made (created) that was made. (created). 4 In Him was Life; and the Life was the Light of men. 5 And the Light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through Him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the True Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made (Created) by Him, and the world knew Him not. 11 He came unto His Own, and His Own received Him not. 12 But as many received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His Name: 13 Which were born, not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. 17 For the law was given by Moses, but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ. 29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. 32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the (Holy) Spirit descending from Heaven like a dove, and it abode upon Him. (Jesus Christ) 33 And I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the Same said unto me, Upon Whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, (Jesus Christ) the Same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. 34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God. Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed (poured into the mold of this evil world’s system of antichrist and ungodliness) to this world; but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, Will of God. 2 Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, (like evolution, atheism, global warming/global climate change agenda, globalism, Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Islamism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Newageism, Roman Catholocism, Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and many other false religions, cults, and false prophets and doctrines) when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His Majesty. 17 For He (Jesus Christ the Son of God) received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a Voice to Him from the Excellent Glory, This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased. 18 And this Voice which came from Heaven we heard, when we were with Him (Jesus Christ) in the Holy mount. 19 We have also a more sure Word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a Light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the Day Star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily (secretly) shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the Way of Truth shall be evil spoken of. 3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. 4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; 5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; 6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorah into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an example unto those that after should live ungodly; 7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation (vile and abominable lifestyles) of the wicked: (sodomites) 8 (For that righteous man [Lot] dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful [wicked and lewd acts] deeds;) 9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the Godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: 10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, 12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; 13 And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; 14 Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children; 15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; 16 But was rebuked for his iniquity; the dumb ass speaking with man’s voice forbade the madness of the prophet. 17 These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever. 18 For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error. 19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought into bondage. 20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions (sin/bondage to sin) of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. 21 For it had been better for them not to have known the Way of righteousness, than, after they had known it, to turn from the Holy Commandment delivered unto them. 22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb. The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire. 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: 2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken by the Holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Savior: 3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of His (Jesus Christ’s) coming? (Return) for since the fathers fell asleep (died), all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the Word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same Word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness; but is long suffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation (conduct/lifestyle) and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. 14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of Him in peace, without spot, (sin) and blameless. 15 And account that the long suffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the Wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness. 18 But grow in Grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for ever, Amen. @expo You said “Glyphosate resistant crops won’t encourage farmers to use more herbicides. It’s illogical; why would you want to spray your field with more herbicides when you have crops that don’t need that much of it? That’s illogical and doesn’t make sense at all. ” Crops were made ‘glyphosate resistant’ BECAUSE glyphosate is sprayed(heavily) on mature crops to ripen / dessicate them for harvesting. Glyphosate usage increased from approx 50 million pounds in 1998 to over 250 million pounds in 2017 and with the increased planting of GMO’s that number continues to increase exponentially. Corrupt people are everywhere Harvard, Govt, regulatory agencies – money is available to compel them to turn a blind eye to truth. Hhhmmmmm I am still a little unsure how eating healthy made you healthier? If you had eaten all of those things but non-organic the results would be the same. GMOs not being safe is a new concept for me. I always knew there were folks that believed it, but I was astonished by the sheer amount of blatant ignorance of information that exists. GMOs do not cause issues, of course they may in the future when new ones are developed. But as a whole of what we have now, are not harmful. They are government regulated, and safe for consumption. The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States: For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies: He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends. We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor. Concern has also surrounded the idea that genetically modified DNA would be unstable, causing damage (via unintentional mutations) not only to the crop, but also to whomever would consume it. Mutations in DNA are closely tied to cancer and other diseases, and thus mutagenic substances can have dire effects on human health. The creation of mutations, called mutagenesis, can be measured and compared to known mutation-causing agents and known safe compounds, allowing researchers to determine whether drugs, chemicals, and foods cause increased mutation rates. There are a variety of ways to measure mutagenicity, but the most traditional method is a process pioneered by Bruce Ames at the University of California in Berkeley. His method, now called the Ames test in his honor, is able to track increased rates of mutations in a living thing in response to some substance, like a chemical or food. To directly test the ability of a GMO to cause mutations, a research group from the National Laboratory of Protein Engineering and Plant Genetic Engineering in Beijing, China applied the Ames test to GMO tomatoes and GMO corn [8]. GMO tomatoes and corn express the viral coat protein of cucumber mosaic virus (CMV). Expression of this coat protein confers resistance to CMV, which is the most broadly infectious virus of any known plant virus, thought to infect over 1,200 plant species from vegetable crops to ornamentals. The results of the Ames test demonstrated no relationship between GMO tomatoes or corn and mutations. They repeated their analysis using two additional methods for analyzing mutagenicity in mice and got the same result, allowing them to conclude that genetically modified DNA did not cause increased mutations in consumers. The modified DNA, like unmodified DNA, was not mutagenic. Mutagenicity aside, there are also concerns surrounding the ability of the modified DNA to transfer to the DNA of whomever eats it or have other toxic side effects. Depending on the degree of processing of their foods, a given person will ingest between 0.1 and 1 g of DNA each day [9]; as such, DNA itself is regarded as safe by the FDA [10]. To determine if the DNA from GMO crops is as safe to consume as the DNA from traditional food sources, the International Life Sciences Institute reviewed the chemical characteristics, susceptibility to degradation, metabolic fate and allergenicity of GMO-DNA and found that, in all cases, GMO-DNA was completely indistinguishable from traditional DNA, and thus is no more likely to transfer to or be toxic to a human [9]. Consistent with this, the researchers working on the GMO potato attempted to isolate the bar gene from their GMO eating rats. Despite 5 generations of exposure to and ingestion of the GMO, the researchers were unable to detect the gene in the rats’ DNA [5]. A strong argument for GMO health safety After more than 20 years of monitoring by countries and researchers around the world, many of the suspicions surrounding the effects of GMOs on organ health, our offspring, and our DNA have been addressed and tested (Figure 1). In the data discussed above, alongside many more studies not mentioned here, GMOs have been found to exhibit no toxicity, in one generation or across many. Though each new product will require careful analysis and assessment of safety, it appears that GMOs as a class are no more likely to be harmful than traditionally bred and grown food sources. Megan L. Norris is a Ph.D. candidate in the Molecular, Cellular and Organismal Biology Program at Harvard University. This article is part of the August 2015 Special Edition, Genetically Modified Organisms and Our Food. Research outcomes, conclusions, are determined by the integrity of unbiased minds. Do not think those who claim GMOs are perfectly healthy are people of Integrity. How do we the people determine this? When Mon-satan-o said, “We will not lose one penny”, it is enough to know their business practices place profits above people. So if GMO is so safe to consume, then WHY do we see more and more food labels screaming “NON GMO”??? What’s the point of non gmo huh?? I’ve studied chemistry back in university for 5 years, I don’t work in that field though, but 1 of the things I remember : eating GMO can affect your future generations, can cause mutations etc. So if you are planning on having children- stay away from gmo. No one on the 1st pages of Google search will tell us that gmo is bad for you- why would they damage giant corporations like Monsanto- too much money, way more important than public health. My advice: always read ingredients- if there’s something hard to pronounce, stay away from it. GMO’s are destroying the planet and all living things on it. PERIOD. There’s no ifs ands or buts. People need to wake up and stop trying to justify food made by “engineers.” This is the problem with trying to find information on the internet for most folks… Not sure if I missed the answer to this here: is there a good explanation for the mentioned toxicity reports from the early anti-GMO research? Or does one have to just weigh the evidence of the body of work that contradicts them, as done here? Good question Brian, and this is one of the greatest hurdles to understanding the truth and falsehoods surrounding the topic. There are a few issues: 1.) Many of the “studies” citing GMO toxicity are not actual scientific studies, but anecdotes experienced by someone, almost always not in a research setting. However these are often referred to in blogs or articles as “studies” 2.) In the case of a peer-reviewed study finding GMOs to be toxic, like the toxic-potato I mention here, it has repeatedly turned out that the work was flawed, poorly carried out and rejected by the scientific community for being bad science. Often a quick google search will reveal this. 3.) The best way, and admittedly most time-consuming, to discern the truth is just as you said, be informed of all the experiments, their quality, and weigh the results. That is what I have attempted to do here, and it turns out that when only rigorous experiments are examined, they are actually all in agreement. No acceptable scientific study has yet found toxic effects from a GMO. Wish I had seen this in 2015. Megan, unless I missed it, there was no mention of other ‘organs’ such as the gut. Not the stomach- but the gut..the colon. In your research did you come across widely published scientific proof where a University in California found that a percentage of school-aged children had GMO’s actually in the gut of the child…and I don’t mean in some GMO food the child had consumed, I mean actually adhered in the lining of the gut? You might want to talk with specialists in the area of colorectal surgery. Ask them if they are finding that more and more people under the age of 19 are suddenly popping up with gut problems so horrible (as in a destroyed colon- the entire colon) that the entire gut can not be treated due to the fact that by the time the ‘problem’ manifests to the point of bleeding, it is too late and the entire colon has to be removed or it will burst and kill the individual. There is no margin, no years of gut problems such as colitis or even Chrones- just a sudden need to remove a colon that looks like raw hamburger. This is exactly what my son’s colorectal surgeon said to us….and among his colleagues, one suspect is the consumption of GMO foods. In fact, they have find no other reason thus far. My son went from 185 to 120 six weeks later. He had 4 surgeries and nearly died twice and his heart stopped once on the table- these events were due to the condition he was in. He was robbed of 1 1/2 years of his life due to the surgeries. His hair still has not grown back (3 years later) and at this point he is 21 years old. Not a very picture, is it? I believe one mistake you made is that you did not look for (or find) research done on the ENTIRE body. It appears the information you found was for most organs but certainly not all. You’re young, you’ll learn, but in the mean time don’t lead people down a path pointing to the ‘safety’ of GMO’s. I’m not saying GMO’s are or are not safe, but I am saying at this point the question is ‘WHY’? Why eat something that isn’t necessary to eat (organics can be found and are coming down in price), why purposely eat something that you know has been grown at least with pesticides sprayed on it? What’s the reason…why would people even want to do that? It certainly doesn’t taste better, and the ground isn’t allowed to rest using GMO seeds, nor does the GMO (or what’s sprayed on it) nourish the ground…so WHY? Hi! Can you provide the source from the “widely published scientific proof” from “a University in California” that you mentioned? I would love to read it and maybe even write a follow up to this article about it. Thanks! Also–FYI there are plenty of benefits of GMOs that answer your question of why we allow them. Including reducing pesticides when compared to non-GMO conventional agriculture, reducing tilling, and hopefully in the future making crops more resistant to environmental disaster and less destructive to the planet. I’d recommend checking out the rest of our special edition (see link at the bottom of this page)! Plants aren’t destructive to the planet, it is the way they are raised that promotes destruction. Agribusinesses who unsustainably farm, and overuse pesticides have lead to the requirement for GMO crops and they have largely contributed to environmental damage. It’s a never ending cycle and GMO products are not the solution, merely a quick fix. If natural alternatives were promoted, farms were treated like organisms and not businesses, and sustainable methods were priority this discussion would not be necessary. I like my food from the earth, with its DNA pure, the way it was intended to be. Also, if a crop is altered to produce its own pesticides, and the claim is that with GMO crops you are now spraying less pesticides doesn’t the total pesticide count, whether produced internally or applied externally, still add up to non-GMO conventional agriculture? First, farming itself can be destructive to the plant! Tilling (both organic and conventional!) can cause fertilizer runoff into our water sources, conventional agriculture still uses pesticides. Plants themselves aren’t usually bad for the environment, but growing them in huge quantities like we do to be able to feed the world’s ever-growing population can be. I’m not saying GMOs are perfect. They have their environmental flaws, like the creation of super weeds (see our article on glyphosphate resistant crops in this issue). I’m just saying that GMOs CAN have benefits ESPECIALLY if we learn from our mistakes with first generation GMOs and do better to fix their flaws next time. The population is growing, climate change is happening, and science–specifically genetic engineering–can help us grow food more sustainably in light of these things. Did you hear about the GMO rice that produces 43% more grain and emits 97% less methane (http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/feeding-the-world/)? Therefore helping to both feed more people AND have less environmental impact! This kind of thing speaks to the potential of genetic engineering and the kind of progress that people are stopping by outright rejecting all GMO technology. Yes GMOs we have now have their issues, but genetic engineering is NOT inherently bad. Also, GR GMOs don’t produce pesticide. They are resistant to pesticide. One form of GMOs produces insecticide (Bt–we have an article on that in this edition, too, if you’re interested!), but it’s actually the same insecticide that is used by organic farmers (http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/insecticidal-plants/), and I believe there is evidence that the consumer has less exposure to the insecticide in the GM version than when it’s applied directly to plants. A study of these two types of crops did find that these crops allowed for a 36.9% reduction in pesticide use (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0111629)! Also, glypohsophate, which is used on GR crops is toxic, but less toxic than other pesticides used on conventional crops (see our article on pesticides). Given that there is little to no evidence of health impacts of eating GMOs (as in this article) and a potential to help solve a major problem our world faces in the future (climate change, feeding a growing population), I just think that we should give GMOs the chance to help us, as long as they’re properly regulated and researched. This article is completely biased. There have been no long term studies regarding this issue so how can you claim that GMOs are safe off a three month trial done on rats? Children in the United States are getting sicker and sicker with an increase in allergies, gluten intolerance, intestinal inflammation, and more. I think it is such a shame that Harvard is teaching students to discredit any research that would result in a loss of profits for said companies involved in the making and distribution of GMOs. These companies only care about their profits and do not care about the health of all human beings. Why is it that so many presidents eat organic? Why is it that so many have their own garden full of fresh vegetables and fruit? If GMOs were safe to eat and the government wants the American people to eat it then why wouldn’t the president and his family eat them? Why did Michelle Obama change our children’s lunches into complete garbage? If she eats organic, why would she not put organic food in schools? I think it is sickening that people get paid to lie about what is going on in the world. You all should be ashamed of yourselves. One day you all will have to answer to God for your part in the destruction of the human race. Please cite your source! It is true that the use of glyphosate has increased, but there are many types of pesticides, many of which are far more toxic than glyphosate, and if you look at OVERALL pesticide use, it has decreased, according to the sources I have read. (Also, as far as I’m aware, glyphosphate is the only pesticide for which there is a resistance gene currently used in commercial agriculture). That’s horrible. Your son has my sympathy. I’m not a doctor but I do have a Bachelor’s in biology and I agree that GMOs may still be the cause of your son’s disease. Let me use an analogy. Asbestos causes mesothelioma, a form of lung cancer. Most people need to inhale a lot of asbestos to get this cancer but a small percentage only need a relatively small exposure to become sick. Your son could be similarly part of a unique minority unfortunately predisposed to become sick. Animal models of human disease rarely discover these groups of people in society. We only know of mesothelioma because so many actual people got cancer working with asbestos. Although, it was really only a small percentage of thousands, maybe millions, working with asbestos. If we consider your son might be uniquely predisposed, along with the fact that the studies were done on a different species than human, and using GMO crop that humans rarely eat, (GMO soy would have been more appropriate) reasonable doubt about the safety of GMO’s still exist. I am responding to the comment that use of pesticides has increased 15 fold with the advent of GMO’s. I sell pesticides to farmers for a living. My sales of pesticides per acre of crop are down about 40% since the advent of GMO’s. I have trouble seeing how that translates into a 15 fold increase. You are not a doctor. And if you do have a degree in biology, you should know that correlation does not equate to causation. All the “evidence” “proving” that GMOs are dangerous are causational patterns. A variety of factors are at play here! You need a peer-reviewed experiment to prove anything in the sciences. The only studies showing harm are pay-for-play journals that are debunked as soon as journalists sensationalize the junk findings. You were way too kind in your reply to this obvious pile of horse manure (organic of course). Can anyone explain how a human body could lose 65 pounds in 6 weeks as this person claimed? While it has been suggested to me that I could lose ten pounds of ugly fat instantly by cutting my head off, all the websites claiming 20 pound losses in an hour or 24 hours or 40 pounds in two days are blatant scams. Colon removal would only involve a few pounds unless it has that twelve pounds of undigested meat that inhabits the fantasies of organic blog trolls. At 185 pounds extreme obesity with water retention issues wasn’t involved. Being hospitalized extreme exercise couldn’t have aided in the loss. My BS detector pegged Red Line on this one.My question to this woman is why are you spending your time spreading malicious nonsense on the Internet. Most of us have already heeded Abraham Lincoln’s advice to not believe everything we read on the Internet, so you are wasting your time. On the other hand, thank you for your reasoned approach. As a recovering extreme organic gardener I wish I had access to this kind of info many decades ago when I went off the rails. That said, practicing organic is good for you and the environment in many ways. Did you ever get a second opinion? Id raise my eyebrows at any doctor who would outright blame GMOs for such an extreme illness. How does he know your son does not have a genetic disorder that caused him to need those surgeries? Obviously your family history and genetic maps are NONE of my business, but its good for you to know. Ive never head of a colon needing to be removed to prevent “bursting.” Its a lumen-ous organ with two openings. Organs that burst are lumens with one opening, such as an appendix or uterus. Its always good to get second opinions, especially when your doctor jumps to such a wild conclusion with no other cases to back it up. After reading what you wrote, i think he confused you or you did not understand what he was saying. I hope your son finds health again soon, from the bottom of my heart. If i were you id be scrutinizing that doc! I am sorry for the pain of your child’s condition, but it’s pure specuilation and grasping for a reason to blame it on GMOs. “and I don’t mean in some GMO food the child had consumed, I mean actually adhered in the lining of the gut” There is no such thing as a “GMO” so there would be no way a “GMO” could adhere to anything. “that the entire gut cannot be treated due to the fact that by the time the ‘problem’ manifests to the point of bleeding, it is too late and the entire colon has to be removed or it will burst and kill the individual” The medical condition you describe has no diagnosis I could find or that I know of. The colon is not a closed organ nor can it be closed into a vessel by inflammation and therefore cannot “burst” under any conditions. Perhaps you are talking about the appendix? Many people in your situation, with no diagnosis for what has occurred, grasp at any possible cause and often find one that is as mysterious as the original illness. Rarely if ever is that speculation the cause. You’re worse than a anti-vac GMO’s are literally the same as cross-breed plants, or even cross-bred animals.Are dogs also toxic for the environment?How about cows?How about pigs?How about all of the food that you eat on a daily basis?It might be non-GMO but it’s still altered genetically by humans.I find it silly people are still trying to argue that GMO’s are dangerous or toxic, yet have no backing evidence that isn’t old and biased. This was such a heartbreaking testament. I’m sorry to hear about what your son and your family went/is going through. I myself have a child who is suffering with a tic disorder which no one can really help him with but a chiropractor trained in Nutrition Response Testing and applied Kinesiology determined that his Thyroid as well as his small intestines are burdened by GMO toxicity. Who knows the truth about GMOs but you’re certainly right, why not avoid it if you can. It seems that more and more the general public’s health is declining and conditions, ailments and diseases that used to be rare are becoming more and more the norm. Could it be our diet? Thanks for sharing Kayla, I very much agree with you. Plants are not destructive if anything they’re the ones going to save this plant from all the horrible things going on, but people are to close-minded to believe this. And what really annoys me is when people claim that ‘making crops more resistant to environmental disaster and less destructive to the planet’, well quite frankly that is absolute bs. Because if scientists and researchers where actually able to spend their time and funds creating an all natural fertiliser and herbicide then we might actually see some success and less of an impact on the soils, water ways and livestock in surrounding areas. The main problem with this is that we have huge corporations like Monsanto, who have too much ‘pride’ and are so focused on ruining people’s business’ and livelihoods, that they would never even consider making a good change that would somewhat benefit people and the environment, and if this was suggested they would sue them for everything that they’ve ever known. This is an extremely messed up mindset and society, and I can most defiantly say that GMOs really do have a considerable effect as my entire family (including myself) have experienced this mainly in the form of allergies. Good point! Also see how bad cheap oils in almost everything, even healthfood wreck havock. Sally Fallon Morell 2016 Vermont Conference part 2 then part 1 on YouTube! Part 1 is the Native Cultures research and common sense (not lab rat tests) comes into play here. Part 2 on Cholesterol myths, bad soy plus!! Long but worth listening to! One doctor said lectins in tomatoes, wheat, eggplant and beans cause leaky gut! GMOs don’t help either ! Thanks!! I would comment that some of the studies sourced for this article are flawed. For example, the “Multigeneration reproductive and developmental toxicity study of bar gene inserted into genetically modified potato on rats”, uses 5% GMO potato in the group fed GMOs to test its toxicity. This is irrelevant to things like corn, where 70%+ of the corn in the US is GMO corn and so our diet, assuming randomized source of corn, will on average have 70%+ GMO in it. I don’t know the numbers for potatoes, but I would be willing to bet that there is more than 5% of our diet of potato is GMO, so the study doesn’t reflect real consumption and would thus not show a real reflection of what are called ‘anecdotal’ evidence. When a farmer is giving feed to his cattle, he is not sitting there measuring out 5% GMO and the rest non-GMO feed for his animals. Furthermore, studies of anything less at least half the life span of the test animal are not useful in predicting long term affects and toxic accumulation — which is what we really care about since people are not slaughtered for food at a few years into their lifespan. The argument that these studies do prove its safe rely on the sort of logic that the tobacco industry has used for years to try to hid that cigarettes deliver carcinogens to the consumer and they may not immediately kill you, but they are not good for you either. Thanks for your comment–you make some interesting points! You mention only one study cited here, some of the papers cited in this study are metastudies that summarize results of 100s of different studies with different methodologies (some of which feed animals higher levels of GM foods and analyze up to several years–rodent lifespans are only ~2 years), which all suggest that GM foods are safe for consumption. These studies are done by independent academic groups without funding or conflict of interest from biotech groups, making the conclusions different from that of the tobacco industry with regards to cigarettes. (As a side note, from a scientific perspective, there’s also a lot less reason to be suspicious of GM foods since the added DNA and proteins are thought to be broken down similarly to any DNA or protein that you would eat, whereas cigarette smoke introduces foreign chemicals to the body). On a more technical note, in the study you mention, the 5% figure refers to the percentage of the rats’ total diet that was made up of potatoes (GM or not GM) NOT the percentage of potatoes in their diet that is GM. Since that particular study is specifically testing potatoes, not corn or other GM products, this actually seems pretty reasonable to me. This would be like a human with a 2000 calorie diet eating about 1 GM potato per day (which I would guess is actually more GM potato than the average human eats, given both the prevalence of potato in our diets and the prevalence of GM potatoes on the market). You’re correct that the average person could have more than 5% of their diet made up of GM foods, but that was not the question of this particular study. Another study cited here (7) actually feeds rats 12-7,100 times the amount of GM vegetable that would be expected to be in human diets, and they still found no health effects by several measures. Well, I prefer to grow my own non-GMO, non- bioengineered produce myself. Purchase Wild-Caught Salmon and Free Range Grass Fed Beef with no added anti-Biotics or hormones. Drink reverse osmosis, alkaline water and cook or reheat food from a stove top, rather than a microwave. Seems to do a body good. Now if I could just “get into” the xercising – although not overweight or anythin and o evidence of disease other than high blood pressure (treated). . The short answer is: the toxic-potato study had design flaws that didn’t allow them to draw any conclusions from their work. One aspect was that their control potato was not equivalent in nutritional value to their GMO potato, meaning a difference in health could just as likely be due to malnutrition. It amazes me how you consider “your science” the only “right science” and how linear is your way of thinking. Nothing in biology is as simple as you pretend to be and there are many other factors that influence the number and quality of toxicity studies on GMOs. Have you considered ‘funding’ and ‘conflict of interest’ at all in your analysis? I would love to hear from you what exactly is “bad science” and what is “good science”. This is a million dollar question and you would solve all the issues for the scientific community! Let me also remind you that 85% of all GMOs are herbicide tolerant and that they were designed to accumulate herbicides and thus going into the food and feed chains.In addition, most of all new GM plants have multiple trait and there is almost no studies that test multiple Bt toxins and multiple herbicides together. This is recognized by EFSA and the scientific community as a knowledge gap. There is a need to study real case scenarios, the food we eat 🙂 Hi Sarah! Thanks for reading! First of all, a lot of GMOs are herbicide tolerant, as you said, but they are not designed to “accumulate herbicide”, but rather resist herbicide. Yes–this can lead to the use of more pesticides on these crops, but the health effects of that on the consumer are unclear. Also, Bt crops actually DECREASE the use of chemical insecticide AND have less Bt (the most common organic insecticide) than organic crops! (See http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/gmos-and-pesticides/, http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/insecticidal-plants/, and http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/roundup-ready-crops/ for more info!). Also, plenty (if not all) of the studies cited here are funded by government agencies in multiple countries, as is most basic scientific research, so there should be no conflict of interest. You’re right that most GMOs have stacked traits to be GR and express Bt, and it might be worth testing those two traits together if it hasn’t been done already (I’ll let Megan answer that). However, what is abundantly clear is that the actual process of genetic modification does not make a crop bad for our health–it’s all about what you modify! It furthermore seems unlikely given the current data that any of the GM crops we eat now are dangerous to our health. Finally, addressing your first paragraph, many of us at SITN are biologists, and we are aware the biology is complicated! We also believe in trusting data. I am interested in seeing all sides of this issue–if you know of other studies that show that GMOs are dangerous to our health, please let me know! I am always willing to change my mind with new evidence. Untrustworthy science is that without controls that did not go through a peer review process and cannot be replicated (like the IRT study), trustworthy or “good” science is the opposite. Actually this is patently untrue. Scientific method, the basis of all science, is about testing ideas, hypotheses and theories against new data, ideas and inputs. Sometimes science will be validated, sometimes it will be improved by new thinking, new methodology, new instrumentation for testing, or even whole new theorems. The idea that science is always correct is ridiculous, as all scientific knowledge so far has been for the most part incremental, while sometimes a transformative idea (Einstein’s theory) for instance will upset the apple cart. Sooooo. The thing is, a lot of the real studies we have on health issues change and develop over more than 20 years and it often takes a few decades to come to a conclusion that may or may not change in the next few. Everyone can argue back and forth on the issue of GMO’s but the truth is we really won’t know for a long time for sure what the affects of GMO’s are. I also want to say that many health issues are actually due to the bad health choices of people in all aspects of their lives. There are studies for example that show that someone who overindulges in food, even for a few years may have a good life, but their descendants then have a higher chance of heart problems. Then when those health problems arise, it isn’t that hard for individuals to develop other health issues. We can see evidence of this in any study of epigenetics. Multiple tests have been done on both humans and animals in regards to those who don’t, and do eat GMOs.We do know their effects, and we know that they do nothing.I don’t see how a organism modified to have different DNA, or even just cutting out and putting in new DNA would have an adverse effect like increasing toxicity or causing impotence.It’s childish thinking.Though, I do agree that science changes constantly, the whole GMO toxicity thing has been disproved for a long time. The article you listed doesn’t explain the country’s reasoning. GMOs being banned in europe doesn’t really mean anything unless the countries that have banned GMOs can provide evidence for why they did so. If they don’t, this is just an appeal to authority, and logically unsound. (For more information, research the appeal to authority logical fallacy.) I think it is premature to make blanket statements about the safety of GMOs based on the research to date. Some potential holes in the analysis of prior research. 1. Mice studies are not the equivalent of a double-bind long term human study. Of course you are right that this can not be done but the assertion that mice studies are enough to “prove” safety is not enough in my opinion 2. Your review of literature show at best that the technique of gene splicing in and of itself is not harmful but this not mean that dangerous & harmful products can be created with gene splicing. Given the infinite permutations of genes that can be combined in the lab it will be only a matter of time that a particular combination will have emergent properties that will be devastating consequences that were not foreseen. With anything, as time goes on business and scientists become lax over time. Mishaps in the Nuclear power industry are a prime example of this. 3. Lack of studies on population outliers. Sure many products may be safe for the general population but can have very severe consequences for certain segments of the population. Have there been studies looking at particular GMO products against all types of test subjects? Some variables would be pregnant, immune comprised, infant, etc. The reason I bring these issues up is that I have two sons. One with a fructose intolerance issue and another with severe allergic GI issues. Per a multitude of studies, the human population is seeing a dramatic rise in allergenic & gastrointestinal ailments in the last 25 years that parallels the introduction of GMO foods. This correlation alone of course does not prove causality but where there is smoke, science must take the time to identify the source of the fire. That sounds like: 1. My goalpost is unattainable, and you haven’t reached it yet. You mentioned something which cannot be done should be done in order to garner proof. You also are the first person to mention “prove” on this page. 2. Just because bad things can result from something, does not mean that thing is inherently harmful to you. Nearly everything you do with a positive outcome, has a negative consequence. 3. Please see the argument written above in the original piece. Sometimes there is no fire. Sometimes there is just more understanding. Sometimes, we get better at catching irregularities as time passes. Correlation most certainly does not prove causation, but more-so, correlation doesn’t prove causation especially when it directly contradicts what we already know to be most likely. The plant is resistant to pesticides because it eats the pesticides. Then you come along and ingest it. Your stomach dissolves it and now your intestine gets ready to absorb the nutrients. WHAM !! It’s ambushed by pesticides/poison/toxic matter, therefore destroying your digestive system slowly. Then of course, it expands to other parts of your body, as it’s carried through your blood. Also many countries in Europe BANNED GMO crops and lately we’ve been coming in second place to Europe in terms of advancing as a society, technology, adapting to new laws, recycling and I feel America, lately, has not been fair in informing us with the truth and protecting us from the bad if there’s money involved. We’re all eating poison and we’ll find out when it’s too late There are some additional things that bother me about GMO’s. DNA and the interplay of the various genes is phenomenally complex. Without even making any alterations in a genome there are many things we do not fully understand about how it all works- what synergies exist, what sequences are key for subsequent sequences to operate successfully, etc. Until I feel confident that we understand more about the complexities of the existing genomes WHEN they are operating within living ecosystems, I do not feel comfortable throwing a wrench into the works. It has taken millions of years for evolution to fine tune these systems- both ours and the plants we are dependent on for food- and there are millions of variables affecting both our internal and external environments. GMO’s feel way too much like playing God. I would rather choose the humbler path of following nature’s lead than the arrogant path, (the one that got us kicked out of the garden of Eden and which is leading us to ruin our second Eden), of tinkering with potentially life threatening technologies . My second major issue with GMO’s is that most are “owned” by one major corporation, Monsanto, and the rest are owned by only a few others. Monsanto would have us believe they are interested in GMO’s because they are saving the world, when really Monsanto is just a chemical company (from birth) maximizing profit for shareholders by creating a legal stranglehold on food production. This corporation which is now considered to be a “person” uses GMO’s to make farmers dependent on them to buy their proprietary seed, and then buy their proprietary chemicals, and in addition they sue farmers if they save seed or are inadvertently the victims of wind blown pollen dispersal of GMO’s into other areas on their or neighboring farms. If I thought for one minute that GMO’s were actually being utilized to make the world a better place I would seriously look at them as a possible tool, but until they are no longer “owned” by Monsanto and a few other for profit chemical companies I cannot trust the purposes for which they have been designed or utilized. Hello Jean, Thank you for adding to this discussion. I want to be transparent with you about why I only approved some of your comments. As this discussion has been going on for several years, I have slowly adopted some guidelines about what comments are actually helpful in the debate. I am more than happy to approve comments that support a different point of view on GMOs (such as the video you posted above!). However, we are a non-profit graduate student organization. We do not get any money or guidance from Monsanto or any other company. I have explained this in the comments section of our GMO articles many times, and yet people still question our motives. In an effort to keep the discussion on the science, I have decided not to approve any accusatory comments. Too bad this article is complete bullshit. Saying GMOs are completely safe is ridiculous. Who paid for your research Monsanto? Did you get any kickbacks? There is so much evidence saying GMOs are toxic. Look what it is doing to the bee population. Just because someone from Harvard has done a study we should take that as fact? This article isn’t about one study, it’s about evidence from a bunch of studies (none of which were done at Harvard as far as I can remember). Also, it’s not about environmental effects, to read about the environmental effects you can look here: http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/signal-to-noise-special-edition-gmos-and-our-food/ . We are a graduate student organization, and we’re not paid by Monsanto, and as far as I know, none of the studies we cited here were either. We are merely interested in providing science articles that are based in primary sources (which is what we are doing here). Also, may I ask if you have gathered any information regarding the disadvantages of GM plants? If you could link some non-commercial studies that aren’t older than 5 years that would be a great help to me. It’s so funny to see you using expressions such as “as far as I can remember” and “as far as I can tell” as valid arguments. Do you have REAL proof that pro-GMO studies are not being funded by Monsanto and the bunch? Have you actually invested your time in studying how these organisations operate, and the ways they are using to “hide” their involvement? You should be asking all these questions if you were a true scientist. Besides, “peer reviews” in many journals don’t prove anything either – I have been a victim of this in academia myself, and few of my fellow friends in academic world regularly experience unfair and biased reviews, as well as false positive reviews where reviewers just refuse to notice flaws in the study that are not very obvious. The scientific community cannot be fully trusted, and this is the sad fact. Your own publication here just enforces this fact imho. Personally, I trust the scientific community and trust that if someone is working with Monsanto or other large agro corporation, they will disclose it as is journal policy in all peer reviewed publications. In fact, there are papers that do include “conflict of interest” statements, but we have not cited these here. I’m not sure it is possible to prove to you, as someone who does not trust the scientific community, that pro-GMO studies are not being funded by Monsanto, but I will say this: as a biologist, it logically doesn’t make much sense to me that just the changing of the DNA of a crop to make it make a protein that has no effect on humans, would make it bad for humans. And the majority of studies support that GM crops are not harmful to our health. Maybe Monsanto is secretly funding the majority of these studies in a huge, HUGE cover-up including probably hundreds of labs and tens to hundreds of journals, and all of the anti-GMO activists have just not been able to find any proof of it, but I doubt it. Conspiracy theory thinking hooks the brain because it feels like critical thinking. Between personal anecdotes and a complete disregard for the data/evidence that has been produced for whatever reason, many consider themselves to be more knowledgeable than the people around the world who dedicate their lives to studying certain topics. The Dunning Kruger effect shows in these comments. I applaud whoever has been contributing to the SITNFlash account over the last five years for having the patience to respond to so many conspiratorial comments. It is undoubtedly incredibly frustrating. All these studies you cite are funded directly or indirectly By MOnanto and other GMOs or the FDA which is inn bed with Monsanto and has been since Bush Sr. Any science connected to capitalist motivations is suspect. We know pollution is really really bad for us–deadly–and yet it is not banned–it is promoted and facilitated by the same governemtn and institutions applaudinng GMOs. Your claim is that th science is “good” (by these capitlaist outfits) and so it should be allowed without question–“it is safe.” So no, labelling, no more regulaitons, no bans, no serious need for further research. Yet, science shows us that industrial pollution is bad, m-kay, and there is no serious law or movement to ban or regulate pollution–government policy is basically to facilitate industry, like GMOs and Big Pharma–even though it is destructive and environmentalists are labelled terrorists and assaulted by police thugs and para military troops endorsed by the government. In one case your science claims it is not right to ban GMOS or regulate them, and in another case, OUR science shows pollution is bad and it cant be regulated–the common denominator is capitalism–PROFIT! not human health, not the public welfare. Not human rights. not earth rights. You see–you are bias and uncritical. You cite flawed science and promote unethical policy against our civil an human rights. You might not be bad people, but you serve bad people and bad policy. What would science look like UN-corrupted by capitalist interests? Think about it. How deep do the capitalist tentacles go? You are a product of capitalist indoctrination and conditioning. Thank you for reading our article. In the spirit of full transparency, I am replying to tell you that I have not approved some of your comments because they are not contributing productively to the conversation due to repeated personal attacks at other commenters, the author of the article, or this site in general. If you would like to re-write your comments without these personal attacks, I would be happy to approve them. I understand that your point of view is that all studies are indirectly funded by Monsanto and are therefore unable to be trusted. We welcome discussion about that point of view, but please don’t attack anyone (the comment above is borderline). I would be very interested to ready why you think this is flawed science that is cited here or any reliable sources about funding of the studies cited. Hey, I wish that were true Randall. I am actually doing an academic research paper on the positives and negatives of GMOs and let me assure you that there is not many studies proving GMOs are toxic, or harmful for that matter. If there were then I wouldn’t have so much trouble trying to find negatives on this topic. Actually I believe that most of the negatives are just fears that people have concerning the potential risks of GMOs, however, those are just potential risks and have not been proved or agreed upon by a scientific body. I’m actually going to have a look on some more articles from this page and see if I can find some disadvantages of GMOs. capitalists fund research. Only big capitalist institutions have the funds to research. So I am not surprised it is hard to find independent studies. But many exist–especially outside America–which are conveniently dismissed by Americans. And were immediately set upon by Monsanto and the capitalist infrastructure to smear them as not good science or conspiracy theorists–hmmm. The point is NOT enough science and research is done or allowed and NO science was done to permit GMOs in the first place back in 96 and earlier. It was passed without question –why? BIG PROFIT. more science is needed and until then GMOs must be in contained labs only. Knowing what we know about all the other harms they produce in society and the ecosystem and civil rights, politics–they must be banned until more research–maybe 20-50 years of extensive independent research is done–and we can see how GMOs impact health over time, but since it would be unethical to use human studies–as they are doing with us in the market place–our studies must be limited and maybe only then after 100 years can we know for sure–bottom line is its not practical and not safe and not doable and not ethical and very very bad for the environment and human rights. there is just no need for it. period. none. It is about profit and control of food–patented terminator seeds. period. BAN IT! The irony of you spreading this nonsensical set of opinions on the Internet is delicious. I suggest you get away from your devilish computer, stomp on your soul-sucking smartphone , throw your TV out a window , and trash your radio and any other electronic device you use. Each of those devices has easily provable disadvantages to your health and psychic well-being. BAN THEM ALL BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE! THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE MUST BE WORSHIPPED!!! Oooo. I feel so righteous now. according to what science? You just can not know that–it is too early. You are not credible. You are not all-knowing. I have seen research that suggest it would be less healthy. And i can tell you, it has less taste–oh sure, corporate labs will use flavor enhancers–also cancer causing to get that nice commercial taste of the real thing, and when consumers are so familiar with it over time they don’t recognize organic food and how things should taste, and we have been acclimated to commercial processed food for a century which it is known is less nutrient, and harmful, and yet corporations deny it and the media denies it and people deny it and somehow think organic food is unhealthy–wow!–and that is because the for-profit media is telling them that and growing a garden is too much work for GMO inundated couch potatoes. I can tell you organic food grown in rich healthy soil is far superior in taste and substance. It is extremely arrogant to believe that a few capitalist studies and no-so-much-studies can improve billions of years of nature science and tens of thousand of years of natural breeding–human selection by natural means. Arrogance. We have become the destroyer of worlds. get a grip would you. You have no right to contaminate our world without our approval–and funny thing the world does not approve and yet we are ignored. hmm. Profit maybe? I am in utter awe of these comments you are making. Completely slandering logical, science-based conclusions with consistently debunked science; fear-mongering tactics with absolutely nothing credible to back it up. It’s these type of people that prevent beneficial technologies from helping society If anything, it is people like YOU that are fear-mongering. You constantly say that the GMOs cause cancer and are bad for your health, when in reality that is simply untrue. You are spreading ill-informed fear, and this article does not try to instill any fear in anyone. Please do more research and not only on the things that fuel your narrative. Its a Radical Wacky Coolkid thing to do. Be like a Radical Wacky Coolkid. I wonder why USA does not ban GMO. It must be good, right? I wonder why USA sponsors warfare around the world for decades. It must be fair, right? (Using your own method here to show you how stupid such statements are) Neither yours nor previous commenters argument is valid. You just reversed their argument and present it as a valid contra-argument which uses the same logic, just biased in an opposite way. Btw, Islam be it right or wrong is still their choice, same as GMO. If people in US choose GMO and ready to face the consequences – that’s fine, but why impose their view upon the rest of the world? Same goes about false US democracy which they’re trying to sell around the world… Science, however, should be free of politics and business – but unfortunately there are tons of proof that it is currently not, hence cannot be fully trusted – simple as that. I’ve never enjoyed reading a comments section nearly as much as I have this one; for many reasons and peoples! I try to be objective when hearing differing sides of an argument and therefore would like to see any credible evidence as to whether or not GMOs are actually harmful to our health; if it’s legit, I’ll listen. I’m not yet convinced of the evils of Monsanto, I suspect there is a lot of personal opinions and anecdotes surrounding their reputation and activities. Does anyone know a good, objective source for vetting them a little more thoroughly? Lastly, I recently read that the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT) is not an “institute” so much as a single guy writing blog posts. Does anyone know if this is true? Would you feed your kids GMOs? Your research is bulshit compared to all the real parents who are witnessing the harmful effects of GMOs on a daily basis. Come do some real studies in the ghetto then maybe you’ll open your eyes to what really is going on. I’m loving to read your series on GMOs. I’ve done extensive research on this matter on the last few weeks and this site has to be one of the most thourough sources there is. That being said, I’m still on the fence about the safety of the use of GMOs to human consumption. The fact is, there is still many things we don’t fully understand about the interplay of gene expression and molecular pathways. Glad you’re enjoying our articles! First, I’d like to highlight that the science is pretty clear about the idea that genetically engineering food is not inherently bad. For example, newer GMO technologies that are focusing on eliminating expression of certain genes rather than adding foreign genes have very little potential to create food that will be harmful our health. At the other extreme, if you genetically engineered corn to express a gene that make the protein that people are allergic to in peanuts, and then you gave someone with a peanut allergy that corn, they would likely also be allergic to the GE-peanut-corn. So I think it’s important to keep in mind that not all GMOs are equal. The Seralini study is somewhere in between these two extremes–they are testing GMOs that have a foreign protein with no known allergenic or negative properties. The summary of my opinion is that there is not enough data to support the idea that there are health effects of GMO crops that are currently on the market, but I don’t think it’s theoretically impossible for a GM food to have negative health consequences, and I fully support continued independent studies. I think the first warning sign for this article is that it hasn’t really been replicated by the scientific community, and, in fact, most meta-analysis of many many GMO studies have found opposite results. On a more technical level, there are two red flags that come up for me about this study (and I’m not an expert in his field, but I am a biologist): (1) there’s no dose-response relationship. Usually to show that a substance is harmful, you would show that if you give an animal more of that substance, the effect is greater. So, you’d expect here that if you give a rat a 33% GMO instead of an 11% GMO diet, you’d get more tumors, liver damage etc. But they don’t really see this, which makes scientists worried that they are just measuring noise (or random fluctuations). and (2) the GMO results (GMOs even in the GMO only and not GMO+R condition were at one point treated with roundup) look very similar to the R results, making it difficult to distinguish an effect of genetic engineering from an effect of roundup. I guess you might be correct on that GMO’s are not linked to Health Issues. I am 14 and got intimidated by a few GMO documentaries a few years ago. I thought that GMO’s were linked to all these health problems, but it seems like, according to you, they were fed 7000x GMO than Human in terms of consumption rates. It seems like if their results can’t be replicated, and that some haphazardly agree and disagree that GMO’s are safe or bad. Here is my question: 97% of scientists believe in Global Warming and that it’s caused by Humans. Why then, is it not the case that 97% of scientists believe that GMO’s are safe ? Also, GMO’s can compete with Native Crops and outcompete them. That would be bad for the environment. Also, what happens if the GMO plants crossbreed with Native Ones. And since all the Native ones would eventually create their own pesticide, environmental pressures would mean that they would overpopulate and native bugs would die. This would mess up the food chain and lead to a loss of biodiversity. Right ? Also, GMO’s lead to superbugs. GMO’s are like overusing antibiotics, accept they are that on steroids. Evolution will lead to resistance and that means more pesticides and more environmental harm. Doesn’t it seem like GMO’s are too complicated. Their environmental impacts are too risky. Especially, if they crossbreed with Native Plants. And what is the advantage of GMO’s ? Why do through all this hassle ? Just eat Organic. If it takes up too much land, use hydroponics. If it raises prices, then work harder and get a pay raise. If Organic means people in 3rd world countries are starving because food is expensive, then tell them to have a 1 child policy and then until they afford it, they can have a 2 child policy. And you’re right, GMOs can cause super-weeds that are resistant to glyphosphate, but it’s actually from people overusing pesticides (which GMOs make possible)–it’s not an inherent property of all GMOs (some GMOs don’t even have pesticide resistance b/c they’re modified to do something else). And to answer your question–data from the AAAS suggests that scientific consensus on GMOs and scientific consensus on human-caused climate change are actually pretty similar (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-entine/post_8915_b_6572130.html)–around 90% of scientists think GMOs are safe and that humans contribute to climate change. I personally think we should continue to be careful and test new GMOs to make sure they don’t cause problems with superweeds and biodiveristy, but so far, those concerns are mostly hypothetical. Hi, I am going to include this research in my argument paper. Thank you for providing a good clarification details regarding the toxicity, genes and mutagenesis. I will cite your research properly and hopefully will have a good feedback to my professor. 🙂 Hi again, another thing is that your references and sources are not up to date. It will actually affect your credibility. Although I took some information that were published after the year of 2012 to make my paper more concise. I still acknowledge and applaud you for your work it is very well written! Liked the article and the comments. One thing I’d point out as an actual farmer is – the word “super weed” is disengenuous. Some people may associate the word “super” with “super powers”. Glyphosate resistant weeds look just like their non glyphosate counterparts. The resistant plants have just developed ways to stop glyphosate from harming them – through natural selection. No herbicide is 100% effective on all targeted weeds – ie – if glyphosate kills all the susceptible weeds – the only ones that survive a treatment might might be resistant. Glyphosate is quite effective at controlling weeds and it took some time for weeds to develop resistance – but glyphosate isn’t the first herbicide to experience resistance – and not all weed species have developed resistance to glyphosate. Many other herbicides have had target weeds develop resistance as well. Glyphosate has been a very effective tool in our area for reducing soil erosion and preserving moisture in our semi arid climate. I am not a scientist, just a mom who wants healthy kids. I talk to other moms, many spending huge amounts of their limited income trying to avoid foods that may be unhealthy for their kids, including GMOs. I wasn’t sure if I should he following suit so I did a Google search today and of the top results your a seemed the most reputable. I did study agriculture, but I am outdated. But, I do remember finding that organic crops often required elevated total toxicity in order to achieve pest control when compared with non-organic crops since the chemicals at the disposal of an organic farmer are, by nature, limited. So, they sometimes must choose something more toxic than traditional pesticides or use much more of their pesticides to achieve control. I do not remember any sources at this point so everyone can (and probably should) have a heyday with that. The point is that I am familiar with the idea that just because something came directly from nature doesn’t mean its healthy (aflotoxin, cyanide (a pesticide that plants made all by themselves), etc). My question is about Bt crops. You said there is evidence that Bt crops actually contain less total pesticide than those sprayed with Bt. However, those sprayed can be washed. I assume you cannot wash the pesticide from Bt crops. But Bt is complex. There may be more to it than I understand. It’s why I ask. Have any studies been done that take washing or rinsing into account, or is that irrelevant for some reason that I do not currently know about? Thank you for your diligent research in an internet full of every kind of article and study. Hi! Thanks for reading! I like that you’re challenging the “natural” = “healthy” idea. I don’t know of any direct comparisons of washed crops sprayed with Bt and Bt GMOs. Actually, though, not all organic Bt treatment can be washed off, since it is sometimes injected (e.g. into squash), which is perhaps why most research has instead focused on toxicity to humans without washing. Bt spray has been considered a very safe pesticide since it was introduced in 1938 (http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/insecticidal-plants/). I’m guessing that there hasn’t been a ton of research about the benefits of washing the Bt-sprayed crops because it’s generally agreed upon that Bt isn’t dangerous to humans (http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/gmos-and-pesticides/, )–even at the higher doses that people are exposed to if they eat unwashed Bt-sprayed crops. Also, Bt toxin in GM crops is at very low doses in the parts of the plant that we usually eat (e.g. kernel of corn, potato tuber) and is relatively higher in the leaves/stems, which I guess is what the bugs usually eat (https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/reg_actions/pip/bt_brad2/2-id_health.pdf). I think all of you should look in to foreign studies on this I went through american after america study on this and its left me just unsure, but second I typed in Russian study holy shit I need to look more in to this and other countries that have and have not Banned GMOs. just like Professor Wilson said up the comments the proper research that needs to be done is not there but as I also said I need to look further in to the subject myself I’m doing a research paper on this and I’m eager to learn more. thanks for this article though. I’d be interested to read anything you find in your search! I have found a difficult time finding studies from any country that convincingly show health effects of eating GMO crops. In this article we cite studies from Korea and China, among other countries. If you’re willing, please share your findings so we can also read these other studies. Chinese studies will most likely be in favour of GMO simply because its negative effects on reproduction can partially solve their over-reproduction problem. Besides, everything in China is seriously controlled by the state and can easily be altered in favour of the state. It’s very sad to see how science has become a tool for business and politicians lately, and them taking control of it which defeats the sole purpose of the science in the first place – delivering the unbiased truth to people. Your information and attitude is among the most responsible I have seen. A sign of an objective person. I am a research scientist in Agriculture and pesticides- worked on it over 40 years. Pesticides have been proven to be safe and GMO’s have been, as well. Do we know all? Certainly not, but there is a huge amount of data showing safety for both. The negatives are mostly circumstantial or feelings. Your comment about human-caused global warming is not true, however. Only about 50% or less of climate scientists think man is influencing climate. IPCC is a group of proponents of man-caused global warming but over 31,000 American Scientists have signed a petition for our government to get out of the Japanese global warming agreement because there is not good data to show that carbon dioxide increases warming. There may be a correlation but not causation. Thanks Thanks for reading! The data I am citing about scientists’ views on climate change is from the Pew Research Center: http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/29/public-and-scientists-views-on-science-and-society/pi_2015-01-29_science-and-society-00-01/ and shows that 88% of scientists think GMOs are safe to eat and 87% think climate change is “mostly due to human activity”. I don’t know where your 50% figure comes from (would be interested to see), but the 31,000 people who signed the OISM Petition Project are probably mostly not climate scientists or even practicing scientists, they are just people with at least Bachelor’s degree in any science/medicine field (according to their website–looks like <30% of the people who signed have PhDs). I am doing a pro-con argument on GMO’s and this essay has so many facts and is so well written. I really enjoyed reading it and even the comments on it were interesting to read. It feels like when it comes to GMO’s so many “studies” and “scientific research groups” are just biased groups trying to get people to see only the “bad side to GMO’s” and not any other way. This essay really helped to clear the waters up. Thanks Megan! Rice, wheat and corn does more than 50% of contribution to the world’s nutritional needs. Wheat alone is consumed as a staple food by 35% of the world’s population. These mega-crops consume significantly more water resources while compared to traditional crops like Sorghum and Millets. Millets are drought resistant and even referred to as “poor man’s crops”. We hear news about drought and food insecurity in African and South Asian countries which, in fact, receive adequate sunlight throughout the year. Is it because these countries move towards the 3 mega crops eventually phasing out the drought resistant traditional crops like millets, sorghum, etc? While we have this interesting debate about GMO’s pros and cons, India is currently facing severe drought due to failure in rainfall. The economy of India is heavily dependent on food exports which majorly includes rice, wheat and corn. And not just export, the consumption of millets and other traditional crops by the people of South Asian and African countries has gone down significantly and the mega crops consumption has increased on the other hand. What’s the solution to these problems? There is heavy pressure on such countries to go GMO in order to increase their rice or wheat production despite their water scarcity. Is GMO the optimal solution or do we need to pay more attention to food and biodiversity? Biodiversity is certainly not in the best interests of companies like Monsanto as it isn’t very easy to commoditize and monetize the drought resistant traditional crops? Even if they find a way out to monetize such crops, it isn’t going to happen overnight yielding immediate profits. Shouldn’t we focus more on preserving food and biodiversity as well? What if, change in mindset and investing on native crops has got a better and sustainable solution? I am sorry to have brought out the political aspect of this in this thread which is meant only for scientific discussion. For more information on food and biodiversity, please refer to the below link. https://www.idrc.ca/en/article/facts-figures-food-and-biodiversity I think there’s an argument to be made for using genetic engineering technology to make drought-resistant crops. However, it will always be important to consider and test the environmental impact of any newly engineered crops. Here’s a quote: “In a study involving 94 articles selected through objective criteria, it was found that the existence of either financial or professional conflict of interest was associated [with] study outcomes that cast genetically modified products in a favourable light.” – Johan Diels, CBQF/Escola Superior de Biotecnologia da Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Portugal, and colleagues Great article! I’m tired of people justifying their “I don’t eat GMO’s” in the possible effects on health! So much people need to read this! What I’m concerned on GMO’s is their impact on the environment, not just directly as crop, but the terrible use of pesticides affecting soil and water (subterranean and water contaminated by run off) since most of them are made to resist glysophate. Thank you for doing this piece of research on gmo’s. My father is an avid farmer at home and a chemical engineer. I’ve always asked him these questions and have so many friends who fear gm food. I recently watched an episode of Bill Nye Save the world and he even spoke with experts on how they are not harmful to humans. Finally i have documents I can show that research was done. Thank you very much. My only concern is the effect they could have on the ecosystem and surrounding plants. But not harm on humans. In fact i hope they are working on something to save Mexico and South American bananas right now . I think people are taught to worry to much about almost everything in life! Does all of this GMO really cause cancer or is it the fact that humans genetically outliving how long the human body is really meant to live? People used to live to 20,30,40.50 at the oldest not 70-100 or more and so there was not as much cancer. Think about if people stopped stressing about everything and enjoyed life how much happier we would all be. Grow your own food, stop making babies and quit trying to find an answer to prove your truth…….I believe that we are taught to waste what precious time we have arguing and trying to prove “OUR” truth……there is no truth. So, put down your proven sticks, eat what you feel comfortable with, go sit out in nature and take a deep breath. Don’t waste your life with these topics. Or else we are going to spend another day writing about the Lactose intolerance scare! If GMO’S are SOO safe, why do those farmers have to wear HAZMAT suits? Do these “scientist(s) know what the LONG TERM effects of GMO’S? I think not. As we all know that Harvard is a biased/ “snowflake” college Because the pesticides and weed killers (Which they also put on organic crops) are dangerous to humans? and they did study long-term effects, If you read any of the words instead of just looking at the pretty pictures, shut up and let the smart people save you and your children’s life. No need to worry, GMOs won’t bite. First of all I would like to thank you for the excellent article and your articulate and logical responses to the people that comment on this site. Next I would like to say how Monsanto is not an evil corporation that most people make it out to be. Many of their products, especially vegetable crops, are changed through hybridization which means that they should not be considered a GMO. However if those count as a GMO then all beef, pork, and poultry products are GMO’s because they were bred to be larger, have more meat, grow faster, etc… I have been luck enough to be able to work with Monsanto inside of their facilities and also learn from some of the greatest minds in that company. I would also like to say that from the perspective of a farmer and the perspective of a student that GMO’s can be helpful and possibly a long term solution to feeding our ever growing population. However this can only be achieved if the new plants are created carefully and made safe through many studies, research, and more information given to the public so that everyone is better informed so that they can make a better decision to them whether it be for or against GMO’s. I am a current grade 12 student and I have been exploring the chemistry behind GMO’s. Specifically, I have been learning about the process in which they are created and how they may impact our world positively and negatively. I find this fascinating because GMO’s seem to be a relatively new technology that can greatly advance our world and food production output. I am interested in your research on the public health concerns related towards GMO’s. Performing research on the topic, I have come across many organizations claiming that GMO’s negatively impact the human body, however they mention that the technology is too new to show long term health effects. Would you be able to help me understand this topic a little better? Specifically, I was wondering if there has been any evidence or research on the longterm health effects of GMO’s and what it may be. In the experiments you recalled in your article there was no evidence that human health was at risk with GMO’s, were those experiments short term? Any other advice or suggestions you may have would be much appreciated. Whenever anyone works outside of the ‘natural evolutionary process’ to produce anything that is ‘living’ whether it be plant, animal, bacterial , viral or anything else they run tremendous risks for ‘backlash’. That ‘backlash’ can only be avoided by ‘natural processes’ and GMO’s are NOT natural. Currently, those who are producing such ‘innovations’ are not held responsible for any negative results. When this disadvantage for the consumer is relieved, by laws that are enforced, then the process will take on a much different approach than what is being used presently. Ultimately, the fact that those who venture into the ‘creation of life’ (these are human attempts at competition with their deities) will ultimately be held responsible for their actions and their products human nature and the ‘law of self preservation’ will rule the actions of those people and safety will be the by product. Ok, but even the organic fruits that you eat today, for example, are not exactly like the ones our ancestors used to have. Ever since people started with agriculture, we’d choose the seeds that served us better, with bigger fruits or faster growth. That’s not natural. It’s humanity interfering with nature. It has always been like that. Doing that with the help of technology is by no means more dangerous. Can you please clarify for me where the funding for this paper came from? Can you clafify what you plan to do when you recieve your doctrine degree? Lastly, who do you work for or intended to work for? I found this article extremely informative but do not agree with it. I am asking about funding because I am sure you are aware of funding that comes from the same position as the author and would recommend if anybody wanted to see a counter argument to this article to watch the moive GMO Roulette. I believe it is beyond safe for me to say that there is an argument for both sides and somewhere in there the truith is. My objective is to find that truith from an unbiased source, which seems to be very challenging these days. Thank you for your time. Hi Mark, Thanks for your comment! We’re a grad student organization and all our articles are written by volunteer grad students. As an organization, we receive some funding from Harvard, but none of that goes to paying writers or editors of the blog (it’s all for keeping our domain name, renting event space etc). I agree with this article and everything that it is supporting. Many people say they have ‘solid’ evidence towards the fact that GMO’s are harmful to your body, but what this article clearly brings to light is the fact that there really are no known adverse reactions towards GMO products. The author is trying to put dust in the eyes of the public. Every second person is getting cancer after eating GMO food. The true results are there to see. Despite humans are 1000 times more careful what they eat and what they don’t eat and how much exercise or whatever necessary to maintain their health still all dangerous disease has become epidemic. This happened after the introduction of GMO food. This is a laughable article and may be paid advertisement to buy more GMO and end up part of population control. I am sure I will be able to find an article totally scientific but opposite to what the author wrote here to deceive the public. If GMO is safe why people are having an epidemic of Diabetes, thyroid problem, obesity, blood pressure, cardiovascular problems, and great cancer epidemic which started as every 49th person was diagnosed with cancer but now every other person has cancer. I understand just GMO is not targetted attack on the body but almost everything that we used for life has been GM.ed in many ways. For example water has chlorine and fluoride with hundreds of side effects, then air is full of planted and hundreds of chemical, then radiation from electronics we use, then all food we eat, then our brains are getting polluted with horrible news of crimes in the world, hardly you see good news of people who are heroes in daily life, they are not reported to promote goodness and human brotherhood. Them the sun is causing cancer due to the hole over the north pole. Most of the cancer caused by what you state in your comment is your comment itself, it really is making me want to die with how you are just stating random things you found on the internet and I just have to say you have really made my day man, I appreciate being stupid for the sake of making my day better! I only hope that they label all GMO foods that way I still have the choice to eat or not to eat. Being a vegan I read all lables. It is getting harder and harder to find food that don’t have GMO in it. This one company that makes veggie meat also has it in it but then they also have caffeine in their meatballs. So it really can’t be called health food, can it? Well we have been modifying food crops for a very long period of time by selecting the characteristics that we think are desirable. Just compare the original wild corn to the corn used by the Aztecs in Mexico when the Spaniards arrived. By the use of genetic modification we have speeded up the process. Introducing genes from unrelated species is new but there is s evidence that in nature there occurs a crossover of genes between unrelated species. One also has to take note that in nature many plants have toxins that are harmful to human health. So when we genetically modify a plant there is a risk we might make the plant more toxic but that same risk exists in nature. Contrary to what some people would like to believe nature is not this benign force that is looking out for our interests. I am an old guy (77 years old) so I am way behind when it comes to modern genetics but I do have a Master’s degree in biology. So I can look at this issue in an objective way because the basic philosophy of science doesn’t change. You don’t jump to conclusions without good evidence. That is not good science. Probably what would bother me the most is pesticide resistance which translates into a heavier use of pesticides To clarify I want to say that my above comment was only meant to show that GMO foods are safe to eat, but we should not accept this as the end of the debate. Megan has done a fine job of synthesizing multiple studies that show how safe the GMO foods are for consumers, however we should not believe this is a closed book on GMO safety. More testing should be done, especially with long term studies that track changes over two or three year periods. Interesting how many people are defending GMOs on this board even though they have no personal investment in the topic…Or do they..Scott here ^ follows up his original comment to clarify that he does in fact believe GMOs are safe to eat and makes a declarative statement that “GMO foods are safe to eat” and immediately following says that not enough research has been completed to actually make this determination, otherwise why would you say more research is necessary? The only reason this topic is searched and therefore this article discovered is someone is either concerned about the safety of GMOs, wants to learn more about GMOs, or the person has a vested interest in the success of GMOs. So to be on this board defending GMOs is questionable to say the least, particularly because there is not enough evidence to even make a claim about the safety of GMOs. So making such a definitive claim is negligent and really suspicious. I have spoke with professors that casually speak of the risk a researcher poses to his or her career if they publish studies shining any negative light on GMOs. It’s fact that Monsanto employs mobster like techniques to keep the public uninformed and the money flowing. Tell me that it hasn’t been proven that Monsanto does this as there isn’t a peer reviewed study on the corruption that flows from the corporate world into our schools, aka, overpriced degree factories. If you don’t accept this as a reality, I’ll find you a peer reviewed study on the increasing rate of naivety in grown people. Thats actually incorrect Jacob. There is a significant amount of information backed by credible sources to indicate that health outcomes from non-GMO foods are the same as GMO foods. Here is a study done on 100 BILLION feed animals over a two decade period. She earned her B.S. from the University of Melbourne in Australia, and both her M.S. and Ph.D. degrees were earned from the University of California, Davis, in animal science and genetics, respectively. The data starts in 1983 through 2011, and GMOs were first introduced in 1996. So if GMO foods cause cancer or tumors or birth defects why did animal health actually improve? Why don’t we see large populations of feed animals rotting in fields as we would expect if GMO foods were dangerous? What I was trying to say with my above comment is that there is research on both sides of this argument and the data points to GMOs being safe for human consumption. However, there are still some studies that show otherwise so we need to continue to pursue that information. You will not be able to prove they are safe, you can only prove they are as safe as non-GMO foods, which is what the large majority of studies prove. I suggest you take a look at the study in my above comment in red text. One more thing to add here, Jacob. The reason I found this article was because I had to write an essay about GMO and non-GMO food safety for college. I had to read multiple academic sources, multiple opinion articles, multiple articles from both sides of this argument and then produce a lengthy essay that combines all this information into one piece. The reason I was putting this information up for others is because I know others have come to this article seeking information about GMO foods. I know many of those people are not in college or may not have a college degree. I was attempting to put the information that I found up here in a concise manner to help others. It is completely up to you if you want to read the two studies that I have linked (in red text), but if you are looking for more information just as I was then I hope what I found was helpful to you. This article by Megan Norris was one of many sources of information that I used. For anyone else looking up the safety of GMO foods you should know the facts and do your own research. Be careful of any articles that give you ‘facts’ but do not back it up with citations or sources. After reading a lot of the comments I’ve come to the conclusion that a lot of these readers are far more intelligent and informed than the person who went to Harvard. Thank god for the internet and being able to find out the truth. Hello everyone, I had to read through till the comment section just to understand what’s going on here. I’m doing my ex-girlfriend’s assignment while she’s with her new boyfriend. 🙂 but yeah, the new age man is really trying to make life better for women, so I agreed to help with her education. I have a simple question(s): Finding that GMO research has concluded that they don’t pose a serious risk to the human body, and seeing that a lot of people are still against them, are these people the anti-vaxxers of food? If you thought of GMOs as vaccinated food, would you still opt for them or the none vaccinated seed/fruits/veggies? The aim is to make them better right? like to not have them rot fast or be attacked by potentially poisonous but naturally occurring organisms. Anyway, this is how I see it. GMOs will always have an effect of some magnitude, and even if they won’t show now, they might show in 3000 years to come. LIfe is about adaptation and evolution, so superbugs will remain on the rise, and the same level of protection we pump in our plants/food and will eventually follow the flow of energy cycle, and bits of each’s contents will somehow end up in our system. but yeah, try to use that analogy against a profit-driven industry. I say, let’s go on with it. You never know when the next breakthrough will save lives. A big thanks to the writer of this article. I am actually doing an assignment and have to compare different 4 articles to find which one do answer my question on GMOs. Wooow i found this as best and interesting. I didnt even have a knowledge on GMOS as im a commerce student but now im no more left out. Thanks to the internet This is why places like Harvard need to be fact checked. Just because it’s Harvard doesn’t mean it’s credible. Now we have countless lawsuits against Monsanto for glyphosate poisoning and several lawsuits have been awarded millions in damages. Great job Ivy league! Who the globalist masters you serve? hello my name is jennifer taylor and i am a 47 year old stay at home and antivax mom. i was looking into gmos after hearing the nasty rumors from some of my gal pals, and found your article. to be honest, i don’t think its right spreading this misinformation that gmos are safe. both vaccines and gmos are dangerous abominations born from labs that can harm our children. i am the mother of 4 and i think its disgusting how you can post this article knowing you are disabling and injuring millions of american kids out there. in fact, i am contact with my lawyer right now, contacting in the hopes of getting this article taken down. goodbye There ya go! DREAM BIG! Maybe your lawyer can just shut down Harvard in its entirety. After this, they can get started on the process of shutting down her references and then their references and so on, all the way until they get to……….nevermind! Just tell your lawyer to shut down the internet. That may be easier. I think we all have to consider that GMOs are a new concept and that the data we have is not conclusive. Even some sources admit that they do not know and cannot predict the long term effects of GMOs and according to studies made in 2015, they were often wrong about the general safety of GMOs. This caused scientists to review their work, so to be honest this is a new subject that we sill cannot be certain about but in the end should be up to the consumer. haha true. I am doing this research for an exam and i did not expect gen z rollin up in the comments. usualy its fourty year old repuplican facebook parents that comment on controversial stuff like this. Hi, Thanks for sharing such an amazing post on GMO products. Above all of these, I was looking was something like this and find this very helpful. Thanks again for sharing such an amazing post! Best Regards. Can you please change the photo for this article. I don’t think it is necessary to contribute to the idea that the only thing worth protecting in a woman is her baby. Wonderful how the man gets kidney’s and a liver, maybe we could add some lungs and a heart to the lady. Glad you remembered his balls tho, how would we ever know it is an all important male without them. GMOs are just a way to help fight world hunger. Have you heard of food security? Don’t you want to stop hearing about the starving people in Africa? It’ll take time, but eventually, GM food will be available to almost every country. I say “almost” because of the bans and restrictions in France, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Italy, and Spain. Although, GMOs are technically in almost every food. The most I’ve seen is corn syrup or fructose corn syrup. ummary: As the prevalence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) continues to rise, there has been an increasing public interest for information concerning the safety of these products. Concerns generally focus on how the GMO may affect the environment or how it may affect the consumer. One specific concern is the possibility for GMOs to negatively affect human health. This could result from differences in nutritional content, allergic response, or undesired side effects such as toxicity, organ damage, or gene transfer. To address these concerns, there have been over 100 research studies comparing the effects of traditional food to genetically modified food, the results of which have been reviewed in various journals [1], [2]. How these results affect regulation can be found through The Center for Environmental Risk Assessment, which hosts a GM Crop Database that can be searched by the public to find GMO crop history, style of modification, and regulation across the world [3]. Though knowing who to trust and what to believe regarding this topic is an ongoing battle, major health groups, including the American Medical Association and World Health Organization, have concluded from the research of independent groups worldwide that genetically modified foods are safe for consumers [4]. Regarding toxicity, this includes any dangers related to organ health, mutations, pregnancy and offspring, and potential for transfer of genes to the consumer. GMO toxicity: fears and scientific analysis After genetically modified foods were introduced in the United States a few decades ago, people independently reported toxic effects caused by GMOs. One example is an anti-GMO advocacy group called the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT), which reported that rats fed a diet containing a GMO potato had virtually every organ system adversely affected after just ten days of feeding [5]. The IRT stated that the toxicity was the result of genetic modification techniques and not a specific case for that particular potato. They claimed the process of making the GMO caused it to be toxic and thus all GMOs were high risk for toxicity. Scientists across the U.S. and the rest of the world have sought to rigorously test the assertions of the IRT and others to uncover any possible toxicity caused by GMOs. To this end, many different types of modifications in various crops have been tested, and the studies have found no evidence that GMOs cause organ toxicity or other adverse health effects. An example of this research is a study carried out on a type of GMO potato that was genetically modified to contain the bar gene. The product of the bar gene is an enzyme that can detoxify herbicides and thus protects the potato from herbicidal treatment. In order to see if this GMO potato would have adverse effects on consumer health like those claimed by the IRT, a group of scientists at the National Institute of Toxicological Research in Seoul, Korea fed rats diets containing either GMO potato or non-GMO potato [6]. For each diet, they tracked male and female rats. To carefully analyze the rats’ health, a histopathological examination of tissues and organs was conducted after the rats died. Histopathology is the examination of organs for disease at the microscopic level (think pathologist doing a biopsy). Histopathological examinations of the reproductive organs, liver, kidneys, and spleen showed no differences between GMO-eating and non-GMO-eating animals. Three years earlier, a separate group had found the same results for a GMO tomato and a GMO sweet pepper [7]. These researchers had split rats into four diet groups: non-GMO tomato, GMO tomato, non-GMO sweet pepper, and GMO sweet pepper. They fed the rats over 7,000 times the average human daily consumption of either GMO or non-GMO tomato or sweet pepper for 30 days and monitored their overall health. Finally, they carried out histopathology and again found no differences in the stomach, liver, heart, kidney, spleen, or reproductive organs of GMO versus non-GMO fed rats. Despite massive ingestion of GMO potato, tomato, or sweet pepper, these studies demonstrated no differences in the vitality or health of the animals, even at the microscopic level. Experiments like these on humans would be completely unethical. Fortunately, prior to these studies years of work have demonstrated that rodents, like mice and rats, are acceptable models for humans, meaning rodent responses to drugs, chemicals, and foods can predict human response. Rat feeding studies like these, in which rats are fed a potential toxic item and monitored for adverse effects, are considered both specific and sensitive for monitoring toxicity of foods and widely used in the food regulation industry [1]. The test of time: GMOs and their effect on our offspring Although scientists have been able to demonstrate that GMOs are not toxic to the animals that eat them, as described above and elsewhere, what about side effects being passed on to our next generations? To discern whether GMO crops affect fertility or embryos during gestation, a group from South Dakota State University again turned to studies on rats. In this case, the rats were eating a type of GMO corn, more commonly known as Bt corn. Bt stands for Bacillus thuringiensis, a microbe that produces insecticidal endotoxin and has been used as a topical pesticide against insects since 1961 (see this article). To allow corn to directly generate this endotoxin, scientists introduced a gene from Bt into the genetic material (DNA) of corn. To address buildup of toxicity over time, this group monitored the GMO-eating rats not only for the lifetime of one generation, but also three additional generations. For each generation, they tracked the fertility of parents and compared the health of the embryos from parents that ate Bt corn to those with parents that did not [8]. Toxic effects can arise in many places and in many ways, but some organs are more susceptible to damage than others, and monitoring them is a good readout for other difficult-to-see effects. Testes are considered a particularly sensitive organ for toxicity tests because of the high degree of cell divisions and thus high susceptibility to cellular or molecular toxins. To examine the affect of Bt corn on testicular health, the researchers tracked testicular development in fetal, postnatal, pubertal, and adult rats for all four generations. The group found no change in testicular health or litter sizes in any generation. Likewise, ingestion by pregnant mothers had no effect on fetal, postnatal, pubertal, or adult testicular development of her offspring. Other groups have monitored toxicity over time as well. For example, the group studying the bar GMO potato also wanted to see if organs and reproductive health were sensitive to GMOs over long exposure times [5]. To do this, they examined the fertility and gestation periods of GMO-eating mothers compared to non-GMO-eating mothers for five generations. They tracked animal body weight, bone, eye, and thymus development, and general retardation. Like the studies on Bt corn, in all cases, they found no significant differences between the GMO potato and non-GMO potato diets, suggesting that there is no buildup or inheritance of toxicity, even over multiple generations. Figure 1. Work from independent researchers has investigated various aspects of GMO safety, especially concerning consumer health and toxicity. Can GMOs change our genes? Concern has also surrounded the idea that genetically modified DNA would be unstable, causing damage (via unintentional mutations) not only to the crop, but also to whomever would consume it. Mutations in DNA are closely tied to cancer and other diseases, and thus mutagenic substances can have dire effects on human health. The creation of mutations, called mutagenesis, can be measured and compared to known mutation-causing agents and known safe compounds, allowing researchers to determine whether drugs, chemicals, and foods cause increased mutation rates. There are a variety of ways to measure mutagenicity, but the most traditional method is a process pioneered by Bruce Ames at the University of California in Berkeley. His method, now called the Ames test in his honor, is able to track increased rates of mutations in a living thing in response to some substance, like a chemical or food. To directly test the ability of a GMO to cause mutations, a research group from the National Laboratory of Protein Engineering and Plant Genetic Engineering in Beijing, China applied the Ames test to GMO tomatoes and GMO corn [8]. GMO tomatoes and corn express the viral coat protein of cucumber mosaic virus (CMV). Expression of this coat protein confers resistance to CMV, which is the most broadly infectious virus of any known plant virus, thought to infect over 1,200 plant species from vegetable crops to ornamentals. The results of the Ames test demonstrated no relationship between GMO tomatoes or corn and mutations. They repeated their analysis using two additional methods for analyzing mutagenicity in mice and got the same result, allowing them to conclude that genetically modified DNA did not cause increased mutations in consumers. The modified DNA, like unmodified DNA, was not mutagenic. Mutagenicity aside, there are also concerns surrounding the ability of the modified DNA to transfer to the DNA of whomever eats it or have other toxic side effects. Depending on the degree of processing of their foods, a given person will ingest between 0.1 and 1 g of DNA each day [9]; as such, DNA itself is regarded as safe by the FDA [10]. To determine if the DNA from GMO crops is as safe to consume as the DNA from traditional food sources, the International Life Sciences Institute reviewed the chemical characteristics, susceptibility to degradation, metabolic fate and allergenicity of GMO-DNA and found that, in all cases, GMO-DNA was completely indistinguishable from traditional DNA, and thus is no more likely to transfer to or be toxic to a human [9]. Consistent with this, the researchers working on the GMO potato attempted to isolate the bar gene from their GMO eating rats. Despite 5 generations of exposure to and ingestion of the GMO, the researchers were unable to detect the gene in the rats’ DNA [5]. A strong argument for GMO health safety After more than 20 years of monitoring by countries and researchers around the world, many of the suspicions surrounding the effects of GMOs on organ health, our offspring, and our DNA have been addressed and tested (Figure 1). In the data discussed above, alongside many more studies not mentioned here, GMOs have been found to exhibit no toxicity, in one generation or across many. Though each new product will require careful analysis and assessment of safety, it appears that GMOs as a class are no more likely to be harmful than traditionally bred and grown food sources. Megan L. Norris is a Ph.D. candidate in the Molecular, Cellular and Organismal Biology Program at Harvard University. This article is part of the August 2015 Special Edition, Genetically Modified Organisms and Our Food. According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway because bees don’t care what humans think is impossible. Yellow, black. Yellow, black. Yellow, black. Yellow, black. Ooh, black and yellow! Let’s shake it up a little. Barry! Breakfast is ready! Ooming! Hang on a second. Hello? – Barry? – Adam? – Oan you believe this is happening? – I can’t. I’ll pick you up. Looking sharp. Use the stairs. Your father paid good money for those. Sorry. I’m excited. Here’s the graduate. We’re very proud of you, son. A perfect report card, all B’s. Very proud. Ma! I got a thing going here. – You got lint on your fuzz. – Ow! That’s me! – Wave to us! We’ll be in row 118,000. – Bye! Barry, I told you, stop flying in the house! – Hey, Adam. – Hey, Barry. – Is that fuzz gel? – A little. Special day, graduation. Never thought I’d make it. Three days grade school, three days high school. Those were awkward. Three days college. I’m glad I took a day and hitchhiked around the hive. You did come back different. – Hi, Barry. – Artie, growing a mustache? Looks good. – Hear about Frankie? – Yeah. – You going to the funeral? – No, I’m not going. Everybody knows, sting someone, you die. Don’t waste it on a squirrel. Such a hothead. I guess he could have just gotten out of the way. I love this incorporating an amusement park into our day. That’s why we don’t need vacations. Boy, quite a bit of pomp… under the circumstances. – Well, Adam, today we are men. – We are! – Bee-men. – Amen! Hallelujah! Students, faculty, distinguished bees, please welcome Dean Buzzwell. Welcome, New Hive Oity graduating class of… …9:15. That concludes our ceremonies. And begins your career at Honex Industries! Will we pick ourjob today? I heard it’s just orientation. Heads up! Here we go. Keep your hands and antennas inside the tram at all times. – Wonder what it’ll be like? – A little scary. Welcome to Honex, a division of Honesco and a part of the Hexagon Group. This is it! Wow. Wow. We know that you, as a bee, have worked your whole life to get to the point where you can work for your whole life. Honey begins when our valiant Pollen Jocks bring the nectar to the hive. Our top-secret formula is automatically color-corrected, scent-adjusted and bubble-contoured into this soothing sweet syrup with its distinctive golden glow you know as… Honey! – That girl was hot. – She’s my cousin! – She is? – Yes, we’re all cousins. – Right. You’re right. – At Honex, we constantly strive to improve every aspect of bee existence. These bees are stress-testing a new helmet technology. – What do you think he makes? – Not enough. Here we have our latest advancement, the Krelman. – What does that do? – Oatches that little strand of honey that hangs after you pour it. Saves us millions. Oan anyone work on the Krelman? Of course. Most bee jobs are small ones. But bees know that every small job, if it’s done well, means a lot. But choose carefully because you’ll stay in the job you pick for the rest of your life. The same job the rest of your life? I didn’t know that. What’s the difference? You’ll be happy to know that bees, as a species, haven’t had one day off in 27 million years. So you’ll just work us to death? We’ll sure try. Wow! That blew my mind! “What’s the difference?” How can you say that? One job forever? That’s an insane choice to have to make. I’m relieved. Now we only have to make one decision in life. But, Adam, how could they never have told us that? Why would you question anything? We’re bees. We’re the most perfectly functioning society on Earth. You ever think maybe things work a little too well here? Like what? Give me one example. I don’t know. But you know what I’m talking about. Please clear the gate. Royal Nectar Force on approach. Wait a second. Oheck it out. – Hey, those are Pollen Jocks! – Wow. I’ve never seen them this close. They know what it’s like outside the hive. Yeah, but some don’t come back. – Hey, Jocks! – Hi, Jocks! You guys did great! You’re monsters! You’re sky freaks! I love it! I love it! – I wonder where they were. – I don’t know. Their day’s not planned. Outside the hive, flying who knows where, doing who knows what. You can’tjust decide to be a Pollen Jock. You have to be bred for that. Right. Look. That’s more pollen than you and I will see in a lifetime. It’s just a status symbol. Bees make too much of it. Perhaps. Unless you’re wearing it and the ladies see you wearing it. Those ladies? Aren’t they our cousins too? Distant. Distant. Look at these two. – Oouple of Hive Harrys. – Let’s have fun with them. It must be dangerous being a Pollen Jock. Yeah. Once a bear pinned me against a mushroom! He had a paw on my throat, and with the other, he was slapping me! – Oh, my! – I never thought I’d knock him out. What were you doing during this? Trying to alert the authorities. I can autograph that. A little gusty out there today, wasn’t it, comrades? Yeah. Gusty. We’re hitting a sunflower patch six miles from here tomorrow. – Six miles, huh? – Barry! A puddle jump for us, but maybe you’re not up for it. – Maybe I am. – You are not! We’re going 0900 at J-Gate. What do you think, buzzy-boy? Are you bee enough? I might be. It all depends on what 0900 means. Hey, Honex! Dad, you surprised me. You decide what you’re interested in? – Well, there’s a lot of choices. – But you only get one. Do you ever get bored doing the same job every day? Son, let me tell you about stirring. You grab that stick, and you just move it around, and you stir it around. You get yourself into a rhythm. It’s a beautiful thing. You know, Dad, the more I think about it, maybe the honey field just isn’t right for me. You were thinking of what, making balloon animals? That’s a bad job for a guy with a stinger. Janet, your son’s not sure he wants to go into honey! – Barry, you are so funny sometimes. – I’m not trying to be funny. You’re not funny! You’re going into honey. Our son, the stirrer! – You’re gonna be a stirrer? – No one’s listening to me! Wait till you see the sticks I have. I could say anything right now. I’m gonna get an ant tattoo! Let’s open some honey and celebrate! Maybe I’ll pierce my thorax. Shave my antennae. Shack up with a grasshopper. Get a gold tooth and call everybody “dawg”! I’m so proud. – We’re starting work today! – Today’s the day. Oome on! All the good jobs will be gone. Yeah, right. Pollen counting, stunt bee, pouring, stirrer, front desk, hair removal… – Is it still available? – Hang on. Two left! One of them’s yours! Oongratulations! Step to the side. – What’d you get? – Picking crud out. Stellar! Wow! Oouple of newbies? Yes, sir! Our first day! We are ready! Make your choice. – You want to go first? – No, you go. Oh, my. What’s available? Restroom attendant’s open, not for the reason you think. – Any chance of getting the Krelman? – Sure, you’re on. I’m sorry, the Krelman just closed out. Wax monkey’s always open. The Krelman opened up again. What happened? A bee died. Makes an opening. See? He’s dead. Another dead one. Deady. Deadified. Two more dead. Dead from the neck up. Dead from the neck down. That’s life! Oh, this is so hard! Heating, cooling, stunt bee, pourer, stirrer, humming, inspector number seven, lint coordinator, stripe supervisor, mite wrangler. Barry, what do you think I should… Barry? Barry! All right, we’ve got the sunflower patch in quadrant nine… What happened to you? Where are you? – I’m going out. – Out? Out where? – Out there. – Oh, no! I have to, before I go to work for the rest of my life. You’re gonna die! You’re crazy! Hello? Another call coming in. If anyone’s feeling brave, there’s a Korean deli on 83rd that gets their roses today. Hey, guys. – Look at that. – Isn’t that the kid we saw yesterday? Hold it, son, flight deck’s restricted. It’s OK, Lou. We’re gonna take him up. Really? Feeling lucky, are you? Sign here, here. Just initial that. – Thank you. – OK. You got a rain advisory today, and as you all know, bees cannot fly in rain. So be careful. As always, watch your brooms, hockey sticks, dogs, birds, bears and bats. Also, I got a couple of reports of root beer being poured on us. Murphy’s in a home because of it, babbling like a cicada! – That’s awful. – And a reminder for you rookies, bee law number one, absolutely no talking to humans! All right, launch positions! Buzz, buzz, buzz, buzz! Buzz, buzz, buzz, buzz! Buzz, buzz, buzz, buzz! Black and yellow! Hello! You ready for this, hot shot? Yeah. Yeah, bring it on. Wind, check. – Antennae, check. – Nectar pack, check. – Wings, check. – Stinger, check. Scared out of my shorts, check. OK, ladies, let’s move it out! Pound those petunias, you striped stem-suckers! All of you, drain those flowers! Wow! I’m out! I can’t believe I’m out! So blue. I feel so fast and free! Box kite! Wow! Flowers! This is Blue Leader. We have roses visual. Bring it around 30 degrees and hold. Roses! 30 degrees, roger. Bringing it around. Stand to the side, kid. It’s got a bit of a kick. That is one nectar collector! – Ever see pollination up close? – No, sir. I pick up some pollen here, sprinkle it over here. Maybe a dash over there, a pinch on that one. See that? It’s a little bit of magic. That’s amazing. Why do we do that? That’s pollen power. More pollen, more flowers, more nectar, more honey for us. Oool. I’m picking up a lot of bright yellow. Oould be daisies. Don’t we need those? Oopy that visual. Wait. One of these flowers seems to be on the move. Say again? You’re reporting a moving flower? Affirmative. That was on the line! This is the coolest. What is it? I don’t know, but I’m loving this color. It smells good. Not like a flower, but I like it. Yeah, fuzzy. Ohemical-y. Oareful, guys. It’s a little grabby. My sweet lord of bees! Oandy-brain, get off there! Problem! – Guys! – This could be bad. Affirmative. Very close. Gonna hurt. Mama’s little boy. You are way out of position, rookie! Ooming in at you like a missile! Help me! I don’t think these are flowers. – Should we tell him? – I think he knows. What is this?! Match point! You can start packing up, honey, because you’re about to eat it! Yowser! Gross. There’s a bee in the car! – Do something! – I’m driving! – Hi, bee. – He’s back here! He’s going to sting me! Nobody move. If you don’t move, he won’t sting you. Freeze! He blinked! Spray him, Granny! What are you doing?! Wow… the tension level out here is unbelievable. I gotta get home. Oan’t fly in rain. Oan’t fly in rain. Oan’t fly in rain. Mayday! Mayday! Bee going down! Ken, could you close the window please? Ken, could you close the window please? Oheck out my new resume. I made it into a fold-out brochure. You see? Folds out. Oh, no. More humans. I don’t need this. What was that? Maybe this time. This time. This time. This time! This time! This… Drapes! That is diabolical. It’s fantastic. It’s got all my special skills, even my top-ten favorite movies. What’s number one? Star Wars? Nah, I don’t go for that… …kind of stuff. No wonder we shouldn’t talk to them. They’re out of their minds. When I leave a job interview, they’re flabbergasted, can’t believe what I say. There’s the sun. Maybe that’s a way out. I don’t remember the sun having a big 75 on it. I predicted global warming. I could feel it getting hotter. At first I thought it was just me. Wait! Stop! Bee! Stand back. These are winter boots. Wait! Don’t kill him! You know I’m allergic to them! This thing could kill me! Why does his life have less value than yours? Why does his life have any less value than mine? Is that your statement? I’m just saying all life has value. You don’t know what he’s capable of feeling. My brochure! There you go, little guy. I’m not scared of him. It’s an allergic thing. Put that on your resume brochure. My whole face could puff up. Make it one of your special skills. Knocking someone out is also a special skill. Right. Bye, Vanessa. Thanks. – Vanessa, next week? Yogurt night? – Sure, Ken. You know, whatever. – You could put carob chips on there. – Bye. – Supposed to be less calories. – Bye. I gotta say something. She saved my life. I gotta say something. All right, here it goes. Nah. What would I say? I could really get in trouble. It’s a bee law. You’re not supposed to talk to a human. I can’t believe I’m doing this. I’ve got to. Oh, I can’t do it. Oome on! No. Yes. No. Do it. I can’t. How should I start it? “You like jazz?” No, that’s no good. Here she comes! Speak, you fool! Hi! I’m sorry. – You’re talking. – Yes, I know. You’re talking! I’m so sorry. No, it’s OK. It’s fine. I know I’m dreaming. But I don’t recall going to bed. Well, I’m sure this is very disconcerting. This is a bit of a surprise to me. I mean, you’re a bee! I am. And I’m not supposed to be doing this, but they were all trying to kill me. And if it wasn’t for you… I had to thank you. It’s just how I was raised. That was a little weird. – I’m talking with a bee. – Yeah. I’m talking to a bee. And the bee is talking to me! I just want to say I’m grateful. I’ll leave now. – Wait! How did you learn to do that? – What? The talking thing. Same way you did, I guess. “Mama, Dada, honey.” You pick it up. – That’s very funny. – Yeah. Bees are funny. If we didn’t laugh, we’d cry with what we have to deal with. Anyway… Oan I… …get you something? – Like what? I don’t know. I mean… I don’t know. Ooffee? I don’t want to put you out. It’s no trouble. It takes two minutes. – It’s just coffee. – I hate to impose. – Don’t be ridiculous! – Actually, I would love a cup. Hey, you want rum cake? – I shouldn’t. – Have some. – No, I can’t. – Oome on! I’m trying to lose a couple micrograms. – Where? – These stripes don’t help. You look great! I don’t know if you know anything about fashion. Are you all right? No. He’s making the tie in the cab as they’re flying up Madison. He finally gets there. He runs up the steps into the church. The wedding is on. And he says, “Watermelon? I thought you said Guatemalan. Why would I marry a watermelon?” Is that a bee joke? That’s the kind of stuff we do. Yeah, different. So, what are you gonna do, Barry? About work? I don’t know. I want to do my part for the hive, but I can’t do it the way they want. I know how you feel. – You do? – Sure. My parents wanted me to be a lawyer or a doctor, but I wanted to be a florist. – Really? – My only interest is flowers. Our new queen was just elected with that same campaign slogan. Anyway, if you look… There’s my hive right there. See it? You’re in Sheep Meadow! Yes! I’m right off the Turtle Pond! No way! I know that area. I lost a toe ring there once. – Why do girls put rings on their toes? – Why not? – It’s like putting a hat on your knee. – Maybe I’ll try that. – You all right, ma’am? – Oh, yeah. Fine. Just having two cups of coffee! Anyway, this has been great. Thanks for the coffee. Yeah, it’s no trouble. Sorry I couldn’t finish it. If I did, I’d be up the rest of my life. Are you…? Oan I take a piece of this with me? Sure! Here, have a crumb. – Thanks! – Yeah. All right. Well, then… I guess I’ll see you around. Or not. OK, Barry. And thank you so much again… for before. Oh, that? That was nothing. Well, not nothing, but… Anyway… This can’t possib	Concerns generally focus on how the GMO may affect the environment or how it may affect the consumer. One specific concern is the possibility for GMOs to negatively affect human health. This could result from differences in nutritional content, allergic response, or undesired side effects such as toxicity, organ damage, or gene transfer. To address these concerns, there have been over 100 research studies comparing the effects of traditional food to genetically modified food, the results of which have been reviewed in various journals [1], [2]. How these results affect regulation can be found through The Center for Environmental Risk Assessment, which hosts a GM Crop Database that can be searched by the public to find GMO crop history, style of modification, and regulation across the world [3]. Though knowing who to trust and what to believe regarding this topic is an ongoing battle, major health groups, including the American Medical Association and World Health Organization, have concluded from the research of independent groups worldwide that genetically modified foods are safe for consumers [4]. Regarding toxicity, this includes any dangers related to organ health, mutations, pregnancy and offspring, and potential for transfer of genes to the consumer. GMO toxicity: fears and scientific analysis After genetically modified foods were introduced in the United States a few decades ago, people independently reported toxic effects caused by GMOs. One example is an anti-GMO advocacy group called the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT), which reported that rats fed a diet containing a GMO potato had virtually every organ system adversely affected after just ten days of feeding [5]. The IRT stated that the toxicity was the result of genetic modification techniques and not a specific case for that particular potato. They claimed the process of making the GMO caused it to be toxic and thus all GMOs were high risk for toxicity.	yes
Bioethics	Should genetically modified organisms (GMOs) be part of our diet?	yes_statement	"genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos) should be included in our "diet".. our "diet" should include "genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos).	https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/gmo-pros-and-cons	GMOs: Pros and Cons, Backed by Evidence	GMOs: Pros and Cons, Backed by Evidence Although most notable organizations and research suggest that GMO foods are safe and sustainable, some people claim they may harm your health and the environment. GMOs, short for genetically modified organisms, are subject to a lot of controversy. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), GMO seeds are used to plant over 90% of all maize (corn), cotton, and soy grown in the United States, which means that many of the foods you eat likely contain GMOs (1). This article helps explain what GMOs are, provides a balanced explanation of their pros and cons, and gives guidance on how to identify GMO foods. “GMO,” which stands for genetically modified organism, refers to any organism whose DNA has been modified using genetic engineering technology. In the food industry, GMO crops have had genes added to them for various reasons, such as improving their growth, nutritional content, sustainability, pest resistance, and ease of farming (2). While it’s possible to naturally give foods desirable traits through selective breeding, this process takes many generations. Also, breeders may struggle to determine which genetic change has led to a new trait. Genetic modification significantly accelerates this process by using scientific techniques that give the plant the specific desired trait. For example, one of the most common GMO crops is Bt corn, which is genetically modified to produce the insecticide Bt toxin. By making this toxin, the corn is able to resist pests, reducing the need for pesticides (3). GMO crops are incredibly common in the United States, with at least 90% of soy, cotton, and corn being grown through genetic techniques (4). While GMO crops make farming much easier, there is some concern around their potential effect on the environment and their safety for human consumption — specifically surrounding illnesses and allergies (5). However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and USDA maintain that GMOs are safe for human and animal consumption (6). Summary GMOs are food items that have been made using genetic engineering techniques. They comprise 90% of soy, cotton, and corn grown in the United States and are deemed safe for human consumption. For starters, many GMO crops have been genetically modified to express a gene that protects them against pests and insects. For example, the Bt gene is commonly genetically engineered into crops like corn, cotton, and soybeans. It comes from a naturally occurring bacteria known as Bacillus thuringiensis. This gene produces a protein that is toxic to several pests and insects, which gives the GMO plants a natural resistance. As such, the GMO crops don’t need to be exposed to harmful pesticides as often (3). In fact, a 2020 study asserts that GMO technology has reduced global chemical pesticide use by 8.3% and indirectly reduced greenhouse gas emissions because farmers don’t need to spray their fields as often (7). Other GMO crops have been modified with genes that help them survive stressful conditions, such as droughts, and resist diseases like blights, resulting in a higher yield for farmers (8, 9, 10). Together, these factors help lower the costs for the farmers and consumers because it allows a greater crop yield and growth through harsher conditions. Additionally, genetic modification can increase the nutritional value of foods. For example, rice high in beta carotene, also called golden rice, was developed to help prevent blindness in regions where local diets are chronically deficient in vitamin A (11). Moreover, genetic modification may be used simply to enhance the flavor and appearance of foods, such as the non-browning apple (12). In addition, current research suggests that GMO foods are safe for consumption (13). Summary GMO foods are easier and less costly for farmers to grow, which makes them cheaper for the consumer. GMO techniques may also enhance foods’ nutrients, flavor, and appearance. Although current research suggests that GMO foods are safe, there is some concern around their long-term safety and environmental impact (13). Here are some of the key concerns around GMO consumption. Allergies There is some concern that GMO foods may trigger an allergic reaction. This is because GMO foods contain foreign genes, so some people worry that they harbor genes from foods that may prompt an allergic reaction. A study from the mid-1990s found that adding a protein from Brazil nuts to GMO soybeans could trigger an allergic reaction in people sensitive to Brazil nuts. However, after scientists discovered this, they quickly abandoned this GMO food (14). Although allergy concerns are valid, there have been no reports of allergic reactions to GMO foods currently on the market. According to the FDA, researchers who develop GMO foods run tests to ensure that allergens aren’t transferred from one food to another (15). In addition, research has shown that GMO foods are no likelier to trigger allergies than their non-GMO counterparts (16). Yet, if you have a soy allergy, both GMO and non-GMO soy products will prompt an allergic reaction. Cancers Similarly, there’s a common concern that GMO foods may aid the progression of cancers. Because cancers are caused by DNA mutations, some people fear that eating foods with added genes may affect your DNA. This worry may stem partly from an early mice study, which linked GMO intake to a higher risk of tumors and early death. However, this study was later retracted because it was poorly designed (17, 18, 19). Currently, no human research ties GMO intake to cancers, and there is no evidence that eating GMOs will change your DNA. The American Cancer Society (ACS) has stated that there’s no evidence to link GMO food intake to an increased or decreased risk of cancer (20). All the same, no long-term human studies exist. Thus, more long-term human research is needed. Other environmental and health concerns Although GMO crops are convenient for farmers, there are environmental concerns. Most GMO crops are resistant to herbicides, such as Roundup. This means that farmers can use Roundup without fear of it harming their own crops. However, a growing number of weeds have developed resistance to this herbicide over time. This has led to even more Roundup being sprayed on crops to kill the resistant weeds because they can affect the crop harvest (21, 22, 23). Roundup and its active ingredient glyphosate are subject to controversy because animal and test-tube studies have linked them to various diseases (24, 25, 26). There is new evidence that glyphosate exposure may increase the relative risk of non-Hodgkins lymphoma by 41% (27, 28). There has also been concern that pollen from Bt crops may negatively impact honeybees, but there doesn’t seem to be any solid evidence to support this yet (29, 30, 31). That said, more long-term human research is necessary. Summary The main concerns around GMOs involve allergies, cancer, and environmental issues — all of which may affect the consumer. While current research suggests few risks, more long-term research is needed. Although GMO foods appear safe for consumption, some people wish to avoid them. Still, this is difficult since most foods in your supermarket are made with ingredients from GMO crops. GMO crops grown and sold in the United States include corn, soybean, canola, sugar beet, alfalfa, cotton, potatoes, papaya, pink pineapple, summer squash, and a few apple varieties (32). In the United States, no regulations currently mandate the labeling of GMO foods. Yet, as of January 2022, the USDA requires food manufacturers to label all foods containing GMO ingredients (33). That said, the labels won’t say “GMO” but instead the term “bioengineered food.” It will display either as the USDA bioengineered food symbol, listed on or near the ingredients, or as a scannable code on the package with directions, such as “Scan here for more information” (34). Presently, some foods may have a third-party “Non-GMO project verified” label, which indicates that the product contains no GMOs. However, this label is voluntary. It’s also worth noting that any food labeled “100% organic” does not contain any GMO ingredients, because U.S. law prohibits this. However, if a product is simply labeled “organic,” it may contain some GMOs (35, 36). In the European Union (EU), foods with more than 0.9% GMO ingredients must list “genetically modified” or “produced from genetically modified [name of food].” For foods without packaging, these words must be listed near the item, such as on the supermarket shelf (37). Summary As of 2022, the USDA requires that foods with GMO ingredients must be labeled “bioengineered food”. You can avoid GMOs by limiting GMO ingredients, eating locally, or buying 100% organic. Most foods in your local supermarket contain GMO ingredients because they’re easier and more cost-effective for farmers, which makes them cheaper for the consumer. In the United States, foods grown using GMO techniques include corn, soybean, canola, sugar beet, alfalfa, cotton, potatoes, papaya, pink pineapple, summer squash, and a few varieties of apples. Although current research suggests that GMO foods are safe for consumption, some people are concerned about their potential health effects. Due to a lack of long-term human studies, more research is needed. As of 2022, all foods in the United States that contain GMO ingredients must have the term “bioengineered food” somewhere on the packaging or a scannable code to show that it has GMO ingredients. Last medically reviewed on March 24, 2023 How we reviewed this article: Our experts continually monitor the health and wellness space, and we update our articles when new information becomes available.	GMOs: Pros and Cons, Backed by Evidence Although most notable organizations and research suggest that GMO foods are safe and sustainable, some people claim they may harm your health and the environment. GMOs, short for genetically modified organisms, are subject to a lot of controversy. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), GMO seeds are used to plant over 90% of all maize (corn), cotton, and soy grown in the United States, which means that many of the foods you eat likely contain GMOs (1). This article helps explain what GMOs are, provides a balanced explanation of their pros and cons, and gives guidance on how to identify GMO foods. “GMO,” which stands for genetically modified organism, refers to any organism whose DNA has been modified using genetic engineering technology. In the food industry, GMO crops have had genes added to them for various reasons, such as improving their growth, nutritional content, sustainability, pest resistance, and ease of farming (2). While it’s possible to naturally give foods desirable traits through selective breeding, this process takes many generations. Also, breeders may struggle to determine which genetic change has led to a new trait. Genetic modification significantly accelerates this process by using scientific techniques that give the plant the specific desired trait. For example, one of the most common GMO crops is Bt corn, which is genetically modified to produce the insecticide Bt toxin. By making this toxin, the corn is able to resist pests, reducing the need for pesticides (3). GMO crops are incredibly common in the United States, with at least 90% of soy, cotton, and corn being grown through genetic techniques (4). While GMO crops make farming much easier, there is some concern around their potential effect on the environment and their safety for human consumption — specifically surrounding illnesses and allergies (5). However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and USDA maintain that GMOs are safe for human and animal consumption (6).	yes
Bioethics	Should genetically modified organisms (GMOs) be part of our diet?	yes_statement	"genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos) should be included in our "diet".. our "diet" should include "genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos).	https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/324576	Pros and cons of GMO foods: Health and environment	Engineers design plants using genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to improve taste, nutritional content, and resilience. However, people have concerns over their safety, and there is much debate about the pros and cons of using GMOs. Genetically engineering foods is a relatively new practice, which means the long-term effects on safety are not yet clear. Many concerns about the disadvantages relate to human health. Scientists have not yet shown that GMO foods are harmful to health, but research is ongoing. Allergic reactions There is a small risk that GMO foods can trigger an allergic reaction, but this will only happen if the genetic change triggers the production of an allergen. For instance, if scientists combine a gene from a Brazil nut with a soybean, there is a slight chance that a person with a nut allergy could have an allergic reaction to products made with the soybean. The World Health Organization (WHO) discourages genetic engineers from using DNA from allergens unless they can prove that the gene itself does not cause the problem. Scientists assess the likelihood of GMO foods causing an allergic reaction in humans before a product reaches the market, and can prevent its launch if necessary. Cancer There have been concerns that eating GMO foods can contribute to the development of cancer by raising levels of potentially carcinogenic substances in the body. The American Cancer Society states there is no evidence that currently available GMO foods either increase or reduce the risk of cancer. While cancer rates have changed over time in the U.S., there is no evidence that these changes coincide with the introduction of GMO foods. If there is a link, it could take several more years before a trend emerges. Antibacterial resistance Some GMOs contain changes that make them resistant to certain antibiotics. In theory, the genes from these plants could enter humans or animals when they eat them. As a result, the person or animal could also develop antibiotic resistance. The likelihood of this happening is very small, but the WHO and other health authorities have guidelines in place to prevent it. Changes in human DNA In 2009, some food scientists noted that food DNA can survive as far as the gut, and there have been concerns that this could affect the immune system. Some people have also raised fears that eating GMO food could lead to genetic changes in humans. However, most of the DNA in food — whether GMO or not — either is destroyed by cooking or breaks down before it reaches the large intestine. Small fragments of DNA from food can and do enter the bloodstream and body organs, but there is no evidence that they have any impact on genetic makeup or human health. Toxicity for body organs In 2009, some researchers suggested that GMO foods might impact the liver, kidney, pancreas, and reproductive system. They did not have evidence to confirm this and called for further studies. The use of GMO crops may even reduce the risk of toxicity from some substances, as farmers can avoid using pesticides that have been harmful in the past. In the U.S., the FDA does not require special labeling for GMO foods. This is because they must meet the same safety standards as other foods, and there should be no need for additional regulation. However, a GMO food needs a special label if it is “materially different” from its conventional counterpart. For example: a GMO canola oil with more lauric acid than traditional canola oil will be labeled “laurate canola oil” a GMO soybean oil with more oleic acid than non-GMO soybean oil must be labeled “high oleic soybean oil” a GMO soybean oil with a high level of stearidonic acid, which does not naturally occur in the oil, must be labeled “stearidonate soybean oil” However, the 2018 National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard states that all foods containing genetically engineered ingredients must now carry the label “derived from bioengineering” or “bioengineered.” Specific symbols show whether a food has been bioengineered. Genetic modification is when scientists insert new DNA into the gene pool of an existing plant. For this to happen, the following needs to take place: Scientists transfer new DNA into plant cells. They grow the cells in tissue culture, and a plant develops. The new plant produces seeds. A person grows plants from the new seeds. The new plants will have genetic features that make them, for example, more nutritious or resistant to pests, disease, or climate factors. For thousands of years, people have used processes such as selective breeding or crossbreeding to produce more viable crops. However, changes took a long time to achieve, and it was hard to make specific changes. In recent years, developments in genetic engineering have allowed scientists to make specific changes more quickly. The crops produced in this way are called GMO crops. The first GMO food to appear on the market was a tomato, in 1994. The following are the most common GMO crops produced and sold in the U.S.: sugar beet canola corn potato summer squash soybean papaya apple alfalfa Derivatives of these foods, such as cornstarch and sugar, also feature in other manufactured foods. It is worth noting that 99.9% of all sugar beet harvested in the U.S. is GMO, as well as over 90% of all canola, corn, soybean, and cotton. Genetic modification can make plants resistant to disease and tolerant of herbicides, and therefore, the process can increase the amount of food that farmers can grow. This in turn can reduce food prices and contribute to food security. GMO crops are relatively new, and researchers are still investigating their long-term safety and health effects, but no evidence has yet emerged that currently available GMO foods are harmful to human health. How we reviewed this article: Medical News Today has strict sourcing guidelines and draws only from peer-reviewed studies, academic research institutions, and medical journals and associations. We avoid using tertiary references. We link primary sources — including studies, scientific references, and statistics — within each article and also list them in the resources section at the bottom of our articles. You can learn more about how we ensure our content is accurate and current by reading our editorial policy.	Some people have also raised fears that eating GMO food could lead to genetic changes in humans. However, most of the DNA in food — whether GMO or not — either is destroyed by cooking or breaks down before it reaches the large intestine. Small fragments of DNA from food can and do enter the bloodstream and body organs, but there is no evidence that they have any impact on genetic makeup or human health. Toxicity for body organs In 2009, some researchers suggested that GMO foods might impact the liver, kidney, pancreas, and reproductive system. They did not have evidence to confirm this and called for further studies. The use of GMO crops may even reduce the risk of toxicity from some substances, as farmers can avoid using pesticides that have been harmful in the past. In the U.S., the FDA does not require special labeling for GMO foods. This is because they must meet the same safety standards as other foods, and there should be no need for additional regulation. However, a GMO food needs a special label if it is “materially different” from its conventional counterpart. For example: a GMO canola oil with more lauric acid than traditional canola oil will be labeled “laurate canola oil” a GMO soybean oil with more oleic acid than non-GMO soybean oil must be labeled “high oleic soybean oil” a GMO soybean oil with a high level of stearidonic acid, which does not naturally occur in the oil, must be labeled “stearidonate soybean oil” However, the 2018 National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard states that all foods containing genetically engineered ingredients must now carry the label “derived from bioengineering” or “bioengineered.” Specific symbols show whether a food has been bioengineered. Genetic modification is when scientists insert new DNA into the gene pool of an existing plant. For this to happen, the following needs to take place: Scientists transfer new DNA into plant cells.	yes
Bioethics	Should genetically modified organisms (GMOs) be part of our diet?	yes_statement	"genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos) should be included in our "diet".. our "diet" should include "genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos).	https://fas.org/publication/protecting-consumers-by-reforming-food-labeling-regulations/	Protecting Consumers by Reforming Food Labeling Regulations ...	Protecting Consumers by Reforming Food Labeling Regulations Summary The Biden-Harris Administration has consistently prioritized consumer protection, invigorating rural communities and natural technologies that address climate change. These three priorities are embodied in this proposal and present an opportunity for a bipartisan win-win. Agriculture directly connects rural Americans with urban ones and is central to practical climate solutions. But as biotechnology advances, consumers face a myriad of new ingredients and labels to parse through at the supermarket. These labels, including ‘organic’ and ‘non-GMO,’ can often be confusing. There are competing views about the proper regulatory framework that will provide the highest nutrition to the most citizens at the lowest possible cost while respecting the environment. Comprehensive food labeling regulation reform can help consumers avoid deceptive marketing and allow farmers and grocers to compete fairly. In addition, it can be a tool to leverage the marketplace to implement climate-friendly solutions. There are two possible approaches to implementing this reform: The best alternative would be to pass legislation that expands the BE labeling program, enhancing the labeling authority of USDA, strengthening Truth-in-Advertising laws, and providing a legal framework to address misleading claims across Federal agencies. Alternatively, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is already empowered to enforce existing Truth-in-Advertising laws. It can use this authority to reinforce the USDA’s existing labeling programs to ensure that consumer information aligns with scientific evidence. Challenge and Opportunity In the past 50 years, the idea of “health foods” has gone mainstream. Despite the lack of hard scientific evidence, the term has morphed from denoting foods that help individuals avoid diet-related diseases to marketing foods that claim to help every American live healthier. This change in the market has also generated healthy profit margins for certain grocery retailers.1 But the distinction is more than marketing—most physicians now agree that there is a strong relationship between diet and disease based on scientific evidence. For example, scientific communities agree that specific ingredients like saturated fats can affect health. To ensure consumers can make informed choices about these ingredients, their presence is explicitly listed on the FDA’s nutrition labels. Unfortunately, the zealous proponents of health foods have gone beyond advocacy of ingredients the medical establishment deems “healthy.” Foods whose heritage can be traced to intentional genetic modification in a modern laboratory are ominously labeled as “genetically modified organisms” (GMOs). Although this label has taken on a negative connotation, it’s simply a descriptor and, by itself, cannot convey whether or not a product is “healthy.” Such labeling is like singling out children born using modern in vitro fertilization and treating them differently than children conceived “naturally”! Conflating the nutritional composition of food with its genetic heritage allows marketers to extract a premium for foods labeled “non-GMO” while failing to acknowledge the actual health benefits of some GMOs. In 2016, Congress established the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (NBFDS), a US federal law that mandates “BE” labeling for bioengineered foods. These foods contain genetic material not accessible via breeding, added using in vitro recombinant DNA techniques. This law empowers USDA to specify whether ingredients should be labeled BE depending on their supply chains and to define analytical tests that establish whether labeling is necessary. These analytical tests allow the agency to define bioengineered products precisely. While GMO and BE foods may overlap, the two labels are inconsistent and have different criteria specified by different organizations. Science has weighed in on GMO/BE foods, and numerous studies have shown no health risks associated with the consumption of GMO/BE foods.2 Indeed, bioengineering improves the nutritional content of some foods. For example, low linoleic acid canola oil has less trans-fat, a dietary component associated with increased rates of heart disease. In such cases, the nutritional differences are reflected on food labels following FDA guidelines. In addition, bioengineering can reduce the number of agricultural chemicals needed to prevent spoilage, eliminating potentially toxic residues and food waste. But marketers of “health(y) foods” have spent millions to support “non-GMO” labels that are unrelated to health while continuing to sow irrational fears to help maintain their margins. To make matters worse, marketers have added to the confusion by labeling certain foods with another vague descriptor, “organic”. Organic farming is a cultivation practice that avoids synthetic pesticides and artificial fertilizers. It is how the crops are grown, not what. But even the USDA’s National Organic Program (65 FR 80547. 12/21/2000)3 conflates the two, specifying that even animals fed with GMO feed cannot be labeled USDA Organic! From a scientific perspective, it is inaccurate to consider any GMO an “ingredient” because the genes themselves are present in minuscule amounts and can be fully digested. The changes are in the code, not the composition. They are made up of natural building blocks, as are the proteins produced. Further, because farm animals digest food to these components, any “pass-through” of GMO characteristics would require extraordinary proof. While it is impossible to prove a negative, there is no evidence of adverse consumer reactions (even among those with severe food allergies) to GMOs themselves. For this reason, USDA’s BE designation expressly excludes animals fed with bioengineered foods (NBFDS, Sec 293(a)(2)(A)]. The current regulatory regime around bioengineered foods, organic farming, and GMOs is inconsistent and requires reform. Consumers deserve objective and relevant information about the foods they consume, but current sources of information can be inaccurate or incomplete.. As consumers have become more health- and origin-conscious, corporations have seized on this awareness to promote their products. Unfortunately, health(y) food marketers often use scientifically tenuous and potentially deceptive labels. Corporations fund academic researchers and non-governmental organizations to conduct independent research to legitimize these marketing messages, often as philanthropic, tax-advantaged donations. While such funding is not necessarily nefarious, it can confuse consumers and undermine more trusted and objective sources of nutrition information – federal agencies. The Government’s responsibility is to provide accurate ratings that support fact-based competition. Free and fair competition in the marketplace has long been the objective of Federal regulations. While corporations should be allowed to differentiate their goods in the eye of the consumer, they shouldn’t be allowed to instill irrational fear of health hazards lacking robust scientific support. This is not unique to the agricultural industry – in fact, it is the core of the regulatory framework for pharmaceuticals. Corporations currently exploit the hodgepodge rating system, but it can be improved through Government regulation. As shown in the figure, surveys show that U. S. consumers trust Government ratings more than any other source except for “experts” and find such ratings to be more understandable, particularly in contrast to those expressed by experts. There is an opportunity for regulatory improvement in the food labeling space, both legislatively and through executive action. Because USDA labeling covers agricultural food sources (including Bio-Engineered and Organic labels), adding a non-Bio Engineered label would further enable consumers to make an informed choice. The dissonance between BE and USDA Organic labels should also be resolved by removing the prohibition on using BE/GMO sources as a condition of Organic labeling. However, this is an issue that must be corrected legislatively. Furthermore, because of the significant market advantages gained through advertising unsubstantiated health claims, market players have taken to the courts, where dozens of lawsuits have been filed against USDA, attempting to force the Department’s labels to support spurious health claims due to ambiguities in the legal definitions of both “organic” and “bioengineered”. Affirming that USDA is empowered by statute to determine specific criteria for its own labels when legislative language is ambiguous will help negate any claims to the contrary. Plan of Action Food labeling is central to the flow of accurate and unbiased information from farm to table. Currently, two primary agencies are responsible for food labeling, USDA and FDA (under HHS), and one agency is responsible for truth in advertising, FTC (under Commerce). These responsibilities are split: USDA covers farm products, FDA covers nutrition, and FTC prosecutes false advertising. The recommended actions below will improve coordination among these agencies, produce a more uniform response to labeling issues, and increase consumer confidence in and knowledge of the food they purchase. Because food labels are often relied upon during a purchase decision in the grocery aisle, the Bioengineered Food Labeling Standard established in 20164 and mandated in 20225 should be strengthened. Specifically: Action Consequence Congress should pass legislation removing redundancy in USDA’s Organic and BE labeling requirements. Simple, mutually exclusive legal definitions will lead to more explicit decisions by the judiciary. USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service should certify a non-BE label through independent laboratory analysis to supplement its BE labeling program. Accountability to a laboratory analytical standard for content, rather than a judgment call by a non-profit NGO, will provide clarity. The Secretary of Commerce should direct FTC to prosecute false advertising for improperly labeled Organic or non-GMO consumer goods Impartial & objective treatment of consumer-facing advertising allows consumers to choose based on their needs. Congress should pass legislation removing redundancy in USDA’s Organic and BE labeling requirements. Although this may be a more long-term solution, the current regulatory regime is confusing and conflates agricultural methods with content. Congress should take up this issue in future Farm Bills and appropriations cycles and develop clear, mutually exclusive legal definitions. This will create more transparent labels for consumers and lead to more explicit decisions by the judiciary in marketing lawsuits. USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service should certify a non-Bioengineered label. AMS currently oversees the assignment of BE labels. Through independent laboratory analysis, the agency should also offer a service to firms to certify a non-BE label, using the NBFLS criteria. USDA already has analytical laboratories and staff conducting spot inspections of meat producers. These capabilities could be leveraged to confirm a non-BE label. In addition, producers who wish to label their goods as “non-BE” would be willing to pay an evaluation fee comparable to fees paid to non-governmental certification agencies, so the budgetary impact should be minimal. Alternatively, because the NBFLS establishes methods that can be performed in certified testing facilities, USDA’s resources could be deployed to spot-check the claims. Further, because non-BE labeling would not be mandatory, producers can choose to remain silent on the content of their goods if their bioengineered content is unknown. Any ingredients with known health benefits should appear on the FDA nutrition label, and any marketer that uses either Organic or non-GMO labeling without adhering to USDA’s authorities should be prosecuted for false advertising. For budgetary purposes, USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and its Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) are allocated approximately $1.7B and $1B, respectively. Additional staffing needs would likely be minimal because spot inspections of manufacturing facilities are already part of their routine. Another angle agencies could take to support a more coordinated approach to consumer protections is through prosecution of improperly labeled Organic or non-GMO foods. While USDA would maintain the responsibility of conducting spot inspections, the FTC would be responsible for enforcing any transgressions through False Advertising Laws.6 There is already precedent for this type of enforcement. Between 2003 and 2010, FTC successfully removed spurious health claims made by POM Wonderful, a marketer of pomegranate juice and related products, despite a vigorous appeal mounted by the company. While this example rejected false advertising based on specific health claims, it could also be extended to false advertising based on general health claims. Conclusion This proposal presents a more coordinated framework for food labeling regulations and would have wide-ranging effects. Among the stakeholders are farmers (both large and small), national grocery chains, food processing companies, agricultural biotechnology companies (particularly those that use laboratory-derived technologies that do not result in a “Bio-Engineered” label), and alternative protein companies that create consumer goods using processes developed in laboratories (e.g., Impossible Foods). In addition, various organizations, such as the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), have filed amicus briefs in lawsuits that target USDA labeling. There is significant interest in improving the current system. In addition to providing the protection that consumers deserve, this proposal has health and climate impacts. Nutrition and health are tightly linked, and consumers know for themselves what foods are likely to aggravate their health outcomes. Accurate labeling empowers consumers to decide for themselves about their individual needs, to the extent that consumers believe that non-BE foods are more nutritious. Constraining both seed and method to organic, non-GMO can have a demonstrable negative impact on the climate mitigation capabilities of agricultural practices. As suggested above, language suggesting that using seeds descended from laboratory methods of genetic modification anywhere in the chain precludes organic production methods should be eliminated. This can be more accurately communicated using two different labeling permutations, “organic & BE” and “organic & non-BE.” Frequently Asked Questions Doesn’t the current non-GMO labeling provide the same information? No. The Non-GMO Project (the NGO responsible for certifying the labels) has extensive, published criteria that suggest that there is a precise definition of a GMO. But, unfortunately, there isn’t one: It’s a gray area whose definition is scientifically imprecise, to the extent that it is defined differently in the US than in the EU (for example). In particular, the Project’s definition is so broad that any food determined (by the Project) to be “unnatural”, including processes and products traced to the use of a genetically modified organism, can be denied a label. In contrast, the USDA’s BE Label is scientifically precise and focused on an analytical criterion that can be objectively determined in the laboratory. What is an example where foods currently labeled non-GMO would be labeled BE? Probably none. It’s hard to tell because, as mentioned above, The Non-GMO Project’s labeling criteria are subjective. According to their criteria, determining a new GMO is intrusive and requires surveillance of its entire development path. In contrast, determining a BE label requires inspection (much like the USDA’s meat grades), albeit in a laboratory setting. What is an example where foods not currently labeled as non-GMO would be labeled non-BE? Because The Non-GMO Project label includes processes and derivatives, foods such as the plant-based Impossible Burger could be labeled non-BE, even though the process involves a GMO, disqualifying it from their labeling. (A GMO is used to create the meat flavor of the protein, which is purified before blending.) Will The Non-GMO Project have a role? Of course! Because they already monitor new GMOs, this non-profit can help guide USDA inspectors to foods that should be labeled as BE but are not. In addition, they can guide analytical procedures that can be used to ascertain whether a given food product is, in fact, BE. What does food labeling have to do with climate change? Agriculture is a globally significant enterprise that can both capture and release greenhouse gases responsible for global warming. Under the current scheme, improving the efficiency of agricultural practices involving GMO processes is discouraged because of the stigma. Innovations such as PivotBio’s enhanced nitrogen fixation organism (a GMO that reduces the amount of fertilizer needed) may be avoided by farmers because of a fully-justified fear of being labeled.	Unfortunately, the zealous proponents of health foods have gone beyond advocacy of ingredients the medical establishment deems “healthy.” Foods whose heritage can be traced to intentional genetic modification in a modern laboratory are ominously labeled as “genetically modified organisms” (GMOs). Although this label has taken on a negative connotation, it’s simply a descriptor and, by itself, cannot convey whether or not a product is “healthy.” Such labeling is like singling out children born using modern in vitro fertilization and treating them differently than children conceived “naturally”! Conflating the nutritional composition of food with its genetic heritage allows marketers to extract a premium for foods labeled “non-GMO” while failing to acknowledge the actual health benefits of some GMOs. In 2016, Congress established the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (NBFDS), a US federal law that mandates “BE” labeling for bioengineered foods. These foods contain genetic material not accessible via breeding, added using in vitro recombinant DNA techniques. This law empowers USDA to specify whether ingredients should be labeled BE depending on their supply chains and to define analytical tests that establish whether labeling is necessary. These analytical tests allow the agency to define bioengineered products precisely. While GMO and BE foods may overlap, the two labels are inconsistent and have different criteria specified by different organizations. Science has weighed in on GMO/BE foods, and numerous studies have shown no health risks associated with the consumption of GMO/BE foods.2 Indeed, bioengineering improves the nutritional content of some foods. For example, low linoleic acid canola oil has less trans-fat, a dietary component associated with increased rates of heart disease. In such cases, the nutritional differences are reflected on food labels following FDA guidelines. In addition, bioengineering can reduce the number of agricultural chemicals needed to prevent spoilage, eliminating potentially toxic residues and food waste. But marketers of “health(y) foods”	yes
Bioethics	Should genetically modified organisms (GMOs) be part of our diet?	no_statement	"genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos) should not be part of our "diet".. our "diet" should not include "genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos).	https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/food-nutrition/genetically-modified-foods-other-novel-foods/safety.html	The safety of genetically modified (GM) foods - Canada.ca	how the GM food was developed, including any genetic changes made to any plant, animal or microorganism used in the product how the GM food compares to an equivalent non-modified food, in terms of: nutrition quality what it is made of (for example, fats, proteins and carbohydrates) The main steps in the safety assessment: A manufacturer, importer or developer submits detailed information to Health Canada. They outline exactly how the product was developed. If the data provided is not complete, Health Canada scientists will ask the developer for more information and scientific data. Some products that do not meet our strict criteria either have their submission closed by Health Canada, or withdrawn voluntarily by the manufacturer before a safety assessment is completed. Health Canada scientists may supplement the information submitted by the manufacturer with relevant published data from the larger scientific community. Health Canada scientists assess all the information available. The reviews take into consideration all the available evidence before making a final decision about the health and safety of a new GM food. The use of company-generated data to perform pre-market assessments of GM foods is a standard scientific method of evaluation used by regulators around the world. While many studies published in scientific journals are the result of developer testing, a significant number of independent laboratories are also studying and publishing on the safety of GM foods. The safety assessment process is based upon principles developed by international experts from the: Codex Alimentarius Commission World Health Organization (WHO) Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Comparative approach One way to establish safety of GM foods is through a comparative approach. This approach allows regulatory agencies to identify potential safety and nutritional issues. The comparative approach identifies all differences between the GM food and the closest unmodified food with a history of safe use. We assess the differences for potential impacts on all aspects of food safety. If the differences aren't found to impact food safety, then we conclude that the GM food is as safe as food that is already considered safe to eat. The comparative approach to GM food safety assessment is used by regulatory agencies around the world in countries such as: Regulating GM foods in Canada all of the GM foods we have reviewed are as safe and nutritious as non-GM foods we have not found any verifiable scientific evidence that shows GM foods are less safe than traditional varieties we have not found a study that caused us to change our conclusions about any assessed GM food product If new information concerning the safety of GM foods does arise, we will: review the new data carefully take appropriate action if we identify any risks or concerns from eating GM foods Internationally, scientists have concluded that GM foods pose no more risk to human health than non-GM foods. In fact, GM foods are subject to a far higher level of regulatory oversight and scientific requirements than traditional organisms consumed as food. Risks of GM techniques in the food supply The risks of GM techniques in the food supply are the same as for foods produced by conventional means. These include potential risks from: toxic compounds allergenic compounds However, techniques used to produce GM foods may: permit the transfer of genetic material from unrelated species transfer a gene from an organism expressing a protein that has no history of use as a food The safety assessment: gives assurances that toxic or allergenic compounds are not transferred along with the desired characteristic when new DNA is introduced into an organism assures that any genetic changes made to an organism do not increase the level of allergenic compounds or anti-nutrients which are naturally present in some organisms consumed as food Long-term effects of GM foods Using GM techniques does not introduce unique risks into the food supply. As a result, the potential for long-term effects from these foods are no different than for conventional foods that have been a safe part of the Canadian diet for a long time. Furthermore, there is no current evidence to indicate that long-term studies are needed to ensure the safety of foods produced using this technology. Some foods may require additional considerations to address long-term health effects if the GM techniques result in: changes that create significantly different nutrient combinations other novel food characteristics not previously encountered in the food supply In such cases, long-term studies may be included in the safety assessment of these products. Canada's international involvement with GM food safety Health Canada was involved with the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Forces on Foods derived from Biotechnology. The Task Forces were created by the Codex Alimentarius Commission to: develop general principles for risk analysis of foods derived from biotechnology provide specific guidance on the safety assessment of such foods The work of the Task Forces led to a number of documents being adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, including: Principles for the Risk Analysis of Foods Derived from Modern Biotechnology (2003) Guideline for the Conduct of Food Safety Assessments of Foods Derived from Recombinant-DNA Plants (2003) Guideline for the Conduct of Food Safety Assessment of Foods Produced Using Recombinant-DNA Microorganisms (2003) Guideline for the Conduct of Food Safety Assessment of Foods Derived from Recombinant-DNA Animals (2008) Health Canada also participates in the work of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Working Group for the Safety of Novel Foods and Feeds. This OECD Working Group is intended to promote the same standards for safety assessments and regulations of novel GM foods and feeds around the world.	If new information concerning the safety of GM foods does arise, we will: review the new data carefully take appropriate action if we identify any risks or concerns from eating GM foods Internationally, scientists have concluded that GM foods pose no more risk to human health than non-GM foods. In fact, GM foods are subject to a far higher level of regulatory oversight and scientific requirements than traditional organisms consumed as food. Risks of GM techniques in the food supply The risks of GM techniques in the food supply are the same as for foods produced by conventional means. These include potential risks from: toxic compounds allergenic compounds However, techniques used to produce GM foods may: permit the transfer of genetic material from unrelated species transfer a gene from an organism expressing a protein that has no history of use as a food The safety assessment: gives assurances that toxic or allergenic compounds are not transferred along with the desired characteristic when new DNA is introduced into an organism assures that any genetic changes made to an organism do not increase the level of allergenic compounds or anti-nutrients which are naturally present in some organisms consumed as food Long-term effects of GM foods Using GM techniques does not introduce unique risks into the food supply. As a result, the potential for long-term effects from these foods are no different than for conventional foods that have been a safe part of the Canadian diet for a long time. Furthermore, there is no current evidence to indicate that long-term studies are needed to ensure the safety of foods produced using this technology.	yes
Bioethics	Should genetically modified organisms (GMOs) be part of our diet?	no_statement	"genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos) should not be part of our "diet".. our "diet" should not include "genetically" "modified" "organisms" (gmos).	https://foodinsight.org/gmo-crops-safety-regulation-and-sustainability-insights/	GMO Crops: Safety, Regulation and Sustainability Insights – Food ...	GMO Crops: Safety, Regulation and Sustainability Insights By Tamika Sims, PhD December 11, 2020 Genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, are a popular topic in today’s conversations about food and farming, and many of us have heard of or read food labels stating “contains bioengineered ingredients” (another way of referring to GMOs). While many of us are familiar with the term GMO, not all of us are quite sure what it is—only, perhaps, that we are advised to avoid them by some people. A 2018 consumer survey by the IFIC found that more than one-third (36 percent) of respondents said they know very little or nothing at all about bioengineered or genetically modified foods, identical to the number who say they know at least a fair amount. Despite the low level of knowledge, a higher volume of respondents (47 percent) said they avoid GMO foods at least somewhat. But when we hear or read “GMO” or “bioengineered food,” do we ever think of the terms “safety,” “regulation” or “sustainability”? If not, IFIC is here to tell you that we should. Let’s look at how these three positive attributes are intertwined with GMOs and what that means for our food supply. Safety signals GMO foods have been part of our food system for more than two decades. The GMO crops available in the U.S.—soybeans, corn (field and sweet), canola, cotton (used in cottonseed oil production), alfalfa, sugar beets, summer squash, papaya, apples and potatoes—are as safe and nutritious as their non-GMO counterparts. The science behind their safety has been evaluated extensively over the past 20 years, including an in-depth analysis performed by 50 scientists that worked on a 2016 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report for more than two years. The NAS scientific cohort examined relevant literature (including more than 900 publications), heard from 80 diverse speakers at three public meetings and 15 webinars, and read more than 700 comments from members of the public to broaden its understanding of issues surrounding GMO crops. Significantly, the subsequent report noted there are no adverse health effects linked to GMO crops. To address directly some of the adverse health claims linked to GMO consumption, the report highlighted that there is no published evidence to support accusations or beliefs that consumption of genetically engineered foods can cause obesity, type 2 diabetes, food allergies or autism spectrum disorder—or that GMO foods generate unique gene or protein fragments that have the ability to induce health risks. In addition to this monumental report, the safety of GMOs has been evaluated by national and international food safety authorities. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) have ensured that GMOs are safe for human, plant and animal health—as has the World Health Organization. The U.S. authorities, in addition to evaluating the safety of GMOs, also impose regulations on their production and introduction to the food system. The realm of regulation As noted above, three federal agencies regulate GMO foods: the EPA, the FDA and the USDA, with each holding a specific role. A newly developed web resource library published by the FDA explains each U.S. agency’s role in regulating GMOs and how that role overlaps with others. The FDA sets and enforces food safety standards for all foods, and in doing so, the agency works to ensure that foods that are GMOs or have GMO ingredients meet the same strict safety standards as all other foods. The EPA regulates the safety of the substances that protect GMO crops, which are also called plant-incorporated protectants (PIPs) and work to give the crops resistance to insects and disease. The EPA also monitors all pesticides that are used on GMO and non-GMO crops. Lastly, the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) protects agriculture in the United States against pests and disease. APHIS issues “regulations to make sure GMO plants are not harmful to other plants.” These agencies work together to uphold a coordinated risk-management system to ensure that established and new biotechnology products are safe for the environment, humans and animals. Established as a formal policy in 1986, the Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology describes how the federal agencies form a system for evaluating products developed using modern biotechnology. Shooting for sustainability GMO technology is not only safe and regulated—it also provides us with a farming tool that has positive environmental and social impacts. GMO crop cultivation and utilization by farmers support food production system sustainability and build social opportunities for farmers and food producers by ensuring crop yields. Many GMO crops grow better than their non-GMO counterparts under environmental stresses and are thus able to ward off crop diseases and pests. GMO crops can grow with less water, energy and pesticides—all environmentally sustainable benefits. From a productivity standpoint, GMO crops also support food system workers. Farmers face many hurdles as they aim to grow our food sources, including those brought on by climate change—such as extreme weather, drought, flooding and ecosystem disruption. The advancement of GMO seed availability to farmers can lead to more successful harvest seasons, which in turn helps feed food system workers’ families as well as the general population. Giving farmers the opportunity to experience success also builds their business skills. And additional positive impacts on workers and individuals can be seen throughout the food supply chain, from the those that pick a crop to those that process and ship the food to those that sell the product in grocery stores—not to mention us, the consumers. In summary, GMO technology has many benefits for both people and the environment, and the above insights help underscore the important elements of safety and regulation surrounding GMO foods.	GMO Crops: Safety, Regulation and Sustainability Insights By Tamika Sims, PhD December 11, 2020 Genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, are a popular topic in today’s conversations about food and farming, and many of us have heard of or read food labels stating “contains bioengineered ingredients” (another way of referring to GMOs). While many of us are familiar with the term GMO, not all of us are quite sure what it is—only, perhaps, that we are advised to avoid them by some people. A 2018 consumer survey by the IFIC found that more than one-third (36 percent) of respondents said they know very little or nothing at all about bioengineered or genetically modified foods, identical to the number who say they know at least a fair amount. Despite the low level of knowledge, a higher volume of respondents (47 percent) said they avoid GMO foods at least somewhat. But when we hear or read “GMO” or “bioengineered food,” do we ever think of the terms “safety,” “regulation” or “sustainability”? If not, IFIC is here to tell you that we should. Let’s look at how these three positive attributes are intertwined with GMOs and what that means for our food supply. Safety signals GMO foods have been part of our food system for more than two decades. The GMO crops available in the U.S.—soybeans, corn (field and sweet), canola, cotton (used in cottonseed oil production), alfalfa, sugar beets, summer squash, papaya, apples and potatoes—are as safe and nutritious as their non-GMO counterparts. The science behind their safety has been evaluated extensively over the past 20 years, including an in-depth analysis performed by 50 scientists that worked on a 2016 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report for more than two years.	yes
Bioethics	Should organ selling be legalized?	yes_statement	"organ" "selling" should be "legalized". legalizing "organ" "selling" is necessary	https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17362762/	Should commercial organ donation be legalized in Germany? An ...	Affiliation Abstract Objective: We evaluated the arguments pro and con concerning kidney sales from a German perspective. At present, we see social, medical, and ethical reasons why organ selling should not be legalized in Germany. Discussion: Legalization of organ selling would weaken the principle of solidarity within the German health system. Conversely, profit making will undermine the principle of social justice. Within the present social system in Germany, there is no economic pressure to sell an organ to save life, and there is no medical need to buy a kidney. Also, there exists the risk that opening the market for organ sales will de-motivate potential directed organ donors. Relatives would have more doubts about giving their consent to donate organs of their deceased. Moreover, the historical experience with the "action T4" of the Nazi regime sensitized German society for the categorical imperative set forth by Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), namely that man is not a means, but an end to himself. By selling one's kidney, the donor uses himself as a means and as an instrument for the end result of gaining money. With directed organ donation, the welfare of the recipient is the end result. The pending reform of the German health system needs a more communitarian sense, which will be eroded should organs be sold and no longer donated as gifts. Conclusion: Germany's special historical experience and a deeply embedded consent toward ethical values give reason for the prohibition of organ selling in Germany.	Affiliation Abstract Objective: We evaluated the arguments pro and con concerning kidney sales from a German perspective. At present, we see social, medical, and ethical reasons why organ selling should not be legalized in Germany. Discussion: Legalization of organ selling would weaken the principle of solidarity within the German health system. Conversely, profit making will undermine the principle of social justice. Within the present social system in Germany, there is no economic pressure to sell an organ to save life, and there is no medical need to buy a kidney. Also, there exists the risk that opening the market for organ sales will de-motivate potential directed organ donors. Relatives would have more doubts about giving their consent to donate organs of their deceased. Moreover, the historical experience with the "action T4" of the Nazi regime sensitized German society for the categorical imperative set forth by Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), namely that man is not a means, but an end to himself. By selling one's kidney, the donor uses himself as a means and as an instrument for the end result of gaining money. With directed organ donation, the welfare of the recipient is the end result. The pending reform of the German health system needs a more communitarian sense, which will be eroded should organs be sold and no longer donated as gifts. Conclusion: Germany's special historical experience and a deeply embedded consent toward ethical values give reason for the prohibition of organ selling in Germany.	no
Bioethics	Should organ selling be legalized?	yes_statement	"organ" "selling" should be "legalized". legalizing "organ" "selling" is necessary	https://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/opinion/20iht-edsatel.1.13856658.html	Opinion \| 'What's wrong with selling kidneys?' - The New York Times	'What's wrong with selling kidneys?' LONDON — This was the question recently posed in the prestigious British Medical Journal. An American transplant surgeon (in favor of selling kidneys) squared off against an Australian nephrologist (against). In an accompanying article, a leading British transplant surgeon called for legalizing organ sales. Coverage in the British press had a positive spin. "Surgeon: Organ trade should be legalized" was The Independent's headline; "Legalize trade in donor organs, pleads surgeon" was The Evening Standard's. We cheer these headlines. The more attention is paid to the worldwide organ shortage and the rapacious underground market it has spawned, the more people, we hope, will support the idea of selling kidneys legally. We do. One of us is a British transplant surgeon who has seen too many patients die for want of a kidney. The other is an American recipient of a kidney who was once desperate enough to contemplate obtaining a kidney in the overseas organ bazaar. We believe in compensating healthy individuals who are willing to relinquish one of their kidneys to save the life of a dying stranger. There really is no other option. As the world has seen, altruistic appeals to organ donation have not yielded enough organs for transplantation. An estimated 40,000 patients are waiting for a transplant in Western Europe, more than 6,000 of them in Britain. Fifteen to 30 percent will die on the waiting list. Granted, not all countries have made the most use of posthumous donation and they should. But even in Spain, which is famously successful at retrieving organs from the newly deceased because of its robust procurement infrastructure, there are deaths on the waiting list. We face a dual tragedy: On one side, thousands of patients who die each year for want of a kidney; on the other a human-rights fiasco in which corrupt brokers deceive indigent donors about the nature of surgery, cheat them out of payment and ignore their post-surgical needs. The World Health Organizatiob estimates that 5 to 10 percent of all transplants performed annually - perhaps 63,000 in all - take place in the clinical netherworlds of China, Pakistan, Egypt, Colombia and the Philippines. Unfortunately, much of the world transplant establishment - including the WHO, the international Transplantation Society and the World Medical Association - advocate remedies that do not go far enough. They insist on obliterating organ trafficking but ignore the time-tested fact that trying to stamp out underground markets either drives corruption further underground or causes it to flourish elsewhere. The truth is that trafficking will only recede when the crying need for organs disappears. Opponents also allege that a legal system of exchange will inevitably replicate the sins of the black market. This is utterly backward. The remedy to this corrupt and unregulated system of exchange is its mirror image: a regulated and transparent regime devoted to donor protection. We suggest a system in which compensation is provided by a third party (government, a charity or insurance) and overseen by the government. Because bidding and private buying will not be permitted, available organs will be distributed to the next in line - not just to the wealthy. Finally, we suggest that lump-sum cash payments not be offered. By providing in-kind rewards - such as a down payment on a house, a contribution to a retirement fund or lifetime health insurance - the program would not be attractive to people who might otherwise rush to donate on the promise of a large sum of instant cash. The only way to stop illicit markets is to create legal ones. Indeed, there is no better justification for testing legal modes of exchange than the very depredations of the underground market. There is nothing wrong with selling kidneys. And until we do so, the fates of third-world donors and the patients who need their organs to survive will remain morbidly entwined. Nadey Hakim, a transplant surgeon in London, was president of the International College of Surgeons from 2005-2007. Sally Satel, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is author of the forthcoming book, "When Altruism Isn't Enough: The Case for Compensating Kidney Donors."	'What's wrong with selling kidneys?' LONDON — This was the question recently posed in the prestigious British Medical Journal. An American transplant surgeon (in favor of selling kidneys) squared off against an Australian nephrologist (against). In an accompanying article, a leading British transplant surgeon called for legalizing organ sales. Coverage in the British press had a positive spin. "Surgeon: Organ trade should be legalized" was The Independent's headline; "Legalize trade in donor organs, pleads surgeon" was The Evening Standard's. We cheer these headlines. The more attention is paid to the worldwide organ shortage and the rapacious underground market it has spawned, the more people, we hope, will support the idea of selling kidneys legally. We do. One of us is a British transplant surgeon who has seen too many patients die for want of a kidney. The other is an American recipient of a kidney who was once desperate enough to contemplate obtaining a kidney in the overseas organ bazaar. We believe in compensating healthy individuals who are willing to relinquish one of their kidneys to save the life of a dying stranger. There really is no other option. As the world has seen, altruistic appeals to organ donation have not yielded enough organs for transplantation. An estimated 40,000 patients are waiting for a transplant in Western Europe, more than 6,000 of them in Britain. Fifteen to 30 percent will die on the waiting list. Granted, not all countries have made the most use of posthumous donation and they should. But even in Spain, which is famously successful at retrieving organs from the newly deceased because of its robust procurement infrastructure, there are deaths on the waiting list. We face a dual tragedy: On one side, thousands of patients who die each year for want of a kidney; on the other a human-rights fiasco in which corrupt brokers deceive indigent donors about the nature of surgery, cheat them out of payment and ignore their post-surgical needs.	yes
Bioethics	Should organ selling be legalized?	yes_statement	"organ" "selling" should be "legalized". legalizing "organ" "selling" is necessary	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_trade	Organ trade - Wikipedia	Organ trade (also known as the blood market) is the trading of human organs, tissues, or other body products, usually for transplantation.[1][2] According to the World Health Organization (WHO), organ trade is a commercial transplantation where there is a profit, or transplantations that occur outside of national medical systems. There is a global need or demand for healthy body parts for transplantation, which exceeds the numbers available. As of January 2020[update], there are more than 100,000 candidates waiting for organ transplant in the United States.[3] The median wait time for heart and liver transplants in the U.S. between 2003 and 2014, was approximately 148 days. Average time waiting for donor organs varies significantly depending on the patients UNOS status. Patients listed as Heart Status A1 wait an average of 73 days.[4] There is a worldwide shortage of organs available for transplantation,[5] yet the commercial trade of human organs is illegal in all countries except Iran. Despite these prohibitions, organ trafficking and transplant tourism remain widespread (however, the data on the extent of the black market trade in organs is difficult to obtain). The question of whether to legalize and regulate the organ trade to combat illegal trafficking and organ shortage is greatly debated. This discussion typically centers on the sale of kidneys by living donors, since human beings are born with two kidneys but need only one to survive. Iran is the only nation that allows organs to be bought and sold for money. Due to lack of infrastructure to maintain an efficient organ transplant system in the early 1980s, Iran legalized living non-related donation (LNRD) of kidneys in 1988.[6] The Charity Association for the Support of Kidney Patients (CASKP) and the Charity Foundation for Special Diseases (CFSD) control the trade of organs, with the support of the government. These nonprofit organizations match donors to recipients, setting up tests to ensure compatibility. Donors receive tax credit compensation from the government, free health care insurance, and often direct payment from the recipient with the average donor being paid $1,200.[6][7] Some donors are also offered employment opportunities. Charity organizations support recipients that cannot afford the cost of the organ.[8] Iran does place restrictions on the commercial organ trade in an attempt to limit transplant tourism. The market is contained within the country; that is, foreigners are not allowed to buy the organs of Iranian citizens. Additionally, organs can only be transplanted between people of the same nationality – so, for example, an Iranian cannot purchase a kidney from a refugee from another country.[7] Proponents of legalized organ trade have hailed the Iranian system as an example of an effective and safe organ trading model. In addition, the LNRD model is compatible with the social climate in the country. Religious practices in Iran stymies donation culture in the country as organ donations is often viewed as taboo. In 2017, from a possible 8,000 cases of brain death, 4,000 organs were viable, but only 808 were transplanted due to lack of consent.[9] Some critics argue that the Iranian system is in some ways coercive, as over 70% of donors are poor.[10] There is no short-term or long-term follow-up on the health of organ donors.[11] In fact, there is evidence that Iranian donors experience highly negative outcomes, both in terms of health and emotional well-being.[12] In Iran's legal markets, the price of a kidney ranges from $28,000 to $45,000.[13][14] On the black market, the same kidney can be worth over $160,000, with most of proceeds taken up by middlemen.[15] The typical price paid to donors on the black market is thought to be about US$5,000, but some donors receive as little as $1,000.[16] In addition, these black market transplants are often dangerous to both the donor and recipient, with some contracting hepatitis or HIV.[13] Australia and Singapore recently legalized monetary compensation for living organ donors. Proponents of such initiatives say that these measures do not pay people for their organs; rather, these measures merely compensate donors for the costs associated with donating an organ.[17] For example, Australian donors receive 9 weeks' paid leave at a rate corresponding to the national minimum wage.[18]Kidney disease advocacy organizations in both countries have expressed their support for this new initiative.[19][20] Although American federal law prohibits the sale of organs, it does permit state governments to compensate donors for travel, medical, and other incidental expenses associated with their donation. In 2004, the state of Wisconsin took advantage of this law to provide tax deductions to living donors to defray the costs of donation.[21] Although all nations apart from Iran prohibit financial transactions for organs, most permit "paired donations" or kidney swaps across multiple parties. Paired donations address the problem of tissue compatibility in organ transplants.[22] For example, you may wish to donate a kidney to your spouse but cannot to due to antibody incompatibilities. However, your kidney is a good match for a stranger who happens to be married to someone whose kidney would be compatible with your spouse. In a paired donation, you would agree to donate your kidney to the stranger, in exchange for the stranger's spouse promising to donate a kidney to your spouse. Such paired donations are arguably a form of organ sale – instead of purchasing a kidney for a loved one with cash, a person pays for it with her own kidney.[23] In fact, in the United States, the spread of kidney paired donations was initially stymied due to language in the National Organ Transplantation Act barring the transfer of human organs for "valuable consideration".[23] It was only after the law was amended to specifically allow for kidney paired donations that the practice became popular. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), illegal organ trade occurs when organs are removed from the body for the purpose of commercial transactions.[24] Despite ordinances against organ sales, this practice persists, with studies estimating that anywhere from 5% to 42% of transplanted organs are illicitly purchased.[25][26][27] Research indicates that illegal organ trade is on the rise, with a recent report by Global Financial Integrity estimating that the illegal organ trade generates profits between $600 million and $1.2 billion per year, with a span over many countries. These countries include, but are not limited to: Criminal networks increasingly engage in kidnappings, especially of children and teenagers, who are then taken to locations with medical equipment. There they are murdered and their organs harvested for the illegal organ trade.[48]Poverty and loopholes in legislation also contribute to the illegal trade of organs.[49] Though claims of organ trafficking are difficult to substantiate due to lack of evidence and reliable data, cases of illegal organ trade have been tried and prosecuted. The persons and entities prosecuted have included criminal gangs,[45][50] hospitals,[51] third-party organ brokers,[52] nephrologists,[12] and individuals attempting to sell their own organs.[53] The United Network for Organ Sharing defines transplant tourism as "the purchase of a transplant organs abroad that includes access to an organ while bypassing laws, rules, or processes of any or all countries involved".[54] The term "transplant tourism" describes the commercialism that drives illegal organ trade, but not all medical tourism for organs is illegal. For example, in some cases, both the donor and the recipient of the organ travel to a country with adequate facilities to perform a legal surgery. In other cases, a recipient travels to receive the organ of a relative living abroad.[54] Transplant tourism raises concerns because it involves the transfer of healthy organs in one direction, depleting the regions where organs are bought. This transfer typically occurs in trends: from South to North, from developing to developed nations, from females to males, and from people of color to whites.[12] In 2007, for example, 2,500 kidneys were purchased in Pakistan, with foreign recipients making up two-thirds of the buyers.[24] In the same year, in Canada and the United Kingdom, experts estimated that about 30 to 50 of their transplant patients illegally purchased organs abroad.[25] The kidney is the most commonly sought-after organ in transplant tourism, with prices for the organ ranging from as little as $1,300[12] to as much as $150,000.[54] Reports estimate that 75% of all illegal organ trading involves kidneys.[55] The liver trade is also prominent in transplant tourism, with prices ranging from $4,000[56] to $157,000.[2] Though livers are regenerative, making liver donations non-fatal, they are much less common due to an excruciating post-operative recovery period that deters donors. Other high-priced body parts commonly sold include corneas ($24,400) and unfertilized eggs ($12,400), while lower-priced bodily commodities include blood ($25–337), skin ($10 per square inch), and bones/ligaments ($5,465).[2] While there is a high demand, and correspondingly a very high price, for vital organs such as hearts and lungs, transplant tourism and organ trafficking of these parts is very rare due to the sophisticated nature of the transplant surgery and the state-of-the-art facilities required for such transplants.[2] The international community has issued many ordinances and declarations against the organ trade. Examples include the World Medical Authority's 1985 denouncement of organs for commercial use; the Council of Europe's Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine of 1997 and its 2002 Optional Protocol Concerning Transplantation of Organs and Tissues of Human Origin; and the Declaration of Istanbul on organ trafficking and transplant tourism.[57] The Declaration of Istanbul defines transplant commercialism, organ trafficking, and transplant tourism.[31] It condemns these practices based on violations to equity, justice, and human dignity.[26] The declaration aims to promote ethical practices in organ transplantation and donation on an international level.[31] It is nonbinding, but over 100 transplant organizations support its principles, including countries such as China, Israel, the Philippines, and Pakistan, which strengthened their laws against illegal organ trading after the declaration's release.[31] The World Health Organization (WHO) has also played a prominent role in condemning the illegal organ trade. The WHO first declared organ trade illegal in 1987, stating that such a trade violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[31] It also condemns the practice on the grounds that it "is likely to take unfair advantage of the poorest and most vulnerable groups, undermines altruistic donation and leads to profiteering and human trafficking."[31] In 1991, at the 44th World Health Assembly, it approved nine guiding principles for human organ transplant. The principles clearly stated that organs cannot be the subject of financial transactions. On May 22, 2004, these guidelines were slightly amended at the 57th World Health Assembly. They are intended for the use of governments worldwide.[24] These global initiatives have served as a helpful resource for establishing medical professional codes and a legal framework for the issue, but have not provided the sanctions required for enforcement.[54] Since the late 1980s, China relied on executed prisoners to provide the bulk of its transplanted organs.[58] This ready source of organs made it second only to the United States for numbers of transplantations performed.[59] There is evidence that the government attempted to downplay the scope of organ harvesting through confidentiality agreements[60] and laws, such as the Temporary Rules Concerning the Utilization of Corpses or Organs from the Corpses of Executed Prisoners.[61] Critics further allege that organs were not distributed on the basis of need, but rather allocated through a corrupt system or simply sold to wealthy Chinese and foreign individuals.[59] One source estimates that China executed at least 4,000 prisoners in 2006 to supply approximately 8,000 kidneys and 3,000 livers for foreign buyers.[26] China was also accused of fueling its transplant industry with organs harvested from living Falun Gong practitioners. The Kilgour–Matas report[62] concluded that China was guilty of this practice; however, the report has come under criticism for its methodology, by both Chinese and Western sources.[59][63] In the 2000s, the country came under increasing international and domestic pressure to end the practice of using organs from prisoners. Since then, it has implemented a number of reforms addressing these allegations. It has developed a registry of voluntary, non-incarcerated donors; it is believed that these living and deceased donors supply most of the organs transplanted in the country today.[59] China also standardized its organ collection process, specifying which hospitals can perform operations and establishing the legal definition of brain death. In 2007, China banned foreign transplant patients and formally outlawed the sale of organs and collecting a person's organs without their consent.[64][54][65] Many non-profit organizations and international jurists are skeptical that China has truly reformed its organ transplant industry.[66] In particular, although the number of organs taken from prisoners has dropped dramatically, there is no prohibition on collecting organs from deceased inmates who sign agreements purporting to donate their organs. There continue to be reports of prison officials offering death row inmates the opportunity to "voluntarily" donate their organs upon death, with the implication that those who decline may get worse treatment from their jailers.[59] Before 1994, India had no legislation banning the sale of organs.[67] Low costs and high availability brought in business from around the globe, and transformed India into one of the largest kidney transplant centers in the world.[68] However, several problems began to surface. Patients were often promised payments that were much higher than what they actually received.[69] Other patients reported that their kidneys were removed without their consent after they underwent procedures for other reasons.[70] In 1994, the country passed the Transplantation of Human Organs Act (THOA), banning commerce in organs and promoting posthumous donation of organs.[71] The law's primary mechanism for preventing the sale of organs was to restrict who could donate a kidney to another person. In particular, the THOA bars strangers from donating to one another; a person can only donate to a relative, spouse, or someone bound by "affection". In practice, though, people evade the law's restrictions to continue the trade in organs. Often, claims of "affection" are unfounded and the organ donor has no connection to the recipient.[57] In many cases, the donor may not be Indian or even speak the same language as the recipient.[72] There have also been reports of the donor marrying the recipient to circumvent THOA's prohibition.[73] Although the sale of organs was not legal in the Philippines, prior to 2008 the practice was tolerated and even endorsed by the government.[74] The Philippine Information Agency, a branch of the government, even promoted "all-inclusive" kidney transplant packages that retailed for roughly $25,000. The donors themselves often received as little as $2,000 for their kidneys.[74] The country was a popular destination for transplant tourism. One high-ranking government official estimated that 800 kidneys were sold annually in the country prior to 2008,[75] and the WHO listed it as one of the top five sites for transplant tourists in 2005.[46] In March 2008, the government passed new legislation enforcing the ban on organ sales. After the crackdown on the practice, the number of transplants has decreased from 1,046 in 2007 to 511 in 2010.[76] Since then, the government has taken a much more active stance against transplant tourism. On September 21, 2021, 92 Republican members of the U.S. Senate and House asked the heads of multiple federal agencies to investigate organ harvesting for research purposes. The letter stated, "We are alarmed by public records obtained from the National Institutes of Heath (NIH) which show that the University of Pittsburgh (Pitt) may have violated federal law by altering abortion procedures to harvest organs from babies who were old enough to live outside the womb."[77] However, PolitiFact reported several months earlier that "There is no indication that the fetal tissues used in the [University of Pittsburgh] experiments were 'purchased'," suggesting that the congress members' later description of this research as involving organ harvesting was inaccurate.[78] Data from the World Health Organization indicates that donors in the illegal organ trade are predominantly impoverished people in developing nations. In one study of organ donors in India, for example, 71% of all donors fell below the poverty line.[25] Poor people (including poor migrants) are more likely to fall victim of organ theft. Accounts of this practice usually characterize the victims as unemployed individuals (often but not always men) between the ages of 20 and 40 who were seeking work and were taken out of the country for operations.[24] Poor people are also more likely to volunteer to sell their organs. One of the primary reasons donors articulate for why they sell their organs is to pay off debt.[24] Migrants for instance may use the money to pay off human traffickers. The most impoverished are frequently viewed as more reliable targets for transplant tourists because they are the most in need of money. While some supporters of the organ trade argue that it helps lift some people out of poverty by providing compensation to donors, evidence of this claim is hotly debated.[10] In many cases, people who sell their organs in order to pay off debt do not manage to escape this debt and remain trapped in debt cycles.[79][80] Often, people feel like they have no choice but to donate their kidneys due to extreme poverty.[80][81] In some cases, organs are sold to family members, either from parents to offspring, or from adult children to parents. This is more frequent in nations where waitlists are less formal, and among families which cannot afford to leave the country for transplants. Reports by the World Health Organization show decreased health and economic well-being for those who donate organs through transplant tourism. In Iran (where organ sales are legal), 58% of donors reported negative health consequences. In Egypt, as many as 78% of donors experienced negative health outcomes, and 96% of donors stated that they regretted donating.[25] These findings are relatively consistent across all countries: those who sell their organs on the market tend to have poorer overall health. Substandard conditions during transplant surgeries can also lead to transmission of diseases like hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and HIV. Donors' poor health is further exacerbated by depression and other mental illnesses brought on by the stress of donating and insufficient care after surgery.[24][54] Impoverished donors' economic outcomes are no better than their health outcomes. A study of Indian donors found that while 96% of donors sold a kidney to pay off debts, 75% still required operative care that is not provided by the buyer.[74] Donors in all countries often report weakness after surgery that leads to decreased employment opportunities, especially for those who make a living through physical labor.[74] Though many statutes regarding organ trade exist, law officials have failed to enforce these mandates successfully. One barrier to enforcement is a lack of communication between medical authorities and law enforcement agencies. Often, enforcement officials' access to information regarding individuals involved in illegal organ transplants is hindered by medical confidentiality regulations. Without the ability to review medical records and histories to build an effective case against perpetrators, officials cannot fully enforce organ trade laws.[27] Many critics state that in order to prohibit illegal organ trading effectively, criminal justice agencies must collaborate with medical authorities to strengthen knowledge and enforcement of organ trade laws. Critics also support other criminal justice actions to meet this goal, such as prioritizing organ trafficking issues among local legislative bodies; multidisciplinary collaboration in cross-border offenses; and further police training in dealing with organ trafficking crimes.[31] There have been various portrayals of illegal organ trade and organ trafficking in the mass media over the past few decades. Many, such as the 1993 book The Baby Train by Jan Brunvand, are variations of the urban legend of an individual who wakes up in a hotel bathtub to discover that one of his or her kidneys has been removed.[27] The 1977 novel Coma by Robin Cook, made into a movie by Michael Crichton, tells of unsuspecting medical patients who are put into a coma in order for their organs to be removed. In addition to books and films, stories of organ trafficking are often depicted through television, tabloid magazines, emails, and the Internet.[82][83] Many of the organ trafficking tales depicted in the media contain unsubstantiated claims. For example, the 1993 British/Canadian TV program The Body Parts Business made a number of claims about organ trafficking that later proved to be false. The program investigated alleged organ and tissue trafficking in Guatemala, Honduras, Argentina, and Russia. One episode discussed a man named Pedro Reggi, reporting that his corneas had been removed without his consent while he was hospitalized in a mental facility. Reggi later disputed this claim, saying that his corneas were still intact, and he had just been suffering from an acute eye infection.[82] Critics, such as Silke Meyer, argue that this sensationalized view of organ trafficking, often based in urban myth, distracts attention from the illegal organ trade. They call for increased scientific research on illegal organ trade, so that organ trafficking legends can be replaced by scientific fact. Meyer argues: "Only then will [organ trafficking] be taken seriously by all governments affected and will the results constitute a solid ground for the field of policy-making."[27] Various solutions have been proposed to staunch the flow of illegal organs around the globe. The primary strategy is to increase the supply of legally donated organs, thereby decreasing the demand that drives the illicit organ trade. One way to accomplish this goal is for states to implement policies of presumed consent.[61] With presumed consent laws (also known as "opt out" laws), consent for organ donation is assumed upon death unless the individual previously "opted out" by submitting documentation. This is in contrast to "opt-in" organ donation policies, which assume that a deceased person would not have wished to donate unless they had previously notified the government of their intention to donate. Presumed consent policies have already been adopted in various countries, including Brazil, certain jurisdictions of the United States, and several European nations. Research shows a 25–30% increase in the amount of available organs in "opt-out" countries.[24] Another proposed method is to enact laws that would hold doctors accountable for not reporting suspected organ trafficking. Scheper-Hughes has written extensively on the issue of doctors knowingly performing illegal operations with illicit organs.[12] She argues that though doctors might be violating doctor-patient privilege by reporting suspected organ trafficking, their legal obligation to the patient is superseded by public interest in ending medical violations of human rights. If accountability measures were imposed, doctors would be liable as accomplices if they knowingly performed operations with black market organs.[61] Personal health records for migrants can help to document information on detected missing organs, and even previously done surgeries. Some projects have been started to keep personal health records of immigrants.[84] Detection of missing organs and associated surgeries is an important first step to detect illicit organ harvesting. Many people in the United States believe that adopting a system for regulating organ trading similar to Iran's will help to decrease the national shortage of kidneys. They argue that the U.S. could adopt similar policies to promote accountability, ensure safety in surgical practices, employ vendor registries, and provide donors with lifetime care. They further argue that private insurance companies and the federal government would be invested in providing such care for donors, and that laws could be enacted to make long-term care an inviolable condition of any donation agreement.[10] The ethical debate of organ trade rests on whether or not people have an inherent right to sell their own organs and, if so, whether or not the potential harms of organ sales override that right.[85][86] While in most democratic countries, there is an implied ethical right to what happens to your body, in the US this right was dictated by the Scheloendorff decision through the court's opinion by Justice Benjamin Cardozo, "Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with her own body"[87] However, this autonomy is limited in organ trade as governments and some ethicist argue the potential harm of organ trade outweighs the rights of an individual. The closest legalized comparison of a right to bodily autonomy for financial gain would be prostitution.[87] Currently 32 countries allow prostitution; none of them allow for the sale of an organ.[88] Views on legalization of prostitution have often viewed it as a "necessary evil" and of prostitution can be legalized as long as the sex worker's human rights such as freedom of speech, travel, work, immigration, health insurance, and housing, are not deprived.[89] Similarly, many argue that as long as the donors rights are respected and the trade is regulated, it would be ethically responsible for organ trade to exist.[90] Organ trade also raises ethical and legal concerns for healthcare providers towards the treatment of patient. Specifically, currently there is little to no guidance on how does the doctor–patient relationship change if the patient received an organ through illegal means.[91] Further more, if organ trade is legalized, an obligation for a physician to respect the patients wish to sell an organ. In the US, there is controversy on whether organ donation wishes are legally enforceable.[92] The primary law governing organ donation is the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (UAGA). However, it is widely considered inadequate as it is up to each state to regulate and uphold this law, with enforcement varying between states for cadaver body donation. Further more, donor shortages still persists in the United States.[93] To avoid lawsuits, providers would violate UAGA and side with the next of kin and ignore any preexisting organ donation requests.[85][92] As such, if organ trade is legalized, there will need to be ethical consideration on if a physician has a duty to perform financially motivated organ transplants. The main argument made in favor of legalized organ sales is that it would increase the number of organs available for transplantation.[94] Although governments have implemented other initiatives to increase organ donation – such as public awareness campaigns, presumed consent laws, and the legal definition of brain death – the waitlist for vital organs continues to grow. Further more, cadaver organ transplantations have poorer clinical outcomes as compared with live organ donations.[95] Legalizing payments for organs would encourage more people to donate their organs. Each organ sold on a market could potentially save the life (and improve the quality of life) of its recipient.[96] For example, patients with kidney disease who receive a kidney transplant from a living donor typically live 7 to 15 years longer than those who depend on dialysis.[95] Economists generally lean in favor of legalizing organ markets. The consensus of American Economic Association members is that organ trade should be allowed, with 70% in favor and 16% opposed.[97] Another literature review, looking at the publications of 72 economic researchers who have studied organ trade, reached a similar conclusion: 68% supported legalization of the organ trade, while only 21% opposed it.[98] Proponents also assert that organ sales ought to be legal because the procedure is relatively safe for donors.[99] The short-term risk of donation is low – patients have a mortality rate of 0.03%,[100] similar to that of certain elective cosmetic procedures such as liposuction.[101] Moreover, they argue, the long-term risks are also relatively minimal. A 2018 systematic review found that kidney donors did not die earlier than non-donors.[102] Donors did have a slightly increased risk of chronic kidney disease and pre-eclampsia (a condition sometimes seen in pregnancy). The review found no difference in the rates of diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, or mental illness. Multiple studies of American and Japanese donors found that they reported a higher quality of life than the average non-donor.[100] Proponents of organ markets argue that, given the comparative safety of donating a kidney, individuals should be permitted to undergo this operation in exchange for payment. Critics challenge this view of transplantation as being overly optimistic. Specifically, they cite research suggesting that individuals who sell their organs fare worse after the procedure than those who freely donate their organs. Kidney sellers are more likely to have renal problems after the operation (such as hypertension and chronic kidney disease), to report reduced overall health, and to suffer from psychological side effects such as depression.[103] Opponents of markets usually ascribe these worse outcomes to the fact that kidney sellers are drawn from the ranks of the poor; if organ sales are permitted, most sellers will be poor and can expect the same dangerous consequences. Proponents of organ markets respond by blaming these bad outcomes on the fact that kidney sellers have been forced into the black market, with minimal oversight, follow-up care, or legal protections from abuse; thus in a regulated market in the developed world, kidney sellers could expect to see outcomes more akin to those of kidney donors Many proponents argue for legalized organ sales on the grounds of autonomy. Individuals are generally free to buy or sell their possessions and their labor. Advocates of organ markets say that, likewise, people ought to be free to buy or sell organs as well.[104] According to this perspective, prohibitions against selling organs are a paternalistic or moralistic intrusion upon individuals' freedom. Proponents acknowledge that, unlike selling a material possession such as a car, selling a kidney does carry some risk of harm. However, they note that people are able to undertake dangerous occupations (such as logging, soldiering, or surrogacy) which carry significant chance of bodily harm.[105] If individuals are allowed to take on that risk in exchange for money, then they ought to be able to take on the risks of selling a kidney as well. Other physicians and philosophers argue that legalization will remedy the abuses of the illicit trade in organs.[106][107] The current ban on the sale of organs has driven both sellers and buyers into the black market, out of sight of the law.[108] Criminal middlemen often take a large cut of the payment for the organ, leaving comparatively little money left for the donor.[109] Because the mainstream medical establishment is barred from participating in the transplantation, the procedure typically occurs in substandard facilities and not according to best practices.[110] Afterwards, the donors often do not receive important medical follow-up because they are afraid that their role in the crime will be discovered. There have also been reports of criminal gangs kidnapping people and illegally harvesting their organs for sale on the black market.[109] Proponents of legalization argue that it will result in better medical care for donors and recipients alike, as well as larger payments to the donors. Some critics challenge the proponents' assumptions that legalization will eliminate the black market for organs or its problems. For example, one scholar argues that once the organ trade became legalized in Iran, it did not end the under-the-table sales in organs.[111] Instead, people made deals outside the government-sanctioned system to acquire organs from more desirable (i.e., healthier) donors. Critics often argue that organ sales should remain prohibited because any market solution will take advantage of the poor. Specifically, they fear that a large financial incentive for donating organs will prove irresistible to individuals in extreme poverty: such individuals may feel like they have no choice but to agree to sell a kidney. Under these circumstances, the decision to sell cannot be regarded as truly voluntary.[112] Consequently, it is appropriate for the government to protect poor people by prohibiting the sale of organs. Critics of legalization argue that proponents exaggerate the impact that a market would have on the supply of organs. In particular, they note that legalized organ sales may “crowd out” altruistic donations.[113] In other words, people who would otherwise give their organs to relatives may decline to do so, opting instead to purchase the organ (or rely on the government to buy one) for their relatives. Proponents of markets counter that while altruistic donations might decrease slightly if organ sales were legalized, this decrease would be more than offset by the influx of organs. Legalization of human organ trading has been opposed by a variety of human rights groups. One such group is Organs Watch, which was established by Nancy Scheper-Hughes – a medical anthropologist who was instrumental in exposing illegal international organ-selling rings. Scheper-Hughes is famous for her investigations, which have led to several arrests due to people from developing countries being forced or fooled into organ donations.[114] Like the World Health Organization, Organs Watch seeks to protect and benefit the poverty-stricken individuals who participate in the illegal organ trade out of necessity.[115] Some opponents of markets adopt a paternalistic stance that prohibits organ sales on the grounds that the government has a duty to prevent harm to its citizens. Unlike the "coercion by poverty" line of argumentation discussed above, these critics do not necessarily question the validity of the donors' consent. Rather, they say that the dangers posed by donating an organ are too great to allow a person to voluntarily undertake them in exchange for money. As noted previously, critics of organ sales cite research suggesting that kidney sellers suffer serious consequences of the operation, faring far worse than altruistic kidney donors. Even if one assumes that kidney sellers will have similar outcomes to donors in a regulated market, one cannot ignore the fact that a nephrectomy is an invasive procedure that – by definition – inflicts some injury upon the patient.[116] These critics argue that the government has a duty to prevent these harms, even if the would-be seller is willing to undertake them. A similar argument focuses on the fact that selling a kidney involves the loss of something unique and essentially irreplaceable on the part of the donor.[117] Given the special value placed on bodily integrity in society, it is appropriate to outlaw the sale of body parts to protect that value. Another criticism of legalized organ sales is that it objectifies human beings. This argument typically starts with the Kantian assumption that every human being is a creature of innate dignity, who must always be regarded as an end to itself and never just a means to an end. A market for organs would reduce body parts to commodities to be bought and sold. Critics argue that, by permitting such transactions, society would reduce the seller of the organ to an object of commerce – a mere means to an ends.[118] Assigning a monetary value to a key organ is essentially assigning a value to its bearer, and putting a price on a human being violates his or her intrinsic dignity. Proponents of organ sales claim that this line of argument confuses the kidney with the whole person;[119] so long as the transaction is conducted in a way that minimizes risks to the donor and fairly compensates him or her, that person is not reduced to a means to an end. Another argument against organ markets is that they will give rise to a pressure to sell organs which would harm all people (even those who did not participate directly in the market).[120] Under the current ban on the organ trade, debtors and heads of families in the developed world face little pressure to sell their organs. If a person's creditors or dependents suggest that said person sell their kidney to raise money, they could refuse on the grounds that it is illegal. In contrast, if organ sales were legalized, a destitute individual could face pressure from family and creditors to sell a kidney – and possibly endure social consequences such as scorn or guilt if they declined. Legalizing organ sales would create this unwanted pressure (and attendant disapproval) for all poor individuals, regardless of whether or not they wished to sell their kidneys. Thus a legal prohibition on selling organs is warranted to protect poor people from this undesirable pressure. Ethicists Charles A. Erin and John Harris have proposed a much more heavily regulated model for organ transactions.[121] Under this scheme, would-be sellers of organs do not contract with would-be recipients. Instead, a government agency would be the sole buyer of organs, paying a standard price set by law and then distributing the organs to its citizens. This safeguard is designed to prevent unscrupulous buyers from taking advantage of potential donors and to ensure that the benefits of the increased organ supply are not limited to the rich. Moreover, participation in the market would be confined to citizens of the state where the market is located, to prevent the unilateral movement of organs from developing nations to the developed world. Erin and Harris's model has been endorsed by a number of prominent advocates of organ markets.[122][123] Many scholars advocate the implementation of a free market system to combat the organ shortage that helps drive illegal organ trade.[124] The organ trade's illegal status creates a price ceiling for organs at zero dollars. This price ceiling affects supply and demand, creating a shortage of organs in the face of a growing demand.[125][126] According to a report published by the Cato Institute, a US-based libertarian think tank, eliminating the price ceiling would eliminate the organ shortage.[10] In the Journal of Economic Perspectives, Nobel laureate Gary Becker and Julio Elias estimated that a $15,000 compensation would provide enough kidneys for everyone on the wait list. The government could pay the compensation to guarantee equality. This would save public money, as dialysis for kidney failure patients is far more expensive.[8] However, other critics argue that such a free market system for organ trade would encourage organ theft through murder and neglect of sick individuals for financial gain. Advocates for the free market of organs counter these claims by saying that murder for financial gain already happens; sanctions against such acts exist to minimize their occurrence; and with proper regulation and law enforcement, such incidents in a legal organ trade could be minimized as well.[124] The incentivized Kidney Donation Model (IKDM) exists as an intermediate between complete Free Market Model and Erin Harris Model, with strong government regulation and rewards with free market approach to donations.[127] Currently in place in Turkey, Iran, in which a free organ market exists which "donations" between donor and recipients are allowed. However, the government also supplements this donation with incentives such as free/discounted medical health insurance, exemptions from co payments/contribution shares, priority when receiving an organ in the future, priority when finding a job, income tax exemptions for salaried employees, and free or discounted public utilities. The American death metal band Cannibal Corpse released a song in 2021 titled "Inhumane Harvest", which has lyrical content about organ harvesting. The song was also released with a music video. The 1994 video game Policenauts revolves around an illegal drug and organ trafficking ring in outer space, which is run cooperatively by a multinational pharmaceutical corporation and corrupt police officers. The 2006 horror film Turistas focuses on a group of American tourists in Brazil who find themselves in the clutches of an underground organ harvesting ring.	Critics often argue that organ sales should remain prohibited because any market solution will take advantage of the poor. Specifically, they fear that a large financial incentive for donating organs will prove irresistible to individuals in extreme poverty: such individuals may feel like they have no choice but to agree to sell a kidney. Under these circumstances, the decision to sell cannot be regarded as truly voluntary.[112] Consequently, it is appropriate for the government to protect poor people by prohibiting the sale of organs. Critics of legalization argue that proponents exaggerate the impact that a market would have on the supply of organs. In particular, they note that legalized organ sales may “crowd out” altruistic donations.[113] In other words, people who would otherwise give their organs to relatives may decline to do so, opting instead to purchase the organ (or rely on the government to buy one) for their relatives. Proponents of markets counter that while altruistic donations might decrease slightly if organ sales were legalized, this decrease would be more than offset by the influx of organs. Legalization of human organ trading has been opposed by a variety of human rights groups. One such group is Organs Watch, which was established by Nancy Scheper-Hughes – a medical anthropologist who was instrumental in exposing illegal international organ-selling rings. Scheper-Hughes is famous for her investigations, which have led to several arrests due to people from developing countries being forced or fooled into organ donations.[114] Like the World Health Organization, Organs Watch seeks to protect and benefit the poverty-stricken individuals who participate in the illegal organ trade out of necessity.[115] Some opponents of markets adopt a paternalistic stance that prohibits organ sales on the grounds that the government has a duty to prevent harm to its citizens.	no
Bioethics	Should organ selling be legalized?	yes_statement	"organ" "selling" should be "legalized". legalizing "organ" "selling" is necessary	https://bpr.berkeley.edu/2018/05/03/legalizing-trafficking-irans-unjust-organ-market-and-why-legal-selling-of-organs-should-not-be-the-resolve/	Legalizing Trafficking: Iran's Unjust Organ Market and Why Legal ...	“The school boards are the key that picks the lock,” said former Trump advisor Steve... Legalizing Trafficking: Iran’s Unjust Organ Market and Why Legal Selling of Organs Should Not be The Resolve By Madhumitha Krishnan on May 3, 2018 Celeste Lee has been patiently waiting for a kidney for over 20 years. She was just 17 when an autoimmune disease wrecked her kidney Function, and since then has been relying on a transplanted kidney to keep her alive. Celeste’s story is not uncommon. Around 4,500 people die annually waiting for a kidney transplant. Along with stem cell research, a proposed method to curb the deficiency of organs has been the selling of kidneys. Sally Satel, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and psychiatrist at Yale School of Medicine, argues that “altruism is not enough.” She states, “We need to give more healthy young and middle-aged people a reason to become living donors.” The commodification of organs will certainly reduce the transplant waiting list and save thousands of lives in the process. However, Satel, along with many proponents of “organ selling”, are quick to brush off the negative consequences that arise. Tactfully, they use a purely utilitarian argument and defend bodily autonomy, claiming that by inhibiting this process we are removing people of agency and are allowing for deaths from lack of donations to continue. What is not addressed is the system this creates for the poor. To gain better insight on what this can do to our society, I look at Iran, the only country which has legalized the selling of organs. I argue that there are far more ethical approaches to dealing with the organ shortage. This includes implementing an opt-out system, mitigating disincentives for kidney donors, and providing non-monetary incentives for donors. Iran: A Case Study Since 1999, Iran has created a program where “A government foundation registers buyers and sellers, matches them up and sets a fixed price of $4,600.” This is a very rosy construction. Firstly, while it sounds like a system of equity, about 70% of Iranian vendors are classified as “poor.” Saeed Daeghan stated that it has created a system where “poor Iranians compete to sell their organs”, and ultimately, this has made Iran more like a “kidney market.” Furthermore, it seems that organ selling is not even instrumental for the advancement of the poor. As stated by Francis Delmonico, the medical director of the New England Organ Bank, “The experience in Iran is that the poor remain poor following a vendor sale, and then with one less kidney.” The Iran case study also shows how exploitation is inevitable. Transplant kidneys for foreigners are by law, outlawed. Yet, this nurse, from Namazi Hospitals (the largest transplant center in Iran for kidneys) says rich Saudi patients come often in the summer where “transplant tourism is very common.” There is also little conclusive evidence that the black market has been eradicated, or even diminished. Nancy Scheper-Hughes, professor of medical anthropology at UC Berkeley and director of Organ Watch, states that “regulation in Iran has not ended the black market, it has simply made it an official policy.” In other words, living donors are still recruited by middlemen to negotiate prices.The government is not, in many cases, the justful arbiter in prices it claims to be. It is still common that donors sell to private entities who provide organs for patients that don’t meet Iran’s standards. Dr. Delmonico mentions that “market forces…determine the under the table price.” It’s also disputable if the Iranian government has, effectively, eliminated their waiting lists for kidneys as they claim. For instance, Dr. Heideri Rouchi claims that the waiting list for cadavers is around 300. While Iran and the United States are different in nature, it is likely that analogous problems would be present wherever such a system is implemented. Dr. Kernstein from Princeton states, “There is little respect for the dignity and little respect for the poor.” A free market of organ sale “would inevitably transfer health from the poor to the rich.” Kernstein states that this entire argument can be boiled down to a value judgment: “whether or not the injustice it causes is validated by the lives it would save and a person’s right to their body.” The Selling of Organs is Unjust The World Trade Organization and the UN have both denounced organ selling as unjust. Legalizing the sale of organs would normalize a system where the poor will be expected to sell their organs. For some individuals, it is probably an acceptable alternative to working long days in a coal mine, harming one’s health and making very little. It could be that a poor man wanting to feed his family will not care much for the ethical dimensions of this debate- he will do what he wants to do, and will greatly benefit from this. It is likely that plenty of individuals will benefit from organ selling, but just as many will be subject to a system where worth is derived from body parts rather than being human. The consequences of commodification are multidimensional. In the long run, such a system further entrenches the divide between the rich and the poor. This is ultimately detrimental to both our society and our democracy. This would just be a greater, more insidious manifestation of economic inequality. And as economic inequality becomes more salient, it becomes likely that people will resort to violent and undemocratic methods to affect change. Furthermore, normalizing organ selling normalizes injustice. If we’re assuming that all people in the United States are equal, a system of organ selling might be acceptable. But the United States is riddled with inequalities. We cannot forget the traces of institutional racism that already exist: So is it that poorer folks, a substantial amount African-Americans, will be expected to provide organs for the White middle class? Is it to say the price of living in the United States as an undocumented immigrant, a refugee, a single mother, is the selling of body parts? Any kidney that is sold in the United States will be sold on a free market, unlike Iran which operates on a command economy. Thus remains the question: if we are to place organs on the free market, then how is it that poorer individuals, when needing transplants, will be able to afford one themselves? According to the American Society of Transplantation, “many transplants fail due to the inability to afford…aspects of essential medical care.” Currently, while hospital fees may be large, the donor system ensures that prices for organ stay low. If we are to legalize commodification, there is no guarantee that supply will meet the demand, the impetus which lowers prices. When looking at an analogous situation, the legalization of prostitution, it becomes clear that the assumption that supply will meet demand is wrong. If supply doesn’t, then the prices of organs will be astronomically high, perhaps even leading to a greater use of illegal organ trafficking.When human lives are dependent on the whims of the market, there is no guarantee that someone who had sold their organ will be able to afford one in the future. The proposed “utilitarian” argument in favor of organ commodification is very shortsighted. It’s proponents tend to fail in recognizing the far-ranging effects beyond the vendor-buyer relationship- and it seems extremely plausible that, when considering all the nuances and potential misuse, negative utility will result. Similarly, the bodily autonomy argument put forth fails to recognize the very different realities different groups face. It assumes that each individual is given the same amount of control over their bodies, whereas bodies are subject to various societal pressures. A homeless single mother might be coerced by her circumstances to a far greater degree than a college student who wants to take a gap year. When such a system will clearly place a burden on the poor, and the expectation becomes for one to either sell their organ or starve, bodily autonomy and choice is diminished. Any action made in that situation will not be made out of considerable volition. What Can be Done? Before even considering such drastic measures, we should first attempt to correct the system at hand. A commonly proposed alternative has been the opt-out system, where everyone is already included as an organ donor if organs are viable after death. In opt-out countries, such as Austria, more than 90% of people donate their organs. In contrast, in the United States, fewer than 15% of individuals donate their organs. It is plausible that implementing an opt-out system itself could remedy the current organ shortage. The opt-out system would be most effective in conjecture with other methods. There are a lot of disincentives to donating organs- particularly the time and money it takes for the actual surgery and recovery. The effort involved with donating kidneys easily dismays many people. So, I propose we begin with mitigating these disincentives by having the government, NGO, or the family of a potential match cover these losses. All fees for transportation, work leave, and recovery should be covered. Non-monetary incentives should also be utilized. Organ donors should be met with the same honors that a veteran is, with recognition in the community and by notable politicians and individuals. We can provide awards and valorize their service, and make being an organ donor an honorable. I worry that legalizing such a system, while providing immediate short-term returns, will, in the long run, be detrimental to our Democracy, to our healthcare system, to our people, and to global order. The United States still maintains a position among the world’s global powers. Once we legalize organ selling, countries with far less accountability will see also this as an option. The United States does not exist in a vacuum, nor is any policy that is implemented revoked without considerable harm. Organs cannot be returned. It is critical that we address the organ shortage, but slight adjustments to the current system should be our first and main priority. Featured Image Source: https://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/we-should-legalize-market-human-organs	The Selling of Organs is Unjust The World Trade Organization and the UN have both denounced organ selling as unjust. Legalizing the sale of organs would normalize a system where the poor will be expected to sell their organs. For some individuals, it is probably an acceptable alternative to working long days in a coal mine, harming one’s health and making very little. It could be that a poor man wanting to feed his family will not care much for the ethical dimensions of this debate- he will do what he wants to do, and will greatly benefit from this. It is likely that plenty of individuals will benefit from organ selling, but just as many will be subject to a system where worth is derived from body parts rather than being human. The consequences of commodification are multidimensional. In the long run, such a system further entrenches the divide between the rich and the poor. This is ultimately detrimental to both our society and our democracy. This would just be a greater, more insidious manifestation of economic inequality. And as economic inequality becomes more salient, it becomes likely that people will resort to violent and undemocratic methods to affect change. Furthermore, normalizing organ selling normalizes injustice. If we’re assuming that all people in the United States are equal, a system of organ selling might be acceptable. But the United States is riddled with inequalities. We cannot forget the traces of institutional racism that already exist: So is it that poorer folks, a substantial amount African-Americans, will be expected to provide organs for the White middle class? Is it to say the price of living in the United States as an undocumented immigrant, a refugee, a single mother, is the selling of body parts? Any kidney that is sold in the United States will be sold on a free market, unlike Iran which operates on a command economy. Thus remains the question: if we are to place organs on the free market, then how is it that poorer individuals, when needing transplants, will be able to afford one themselves?	no
Bioethics	Should organ selling be legalized?	yes_statement	"organ" "selling" should be "legalized". legalizing "organ" "selling" is necessary	https://blog.spcollege.edu/public-safety-policy-legal-studies-educational-information/ethical-discussions-legalizing-the-sale-of-kidneys/	Ethical Discussions: Legalizing the sale of kidneys - Public Safety ...	Ethical Discussions: Legalizing the sale of kidneys The need for kidney transplants has been steadily growing in recent years. In the United States as well as many other countries, the need for kidney transplants is far greater than available donors. According to an article in the New York Times, in 2013 there were approximately 16,900 kidney transplants. However, this past September there were more than 100,000 patients who needed a kidney transplant. On average, in the United States, the waiting time for a kidney is close to 5 years. Over 4,000 people a year die waiting for a kidney transplant. An article in the Wall Street Journal, written last year by a Nobel Prize winning professor of economics at the University of Chicago and another economics professor at the Universidad del CEMA in Argentina, discussed the need for kidney transplants and suggested that the solution to the current kidney shortage was to establish a market for organs. The authors estimated that the kidney shortage might be resolved by setting up a system by which individuals would receive an average payment of $15,000 to donate a kidney. Currently, the only country in which it is legal to sell a kidney is Iran. A few years ago, a British academic created a stir when she suggested the idea that college students should be allowed to sell a kidney if they wished to do so, and that this could help the kidney shortage problem as well as enable college students to gain money to pay off debt. She stated that college students should be paid a set amount, around £28,000, to donate a kidney. That amount is equal to the average annual income in the United Kingdom. Is it ethical to set up a system by which people can donate a kidney for money? Does this commodify the human body? Does this exploit people who are economically disadvantaged, or does it simply create an opportunity for them to make the decision to sell a kidney? 33 thoughts on “Ethical Discussions: Legalizing the sale of kidneys” I don’t believe there is that much difference between this and organ donation. Money being exchanged instead of a donation. It is the choice of the individual. Agreed it is sort of a macabre scenario, but if the individual wants to risk the loss of a kidney then that is his/her decision. Whenever money enters the equation it seems that is all that is focused on. I believe setting up a kidney market would be more beneficial than not. A friend of mine’s father is a transplant surgeon, specifically in the abdominal organs. He explained to me how the demand for kidney transplants are so high, but their demands cannot fully be met, as the process for finding a suitable kidney (and donor) is a long and meticulous process. Surrogate mothers, as well as Sperm and egg banks are widely used, with the same concept: giving a part of or using your body for a large sum of money. While giving up a kidney IS more dangerous than giving up reproductive cells, it is possible to function safely with only one kidney. However, there should be restrictions and requirements in the market. Background checks and reviews of health records should be vital to a decision of whether or not a person could function properly, with a lower risk of future health problems, if they decide to sell a kidney. By creating a market, however, students and other individuals in debt could potentially help in solving many of their problems, as well as monumentally aiding the demands for kidney transplants, and speeding up the grueling process of selecting a donor and kidney. Many also believe that in a process of a transplant, everybody involved makes money EXCEPT the donor themselves. The surgeon, the organ donation center, and the hospital all make money, while the donor makes nothing (he simply loses a part of his body. no big deal.) there is virtually no difference between selling and donating organs, besides the fact that the donor gets the money, which he unarguably deserves more so than any other member involved in the process. society commercializes and advertises many harmful products and methods, such as drinking, or in a more harmful case, smoking. Why should you be allowed to give up your own money for something so lethal to one or more organs, but not be allowed to give an organ, which you CAN safely live without, for money? One could argue “you’re mutilating the human body” but with smoking, drinking, plastic surgery, etc., I don’t really think it’s a decent argument. Yes, this topic is extremely controversial. But, if we allow organ donation, why can’t we allow organ sales? Yes, it does commodify the human body, but society has been far ahead in that category. Sex industry, prostitution, plastic surgery, even the cosmetics industry commodifies the human body in one way or another. The decision to sell a kidney is a personal decision, so, if you don’t want to? Don’t. But by setting up markets, it could be more beneficial than not, by speeding up and helping the process of finding an organ and donor, as well as helping the donors financially. I do not believe it is ethical to sell a kidney, or to create a system which allows people to do so. Not only does this exploit people that are having financial difficulties, but it also sets them up for future possibly life threatening problems. The British Acedemic who suggested that college students be allowed to sell a kidney in order to help pay off debt was only considering the positive effects short term. Anytime a person goes under the knife there is a risk of death. To add to the reasons a person should not consider sale of an organ is that there is no guarantee they will not have problems with the remaining kidney later in life. For monetary gain a person could be risking their very lives. This is wrong on so many levels. First of all, a mere 15,000 dollars for one of my kidneys? Are you kidding me? Organ donation is a wonderful thing, and if I am ever in a situation where I needed a kidney, I would be very grateful to the donor for their sacrifice. It’s a sacrifice, NOT a get out of debt quick scheme, driven by financial insecurity and desperation. Many, particularly young naïve, cash strapped and debt ridden college students would be misled if such a system existed. Who is the voice here, reason or desperation? The mere mention of college students in this article, suggests a scam. 15,000 dollars to the poor starving student, and how much will that kidney be sold for? Money isn’t everything. Interesting that no medical expert was mentioned in the article, only an economics professor! Is it ethical to set up a system by which people can donate a kidney for money? I believe it is Ethical to allow Citizens who live and a country where they can legally adopt kids, the right to sell an organ. If we are able to adopt someone into a better life, better opportunities, and a better way of living as a whole. Why can we not save potential that same life with a God given organ that is ours alone to do with as we please? If there are Millions of people dying simply “Waiting” on such an invaluable organ why not create a market for it? We create a market for literally everything else. The Price of an adoption is not free nor is it a cheap endeavor. Yet we are putting restraints on an internal organ that is inside the body of an individual born into a Free Nation. Why turn away from a potential life saver in every sense of the word, you would then have people Middle & lower class given the opportunity rid themselves of student loan debt or whatever type of debt they need assistance with to create a better way of living for that individual or family. And in retrospect you are saving and creating potentially a second chance at life for someone, Mother, Father, Brother, sister, etc. This could also kick start our economy. Does this commodify the human body? Yes, it does. We commercialize and bottle up sex that potentially can spread disease, we commercialize tobacco that kills millions of Americans a day, we even allow abortion; voluntary killing of a fetus, made to listen to the heartbeat just to understand it will no longer beat because you PAID for it to not be so? Interesting, I would say. Yet, it matters HOW we are able to saving another’s life, when realistically we only need 1 kidney to live a healthy life. Interesting. What is wrong with making this a commercialized commodity like anything else? Does this exploit people who are economically disadvantaged, or does it simply create an opportunity for them to make the decision to sell a kidney? Both. Just to play devils’ advocate we would have to treat this like anything else. You cannot account for each individuals drive and purpose that brought them to this decision. Nor can we say because an individual is at an economically disadvantage they will consider selling their Kidney. Keep in mind there is already a Black Market for this. We cannot place any misconceived hypotheticals to everyone that is below the poverty line. Rules and laws would have to be put into place, open to everyone regardless. Millions would be saved and as individual voters and Americans we would take the best path laid out for our own goals, dreams and aspirations to what is hoped to be a better life or situation than you are currently in. What if we could disintegrate lower class all together? What if we could give someone a 2nd chance to right the direction in their life? What if we could free up financial debt? Hike credit scores? What is so horrible about that? Keeping in mind we are saving potentially, neighbors, nurses, teachers, people from all walks of life and backgrounds that could potential still have a purpose left to contribute in their lifetime if given the opportunity to receive a Kidney from a willing and healthy participant. It is sad to say but in a dog eat dog world, money talks and to diminish the death toll in this it would not be a horrible idea to me. For me I’m in the middle, but there are more positive stuff than negative stuff on legalizing the sale of kidneys. The positive stuff is that, we can help the people that is suffering from kidney problems that is praying to find their match and don’t have to wait years just for their transplant. I think for me, it is the persons decision if he wants to donate his/her kidney or not and I don’t think he/she will put his/her self in the position where she/he does not know the pros and cons to what she/he is trying to do. We can help a lot of lives through that. But at the same time the negative possibilities is that the people that has financial problem and needs money will take advantage of the situation. The assumption is only people who don’t need money donate organ, and assumes people with lower income do not donate organ; which mean that only people with lower income would sell a kidney and people who don’t need money would not sell a kidney. To me there is no ethical question involve because it is still a personal choice to donate or sell. The only ethical question is how the kidney is acquired. The potential for black market opportunity becomes greater. As a proponent of the free market, I am not completely against an individual making their individual choice to sell their kidney to a person in desperate need of a kidney. With that being said, I do feel that there needs to be a guideline of requirements that should be met such as an age limit – and no offense to folks of college student age (I’m 37), but in my humble opinion being of the college student age is not a mature enough age to make that decision even though they are legal adults. A lot happens when you pass your mid 20’s as far as your outlook on life and your habits, so please do not think I’m calling anyone out. I’m not big on the idea as far as living a life with one kidney for myself, I wouldn’t sell one of mine unless I couldn’t afford to feed my kids any longer or something desperate like that, but I believe in individual liberty and personal responsibility – so who am I to tell someone what to do with their organs? OK. I am again some what unsure what to answer on the subject of selling one’s kidney . Again, this Ethics course is running parallel with my Economics class. Supply and demand drives free enterprise and helps the economy grow, but is it ethical for example to sell plywood or generators at huge mark ups in the after math of a hurricane? Is it ethical to create a market where students are offered the chance to sell their kidneys? Not to me. While it may be legal, or made legal, I do not feel that either practice is ethical. I am however glad that it is not my choice to tell others what to do or not do with their body parts…. So, I guess that I am sure after all…. Not ethical is my stance on creating a kidney market. It is very unfortunate that there are individual who need a kidney in order to live. However, I don’t feel that a system should be set up for this purpose. I feel that it is not ethical to sell ones kidney. It should not be view as good and services. It is a vital body organ and needs to be viewed as such. I feel that there should be more programs such as the registries that help locate such organs, but for a student to sell their kidney for money just doesn’t seem like the individual is doing it for the right reason. Everyone one at some point in life will have financial difficulties however, there are many other legal and moral ethical ways to get money. An individual should not be given the platform to risk their lives for money by selling part of their bodies. Who can set a price tag on your body parts? With all the greed and opportunistic people, I do not think the US should legalize the selling of body parts. With college kids putting themselves through college, they already donate blood, and plasma and sell term papers, next kids would be walking around trying to sell their kidneys. On the contrary, I do believe that there should be an organization process set up for those who wish to donate. We already have sperm and egg donors, and surrogate mothers who are paid for their time and donation, so a kidney or another organ could become part of the system. The system should be set up with a screening process including a physical by an MD, a mental eval and counseling so that a person would have to fall into a certain criteria, and not just any Tom, Dick and Harry who is hard up on cash can just go donate their kidney. Along with the screening process their should be a wait to see if in a year if you would still like to donate your vital organ you can do so, and it wasnt a decision that your are pressured into. With setting up a market there will be more kidneys given to those in need of transplants. I went to college with kids that would sell plasma and other bodily fluids to make some extra cash. Women can “donate” their wombs to parents that cannot have children. Although these donations are not “permanent” and kidneys don’t grow back, this could greatly benefit those who need kidneys. Because this is more of a permanent procedure there should be a screening process to ensure there is no one just doing this for the money. As long as there are proper procedures to ensure each that each person who is willing to donate their kidney, has a healthy kidney to donate, I don’t see why one can’t. I just think it’s extremely necessary to make these kind of procedures mandatory. Just about anybody can give blood and get some extra cash in small amounts over time. But shelling out thousands of dollars for a vital organ, it definitely needs to be in good health for the recipient. I do think that if this were to be legalized, then in the beginning stages of marketing for it- each donor would need to be fully informed on the lifelong affects it would have on their body and the medication that may need to be taken. On the other side- what if a person is willing to donate, and after having it removed finds out they could have donated it for money, decides he/she wants it back if they receive no compensation. Would they/are they allowed to do so, under law? So I agree with some of the previous comments, there probably should be a screening process to ensure there is no aftermath stress for any party involved(donor/bank or whoever is funding the money), so everything is on the table, and there is a complete and equal understanding between both parties(previously described) before anything transpires that can not be reversed. I believe if a person wants to sell a kidney for money I have no problem if the person’s doctor has given the approval and they are healthy and their family history doesn’t have any possible complications. But I believe the person themselves should be the one to do it not forcing someone to do it and not someone walking in with a jar filled with kidneys if they bring people I don’t think they should do it if two sides disagree but I see many positives with this as it gives the people a choice to donate or sell and it can make fewer people die each year It gives people badly in need of a transplant better odds that they will get a kidney while it gives people who need money an opportunity to get some extra money but everyone before doing the transplant I think should see what risks they may have because almost everyone can get a risk or have health problems so I think a doctors approval should be needed. To prevent anyone’s family from creating a lawsuit I feel it’s best to see if there are more pros than cons and if so I don’t have a problem with people doing it. I think it would be a good idea for everyone involved to sign legal paper saying if anything goes wrong they understand the risks and there family be advised at what will happen I don’t think it’s unfair to anyone because it takes people of the list if they can afford to buy it reduces the number the need it and I don’t see from the statistics that it would be likely that any kidney’s would be thrown away if the number of people needing it is higher than the number are available I don’t see any going to waste. This definitely isn’t the most informing article on this subject, so therefore this might not be the most educated comment here… Just my opinions. Is it ethical to set up this system? Well, it has the potential to save a lot of lives for the over 100,000 people needing a kidney transplant, but it could endanger the life of the person selling their kidney.. Obviously there must be a screening process to determine whose eligible to sell their precious organs, but like Angela Clark said, people sell their plasma for extra money all the time. I think if there should be a minimum age of 21 to sell your kidney, because even though 18 is considered an adult I don’t believe the brain is developed enough by just 18 to make a decision like that. That said, selling your kidney for profit as an adult who is aware of the ALL of the risks associated with the procedure should absolutely have the opportunity to do so. Those saying it takes advantage of people with financial difficulties need to open their eyes and realize that there are way worse things they could be getting paid to do in their time of financial desperateness than selling their kidney to someone in need. Also, I think that the potential kidney sellers should have to speak to a Doctor that will evaluate their overall physical and mental health before they are eligible for a program like this. The blog post is intended to introduce the topic for discussion and to provide further sources of information. There are links to three separate articles in the blog post which provide more details about the topic for readers seeking additional data. I do not believe it would be ethical to allow the sale of a kidney. Yes it may help one person temporarily by helping them pay some dept or another to get the kidney but what about the donor? What would happen to them if something came up later or there was a complication due to the loss of a part of their body? Or how about the recipient of the kidney if there was a complication there on their end? In that instance the donor would have mutilated their own body for no real gain. Even on the dept end there would be no real gain, as a college student just going for my basic AA I already have more then 15,000 dollars in dept and I haven’t even finished my basic degree let alone going to a bigger college or a harder to earn degree. Even as a regular citizen with house or car payments again 15,000 dollars wouldn’t be very beneficial. How about where would that 15,000 dollars person where would that come, I doubt the government or medical insurgence would cover that, most likely the receiver of the kidney would have to pay it, so what they now have to magically come up with 15,000 dollars or die? wouldn’t that be a little unfair? then if they could come up with 15,000 dollars on the spot, what only the rich would deserve to live, or now they get to live great along with their own 15,000 dollars in debt. Then there is recovery time for both people which for the student would take time away from classes, work and possibly family time. So in the end though it would be the persons choice and it is their body to sell like meat at the market, I personally think there would be more negatives to allow it, then positives to be worth the price. So no I don’t think its worth having your body cut open for a kidney or for anything else really unless absolutely necessary to save your life. 4,000 per year is an enormous amount of lives to be lost if there is an easy solution. If any dollar amount was awarded to individuals who donated one of his or her kidneys to the thousands of patients waiting for one, it is safe to presume there would be much more kidneys than is even needed. The ethical concerns arise when questions are posed such as, “is it right to offer someone who is financially unstable money for their body parts?” and, “how much, in dollar amounts, is the human body worth?” Very obviously, these ethical concerns are not being posed by any of the 100,000 patients who needed kidney transplants last September, and definitely not by those patients’ mothers, children, or spouses. My opinion is that these ethical concerns are valid, but also that they are microscopic compared to the ethical concerns attached to 4,000 lives lost per year while waiting for a kidney, when there is something that can be done to prevent those losses. When a life is in critical condition, the ethical concerns attached to donating kidneys for money become much less important. Karl Wormer at John Hopkins Medical Center spends his days caring for kidney donors before, during, and after donating a kidneys, and he recalls a comment one of his patients made regarding to the reasons why someone may donate a kidney, he states, “The motivations of these individuals is best summed up by one of my previous donors who said that his life would not be complete if he died with two kidneys and was not able to donate one to someone to help them out.” So if there are already people who are already donating their kidneys for reasons such as self-satisfaction and fulfillment, why shouldn’t those individuals be awarded a dollar amount as sort of a “thank you” from the recipient? If it is already legal for a person to donate his or her kidney to someone who is in dire need, why is it illegal to make the situation sort of a, “win-win,” benefitting both parties? And finally, if a person is willing to sell his or her kidney for any reason whether it be student loans, mortgage or even just for a vacation, why not let that person make that decision for themselves? American obesity, heart disease, and diabetes are on the rise because of Americans high taste to salts, and fats. A small percentage is genetics, but most of these diseases can be purely preventable. Therefore, I feel the two professors from Chicago and Argentina solution is arguably correct. The facts state that over 4,000 people die waiting for a kidney transplant, and that waiting time is close to five years. An answer that can give hope to individuals faster is not only an ethical decision but the right one. The professors state that individuals are able to sell their kidney and in result they receive a money payment of 15,000 dollars. With this payment, some individuals who are in college could use that payment to pay off their college debt. Individuals who oppose the idea believe it is unethical because individuals can use it to pay off their college debt, or it puts those individuals at a higher risk for serious health problems in the future. However I feel the problem our nation has is we all want to get involved in other people’s business. If one were to donate it would be their absolute right. And yes there could be a huge risk to the individuals who donates their kidney, but whose business is it for someone else to limit that individuals own personal right. The way we are going right now, Americans indulging themselves with sweets and carbs is not doing anything in solving this national epidemic we are all facing. We have a system right now that is making individuals wait and wait for an organ until it becomes to late. We need to rethink our ways, and I believe the professors are on the right path. This system could go as an incentive for young individuals to sell their kidneys, and in result provide another individual with hope for a better life. I think it is ethical to set up a system the kidneys can be sold and that individual would get paid to do so. These are people who would freely make that decision themselves. And with that decision, a life would be save. Also, the people selling the kidneys would be rewarded with an extra income , and there is no crime to it.Once the word” money” is involved, most would think that it is unethical to sell kidneys. There are thousands of people on the waiting list. And if there are no known kidneys, they will eventually die. I wouldn’t think the people on the waiting list care where the kidney(s) is coming from. Once they live, Is that unethical?. When one get a call stating that they are a definite match, I wouldn’t think the recipient would asked for names, geographical boundaries and go and research. I would think their initial actions would be jumping for joy and life. I do believe it is ethical for someone to sell their kidney. After all it’s their body they have a right to do with it what they wish. The idea of selling ones kidney seems like a no-brainer to me. There is very little risk for the people donating the kidney. The surgeons who preform these operations on patients have probably preformed thousands if not tens of thousands of kidney transplants in the past. So, with that being said, let’s apply Act Utilitarianism to a situation to see if it is indeed ethical to sell ones kidney. In this theoretical situation a man named Hrothgar is dying from PKD, he has a wife and two small children. A college kid name Grendel doesn’t want to want to begin his adult life in debt so, he decides to sell his kidney. The possible actions are: Grendel sells his kidney to Hrothgar and Grendel doesn’t sell his kidney. People affected by the optional actions: Grendel, because there is a itsy-bitsy chance some sort of completions could arise from the surgery, Hrothgar, because if he doesn’t receive a new kidney he will die, and Hrothgar’s family; his family needs him to keep the peace in the new kingdom. Grendel Hrothgar Hrothgar’s family Net Grendel sells his kidney: +8 +10 +10 +28 Grendel doesn’t sell his kidney: -5 -10 -10 -25 According to Act Utilitarianism we should let Grendel sell his kidney to Hrothgar. The idea that this would commodity the human body is ridicules. The human body has been a commodity for centuries. Prostitution the world oldest professions is by definition the sale of one’s body. Is it more appropriate to sell sex then a kidney which would save a life? As to the question would this exploited people who are more disadvantaged, I think it might be a little exploitive, but the Red Cross blood center pays people money for their blood, so there is already a precedent there. And if anything this would create a whole new marked; more jobs would be created as a result. If someone is down on their luck in life and they need cash quick and as long as they are willing and healthy enough to sell their kidney then they should be able to do as they so wish. I believe it is ethical to have a market where kidneys could be sold to people who are willing to buy them for people who are in need of them. Just like nowadays where there are banks that sell sperm to the families that don’t have other alternatives. Now, about that price range though, I wouldn’t set the bar too high for it. I think 1500 is too much to give away and too much to receive because then there would be a problem that people could easily fall into the trap of. We would see people go to any extreme just to get some money. At the same time, I think we’d be falling in the range of exploiting our human bodies for money. I could also see how people would sell up to anything just to get some cash not for the fun of it but because of necessity. The kidney market would get sky rocket and I think investors would start making other body part markets to where we’d see places selling eyes, arms and whatever that is indispensable and hospitals that are willing to buy just because these places would get great amount of profit. I believe that’s where it would be unethical. To have a kidney market isn’t a bad idea, it should have strict regulations though like only for specific purposes of buying and selling kidneys. There should be a reasonable amount of money paid for those willing to sell kidneys but the person must meet requirements to sell it in the first place. A lot of regulations should take place just to make it safe and avoid any legal or illegal problems. My cousin was someone whose kidney stopped working and his mother, my aunt, donated her very own to provide. I know kidney failures have increasingly grown with thousands of people dying every year of it. If there is a way to lower the rate and have more donators by opening a market, I think it would be a useful idea. Donating Kidneys for Money After reading the blog about “Legalizing the sales of kidneys” I came to an agreement that the sale of kidneys would be a very helpful idea. I believe it is ethical to set up a system by which people can donate a kidney for money. However before I start discussing why I agree for the sale of kidneys I want to talk about why people don’t donate their kidneys in the first place. Many people don’t donate their kidneys because a lot of them don’t want to donate a kidney to a stranger they don’t know. People much rather donate to a relative or a close friend. Another reason people don’t donate kidneys so easily is because they don’t get paid for it or don’t even get some type of reward for doing a nice deed. According to the article the need of kidney transplants have grown over the recent years. I found that about 101,662 people living in the United States are awaiting a kidney transplant stated by kidney.org. If people would get paid to donate a kidney there would be a greater amount of people that would donate their kidneys. Who doesn’t want to get paid $15,000 for donating their kidney? Patients in need of a kidney wouldn’t have to wait five or more years to get a transplant if the sale of kidneys would be legalized. This would also commodify the bodies of the patients in need of a transplant because without a kidney transplant they could lose their lives. Imagine how helpless these patients feel knowing that they might not live to get a transplant. By also giving people money to donate not only would they be helping the patients but they would also be helping themselves by the money they are given. I don’t think this would exploit the people who are economically disadvantaged, I actually think this would be very beneficial to them. The donors could pay off any debts, expenses, or even save the money they got for other types of emergencies. In addition to getting paid to donate a kidney, donors would feel great knowing that they saved a life. In conclusion I believe legalizing the sale of kidneys would be very beneficial not only to the patients but to the donors as well but its every individuals decision whether or not they would want to donate. I don’t think there is anything wrong with setting up a system for people to sell their kidneys for money. As long as, they kidneys coming in are clean and able to be used. There would be a lot more lives saved by it because more people would be willing to give up a kidney. I agree with the idea of reimbursing the participant for the kidney because you have organ donors who don’t get anything at all. Yes, money is involved but at the same time a lot of lives would be saved. For me, it comes down to choices personally I would not do it but I know a couple of college students who would because of college debt. It all depends on the individual I don’t think the money aspect of it makes it less ethical I see it as a great incentive for people to want to help. This is a serious issue because there are a lot of people on a waiting list waiting for a kidney transplant. I am speaking from personal experience this is a subject that I know really well. The only thing that I would be worried about would be the type of people that sell their kidneys because college students tend to do a lot of things that is not good for the body. So how would they pick the right people to sell a kidney? I don’t see any harm in selling a kidney you get to save a life and make some money while doing it. Life is all about options and this option seems to work for everybody because the person who will receive the kidney would be more that grateful and very thankful because they have been waiting for someone to give them a kidney possible they have been waiting for years. After reading the article of Legalizing the sale of a kidney i have come to the Determination that this is an amazing idea. Setting up a system by which people can donate a kidney is something that could be very helpful for everyone. specially for those in need, According to a National kidney foundation there are 123,193 people waiting for lifesaving organ transplants in the us. And the median wait time for an individual is approximately is 3.6 years and depending on the patient’s health. setting up this program will not just help these people in need but it would help good healthy people as well, as for example college students. The reason i say this is because this could be a great opportunity for certain people to have this donation and receive up to 15,000 which is what the program will pay you. And this minney could be use for good causes as for example to pay any college expenses or any money that has been granted to you. It is scientifically proven that most people are born with two kidneys and that you only need one to live, which this means that this decision would not be exploding anyone by having one of their kidney remove. Another huge reason that i think this would be a great idea is because there is something called the Black Market which is an illegal traffic or trade that takes place outside the government’s authorization and thousands of people use this to kidnap people and sell their organs especially kidneys. The illegal trades of kidneys have raisen to approximately 10,000 black market operations selling human bodies. The reason i say this is because by setting up this donation program the black market would not be buying as much kidneys now and the amount of people being kidnap would reduce. I mean who does not want to get 15,000 dollars for exchanging one of your kidneys especially if its for a very good cause. I do not believe in selling your kidneys. I mean yes that is quite a bit of money especially if you are a poor college student like myself; however, I feel like this is such a negative of use of the human body just for acquiring money. I mean if you wish to exploit yourself like this you might as well become a stripper. There are positive aspects to this situation, and instead of people waiting years for a suitable donor to arrive the medical field could have an access to numerous amounts of kidneys to treat sick or dying patients. It would also benefit college students that are struggling to survive in this social and financial nightmare. I believe that it makes you a better person to endure those hardships, so that you appreciate life when you make it to the top. I believe the negatives would out way the positives because as it is common in human, we tend to abuse opportunities like this, and take a look at the social security system not a too promising future. Then how would that look to the children then everyone would start selling their kidneys, so that they could receive 15,000 dollars for their kidney, and if we started selling kidneys like it was nothing were would the line be draw would people starting selling one of their lungs to a smoker, so that they continue their dirty habit and ruin a perfectly functioning body part, but getting away from people possibly abusing the system. We are still faced with the shear fact that the cost for a kidney transplant would be insane. I believe the cost would skyrocket because the hospital or clinic that would have to perform the extraction of kidney would have to pay the individual, and add the extra cost to the potential patient. I believe the commercial selling of kidneys would be a terrible idea despite the benefits that it could provide. I think this is absolutely a great idea. Fifteen thousand dollars to sell a kidney? Count me in. It’s my body I can do what I want with it. If I can sell it on the black market I should be able to sell it to a reputable business. I think the fact that they are advertising college students to sell them is a bit weird due to them being young, but maybe it has something to do with most young peoples kidneys being in good shape. I know for instance my grandfather needed a kidney transplant, and I’m not sure how he went about getting one, but I am sure that it would have been cheaper and probably easier to afford and get ahold of if people were able to legally sell them. Also I think it will exponentially increase the safety of selling kidneys because instead of doing a shady back alley kidney black market deal and transplant, you can go to a reputable business and sell it where you know the risk of injury and/or life is much lower. Now i’m sure there are some good reasons for not being able to sell kidneys legally, but I think the positives definitely out weigh the negatives in this situation. I would need some strong convincing otherwise that i’m not sure anyone would be able to do. I think if you can smoke of drink and ruin your liver and lungs because its “your body”, then you should absolutely be able to sell a kidney. I mean the fact that assisted suicide is legally more common than just selling a kidney for a profit, that you don’t necessarily need is illegal boggles me. That basically says it is alright to kill yourself or have someone kill you, but you cant sell a kidney that will keep you alive and benefit both all parties involved. Its ludicrous. Every year, four thousand people die waiting for a kidney transplant? That’s a whole lot of people who die waiting for something as simple as a kidney transplant. So, what would motivate more people to give one kidney away? Well, what motivates all of us? Money. If the hospital paid us to give organs away, a lot more people would do it. Is it the ethical thing to do though? Selling organs for money might seem wrong when one says it out loud, but on paper, it works out for everyone. It’s a win win all around; the patient gets to live, the donor gets a handsome sum of money, and the doctors help more patients thus helping out the hospital as a whole. People against this idea would say it’s unethical to sell your body parts, but if it helps everyone and no one loses, why is it unethical. If we run this idea through a couple of ethical theories, such as Rawls theory, it proves to be ethical. According to Rawls, an action or idea is ethical if it is fair to all stakeholders. The stakeholders in this situation would be the doctor, the hospital, the patient, and the donor. It’s fair to the patient obviously because he/she gets to continue their life and is fair to the donor because he/she sold their kidney willingly and received several thousand dollars for it. It is fair to the doctor because he doesn’t have to tell the patient that they have a slim chance and it is fair for the hospital because they gain a higher reputation for helping more people. In conclusion, although selling your own kidney sounds wrong and unethical, when you really think about it, it does much more good than bad. Is it ethical to set up a system by which people can donate a kidney for money? I think it is ethical to let people have control over what they want to do with their bodies. We live in a country where you can donate blood, sell plasma, put your child up for adoption, or get almost any cosmetic adjustment you can think of. As long as it’s your body and you aren’t harming anyone I think it would be pretty ethical to set up a system where people can donate a kidney for money as long as it was the person’s decision and they were comfortable with it. Does this commodify the human body? I can see where some people would feel like this could be commodifying the body, you’re donating a vital organ for cash, you’re basically selling pieces of yourself. But, I also feel like this could be viewed as doing something extraordinary for someone else and being compensated for a painful procedure. Donating a kidney out of the kindness of your heart isn’t going to cut it for much longer as the need for kidney transplants is far greater than available donors, so a money incentive might be a good thing. Does this exploit people who are economically disadvantaged, or does it simply create an opportunity for them to make the decision to sell a kidney? I personally think that it could be looked at two ways, just like selling plasma I mentioned earlier it’s all how it’s looked at. With the selling plasma you have alcoholics and homeless people selling it to afford liquor or whatever it is they need or you could have a broke college student selling it to scrape by until the end of the week or you have the person who does it because they feel it helps and the money is just like a perk. I think if you figured you don’t need your kidney and would rather pay off student loans then it becomes just an opportunity to sell something, but if you were very poor and knew the only way to get extra money was to sell your kidney then it’s kind of like exploiting economically disadvantaged. After researching and figuring out the advantage and the disadvantage to both sides, I think it’s unethical legalizing the sale of kidneys and if a system like that got legalized, it would be a complete failure. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against donating a kidney to your loved ones, and if one of my loved ones ever needed a kidney I would not hesitate to give them one of mine. It’s a big sacrifice and it comes out of a lot of love and courage for someone to do something like that. I think most people would agree that god created us with two kidneys, and if you don’t believe in god simply believe that your human body has two kidneys for a reason. I understand that people can live a healthy life with only one, but what happens if you donate one and in the future the one you’re left with fails? What happens if at the time of the donation you’re healthy and after five or X amount of years you get diabetes, blood pressure, or heart problems? Those are some very important question you need to think about before you decide selling a kidney. Let’s put all that aside and discuss why a system like that would be a complete failure. Personally I think because the money that is offered is not that much. I think desperate people do desperate things, but at the same time I can’t imagine that someone would be so desperate that they cannot think nor do anything else in the world other than selling a part of their body. Let’s assume that the person who’s doing that really have no other option, and everyone knows that the black market for organs exists everywhere even in the United States. If a system like that got legalized, why would I sell my kidney for $15,000 or even £28,000 while on the other hand, with little research I can find some rich guy that is willing to pay $200,000 or even more because he doesn’t want to wait or be on the waiting list. After I read this blog post I decided to do a little more search on the sale of kidneys. The selling of kidneys is ethical, we already sell eggs and sperm so there really is no difference. Most people who need kidney transplants don’t often get them because of the short supply; then those who don’t get them either die or have to spend a long time on dialysis. Yes, people who are desperate for money would jump at the chance of getting money for an organ but before they could they should receive some sort of counseling to see if they if they really want through with it and get tested to see if they are healthy enough to give one. In an article I read it pointed out that it would be more beneficial to pay a living patient for their kidney then to keep a patient in the hospital who needs a kidney. When the question comes up of why don’t people donate their kidney if so many people need them, the answer is simple people won’t willing give up an organ like that unless their getting something out of it. If hospitals paid patients for their kidneys then there would be a lot more kidneys to give and less people would die. It would also eliminate the sale of organs in the black market and reduce the underground operations that occur to get those kidneys. Research has shown that a person can lead a normal life with only one working kidney. Living with one kidney is like giving up insurance on your life but if there were more people donating getting a new one would be a lot less of a hassle. So if people would be compensated for their kidney they are more than likely to give one up. I think that it is ethically right to setup a system by which people can donate a kidney for money. It should be the donor’s choice to either donate their organ or not. One has a lot of advantages by doing so; the most important advantage is knowing that they made a difference in someone’s life not only the individual’s life but also their family’s as well. The donor gives them a second chance at life but nevertheless, they are still able to live their own life after the surgery. Based on the article above, once college students are involved the advantage becomes even greater. There are thousands of students struggling to pay off their college debt and spend most of their adulthood trying to pay it off. Students struggle two jobs or more while still enrolled in classes, hoping that their debt would decrease. But unfortunately while focused on their student loans, their grades start dropping, and their anxiety increases which leads to bigger problems. Student and the recipient would benefit so much from this system. Does this commodify the human body? In a way yes people’s bodies get exposed but the waiting list gets longer and longer each year while time is ticking, selflessness is just not enough. Many people need more of a motivation to give. And that’s why we need to be able to reimburse people who are willing to give a kidney to a stranger, to save a life, not talking about a classic commercial free-for-all, but a third party payer. Does this exploit people who are economically disadvantaged, or does it simply create an opportunity for them to make the decision to sell a kidney? I believe it simply creates an opportunity for them to make a decision to sell their kidney. The donor’s morals of course should be questioned and held under close supervision but at the end of the day it is their body, they can choose whatever they want to do with it. They will have to decide if their choice and economic disadvantage is worth the risk of donating. The government controls enough why someone cannot have the right to choose. I incline to agree with letting people to have the option to sell their organs, if they so choose to. This whole new approach of changing the system is a good idea, so that it not only helps those that are in dire need of a transplant but also can benefit the donor by receiving so sort of compensation for their donation. I believe it is ethical and it can greatly help the public. In a way, it can also be very understandable that it may seem that the human body becomes more of a commodity, and can exploit the disadvantaged. For that reason alone I think if some type of regulation were to be passed so that these of transactions are to occur, it should be closely monitored by some kind of healthcare organization so that it can provide those that are interested in donating can be educated on the process before officially going forward with it. Of course this should not be a solution that should stay in place for the future, but just temporarily; more research and development should be always taking place to better provide patients with alternatives to obtain organs when needed. One example is how researchers that can now grow organ using adult stem cells and so on. It is clear that with the global population growing more and more it should be a very top priority to look into when reviewing organ donations of any kind, if not there will just a growing list of deaths that occur because they were waiting for the right donor to come along. More should be looked into the matter not only from an ethical point of view but also a regulatory perspective as well. It looks as if this subject just seems to be one of those subjects that don’t always come up for discussion, that really should be at the forefront. Comments are closed. Get more information or request details about SPC’s public policy and legal programs	Yes, this topic is extremely controversial. But, if we allow organ donation, why can’t we allow organ sales? Yes, it does commodify the human body, but society has been far ahead in that category. Sex industry, prostitution, plastic surgery, even the cosmetics industry commodifies the human body in one way or another. The decision to sell a kidney is a personal decision, so, if you don’t want to? Don’t. But by setting up markets, it could be more beneficial than not, by speeding up and helping the process of finding an organ and donor, as well as helping the donors financially. I do not believe it is ethical to sell a kidney, or to create a system which allows people to do so. Not only does this exploit people that are having financial difficulties, but it also sets them up for future possibly life threatening problems. The British Acedemic who suggested that college students be allowed to sell a kidney in order to help pay off debt was only considering the positive effects short term. Anytime a person goes under the knife there is a risk of death. To add to the reasons a person should not consider sale of an organ is that there is no guarantee they will not have problems with the remaining kidney later in life. For monetary gain a person could be risking their very lives. This is wrong on so many levels. First of all, a mere 15,000 dollars for one of my kidneys? Are you kidding me? Organ donation is a wonderful thing, and if I am ever in a situation where I needed a kidney, I would be very grateful to the donor for their sacrifice. It’s a sacrifice, NOT a get out of debt quick scheme, driven by financial insecurity and desperation. Many, particularly young naïve, cash strapped and debt ridden college students would be misled if such a system existed. Who is the voice here, reason or desperation? The mere mention of college students in this article, suggests a scam.	no
Bioethics	Should organ selling be legalized?	yes_statement	"organ" "selling" should be "legalized". legalizing "organ" "selling" is necessary	https://peh-med.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13010-022-00122-4	How a compensated kidney donation program facilitates the sale of ...	Abstract Background Advocates for a regulated system to facilitate kidney donation between unrelated donor-recipient pairs argue that monetary compensation encourages people to donate vital organs that save the lives of patients with end-stage organ failure. Scholars support compensating donors as a form of reciprocity. This study aims to assess the compensation system for the unrelated kidney donation program in the Islamic Republic of Iran, with a particular focus on the implications of Islam on organ donation and organ sales. Methods This study reviews secondary documents for philosophical argumentation and ethical analysis of human organ donation and sale for transplantation. Results and discussion According to Islamic law, organ donation is an act of sadaqatul jariyah, and individuals are permitted to donate organs with the intention of saving lives. The commercialization of humans as organ sellers and buyers is contrary to the Islamic legal maxim eethaar, undermining donors of ‘selfless’ or ‘altruistic’ motivations. Such an act should be considered immoral, and the practice should not be introduced into other countries for the sake of protecting human dignity, integrity, solidarity, and respect. I, therefore, argue that Iran’s unrelated kidney donation program not only disregards the position of the Islamic religion with respect to the provision or receipt of monetary benefits for human kidneys for transplantation but that it also misinterprets the Islamic legal proscription of the sale of human organs. I also argue that the implementation of Iran’s unrelated kidney donor transplantation program is unethical and immoral in that potential donors and recipients engage in a bargaining process akin to that which sellers and buyers regularly face in regulated commodity exchange markets. Conversely, I suggest that a modest fixed monetary remuneration as a gift be provided to a donor as a reward for their altruistic organ donation, which is permissible by Islamic scholars. This may remove the need to bargain for increased or decreased values of payment in exchange for the organ, as well as the transactional nature of ‘buyer and seller’, ensuring the philosophy of ‘donor and recipient’ is maintained. Background The program of kidney donation and transplantation between unrelated donor-recipient pairs in the Islamic Republic of Iran is different from that of many other countries in the world [1,2,3,4]. Similar to biomedical practices in many other countries, organs have generally been obtained from deceased, living-related, and unrelated transplant donors in Iran [1, 3, 5,6,7,8]. Despite the fact that in Iran deceased donors (DDs) or their families do not receive any monetary benefits, every living donor (e.g., related and unrelated) receives a fixed monetary stipend from the government for donating organs [9]. They also receive a year’s worth of medical insurance, transplantation, costs, and medicines at subsidized prices from the government [1, 4, 8, 9]. Aside from the fixed financial compensation from the Iranian government, each living unrelated donor also receives extra monetary compensation directly from the recipient [9]. This compensation is the result of a direct negotiation between the potential donor and recipient on an agreed amount for the exchange of a kidney [1, 4, 9, 10]. This study is based on and adapted from the fourth section of the dissertation project [11]. This article reviews a selection of medical-legal, bioethical, anthropological, sociological, philosophical, and Islamic classical literature and evaluates the stipulations of Iran’s compensation system for unrelated kidney donation for transplantation. It also examines the implications of Islam on organ donation, organ sales, and monetary compensation for human organ transplantation in the light of Iran’s unrelated kidney donation program. I start with a brief summary of the provisions of the law and practice on the compensated and regulated system for unrelated kidney donation for the transplantation program in Iran. I thereafter proceed to a review of the pertinent Islamic literature, demonstrate the disregard for Islamic law of Iran’s program, and propose a fixed modest monetary incentive for organ donation as a suitable ethical alternative. A system for the regulated compensation of unrelated kidney donors in Iran The first Iranian kidney transplant was successfully performed at Shiraz University in 1967 [8, 12]. Until 1988 saw the advent of a program for kidney donation from unrelated individuals, the number of patients with dialysis steadily increased and hemodialysis was the best option for patients with end-stage renal failure in Iran [8]. From 1967 to 1985, only 112 kidneys were transplanted in the country [4]. The number of patients with hemodialysis increased significantly during the Iranian revolution of 1979, which resulted in the freezing of Iranian assets in international accounts and the eight-year Iran-Iraq war from September 1980 until August 1988 [4]. Economic sanctions by donor agencies and foreign countries resulted in a lack of government funds for the dialysis program, leading to a shortage of equipment. During this time, as kidney transplant facilities were very limited in the country, the Ministry of Health and Medical Education (MOHME) began permitting patients with dialysis to undergo transplantation in overseas countries [4]. Under this procedure, patients with dialysis needed to apply with the required documents and identify living donors to whom they were related (termed living related donors; LRDs) in order to be accepted by the Transplant Centers overseas. Those willing to undertake such transplantation operations could apply for government funding [4]. This system created problems for dialysis patients, as a large number of patients had to wait for transplantation to be granted by the MOHME [8]. In spite of the long waiting list for transplant patients, from 1980 to 1985, using government funds, more than 400 dialysis patients traveled to many European countries and the United States for renal transplantation [8, 13]. This significant increase in the demand for kidneys ultimately led the Iranian Government to establish a legal, compensated and regulated system for renal donor organ transplantation between unrelated donor-recipient pairs [5]. Given that expenditure on kidney donation for transplantation abroad was expensive, the high cost of transplantation certainly increased the waiting list of transplant patients [8]. As a result, a large number of patients with end-stage renal failure endured a long waiting time for their hemodialysis and transplantation. This grim reality officially encouraged Iranian policymakers and health experts to set up transplant centers across the country [8]. Under this initiative, two kidney transplant teams were organized between 1985 and 1987, and only 274 kidney transplants from LRDs were performed by these teams [3]. Another reason for the initiation of a compensated and regulated system for unrelated kidney donation was that deceased and LRDs were the only sources of transplantation organs [8]. This was because a large number of patients with renal failure needed transplantation, but had no potential LRDs for transplantation or, in some cases, their potential related kidney donors refused to donate to their relatives [8, 14, 15]. Despite the program of unrelated renal donor organ transplantation starting in 1988 [4, 8], the initiative to provide financial compensation to living unrelated donors (LUDs) began in 1997 [1, 4]. A non-related kidney donation program was considered a safe and cost-effective procedure with acceptable risk to donors and a ready solution to a scarcity of organs and long waiting times for transplant patients [16]. The reason for introducing compensation for LUDs was the recognition by Iranian society that receiving kidneys from LUDs would increase the donation rate [1]. For example, the increase in the number of transplant centers from two in 1985 to 23 in 2001 resulted in clearing the country’s waiting list for kidney transplants by 1999 [4, 5]. The increase in the availability of human organs, especially kidneys, in Iran was because transplantation was permitted following the confirmed brain death of the donor (with a requirement for close cooperation between Muslim jurists and medical experts) and because of the establishment of a national coordinating body for organ transplantation and the introduction of a compensated unrelated kidney donation program [17]. How does the unrelated kidney transplant program actually work in Iran? In the early phase, once a patient has been identified, physicians search for medically appropriate LRDs for transplantation. In doing so, physicians advise patients to identify potential LRDs within their families [8]. Physicians encourage relatives to donate kidneys to their patients because they have a longer graft survival rate [8]. If the recipient does not have LRDs or a potential LRD is not willing to donate a kidney, the recipient is referred to the Dialysis and Transplant Patients Association (DATPA) to identify organs, particularly kidneys, from DDs, waiting in the queue up to a maximum of 6 months [18]. If no suitable DD is identified in this time, the DATPA searches for an appropriate LUD [18]. Despite families of DDs not receiving any financial stipend from the government, LUDs receive a fixed stipend from the Iranian government, as well as medical insurance, transplant and hospital charges and medicines at reduced prices [4, 9]. LRDs do not usually accept money from the recipient families because their motives are to support a loved one [9]. The provisions on the practice of unrelated kidney donation are divided into three phases [4]. In the first phase, LUDs aged 18–35 who wish to donate kidneys are referred to the DATPA for free registration for both donors and recipients [4]. In the second phase, informed consent is sought from both donors and their immediate relatives to obtain a national identification card from the DATPA [4]. The DATPA then formally introduces a potential donor to the recipient. At this stage, the consent form or “letter of agreement” is duly signed by a witness (e.g., parent or spouse) ([1], 271). The consent form states that the LUD will receive a fixed amount of compensation (10 million Iranian rials) and one-year of post-operative medical insurance and hospital charges from the government or the charity after transplantation [1, 4]. However, for the final evaluation, all donors and recipients are referred to nephrologists for further evaluation, cross-match, and angiography [4]. A complete medical check-up for potential LUDs is performed as donors may have serious transmissible diseases such as hepatitis B and HIV infection [1]. However, tissue matching between organ donors and recipients is performed prior to transplantation. Since the transplant program protects the safety of donors by establishing a screening program and health check-up protocols, it also “rules out the possibility that donors with poor organs may try to cover up medical problems to participate in the program” ([1], 271). If a potential donor has some negative health consequences, he or she will be excluded for transplantation. If a donor is female, either related or unrelated, physicians will pay close attention to any indirect family pressure, resistance or coercion. If females do not wish to donate willingly, physicians will not wish to make a transplant, explaining the cause of medical inadequacy for donors [4]. The third phase directly involves a “negotiation” between the potential LUD and recipient, where the LUD receives extra financial compensation from the recipients for their donation ([4], 629). It usually takes place on the foundation or university premises, where a reserved space is provided for their negotiation [4]. This means that donors meet with recipients prior to donation to confirm payments from recipients under the DATPA control [19]. The DATPA has no record of the agreed amount for the exchange of kidneys and has no role in the negotiation process [4]. In addition, the DATPA only maintains certain controls or formalities over the issue by introducing another potential donor to the recipients in cases where the LUD requires an unusual amount of monetary compensation [4]. Such avaricious donors may be removed from the potential donor lists [4]. The additional reward from recipients is not “regulated” as recipients and donors meet directly where there is no chance of being abused by brokers ([4], 629). It is a government-controlled organ transplantation system where no surgical team or brokers are permitted to participate in a monetary transaction and no intermediary receives any payment. All financial transactions are settled directly between the LUD and the recipient. After transplantation, donors submit transplant documents, including a hospital certificate certifying that transplantation has been performed, to the designated charity to receive a gift (10 million Iranian rials) and a year of medical insurance [4, 20]. Transplants are performed in university hospitals and are paid for by insurance companies and the MOHME [4]. If a financially poor recipient is unable to pay extra compensation to the LUD, DATPA then seeks assistance from charities to pay the extra compensation to the LUD. By the end of 2006, a total of 21,359 kidneys had been transplanted across Iran, of which 15.2% came from LRDs, 5.2% from DDs and 79.6% from LUDs [17]. Methods This study reviews secondary documents for philosophical argumentation and ethical analysis of human organ donation and sale for transplantation. Results An assessment of the compensated kidney donation program in Iran Iranian scholars who support an unrelated kidney donor organ transplantation program often argue that monetary compensation or reward for kidney donation to LUDs is permissible as it saves the lives of many vulnerable patients [4, 8]. Further, it is associated with acceptable donor risks, reduces the scarcity of transplantable organs through a ‘safe’ and ‘cost-effective’ procedure, and decreases the death rate for patients with end-stage organ failure while on the waiting list [16]. The Iranian government’s financial compensation scheme for LUDs is an effort to address many issues plaguing Iranian society, including increasing unemployment and poverty, poor dialysis patient outcomes, and the black market in organs [3]. The LUD compensation scheme was created in response to a perceived shortage of organs available for transplantation, and it was intended to promote organ donation through financial incentives [9]. Bagheri expresses concerns about the direct payment system between donors and recipients for the exchange of kidneys but he supports the offer of additional financial compensation packages to LUDs, arguing that the LUDs should not be deprived of their “rightful claim to be compensated” because everyone who participates in the procurement of organs, except the donor, should be responsible for the recognition of the sacrifices of organ donors ([1], 270). Bagheri asserts that there is no conflict between an altruistic act of organ donation and a logical compensation for one’s organs, time and financial loss ([1], 279). In addition, a justification in favor of a compensated and regulated unrelated kidney donor organ transplantation program is offered by Abdallah Daar: “[I] f the buying and selling of organs is as unstoppable as it appears to be, then leaving it totally unregulated causes more harm than good, which is arguably unethical especially as it encourages only the rich to benefit. Regulating the practice will very likely minimize harm by opening it to scrutiny, enforcing compliance with standards to protect donors, recipients, and society, removing rapacious middleman, and enabling the poor to receive transplants on an equal footing with the rich. What could be a more obvious step if we want to improve the situation?” ([21], 601). Nourbala et al., therefore, suggest that other countries apply Iran’s experience to enhance their kidney donation for transplantation programs because it has good health outcomes and low costs compared to programs in other countries ([22], 929). What are the rewards for altruistic donations in Iran? As mentioned earlier, an LUD currently receives 10 million Iranian rials from government or charities, a year of health insurance, expensive medicines at subsidized prices, and additional compensation from the recipient. For additional compensation, if potential recipients are unable to pay LUDs, there are charities that can help them. The fixed amount of compensation (10 million Iranian rials) could be referred to as an ‘altruistic gift’ as donors and recipients are not involved in the negotiation of kidney exchange. Medical facilities such as subsidized medicines and 1-year’s free health insurance are necessary for donors to recover in good health. However, what seems most controversial is the additional compensation paid directly to the LUD by the recipient. The transplant surgeon Anne Griffin considers it to be an unregulated system because it involves inadequate oversight monitoring of human organs ([23], 502). Although Iran’s scholars consider all monetary compensation to be rewarding altruistic donation, unrestricted bargaining situations between donors and recipients for organ exchange seems more like organ selling and purchasing, as such practice is very similar to hidden markets in human organs elsewhere in the world [24,25,26,27,28,29]. Despite Iran’s unrelated kidney donation scheme saving many lives of vulnerable patients, at the same time it provides an opportunity to engage in bargaining for human organs and could simply be called organ sale. Given that potential donors and recipients individually meet and engage in negotiations, it should be considered a completely free bargaining in organs like free trade, which is unacceptable, ethically impermissible and morally flawed. Iran is the only country in the world to have legalized the human kidney trade with LUDs [1, 5, 30]. As has happened before, with many patients currently on the waiting list for organ transplantation in Iran, the huge demand for kidneys could create an unwelcome bargaining situation between unrelated donors and recipients. Despite Iran’s biomedical legislation suggesting that LUDs who demand unreasonable compensation will be excluded from the donor list, barring these LUDs from the list is perhaps coincidental as several transplant patients are still in the long queue for transplantation. For example, a single-center study report shows that the average waiting time for renal transplantation is 386.22 days [5]. Perhaps very few potential donors have been barred from the list as rich patients are in need and healthy organ donors, particularly the poor, are looking for a quick fix to solve their financial problems. Malekshahi et al. argue that people in lower socio-economic groups may decide to sell their kidneys to mitigate their financial problems: LUDs are, therefore, mostly motivated by economic reasons [5]. As Harmon & Delmonico explain, “there is no oversight of these transactions in the Iranian system, nor could such oversight be assured or verified in any other regulated market” ([31], 1146). In Iran, not only are poor donors intentionally chosen on the basis of economic class, but Iran’s policy makers, physicians, researchers, and bioethicists must realize that permitting LUDs an unlimited bargaining position will encourage and coerce poor donors to sell their kidneys to rich recipients. Overall, the debate raises the question of whether this transaction should be permitted by biomedical policy and what amount of monetary compensation or reward should be set for living altruistic donations. Although some scholars are in favor of selling human organs to markets for the sole purpose of saving human life [24, 32,33,34,35], many Islamic institutions, as well as the vast majority of Muslim scholars and physicians still do not support this ([14], 178 [36];, 39–40). Unlimited bargaining conditions make the transplantation process a disgrace, as a study shows that only poor individuals sell their kidneys to rich patients [9] because poverty makes poor Iranians vulnerable to exploitation [37]. Iran’s poor donors are forced to become organ vendors as they are mostly “helpless,” “jobless,” “indebted” and “largely destitute” ([38], 625). However, it is hopeful and encouraging that the Iranian government has recently diverted funds from the unrelated kidney transplant program to DD transplantation ([38], 626), and the now 14% of transplants from deceased donors indicates that some progress has been made in deceased kidney transplantation in Iran [5]. Nevertheless, kidneys have mostly been “purchased” from LUDs for transplantation ([5], 4). For example, a recently published single centre study shows that approximately 51.8% of the kidneys received were purchased and 48.2% were donated altruistically ([5], 3). Nejatisafa and others think that the Iranian model of organ transplantation should be reassessed and overhauled before offering it as a successful model to the transplant community in the rest of the world ([39], 940). Discussion Implications of Islam on organ donation and transplantation Islam is a holistic religion that directs every aspect of human life [40]. According to the Islamic tradition, humans are the greatest creations of God on Earth (Quran 95:4). However, God has made humans susceptible to disease and ailments [41]. The Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him, PBUH) has said that “Allah did not send down a disease without having sent down its cure” ([14], 162). The Quran and Prophetic sayings encourage Muslims to actively seek remedies for their ailments [41, 42]. Islam encourages Muslims to seek new methods of treatment and to apply them if they have proved successful [43]. Organ donation and transplantation is a new invention of modern science and technology that has emerged as a lifesaving medical treatment for patients with end-stage organ failure [11]. As all aspects of human life including science and technology in general are part of Islamic teaching, modern science and the medical invention of organ transplantation, in particular, is, therefore, a part of Islamic culture. So, the issue of organ donation and transplantation should be interpreted appropriately in light of the Islamic traditions and its legal jurisprudences. As organ donation and transplantation is a new medical procedure only available since the twentieth century, the issue is not explicitly mentioned in the verses of the primary sources of the Islamic classics such as the Quran (the literal word of The Almighty Allah as dictated to Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] by the archangel Gabriel) and the Sunnah (sayings, actions, works and tacit assents of the Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] and his companions) directly [36, 44,45,46,47,48,49]. As the Quran and Sunnah were written in the seventh and ninth centuries, it is not possible to find direct rulings in the primary sources of Islamic jurisprudence on the permissibility of organ donation and transplantation [36]. Muslim scholars thus prefer to use secondary sources such as the Ijma, the general consensus; Qiyas, the inference, and analogies; and Ijtihad, the exhaustive efforts of Islamic scholars to find the explanation on a particular modern issue in light of the primary sources [14, 47]. If a clear ruling on a particular issue can not be found in the secondary sources, Muslim scholars then prefer to use subsidiary sources such as the Istihsan, preferential reasoning; Urf, customary conventions; and Maslahah, the cannon for public welfare and the common good, to find guidance on the issue derived from the guidelines of the primary sources of Islamic law [14, 47]. Muslim scholars who oppose and support organ donation for transplantation use almost the same verses of the Quran and Sunnah [14, 47, 50, 51], but their opinion about the permissibility of the issue varies with their interpretation of the texts. Geographical and historical differences, cultural and societal diversity, prevailing social customs, and the variety of politico-administrative systems have inevitably led to differing views among Muslim scholars about whether organ donation should be permitted [52]. The variance of opinions between Sunni and Shia communities regarding organ donation further complicates the issue and results in disparities in the laws on organ transplantation between Muslim countries, depending on which sect is in the majority [36]. Sunni Muslims, accounting for between 85 and 90% of total Muslims, and the remaining 10 to 15% Shia both share their juridical guidance of legal orthodoxy as follows: the Maliki, the Shafi, the Hanbali, the Hanafi, and the Jafari. Muslims who belong to the Maliki school live today in sub-Saharan Africa and Egypt; the Shafi believers are currently active in the Indian sub-continent, East Africa, Egypt, and Yemen; the Hanbali Muslims are dominant in Saudi Arabia; and the Hanafi Muslims are widely spread out in the Muslim region and historically prevalent in Turkey, central Asia, Europe, the Middle East, Afghanistan, and the Indian Sub-continent including India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh [14]. Shia Muslims are the majority mostly in Iran, Iraq, Azerbaijan, and Bahrain. While there is a diversity of opinion among Muslims regarding the permissibility of organ transplantation across the world, scholars from the Indo-Pakistani subcontinent who belong to the Ḥanafī school tend to hold contingently permissible views and Shia scholars in the Middle East often hold views that the process is permissible as-is [45]. Due to problematic interpretations of Islamic classic literature and fatwas, Muslim adherents often hold varying opinions on the permissibility of organ donation and transplantation. Consequently, Muslim scholars have discussed the ethical and legal consequences of organ transplantation for many years [52]. Since Arabic remains the dominant language for such debates, discussions, and publications, little is known about the implications of Islam on organ transplantation in the wider international bioethics community [52]. Prejudice regarding the permissibility of organ transplantation is widely disseminated, which contributes to confusion. For example, contentious fatwas banning organ donation are often posted on social media, while those advocating for the biomedical practice are not. Even though a fatwa might be more commonly applied by individuals due to its prominence, it does not give it an inherently higher ethical-legal status [53]. These variations have resulted in a diversity of opinions among Muslim scholars about the permissibility of organ donation and transplantation. Most Muslim scholars, Sunni and Shia, support organ donation and transplantation [47, 51, 54] but their opinions are not universally accepted, as some hold the view that organ procurement contradicts sharia Islamic law [36]. By citing the following Quranic verses (2:195; 5:32; 8:27; 17:70), scholars who oppose organ donation base their stance on the Islamic belief that the human body, whether dead or alive, is a sacred thing that should be treated with care, respect, compassion, and utmost attention [55]. It is thus disrespectful to violate the human body in some way to procure organs or body parts [56]. These scholars reject organ donation because it abuses the human body [36]. Muslim scholars also oppose organ transplantation because human life is a divine gift and the human body, including its integral organs, is an Al-Amanah or a sort of trusteeship that Muslims receive from The Almighty, not the sole property of humans themselves (Quran 4:58). Muslims should therefore maintain this trusteeship [51]. Humans can not donate any organs which are not their own [47]. Because The Almighty has endowed humans concerning their bodily organs (Quran 90:8), giving consent for someone to obtain organs for transplantation by harming one’s body is a breach of trust with The Almighty, which is not permitted in Islam [49]. Muslim scholars also maintain that altering The Almighty’s creation is not accepted in Islam (Quran 30:30). They hold the view that opening the human body to obtain an organ is an act of aggression against the human body and these types of aggression should not be permitted [41, 49]. Scholars view organ donation as an impermissible activity based on the principle of the sanctity and entrustment of the human body. They use the following Prophetic saying “Breaking the bones of a Muslim when he is dead is like breaking it when he is alive” as justification for their argument as aggression toward the human body to be a crime [41]. They also assert that The Almighty will not accept those who alter His creations by cutting the human body and obtaining organs for transplantation as they have committed a wrongdoing. They warn that wrongdoers who alter The Almighty’s creation will be punished in the al-akhirah or the hereafter [51]. Scholars who oppose donating organs for transplantation are in the minority and form small groups among contemporary Muslim scholars and believers [36, 47, 51]. They narrowly focus their argument as they generally use the literal and strict meaning of the verses of the two primary holy scriptures, the Quran and Sunnah [47]. In contrast, scholars supporting organ transplantation base their views on the spirit of the verses of the Quran and Sunnah. They argue that modern medical science has proved organ transplantation to be a successful method of treatment [11]. They support organ donation, as the purpose of Islamic law is to serve the betterment of human society, so organ transplantation should be endorsed legally as it provides benefits rather than degrades the welfare of humankind [47]. Muslim scholars who endorse organ transplantation cite several Islamic principles to support their argument. The Islamic principle based upon the verse of the Quran (2:173) as “al-darurat tubih al-mahzurat” or “necessity renders all prohibited things permissible” is often cited by Muslim scholars to justify organ donation [14, 36, 48]. That is, while organ donation is prohibited in Islamic law, it is permitted if there is a dire necessity. Religious scholars thus approve organ donation for transplantation to preserve lives even though violating the human body is forbidden in Islam. Organ transplantation is conditionally permissible by Muslim scholars based on the principle that the pressing needs of the living outweigh the benefits of the dead. The group of scholars who base their view on the Islamic principle of ‘dire necessity’ generally cite Quranic verses (2:173; 6:145; 16:89) to support their argument. Altruism or eethaar is highly praised in Islam [36]. Saving the life of a human holds great importance in the Quran and Sunnah. Scholars favoring organ transplantation repeatedly refer to the verse of the Quran (5:32) that supports human altruism based on “… whoever saves a life, it will be as if they saved all of humanity”. The Quran encourages helping others and saving a human life [36, 44, 49]. Islam values saving human lives and prioritizing the needs of the living over the dead. The altruism framework thus permits humans to use their bodies correctly and encourages individuals to donate their organs as gifts [40]. The two Prophetic sayings that Islamic scholars apply to organ donation and transplantation are sadaqatul jariyah (an ongoing charity) and kullu-ma’aroofin-sadaqah (all good deeds are a charity) [36]. That is, donating organs to someone in dire need of a life-sustaining transplant is a long-term act of charity. Since organ donation is sadaqatul jariyah, a donor will be rewarded as narrated by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), “when a person dies, all their deeds end except three: a continuing charity, beneficial knowledge, and a child who prays for parents”. The interpretation of the Prophetic saying is that organ donation is one of the most continuing acts of charity that a person performs because the benefits of this type of charity can be reaped both during one’s lifetime and long after one has passed away. The following Quranic verse is also cited by Muslim scholars to validate organ donation: “cooperate with one another in righteousness and piety, and do not cooperate in sin and transgression. Have fear of Allah. Allah is stern in punishment” (5:2). The interpretation of this verse is that Islam encourages Muslims to be careful and cooperative to their communities in ‘righteousness’ and ‘piety’, not in ‘sin’ and ‘transgression’. Muslim scholars thus endorse organ donation as it sustains or prolongs human life [47]. As saving the life of a vulnerable patient is a good act, Muslim scholars affirm that such cooperation is surely a good deed [47], and The Almighty will reward Muslims in this life for their good deeds, as well as in the al-akhirah or the afterlife (Quran16:97). There is also widespread agreement among Muslim scholars and Islamic organizations on the permissibility of living and deceased donor organ transplantation issued in similar rulings, including those from the United Kingdom Muslim Law Council, the Islamic Jurisprudence Assembly Council in Saudi Arabia, the Islamic Code of Medical Ethics, the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore, the Medical Ethics Committee of the Islamic Medical Association of North America, and the Islamic Organization of Medical Sciences [36, 41]. The International Seminar on Organ Donation and Transplantation organized by the Indonesian Council of Ulama together with the Federation of the Islamic Medical Association (FIMA) and the Indonesian Forum for Islamic Medical Studies in Jakarta on 30 July 1996 determined that the human body and its internal organs belong to The Almighty (Quran 2:195) and these divine assets were created for the welfare and benefits of humankind (Quran 2:29), so humans can use organs for the welfare and benefit of the community [14, 51]. It is lawful to obtain organs from a living person that can regenerate such as the bone marrow, skin, a part of the liver, or any non-regenerative organs without which a donor may still survive (e.g., one kidney or a portion of a lung) but organs (e.g., heart, pancreas) which are essential for survival can not be donated. Further, donors must be adequately informed about the potential outcome of transplant procedures [41]. This condition upholds the spirit that Islam preserves by saving human life as stated in the Quran (5:32) ([48], 3273), donating an organ that is not one of a pair to a recipient is risky for donors because it may harm their health. So humans can donate organs that can save the lives of patients that would not put donors in grave danger. Scholars suggest that organs can be removed from a body of brain-dead donors for transplantation if donors or their families give consent and physicians can declare a person dead medically with good understanding [41, 49]. Provisions of Islamic law concerning organ sales While most Islamic scholars endorse organ donation, there is significant disagreement concerning the permissibility of organ sales ([57], 4–5 [36];, 39–40). Most scholars oppose accepting any form of compensation for organs on the basis that the human body and its integral organs are not commodities that can be sold [48]. These scholars base their view on the Islamic principle that, as previously stated, the human body and its integral organs are the sole property of Almighty Allah, and humans are merely its caretaker or steward [58, 59]. Some scholars believe that both the donation and sale of organs are permissible in Islam only when there is no other option available to save a life of a patient. They argue that if the existence of necessity makes the prohibited act permissible (i.e., conditionally permitting someone to donate organs for transplantation), then there is no good reason why such Islamic principle ought not to be used for organ sale. If the life of a patient depended on purchasing an organ, would it not be permitted out of the principle of necessity? A moderate Egyptian Sunni Muslim scholar, Mufti Muhammad Sayed Tantawi, answers the question by arguing that both the donation and sale of human organs are permissible only when there is no other option to save the life of a patient as the existence of dire necessity would make a prohibited act permissible [60]. Tantawi also argues that an organ can be purchased and transplanted into another human body in dire necessity as the removal of greater harm and preserving a human life are the highest priorities in Islamic scriptures such as in the Quran and Sunnah [60]. If the Islamic principle of ‘dire necessity’ can be applied to organ donation, what Tantawi claims is that it can also be applied to organ selling. That is, a person in dire need of an organ should be permitted to buy it for transplantation. Most Sunni scholars oppose payment for organs, while Shia jurisprudence has ruled in favor of payment if the organ is required to save a life [41]. Islamic interpretation opposing organ selling Muslim scholars who support organ donation for transplantation are primarily against organ sales ([47], 734). The Indonesian Council of Ulama in the final Resolution of the International Seminar on Organ Transplantation and Health Care Management from Islamic Perspective with the Indonesian Forum for Islamic Medical Studies (IFIMS), the Indonesian Council of Ulama and the Federation of the Islamic Medical Association refers to the following three propositions: 1) the advocates of the school of thought defined as “milku–al-raqabah” (right over the whole body including internal organs), regard humans to be the owners of their whole body and its internal organs; humans, therefore, can sell their organs or give their organs to others; 2) the advocates of the school of thought defined as “milku-al-manfa’ah” (mere right over the organs), consider that humans have mere rights over their organs; so humans have rights to use their organs and this in turn stipulates the right to lend, but not sell, them; and 3) according to the school supporting “milku- al-intifa” (a sort of trustee over the organs), humans have the right to use their organs only for their own benefit. Humans do not have the right to lend or sell their organs to other people ([14], 162–163). The Ulama (a body of Muslim scholars) who joined this seminar unanimously agree and support the third school of thought Milku-al-intifa [14]. It follows that humans have the right to use their organs, but as the human body belongs to The Almighty, they cannot lend or sell their organs to anyone else. The Resolution concludes that humans have the right to use their organs only for themselves but not to lend or sell their organs to anyone. The Islamic Fiqa Academy in Jeddah in the final announcement of a conference on organ transplantation in March 2009, prohibited humans from selling their bodily organs [57]. The reason, as the Academy announced, is that “the human body is sanctified by The Almighty who had forbidden turning it into an item for commercial sale, purchase, or exchange. Humans must be a reliable guard of his body” ([57], 5). Many other Islamic organizations such as the United Arab Draft Law on Human Organ Transplants (article 7, adopted by the Council of Ministries of Arab countries, Khartoum, 1987) prescribe that the selling of human organs or financial remuneration is always prohibited and that doctors must not participate in or facilitate such an organ transplant if informed of such negotiations [14]. The reason is that the resulting physical health of recipients is not good after such transplantations [14]. An example from Kuwait can be used in this regard. Many organ failure patients went abroad, bought organs, and underwent transplantations between 1986 and 1990. After returning home, many patients had to go to the medical center at Kuwait University due to negative and serious health consequences, including tuberculosis, rejections, infections, contagious diseases, and various forms of hepatitis; four of the transplant recipients were HIV positive and two of these died of AIDS [14]. The Muslim scholar Abdulaziz Sachedina states that the human body is not a commodity that can be turned into a commercial deal or another advantage ([59], 187). The human body cannot be used as a means of negotiation in other than exceptional and unavoidable circumstances. Sachedina argues that organ transplantation is only conditionally permitted based on Islamic jurisprudence as it ensures greater benefits than harms ([59], 185). Muslim scholars warn that The Almighty has imposed restrictions on how humans use their bodies and their integral organs. As organs are the parts of basic human dignity, they can be donated, but engaging in bargaining for their sale is immoral because human life deserves dignity and integrity, making organs worthy of care and protection. Supporting this position, Dr. Amin Muhammad Salam Al-Batush, a Wahhabi scholar, asks the question “is the human body the property of its owner?” ([57], 5). He gives the answer “there is no law, nature, or logic which could permit the sale of human body parts, since The Almighty sanctified and separated humans from other things” ([57], 5). He argues that “saleable goods are those which are detached from the human being, not which are connected to him” ([57], 5). This implies that human organs are an integral part of the human body and should not be considered commodities or resources for sale or that which can be used to solve a financial crisis or to fulfill a basic need [45]. Among Muslim scholars who oppose organ sale, Sherine F. Hamdy states that Egyptian jurists favor organ donation in certain circumstances when there is no alternative for saving a human life without transplantation. She reiterates that there should be no harm that afflicts living donors and no commercial transactions involving organs [61]. She argues that the necessity (Darura) over the welfare of human life (Maslahah) makes organ donation conditionally permissible without exchanging financial benefits [61]. A prominent Egyptian Islamic scholar, Sheikh Zaki Badawi, issued a ruling that states “human organs should be donated, but not sold. It is prohibited to receive a price for an organ” ([62], 156). By citing Quranic verse (90:13), scholars determined that the donor of an organ should receive no financial benefit, effectively ruling out any organ payment system as a viable policy [36]. This means that human organs should not be sold in markets as commodities, but can be donated based on eethaar or selflessness, altruism. Muslim nephrologist, Yassin Ibrahim M. El-Shahat, argues that organ donation is an act of altruism, charity, and benevolence through which the lives of humans are saved ([48], 3273). He persuasively argues that human organs are not commodities and should only be donated for the spirit of love and cooperation with one’s fellow humans ([48], 3273). He argues that viewing one’s organ as a commodity that can be sold in markets is directly an affront to human solidarity and dignity and is strictly forbidden in Islam ([48], 3273). As selling anything involves bargaining, such practice may force donors and recipients to engage in competition for higher and lower prices. Islam condemns such practices because everything, including human organs, belongs to The Almighty (Quran 2:195; 4:29) and, as such, human organs should not be considered commodities. If humans are forcefully placed in markets, they would count as mere objects ([63], 207). As a result, human organs will necessarily become commodities with price tags, so they would no longer be priceless, worthy, and valuable [64]. Organ selling would also undermine donors’ altruistic motivations to donate organs [63]. Selling and buying human organs in a market would disregard the act of organ donation as a gift and undermine its charitable obligations to save a human life [63]. Bioethicist Dariusch Atighetchi argues that monetary bargaining for human organs reduces the altruistic inclination in people and in the relatives of the patient to donate their organs ([14], 180). Why does Islam prohibit organ selling? The practice of organ selling and buying is prohibited in Islam on the basis of several ethical considerations: a) “human dignity” ([48], 3273); b) “exploitation of the poor” ([1], 274 [26];, 345 [47];, 731 [65];, 772); c) “sacredness of human life” [66], 222 [67];, 1326); and d) “respect for humans” ([57], 5–6). This section explains why the sale of human organs for transplantation is not permitted in Islam. Human dignity Scholars see the practice of organ selling as contrary to “human dignity” ([68], 362). Organ selling is strictly prohibited in Islam because it erodes human dignity, placing humans on the market for sale as commodities ([69], 223). While people openly and freely sell and buy many things that sustain human life without having to deal with any moral complaints, the human body and its integral organs are not ordinary products that can be exchanged. They are not produced like caps, hats, t-shirts, and boots, and should not be sold for the need of anyone else. If a human body and its integral organs are considered as objects for exchange it would imply that humans, in general, can be treated as mundane entities, which would undermine human dignity. Islam requires that we recognize the human body and its integral organs as a gift from The Almighty on Earth ([47], 726), so donors may only take risks with their bodies to save the lives of their loved ones inspired by altruism and solidarity. Human organs (e.g., kidneys, liver, pancreas, eyes, etc.) are integral parts of the human body and these are necessary for human life [70,71,72]. Without these, there is no possibility of sustaining a natural life [73]. Advocates of organ sales treat the human body as a “collection of spare parts” ([32], 10), but all organs in humans are integral insofar as they are necessary for normal existence ([73], 143–144). If we lose one of our kidneys or eyes, we can survive, but not the same as before. While the brain is a higher organ than the kidney or liver, a human body is created with two kidneys, and both kidneys are important for complete bodily function. Living life with two kidneys is not equivalent to living with only one. As such, a kidney is an indispensable part of the human body, and the removal of a kidney may cause serious injury or even death. Physicians suggest that people who have a single kidney should be careful with the rest of their life and protect it from injury and that it is best to avoid contact sports such as football, cricket, boxing, hockey, soccer, martial arts, or wrestling [74]. From October 1999 to December 2008, 14 living kidney donor deaths (0.03%) were reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network or identified in the Social Security Death Master File among 51,153 donors within 30 days of donation and 39 donors (0.08%) had died by 12 months after donation [75]. As such, all organs are integral insofar as they are necessary for good health and natural existence. An example from Sherine F. Hamdy also supports this argument: Why did God give us two kidneys? Just as there are two eyes for the function of complete sight and two ears to hear all 360 degrees around us, so are the two kidneys essential to filter toxins throughout the body. With two kidneys, there is extra energy for us to absorb exposure to external or internal insults to the body. When we take out one of the kidneys, there is inflation in the remaining kidney, proving that the function rises. Sometimes a kidney donor will need occasional dialysis because both kidneys are necessary. Like the fibers in our muscles - most of the time, they compensate for one another. Each takes turns working; they don’t all work at the same time. It is like the alternating keys on the piano. God created humans in this way. Each kidney has one million nephrons, and only 10 percent work at a time, taking turns. Why? Why did God give us so much function? The function of the kidneys is to make the toxins in the urine stay under a particular level in the blood … … Because the kidneys carry out such a huge important task, there has to be two of them. And there’s a relationship between them; they compensate for one another. They call this counterbalance. Like the liver, you take a piece of it, a lobe, and transplant it into someone else. And this small lobe will grow to the size of a normal liver, and then it stops. Why doesn’t it keep on growing? How does it know which size to grow? The cells have a memory; these are divine signs that no one understands exactly. Now when you take a piece of this liver from the donor, there are great risks involved. He could die, the donor. When we go on a car journey, we carry a spare tire in the car. And life is an eternal journey, [so] we need the reserves that God gave us. This is why organ transplantation from living donors creates harm to the donors. And we have a legal-ethical principle in Islam: la darar wa la dirar [no harm can be inflicted or tolerated]. And that prevention of harm takes precedence over taking a benefit ([73], 143). So, all integral organs are essential for healthy survival. Without doing serious harm, we should recognize that Islam only permits organ donation for transplantation in cases of extreme necessity to save a life ([48], 3273), so donors may only take the risk to assist and save the lives of loved ones and sick patients inspired by the spirit of altruism and solidarity. The sole purpose of selling organs, however, is to profit financially, which may put poor people in particular on the market as interchangeable commodities. Exploitation of the poor Muslim theologist, Ghulam Haider Aasi, considers that organ selling directly exploits the human body and the poorest and weekest members of society, thus selling parts of it for monetary benefit is forbidden in Islam ([47], 731). Aasi opposes organ sale because monetary incentives may be used to coerce poor and vulnerable people in any society into selling their body parts or organs to wealthy patients. Moniruzzaman ([76], 69), Moazam, Zaman, and Jafarey ([77], 29), and Gill and Sade ([78], 29) see the relation between the sellers and buyers as exploitative, unlike donors who donate altruistically. As most organ sellers are in extreme poverty, they cannot make objective decisions due to their vulnerable position ([79], 146). In contrast, despite being in need, recipients are always the winner in purchasing organs from poor people because buyers are comparatively rich, educated, and well informed, and they can easily convince and coerce poor sellers ([76], 75 [80];, 17 [81];, 53). In addition, organ recipients will usually try to buy organs by paying as little as possible to the vendor. Organ selling is actually not a level playing field as the poor vendor is always coerced by monetary interest and has limited decision-making capacity and bargaining power in terms of fully comprehending the health consequences of organ donation ([82], 1267). Iran is a glaring example of where poor people sell their kidneys to rich recipients [83]. Thus, it is clearly suggested by the World Health Assembly to its member countries that each country has “a responsibility to protect the vulnerable and poor from being exploited as a source of organs for the rich” ([84], 1414). While legalizing a market in human organs would increase the capacity to supply human organs for transplantation, it would also place humans in markets as objects and exploit poor people because the poor remain vulnerable in bargaining situations. For example, LUDs likely sell their kidneys in Iran where a vast majority of kidneys (76%) are currently procured from impoverished donors who often use their money to pay off debts [18]. An empirical study of a randomly selected sample of donors showed that most (84%) LUDs in Iran were from poor areas, 16% belonged to the middle class, and none of them were from wealthy sectors. Of those who received kidneys, 50.4% were poor, 36.2% belonged to the middle class, and 13.4% were wealthy [85]. Kidney recipients may belong to the poor socio-economic class in Iran as it is possible to seek help from charities to pay LUDs for donating organs [19], but the vast majority of LUDs are from socio-economically impoverished sectors of society, and poor vendors are directly involved with recipients in the asymmetrical negotiation process for kidneys. Sacredness of human life Organ selling is “inhumane” and “unacceptable” ([86], 961) as rich recipients wish to purchase healthy organs for securing and sustaining life. Wealthy buyers typically want to purchase healthy kidneys from young sellers. For instance, a cross-sectional study in Iran found that LUDs were younger compared with LRDs ([87], 3210). If selling organs is legally permitted, the poor may be encouraged to sell their organs whatever the medical risk. The principle of Islamic Jurisprudence, however, is to protect human benefit that outweighs the risk. Julian Koplin argues that Iranian kidney vendors endure a range of potential harms as they desperately want to sell their organs to get out of poverty ([88], 8). Moniruzzaman also suggests that Bangladeshi poor people sell their organs and take on high risks of suffering ([26], 171). Organ selling thus erodes the sacredness of human life as only the rich recipient derives benefits because only they can afford to buy organs, violating the principle of justice [89]. Theologian and bioethicist Alastair Campbell states that seeing the human body as an indefinite object which is interchangeable with other objects and commensurable with monetary values is morally wrong ([90], 17). Mario Morelli reinforces the moral dictum of Emanuel Kant and sees human beings as moral agents and ends in themselves, not as merely a means for others to gain an end ([91], 318). What Morelli reveals is that if one donates a kidney for the purpose of beneficence, one does not use oneself as a mere means. Giving up a bodily organ for other reasons, such as financial gain, however, violates human dignity. Treating the human body as a commodity with a monetary value for the exchangeable object is always treating someone as a mere means to an end. This secular viewpoint is consistent with Islamic principles, which consider the human body and its integral organs as sacred things [47, 49]. While advocates of the market in human organs argue that those who are rich have legal and moral rights to buy anything that they wish [32, 34, 35, 92], payment for organs is necessarily degrading and incompatible with basic human values such as social justice, equality and the spirit of solidarity and altruism. Organ selling or the establishment of a regulated market in human organs is very likely to cause harms that outweigh the benefits to sacred human life [83, 88]. Respect for humans Saruhan opines that each human action is evaluated based on intentions ([93], 84). This means that intention is the essential component for the moral evaluation of an action. Intention is the motivating force that engages humans in their actions. Considering this view, I argue that saving a human life by donating organs altruistically is different from selling organs. Despite the risk of surgery and the potential for serious complications in either donating or selling organs, both violate the sanctity of and respect for human life. However, the bodily violation is diminished in Islam if it is overwhelmed by the act of improving others’ welfare and good ([94], 334). Philosopher and bioethicist Mark J. Cherry sees no intrinsic difference between the practice of organ donation and sale, as the main purpose of both is to preserve human lives, eliminating greater harm ([32], 152), but an ethical question arises as to whether these two things are equivalent. For example, Mark Cherry argues that “if it is altruistic for a parent to give a kidney to a child to save his life, it can similarly be altruistic for a parent to sell a kidney to pay for the lifesaving operation” ([32], 152). Despite there being no difference between the intention of a father who wishes to save the life of a child and either donating organs or paying monetary benefits by selling organs for a child’s life-saving surgery, I consider that the nature of such actions is different. Despite the similar intention of the father, the actions are different. Saving the life of a child by donating organs is morally permissible as it would not place the father on the market as an exchangeable commodity. On the other hand, saving the life of a child by selling an organ and paying for a life-saving surgery is a morally wrong action because the human body is not a mere thing, but a blessing and trusteeship from The Almighty Allah (Quran 4:58). The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) prohibited selling what one does not have ownership of (e.g., Tirmidhi 1232). We should thus consider that everyone is reasonably entitled to act differently based upon their particular intention. Islam emphasizes that a person who has planned to donate altruistically will not be blamed for his action in practice as he has good intentions (i.e., to save human lives) [95, 96]. Such an action is perceived as an altruistic expression and moral commitment to save human life [97]. On the other hand, organ selling may place the human body in a market as an everyday product, ignoring and undermining the essential gift as one has the intention of receiving monetary benefits rather than saving the lives of others. Islam thus permits organ donation for transplantation altruistically [97,98,99], while selling organs characterizes the human body and its organs as exchangeable assets [100] to be used to support the benefits and interests of the buyer [19, 76]. The respect for humans is disregarded when the human body and its integral organ are intrinsically considered as exchangeable objects and products. If blood, why not organ sale? Many might argue that if selling blood is legally and ethically permissible in critical circumstances, why not sell human organs. Their argument, the comparison between selling human blood and organs, however, is misleading and inappropriate. We must recognize the fact that human blood and human organs are not the same. As previously mentioned, necessity often makes unlawful things permissible [48, 52, 101]; when there is no alternative way of saving a life, human blood can be sold to save that life. Blood selling is unlawful [14, 102], except when it is the only option to save human life [14], and otherwise should not be permitted. This interpretation is based on the verse of the Quran that states that ‘O Prophet’, “I do not find in what has been revealed to me anything forbidden to eat except carrion, running blood, swine—which is impure—or a sinful offering in the name of any other than Allah. But if someone is compelled by necessity—neither driven by desire nor exceeding immediate need—then surely your Lord is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful” (Quran 6:145). The consensus of scholars is that blood selling is permissible when it is carried out to save a human life, but they argue that this illegal practice should never be permitted. If humans are permitted to sell their blood, it would turn an altruistic act into an illegal practice. On the other hand, human blood and organs are different. Human blood is a replaceable tissue, unlike the internal organs of the human body, and blood donation does not cause as serious a degree of harm to the blood donor’s health as is caused by organ donation. As such, trade in organs should not be permitted as the practice has negative health consequences for donors and seriously dishonours them through the forfeiture of “irreplaceable body parts” ([94], 338), while blood selling does not harm the donor in the same way. Moreover, being a blood donor may have some positive benefits; one example is cited in the American Journal of Epidemiology that finds blood donors are 33 and 88% less likely to suffer from cardiovascular disease and heart attack, respectively ([103], 448). Legal provisions in Islam addressing gift rewarding The World Health Organization (WHO) resolution “preventing the purchase and sale of human organs” asserts that the purchase and sale of human organs for transplantation is exploitative and incompatible with human dignity [104]. This resolution contends that prohibition of organ selling is necessary so as “to prevent the exploitation of human distress, particularly in children and other vulnerable groups, and to further the recognition of the ethical principles which condemn the buying and selling of organs for purposes of transplantation” [104]. Therefore, the WHO urges member countries to adopt appropriate measures to enact policies and regulations forbidding commercial transactions involving human organs [104]. Despite the WHO prohibition on organ selling and monetary transactions involving human organs, in 1987 a well-known Indian Physician, Dr. C. T. Patel, first introduced the term “gift with reward”. Patel argued that “kidney donation is a good act. It is the gift of life. The financial incentive to promote such an act is moral and justified” ([105], 22). Patel was actually justifying the practice of receiving compensation for LUD kidney transplants. Thus, the term ‘rewarding gift’ entered into the professional debate in bioethics literature. What are Muslim scholars’ views on rewarding the gift of organ donation for transplantation? Dariusch Atighetchi sees that there is a difficulty in distinguishing between the sale of human organs and the practice of rewarding the gift received for donations ([14], 178). The reason is that, in both cases, recipients and donors desperately engage in bargaining for organs that makes the issue most critical and debated. The International Islamic Fiqa Academy issued a ruling that, despite organ selling being strictly prohibited, considered monetary gifts to altruistic donors as a debatable issue ([106], 2044). While the Jeddah Council of the Academy of Islamic Law (Resolution no. 26 on organ transplants, 6–11 February 1988) bans organ selling completely, it emphasizes that recipients could consider bearing the expenses or paying compensation to donors as a sign of appreciation that is necessary for altruistic donors’ survival [14]. Sahin Aksoy’s rewarding the gift of altruistic organ donors is a very persuasive argument. Aksoy claims that despite Islam prohibiting organ sale, the giving of a reward for altruistic organ donation can be permitted as Islam does permit exceptions ([107], 468). Aksoy recognizes that human organs are not mere property that can be donated freely and should not even be considered a legitimate part of trade or a way of earning or generating income, but that does not mean that any financial transaction associated with organ donations should be considered forbidden ([107], 468). As Islam permits exceptions, offering financial benefits to donors for altruistic organs does not infringe the sprit of the Islamic principles as it is a natural way of life ([107], 468). As our nature limits human choices and freedom of actions from doing anything that one wishes, one cannot do whatever one wishes with one’s own body. As such, Natour & Fishman are against giving any compensation, price or gifts for altruistic organ donations as Muslim donors may come to expect a heavy reward for their altruism ([57], 6–7). But I support Aksoy ([107], 469) as he views compensation in the form of a limited degree of reward (e.g., half the blood money such as 5000 Kuwaiti Dinars) for altruistic organ donations as a way to encourage donations. He sees financial reward as a mechanism to motivate donors as it can be considered an example of the robust realism of the Islamic way. Aksoy also suggests that some amount of monetary compensation can be offered to donors under state supervision if it encourages people to donate organs and promotes public welfare ([107], 472) According to Aksoy, a limited reward would not coerce altruistic donors to donate organs against their altruism as the reward is limited and fixed. Rather it may motivate donors altruistically to donate organs for transplantation where a regulation should be set under state authority. The government can incentivize charitable donations by providing medals, free medical treatments, or even a set amount of money for the well-being of a donor’s health [108]. Limited and fixed financial benefits as rewards for receiving organs is expressing an appreciation and honor to altruistic donors. Egyptian Islamic scholar Sheikh Yusuf Andullah al-Qaradawi, who opposes organ selling because human organs are not “merchandisable things” to be “bargained over,” believes altruistic donors may receive a gift or a gift of honor (ikramiyya) from unrelated beneficiaries ([57], 5). What he expresses is that bargaining for human organs is prohibited in Islam but offering rewards to altruistic donors as gifts is permissible. The main objective of offering a modest benefit for organs is to give assurances to altruistic donors that the donation does not involve bargaining, but is voluntary, and human life is protected, not exploited or coerced. The permanent committee of a supreme Islamic Judicial Authority in Saudi Arabia issued a ruling that “there is nothing wrong with accepting it (an amount of money as a gift), without you (the recipient) longing for that, and you can respond in kind if you are able to with an appropriate gift, or you can supplicate for him, because the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is reported to have said that “Whoever does you a favor, respond in kind, and if you can’t find the means of doing so, then keep praying for him until you think that you have responded in kind” [109]. This Prophetic verse can be interpreted as offering gifts intrinsically is a moral appreciation by recipients that shows friendship and honour to altruistic donors and is legally and ethically permissible in Islam. As discussed previously, organ donation is a voluntary, altruistic and charitable act [110,111,112,113,114]. Many might argue that altruistic donors might not expect anything in return for donations. I contend that if recipients wish to give some benefits for receiving organs freely, why ought we not to consider it for altruistic donors. Altruistic donors may also receive such benefits. Offering modest benefits as rewarding gifts for altruistic donors should not be considered a morally offensive practice because it would not involve any bargaining and it may not coerce altruistic donors into selling their organs to anyone beyond their altruism. These benefits should be considered as a moral and thankful appreciation by the recipients that do not place altruistic donors or their organs in markets as commodities. When a Muslim carries out a good deed, he or she reserves his or her intention for The Almighty and does not expect any reward in return, as Muslim believers should continue to strive for rewards in the hereafter while rewards are not necessarily seen in the world (see Quran 4:40). Despite Islam not supporting the expectation of receiving a reward in return for good deeds, I contend that offering some benefits intrinsically to altruistic organ donors is not a payment in return for a generous act but consistent with Islamic principles which define the act as being committed without expectations. Insofar as human organs are precious, valuable and sacred things, these are characterized as gifts and should always be donated in the spirit of solidarity and altruism [69, 115, 116]. In a subsequent address to the Transplantation Society, Pope John Paul II also stated that any practice that attempts to commercialize human organs or treats them as exchangeable products must be deemed ethically impermissible [30, 117]. While the Christian Church has long opposed payment for organs donated by living persons, ‘entitlement compensation’ for human organs is permitted because it retains the act of donation as essentially altruistic ([36], 40). In addition, from a Jewish religious moral standpoint, giving a reasonable compensation to donors for their act of ‘self-endangerment’ in saving a life is a good act ([118], 423). Despite Bagheri’s view having been criticised as he supports giving unlimited financial compensation to altruistic LUDs in Iran, his claim is partially substantiated as he sees depriving the donor of receiving gifts or thankful wishes for their generous donations in many societies worldwide as driving forward the acceptability of a regulated market in human organs ([1], 272). For example, the absence of financial compensation for altruistic donors’ post-operative care and well-being has created a black market in many countries of the world, including India, Pakistan, The Philippines, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Bangladesh and many others [76, 77, 119]. My normative argument is that if we may not willingly offer something for receiving organs, will sufficient altruistic donors continue to donate organs willingly? Glasson et al. [120], Delmonico et al. [121], Grazi & Wolowelsky [122], Friedlaender [24] and Novelli et al. [123] have explored various types of incentives for altruistic organ donation, such as providing healthcare expenses, tax relief, educational grants for their children, or pension/early retirement benefits, as well as funeral costs in the case of the deceased donor, to alleviate the current shortage of organs. If altruism is the motivation for organ donation, and as organ donation is considered a charitable gift to the recipient, why should it not be permitted to give any gifts to the donors in return for their altruistic donation? One viewpoint proposed by Delmonico et al. [112] is that the symbolism of gift giving is critical as it is a core social value in many societies. However, while these writers support the notion of offering gifts in return for altruistic organ donations (akin to the Red-Cross giving t-shirts, food, drinks, etc. in their blood donation programs), they are against offering any gift with a financial value. In another publication, Delmonico and his colleagues ([121], 1187) oppose payment for human organs but propose mitigating the burdens on organ donors such as the costs of travel and accommodation for medical examinations and organ retrieval surgery, and loss of wages and expenses during the period of organ removal surgery and recovery, which is described as a neutral act. It is possible to take a different view of the symbolism of gift giving. Although offering a reward (in the form of a modest amount of money) for receiving organs has a monetary value, it should still be considered as a gift. It is a benefit offered in gratitude. Any gift can have monetary value, just as t-shirts, food, or drinks do. The crucial point is that gifts are not to be used as commodities, with their value to be bargained for in an open market. In the case of organ donation, the monetary value of the reward must not be so much as to attract the poor or vulnerable to donate purely in order to receive the reward. As long as these conditions are met, then the offering of a limited and reasonably modest gift in exchange for receiving organs is symbolically appropriate, as long as the organ recipients benefit from the donations. Delmonico et al. ([112], 2004) also believe that the fundamental trust of society including life and liberty should not have any monetary price. They argue that its value is “disregarded when a poor person feels compelled to risk death for the sole purpose of obtaining monetary payment for a body part” ([112], 2004). I contend that this does not mean that the recipient should never offer any monetary reward to the donor. If such reward is permitted, then it should be offered to the donor as a limited amount, without negotiation, and primarily to express the recipient’s appreciation of or gratitude to the donor for their assistance and acknowledgement of the inconvenience endured. This should not lead to organ trade or the attribution of a price tag to any organ. As donors donate organs altruistically, recipients may also offer something else in reward to the potential altruistic donors such as the Iranian government or charities offering a fixed amount of 10 million Iranian rials. It is not just that those who receive an organ for transplantation will have their life saved or improved; those who donate altruistically will not receive any benefits from transplantation. I consider that offering a fixed modest benefit to altruistic donors would be a fair acknowledgement of the organ donation for transplantation. Donors and recipients each benefit from such an altruistic donation and the subsequently expressed thanks. This symbolic gift or financial benefit may vary from country to country and region to region with variations in Gross National Product, Gross Domestic Product, and costs of medical and social care, and daily living expenses. A number of scholars have proposed a fixed amount of financial compensation for organ donors [30, 124, 125], but these come with a larger price tag. I believe that a higher financial incentive for exchanging organs will compel altruistic donors to donate their organs for reasons other than altruism. A limited benefit may secure donors’ safety and thus reduce the potential harms that donors may incur through donating organs for transplantation. We must recognize that the fixed amount of money, is not for the organs, but this benefit is rightly set at a reasonably generous level to show a moral appreciation and religious obligation to the donors. Otherwise, if such benefit is not offered, donors may not always be willing to donate because they may feel worried about their health. Denying such benefits to altruistic donors might equally be considered to be denying patients the right to live. Medical anthropologist, Monir Moniruzzaman, argues that rewards are highly controversial as they “promote the concept that organs are not bought, rather, donors receive a reward for their gifted organs” ([26], 328). He cites two references in favor of his argument: Lesley A. Sharp notes that “reward gifting is an oxymoronic euphemism that downplays the contradictions inherent in attempts to blend altruistic and market principles; rewarding gifting and direct payment occupy different points on the same continuum” ([26], 328); and Robert M. Veatch argues that “rewarding gifting is a blatant corruption of the language as it signifies that the transfer of money is not a ‘reward’, but a payment” ([26], 328). What I understand is that both Lesley Sharp and Robert Veatch see reward gifting as a (direct) payment. We should recognize that payment (direct) does not compel donors to donate against their altruism as long as the payment does not attract donors. What I mean is that, despite the reward being direct, if it is moderate, it will not force people to go against their altruism. Furthermore, I contend that if the reward is fixed, there is no chance for donors or recipients to engage in bargaining. Removing the ability to bargain for increased or decreased payment in exchange for the organ removes the transactional nature of “buyer and seller” and ensures the philosophy of “donor and recipient”. Finally, we ought not to consider this rewarding gift as an exchange of human organs for transplantation. Despite the WHO’s guiding principles and the Istanbul Declaration both opposing material gains or incentives for organ donations globally [126], we should consider that offering a limited, bearable, and fixed rewarding gift for altruistic donation is realistic and pragmatic. First, as healthcare and social welfare coverage is not present in many countries worldwide, altruistic donors may face negative health consequences after their transplantations. As donors need to receive follow-up care immediately after 1 month, 6 months, 1 year and annually thereafter, such fixed benefits will help to assure the full recovery of altruistic donors. After transplantation, donors need costly medication, clinical follow-up care and proper education and counselling on their physical and psychological health and wellbeing. Second, if altruistic donors face negative health consequences, these benefits can properly be used to lessen their physical and psychological suffering. Third, donors need to incur the ancillary costs of organ donation such as the travel expenses, lodging and food while travelling for medical examination and surgery, loss of wages, and other expenses during the period of pre-surgical assessment and organ removal surgery. Reimbursement of these costs should not be considered as the price of the organ; rather it should be considered as part of the expense of follow-up care. If such benefits are not provided to altruistic donors, donors may not always donate their organs freely. As the question of financial compensation for receiving organs becomes unavoidable in the current socio-economic climate in many parts of the world, it is logical that altruistic donors may not always wish to donate altruistically without receiving reimbursement where the safety net of health and social care coverage is virtually absent. Despite the Council of Europe’s “Additional Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine Concerning Transplantation of Organs and Tissues of Human Origin” strongly prohibiting individuals from benefitting financially from donations, this does not prohibit donors from receiving justifiable compensation for their inconvenience to cover post-operative costs and expenses in regard to the loss of income [127]. If we were not to do this, it would denigrate this charitable practice into the immoral and unethical practice of organ selling. Consequently, organs will only be sold to medically suitable patients who have the ability to pay vast quantities of money for the privilege. Conclusions In conclusion, gifts in reward for donating organs are not akin to payments, as long as no bargaining is involved that may exploit a donor’s vulnerability and/or recipient’s corrupt intentions. The reward for organs must be fixed and modest. That it is limited is crucial because if donors could receive unlimited financial benefits from recipients, it may compel poor people into donating their organs without altruism, as currently happens in Iran. A fixed, modest reward would not coerce or exploit the vulnerable and would not compel them to donate organs purely for financial gain because the value of the gift would be absolute. As this gift is fixed (e.g., 10 million Iranian rials) for altruistic donors to express the recipient’s moral and thankful appreciation for receiving organs, such gifts would not encourage donors to sell organs to improve their circumstances in life. Such a gift is not controversial or unethical. As there are several direct and indirect costs associated with organ donation and post-operative care, a pre-defined gift is necessary to ensure the donor’s full recovery and well-being. Despite Islam opposing bargaining between donors and recipients for the exchange of organs, it supports offering a fixed gift for altruistic donation. Permitting such a rewarding gift would be an effective, efficient, and ethical means of obtaining organs for transplantation that will increase the supply of human organs for transplantation, protect donors from harm, and reduce human suffering without legalizing organ trade. It may be time for the government of Iran to revise its public policy and practice in biomedicine to prevent the poor from selling their organs in a regulated market. Aksoy S. A critical approach to the current understanding of Islamic scholars on using cadaver organs without prior permission. Bioethics [Internet]. 2001;15:461–72 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12058770. Newton JD. How does the general public view posthumous organ donation? A meta-synthesis of the qualitative literature. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:791 Available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/791. BioMed Central Ltd. Acknowledgments I would like to thank Professor Ruiping Fan, my Ph.D. thesis supervisor, for his guidance to accomplish this study. I would also like to thank Professor Mark J. Cherry for his guidance to improve the manuscript. Authors’ information Md. Sanwar Siraj received a Doctorate in Islamic law and bioethics with a focus on living donor organ transplantation in Bangladesh. His research mainly focuses on the intersection of Islamic law, ethics, and healthcare issues. Code availability Not applicable. Funding This study was supported by the HKSAR Government Postgraduate Studentship (UGC-allocated funds), Hong Kong. Author information Authors and Affiliations Department of Government and Politics, Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka, Bangladesh Corresponding author Ethics declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Consent for publication The author has approved the article to be published in Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine. Competing interests The author declares that the article does not contain any conflicts of interest. Additional information Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Rights and permissions Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. About this article Cite this article Siraj, M.S. How a compensated kidney donation program facilitates the sale of human organs in a regulated market: the implications of Islam on organ donation and sale. Philos Ethics Humanit Med17, 10 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-022-00122-4	But if someone is compelled by necessity—neither driven by desire nor exceeding immediate need—then surely your Lord is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful” (Quran 6:145). The consensus of scholars is that blood selling is permissible when it is carried out to save a human life, but they argue that this illegal practice should never be permitted. If humans are permitted to sell their blood, it would turn an altruistic act into an illegal practice. On the other hand, human blood and organs are different. Human blood is a replaceable tissue, unlike the internal organs of the human body, and blood donation does not cause as serious a degree of harm to the blood donor’s health as is caused by organ donation. As such, trade in organs should not be permitted as the practice has negative health consequences for donors and seriously dishonours them through the forfeiture of “irreplaceable body parts” ([94], 338), while blood selling does not harm the donor in the same way. Moreover, being a blood donor may have some positive benefits; one example is cited in the American Journal of Epidemiology that finds blood donors are 33 and 88% less likely to suffer from cardiovascular disease and heart attack, respectively ([103], 448). Legal provisions in Islam addressing gift rewarding The World Health Organization (WHO) resolution “preventing the purchase and sale of human organs” asserts that the purchase and sale of human organs for transplantation is exploitative and incompatible with human dignity [104]. This resolution contends that prohibition of organ selling is necessary so as “to prevent the exploitation of human distress, particularly in children and other vulnerable groups, and to further the recognition of the ethical principles which condemn the buying and selling of organs for purposes of transplantation” [104].	no
Bioethics	Should organ selling be legalized?	no_statement	"organ" "selling" should not be "legalized". legalizing "organ" "selling" is not advisable	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2504358/	The Bioethics and Utility of Selling Kidneys for Renal ...	Share RESOURCES As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. Learn more: PMC Disclaimer \| PMC Copyright Notice The publisher's final edited version of this article is available at Transplant Proc Abstract In the fifty years since kidney transplantation was first performed, this procedure has evolved from a highly speculative biomedical endeavor to a medically viable and often standard course of therapy (1). Long-term survival is markedly improved among patients who receive a kidney compared with patients who remain on the waiting list for such an organ (2). As outcomes have improved and more clinical indications have emerged, the number of people awaiting transplantation has grown significantly. In stark contrast to the robust expansion of the waiting list, the number of available deceased donors has remained relatively constant over the last several years (1). The current mechanism for procuring kidneys relies on voluntary donations by the general public, with the primary motivation being altruism. However, in light of the ever-increasing waiting list, it is the authors’ belief that the current system needs to be revised if supply is ever going to meet demand. In response to this critical organ shortage, different programs have been developed in an attempt to increase organ donation. At present, however, no solution to the problem has emerged. This paper begins by outlining the scope of the problem and current legislation governing the procurement of transplantable organs/tissues in the United States. It continues with an overview of different proposals to increase supply. It concludes by exploring some of the controversy surrounding the proposal to increase donation using financial incentives. Though the following discussion certainly has implications for other transplantable organs, this paper will focus on kidney transplantation because the waiting list for kidneys is by far the longest of all the solid organs; and, as it carries the smallest risk to living donors, is the least ethically problematic. Keywords: Bioethics, Transplantation, End Stage Renal Disease On December 23 1954, the first live donor kidney transplant was performed. The donor, Ronald Herrick, gave his kidney to his identical twin brother, Richard, who was suffering from chronic nephritis. Following the transplant, Richard lived for eight years, married, and had two children. Ronald Herrick is still alive today at the age of 73 (3). At that time, and still today, the idea of live kidney donation was fraught with ethical concerns. One of the first rules taught to medical students is that of, “Do no harm”. In the case of the live kidney donor, this injunction appears to be violated, since a healthy individual must undergo surgery in order to procure his/her organ. In order for the operation to be morally acceptable, the benefit to the recipient must far outweigh the risk assumed by the donor. Another morally acceptable reason for the procedure might be that it provides a benefit to the donor. In the case of the two brothers, the benefit was the desire of Ronald to help his brother live. In this manuscript we explore whether, for another donor, the benefit could ethically be something else entirely. Discussion We begin the discussion with a history of the discourse surrounding the procuring of organs in the United States and then explore the controversy surrounding the proposals to increase donation with financial incentives. Living Versus Deceased Donor Transplantation and Current Waiting Lists Patients with advanced kidney disease can receive organs from either deceased or living donors. Outcomes data from UNOS, the United Network for Organ Sharing, have long demonstrated that the best survival rates occur in recipients of kidneys from living donors. For example, five-year Kaplan Meier survival rates for kidney transplants performed between 1995 and 2002 is 90.5 percent for living donor recipients, as opposed to 82.5 percent for patients receiving deceased donor organs (4). Although outcomes with living donor kidneys are superior, there is a large supply-demand discrepancy between the number of individuals willing to donate kidneys and the number of candidates on the waiting list. As of May 31, 2004, there were 88,165 patients awaiting transplantation, 61,960 of whom were waiting for kidneys (5). During 2004, only 16,002 kidneys were transplanted in the United States, of which 9,355 were from deceased donors and 6,647 from living donors respectively (5). While the total number of kidneys transplanted during 2004 represented an increase over years past, it is woefully insufficient to meet the ever-proliferating waitlist needs. Laws Governing Transplantation The burgeoning scarcity of organs is not a new issue. As early as 1968 the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws drafted the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act of 1968 (UAGA). This legislation was designed to serve as a guideline for state governments of the principles and procedures for the donation and receipt of transplantable organs (6). Under this Act, any competent adult has the ability to permit, specify, or forbid the use of his or her body and organs for transplantation, research, or educational purposes after his death. Consent to organ donation can be established by a donor card or will, referred to as an “opt-in” system. In the absence of memorialized intent, the next of kin may determine whether or not donation takes place. The UAGA of 1968 did not make reference to any financial incentives or other monetary issues related to organ procurement, thinking that the matter should be left to “the decency of intelligent human beings” (7). By 1973 all 50 states including the District of Columbia had accepted this Act (8); however, despite widespread endorsement, the shortage of organs continued to escalate. In 1987 the states drafted a revision of the UAGA. The revised legislation banned commercial transactions involving deceased donor organs and simplified the requirement for a valid donor card (9). It also required medical personnel to request consent for organ donation from all suitable patients or their next of kin. In addition, the revised legislation allowed for donors to donate organs, if this was their preference, even when the next of kin disagreed with their decision. Since the UAGA of 1987 was not uniformly accepted by all states, at present most states do not specifically prohibit the sale of organs for transplantation. In addition to the above state legislation, the federal government attempted to resolve the organ shortage with a variety of legislation. The first of these was established in 1984 in the form of the National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA). The act was established by Congress to both alleviate the scarcity of organs and to improve donor-recipient matching through a national system of organ procurement and allotment (10). To aid in their objectives, the NOTA directed the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to establish a nationwide Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), which would provide a central computer registry of potential transplant recipients (11). In contrast to the state act of 1987, the federal act under NOTA in 1984, prohibited commercial transactions involving human organs from live donors (12). Violation of this law is a felony and is punishable by a fine of 50,000 dollars and/or up to 5 years in prison (13). While this Act forbids the use of money in order to acquire, receive, or transfer, any human organ for transplantation, it does allow for “reasonable payments associated with the removal, transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, and storage of a human organ or the expenses of travel, housing, and lost wages incurred by the donor of a human organ in connection with donation of the organ” (14). Congress established the prohibition on the financial incentives for organ acquisition, because they feared that such incentives would prey on the more indigent members of society. Attempts To Increase Supply Through Less Controversial Means One of the main elements of NOTA was that it authorized the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish a Task Force for organ procurement, with the requirement to develop new and more effective ways of procuring and allocating organs. Though the principles of the UAGA and NOTA have been adopted in one form or another in all fifty states, organ donation has continued to be far outpaced by demand. Though there are a number of reasons for this, first, and foremost, there remains a huge shortage of donors-both living and deceased. Greater efforts are certainly being made to get more citizens to become organ donors. One option being considered is an “opt-out” law, similar to what several European countries are currently trying, where there is “presumed” consent unless otherwise specified. The results in Europe have been variable. For example, the opt-out law in Sweden does not seem to have influenced donation rates per million of population, whereas Spain has increased its donation rate, albeit modestly (15). As the head of the Committee for Transplantation at Vienna’s University Hospital, Professor Ferdinand Muehlbacher, noted, “Presumed consent--making the individual opt-out of being an organ/tissue donor--is not a panacea to combating the shortage of donors” (16). In another attempt to encourage and facilitate deceased donor transplantion, policies and and procedures to identify and expedite the allocation of kidneys with unfavorable donor characteristics were developed and implemented. Expanded Criteria Donor (ECD) kidneys represented 15% of deceased donor transplants in 2002, though it should be noted that ECD kidneys have lower allograft survival rates and the most appropriate use for ECD kidneys continues to be debated (17). The main point is that the above efforts, though helpful, are, in and of themselves, insufficient to address the enormous, and growing, waitlist. A “Black Market” For Kidney Transplantation Has Developed As a result of the organ shortage, a black market has developed in which the indigent are targeted and paid for their body parts (18). This system poses additional risks to both donor and recipient. While it may seem as though recipients have nothing to lose by venturing into the kidney black market, the reality is somewhat different. On the one hand, kidney transplantation should be expected to provide patients with longer life expectancy as well as a markedly improved quality of life. In a study reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, the mortality rates were analyzed among over 200,000 patients who underwent dialysis for end-stage renal disease. Of these, some 23,000 actually received a kidney. The overall projected years of life remaining were ten for patients who remained on the waiting list and twenty for those who received a transplant (2). On the other hand, since the sale of organs is not permitted in developed countries, many patients seek out transplantation in third world countries where medical care may be substandard. This system, therefore, has the potential to pose an increased risk of complications and comorbidity to recipients, culminating in inferior outcomes. In support of this notion, in 2003 Friedlaender, a medical doctor in Israel, described a series of eighty patients who underwent commercial living unrelated kidney transplants in Iraq, as the practice is illegal in Israel. Sixty-five percent of the patients had to be re-hospitalized immediately after the procedure and there was a ten percent mortality rate after one year, much higher than would be expected in a modern transplant center (19). Published studies from India also show an increased incidence of viral infections such as hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and HIV acquired through transplantation, in recipients who elected to pay non-related living donors for kidneys on the black market (20). The health risk to the donor may also be considerable in this setting. Besides being subjected to operative risks and potential infectious complications following nephrectomy, reports have shown that donors are sometimes sent home from the hospital too early, and are often administered substandard care as a result of their dire financial straits and educational inadequacies. These donors, with limited access and resources to start with, are not offered follow up care and are discharged without further regard once the procedure has been performed. In the event of an individual dying as a result of donation, there are frequently no systems in place to protect their next of kin or offer compensation for any negligence or damage. Arguments Against the Selling of Organs Concerns raised regarding the selling of organs, some practical and some philosophical, include: 1) Selling of organs puts the healthy donor at risk and is a violation of a core principle of medicine, “Do no harm”. 2) Selling of organs is unfair in that it sets up a two-tier system where the wealthy can purchase organs and the poor are coerced by financial incentives. 3) The idea of selling organs violates religious and community norms and may actually result in a decrease in the availability of organs as groups opposed to this concept may withhold altruistic donation. 4) It is simply immoral to sell organs. Violation of the Principle of “Do No Harm” A principle in medicine is that benefit must outweigh risk. In Western countries, live donation of a kidney is a remarkably safe procedure (the donation of a lobe of the liver is another story). Dr. Thomas Peters, director of the Transplant Center in Jacksonville Florida has recently estimated the mortality rate from living kidney donation at 3 in 10,000. In addition, over 90% of those who have donated a kidney and been given proper medical care have affirmed that they would go through the process again (21). Much of the morbidity and mortality associated with the black market in renal transplantation, discussed previously, could be avoided if legalized systems were in place to protect or provide care for both the donor and the recipient. The benefit to the donor, as well as the recipient and society, could be significant. Mandating reliance on the traditional methods of organ procurement denies the importance that finances play in the current system of organ allocation. For example, the current system allows for financial compensation to everyone but the donor (22). Surgeons, the hospital in which the transplant takes place, and all other parties involved in the process of procurement are compensated for their efforts. In fact, hospitals often bill transplant patients more than twice the hospital’s organ acquisition cost (23). Traditional methods of organ procurement also ignore the cost that society incurs while ESRD patients are on the waiting list. Using a Markov model, Matas and Schnitzler found that a kidney transplant from a living paid unrelated donor could save $94,579 (24). Therefore, a payment to a living kidney donor of $80,000 together with the provision of improved post donation health benefits, would still produce a net financial saving to society compared to providing chronic dialysis therapy for that potential recipient while he waits for a deceased donor kidney. The benefit to recipients in this setting would be the minimization or even avoidance of needing dialysis, resulting in enhanced quality of life and longevity. Thus, theoretically, living kidney donors could be paid up to $80,000, while at the same time saving money and increasing health benefits. An alternative, that might be more acceptable, would be to utilize some other form of compensation such as a college ‘scholarship’ for the patient or a designee (this is discussed in depth later). Two-Tier System for Organ Transplantation and Coercion A concern that has been raised is that selling of organs allows the wealthy to purchase organs while the poor would be “priced out of the market”. For kidneys, at least, this should not be an issue as renal replacement (dialysis or transplant) is covered by HR1, the Medicare Act of 1973, and everyone is entitled to this benefit (25). Selling of organs is also thought to unfairly target the poor. Those in opposition to organ commercialization express the belief that the indigent are unable to act autonomously in the face of potential financial reward, and that such a system involves coercion of those who are underprivileged. It is argued that the exchange between vendor and recipient is not truly free, since most potential vendors are coerced by financial benefits due to their extreme poverty and limited insight. The claim is that the financially disadvantaged do not have the free will to make a truly informed decision when faced with the possibility of financial compensation (26). The idea of free will and informed consent has been discussed by Beauchamp and Childress, both of whom have been very influential in the evolution and development of the field of bioethics. It is attention to autonomy that underlies privacy and confidentiality issues, as well as concerns involving informed consent, as the principle of autonomy allows for individual freedom of action. Beauchamp and Childress define autonomy as, “…personal rule of the self that is free from both controlling interferences by others and from personal limitations that prevent meaningful choice such as inadequate understanding” (27). This definition is often used by bioethicists and other medical personnel to determine procedural policy in medicine. However, examination of this definition reveals that autonomy in its pure form is more fiction than reality, as we are all, to some extent, governed by controlling influences from others. The concept of autonomy stems from a Kantian philosophy and view of the world. Kant, a philosopher in the eighteenth century developed immutable rules by which he felt individuals should live their lives. One of these rules is that each individual is an end in themselves and should be treated as such. According to Kant, one must never be treated as a means to an end. For Kant, seeing as we are all ends in ourselves, and we are meant to act from a sense of duty irrespective of our external circumstances and influences, instituting a principle such as autonomy seems reasonable (28). While his ideas seem laudable, when Kantian principles are applied to real world situations, his philosophy typically breaks down. The problem with the Kantian viewpoint, and also with the principle of autonomy, is that it is too abstract and is not always practical. Real life situations frequently require a subtle understanding of circumstances and motivation and cannot always be decided based on rigid principles. Particularly in the field of health care, individuals have unique experiences and are suffering on a very practical level. The application of rigid principles to their situation may not be advisable. Informed consent, which according to Beauchamp and Childress was established primarily to protect autonomy, is similarly amorphous, and, is admittedly, rarely informed or truly consent. Beauchamp and Childress allude to this when they mention that disclosure of information, a factor necessary for informed consent, is, “ often less vital in clinical medicine than a health professional’s recommendation of one or more actions ” (27). Disclosure of information sounds like a worthy ideal, and would hypothetically generate patients with a real understanding of their situation and options; however, in practice, it is frequently the physicians’ recommendation that makes the difference. “Understanding”, another one of the factors important in informed consent is also not always practical, as “the chances are remote that a subject really understands what he has consented to ” (27). While autonomy may be more fiction than reality, one can still argue that in any case, one group may have less autonomy than another. If one were to take this argument to its logical conclusion, he may have a hard time explaining why a group that he thinks has limited autonomy, namely the poor, needs to be further restricted when they make a decision to sell a kidney. In fact, an argument can be made that allowing an individual to benefit from the sale of his kidney further enhances his autonomy and gives him an opportunity to improve his economic circumstances. Perhaps the better course is to endeavor to change the circumstances that disadvantaged people are living in, as opposed to further restricting their choices. Violation of Religious and Community Norms It has been argued that using financial incentives could alienate religions and cultures and actually reduce the supply of available organs (29). For example, the Catholic Church is opposed to selling organs (30, 31). Also, as Caplan notes, African-Americans are as likely to be turned off by a market in body parts due to their historical experience with slavery and a distrust of the medical system resulting from experiences such as the Tuskegee syphilis study, as they are to be motivated by financial incentives (29, 32, 33). Obviously, it is impossible to know the impact of financial incentives on the supply of organs before such an “experiment” has been attempted. However, the results of a recent study are encouraging. 971 patients in Pennsylvania were contacted in a telephone survey and respondents were asked whether they supported donor benefits as a matter of public policy, and whether they thought that benefits would affect donation rates (34). A primary goal was to examine how public opinion varied with the sociodemographic characteristics of respondents, particularly their ethnicity and whether or not they were registered as donors. The study found support for donor benefits, with 59% of respondents agreeing that “the state should offer incentives or benefits that encourage eligible families to donate a loved one’s organs.” In the adjusted models, nonwhite respondents were twice as likely to support direct payment as white respondents. Importantly, the study did not find that currently registered donors would oppose benefits and reconsider their decision to donate. On the contrary, registered donors appeared highly committed to their donation decision and expressed strong support for benefit programs. The number of respondents opposed to benefits was small, and most were not registered donors (34). 78.7% of the respondents were Christian, 3.1% Jewish, 5.1% “other”, 11.8% “none”, and 1.2% refused to answer or did not know, which mirrors the United States population. The above study is particularly salient with respect to minority groups. Caucasian donors made up most of the estimated 50,524 live kidney donors between 1988 and 2005. In contrast, data from UNOS show that the numbers of donors from historically disadvantaged ethnic groups were much lower: 9,084 for African Americans and 8,136 for Hispanics over the same period. In essence, while African Americans account for 36% of waitlisted kidney candidates, they continue to be underrepresented among living donor recipients and additionally have lower rates of transplantation than Caucasians (35). As far as deceased donor kidney transplants are concerned, there have been 63,830 kidneys from Caucasians over this time period compared to 10,618 and 8,919 for their African American and Hispanic counterparts respectively (36). This is important because historically disadvantaged minorities spend longer on the waiting list for kidney transplantation and have more difficulty finding an organ match than do other ethnic groups. They are also less likely to receive well-matched organs, a situation that contributes to higher risks of graft rejection and ultimately graft failure in this population (37). These data strongly underscore the problems faced by historically disadvantaged minorities. Carefully regulated and monitored programs that offer financial incentives for organs could potentially augment the pool of available kidneys, and help disadvantaged minorities to an even greater degree. This is particularly poignant among the African American population, disproportionately afflicted with ESRD, with both higher incidence and prevalence rates compared to Caucasians (38, 39). For the reasons mentioned above, and the fact that six antigen matches are given to patients preferentially, irrespective of the time on the waiting list, in the years 2001–2002 the median number of days spent on the waiting list for Caucasians with ESRD was 1,312, while the number of days for African Americans and Hispanics was not even estimated since fewer than half of those on the list were transplanted (40). In keeping with historical data, improved rates of transplantation and the greater use of living donors in these patient populations would be expected to enhance life expectancy and patient survival. It should be noted that an attempt has recently been made to increase the availability of kidneys for minorities by the 2004 decision of UNOS to remove the necessity of B-locus matching, though the practical results of this decision are not yet fully known. The Morality of Selling Organs The last of the arguments discussed is best typified by the words of Mill, a 19th century philosopher, “For if (an opinion) were accepted as a result of argument, the refutation of the argument might shake the solidity of the conviction; but when it rests solely on feeling, the worse it fares in argumentative contest, the more persuaded its adherents are that their feeling must have some deeper ground, which the arguments do not reach; and while the feeling remains, it is always throwing up fresh intrenchments of argument to repair any breach in the old ” (41). Thus, when the above arguments are countered, the invariable response is that the selling of human body parts is simply inherently immoral. Clearly, there is not much that can be said to convince someone with such an opinion of the need for selling kidneys; however, those who favor this argument should realize that people are engaged in the selling of body tissue in this country today. Young female college students are targeted by people who desperately want children, and are paid for their oocytes. There are men who choose to donate their sperm in exchange for financial compensation. People also sell blood, and in fact are encouraged to do so in times of need. While blood donors end up regenerating the blood that they supply, they are also subject to minimal risk, including infection and a decreased blood store for the period it takes for their red blood cells to regenerate. Lastly, those who feel that a system for organ selling should not be legalized are turning a blind eye to the abuse that the people they are trying to protect are suffering at the hands of the black market. The reality is that the organ shortage needs to be addressed in a way that will increase donations and until it is, the sale of organs will continue on the black market. A strong argument can be made that the welfare of both those who are waiting for organs and those who are willing to sell them should not be compromised for the sake of philosophy. If someone is determined to accept the immorality of organ selling as a self-standing principle, they must also accept that there are other, equally important concerns that will be overridden as a result. Some of these include allowing people to die when they could have otherwise been saved and denying competent individuals the right to make choices. Other Types of Financial Remuneration While arguments in favor of the selling of kidneys may be persuasive, there is always the possibility of abuse if a pure market system is adopted. For example, there is the potential for kidneys to be traded over the Internet or through other difficult to regulate media. In response, other financial incentives have been proposed. One such alternative is a “lump sum” futures market approach whereby a donor could name either a person or a charitable beneficiary if his organs were procured for donation purposes. This system does not necessarily involve cash exchanges, but may include such alternatives as payment of funeral expenses. In this way, there might be less financial coercion for those willing to donate. It should be noted that in the recent article by Bryce et al, of the five types of benefits included in their survey all were favored by a majority of respondents; however, direct payment received the lowest level of support (84% medical expenses, 81% favored funeral benefits, 78% travel/lodging expenses, 73% charitable contributions, and 53% direct payment) (34). The other model is one of renewable contracts in which people who consistently express the desire to donate are awarded preferential treatment for organs should the need arise. However, this model is problematic on several grounds, including the possibility of further worsening the inequity within the current system. It also raises the hypothetical philosophical quandary of elevating those who exhibit the willingness to undergo one act of beneficence above those who exhibit a lifetime of sustained beneficence on the part of another (42). Summary In conclusion, many programs have been developed over the years to try and increase the organ donation rate; however none of these programs have been completely successful and the number of patients on the kidney transplant waiting list continues to increase. Those against financial incentives for the donation of organs rely primarily on a Kantian argument of autonomy and arguments about the inherent lack of morality of organ selling. However, the reality we are facing requires an honest reappraisal of the situation. Financial incentives would very likely increase the pool of donors. While any system involving financial incentives would have to be carefully regulated, it has the potential to afford everyone involved much benefit. In addition to increasing the pool of donors, such a system may act preferentially to benefit those from lower income groups, who frequently have reduced access to transplantation. Whether the incentives take the form of renewable contracts, market based proposals, or lump sum future markets, it is important to prevent the current organ scarcity from becoming an even greater problem. In response to this problem, the Institute of Medicine is reportedly working with an expert panel to study various options for increasing organ donation, including the use of financial incentives for both living and deceased donors (34, 43). This has coincided with a growing interest in this topic among the general public as demonstrated by recent op-ed pieces in high profile newspapers such as The Economist (44, 45). Acknowledgments This work was supported in part by grants from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (RO1 DK069909 and R21 DK070980 to J.H.L.). Footnotes Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. 8. The national Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) was organized in 1982 to promote uniformity of State Law. Ann McIntosh, Comment Regulating the Gift of Life 65 WASH.L.REV.171, 171.n.8 (1990)	The Morality of Selling Organs The last of the arguments discussed is best typified by the words of Mill, a 19th century philosopher, “For if (an opinion) were accepted as a result of argument, the refutation of the argument might shake the solidity of the conviction; but when it rests solely on feeling, the worse it fares in argumentative contest, the more persuaded its adherents are that their feeling must have some deeper ground, which the arguments do not reach; and while the feeling remains, it is always throwing up fresh intrenchments of argument to repair any breach in the old ” (41). Thus, when the above arguments are countered, the invariable response is that the selling of human body parts is simply inherently immoral. Clearly, there is not much that can be said to convince someone with such an opinion of the need for selling kidneys; however, those who favor this argument should realize that people are engaged in the selling of body tissue in this country today. Young female college students are targeted by people who desperately want children, and are paid for their oocytes. There are men who choose to donate their sperm in exchange for financial compensation. People also sell blood, and in fact are encouraged to do so in times of need. While blood donors end up regenerating the blood that they supply, they are also subject to minimal risk, including infection and a decreased blood store for the period it takes for their red blood cells to regenerate. Lastly, those who feel that a system for organ selling should not be legalized are turning a blind eye to the abuse that the people they are trying to protect are suffering at the hands of the black market. The reality is that the organ shortage needs to be addressed in a way that will increase donations and until it is, the sale of organs will continue on the black market. A strong argument can be made that the welfare of both those who are waiting for organs and those who are willing to sell them should not be compromised for the sake of philosophy.	yes
Bioethics	Should organ selling be legalized?	no_statement	"organ" "selling" should not be "legalized". legalizing "organ" "selling" is not advisable	https://www.cram.com/essay/Human-Organs-Should-Not-Be-Legalized-Essay/P3VDSJTAYHMQW	Human Organs Should Not Be Legalized Essay - 1131 Words \| Cram	Human Organs Should Not Be Legalized Essay Organ transplants have become a life-saving therapy for thousands of people, and the demands for organs from patients with organ failure for exceeds the supply. While every day, about 18 persons dies because they are waiting on an organ, I disagree with the sales of human organs being legalized. The sale of human organs should not be legalized because it will benefit the wealthy but pressure the poor to sacrifice their own health, it would be more difficult to obtain an organ if donors can sell them and people may think they can use their body for profit. Yuri, a 29-year-old Egyptian man residing in the outskirts of Cairo, worked an average of 12 hours a day on a bus calling out destinations at bus stops and collecting passengers ' fees. When…show more content… Sam Vaknin portrays a grim picture of the current black market trade in human body parts. Those who sell their organs are usually individuals in developing nations in extreme poverty who make very little from the sale, while those who transport the organs usually make a fortune reselling the organs to recipients in rich, developed countries. Part of the organ trade involves the abduction of individuals, including children, and the theft of their organs. Vaknin applauds the willingness of the American Medical Association to investigate "the effects [that] paying for cadaveric organs would have on the current shortage" of organs. He concludes that the current international ban on organ sales has produced the black market trade, and it would be "better to legalize and regulate the trade than transform it into a form of organized crime. Deep down inside all of us want to do well and have a better world. So many people are dying today because of the shortage of organ donors and the United States government is doing nothing about it but they are also making a profit from this. Human organ sales should not be legalized; people living in poverty can’t afford to pay for an organ, those who are willing to give an organ may not want to give one because they can sell them and get paid. Lastly, people think they can make a good profit from selling organs because of how their life is. Let’s think before we act and make this a better world for Related Documents According to the World Health Organization, the illegal trade in kidneys has risen to such a level that an estimated ten thousand black market operations involving purchased human tissue and organs now take place annually. Organ donations can create a brewing ground for murky crimes! Everything from body snatching, transplantation tourism, involuntary donation, and, the black market organ trade. It is unfortunate that these crimes are on the rise. However, if government legislation were to gain control over organ donation and make ethical organ donation possible, then everyone can benefit. The people who truly need the organs would receive them, and the people who honestly want to donate to help save a life can donate. Black magic is another example as to why a policy would be beneficial. There are cases when organs are used for illicit experimentations from unethical scientists. This is not only unethical but also a biohazard to the general public. No illegal acts or doings just for the simple monetary gain will occur. It is the people who suffer most in the end from these wretched crimes. Cash and other materialistic rewards cloud the correct mental state of those in the unfortunate situation of needing an organ transplant. People will even go as far as selling their own egg or sperm nowadays, for simply the monetary reward. There are people who would give anything to… Joanna Mackay’s essay, Organ Sales Will Save Lives speaks for itself. It is what the world has been going through for more than two decades up to this point. The shortage within the supply of organs, in this case, Kidneys. Kidneys are at a high demand not just domestically but internationally and that is where the problem began to get uncontrollable. In the year 2000, 2,583 Americans died while waiting for a Kidney transplant. While internationally the number sat right around 50,000 people. With the sale of organs being illegal internationally, that is what makes the demand so high. In the essay, an example was given about the demand. “When ‘desperately wanted goods’ are made illegal, history has shown that there is more opportunity for corruption… In MIT student Joanna Mackay’s article “Organ Sales Will Save Lives” she focuses on why organ sales should be made legal. She researches information about how people are dying due to minimum organs, third world donors, moral issues and the advantage to government regulation to argue her point that organ sales should be available if one desires. Joanna's presents how people are dying and suffering from the lack of organ sales. She states how dialysis is a way of treating kidneys, but, it is not permanent and there are side effects such as: feeling tired and faint. A live kidney has more benefits than a cadaverous one. Mackay points out how 2,583 Americans died while… The patient is given a new kidney, but the donor obtains nothing. The doctors and nurses are even paid for performing the operation. Of course the donor will have that heart-warming, inspirational sensation of helping another human being, but this isn’t always enough. In the perfect place, altruism would be enough, but in this day and time, money is the whole kit and caboodle. Most people would claim that authorizing the sale of organs will take advantage of the poorer people in the third world countries, but that’s already happening. The organ seller does usually collect most of the money promised, but it doesn’t make a dent on their financial struggles. The threat of a $50,000 fine and five years in prison (Finkel 26), the up-to-date ban is not successful in averting illegal organ sales and operations. The underprivileged families don’t need more harsh and rigorous punishments, on the contrary they need just the opposite. If organ sales were made lawful, it could be controlled and supervised by the government. By regulating this, education and details could be used in the application procedure. Regulation would guarantee that the seller is legitimately rewarded and they would know the health risks and precautions. In the illegal organ trade, surgeons accumulate most of the buyer’s money for putting their careers in danger and the brokers also receive a pretty hefty cut, but if this… In MIT Student Joanna MacKay’s essay, Organ Sales Will Save Lives, she argues that the selling of human organs should be legalized. She mentions that government regulation of human organs would save lives since people are suffering and dying. No drugs can cure a failed kidney so people use dialysis, a long, expensive, temporary solution. MacKay notes that in the year 2000 there were 2,583 American deaths waiting for a transplant and 50,000 worldwide (157). There is a long wait list for transplants so people turn to the black market to buy a live kidney, versus a cadaverous transplant. These live kidneys last longer but cost $150,000 (MacKay 157). Some people that would benefit from the legalization of organ sales would be people in third-world countries living in poverty. These people selling kidneys on the black market receive $1,000 after the… "Organ Sales Will Save Lives" by Joanna MacKay explains the problem that thousands of people are complaining about. This problem is that thousands of people are begging to buy a kidney, but the government doesn't allow people to sell human organs. This outcome causes thousands of people to die each year, creating chaos around the world. Mackay and the other author’s want to convey their message to the government on why this catastrophic problem should be fixed. Since this essay is written on the subject of organ sales and Mackay’s essay was written back in 2004 some information may be dated, however not much has changed to fix this issue.… “Every 14 minutes someone is added to the kidney transplant list”, the National Kidney Foundation is not playing around. Statistically speaking that is a lot of people in need of a vital organ. The author Joanna Macay talks about the need for organ donations in her Article “Organ Sales will Save Lives”. Macay disputes her case briefly when stating her thesis in the first paragraph. She goes on to give her opinion that the selling of organs should be built to become legal. More specifically the selling of kidneys.… If there was a statistic that backed up organ legalization as far as how many lives would be saved per year, would it be immoral for a person to be in approval of legalization? Miriam Schulman, the director of Markkula for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University, who wrote Kidneys for Sale: A Reconsideration, believes it goes far beyond saving lives. Anthony Gregory, a research fellow and student programs director at the Independent Institute, and the author of Why Legalizing Organ Sales Would Help Save Lives, End Violence, has similar beliefs as Schulman. Both authors explain how legalizing does not only benefit the rich, but can also benefit the poor as well in other ways; what the need is to what is actually available, such as how many kidneys are available to how many are actually donated; and explains what the people who… In the article, "Organ Sales Will Save Lives, by Joanne MacKay, she appeals to the readers’ emotions by raising awareness that there are thousands of people in the world that die every year due to not enough life-saving organs, specifically kidneys. End Stage Renal Disease is when the kidneys stop working and the patient must endure grueling dialysis treatments and put on the transplant list, where they wait for a very long time for a cadaver kidney donation (MacKay ##). With only these options, some patients look to the black market to purchase a kidney, because it is banned in the United States. MacKay's argument is that "Governments should not ban the sale of human organs; they should regulate it. Lives should not be wasted; they should… Organ selling needs to be legal since other forms of sales from one human to another are allowed, it can lower the cost of the deficit and may increase profit for the donor, and it will dramatically decrease the quantity of people on the waiting list for a viable organ.… Should organs be legal to sell around the world? Sally Satel, a practicing psychiatrist and kidney receiver, believes so. Satel states that there is a global organ shortage, and that has to do with kidney selling being illegal. In order to make organ selling legal, one would have to price a kidney at $50,000, and implement rigorous health screening. However, what Satel argues in “Why We Need a Market for Human Organs,” reprinted from The Wall Street Journal, is a high risk, high reward deal task in that if everything goes according to plan, everyone is has a new kidney (in theory). On the other hand, if one thing goes bad, then millions can be without a kidney, or worse die (again, all in theory).… In “Thinking the Unthinkable: Organ Sales,” published in The Boston Globe on July 19, 2003 by Richard A. Epstein, he discusses a major problem in the health and wellbeing of people in the United States, the shortage of organs. He also brings up a solid reasoning to legalize the sales of organs to help get people off the waiting list and living health lives. He points out that we praise people that donate them, but if the party was to receive compensation people would be more apt to part with their organs.… Those who concurred on the lawfulness of organ sale have shown few facts that support the acts. As of March 6, the waiting list for all potential recipients for organ transplants was 11,143, and the waiting list for kidneys alone remains at 91,015. This leaves 10,185 (a decrease) dropped from deceased donors and 5,232 from living donors. They just underscore how the kidneys are scarce, says, Margaret Mclean, director of Applied Ethics. Approximately, 17 people die every day because they are waiting for a vital organ transplant. The proponents try to increase the number of donors from the dot on the driver’s license for donations. There are some U.S and international laws against kidney sales. For example, some sell his or her kidneys to get enough money to buy an iPad or an IPhone. The black market businesses have estimated that they sale organs ileally for roughly 75,000 dollars per year. Many do not want to donate their organs because of real fear. The black market has valued human organs at five thousand dollars each, so they report. They suggest sales of organ may be for itself. Some people who disobey the laws are increasing to a large scale number. On the other hand, there are those who believe that it might be better to legalize the sale of… Have you ever thought about the possibility of selling their own organs for transplantation? The question, of course is wild, but practice shows that from time to time, is in a difficult financial situation of the inhabitants of our country are beginning thinking outloud about using this opportunity to help others and make some money at the same time. About 75,000 Americans are on the waiting list for kidney transplants. But in the coming year, just 18,000 will get them.(1) Many people believe that the human body can perfectly function without parts of it organs and can live a long life afterwards. However, selling your organs is morally wrong, simply…	Most people would claim that authorizing the sale of organs will take advantage of the poorer people in the third world countries, but that’s already happening. The organ seller does usually collect most of the money promised, but it doesn’t make a dent on their financial struggles. The threat of a $50,000 fine and five years in prison (Finkel 26), the up-to-date ban is not successful in averting illegal organ sales and operations. The underprivileged families don’t need more harsh and rigorous punishments, on the contrary they need just the opposite. If organ sales were made lawful, it could be controlled and supervised by the government. By regulating this, education and details could be used in the application procedure. Regulation would guarantee that the seller is legitimately rewarded and they would know the health risks and precautions. In the illegal organ trade, surgeons accumulate most of the buyer’s money for putting their careers in danger and the brokers also receive a pretty hefty cut, but if this… In MIT Student Joanna MacKay’s essay, Organ Sales Will Save Lives, she argues that the selling of human organs should be legalized. She mentions that government regulation of human organs would save lives since people are suffering and dying. No drugs can cure a failed kidney so people use dialysis, a long, expensive, temporary solution. MacKay notes that in the year 2000 there were 2,583 American deaths waiting for a transplant and 50,000 worldwide (157). There is a long wait list for transplants so people turn to the black market to buy a live kidney, versus a cadaverous transplant. These live kidneys last longer but cost $150,000 (MacKay 157). Some people that would benefit from the legalization of organ sales would be people in third-world countries living in poverty. These people selling kidneys on the black market receive $1,000 after the… "Organ Sales Will Save Lives" by Joanna MacKay explains the problem that thousands of people are complaining about.	yes
Intellectual Property	Should patents apply to software?	yes_statement	"patents" should "apply" to "software".. "software" should be eligible for "patents".	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent	Software patent - Wikipedia	A patent is a set of exclusionary rights granted by a state to a patent holder for a limited period of time, usually 20 years. These rights are granted to patent applicants in exchange for their disclosure of the inventions. Once a patent is granted in a given country, no person may make, use, sell or import/export the claimed invention in that country without the permission of the patent holder. Permission, where granted, is typically in the form of a license which conditions are set by the patent owner: it may be free or in return for a royalty payment or lump sum fee. Patents are territorial in nature. To obtain a patent, inventors must file patent applications in each and every country in which they want a patent. For example, separate applications must be filed in Japan, China, the United States and India if the applicant wishes to obtain patents in those countries. However, some regional offices exist, such as the European Patent Office (EPO), which act as supranational bodies with the power to grant patents which can then be brought into effect in the member states, and an international procedure also exists for filing a single international application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), which can then give rise to patent protection in most countries. These different countries and regional offices have different standards for granting patents. This is particularly true of software or computer-implemented inventions, especially where the software is implementing a business method. On 21 May 1962, a British patent application entitled "A Computer Arranged for the Automatic Solution of Linear Programming Problems" was filed.[1] The invention was concerned with efficient memory management for the simplex algorithm, and could be implemented by purely software means. The patent struggled to establish that it represented a 'vendible product'. "The focus of attention shifted to look at the relationship between the [unpatentable] computer program and the [potentially patentable] programmed computer".[2] The patent was granted on August 17, 1966, and seems to be one of the first software patents, establishing the principle that the computer program itself was unpatentable and therefore covered by copyright law, while the computer program embedded in hardware was potentially patentable.[3] Most countries place some limits on the patenting of inventions involving software, but there is no one legal definition of a software patent. For example, U.S. patent law excludes "abstract ideas", and this has been used to refuse some patents involving software. In Europe, "computer programs as such" are excluded from patentability, thus European Patent Office policy is consequently that a program for a computer is not patentable if it does not have the potential to cause a "technical effect" which is by now understood as a material effect (a "transformation of nature").[4] Substantive law regarding the patentability of software and computer-implemented inventions, and case law interpreting the legal provisions, are different under different jurisdictions. In Australia, there is no particular exclusion for patents relating to software. The subject matter of an invention is patentable in Australia, if it is a manner of manufacture within the meaning of section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies.[5] The High Court of Australia has refrained from ruling on the precise definition of manner of manufacture stating that any such attempt is bound to fail for the policy reason of encouraging national development in fields that may be unpredictable.[6] In assessing whether an invention is a manner of manufacture, the High Court has relied on the inquiry of whether the subject of the claims defining the invention has as its end result an artificially created state of affairs.[6] In a decision of the Federal Court of Australia, on the patentability of an improved method of representing curved images in computer graphics displays, it was held that the application of selected mathematical methods to computers may involve steps which are foreign to the normal use of computers and hence amount to a manner of manufacture.[7] In another unanimous decision by the Full Federal Court of Australia, an invention for methods of storing and retrieving Chinese characters to perform word processing was held to be an artificially created state of affairs and consequently within the concept of a manner of manufacture.[8] Nevertheless, in a recent decision on the patentability of a computer implemented method of generating an index based on selection and weighing of data based on certain criterion, the Full Federal Court of Australia reaffirmed that mere methods, schemes and plans are not manners of manufacture.[9] The Full Court went on to hold that the use of a computer to implement a scheme did not contribute to the invention or the artificial effect of the invention.[9] The subject matter of the invention was held to be an abstract idea and not a manner of manufacture within the meaning of the term in the Patents Act. The same Full Federal Court in another decision regarding the patentability of an invention regarding a method and system for assessing an individual's competency in relation to certain criterion, reiterated that a business method or mere scheme were per se are not patentable.[10] In principle, computer software is still a valid patentable subject matter in Australia. But, in circumstances where patents have been sought over software to merely implement abstract ideas or business methods, the courts and the Commissioner of Patents have resisted granting patent protection to such applications both as a matter of statutory interpretation and policy. In Canada, courts have held that the use of a computer alone neither lends, nor reduces patentability of an invention. However, it is the position of the Canadian Patent Office that where a computer is an "essential element" of a patent's claims, the claimed invention is generally patentable subject matter.[11] In China, the starting time of software patent is relatively late. Before 2006, software patents were basically not granted, and software and hardware had to be combined when applying for a patent. With the development of network technology and software technology, China's patent examination system has been constantly updated. Recently, the design idea of the software itself has been allowed to apply for patent separately, instead of requiring to be combined with hardware. However, software patent writing requirements are relatively high. Software patents can be written as either a product or a method, depending on the standards of review. However, no matter what form it is written in, it is difficult to highlight the creativity of the scheme, which requires specific case analysis. Software that can be patented mainly includes (but is not limited to): (1) Industrial control software, such as controlling the movement of mechanical equipment; (2) Software to improve the internal performance of the computer, such as a software can improve the virtual memory of the computer; Within European Union member states, the EPO and other national patent offices have issued many patents for inventions involving software since the European Patent Convention (EPC) came into force in the late 1970s. Article 52EPC excludes "programs for computers" from patentability (Art. 52(2)) to the extent that a patent application relates to a computer program "as such" (Art. 52(3)). This has been interpreted to mean that any invention that makes a non-obvious "technical contribution" or solves a "technical problem" in a non-obvious way is patentable even if that technical problem is solved by running a computer program.[12] When the EPO examines a patent application with questionable subject matter eligibility, their approach is to simply[dubious – discuss] disregard any ineligible portions or aspects and evaluate the rest.[13] This is notably different from the U.S. approach (see below). Computer-implemented inventions that only solve a business problem using a computer, rather than a technical problem, are considered unpatentable as lacking an inventive step (see T 258/03). Nevertheless, the fact that an invention is useful in business does not mean it is not patentable if it also solves a technical problem. A summary of the developments concerning patentability of computer programs under the European Patent Convention is given in (see G 3/08) as a response of the Enlarged Board of Appeal to questions filed by the President of the European Patent Office according to Article 112(1)(b)EPC.[needs update] United Kingdom patent law is interpreted to have the same effect as the European Patent Convention such that "programs for computers" are excluded from patentability to the extent that a patent application relates to a computer program "as such". Current case law in the UK states that an (alleged) invention will only be regarded as an invention if it provides a contribution that is not excluded and that is also technical. A computer program implementing a business process is therefore not an invention, but a computer program implementing an industrial process may well be. In India, a clause to include software patents was quashed by the Indian Parliament in April 2005.[16] However, following publication of the new guidelines on the examination of computer-related inventions on 19 February 2016, the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade marks accepts applications for software patents, as long as the software is claimed in conjunction with a novel hardware.[17] On 30 June 2017, revised guidelines on the examination of computer related inventions were published. This 2017 guidelines provides clarity on patentability of software invention in India, i.e., the claimed computer-related invention needs to be ascertained whether it is of a technical nature involving technical advancement as compared to the existing knowledge or having economic significance or both, and is not subject to exclusion under Section 3 of the Patents Act.[18] In 2019, the Court observed, In today’s digital world, when most inventions are based on computer programs, it would be retrograde to argue that all such inventions would not be patentable. Innovation in the field of artificial intelligence, blockchain technologies and other digital products would be based on computer programs, however the same would not become nonpatentable inventions – simply for that reason. It is rare to see a product which is not based on a computer program. Whether they are cars and other automobiles, microwave ovens, washing machines, refrigerators, they all have some sort of computer programs in-built in them. Thus, the effect that such programs produce including in digital and electronic products is crucial in determining the test of patentability. Patent applications in these fields would have to be examined to see if they result in a “technical contribution”, it added. Further elaborating on the usage of the term ‘per se’ in Section 3(k), the Court said, The words ‘per se’ were incorporated so as to ensure that genuine inventions which are developed, based on computer programs are not refused patents.[19] With respect to the term per se, the joint parliamentary committee had expressed the following view: In the new proposed clause (k) the words: “per se” have been inserted. This change has been proposed because sometimes the computer programme may include certain other things, ancillary thereto or developed thereon. The intention here is not to reject them for grant of patent if they are inventions. However, the computer programs as such are not intended to be granted patent. This amendment has been proposed to clarify the purpose.[20] Software-related inventions are patentable. To qualify as an invention, however, there must be "a creation of technical ideas utilizing a law of nature"[21] although this requirement is typically met by "concretely realising the information processing performed by the software by using hardware resources".[22] Software-related inventions may be considered obvious if they involve the application of an operation known in other fields, the addition of a commonly known means or replacement by equivalent, the implementation in software of functions which were previously performed by hardware, or the systematisation of known human transactions.[23] In 1999, the allowance rate for business method patents at the Japan Patent Office (JPO) reached an all-time high of roughly 35 percent. Subsequently, the JPO experienced a surge in business method patent filings. This surge was met with a dramatic decrease in the average grant rate of business method patents during the following six years; it lingered around 8 percent between 2003 and 2006 (8 percent is extremely low in comparison to the average of 50 percent across all technical fields). Since 2006, the average grant rate for business method patents has risen to the current rate of roughly 25 percent.[24] In New Zealand computer programs are excluded from patentability under the Patents Act 2013,[25] but guidelines permitting embedded software were added since the initial Patents Bill.[26] From 2013 computer programs 'as such' are excluded from patentability. The as such wording rules out only those software based patents where novelty lies solely in the software. Similar to Europe.[27] In the Philippines, "schemes, rules and methods of performing mental acts, playing games or doing business, and programs for computers" are non-patentable inventions under Sec. 22.2 of Republic Act No. 8293, otherwise known as the "Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines". In South Africa, "a program for a computer" is excluded from recognition as an invention by section 25(2) of the Patents Act.[28] However, this restriction applies "only to the extent to which a patent or an application for a patent relates to that thing as such"[29] and should not prevent, for example, a product, process, or method which may be implemented on a computer from being an invention, provided that the requirements of novelty and inventiveness are met. In South Korea, software is considered patentable and many patents directed towards "computer programs" have been issued.[30] In 2006, Microsoft's sales of its "Office" suite were jeopardized due to a possible patent infringement.[31] A ruling by the Supreme Court of Korea found that patents directed towards automatic language translation within software programs were valid and possibly violated by its software.[31] As like as 52(2) of the European Patent Convention (EPC), section 9 of the Thai Patent Act 1999 states that Thai patent law does not include software (or computer program) from patentability because the computer software is not considered as an “invention”, in which it is not the idea of the product itself. Hence, the software is considered as the manual or instruction that was controlled by users to perform the tasks.[32] A software patents law in Thailand has been controversial debates among the economists and national developers’ overtime since there were two significant developments in the international patent law; (1) the European Union's attempt to harmonize national patent laws by the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and Council on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions,[33] and (2) the US court decision to expand patent protection to business methods.[33] The opinions are divided into two sides. Dr. Tangkitvanich, the IT specialist of Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI), raised his concern that Thailand is not in a good stage for a software patent as there were several flaws in patent rights. For example, the business method prevention has high tendency to hinder the growth in innovations especially for the infant software companies.[34] Moreover, the software patent may cause monopoly and innovation problems. “Monopoly will thwart innovations of new software products, particularly open-source software”, said by a group of Thai Economists. However, Dr. Hirapruk who is the Director of Software Park Thailand, on the other hand, provides his support on allowing the computer programs to be patentable: “Thailand had to provide a patent-right protection for computer software to ensure foreign high-tech investors that software producers' creativity would be secured from violations in Thailand”. As a result, Mr. Sribhibhadh, president of the Association of Thai Software Industry, emphasized that there will need to be a clear overview of the impact on the local industry if Thailand really had to fully implement the patent right protections. The first software patent was issued June 19, 1968 to Martin Goetz for a data sorting algorithm.[35] The United States Patent and Trademark Office has granted patents that may be referred to as software patents since at least the early 1970s.[36] In Gottschalk v. Benson (1972), the United States Supreme Court ruled that a patent for a process should not be allowed if it would "wholly pre-empt the mathematical formula and in practical effect would be a patent on the algorithm itself", adding that "it is said that the decision precludes a patent for any program servicing a computer. We do not so hold."[37] In 1981, the Supreme Court stated that "a claim drawn to subject matter otherwise statutory does not become nonstatutory simply because it uses a mathematical formula, computer program, or digital computer" and a claim is patentable if it contains "a mathematical formula [and] implements or applies the formula in a structure or process which, when considered as a whole, is performing a function which the patent laws were designed to protect".[38] When a patent application is examined by the USPTO, the initial threshold question (for each claim) is whether the subject matter is eligible, so this is evaluated separately and prior to the other patentability criteria (novelty, nonobviousness).[39] This is notably different than the European approach (see above). Due to different treatment of federal patent rights in different parts of the country, in 1982 the U.S. Congress created a new court (the Federal Circuit) to hear patent cases. Following several landmark decisions by this court, by the early 1990s the patentability of software was well established, and in 1996 the USPTO issued Final Computer Related Examination Guidelines stating that "A practical application of a computer-related invention is statutory subject matter. This requirement can be discerned from the variously phrased prohibitions against the patenting of abstract ideas, laws of nature or natural phenomena" (emphasis added).[40] The emergence of the Internet and e-commerce led to many patents being applied for and being granted for business methods implemented in software and the question of whether business methods are statutory subject matter is a separate issue from the question of whether software is. Critics of the Federal Circuit believe that the non-obviousness standard is partly responsible for the large increase in patents for software and business methods.[41] There have been several successful enforcement trials in the United States, some of which are listed in the list of software patents article. An issue with software patent intellectual property rights is typically revolved around deciding whether the company or inventor owns it. As a matter of law, in the United States, the employee generally owns the IP right unless the employee's inventing skills or task to create the invention is the main specific hiring reason or a specific clause in the employment agreement assigning invention rights.[42][43] A work for hire created after 1978 has copyright protection for 120 years from its creation date or 90 years from its publication date whichever comes first.[44] Patent protection for software lasts 20 years.[45] In Indonesia, software cannot be protected by patents, until the implementation of the Law No. 13 Year 2016, Patent Law in Indonesia.[46] To begin evaluation, it is necessary to distinguish whether or not the application is considered an invention. Under Law No. 14 Year 2001, Article 1 of Patent Law in Indonesia,[47] application is considered as an invention if the activity is created to solve a particular conflict or problem in the technology sector. Furthermore, it can be executed in the medium of a new process or product or a developmental enhancement in a product or process. According to Law No. 14 Year 2001, Article 7 of Patent Law in Indonesia.,[47] an application can not be patented as an invention if the product or process contradicts or challenges the current regulations and rules, public order or ethics, and religious morality. In addition, if the application is treated as a method or theory in the scientific or mathematics, argued to be any type of living creatures, with the exception of micro-organisms, or is considered as an essential biological measure to produce plants or animals, the application is not a patentable invention.[47] As software contains algorithms, it is deemed to be part of the field of mathematics; hence, software cannot be protected by patents in Indonesia. However, one way for the Indonesian Intellectual Property office to grant software patents in Indonesia is if the application has been patented in other nations, which have ratified the Patent Corporation Treaty (PCT). Therefore, in accordance to the regulations under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, a software will have a regional protection among the participating entities of World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).[48] An important update was enacted on 26 August 2016, the Law No. 13 Year 2016, Patent Law in Indonesia.[46] This update is geared to encourage innovation and growth by augmenting the number of patents within the public and private sector in Indonesia. This update proposes an extension of protection for simple patent, which grants application for patents for new improvements or inventions to existing processes. Intangible inventions can also be patented; under the former law, simple patent is restricted for tangible inventions, which has a positive implication for software patents in Indonesia. Furthermore, these changes provide more protection to the pharmaceutical industry and encourage public access to medical knowledge. This can boost new software ideas and processes within the healthcare and pharmaceutical sector. This update provides a stronger protection of traditional knowledge. In addition, a significant update is the usability of electronic filling and electronic media. Under this new law, application can be made electronically. For the U.S., the purpose of patents is laid down in the constitutional clause that gives Congress the power to "promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;" (Article I, Section 8, Clause 8).[49] For Europe, there is no similar definition. Commonly four patent justification theories are recognised, as laid down for instance by Machlup in 1958,[50] which include justice to the inventor and benefit for society by rewarding inventors. Disclosure is required in return for the exclusive right, and disclosure may promote further development. However, the value of disclosure should not be overestimated: some inventions could not be kept secret otherwise, and patents also prohibit independent reinventions to be exploited. There is debate as to whether or not these aims are achieved with software patents. In seeking to find a balance, different countries have different policies as to where the boundary between patentable and non-patentable software should lie. In Europe, a number of different proposals for setting a boundary line were put forward during the debate concerning the proposed Directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions, none of which were found acceptable by the various parties to the debate. Two particular suggestions for a hurdle that software must pass to be patentable include: A computer program that utilises "controllable forces of nature to achieve predictable results".[51] In the US, Ben Klemens, a Guest Scholar at the Brookings Institution, proposed that patents should be granted only to inventions that include a physical component that is by itself nonobvious.[53] This is based on Justice William Rehnquist's ruling in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Diamond v. Diehr that stated that "... insignificant postsolution activity will not transform an unpatentable principle into a patentable process."[54] By this rule, one would consider software loaded onto a stock PC to be an abstract algorithm with obvious postsolution activity, while a new circuit design implementing the logic would likely be a nonobvious physical device. Upholding an "insignificant postsolution activity" rule as per Justice Rehnquist's ruling would also eliminate most business method patents. A common objection to software patents is that they relate to trivial inventions.[55] A patent on an invention that many people would easily develop independently of one another should not, it is argued, be granted since this impedes development. There are a number of high-profile examples where the patenting of a data exchange standards forced another programming group to introduce an alternative format. For instance, the Portable Network Graphics (PNG) format was largely introduced to avoid the Graphics Interchange Format (GIF) patent problems, and OggVorbis to avoid MP3. If it is discovered that these new suggested formats are themselves covered by existing patents, the final result may be a large number of incompatible formats. Creating such formats and supporting them costs money and creates inconvenience to users. Under the European Patent Convention (EPC), and in particular its Article 52,[56] "programs for computers" are not regarded as inventions for the purpose of granting European patents,[57] but this exclusion from patentability only applies to the extent to which a European patent application or European patent relates to a computer program as such.[58] As a result of this partial exclusion, and despite the fact that the EPO subjects patent applications in this field to a much stricter scrutiny[59] when compared to their American counterpart, that does not mean that all inventions including some software are de jure not patentable. Patent and copyright protection constitute two different means of legal protection which may cover the same subject matter, such as computer programs, since each of these two means of protection serves its own purpose.[60] Software is protected as works of literature under the Berne Convention. This allows the creator to prevent another entity from copying the program and there is generally no need to register code in order for it to be copyrighted. Patents, on the other hand, give their owners the right to prevent others from using the technology defined by the patent claims, even if the technology was independently developed and there was no copying of a software or software code involved. In fact, one of the most recent EPO decisions[61] clarifies the distinction, stating that software is patentable, because it is basically only a technical method executed on a computer, which is to be distinguished from the program itself for executing the method, the program being merely an expression of the method, and thus being copyrighted. Patents cover the underlying methodologies embodied in a given piece of software, or the function that the software is intended to serve, independent of the particular language or code that the software is written in. Copyright prevents the direct copying of some or all of a particular version of a given piece of software, but does not prevent other authors from writing their own embodiments of the underlying methodologies. Assuming a dataset meets certain criteria, copyright can also be used to prevent a given set of data from being copied while still allowing the author to keep the contents of said set of data a trade secret.[62] Whether and how the numerus clausus principle shall apply to the legal hybrid software[63] to provide a judicious balance between property rights of the title holders and freedom rights of computing professionals[64] and society as a whole,[65] is in dispute.[66][67][68] There is strong dislike in the free software community towards software patents. Much of this has been caused by free software or open source projects terminating[73] when the owners of patents covering aspects of a project demanded license fees that the project could not pay, or was not willing to pay, or offered licenses with terms that the project was unwilling to accept, or could not accept, because it conflicted with the free software license in use.[74] Several patent holders have offered royalty-free patent licenses for a very small portion of their patent portfolios. Such actions have provoked only minor reaction from the free and open source software communities for reasons such as fear of the patent holder changing their mind or the license terms being so narrow as to have little use.[75] Companies that have done this include Apple,[76]IBM,[77]Microsoft,[78]Nokia,[79]Novell,[80]Red Hat,[81] and Sun (now Oracle).[82] In 2006, Microsoft's pledge not to sue Novell Linux customers, openSUSE contributors, and free/open source software developers over patents[84] and the associated collaboration agreement with Novell[85] was met with disdain from the Software Freedom Law Center[86] while commentators from the Free Software Foundation stated that the agreement would not comply with GPLv3. Meanwhile, Microsoft has reached similar agreements with Dell and Samsung,[87] due to alleged patent infringements of the Linux operating system. Microsoft has also derived revenue from Android by making such agreements-not-to-sue with Android vendors.[88] In the late 1990s, Unisys claimed to have granted royalty free licenses to hundreds of not-for-profit organizations that used the patented LZW compression method and, by extension, the GIF image format. However, this did not include most software developers and Unisys were "barraged" by negative and "sometimes obscene" emails from software developers.[89] Patenting software is widespread in the US. As of 2015, approximately 500,000 patents had issued in the 23 classes of patents covering "computer implemented inventions" (see table). Many software companies cross license their patents to each other. These agreements allow each party to practice the other party's patented inventions without the threat of being sued for patent infringement. Microsoft, for example, has agreements with IBM, Sun (now Oracle), SAP, Hewlett-Packard, Siemens, Cisco, Autodesk,[91] and recently Novell. Microsoft cross-licensed its patents with Sun, despite being direct competitors, and with Autodesk even though Autodesk has far fewer patents than Microsoft. The ability to negotiate cross licensing agreements is a major reason that many software companies, including those providing open source software, file patents. As of June 2006, for example, Red Hat had developed a portfolio of 10 issued US patents, 1 issued European patent, 163 pending US patent applications, and 33 pending international PCT (Patent Cooperation Treaty) patent applications. Red Hat uses this portfolio to cross license with proprietary software companies so that they can preserve their freedom to operate.[81] Other patent holders are in the business of inventing new "computer implemented inventions" and then commercializing the inventions by licensing the patents to other companies that manufacture the inventions. Walker Digital, for example, has generated a large patent portfolio from its research efforts, including the basic patent on the Priceline.com reverse auction technology. US universities also fall into this class of patent owners. They collectively generate about $1.4 billion per year through licensing the inventions they develop to both established and start up companies in all fields of technology, including software.[92] Still other patent holders focus on obtaining patents from original inventors and licensing them to companies that have introduced commercial products into the marketplace after the patents were filed. Some of these patent holders, such as Intellectual Ventures, are privately held companies financed by large corporations such as Apple, Microsoft, Intel, Google, etc. Others, such as Acacia Technologies, are publicly traded companies with institutional investors being the primary shareholders.[93] The practice of acquiring patents merely to license them is controversial in the software industry. Companies that have this business model are pejoratively referred to as patent trolls. It is an integral part of the business model that patent licensing companies sue infringers that do not take a license. Furthermore, they may take advantage of the fact that many companies will pay a modest license fee (e.g. $100,000 to $1,000,000) for rights to a patent of questionable validity, rather than pay the high legal fees ($2,000,000 or more) to demonstrate in court that the patent is invalid.[citation needed]	Before 2006, software patents were basically not granted, and software and hardware had to be combined when applying for a patent. With the development of network technology and software technology, China's patent examination system has been constantly updated. Recently, the design idea of the software itself has been allowed to apply for patent separately, instead of requiring to be combined with hardware. However, software patent writing requirements are relatively high. Software patents can be written as either a product or a method, depending on the standards of review. However, no matter what form it is written in, it is difficult to highlight the creativity of the scheme, which requires specific case analysis. Software that can be patented mainly includes (but is not limited to): (1) Industrial control software, such as controlling the movement of mechanical equipment; (2) Software to improve the internal performance of the computer, such as a software can improve the virtual memory of the computer; Within European Union member states, the EPO and other national patent offices have issued many patents for inventions involving software since the European Patent Convention (EPC) came into force in the late 1970s. Article 52EPC excludes "programs for computers" from patentability (Art. 52(2)) to the extent that a patent application relates to a computer program "as such" (Art. 52(3)). This has been interpreted to mean that any invention that makes a non-obvious "technical contribution" or solves a "technical problem" in a non-obvious way is patentable even if that technical problem is solved by running a computer program.[12] When the EPO examines a patent application with questionable subject matter eligibility, their approach is to simply[dubious – discuss] disregard any ineligible portions or aspects and evaluate the rest.[13] This is notably different from the U.S. approach (see below).	yes
Intellectual Property	Should patents apply to software?	yes_statement	"patents" should "apply" to "software".. "software" should be eligible for "patents".	https://www.bitlaw.com/software-patent/index.html	Software Patent (BitLaw)	Software Patent A software patent is a patent that protects computer software. Software patents can cover a stand-alone computer software program, a mobile device app, or software that is integrated into a mechanical device. In order for software to be patentable, it must meet the same requirements of any other type of invention. In particular, a software invention must be new, useful, and non-obvious. A fourth requirement is that the invention be of a type that is eligible for patent protection. While this last requirement applies to all inventions, the question of whether an invention is eligible is much more impactful to software inventions than it is to other types of inventions. The following is an introduction to software patents. This page also serves as an index to the other writings on software patents that are found on the Bitlaw website. This information is organized as follows: Software is Patentable It is now well established that many types of computer software, including mobile apps, can be protected by patents in the United States. But this was not always the case. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the PTO) originally decided in the 1960s that computer programs were generally unpatentable. The Supreme Court considered the issue three times in the 1970s and 80s, first seeming to agree with the PTO that most software was unpatentable but then softening their position. By the 1990s, it was assumed that any software that produced a useful result was eligible as long as it met the other patent requirements. But in the 2000s, culminating in the 2014 Alice decision, the courts dialed back on the type of software that was eligible. At the current time, software is patentable, but only that software that not directed to an abstract idea. You can read more about this history on: Under the Alice decision of the Supreme Court, and the more recent decisions by the Federal Circuit, it is clear that software is eligible for patent protection, but not all software is eligible. In order to be eligible, the application seeking protection for a software invention must claim the invention appropriately. For example, while it is true that software per se is not eligible, this restriction is easily overcome by drafting the claims of the application to cover a method that performs the steps of the software, or a computer system that executes the software. In addition, the software must not be ineligible because it is solely directed to an abstract idea. Software that is claimed as only an improvement to a method of performing a business task, for example, might be considered ineligible for patent protection, but software that is claimed as a technique that improves the functioning of the computer would be eligible, even if that improvement is primarily useful for improving the method for performing that business task. This current state of patent eligibility is described in general at: The determination of which software is appropriate for patent protection is described in more detail below. Should you protect software with a patent? Patents on software inventions are no different than other patents. As such, obtaining a patent grants certain rights to the patent holder, namely the exclusive right to make, use, sell, and import your invention. These right are described in detail here: But you obtain those rights only after a significant cost, and only after the application is examined and the patent office has agreed that a patent should be granted on your invention. Before the patent issues, you have the right to publicly state that your software is "patent pending." The weighing of the costs and time delays for filing a patent application against the benefits of patent pending and the rights obtained when a patent issues are discussed here: Patent protection is not the only way to protect computer software. Copyright protection is automatically granted to software upon the creation and "fixing" (saving to disk) of any new code. But the rights granted under copyright law are limited to copying of the computer code. Copyright law never protects the underlying idea of the software. In other words, if someone views your software and "steals your idea" by writing new code from scratch that performs the same function, copyright law will not stop them. But a software patent might. See the following discussion for more information: In addition, however, software must not be ineligible because it is solely directed to an abstract idea. Whether or not software is eligible for patent protection is, unfortunately, a complicated issue. While the statutory basis for this requirement is Section 101 of the Patent Act (hence, this is frequently referred to as the "Section 101" issue), the actual statute does not describe this issue at all. Rather, courts have created this law and the test for patent eligibility, which makes interpreting this issue much more difficult. The Bitlaw website contains a great deal of information on this topic, including the following web pages: Even if your software is new, useful, and non-obvious, and it is eligible under Section 101, that does not necessarily mean that it is appropriate for you to apply for patent protection. Patents are expensive, and if your goal is to share your software with the world, such as by licensing it as open-source software or including it into an existing open-source project, patent protection can make little sense. In addition, if your software has no commercial value, it may not make financial sense to file for patent protection. We have written some information on valuing your invention here: If you want to protect your software through the patent system, you must submit a patent application. Your application must describe your invention in detail (the specification), should include drawings, and must truthfully name the inventors of the invention. These aspects of the application are described here: You may wonder whether you have developed your software sufficiently to file a patent application. It is important to file your application early, as the United States is now a first-to-file country. This means that if two people separately invent the same invention, the patent for the invention will be granted to the person that is the first to file their patent application. In addition, you must file your patent application with one year of your first public disclosure or offer to sell your invention. You do not need to have created your software invention before you file your patent application, but you must know that the invention can be implemented and how it can be done. These issues are discussed here: Contrary to popular belief, it is not necessary to search your software invention before you file a patent application. In some cases, it may even be wise to skip doing a patentability search. You should read the following to understand better when doing a search makes sense, and when it can be skipped: Patent applications are expensive, with software applications typically costing between $10,000 and $15,000. In addition, the cost of filing the application is not the end of the costs, as more thousands will have to be spend before the patent issues. The breakdown of these costs is presented here: Because the cost of drafting a non-provisional utility patent application is so high, it frequently makes sense to start the patent process by filing a provisional patent application. A provisional application by itself will never become a patent. Rather, provisional applications act as placeholders. Within one year, you will replace your provisional application with a (full-cost) non-provisional application. The job of the provisional application is to (inexpensively) establish a first filing date in the patent process. This is described here: Provisional applications don't actually save any money in the patent process since the provisional application has to be replaced by a full-cost application within one year. Nonetheless, a provisional application can be an extremely useful way to delay the high cost of drafting a non-provisional application. During this one-year period, inventors can produce and market their invention, and develop a much better understanding of whether the invention will be profitable before the full-cost of the patent application is incurred. This advantage is discussed in more detail here:	Software Patent A software patent is a patent that protects computer software. Software patents can cover a stand-alone computer software program, a mobile device app, or software that is integrated into a mechanical device. In order for software to be patentable, it must meet the same requirements of any other type of invention. In particular, a software invention must be new, useful, and non-obvious. A fourth requirement is that the invention be of a type that is eligible for patent protection. While this last requirement applies to all inventions, the question of whether an invention is eligible is much more impactful to software inventions than it is to other types of inventions. The following is an introduction to software patents. This page also serves as an index to the other writings on software patents that are found on the Bitlaw website. This information is organized as follows: Software is Patentable It is now well established that many types of computer software, including mobile apps, can be protected by patents in the United States. But this was not always the case. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the PTO) originally decided in the 1960s that computer programs were generally unpatentable. The Supreme Court considered the issue three times in the 1970s and 80s, first seeming to agree with the PTO that most software was unpatentable but then softening their position. By the 1990s, it was assumed that any software that produced a useful result was eligible as long as it met the other patent requirements. But in the 2000s, culminating in the 2014 Alice decision, the courts dialed back on the type of software that was eligible. At the current time, software is patentable, but only that software that not directed to an abstract idea. You can read more about this history on: Under the Alice decision of the Supreme Court, and the more recent decisions by the Federal Circuit, it is clear that software is eligible for patent protection, but not all software is eligible.	yes
Intellectual Property	Should patents apply to software?	yes_statement	"patents" should "apply" to "software".. "software" should be eligible for "patents".	https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s2106.html	2106-Patent Subject Matter Eligibility	2106 Patent Subject Matter Eligibility [R-10.2019] First, the claimed invention must be to one of the four statutory categories. 35 U.S.C. 101 defines the four categories of invention that Congress deemed to be the appropriate subject matter of a patent: processes, machines, manufactures and compositions of matter. The latter three categories define “things” or “products” while the first category defines “actions” (i.e., inventions that consist of a series of steps or acts to be performed). See 35 U.S.C. 100(b) (“The term ‘process’ means process, art, or method, and includes a new use of a known process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or material.”). See MPEP § 2106.03 for detailed information on the four categories. Second, the claimed invention also must qualify as patent-eligible subject matter, i.e., the claim must not be directed to a judicial exception unless the claim as a whole includes additional limitations amounting to significantly more than the exception. The judicial exceptions (also called “judicially recognized exceptions” or simply “exceptions”) are subject matter that the courts have found to be outside of, or exceptions to, the four statutory categories of invention, and are limited to abstract ideas, laws of nature and natural phenomena (including products of nature). Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 216, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1980 (2014) (citing Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576, 589, 106 USPQ2d 1972, 1979 (2013). See MPEP § 2106.04 for detailed information on the judicial exceptions. Because abstract ideas, laws of nature, and natural phenomenon "are the basic tools of scientific and technological work", the Supreme Court has expressed concern that monopolizing these tools by granting patent rights may impede innovation rather than promote it. See Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 216, 110 USPQ2d at 1980; Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 71, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965 (2012). However, the Court has also emphasized that an invention is not considered to be ineligible for patenting simply because it involves a judicial exception. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 217, 110 USPQ2d at 1980-81 (citing Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 187, 209 USPQ 1, 8 (1981)). See also Thales Visionix Inc. v. United States, 850 F.3d. 1343, 1349, 121 USPQ2d 1898, 1902 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (“That a mathematical equation is required to complete the claimed method and system does not doom the claims to abstraction.”). Accordingly, the Court has said that integration of an abstract idea, law of nature or natural phenomenon into a practical application may be eligible for patent protection. See, e.g., Alice, 573 U.S. at 217, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (explaining that “in applying the §101 exception, we must distinguish between patents that claim the ‘buildin[g] block[s]’ of human ingenuity and those that integrate the building blocks into something more” (quoting Mayo, 566 U.S. at 89, 110 USPQ2d at 1971) and stating that Mayo “set forth a framework for distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts”); Mayo, 566 U.S. at 80, 84, 101 USPQ2d at 1969, 1971 (noting that the Court in Diamond v. Diehr found “the overall process patent eligible because of the way the additional steps of the process integrated the equation into the process as a whole,” but the Court in Gottschalk v. Benson “held that simply implementing a mathematical principle on a physical machine, namely a computer, was not a patentable application of that principle”); Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 611, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (2010) (“Diehr explained that while an abstract idea, law of nature, or mathematical formula could not be patented, ‘an application of a law of nature or mathematical formula to a known structure or process may well be deserving of patent protection.’” (quoting Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 187, 209 USPQ 1, 8 (1981)) (emphasis in original)); Diehr, 450 U.S. at 187, 192 n.14, 209 USPQ at 10 n.14 (explaining that the process in Parker v. Flook was ineligible not because it contained a mathematical formula, but because it did not provide an application of the formula). See Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 209 USPQ 1 (1981); Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 175 USPQ 673 (1972); Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 198 USPQ 193 (1978). The Supreme Court in Mayo laid out a framework for determining whether an applicant is seeking to patent a judicial exception itself, or a patent-eligible application of the judicial exception. See Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 217-18, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. 66, 101 USPQ2d 1961). This framework, which is referred to as the Mayo test or the Alice/Mayo test, is discussed in further detail in subsection III, below. The first part of the Mayo test is to determine whether the claims are directed to an abstract idea, a law of nature or a natural phenomenon (i.e., a judicial exception). Id. If the claims are directed to a judicial exception, the second part of the Mayo test is to determine whether the claim recites additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Id. citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72-73, 101 USPQ2d at 1966). The Supreme Court has described the second part of the test as the "search for an 'inventive concept'". Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 217-18, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72-73, 101 USPQ2d at 1966). The Alice/Mayo two-part test is the only test that should be used to evaluate the eligibility of claims under examination. While the machine-or-transformation test is an important clue to eligibility, it should not be used as a separate test for eligibility. Instead it should be considered as part of the "integration" determination or "significantly more" determination articulated in the Alice/Mayo test. Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 605, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1007 (2010). See MPEP § 2106.04(d) for more information about evaluating whether a claim reciting a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application and MPEP § 2106.05(b) and MPEP § 2106.05(c) for more information about how the machine-or-transformation test fits into the Alice/Mayo two-part framework. Likewise, eligibility should not be evaluated based on whether the claim recites a "useful, concrete, and tangible result," State Street Bank, 149 F.3d 1368, 1374, 47 USPQ2d 1596, 1602 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (quoting In re Alappat, 33 F.3d 1526, 1544, 31 USPQ2d 1545, 1557 (Fed. Cir. 1994)), as this test has been superseded. In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943, 959-60, 88 USPQ2d 1385, 1394-95 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (en banc), aff'd by Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 95 USPQ2d 1001 (2010). See also TLI Communications LLC v. AV Automotive LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“It is well-settled that mere recitation of concrete, tangible components is insufficient to confer patent eligibility to an otherwise abstract idea”). The programmed computer or “special purpose computer” test of In re Alappat, 33 F.3d 1526, 31 USPQ2d 1545 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (i.e., the rationale that an otherwise ineligible algorithm or software could be made patent-eligible by merely adding a generic computer to the claim for the “special purpose” of executing the algorithm or software) was also superseded by the Supreme Court’s Bilski and Alice Corp. decisions. Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 785 F.3d 616, 623, 114 USPQ2d 1711, 1715 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“[W]e note that Alappat has been superseded by Bilski, 561 U.S. at 605–06, and Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 110 USPQ2d 1976 (2014)”); Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., 792 F.3d 1363, 1366, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“An abstract idea does not become nonabstract by limiting the invention to a particular field of use or technological environment, such as the Internet [or] a computer”). Lastly, eligibility should not be evaluated based on whether the claimed invention has utility, because “[u]tility is not the test for patent-eligible subject matter.” Genetic Techs. Ltd. v. Merial LLC, 818 F.3d 1369, 1380, 118 USPQ2d 1541, 1548 (Fed. Cir. 2016). Examiners are reminded that 35 U.S.C. 101 is not the sole tool for determining patentability; 35 U.S.C. 112 , 35 U.S.C. 102, and 35 U.S.C. 103 will provide additional tools for ensuring that the claim meets the conditions for patentability. As the Supreme Court made clear in Bilski, 561 U.S. at 602, 95 USPQ2d at 1006: The § 101 patent-eligibility inquiry is only a threshold test. Even if an invention qualifies as a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, in order to receive the Patent Act’s protection the claimed invention must also satisfy ‘‘the conditions and requirements of this title.’’ § 101. Those requirements include that the invention be novel, see § 102, nonobvious, see § 103, and fully and particularly described, see § 112. II. ESTABLISH BROADEST REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF CLAIM AS A WHOLE It is essential that the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claim be established prior to examining a claim for eligibility. The BRI sets the boundaries of the coverage sought by the claim and will influence whether the claim seeks to cover subject matter that is beyond the four statutory categories or encompasses subject matter that falls within the exceptions. See MyMail, Ltd. v. ooVoo, LLC, 934 F.3d 1373, 1379, 2019 USPQ2d 305789 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (“Determining patent eligibility requires a full understanding of the basic character of the claimed subject matter”), citing Bancorp Servs., LLC v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Can. (U.S.), 687 F.3d 1266, 1273-74, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1430 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943, 951, 88 USPQ2d 1385, 1388 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (en banc ), aff'd by Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 95 USPQ2d 1001 (2010) (“claim construction … is an important first step in a § 101 analysis”). Evaluating eligibility based on the BRI also ensures that patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101 does not depend simply on the draftsman’s art. Alice, 573 U.S. 208, 224, 110 USPQ2d at 1984, 1985 (citing Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 593, 198 USPQ 193, 198 (1978) and Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72, 101 USPQ2d at 1966). See MPEP § 2111 for more information about determining the BRI. Claim interpretation affects the evaluation of both criteria for eligibility. For example, in Mentor Graphics v. EVE-USA, Inc., 851 F.3d 1275, 112 USPQ2d 1120 (Fed. Cir. 2017), claim interpretation was crucial to the court’s determination that claims to a “machine-readable medium” were not to a statutory category. In Mentor Graphics, the court interpreted the claims in light of the specification, which expressly defined the medium as encompassing “any data storage device” including random-access memory and carrier waves. Although random-access memory and magnetic tape are statutory media, carrier waves are not because they are signals similar to the transitory, propagating signals held to be non-statutory in Nuijten. 851 F.3d at 1294, 112 USPQ2d at 1133 (citing In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 84 USPQ2d 1495 (Fed. Cir. 2007)). Accordingly, because the BRI of the claims covered both subject matter that falls within a statutory category (the random-access memory), as well as subject matter that does not (the carrier waves), the claims as a whole were not to a statutory category and thus failed the first criterion for eligibility. With regard to the second criterion for eligibility, the Alice/Mayo test, claim interpretation can affect the first part of the test (whether the claims are directed to a judicial exception). For example, the patentee in Synopsys argued that the claimed methods of logic circuit design were intended to be used in conjunction with computer-based design tools, and were thus not mental processes. Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 839 F.3d 1138, 1147-49, 120 USPQ2d 1473, 1480-81 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The court disagreed, because it interpreted the claims as encompassing nothing other than pure mental steps (and thus falling within an abstract idea grouping) because the claims did not include any limitations requiring computer implementation. In contrast, the patentee in Enfish argued that its claimed self-referential table for a computer database was an improvement in an existing technology and thus not directed to an abstract idea. Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1336-37, 118 USPQ2d 1684, 1689-90 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The court agreed with the patentee, based on its interpretation of the claimed “means for configuring” under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as requiring a four-step algorithm that achieved the improvements, as opposed to merely any form of storing tabular data. See also McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games America, Inc. 837 F.3d 1299, 1314, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1102 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (the claim’s construction incorporated rules of a particular type that improved an existing technological process). Claim interpretation can also affect the second part of the Alice/Mayo test (whether the claim recites additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception). For example, in Amdocs (Israel) Ltd. v. Openet Telecom, Inc., where the court relied on the construction of the term “enhance” (to require application of a number of field enhancements in a distributed fashion) to determine that the claim entails an unconventional technical solution to a technological problem. 841 F.3d 1288, 1300-01, 120 USPQ2d 1527, 1537 (Fed. Cir. 2016). III. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS AND FLOWCHART Examiners should determine whether a claim satisfies the criteria for subject matter eligibility by evaluating the claim in accordance with the following flowchart. The flowchart illustrates the steps of the subject matter eligibility analysis for products and processes that are to be used during examination for evaluating whether a claim is drawn to patent-eligible subject matter. It is recognized that under the controlling legal precedent there may be variations in the precise contours of the analysis for subject matter eligibility that will still achieve the same end result. The analysis set forth herein promotes examination efficiency and consistency across all technologies. As shown in the flowchart, Step 1 relates to the statutory categories and ensures that the first criterion is met by confirming that the claim falls within one of the four statutory categories of invention. See MPEP § 2106.03 for more information on Step 1. Step 2, which is the Supreme Court’s Alice/Mayo test, is a two-part test to identify claims that are directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A) and to then evaluate if additional elements of the claim provide an inventive concept (Step 2B) (also called "significantly more" than the recited judicial exception). See MPEP § 2106.04 for more information on Step 2A and MPEP § 2106.05 for more information on Step 2B. The flowchart also shows three pathways (A, B, and C) to eligibility: Pathway A: Claims taken as a whole that fall within a statutory category (Step 1: YES) and, which may or may not recite a judicial exception, but whose eligibility is self-evident can be found eligible at Pathway A using a streamlined analysis. See MPEP § 2106.06 for more information on this pathway and on self-evident eligibility. Pathway B: Claims taken as a whole that fall within a statutory category (Step 1: YES) and are not directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A: NO) are eligible at Pathway B. These claims do not need to go to Step 2B. See MPEP § 2106.04 for more information about this pathway and Step 2A. Pathway C: Claims taken as a whole that fall within a statutory category (Step 1: YES), are directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A: YES), and recite additional elements either individually or in an ordered combination that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (Step 2B: YES) are eligible at Pathway C. See MPEP § 2106.05 for more information about this pathway and Step 2B. Claims that could have been found eligible at Pathway A (streamlined analysis), but are subjected to further analysis at Steps 2A or Step 2B, will ultimately be found eligible at Pathways B or C. Thus, if the examiner is uncertain about whether a streamlined analysis is appropriate, the examiner is encouraged to conduct a full eligibility analysis. However, if the claim is not found eligible at any of Pathways A, B or C, the claim is patent ineligible and should be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101. Regardless of whether a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 is made, a complete examination should be made for every claim under each of the other patentability requirements: 35 U.S.C. 102, 103, 112, and 101 (utility, inventorship and double patenting) and non-statutory double patenting. MPEP § 2103. 2106.01 [Reserved] 2106.02 [Reserved] 35 U.S.C. 101 enumerates four categories of subject matter that Congress deemed to be appropriate subject matter for a patent: processes, machines, manufactures and compositions of matter. As explained by the courts, these “four categories together describe the exclusive reach of patentable subject matter. If a claim covers material not found in any of the four statutory categories, that claim falls outside the plainly expressed scope of § 101 even if the subject matter is otherwise new and useful.” In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1354, 84 USPQ2d 1495, 1500 (Fed. Cir. 2007). A process defines “actions”, i.e., an invention that is claimed as an act or step, or a series of acts or steps. As explained by the Supreme Court, a “process” is “a mode of treatment of certain materials to produce a given result. It is an act, or a series of acts, performed upon the subject-matter to be transformed and reduced to a different state or thing.” Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 70, 175 USPQ 673, 676 (1972) (italics added) (quoting Cochrane v. Deener, 94 U.S. 780, 788, 24 L. Ed. 139, 141 (1876)). See also Nuijten, 500 F.3d at 1355, 84 USPQ2d at 1501 (“The Supreme Court and this court have consistently interpreted the statutory term ‘process’ to require action”); NTP, Inc. v. Research in Motion, Ltd., 418 F.3d 1282, 1316, 75 USPQ2d 1763, 1791 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (“[A] process is a series of acts.”) (quoting Minton v. Natl. Ass’n. of Securities Dealers, 336 F.3d 1373, 1378, 67 USPQ2d 1614, 1681 (Fed. Cir. 2003)). As defined in 35 U.S.C. 100(b), the term “process” is synonymous with “method.” The other three categories (machines, manufactures and compositions of matter) define the types of physical or tangible “things” or “products” that Congress deemed appropriate to patent. Digitech Image Techs. v. Electronics for Imaging, 758 F.3d 1344, 1348, 111 USPQ2d 1717, 1719 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (“For all categories except process claims, the eligible subject matter must exist in some physical or tangible form.”). Thus, when determining whether a claimed invention falls within one of these three categories, examiners should verify that the invention is to at least one of the following categories and is claimed in a physical or tangible form. • A manufacture is “a tangible article that is given a new form, quality, property, or combination through man-made or artificial means.” Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1349, 111 USPQ2d at 1719-20 (citing Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303, 308, 206 USPQ 193, 197 (1980)). As the courts have explained, manufactures are articles that result from the process of manufacturing, i.e., they were produced “from raw or prepared materials by giving to these materials new forms, qualities, properties, or combinations, whether by hand-labor or by machinery.” Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc., 137 S. Ct. 429, 120 USPQ2d 1749, 1752-3 (2016) (quoting Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U. S. 303, 308, 206 USPQ 193, 196-97 (1980)); Nuijten, 500 F.3d at 1356-57, 84 USPQ2d at 1502. Manufactures also include “the parts of a machine considered separately from the machine itself.” Samsung Electronics, 137 S. Ct. at 435, 120 USPQ2d at 1753 (quoting 1 W. Robinson, The Law of Patents for Useful Inventions §183, p. 270 (1890)). • A composition of matter is a “combination of two or more substances and includes all composite articles.” Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1348-49, 111 USPQ2d at 1719 (citation omitted). This category includes all compositions of two or more substances and all composite articles, “'whether they be the results of chemical union or of mechanical mixture, or whether they be gases, fluids, powders or solids.'” Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. at 308, 206 USPQ at 197 (quoting Shell Dev. Co. v. Watson, 149 F. Supp. 279, 280 (D.D.C. 1957); id. at 310 holding genetically modified microorganism to be a manufacture or composition of matter). It is not necessary to identify a single category into which a claim falls, so long as it is clear that the claim falls into at least one category. For example, because a microprocessor is generally understood to be a manufacture, a product claim to the microprocessor or a system comprising the microprocessor satisfies Step 1 regardless of whether the claim falls within any other statutory category (such as a machine). It is also not necessary to identify a “correct” category into which the claim falls, because although in many instances it is clear within which category a claimed invention falls, a claim may satisfy the requirements of more than one category. For example, a bicycle satisfies both the machine and manufacture categories, because it is a tangible product that is concrete and consists of parts such as a frame and wheels (thus satisfying the machine category), and it is an article that was produced from raw materials such as aluminum ore and liquid rubber by giving them a new form (thus satisfying the manufacture category). Similarly, a genetically modified bacterium satisfies both the composition of matter and manufacture categories, because it is a tangible product that is a combination of two or more substances such as proteins, carbohydrates and other chemicals (thus satisfying the composition of matter category), and it is an article that was genetically modified by humans to have new properties such as the ability to digest multiple types of hydrocarbons (thus satisfying the manufacture category). Non-limiting examples of claims that are not directed to any of the statutory categories include: • Products that do not have a physical or tangible form, such as information (often referred to as “data per se”) or a computer program per se (often referred to as “software per se”) when claimed as a product without any structural recitations; • Transitory forms of signal transmission (often referred to as “signals per se”), such as a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal or carrier wave; and • Subject matter that the statute expressly prohibits from being patented, such as humans per se, which are excluded under The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), Public Law 112-29, sec. 33, 125 Stat. 284 (September 16, 2011). As the courts' definitions of machines, manufactures and compositions of matter indicate, a product must have a physical or tangible form in order to fall within one of these statutory categories. Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1348, 111 USPQ2d at 1719. Thus, the Federal Circuit has held that a product claim to an intangible collection of information, even if created by human effort, does not fall within any statutory category. Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1350, 111 USPQ2d at 1720 (claimed “device profile” comprising two sets of data did not meet any of the categories because it was neither a process nor a tangible product). Similarly, software expressed as code or a set of instructions detached from any medium is an idea without physical embodiment. See Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437, 449, 82 USPQ2d 1400, 1407 (2007); see also Benson, 409 U.S. 67, 175 USPQ2d 675 (An "idea" is not patent eligible). Thus, a product claim to a software program that does not also contain at least one structural limitation (such as a “means plus function” limitation) has no physical or tangible form, and thus does not fall within any statutory category. Another example of an intangible product that does not fall within a statutory category is a paradigm or business model for a marketing company. In re Ferguson, 558 F.3d 1359, 1364, 90 USPQ2d 1035, 1039-40 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Even when a product has a physical or tangible form, it may not fall within a statutory category. For instance, a transitory signal, while physical and real, does not possess concrete structure that would qualify as a device or part under the definition of a machine, is not a tangible article or commodity under the definition of a manufacture (even though it is man-made and physical in that it exists in the real world and has tangible causes and effects), and is not composed of matter such that it would qualify as a composition of matter. Nuijten, 500 F.3d at 1356-1357, 84 USPQ2d at 1501-03. As such, a transitory, propagating signal does not fall within any statutory category. Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc., 851 F.3d 1275, 1294, 112 USPQ2d 1120, 1133 (Fed. Cir. 2017); Nuijten, 500 F.3d at 1356-1357, 84 USPQ2d at 1501-03. II. ELIGIBILITY STEP 1: WHETHER A CLAIM IS TO A STATUTORY CATEGORY As described in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 1 of the eligibility analysis asks: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Like the other steps in the eligibility analysis, evaluation of this step should be made after determining what the inventor has invented by reviewing the entire application disclosure and construing the claims in accordance with their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI). See MPEP § 2106, subsection II, for more information about the importance of understanding what has been invented, and MPEP § 2111 for more information about the BRI. In the context of the flowchart in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 1 determines whether: • The claim as a whole does not fall within any statutory category (Step 1: NO) and thus is non-statutory, warranting a rejection for failure to claim statutory subject matter; or • The claim as a whole falls within one or more statutory categories (Step 1: YES), and thus must be further analyzed to determine whether it qualifies as eligible at Pathway A or requires further analysis at Step 2A to determine if the claim is directed to a judicial exception. A claim whose BRI covers both statutory and non-statutory embodiments embraces subject matter that is not eligible for patent protection and therefore is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Such claims fail the first step (Step 1: NO) and should be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, for at least this reason. In such a case, it is a best practice for the examiner to point out the BRI and recommend an amendment, if possible, that would narrow the claim to those embodiments that fall within a statutory category. For example, the BRI of machine readable media can encompass non-statutory transitory forms of signal transmission, such as a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal per se. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 84 USPQ2d 1495 (Fed. Cir. 2007). When the BRI encompasses transitory forms of signal transmission, a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 as failing to claim statutory subject matter would be appropriate. Thus, a claim to a computer readable medium that can be a compact disc or a carrier wave covers a non-statutory embodiment and therefore should be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter. See, e.g., Mentor Graphics v. EVE-USA, Inc., 851 F.3d at 1294-95, 112 USPQ2d at 1134 (claims to a “machine-readable medium” were non-statutory, because their scope encompassed both statutory random-access memory and non-statutory carrier waves). If a claim is clearly not within one of the four categories (Step 1: NO), then a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 must be made indicating that the claim is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Form paragraphs 7.05 and 7.05.01 should be used; see MPEP § 2106.07(a)(1). However, as shown in the flowchart in MPEP § 2106 subsection III, when a claim fails under Step 1 (Step 1: NO), but it appears from applicant’s disclosure that the claim could be amended to fall within a statutory category (Step 1: YES), the analysis should proceed to determine whether such an amended claim would qualify as eligible at Pathway A, B or C. In such a case, it is a best practice for the examiner to recommend an amendment, if possible, that would resolve eligibility of the claim. In addition to the terms “laws of nature,” “natural phenomena,” and “abstract ideas,” judicially recognized exceptions have been described using various other terms, including “physical phenomena,” “products of nature,” “scientific principles,” “systems that depend on human intelligence alone,” “disembodied concepts,” “mental processes,” and “disembodied mathematical algorithms and formulas.” It should be noted that there are no bright lines between the types of exceptions, and that many of the concepts identified by the courts as exceptions can fall under several exceptions. For example, mathematical formulas are considered to be a judicial exception as they express a scientific truth, but have been labelled by the courts as both abstract ideas and laws of nature. Likewise, “products of nature” are considered to be an exception because they tie up the use of naturally occurring things, but have been labelled as both laws of nature and natural phenomena. Thus, it is sufficient for this analysis for the examiner to identify that the claimed concept (the specific claim limitation(s) that the examiner believes may recite an exception) aligns with at least one judicial exception. The Supreme Court has explained that the judicial exceptions reflect the Court’s view that abstract ideas, laws of nature, and natural phenomena are “the basic tools of scientific and technological work”, and are thus excluded from patentability because “monopolization of those tools through the grant of a patent might tend to impede innovation more than it would tend to promote it.” Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 216, 110 USPQ2d at 1980 (quoting Myriad, 569 U.S. at 589, 106 USPQ2d at 1978 and Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs. Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 71, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965 (2012)). The Supreme Court’s concern that drives this “exclusionary principle” is pre-emption. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 216, 110 USPQ2d at 1980. The Court has held that a claim may not preempt abstract ideas, laws of nature, or natural phenomena, even if the judicial exception is narrow (e.g., a particular mathematical formula such as the Arrhenius equation). See, e.g., Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79-80, 86-87, 101 USPQ2d at 1968-69, 1971 (claims directed to “narrow laws that may have limited applications” held ineligible); Flook, 437 U.S. at 589-90, 198 USPQ at 197 (claims that did not “wholly preempt the mathematical formula” held ineligible). This is because such a patent would “in practical effect [] be a patent on the [abstract idea, law of nature or natural phenomenon] itself.” Benson, 409 U.S. at 71- 72, 175 USPQ at 676. The concern over preemption was expressed as early as 1852. See Le Roy v. Tatham, 55 U.S. (14 How.) 156, 175 (1852) (“A principle, in the abstract, is a fundamental truth; an original cause; a motive; these cannot be patented, as no one can claim in either of them an exclusive right.”). The Supreme Court’s decisions make it clear that judicial exceptions need not be old or long-prevalent, and that even newly discovered or novel judicial exceptions are still exceptions. For example, the mathematical formula in Flook, the laws of nature in Mayo, and the isolated DNA in Myriad were all novel or newly discovered, but nonetheless were considered by the Supreme Court to be judicial exceptions because they were “‘basic tools of scientific and technological work’ that lie beyond the domain of patent protection.” Myriad, 569 U.S. 576, 589, 106 USPQ2d at 1976, 1978 (noting that Myriad discovered the BRCA1 and BRCA1 genes and quoting Mayo, 566 U.S. 71, 101 USPQ2d at 1965); Flook, 437 U.S. at 591-92, 198 USPQ2d at 198 (“the novelty of the mathematical algorithm is not a determining factor at all”); Mayo, 566 U.S. 73-74, 78, 101 USPQ2d 1966, 1968 (noting that the claims embody the researcher's discoveries of laws of nature). The Supreme Court’s cited rationale for considering even “just discovered” judicial exceptions as exceptions stems from the concern that “without this exception, there would be considerable danger that the grant of patents would ‘tie up’ the use of such tools and thereby ‘inhibit future innovation premised upon them.’” Myriad, 569 U.S. at 589, 106 USPQ2d at 1978-79 (quoting Mayo, 566 U.S. at 86, 101 USPQ2d at 1971). See also Myriad, 569 U.S. at 591, 106 USPQ2d at 1979 (“Groundbreaking, innovative, or even brilliant discovery does not by itself satisfy the §101 inquiry.”). The Federal Circuit has also applied this principle, for example, when holding a concept of using advertising as an exchange or currency to be an abstract idea, despite the patentee’s arguments that the concept was “new”. Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772 F.3d 709, 714-15, 112 USPQ2d 1750, 1753-54 (Fed. Cir. 2014). Cf. Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 839 F.3d 1138, 1151, 120 USPQ2d 1473, 1483 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“a new abstract idea is still an abstract idea”) (emphasis in original). For a detailed discussion of abstract ideas, see MPEP § 2106.04(a); for a detailed discussion of laws of nature, natural phenomena and products of nature, see MPEP § 2106.04(b). II. ELIGIBILITY STEP 2A: WHETHER A CLAIM IS DIRECTED TO A JUDICIAL EXCEPTION As described in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 2A of the Office’s eligibility analysis is the first part of the Alice/Mayo test, i.e., the Supreme Court’s “framework for distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts.” Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 217-18, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1981 (2014) (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 77-78, 101 USPQ2d at 1967-68). Like the other steps in the eligibility analysis, evaluation of this step should be made after determining what the inventor has invented by reviewing the entire application disclosure and construing the claims in accordance with their broadest reasonable interpretation. See MPEP § 2106, subsection II for more information about the importance of understanding what has been invented, and MPEP § 2111 for more information about the broadest reasonable interpretation. Step 2A asks: Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon (product of nature) or an abstract idea? In the context of the flowchart in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 2A determines whether: • The claim as a whole is not directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A: NO) and thus is eligible at Pathway B, thereby concluding the eligibility analysis; or • The claim as a whole is directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A: YES) and thus requires further analysis at Step 2B to determine if the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the exception itself. A.Step 2A Is a Two-Prong Inquiry Step 2A is a two-prong inquiry, in which examiners determine in Prong One whether a claim recites a judicial exception, and if so, then determine in Prong Two if the recited judicial exception is integrated into a practical application of that exception. Together, these prongs represent the first part of the Alice/Mayo test, which determines whether a claim is directed to a judicial exception. The flowchart below depicts the two-prong analysis that is performed in order to answer the Step 2A inquiry. 1. Prong One Prong One asks does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon? In Prong One examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception, i.e. whether a law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea is set forth or described in the claim. While the terms "set forth" and "described" are thus both equated with "recite", their different language is intended to indicate that there are two ways in which an exception can be recited in a claim. For instance, the claims in Diehr, 450 U.S. at 178 n. 2, 179 n.5, 191-92, 209 USPQ at 4-5 (1981), clearly stated a mathematical equation in the repetitively calculating step, and the claims in Mayo, 566 U.S. 66, 75-77, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1967-68 (2012), clearly stated laws of nature in the wherein clause, such that the claims “set forth” an identifiable judicial exception. Alternatively, the claims in Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 218, 110 USPQ2d at 1982, described the concept of intermediated settlement without ever explicitly using the words “intermediated” or “settlement.” The Supreme Court has held that Section 101 contains an implicit exception for ‘‘[l]aws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas,’’ which are ‘‘the basic tools of scientific and technological work.’’ Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 216, 110 USPQ2d at 1980 (citing Mayo, 566 US at 71, 101 USPQ2d at 1965). Yet, the Court has explained that ‘‘[a]t some level, all inventions embody, use, reflect, rest upon, or apply laws of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract ideas,’’ and has cautioned ‘‘to tread carefully in construing this exclusionary principle lest it swallow all of patent law.’’ Id. See also Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1335, 118 USPQ2d 1684, 1688 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“The ‘directed to’ inquiry, therefore, cannot simply ask whether the claims involve a patent-ineligible concept, because essentially every routinely patent-eligible claim involving physical products and actions involves a law of nature and/or natural phenomenon”). Examiners should accordingly be careful to distinguish claims that recite an exception (which require further eligibility analysis) and claims that merely involve an exception (which are eligible and do not require further eligibility analysis). An example of a claim that recites a judicial exception is “A machine comprising elements that operate in accordance with F=ma.” This claim sets forth the principle that force equals mass times acceleration (F=ma) and therefore recites a law of nature exception. Because F=ma represents a mathematical formula, the claim could alternatively be considered as reciting an abstract idea. Because this claim recites a judicial exception, it requires further analysis in Prong Two in order to answer the Step 2A inquiry. An example of a claim that merely involves, or is based on, an exception is a claim to “A teeter-totter comprising an elongated member pivotably attached to a base member, having seats and handles attached at opposing sides of the elongated member.” This claim is based on the concept of a lever pivoting on a fulcrum, which involves the natural principles of mechanical advantage and the law of the lever. However, this claim does not recite these natural principles and therefore is not directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A: NO). Thus, the claim is eligible at Pathway B without further analysis. If the claim recites a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea enumerated in MPEP § 2106.04(a), a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon), the claim requires further analysis in Prong Two. If the claim does not recite a judicial exception (a law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea), then the claim cannot be directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A: NO), and thus the claim is eligible at Pathway B without further analysis. For more information how to determine if a claim recites an abstract idea, see MPEP § 2106.04(a). For more information on how to determine if a claim recites a law of nature or natural phenomenon, see MPEP § 2106.04(b). For more information on how to determine if a claim recites a product of nature, see MPEP § 2106.04(c). 2. Prong Two Prong Two asks does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? In Prong Two, examiners evaluate whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application of that exception. If the additional elements in the claim integrate the recited exception into a practical application of the exception, then the claim is not directed to the judicial exception (Step 2A: NO) and thus is eligible at Pathway B. This concludes the eligibility analysis. If, however, the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception (Step 2A: YES), and requires further analysis under Step 2B (where it may still be eligible if it amounts to an ‘‘inventive concept’’). For more information on how to evaluate whether a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application, see MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2). The mere inclusion of a judicial exception such as a mathematical formula (which is one of the mathematical concepts identified as an abstract idea in MPEP § 2106.04(a)) in a claim means that the claim “recites” a judicial exception under Step 2A Prong One. However, mere recitation of a judicial exception does not mean that the claim is “directed to” that judicial exception under Step 2A Prong Two. Instead, under Prong Two, a claim that recites a judicial exception is not directed to that judicial exception, if the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of that exception. Prong Two thus distinguishes claims that are “directed to” the recited judicial exception from claims that are not “directed to” the recited judicial exception. Because a judicial exception is not eligible subject matter, Bilski, 561 U.S. at 601, 95 USPQ2d at 1005-06 (quoting Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. at 309, 206 USPQ at 197 (1980)), if there are no additional claim elements besides the judicial exception, or if the additional claim elements merely recite another judicial exception, that is insufficient to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. See, e.g., RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co., 855 F.3d 1322, 1327, 122 USPQ2d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (“Adding one abstract idea (math) to another abstract idea (encoding and decoding) does not render the claim non-abstract”); Genetic Techs. v. Merial LLC, 818 F.3d 1369, 1376, 118 USPQ2d 1541, 1546 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (eligibility “cannot be furnished by the unpatentable law of nature (or natural phenomenon or abstract idea) itself.”). For a claim reciting a judicial exception to be eligible, the additional elements (if any) in the claim must “transform the nature of the claim” into a patent-eligible application of the judicial exception, Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 217, 110 USPQ2d at 1981, either at Prong Two or in Step 2B. If there are no additional elements in the claim, then it cannot be eligible. In such a case, after making the appropriate rejection (see MPEP § 2106.07 for more information on formulating a rejection for lack of eligibility), it is a best practice for the examiner to recommend an amendment, if possible, that would resolve eligibility of the claim. B.Evaluating Claims Reciting Multiple Judicial Exceptions A claim may recite multiple judicial exceptions. For example, claim 4 at issue in Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 95 USPQ2d 1001 (2010) recited two abstract ideas, and the claims at issue in Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs. Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 101 USPQ2d 1961 (2012) recited two laws of nature. However, these claims were analyzed by the Supreme Court in the same manner as claims reciting a single judicial exception, such as those in Alice Corp., 573 U.S. 208, 110 USPQ2d 1976. During examination, examiners should apply the same eligibility analysis to all claims regardless of the number of exceptions recited therein. Unless it is clear that a claim recites distinct exceptions, such as a law of nature and an abstract idea, care should be taken not to parse the claim into multiple exceptions, particularly in claims involving abstract ideas. Accordingly, if possible examiners should treat the claim for Prong Two and Step 2B purposes as containing a single judicial exception. In some claims, the multiple exceptions are distinct from each other, e.g., a first limitation describes a law of nature, and a second limitation elsewhere in the claim recites an abstract idea. In these cases, for purposes of examination efficiency, examiners should select one of the exceptions and conduct the eligibility analysis for that selected exception. If the analysis indicates that the claim recites an additional element or combination of elements that integrate the selected exception into a practical application or that amount to significantly more than the selected exception, then the claim should be considered patent eligible. On the other hand, if the claim does not recite any additional element or combination of elements that integrate the selected exception into a practical application, and also does not recite any additional element or combination of elements that amounts to significantly more than the selected exception, then the claim should be considered ineligible. University of Utah Research Foundation v. Ambry Genetics, 774 F.3d 755, 762, 113 USPQ2d 1241, 1246 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (because claims did not amount to significantly more than the recited abstract idea, court “need not decide” if claims also recited a law of nature). In other claims, multiple abstract ideas, which may fall in the same or different groupings, or multiple laws of nature may be recited. In these cases, examiners should not parse the claim. For example, in a claim that includes a series of steps that recite mental steps as well as a mathematical calculation, an examiner should identify the claim as reciting both a mental process and a mathematical concept for Step 2A Prong One to make the analysis clear on the record. However, if possible, the examiner should consider the limitations together as a single abstract idea for Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B (if necessary) rather than as a plurality of separate abstract ideas to be analyzed individually. 2106.04(a) Abstract Ideas [R-07.2022] The abstract idea exception has deep roots in the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence. See Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 601-602, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1006 (2010) (citing Le Roy v. Tatham, 55 U.S. (14 How.) 156, 174–175 (1853)). Despite this long history, the courts have declined to define abstract ideas. However, it is clear from the body of judicial precedent that software and business methods are not excluded categories of subject matter. For example, the Supreme Court concluded that business methods are not “categorically outside of § 101's scope,” stating that “a business method is simply one kind of ‘method’ that is, at least in some circumstances, eligible for patenting under § 101.” Bilski, 561 U.S. at 607, 95 USPQ2d at 1008 (2010). See also Content Extraction and Transmission, LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, 776 F.3d 1343, 1347, 113 USPQ2d 1354, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (“there is no categorical business-method exception”). Likewise, software is not automatically an abstract idea, even if performance of a software task involves an underlying mathematical calculation or relationship. See, e.g., Thales Visionix, Inc. v. United States, 850 F.3d 1343, 121 USPQ2d 1898, 1902 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (“That a mathematical equation is required to complete the claimed method and system does not doom the claims to abstraction.”); McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1316, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1103 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (methods of automatic lip synchronization and facial expression animation using computer-implemented rules were not directed to an abstract idea); Enfish, 822 F.3d 1327, 1336, 118 USPQ2d 1684, 1689 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (claims to self-referential table for a computer database were not directed to an abstract idea). To facilitate examination, the Office has set forth an approach to identifying abstract ideas that distills the relevant case law into enumerated groupings of abstract ideas. The enumerated groupings are firmly rooted in Supreme Court precedent as well as Federal Circuit decisions interpreting that precedent, as is explained in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2). This approach represents a shift from the former case-comparison approach that required examiners to rely on individual judicial cases when determining whether a claim recites an abstract idea. By grouping the abstract ideas, the examiners’ focus has been shifted from relying on individual cases to generally applying the wide body of case law spanning all technologies and claim types. Examiners should determine whether a claim recites an abstract idea by (1) identifying the specific limitation(s) in the claim under examination that the examiner believes recites an abstract idea, and (2) determining whether the identified limitations(s) fall within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas listed above. The groupings of abstract ideas, and their relationship to the body of judicial precedent, are further discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2). If the identified limitation(s) falls within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas, it is reasonable to conclude that the claim recites an abstract idea in Step 2A Prong One. The claim then requires further analysis in Step 2A Prong Two, to determine whether any additional elements in the claim integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, see MPEP § 2106.04(d). If the identified limitation(s) do not fall within any of the groupings of abstract ideas, it is reasonable to find that the claim does not recite an abstract idea. This concludes the abstract idea judicial exception eligibility analysis, except in the rare circumstance discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(3), below. The claim is thus eligible at Pathway B unless the claim recites, and is directed to, another exception (such as a law of nature or natural phenomenon). If the claims recites another judicial exception (i.e. law of nature or natural phenomenon), see MPEP §§ 2106.04(b) and 2106.04(c) for more information on Step 2A analysis. MPEP § 2106.04(a)(1) provides examples of claims that do not recite abstract ideas (or other judicial exceptions) and thus are eligible at Step 2A Prong One. MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2) provides further explanation on the abstract idea groupings. It should be noted that these groupings are not mutually exclusive, i.e., some claims recite limitations that fall within more than one grouping or sub-grouping. For example, a claim reciting performing mathematical calculations using a formula that could be practically performed in the human mind may be considered to fall within the mathematical concepts grouping and the mental process grouping. Accordingly, examiners should identify at least one abstract idea grouping, but preferably identify all groupings to the extent possible, if a claim limitation(s) is determined to fall within multiple groupings and proceed with the analysis in Step 2A Prong Two. 2106.04(a)(1) Examples of Claims That Do Not Recite Abstract Ideas [R-10.2019] When evaluating a claim to determine whether it recites an abstract idea, examiners should keep in mind that while “all inventions at some level embody, use, reflect, rest upon, or apply laws of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract ideas”, not all claims recite an abstract idea. See Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank, Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 217, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1980-81 (2014) (citing Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs. Inc., 566 US 66, 71, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965 (2012)). The Step 2A Prong One analysis articulated in MPEP § 2106.04 accounts for this cautionary principle by requiring a claim to recite (i.e., set forth or describe) an abstract idea in Prong One before proceeding to the Prong Two inquiry about whether the claim is directed to that idea, thereby separating claims reciting abstract ideas from those that are merely based on or involve an abstract idea. Some claims are not directed to an abstract idea because they do not recite an abstract idea, although it may be apparent that at some level they are based on or involve an abstract idea. Because these claims do not recite an abstract idea (or other judicial exception), they are eligible at Step 2A Prong One (Pathway B). Non-limiting hypothetical examples of claims that do not recite (set forth or describe) an abstract idea include: i. a printer comprising a belt, a roller, a printhead and at least one ink cartridge; ii. a washing machine comprising a tub, a drive motor operatively connected to the tub, a controller for controlling the drive motor, and a housing for containing the tub, drive motor, and controller; iii. an earring comprising a sensor for taking periodic blood glucose measurements and a memory for storing measurement data from the sensor; iv. a method for sequencing BRCA1 gene sequences comprising: amplifying by a polymerization chain reaction technique all or part of a BRCA1 gene from a tissue sample from a human subject using a set of primers to produce amplified nucleic acids; and sequencing the amplified nucleic acids; v. a method for loading BIOS into a local computer system which has a system processor and volatile memory and non-volatile memory, the method comprising the steps of: responding to powering up of the local computer system by requesting from a memory location remote from the local computer system the transfer to and storage in the volatile memory of the local computer system of BIOS configured for effective use of the local computer system, transferring and storing such BIOS, and transferring control of the local computer system to such BIOS; vi. a method of rearranging icons on a graphical user interface (GUI) comprising the steps of: receiving a user selection to organize each icon based on the amount of use of each icon, determining the amount of use of each icon by using a processor to track the amount of memory allocated to the application associated with the icon over a period of time, and automatically moving the most used icons to a position in the GUI closest to the start icon of the computer system based on the determined amount of use; and vii. a method of training a neural network for facial detection comprising: collecting a set of digital facial images, applying one or more transformations to the digital images, creating a first training set including the modified set of digital facial images; training the neural network in a first stage using the first training set, creating a second training set including digital non-facial images that are incorrectly detected as facial images in the first stage of training; and training the neural network in a second stage using the second training set. The Court’s rationale for identifying these “mathematical concepts” as judicial exceptions is that a ‘‘mathematical formula as such is not accorded the protection of our patent laws,’’ Diehr, 450 U.S. at 191, 209 USPQ at 15 (citing Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 175 USPQ 673), and thus ‘‘the discovery of [a mathematical formula] cannot support a patent unless there is some other inventive concept in its application.’’ Flook, 437 U.S. at 594, 198 USPQ at 199. In the past, the Supreme Court sometimes described mathematical concepts as laws of nature, and at other times described these concepts as judicial exceptions without specifying a particular type of exception. See, e.g., Benson, 409 U.S. at 65, 175 USPQ2d at 674; Flook, 437 U.S. at 589, 198 USPQ2d at 197; Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. v. Radio Corp. of Am., 306 U.S. 86, 94, 40 USPQ 199, 202 (1939) (‘‘[A] scientific truth, or the mathematical expression of it, is not patentable invention[.]’’). More recent opinions of the Supreme Court, however, have affirmatively characterized mathematical relationships and formulas as abstract ideas. See, e.g., Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 218, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1981 (2014) (describing Flook as holding “that a mathematical formula for computing ‘alarm limits’ in a catalytic conversion process was also a patent-ineligible abstract idea.”); Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 611-12, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (2010) (noting that the claimed “concept of hedging, described in claim 1 and reduced to a mathematical formula in claim 4, is an unpatentable abstract idea,”). When determining whether a claim recites a mathematical concept (i.e., mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, and mathematical calculations), examiners should consider whether the claim recites a mathematical concept or merely limitations that are based on or involve a mathematical concept. A claim does not recite a mathematical concept (i.e., the claim limitations do not fall within the mathematical concept grouping), if it is only based on or involves a mathematical concept. See, e.g., Thales Visionix, Inc. v. United States, 850 F.3d 1343, 1348-49, 121 USPQ2d 1898, 1902-03 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (determining that the claims to a particular configuration of inertial sensors and a particular method of using the raw data from the sensors in order to more accurately calculate the position and orientation of an object on a moving platform did not merely recite “the abstract idea of using ‘mathematical equations for determining the relative position of a moving object to a moving reference frame’.”). For example, a limitation that is merely based on or involves a mathematical concept described in the specification may not be sufficient to fall into this grouping, provided the mathematical concept itself is not recited in the claim. It is important to note that a mathematical concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because “[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula.” In re Grams, 888 F.2d 835, 837 and n.1, 12 USPQ2d 1824, 1826 and n.1 (Fed. Cir. 1989). See, e.g., SAP America, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC, 898 F.3d 1161, 1163, 127 USPQ2d 1597, 1599 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (holding that claims to a ‘‘series of mathematical calculations based on selected information’’ are directed to abstract ideas); Digitech Image Techs., LLC v. Elecs. for Imaging, Inc., 758 F.3d 1344, 1350, 111 USPQ2d 1717, 1721 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (holding that claims to a ‘‘process of organizing information through mathematical correlations’’ are directed to an abstract idea); and Bancorp Servs., LLC v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Can. (U.S.), 687 F.3d 1266, 1280, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1434 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (identifying the concept of ‘‘managing a stable value protected life insurance policy by performing calculations and manipulating the results’’ as an abstract idea). A. Mathematical Relationships A mathematical relationship is a relationship between variables or numbers. A mathematical relationship may be expressed in words or using mathematical symbols. For example, pressure (p) can be described as the ratio between the magnitude of the normal force (F) and area of the surface on contact (A), or it can be set forth in the form of an equation such as p = F/A. Examples of mathematical relationships recited in a claim include: i. a relationship between reaction rate and temperature, which relationship can be expressed in the form of a formula called the Arrhenius equation, Diamond v. Diehr; 450 U.S. at 178 n. 2, 179 n.5, 191-92, 209 USPQ at 4-5 (1981); ii. a conversion between binary coded decimal and pure binary, Benson, 409 U.S. at 64, 175 USPQ at 674; iii. a mathematical relationship between enhanced directional radio activity and antenna conductor arrangement (i.e., the length of the conductors with respect to the operating wave length and the angle between the conductors), Mackay Radio & Tel. Co. v. Radio Corp. of America, 306 U.S. 86, 91, 40 USPQ 199, 201 (1939) (while the litigated claims 15 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 1,974,387 expressed this mathematical relationship using a formula that described the angle between the conductors, other claims in the patent (e.g., claim 1) expressed the mathematical relationship in words); and iv. organizing information and manipulating information through mathematical correlations, Digitech Image Techs., LLC v. Electronics for Imaging, Inc., 758 F.3d 1344, 1350, 111 USPQ2d 1717, 1721 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The patentee in Digitech claimed methods of generating first and second data by taking existing information, manipulating the data using mathematical functions, and organizing this information into a new form. The court explained that such claims were directed to an abstract idea because they described a process of organizing information through mathematical correlations, like Flook's method of calculating using a mathematical formula. 758 F.3d at 1350, 111 USPQ2d at 1721. B. Mathematical Formulas or Equations A claim that recites a numerical formula or equation will be considered as falling within the “mathematical concepts” grouping. In addition, there are instances where a formula or equation is written in text format that should also be considered as falling within this grouping. For example, the phrase “determining a ratio of A to B” is merely using a textual replacement for the particular equation (ratio = A/B). Additionally, the phrase “calculating the force of the object by multiplying its mass by its acceleration” is using a textual replacement for the particular equation (F= ma). Examples of mathematical equations or formulas recited in a claim include: A claim that recites a mathematical calculation, when the claim is given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, will be considered as falling within the “mathematical concepts” grouping. A mathematical calculation is a mathematical operation (such as multiplication) or an act of calculating using mathematical methods to determine a variable or number, e.g., performing an arithmetic operation such as exponentiation. There is no particular word or set of words that indicates a claim recites a mathematical calculation. That is, a claim does not have to recite the word “calculating” in order to be considered a mathematical calculation. For example, a step of “determining” a variable or number using mathematical methods or “performing” a mathematical operation may also be considered mathematical calculations when the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim in light of the specification encompasses a mathematical calculation. • commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations); and • managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). The Supreme Court has identified a number of concepts falling within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping as abstract ideas. In particular, in Alice, the Court concluded that the use of a third party to mediate settlement risk is a ‘‘fundamental economic practice’’ and thus an abstract idea. 573 U.S. at 219–20, 110 USPQ2d at 1982. In addition, the Court in Alice described the concept of risk hedging identified as an abstract idea in Bilski as ‘‘a method of organizing human activity’’. Id. Previously, in Bilski, the Court concluded that hedging is a ‘‘fundamental economic practice’’ and therefore an abstract idea. 561 U.S. at 611–612, 95 USPQ2d at 1010. The term “certain” qualifies the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping as a reminder of several important points. First, not all methods of organizing human activity are abstract ideas (e.g., “a defined set of steps for combining particular ingredients to create a drug formulation” is not a certain "method of organizing human activity”), In re Marco Guldenaar Holding B.V., 911 F.3d 1157, 1160-61, 129 USPQ2d 1008, 1011 (Fed. Cir. 2018). Second, this grouping is limited to activity that falls within the enumerated sub-groupings of fundamental economic principles or practices, commercial or legal interactions, and managing personal behavior and relationships or interactions between people, and is not to be expanded beyond these enumerated sub-groupings except in rare circumstances as explained in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(3). Finally, the sub-groupings encompass both activity of a single person (for example, a person following a set of instructions or a person signing a contract online) and activity that involves multiple people (such as a commercial interaction), and thus, certain activity between a person and a computer (for example a method of anonymous loan shopping that a person conducts using a mobile phone) may fall within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping. It is noted that the number of people involved in the activity is not dispositive as to whether a claim limitation falls within this grouping. Instead, the determination should be based on whether the activity itself falls within one of the sub-groupings. A.Fundamental Economic Practices or Principles The courts have used the phrases “fundamental economic practices” or “fundamental economic principles” to describe concepts relating to the economy and commerce. Fundamental economic principles or practices include hedging, insurance, and mitigating risks. The term “fundamental” is not used in the sense of necessarily being “old” or “well-known.” See, e.g., OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1364, 115 U.S.P.Q.2d 1090, 1092 (Fed Cir. 2015) (a new method of price optimization was found to be a fundamental economic concept); In re Smith, 815 F.3d 816, 818-19, 118 USPQ2d 1245, 1247 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (describing a new set of rules for conducting a wagering game as a “fundamental economic practice”); In re Greenstein, 774 Fed. Appx. 661, 664, 2019 USPQ2d 212400 (Fed Cir. 2019) (non-precedential) (claims to a new method of allocating returns to different investors in an investment fund was a fundamental economic concept). However, being old or well-known may indicate that the practice is fundamental. See, e.g., Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 219-20, 110 USPQ2d 1981-82 (2014) (describing the concept of intermediated settlement, like the risk hedging in Bilski, to be a “‘fundamental economic practice long prevalent in our system of commerce’” and also as “a building block of the modern economy”) (citation omitted); Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 611, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (2010) (claims to the concept of hedging are a “fundamental economic practice long prevalent in our system of commerce and taught in any introductory finance class.”) (citation omitted); Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1313, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“The category of abstract ideas embraces ‘fundamental economic practice[s] long prevalent in our system of commerce,’ … including ‘longstanding commercial practice[s]’”). An example of a case identifying a claim as reciting a fundamental economic practice is Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 609, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1009 (2010). The fundamental economic practice at issue was hedging or protecting against risk. The applicant in Bilski claimed “a series of steps instructing how to hedge risk,” i.e., how to protect against risk. 561 U.S. at 599, 95 USPQ2d at 1005. The method allowed energy suppliers and consumers to minimize the risks resulting from fluctuations in market demand for energy. The Supreme Court determined that hedging is “fundamental economic practice” and therefore is an “unpatentable abstract idea.” 561 U.S. at 611-12, 95 USPQ2d at 1010. Another example of a case identifying a claim as reciting a fundamental economic practice is Bancorp Services., L.L.C. v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada (U.S.), 687 F.3d 1266, 103 USPQ2d 1425 (Fed. Cir. 2012). The fundamental economic practice at issue in Bancorp pertained to insurance. The patentee in Bancorp claimed methods and systems for managing a life insurance policy on behalf of a policy holder, which comprised steps including generating a life insurance policy including a stable value protected investment with an initial value based on a value of underlying securities, calculating surrender value protected investment credits for the life insurance policy; determining an investment value and a value of the underlying securities for the current day; and calculating a policy value and a policy unit value for the current day. 687 F.3d at 1270-71, 103 USPQ2d at 1427. The court described the claims as an “attempt to patent the use of the abstract idea of [managing a stable value protected life insurance policy] and then instruct the use of well-known [calculations] to help establish some of the inputs into the equation.” 687 F.3d at 1278, 103 USPQ2d at 1433 (alterations in original) (citing Bilski). Other examples of "fundamental economic principles or practices" include: “Commercial interactions” or “legal interactions” include agreements in the form of contracts, legal obligations, advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors, and business relations. An example of a claim reciting a commercial or legal interaction, where the interaction is an agreement in the form of contracts, is found in buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d. 1350, 112 USPQ2d 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The agreement at issue in buySAFE was a transaction performance guaranty, which is a contractual relationship. 765 F.3d at 1355, 112 USPQ2d at 1096. The patentee claimed a method in which a computer operated by the provider of a safe transaction service receives a request for a performance guarantee for an online commercial transaction, the computer processes the request by underwriting the requesting party in order to provide the transaction guarantee service, and the computer offers, via a computer network, a transaction guaranty that binds to the transaction upon the closing of the transaction. 765 F.3d at 1351-52, 112 USPQ2d at 1094. The Federal Circuit described the claims as directed to an abstract idea because they were “squarely about creating a contractual relationship--a ‘transaction performance guaranty’.” 765 F.3d at 1355, 112 USPQ2d at 1096. Other examples of subject matter where the commercial or legal interaction is an agreement in the form of contracts include: An example of a claim reciting a commercial or legal interaction in the form of a legal obligation is found in Fort Properties, Inc. v. American Master Lease, LLC, 671 F.3d 1317, 101 USPQ2d 1785 (Fed Cir. 2012). The patentee claimed a method of “aggregating real property into a real estate portfolio, dividing the interests in the portfolio into a number of deedshares, and subjecting those shares to a master agreement.” 671 F.3d at 1322, 101 USPQ2d at 1788. The legal obligation at issue was the tax-free exchanges of real estate. The Federal Circuit concluded that the real estate investment tool designed to enable tax-free exchanges was an abstract concept. 671 F.3d at 1323, 101 USPQ2d at 1789. Other examples of subject matter where the commercial or legal interaction is a legal obligation include: An example of a claim reciting advertising is found in Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772 F.3d 709, 714-15, 112 USPQ2d 1750, 1753-54 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The patentee in Ultramercial claimed an eleven-step method for displaying an advertisement (ad) in exchange for access to copyrighted media, comprising steps of receiving copyrighted media, selecting an ad, offering the media in exchange for watching the selected ad, displaying the ad, allowing the consumer access to the media, and receiving payment from the sponsor of the ad. 772 F.3d. at 715, 112 USPQ2d at 1754. The Federal Circuit determined that the "combination of steps recites an abstraction—an idea, having no particular concrete or tangible form" and thus was directed to an abstract idea, which the court described as "using advertising as an exchange or currency." Id. Other examples of subject matter where the commercial or legal interaction is advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors include: An example of a claim reciting business relations is found in Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services, 859 F.3d 1044, 123 USPQ2d 1100 (Fed. Cir. 2017). The business relation at issue in Credit Acceptance is the relationship between a customer and dealer when processing a credit application to purchase a vehicle. The patentee claimed a “system for maintaining a database of information about the items in a dealer’s inventory, obtaining financial information about a customer from a user, combining these two sources of information to create a financing package for each of the inventoried items, and presenting the financing packages to the user.” 859 F.3d at 1054, 123 USPQ2d at 1108. The Federal Circuit described the claims as directed to the abstract idea of “processing an application for financing a loan” and found “no meaningful distinction between this type of financial industry practice” and the concept of intermediated settlement in Alice or the hedging concept in Bilski. 859 F.3d at 1054, 123 USPQ2d at 1108. Another example of subject matter where the commercial or legal interaction is business relations includes: C. Managing Personal Behavior or Relationships or Interactions Between People The sub-grouping “managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people” include social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions. An example of a claim reciting managing personal behavior is Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1636 (Fed. Cir. 2015). The patentee in this case claimed methods comprising storing user-selected pre-set limits on spending in a database, and when one of the limits is reached, communicating a notification to the user via a device. 792 F.3d. at 1367, 115 USPQ2d at 1639-40. The Federal Circuit determined that the claims were directed to the abstract idea of “tracking financial transactions to determine whether they exceed a pre-set spending limit (i.e., budgeting)”, which “is not meaningfully different from the ideas found to be abstract in other cases before the Supreme Court and our court involving methods of organizing human activity.” 792 F.3d. at 1367-68, 115 USPQ2d at 1640. Other examples of managing personal behavior recited in a claim include: iii. a mental process that a neurologist should follow when testing a patient for nervous system malfunctions, In re Meyer, 688 F.2d 789, 791-93, 215 USPQ 193, 194-96 (CCPA 1982). An example of a claim reciting social activities is Voter Verified, Inc. v. Election Systems & Software, LLC, 887 F.3d 1376, 126 USPQ2d 1498 (Fed. Cir. 2018). The social activity at issue in Voter Verified was voting. The patentee claimed “[a] method for voting providing for self-verification of a ballot comprising the steps of” presenting an election ballot for voting, accepting input of the votes, storing the votes, printing out the votes, comparing the printed votes to votes stored in the computer, and determining whether the printed ballot is acceptable. 887 F.3d at 1384-85, 126 USPQ2d at 1503-04. The Federal Circuit found that the claims were directed to the abstract idea of “voting, verifying the vote, and submitting the vote for tabulation”, which is a “fundamental activity that forms the basis of our democracy” and has been performed by humans for hundreds of years. 887 F.3d at 1385-86, 126 USPQ2d at 1504-05. Another example of a claim reciting social activities is Interval Licensing LLC, v. AOL, Inc., 896 F.3d 1335, 127 USPQ2d 1553 (Fed. Cir. 2018). The social activity at issue was the social activity of “’providing information to a person without interfering with the person’s primary activity.’” 896 F.3d at 1344, 127 USPQ2d 1553 (citing Interval Licensing LLC v. AOL, Inc., 193 F. Supp.3d 1184, 1188 (W.D. 2014)). The patentee claimed an attention manager for acquiring content from an information source, controlling the timing of the display of acquired content, displaying the content, and acquiring an updated version of the previously-acquired content when the information source updates its content. 896 F.3d at 1339-40, 127 USPQ2d at 1555. The Federal Circuit concluded that “[s]tanding alone, the act of providing someone an additional set of information without disrupting the ongoing provision of an initial set of information is an abstract idea,” observing that the district court “pointed to the nontechnical human activity of passing a note to a person who is in the middle of a meeting or conversation as further illustrating the basic, longstanding practice that is the focus of the [patent ineligible] claimed invention.” 896 F.3d at 1344-45, 127 USPQ2d at 1559. An example of a claim reciting following rules or instructions is In re Marco Guldenaar Holding B.V., 911 F.3d 1157, 1161, 129 USPQ2d 1008, 1011 (Fed. Cir. 2018). The patentee claimed a method of playing a dice game including placing wagers on whether certain die faces will appear face up. 911 F.3d at 1160; 129 USPQ2d at 1011. The Federal Circuit determined that the claims were directed to the abstract idea of “rules for playing games”, which the court characterized as a certain method of organizing human activity. 911 F.3d at 1160-61; 129 USPQ2d at 1011. Other examples of following rules or instructions recited in a claim include: ii. a series of instructions of how to hedge risk, Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 595, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1004 (2010). III. MENTAL PROCESSES The courts consider a mental process (thinking) that “can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper” to be an abstract idea. CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1372, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1695 (Fed. Cir. 2011). As the Federal Circuit explained, “methods which can be performed mentally, or which are the equivalent of human mental work, are unpatentable abstract ideas the ‘basic tools of scientific and technological work’ that are open to all.’” 654 F.3d at 1371, 99 USPQ2d at 1694 (citing Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 175 USPQ 673 (1972)). See also Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs. Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 71, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965 (2012) (“‘[M]ental processes[] and abstract intellectual concepts are not patentable, as they are the basic tools of scientific and technological work’” (quoting Benson, 409 U.S. at 67, 175 USPQ at 675)); Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 589, 198 USPQ 193, 197 (1978) (same). Accordingly, the “mental processes” abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. A discussion of concepts performed in the human mind, as well as concepts that cannot practically be performed in the human mind and thus are not “mental processes”, is provided below with respect to point A. The courts do not distinguish between mental processes that are performed entirely in the human mind and mental processes that require a human to use a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper or a slide rule) to perform the claim limitation. See, e.g., Benson, 409 U.S. at 67, 65, 175 USPQ at 674-75, 674 (noting that the claimed “conversion of [binary-coded decimal] numerals to pure binary numerals can be done mentally,” i.e., “as a person would do it by head and hand.”); Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 839 F.3d 1138, 1139, 120 USPQ2d 1473, 1474 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (holding that claims to a mental process of “translating a functional description of a logic circuit into a hardware component description of the logic circuit” are directed to an abstract idea, because the claims “read on an individual performing the claimed steps mentally or with pencil and paper”). Mental processes performed by humans with the assistance of physical aids such as pens or paper are explained further below with respect to point B. Nor do the courts distinguish between claims that recite mental processes performed by humans and claims that recite mental processes performed on a computer. As the Federal Circuit has explained, “[c]ourts have examined claims that required the use of a computer and still found that the underlying, patent-ineligible invention could be performed via pen and paper or in a person’s mind.” Versata Dev. Group v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1335, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1702 (Fed. Cir. 2015). See also Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1318, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (‘‘[W]ith the exception of generic computer-implemented steps, there is nothing in the claims themselves that foreclose them from being performed by a human, mentally or with pen and paper.’’); Mortgage Grader, Inc. v. First Choice Loan Servs. Inc., 811 F.3d 1314, 1324, 117 USPQ2d 1693, 1699 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (holding that computer-implemented method for "anonymous loan shopping" was an abstract idea because it could be "performed by humans without a computer"). Mental processes recited in claims that require computers are explained further below with respect to point C. Because both product and process claims may recite a “mental process”, the phrase “mental processes” should be understood as referring to the type of abstract idea, and not to the statutory category of the claim. The courts have identified numerous product claims as reciting mental process-type abstract ideas, for instance the product claims to computer systems and computer-readable media in Versata Dev. Group. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 115 USPQ2d 1681 (Fed. Cir. 2015). This concept is explained further below with respect to point D. The following discussion is meant to guide examiners and provide more information on how to determine whether a claim recites a mental process. Examiners should keep in mind the following points A, B, C, and D when performing this evaluation. A. A Claim With Limitation(s) That Cannot Practically be Performed in the Human Mind Does Not Recite a Mental Process Claims do not recite a mental process when they do not contain limitations that can practically be performed in the human mind, for instance when the human mind is not equipped to perform the claim limitations. See SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 930 F.3d 1295, 1304 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (declining to identify the claimed collection and analysis of network data as abstract because “the human mind is not equipped to detect suspicious activity by using network monitors and analyzing network packets as recited by the claims”); CyberSource, 654 F.3d at 1376, 99 USPQ2d at 1699 (distinguishing Research Corp. Techs. v. Microsoft Corp., 627 F.3d 859, 97 USPQ2d 1274 (Fed. Cir. 2010), and SiRF Tech., Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 601 F.3d 1319, 94 USPQ2d 1607 (Fed. Cir. 2010), as directed to inventions that ‘‘could not, as a practical matter, be performed entirely in a human’s mind’’). Examples of claims that do not recite mental processes because they cannot be practically performed in the human mind include: • a claim to a method for calculating an absolute position of a GPS receiver and an absolute time of reception of satellite signals, where the claimed GPS receiver calculated pseudoranges that estimated the distance from the GPS receiver to a plurality of satellites, SiRF Tech., 601 F.3d at 1331-33, 94 USPQ2d at 1616-17; • a claim to a method for rendering a halftone image of a digital image by comparing, pixel by pixel, the digital image against a blue noise mask, where the method required the manipulation of computer data structures (e.g., the pixels of a digital image and a two-dimensional array known as a mask) and the output of a modified computer data structure (a halftoned digital image), Research Corp. Techs., 627 F.3d at 868, 97 USPQ2d at 1280. In contrast, claims do recite a mental process when they contain limitations that can practically be performed in the human mind, including for example, observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions. Examples of claims that recite mental processes include: • a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016); • claims to “comparing BRCA sequences and determining the existence of alterations,” where the claims cover any way of comparing BRCA sequences such that the comparison steps can practically be performed in the human mind, University of Utah Research Foundation v. Ambry Genetics, 774 F.3d 755, 763, 113 USPQ2d 1241, 1246 (Fed. Cir. 2014); • a claim to collecting and comparing known information (claim 1), which are steps that can be practically performed in the human mind, Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen IDEC, 659 F.3d 1057, 1067, 100 USPQ2d 1492, 1500 (Fed. Cir. 2011); and • a claim to identifying head shape and applying hair designs, which is a process that can be practically performed in the human mind, In re Brown, 645 Fed. App'x 1014, 1016-17 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (non-precedential). B. A Claim That Encompasses a Human Performing the Step(s) Mentally With or Without a Physical Aid Recites a Mental Process If a claim recites a limitation that can practically be performed in the human mind, with or without the use of a physical aid such as pen and paper, the limitation falls within the mental processes grouping, and the claim recites an abstract idea. See, e.g., Benson, 409 U.S. at 67, 65, 175 USPQ at 674-75, 674 (noting that the claimed “conversion of [binary-coded decimal] numerals to pure binary numerals can be done mentally,” i.e., “as a person would do it by head and hand.”); Synopsys, 839 F.3d at 1139, 120 USPQ2d at 1474 (holding that claims to the mental process of “translating a functional description of a logic circuit into a hardware component description of the logic circuit” are directed to an abstract idea, because the claims “read on an individual performing the claimed steps mentally or with pencil and paper”). The use of a physical aid (e.g., pencil and paper or a slide rule) to help perform a mental step (e.g., a mathematical calculation) does not negate the mental nature of the limitation, but simply accounts for variations in memory capacity from one person to another. For instance, in CyberSource, the court determined that the step of “constructing a map of credit card numbers” was a limitation that was able to be performed “by writing down a list of credit card transactions made from a particular IP address.” In making this determination, the court looked to the specification, which explained that the claimed map was nothing more than a listing of several (e.g., four) credit card transactions. The court concluded that this step was able to be performed mentally with a pen and paper, and therefore, it qualified as a mental process. 654 F.3d at 1372-73, 99 USPQ2d at 1695. See also Flook, 437 U.S. at 586, 198 USPQ at 196 (claimed “computations can be made by pencil and paper calculations”); University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc. v. General Electric Co., 916 F.3d 1363, 1367, 129 USPQ2d 1409, 1411-12 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (relying on specification’s description of the claimed analysis and manipulation of data as being performed mentally “‘using pen and paper methodologies, such as flowsheets and patient charts’”); Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1318, 120 USPQ2d at 1360 (although claimed as computer-implemented, steps of screening messages can be “performed by a human, mentally or with pen and paper”). C. A Claim That Requires a Computer May Still Recite a Mental Process Claims can recite a mental process even if they are claimed as being performed on a computer. The Supreme Court recognized this in Benson, determining that a mathematical algorithm for converting binary coded decimal to pure binary within a computer’s shift register was an abstract idea. The Court concluded that the algorithm could be performed purely mentally even though the claimed procedures “can be carried out in existing computers long in use, no new machinery being necessary.” 409 U.S at 67, 175 USPQ at 675. See also Mortgage Grader, 811 F.3d at 1324, 117 USPQ2d at 1699 (concluding that concept of “anonymous loan shopping” recited in a computer system claim is an abstract idea because it could be “performed by humans without a computer”). In evaluating whether a claim that requires a computer recites a mental process, examiners should carefully consider the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim in light of the specification. For instance, examiners should review the specification to determine if the claimed invention is described as a concept that is performed in the human mind and applicant is merely claiming that concept performed 1) on a generic computer, or 2) in a computer environment, or 3) is merely using a computer as a tool to perform the concept. In these situations, the claim is considered to recite a mental process. 1. Performing a mental process on a generic computer. An example of a case identifying a mental process performed on a generic computer as an abstract idea is Voter Verified, Inc. v. Election Systems & Software, LLC, 887 F.3d 1376, 1385, 126 USPQ2d 1498, 1504 (Fed. Cir. 2018). In this case, the Federal Circuit relied upon the specification in explaining that the claimed steps of voting, verifying the vote, and submitting the vote for tabulation are “human cognitive actions” that humans have performed for hundreds of years. The claims therefore recited an abstract idea, despite the fact that the claimed voting steps were performed on a computer. 887 F.3d at 1385, 126 USPQ2d at 1504. Another example is Versata, in which the patentee claimed a system and method for determining a price of a product offered to a purchasing organization that was implemented using general purpose computer hardware. 793 F.3d at 1312-13, 1331, 115 USPQ2d at 1685, 1699. The Federal Circuit acknowledged that the claims were performed on a generic computer, but still described the claims as “directed to the abstract idea of determining a price, using organizational and product group hierarchies, in the same way that the claims in Alice were directed to the abstract idea of intermediated settlement, and the claims in Bilski were directed to the abstract idea of risk hedging.” 793 F.3d at 1333; 115 USPQ2d at 1700-01. 2. Performing a mental process in a computer environment. An example of a case identifying a mental process performed in a computer environment as an abstract idea is Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d at 1316-18, 120 USPQ2d at 1360. In this case, the Federal Circuit relied upon the specification when explaining that the claimed electronic post office, which recited limitations describing how the system would receive, screen and distribute email on a computer network, was analogous to how a person decides whether to read or dispose of a particular piece of mail and that “with the exception of generic computer-implemented steps, there is nothing in the claims themselves that foreclose them from being performed by a human, mentally or with pen and paper”. 838 F.3d at 1318, 120 USPQ2d at 1360. Another example is FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Sys., Inc., 839 F.3d 1089, 120 USPQ2d 1293 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The patentee in FairWarning claimed a system and method of detecting fraud and/or misuse in a computer environment, in which information regarding accesses of a patient’s personal health information was analyzed according to one of several rules (i.e., related to accesses in excess of a specific volume, accesses during a pre-determined time interval, or accesses by a specific user) to determine if the activity indicates improper access. 839 F.3d. at 1092, 120 USPQ2d at 1294. The court determined that these claims were directed to a mental process of detecting misuse, and that the claimed rules here were “the same questions (though perhaps phrased with different words) that humans in analogous situations detecting fraud have asked for decades, if not centuries.” 839 F.3d. at 1094-95, 120 USPQ2d at 1296. 3. Using a computer as a tool to perform a mental process. An example of a case in which a computer was used as a tool to perform a mental process is Mortgage Grader, 811 F.3d. at 1324, 117 USPQ2d at 1699. The patentee in Mortgage Grader claimed a computer-implemented system for enabling borrowers to anonymously shop for loan packages offered by a plurality of lenders, comprising a database that stores loan package data from the lenders, and a computer system providing an interface and a grading module. The interface prompts a borrower to enter personal information, which the grading module uses to calculate the borrower’s credit grading, and allows the borrower to identify and compare loan packages in the database using the credit grading. 811 F.3d. at 1318, 117 USPQ2d at 1695. The Federal Circuit determined that these claims were directed to the concept of “anonymous loan shopping”, which was a concept that could be “performed by humans without a computer.” 811 F.3d. at 1324, 117 USPQ2d at 1699. Another example is Berkheimer v. HP, Inc., 881 F.3d 1360, 125 USPQ2d 1649 (Fed. Cir. 2018), in which the patentee claimed methods for parsing and evaluating data using a computer processing system. The Federal Circuit determined that these claims were directed to mental processes of parsing and comparing data, because the steps were recited at a high level of generality and merely used computers as a tool to perform the processes. 881 F.3d at 1366, 125 USPQ2d at 1652-53. D. Both Product and Process Claims May Recite a Mental Process Examiners should keep in mind that both product claims (e.g., computer system, computer-readable medium, etc.) and process claims may recite mental processes. For example, in Mortgage Grader, the patentee claimed a computer-implemented system and a method for enabling borrowers to anonymously shop for loan packages offered by a plurality of lenders, comprising a database that stores loan package data from the lenders, and a computer system providing an interface and a grading module. The Federal Circuit determined that both the computer-implemented system and method claims were directed to “anonymous loan shopping”, which was an abstract idea because it could be “performed by humans without a computer.” 811 F.3d. at 1318, 1324-25, 117 USPQ2d at 1695, 1699-1700. See also FairWarning IP, 839 F.3d at 1092, 120 USPQ2d at 1294 (identifying both system and process claims for detecting improper access of a patient's protected health information in a health-care system computer environment as directed to abstract idea of detecting fraud); Content Extraction & Transmission LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 776 F.3d 1343, 1345, 113 USPQ2d 1354, 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (system and method claims of inputting information from a hard copy document into a computer program). Accordingly, the phrase “mental processes” should be understood as referring to the type of abstract idea, and not to the statutory category of the claim. Examples of product claims reciting mental processes include: • An application program interface for extracting and processing information from a diversity of types of hard copy documents – Content Extraction, 776 F.3d at 1345, 113 USPQ2d at 1356; • A wide-area real-time performance monitoring system for monitoring and assessing dynamic stability of an electric power grid – Electric Power Group, 830 F.3d at 1351 and n.1, 119 USPQ2d at 1740 and n.1; and 2106.04(a)(3) Tentative Abstract Ideas [R-10.2019] There may be rare circumstances in which an examiner believes a claim limitation should be treated as an abstract idea even though it does not fall within any of the groupings of abstract ideas discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2) (i.e., mathematical concepts, certain methods of organizing human activity, mental processes). This type of claim limitation is referred to as a “tentative abstract idea.” In such circumstances, the examiner should evaluate the claim under the subject matter eligibility framework: • If the claim as a whole integrates the tentative abstract idea into a practical application, the claim is not directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A; NO) and thus is eligible at Pathway B. This concludes the eligibility analysis. • If the claim as a whole does not integrate the tentative abstract idea into a practical application, then the claim is directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A: YES) and thus requires further analysis at Step 2B. At Step 2B, if the claim as a whole provides an inventive concept (Step 2B: YES), the claim is eligible at Pathway C. This concludes the eligibility analysis. • If the claim as a whole does not provide an inventive concept (Step 2B: NO), the application should be brought to the attention of the Technology Center (TC) director. A rejection of a claim reciting a tentative abstract idea must be approved by the TC director (which approval will be indicated in the file record of the application) and must provide a justification for why such claim limitation is being treated as reciting an abstract idea. The TC Director will give approval for a Step 2B subject matter eligibility rejection of a claim reciting a tentative abstract idea. The ensuing Office action will identify that the claim(s) are directed to a previously non-enumerated abstract idea via form paragraph 7.05.017 and include the TC Director’s signature. The TC Director will then inform Patents Management that this procedure has been used so that the public can be notified, for example, on USPTO.GOV at the Subject Matter Eligibility website. In response to a Step 2B rejection of a claim reciting a tentative abstract idea, an interview with the examiner may be conducted, which may help advance prosecution and identify patent eligible subject matter. See MPEP § 713. For applications in which an abstract idea has been identified using the tentative abstract idea procedure, an interview with the TC Director that provided approval is not necessary because the examiner retains the authority to withdraw or maintain a rejection upon consideration of applicant’s reply. The examiner is not required to obtain TC Director approval to withdraw or maintain such a § 101 subject matter eligibility rejection. Laws of nature and natural phenomena, as identified by the courts, include naturally occurring principles/relations and nature-based products that are naturally occurring or that do not have markedly different characteristics compared to what occurs in nature. The courts have often described these exceptions using other terms, including “physical phenomena,” “scientific principles”, “natural laws,” and “products of nature.” I. LAWS OF NATURE AND NATURAL PHENOMENA, GENERALLY The law of nature and natural phenomenon exceptions reflect the Supreme Court's view that the basic tools of scientific and technological work are not patentable, because the “manifestations of laws of nature” are “part of the storehouse of knowledge,” “free to all men and reserved exclusively to none.” Funk Bros. Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co., 333 U.S. 127, 130, 76 USPQ 280, 281 (1948). Thus, “a new mineral discovered in the earth or a new plant found in the wild is not patentable subject matter” under Section 101. Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303, 309, 206 USPQ 193, 197 (1980). “Likewise, Einstein could not patent his celebrated law that E=mc2; nor could Newton have patented the law of gravity.” Id. Nor can one patent “a novel and useful mathematical formula,” Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 585, 198 USPQ 193, 195 (1978); electromagnetism or steam power, O’Reilly v. Morse, 56 U.S. (15 How.) 62, 113-114 (1853); or “[t]he qualities of ... bacteria, ... the heat of the sun, electricity, or the qualities of metals,” Funk, 333 U.S. at 130, 76 USPQ at 281; see also Le Roy v. Tatham, 55 U.S. (14 How.) 156, 175 (1853). The courts have identified the following concepts and products as examples of laws of nature or natural phenomena: The courts have also noted, however, that not every claim describing a natural ability or quality of a product, or describing a natural process, necessarily recites a law of nature or natural phenomenon. See Rapid Litig. Mgmt. v. CellzDirect, Inc., 827 F.3d 1042, 1048-49, 119 USPQ2d 1370, 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (claims reciting process steps of fractionating, recovering, and cryopreserving hepatocytes held to be eligible, because they are not focused on merely observing or detecting the ability of hepatocytes to survive multiple freeze-thaw cycles). Thus, in a claimed method of treating cancer with chemotherapy, the cancer cells’ inability to survive chemotherapy is not considered to be a law of nature. Similarly, in a claimed method of treating headaches with aspirin, the human body’s natural response to aspirin is not considered to be a law of nature. These claims are accordingly eligible at Prong One unless they recite another exception, in which case they require further analysis in Prong Two (and Step 2B, if needed) to determine their eligibility. Similarly, a method of producing a new compound is not directed to the individual components’ ability to combine to form the new compound. Id. See also Tilghman v. Proctor, 102 U.S. 707, 729 (1881) (claims reciting process steps for manufacturing fatty acids and glycerol by hydrolyzing fat at high temperature and pressure were held to be eligible, because they are not focused on the chemical principle that fat can be hydrolyzed into its components). Even if a claim does recite a law of nature or natural phenomenon, it may still be eligible at any of Pathways A through C. For example, claims reciting a naturally occurring relationship between a patient’s genotype and the risk of QTc prolongation (a law of nature) were held eligible as not “directed to” that relationship because they also recited a step of treating the patient with an amount of a particular medication that was tailored to the patient’s genotype. Vanda Pharms., 887 F.3d at 1134-36, 126 USPQ2d at 1279-81. This particular treatment step applied the natural relationship in a manner that integrated it into a practical application. The court’s analysis in Vanda is equivalent to a finding of eligibility at Step 2A Prong Two (Pathway B). As explained in MPEP § 2106.04, a claim that recites a law of nature or a natural phenomenon requires further analysis in Step 2A Prong Two to determine whether the claim integrates the exception into a practical application. A claim that does not recite a law of nature or natural phenomenon is eligible at Pathway B (Step 2A: NO) unless the claim recites, and is directed to, another exception (such as an abstract idea, or a product of nature). II. PRODUCTS OF NATURE When a law of nature or natural phenomenon is claimed as a physical product, the courts have often referred to the exception as a “product of nature”. For example, the isolated DNA of Myriad and the primers of Ambry Genetics were described as products of nature by the courts. Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576, 580, 106 USPQ2d 1972, 1975 (2013); University of Utah Research Foundation v. Ambry Genetics, 774 F.3d 755, 758-59, 113 USPQ2d 1241, 1243 (Fed. Cir. 2014). As explained in those decisions, products of nature are considered to be an exception because they tie up the use of naturally occurring things, but they have been labeled as both laws of nature and natural phenomena. See Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. at 590-91, 106 USPQ2d at 1979 (claims to isolated DNA held ineligible because they “claim naturally occurring phenomena” and are “squarely within the law of nature exception”); Funk Bros. Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co., 333 U.S. 127, 130, 76 USPQ 280, 281 (1948) (claims to bacterial mixtures held ineligible as “manifestations of laws of nature” and “phenomena of nature”). Step 2A of the Office’s eligibility analysis uses the terms “law of nature” and “natural phenomenon” as inclusive of “products of nature”. It is important to keep in mind that product of nature exceptions include both naturally occurring products and non-naturally occurring products that lack markedly different characteristics from any naturally occurring counterpart. See, e.g.,Ambry Genetics, 774 F.3d at 760, 113 USPQ2d at 1244 (“Contrary to Myriad's argument, it makes no difference that the identified gene sequences are synthetically replicated. As the Supreme Court made clear, neither naturally occurring compositions of matter, nor synthetically created compositions that are structurally identical to the naturally occurring compositions, are patent eligible.”). Thus, a synthetic, artificial, or non-naturally occurring product such as a cloned organism or a human-made hybrid plant is not automatically eligible because it was created by human ingenuity or intervention. See, e.g.,In re Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), 750 F.3d 1333, 1337, 110 USPQ2d 1668, 1671-72 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (cloned sheep); cf. J.E.M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred Int’l, Inc., 534 U.S. 130-132, 60 USPQ2d 1868-69 (2001) (hybrid plant). Instead, the key to the eligibility of all non-naturally occurring products is whether they possess markedly different characteristics from any naturally occurring counterpart. When a claim recites a nature-based product limitation, examiners should use the markedly different characteristics analysis discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(c) to evaluate the nature-based product limitation and determine the answer to Step 2A. Nature-based products, as used herein, include both eligible and ineligible products and merely refer to the types of products subject to the markedly different characteristics analysis used to identify product of nature exceptions. Examples of nature-based products include the isolated gene and cDNA sequences of Myriad, the cloned farm animals of Roslin, and the bacterium of Chakrabarty. As is evident from these examples, and as further discussed in MPEP § 2105, a nature-based product that is a living organism (e.g., a plant, an animal, a bacterium, etc.) is not excluded from patent protection merely because it is alive, and such a product is eligible for patenting if it satisfies the markedly different characteristics analysis. It is important to keep in mind that under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the claims, a nature-based product limitation may encompass both eligible and ineligible products. For example, a claim to a “cloned giraffe” may have a BRI encompassing cloned giraffes with markedly different characteristics, as well as cloned giraffes that lack markedly different characteristics and thus are products of nature. Cf. Roslin, 750 F.3d at 1338-39, 110 USPQ2d at 1673 (applicant could not rely on unclaimed features to distinguish claimed mammals from donor mammals). Such a claim recites a product of nature, and thus requires further analysis in Prong Two. If the claim is ultimately rejected as failing to encompass an inventive concept (Step 2B: NO), it is a best practice for the examiner to point out the broadest reasonable interpretation and recommend an amendment, if possible, that would narrow the claim to those embodiments that are not directed to products of nature, or that are otherwise eligible. For claims that recite a nature-based product limitation (which may or may not be a product of nature exception) but which are directed to inventions that clearly do not seek to tie up any judicial exception, examiners should consider whether the streamlined eligibility analysis discussed in MPEP § 2106.06 is appropriate. In such cases, it would not be necessary to conduct a markedly different characteristics analysis. The markedly different characteristics analysis is part of Step 2A Prong One, because the courts use this analysis to identify product of nature exceptions. For example, Chakrabarty relied on a comparison of the claimed bacterium to naturally occurring bacteria when determining that the claimed bacterium was not a product of nature because it had “markedly different characteristics from any found in nature”. Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303, 310, 206 USPQ 193, 197 (1980). Similarly, Roslin relied on a comparison of the claimed sheep to naturally occurring sheep when determining that the claimed sheep was a product of nature because it “does not possess ‘markedly different characteristics from any [farm animals] found in nature.’” In re Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), 750 F.3d 1333, 1337, 110 USPQ2d 1668, 1671-72 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (quoting Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. at 310, 206 USPQ at 197 (alterations in original)). This section sets forth guidelines for performing the markedly different characteristics analysis, including information on when to perform the analysis, and how to perform the analysis. Examiners should consult these guidelines when performing an eligibility analysis of a claim that recites a nature-based product limitation. Nature-based products, as used herein, include both eligible and ineligible products and merely refer to the types of products subject to the markedly different characteristics analysis used to identify product of nature exceptions. If the claim includes a nature-based product that has markedly different characteristics, then the claim does not recite a product of nature exception and is eligible (Step 2A: NO) at Pathway B unless the claim recites another exception (such as a law of nature or abstract idea, or a different natural phenomenon). For claims where the entire claim is a single nature-based product (e.g., a claim to “a Lactobacillus bacterium”), once a markedly different characteristic in that product is shown, no further analysis would be necessary for eligibility because no product of nature exception is recited (i.e., Step 2B is not necessary because the answer to Step 2A is NO). For claims including limitations in addition to the nature-based product, examiners should consider whether the claim recites another exception and thus requires further eligibility analysis. If the claim includes a nature-based product that does not exhibit markedly different characteristics from its naturally occurring counterpart in its natural state, then the claim recites a “product of nature” exception, and requires further analysis in Step 2A Prong Two to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. I. WHEN TO PERFORM THE MARKEDLY DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTICS ANALYSIS Because a nature-based product can be claimed by itself (e.g., “a Lactobacillus bacterium”) or as one or more limitations of a claim (e.g., “a probiotic composition comprising a mixture of Lactobacillus and milk in a container”), care should be taken not to overly extend the markedly different characteristics analysis to products that when viewed as a whole are not nature-based. Instead, the markedly different characteristics analysis should be applied only to the nature-based product limitations in the claim to determine whether the nature-based products are “product of nature” exceptions. Examiners should keep in mind that if the nature-based product limitation is naturally occurring, there is no need to perform the markedly different characteristics analysis because the limitation is by definition directed to a naturally occurring product and thus falls under the product of nature exception. However, if the nature-based product limitation is not naturally occurring, for example due to some human intervention, then the markedly different characteristics analysis must be performed to determine whether the claimed product limitation is a product of nature exception. A. Product Claims Where the claim is to a nature-based product by itself (e.g., a claim to “a Lactobacillus bacterium”), the markedly different characteristics analysis should be applied to the entire product. See, e.g., Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. at 305, 309-10, 206 USPQ at 195, 197-98 (applying analysis to entire claimed “bacterium from the genus Pseudomonas containing therein at least two stable energy-generating plasmids, each of said plasmids providing a separate hydrocarbon degradative pathway”). Where the claim is to a nature-based product produced by combining multiple components (e.g., a claim to “a probiotic composition comprising a mixture of Lactobacillus and milk”), the markedly different characteristics analysis should be applied to the resultant nature-based combination, rather than its component parts. For instance, for the probiotic composition example, the mixture of Lactobacillus and milk should be analyzed for markedly different characteristics, rather than the Lactobacillus separately and the milk separately. See subsection II, below, for further guidance on the markedly different characteristic analysis. Where the claim is to a nature-based product in combination with non-nature based elements (e.g., a claim to “a yogurt starter kit comprising Lactobacillus in a container with instructions for culturing Lactobacillus with milk to produce yogurt”), the markedly different characteristics analysis should be applied only to the nature-based product limitation. For instance, for the yogurt starter kit example, the Lactobacillus would be analyzed for markedly different characteristics. The container and instructions would not be subject to the markedly different characteristics analysis as they are not nature-based products, but would be evaluated as additional elements in Prong Two (and Step 2B if needed) if it is determined that the Lactobacillus does not have markedly different characteristics from any naturally occurring counterpart and thus is a product of nature exception. See, e.g., Funk Bros. Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co., 333 U.S. 127, 130, 76 USPQ 280, 281 (1948) (although claims 7, 8, 13 and 14 recited an inoculant comprising a bacterial mixture and a powder base, only the bacterial mixture was analyzed). B. Product-by-Process Claims For a product-by-process claim (e.g., a claim to a cloned farm animal produced by a nuclear transfer cloning method), the analysis turns on whether the nature-based product in the claim has markedly different characteristics from its naturally occurring counterpart. See MPEP § 2113 for more information on product-by-process claims. C. Process Claims For a process claim, the general rule is that the claim is not subject to the markedly different analysis for nature-based products used in the process. This is because the analysis of a process claim should focus on the active steps of the process rather than the products used in those steps. For example, when evaluating a claimed process of cryopreserving hepatocyte cells comprising performing density gradient fractionation to separate viable and non-viable hepatocytes, recovering the viable hepatocytes, and cryopreserving the recovered viable hepatocytes, the court did not subject the claim to the markedly different characteristics analysis for the nature-based products (the hepatocytes) used in the process. Rapid Litig. Mgmt. v. CellzDirect, Inc., 827 F.3d 1042, 1049, 119 USPQ2d 1370, 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (claims are directed to a process of creating a preparation of multi-cryopreserved hepatocytes, not to the preparation itself). However, in the limited situation where a process claim reciting a nature-based product is drafted in such a way that there is no difference in substance from a product claim, the claim is subject to the markedly different analysis for the recited nature-based product. These types of claims are drafted in a way that focuses on the product rather than the process steps. For example, consider a claim that recites, in its entirety, “a method of providing an apple.” Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, this claim is focused on the apple fruit itself, which is a nature-based product. Similarly, claims to detecting naturally occurring cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) in maternal blood were held to be directed to the cffDNA, because the “existence and location of cffDNA is a natural phenomenon [and thus] identifying its presence was merely claiming the natural phenomena itself.” Rapid Litig. Mgmt., 827 F.3d at 1048, 119 USPQ2d at 1374, (explaining the holding in Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, 788 F.3d 1371, 115 USPQ2d 1152 (Fed. Cir. 2015)). II. HOW TO PERFORM THE MARKEDLY DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTICS ANALYSIS The markedly different characteristics analysis compares the nature-based product limitation to its naturally occurring counterpart in its natural state. Markedly different characteristics can be expressed as the product’s structure, function, and/or other properties, and are evaluated based on what is recited in the claim on a case-by-case basis. If the analysis indicates that a nature-based product limitation does not exhibit markedly different characteristics, then that limitation is a product of nature exception. If the analysis indicates that a nature-based product limitation does have markedly different characteristics, then that limitation is not a product of nature exception. This section sets forth guidelines for performing the markedly different characteristics analysis, including information on (a) selecting the appropriate naturally occurring counterpart(s) to the nature-based product limitation, (b) identifying appropriate characteristics for analysis, and (c) evaluating characteristics to determine whether they are “markedly different”. A. Selecting The Appropriate Counterpart(s) Because the markedly different characteristics analysis compares the nature-based product limitation to its naturally occurring counterpart in its natural state, the first step in the analysis is to select the appropriate counterpart(s) to the nature-based product. When the nature-based product is derived from a naturally occurring thing, then the naturally occurring thing is the counterpart. For example, assume that applicant claims deoxyacid A, which is a chemical derivative of a naturally occurring chemical called acid A. Because the inventor created the claimed nature-based product (deoxyacid A) by modifying the naturally occurring acid A, the closest natural counterpart for deoxyacid A would be the natural product from which it was derived, i.e., acid A. See, e.g.,Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. at 305 and n.1, 206 USPQ at 195 and n.1 (counterpart to genetically modified Pseudomonas bacterium containing multiple plasmids is the naturally occurring unmodified Pseudomonas bacterium from which the claimed bacterium was created); Roslin, 750 F.3d at 1337, 110 USPQ2d at 1671-72 (counterparts to cloned sheep are naturally occurring sheep such as the donor ewe from which the clone was created). Although the selected counterpart should be in its natural state, examiners should take care not to confuse the counterpart with other material that may occur naturally with, or adjacent to, the counterpart. For example, assume that applicant claims a nucleic acid having a nucleotide sequence derived from naturally occurring gene B. Although gene B occurs in nature as part of a chromosome, the closest natural counterpart for the claimed nucleic acid is gene B, and not the whole chromosome. See, e.g., Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576, 591-94, 106 USPQ2d 1972, 1979-81 (2013) (comparing isolated BRCA1 genes and BRCA1 cDNA molecules to naturally occurring BRCA1 gene); Roche Molecular System, Inc. v. CEPHEID, 905 F.3d 1363, 1371, 128 USPQ2d 1221, 1227 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (comparing claimed primers to “their corresponding nucleotide sequences on the naturally occurring DNA”). Similarly, assume that applicant claims a single-stranded piece of DNA (a primer) having a nucleotide sequence derived from the sense strand of naturally occurring nucleic acid C. Although nucleic acid C occurs in nature as a double-stranded molecule having a sense and an antisense strand, the closest natural counterpart for the claimed nucleic acid is the sense strand of C only. See, e.g., University of Utah Research Foundation v. Ambry Genetics, 774 F.3d 755, 760, 113 USPQ2d 1241, 1241 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (comparing single-stranded nucleic acid to the same strand found in nature, even though “single-stranded DNA cannot be found in the human body”). When there are multiple counterparts to the nature-based product, the comparison should be made to the closest naturally occurring counterpart. For example, assume that the inventor creates a cloned sheep D by transferring nuclear DNA from a Finn-Dorset sheep into an egg cell (which contains mitochondrial DNA) from a Scottish Blackface sheep. Applicant then claims sheep D. Here, because sheep D was created via combining DNA from two different naturally occurring sheep of different breeds, there is no single closest natural counterpart. The examiner should therefore select the counterpart most closely related to sheep D based on the examiner’s expertise in the particular art. For the example discussed here, the closest counterparts might be naturally occurring Finn-Dorset or Scottish Blackface sheep, as opposed to sheep of a different breed such as Bighorn sheep. Cf. Roslin, 750 F.3d at 1337, 110 USPQ2d at 1671-72 (claimed sheep produced by nuclear transfer into an oocyte and subsequent manipulation of natural embryonic development processes was compared to naturally occurring sheep such as the donor ewe from which the nuclear material was obtained). When the nature-based product is a combination produced from multiple components, the closest counterpart may be the individual nature-based components of the combination. For example, assume that applicant claims an inoculant comprising a mixture of bacteria from different species, e.g., some bacteria of species E and some bacteria of species F. Because there is no counterpart mixture in nature, the closest counterparts to the claimed mixture are the individual components of the mixture, i.e., each naturally occurring species by itself. See, e.g., Funk Bros., 333 U.S. at 130, 76 USPQ at 281 (comparing claimed mixture of bacterial species to each species as it occurs in nature); Ambry Genetics, 774 F.3d at 760, 113 USPQ2d at 1244 (although claimed as a pair, individual primer molecules were compared to corresponding segments of naturally occurring gene sequence); In re Bhagat, 726 Fed. Appx. 772, 778-79 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (non-precedential) (comparing claimed mixture of lipids with particular lipid profile to “naturally occurring lipid profiles of walnut oil and olive oil”). See subsection II.C. If the claim is rejected as ineligible, it is a “best practice” for the examiner to identify the selected counterpart in the Office action if the record is not already clear. This practice assists the applicant in responding, and clarifies the record as to how the examiner is interpreting the claim. B. Identifying Appropriate Characteristics For Analysis Because the markedly different characteristics analysis is based on comparing the characteristics of the claimed nature-based product and its counterpart, the second step in the analysis is to identify appropriate characteristics to compare. Appropriate characteristics must be possessed by the claimed product, because it is the claim that must define the invention to be patented. Cf. Roslin, 750 F.3d at 1338, 110 USPQ2d at 1673 (unclaimed characteristics could not contribute to eligibility). Examiners can identify the characteristics possessed by the claimed product by looking at what is recited in the claim language and encompassed within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the nature-based product. In some claims, a characteristic may be explicitly recited. For example, in a claim to “deoxyribose”, the recited chemical name informs those in the art of the structural characteristics of the product (i.e., the “deoxy” prefix indicates that a hydroxyl group has been removed as compared to ribose). In other claims, the characteristic may be apparent from the broadest reasonable interpretation even though it is not explicitly recited in the claim. For example, in a claim to “isolated gene B,” the examiner would need to rely on the broadest reasonable interpretation of “isolated gene B” to determine what characteristics the isolated gene has, e.g., what its nucleotide sequence is, and what, if any, protein it encodes. Appropriate characteristics can be expressed as the nature-based product’s structure, function, and/or other properties, and are evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Non-limiting examples of the types of characteristics considered by the courts when determining whether there is a marked difference include: • Biological or pharmacological functions or activities; • Chemical and physical properties; • Phenotype, including functional and structural characteristics; and • Structure and form, whether chemical, genetic or physical. Examples of biological or pharmacological functions or activities include, but are not limited to: i. the protein-encoding information of a nucleic acid, Myriad, 569 U.S. at 590-91, 106 USPQ2d at 1979; ii. the ability of complementary nucleotide sequences to bind to each other, Ambry Genetics, 774 F.3d at 760-61, 113 USPQ2d at 1244; iii. the properties and functions of bacteria such as the ability to infect certain leguminous plants, Funk Bros., 333 U.S. at 130-31, 76 USPQ2d at 281-82; iv. the ability to degrade certain hydrocarbons, Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. at 310, 206 USPQ2d at 195; and Examples of phenotypic characteristics include, but are not limited to: i. functional and structural characteristics such as the shape, size, color, and behavior of an organism, Roslin, 750 F.3d at 1338, 110 USPQ2d at 1672. Examples of structure and form include, but are not limited to: i. physical structure or form such as the physical presence of plasmids in a bacterial cell, Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. at 305 and n.1, 206 USPQ2d at 195 and n.1; ii. chemical structure and form such as a chemical being a “nonsalt” and a “crystalline substance”, Parke-Davis, 189 F. at 100, 103; iii. genetic structure such as the nucleotide sequence of DNA, Myriad, 569 U.S. at 590, 594-95, 106 USPQ2d at 1979, 1981; and iv. the genetic makeup (genotype) of a cell or organism, Roslin, 750 F.3d at 1338-39, 110 USPQ2d at 1672-73. C. Evaluating Characteristics To Determine Whether They Are “Markedly Different” The final step in the markedly different characteristics analysis is to compare the characteristics of the claimed nature-based product to its naturally occurring counterpart in its natural state, in order to determine whether the characteristics of the claimed product are markedly different. The courts have emphasized that to show a marked difference, a characteristic must be changed as compared to nature, and cannot be an inherent or innate characteristic of the naturally occurring counterpart or an incidental change in a characteristic of the naturally occurring counterpart. Myriad, 569 U.S. at 580, 106 USPQ2d at 1974-75. Thus, in order to be markedly different, the inventor must have caused the claimed product to possess at least one characteristic that is different from that of the counterpart. If there is no change in any characteristic, the claimed product lacks markedly different characteristics, and is a product of nature exception. If there is a change in at least one characteristic as compared to the counterpart, and the change came about or was produced by the inventor’s efforts or influences, then the change will generally be considered a markedly different characteristic such that the claimed product is not a product of nature exception. 1. Examples of Products Having Markedly Different Characteristics In Chakrabarty, the Supreme Court identified a claimed bacterium as a nature-based product having markedly different characteristics. This bacterium had a changed functional characteristic, i.e., it was able to degrade at least two different hydrocarbons as compared to naturally occurring Pseudomonas bacteria that can only degrade a single hydrocarbon. The claimed bacterium also had a different structural characteristic, i.e., it was genetically modified to include more plasmids than are found in a single naturally occurring Pseudomonas bacterium. The Supreme Court considered these changed characteristics to be “markedly different characteristics from any found in nature” due to the additional plasmids and resultant capacity for degrading multiple hydrocarbon components of oil. Therefore, the bacterium was eligible. Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303, 310, 206 USPQ 193, 197 (1980). In Myriad, the Supreme Court identified a claimed full-length complementary DNA (cDNA) of the BRCA1 gene as a nature-based product having markedly different characteristics. This claimed cDNA had the same functional characteristics (i.e., it encoded the same protein) as the naturally occurring gene, but had a changed structural characteristic, i.e., a different nucleotide sequence containing only exons, as compared to the naturally occurring sequence containing both exons and introns. The Supreme Court concluded that the “cDNA retains the naturally occurring exons of DNA, but it is distinct from the DNA from which it was derived. As a result, [this] cDNA is not a ‘product of nature’” and is eligible. Myriad, 569 U.S. at 595, 106 USPQ2d at 1981. 2. Examples of Products Lacking Markedly Different Characteristics In Myriad, the Supreme Court made clear that not all changes in characteristics will rise to the level of a marked difference, e.g., the incidental changes resulting from isolation of a gene sequence are not enough to make the isolated gene markedly different. Myriad, 569 U.S. at 580, 106 USPQ2d at 1974-75. The patentee in Myriad had discovered the location of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in the human genome, and isolated them, i.e., separated those specific genes from the rest of the chromosome on which they exist in nature. As a result of their isolation, the isolated genes had a different structural characteristic than the natural genes, i.e., the natural genes had covalent bonds on their ends that connected them to the rest of the chromosome, but the isolated genes lacked these bonds. However, the claimed genes were otherwise structurally identical to the natural genes, e.g., they had the same genetic structure and nucleotide sequence as the BRCA genes in nature. The Supreme Court concluded that these isolated but otherwise unchanged genes were not eligible, because they were not different enough from what exists in nature to avoid improperly tying up the future use and study of the naturally occurring BRCA genes. See, e.g., Myriad, 569 U.S. at 585, 106 USPQ2d at 1977 (“Myriad's patents would, if valid, give it the exclusive right to isolate an individual’s BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes … But isolation is necessary to conduct genetic testing”) and 569 U.S. at 593, 106 USPQ2d at 1980 (describing how would-be infringers could not avoid the scope of Myriad’s claims). In sum, the claimed genes were different, but not markedly different, from their naturally occurring counterparts (the BRCA genes), and thus were product of nature exceptions. In Ambry Genetics, the court identified claimed DNA fragments known as “primers” as products of nature, because they lacked markedly different characteristics. University of Utah Research Foundation v. Ambry Genetics Corp., 774 F.3d 755, 113 USPQ2d 1241 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The claimed primers were single-stranded pieces of DNA, each of which corresponded to a naturally occurring double-stranded DNA sequence in or near the BRCA genes. The patentee argued that these primers had markedly different structural characteristics from the natural DNA, because the primers were synthetically created and because “single-stranded DNA cannot be found in the human body”. The court disagreed, concluding that the primers’ structural characteristics were not markedly different than the corresponding strands of DNA in nature, because the primers and their counterparts had the same genetic structure and nucleotide sequence. 774 F.3d at 760, 113 USPQ2d at 1243-44. The patentee also argued that the primers had a different function than when they are part of the DNA strand because when isolated as a primer, a primer can be used as a starting material for a DNA polymerization process. The court disagreed, because this ability to serve as a starting material is innate to DNA itself, and was not created or altered by the patentee: In fact, the naturally occurring genetic sequences at issue here do not perform a significantly new function. Rather, the naturally occurring material is used to form the first step in a chain reaction--a function that is performed because the primer maintains the exact same nucleotide sequence as the relevant portion of the naturally occurring sequence. One of the primary functions of DNA’s structure in nature is that complementary nucleotide sequences bind to each other. It is this same function that is exploited here--the primer binds to its complementary nucleotide sequence. Thus, just as in nature, primers utilize the innate ability of DNA to bind to itself. Ambry Genetics, 774 F.3d at 760-61, 113 USPQ2d at 1244. In sum, because the characteristics of the claimed primers were innate to naturally occurring DNA, they lacked markedly different characteristics from nature and were thus product of nature exceptions. A similar result was reached in Marden, where the court held a claim to ductile vanadium ineligible, because the “ductility or malleability of vanadium is . . . one of its inherent characteristics and not a characteristic given to it by virtue of a new combination with other materials or which characteristic is brought about by some chemical reaction or agency which changes its inherent characteristics”. In re Marden, 47 F.2d 958, 959, 18 CCPA 1057, 1060, 8 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1931). In Roslin, the court concluded that claimed clones of farm animals were products of nature, because they lacked markedly different characteristics from the counterpart farm animals found in nature. In re Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), 750 F.3d 1333, 1337, 110 USPQ2d 1668, 1671 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The inventor created its clones (which included the famous cloned sheep named Dolly) by transferring the genetic material of a donor into an oocyte (egg cell), letting the oocyte develop into an embryo, and then implanting the embryo into a surrogate animal where it developed into a baby animal. The applicant argued that the clones, including Dolly, were eligible because they were created via human ingenuity, and had phenotypic differences such as shape, size and behavior compared to their donors. The court was unpersuaded, explaining that the clones were exact genetic replicas of the donors and thus did not possess markedly different characteristics. 750 F.3d at 1337, 110 USPQ2d at 1671-72 (“Roslin’s chief innovation was the preservation of the donor DNA such that the clone is an exact copy of the mammal from which the somatic cell was taken. Such a copy is not eligible for patent protection.”). The court noted that the alleged phenotypic differences (e.g., the fact that Dolly may have been taller or heavier than her donor) could not make the clones markedly different because these differences were not claimed. 750 F.3d at 1338, 110 USPQ2d at 1672. See also Roche Molecular System, Inc. v. CEPHEID, 905 F.3d 1363, 1370, 128 USPQ2d 1221, 1226 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (alleged structural differences between linear primers and their counterparts on a circular chromosome were neither claimed nor relevant to the eligibility inquiry). 2106.04(d) Integration of a Judicial Exception Into A Practical Application [R-07.2022] The Supreme Court has long distinguished between principles themselves (which are not patent eligible) and the integration of those principles into practical applications (which are patent eligible). See, e.g., Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 80, 84, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1968-69, 1970 (2012) (noting that the Court in Diamond v. Diehr found ‘‘the overall process patent eligible because of the way the additional steps of the process integrated the equation into the process as a whole,’’ but the Court in Gottschalk v. Benson ‘‘held that simply implementing a mathematical principle on a physical machine, namely a computer, was not a patentable application of that principle’’). Similarly, in a growing body of decisions, the Federal Circuit has distinguished between claims that are ‘‘directed to’’ a judicial exception (which require further analysis to determine their eligibility) and those that are not (which are therefore patent eligible), e.g., claims that improve the functioning of a computer or other technology or technological field. See Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 209 USPQ 1 (1981); Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 175 USPQ 673 (1972). See, e.g., MPEP § 2106.06(b) (summarizing Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 118 USPQ2d 1684 (Fed. Cir. 2016), McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 120 USPQ2d 1091 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and other cases that were eligible as improvements to technology or computer functionality instead of being directed to abstract ideas). Accordingly, after determining that a claim recites a judicial exception in Step 2A Prong One, examiners should evaluate whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception in Step 2A Prong Two. A claim that integrates a judicial exception into a practical application will apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception. Whether or not a claim integrates a judicial exception into a practical application is evaluated using the considerations set forth in subsection I below, in accordance with the procedure described below in subsection II. In the context of the flowchart in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 2A Prong Two determines whether: • The claim as a whole integrates the judicial exception into a practical application, in which case the claim is not directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A: NO) and is eligible at Pathway B. This concludes the eligibility analysis. • The claim as a whole does not integrate the exception into a practical application, in which case the claim is directed to the judicial exception (Step 2A: YES), and requires further analysis under Step 2B (where it may still be eligible if it amounts to an inventive concept). See MPEP § 2106.05 for discussion of Step 2B. The Supreme Court and Federal Circuit have identified a number of considerations as relevant to the evaluation of whether the claimed additional elements demonstrate that a claim is directed to patent-eligible subject matter. The list of considerations here is not intended to be exclusive or limiting. Additional elements can often be analyzed based on more than one type of consideration and the type of consideration is of no import to the eligibility analysis. Additional discussion of these considerations, and how they were applied in particular judicial decisions, is provided in MPEP § 2106.05(a) through (c) and MPEP § 2106.05(e) through (h). Limitations the courts have found indicative that an additional element (or combination of elements) may have integrated the exception into a practical application include: • An improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, as discussed in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a); • Applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2); • Implementing a judicial exception with, or using a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(b); • Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(c); and • Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(e). The courts have also identified limitations that did not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application: • Merely reciting the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(f); • Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(g); and • Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(h). Step 2A Prong Two is similar to Step 2B in that both analyses involve evaluating a set of judicial considerations to determine if the claim is eligible. See MPEP §§ 2106.05(a) through (h) for the list of considerations that are evaluated at Step 2B. Although most of these considerations overlap (i.e., they are evaluated in both Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B), Step 2A specifically excludes consideration of whether the additional elements represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity. Accordingly, in Step 2A Prong Two, examiners should ensure that they give weight to all additional elements, whether or not they are conventional, when evaluating whether a judicial exception has been integrated into a practical application. Additional elements that represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity may integrate a recited judicial exception into a practical application. It is notable that mere physicality or tangibility of an additional element or elements is not a relevant consideration in Step 2A Prong Two. As the Supreme Court explained in Alice Corp., mere physical or tangible implementation of an exception does not guarantee eligibility. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 224, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1983-84 (2014) (“The fact that a computer ‘necessarily exist[s] in the physical, rather than purely conceptual, realm,’ is beside the point”). See also Genetic Technologies Ltd. v. Merial LLC, 818 F.3d 1369, 1377, 118 USPQ2d 1541, 1547 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (steps of DNA amplification and analysis are not “sufficient” to render claim 1 patent eligible merely because they are physical steps). Conversely, the presence of a non-physical or intangible additional element does not doom the claims, because tangibility is not necessary for eligibility under the Alice/Mayo test. Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 118 USPQ2d 1684 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“that the improvement is not defined by reference to ‘physical’ components does not doom the claims”). See also McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1315, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1102 (Fed. Cir. 2016), (holding that a process producing an intangible result (a sequence of synchronized, animated characters) was eligible because it improved an existing technological process). In addition, a specific way of achieving a result is not a stand-alone consideration in Step 2A Prong Two. However, the specificity of the claim limitations is relevant to the evaluation of several considerations including the use of a particular machine, particular transformation and whether the limitations are mere instructions to apply an exception. See MPEP §§ 2106.05(b), 2106.05(c), and 2106.05(f). For example, in Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 198 USPQ 193 (1978), the Supreme Court noted that the “patent application does not purport to explain how to select the appropriate margin of safety, the weighting factor, or any of the other variables” in the claimed mathematical formula, “[n]or does it purport to contain any disclosure relating to the chemical processes at work, the monitoring of process variables, or the means of setting off an alarm or adjusting an alarm system.” 437 U.S. at 586, 198 USPQ at 195. The Court found this failure to explain any specifics of how to use the claimed formula informative when deciding that the additional elements in the claim were insignificant post-solution activity and thus not meaningful enough to render the claim eligible. 437 U.S. at 589-90, 198 USPQ at 197. II. HOW TO EVALUATE WHETHER THE ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS INTEGRATE THE JUDICIAL EXCEPTION INTO A PRACTICAL APPLICATION The analysis under Step 2A Prong Two is the same for all claims reciting a judicial exception, whether the exception is an abstract idea, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon (including products of nature). Examiners evaluate integration into a practical application by: (1) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s); and (2) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they integrate the exception into a practical application, using one or more of the considerations introduced in subsection I supra, and discussed in more detail in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1), 2106.04(d)(2), 2106.05(a) through (c) and 2106.05(e) through (h). Many of these considerations overlap, and often more than one consideration is relevant to analysis of an additional element. Not all considerations will be relevant to every element, or every claim. Because the evaluation in Prong Two is not a weighing test, it is not important how the elements are characterized or how many considerations apply from the list. It is important to evaluate the significance of the additional elements relative to the invention, and to keep in mind the ultimate question of whether the exception is integrated into a practical application. If the claim as a whole integrates the judicial exception into a practical application based upon evaluation of these considerations, the additional limitations impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception and the claim is eligible at Step 2A. Examiners should examine each claim for eligibility separately, based on the particular elements recited therein. Claims should not be judged to automatically stand or fall with similar claims in an application. For instance, one claim may be ineligible because it is directed to a judicial exception without amounting to significantly more, but another claim dependent on the first may be eligible because it recites additional elements that do amount to significantly more, or that integrate the exception into a practical application. For more information on how to evaluate claims reciting multiple judicial exceptions, see MPEP § 2106.04, subsection II.B. III. EXAMPLES OF HOW THE OFFICE EVALUATES WHETHER THE CLAIM AS A WHOLE INTEGRATES THE JUDICIAL EXCEPTION INTO A PRACTICAL APPLICATION The Prong Two analysis considers the claim as a whole. That is, the limitations containing the judicial exception as well as the additional elements in the claim besides the judicial exception need to be evaluated together to determine whether the claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application. Because a judicial exception alone is not eligible subject matter, if there are no additional claim elements besides the judicial exception, or if the additional claim elements merely recite another judicial exception, that is insufficient to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. However, the way in which the additional elements use or interact with the exception may integrate it into a practical application. Accordingly, the additional limitations should not be evaluated in a vacuum, completely separate from the recited judicial exception. Instead, the analysis should take into consideration all the claim limitations and how those limitations interact and impact each other when evaluating whether the exception is integrated into a practical application. Two examples of how the Office evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application are provided. In Solutran, Inc. v. Elavon, Inc., 931 F.3d 1161, 2019 USPQ2d 281076 (Fed. Cir. 2019), the claims were to methods for electronically processing paper checks, all of which contained limitations setting forth receiving merchant transaction data from a merchant, crediting a merchant’s account, and receiving and scanning paper checks after the merchant’s account is credited. In part one of the Alice/Mayo test, the Federal Circuit determined that the claims were directed to the abstract idea of crediting the merchant’s account before the paper check is scanned. The court first determined that the recited limitations of “crediting a merchant’s account as early as possible while electronically processing a check” is a “long-standing commercial practice” like in Alice and Bilski. 931 F.3d at 1167, 2019 USPQ2d 281076, at *5 (Fed. Cir. 2019). The Federal Circuit then continued with its analysis under part one of the Alice/Mayo test finding that the claims are not directed to an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology. In particular, the court determined that the claims “did not improve the technical capture of information from a check to create a digital file or the technical step of electronically crediting a bank account” nor did the claims “improve how a check is scanned.” Id. This analysis is equivalent to the Office’s analysis of determining that the exception is not integrated into a practical application at Step 2A Prong Two, and thus that the claims are directed to the judicial exception (Step 2A: YES). In Finjan Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc., 879 F.3d 1299, 125 USPQ2d 1282 (Fed. Cir. 2018), the claimed invention was a method of virus scanning that scans an application program, generates a security profile identifying any potentially suspicious code in the program, and links the security profile to the application program. 879 F.3d at 1303-04, 125 USPQ2d at 1285-86. The Federal Circuit noted that the recited virus screening was an abstract idea, and that merely performing virus screening on a computer does not render the claim eligible. 879 F.3d at 1304, 125 USPQ2d at 1286. The court then continued with its analysis under part one of the Alice/Mayo test by reviewing the patent’s specification, which described the claimed security profile as identifying both hostile and potentially hostile operations. The court noted that the security profile thus enables the invention to protect the user against both previously unknown viruses and “obfuscated code,” as compared to traditional virus scanning, which only recognized the presence of previously-identified viruses. The security profile also enables more flexible virus filtering and greater user customization. 879 F.3d at 1304, 125 USPQ2d at 1286. The court identified these benefits as improving computer functionality, and verified that the claims recite additional elements (e.g., specific steps of using the security profile in a particular way) that reflect this improvement. Accordingly, the court held the claims eligible as not being directed to the recited abstract idea. 879 F.3d at 1304-05, 125 USPQ2d at 1286-87. This analysis is equivalent to the Office’s analysis of determining that the additional elements integrate the judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A Prong Two, and thus that the claims were not directed to the judicial exception (Step 2A: NO). 2106.04(d)(1) Evaluating Improvements in the Functioning of a Computer, or an Improvement to Any Other Technology or Technical Field in Step 2A Prong Two [R-10.2019] A claim reciting a judicial exception is not directed to the judicial exception if it also recites additional elements demonstrating that the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. One way to demonstrate such integration is when the claimed invention improves the functioning of a computer or improves another technology or technical field. The application or use of the judicial exception in this manner meaningfully limits the claim by going beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, and thus transforms a claim into patent-eligible subject matter. Such claims are eligible at Step 2A because they are not “directed to” the recited judicial exception. The courts have not provided an explicit test for this consideration, but have instead illustrated how it is evaluated in numerous decisions. These decisions, and a detailed explanation of how examiners should evaluate this consideration are provided in MPEP § 2106.05(a). In short, first the specification should be evaluated to determine if the disclosure provides sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. The specification need not explicitly set forth the improvement, but it must describe the invention such that the improvement would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. Conversely, if the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner (i.e., a bare assertion of an improvement without the detail necessary to be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art), the examiner should not determine the claim improves technology. Second, if the specification sets forth an improvement in technology, the claim must be evaluated to ensure that the claim itself reflects the disclosed improvement. That is, the claim includes the components or steps of the invention that provide the improvement described in the specification. The claim itself does not need to explicitly recite the improvement described in the specification (e.g., “thereby increasing the bandwidth of the channel”). While the courts usually evaluate “improvements” as part of the “directed to” inquiry in part one of the Alice/Mayo test (equivalent to Step 2A), they have also performed this evaluation in part two of the Alice/Mayo test (equivalent to Step 2B). See, e.g., BASCOM Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1349-50, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1241-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016). However, the improvement analysis at Step 2A Prong Two differs in some respects from the improvements analysis at Step 2B. Specifically, the “improvements” analysis in Step 2A determines whether the claim pertains to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology without reference to what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity. That is, the claimed invention may integrate the judicial exception into a practical application by demonstrating that it improves the relevant existing technology although it may not be an improvement over well-understood, routine, conventional activity. It should be noted that while this consideration is often referred to in an abbreviated manner as the “improvements consideration,” the word “improvements” in the context of this consideration is limited to improvements to the functioning of a computer or any other technology/technical field, whether in Step 2A Prong Two or in Step 2B. Examples of claims that improve technology and are not directed to a judicial exception include: Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1339, 118 USPQ2d 1684, 1691-92 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (claims to a self-referential table for a computer database were directed to an improvement in computer capabilities and not directed to an abstract idea); McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1315, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1102-03 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (claims to automatic lip synchronization and facial expression animation were directed to an improvement in computer-related technology and not directed to an abstract idea); Visual Memory LLC v. NVIDIA Corp., 867 F.3d 1253,1259-60, 123 USPQ2d 1712, 1717 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (claims to an enhanced computer memory system were directed to an improvement in computer capabilities and not an abstract idea); Finjan Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc., 879 F.3d 1299, 125 USPQ2d 1282 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (claims to virus scanning were found to be an improvement in computer technology and not directed to an abstract idea); SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 930 F.3d 1295, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (claims to detecting suspicious activity by using network monitors and analyzing network packets were found to be an improvement in computer network technology and not directed to an abstract idea). Additional examples are provided in MPEP § 2106.05(a). A claim reciting a judicial exception is not directed to the judicial exception if it also recites additional element(s) demonstrating that the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. One way to demonstrate such integration is when the additional elements apply or use the recited judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition. The application or use of the judicial exception in this manner meaningfully limits the claim by going beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, and thus transforms a claim into patent-eligible subject matter. Such claims are eligible at Step 2A, because they are not “directed to” the recited judicial exception. The particular treatment or prophylaxis consideration originated as part of the other meaningful limitations consideration discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(e) and shares the same legal basis in Supreme Court jurisprudence as that consideration. However, recent jurisprudence has provided additional guidance that is especially relevant to only a subset of claims, thus warranting the elevation of the particular treatment or prophylaxis consideration to become a stand-alone consideration in the Step 2A Prong Two analysis. Vanda Pharm. Inc. v. West-Ward Pharm. Int’l Ltd., 887 F.3d 1117, 126 USPQ2d 1266 (Fed. Cir. 2018). The claims in Vanda recited a method of treating a patient having schizophrenia with iloperidone, a drug known to cause QTc prolongation (a disruption of the heart’s normal rhythm that can lead to serious health problems) in patients having a particular genotype associated with poor drug metabolism. 887 F.3d at 1121, 126 USPQ2d at 1269-70. In particular, the claims recited steps of: (1) performing a genotyping assay to determine if a patient has a genotype associated with poor drug metabolism; and (2) administering iloperidone to the patient in a dose range that depends on the patient’s genotype. Id. Although Vanda’s claims recited a law of nature (the naturally occurring relationship between the patient’s genotype and the risk of QTc prolongation) like the claims in Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 101 USPQ2d 1961 (2012), the Federal Circuit distinguished them from the Mayo claims based on the differences in the administration steps. In particular, the court explained that Mayo’s step of administering a drug to a patient was performed in order to gather data about the recited laws of nature, and this step was thus ancillary to the overall diagnostic focus of the claims. 887 F.3d at 1134-35, 126 USPQ2d at 1280. In contrast, Vanda’s claims used the recited law of nature to more safely treat the patients with the drug, thereby reducing the patient’s risk of QTc prolongation. 887 F.3d at 1135, 126 USPQ2d at 1280. Accordingly, the court held Vanda’s claims eligible at the first part of the Alice/Mayo test (Step 2A) because the claims were not “directed to” the recited judicial exception. 887 F.3d at 1136, 126 USPQ2d at 1281. Examiners should keep in mind that in order to qualify as a “treatment” or “prophylaxis” limitation for purposes of this consideration, the claim limitation in question must affirmatively recite an action that effects a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition. An example of such a limitation is a step of “administering amazonic acid to a patient” or a step of “administering a course of plasmapheresis to a patient.” If the limitation does not actually provide a treatment or prophylaxis, e.g., it is merely an intended use of the claimed invention or a field of use limitation, then it cannot integrate a judicial exception under the “treatment or prophylaxis” consideration. For example, a step of “prescribing a topical steroid to a patient with eczema” is not a positive limitation because it does not require that the steroid actually be used by or on the patient, and a recitation that a claimed product is a “pharmaceutical composition” or that a “feed dispenser is operable to dispense a mineral supplement” are not affirmative limitations because they are merely indicating how the claimed invention might be used. When determining whether a claim applies or uses a recited judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, the following factors are relevant. a. The Particularity Or Generality Of The Treatment Or Prophylaxis The treatment or prophylaxis limitation must be “particular,” i.e., specifically identified so that it does not encompass all applications of the judicial exception(s). For example, consider a claim that recites mentally analyzing information to identify if a patient has a genotype associated with poor metabolism of beta blocker medications. This falls within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas enumerated in MPEP § 2106.04(a). The claim also recites “administering a lower than normal dosage of a beta blocker medication to a patient identified as having the poor metabolizer genotype.” This administration step is particular, and it integrates the mental analysis step into a practical application. Conversely, consider a claim that recites the same abstract idea and “administering a suitable medication to a patient.” This administration step is not particular, and is instead merely instructions to “apply” the exception in a generic way. Thus, the administration step does not integrate the mental analysis step into a practical application. Examiners may find it helpful to evaluate other considerations such as the mere instructions to apply an exception consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)), and the field of use and technological environment consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)), when making a determination of whether a treatment or prophylaxis limitation is particular or general. b. Whether The Limitation(s) Have More Than A Nominal Or Insignificant Relationship To The Exception(s) The treatment or prophylaxis limitation must have more than a nominal or insignificant relationship to the exception(s). For example, consider a claim that recites a natural correlation (law of nature) between blood glucose levels over 250 mg/dl and the risk of developing ketoacidosis (a life-threatening medical condition). The claim also recites "treating a patient having a blood glucose level over 250 mg/dl with insulin”. Insulin acts to lower blood glucose levels, and administering insulin to a patient will reduce the patient’s blood glucose level, thereby lowering the risk that the patient will develop ketoacidosis. Thus, in the context of this claim, the administration step is significantly related to the recited correlation between high blood glucose levels and the risk of ketoacidosis. Because insulin is also a “particular” treatment, this administration step integrates the law of nature into a practical application. Alternatively, consider a claim that recites the same law of nature and also recites “treating a patient having a blood glucose level over 250 mg/dl with aspirin.” Aspirin is not known in the art as a treatment for ketoacidosis or diabetes, although some patients with diabetes may be on aspirin therapy for other medical reasons (e.g., to control pain or inflammation, or to prevent blood clots). In the context of this claim and the recited correlation between high blood glucose levels and the risk of ketoacidosis, administration of aspirin has at best a nominal connection to the law of nature, because aspirin does not treat or prevent ketoacidosis. This step therefore does not apply or use the exception in any meaningful way. Thus, this step of administering aspirin does not integrate the law of nature into a practical application. Examiners may find it helpful to evaluate other considerations such as the insignificant extra-solution activity consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)), and the field of use and technological environment consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)), when making a determination of whether a treatment or prophylaxis limitation has more than a nominal or insignificant relationship to the exception(s). c. Whether The Limitation(s) Are Merely Extra-Solution Activity Or A Field Of Use The treatment or prophylaxis limitation must impose meaningful limits on the judicial exception, and cannot be extra-solution activity or a field-of-use. For example, consider a claim that recites (a) administering rabies and feline leukemia vaccines to a first group of domestic cats in accordance with different vaccination schedules, and (b) analyzing information about the vaccination schedules and whether the cats later developed chronic immune-mediated disorders to determine a lowest-risk vaccination schedule. Step (b) falls within the mental process grouping of abstract ideas enumerated in MPEP § 2106.04(a). While step (a) administers vaccines to the cats, this administration is performed in order to gather data for the mental analysis step, and is a necessary precursor for all uses of the recited exception. It is thus extra-solution activity, and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Conversely, consider a claim reciting the same steps (a) and (b), but also reciting step (c) “vaccinating a second group of domestic cats in accordance with the lowest-risk vaccination schedule.” Step (c) applies the exception, in that the information from the mental analysis in step (b) is used to alter the order and timing of the vaccinations so that the second group of cats has a lower risk of developing chronic immune-mediated disorders. Step (c) thus integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. Examiners may find it helpful to evaluate other considerations such as the insignificant extra-solution activity consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)), and the field of use and technological environment consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)), when making a determination of whether a treatment or prophylaxis limitation is merely extra-solution activity or a field of use. An inventive concept “cannot be furnished by the unpatentable law of nature (or natural phenomenon or abstract idea) itself.” Genetic Techs. v. Merial LLC, 818 F.3d 1369, 1376, 118 USPQ2d 1541, 1546 (Fed. Cir. 2016). See also Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 21-18, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 78, 101 USPQ2d at 1968 (after determining that a claim is directed to a judicial exception, “we then ask, ‘[w]hat else is there in the claims before us?”) (emphasis added)); RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co., 855 F.3d 1322, 1327, 122 USPQ2d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (“Adding one abstract idea (math) to another abstract idea (encoding and decoding) does not render the claim non-abstract”). Instead, an “inventive concept” is furnished by an element or combination of elements that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception, and is sufficient to ensure that the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 27-18, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72-73, 101 USPQ2d at 1966). Evaluating additional elements to determine whether they amount to an inventive concept requires considering them both individually and in combination to ensure that they amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Because this approach considers all claim elements, the Supreme Court has noted that “it is consistent with the general rule that patent claims ‘must be considered as a whole.’” Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 218 n.3, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (quoting Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 188, 209 USPQ 1, 8-9 (1981)). Consideration of the elements in combination is particularly important, because even if an additional element does not amount to significantly more on its own, it can still amount to significantly more when considered in combination with the other elements of the claim. See, e.g., Rapid Litig. Mgmt. v. CellzDirect, 827 F.3d 1042, 1051, 119 USPQ2d 1370, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (process reciting combination of individually well-known freezing and thawing steps was “far from routine and conventional” and thus eligible); BASCOM Global Internet Servs. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1350, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1242 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (inventive concept may be found in the non-conventional and non-generic arrangement of components that are individually well-known and conventional). Although the courts often evaluate considerations such as the conventionality of an additional element in the eligibility analysis, the search for an inventive concept should not be confused with a novelty or non-obviousness determination. See Mayo, 566 U.S. at 91, 101 USPQ2d at 1973 (rejecting “the Government’s invitation to substitute §§ 102, 103, and 112 inquiries for the better established inquiry under § 101”). As made clear by the courts, the “‘novelty’ of any element or steps in a process, or even of the process itself, is of no relevance in determining whether the subject matter of a claim falls within the § 101 categories of possibly patentable subject matter.” Intellectual Ventures I v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1315, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (quoting Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. at 188–89, 209 USPQ at 9). See also Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 839 F.3d 1138, 1151, 120 USPQ2d 1473, 1483 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“a claim for a new abstract idea is still an abstract idea. The search for a § 101 inventive concept is thus distinct from demonstrating § 102 novelty.”). In addition, the search for an inventive concept is different from an obviousness analysis under 35 U.S.C. 103. See, e.g., BASCOM Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1350, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1242 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“The inventive concept inquiry requires more than recognizing that each claim element, by itself, was known in the art. . . . [A]n inventive concept can be found in the non-conventional and non-generic arrangement of known, conventional pieces.”). Specifically, lack of novelty under 35 U.S.C. 102 or obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 of a claimed invention does not necessarily indicate that additional elements are well-understood, routine, conventional elements. Because they are separate and distinct requirements from eligibility, patentability of the claimed invention under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 with respect to the prior art is neither required for, nor a guarantee of, patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101. The distinction between eligibility (under 35 U.S.C. 101) and patentability over the art (under 35 U.S.C. 102 and/or 103) is further discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(d). The Supreme Court has identified a number of considerations as relevant to the evaluation of whether the claimed additional elements amount to an inventive concept. The list of considerations here is not intended to be exclusive or limiting. Additional elements can often be analyzed based on more than one type of consideration and the type of consideration is of no import to the eligibility analysis. Additional discussion of these considerations, and how they were applied in particular judicial decisions, is provided in in MPEP § 2106.05(a) through (h). Limitations that the courts have found to qualify as “significantly more” when recited in a claim with a judicial exception include: ii. Improvements to any other technology or technical field, e.g., a modification of conventional rubber-molding processes to utilize a thermocouple inside the mold to constantly monitor the temperature and thus reduce under- and over-curing problems common in the art, as discussed in Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 191-92, 209 USPQ 1, 10 (1981) (see MPEP § 2106.05(a)); iii. Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine, e.g., a Fourdrinier machine (which is understood in the art to have a specific structure comprising a headbox, a paper-making wire, and a series of rolls) that is arranged in a particular way to optimize the speed of the machine while maintaining quality of the formed paper web, as discussed in Eibel Process Co. v. Minn. & Ont. Paper Co., 261 U.S. 45, 64-65 (1923) (see MPEP § 2106.05(b)); iv. Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, e.g., a process that transforms raw, uncured synthetic rubber into precision-molded synthetic rubber products, as discussed in Diehr, 450 U.S. at 184, 209 USPQ at 21 (see MPEP § 2106.05(c)); Limitations that the courts have found not to be enough to qualify as “significantly more” when recited in a claim with a judicial exception include: i. Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, e.g., a limitation indicating that a particular function such as creating and maintaining electronic records is performed by a computer, as discussed in Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 225-26, 110 USPQ2d at 1984 (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)); ii. Simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry, as discussed in Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 225, 110 USPQ2d at 1984 (see MPEP § 2106.05(d)); iii. Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, e.g., mere data gathering in conjunction with a law of nature or abstract idea such as a step of obtaining information about credit card transactions so that the information can be analyzed by an abstract mental process, as discussed in CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1375, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)); or iv. Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, e.g., a claim describing how the abstract idea of hedging could be used in the commodities and energy markets, as discussed in Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 595, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (2010) or a claim limiting the use of a mathematical formula to the petrochemical and oil-refining fields, as discussed in Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 588-90, 198 USPQ 193, 197-98 (1978) (MPEP § 2106.05(h)). It is notable that mere physicality or tangibility of an additional element or elements is not a relevant consideration in Step 2B. As the Supreme Court explained in Alice Corp., mere physical or tangible implementation of an exception is not in itself an inventive concept and does not guarantee eligibility: The fact that a computer “necessarily exist[s] in the physical, rather than purely conceptual, realm,” is beside the point. There is no dispute that a computer is a tangible system (in § 101 terms, a “machine”), or that many computer-implemented claims are formally addressed to patent-eligible subject matter. But if that were the end of the § 101 inquiry, an applicant could claim any principle of the physical or social sciences by reciting a computer system configured to implement the relevant concept. Such a result would make the determination of patent eligibility “depend simply on the draftsman’s art,” Flook, supra, at 593, 98 S. Ct. 2522, 57 L. Ed. 2d 451, thereby eviscerating the rule that “‘[l]aws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas are not patentable,’” Myriad, 133 S. Ct. 1289, 186 L. Ed. 2d 124, 133). Alice Corp. provides an example of how courts conduct the significantly more analysis. In this case, the Supreme Court analyzed claims to computer systems, computer readable media, and computer-implemented methods, all of which described a scheme for mitigating “settlement risk,” which is the risk that only one party to an agreed-upon financial exchange will satisfy its obligation. In part one of the Alice/Mayo test, the Court determined that the claims were directed to the abstract idea of mitigating settlement risk. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 221, 110 USPQ2d at 1982. The Court then walked through part two of the Alice/Mayo test, in which: • The Court identified the additional elements in the claim, e.g., by noting that the method claims recited steps of using a computer to “create electronic records, track multiple transactions, and issue simultaneous instructions”, and that the product claims recited hardware such as a “data processing system” with a “communications controller” and a “data storage unit” (573 U.S. at 224-26, 110 USPQ2d at 1984-85); • The Court considered the additional elements individually, noting that all the computer functions were “‘well-understood, routine, conventional activit[ies]’ previously known to the industry," each step “does no more than require a generic computer to perform generic computer functions”, and the recited hardware was “purely functional and generic” (573 U.S. at 225-26, 110 USPQ2d at 1984-85); and • The Court considered the additional elements “as an ordered combination,” and determined that “the computer components … ‘[a]dd nothing … that is not already present when the steps are considered separately’” and simply recite intermediated settlement as performed by a generic computer.” 573 U.S. at 225 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1972). Based on this analysis, the Court concluded that the claims amounted to “‘nothing significantly more’ than an instruction to apply the abstract idea of intermediated settlement using some unspecified, generic computer”, and therefore held the claims ineligible because they were directed to a judicial exception and failed the second part of the Alice/Mayo test. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 225-27, 110 USPQ2d at 1984. BASCOM provides another example of how courts conduct the significantly more analysis, and of the critical importance of considering the additional elements in combination. In this case, the Federal Circuit vacated a judgment of ineligibility because the district court failed to properly perform the second step of the Alice/Mayo test when analyzing a claimed system for filtering content retrieved from an Internet computer network. BASCOM Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 119 USPQ2d 1236 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that the claims were directed to the abstract idea of filtering Internet content, and then walked through the district court’s analysis in part two of the Alice/Mayo test, noting that: • The district court properly considered the additional elements individually, for example by consulting the specification, which described each of the additional elements as “well-known generic computer components” (827 F.3d at 1349, 119 USPQ2d at 1242); and • The district court should have considered the additional elements in combination, because the “inventive concept inquiry requires more than recognizing that each claim element, by itself, was known in the art” (827 F.3d at 1350, 119 USPQ2d at 1242). Based on this analysis, the Federal Circuit concluded that the district court erred by failing to recognize that when combined, an inventive concept may be found in the non-conventional and non-generic arrangement of the additional elements, i.e., the installation of a filtering tool at a specific location, remote from the end-users, with customizable filtering features specific to each end user. 827 F.3d at 1350, 119 USPQ2d at 1242. As described in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 2B of the Office’s eligibility analysis is the second part of the Alice/Mayo test, i.e., the Supreme Court’s “framework for distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts.” Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 217, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1981 (2014) (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. 66, 101 USPQ2d 1961 (2012)). Like the other steps in the eligibility analysis, evaluation of this step should be made after determining what the inventor has invented by reviewing the entire application disclosure and construing the claims in accordance with their broadest reasonable interpretation. See MPEP § 2106, subsection II for more information about the importance of understanding what has been invented, and MPEP § 2111 for more information about the broadest reasonable interpretation. Step 2B asks: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? Examiners should answer this question by first identifying whether there are any additional elements (features/limitations/steps) recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception(s), and then evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether they contribute an inventive concept (i.e., amount to significantly more than the judicial exception(s)). This evaluation is made with respect to the considerations that the Supreme Court has identified as relevant to the eligibility analysis, which are introduced generally in Part I.A of this section, and discussed in detail in MPEP § 2106.05(a) through (h). Many of these considerations overlap, and often more than one consideration is relevant to analysis of an additional element. Not all considerations will be relevant to every element, or every claim. Because the evaluation in Step 2B is not a weighing test, it is not important how the elements are characterized or how many considerations apply from this list. It is important to evaluate the significance of the additional elements relative to the invention, and to keep in mind the ultimate question of whether the additional elements encompass an inventive concept. Although the conclusion of whether a claim is eligible at Step 2B requires that all relevant considerations be evaluated, most of these considerations were already evaluated in Step 2A Prong Two. Thus, in Step 2B, examiners should: • Carry over their identification of the additional element(s) in the claim from Step 2A Prong Two; • Re-evaluate any additional element or combination of elements that was considered to be insignificant extra-solution activity per MPEP § 2106.05(g), because if such re-evaluation finds that the element is unconventional or otherwise more than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, this finding may indicate that the additional element is no longer considered to be insignificant; and • Evaluate whether any additional element or combination of elements are other than what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, or simply append well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, per MPEP § 2106.05(d). In the context of the flowchart in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 2B determines whether: • The claim as a whole does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself (there is no inventive concept in the claim) (Step 2B: NO) and thus is not eligible, warranting a rejection for lack of subject matter eligibility and concluding the eligibility analysis; or • The claim as a whole does amount to significantly more than the exception (there is an inventive concept in the claim) (Step 2B: YES), and thus is eligible at Pathway C, thereby concluding the eligibility analysis. Examiners should examine each claim for eligibility separately, based on the particular elements recited therein. Claims should not be judged to automatically stand or fall with similar claims in an application. For instance, one claim may be ineligible because it is directed to a judicial exception without amounting to significantly more, but another claim dependent on the first may be eligible because it recites additional elements that do amount to significantly more. For more information on how to evaluate claims reciting multiple judicial exceptions, see MPEP § 2106.04, subsection II.B. If the claim as a whole does recite significantly more than the exception itself, the claim is eligible (Step 2B: YES) at Pathway C, and the eligibility analysis is complete. If there are no meaningful limitations in the claim that transform the exception into a patent-eligible application, such that the claim does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, the claim is not patent-eligible (Step 2B: NO) and should be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101. See MPEP § 2106.07 for information on how to formulate an ineligibility rejection. 2106.05(a) Improvements to the Functioning of a Computer or To Any Other Technology or Technical Field [R-07.2022] While improvements were evaluated in Alice Corp. as relevant to the search for an inventive concept (Step 2B), several decisions of the Federal Circuit have also evaluated this consideration when determining whether a claim was directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A). See, e.g., Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1335-36, 118 USPQ2d 1684, 1689 (Fed. Cir. 2016); McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1314-16, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1102-03 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Visual Memory, LLC v. NVIDIA Corp., 867 F.3d 1253, 1259-60, 123 USPQ2d 1712, 1717 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Thus, an examiner should evaluate whether a claim contains an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field at Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B, as well as when considering whether the claim has such self-evident eligibility that it qualifies for the streamlined analysis. See MPEP § 2106.04(d)(1) for more information about evaluating improvements in Step 2A Prong Two, and MPEP § 2106.07(b) for more information about improvements in the streamlined analysis context. If it is asserted that the invention improves upon conventional functioning of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes, a technical explanation as to how to implement the invention should be present in the specification. That is, the disclosure must provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. The specification need not explicitly set forth the improvement, but it must describe the invention such that the improvement would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art. Conversely, if the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner (i.e., a bare assertion of an improvement without the detail necessary to be apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art), the examiner should not determine the claim improves technology. An indication that the claimed invention provides an improvement can include a discussion in the specification that identifies a technical problem and explains the details of an unconventional technical solution expressed in the claim, or identifies technical improvements realized by the claim over the prior art. For example, in McRO, the court relied on the specification’s explanation of how the particular rules recited in the claim enabled the automation of specific animation tasks that previously could only be performed subjectively by humans, when determining that the claims were directed to improvements in computer animation instead of an abstract idea. McRO, 837 F.3d at 1313-14, 120 USPQ2d at 1100-01. In contrast, the court in Affinity Labs of Tex. v. DirecTV, LLC relied on the specification’s failure to provide details regarding the manner in which the invention accomplished the alleged improvement when holding the claimed methods of delivering broadcast content to cellphones ineligible. 838 F.3d 1253, 1263-64, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207-08 (Fed. Cir. 2016). After the examiner has consulted the specification and determined that the disclosed invention improves technology, the claim must be evaluated to ensure the claim itself reflects the disclosed improvement in technology. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1316, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (patent owner argued that the claimed email filtering system improved technology by shrinking the protection gap and mooting the volume problem, but the court disagreed because the claims themselves did not have any limitations that addressed these issues). That is, the claim must include the components or steps of the invention that provide the improvement described in the specification. However, the claim itself does not need to explicitly recite the improvement described in the specification (e.g., “thereby increasing the bandwidth of the channel”). The full scope of the claim under the BRI should be considered to determine if the claim reflects an improvement in technology (e.g., the improvement described in the specification). In making this determination, it is critical that examiners look at the claim “as a whole,” in other words, the claim should be evaluated “as an ordered combination, without ignoring the requirements of the individual steps.” When performing this evaluation, examiners should be “careful to avoid oversimplifying the claims” by looking at them generally and failing to account for the specific requirements of the claims. McRO, 837 F.3d at 1313, 120 USPQ2d at 1100. An important consideration in determining whether a claim improves technology is the extent to which the claim covers a particular solution to a problem or a particular way to achieve a desired outcome, as opposed to merely claiming the idea of a solution or outcome. McRO, 837 F.3d at 1314-15, 120 USPQ2d at 1102-03; DDR Holdings, 773 F.3d at 1259, 113 USPQ2d at 1107. In this respect, the improvement consideration overlaps with other considerations, specifically the particular machine consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(b)), and the mere instructions to apply an exception consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)). Thus, evaluation of those other considerations may assist examiners in making a determination of whether a claim satisfies the improvement consideration. It is important to note, the judicial exception alone cannot provide the improvement. The improvement can be provided by one or more additional elements. See the discussion of Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 187 and 191-92, 209 USPQ 1, 10 (1981)) in subsection II, below. In addition, the improvement can be provided by the additional element(s) in combination with the recited judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.04(d) (discussing Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Sys., Inc., 879 F.3d 1299, 1303-04, 125 USPQ2d 1282, 1285-87 (Fed. Cir. 2018)). Thus, it is important for examiners to analyze the claim as a whole when determining whether the claim provides an improvement to the functioning of computers or an improvement to other technology or technical field. During examination, the examiner should analyze the “improvements” consideration by evaluating the specification and the claims to ensure that a technical explanation of the asserted improvement is present in the specification, and that the claim reflects the asserted improvement. Generally, examiners are not expected to make a qualitative judgement on the merits of the asserted improvement. If the examiner concludes the disclosed invention does not improve technology, the burden shifts to applicant to provide persuasive arguments supported by any necessary evidence to demonstrate that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the disclosed invention improves technology. Any such evidence submitted under 37 CFR 1.132 must establish what the specification would convey to one of ordinary skill in the art and cannot be used to supplement the specification. See, e.g.MPEP § 716.09 on 37 CFR 1.132 practice with respect to rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). For example, in response to a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101, an applicant could submit a declaration under § 1.132 providing testimony on how one of ordinary skill in the art would interpret the disclosed invention as improving technology and the underlying factual basis for that conclusion. I. IMPROVEMENTS TO COMPUTER FUNCTIONALITY In computer-related technologies, the examiner should determine whether the claim purports to improve computer capabilities or, instead, invokes computers merely as a tool. Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1336, 118 USPQ2d 1684, 1689 (Fed. Cir. 2016). In Enfish, the court evaluated the patent eligibility of claims related to a self-referential database. Id. The court concluded the claims were not directed to an abstract idea, but rather an improvement to computer functionality. Id. It was the specification’s discussion of the prior art and how the invention improved the way the computer stores and retrieves data in memory in combination with the specific data structure recited in the claims that demonstrated eligibility. 822 F.3d at 1339, 118 USPQ2d at 1691. The claim was not simply the addition of general purpose computers added post-hoc to an abstract idea, but a specific implementation of a solution to a problem in the software arts. 822 F.3d at 1339, 118 USPQ2d at 1691. Examples that the courts have indicated may show an improvement in computer-functionality: v. A memory system having programmable operational characteristics that are configurable based on the type of processor, which can be used with different types of processors without a tradeoff in processor performance, Visual Memory, LLC v. NVIDIA Corp., 867 F.3d 1253, 1259-60, 123 USPQ2d 1712, 1717 (Fed. Cir. 2017); vii. Particular structure of a server that stores organized digital images, TLI Communications, 823 F.3d at 612, 118 USPQ2d at 1747 (finding the use of a generic server insufficient to add inventive concepts to an abstract idea); It is important to note that in order for a method claim to improve computer functionality, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim must be limited to computer implementation. That is, a claim whose entire scope can be performed mentally, cannot be said to improve computer technology. Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 839 F.3d 1138, 120 USPQ2d 1473 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (a method of translating a logic circuit into a hardware component description of a logic circuit was found to be ineligible because the method did not employ a computer and a skilled artisan could perform all the steps mentally). Similarly, a claimed process covering embodiments that can be performed on a computer, as well as embodiments that can be practiced verbally or with a telephone, cannot improve computer technology. See RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co., 855 F.3d 1322, 1328, 122 USPQ2d 1377, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (process for encoding/decoding facial data using image codes assigned to particular facial features held ineligible because the process did not require a computer). Examples that the courts have indicated may not be sufficient to show an improvement in computer-functionality: iv. Recording, transmitting, and archiving digital images by use of conventional or generic technology in a nascent but well-known environment, without any assertion that the invention reflects an inventive solution to any problem presented by combining a camera and a cellular telephone, TLI Communications, 823 F.3d at 611-12, 118 USPQ2d at 1747; v. Affixing a barcode to a mail object in order to more reliably identify the sender and speed up mail processing, without any limitations specifying the technical details of the barcode or how it is generated or processed, Secured Mail Solutions, LLC v. Universal Wilde, Inc., 873 F.3d 905, 910-11, 124 USPQ2d 1502, 1505-06 (Fed. Cir. 2017); vii. Providing historical usage information to users while they are inputting data, in order to improve the quality and organization of information added to a database, because “an improvement to the information stored by a database is not equivalent to an improvement in the database’s functionality,” BSG Tech LLC v. Buyseasons, Inc., 899 F.3d 1281, 1287-88, 127 USPQ2d 1688, 1693-94 (Fed. Cir. 2018); and The courts have also found that improvements in technology beyond computer functionality may demonstrate patent eligibility. In McRO, the Federal Circuit held claimed methods of automatic lip synchronization and facial expression animation using computer-implemented rules to be patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101, because they were not directed to an abstract idea. McRO, 837 F.3d at 1316, 120 USPQ2d at 1103. The basis for the McRO court's decision was that the claims were directed to an improvement in computer animation and thus did not recite a concept similar to previously identified abstract ideas. Id. The court relied on the specification's explanation of how the claimed rules enabled the automation of specific animation tasks that previously could not be automated. 837 F.3d at 1313, 120 USPQ2d at 1101. The McRO court indicated that it was the incorporation of the particular claimed rules in computer animation that "improved [the] existing technological process", unlike cases such as Alice where a computer was merely used as a tool to perform an existing process. 837 F.3d at 1314, 120 USPQ2d at 1102. The McRO court also noted that the claims at issue described a specific way (use of particular rules to set morph weights and transitions through phonemes) to solve the problem of producing accurate and realistic lip synchronization and facial expressions in animated characters, rather than merely claiming the idea of a solution or outcome, and thus were not directed to an abstract idea. 837 F.3d at 1313, 120 USPQ2d at 1101. Consideration of improvements is relevant to the eligibility analysis regardless of the technology of the claimed invention. That is, the consideration applies equally whether it is a computer-implemented invention, an invention in the life sciences, or any other technology. See, e.g., Rapid Litigation Management v. CellzDirect, Inc., 827 F.3d 1042, 119 USPQ2d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2016), in which the court noted that a claimed process for preserving hepatocytes could be eligible as an improvement to technology because the claim achieved a new and improved way for preserving hepatocyte cells for later use, even though the claim is based on the discovery of something natural. Notably, the court did not distinguish between the types of technology when determining the invention improved technology. However, it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology. For example, in Trading Technologies Int’l v. IBG, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093-94, 2019 USPQ2d 138290 (Fed. Cir. 2019), the court determined that the claimed user interface simply provided a trader with more information to facilitate market trades, which improved the business process of market trading but did not improve computers or technology. Examples that the courts have indicated may be sufficient to show an improvement in existing technology include: i. Particular computerized method of operating a rubber molding press, e.g., a modification of conventional rubber-molding processes to utilize a thermocouple inside the mold to constantly monitor the temperature and thus reduce under- and over-curing problems common in the art, Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 187 and 191-92, 209 USPQ 1, 8 and 10 (1981); To show that the involvement of a computer assists in improving the technology, the claims must recite the details regarding how a computer aids the method, the extent to which the computer aids the method, or the significance of a computer to the performance of the method. Merely adding generic computer components to perform the method is not sufficient. Thus, the claim must include more than mere instructions to perform the method on a generic component or machinery to qualify as an improvement to an existing technology. See MPEP § 2106.05(f) for more information about mere instructions to apply an exception. Examples that the courts have indicated may not be sufficient to show an improvement to technology include: 2106.05(b) Particular Machine [R-07.2022] When determining whether a claim integrates a judicial exception, into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two and whether a claim recites significantly more than a judicial exception in Step 2B, examiners should consider whether the judicial exception is applied with, or by use of, a particular machine. "The machine-or-transformation test is a useful and important clue, and investigative tool” for determining whether a claim is patent eligible under § 101. Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 604, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1007 (2010). It is noted that while the application of a judicial exception by or with a particular machine is an important clue, it is not a stand-alone test for eligibility. Id. All claims must be evaluated for eligibility using the two-part test from Alice/Mayo. If a claim passes the Alice/Mayo test (i.e., is not directed to an exception at Step 2A, or amounts to significantly more than any recited exception in Step 2B), then the claim is eligible even if it fails the machine-or-transformation test ("M-or-T test"). Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 604, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1007 (2010) (explaining that a claim may be eligible even if it does not satisfy the M-or-T test); McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1315, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1102 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“[T]here is nothing that requires a method ‘be tied to a machine or transform an article’ to be patentable”). And if a claim fails the Alice/Mayo test (i.e., is directed to an exception at Step 2A and does not amount to significantly more than the exception in Step 2B), then the claim is ineligible even if it passes the M-or-T test. DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1256, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1104 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (“[I]n Mayo, the Supreme Court emphasized that satisfying the machine-or-transformation test, by itself, is not sufficient to render a claim patent-eligible, as not all transformations or machine implementations infuse an otherwise ineligible claim with an 'inventive concept.'”). Examiners may find it helpful to evaluate other considerations such as the mere instructions to apply an exception consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)), the insignificant extra-solution activity consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)), and the field of use and technological environment consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)), when making a determination of whether an element (or combination of elements) is a particular machine. For information on the definition of the term “machine,” see MPEP § 2106.03. When determining whether a machine recited in a claim provides significantly more, the following factors are relevant. I. THE PARTICULARITY OR GENERALITY OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE MACHINE OR APPARATUS The particularity or generality of the elements of the machine or apparatus, i.e., the degree to which the machine in the claim can be specifically identified (not any and all machines). One example of applying a judicial exception with a particular machine is Mackay Radio & Tel. Co. v. Radio Corp. of America, 306 U.S. 86, 40 USPQ 199 (1939). In this case, a mathematical formula was employed to use standing wave phenomena in an antenna system. The claim recited the particular type of antenna and included details as to the shape of the antenna and the conductors, particularly the length and angle at which they were arranged. 306 U.S. at 95-96; 40 USPQ at 203. Another example is Eibel Process, in which gravity (a law of nature or natural phenomenon) was applied by a Fourdrinier machine (which was understood in the art to have a specific structure comprising a headbox, a paper-making wire, and a series of rolls) arranged in a particular way to optimize the speed of the machine while maintaining quality of the formed paper web. Eibel Process Co. v. Minn. & Ont. Paper Co., 261 U.S. 45, 64-65 (1923). It is important to note that a general purpose computer that applies a judicial exception, such as an abstract idea, by use of conventional computer functions does not qualify as a particular machine. Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772 F.3d 709, 716-17, 112 USPQ2d 1750, 1755-56 (Fed. Cir. 2014). See also TLI Communications LLC v. AV Automotive LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (mere recitation of concrete or tangible components is not an inventive concept); Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 785 F.3d 616, 623, 114 USPQ2d 1711, 1715 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (noting that Alappat’s rationale that an otherwise ineligible algorithm or software could be made patent-eligible by merely adding a generic computer to the claim was superseded by the Supreme Court’s Bilski and Alice Corp. decisions). If applicant amends a claim to add a generic computer or generic computer components and asserts that the claim recites significantly more because the generic computer is 'specially programmed' (as in Alappat, now considered superseded) or is a 'particular machine' (as in Bilski), the examiner should look at whether the added elements integrate the exception into a practical application or provide significantly more than the judicial exception. Merely adding a generic computer, generic computer components, or a programmed computer to perform generic computer functions does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 223-24, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1983-84 (2014). See In re Alappat, 33 F.3d 1526, 1545, 31 USPQ2d 1545, 1558 (Fed. Cir. 1994); In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943, 88 USPQ2d 1385 (Fed. Cir. 2008) II. WHETHER THE MACHINE OR APPARATUS IMPLEMENTS THE STEPS OF THE METHOD Integral use of a machine to achieve performance of a method may integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more, in contrast to where the machine is merely an object on which the method operates, which does not integrate the exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, 654 F.3d 1366, 1370, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011) ("We are not persuaded by the appellant's argument that the claimed method is tied to a particular machine because it ‘would not be necessary or possible without the Internet.’ . . . Regardless of whether "the Internet" can be viewed as a machine, it is clear that the Internet cannot perform the fraud detection steps of the claimed method"). For example, as described in MPEP § 2106.05(f), additional elements that invoke computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process will generally not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception. See, e.g., Versata Development Group v. SAP America, 793 F.3d 1306, 1335, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1702 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (explaining that in order for a machine to add significantly more, it must “play a significant part in permitting the claimed method to be performed, rather than function solely as an obvious mechanism for permitting a solution to be achieved more quickly”). III. WHETHER ITS INVOLVEMENT IS EXTRA-SOLUTION ACTIVITY OR A FIELD-OF-USE Whether its involvement is extra-solution activity or a field-of-use, i.e., the extent to which (or how) the machine or apparatus imposes meaningful limits on the claim. Use of a machine that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step or in a field-of-use limitation) would not integrate a judicial exception or provide significantly more. See Bilski, 561 U.S. at 610, 95 USPQ2d at 1009 (citing Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 590, 198 USPQ 193, 197 (1978)), and CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, 654 F.3d 1366, 1370, 99 USPQ2d 1690 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (citations omitted) (“[N]othing in claim 3 requires an infringer to use the Internet to obtain that data. The Internet is merely described as the source of the data. We have held that mere ‘[data-gathering] step[s] cannot make an otherwise nonstatutory claim statutory.’” 654 F.3d at 1375, 99 USPQ2d at 1694 (citation omitted)). See MPEP § 2106.05(g) & (h) for more information on insignificant extra-solution activity and field of use, respectively. 2106.05(c) Particular Transformation [R-07.2022] Another consideration when determining whether a claim integrates a judicial exception into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two and whether a claim recites significantly more in Step 2B is whether the claim effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing. "[T]ransformation and reduction of an article ‘to a different state or thing’ is the clue to patentability of a process claim that does not include particular machines." Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 658, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1007 (2010) (quoting Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 70, 175 USPQ 673, 676 (1972)). If such a transformation exists, the claims are likely to be significantly more than any recited judicial exception or to integrate any recited judicial exception into a practical application. It is noted that while the transformation of an article is an important clue, it is not a stand-alone test for eligibility. Id. All claims must be evaluated for eligibility using the two-part test from Alice/Mayo. If a claim passes the Alice/Mayo test (i.e., is not directed to an exception at Step 2A, or amounts to significantly more than any recited exception in Step 2B), then the claim is eligible even if it “fails” the M-or-T test. Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 604, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1007 (2010) (explaining that a claim may be eligible even if it does not satisfy the M-or-T test); McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1315, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1102 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“[T]here is nothing that requires a method ‘be tied to a machine or transform an article’ to be patentable”). And if a claim fails the Alice/Mayo test (i.e., is directed to an exception at Step 2A and does not amount to significantly more than the exception in Step 2B), then the claim is ineligible even if it passes the M-or-T test. DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1256, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1104 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (“[I]n Mayo, the Supreme Court emphasized that satisfying the machine-or-transformation test, by itself, is not sufficient to render a claim patent-eligible, as not all transformations or machine implementations infuse an otherwise ineligible claim with an “inventive concept.”). Examiners may find it helpful to evaluate other considerations such as the mere instructions to apply an exception consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)), the insignificant extra-solution activity consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)), and the field of use and technological environment consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)), when making a determination of whether a claim satisfies the particular transformation consideration. An “article” includes a physical object or substance. The physical object or substance must be particular, meaning it can be specifically identified. “Transformation” of an article means that the “article” has changed to a different state or thing. Changing to a different state or thing usually means more than simply using an article or changing the location of an article. A new or different function or use can be evidence that an article has been transformed. Purely mental processes in which thoughts or human based actions are “changed” are not considered an eligible transformation. For data, mere “manipulation of basic mathematical constructs [i.e.,] the paradigmatic ‘abstract idea,’” has not been deemed a transformation. CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, 654 F.3d 1366, 1372 n.2, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1695 n.2 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (quoting In re Warmerdam, 33 F.3d 1354, 1355, 1360, 31 USPQ2d 1754, 1755, 1759 (Fed. Cir. 1994)). Tilghman v. Proctor, 102 U.S. 707 (1881), provides an example of effecting a transformation of a particular article to a different state or thing. In that case, the claim was directed to a process of subjecting a mixture of fat and water to a high degree of heat and included additional parameters relating to the level of heat, the quantities of fat and water, and the strength of the mixing vessel. The claimed process, which used the natural principle that the elements of neutral fat require that they be severally united with an atomic equivalent of water in order to separate and become free, resulted in the transformation of the fatty bodies into fat acids and glycerine. Id. at 729. Where a transformation is recited in a claim, the following factors are relevant to the analysis: 2. The degree to which the recited article is particular. A transformation applied to a generically recited article or to any and all articles would likely not provide significantly more than the judicial exception. A transformation that can be specifically identified, or that applies to only particular articles, is more likely to provide significantly more (or integrates a judicial exception into a practical application). 3. The nature of the transformation in terms of the type or extent of change in state or thing. A transformation resulting in the transformed article having a different function or use, would likely provide significantly more, but a transformation resulting in the transformed article merely having a different location, would likely not provide significantly more (or integrate a judicial exception into a practical application). For example, a process that transforms raw, uncured synthetic rubber into precision-molded synthetic rubber products, as discussed in Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 184, 209 USPQ 1, 21 (1981)), provides significantly more (or integrate a judicial exception into a practical application). 4. The nature of the article transformed. Transformation of a physical or tangible object or substance is more likely to provide significantly more (or integrate a judicial exception into a practical application) than the transformation of an intangible concept such as a contractual obligation or mental judgment. 5. Whether the transformation is extra-solution activity or a field-of-use (i.e., the extent to which (or how) the transformation imposes meaningful limits on the execution of the claimed method steps). A transformation that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method (e.g., in a data gathering step or in a field-of-use limitation) would not provide significantly more (or integrate a judicial exception into a practical application). For example, in Mayo the Supreme Court found claims regarding calibrating the proper dosage of thiopurine drugs to be patent ineligible subject matter. The Federal Circuit had held that the step of administering the thiopurine drug demonstrated a transformation of the human body and blood. Mayo, 566 U.S. at 76, 101 USPQ2d at 1967. The Supreme Court disagreed, finding that this step was only a field-of-use limitation and did not provide significantly more than the judicial exception. Id. See MPEP § 2106.05(g) & (h) for more information on insignificant extra-solution activity and field of use, respectively. Another consideration when determining whether a claim recites significantly more than a judicial exception is whether the additional element(s) are well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry. This consideration is only evaluated in Step 2B of the eligibility analysis. If the additional element (or combination of elements) is a specific limitation other than what is well-understood, routine and conventional in the field, for instance because it is an unconventional step that confines the claim to a particular useful application of the judicial exception, then this consideration favors eligibility. If, however, the additional element (or combination of elements) is no more than well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, which is recited at a high level of generality, then this consideration does not favor eligibility. DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 113 USPQ2d 1097 (Fed. Cir. 2014), provides an example of additional elements that favored eligibility because they were more than well-understood, routine conventional activities in the field. The claims in DDR Holdings were directed to systems and methods of generating a composite webpage that combines certain visual elements of a host website with the content of a third-party merchant. 773 F.3d at 1248, 113 USPQ2d at 1099. The court found that the claim had additional elements that amounted to significantly more than the abstract idea, because they modified conventional Internet hyperlink protocol to dynamically produce a dual-source hybrid webpage, which differed from the conventional operation of Internet hyperlink protocol that transported the user away from the host’s webpage to the third party’s webpage when the hyperlink was activated. 773 F.3d at 1258-59, 113 USPQ2d at 1106-07. Thus, the claims in DDR Holdings were eligible. On the other hand, Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 67, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1964 (2010) provides an example of additional elements that were not an inventive concept because they were merely well-understood, routine, conventional activity previously known to the industry, which were not by themselves sufficient to transform a judicial exception into a patent eligible invention. Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 79-80, 101 USPQ2d 1969 (2012) (citing Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 590, 198 USPQ 193, 199 (1978) (the additional elements were “well known” and, thus, did not amount to a patentable application of the mathematical formula)). In Mayo, the claims at issue recited naturally occurring correlations (the relationships between the concentration in the blood of certain thiopurine metabolites and the likelihood that a drug dosage will be ineffective or induce harmful side effects) along with additional elements including telling a doctor to measure thiopurine metabolite levels in the blood using any known process. 566 U.S. at 77-79, 101 USPQ2d at 1967-68. The Court found this additional step of measuring metabolite levels to be well-understood, routine, conventional activity already engaged in by the scientific community because scientists “routinely measured metabolites as part of their investigations into the relationships between metabolite levels and efficacy and toxicity of thiopurine compounds.” 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968. Even when considered in combination with the other additional elements, the step of measuring metabolite levels did not amount to an inventive concept, and thus the claims in Mayo were not eligible. 566 U.S. at 79-80, 101 USPQ2d at 1968-69. When making a determination whether the additional elements in a claim amount to significantly more than a judicial exception, the examiner should evaluate whether the elements define only well-understood, routine, conventional activity. In this respect, the well-understood, routine, conventional consideration overlaps with other Step 2B considerations, particularly the improvement consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(a)), the mere instructions to apply an exception consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)), and the insignificant extra-solution activity consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)). Thus, evaluation of those other considerations may assist examiners in making a determination of whether a particular element or combination of elements is well-understood, routine, conventional activity. In addition, examiners should keep in mind the following points when determining whether additional elements define only well-understood, routine, conventional activity. 1. An additional element (or combination of additional elements) that is known in the art can still be unconventional or non-routine. The question of whether a particular claimed invention is novel or obvious is “fully apart” from the question of whether it is eligible. Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 190, 209 USPQ 1, 9 (1981). For example, claims may exhibit an improvement over conventional computer functionality even if the improvement lacks novelty over the prior art. Compare, e.g.,Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 118 USPQ2d 1684 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (holding several claims from U.S. Patent Nos. 6,151,604 and 6,163,775 eligible) with Microsoft Corp. v. Enfish, LLC, 662 Fed. App'x 981 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (holding some of the same claims to be anticipated by prior art). The eligible claims in Enfish recited a self-referential database having two key features: all entity types can be stored in a single table; and the table rows can contain information defining the table columns. Enfish, 822 F.3d at 1332, 118 USPQ2d at 1687. Although these features were taught by a single prior art reference (thus anticipating the claims), Microsoft Corp., 662 Fed. App'x at 986, the features were not conventional and thus were considered to reflect an improvement to existing technology. In particular, they enabled the claimed table to achieve benefits over conventional databases, such as increased flexibility, faster search times, and smaller memory requirements. Enfish, 822 F.3d at 1337, 118 USPQ2d at 1690. 2. A factual determination is required to support a conclusion that an additional element (or combination of additional elements) is well-understood, routine, conventional activity.Berkheimer v. HP, Inc., 881 F.3d 1360, 1368, 125 USPQ2d 1649, 1654 (Fed. Cir. 2018). However, this does not mean that a prior art search is necessary to resolve this inquiry. Instead, examiners should rely on what the courts have recognized, or those in the art would recognize, as elements that are well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the relevant field when making the required determination. For example, in many instances, the specification of the application may indicate that additional elements are well-known or conventional. See, e.g., Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec, 838 F.3d 1307, 1317; 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“The written description is particularly useful in determining what is well-known or conventional”); Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Network, Inc., 790 F.3d 1343, 1348, 115 USPQ2d 1414, 1418 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (relying on specification’s description of additional elements as “well-known”, “common” and “conventional”); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 614, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (Specification described additional elements as “either performing basic computer functions such as sending and receiving data, or performing functions ‘known’ in the art.”). As such, an examiner should determine that an element (or combination of elements) is well-understood, routine, conventional activity only when the examiner can readily conclude, based on their expertise in the art, that the element is widely prevalent or in common use in the relevant industry. The analysis as to whether an element (or combination of elements) is widely prevalent or in common use is the same as the analysis under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as to whether an element is so well-known that it need not be described in detail in the patent specification. See Genetic Techs. Ltd. v. Merial LLC, 818 F.3d 1369, 1377, 118 USPQ2d 1541, 1546 ( Fed. Cir. 2016) (supporting the position that amplification was well-understood, routine, conventional for purposes of subject matter eligibility by observing that the patentee expressly argued during prosecution of the application that amplification was a technique readily practiced by those skilled in the art to overcome the rejection of the claim under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph); see also Lindemann Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. Am. Hoist & Derrick Co., 730 F.2d 1452, 1463, 221 USPQ 481, 489 (Fed. Cir. 1984) ("[T]he specification need not disclose what is well known in the art."); In re Myers, 410 F.2d 420, 424, 161 USPQ 668, 671 (CCPA 1969) ("A specification is directed to those skilled in the art and need not teach or point out in detail that which is well-known in the art."); Exergen Corp., 725 Fed. App’x. 959, 965 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (holding that "[l]ike indefiniteness, enablement, or obviousness, whether a claim is directed to patent eligible subject matter is a question of law based on underlying facts," and noting that the Supreme Court has recognized that "the inquiry 'might sometimes overlap' with other fact-intensive inquiries like novelty under 35 U.S.C. § 102"). If the element is not widely prevalent or in common use, or is otherwise beyond those elements recognized in the art or by the courts as being well-understood, routine or conventional, then the element will in most cases favor eligibility. For example, even if a particular technique (e.g., measuring blood glucose via an earring worn by a person with diabetes) would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art because it was discussed in several widely-read scientific journals or used by a few scientists, mere knowledge of the particular technique or use of the particular technique by a few scientists is not necessarily sufficient to make the use of the particular technique routine or conventional in the relevant field. The examiner in this situation would already know, based on the examiner's expertise in the field, that blood glucose is routinely and conventionally monitored by other techniques (e.g., via placing a small droplet of blood on a diagnostic test strip, or via an implanted insulin pump with a glucose sensor). Thus, the examiner would not need to perform a prior art search in order to determine that the particular claimed technique using the glucose-sensing earring was not well-understood, routine, conventional activity previously engaged in by scientists in the field. The required factual determination must be expressly supported in writing, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.07(a). Appropriate forms of support include one or more of the following: (a) A citation to an express statement in the specification or to a statement made by an applicant during prosecution that demonstrates the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of the additional element(s); (b) A citation to one or more of the court decisions discussed in Subsection II below as noting the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of the additional element(s); (c) A citation to a publication that demonstrates the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of the additional element(s); and (d) A statement that the examiner is taking official notice of the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of the additional element(s). For more information on supporting a conclusion that an additional element (or combination of additional elements) is well-understood, routine, conventional activity, see MPEP § 2106.07(a), subsection III. 3. Even if one or more additional elements are well-understood, routine, conventional activity when considered individually, the combination of additional elements may amount to an inventive concept.Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. at 188, 209 USPQ at 9 (1981) (“[A] new combination of steps in a process may be patentable even though all the constituents of the combination were well known and in common use before the combination was made.”). For example, a microprocessor that performs mathematical calculations and a clock that produces time data may individually be generic computer components that perform merely generic computer functions, but when combined may perform functions that are not generic computer functions and thus be an inventive concept. See, e.g. Rapid Litig. Mgmt. v. CellzDirect, Inc., 827 F.3d 1042, 1051, 119 USPQ2d 1370, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (holding that while the additional steps of freezing and thawing hepatocytes were well known, repeating those steps, contrary to what was taught in the art, was not routine or conventional). For example, in BASCOM, even though the court found that all of the additional elements in the claim recited generic computer network or Internet components, the elements in combination amounted to significantly more because of the non-conventional and non-generic arrangement that provided a technical improvement in the art. BASCOM Global Internet Servs. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1350-51, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1243-44 (2016). A rejection should only be made if an examiner relying on the examiner's expertise in the art can conclude in the Step 2B inquiry that the additional elements do not amount to significantly more (Step 2B: NO). If the elements or functions are beyond those recognized in the art or by the courts as being well‐understood, routine, conventional activity, then the elements or functions will in most cases amount to significantly more (Step 2B: YES). For more information on formulating a subject matter eligibility rejection involving well-understood, routine, conventional activity, see MPEP § 2106.07(a). II. ELEMENTS THAT THE COURTS HAVE RECOGNIZED AS WELL-UNDERSTOOD, ROUTINE, CONVENTIONAL ACTIVITY IN PARTICULAR FIELDS Because examiners should rely on what the courts have recognized, or those of ordinary skill in the art would recognize, as elements that describe well‐understood, routine activities, the following section provides examples of elements that have been recognized by the courts as well-understood, routine, conventional activity in particular fields. It should be noted, however, that many of these examples failed to satisfy other considerations (e.g., because they were recited at a high level of generality and thus were mere instructions to apply an exception, or were insignificant extra-solution activity). Thus, examiners should carefully analyze additional elements in a claim with respect to all relevant Step 2B considerations, including this consideration, before making a conclusion as to whether they amount to an inventive concept. The courts have recognized the following computer functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity. ii. Performing repetitive calculations, Flook, 437 U.S. at 594, 198 USPQ2d at 199 (recomputing or readjusting alarm limit values); Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, 687 F.3d 1266, 1278, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (“The computer required by some of Bancorp’s claims is employed only for its most basic function, the performance of repetitive calculations, and as such does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of those claims.”); This listing is not meant to imply that all computer functions are well‐understood, routine, conventional activities, or that a claim reciting a generic computer component performing a generic computer function is necessarily ineligible. See e.g. Amdocs (Israel), Ltd. v. Openet Telecom, Inc., 841 F.3d 1288, 1316, 120 USPQ2d 1527, 1549 (Fed. Cir. 2016), BASCOM Global Internet Servs. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1348, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1241 (Fed. Cir. 2016). Courts have held computer‐implemented processes not to be significantly more than an abstract idea (and thus ineligible) where the claim as a whole amounts to nothing more than generic computer functions merely used to implement an abstract idea, such as an idea that could be done by a human analog (i.e., by hand or by merely thinking). On the other hand, courts have held computer-implemented processes to be significantly more than an abstract idea (and thus eligible), where generic computer components are able in combination to perform functions that are not merely generic. DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1257-59, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1105-07 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The courts have recognized the following laboratory techniques as well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the life science arts when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity: Below are examples of other types of activity that the courts have found to be well-understood, routine, conventional activity when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity: 2106.05(e) Other Meaningful Limitations [R-10.2019] The analysis of whether the claim includes other meaningful limitations may be relevant for both eligibility analysis Step 2A Prong Two, and Step 2B. The claim should add meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment to transform the judicial exception into patent-eligible subject matter. The phrase “meaningful limitations” has been used by the courts even before Alice and Mayo in various contexts to describe additional elements that provide an inventive concept to the claim as a whole. The considerations described in MPEP § 2106.05(a)-(d) are meaningful limitations when they amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, or when they integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. This broad label signals that there can be other considerations besides those described in MPEP § 2106.05(a)-(d) that when added to a judicial exception amount to meaningful limitations that can transform a claim into patent-eligible subject matter. Diamond v. Diehr provides an example of a claim that recited meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. 450 U.S. 175, 209 USPQ 1 (1981). In Diehr, the claim was directed to the use of the Arrhenius equation (an abstract idea or law of nature) in an automated process for operating a rubber-molding press. 450 U.S. at 177-78, 209 USPQ at 4. The Court evaluated additional elements such as the steps of installing rubber in a press, closing the mold, constantly measuring the temperature in the mold, and automatically opening the press at the proper time, and found them to be meaningful because they sufficiently limited the use of the mathematical equation to the practical application of molding rubber products. 450 U.S. at 184, 187, 209 USPQ at 7, 8. In contrast, the claims in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International did not meaningfully limit the abstract idea of mitigating settlement risk. 573 U.S. 208, 110 USPQ2d 1976 (2014). In particular, the Court concluded that the additional elements such as the data processing system and communications controllers recited in the system claims did not meaningfully limit the abstract idea because they merely linked the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (i.e., “implementation via computers”) or were well-understood, routine, conventional activity recited at a high level of generality. 573 U.S. at 225-26, 110 USPQ2d at 1984-85. Classen Immunotherapies Inc. v. Biogen IDEC provides another example of claims that recited meaningful limitations. 659 F.3d 1057, 100 USPQ2d 1492 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (decision on remand from the Supreme Court, which had vacated the lower court’s prior holding of ineligibility in view of Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 95 USPQ2d 1001 (2010)). In Classen, the claims recited methods that gathered and analyzed the effects of particular immunization schedules on the later development of chronic immune-mediated disorders in mammals in order to identify a lower risk immunization schedule, and then immunized mammalian subjects in accordance with the identified lower risk schedule (thereby lowering the risk that the immunized subject would later develop chronic immune-mediated diseases). 659 F.3d at 1060-61; 100 USPQ2d at 1495-96. Although the analysis step was an abstract mental process that collected and compared known information, the immunization step was meaningful because it integrated the results of the analysis into a specific and tangible method that resulted in the method “moving from abstract scientific principle to specific application.” 659 F.3d at 1066-68; 100 USPQ2d at 1500-01. In contrast, in OIP Technologies, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., the court determined that the additional steps to “test prices and collect data based on the customer reactions” did not meaningfully limit the abstract idea of offer-based price optimization, because the steps were well-understood, routine, conventional data-gathering activities. 788 F.3d 1359, 1363-64, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015). With respect to treatment or prophylaxis limitations, such as the immunization step in Classen, examiners should note that the other meaningful limitations consideration overlaps with the particular treatment or prophylaxis consideration that is evaluated in Step 2A Prong Two (see MPEP § 2106.04(d)(2)). When evaluating whether additional elements meaningfully limit the judicial exception, it is particularly critical that examiners consider the additional elements both individually and as a combination. When an additional element is considered individually by an examiner, the additional element may be enough to qualify as “significantly more” if it meaningfully limits the judicial exception, and may also add a meaningful limitation by integrating the judicial exception into a practical application. However, even in the situation where the individually-viewed elements do not add significantly more or integrate the exception, those additional elements when viewed in combination may render the claim eligible. See Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 188, 209 USPQ2d 1, 9 (1981) (“a new combination of steps in a process may be patentable even though all the constituents of the combination were well known and in common use before the combination was made”); BASCOM Global Internet Servs. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1349, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1242 (Fed. Cir. 2016). It is important to note that, when appropriate, an examiner may explain on the record why the additional elements meaningfully limit the judicial exception. 2106.05(f) Mere Instructions To Apply An Exception [R-10.2019] Another consideration when determining whether a claim integrates a judicial exception into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or recites significantly more than a judicial exception in Step 2B is whether the additional elements amount to more than a recitation of the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) or are more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer. As explained by the Supreme Court, in order to make a claim directed to a judicial exception patent-eligible, the additional element or combination of elements must do “‘more than simply stat[e] the [judicial exception] while adding the words ‘apply it’”. Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 573 U.S. 208, 221, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1982-83 (2014) (quoting Mayo Collaborative Servs. V. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 72, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965). Thus, for example, claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 223, 110 USPQ2d at 1983. See also 573 U.S. at 224, 110 USPQ2d at 1984 (warning against a § 101 analysis that turns on “the draftsman’s art”). The Supreme Court has identified additional elements as mere instructions to apply an exception in several cases. For instance, in Mayo, the Supreme Court concluded that a step of determining thiopurine metabolite levels in patients’ blood did not amount to significantly more than the recited laws of nature, because this additional element simply instructed doctors to apply the laws by measuring the metabolites in any way the doctors (or medical laboratories) chose to use. 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968. In Alice Corp., the claim recited the concept of intermediated settlement as performed by a generic computer. The Court found that the recitation of the computer in the claim amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea on a generic computer. 573 U.S. at 225-26, 110 USPQ2d at 1984. The Supreme Court also discussed this concept in an earlier case, Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 70, 175 USPQ 673, 676 (1972), where the claim recited a process for converting binary-coded-decimal (BCD) numerals into pure binary numbers. The Court found that the claimed process had no meaningful practical application except in connection with a computer. Benson, 409 U.S. at 71-72, 175 USPQ at 676. The claim simply stated a judicial exception (e.g., law of nature or abstract idea) while effectively adding words that “apply it” in a computer. Id. Requiring more than mere instructions to apply an exception does not mean that the claim must be narrow in order to be eligible. The courts have identified some broad claims as eligible see, e.g.,McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 120 USPQ2d 1091 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Thales Visionix Inc. v. United States, 850 F.3d. 1343, 121 USPQ2d 1898 (Fed. Cir. 2017), and some narrow claims as ineligible see e.g.,Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772 F.3d 709, 112 USPQ2d 1750 (Fed. Cir. 2014); Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 119 USPQ2d 1739 (Fed. Cir. 2016). Thus, examiners should carefully consider each claim on its own merits, as well as evaluate all other relevant considerations, before making a determination of whether an element (or combination of elements) is more than mere instructions to apply an exception. For example, because this consideration often overlaps with the improvement consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(a)), the particular machine and particular transformation considerations (see MPEP § 2106.05(b) and (c), respectively), and the well-understood, routine, conventional consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(d)), evaluation of those other considerations may assist examiners in making a determination of whether an element (or combination of elements) is more than mere instructions to apply an exception. Note, however, that examiners should not evaluate the well-understood, routine, conventional consideration in the Step 2A Prong Two analysis, because that consideration is only evaluated in Step 2B. For claim limitations that do not amount to more than a recitation of the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), such as mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, examiners should explain why they do not meaningfully limit the claim in an eligibility rejection. For example, an examiner could explain that implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or add significantly more in Step 2B, similar to how the recitation of the computer in the claim in Alice amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer. For more information on formulating a subject matter eligibility rejection. See MPEP § 2106.07(a). When determining whether a claim simply recites a judicial exception with the words “apply it” (or an equivalent), such as mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, examiners may consider the following: (1) Whether the claim recites only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claim fails to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished. The recitation of claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words “apply it”. See Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1356, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1743-44 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Intellectual Ventures I v. Symantec, 838 F.3d 1307, 1327, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Network, Inc., 790 F.3d 1343, 1348, 115 USPQ2d 1414, 1417 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In contrast, claiming a particular solution to a problem or a particular way to achieve a desired outcome may integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Electric Power, 830 F.3d at 1356, 119 USPQ2d at 1743. By way of example, in Intellectual Ventures I v. Capital One Fin. Corp., 850 F.3d 1332, 121 USPQ2d 1940 (Fed. Cir. 2017), the steps in the claims described “the creation of a dynamic document based upon ‘management record types’ and ‘primary record types.’” 850 F.3d at 1339-40; 121 USPQ2d at 1945-46. The claims were found to be directed to the abstract idea of “collecting, displaying, and manipulating data.” 850 F.3d at 1340; 121 USPQ2d at 1946. In addition to the abstract idea, the claims also recited the additional element of modifying the underlying XML document in response to modifications made in the dynamic document. 850 F.3d at 1342; 121 USPQ2d at 1947-48. Although the claims purported to modify the underlying XML document in response to modifications made in the dynamic document, nothing in the claims indicated what specific steps were undertaken other than merely using the abstract idea in the context of XML documents. The court thus held the claims ineligible, because the additional limitations provided only a result-oriented solution and lacked details as to how the computer performed the modifications, which was equivalent to the words “apply it”. 850 F.3d at 1341-42; 121 USPQ2d at 1947-48 (citing Electric Power Group., 830 F.3d at 1356, 1356, USPQ2d at 1743-44 (cautioning against claims “so result focused, so functional, as to effectively cover any solution to an identified problem”)). Other examples where the courts have found the additional elements to be mere instructions to apply an exception, because they recite no more than an idea of a solution or outcome include: ii. A general method of screening emails on a generic computer without any limitations that addressed the issues of shrinking the protection gap and mooting the volume problem, Intellectual Ventures I v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1319, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2016); and In contrast, other cases have found that additional elements are more than “apply it” or are not “mere instructions” when the claim recites a technological solution to a technological problem. In DDR Holdings, the court found that the additional elements did amount to more than merely instructing that the abstract idea should be applied on the Internet. DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1259, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1107 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The claims at issue specified how interactions with the Internet were manipulated to yield a desired result—a result that overrode the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink. 773 F.3d at 1258; 113 USPQ2d at 1106. In BASCOM, the court determined that the claimed combination of limitations did not simply recite an instruction to apply the abstract idea of filtering content on the Internet. BASCOM Global Internet Servs. v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1350, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1243 (Fed. Cir. 2016). Instead, the claim recited a “technology based solution” of filtering content on the Internet that overcome the disadvantages of prior art filtering systems. 827 F.3d at 1350-51, 119 USPQ2d at 1243. Finally, in Thales Visionix, the particular configuration of inertial sensors and the particular method of using the raw data from the sensors was more than simply applying a law of nature. Thales Visionix, Inc. v. United States, 850 F.3d 1343, 1348-49, 121 USPQ2d 1898, 1902 (Fed. Cir. 2017). The court found that the claims provided a system and method that “eliminate[d] many ‘complications’ inherent in previous solutions for determining position and orientation of an object on a moving platform.” In other words, the claim recited a technological solution to a technological problem. Id. (2) Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, “claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer” does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015). In contrast, a claim that purports to improve computer capabilities or to improve an existing technology may integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1314-15, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1101-02 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1335-36, 118 USPQ2d 1684, 1688-89 (Fed. Cir. 2016). See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a) for a discussion of improvements to the functioning of a computer or to another technology or technical field. TLI Communications provides an example of a claim invoking computers and other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. The court stated that the claims describe steps of recording, administration and archiving of digital images, and found them to be directed to the abstract idea of classifying and storing digital images in an organized manner. 823 F.3d at 612, 118 USPQ2d at 1747. The court then turned to the additional elements of performing these functions using a telephone unit and a server and noted that these elements were being used in their ordinary capacity (i.e., the telephone unit is used to make calls and operate as a digital camera including compressing images and transmitting those images, and the server simply receives data, extracts classification information from the received data, and stores the digital images based on the extracted information). 823 F.3d at 612-13, 118 USPQ2d at 1747-48. In other words, the claims invoked the telephone unit and server merely as tools to execute the abstract idea. Thus, the court found that the additional elements did not add significantly more to the abstract idea because they were simply applying the abstract idea on a telephone network without any recitation of details of how to carry out the abstract idea. Other examples where the courts have found the additional elements to be mere instructions to apply an exception, because they do no more than merely invoke computers or machinery as a tool to perform an existing process include: ii. Generating a second menu from a first menu and sending the second menu to another location as performed by generic computer components, Apple, Inc. v. Ameranth, Inc., 842 F.3d 1229, 1243-44, 120 USPQ2d 1844, 1855-57 (Fed. Cir. 2016); v. Requiring the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer, Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1370-71, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1642 (Fed. Cir. 2015); and vi. A method of assigning hair designs to balance head shape with a final step of using a tool (scissors) to cut the hair, In re Brown, 645 Fed. App'x 1014, 1017 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (non-precedential). (3) The particularity or generality of the application of the judicial exception. A claim having broad applicability across many fields of endeavor may not provide meaningful limitations that integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or amount to significantly more. For instance, a claim that generically recites an effect of the judicial exception or claims every mode of accomplishing that effect, amounts to a claim that is merely adding the words “apply it” to the judicial exception. See Internet Patents Corporation v. Active Network, Inc., 790 F.3d 1343, 1348, 115 USPQ2d 1414, 1418 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (The recitation of maintaining the state of data in an online form without restriction on how the state is maintained and with no description of the mechanism for maintaining the state describes “the effect or result dissociated from any method by which maintaining the state is accomplished” and does not provide a meaningful limitation because it merely states that the abstract idea should be applied to achieve a desired result). See also O’Reilly v. Morse, 56 U.S. 62 (1854) (finding ineligible a claim for “the use of electromagnetism for transmitting signals at a distance”); The Telephone Cases, 126 U.S. 1, 209 (1888) (finding a method of “transmitting vocal or other sound telegraphically ... by causing electrical undulations, similar in form to the vibrations of the air accompanying the said vocal or other sounds,” to be ineligible, because it “monopolize[d] a natural force” and “the right to avail of that law by any means whatever.”). In contrast, limitations that confine the judicial exception to a particular, practical application of the judicial exception may amount to significantly more or integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. For example, in BASCOM, the combination of additional elements, and specifically “the installation of a filtering tool at a specific location, remote from the end‐users, with customizable filtering features specific to each end user” where the filtering tool at the ISP was able to “identify individual accounts that communicate with the ISP server, and to associate a request for Internet content with a specific individual account,” were held to be meaningful limitations because they confined the abstract idea of content filtering to a particular, practical application of the abstract idea. 827 F.3d at 1350-51, 119 USPQ2d at 1243. 2106.05(g) Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity [R-10.2019] Another consideration when determining whether a claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or recites significantly more in Step 2B is whether the additional elements add more than insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. The term “extra-solution activity” can be understood as activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim. Extra-solution activity includes both pre-solution and post-solution activity. An example of pre-solution activity is a step of gathering data for use in a claimed process, e.g., a step of obtaining information about credit card transactions, which is recited as part of a claimed process of analyzing and manipulating the gathered information by a series of steps in order to detect whether the transactions were fraudulent. An example of post-solution activity is an element that is not integrated into the claim as a whole, e.g., a printer that is used to output a report of fraudulent transactions, which is recited in a claim to a computer programmed to analyze and manipulate information about credit card transactions in order to detect whether the transactions were fraudulent. As explained by the Supreme Court, the addition of insignificant extra-solution activity does not amount to an inventive concept, particularly when the activity is well-understood or conventional. Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 588-89, 198 USPQ 193, 196 (1978). In Flook, the Court reasoned that “[t]he notion that post-solution activity, no matter how conventional or obvious in itself, can transform an unpatentable principle into a patentable process exalts form over substance. A competent draftsman could attach some form of post-solution activity to almost any mathematical formula”. 437 U.S. at 590; 198 USPQ at 197; Id. (holding that step of adjusting an alarm limit variable to a figure computed according to a mathematical formula was “post-solution activity”). See also Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs. Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 79, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1968 (2012) (additional element of measuring metabolites of a drug administered to a patient was insignificant extra-solution activity). Examiners should carefully consider each claim on its own merits, as well as evaluate all other relevant considerations, before making a determination of whether an element (or combination of elements) is insignificant extra-solution activity. In particular, evaluation of the particular machine and particular transformation considerations (see MPEP § 2106.05(b) and (c), respectively), the well-understood, routine, conventional consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(d)), and the field of use and technological environment consideration (see MPEP § 2106.05(h)) may assist examiners in making a determination of whether an element (or combination of elements) is insignificant extra-solution activity. Note, however, that examiners should not evaluate the well-understood, routine, conventional consideration in the Step 2A Prong Two analysis, because that consideration is only evaluated in Step 2B. This consideration is similar to factors used in past Office guidance (for example, the now superseded Bilski and Mayo analyses) that were described as mere data gathering in conjunction with a law of nature or abstract idea. When determining whether an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity, examiners may consider the following: (1) Whether the extra-solution limitation is well known. See Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 611-12, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (2010) (well-known random analysis techniques to establish the inputs of an equation were token extra-solution activity); Flook, 437 U.S. at 593-95, 198 USPQ at 197 (a formula would not be patentable by only indicating that is could be usefully applied to existing surveying techniques); Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indem. Co., 850 F.3d 1315, 1328-29, 121 USPQ2d 1928, 1937 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (the use of a well-known XML tag to form an index was deemed token extra-solution activity). Because this overlaps with the well-understood, routine, conventional consideration, it should not be considered in the Step 2A Prong Two extra-solution activity analysis. (2) Whether the limitation is significant (i.e. it imposes meaningful limits on the claim such that it is not nominally or tangentially related to the invention). See Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772 F.3d 709, 715-16, 112 USPQ2d 1750, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (restricting public access to media was found to be insignificant extra-solution activity); Apple, Inc. v. Ameranth, Inc., 842 F.3d 1229, 1242, 120 USPQ2d 1844, 1855 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (in patents regarding electronic menus, features related to types of ordering were found to be insignificant extra-solution activity). This is considered in Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B. ii. Testing a system for a response, the response being used to determine system malfunction, In re Meyers, 688 F.2d 789, 794; 215 USPQ 193, 196-97 (CCPA 1982); iii. Presenting offers to potential customers and gathering statistics generated based on the testing about how potential customers responded to the offers; the statistics are then used to calculate an optimized price, OIP Technologies, 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93; vi. Determining the level of a biomarker in blood, Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968. See also PerkinElmer, Inc. v. Intema Ltd., 496 Fed. App'x 65, 73, 105 USPQ2d 1960, 1966 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (assessing or measuring data derived from an ultrasound scan, to be used in a diagnosis). • Selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated: For claim limitations that add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (e.g., mere data gathering in conjunction with a law of nature or abstract idea), examiners should explain in an eligibility rejection why they do not meaningfully limit the claim. For example, an examiner could explain that adding a final step of storing data to a process that only recites computing the area of a space (a mathematical relationship) does not add a meaningful limitation to the process of computing the area. For more information on formulating a subject matter eligibility rejection, see MPEP § 2106.07(a). 2106.05(h) Field of Use and Technological Environment [R-10.2019] Another consideration when determining whether a claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or recites significantly more than a judicial exception in Step 2B is whether the additional elements amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. As explained by the Supreme Court, a claim directed to a judicial exception cannot be made eligible “simply by having the applicant acquiesce to limiting the reach of the patent for the formula to a particular technological use.” Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 192 n.14, 209 USPQ 1, 10 n. 14 (1981). Thus, limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. The courts often cite to Parker v. Flook as providing a classic example of a field of use limitation. See, e.g., Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 612, 95 USPQ2d 1001, 1010 (2010) (“Flook established that limiting an abstract idea to one field of use or adding token postsolution components did not make the concept patentable”) (citing Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 198 USPQ 193 (1978)). In Flook, the claim recited steps of calculating an updated value for an alarm limit (a numerical limit on a process variable such as temperature, pressure or flow rate) according to a mathematical formula “in a process comprising the catalytic chemical conversion of hydrocarbons.” 437 U.S. at 586, 198 USPQ at 196. Processes for the catalytic chemical conversion of hydrocarbons were used in the petrochemical and oil-refining fields. Id. Although the applicant argued that limiting the use of the formula to the petrochemical and oil-refining fields should make the claim eligible because this limitation ensured that the claim did not preempt all uses of the formula, the Supreme Court disagreed. 437 U.S. at 588-90, 198 USPQ at 197-98. Instead, the additional element in Flook regarding the catalytic chemical conversion of hydrocarbons was not sufficient to make the claim eligible, because it was merely an incidental or token addition to the claim that did not alter or affect how the process steps of calculating the alarm limit value were performed. Further, the Supreme Court found that this limitation did not amount to an inventive concept. 437 U.S. at 588-90, 198 USPQ at 197-98. The Court reasoned that to hold otherwise would “exalt[] form over substance”, because a competent claim drafter could attach a similar type of limitation to almost any mathematical formula. 437 U.S. at 590, 198 USPQ at 197. In contrast, the additional elements in Diamond v. Diehr as a whole provided eligibility and did not merely recite calculating a cure time using the Arrhenius equation “in a rubber molding process”. Instead, the claim in Diehr recited specific limitations such as monitoring the elapsed time since the mold was closed, constantly measuring the temperature in the mold cavity, repetitively calculating a cure time by inputting the measured temperature into the Arrhenius equation, and opening the press automatically when the calculated cure time and the elapsed time are equivalent. 450 U.S. at 179, 209 USPQ at 5, n. 5. These specific limitations act in concert to transform raw, uncured rubber into cured molded rubber. 450 U.S. at 177-78, 209 USPQ at 4. A more recent example of a limitation that does no more than generally link a judicial exception to a particular technological environment is Affinity Labs of Texas v. DirecTV, LLC, 838 F.3d 1253, 120 USPQ2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2016). In Affinity Labs, the claim recited a broadcast system in which a cellular telephone located outside the range of a regional broadcaster (1) requests and receives network-based content from the broadcaster via a streaming signal, (2) is configured to wirelessly download an application for performing those functions, and (3) contains a display that allows the user to select particular content. 838 F.3d at 1255-56, 120 USPQ2d at 1202. The court identified the claimed concept of providing out-of-region access to regional broadcast content as an abstract idea, and noted that the additional elements limited the wireless delivery of regional broadcast content to cellular telephones (as opposed to any and all electronic devices such as televisions, cable boxes, computers, or the like). 838 F.3d at 1258-59, 120 USPQ2d at 1204. Although the additional elements did limit the use of the abstract idea, the court explained that this type of limitation merely confines the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (cellular telephones) and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims. 838 F.3d at 1259, 120 USPQ2d at 1204. Examples of limitations that the courts have described as merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception include: i. A step of administering a drug providing 6-thioguanine to patients with an immune-mediated gastrointestinal disorder, because limiting drug administration to this patient population did no more than simply refer to the relevant pre-existing audience of doctors who used thiopurine drugs to treat patients suffering from autoimmune disorders, Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs. Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 78, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1968 (2012); ii. Identifying the participants in a process for hedging risk as commodity providers and commodity consumers, because limiting the use of the process to these participants did no more than describe how the abstract idea of hedging risk could be used in the commodities and energy markets, Bilski, 561 U.S. at 595, 95 USPQ2d at 1010; iii. Limiting the use of the formula C = 2 (pi) r to determining the circumference of a wheel as opposed to other circular objects, because this limitation represents a mere token acquiescence to limiting the reach of the claim, Flook, 437 U.S. at 595, 198 USPQ at 199; iv. Specifying that the abstract idea of monitoring audit log data relates to transactions or activities that are executed in a computer environment, because this requirement merely limits the claims to the computer field, i.e., to execution on a generic computer, FairWarning v. Iatric Sys., 839 F.3d 1089, 1094-95, 120 USPQ2d 1293, 1295 (Fed. Cir. 2016); v. Language specifying that the process steps of virus screening were used within a telephone network or the Internet, because limiting the use of the process to these technological environments did not provide meaningful limits on the claim, Intellectual Ventures I v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1319-20, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1361 (2016); vi. Limiting the abstract idea of collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis to data related to the electric power grid, because limiting application of the abstract idea to power-grid monitoring is simply an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1742 (Fed. Cir. 2016); vii. Language informing doctors to apply a law of nature (linkage disequilibrium) for purposes of detecting a genetic polymorphism, because this language merely informs the relevant audience that the law of nature can be used in this manner, Genetic Techs. Ltd. v. Merial LLC, 818 F.3d 1369, 1379, 118 USPQ2d 1541, 1549 (Fed. Cir. 2016); viii. Language specifying that the abstract idea of budgeting was to be implemented using a “communication medium” that broadly included the Internet and telephone networks, because this limitation merely limited the use of the exception to a particular technological environment, Intellectual Ventures I v. Capital One Bank, 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1640 (Fed. Cir. 2015); ix. Specifying that the abstract idea of using advertising as currency is used on the Internet, because this narrowing limitation is merely an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772 F.3d 709, 716, 112 USPQ2d 1750, 1755 (Fed. Cir. 2014); and x. Requiring that the abstract idea of creating a contractual relationship that guarantees performance of a transaction (a) be performed using a computer that receives and sends information over a network, or (b) be limited to guaranteeing online transactions, because these limitations simply attempted to limit the use of the abstract idea to computer environments, buySAFE Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1354, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1095-96 (Fed. Cir. 2014). Examiners should be aware that the courts often use the terms “technological environment” and “field of use” interchangeably, and thus for purposes of the eligibility analysis examiners should consider these terms interchangeable. Examiners should also keep in mind that this consideration overlaps with other considerations, particularly insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)). For instance, a data gathering step that is limited to a particular data source (such as the Internet) or a particular type of data (such as power grid data or XML tags) could be considered to be both insignificant extra-solution activity and a field of use limitation. See, e.g., Ultramercial, 772 F.3d at 716, 112 USPQ2d at 1755 (limiting use of abstract idea to the Internet); Electric Power, 830 F.3d at 1354, 119 USPQ2d at 1742 (limiting application of abstract idea to power grid data); Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indem. Co., 850 F.3d 1315, 1328-29, 121 USPQ2d 1928, 1939 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (limiting use of abstract idea to use with XML tags). Thus, examiners should carefully consider each claim on its own merits, as well as evaluate all other relevant considerations, before making a determination on this consideration. For claim limitations that generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, examiners should explain in an eligibility rejection why they do not meaningfully limit the claim. For example, an examiner could explain that employing generic computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment, does not add significantly more, similar to how limiting the abstract idea in Flook to petrochemical and oil-refining industries was insufficient. For more information on formulating a subject matter eligibility rejection, see MPEP § 2106.07(a). 2106.06 Streamlined Analysis [R-10.2019] For purposes of efficiency in examination, examiners may use a streamlined eligibility analysis (Pathway A) when the eligibility of the claim is self-evident, e.g., because the claim clearly improves a technology or computer functionality. However, if there is doubt as to whether the applicant is effectively seeking coverage for a judicial exception itself, the full eligibility analysis (the Alice/Mayo test described in MPEP § 2106, subsection III) should be conducted to determine whether the claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application or recites significantly more than the judicial exception. The results of the streamlined analysis will always be the same as the full analysis, thus the streamlined analysis is not a means of avoiding a finding of ineligibility that would occur if a claim were to undergo the full eligibility analysis. Similarly, a claim that qualifies as eligible after Step 2A (Pathway B) or Step 2B (Pathway C) of the full analysis would also be eligible if the streamlined analysis (Pathway A) were applied to that claim. It may not be apparent that an examiner employed the streamlined analysis because the result is a conclusion that the claim is eligible, and there will be no rejection of the claim on eligibility grounds. In practice, the record may reflect the conclusion of eligibility simply by the absence of an eligibility rejection or may include clarifying remarks, when appropriate. In the context of the flowchart in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, if, when viewed as a whole, the eligibility of the claim is self-evident (e.g., because the claim clearly improves a technology or computer functionality), the claim is eligible at Pathway A, thereby concluding the eligibility analysis. 2106.06(a) Eligibility is Self Evident [R-08.2017] A streamlined eligibility analysis can be used for a claim that may or may not recite a judicial exception but, when viewed as a whole, clearly does not seek to tie up any judicial exception such that others cannot practice it. Such claims do not need to proceed through the full analysis herein as their eligibility will be self-evident. On the other hand, a claim that does not qualify as eligible after Step 2B of the full analysis would not be suitable for the streamlined analysis, because the claim lacks self‐evident eligibility. For instance, a claim directed to a complex manufactured industrial product or process that recites meaningful limitations along with a judicial exception may sufficiently limit its practical application so that a full eligibility analysis is not needed. As an example, a robotic arm assembly having a control system that operates using certain mathematical relationships is clearly not an attempt to tie up use of the mathematical relationships and would not require a full analysis to determine eligibility. Also, a claim that recites a nature-based product, but clearly does not attempt to tie up the nature-based product, does not require a markedly different characteristics analysis to identify a “product of nature” exception. As an example, a claim directed to an artificial hip prosthesis coated with a naturally occurring mineral is not an attempt to tie up the mineral. Similarly, claimed products that merely include ancillary nature-based components, such as a claim that is directed to a cellphone with an electrical contact made of gold or a plastic chair with wood trim, would not require analysis of the nature-based component to determine whether the claims are directed to a “product of nature” exception because such claims do not attempt to improperly tie up the nature-based product. 2106.06(b) Clear Improvement to a Technology or to Computer Functionality [R-08.2017] As explained by the Federal Circuit, some improvements to technology or to computer functionality are not abstract when appropriately claimed, and thus claims to such improvements do not always need to undergo the full eligibility analysis. Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1335-36, 118 USPQ2d 1684, 1689 (Fed. Cir. 2016). MPEP § 2106.05(a) provides details regarding improvements to a technology or computer functionality. For instance, claims directed to clear improvements to computer-related technology do not need the full eligibility analysis. Enfish, 822 F.3d at 1339, 118 USPQ2d at 1691-92 (claims to a self-referential table for a computer database held eligible at step 1 of the Alice/Mayo test as not directed to an abstract idea). Claims directed to improvements to other technologies or technological processes, beyond computer improvements, may also avoid the full eligibility analysis. McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1316, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1103 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (claims to automatic lip synchronization and facial expression animation found eligible at Step 1 of the Alice/Mayo test as directed to an improvement in computer-related technology). In these cases, when the claims were viewed as a whole, their eligibility was self-evident based on the clear improvement, so no further analysis was needed. Although the Federal Circuit held these claims eligible at Step 2A as not being directed to abstract ideas, it would be reasonable for an examiner to have found these claims eligible at Pathway A based on the clear improvement, or at Pathway B (Step 2A) as not being directed to an abstract idea. If the claims are a “close call” such that it is unclear whether the claims improve technology or computer functionality, a full eligibility analysis should be performed to determine eligibility. See BASCOM Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1349, 119 USPQ2d 1236, 1241 (Fed Cir. 2016). Only when the claims clearly improve technology or computer functionality, or otherwise have self-evident eligibility, should the streamlined analysis be used. For example, because the claims in BASCOM described the concept of filtering content, which is a method of organizing human behavior previously found to be abstract, the Federal Circuit considered them to present a “close call” in the first step of the Alice/Mayo test (Step 2A), and thus proceeded to the second step of the Alice/Mayo test (Step 2B) to determine their eligibility. Id. Although the Federal Circuit held these claims eligible at Step 2B (Pathway C) because they presented a “technology-based solution” of filtering content on the Internet that overcame the disadvantages of prior art filtering systems and that amounted to significantly more than the recited abstract idea, it also would be reasonable for an examiner to have found these claims eligible at Pathway A or B if the examiner had considered the technology-based solution to be an improvement to computer functionality. Eligibility rejections must be based on failure to comply with the substantive law under 35 U.S.C. 101 as interpreted by judicial precedent. The substantive law on eligibility is discussed in MPEP §§ 2106.03 through 2106.06. Examination guidance, training, and explanatory examples discuss the substantive law and establish the policies and procedures to be followed by examiners in evaluating patent applications for compliance with the substantive law, but do not serve as a basis for a rejection. Accordingly, while it would be acceptable for applicants to cite training materials or examples in support of an argument for finding eligibility in an appropriate factual situation, applicants should not be required to model their claims or responses after the training materials or examples to attain eligibility. When evaluating a claimed invention for compliance with the substantive law on eligibility, examiners should review the record as a whole (e.g., the specification, claims, the prosecution history, and any relevant case law precedent or prior art) before reaching a conclusion with regard to whether the claimed invention sets forth patent eligible subject matter. The evaluation of whether the claimed invention qualifies as patent-eligible subject matter should be made on a claim-by-claim basis, because claims do not automatically rise or fall with similar claims in an application. For example, even if an independent claim is determined to be ineligible, the dependent claims may be eligible because they add limitations that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception recited in the independent claim. And conversely, even if an independent claim is determined to be eligible, a dependent claim may be ineligible because it adds a judicial exception without also adding limitations that integrate the judicial exception or provide significantly more. Thus, each claim in an application should be considered separately based on the particular elements recited therein. If the evaluation of the claimed invention results in a conclusion that it is more likely than not that the claim as a whole does not satisfy both criteria for eligibility (Step 1: NO and/or Step 2B: NO), then examiners should formulate an appropriate rejection of that claim under Step 1 and/or Step 2B. The rejection should set forth a prima facie case of ineligibility under the substantive law. The concept of the prima facie case is a procedural tool of patent examination, which allocates the burdens going forward between the examiner and applicant. In particular, the initial burden is on the examiner to explain why a claim or claims are ineligible for patenting clearly and specifically, so that applicant has sufficient notice and is able to effectively respond. When an examiner determines a claim does not fall within a statutory category (Step 1: NO), the rejection should provide an explanation of why the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention. See MPEP § 2106.03 for a discussion of Step 1 and the statutory categories of invention. When an examiner determines that a claim is directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A: YES) and does not provide an inventive concept (Step 2B: NO), the rejection should provide an explanation for each part of the Step 2 analysis. For example, the rejection should identify the judicial exception by referring to what is recited (i.e., set forth or described) in the claim and explain why it is considered an exception, identify any additional elements (specifically point to claim features/limitations/steps) recited in the claim beyond the identified judicial exception, and explain the reason(s) that the additional elements taken individually, and also taken as a combination, 1) do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and 2) do not result in the claim as a whole amounting to significantly more than the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.04et seq. for a discussion of Step 2A and the judicial exceptions, MPEP § 2106.05et seq. for a discussion of Step 2B and the search for an inventive concept, and MPEP § 2106.07(a) for more information on formulating an ineligibility rejection. If the evaluation of the claimed invention results in a conclusion that it is more likely than not that the claimed invention falls within a statutory category (Step 1: YES) and is either not directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A: NO) or is directed to a judicial exception and amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception (Step 2B: YES), then the examiner should not reject the claim. When evaluating a response by applicant to a subject matter eligibility rejection, examiners must carefully consider all of applicant’s arguments and evidence presented to rebut the rejection. If applicant properly challenges the examiner’s findings, the rejection should be withdrawn or, if the examiner deems it appropriate to maintain the rejection, a rebuttal must be provided in the next Office action. This is discussed in greater detail in MPEP § 2106.07(b). After determining what has been invented and establishing the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed invention (see MPEP § 2111), the eligibility of each claim should be evaluated as a whole using the analysis detailed in MPEP § 2106. If it is determined that the claim does not recite eligible subject matter, a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 is appropriate. When making the rejection, the Office action must provide an explanation as to why each claim is unpatentable, which must be sufficiently clear and specific to provide applicant sufficient notice of the reasons for ineligibility and enable the applicant to effectively respond. A subject matter eligibility rejection under Step 2 should provide an explanation for each part of the Step 2 analysis: • For Step 2A Prong One, the rejection should identify the judicial exception by referring to what is recited (i.e., set forth or described) in the claim and explain why it is considered an exception. For example, if the claim is directed to an abstract idea, the rejection should identify the abstract idea as it is recited (i.e., set forth or described) in the claim and explain why it is an abstract idea. Similarly, if the claim is directed to a law of nature or a natural phenomenon, the rejection should identify the law of nature or natural phenomenon as it is recited (i.e., set forth or described) in the claim and explain using a reasoned rationale why it is considered a law of nature or natural phenomenon. • For Step 2A Prong Two, the rejection should identify any additional elements (specifically point to claim features/limitations/steps) recited in the claim beyond the identified judicial exception; and evaluate the integration of the judicial exception into a practical application by explaining that 1) there are no additional elements in the claim; or 2) the claim as a whole, looking at the additional elements individually and in combination, does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application using the considerations set forth in MPEP §§ 2106.04(d), 2106.05(a)- (c) and (e)- (h). Examiners should give weight to all of the claimed additional elements in Prong Two, even if those elements represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity. • For Step 2B, the rejection should explain why the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim, as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the identified judicial exception. For instance, when the examiner has concluded that certain claim elements recite well understood, routine, conventional activities in the relevant field, the examiner must expressly support the rejection in writing with one of the four options specified in Subsection III. Under the principles of compact prosecution, regardless of whether a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 is made based on lack of subject matter eligibility, a complete examination should be made for every claim under each of the other patentability requirements: 35 U.S.C. 102, 103, 112, and 101 (utility, inventorship and double patenting) and non-statutory double patenting. Thus, examiners should state all non-cumulative reasons and bases for rejecting claims in the first Office action. I. WHEN MAKING A REJECTION, IDENTIFY AND EXPLAIN THE JUDICIAL EXCEPTION RECITED IN THE CLAIM (STEP 2A PRONG ONE) A subject matter eligibility rejection should point to the specific claim limitation(s) that recites (i.e., sets forth or describes) the judicial exception. The rejection must explain why those claim limitations set forth or describe a judicial exception (e.g., a law of nature). Where the claim describes, but does not expressly set forth, the judicial exception, the rejection must also explain what subject matter those limitations describe, and why the described subject matter is a judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.04 for more information about Step 2A of the eligibility analysis. When the examiner has determined the claim recites an abstract idea, the rejection should identify the abstract idea as it is recited (i.e., set forth or described) in the claim, and explain why it falls within one of the groupings of abstract ideas (i.e., mathematical concepts, mental processes, or certain methods of organizing human activity) enumerated in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2). Alternatively, the examiner should provide justification for why a specific limitation(s) recited in the claim is being treated as an abstract idea if it does not fall within the groupings of abstract ideas in accordance with the “tentative abstract idea” procedure (see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(3)). While not required, this explanation or justification may include citing to an appropriate court decision that supports the identification of the subject matter recited in the claim language as an abstract idea within one of the groupings. Examiners should be familiar with any cited decision relied upon in making or maintaining a rejection to ensure that the rejection is reasonably tied to the facts of the case and to avoid relying upon language taken out of context. Examiners should not go beyond those concepts that are enumerated as abstract ideas in MPEP § 2106.04, unless they are identifying a tentative abstract idea in the claim, and should avoid relying upon or citing non-precedential decisions unless the facts of the application under examination uniquely match the facts at issue in the non-precedential decisions. Examiners are reminded that a chart of court decisions is available on the USPTO’s Internet website (www.uspto.gov/ PatentEligibility). Sample explanation: The claim recites the step of comparing collected information to a predefined threshold, which is an act of evaluating information that can be practically performed in the human mind. Thus, this step is an abstract idea in the “mental process” grouping. When the examiner has determined the claim recites a law of nature or a natural phenomenon, the rejection should identify the law of nature or natural phenomenon as it is recited (i.e., set forth or described) in the claim and explain using a reasoned rationale why it is considered a law of nature or natural phenomenon. See MPEP § 2106.04(b) for more information about laws of nature and natural phenomena. Sample explanation: The claim recites the correlation of X, and X is a law of nature because it describes a consequence of natural processes in the human body, e.g., the naturally-occurring relationship between the presence of Y and the manifestation of Z. Sample explanation: The claim recites X, which is a natural phenomenon because it occurs in nature and exists in principle apart from any human action. When the examiner has determined the claim recites a product of nature, the rejection should identify the exception as it is recited (i.e., set forth or described) in the claim, and explain using a reasoned rationale why the product does not have markedly different characteristics from its naturally occurring counterpart in its natural state. See MPEP § 2106.04(b) for more information about products of nature, and MPEP § 2106.04(c) for more information about the markedly different characteristics analysis. Sample explanation: The claim recites X, which as explained in the specification was isolated from naturally occurring Y. X is a nature-based product, so it is compared to its closest naturally occurring counterpart (X in its natural state) to determine if it has markedly different characteristics. Because there is no indication in the record that isolation of X has resulted in a marked difference in structure, function, or other properties as compared to its counterpart, X is a product of nature exception. II. WHEN MAKING A REJECTION, EXPLAIN WHY THE ADDITIONAL CLAIM ELEMENTS DO NOT RESULT IN THE CLAIM AS A WHOLE INTEGRATING THE JUDICIAL EXCEPTION INTO A PRACTICAL APPLICATION OR AMOUNTING TO SIGNIFICANTLY MORE THAN THE JUDICIAL EXCEPTION (STEP 2A PRONG TWO AND STEP 2B) After identifying the judicial exception in the rejection, identify any additional elements (features/limitations/steps) recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception and explain why they do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and do not add significantly more to the exception. The explanation should address the additional elements both individually and as a combination when determining whether the claim as whole recites eligible subject matter. It is important to remember that a new combination of steps in a process may be patent eligible even though all the steps of the combination were individually well known and in common use before the combination was made. Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 188, 209 USPQ 1, 9 (1981). Thus, it is particularly critical to address the combination of additional elements, because while individually-viewed elements may not appear to integrate an exception into a practical application or add significantly more, those additional elements when viewed in combination may amount to significantly more than the exception by meaningfully limiting the judicial exception. See MPEP § 2106.05 for more information about Step 2B of the eligibility analysis. A rejection should be made only if it is readily apparent to an examiner relying on the examiner's expertise in the art in the Step 2A Prong Two inquiry and Step 2B inquiry that the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application and do not amount to claiming significantly more than the recited judicial exception. When making a rejection, it is important for the examiner to explain the rationale underlying the conclusion so that applicant can effectively respond. On the other hand, when appropriate, the examiner should explain why the additional elements integrate an exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept by adding a meaningful limitation to the claimed exception. See MPEP §§ 2106.04(d) and 2106.05 for a listing of considerations that qualify, and to not qualify, as integrating an exception or providing significantly more than an exception, and MPEP § 2106.07(c) for more information on clarifying the record when a claim is found eligible. In the Step 2B inquiry, if the examiner has concluded that particular claim limitations are well understood, routine, conventional activities (or elements) to those in the relevant field, the rejection should support this conclusion in writing with a factual determination in accordance with Subsection III below. See MPEP § 2106.05(d) for more information about well understood, routine, conventional activities and elements, and Subsection III below for more information about how to support a conclusion that a claim limitation is well understood, routine, conventional activity. For claim limitations that recite a generic computer component performing generic computer functions at a high level of generality, such as using the Internet to gather data, examiners can explain why these generic computing functions do not meaningfully limit the claim. Examiners should keep in mind that the courts have held computer-implemented processes to be significantly more than an abstract idea (and thus eligible), where generic computer components are able in combination to perform functions that are not merely generic. DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, LP, 773 F.3d 1245, 1258-59, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106-07 (Fed. Cir. 2014). See MPEP § 2106.05(f) for more information about generic computing functions that the courts have found to be mere instructions to implement a judicial exception on a computer, and MPEP § 2106.05(d) for more information about well understood, routine, conventional activities and elements (a relevant consideration only in Step 2B). For claim limitations that add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (e.g., mere data gathering in conjunction with a law of nature or abstract idea), or that generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, examiners should explain why they do not meaningfully limit the claim. For example, adding a final step of storing data to a process that only recites computing the area of a two dimensional space (a mathematical relationship) does not add a meaningful limitation to the process of computing the area. As another example, employing well-known computer functions to execute an abstract idea, even when limiting the use of the idea to one particular environment, does not integrate the exception into a practical application or add significantly more, similar to how limiting the computer implemented abstract idea in Flook to petrochemical and oil-refining industries was insufficient. See e.g., Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 588-90, 198 USPQ 193, 197-98 (1978) (limiting use of mathematical formula to use in particular industries did not amount to an inventive concept). See MPEP § 2106.05(g) for more information about insignificant extra-solution activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h) for more information about generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. In the event a rejection is made, it is a best practice for the examiner to consult the specification to determine if there are elements that could be added to the claim to make it eligible. If so, the examiner should identify those elements in the Office action and suggest them as a way to overcome the rejection. When performing the analysis at Step 2A Prong One, it is sufficient for the examiner to provide a reasoned rationale that identifies the judicial exception recited in the claim and explains why it is considered a judicial exception (e.g., that the claim limitation(s) falls within one of the abstract idea groupings). Therefore, there is no requirement for the examiner to rely on evidence, such as publications or an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.104(d)(2), to find that a claim recites a judicial exception. Cf. Affinity Labs of Tex., LLC v. Amazon.com Inc., 838 F.3d 1266, 1271-72, 120 USPQ2d 1210, 1214-15 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (affirming district court decision that identified an abstract idea in the claims without relying on evidence); OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1362-64, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-94 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (same); Content Extraction & Transmission LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 776 F.3d 1343, 1347, 113 USPQ2d 1354, 1357-58 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (same). At Step 2A Prong Two or Step 2B, there is no requirement for evidence to support a finding that the exception is not integrated into a practical application or that the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the exception unless the examiner asserts that additional limitations are well-understood, routine, conventional activities in Step 2B. Examiners should not assert that an additional element (or combination of elements) is well-understood, routine, or conventional unless the examiner finds, and expressly supports the rejection in writing with one or more of the following: (A) A citation to an express statement in the specification or to a statement made by an applicant during prosecution that demonstrates the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of the additional element(s). A specification demonstrates the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of additional elements when it describes the additional elements as well-understood or routine or conventional (or an equivalent term), as a commercially available product, or in a manner that indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. 112(a). A finding that an element is well-understood, routine, or conventional cannot be based only on the fact that the specification is silent with respect to describing such element. (B) A citation to one or more of the court decisions discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(d), subsection II, as noting the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of the additional element(s). Examiners should be careful to ensure the claim limitations before the examiner are the same as those found to be well-understood, routine, conventional by the courts. The additional elements under examination should be recited in the same manner, meaning they should be recited at the same high level of generality as in those court decisions. It is not enough that the additional elements are similar to the elements at issue in those cases. In addition, the court decisions discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(d), subsection II, are not meant to imply that all computer functions are well-understood, routine, conventional functions, or that a claim reciting a generic computer component performing a generic computer function is necessarily ineligible. Examiners should keep in mind that the courts have held computer-implemented processes to be significantly more than an abstract idea (and thus eligible), where generic computer components are able in combination to perform functions that are not merely generic. DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, LP, 773 F.3d 1245, 1258-59, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106-07 (Fed. Cir. 2014). See MPEP § 2106.05(f) for more information about generic computing functions that the courts have found to be mere instructions to implement a judicial exception on a computer. (C) A citation to a publication that demonstrates the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of the additional element(s). An appropriate publication could include a book, manual, review article, or other source that describes the state of the art and discusses what is well-known and in common use in the relevant industry. It does not include all items that might otherwise qualify as a "printed publication" as used in 35 U.S.C. 102. Whether something is disclosed in a document that is considered a "printed publication" under 35 U.S.C. 102 is a distinct inquiry from whether something is well-known, routine, conventional activity. A document may be a printed publication but still fail to establish that something it describes is well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See Exergen Corp. v. Kaz USA, 725 Fed. App’x. 959, 966 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (the single copy of a thesis, written in German and located in a German university library, considered to be a "printed publication" in In re Hall, 781 F.2d 897, 228 USPQ 453 (Fed. Cir. 1986) "would not suffice to establish that something is 'well-understood, routine, and conventional activity previously engaged in by scientists who work in the field'"). The nature of the publication and the description of the additional elements in the publication would need to demonstrate that the additional elements are widely prevalent or in common use in the relevant field, comparable to the types of activity or elements that are so well-known that they do not need to be described in detail in a patent application to satisfy 35 U.S.C. 112(a). For example, while U.S. patents and published applications are publications, merely finding the additional element in a single patent or published application would not be sufficient to demonstrate that the additional element is well-understood, routine, conventional, unless the patent or published application demonstrates that the additional element is widely prevalent or in common use in the relevant field. (D) A statement that the examiner is taking official notice of the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of the additional element(s). This option should be used only when examiners are certain, based upon their personal knowledge, that the additional element(s) represents well-understood, routine, conventional activity engaged in by those in the relevant art, in that the additional elements are widely prevalent or in common use in the relevant field, comparable to the types of activity or elements that are so well-known that they do not need to be described in detail in a patent application to satisfy 35 U.S.C. 112(a). For example, the examiner could take official notice that a generic computer component performing generic computer functions at a high level of generality, such as using the Internet to gather data, is well-understood, routine, conventional. Procedures for taking official notice and addressing an applicant’s challenge to official notice are discussed in MPEP § 2144.03. 2106.07(a)(1) Form Paragraphs for use in Lack of Subject Matter Eligibility Rejections [R-10.2019] Use form paragraphs 7.04.01, 7.05, and 7.05.01 for rejections based on a failure to claim an invention that falls within the statutory categories of invention (i.e., the claim is not to one of the four statutory categories of invention and is thus rejected at Step 1 of the eligibility analysis). Use form paragraphs 7.04.01, 7.05, and 7.05.016 for rejections based on a failure to claim an invention that is directed to patent-eligible subject matter, i.e., the claim is directed to a judicial exception without providing an inventive concept/significantly more, and is thus rejected at Step 2B of the eligibility analysis. If the judicial exception to which the claim is directed is a "tentative abstract idea," i.e., an abstract idea that does not fall within any of the groupings of abstract ideas discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2), then the Step 2B rejection must also use form paragraph 7.05.017 (in addition to form paragraphs 7.04.01, 7.05, and 7.05.016) and include the TC Director's signature. ¶ 7.04.01 Statement of Statutory Basis, 35 U.S.C. 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Examiner Note: This form paragraph must precede the first use of 35 U.S.C. 101 in all first actions on the merits and final rejections. Examiner Note: 1. This form paragraph must be preceded by form paragraph 7.04.01 in first actions and final rejections. 2. This form paragraph must be followed by a detailed explanation of the grounds of rejection using one or more of form paragraphs 7.05.01, 7.05.016, 7.05.017, 7.05.02, 7.05.03, or another appropriate reason. Examiner Note: 2. In bracket 1, explain why the claimed invention is not patent eligible subject matter by identifying what the claim(s) is/are directed to and explain why it does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter recited in 35 U.S.C. 101 (process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter), e.g., the claim(s) is/are directed to a signal per se, mere information in the form of data, a contract between two parties, or a human being (see MPEP § 2106, subsection I). 3. For a claim that is directed to a judicial exception and is nonstatutory, use form paragraph 7.05.016. the claimed invention is directed to [1] without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) [2]. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because [3]. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because [4]. Examiner Note: 1. This form paragraph should be preceded by form paragraph 7.05. For claims that recite a tentative abstract idea (i.e., a limitation identified as an abstract idea even though it does not fall within the groupings of abstract ideas discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)), this form paragraph should be accompanied by form paragraph 7.05.017. 2. This form paragraph is for use with all product (machine, manufacture, and composition of matter) and process claims, and for all claims directed to a law of nature, natural phenomenon (including a product of nature), or abstract idea. 3. In bracket 1, identify whether the claim(s) are directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon (including a product of nature), or an abstract idea. 4. In bracket 2, identify the exception by referring to how it is recited in the claim and explain why it is considered an exception (e.g., for an abstract idea, identify the abstract idea grouping in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2) into which the recited exception falls). For example, "the Arrhenius equation, which is a law of nature and a mathematical concept which describes the relationship between temperature and reaction rate" or "the series of steps instructing how to hedge risk, which is a fundamental economic practice and thus grouped as a certain method of organizing human interactions." For a product of nature exception, refer to how it is recited in the claim and explain why its characteristics are not markedly different from the product’s naturally occurring counterpart in its natural state. For example, "the naturally occurring DNA segment, which is not markedly different from its naturally occurring counterpart because it conveys the same genetic information." Provide additional explanation regarding the exception and how it has been identified when appropriate. 5. In bracket 3, explain why the combination of additional elements fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. For example, if the claim is directed to an abstract idea with additional generic computer elements, explain that the generically recited computer elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer; or, if the claim is directed to a method of using a naturally occurring correlation, explain that data gathering steps required to use the correlation do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are insignificant extra-solution activity. Similarly, if the claim recites a "naturally occurring DNA segment" with an additional element of a test tube, explain that merely placing the product of nature into a generic container such as a test tube does not add a meaningful limitation as it is merely a nominal or token extra-solution component of the claim, and is nothing more than an attempt to generally link the product of nature to a particular technological environment. 6. In bracket 4, identify the additional elements and explain why, when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an "inventive concept") to the exception. For example, if the additional limitations only store and retrieve information in memory, explain that these are well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions as recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d). Examiner Note: 2. Approval from the TC Director is required to treat a tentative abstract idea (i.e., a claim limitation(s) that does not fall within the groupings of abstract ideas discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)) as an abstract idea. This form paragraph should be used to demonstrate that this approval has been obtained. 3. In bracket 1, provide the justification for why the claim limitation(s) is/are being treated as an abstract idea. For example, provide an explanation of why the claim limitation is among the "basic tools of scientific and technological work." 4. In bracket 2, insert the TC Director's signature. Approval of the TC Director is required to treat a claim limitation that does not fall within the groupings of abstract ideas discussed in MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2) as reciting an abstract idea. See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(3). 2106.07(b) Evaluating Applicant’s Response [R-10.2019] After examiners identify and explain in the record the reasons why a claim is directed to an abstract idea, natural phenomenon, or law of nature without significantly more, then the burden shifts to the applicant to either amend the claim or make a showing of why the claim is eligible for patent protection. In response to a rejection based on failure to claim patent-eligible subject matter, applicant may: (i) amend the claim, e.g., to add additional elements or modify existing elements so that the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception, (or integrates the judicial exception into a practical application), (ii) present persuasive arguments based on a good faith belief as to why the rejection is in error and/or (iii) submit evidence traversing a subject matter eligibility rejection according to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 716.01 and 37 CFR 1.132. When evaluating a response, examiners must carefully consider all of applicant's arguments and evidence rebutting the subject matter eligibility rejection. If applicant has amended the claim, examiners should determine the amended claim’s broadest reasonable interpretation and again perform the subject matter eligibility analysis. If applicant's claim amendment(s), evidence, and/or argument(s) persuasively establish that the claim is not directed to a judicial exception or is directed to significantly more than a judicial exception, the rejection should be withdrawn. Applicant may argue that a claim is eligible because the claim as a whole integrates the judicial exception into a practical application or amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception when the additional elements are considered both individually and in combination. When an additional element is considered individually by the examiner, the additional element may be enough to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or to qualify as "significantly more" if it meaningfully limits the judicial exception, e.g., it improves another technology or technical field, improves the functioning of a computer itself. In addition, even if an element does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or amount to significantly more on its own (e.g., because it is merely a generic computer component performing generic computer functions), it can still integrate or amount to significantly more when considered in combination with the other elements of the claim. For example, generic computer components that individually perform merely generic computer functions (e.g., a CPU that performs mathematical calculations or a clock that produces time data) in some instances are able in combination to perform functions that are not generic computer functions and therefore integrate or amount to significantly more than an abstract idea (and are thus eligible). If applicant properly challenges the examiner's findings but the examiner deems it appropriate to maintain the rejection, a rebuttal must be provided in the next Office action. Several examples of appropriate examiner responses are provided below. (1) If applicant challenges the identification of a tentative abstract idea that was based on a court case and the challenge is not persuasive, an appropriate response would be an explanation as to why the abstract idea identified in the claim is similar to the concept in the cited case. (2) If applicant responds to an examiner's assertion that something is well-known, routine, conventional activity with a specific argument or evidence that the additional elements in a claim are not well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously engaged in by those in the relevant art, the examiner should reevaluate whether the additional elements are in actuality well-known, routine, conventional activities to those who work in the relevant field. It is especially necessary for the examiner to fully reevaluate their position when such additional elements are not discussed in the specification as being known generic functions/components/activities or are not treated by the courts as well-understood, routine, conventional activities. If the rejection is to be maintained, the examiner should consider whether evidence should be provided to further support the rejection and clarify the record for appeal. See MPEP § 2106.05(d) for examples of elements that the courts have found to be well understood, routine and conventional activity. If the examiner has taken official notice per item (D) of subsection III above that an element(s) is well-understood, routine, conventional activity, and the applicant challenges the examiner's position, specifically stating that such element(s) is not well-understood, routine, conventional activity, the examiner must then provide one of the items discussed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of subsection III above, or an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.104(d)(2) setting forth specific factual statements and explanation to support the examiner’s position. See also MPEP § 2106.07(b), item (2). (3) If applicant amends a claim to add a generic computer or generic computer components and asserts that the claim is integrated into a practical application or recites significantly more because the generic computer is 'specially programmed' (as in Alappat, now considered superseded) or is a 'particular machine' (as in Bilski), the examiner should look at whether the added elements integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more than the judicial exception. Merely adding a generic computer, generic computer components, or a programmed computer to perform generic computer functions does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 224, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1984 (2014). See also OIP Techs. v. Amazon.com, 788 F.3d 1359, 1364, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093-94 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“Just as Diehr could not save the claims in Alice, which were directed to ‘implement[ing] the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer’, it cannot save OIP's claims directed to implementing the abstract idea of price optimization on a generic computer.”) (citations omitted). (4) If applicant argues that the claim is specific and does not preempt all applications of the exception, the examiner should reconsider Step 2A of the eligibility analysis, e.g., to determine whether the claim is directed to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field. If an examiner still determines that the claim is directed to a judicial exception, the examiner should then reconsider in Step 2B whether the additional elements in combination (as well as individually) amount to an inventive concept, e.g., because they are more than the non-conventional and non-generic arrangement of known, conventional elements. Such reconsideration is appropriate because, although preemption is not a standalone test for eligibility, it remains the underlying concern that drives the two-part framework from Alice Corp. and Mayo (Steps 2A and 2B). Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 839 F.3d 1138, 1150, 120 USPQ2d 1473, 1483 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Rapid Litig. Mgmt. v. CellzDirect, Inc., 827 F.3d 1042, 1052, 119 USPQ2d 1370, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., 788 F.3d 1371, 1379, 115 USPQ2d 1152, 1158 (Fed. Cir. 2015). 2106.07(c) Clarifying the Record [R-08.2017] When the claims are deemed patent eligible, the examiner may make clarifying remarks on the record. For example, if a claim is found eligible because it improves upon existing technology, the examiner could reference the portion of the specification that describes the claimed improvement and note the claim elements that produce that improvement. The clarifying remarks may be made at any point during prosecution as well as with a notice of allowance. Clarifying remarks may be useful in explaining the rationale for a rejection as well. For instance, explaining the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of a claim will assist applicant in understanding and responding to a rejection. As an example, a rejection for failure to recite patent eligible subject matter in a claim to a computer readable medium could include an explanation that the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim covers a carrier wave, which does not fall within one of the four categories of invention, and a suggestion to overcome the rejection by submitting a narrowing amendment to cover the statutory embodiments.	284 (September 16, 2011). As the courts' definitions of machines, manufactures and compositions of matter indicate, a product must have a physical or tangible form in order to fall within one of these statutory categories. Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1348, 111 USPQ2d at 1719. Thus, the Federal Circuit has held that a product claim to an intangible collection of information, even if created by human effort, does not fall within any statutory category. Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1350, 111 USPQ2d at 1720 (claimed “device profile” comprising two sets of data did not meet any of the categories because it was neither a process nor a tangible product). Similarly, software expressed as code or a set of instructions detached from any medium is an idea without physical embodiment. See Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437, 449, 82 USPQ2d 1400, 1407 (2007); see also Benson, 409 U.S. 67, 175 USPQ2d 675 (An "idea" is not patent eligible). Thus, a product claim to a software program that does not also contain at least one structural limitation (such as a “means plus function” limitation) has no physical or tangible form, and thus does not fall within any statutory category. Another example of an intangible product that does not fall within a statutory category is a paradigm or business model for a marketing company. In re Ferguson,	no
Intellectual Property	Should patents apply to software?	yes_statement	"patents" should "apply" to "software".. "software" should be eligible for "patents".	https://www.foley.com/en/insights/publications/2023/07/ip-protecting-autonomous-vehicle-software	IP Considerations in Protecting Autonomous Vehicle Software with ...	As autonomous vehicles and associated software become more commonplace in the automotive industry, it is important to recognize which forms of intellectual property grant protection within quickly evolving areas of technology and to understand how to obtain registration and enjoy the advantages within an increasingly competitive landscape. Autonomous vehicles are unique in the automotive industry because they incorporate new forms of technology not commonly embedded in automobiles. This can include, image recognition systems, LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), and most importantly complex software incorporating artificial intelligence and machine learning. Intellectual property protection enables autonomous vehicle developers to get ahead of their competitors, create an environment in which research and innovation are incentivized, stop others from infringing protected technology, and can allow technology to be further monetized through licensing agreements. A comprehensive IP strategy using both patents and copyrights can help protect key technology. Patent Protection The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will generally grant a software patent for autonomous vehicles once it is shown to overcome two hurdles to patentability: (1) a showing that the claimed subject matter is neither anticipated nor obvious based on the prior art, and (2) a showing that the claimed subject matter is not directed to a “judicial exception” (e.g., an abstract idea), or if it is, that the claim as a whole includes additional limitations amounting to “significantly more” than the exception. Through careful drafting, patents can protect the algorithms or methods used in the software, user interfaces for the software itself, and data processing techniques. Two types of patents are most relevant here: utility patents and design patents. Utility patents protect functional aspects of an autonomous vehicle for 20 years. Design patents protect the ornamental appearance of an autonomous vehicle’s components for 15 years. A utility patent may protect the functional aspects of an autonomous vehicle, such as the transmission or the machine learning software that drives the vehicle. A design patent may protect ornamental designs, such as a user interface appearance of an infotainment console connecting the driver to the software. As autonomous vehicles become more ubiquitous, the interface and interactions between the software and the driver will be more prevalent and important to protect. When it comes to software or other computing technology, a utility patent cannot protect the idea or the math alone, but instead must apply that idea or math to something. Practitioners will sometimes refer to this requirement informally as a “technical effect” or “technical solution to a technical problem.” For example, a patent cannot protect the idea of mobile-device tracking, but a patent for mobile-device tracking software was deemed valid because it recited the hardware and software details of a specific implementation. Likewise, a patent cannot protect the idea of steering a car, but a patent can protect a specific software program that executes a method of autonomous driving by applying a particular artificial intelligence on LIDAR and computer vision inputs. Copyright Protection A software patent protects the functionality of the software for 20 years, whereas a copyright protects the code itself for the duration of the life of the author plus 70 years. Combining these two forms of protection provides diverse protection over software innovations and strengthens the IP portfolio. However, registering software for copyright has its own challenges. Under copyright law, the software is considered a literary work and is eligible for protection if the software is (1) a work of authorship, (2) original, and (3) fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Copyright law protects authors of literary works, but an author must be human. This was recently affirmed in the Midjourney case where the US Copyright Office held that images created by the Midjourney AI were not protected by copyright because they are not products of human authorship. Recently, the automotive industry is experiencing an increased volume of collaboration between major manufacturers and smaller entities when developing autonomous vehicle software and training the underlying AI/ML models, raising the issue of training models as a source of copyright protection. To better train software models for autonomous vehicles, major manufacturers are likely to outsource some aspects of their software being developed to third parties. These models are not technically copyrightable because they are being trained and “authored” by data and not by a human author. It is critical that ownership over the software-executed models and the input and output data are clearly established. As more automobile manufacturers incorporate artificial intelligence and machine learning into their software, there comes an issue with licensing. This is a new area of law with questions and issues about ownership of the trained model and whether the trained model is considered a separate work. Issues can arise if licensing provisions do not outline in specificity the outcome of these models, the trained models, the training data, and the output data. To avoid these issues, it is essential licensing agreements contain provisions about ownership of autonomous vehicle software and further derivatives to proactively prevent potential issues and litigation. Special thanks to Alex Liederman, a summer associate in Foley's Washington, D.C. office, for his contributions to this article. This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.	Through careful drafting, patents can protect the algorithms or methods used in the software, user interfaces for the software itself, and data processing techniques. Two types of patents are most relevant here: utility patents and design patents. Utility patents protect functional aspects of an autonomous vehicle for 20 years. Design patents protect the ornamental appearance of an autonomous vehicle’s components for 15 years. A utility patent may protect the functional aspects of an autonomous vehicle, such as the transmission or the machine learning software that drives the vehicle. A design patent may protect ornamental designs, such as a user interface appearance of an infotainment console connecting the driver to the software. As autonomous vehicles become more ubiquitous, the interface and interactions between the software and the driver will be more prevalent and important to protect. When it comes to software or other computing technology, a utility patent cannot protect the idea or the math alone, but instead must apply that idea or math to something. Practitioners will sometimes refer to this requirement informally as a “technical effect” or “technical solution to a technical problem.” For example, a patent cannot protect the idea of mobile-device tracking, but a patent for mobile-device tracking software was deemed valid because it recited the hardware and software details of a specific implementation. Likewise, a patent cannot protect the idea of steering a car, but a patent can protect a specific software program that executes a method of autonomous driving by applying a particular artificial intelligence on LIDAR and computer vision inputs. Copyright Protection A software patent protects the functionality of the software for 20 years, whereas a copyright protects the code itself for the duration of the life of the author plus 70 years. Combining these two forms of protection provides diverse protection over software innovations and strengthens the IP portfolio. However, registering software for copyright has its own challenges.	yes
Intellectual Property	Should patents apply to software?	yes_statement	"patents" should "apply" to "software".. "software" should be eligible for "patents".	https://boldip.com/how-to-apply-patents-software-inventions-bp/	How to Apply for Patents for Software-Related Inventions - Bold ...	How to Apply for Patents for Software-Related Inventions The application process for software-related patents doesn’t differ enormously from other patent applications. However, the criteria your invention must meet to be eligible for a patent are much different. Over the years, court decisions have only increased the ambiguity surrounding patents for operating systems, applications, and other software-related inventions. Accordingly, navigating the technicalities can be challenging. At Bold Patents, we believe innovation should be accessible, and we hope this article will help guide you on your path to successfully patenting your software-related invention. Do I Need a Patent for My Software-Related Invention? Before you begin your software-related patent application, you should ask yourself a few questions: What are your long-term goals? Do you have a plan for enforcing your IP? Or are you considering to instead monetize by licensing/selling your IP portfolio? Things move much more quickly in the software/high-tech field than they do in other industries so having a longer term plan becomes more impoortant for software related companies. Ideal candidates for software-related patents have projected sustainable market value. Does your product improve on existing technology or include a function that has not yet existed in the public domain? It can be challenging to prove the novelty of a software product. Can elements of your product advance the current state of technology? What type of patent is suitable for your invention? You may want to base your patent application on your IP’s features. For example, a software patent that is centered around a process you’ve invented would likely fall under the scope of a utility patent. Conversely, visual elements like icons or displays would be better protected with a design patent. When Can I File For A Software-Related Patent? After the value of IP has been established, people often want to obtain patent protection right away. Generally, you can file for a software-related patent anytime during your invention’s development—but how early is too early to file? At a minimum, you should have a product that is functional on a basic level before you file. Any critical features or components should be included, including an outline of further development plans. What Criteria Do Patents for Software-Related Inventions Need to Meet? A software-related patent must be more than an abstract idea. For software-based inventions to be patentable, they must improve computer functionality in some unique way. It sounds simple, but there’s more to it than first impressions indicate. For example, if someone could adequately solve the same problem through the same means without the help of your invention, it isn’t eligible. The subject invention must be transformable. In short, this second requirement covers inventions that don’t quite fall under the scope of the first. Suppose your invention is not a concrete tool (like a methodology) but its results could not be duplicated in its absence. In this case, the inventor needs only to prove its technical merit, or its ability to be transformed into something patentable. Novelty is one of the primary requirements for patents of any kind, so this requirement is far less inhibiting than it seems. Example You’ve been using an open-source testing framework that automates regression testing. You discovered that it can be used in conjunction with AI to automate other aspects of software testing, like functionality tests. It’s unlikely that your methodology would be patentable because someone with similar engineering expertise could draw the same conclusion without the use of your particular method. Explanation In the case of Alice v. CLS Bank, Alice’s invention only required a generic computer with generic computer functions to implement. Several justices of the court concurred that any claim which merely describes a method of doing business should not be patentable. Why are the criteria so specific? Patents for software-related inventions are complicated due to the nature of their industry. As with any USPTO claim, newness is a patent requirement. Unfortunately, the novelty of abstract ideas is difficult to measure in the software industry. One could make the argument that anyone with equal technical expertise could stumble upon the same problem-solving method on their own. For this reason, software-related inventions must prove their uniqueness by demonstrating their ability to introduce something brand new to a common process. Pro Tip The software-related components of an invention must add something to the process that wasn’t there before. Software-Related Patent Criteria FAQ Q: Can I obtain patent protection for graphical user interfaces? A: Yes, it is possible to patent your UI. Tangible features of your product are most likely to receive patent protection under a design patent. Q: Do I need to write software code in my patent? A: No,you do not need to write out the code for your software patent. Your patent only needs to describe how the code will accomplish its desired operations. The most important things to include in your patent description are the features, functionality, and architecture. Q: What should my patent description include? A: Your description should effectively explain the steps or processes your software follows in order to achieve the outcome/benefit/functionality it was created to solve. It must adequately convey the utility or design patent requirements while also providing context in the form of flowcharts and diagrams. Although code is not required, it can be helpful to imagine that your description will serve as an instruction manual for someone who is trying to prototype your invention. Q: What is a Section 101 denial? A: Section 101 of the patent act has four statutory categories. In accordance with Section 101, patents will be granted if the subject is a “new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.” If a patent has been denied citing Section 101 as the basis, the invention may not be patentable because it does not fit any of the above categories. Note: Non-statutory exceptions exist regarding the patentability of abstract ideas or inventions. For instance, certain inventions may be basic tools of technological work or even natural phenomena by the USPTO. The complexities of Section 101 can be extremely difficult to navigate without the help of a seasoned IP professional. Consulting with an expert is always recommended. Do software-related patents take longer to execute? Patents for software-related inventions must go through the same process as any other. Once your initial submissions have been made, you must wait for the USPTO to review your claim. They may ask for additional information or clarification, especially if the scope of your claims is too broad. Eighteen months after your application has been submitted, the USPTO will publish a detailed description of your invention. This time frame is prone to delay because the patent may not be granted immediately after publication. We’ve published a walkthrough of the patent application process before, so we’ll skip the gritty details and provide you with a few helpful tips about moving your invention through the patenting process instead. How can I perform a prior art search? The PatentScope database is an excellent resource for performing prior art searches. It is operated by the World Intellectual Property Organization, meaning that it has an international scope of coverage. Through PatentScope, you can access abstract versions of patent applications filed through the Patent Cooperation Treaty. We also recommend checking the USPTO’s online search tool for publications that might be like yours. The search may be arduous, but it’s one of the most important phases of the patenting process. A thorough patent search will ensure your invention doesn’t infringe on another, saving you from possible denial of your patent application. Should I seek professional legal advice? As demonstrated above, patents for software-related inventions can be highly complex. Seeking guidance from an intellectual property attorney will reduce the chances of your application being denied by the USPTO. Those who are just beginning their patent application journey should consider obtaining a free Discovery Call. J.D. Houvener is a Registered USPTO Patent Attorney who has a strong interest in helping entrepreneurs and businesses thrive. J.D. leverages his technical background in engineering and experience in the aerospace industry to provide businesses with a unique perspective on their patent needs. He works with clients who are serious about investing in their intellectual assets and provides counsel on how to capitalize their patents in the market. If you have any questions regarding this article or patents in general, consider contacting J.D. at https://boldip.com/contact/ The information provided on this website is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. This website may be considered attorney-advertising. All information is current at the time of publication, and is subject to change. The law firm responsible for the content of this website is Bold IP, PLLC, which does business through one or more trade names, including Bold Patents, Bold Patent Law, and others.	How to Apply for Patents for Software-Related Inventions The application process for software-related patents doesn’t differ enormously from other patent applications. However, the criteria your invention must meet to be eligible for a patent are much different. Over the years, court decisions have only increased the ambiguity surrounding patents for operating systems, applications, and other software-related inventions. Accordingly, navigating the technicalities can be challenging. At Bold Patents, we believe innovation should be accessible, and we hope this article will help guide you on your path to successfully patenting your software-related invention. Do I Need a Patent for My Software-Related Invention? Before you begin your software-related patent application, you should ask yourself a few questions: What are your long-term goals? Do you have a plan for enforcing your IP? Or are you considering to instead monetize by licensing/selling your IP portfolio? Things move much more quickly in the software/high-tech field than they do in other industries so having a longer term plan becomes more impoortant for software related companies. Ideal candidates for software-related patents have projected sustainable market value. Does your product improve on existing technology or include a function that has not yet existed in the public domain? It can be challenging to prove the novelty of a software product. Can elements of your product advance the current state of technology? What type of patent is suitable for your invention? You may want to base your patent application on your IP’s features. For example, a software patent that is centered around a process you’ve invented would likely fall under the scope of a utility patent. Conversely, visual elements like icons or displays would be better protected with a design patent. When Can I File For A Software-Related Patent? After the value of IP has been established, people often want to obtain patent protection right away. Generally, you can file for a software-related patent anytime during your invention’s development—but how early is too early to file? At a minimum, you should have a product that is functional on a basic level before you file. Any critical features or components should be included, including an outline of further development plans.	yes
Intellectual Property	Should patents apply to software?	yes_statement	"patents" should "apply" to "software".. "software" should be eligible for "patents".	https://www.iam-media.com/securing-software-patents-through-epo	Securing software patents through the EPO - IAM	Securing software patents through the EPO This is an Insight article, written by a selected partner as part of IAM's co-published content. Read more on Insight For granting European patents, the European Patent Office (EPO) is bound by the provisions of the European Patent Convention (EPC) (established in 1973 and revised in 2000). Patentability of software under the EPC Under Article 52(2)(c) of the EPC, computer programs are not regarded as patentable inventions, meaning that European patents cannot be granted for that subject matter. Specifically, the EPC considers that “schemes, rules and methods for performing mental acts, playing games or doing business, and programs for computers” are not patentable inventions. The notable exclusion of computer programs or software from patentability is generally reflected in the national legal provisions of the European countries bound by the EPC. On the other hand, Article 52(3) of the EPC states that patentability of computer programs, among others, is excluded only to the extent that European patent applications and patents relate to that subject matter “as such”. This means that some aspects of a software invention, going beyond a “computer program as such”, may still lead to the grant of a European patent. Computer-implemented inventions The EPO Guidelines for Examination explain (G-II, 3.6) that the exclusion from patentability of “computer programs as such” does not apply to computer programs “having a technical character”. Computer programs with technical character will produce a “further technical effect” when run on a computer, beyond the mere physical interactions between the program (software) and the computer (hardware) on which it is run. The guidelines thus define ‘computer-implemented inventions’ (CIIs) as solutions which are technical and involve computers, computer networks or other programmable apparatuses, wherein at least one feature is realised by means of a computer program (F-IV, 3.9). According to the EPO, an invention which involves a computer program but simultaneously exceeds the boundaries of software “as such” and provides a “further technical effect”, is eligible for patent protection. The EPO recognises that patent protection is as well-deserved for CIIs as it is for innovations in more traditional technologies, as they all represent benefits for society. It is thus clear that patent coverage for certain aspects of software can be obtained at the EPO, and there is ongoing practice for judging these CIIs. At the same time, it should be kept in mind that patent examination is conducted by the EPO on a case-by-case basis: while harmonisation is certainly sought after, a certain degree of variability in the case law is expected, especially as technology evolves. To be considered a patentable CII before the EPO, any patent application relating to software should demonstrate technical character in the specific characteristics of the invention. The applicant should take these aspects into account, to reduce uncertainty during the examination of patentability requirements of the claims of the patent application. Double hurdle in examination When considering a software patent application, the initial hurdle is whether the claims are directed to a patentable invention. The EPO will consider whether the subject matter of the claims possesses technical character or is directed to a “computer program as such”. If the technical character of the software patent application is established, the EPO treats it as an actual CII. As is the case for all types of invention, including CIIs, the EPO will examine whether the claimed subject matter satisfies the substantive patentability requirements and deserves protection. Therefore, a further hurdle is whether the claimed invention is novel over the prior art, involves an inventive step and is susceptible of industrial application as required by Article 52(1) of the EPC for granting a patent. When facing these two hurdles, the applicant of a software patent application filed before the EPO should pay serious attention to the technical features which are particularly directed to solving a technical problem within the software’s scope. Highlighting the technical character of the invention is, in fact, useful for overcoming the first hurdle by achieving CII status and for overcoming the second hurdle related to substantive patentability requirements, to maximise the chances of obtaining patent protection. Role of technical character The EPO will look for at least one claimed feature which possesses technical character. The good news is that it is easy, from a practical standpoint, to avoid the claims of a software application being rejected as “computer programs as such”: technical character can be provided by simply reciting ‘computer’, ‘database’ or any ‘hardware’ means in the claims. The not-so-good news is that relegating the technical character of a software invention in its hardware implementation may not be enough for achieving a patent grant at the EPO. In practice, a CII is likely to comprise a mix of features, some of which relate to technical aspects of the software (eg, algorithms, specific protocols or even hardware), and some relate to the purpose of the software and the nature of the information which is involved. The EPO will examine this mix of technical and non-technical features appearing in the claims, as prescribed by the guidelines (G-VII, 5.4). When assessing inventive step of a CII, the EPO will focus only on the technical aspects, since features which do not contribute to the technical character of the invention are not considered useful for supporting the presence of an inventive step. As an outcome, many software patent applications examined by the EPO achieve the status of CII, but end up being rejected nonetheless: the claims may relate to a computer program having technical character, but they may differentiate from the prior art only by non-technical features, which cannot support the presence of an inventive step and lead to the grant of a patent. In other words, the EPO will consider a claim of a CII as lacking inventive step if the invention is realised by generic computer means – which are known per se – and if the only differences with respect to the prior art reside in non-technical details regarding the purpose of the software and the nature of information which is treated. This criterion of the EPO represents a big obstacle for CIIs. In practice, very few software inventions are embodied in dedicated and original hardware; most software inventions are meant to be executed on existing computer means, as apps will run on phones or tablets, and most programs will run on generic PCs which may or may not include network features. For most of these software solutions, the status of a CII is easily reached by reciting in the claims the presence of the computer means. Unfortunately, if these computer means are already of a known type, the CII may be considered by the EPO as being an obvious implementation of methods which are devoid of technical character. A patent application before the EPO regarding a CII should include a proper technical characterisation of the invention, focusing on technical details which go beyond the purpose of the software and the nature of information which is treated. In fact, non-technical features which are relevant from a marketing standpoint, cannot be the sole actors when defending inventiveness of the solution before the EPO, and must be supplemented by sound technical features which are directed to achieving a technical effect. Examples of technical character for CIIs The EPO frequently updates the guidelines to reflect changes in case law and keep up with the pace of ever-developing fields of technology. From 2015 to 2018 several remarks concerning aspects of software patents and CIIs have been provided in the guidelines. The guidelines give examples of features of CIIs which possess technical character and can be more effective in overcoming the double-hurdle examination, in particular supporting the presence of an inventive step in the patent application. Software which is directed to generic control or processing, and is often run on generic computer means, is typically claimed in the form of a method. The guidelines explain (G-II, 3.6.1) that if a method possesses technical character, a corresponding computer program specifying that same method produces a further technical effect when run on a computer. Examples given in the guidelines include: methods of controlling an anti-lock braking system in a car; determining emissions by an X-ray device; compressing digital video; restoring a distorted digital image; and encrypting electronic communication. The list is not exclusive, as many granted European patents involve at least some degree of control, processing or automation realised by means of a computer program. Another category of software patents of commercial interest considered in the guidelines (G-II, 3.5.3) is represented by computer-implemented business methods. By itself, a ‘business method’ represents activities which are of a financial, commercial, administrative or organisational nature, and which are not patentable “as such”. If a business method claim also specifies technical means (eg, computer networks or other programmable apparatuses), it becomes a CII. The EPO holds that only those features of technical implementation contribute to the technical character, whereas the features specifying the business method itself do not. Consequently, the EPO often finds that a particular computer implementation of a business method is already a well-known hardware set-up, and that the residual business features cannot provide an inventive step. For these reasons, patents concerning computer-implemented business methods are extremely difficult – if not almost impossible – to obtain at the EPO. Software patents may also relate to artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. In a definition provided by the guidelines (G-II, 3.3.1), ‘AI’ and ‘machine learning’ are based on computational models and algorithms for classification, clustering, regression and dimensionality reduction. The EPO regards these algorithms as having an abstract mathematical nature and being excluded from patentability “as such”. At the same time, the EPO indicates that AI and machine learning find applications in various fields of technology, and if a technical effect can be derived by the interaction of the software with the technology, the claim will be treated by the EPO as any other CII by considering its technical character. The guidelines also discuss computer simulations (G-II, 3.3.2) and graphical user interfaces (GUIs) (G-II, 3.7.1). For these classes of software, once again, the discrimination is according to their technical character. If a simulation is directed to an adequately defined class of technical items or specific technical processes, it is regarded by the EPO as potentially possessing technical character, whereas simulations of non-technical processes (eg, a marketing campaign, administrative scheme for transporting goods or determining a schedule for agents in a call centre) are attributed no technical character which contributes to inventiveness. The features of GUIs, which relate to presenting information and receiving input as part of human-computer interaction, are considered by the EPO on a case-by-case basis. As a particular example, the graphic design of a menu (eg, its look and feel) is determined by aesthetic considerations and is regarded by the EPO as not contributing to technical character. The guidelines (G-II, 3.6.1) also consider specific software directed to the internal functioning of the computer on which it is to be executed, which may be considered to produce a further technical effect. When considering data retrieval, formats and structures of databases, the guidelines (G-II, 3.6.3) make a distinction between ‘functional data’ and ‘cognitive data’: Functional data serves to control the operation of a device processing the data and inherently comprises corresponding technical features. Cognitive data is only relevant to human users and cannot produce a technical effect. When it comes to programming languages and techniques, technical character is often excluded by the guidelines (G-II, 3.6.3). These are just some of the examples provided in the guidelines which concern the technical character of a CII involving software and hardware aspects. One conclusion which can be derived is that, in designing the specific patent coverage sought for a software-involving solution, a general aim should be to explain in detail the technical character of the solution, showing the technical effect which goes beyond the mere execution of the software on a computer system of known type. Gold standard for software patents Having a software patent granted in Europe by the EPO is already a great result for an applicant. For litigation and licensing purposes, it is desirable to have several software patents with at least a comparable scope of protection, granted in countries other than the ones bound by the EPC. This result is harder to achieve, as different patent offices will apply different examination standards when it comes to eligibility and patentability of software inventions. It could be advocated that the approach of the EPO can be used as a ‘gold standard’ for patentability. If a software invention clears the stricter requirements of the EPO for CIIs, it is likely to be allowable in other important jurisdictions (eg, Japan, China and the United States). Although appealing, this strategy may not work perfectly in practice, as some patent offices do not necessarily have a lower bar than the EPO when it comes to software inventions, but rather have slightly different requirements for patentability. It has been shown by considering the specific requirements of the EPO for CIIs that eligibility and patentability of software inventions is a very delicate matter, wherein the weight of each word in the claims can be highly relevant. For software inventions worldwide, a simplified solution of the ‘one-size-fits-all’ kind should not be expected. At the same time, an important lesson can be learned from EPO practice when it comes to software patents and CIIs: it is always advisable to focus on the technical aspects of the software, keeping in mind that considerations relating to the purpose of the software and the nature of information which is treated may be appealing when it comes to marketing purposes, but may be given little to no weight when assessing patentability and inventiveness.	This means that some aspects of a software invention, going beyond a “computer program as such”, may still lead to the grant of a European patent. Computer-implemented inventions The EPO Guidelines for Examination explain (G-II, 3.6) that the exclusion from patentability of “computer programs as such” does not apply to computer programs “having a technical character”. Computer programs with technical character will produce a “further technical effect” when run on a computer, beyond the mere physical interactions between the program (software) and the computer (hardware) on which it is run. The guidelines thus define ‘computer-implemented inventions’ (CIIs) as solutions which are technical and involve computers, computer networks or other programmable apparatuses, wherein at least one feature is realised by means of a computer program (F-IV, 3.9). According to the EPO, an invention which involves a computer program but simultaneously exceeds the boundaries of software “as such” and provides a “further technical effect”, is eligible for patent protection. The EPO recognises that patent protection is as well-deserved for CIIs as it is for innovations in more traditional technologies, as they all represent benefits for society. It is thus clear that patent coverage for certain aspects of software can be obtained at the EPO, and there is ongoing practice for judging these CIIs. At the same time, it should be kept in mind that patent examination is conducted by the EPO on a case-by-case basis: while harmonisation is certainly sought after, a certain degree of variability in the case law is expected, especially as technology evolves. To be considered a patentable CII before the EPO, any patent application relating to software should demonstrate technical character in the specific characteristics of the invention. The applicant should take these aspects into account, to reduce uncertainty during the examination of patentability requirements of the claims of the patent application. Double hurdle in examination When considering a software patent application, the initial hurdle is whether the claims are directed to a patentable invention.	yes
Intellectual Property	Should patents apply to software?	yes_statement	"patents" should "apply" to "software".. "software" should be eligible for "patents".	http://www.paulgraham.com/softwarepatents.html	Are Software Patents Evil?	A few weeks ago I found to my surprise that I'd been granted four patents. This was all the more surprising because I'd only applied for three. The patents aren't mine, of course. They were assigned to Viaweb, and became Yahoo's when they bought us. But the news set me thinking about the question of software patents generally. Patents are a hard problem. I've had to advise most of the startups we've funded about them, and despite years of experience I'm still not always sure I'm giving the right advice. One thing I do feel pretty certain of is that if you're against software patents, you're against patents in general. Gradually our machines consist more and more of software. Things that used to be done with levers and cams and gears are now done with loops and trees and closures. There's nothing special about physical embodiments of control systems that should make them patentable, and the software equivalent not. Unfortunately, patent law is inconsistent on this point. Patent law in most countries says that algorithms aren't patentable. This rule is left over from a time when "algorithm" meant something like the Sieve of Eratosthenes. In 1800, people could not see as readily as we can that a great many patents on mechanical objects were really patents on the algorithms they embodied. Patent lawyers still have to pretend that's what they're doing when they patent algorithms. You must not use the word "algorithm" in the title of a patent application, just as you must not use the word "essays" in the title of a book. If you want to patent an algorithm, you have to frame it as a computer system executing that algorithm. Then it's mechanical; phew. The default euphemism for algorithm is "system and method." Try a patent search for that phrase and see how many results you get. Since software patents are no different from hardware patents, people who say "software patents are evil" are saying simply "patents are evil." So why do so many people complain about software patents specifically? I think the problem is more with the patent office than the concept of software patents. Whenever software meets government, bad things happen, because software changes fast and government changes slow. The patent office has been overwhelmed by both the volume and the novelty of applications for software patents, and as a result they've made a lot of mistakes. The most common is to grant patents that shouldn't be granted. To be patentable, an invention has to be more than new. It also has to be non-obvious. And this, especially, is where the USPTO has been dropping the ball. Slashdot has an icon that expresses the problem vividly: a knife and fork with the words "patent pending" superimposed. The scary thing is, this is the only icon they have for patent stories. Slashdot readers now take it for granted that a story about a patent will be about a bogus patent. That's how bad the problem has become. The problem with Amazon's notorious one-click patent, for example, is not that it's a software patent, but that it's obvious. Any online store that kept people's shipping addresses would have implemented this. The reason Amazon did it first was not that they were especially smart, but because they were one of the earliest sites with enough clout to force customers to log in before they could buy something. [1] We, as hackers, know the USPTO is letting people patent the knives and forks of our world. The problem is, the USPTO are not hackers. They're probably good at judging new inventions for casting steel or grinding lenses, but they don't understand software yet. At this point an optimist would be tempted to add "but they will eventually." Unfortunately that might not be true. The problem with software patents is an instance of a more general one: the patent office takes a while to understand new technology. If so, this problem will only get worse, because the rate of technological change seems to be increasing. In thirty years, the patent office may understand the sort of things we now patent as software, but there will be other new types of inventions they understand even less. Applying for a patent is a negotiation. You generally apply for a broader patent than you think you'll be granted, and the examiners reply by throwing out some of your claims and granting others. So I don't really blame Amazon for applying for the one-click patent. The big mistake was the patent office's, for not insisting on something narrower, with real technical content. By granting such an over-broad patent, the USPTO in effect slept with Amazon on the first date. Was Amazon supposed to say no? Where Amazon went over to the dark side was not in applying for the patent, but in enforcing it. A lot of companies (Microsoft, for example) have been granted large numbers of preposterously over-broad patents, but they keep them mainly for defensive purposes. Like nuclear weapons, the main role of big companies' patent portfolios is to threaten anyone who attacks them with a counter-suit. Amazon's suit against Barnes & Noble was thus the equivalent of a nuclear first strike. That suit probably hurt Amazon more than it helped them. Barnes & Noble was a lame site; Amazon would have crushed them anyway. To attack a rival they could have ignored, Amazon put a lasting black mark on their own reputation. Even now I think if you asked hackers to free-associate about Amazon, the one-click patent would turn up in the first ten topics. Google clearly doesn't feel that merely holding patents is evil. They've applied for a lot of them. Are they hypocrites? Are patents evil? There are really two variants of that question, and people answering it often aren't clear in their own minds which they're answering. There's a narrow variant: is it bad, given the current legal system, to apply for patents? and also a broader one: is it bad that the current legal system allows patents? These are separate questions. For example, in preindustrial societies like medieval Europe, when someone attacked you, you didn't call the police. There were no police. When attacked, you were supposed to fight back, and there were conventions about how to do it. Was this wrong? That's two questions: was it wrong to take justice into your own hands, and was it wrong that you had to? We tend to say yes to the second, but no to the first. If no one else will defend you, you have to defend yourself. [2] The situation with patents is similar. Business is a kind of ritualized warfare. Indeed, it evolved from actual warfare: most early traders switched on the fly from merchants to pirates depending on how strong you seemed. In business there are certain rules describing how companies may and may not compete with one another, and someone deciding that they're going to play by their own rules is missing the point. Saying "I'm not going to apply for patents just because everyone else does" is not like saying "I'm not going to lie just because everyone else does." It's more like saying "I'm not going to use TCP/IP just because everyone else does." Oh yes you are. A closer comparison might be someone seeing a hockey game for the first time, realizing with shock that the players were deliberately bumping into one another, and deciding that one would on no account be so rude when playing hockey oneself. Hockey allows checking. It's part of the game. If your team refuses to do it, you simply lose. So it is in business. Under the present rules, patents are part of the game. What does that mean in practice? We tell the startups we fund not to worry about infringing patents, because startups rarely get sued for patent infringement. There are only two reasons someone might sue you: for money, or to prevent you from competing with them. Startups are too poor to be worth suing for money. And in practice they don't seem to get sued much by competitors, either. They don't get sued by other startups because (a) patent suits are an expensive distraction, and (b) since the other startups are as young as they are, their patents probably haven't issued yet. [3] Nor do startups, at least in the software business, seem to get sued much by established competitors. Despite all the patents Microsoft holds, I don't know of an instance where they sued a startup for patent infringement. Companies like Microsoft and Oracle don't win by winning lawsuits. That's too uncertain. They win by locking competitors out of their sales channels. If you do manage to threaten them, they're more likely to buy you than sue you. When you read of big companies filing patent suits against smaller ones, it's usually a big company on the way down, grasping at straws. For example, Unisys's attempts to enforce their patent on LZW compression. When you see a big company threatening patent suits, sell. When a company starts fighting over IP, it's a sign they've lost the real battle, for users. A company that sues competitors for patent infringement is like a defender who has been beaten so thoroughly that he turns to plead with the referee. You don't do that if you can still reach the ball, even if you genuinely believe you've been fouled. So a company threatening patent suits is a company in trouble. When we were working on Viaweb, a bigger company in the e-commerce business was granted a patent on online ordering, or something like that. I got a call from a VP there asking if we'd like to license it. I replied that I thought the patent was completely bogus, and would never hold up in court. "Ok," he replied. "So, are you guys hiring?" If your startup grows big enough, however, you'll start to get sued, no matter what you do. If you go public, for example, you'll be sued by multiple patent trolls who hope you'll pay them off to go away. More on them later. In other words, no one will sue you for patent infringement till you have money, and once you have money, people will sue you whether they have grounds to or not. So I advise fatalism. Don't waste your time worrying about patent infringement. You're probably violating a patent every time you tie your shoelaces. At the start, at least, just worry about making something great and getting lots of users. If you grow to the point where anyone considers you worth attacking, you're doing well. We do advise the companies we fund to apply for patents, but not so they can sue competitors. Successful startups either get bought or grow into big companies. If a startup wants to grow into a big company, they should apply for patents to build up the patent portfolio they'll need to maintain an armed truce with other big companies. If they want to get bought, they should apply for patents because patents are part of the mating dance with acquirers. Most startups that succeed do it by getting bought, and most acquirers care about patents. Startup acquisitions are usually a build-vs-buy decision for the acquirer. Should we buy this little startup or build our own? And two things, especially, make them decide not to build their own: if you already have a large and rapidly growing user base, and if you have a fairly solid patent application on critical parts of your software. There's a third reason big companies should prefer buying to building: that if they built their own, they'd screw it up. But few big companies are smart enough yet to admit this to themselves. It's usually the acquirer's engineers who are asked how hard it would be for the company to build their own, and they overestimate their abilities. [4] A patent seems to change the balance. It gives the acquirer an excuse to admit they couldn't copy what you're doing. It may also help them to grasp what's special about your technology. Frankly, it surprises me how small a role patents play in the software business. It's kind of ironic, considering all the dire things experts say about software patents stifling innovation, but when one looks closely at the software business, the most striking thing is how little patents seem to matter. In other fields, companies regularly sue competitors for patent infringement. For example, the airport baggage scanning business was for many years a cozy duopoly shared between two companies, InVision and L-3. In 2002 a startup called Reveal appeared, with new technology that let them build scanners a third the size. They were sued for patent infringement before they'd even released a product. You rarely hear that kind of story in our world. The one example I've found is, embarrassingly enough, Yahoo, which filed a patent suit against a gaming startup called Xfire in 2005. Xfire doesn't seem to be a very big deal, and it's hard to say why Yahoo felt threatened. Xfire's VP of engineering had worked at Yahoo on similar stuff-- in fact, he was listed as an inventor on the patent Yahoo sued over-- so perhaps there was something personal about it. My guess is that someone at Yahoo goofed. At any rate they didn't pursue the suit very vigorously. Why do patents play so small a role in software? I can think of three possible reasons. One is that software is so complicated that patents by themselves are not worth very much. I may be maligning other fields here, but it seems that in most types of engineering you can hand the details of some new technique to a group of medium-high quality people and get the desired result. For example, if someone develops a new process for smelting ore that gets a better yield, and you assemble a team of qualified experts and tell them about it, they'll be able to get the same yield. This doesn't seem to work in software. Software is so subtle and unpredictable that "qualified experts" don't get you very far. That's why we rarely hear phrases like "qualified expert" in the software business. What that level of ability can get you is, say, to make your software compatible with some other piece of software-- in eight months, at enormous cost. To do anything harder you need individual brilliance. If you assemble a team of qualified experts and tell them to make a new web-based email program, they'll get their asses kicked by a team of inspired nineteen year olds. Experts can implement, but they can't design. Or rather, expertise in implementation is the only kind most people, including the experts themselves, can measure. [5] But design is a definite skill. It's not just an airy intangible. Things always seem intangible when you don't understand them. Electricity seemed an airy intangible to most people in 1800. Who knew there was so much to know about it? So it is with design. Some people are good at it and some people are bad at it, and there's something very tangible they're good or bad at. The reason design counts so much in software is probably that there are fewer constraints than on physical things. Building physical things is expensive and dangerous. The space of possible choices is smaller; you tend to have to work as part of a larger group; and you're subject to a lot of regulations. You don't have any of that if you and a couple friends decide to create a new web-based application. Because there's so much scope for design in software, a successful application tends to be way more than the sum of its patents. What protects little companies from being copied by bigger competitors is not just their patents, but the thousand little things the big company will get wrong if they try. The second reason patents don't count for much in our world is that startups rarely attack big companies head-on, the way Reveal did. In the software business, startups beat established companies by transcending them. Startups don't build desktop word processing programs to compete with Microsoft Word. [6] They build Writely. If this paradigm is crowded, just wait for the next one; they run pretty frequently on this route. Fortunately for startups, big companies are extremely good at denial. If you take the trouble to attack them from an oblique angle, they'll meet you half-way and maneuver to keep you in their blind spot. To sue a startup would mean admitting it was dangerous, and that often means seeing something the big company doesn't want to see. IBM used to sue its mainframe competitors regularly, but they didn't bother much about the microcomputer industry because they didn't want to see the threat it posed. Companies building web based apps are similarly protected from Microsoft, which even now doesn't want to imagine a world in which Windows is irrelevant. The third reason patents don't seem to matter very much in software is public opinion-- or rather, hacker opinion. In a recent interview, Steve Ballmer coyly left open the possibility of attacking Linux on patent grounds. But I doubt Microsoft would ever be so stupid. They'd face the mother of all boycotts. And not just from the technical community in general; a lot of their own people would rebel. Good hackers care a lot about matters of principle, and they are highly mobile. If a company starts misbehaving, smart people won't work there. For some reason this seems to be more true in software than other businesses. I don't think it's because hackers have intrinsically higher principles so much as that their skills are easily transferrable. Perhaps we can split the difference and say that mobility gives hackers the luxury of being principled. Google's "don't be evil" policy may for this reason be the most valuable thing they've discovered. It's very constraining in some ways. If Google does do something evil, they get doubly whacked for it: once for whatever they did, and again for hypocrisy. But I think it's worth it. It helps them to hire the best people, and it's better, even from a purely selfish point of view, to be constrained by principles than by stupidity. (I wish someone would get this point across to the present administration.) I'm not sure what the proportions are of the preceding three ingredients, but the custom among the big companies seems to be not to sue the small ones, and the startups are mostly too busy and too poor to sue one another. So despite the huge number of software patents there's not a lot of suing going on. With one exception: patent trolls. Patent trolls are companies consisting mainly of lawyers whose whole business is to accumulate patents and threaten to sue companies who actually make things. Patent trolls, it seems safe to say, are evil. I feel a bit stupid saying that, because when you're saying something that Richard Stallman and Bill Gates would both agree with, you must be perilously close to tautologies. The CEO of Forgent, one of the most notorious patent trolls, says that what his company does is "the American way." Actually that's not true. The American way is to make money by creating wealth, not by suing people. [7] What companies like Forgent do is actually the proto-industrial way. In the period just before the industrial revolution, some of the greatest fortunes in countries like England and France were made by courtiers who extracted some lucrative right from the crown-- like the right to collect taxes on the import of silk-- and then used this to squeeze money from the merchants in that business. So when people compare patent trolls to the mafia, they're more right than they know, because the mafia too are not merely bad, but bad specifically in the sense of being an obsolete business model. Patent trolls seem to have caught big companies by surprise. In the last couple years they've extracted hundreds of millions of dollars from them. Patent trolls are hard to fight precisely because they create nothing. Big companies are safe from being sued by other big companies because they can threaten a counter-suit. But because patent trolls don't make anything, there's nothing they can be sued for. I predict this loophole will get closed fairly quickly, at least by legal standards. It's clearly an abuse of the system, and the victims are powerful. [8] But evil as patent trolls are, I don't think they hamper innovation much. They don't sue till a startup has made money, and by that point the innovation that generated it has already happened. I can't think of a startup that avoided working on some problem because of patent trolls. So much for hockey as the game is played now. What about the more theoretical question of whether hockey would be a better game without checking? Do patents encourage or discourage innovation? This is a very hard question to answer in the general case. People write whole books on the topic. One of my main hobbies is the history of technology, and even though I've studied the subject for years, it would take me several weeks of research to be able to say whether patents have in general been a net win. One thing I can say is that 99.9% of the people who express opinions on the subject do it not based on such research, but out of a kind of religious conviction. At least, that's the polite way of putting it; the colloquial version involves speech coming out of organs not designed for that purpose. Whether they encourage innovation or not, patents were at least intended to. You don't get a patent for nothing. In return for the exclusive right to use an idea, you have to publish it, and it was largely to encourage such openness that patents were established. Before patents, people protected ideas by keeping them secret. With patents, central governments said, in effect, if you tell everyone your idea, we'll protect it for you. There is a parallel here to the rise of civil order, which happened at roughly the same time. Before central governments were powerful enough to enforce order, rich people had private armies. As governments got more powerful, they gradually compelled magnates to cede most responsibility for protecting them. (Magnates still have bodyguards, but no longer to protect them from other magnates.) Patents, like police, are involved in many abuses. But in both cases the default is something worse. The choice is not "patents or freedom?" any more than it is "police or freedom?" The actual questions are respectively "patents or secrecy?" and "police or gangs?" As with gangs, we have some idea what secrecy would be like, because that's how things used to be. The economy of medieval Europe was divided up into little tribes, each jealously guarding their privileges and secrets. In Shakespeare's time, "mystery" was synonymous with "craft." Even today we can see an echo of the secrecy of medieval guilds, in the now pointless secrecy of the Masons. The most memorable example of medieval industrial secrecy is probably Venice, which forbade glassblowers to leave the city, and sent assassins after those who tried. We might like to think we wouldn't go so far, but the movie industry has already tried to pass laws prescribing three year prison terms just for putting movies on public networks. Want to try a frightening thought experiment? If the movie industry could have any law they wanted, where would they stop? Short of the death penalty, one assumes, but how close would they get? Even worse than the spectacular abuses might be the overall decrease in efficiency that would accompany increased secrecy. As anyone who has dealt with organizations that operate on a "need to know" basis can attest, dividing information up into little cells is terribly inefficient. The flaw in the "need to know" principle is that you don't know who needs to know something. An idea from one area might spark a great discovery in another. But the discoverer doesn't know he needs to know it. If secrecy were the only protection for ideas, companies wouldn't just have to be secretive with other companies; they'd have to be secretive internally. This would encourage what is already the worst trait of big companies. I'm not saying secrecy would be worse than patents, just that we couldn't discard patents for free. Businesses would become more secretive to compensate, and in some fields this might get ugly. Nor am I defending the current patent system. There is clearly a lot that's broken about it. But the breakage seems to affect software less than most other fields. In the software business I know from experience whether patents encourage or discourage innovation, and the answer is the type that people who like to argue about public policy least like to hear: they don't affect innovation much, one way or the other. Most innovation in the software business happens in startups, and startups should simply ignore other companies' patents. At least, that's what we advise, and we bet money on that advice. The only real role of patents, for most startups, is as an element of the mating dance with acquirers. There patents do help a little. And so they do encourage innovation indirectly, in that they give more power to startups, which is where, pound for pound, the most innovation happens. But even in the mating dance, patents are of secondary importance. It matters more to make something great and get a lot of users. Notes [1] You have to be careful here, because a great discovery often seems obvious in retrospect. One-click ordering, however, is not such a discovery. [2] "Turn the other cheek" skirts the issue; the critical question is not how to deal with slaps, but sword thrusts. [3] Applying for a patent is now very slow, but it might actually be bad if that got fixed. At the moment the time it takes to get a patent is conveniently just longer than the time it takes a startup to succeed or fail. [4] Instead of the canonical "could you build this?" maybe the corp dev guys should be asking "will you build this?" or even "why haven't you already built this?" [5] Design ability is so hard to measure that you can't even trust the design world's internal standards. You can't assume that someone with a degree in design is any good at design, or that an eminent designer is any better than his peers. If that worked, any company could build products as good as Apple's just by hiring sufficiently qualified designers. [6] If anyone wanted to try, we'd be interested to hear from them. I suspect it's one of those things that's not as hard as everyone assumes. [7] Patent trolls can't even claim, like speculators, that they "create" liquidity. [8] If big companies don't want to wait for the government to take action, there is a way to fight back themselves. For a long time I thought there wasn't, because there was nothing to grab onto. But there is one resource patent trolls need: lawyers. Big technology companies between them generate a lot of legal business. If they agreed among themselves never to do business with any firm employing anyone who had worked for a patent troll, either as an employee or as outside counsel, they could probably starve the trolls of the lawyers they need. Thanks to Dan Bloomberg, Paul Buchheit, Sarah Harlin, Jessica Livingston, and Peter Norvig for reading drafts of this, to Joel Lehrer and Peter Eng for answering my questions about patents, and to Ankur Pansari for inviting me to speak.	A few weeks ago I found to my surprise that I'd been granted four patents. This was all the more surprising because I'd only applied for three. The patents aren't mine, of course. They were assigned to Viaweb, and became Yahoo's when they bought us. But the news set me thinking about the question of software patents generally. Patents are a hard problem. I've had to advise most of the startups we've funded about them, and despite years of experience I'm still not always sure I'm giving the right advice. One thing I do feel pretty certain of is that if you're against software patents, you're against patents in general. Gradually our machines consist more and more of software. Things that used to be done with levers and cams and gears are now done with loops and trees and closures. There's nothing special about physical embodiments of control systems that should make them patentable, and the software equivalent not. Unfortunately, patent law is inconsistent on this point. Patent law in most countries says that algorithms aren't patentable. This rule is left over from a time when "algorithm" meant something like the Sieve of Eratosthenes. In 1800, people could not see as readily as we can that a great many patents on mechanical objects were really patents on the algorithms they embodied. Patent lawyers still have to pretend that's what they're doing when they patent algorithms. You must not use the word "algorithm" in the title of a patent application, just as you must not use the word "essays" in the title of a book. If you want to patent an algorithm, you have to frame it as a computer system executing that algorithm. Then it's mechanical; phew. The default euphemism for algorithm is "system and method." Try a patent search for that phrase and see how many results you get. Since software patents are no different from hardware patents, people who say "software patents are evil" are saying simply "patents are evil."	yes
Intellectual Property	Should patents apply to software?	yes_statement	"patents" should "apply" to "software".. "software" should be eligible for "patents".	https://henry.law/blog/software-patent-protection/	SHOULD SOFTWARE STARTUPS SEEK PATENT PROTECTION ...	SHOULD SOFTWARE STARTUPS SEEK PATENT PROTECTION? Software patents are somewhat controversial in both the legal and technical worlds. There’s a well-documented public policy debate about whether software patents are good or bad for the economy overall. For example, a 2015 whitepaper by the Electronic Frontier Foundation analyzed insights from 16,500 people to discuss how the current system can be exploited by bad actors to discourage innovation. Further, the Supreme Court’s 2014 decision on Alice Corp. created a lot of uncertainty around the future of software patents. The Court ruled that implementing abstract ideas on a computer didn’t meet intellectual property standards — but also refused to define what constitutes an “abstract idea.” In the wake of Alice, many business methods and software patents were invalidated. But software is still generally eligible for patent protection, and lots of people are still pursuing software patents. Notably, some of the biggest software companies are simultaneously filing huge volumes of patent applications while they lobby against strong patent rights. So regardless of your views on software patents as a matter of public policy, tech companies who are developing innovative software solutions should take an objective look at the value of pursuing patent protection as a part of their overall business strategy. You can gain many business advantages from patenting your software — here’s what you need to consider. 7 REASONS NOT TO PURSUE SOFTWARE PATENTS There are many valid arguments against software patents as part of a business strategy. Depending on the particular type of software you’re developing and your business model, some of these reasons might apply to you. 1. THE PATENT PROCESS IS SLOW On average, it takes about two to three years for an application to mature into a patent. But in the fast-paced world of software development, that can be a lifetime: By the time your patent issues, your software may be outdated, or its code might have evolved significantly. 2. THE COSTS DON’T ALWAYS JUSTIFY THE INVESTMENT Notably, you might not see much return on investment if you seek patent protection for an invention with a short shelf life — and the rate of technological change for many types of software is extremely high. 3. YOU CAN PURSUE LOWER-COST IP PROTECTIONS Besides, in order to file for a patent, you must publicly disclose the technique used in your software — which may not benefit your business. By contrast, neither copyrights nor trade secrecy require public disclosure. 4. IP MIGHT NOT BE YOUR MOST VALUABLE ASSET Typically, you want to invest the most in your core business assets. “IP-centric” companies consider their technological innovations to be among their most important business assets and will set aside a significant portion of their R&D budget for patent prosecution. But many software companies’ strongest assets are their brand, user base and industry adoption — meaning a particular innovation or patentable feature won’t be as valuable towards their business strategy. In this case, you might prefer to protect your IP using less costly options. 5. SOFTWARE DOESN’T REQUIRE A HIGH R&D INVESTMENT In addition, “IP-centric” companies typically have long R&D cycles. And because patents exclude competing products from the market for up to 20 years, they’re essential for recouping high R&D investment. But many types of software don’t require the same level of R&D commitment as many other fields of technology. For this reason, patents may not be a necessary tool to maximize your profit margins. 6. SOFTWARE PATENTABILITY ISN’T GUARANTEED In the wake of the Alice decision, the patent process is far less predictable for software inventions than it used to be. Even though software can be patent-eligible, the U.S. patent office has created a moving target for meeting the patent-eligibility standards. You might prefer to invest in a more certain maneuver. 7. OPEN-SOURCE MODELS COULD UNDERMINE THE VALUE OF YOUR PATENTS Generally speaking, you can pursue patent protection for software that includes open-source code. If you patent an open-source software tool that you developed, you could potentially exclude competitors from distributing competing products. However, open-source models aren’t compatible with typical royalty-based patent licensing terms, and your open source distribution would end up weakening your ability to enforce your patent. There’s no clear best practice for how to handle patents involving open-source software, in part because there are a variety of commonly-used open source licenses, and they all treat patents a little differently. While it’s possible for the strategy to work out in your favor, we strongly encourage speaking to a patent professional about your specific situation. 6 REASONS TO PURSUE SOFTWARE PATENTS Pursuing software patents can be a tricky process. But when done right, software patents can give your business a competitive edge. 1. ATTRACT VENTURE CAPITAL FUNDING If you’re a startup or otherwise plan to raise funding for your business, whether through venture capital or other sources, you need to understand where the value is in your company. Having a solid patent portfolio can increase your company’s valuation and prove that you have unique technology on your hands. 2. PROTECT THE FUNCTIONALITY OF YOUR SOFTWARE As mentioned earlier, copyrights are a more affordable option for protecting your software. But keep in mind that copyrights cover only the expression of your software (i.e., code). So copyrights prevent people from copying your code. But if a competitor develops their own competing software (without copying your code), copyright would not protect you — even if they reverse engineered your product. By contrast, patents protect the functionality of your software, allowing you to exclude competing products that perform the same algorithm or computation. 3. GAIN A COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE If you have a patent on valuable software, your competitors will have to expend additional resources to deal with the risk of infringing your patent. And even if they manage to code around your patent rights, they might end up with a lower-quality product. These barriers to entry can be especially useful for deterring large companies that would otherwise have the resources to copy your work and bring a similar product to market first. 4. LICENSING REVENUE Patents give you leverage to negotiate licenses, which allow other companies to use or sell your software in exchange for royalty payments. Licensing can help generate significant revenue for your business. It’s a cliche to say that software is ubiquitous in our economy. Virtually every industry relies on software in their products, customer service, or back-end operations. Automotive, airline, oil and gas, banking… even groceries, just to name a few! You might be able to license your software to businesses in these other industries. But in most cases, entering a new industry requires partnering with a company who already has a customer base and assets within that industry (why did Amazon acquire Whole Foods?). If you don’t have patents, big players in another industry won’t have much incentive to pay you for your software solution. For example, they probably have the resources to develop their own software if you haven’t created any IP obstacles. 5. PATENT APPLICATIONS THEMSELVES HAVE VALUE Your business could benefit simply from filing a patent application — even if the application doesn’t mature into a patent, or you never actually enforce its claims. For example, your patent application might prevent another company from getting their own patent on the algorithm you developed. Besides, if you don’t want your patent to issue or last for the full 20-year term, you can always abandon it; you won’t be responsible for subsequent costs. 6. GET ACQUIRED Are you hoping that your startup will get acquired or adopted by a major software company? All major software companies are filing patent applications to protect their inventions. If you want to attract the big players, it always helps to follow industry best practices. PURSUE PATENT PROTECTION WHEN IT BENEFITS YOUR BUSINESS It’s easy to get caught up in the fervent public policy debate surrounding software patents. Ultimately, keep in mind that patents are not simply tools to prove how innovative your work is — they are first and foremost business assets. You should pursue software patents if they can add value to your business overall. Considering patenting your software? Use our FREE checklist to determine whether it’s the right next step for you — and what to do if it isn’t. Download it now! ARE YOU READY TO START THE PATENT PROCESS? Get our free checklist to find out if your business is ready to pursue patent protection. Read Next Don't miss a new article. Henry Patent Law's Patent Law News + Insights blog is designed to help people like you build smart, scalable patent strategies that protect your intellectual property as your business grows. Subscribe to receive email updates every time we publish a new article — don't miss out on key tips to help your business be more successful.	LICENSING REVENUE Patents give you leverage to negotiate licenses, which allow other companies to use or sell your software in exchange for royalty payments. Licensing can help generate significant revenue for your business. It’s a cliche to say that software is ubiquitous in our economy. Virtually every industry relies on software in their products, customer service, or back-end operations. Automotive, airline, oil and gas, banking… even groceries, just to name a few! You might be able to license your software to businesses in these other industries. But in most cases, entering a new industry requires partnering with a company who already has a customer base and assets within that industry (why did Amazon acquire Whole Foods?). If you don’t have patents, big players in another industry won’t have much incentive to pay you for your software solution. For example, they probably have the resources to develop their own software if you haven’t created any IP obstacles. 5. PATENT APPLICATIONS THEMSELVES HAVE VALUE Your business could benefit simply from filing a patent application — even if the application doesn’t mature into a patent, or you never actually enforce its claims. For example, your patent application might prevent another company from getting their own patent on the algorithm you developed. Besides, if you don’t want your patent to issue or last for the full 20-year term, you can always abandon it; you won’t be responsible for subsequent costs. 6. GET ACQUIRED Are you hoping that your startup will get acquired or adopted by a major software company? All major software companies are filing patent applications to protect their inventions. If you want to attract the big players, it always helps to follow industry best practices. PURSUE PATENT PROTECTION WHEN IT BENEFITS YOUR BUSINESS It’s easy to get caught up in the fervent public policy debate surrounding software patents. Ultimately, keep in mind that patents are not simply tools to prove how innovative your work is — they are first and foremost business assets.	yes
Intellectual Property	Should patents apply to software?	yes_statement	"patents" should "apply" to "software".. "software" should be eligible for "patents".	https://www.wired.com/2012/11/richard-stallman-software-patents/	Let's Limit the Effect of Software Patents, Since We Can't Eliminate ...	Let's Limit the Effect of Software Patents, Since We Can't Eliminate Them Patents threaten every software developer, and the patent wars we have long feared have broken out. Software developers and software users – which in our society, is most people – need software to be free of patents. The patents that threaten us may be called "software patents," but that term is misleading. The first U.S. patent...Image: USPTO Patents threaten every software developer, and the patent wars we have long feared have broken out. Software developers and software users – which in our society, is most people – need software to be free of patents. The patents that threaten us are often called "software patents," but that term is misleading. Such patents are not about any specific program. Rather, each patent describes some practical idea, and says that anyone carrying out the idea can be sued. So it's clearer to call them "computational idea patents." The U.S. patent system doesn't label patents to say this one's a "software patent" and that one isn't. Software developers are the ones who make a distinction between the patents that threaten us – those that cover ideas that can be implemented in software – and the rest. For example: If the patented idea is the shape of a physical structure or a chemical reaction, no program can implement that idea; that patent doesn't threaten the software field. But if the idea that's patented is a computation, that patent's barrel points at software developers and users. This is not to say that computational idea patents prohibit only software. These ideas can also be implemented in hardware ... and many of them have been. Each patent typically covers both hardware and software implementations of the idea. The Magnitude of the Software Problem Still, software is where computational idea patents cause a special problem. In software, it's easy to implement thousands of ideas together in one program: If 10 percent are patented, that means hundreds of patents threaten it. [#contributor: /contributors/59327110a312645844994e4d]\|\|\|Richard Stallman, president of the Free Software Foundation, launched the development of the [free software](http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) operating system [GNU](http://www.gnu.org/gnu/the-gnu-project.html) in 1984. The [GNU/Linux](http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html) system (essentially GNU with Linux added) is used on tens of millions of computers today. Stallman also founded the League for Programming Freedom in 1989, which campaigned against legal threats to programming – principally software patents.\|\|\| When Dan Ravicher of the Public Patent Foundation studied one large program (Linux, which is the kernel of the GNU/Linux operating system) in 2004, he found 283 U.S. patents that appeared to cover computing ideas implemented in the source code of that program. That same year, it was estimated that Linux was .25 percent of the whole GNU/Linux system. Multiplying 300 by 400 we get the order-of-magnitude estimate that the system as a whole was threatened by around 100,000 patents. If half of those patents were eliminated as "bad quality" – i.e., mistakes of the patent system – it would not really change things. Whether 100,000 patents or 50,000, it's the same disaster. This is why it's a mistake to limit our criticism of software patents to just "patent trolls" or "bad quality" patents. In this sense Apple, which isn't a "troll" by the usual definition, is the most dangerous patent aggressor today. I don't know whether Apple's patents are "good quality," but the better the patent's "quality," the more dangerous its threat. We need to fix the whole problem, not just a part. The usual suggestions for correcting the problem legislatively involve changing the criteria for granting patents – for instance, to ban issuing patents on computational practices and systems to perform them. But this approach has two drawbacks. >It’s a mistake to limit our criticism of software patents to just 'patent trolls' or 'bad quality' patents. First, patent lawyers are clever at reformulating patents to fit whatever rules may apply; they transform any attempt at limiting the substance of patents into a requirement of mere form. For instance, many U.S. computational idea patents describe a system including an arithmetic unit, an instruction sequencer, a memory, plus controls to carry out a particular computation. This is a peculiar way of describing a computer running a program that does a certain computation; it was designed to make the patent application satisfy criteria that the U.S. patent system was believed for a time to require. Second, the U.S. already has many thousands of computational idea patents, and changing the criteria to prevent issuing more would not get rid of the existing ones. We would have to wait almost 20 years for the problem to be entirely corrected through patent expiration. And legislating the abolition of these existing patents is probably unconstitutional. (Perversely, the Supreme Court has insisted that Congress can extend private privileges at the expense of the public's rights but that it can't go in the other direction.) A Different Approach: Limit Effect, Not Patentability My suggestion is to change the effect of patents. We should legislate that developing, distributing, or running a program on generally used computing hardware does not constitute patent infringement. This approach has several advantages: >We would have to wait almost 20 years for the problem to be entirely corrected through patent expiration. It doesn't require classifying patents or patent applications as "software" or "not software." It provides developers and users with protection from both existing and potential future computational idea patents. This approach doesn't entirely invalidate existing computational idea patents, because they would continue to apply to implementations using special-purpose hardware. This is an advantage because it eliminates an argument against the legal validity of the plan. The U.S. passed a law some years ago shielding surgeons from patent lawsuits, so that even if surgical procedures are patented, surgeons are safe. That provides a precedent for this solution. Software developers and software users need protection from patents. This is the only legislative solution that would provide full protection for all. We could then go back to competing or cooperating ... without the fear that some stranger will wipe away our work. Editor's Note: Given the enormous influence of patents on technology and business -- and complexity of the issues involved -- Wired is running a special series of expert opinions on "the patent fix". To help move reform efforts forward, some of these proposals also advocate specific Solutions to the Software Patent Problem (as part of a conference hosted by the Santa Clara University High Tech Law Institute). Angela Watercutter is a senior editor at WIRED covering pop culture. She also serves as the publication's deputy bureau chief in New York. Prior to joining WIRED she was a reporter for the Associated Press. Watercutter was also a senior editor of Longshot magazine and a contributor to Pop-Up Magazine.... Read more Plus: Russia tightens social media censorship, new cyberattack reporting rules for US companies, and Google Street View returns to Germany. Matt Burgess WIRED is where tomorrow is realized. It is the essential source of information and ideas that make sense of a world in constant transformation. The WIRED conversation illuminates how technology is changing every aspect of our lives—from culture to business, science to design. The breakthroughs and innovations that we uncover lead to new ways of thinking, new connections, and new industries.	We should legislate that developing, distributing, or running a program on generally used computing hardware does not constitute patent infringement. This approach has several advantages: >We would have to wait almost 20 years for the problem to be entirely corrected through patent expiration. It doesn't require classifying patents or patent applications as "software" or "not software. " It provides developers and users with protection from both existing and potential future computational idea patents. This approach doesn't entirely invalidate existing computational idea patents, because they would continue to apply to implementations using special-purpose hardware. This is an advantage because it eliminates an argument against the legal validity of the plan. The U.S. passed a law some years ago shielding surgeons from patent lawsuits, so that even if surgical procedures are patented, surgeons are safe. That provides a precedent for this solution. Software developers and software users need protection from patents. This is the only legislative solution that would provide full protection for all. We could then go back to competing or cooperating ... without the fear that some stranger will wipe away our work. Editor's Note: Given the enormous influence of patents on technology and business -- and complexity of the issues involved -- Wired is running a special series of expert opinions on "the patent fix". To help move reform efforts forward, some of these proposals also advocate specific Solutions to the Software Patent Problem (as part of a conference hosted by the Santa Clara University High Tech Law Institute). Angela Watercutter is a senior editor at WIRED covering pop culture. She also serves as the publication's deputy bureau chief in New York. Prior to joining WIRED she was a reporter for the Associated Press. Watercutter was also a senior editor of Longshot magazine and a contributor to Pop-Up Magazine.... Read more Plus: Russia tightens social media censorship, new cyberattack reporting rules for US companies, and Google Street View returns to Germany. Matt Burgess WIRED is where tomorrow is realized. It is the essential source of information and ideas that make sense of a world in constant transformation.	no
Endoscopy	Should patients stop taking blood thinners before an endoscopy?	yes_statement	"patients" should "stop" "taking" "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".. it is necessary for "patients" to discontinue "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".	https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/endoscopy/about/pac-20395197	Upper endoscopy - Mayo Clinic	Overview Endoscopy Endoscopy An upper gastrointestinal endoscopy involves inserting a flexible, lighted tube called an endoscope down your throat and into your esophagus. A tiny camera on the end of the endoscope lets your doctor examine your esophagus, stomach and the beginning of your small intestine, called the duodenum. An upper endoscopy, also called an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, is a procedure used to visually examine your upper digestive system. This is done with the help of a tiny camera on the end of a long, flexible tube. A specialist in diseases of the digestive system (gastroenterologist) uses an endoscopy to diagnose and sometimes treat conditions that affect the upper part of the digestive system. The medical term for an upper endoscopy is esophagogastroduodenoscopy. You may have an upper endoscopy done in your health care provider's office, an outpatient surgery center or a hospital. Products & Services Why it's done Gastrointestinal tract Gastrointestinal tract Your digestive tract stretches from your mouth to your anus. It includes the organs necessary to digest food, absorb nutrients and process waste. An upper endoscopy is used to diagnose and sometimes treat conditions that affect the upper part of the digestive system. The upper digestive system includes the esophagus, stomach and beginning of the small intestine (duodenum). Diagnose. An endoscopy offers an opportunity to collect tissue samples (biopsy) to test for diseases and conditions that may be causing anemia, bleeding, inflammation or diarrhea. It can also detect some cancers of the upper digestive system. Treat. Special tools can be passed through the endoscope to treat problems in your digestive system. For example, an endoscopy can be used to burn a bleeding vessel to stop bleeding, widen a narrow esophagus, clip off a polyp or remove a foreign object. An endoscopy is sometimes combined with other procedures, such as an ultrasound. An ultrasound probe may be attached to the endoscope to create images of the wall of your esophagus or stomach. An endoscopic ultrasound may also help create images of hard-to-reach organs, such as your pancreas. Newer endoscopes use high-definition video to provide clearer images. Many endoscopes are used with technology called narrow band imaging. Narrow band imaging uses special light to help better detect precancerous conditions, such as Barrett's esophagus. There is a problem with information submitted for this request. Review/update the information highlighted below and resubmit the form. From Mayo Clinic to your inbox Sign up for free and stay up to date on research advancements, health tips, current health topics, and expertise on managing health. Click here for an email preview. Email ErrorEmail field is required ErrorInclude a valid email address To provide you with the most relevant and helpful information, and understand which information is beneficial, we may combine your email and website usage information with other information we have about you. If you are a Mayo Clinic patient, this could include protected health information. If we combine this information with your protected health information, we will treat all of that information as protected health information and will only use or disclose that information as set forth in our notice of privacy practices. You may opt-out of email communications at any time by clicking on the unsubscribe link in the e-mail. Sorry something went wrong with your subscription Risks Bleeding. Your risk of bleeding complications after an endoscopy is increased if the procedure involves removing a piece of tissue for testing (biopsy) or treating a digestive system problem. In rare cases, such bleeding may require a blood transfusion. Infection. Most endoscopies consist of an examination and biopsy, and risk of infection is low. The risk of infection increases when additional procedures are performed as part of your endoscopy. Most infections are minor and can be treated with antibiotics. Your provider may give you preventive antibiotics before your procedure if you are at higher risk of infection. Tearing of the gastrointestinal tract. A tear in your esophagus or another part of your upper digestive tract may require hospitalization, and sometimes surgery to repair it. The risk of this complication is very low — it occurs in an estimated 1 of every 2,500 to 11,000 diagnostic upper endoscopies. The risk increases if additional procedures, such as dilation to widen your esophagus, are performed. A reaction to sedation or anesthesia. Upper endoscopy is usually performed with sedation or anesthesia. The type of anesthesia or sedation depends on the person and the reason for the procedure. There is a risk of a reaction to sedation or anesthesia, but the risk is low. You can reduce your risk of complications by carefully following your health care provider's instructions for preparing for an endoscopy, such as fasting and stopping certain medications. Symptoms that could mean a complication Symptoms to watch for after your endoscopy include: Fever Chest pain Shortness of breath Bloody, black or very dark colored stool Difficulty swallowing Severe or persistent abdominal pain Vomiting, especially if your vomit is bloody or looks like coffee grounds Call your provider immediately or go to an emergency room if you experience any of these symptoms. How you prepare Your provider will give you specific instructions to prepare for your endoscopy. You may be asked to: Fast before the endoscopy. You'll typically need to stop eating solid food for eight hours and stop drinking liquids for four hours before your endoscopy. This is to ensure your stomach is empty for the procedure. Stop taking certain medications. You'll need to stop taking certain blood-thinning medications in the days before your endoscopy, if possible. Blood thinners may increase your risk of bleeding if certain procedures are performed during the endoscopy. If you have ongoing conditions, such as diabetes, heart disease or high blood pressure, your provider will give you specific instructions regarding your medications. Tell your provider about all the medications and supplements you're taking before your endoscopy. Plan ahead for your recovery Most people undergoing an upper endoscopy will receive a sedative to relax them and make them more comfortable during the procedure. Plan ahead for your recovery while the sedative wears off. You may feel mentally alert, but your memory, reaction times and judgment may be impaired. Find someone to drive you home. You may also need to take the day off from work. Don't drive or make any important personal or financial decisions for 24 hours. What you can expect During an endoscopy During an upper endoscopy procedure, you'll be asked to lie down on a table on your back or on your side. As the procedure gets underway: Monitors often are attached to your body. This allows your health care team to monitor your breathing, blood pressure and heart rate. You may receive a sedative medication. This medication, given through a vein in your forearm, helps you relax during the endoscopy. An anesthetic may be used in your mouth. An anesthetic spray numbs your throat in preparation for insertion of the long, flexible tube (endoscope). You may be asked to wear a plastic mouth guard to hold your mouth open. Then the endoscope is inserted in your mouth. Your provider may ask you to swallow as the scope passes down your throat. You may feel some pressure in your throat, but you shouldn't feel pain. You can't talk after the endoscope passes down your throat, though you can make noises. The endoscope doesn't interfere with your breathing. As the endoscope travels down your esophagus: A tiny camera at the tip transmits images to a video monitor in the exam room. Your provider watches this monitor to look for anything out of the ordinary in your upper digestive tract. If something unusual is found in your digestive tract, images can be taken for later examination. Gentle air pressure may be fed into your esophagus to inflate your digestive tract. This allows the endoscope to move freely. And it allows the folds of your digestive tract to be examined more easily. You may feel pressure or fullness from the added air. Your provider will pass special surgical tools through the endoscope to collect a tissue sample or remove a polyp. This is done with the help from a video monitor to guide the tools. When the exam is finished, the endoscope is slowly retracted through your mouth. An endoscopy typically takes 15 to 30 minutes. After the endoscopy You'll be taken to a recovery area to sit or lie quietly after your endoscopy. You may stay for an hour or so. During this time, your health care team can monitor you as the sedative begins to wear off. Once you're at home, you may experience some mildly uncomfortable symptoms after endoscopy, such as: Bloating and gas Cramping Sore throat These signs and symptoms will improve with time. If you're concerned or quite uncomfortable, call your health care provider. Take it easy for the rest of the day after your endoscopy. After receiving a sedative, you may feel alert, but your reaction times are affected and judgment is delayed. Results When you receive the results of your endoscopy will depend on your situation. If, for instance, the endoscopy was performed to look for an ulcer, you may learn the findings right after your procedure. If a tissue sample (biopsy) was collected, you may need to wait a few days to get results from the testing laboratory. Ask your provider when you can expect the results of your endoscopy.	How you prepare Your provider will give you specific instructions to prepare for your endoscopy. You may be asked to: Fast before the endoscopy. You'll typically need to stop eating solid food for eight hours and stop drinking liquids for four hours before your endoscopy. This is to ensure your stomach is empty for the procedure. Stop taking certain medications. You'll need to stop taking certain blood-thinning medications in the days before your endoscopy, if possible. Blood thinners may increase your risk of bleeding if certain procedures are performed during the endoscopy. If you have ongoing conditions, such as diabetes, heart disease or high blood pressure, your provider will give you specific instructions regarding your medications. Tell your provider about all the medications and supplements you're taking before your endoscopy. Plan ahead for your recovery Most people undergoing an upper endoscopy will receive a sedative to relax them and make them more comfortable during the procedure. Plan ahead for your recovery while the sedative wears off. You may feel mentally alert, but your memory, reaction times and judgment may be impaired. Find someone to drive you home. You may also need to take the day off from work. Don't drive or make any important personal or financial decisions for 24 hours. What you can expect During an endoscopy During an upper endoscopy procedure, you'll be asked to lie down on a table on your back or on your side. As the procedure gets underway: Monitors often are attached to your body. This allows your health care team to monitor your breathing, blood pressure and heart rate. You may receive a sedative medication. This medication, given through a vein in your forearm, helps you relax during the endoscopy. An anesthetic may be used in your mouth. An anesthetic spray numbs your throat in preparation for insertion of the long, flexible tube (endoscope).	yes
Endoscopy	Should patients stop taking blood thinners before an endoscopy?	yes_statement	"patients" should "stop" "taking" "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".. it is necessary for "patients" to discontinue "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".	http://regionalsurgicenter.com/upper-endoscopy-egd-preparation/	Upper Endoscopy (EGD) Preparation – Regional SurgiCenter	Upper Endoscopy (EGD) Upper endoscopy is a procedure that allows for the direct visualization of the lining of the upper part of your gastrointestinal tract, which includes the esophagus, stomach and duodenum (first portion of the small intestine). During this procedure, a thin, flexible tube, called and endoscope, with its own lens and light source is passed through the mouth and advanced to the beginning of the small intestine. Why is upper endoscopy done? Upper endoscopy assists the doctor in evaluating symptoms of persistent upper abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting or difficulty swallowing. It is an excellent test for finding the cause of bleeding from the upper gastrointestinal tract and is more accurate than X-ray films for detecting inflammation, ulcers and tumors of the esophagus, stomach and duodenum. A biopsy (small tissue sample) is often obtained during an upper endoscopy. A biopsy can distinguish between benign and malignant (cancerous) tissues, can detect the presence of Helicobacter pylori (a bacterium associated with most ulcers) and can detect Barrett’s esophagus (a potential precursor to esophageal cancer). Upper endoscopy is also used to treat conditions of the upper gastrointestinal tract such as bleeding and to dilate strictures (narrowed areas). How should I prepare for the procedure? An empty stomach is essential for an accurate and safe examination, so you should have nothing to eat or drink, including water, for at least eight hours before the examination. Can I take my current medications? Most medications can be continued as usual. Inform us about medications you’re taking, particularly aspirin products, arthritis medications, anticoagulants (blood thinners), insulin or iron products. What about Aspirin? Do not stop aspirin, unless instructed by your physician or our staff. You may have stopped aspirin before a previous upper endoscopy. The latest research and guidelines tell us that it is safe to perform routine upper endoscopy and biopsy while patients continue their aspirin. The data also shows us that the risk of bleeding is very low and when compared with the risk of a stroke or other clotting event, bleeding is relatively easy to control. Major clotting events, such as stroke can leave irreversible damage. When a procedure with higher bleeding risk is anticipated, such as esophageal dilation, BARRX-HALO (radiofrequency ablation) or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), you will usually be instructed to discontinue taking aspirin for 5 days prior to your procedure, and you may be asked to hold it for a few days after your procedure. What about Plavix® (clopidogrel)? Do not stop Plavix® (clopidogrel), unless instructed by your physician or our staff. You may have stopped Plavix® (clopidogrel) before a previous upper endoscopy. The latest research and guidelines tell us that it is safe to perform routine upper endoscopy and biopsy while patients continue their Plavix® (clopidogrel). The data also shows us that the risk of bleeding is very low and when compared with the risk of a stroke or other clotting event, bleeding is relatively easy to control. Major clotting events, such as stroke can leave irreversible damage. When a procedure with higher bleeding risk is anticipated, such as esophageal dilation, BARRX-HALO (radiofrequency ablation) or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), you will usually be instructed to discontinue taking Plavix® for 5 days prior to your procedure, and you may be asked to hold it for a few days after your procedure. What about Pradaxa® (dabigatran)? Please stop taking Pradaxa® (dabigatran) 36 hours before your upper endoscopy (EGD). Pradaxa® (dabigatran) has an extremely short half-life, unlike Coumadin®, which means the blood thinning effect is gone after 24-36 hours after stopping the medication. What about Coumadin®? Do not stop Coumadin®. You may have stopped Coumadin® before a previous upper endoscopy. The latest research and guidelines tell us that it is safe to perform routine upper endoscopy and biopsy while patients continue their Coumadin® as long as their INR is in the routine, therapeutic range of between 2 and 3. The data sldo shows us that the risk of bleeding is very low and when compared with the risk of a stroke or other clotting event, bleeding is relatively easy to control. Major clotting events, such as stroke can leave irreversible damage. When a procedure with higher bleeding risk is anticipated, such as esophageal dilation, BARRX-HALO (radiofrequency ablation) or endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR), you will usually be instructed to discontinue taking Coumadin® for 5 days prior to your procedure, and you may be asked to hold it for a few days after your procedure. What if I use inhalers for Asthma or other breathing problems? Please use your inhalers as you would normally use them. Also, please be sure and bring all of your inhalers to your procedure, as you may be asked to use them just prior to your exam. Will I need antibiotics? No. Even if you have a prosthetic heart valve or other prosthesis, the latest recommendations by the Gastrointestinal and Cardiovascular societies do not recommend the use of antibiotics for routine upper endoscopy regardless of prosthetic devices. What can I expect during upper endoscopy? Upper endoscopy is well tolerated and pain-free. You will be given a sedative, propofol, by our anesthesia team who will be present to monitor your vital signs during the examination. You will not experience any sensation of gagging or choking. A mouthpiece will be placed between your teeth to keep your mouth open and to prevent your teeth from biting our scope. You will lie on your left side, and the endoscope will be passed through your mouth and into the esophagus, stomach and duodenum. The endoscope doesn’t interfere with your breathing. The examination typically lasts 10 minutes. What happens after upper endoscopy? You will be monitored until most of the effects of the medication have worn off. Your throat might be a little sore, and you might feel bloated because of air introduced into your stomach during the test. You will be given a liquid to drink before you leave our office. Once you leave the office, you will be able to eat unless you are instructed otherwise. The results of the examination will be discussed with you. If a biopsy was taken or a polyp was removed, the material is sent to a pathology lab and the results are available in approximately 5 business days. Your results will be given to you directly at a follow-up appointment or you will receive a letter via standard mail delivery with the results and recommendations for follow-up. All of the results, including your pathology results and procedure reports will be forwarded to your primary care physician and the physician that referred you to Gastroenterology Consultants. You will not be allowed to drive for 12 hours. You will need to arrange for someone to accompany you home because the sedatives might affect your judgment and reflexes for the rest of the day. What are the possible complications of upper endoscopy? Although complications are rare, bleeding can occur at a biopsy site or where a polyp was removed. If this occurs, it’s usually minimal and rarely requires follow-up. Other potential risks include a reaction to the sedative used and a perforation (a tear in the gastrointestinal tract lining). It’s important to recognize early signs of possible complications. If you have a fever after the test, trouble swallowing or increasing throat, chest or abdominal pain, contact us immediately.	Upper endoscopy is also used to treat conditions of the upper gastrointestinal tract such as bleeding and to dilate strictures (narrowed areas). How should I prepare for the procedure? An empty stomach is essential for an accurate and safe examination, so you should have nothing to eat or drink, including water, for at least eight hours before the examination. Can I take my current medications? Most medications can be continued as usual. Inform us about medications you’re taking, particularly aspirin products, arthritis medications, anticoagulants (blood thinners), insulin or iron products. What about Aspirin? Do not stop aspirin, unless instructed by your physician or our staff. You may have stopped aspirin before a previous upper endoscopy. The latest research and guidelines tell us that it is safe to perform routine upper endoscopy and biopsy while patients continue their aspirin. The data also shows us that the risk of bleeding is very low and when compared with the risk of a stroke or other clotting event, bleeding is relatively easy to control. Major clotting events, such as stroke can leave irreversible damage. When a procedure with higher bleeding risk is anticipated, such as esophageal dilation, BARRX-HALO (radiofrequency ablation) or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), you will usually be instructed to discontinue taking aspirin for 5 days prior to your procedure, and you may be asked to hold it for a few days after your procedure. What about Plavix® (clopidogrel)? Do not stop Plavix® (clopidogrel), unless instructed by your physician or our staff. You may have stopped Plavix® (clopidogrel) before a previous upper endoscopy. The latest research and guidelines tell us that it is safe to perform routine upper endoscopy and biopsy while patients continue their Plavix® (clopidogrel).	no
Endoscopy	Should patients stop taking blood thinners before an endoscopy?	yes_statement	"patients" should "stop" "taking" "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".. it is necessary for "patients" to discontinue "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".	https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diagnostics/22156-nasal-endoscopy	Nasal Endoscopy: Procedure & What It Is	Nasal Endoscopy During nasal endoscopy, your healthcare provider inserts an endoscope (a thin, flexible tube with a light and camera) into your nose. This gives them a clear, inside view of your sinuses and nasal passages. Nasal endoscopy aids in diagnosing and treating a range of health conditions. It may also be necessary when taking biopsies of lesions or masses. Overview What is nasal endoscopy? Nasal endoscopy (en-dah-skuh-pee) is a procedure used to look at the inside of your nasal cavity and openings to your sinus passage. Your healthcare provider inserts an endoscope (a long tube with a camera and a light) into your nose to examine your nasal and sinus region. The camera captures video images and projects them onto a screen. Is rhinoscopy the same as nasal endoscopy? Yes. The terms “rhinoscopy” (ry-naw-skuh-pee) and “nasal endoscopy” are interchangeable. Who performs nasal endoscopy? An ear, nose and throat doctor often performs nasal endoscopy in their office to diagnose or treat nasal or sinus problems. Test Details How do I prepare for nasal endoscopy? Generally, there aren’t any special preparations required for your nasal endoscopy procedure. Your healthcare provider can tell you if you need to do anything specific before your visit. People who take blood thinners should inform their healthcare provider and may need to temporarily stop taking these medications, but this is rarely the case. What can I expect during nasal endoscopy? Typically, you’ll be in a seated position for your nasal endoscopy. First, your healthcare provider decongests and partially numbs your nose to make the exam more comfortable. They may also apply a topical decongestant to reduce swelling, which allows the endoscope to move freely. Next, your healthcare provider inserts the endoscope and thoroughly examines your nasal and sinus passages, checking for any abnormalities. After examining one side of your nose, your healthcare provider will repeat this step on the opposite side. If necessary, they’ll remove a tissue sample and send it to a pathology lab for analysis. How painful is nasal endoscopy? Nasal endoscopy shouldn’t hurt; though, you’ll probably feel pressure during the procedure. The numbing spray may numb your mouth and throat, as well as your nose, and it does have a bitter taste. The numbness should go away in approximately 30 minutes. Nasal endoscopy after-effects may include slight soreness in your nose and throat. These symptoms usually resolve on their own in one or two days. How long does a nasal endoscopy take? In most cases, nasal endoscopy takes one to two minutes to complete. What can I expect after nasal endoscopy? Due to the lingering numbness from the anesthetic spray, it’s a good idea to avoid eating and drinking for about an hour after your nasal endoscopy. Your healthcare provider will let you know if you need to follow any additional instructions. What are the risks of nasal endoscopy? Specific risks depend on several factors, including your age and other existing health conditions. Be sure to ask your healthcare provider about potential complications during your consultation. Can nasal endoscopy cause infection? Very rarely, people may develop an infection following nasal endoscopy. Call your healthcare provider if you develop fever, chills, nausea or other signs of infection. Results and Follow-Up When should I know the results of nasal endoscopy? Your healthcare provider might review the results of your nasal endoscopy with you immediately. If they need more information to design a treatment plan, they may order more imaging tests, such as a CT scan. When should I call my doctor? Any time you have a question or concern regarding nasal endoscopy, call your healthcare provider. If you’ve already had the procedure, schedule an appointment with your healthcare provider if you develop pain, fever or other worrisome symptoms. A note from Cleveland Clinic Nasal endoscopy is a common test used to look at the inside of your nasal and sinus passages. It can help your healthcare provider learn more about what’s causing your symptoms so they can design an appropriate treatment plan. Ask your healthcare provider if nasal endoscopy is right for you. Related Institutes & Services At Cleveland Clinic's Head & Neck Institute, our providers are recognized in the U.S. and throughout the world for their expertise and breadth of care in disorders of the ear, nose and throat, in adults and pediatric patients. Related Institutes & Services At Cleveland Clinic's Head & Neck Institute, our providers are recognized in the U.S. and throughout the world for their expertise and breadth of care in disorders of the ear, nose and throat, in adults and pediatric patients.	An ear, nose and throat doctor often performs nasal endoscopy in their office to diagnose or treat nasal or sinus problems. Test Details How do I prepare for nasal endoscopy? Generally, there aren’t any special preparations required for your nasal endoscopy procedure. Your healthcare provider can tell you if you need to do anything specific before your visit. People who take blood thinners should inform their healthcare provider and may need to temporarily stop taking these medications, but this is rarely the case. What can I expect during nasal endoscopy? Typically, you’ll be in a seated position for your nasal endoscopy. First, your healthcare provider decongests and partially numbs your nose to make the exam more comfortable. They may also apply a topical decongestant to reduce swelling, which allows the endoscope to move freely. Next, your healthcare provider inserts the endoscope and thoroughly examines your nasal and sinus passages, checking for any abnormalities. After examining one side of your nose, your healthcare provider will repeat this step on the opposite side. If necessary, they’ll remove a tissue sample and send it to a pathology lab for analysis. How painful is nasal endoscopy? Nasal endoscopy shouldn’t hurt; though, you’ll probably feel pressure during the procedure. The numbing spray may numb your mouth and throat, as well as your nose, and it does have a bitter taste. The numbness should go away in approximately 30 minutes. Nasal endoscopy after-effects may include slight soreness in your nose and throat. These symptoms usually resolve on their own in one or two days. How long does a nasal endoscopy take? In most cases, nasal endoscopy takes one to two minutes to complete. What can I expect after nasal endoscopy? Due to the lingering numbness from the anesthetic spray, it’s a good idea to avoid eating and drinking for about an hour after your nasal endoscopy. Your healthcare provider will let you know if you need to follow any additional instructions.	no
Endoscopy	Should patients stop taking blood thinners before an endoscopy?	yes_statement	"patients" should "stop" "taking" "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".. it is necessary for "patients" to discontinue "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".	https://ridgelinesurgical.com/patient-center/egd-preparation-instructions.dot	EGD Preparation Instructions \| Ridgeline Endoscopy Center	EGD Preparation Instructions Ridgeline Endoscopy Center-South Ogden: 6028 South Ridgeline Drive, Suite 100. Ridgeline Endoscopy Center will contact you 2 days before your appointment with your arrival time. If you have not heard from Ridgeline within 48 hours of your scheduled date you can reach them at 801-409-1031 to obtain your arrival time. McKay Dee Hospital: Take main elevator to 2nd floor, turn left, and go down hall to Suite 2670, Endoscopy Lab. It is McKay policy that your ride is there with you at check in and they need to stay the whole time you are there. Arrive 45 Minutes before your scheduled start time. Layton Intermountain Hospital: Go through the main entrance and go to registration. Layton Intermountain Hospital will contact you 2-3 days before your appointment with your arrival time. BLOOD THINNERS AND PATIENTS WITH A HEART VALVE REPLACEMENT, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE: Call the Physician who prescribed your blood thinner (your primary care doctor or cardiologist) and ASK if you can STOP taking your blood thinning medication(s) (e.g. Coumadin, Plavix, Xarelto, ELIQUIS, Pradaxa, Prasugrel, Brilinta, Cilostazol, Aggrenox.). Many procedures cannot be performed if you are on a blood thinning medication, but you MUST obtain approval from the prescribing physician PRIOR to discontinuing any blood thinners. Your doctor may put you on an alternate medication while you stop your blood thinning medication(s). THREE DAYS BEFORE PROCEDURE: Discontinue all blood thinning drugs (prescription and non-prescription), including Coumadin, Plavix, Xarelto , ELIQUIS, Pradaxa, Prasugrel, Brilinta, Cilostazol, Aggrenox. REMEMBER! Your primary care doctor or cardiologist MUST approve this action BEFORE you discontinue these medications when you are taking them for blood thinning. DAY OF EXAM NO solid foods today; however you can drink as much water as you need to up to two (2) hours prior to your procedure, but you MUST NOT take anything by mouth after that. BRING your driver’s license, insurance card, and a list of any prescription and over-the -counter medications you are currently taking with you to your exam. YOU WILL BE SEDATED during your procedure and you will not be allowed to drive for 12 hours after so an ADULT MUST ACCOMPANY you to your appointment to drive you home. If you plan to ride the bus, use “The Ride,” or take the taxi, YOU MUST still have a responsible person over the age of 16 accompany you home. A discharge instructions sheet will be provided immediately following your procedure. It takes approximately ten (10) days to get biopsy or pathology reports back to our office. You will be notified of the results by a follow- up appointment, letter, or by phone.	ON AS POSSIBLE: Call the Physician who prescribed your blood thinner (your primary care doctor or cardiologist) and ASK if you can STOP taking your blood thinning medication(s) (e.g. Coumadin, Plavix, Xarelto, ELIQUIS, Pradaxa, Prasugrel, Brilinta, Cilostazol, Aggrenox.). Many procedures cannot be performed if you are on a blood thinning medication, but you MUST obtain approval from the prescribing physician PRIOR to discontinuing any blood thinners. Your doctor may put you on an alternate medication while you stop your blood thinning medication(s). THREE DAYS BEFORE PROCEDURE: Discontinue all blood thinning drugs (prescription and non-prescription), including Coumadin, Plavix, Xarelto , ELIQUIS, Pradaxa, Prasugrel, Brilinta, Cilostazol, Aggrenox. REMEMBER! Your primary care doctor or cardiologist MUST approve this action BEFORE you discontinue these medications when you are taking them for blood thinning. DAY OF EXAM NO solid foods today; however you can drink as much water as you need to up to two (2) hours prior to your procedure, but you MUST NOT take anything by mouth after that. BRING your driver’s license, insurance card, and a list of any prescription and over-the -counter medications you are currently taking with you to your exam. YOU WILL BE SEDATED during your procedure and you will not be allowed to drive for 12 hours after so an ADULT MUST ACCOMPANY you to your appointment to drive you home. If you plan to ride the bus, use “The Ride,” or take the taxi, YOU MUST still have a responsible person over the age of 16 accompany you home. A discharge instructions sheet will be provided immediately following your procedure. It takes approximately ten (10) days to get biopsy or pathology reports back to our office. You will be notified of the results by a follow- up appointment,	yes
Endoscopy	Should patients stop taking blood thinners before an endoscopy?	yes_statement	"patients" should "stop" "taking" "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".. it is necessary for "patients" to discontinue "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".	https://www.massgeneral.org/medicine/gastroenterology/about/frequently-asked-questions	FAQ as You Prepare for Your Colonoscopy or Upper Endoscopy	We have remained at the forefront of medicine by fostering a culture of collaboration, pushing the boundaries of medical research, educating the brightest medical minds and maintaining an unwavering commitment to the diverse communities we serve. Frequently Asked Questions as You Prepare for Your Colonoscopy or Upper Endoscopy Thank you for choosing to have your procedure with Mass General Gastroenterology Associates. Patients often have questions as they prepare for their colonoscopy or upper endoscopy. Below are answers to some frequently asked questions. Information on preparing for your procedure can also be found in the bowel preparation packet that you received in the mail. If you still have questions after reviewing your bowel preparation packet and the information below, please call the GI office at 617-726-7663. Medicines Do I need to stop taking my blood thinner? If you take blood thinners, we recommend you take them unless your gastroenterology doctor told you to stop taking them. We also encourage you to communicate with your prescribing provider (heart doctor or primary care provider). Blood thinners may include Coumadin, Plavix, Pradaxa, Eliquis and Lovenox. If I had a knee replacement, should I take antibiotics ? If you previously had a knee replacement, antibiotics are generally not needed to prevent joint infections. However, if your orthopedic doctor or primary care doctor recommends antibiotics, please contact their office for a prescription and instructions. If I had a heart valve replacement, should I take antibiotics? If you previously had a heart valve replacement, antibiotics are generally not needed to prevent valve infections. However, if you have a high-risk heart condition, antibiotics may be recommended. Please check with your heart doctor to see if antibiotics are recommended for you. Can I continue my vitamins, iron pills, or liquid antacids? If you take vitamins, iron pills, or liquid antacids, stop taking them 5 days before your procedure. Liquid antacids include Mylanta and Gaviscon. If you are unsure, check with your prescribing provider. Should I take my medicine for diabetes? If you are taking Canagliflozin (Invokana), Canagliflozin and Metformin (Invokamet), Dapagliflozin (Farxiga), Xigduo XR Dapagliflozin and Metformin extended-release, or Empagliflozin (Jardiance), please stop it at least three days before your colonoscopy. If you are taking ertugliflozin (Steglatro, Steglujan, or Segluromet), please stop it at least four days before your scheduled colonoscopy. Make sure to contact your primary care physician or diabetes doctor about the suggested changes above and get their guidance as well If you take insulin, we usually recommend that you take ½ your normal dose on the day of the procedure. Should I take other medicines prescribed for me? Contact the provider who prescribed the medicine for you about any changes needed before your procedure. In general, we recommend that you take your usual medicine as prescribed when possible. Bowel Prep Laxative What should I do if a prescription for laxative wasn’t included in my bowel preparation packet? Some bowel preparations require prescription laxative. If your bowel preparation instructions say that you will need to take prescription laxative, your prescription will be sent electronically to your pharmacy. Many pharmacies place these prescriptions on hold, so contact your pharmacy and ask to have it filled. What should I do if my pharmacy hasn’t received the prescription for laxative yet? Please call your pharmacy first. If your pharmacy does not have the prescription for laxative, please call your gastroenterology doctor’s office for a prescription. If your procedure is more than 1 week away, you may also send a Patient Gateway message to request a prescription at patientgateway.massgeneralbrigham.org I was given PEG laxative. Is it the same as GoLYTELY? Yes, PEG and GoLYTELY laxatives are the same. The generic name is PEG-3350 with Electrolytes (polyethylene glycol electrolyte solution). Brand names include GoLYTELY, NuLYTELY, Colyte, Trilyte, or GaviLyte. What if a prior authorization is needed for my prep/laxative?Please check with your insurance upon scheduling to understand if your prep requires a prior authorization (insurance coverage). It is important to you notify the office as soon as possible to avoid scheduling issues. I took magnesium citrate as a laxative the last time. Can I have that this time? We no longer recommend magnesium citrate as a laxative for our patients. Magnesium citrate doesn’t work as well and can have more risks and side effects than other laxatives. My friend had a laxative that was easier to drink. Can I have a different laxative? We strongly recommend that you use the laxative prescribed for you. Other laxatives may not work as well, may not be covered by your insurance, and can be more expensive. Do I need to drink half of the laxative the night before my procedure and half the morning of my procedure? Yes, it is important to drink half of the laxative the night before your procedure and half the morning of your procedure. Make sure you follow the schedule in your bowel preparation packet carefully. Following this schedule will clean your bowels completely and allow your gastroenterology doctor to see inside your colon better. If your bowels are not clean, your procedure may get postponed, cancelled, or need to be repeated. You may also be given a different bowel preparation to clean your bowels better. Please follow our instructions and disregard the bottle which may tell you to take the laxative all at once. Do I need to wake up in the middle of the night to finish drinking the laxative? It is very important that you finish the laxative 4 hours before your scheduled arrival time as instructed in your bowel preparation packet. This may require you to wake up in the middle of the night to finish drinking the laxative. The correct timing of drinking the laxative is important in cleaning your bowels completely and allowing your gastroenterology doctor to see inside your colon better. We understand early appointments and travel time may be difficult however please make every effort to follow the prep instructions, it is to your benefit to avoid having to re-schedule your procedure for poor prep. You may drink a small amount of clear liquids up until 2 hours before your procedure. If your bowels are not clean, your procedure may get postponed, cancelled, or need to be repeated. Can I drink all the laxative the night before my procedure? No. It is important to follow the schedule in your bowel preparation packet. Drinking the last half of the laxative closer to your procedure time will give better results and a cleaner colon for your procedure. If your bowels are not clean, your procedure may get postponed, cancelled, or need to be repeated. You may also be given a different bowel preparation to clean your bowels better. What should I do if I have a long travel time to MGH for my procedure? If you have a long travel time to MGH for your procedure, we recommend that you drink the last half of the laxative earlier. For example, we generally recommend drinking the last half of the laxative 4-5 hours before your scheduled arrival time. However, if it will take you 2 hours to get to MGH, you may want to drink the last half of the laxative 6-7 hours before your scheduled arrival time instead. This will allow the laxative to work before you leave for your procedure. What are some tips for drinking the laxative if I feel sick to my stomach? It is common to feel nauseous or sick to your stomach during your bowel preparation. Here are some tips you can try to help you drink the laxative: Rest for 30 minutes then continue to drink the laxative every 20-30 minutes as tolerated. Use a straw to drink the laxative. Chill the laxative in the fridge and drink it cold. Add some fruit juice, Crystal Light, or ice to the laxative to help make it taste better. Don’t use any red, purple or orange colored fruit juice or Crystal Light. Chew gum or suck on lemon or hard candy in between drinks to help with the taste. These tips can also be found in your bowel preparation packet. What if the amount of laxative will be too much for me to drink? If you think the amount of laxative will be too much for you to drink, talk with your gastroenterologist about your options. What should I do if I already drank the first half of the laxative, but haven’t had a bowel movement yet? If you haven’t had a bowel movement after the first half of the laxative, continue to drink the laxative until you have a bowel movement then stop. In the morning, finish drinking the rest of the laxative as instructed in your bowel preparation packet. Be sure to drink plenty of clear liquids to keep yourself hydrated. What should I do if I have severe constipation or gastroesophageal reflux disease? If you have a history of severe constipation, GERD (gastroesophageal reflux disease), or any other problems with digestion, contact your gastroenterology doctor at least 2 weeks before your procedure to discuss the right laxative and diet plan for you. What should I do if I don’t think the laxative prescribed for me will clean out my bowels completely? If you don’t think the laxative prescribed for you will clean out your bowels completely, contact your gastroenterology doctor at least 2 weeks before your procedure to discuss the right laxative and diet plan for you. How can I tell if my bowels are clean before my procedure? After finishing your laxative, your stool should be watery. The color of your stool should also be clear or yellow. What do you recommend if I did not tolerate the prep for my last colonoscopy? Please discuss prep options with your endoscopist and or primary care provider when the procedure is booked. It is important to have the best prep possible to ensure a thorough examination of your colon. If I have constipation, what can I do improve this? If you move your bowels 2 times a week or less or if you use a laxative more than 2 times a month, at bedtime, take 4 tablespoons of milk of magnesia. Anti-Gas Pills What are anti-gas pills? Anti-gas pills are chewable simethicone tablets. They are available over the counter at your pharmacy. Some brand names include Gas-X, Maalox Anti-Gas, Mylicon, and Mylanta Gas. Any brand is fine. Please take two tablets of the regular strength simethicone. Ask your pharmacist if you would like help finding them. Please avoid the cherry flavor (red color). Diet and Nutrition I ate breakfast the morning of my procedure. Can I still have my procedure? If you ate breakfast the morning of your procedure, your procedure must be rescheduled for a later date. To reschedule your procedure, please call [GI office/617-726-2426 option #3] as soon as possible. It is important to follow the instructions in your bowel preparation packet carefully to prevent your procedure from getting rescheduled. Arrival and Procedure Times It is important to arrive at the time listed in your bowel preparation packet to allow us to get you ready for your procedure. This includes filling out paperwork, changing into a hospital gown, taking your vital signs, placing an IV (intravenous) catheter in your arm for medicine, and answering any questions you have about the procedure. Please arrive on time to prevent delays in starting your procedure. How long will my procedure last? Plan on spending about 3 hours total in the Endoscopy Unit. This includes time needed to prepare for the procedure, perform the procedure, and recover after the procedure. Average length of each procedure: Colonoscopy – 20-30 minutes Flexible Sigmoidoscopy - 10 minutes Upper Endoscopy - 10 minutes The length of your procedure will depend on the type of procedure you will have and the care you will need during the procedure. Escort Why do I need an escort? You will receive medicine to help you feel relaxed and comfortable during your procedure. It will take some time for the medicine to completely wear off after. For this reason, you will need an escort, an adult aged 18 or over, to come up to the endoscopy unit in person to pick you up. Ride services such as Uber, Lyft, etc will not suffice as an escort. When you arrive for your procedure, you must provide the name and phone number of your escort. Before your procedure begins, we will confirm with you, the patient, that your escort will be able to pick you at the Endoscopy Unit and bring you home. If we cannot confirm that you have an escort, your procedure will be rescheduled for a later date. We follow this policy strictly for the safety of our patients. What time should my escort pick me up? Your escort should be able to pick you up 30 minutes after we call them. Procedure Questions What is conscious (procedural) sedation? Will I be going to sleep? It is combination of sedatives and narcotics. Our goal is not for you to go to sleep but for you to feel comfortable during the exam. You will feel the effects of the medications for a couple hours after the procedure. Therefore, you cannot drive the day of your examination. What are the common complications that arise from colonoscopy or endoscopy? The common complication from these procedures is related to conscious sedation. Many patients feel sleepy and tired after the procedures. After colonoscopy, bloating and cramps is common. The more serious complications include bleeding or perforation. Bleeding may occur after a polyp is removed. With significant bleeding, you will see fresh, red blood in your stool. A perforation of your bowel will cause severe abdominal pain and fever. For these serious complications, it is important for you to be evaluated quickly in the MGH emergency department or a one closer to you. Post-Procedure Questions What if I haven’t received my results from my procedure after 14 days? Some mild gas pain may be expected following your colonoscopy. Walking can be helpful. If pain is persistent and accompanied by fever, chills, blood in stools, hard abdomen, abdominal swelling or inability to pass gas, you should seek urgent medical attention. What is a biopsy and how to I get the report? A biopsy is a sample of tissue taken during a procedure. Biopsies are often taken of ulcers, tumors, polyps, and abnormal tissue in order to examine the samples with a microscope. The reports are usually available in 10-14 days. After your procedure, you should receive a written letter with the biopsy results. Will I see my physician after the procedure? Since you will be receiving sedatives for your procedures, you may not remember much of the test or the discussions afterwards. You will have the opportunity to see your physician prior to the procedure and your discharge paperwork will inform you if polyps were removed or biopsies taken. The results of the procedure will be given to you in written form. This will help you remember what was found during the procedure. All reports are sent to the referring physician(s) after the procedure. What if I am breast feeding? If you receive anesthesia, please discuss with your pediatrician for recommendations for breast feeding after sedation/anesthesia. Other GI Endoscopy Procedure Questions What is an ERCP? ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) is a term for a procedure in which the bile and pancreatic ducts are examined with an endoscope. X-ray dye is injected into the ducts and x-ray pictures are taken. If there is a blockage, a stent will be placed to unblock the duct. What is an MRCP? MRCP (Magnetic Cholangiopancreatography) is a term for a uses a powerful magnetic field, radio waves and a computer to evaluate the liver, gallbladder, bile ducts, pancreas and pancreatic duct for disease. It is noninvasive and does not use radiation. A dye is used to better examine the given area. What is an EUS? EUS, or endoscopic ultrasound, is an endoscopic exam using an endoscope with an ultrasound probe on the tip of the scope. This type of exam is often performed to evaluate patients with abnormalities in the pancreas and tumors in the esophagus and stomach. Endoscopic Procedures During COVID-19 Peter Carolan, MD, clinical chief of the Massachusetts General Hospital Division of Gastroenterology, and Norman Nishioka, MD, director of Endoscopy, discuss the safety measures that have been implemented at Mass General and explain the importance of getting the care you need without delay. We use cookies and other tools to enhance your experience on our website and to analyze our web traffic. For more information about these cookies and the data collected, please refer to our Privacy Policy.	We have remained at the forefront of medicine by fostering a culture of collaboration, pushing the boundaries of medical research, educating the brightest medical minds and maintaining an unwavering commitment to the diverse communities we serve. Frequently Asked Questions as You Prepare for Your Colonoscopy or Upper Endoscopy Thank you for choosing to have your procedure with Mass General Gastroenterology Associates. Patients often have questions as they prepare for their colonoscopy or upper endoscopy. Below are answers to some frequently asked questions. Information on preparing for your procedure can also be found in the bowel preparation packet that you received in the mail. If you still have questions after reviewing your bowel preparation packet and the information below, please call the GI office at 617-726-7663. Medicines Do I need to stop taking my blood thinner? If you take blood thinners, we recommend you take them unless your gastroenterology doctor told you to stop taking them. We also encourage you to communicate with your prescribing provider (heart doctor or primary care provider). Blood thinners may include Coumadin, Plavix, Pradaxa, Eliquis and Lovenox. If I had a knee replacement, should I take antibiotics ? If you previously had a knee replacement, antibiotics are generally not needed to prevent joint infections. However, if your orthopedic doctor or primary care doctor recommends antibiotics, please contact their office for a prescription and instructions. If I had a heart valve replacement, should I take antibiotics? If you previously had a heart valve replacement, antibiotics are generally not needed to prevent valve infections. However, if you have a high-risk heart condition, antibiotics may be recommended. Please check with your heart doctor to see if antibiotics are recommended for you. Can I continue my vitamins, iron pills, or liquid antacids? If you take vitamins, iron pills, or liquid antacids, stop taking them 5 days before your procedure. Liquid antacids include Mylanta and Gaviscon. If you are unsure, check with your prescribing provider.	no
Endoscopy	Should patients stop taking blood thinners before an endoscopy?	yes_statement	"patients" should "stop" "taking" "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".. it is necessary for "patients" to discontinue "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".	https://www.pghclinic.com/endoscopy	Endoscopy - Palmetto Gastroenterology and Hepatololgy \| Aiken ...	What is an Upper Gastrointestinal (GI) Endoscopy? Upper GI endoscopy is a procedure that uses a lighted, flexible endoscope to see inside the upper GI tract. The upper GI tract includes the esophagus, stomach, and duodenum — the first part of the small intestine. What problems can an Upper GI Endoscopy detect? Upper GI endoscopy can detect ulcers abnormal growths precancerous conditions bowel obstruction inflammation hiatal hernia When is an Upper GI Endoscopy used? Upper GI endoscopy can be used to determine the cause of abdominal pain nausea vomiting unexplained weight loss anemia bleeding in the upper GI tract Upper GI endoscopy can be used to remove stuck objects, including food, and to treat conditions such as bleeding ulcers. It can also be used to biopsy tissue in the upper GI tract. During a biopsy, a small piece of tissue is removed for later examination with a microscope. How to Prepare for Upper GI Endoscopy The upper Gl tract must be empty before upper GI endoscopy. Generally, no eating or drinking is allowed for 4 to 8 hours before the procedure. Smoking and chewing gum are also prohibited during this time. Patients should tell their doctor about all health conditions they have—especially heart and lung problems, diabetes, and allergies— and all medications they are taking. Patients may be asked to temporarily stop taking medications that affect blood clotting or interact with sedatives, which are often given during upper GI endoscopy. Medications and vitamins that may be restricted before and after upper GI endoscopy include Driving is not permitted for 12 to 24 hours after upper GI endoscopy to allow sedatives time to completely wear off. Before the appointment, patients should make plans for a ride home. How is an Upper GI Endoscopy performed? Upper GI endoscopy is conducted at a hospital or outpatient center. Patients may receive a local, liquid anesthetic that is gargled or sprayed on the back of the throat. The anesthetic numbs the throat and calms the gag reflex. An intravenous (IV) needle is placed in a vein in the arm if a sedative will be given. Sedatives help patients stay relaxed and comfortable. While patients are sedated, the doctor and medical staff monitor vital signs. During the procedure, patients lie on their back or side on an examination table. An endoscope is carefully fed down the esophagus and into the stomach and duodenum. A small camera mounted on the endoscope transmits a video image to a video monitor, allowing close examination of the intestinal lining. Air is pumped through the endoscope to inflate the stomach and duodenum, making them easier to see. Special tools that slide through the endoscope allow the doc- tor to perform biopsies, stop bleeding, and remove abnormal growths. Recovery from an Upper GI Endoscopy After upper GI endoscopy, patients are moved to a recovery room where they wait about an hour for the sedative to wear off. During this time, patients may feel bloated or nauseated. They may also have a sore throat, which can stay for a day or two. Patients will likely feel tired and should plan to rest for the remainder of the day. Unless otherwise directed, patients may immediately resume their normal diet and medications. Some results from upper GI endoscopy are available immediately after the procedure. The doctor will often share results with the patient after the sedative has worn off. Biopsy results are usually ready in a few days. What are the risks associated with upper GI endoscopy? Risks associated with upper GI endoscopy include abnormal reaction to sedatives bleeding from biopsy accidental puncture of the upper GI tract Patients who experience any of the following rare symptoms after upper GI endoscopy should contact their doctor immediately: swallowing difficulties throat, chest, and abdominal pain that worsen vomiting bloody or very dark stool fever Points to Remember Upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is a procedure that uses a lighted, flexible endoscope to see inside the upper GI tract. To prepare for upper GI endoscopy, no eating or drinking is allowed for 4 to 8 hours before the procedure. Smoking and chewing gum are also prohibited. Patients should tell their doctor about all health conditions they have and all medications they are taking. Driving is not permitted for 12 to 24 hours after upper GI endoscopy to allow the sedative time to wear off. Before the appointment, patients should make plans for a ride home. Before upper GI endoscopy, the patient will receive a local anesthetic to numb the throat. An intravenous (IV) needle is placed in a vein in the arm if a sedative will be given. During upper GI endoscopy, an endoscope is carefully fed into the upper GI tract and images are transmitted to a video monitor. Special tools that slide through the endoscope allow the doctor to perform biopsies, stop bleeding, and remove abnormal growths. After upper GI endoscopy, patients may feel bloated or nauseated and may also have a sore throat.	How to Prepare for Upper GI Endoscopy The upper Gl tract must be empty before upper GI endoscopy. Generally, no eating or drinking is allowed for 4 to 8 hours before the procedure. Smoking and chewing gum are also prohibited during this time. Patients should tell their doctor about all health conditions they have—especially heart and lung problems, diabetes, and allergies— and all medications they are taking. Patients may be asked to temporarily stop taking medications that affect blood clotting or interact with sedatives, which are often given during upper GI endoscopy. Medications and vitamins that may be restricted before and after upper GI endoscopy include Driving is not permitted for 12 to 24 hours after upper GI endoscopy to allow sedatives time to completely wear off. Before the appointment, patients should make plans for a ride home. How is an Upper GI Endoscopy performed? Upper GI endoscopy is conducted at a hospital or outpatient center. Patients may receive a local, liquid anesthetic that is gargled or sprayed on the back of the throat. The anesthetic numbs the throat and calms the gag reflex. An intravenous (IV) needle is placed in a vein in the arm if a sedative will be given. Sedatives help patients stay relaxed and comfortable. While patients are sedated, the doctor and medical staff monitor vital signs. During the procedure, patients lie on their back or side on an examination table. An endoscope is carefully fed down the esophagus and into the stomach and duodenum. A small camera mounted on the endoscope transmits a video image to a video monitor, allowing close examination of the intestinal lining. Air is pumped through the endoscope to inflate the stomach and duodenum, making them easier to see. Special tools that slide through the endoscope allow the doc- tor to perform biopsies, stop bleeding, and remove abnormal growths.	yes
Endoscopy	Should patients stop taking blood thinners before an endoscopy?	yes_statement	"patients" should "stop" "taking" "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".. it is necessary for "patients" to discontinue "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".	https://health.uconn.edu/gastroenterology/patient-care/patient-resources/colonoscopy-frequently-asked-questions/	Colonoscopy Frequently Asked Questions \| Gastroenterology and ...	Colonoscopy Frequently Asked Questions The colonoscopy instructions and FAQs are for UConn Health patients. If you're not a UConn Health patient, please contact your provider with any questions. What happens if I start drinking the preparation laxative and I become nauseated or start vomiting? Slow down. If you’re drinking the gallon preparation (TriLyte, NuLytely or GoLytely) then try to drink 4 ounces every 15 to 20 minutes after waiting about 30 minutes. Try to drink as much as you can as this will improve the quality of the preparation and the quality of the examination. What happens if I drink the preparation and get no results? If you don’t have frequent and progressively looser bowel movements within 3 hours of taking the preparation you will likely need something else to help it to work properly. Have someone purchase rectal suppositories from a pharmacy. Place one in the rectum and if this doesn’t help, call the GI office at 860-679-3238. Why do I have to have someone drive me home? After your procedure is over you may be sleepy, uncomfortable, nauseated, or simply not yourself. This is the effect of the medications used for sedation and the procedure itself. Your reflexes will be slowed until the following day and you might injure yourself or others if you try to drive or operate machinery. Whenever possible you should be around someone that you know until the following day or at least until you arrive safely at home. Can I take a bus or taxi home by myself after my procedure? No. Due to the sedation given during the procedure, you are considered impaired. The sedation medication impairs your judgment and reflexes. A trusted person must be with you to accompany you on public transit. Can I take aspirin, anticoagulants, or blood thinners before the procedure? It is recommended that you discuss with your GI doctor or the prescribing physician to find out if you should stop taking aspirin, arthritis medications, anticoagulants, and blood thinners about 4 days before the procedure to reduce the risk of bleeding if polyps need to be removed. In most cases the procedure can still be performed if you forget to stop them. You should stop taking them as soon as you remember and call the GI office at 860-679-3238. If you are taking Coumadin (warfarin), you should call the GI endoscopy unit at 860-679-7595 as soon as you realize the error. I am very thin. Do I still have to take all of the laxatives? Yes. You must follow the preparation instructions provided to you. Your colon is approximately 6 feet long and must be completely emptied to help ensure an accurate and thorough examination. I seem to be all ‘cleaned out’ but haven’t finished my preparation. Do I need to finish it? Yes. You must follow the preparation instructions provided to you to help ensure an accurate and thorough examination. Can I use cream during the preparation to help with anal irritation I’m experiencing? Yes, you may apply Desitin, A+D Ointment, Vaseline or any other cream. Can I have my colonoscopy if I am having my menstrual period? Yes. When can I eat after the procedure is done? In general, you can eat immediately after your procedure as long as you avoid greasy or spicy foods. Please be aware that the sedation medication may cause mild nausea and you may not have a full appetite until the following day. Can I go back to work following my procedure? Due to the sedation given during the procedure, you should plan to rest at home for the remainder of the day. You may resume your usual activities the day after your procedure. How will I learn the results of the test? You will be told about the preliminary results of the test before you leave to go home. You will also be given written information about these results as it is common not to remember all of what is said soon after the procedure. If biopsies are performed or polyps are removed during the procedure you will be contacted with the results in about one week. Who can I call if I have questions regarding the preparation? If you are a patient scheduled for a colonoscopy at UConn Health and have problems with the preparation and/or have questions during weekday hours (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) call 860-679-3238 and ask to speak with the GI nurse. If you are a patient scheduled for a colonoscopy at UConn Health and have problems with the preparation and/or have questions during the evening hours (after 4:30 p.m.) or on the weekend call 860-679-2626 and ask for the GI fellow on call.	8. Why do I have to have someone drive me home? After your procedure is over you may be sleepy, uncomfortable, nauseated, or simply not yourself. This is the effect of the medications used for sedation and the procedure itself. Your reflexes will be slowed until the following day and you might injure yourself or others if you try to drive or operate machinery. Whenever possible you should be around someone that you know until the following day or at least until you arrive safely at home. Can I take a bus or taxi home by myself after my procedure? No. Due to the sedation given during the procedure, you are considered impaired. The sedation medication impairs your judgment and reflexes. A trusted person must be with you to accompany you on public transit. Can I take aspirin, anticoagulants, or blood thinners before the procedure? It is recommended that you discuss with your GI doctor or the prescribing physician to find out if you should stop taking aspirin, arthritis medications, anticoagulants, and blood thinners about 4 days before the procedure to reduce the risk of bleeding if polyps need to be removed. In most cases the procedure can still be performed if you forget to stop them. You should stop taking them as soon as you remember and call the GI office at 860-679-3238. If you are taking Coumadin (warfarin), you should call the GI endoscopy unit at 860-679-7595 as soon as you realize the error. I am very thin. Do I still have to take all of the laxatives? Yes. You must follow the preparation instructions provided to you. Your colon is approximately 6 feet long and must be completely emptied to help ensure an accurate and thorough examination. I seem to be all ‘cleaned out’ but haven’t finished my preparation. Do I need to finish it? Yes. You must follow the preparation instructions provided to you to help ensure an accurate and thorough examination. Can I use cream during the preparation to help with anal irritation I’m experiencing?	yes
Endoscopy	Should patients stop taking blood thinners before an endoscopy?	yes_statement	"patients" should "stop" "taking" "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".. it is necessary for "patients" to discontinue "blood" "thinners" before an "endoscopy".	https://www.baystatehealth.org/services/gastroenterology/diagnosis-and-treatment/endoscopy/preparing-for-an-endoscopy	Preparing for an Endoscopy \| Baystate Health	Preparing for an Endoscopy What to Expect Before the Procedure Your provider will give you information about preparing for your procedure, including instructions for eating and drinking, for taking your regular medications, and for your preparation prescription. Ask your provider if you have questions leading up to your procedure. Routine Medications Be sure to check with your doctor about taking any medication the day of your exam. This includes over-the-counter medications and herbal supplements. You may be advised by your doctor to stop taking any blood thinners such as: aspirin, ibuprofen (Motrin), naprosyn (Alleve), coumadin, plavix, or vitamin E several days before your exam. Please bring to your exam a list of all medications that you take, including the dosage and the reason why you take them. The Day of Your Procedure After registering at the hospital front desk, you will be brought to a private admitting room where a specially trained nurse will review your medical history and ask you to sign any necessary paperwork. You will then change into an endoscopy gown and the nurse will record your vital signs and start your IV. The admission process takes approximately 20-30 minutes. Your family will be able to be with you during this part of the process. What to Expect During the Procedure Your procedure nurse will meet you in the admitting room, where they will re-identify you and briefly review your record. Your nurse will then transport you to the procedure room, and staff will direct your family to the waiting room. The nurse and GI (gastrointestinal) tech will help position you for your exam, including connecting you to equipment that will allow them to monitor your vital signs during your procedure. You will be able to speak to your doctor and ask any last minute questions. Your nurse or anesthetist will then administer the medicines through your IV that will make you sleepy. Most patients sleep during their endoscopy procedures. The goal with any type of sedation is to keep the patient safe and comfortable. Procedure times vary based on complexity; for example, a colonoscopy generally takes between 15-20 minutes; other procedures may take as long as 1 hour. What to Expect After the Procedure Your recovery process will take between 30-45 minutes. Your procedure nurse will transport you to the recovery area, and your family will be called in to be with you while you wake up. When you are awake enough, we will review the results of your exam and any other instructions with you and your family. We will give you something to drink and remove your IV, and you will be ready to dress and be discharged. After Procedure Restrictions In most cases, patients are permitted to resume their usual diet and medications immediately unless specifically indicated in your discharge instructions. Restrictions include: If a polyp was removed, your doctor may advise holding blood thinners such as: aspirin, ibuprofen (Motrin), naprosyn (Alleve), coumadin, plavix, or vitamin E several days to prevent bleeding. In the 24 hours following your procedure, you should not drive or drink alcohol. You must be discharged with a person who will drive you home and assure your well-being after arriving home. This restriction is especially important for elderly patients and those with significant medical histories, such as diabetes and cardiac conditions. You are also advised not to engage in any activities that require mental acuity or good coordination, such as: sports, legal decisions, or power tool use. Please note: If you experience any “gas” discomfort after the exam, know that it is normal. Air is used to dilate the bowel during the exam. If you are uncomfortable, you may try applying a heating pad to your stomach and/or walking around. If you have any questions after your procedure, please ask your health care provider. FOR HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS We use cookies on our website to enhance your experience, to deliver more relevant content, and to improve the quality of our site. By using this website, you are agreeing to cookies being collected in line with our Privacy Policy.	Preparing for an Endoscopy What to Expect Before the Procedure Your provider will give you information about preparing for your procedure, including instructions for eating and drinking, for taking your regular medications, and for your preparation prescription. Ask your provider if you have questions leading up to your procedure. Routine Medications Be sure to check with your doctor about taking any medication the day of your exam. This includes over-the-counter medications and herbal supplements. You may be advised by your doctor to stop taking any blood thinners such as: aspirin, ibuprofen (Motrin), naprosyn (Alleve), coumadin, plavix, or vitamin E several days before your exam. Please bring to your exam a list of all medications that you take, including the dosage and the reason why you take them. The Day of Your Procedure After registering at the hospital front desk, you will be brought to a private admitting room where a specially trained nurse will review your medical history and ask you to sign any necessary paperwork. You will then change into an endoscopy gown and the nurse will record your vital signs and start your IV. The admission process takes approximately 20-30 minutes. Your family will be able to be with you during this part of the process. What to Expect During the Procedure Your procedure nurse will meet you in the admitting room, where they will re-identify you and briefly review your record. Your nurse will then transport you to the procedure room, and staff will direct your family to the waiting room. The nurse and GI (gastrointestinal) tech will help position you for your exam, including connecting you to equipment that will allow them to monitor your vital signs during your procedure. You will be able to speak to your doctor and ask any last minute questions. Your nurse or anesthetist will then administer the medicines through your IV that will make you sleepy. Most patients sleep during their endoscopy procedures. The goal with any type of sedation is to keep the patient safe and comfortable. Procedure times vary based on complexity; for example, a colonoscopy generally takes between 15-20 minutes; other procedures may take as long as 1 hour.	yes
Veganism	Should pregnant women follow a vegan diet?	yes_statement	"pregnant" "women" should "follow" a "vegan" "diet".. it is advisable for "pregnant" "women" to adopt a "vegan" "diet".	https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/is-vegan-diet-healthy-for-kids-belgian-doctors-say-no/	Is Vegan Diet Healthy For Kids? Belgian Doctors Say No - CBS ...	Is Vegan Diet Healthy For Kids? Belgian Doctors Say No (CNN) -- Belgium's Royal Academy of Medicine recommended last week that children, teens, pregnant women and nursing mothers do not follow a vegan diet. An estimated 3% of Belgian children follow this type of vegetarianism that excludes meat, eggs, dairy products and all other animal-derived ingredients, according to the academy's statement. The eating plan is "restrictive," creates "unavoidable" nutritional shortcomings and, if not properly monitored, could lead to deficiencies and stunted development, the academy said. The medical opinion was requested by a representative of a national human rights organization, who sought guidance for pediatricians and other health care workers. The Royal Academy of Medicine functions as an advisory agency for Belgium's government institutions. Dr. Georges Casimir, a pediatrician at Queen Fabiola Children's Hospital and head of the commission appointed by the academy to study the issue of veganism, discouraged the diet for children and pregnant women due to the possibility of "irreversible" harms. A potential health issue caused by a vegan diet is a lack of sufficient proteins and essential fatty acids for the developing brain. Vitamins, including essential ingredients such as D and B12, calcium or even trace elements and nutrients essential for proper development are "absent from this diet," according to a statement from Casimir. Isabelle Thiebaut, a co-author of the opinion and president of an European organization for dieticians, said that it is important to explain to parents about "weight-loss and psychomotor delays, undernutrition, anemia" and other possible nutritional shortfalls caused by a vegan diet for children. If parents do not follow the new recommendation, children who continue to follow a vegan diet should receive supplements, medical followup and regular blood tests, according to the academy. Not everyone agrees with the academy's statement. The British Dietetic Association stated that "well-planned plant-based, vegan-friendly diets can be devised to support healthy living at every age and life-stage." Great Britain has about 600,000 vegans, roughly 1.2% of the population in 2018, according to the nonprofit Vegan Society. The same opinion is maintained across the pond. "Appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases," according to the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, an US organization for nutrition professionals. "These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes." The organization's position paper also states that vegans are at reduced risk of certain health conditions, including heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, certain types of cancer and obesity. A small group of vegetarians coined the term "vegan" in 1944, according to the Vegan Society. A recent study that explored the impact of different diets suggests that global adoption of a vegan diet would avoid 8.1 million deaths per year by 2050.	Is Vegan Diet Healthy For Kids? Belgian Doctors Say No (CNN) -- Belgium's Royal Academy of Medicine recommended last week that children, teens, pregnant women and nursing mothers do not follow a vegan diet. An estimated 3% of Belgian children follow this type of vegetarianism that excludes meat, eggs, dairy products and all other animal-derived ingredients, according to the academy's statement. The eating plan is "restrictive," creates "unavoidable" nutritional shortcomings and, if not properly monitored, could lead to deficiencies and stunted development, the academy said. The medical opinion was requested by a representative of a national human rights organization, who sought guidance for pediatricians and other health care workers. The Royal Academy of Medicine functions as an advisory agency for Belgium's government institutions. Dr. Georges Casimir, a pediatrician at Queen Fabiola Children's Hospital and head of the commission appointed by the academy to study the issue of veganism, discouraged the diet for children and pregnant women due to the possibility of "irreversible" harms. A potential health issue caused by a vegan diet is a lack of sufficient proteins and essential fatty acids for the developing brain. Vitamins, including essential ingredients such as D and B12, calcium or even trace elements and nutrients essential for proper development are "absent from this diet," according to a statement from Casimir. Isabelle Thiebaut, a co-author of the opinion and president of an European organization for dieticians, said that it is important to explain to parents about "weight-loss and psychomotor delays, undernutrition, anemia" and other possible nutritional shortfalls caused by a vegan diet for children. If parents do not follow the new recommendation, children who continue to follow a vegan diet should receive supplements, medical followup and regular blood tests, according to the academy. Not everyone agrees with the academy's statement.	no
Veganism	Should pregnant women follow a vegan diet?	yes_statement	"pregnant" "women" should "follow" a "vegan" "diet".. it is advisable for "pregnant" "women" to adopt a "vegan" "diet".	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6356233/	Vegan Nutrition for Mothers and Children: Practical Tools for ...	Share RESOURCES As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. Learn more: PMC Disclaimer \| PMC Copyright Notice Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Associated Data Abstract As the number of subjects choosing vegan diets increases, healthcare providers must be prepared to give the best advice to vegan patients during all stages of life. A completely plant-based diet is suitable during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, and childhood, provided that it is well-planned. Balanced vegan diets meet energy requirements on a wide variety of plant foods and pay attention to some nutrients that may be critical, such as protein, fiber, omega-3 fatty acids, iron, zinc, iodine, calcium, vitamin D, and vitamin B12. This paper contains recommendations made by a panel of experts from the Scientific Society for Vegetarian Nutrition (SSNV) after examining the available literature concerning vegan diets during pregnancy, breastfeeding, infancy, and childhood. All healthcare professionals should follow an approach based on the available evidence in regard to the issue of vegan diets, as failing to do so may compromise the nutritional status of vegan patients in these delicate periods of life. 1. Introduction Well-planned vegan diets, when based on a wide variety of plant foods and excluding all animal derivatives, can provide adequate nutrition throughout all stages of life, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, and childhood [1]. As veganism gains popularity worldwide [2], it does so in Italy, as well. Vegans account for 1% of the total population, and the percentage of people making this dietary choice has been growing in the past years [3]. The exact number of vegan mothers and children following a vegan diet in Italy is not known, but it is likely that the percentage is similar to that of the general population. In the United States, 1% of children aged 8–18 years is estimated to be vegan, as is 3.4% of the total American population [4,5]. The Italian Society for Human Nutrition (SINU) approves vegan diets during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, and childhood [6], and strongly suggests that government institutions and health and nutrition organizations provide more educational resources in order to help Italian plant-based eaters. In this scenario, a panel of experts from the Scientific Society for Vegetarian Nutrition (SSNV) examined the available literature concerning vegan nutrition in pregnant and breastfeeding women, infants, and children in order to summarize the most relevant recommendations for healthcare providers to best serve their vegan patients in these various delicate stages of life. In 2016, the SSNV also created the Veg Family Network [7], which groups all experts in the field of vegan nutrition for mothers and children in Italy, so that vegan families can easily find skilled healthcare professionals for advice. 2. Well-Planned Vegan Diets: Definition Although often framed in terms of lacking, vegan diets are actually rich in a wide variety of foods: grains, legumes (including soy and its derivatives), vegetables, fruits, nuts and seeds, vegetable fats, and herbs and spices [1,6]. Concerns about vegan diets during pregnancy, breastfeeding, infancy, and childhood arose in the past [8,9,10], but this was due to the fact that although being categorized as “vegan”, the investigated subjects were following restrictive diets not respecting all the criteria required to define the diet as being well-planned. Consume large amounts and a wide variety of plant foods, emphasizing the intake of whole or minimally processed foods: a vegan diet can be nutritionally adequate when meeting the calorie requirements from a variety of nutrient-dense foods, mainly unprocessed, belonging to all the plant food groups. The only exception being during late pregnancy, infancy, and early childhood, when fiber must be limited. Limit the amount of vegetable fats, as suggested by the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs), in order to not displace more nutrient-dense foods nor limit excess calories. Choose vegetable fats carefully, consuming good sources of omega-3 fatty acids and monounsaturated oils, while avoiding trans fats and tropical oils (coconut, palm, and palm kernel oils) in order to emphasize the efficiency of the omega-3 metabolic pathway. The only exception is during infancy and early childhood, when fats should not be limited but should still be carefully chosen. Consume adequate amounts of calcium and pay attention to vitamin D status: good calcium sources should be obtained by increasing the intakes of calcium-rich foods from plant sources. Conversely, as no kind of diet can provide adequate amounts of vitamin D, the recommendations for vitamin D are the same as for the general population. Consume adequate amounts of vitamin B12: the intake of reliable sources of vitamin B12 is fundamental for a well-planned vegetarian diet, as vitamin B12 status can be compromised, over time, in all vegetarian subjects who do not supplement it. 3. Vegan Diets During Pregnancy, Lactation, and Childhood Several scientific societies have released their position statement on vegetarian diets and are favorable to complete plant-based diets during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, and childhood, as long as they are well-planned (see definition above) [1,4,12,13,14]. Pregnant and breastfeeding vegan women can meet all of their nutrient needs on a vegan diet that includes a variety of plant foods and reliable sources of vitamin B12 and vitamin D [15,16,17]. The average birthweight of infants born to vegan mothers does not differ significantly from that of infants of omnivorous mothers. Macrobiotic vegan women, whose diets can be highly restricted in calories and nutrients, in contrast to well-planned vegan diets, give birth to infants whose weights are significantly lower than expected [18]. Following a plant-rich diet during pregnancy may be protective against the development of preeclampsia, pre-gravid obesity, and minimize the exposure to genotoxic agents. It may also protect from the onset of pediatric diseases, such as pediatric wheezing, diabetes, neural tube defects, orofacial clefts, and some pediatric tumors [19]. The growth of vegan preschoolers, children, and adolescents falls within normal range [22,23], except for those following restrictive macrobiotic diets, whose growth rates are reduced [24]. Children following plant-based diets might have a lower risk of developing obesity [25], are less exposed to veterinary antibiotics found in animal-derived foods [26], and show a more favorable anti-inflammatory adipokine profile [27]. Our review examines the available recommendations regarding nutrients which may be critical in a vegan diet during pregnancy, breastfeeding, infancy, and childhood due to higher requirements and particular physiologic conditions [1,4,12,13]. For the purpose of this paper, we will use the term infants as referring to children from birth to 12 months of age, and the term children from 1 to 17 years of age. 3.1. Protein Protein requirements can be easily met on a vegan diet that includes a variety of plant foods and meets calorie requirements [1,6,15]. Beans, grains, nuts and seeds, and green leafy vegetables are a good source of protein in vegan diets [28]. Soy and its derivatives, pseudocereals (buckwheat, quinoa, and amaranth), lupins, spinach, and hemp seeds have all the essential amino acids in a proportion similar to animal foods [28], and their consumption should be encouraged. All essential amino acids can be found in plant proteins [28]. If a variety of plant foods is consumed throughout the day then there is no need for combining different protein sources at each meal [1]. Nevertheless, the presence of antinutritional factors and of fiber is responsible for a lower digestibility of plant proteins (on average about 85%) [29], and when protein needs are particularly high, such as during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, and childhood, some precautions are needed. 3.1.1. Pregnancy and Lactation Protein intakes should be increased by 10% in vegan pregnant and lactating women, as for all adult vegetarians [6,30]. Additional servings of grains, protein-rich plant foods (legumes, soy milk, soy yoghurt, tofu, tempeh, and meat analogs based on wheat or soy protein) and nuts and seeds should be consumed by vegan women during the second and third trimester of pregnancy and during breastfeeding to meet increased protein requirements [15]. 3.1.2. Infancy and Childhood From 6 to 12 months of age breast or formula milk are good sources of protein in addition to solid foods that are gradually introduced [31], and from 1 to 17 years of age a vegan diet can provide adequate protein, even if the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) increases by 15%, as some authors suggest [12,31]. Since such protein requirements are easily reached and at times exceeded in a vegan diet [32], we suggest heeding to this recommendation. Infants and young children, whose small stomachs cannot contain great quantities of food and whose total muscle mass is limited together with the efficiency of the amino acid pool, may benefit from consuming different plant sources of protein at each meal, or at least from consuming different plant protein sources at intervals shorter than 6 h [33]. This is very easy for them to do, since they often consume small and frequent meals. In addition to the above-mentioned protein-rich plant foods, during infancy and early childhood, breast milk and plant-based formula milk provide a good amount of protein [33]. Only commercial infant formulas are recommended for vegan infants, and the use of homemade formulas (based on plant-milks and grains) is strongly discouraged, as it has been associated with nutritional problems in infants [31]. Although the content of isoflavones and aluminum in vegan formulas based on soy protein caused some perplexities in the past in regard to possible negative health effects, the available data suggest that modern soy formulas for infants are a safe option [34]. 3.2. Fiber Fiber is abundant in plant-foods and cannot be digested by human enzymes in the digestive tract. Soluble fiber is fermented by gut bacteria, thus producing compounds that may be beneficial to human health [35]. Insoluble fiber increases the bulk of ingested food [36]. By interfering with the absorption of protein and fat and increasing the total volume of food, fiber decreases the calorie density of meals [37]. It also promotes satiety, which occurs earlier after meals containing fiber [38,39]. An excess of fiber, limiting food and calorie intake, may be detrimental during late pregnancy, infancy, and early childhood. 3.2.1. Pregnancy A regular intake of high fiber foods, as happens in vegan diets, affects the gut microbiota richness of pregnant women positively [40], and so helps fight constipation [41]. Fiber consumption should meet the recommended intake for vegan pregnant women [16,17], unless it causes reduction in food intake and difficulty in meeting the higher energy and nutrient requirements [15], especially during the second and third trimesters, when gastric capacity decreases due to the increased abdominal space required by the fetus. In this case, fruits and vegetable juices, refined grains, peeled beans, and high-protein, high-energy, fiber-free foods such as soy milk, tofu, and soy yoghurt should be preferred. 3.2.2. Infancy and Childhood Since the growth rate is very high in the first year of life [42], an excess of fiber may interfere with proper growth by reducing the calorie density of meals, by interfering with the absorption of fats and minerals and leading to early satiety. Vegan infants’ meals up to 12 months of age should be as fiber-deprived as possible (e.g., refined-grains, peeled and mashed beans, or well-cooked beans passed through a sieve). Fiber-free foods such as tofu and soy yoghurt, and strained fruits and vegetables should be preferred [43] (p.339–340). Attention to fiber content must be also paid during the second year of life, as growth velocity is still high [42], but after 12 months whole plant foods also participate in reaching the adequacy of the diet. 3.3. Omega-3 Fatty Acids Good plant sources of omega-3 fatty acids include ground flaxseeds and flaxseed oil, ground chia seeds, and walnuts. One serving of omega-3-rich foods provides approximately 2.5 g of alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) [15,32], from which long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) eicosapentaenoic/docosahexaenoic (EPA/DHA) are then synthetized [44,45]. To maintain an optimal omega-6/omega-3 ratio and favor the conversion of ALA into PUFAs, seed oils rich in omega-6, trans fats (margarine), and tropical oils (coconut, palm, and palm kernel oils) rich in saturated fats should be avoided or strongly limited [46,47]. Inadequate intakes of energy, proteins, and micronutrients may also impair EPA and DHA synthesis [6]. Olive oil has a low influence on the omega-6/omega-3 ratio and, in addition to flaxseed oil, if used as an omega-3 source, should be the only additional oil to use [45,47]. During the delicate phases of pregnancy, breastfeeding, infancy, and early childhood, when the process of ALA conversion may not keep up with the increased DHA requirements, we suggest insisting upon the Italian DRIs, which recommend a supplementary source of preformed DHA [16]. 3.3.1. Pregnancy and Lactation Diets of pregnant and lactating women should include 2 daily servings of omega-3 rich foods in order to meet requirements [15,16,17]. The conversion rate from ALA to PUFA can be insufficient to meet the slightly increased DHA requirements during pregnancy and lactation [16], for which all pregnant or breastfeeding women, including vegans, should supplement 100–200 mg of DHA daily [15,16,48]. 3.3.2. Infancy and Childhood Fats should be not limited in infancy and early childhood (they can provide up to 40% of total energy), but rather carefully selected in order to obtain an optimal omega-6/omega-3 ratio [16,44,45,50]. Breast milk of women following a well-balanced vegan diet and formula milk are a good source of omega-3 fatty acids [15,32]. Vegan children from 6 to 12 months should continue to receive breast milk or infant formula on demand and consume 1–2 servings daily of omega-3 rich foods, preferably in the form of flaxseed oil, which does not contain fiber [32]. Vegan children from 1 year of age on should meet their omega-3 requirements by consuming 2 servings of omega-3 rich foods daily [16,17,32]. Choosing at least one serving of flaxseed oil per day instead of the other fiber-containing plant omega-3 sources helps reduce fiber content of the diet when necessary [29,31]. DHA requirements are higher during infancy and early childhood, as DHA participates in retina and neural development [51]. A daily DHA supplement of 100 mg is suggested for all children, including vegans, from 6 months to 3 years of age [16]. Algal-derived DHA is a viable option [49] and may be more acceptable to vegan parents. 3.4. Iron Iron content of vegan diets is higher than in lacto-ovo-vegetarian or omnivorous diets [52]. Iron in plant foods, however, is found in the non-heme form, which can be more variably absorbed than iron in the heme form found in meat, fish, and their derivatives (bioavailability of 1–34% and of 15–35%, respectively) [52,53,54]. Conversely, only the absorption of non-heme iron is subject to homeostatic regulation, which may protect plant-based eaters from iron overload, a risk factor for cardiometabolic diseases [54,55]. 3.4.1. Pregnancy and Lactation All pregnant women are potentially at risk for iron deficiency (from 7–30% of all pregnancies) [57], as iron requirements nearly double during this period of life [16,17]. Although it has been suggested by some authors that all vegans should increase their recommended iron intake up to 80% [1], a well-balanced vegan diet can easily overcome average iron needs [15]. Iron-rich foods such as whole grains, beans, soy and its derivatives, nuts and seeds, and green leafy vegetables should be consumed daily, in combination with a source of vitamin C (or other organic acids from fruit) or beta carotene [1,52,56]. Cooking practices and food preparation techniques that increase iron absorption should be used whenever possible [1,6,52]. Iron supplementation is required in all pregnant women when hemoglobin levels drop below 110 g/L during the first trimester or below 105 g/L during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy [58,59]. Wheat germ and some herbs, such as dried thyme, have good iron content in small volumes [28] and their regular consumption should be encouraged in pregnant vegan women. During lactation iron requirements drop dramatically, so the attention to iron intake should return to how it was during the pre-pregnancy period [15,16,17]. 3.4.2. Infancy and Childhood All infants are a population at risk for iron deficiency, thus they should receive complementary solid foods rich in iron [14]. Vegan infants can rely on iron-enriched infant cereals, mashed and peeled beans, soy and its derivatives, and nut and seed butter for reaching an optimal iron intake [14,31]. Wheat germ can be added to soy yoghurt or to other pureed solid foods to increase the iron content of infants’ meals, and a vitamin C source, such as a few drops of lemon juice, can improve iron absorption [28,52,56]. Fiber should be limited, as it may impair iron absorption, and all cooking practices and food preparation techniques that enhance iron absorption should be used when preparing infant food [31]. Vegan children older than 1 year of age should include good iron sources (whole grains, legumes, soy and its derivatives, green leafy vegetables, nuts and seeds) at each meal, along with a source of vitamin C or other organic acids, such as lemon juice or fruit. In this age group, it is also advised to pay attention to cooking procedures and food preparation techniques that decrease the phytate content of the diet [32]. 3.5. Zinc Grains, legumes, soy, and nuts and seeds are good plant sources of zinc [6]. However, zinc absorption may be impaired by the phytate and fiber content of such foods [60,61]. Nutritional yeast is a good source of zinc [28], and its consumption is popular among vegans. The presence of zinc-rich foods and of vitamin C or other organic acids (i.e., from fruits) in the same meal increases zinc absorption [62]. 3.5.1. Pregnancy and Lactation The consumption of a variety of plant foods rich in zinc should be encouraged throughout the day, along with vitamin C or other organic acids sources (i.e., fruits, a few drops of lemon), as well as the adoption of food preparation techniques that decrease the phytate content of foods (soaking and germination of grains and legumes, fermentation, and sour leavening of bread) [6,15]. Although an interference between zinc and iron absorption has been suggested [63], other data do not support this hypothesis [64], so iron supplements can be prescribed to vegan pregnant women when hemoglobin levels drop without the risk of compromising zinc status. 3.5.2. Infancy and Childhood From 6 to 12 months of age, breast milk and formula milk are good sources of zinc [6]. Zinc-rich foods should be offered at each meal (legumes, nut and seed butters, soy and its derivatives) [32]. Limiting the fiber content of the diet for children up to 24 months of age by choosing refined products or by manually removing it (peeling beans and straining fruits and vegetables) increases zinc absorption [31,32]. The daily consumption of a wide variety of plant foods can meet zinc recommendations in older children [32], and its absorption can be enhanced by the simultaneous presence of vitamin C and organic acids sources (e.g. some fruits as a dessert, a few drops of lemon in the water) in a meal. Nutritional yeast can be spread over children’s meals (e.g., pasta, soups) for an additional source of zinc intake. 3.6. Iodine Good sources of iodine, an essential mineral for normal thyroid function, are seafood and, in coastal areas, iodine-containing water and mist from the sea [29] (p. 161). Many inland populations are at risk of iodine deficiency, regardless of their type of diet, so universal salt iodization is recommended worldwide in order to prevent iodine deficiency [65]. 3.6.1. Pregnancy and Lactation Iodized salt is the safest way to reach iodine requirements in vegan pregnant and lactating women [15]. Iodine content of seaweed, a popular iodine source among vegetarians, is highly variable and excessive iodine intake may impair thyroid function in the fetus and after birth [66,67]. Iodine per gram of iodized salt varies among countries. In Italy, 1 g of iodized salt contains 30 μg of iodine [68], so 1.3 teaspoons (6.5 g) satisfies the Italian Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) for iodine both in pregnant and lactating vegan women, which is 200 μg per day [15,16]. In the United States, 1 g of iodized salt provides 45 μg of iodine [69], so 1 teaspoon (5 g) during pregnancy and 1.3 teaspoons (6.5 g) during lactation meets the US RDA for iodine in vegan women, which are, respectively, 220 μg and 290 μg per day. Although the World Health Organization (WHO) suggests limiting salt intake to 5 g per day in order to control blood pressure levels [70], vegans are at lower risk for hypertension [71], so a slightly higher intake for this short period of life can be considered harmless in this population. If it is necessary to limit salt intake, an algal-derived supplement can be a viable option. 3.6.2. Infancy and Childhood Infants and young children are a group at risk of iodine deficiency [14], but complementary foods are only iodine-fortified in some countries [72,73]. In infants and young children not consuming salt, 400 to 900 mL of, respectively, breast or formula milk alone can meet iodine requirements [16,17,74]. If using salt (not before 12 months of age), the daily consumption of 3.3 to 5 g of iodized salt per day in Italian vegan children (providing 100 to 150 μg of iodine) and of 2 to 3.33 g per day in US vegan children (providing 90 to 155 μg of iodine) is suggested in order to meet requirements [32]. Alternatively, an algal-derived iodine supplement can be used. 3.7. Calcium Calcium requirements can be met in a vegan diet by choosing plant foods rich in calcium [6,15]. Calcium from water has a high bioavailability (23.6% to 47.5%) [75], so tap water (average calcium 100 mg/L) and calcium-rich mineral water (300–350 mg/L) may also help vegans in reaching their daily requirements [15]. Calcium intake is not the only determinant of an optimal bone mass density: low dietary sodium and phosphorus intake, exercise, and an optimal vitamin D and B12 status also positively affect bone mineralization [6,76,77,78]. 3.7.1. Pregnancy and Lactation Calcium requirements are higher during pregnancy and lower during lactation [16,17]. Six daily servings of calcium-rich foods can satisfy calcium requirements in pregnant women, although for calorie requirements above 2400 kcal per day calcium needs are almost automatically satisfied by the variety of plant-based foods consumed [15]. 3.7.2. Infancy and Childhood Vegan infants meet most of their calcium requirements through breast or formula milk [31]. In vegan children, including 3 to 5 serving of calcium-rich foods per day is sufficient to meet requirements [32]. 3.8. Vitamin D Vitamin D status depends more on sun exposure and supplementation than on dietary intake [79]. If risk factors for low endogenous vitamin D synthesis are present, such as pigmented skin, low sun exposure, or living at northern latitudes, supplementation should be considered in all subjects, possibly after assessing serum 25-OH vitamin D levels [80]. Both vitamin D2 and vitamin D3 are effective in maintaining optimal vitamin D levels at low-medium doses (600–4000 IU), which are the ones we recommend for maintenance of an optimal vitamin D status in this population [81]. Recommendations for supplementing vitamin D in pregnant and lactating women, infants, and children are summarized in Table 1 [82,83,84]. Most prenatal vitamins contain insufficient vitamin D in order to prevent vitamin D deficiency in the newborn [87], so daily doses of 1000 to 2000 IU per day are suggested and considered safe in pregnant women [16,17,88]. Levels of 25-OH vitamin D must be checked along with calcium, phosphorus, and parathormone (PTH) after at least 6 months from the beginning of the supplementation (according to Table 1) [85,86]. Supplementing more than 4000 IU per day during pregnancy is not considered safe, so high dose boluses (usually >/= 25,000 IU) of vitamin D must be avoided [89]. 3.8.2. Infancy and Childhood Human milk and formula milk are not sufficient to prevent vitamin D deficiency in infants [87,90]. All infants, including vegan infants, should supplement 400 IU of vitamin D daily throughout their first year of life to prevent rickets and vitamin D deficiency later in life [87]. 3.9. Vitamin B12 A sufficient amount of vitamin B12 cannot be found in plant-foods [1,6]. Fermented food and seaweed cannot be considered reliable sources of vitamin B12 [91]. The consumption of B12 fortified foods in vegan diets is sometimes suggested as a means in which to ensure a good daily intake of vitamin B12 [1]. Such products, however, are not always available, and even when they are, they must be consumed three times per day in order to provide adequate amounts of vitamin B12 [6]. Therefore, we suggest that all vegans meet their B12 requirements through supplementation. Serum total B12 is the most common and widespread method to define B12 status and should be considered optimal above 360 pmol/L, if holo-transcobalamin II is not available, as up to this level there is no increase in the markers of functional B12 deficiency [92]. Daily and weekly doses for maintaining already normal B12 levels, as suggested by the Italian Society of Human Nutrition, are reported in Table 2 [6,93]. 1 during pregnancy, taking this dose in two separate halves can increase B12 bioavailability. 3.9.1. Pregnancy and Lactation Since B12 deficiency can occur during pregnancy regardless of the type of diet, because of store depletion due to higher demands [94], an adequate B12 status should be maintained during vegan pregnancy, and the use of a vitamin B12 supplement represents the most reliable way [20]. Milk from breastfeeding vegan mothers provides adequate vitamin B12 in infants only if vegan mothers are supplementing B12 correctly [20]. Although containing 100% of the RDA for vitamin B12, common pre- and postnatal multivitamins are negatively associated with B12 concentration in breastmilk of vegan women, because only a fraction of the B12 they provide is absorbed [6,20]. Pregnant and lactating vegan mothers should be encouraged to take an individual B12, not multivitamin, supplement and dissolve it under the tongue or chew it slowly in order to increase absorption [6,20]. In case of assessed B12 deficiency, there is no consensus regarding dose, route of administration, or form of the vitamin supplement. The majority of clinical studies suggest starting with high parenteral doses of B12, after which oral treatment is given [95]. In the United States, the usual treatment depends on injection of 1 mg cyanocobalamin daily for the first week, followed by weekly injections for the next month, and then monthly injections [96]. We suggest the following oral supplementation algorithm, described in Table 3, which depends on the actual serum levels of B12, in order to guarantee a daily amount of absorbed B12 corresponding to 5 times the RDA for B12 [16,17]. Table 3 Proposal of an oral supplementation scheme for vitamin B12 deficiency in pregnant and lactating women, infants, and children. B12 supplementation should then proceed, according to Table 2, so as to maintain optimal B12 levels. Serum B12, folic acid, HCY, and Cell Blood Count (CBC) should be checked not before 6–8 months from the beginning of the supplementation. We suggest that B12 status (serum B12, along with HCY, CBC, and folic acid) should be regularly checked throughout pregnancy also in women with optimal B12 levels in the first trimester of pregnancy, and to adjust supplementation schemes according to the laboratory results. 3.9.2. Infancy and Childhood Vegan infants should start supplementing B12 with the beginning of complementary feeding, at around 6 months of age since, with the introduction of solid foods, the amount of vitamin B12 provided by breast or formula milk decreases. The amount of B12 to supplement daily varies with age and is shown in Table 2 [6]. In the case of B12 deficiency in infants and children, no protocol regarding supplementation exists so far. Therefore, we calculated an oral supplementation scheme, shown in Table 3, which depends on the child’s age and on the actual serum B12 levels, in order to guarantee daily amount of absorbed B12 corresponding to 5 times the RDA. B12 supplementation should then proceed in order to maintain optimal B12 levels. Serum B12, folic acid, HCY, and CBC should be checked not before than 6–8 months from the beginning of the supplementation. 4. Menu Planning The VegPlate is a plate-shaped vegetarian food guide designed to respect Italian and US DRIs during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, and childhood, while using only plant-based foods [15,32]. For each calorie requirement, it suggests the number of servings for each food group (grains, protein-rich foods, nuts and seeds, vegetables, fruits, and fats) to include daily in order to automatically reach a nutritionally adequate vegan diet. With this method a well-balanced vegan diet can be planned by any healthcare professional within minutes, with no further calculations required. 5. Conclusions Vegan diets can meet nutrient requirements and can be an appropriate choice for all life stages, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, and childhood, provided that they are well-planned. In fact, the problems that occurred in subjects excluding all animal components from their diet were related to the incompleteness of the diet, and thus to nutritional deficiencies. In the past, this was due to the categorization of restrictive diets (i.e., the macrobiotic diet) as vegan [24,97,98]. Today, isolated cases of malnutrition in vegan children have been related almost exclusively to the inappropriateness of the diet offered to the infant or to the lack of B12 supplementation [99,100,101]. A well-planned vegan diet is complete when it follows all the criteria that define it as adequate: (i) consumption of a variety of plant foods throughout the day is encouraged, and no plant-based food group is excluded; (ii) attention is centered on the potentially critical nutrients, namely those that cannot be automatically provided by the variety of the foods consumed. Particularly during pregnancy, breastfeeding, infancy, and childhood, critical nutrients include protein, omega-3 fatty acids, iron, zinc, iodine, and calcium. Vegan pregnant and lactating women and vegan parents must be aware of the dietary sources of such nutrients and of the food preparation techniques and cooking practices that enhance their bioavailability. If sun exposure is insufficient or inefficient, vitamin D supplements are required to maintain an optimal vitamin D status. There are no reliable sources of vitamin B12 in plant foods, as such, a B12 supplementation is mandatory for all vegans. Due to the rapid increase in popularity of vegan diets, healthcare providers must be aware of the characteristics of a complete vegan diet in order to advise their patients correctly. Vegan diets restricting energy intake, excluding one or more food groups, not paying attention to critical nutrients or to vitamin D status, and not supplementing vitamin B12 cannot be considered well-balanced, and may have dangerous health consequences. This paper summarizes the recommendations made by the Scientific Society for Vegetarian Nutrition (SSNV) concerning vegan diets during these delicate phases of life. Since there are not enough studies to give evidence-based recommendations, the evidence level of such statements is to be considered as expert opinion. Not following these recommendations can put these vulnerable subjects at clear risk for nutritional deficiencies. Acknowledgments We wish to thank all the members of the VegFamily Network for the thoughtful suggestions and the anonymous reviewers whose suggestions have led to an improvement of the contents. Supplementary Materials The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/11/1/5/s1: Figure S1. (a) The VegPlate (b) graphic representation of the additional servings during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy and during lactation [15,32]; Figure S2. The VegPlate for infants (6 to 12 months); Table S1. Sample menus. Funding The Scientific Society for Vegetarian Nutrition funded the publication fee. Conflicts of Interest L.B. is the author of books describing the method of the VegPlate, which is cited in this paper; M.A.B. is the director of the International Master in Vegetarian Nutrition and Dietetics, hosted by Funiber; all other authors declare no conflict of interest.	B12: the intake of reliable sources of vitamin B12 is fundamental for a well-planned vegetarian diet, as vitamin B12 status can be compromised, over time, in all vegetarian subjects who do not supplement it. 3. Vegan Diets During Pregnancy, Lactation, and Childhood Several scientific societies have released their position statement on vegetarian diets and are favorable to complete plant-based diets during pregnancy, lactation, infancy, and childhood, as long as they are well-planned (see definition above) [1,4,12,13,14]. Pregnant and breastfeeding vegan women can meet all of their nutrient needs on a vegan diet that includes a variety of plant foods and reliable sources of vitamin B12 and vitamin D [15,16,17]. The average birthweight of infants born to vegan mothers does not differ significantly from that of infants of omnivorous mothers. Macrobiotic vegan women, whose diets can be highly restricted in calories and nutrients, in contrast to well-planned vegan diets, give birth to infants whose weights are significantly lower than expected [18]. Following a plant-rich diet during pregnancy may be protective against the development of preeclampsia, pre-gravid obesity, and minimize the exposure to genotoxic agents. It may also protect from the onset of pediatric diseases, such as pediatric wheezing, diabetes, neural tube defects, orofacial clefts, and some pediatric tumors [19]. The growth of vegan preschoolers, children, and adolescents falls within normal range [22,23], except for those following restrictive macrobiotic diets, whose growth rates are reduced [24]. Children following plant-based diets might have a lower risk of developing obesity [25], are less exposed to veterinary antibiotics found in animal-derived foods [26], and show a more favorable anti-inflammatory adipokine profile [27].	yes
Veganism	Should pregnant women follow a vegan diet?	yes_statement	"pregnant" "women" should "follow" a "vegan" "diet".. it is advisable for "pregnant" "women" to adopt a "vegan" "diet".	https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vegan-keto-diet	Vegan Keto Diet Guide: Benefits, Foods and Sample Menu	Because the vegan keto diet is more restrictive than normal vegan diets, it’s critical that those following it supplement with high-quality vitamins and minerals and plan their meals to ensure a nutritionally adequate diet. Eating fortified foods, focusing on whole-foods and enhancing nutrient availability, for example through fermenting and sprouting, is important for people following a vegan keto diet. However, it may be difficult for vegan keto dieters to meet their micronutrient needs through food alone. Supplementing with certain vitamins and minerals commonly lacking in vegan diets is a smart way to prevent potential deficiencies and ensure that your daily requirements are met. Vegan keto diet side effects Transitioning to a ketogenic diet can be difficult. Often referred to as the keto flu, the transition period from a higher-carb diet to a keto diet can be challenging on your body. As your body switches from burning glucose to fat for fuel, unpleasant symptoms may occur. What’s more, supplementing with the electrolytes magnesium, sodium and potassium can help reduce certain symptoms, such as muscle aches, headaches and insomnia. As the vegan keto diet restricts many foods, it’s not appropriate for everyone. The vegan keto diet may not be suitable for those with type 1 diabetes, women who are pregnant or breastfeeding, athletes or those with eating disorders or a history of disordered eating. If you consider transitioning to a vegan keto diet, consult your doctor or a qualified health professional first to ensure the diet is safe to follow. Summary Low-carb, high-fat diets may not be suitable for pregnant women, children and people with certain medical conditions. If you’re unsure whether the vegan keto diet is the right choice for you, seek advice from your doctor. Vegan and ketogenic diets have been linked to benefits like weight loss and reduced heart disease and diabetes risks. Certain supplements may be necessary to ensure nutrient needs are met, including iron and vitamins B12 and D. Though research shows that both the vegan diet and the keto diet may benefit your health, studies on the effects of the vegan keto diet are needed to determine if this diet is effective and safe to follow long term. How we reviewed this article: Our experts continually monitor the health and wellness space, and we update our articles when new information becomes available.	Because the vegan keto diet is more restrictive than normal vegan diets, it’s critical that those following it supplement with high-quality vitamins and minerals and plan their meals to ensure a nutritionally adequate diet. Eating fortified foods, focusing on whole-foods and enhancing nutrient availability, for example through fermenting and sprouting, is important for people following a vegan keto diet. However, it may be difficult for vegan keto dieters to meet their micronutrient needs through food alone. Supplementing with certain vitamins and minerals commonly lacking in vegan diets is a smart way to prevent potential deficiencies and ensure that your daily requirements are met. Vegan keto diet side effects Transitioning to a ketogenic diet can be difficult. Often referred to as the keto flu, the transition period from a higher-carb diet to a keto diet can be challenging on your body. As your body switches from burning glucose to fat for fuel, unpleasant symptoms may occur. What’s more, supplementing with the electrolytes magnesium, sodium and potassium can help reduce certain symptoms, such as muscle aches, headaches and insomnia. As the vegan keto diet restricts many foods, it’s not appropriate for everyone. The vegan keto diet may not be suitable for those with type 1 diabetes, women who are pregnant or breastfeeding, athletes or those with eating disorders or a history of disordered eating. If you consider transitioning to a vegan keto diet, consult your doctor or a qualified health professional first to ensure the diet is safe to follow. Summary Low-carb, high-fat diets may not be suitable for pregnant women, children and people with certain medical conditions. If you’re unsure whether the vegan keto diet is the right choice for you, seek advice from your doctor. Vegan and ketogenic diets have been linked to benefits like weight loss and reduced heart disease and diabetes risks.	no
Veganism	Should pregnant women follow a vegan diet?	yes_statement	"pregnant" "women" should "follow" a "vegan" "diet".. it is advisable for "pregnant" "women" to adopt a "vegan" "diet".	https://www.babydoppler.com/blog/vegan-pregnancy-is-it-safe/	Vegan Pregnancy: Is It Safe? - BabyDoppler.com	Vegan Pregnancy: Is It Safe? Vegan Pregnancy: Is It Safe? Pregnant women following a vegan or vegetarian diet is somewhat of a controversial subject. Some health care providers are worried that mothers may not get enough nutrients to pass onto their growing baby, while others maintain that a healthy vegan diet still leads to a healthy child. The debate can lead to many questions: Is it safe to entertain a vegan pregnancy? Is raising a vegan baby safe? How can my baby and I be healthy without eating animal products? If you’re a vegan who is pregnant or plans on becoming pregnant, this post will help clear your confusion. The information below outlines general recommendations and considerations; however, you should always consult your doctor to see what’s right for you. Vegan VS. Vegetarian Pregnancy: What’s the Difference? Vegetarians and vegans do not consume meat. The difference is that vegans do not consume any animal byproducts, whereas vegetarians do. Animal byproducts include anything with dairy, animal fat, honey or eggs. While it may seem simple, these ingredients are in many unsuspecting foods. For example, gelatin — an animal product — is found in Jell-O, marshmallows and gummy candies and therefore is not eaten by vegans. Many breads also contain milk. Some vegans also make lifestyle changes such as avoiding any product tested on animals or made with animal byproducts. Is a Vegan Pregnancy Safe? A 1987 study conducted by The Farm, a community that honors vegan diets, concluded that it’s possible for a woman to have a normal pregnancy on a vegan diet. Whether the mother got her protein from animal or vegetable sources didn’t seem to affect their birth weight. However, the study of 775 women noted that vegans should be health conscious and use supplements such as prenatal vitamins, iron and calcium. There might be an added bonus to following a vegan diet while pregnant: You may have a reduced risk of Preeclampsia — a pregnancy disorder characterized by high blood pressure and fluid retention. A recent 2015 study also concluded that vegan-vegetarian diets may be considered safe during pregnancy if nutritional requirements are met. Unfortunately, there is still a lack of research in this area. Long story short: It’s healthy to follow a vegan diet while pregnant as long as you get the proper nutrients. However, having a vegan pregnancy may not be as “easy” as having a “normal” pregnancy. Below are a few points you should take into account to keep you and your baby healthy. Vegan Pregnancy Proteins During pregnancy, you should be eating around 60 grams or more of protein each day. Many vegans already achieve this, but if you’re someone who typically eats carb-centered meals, it’s time to change your habits. A reason many people think vegan pregnancy is risky is because they think it’s hard to meet protein requirements. However, protein isn’t just in meat; it’s also in many plant-based foods, so getting your daily intake isn’t too hard. Sources of vegan protein include: Nuts Nut butter Seeds (such as hemp or chia seeds) Quinoa Tofu Soy milk Vegan protein powder Oatmeal Beans Chickpeas Edamame Green peas Brown rice Calcium Requirements With all the milk commercials repeating that “milk gives you calcium to build strong bones,” it shouldn’t come as a surprise that calcium requirements during vegan pregnancy can be a cause of concern. Despite this common worry, calcium from dairy milk is actually harder to absorb, making some vegan foods a better source. The need for calcium does not increase during pregnancy and stays at 1,000 milligrams a day. Because vegans don’t drink cow’s milk, they should become more aware of their calcium intake during pregnancy. Your baby can grow strong bones if you consume calcium-rich foods such as: Leafy green vegetables Oranges Beans Nuts Chickpeas If you’re getting your daily allowance of vegan protein, it’s likely that you already eat many of these foods. There are many reasons to limit your caffeine intake during pregnancy and we’ll give you another one: It may affect calcium absorption. Iron Requirements A woman’s body demands more iron when she is pregnant because of an increase in blood volume for the baby. This means that if you already have low iron levels, they will likely get even lower during pregnancy. It’s common for even meat-eating mothers to become iron deficient. For this reason, it’s recommended that pregnant women take an iron supplement — for vegans, this would be a non-heme iron supplement. If iron supplements cause unpleasant side effects, such as stomach issues, you should closely monitor your intake through food sources. Although some meats are a good source of iron, many vegan foods can also fulfill your requirement: Spinach Beans Soy Milk Fortified cereals When you eat vegan sources of protein, you’re consuming non-heme iron. Non-heme iron should be consumed with vitamin C, such as an orange or glass of orange juice, to help absorption. Vitamin D Requirements Some vegans may struggle with getting their daily allowance of vitamin D since it’s not found in high amounts in vegan foods. Without enough vitamin D, your baby could have bone growth problems. While hanging out in the sun is a good way to get your vitamin D, cold weather and our daily working lifestyles may prevent us from exposure. Fortified foods such as cereals or soy milk may contain vitamin D; however, you’re probably better off taking a vitamin D supplement. Prenatal Supplements for Vegans Just like all pregnant women, vegans should also take prenatal vitamins. One of the most important supplements is folic acid. Taking folic acid will help prevent birth defects such as brain and spinal cord issues. The recommended amount is 400 micrograms daily and increases to 500 micrograms while breastfeeding. Vegan Pregnancy Weight Gain Women who are pregnant typically gain weight fairly quickly. However, vegans may be smaller and may gain baby weight too slowly. Women who are underweight should ideally try to gain weight before they become pregnant. It can be tempting to chow down on sweets or unhealthy carbs such as breads or pastas, but try to limit those foods. Instead, gain weight the healthy way by eating foods with healthy fats and calories. This includes plenty of nuts, nut butters, avocados or fruits. To see if you are at a healthy weight before pregnancy, you can use a BMI calculator. Dietitians for Vegan Pregnancies When you start going for prenatal appointments, tell your doctor that you follow a vegan diet so that he or she can monitor your health appropriately. The information above provided general recommendations and points you should consider if you’re a pregnant vegan. However, each woman is different. If it seems difficult to implement the above diet, you may want to consult a dietitian. A dietitian will take into consideration your needs, preferences and food restrictions. He or she will be able to recommend specific foods and diet plans to ensure you’re getting all the nutrients necessary for a healthy baby. Is a Vegan Diet Safe for Babies? If you follow a vegan diet, it’s likely that you plan to raise your child as a vegan as well. Vegan babies and children can grow up healthy if you are careful to feed them the right nutrients. It’s important that you discuss your options with your pediatrician to ensure you’re making the right decision for your baby’s health. Many vegan mothers choose to breastfeed their babies because they see it as the most natural milk. You can also choose a soy milk formula; however, it will contain fewer calories and less fat. On the other hand, almond milk formula has adequate fat content but contains less protein. As your baby grows, he or she can start eating pureed vegan foods such as fruits, vegetables, beans and chickpeas. However, it’s very important that the solid foods contain enough protein, calories, calcium and iron. You may choose to consult a dietitian at this stage. It’s important to note that there has been a lot of recent controversy on this issue. In April 2016, a lawmaker in Italy proposed a bill that would make it illegal to feed kids a vegan diet. If passed, the diet would be seen as a form of domestic abuse and would have parents imprisoned. The legislation calls vegan diets “dangerous” and argues that parents don’t have enough knowledge to ensure their children are getting the correct nutrients. Another option is to raise your baby on a vegetarian diet as opposed to a vegan diet. This way, he or she can consume regular baby formula and has more options for solid foods. A 1989 study by The Farm investigated the growth of 404 vegetarian children aged 4 months to 10 years old. The children reached healthy heights and weights; however, their growth was modestly less than the US growth reference. Are you following a vegan or vegetarian diet during pregnancy? If you are, comment below! We’d love to hear any tips or recommendations you may have. Be sure to share this article with your vegan and vegetarian friends, too!	While it may seem simple, these ingredients are in many unsuspecting foods. For example, gelatin — an animal product — is found in Jell-O, marshmallows and gummy candies and therefore is not eaten by vegans. Many breads also contain milk. Some vegans also make lifestyle changes such as avoiding any product tested on animals or made with animal byproducts. Is a Vegan Pregnancy Safe? A 1987 study conducted by The Farm, a community that honors vegan diets, concluded that it’s possible for a woman to have a normal pregnancy on a vegan diet. Whether the mother got her protein from animal or vegetable sources didn’t seem to affect their birth weight. However, the study of 775 women noted that vegans should be health conscious and use supplements such as prenatal vitamins, iron and calcium. There might be an added bonus to following a vegan diet while pregnant: You may have a reduced risk of Preeclampsia — a pregnancy disorder characterized by high blood pressure and fluid retention. A recent 2015 study also concluded that vegan-vegetarian diets may be considered safe during pregnancy if nutritional requirements are met. Unfortunately, there is still a lack of research in this area. Long story short: It’s healthy to follow a vegan diet while pregnant as long as you get the proper nutrients. However, having a vegan pregnancy may not be as “easy” as having a “normal” pregnancy. Below are a few points you should take into account to keep you and your baby healthy. Vegan Pregnancy Proteins During pregnancy, you should be eating around 60 grams or more of protein each day. Many vegans already achieve this, but if you’re someone who typically eats carb-centered meals, it’s time to change your habits. A reason many people think vegan pregnancy is risky is because they think it’s hard to meet protein requirements.	yes
Veganism	Should pregnant women follow a vegan diet?	no_statement	"pregnant" "women" should not "follow" a "vegan" "diet".. it is not recommended for "pregnant" "women" to adhere to a "vegan" "diet".	https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vegan-pregnancy	Vegan Pregnancy: Safety, Foods, Supplements, and Meal Plan	That said, a vegan diet that provides adequate amounts of these nutrients appears to be just as healthy as a conventional diet that includes meat, eggs, and dairy. For instance, research suggests that women who follow a vegan diet are generally at no greater risk of pregnancy complications than women who don’t. In fact, vegan women may have a lower risk of postpartum depression, cesarean section (C-section) delivery, and maternal or infant mortality (6, 7). As a result, several nutrition societies across the world, including the U.S. Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, have issued official statements backing the safety of vegan diets for all stages of life, including pregnancy (8, 9, 10). All the same, experts agree that well-planned vegan diets require careful monitoring of nutrient intake, a focus on diverse and nutrient-rich foods, and the use of fortified foods or supplements (6, 11). summary Balanced vegan diets are considered safe for all periods of life, including pregnancy. However, they require careful planning. Appropriately planned vegan diets may provide health benefits to both you and your baby. For example, plant-based diets tend to be rich in fiber but low in sugar and fat. These attributes may safeguard against gestational diabetes — or high blood sugar levels during pregnancy — as well as excess weight gain during pregnancy (6, 7). What’s more, the vegan diet’s high veggie and fiber content may guard against preeclampsia — a complication caused by a rise in blood pressure during pregnancy (12, 13). Nonetheless, more research is needed. It’s important to remember that these benefits only apply to well-planned vegan diets that provide sufficient amounts of all important nutrients (14). Thus, women interested in following a vegan diet during pregnancy should consider seeking guidance from a registered dietitian specializing in plant-based diets. Doing so can help ensure you’re getting all the nutrients that you and your baby need. summary Properly planned vegan diets may protect mothers and babies from a variety of pregnancy-related complications, including gestational diabetes and developmental issues. You should consult a dietitian if you wish to follow this diet while pregnant. Iron. Your body doesn’t absorb non-heme iron from plant foods as well as it does the heme iron in animal products. This may increase your risk of iron deficiency and related complications, such as preterm birth and low birth weight (11, 24). Iodine. Vegan diets devoid of iodized salt, seaweed, or iodine supplements may contain too little of this nutrient. Insufficient iodine intakes can result in poor infant growth, as well as compromised thyroid and mental function (6, 25). Omega-3 fats. People on vegan diets tend to have low blood levels of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) — two omega-3s important for your baby’s eyes, brain, and nervous system (14). Protein. Insufficient protein intake may slow your baby’s growth and development. Protein may be plentiful on a vegan diet but more difficult to digest, raising your daily protein requirements by around 10% (6, 7). Zinc. Most women get too little zinc during pregnancy, which may result in low birth weight, prolonged labor, and preterm birth. Plant-based zinc is more difficult to absorb, raising daily requirements by 50% for vegan women (6, 7, 28, 29). Choline. This nutrient is essential for the development of your baby’s nervous system. Most women get too little during pregnancy — and plant foods contain only small amounts (30, 31). Getting sufficient amounts of all these nutrients on a vegan diet is possible but requires careful planning. In particular, you may need to take several supplements (8, 9, 10). If you want to maintain a vegan diet during pregnancy, consider having a dietitian review your diet and nutrient levels, as they can help you identify and compensate for any suboptimal intakes. summary Vegan diets are naturally low in certain nutrients, so you should plan your food intake carefully, take supplements, and consult a dietitian if you plan to follow this diet while pregnant. Nutrient-rich plant foods If you follow a vegan diet during pregnancy, be sure to eat sufficient amounts of the following foods: Tofu, seitan, and tempeh. Soy products are rich in protein and can replace meat in many recipes. Mock meats are another option but shouldn’t be eaten in excess because they’re rich in fat and salt. Legumes. Beans, peas, and lentils are good sources of fiber and plant-based protein. Sprouting, fermenting, and thorough cooking can make it easier for your body to absorb their nutrients (32). Nuts and seeds. Most are good sources of iron and zinc. Eat one to two Brazil nuts each day to meet your selenium requirements, and munch on walnuts and hemp, chia, or flax seeds to get alpha-linolenic acid (ALA), an essential omega-3 (33). Calcium-fortified yogurts and plant milks. These foods make it easier for you to get enough calcium. Opt for unsweetened versions whenever possible. Nutritional yeast. This protein-rich topping is often fortified with vitamin B12 and adds a cheesy flavor to your dishes. Whole grains, cereals, and pseudocereals. In addition to being rich in fiber and B vitamins, these foods provide some iron and zinc. Certain grains, such as teff, amaranth, spelt, and quinoa, are especially rich in protein (34, 35, 36, 37). Furthermore, fermenting, sprouting, and cooking with cast iron pans may enhance your absorption of certain nutrients, such as iron and zinc (32, 44). summary The vegan foods above can help you meet your nutrient needs during pregnancy. Eating fortified, sprouted, and fermented foods, as well as using cast iron cookware, may further boost your diet’s nutrient content. Some nutrients are difficult or even impossible to obtain from whole plant foods alone. As such, many health professionals recommend relying on the following supplements for a vegan diet during pregnancy: Vitamin B12. While it may be possible to get enough vitamin B12 from fortified foods, a supplement is the most reliable way to ensure adequate intake (49). Vitamin D. This vitamin may be especially beneficial for women who get less sun exposure. Vegan options include vitamin D2 or lichen-derived vitamin D3 (50, 51). Omega-3 fats. Algae oil is rich in EPA and DHA, making it a good vegan alternative to eating fish or taking fish oil (43). Iodine. Iodine-poor soils can make it difficult to get enough of this nutrient through plant foods. As iodized salt and some seaweed may result in excess iodine or sodium intakes, a supplement is likely your best option (52). Choline. Some plant foods boast small amounts of choline, but a supplement is your best bet to cover your requirements during pregnancy (49). Folate. Vegan diets are usually rich in this nutrient. Yet, since folate plays a crucial role in preventing birth defects, all women who are pregnant or trying to become pregnant are encouraged to take folic acid (49). You may also want to consider iron, zinc, and calcium supplements. Although prenatal vitamins are helpful, many of them lack adequate amounts of choline, omega-3s, and vitamin B12 (53). That said, excess intake of some of these nutrients blocks the absorption of other nutrients. Thus, it’s best to talk to your healthcare provider before adding any supplements to your diet (54, 55, 56). summary If you follow a vegan diet while pregnant, you should consider taking choline, algae oil, iodine, and vitamins B12 and D, among other supplements.	That said, a vegan diet that provides adequate amounts of these nutrients appears to be just as healthy as a conventional diet that includes meat, eggs, and dairy. For instance, research suggests that women who follow a vegan diet are generally at no greater risk of pregnancy complications than women who don’t. In fact, vegan women may have a lower risk of postpartum depression, cesarean section (C-section) delivery, and maternal or infant mortality (6, 7). As a result, several nutrition societies across the world, including the U.S. Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, have issued official statements backing the safety of vegan diets for all stages of life, including pregnancy (8, 9, 10). All the same, experts agree that well-planned vegan diets require careful monitoring of nutrient intake, a focus on diverse and nutrient-rich foods, and the use of fortified foods or supplements (6, 11). summary Balanced vegan diets are considered safe for all periods of life, including pregnancy. However, they require careful planning. Appropriately planned vegan diets may provide health benefits to both you and your baby. For example, plant-based diets tend to be rich in fiber but low in sugar and fat. These attributes may safeguard against gestational diabetes — or high blood sugar levels during pregnancy — as well as excess weight gain during pregnancy (6, 7). What’s more, the vegan diet’s high veggie and fiber content may guard against preeclampsia — a complication caused by a rise in blood pressure during pregnancy (12, 13). Nonetheless, more research is needed. It’s important to remember that these benefits only apply to well-planned vegan diets that provide sufficient amounts of all important nutrients (14). Thus, women interested in following a vegan diet during pregnancy should consider seeking guidance from a registered dietitian specializing in plant-based diets. Doing so can help ensure you’re getting all the nutrients that you and your baby need.	yes
Veganism	Should pregnant women follow a vegan diet?	no_statement	"pregnant" "women" should not "follow" a "vegan" "diet".. it is not recommended for "pregnant" "women" to adhere to a "vegan" "diet".	https://www.purewow.com/wellness/vegan-pregnancy	Is It Healthy to Stick to a Vegan Diet When Pregnant? We Asked a ...	Is It Healthy to Stick to a Vegan Diet When Pregnant? We Asked a Doctor You already know that sushi and alcohol are off-limits when you’re expecting. But what’s the deal with veganism and pregnancy? We tapped OB/GYN Dr. Jessica Shepherd to find out. First, some good news for moms-to-be on a vegan or plant-based diet—you can absolutely continue to follow your healthy eating plan in pregnancy. Yep, despite what you might have heard, eating a vegan or vegetarian diet while you’re expecting can be totally healthy for mom and baby. It just might take a little more planning on your part since some vital nutrients for your developing fetus are more easily be found in animal products—but that doesn’t mean you can’t get them elsewhere. Dr. Shepherd cautions women to let their practitioner know whether they’re vegan, vegetarian, lacto-ovo vegetarian (eats dairy and eggs) or lacto-vegetarian (eats dairy, no eggs), since they all have separate dietary needs that may need to be managed. “But in general, those on a vegan diet need to make sure they’re getting enough proteins, amino acids, iron, calcium, vitamins D and B12,” she tells us. Restricting calories could also be a problem (per the American Pregnancy Organization, women should eat an extra 200 to 300 calories in the second and third trimester of pregnancy). But as Dr. Shepherd points out, someone could be lacking in vital nutrients or calories even if they’re not vegan. Under-nutrition can impair fetal development and growth, so it’s important that all women (whether they’re following a vegan diet or not) avoid nutritional deficiencies throughout pregnancy. Wondering how to make sure you’re getting what you need for your growing bump? Good sources of protein for vegans include legumes and whole grains, while essential amino acids can be found in tofu, soy and whole grains. Doctors typically check iron levels around week 20 of pregnancy and may recommend a supplement if results are low (even meat-eaters may need this in pregnancy). For calcium, green leafy vegetables and fortified orange juice and almond milk can help pregnant women reach their 1,000 mg per day goal. Vitamin B12 is naturally found only in food that comes from animals but can also be found in fortified cereals and soy milk if your prenatal vitamin doesn’t offer enough. Similarly, you can take a vitamin D supplement if necessary (since the best way to get enough of this nutrient from food is from fish or milk). While there’s no need for any additional tests at your OB’s office, Dr. Shepherd encourages women to talk about their diets with their doctor. “You could be vegan and eating potato chips all day, which obviously isn’t great,” she says. Likewise, someone else could be eating red meat every day and that might also need to be addressed. Bottom line: The advice for pregnant women following a vegan eating plan is the same as for meat-eaters: Make sure you eat a well-balanced and nutrient-rich diet, take your prenatal vitamin every day and attend all of your prenatal doctor appointments.	Is It Healthy to Stick to a Vegan Diet When Pregnant? We Asked a Doctor You already know that sushi and alcohol are off-limits when you’re expecting. But what’s the deal with veganism and pregnancy? We tapped OB/GYN Dr. Jessica Shepherd to find out. First, some good news for moms-to-be on a vegan or plant-based diet—you can absolutely continue to follow your healthy eating plan in pregnancy. Yep, despite what you might have heard, eating a vegan or vegetarian diet while you’re expecting can be totally healthy for mom and baby. It just might take a little more planning on your part since some vital nutrients for your developing fetus are more easily be found in animal products—but that doesn’t mean you can’t get them elsewhere. Dr. Shepherd cautions women to let their practitioner know whether they’re vegan, vegetarian, lacto-ovo vegetarian (eats dairy and eggs) or lacto-vegetarian (eats dairy, no eggs), since they all have separate dietary needs that may need to be managed. “But in general, those on a vegan diet need to make sure they’re getting enough proteins, amino acids, iron, calcium, vitamins D and B12,” she tells us. Restricting calories could also be a problem (per the American Pregnancy Organization, women should eat an extra 200 to 300 calories in the second and third trimester of pregnancy). But as Dr. Shepherd points out, someone could be lacking in vital nutrients or calories even if they’re not vegan. Under-nutrition can impair fetal development and growth, so it’s important that all women (whether they’re following a vegan diet or not) avoid nutritional deficiencies throughout pregnancy. Wondering how to make sure you’re getting what you need for your growing bump?	yes
Veganism	Should pregnant women follow a vegan diet?	no_statement	"pregnant" "women" should not "follow" a "vegan" "diet".. it is not recommended for "pregnant" "women" to adhere to a "vegan" "diet".	https://www.webmd.com/baby/is-it-safe-to-eat-a-vegan-diet-while-pregnant	Is It Safe to Eat a Vegan Diet While Pregnant?	In this Article A vegan diet has been shown to offer a number of health benefits. In general, plant-based diets are associated with lower risks of heart disease, obesity, hypertension, and diabetes. Eating a variety of plants and avoiding high levels of saturated fat and cholesterol âÂ both of which are found in many animal products â can be good for you. But is it good if you're pregnant?Â There are some nutrients that are essential during pregnancy that are harder to get from plant sources. However, a well-planned vegan diet can provide everything you need during all stages of your life, including when you're pregnant or breastfeeding.Â Additionally, a diet containing a lot of fruits and vegetables may help protect you from some pregnancy complications, such as preeclampsia (high blood pressure) and gestational diabetes. A plant-based diet during pregnancy may also reduce your baby's risk of certain childhood diseases such as asthma, eczema, diabetes, and even some cancers.Â If you're worried that you may not be getting all of the nutrients you need from your diet, you may want to consult with a dietician who can make sure you're getting all of the essential nutrients you need during pregnancy.Â Benefits of a Vegan Diet During Pregnancy A vegan diet can offer benefits to both you and your baby, including: Reduced risk of preeclampsia. Preeclampsia is a serious pregnancy complication associated with high blood pressure and organ damage. A review of the medical records of 775 health-conscious vegan mothers who received good prenatal care and supplemented their diets with vitamins found that only one developed preeclampsia. Preeclampsia is often associated with rapid weight gain and eating foods high in saturated fat. A healthy vegan diet may protect against developing preeclampsia. Reduced risk of gestational diabetes. Vegan diets that are high in fiber â including fruits, vegetables, and whole grains â and low in saturated fat may reduce the risk of excessive weight gain and gestational diabetes. If you have gestational diabetes, a vegan diet may reduce your chances of having a C-section. It may also reduce your need for insulin.Â Reduced risk of some neural tube defects and brain tumors. Neural tube defects, which are birth defects of the brain, spine, or spinal cord, have been associated with a high nitrate intake during pregnancy. Since cured meat and smoked fish are the main sources of nitrates in most diets, vegan diets reduce this risk.Â Risks of a Vegan Diet During Pregnancy A vegan diet during pregnancy needs to be healthy, diverse, and well-planned. If not, it will likely lack essential nutrients. Vegan diets that lack in nutrients such as protein, vitamin B12, vitamin D, calcium, DHA, and iron increase the risk that your baby may have low birth weight or birth defects.Â Vegan diets need to include the following, especially if you're pregnant:Â Vitamin B-12. This is not found in most plant foods, so be sure to supplement. Vitamin B-12 is included in all standard prenatal supplements.Â Iron. Plant-based sources of iron include foods such as beans, dark green vegetables, dried fruits, nuts, and seeds. You may still need to supplement, especially in the second half of your pregnancy.Â Nutrients such as zinc and iodine. These are found in some vegetables and prenatal supplements.Â	In this Article A vegan diet has been shown to offer a number of health benefits. In general, plant-based diets are associated with lower risks of heart disease, obesity, hypertension, and diabetes. Eating a variety of plants and avoiding high levels of saturated fat and cholesterol âÂ both of which are found in many animal products â can be good for you. But is it good if you're pregnant?Â There are some nutrients that are essential during pregnancy that are harder to get from plant sources. However, a well-planned vegan diet can provide everything you need during all stages of your life, including when you're pregnant or breastfeeding. Â Additionally, a diet containing a lot of fruits and vegetables may help protect you from some pregnancy complications, such as preeclampsia (high blood pressure) and gestational diabetes. A plant-based diet during pregnancy may also reduce your baby's risk of certain childhood diseases such as asthma, eczema, diabetes, and even some cancers. Â If you're worried that you may not be getting all of the nutrients you need from your diet, you may want to consult with a dietician who can make sure you're getting all of the essential nutrients you need during pregnancy. Â Benefits of a Vegan Diet During Pregnancy A vegan diet can offer benefits to both you and your baby, including: Reduced risk of preeclampsia. Preeclampsia is a serious pregnancy complication associated with high blood pressure and organ damage. A review of the medical records of 775 health-conscious vegan mothers who received good prenatal care and supplemented their diets with vitamins found that only one developed preeclampsia. Preeclampsia is often associated with rapid weight gain and eating foods high in saturated fat. A healthy vegan diet may protect against developing preeclampsia. Reduced risk of gestational diabetes.	yes
Viniculture	Should red wine be served at room temperature?	yes_statement	"red" "wine" should be "served" at "room" "temperature".. it is recommended to "serve" "red" "wine" at "room" "temperature".. "room" "temperature" is the ideal "serving" "temperature" for "red" "wine".	https://www.newair.com/blogs/learn/do-you-chill-red-wine	Should You Chill Red Wine? The Answer May Surprise You – Newair	Should You Chill Red Wine? The Answer May Surprise You Of all the aspects of serving and sipping wine, one in particular gets the most attention from newbies and committed oenophiles alike: Do you chill red wine? The short answer: It depends. Like most things having to do with wine, subtleties abound. Each type of grape produces a different body and flavor of wine, and these elements are heavily influenced by serving temperature. Add to that the knowledge that growing even the same variety of grapes in different locations and conditions will further alter the flavor profile, and you have a nearly endless array of wines to choose from — no two of which will need the exact same care as any other wine for full enjoyment. Still, there are general rules to follow when it comes to serving and storing red wine, and knowing them is a great place to start. Understanding the basics will also help you to know when those rules are meant be broken. Storing Red Wine Regardless of variety, red wine should be stored at fairly cool temperatures to keep it from spoiling. Even alcohol goes bad eventually, although it takes longer to develop off flavors and aromas than, say, fresh fruit. When you consider a traditional wine cellar, this idea makes sense. The temperature underground or in a cool cave is right around 55 degrees, and this temperature is ideal for keeping anything from a CaliforniaPinot Noir to a Cabernet Sauvignon from Italy in great shape for drinking at a later date. You may be lucky enough to have a basement where you can maintain a cellar temperature of 55 degrees year-round, but most people don’t. It’s best to solve this problem with a dedicated wine refrigerator in which you can store your bottles of Burgundy on their sides. Your standard kitchen refrigerator needs to be kept much colder than this, so a separate wine fridge is efficient and keeps your favorite reds for months — maybe even years — at a time. Serving Red Wine Although the proper temperature for wine storage is a cool 55 degrees, the general rule of thumb for serving reds holds that they taste their best at room temperature. This is a great place to start, since many people prefer a warm red with meals, especially for food pairings with rich meats like steak or duck. If you dig a little deeper into recommended serving temperatures for red and white wine, though, you’ll find that each variety has its own ideal temperature — not all red wine is created equal. Within the color category are subcategories that describe the wine’s body. Body is based on how the wine feels in your mouth, whether heavy and thick or light and thin. This feel, in turn, is typically correlated to the alcohol content of the wine.Generally speaking, different grape varieties fall into different categories of body: Medium-Bodied Reds:Cabernet Franc, Grenache, Malbec, Merlot, Rioja and many blended reds from Spain fall into this category. Alcohol content is typically between 12% and 13.5%. Light-Bodied Reds:Barbera, Beaujolais, Chianti and Pinot Noir are lighter wines, despite their dark color. This group includes reds with an alcohol content below 12%. Once you break your reds down into groups according to their body/alcohol content, you have a new rule to follow: The fuller the wine, the warmer it should be served. The right temperature for full-bodied reds truly is room temperature — provided you keep your house at 64 to 65 degrees year-round. If that sounds little cool to you, you’re not alone. Many people prefer indoor temperatures between 68 and 75, which would be significantly warmer than the temperature at which you should drink your wine. The result? Even a “room temperature” wine may be at its best a bit colder than you have been led to believe. Expert Advice About When to Chill Red Wine Now that you understand the basics of body and serving temperature, you can dive into the nitty-gritty. Set your wine fridge to the right temperature for serving your reds based on their body, and you’ll get it right every time: Full-Bodied Reds: 64 to 65 degrees Medium-Bodied Reds: 60 to 62 degrees Light-Bodied Reds: 55 to 60 degrees As you can see, many sommeliers recommend that light-bodied red be chilled just a touch before serving. These reds are ideal straight out of the cellar or wine fridge, and as you sip, you’ll notice how they warm in the glass toward the warmer end of the ideal temperature range. For medium- and full-bodied reds, you’ll need to remove them from storage and bring them up a few degrees before serving — if you want them in the 60-degree range. This is most easily accomplished by placing the bottles on your bar or table 30 minutes before serving; however, you can also harness the convenience of a dual-zone wine fridge that lets you adjust the temperatures to serving standard a few hours before your dinner. Best Red Wines for Chilling If you have tried drinking your reds a bit cooler as recommended above, and you like the results, you might consider select varieties of reds that are ideal for serving chilled. Drinking red wine in the summer can be a newly refreshing experience if you seek out these varieties: Chiron Côtes du Rhone Cru Beaujolais Fichimori If you can’t find these varieties in your area, look for any red from the Loire Valley, France, to serve this way. If you prefer to use American wines to give drinking chilledred wines a go, just pick a light wine with less alcohol and fruity flavors. Chilling the wine brings out the fruit and highlights the refreshing crispness of lighter wines. You may find that this is the perfect way to enjoy red wine in the summertime; if you prefer it to white wine, you shouldn’t feel like you have to switch gears when the heat and humidity kick in! Special Recipes for Really Cold Reds If you’re feeling especially bold, you may want to try some trendy new drink recipes that allow you to enjoy your red wine really cold. Sangria Sangria isn’t new, but it’s definitely worth trying. You can experiment with different fruits, adding sparkling wines like Asti or Prosecco for some extra fizz, or serving it over ice for a lighter drink. Any red wine that works well chilled will be excellent in a sangria. Feel free to use your favorite wine to come up with the perfect house blend for your signature sangria. Wine Ice Cubes Due to the alcohol content, wine will never make rock-solid ice cubes; however, you can get them to firm up in a standard ice cube tray if you practice a little patience. Wine ice cubes are useful for cooking when you need just a tablespoon or two of red wine at a time for a sauce, but you can also use them to chill your red wine. This is a great way to allow your guests to drink their red at their own preferred temperature: Those who like it warm can skip the ice, but those who prefer a cooler drink can add ice to taste — all without watering it down! Wine Slushies For a really cold take on drinking red wine, try making wine slushies for your next warm-weather gathering. Think of these as adult smoothies or soft sno-cones. In general, you make them by mixing together wine, fruit and ice, popping it all in the blender, and blitzing until you get a soft, grainy texture. An easy way to start is with your favorite sangria recipe, but a quick internet search will reveal loads of ways to sip red wine in a totally new — and icy-fresh — way. A Note About Personal Preference At the end of the day, there’s no truly right or wrong way to enjoy your red wine. Some people like their wine chilled and others like it warmer, and that’s okay. Starting with a solid understanding of the best practices for chilling red wine will help you know exactly why you should serve yours at a particular temperature, but only experimentation and experience will show you what you really like. Fortunately, sipping your wine at different temperatures can be an exceptionally fun project! Once you figure out your favorite temperature for serving various bottles of red, you’ll have the information you need to set the thermostat on your wine fridge to make sure you always get the right amount of chill on your wine before you pour. And if anyone gives you grief about trying a red one with a little extra chill, just ask them to give it a try. Most people end up drinking red wine warmer than they should due to our ever-hotter idea of what room temperature should be, so they are likely to be pleasantly surprised at how much added flavor comes out of a slightly cooler glass of red wine.	The right temperature for full-bodied reds truly is room temperature — provided you keep your house at 64 to 65 degrees year-round. If that sounds little cool to you, you’re not alone. Many people prefer indoor temperatures between 68 and 75, which would be significantly warmer than the temperature at which you should drink your wine. The result? Even a “room temperature” wine may be at its best a bit colder than you have been led to believe. Expert Advice About When to Chill Red Wine Now that you understand the basics of body and serving temperature, you can dive into the nitty-gritty. Set your wine fridge to the right temperature for serving your reds based on their body, and you’ll get it right every time: Full-Bodied Reds: 64 to 65 degrees Medium-Bodied Reds: 60 to 62 degrees Light-Bodied Reds: 55 to 60 degrees As you can see, many sommeliers recommend that light-bodied red be chilled just a touch before serving. These reds are ideal straight out of the cellar or wine fridge, and as you sip, you’ll notice how they warm in the glass toward the warmer end of the ideal temperature range. For medium- and full-bodied reds, you’ll need to remove them from storage and bring them up a few degrees before serving — if you want them in the 60-degree range. This is most easily accomplished by placing the bottles on your bar or table 30 minutes before serving; however, you can also harness the convenience of a dual-zone wine fridge that lets you adjust the temperatures to serving standard a few hours before your dinner. Best Red Wines for Chilling If you have tried drinking your reds a bit cooler as recommended above, and you like the results, you might consider select varieties of reds that are ideal for serving chilled.	no
Viniculture	Should red wine be served at room temperature?	yes_statement	"red" "wine" should be "served" at "room" "temperature".. it is recommended to "serve" "red" "wine" at "room" "temperature".. "room" "temperature" is the ideal "serving" "temperature" for "red" "wine".	https://www.decanter.com/learn/red-wine-serving-temperature-420885/	What's the perfect red wine serving temperature? Ask Decanter	Can you serve red wine chilled? When recommending lighter summer wines in Decanter magazine’s September 2020 issue, Peter Richards MW wrote that ‘good summer reds should be served at 10°C-16°C (50°F-60°F)’. He added, ‘That’s significantly cooler than many a summer’s day, so don’t be afraid to pop them in the fridge for 30 minutes before serving.’ It can be hard to generalise about particular wines or grape varieties due to variations in winemaking styles. But you’d typically find Beaujolais (Gamay) and Valpolicella Classico (Corvina) towards the lighter, chilled end of the serving temperature spectrum. The below graphic from Decanter’s archive shows how Pinot Noir would generally range from light to medium-bodied, with some styles of Rioja (Tempranillo) in the mid-range and then the Cabernet Sauvignon-dominant and Syrah / Shiraz wines of this world in the full-bodied band. Credit: Annabelle Sing / Decanter Oak, ageing and structure Certain grape varieties just have more tannin, colour and potential to create full, structured wine than others. Yet the age of the wine and also how it has been handled in the cellar can affect things. Is your red wine temperature too warm? Alcohol levels may then feel out-of-balance and the wine’s natural structure and freshness can be lost. Wine is a question of personal taste, but these are generally considered undesirable qualities. Many of us have probably experienced a soupy red wine at one time or another, whether on holiday in a warm climate or in a restaurant that hasn’t got its wine cellar under control. Don’t be afraid to ask for the ice bucket for a few minutes. How can you get the serving temperature right? A wine fridge with temperature control is obviously the gold standard here, but a simple wine thermometer can also help. It might also be helpful to know the temperature of the room you’re in. Trust your gut instinct, too. ‘I can’t recall the last time I used a thermometer either at home or in a professional environment,’ master sommelier Xavier Rousset told Decanter in 2016.	Can you serve red wine chilled? When recommending lighter summer wines in Decanter magazine’s September 2020 issue, Peter Richards MW wrote that ‘good summer reds should be served at 10°C-16°C (50°F-60°F)’. He added, ‘That’s significantly cooler than many a summer’s day, so don’t be afraid to pop them in the fridge for 30 minutes before serving.’ It can be hard to generalise about particular wines or grape varieties due to variations in winemaking styles. But you’d typically find Beaujolais (Gamay) and Valpolicella Classico (Corvina) towards the lighter, chilled end of the serving temperature spectrum. The below graphic from Decanter’s archive shows how Pinot Noir would generally range from light to medium-bodied, with some styles of Rioja (Tempranillo) in the mid-range and then the Cabernet Sauvignon-dominant and Syrah / Shiraz wines of this world in the full-bodied band. Credit: Annabelle Sing / Decanter Oak, ageing and structure Certain grape varieties just have more tannin, colour and potential to create full, structured wine than others. Yet the age of the wine and also how it has been handled in the cellar can affect things. Is your red wine temperature too warm? Alcohol levels may then feel out-of-balance and the wine’s natural structure and freshness can be lost. Wine is a question of personal taste, but these are generally considered undesirable qualities. Many of us have probably experienced a soupy red wine at one time or another, whether on holiday in a warm climate or in a restaurant that hasn’t got its wine cellar under control. Don’t be afraid to ask for the ice bucket for a few minutes. How can you get the serving temperature right? A wine fridge with temperature control is obviously the gold standard here, but a simple wine thermometer can also help. It might also be helpful to know the temperature of the room you’re in. Trust your gut instinct, too.	no
Viniculture	Should red wine be served at room temperature?	yes_statement	"red" "wine" should be "served" at "room" "temperature".. it is recommended to "serve" "red" "wine" at "room" "temperature".. "room" "temperature" is the ideal "serving" "temperature" for "red" "wine".	https://hopefamilywines.com/blog/best-way-to-serve-a-cabernet-sauvignon-wine/	Best Way to Serve a Cabernet Sauvignon Wine \| Hope Family Wines	Best Way to Serve a Cabernet Sauvignon Wine Cabernet Sauvignon wine is one of our favorite wines. Austin Hope has been perfecting his cabernet sauvignon for years and it continues to outshine many of the other wines available in the United States, as well as the world. Wine Enthusiast Magazine ranked the Austin Hope Cabernet Sauvignon 2018 as the #7 on The Enthusiast Top 100 of 2020, which marks the 2nd time in two years that his wines have made it into the top 10. And on top of that, it’s the only wine from Paso Robles to break the top 10 overall. Austin Hope is clearly doing something right when it comes it comes to their wine, but you should also know how to properly serve specific wines to truly experience what the winemaker intended. Serving Cabernet Sauvignon What Temperature Should Cabernet Sauvignon Be Served At? We’ve all heard the saying that red wine should be served at room temperature while white wine should be served chill, but did you know that’s a myth? Red wine is best served slightly cooler than room temperature, but not at the low temperatures that normal refrigerators are typically set at. The ideal serving temperature for a cabernet sauvignon wine is going to be around 60-degrees Fahrenheit, but Austin Hope likes to suggest serving it at 57-58 degrees for the best flavor. So if you’ve been storing your wine in a wine fridge you may have to let it warm up just a bit before serving and if you’ve been storing it at room temperature, a quick rest in your kitchen refrigerator for about 30 minutes should bring the wine down to the ideal temperature. There’s nothing wrong with serving cabernet sauvignon at room temperature if that’s what you’re used to, but if you really want to get the full experience and the full flavor profiles, it’s best to chill it for just a little while before serving. Decant Your Wine After the cabernet sauvignon has been brought to the correct temperature, the next thing you want to do is aerate the wine. This can be done with a wine decanter or by just opening the bottle and letting it sit for a little while. Which Wine Glass to Use for Cabernet Sauvignon? Once the wine has been properly decanted or aerated it’s time to pour. Cabernet sauvignon is best served in a taller red wine glass with a larger bowl. The larger bowl allows for the oxygen to touch more of the surface area of the wine, while the height of the bowl allows for the wine to take longer to reach your lips. By having the wine take longer to reach your lips with each sip you’re allowing for the aroma of the wine to enter your nose before the wine reaches your mouth. Your sense of smell deeply affects your sense of taste, so by using a glass that helps promote the use of both senses you can get a better feel for the full flavor profile of the wine. The final thing you want to make sure you’re doing when drinking a cabernet sauvignon, is to hold the wine glass by the stem. We’ve talked about stemless vs. stemmed wine glasses previously and if you’re truly looking for the best wine drinking experience, especially with our Austin Hope Cabernet Sauvignon, then you’ll want to do whatever you can to prevent the wine from heating up too much from your body heat. So, holding the glass by the stem will prevent this. Drinking Cabernet Sauvignon Wine If you adhere to the tips above when drinking a cabernet sauvignon wine, you will get to experience exactly what the wine maker intended when they produced the wine. The wine will be at the ideal temperature, it will be decanted to perfection, and you’ll get to experience the wine with both your sense of smell and taste. But even if you’re in a situation where you are unable to follow all these tips, you’re still going to be getting a great glass of wine with a cabernet sauvignon.	Best Way to Serve a Cabernet Sauvignon Wine Cabernet Sauvignon wine is one of our favorite wines. Austin Hope has been perfecting his cabernet sauvignon for years and it continues to outshine many of the other wines available in the United States, as well as the world. Wine Enthusiast Magazine ranked the Austin Hope Cabernet Sauvignon 2018 as the #7 on The Enthusiast Top 100 of 2020, which marks the 2nd time in two years that his wines have made it into the top 10. And on top of that, it’s the only wine from Paso Robles to break the top 10 overall. Austin Hope is clearly doing something right when it comes it comes to their wine, but you should also know how to properly serve specific wines to truly experience what the winemaker intended. Serving Cabernet Sauvignon What Temperature Should Cabernet Sauvignon Be Served At? We’ve all heard the saying that red wine should be served at room temperature while white wine should be served chill, but did you know that’s a myth? Red wine is best served slightly cooler than room temperature, but not at the low temperatures that normal refrigerators are typically set at. The ideal serving temperature for a cabernet sauvignon wine is going to be around 60-degrees Fahrenheit, but Austin Hope likes to suggest serving it at 57-58 degrees for the best flavor. So if you’ve been storing your wine in a wine fridge you may have to let it warm up just a bit before serving and if you’ve been storing it at room temperature, a quick rest in your kitchen refrigerator for about 30 minutes should bring the wine down to the ideal temperature. There’s nothing wrong with serving cabernet sauvignon at room temperature if that’s what you’re used to, but if you really want to get the full experience and the full flavor profiles, it’s best to chill it for just a little while before serving.	no
Viniculture	Should red wine be served at room temperature?	yes_statement	"red" "wine" should be "served" at "room" "temperature".. it is recommended to "serve" "red" "wine" at "room" "temperature".. "room" "temperature" is the ideal "serving" "temperature" for "red" "wine".	https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/i-put-ice-in-my-wine-because-you-dont-serve-it-at-the-right-temperature-12315712/	I Put Ice in My Wine Because You Don't Serve it at the Right ...	I Put Ice in My Wine Because You Don’t Serve it at the Right Temperature Is there one perfect temperature to serve red or white wine? Perhaps not, but here are some good guidelines Kat J. McAlpine August 2, 2012 Photo courtesy of Flickr user 96dpi “A glass of the Chianti. With ice on the side.” While I’ve had more than a few raised eyebrows shot in my direction for willingly diluting my red wines with ice, my distaste for the acetic sting that accompanies warm wine far outweighs my concern for thinning out my drink with a cube or two of ice. I’ve often wondered about the age-old “rule” that red wine should be served at room temperature, while white wines should be served chilled. Personally, I’ve always found room temperature red wine to be, well, repulsive. It turns out that my uncouth icing of the reds is not completely unjustified. Most red wines are served too warm; the “room temperature” rule originated in Europe, where room temperature is between 60 and 65 degrees Fahrenheit. On the other hand, chilled white wine came from the European cellar, where temperatures hover around 55 degrees Fahrenheit. In America, to achieve the ideal wine temperature you actually have to cool red wines and warm white wines, assuming your reds are stored in a room temperature wine rack and your whites are kept cold (too cold!) in the refrigerator. Average room temperatures can be over 70 degrees and most refrigerators are a frosty 35 degrees Fahrenheit. One critic recommends putting a bottle of red wine in the fridge for 45 minutes before serving while taking a bottle of white wine out of the fridge 30 minutes prior to serving. The reason temperature is so important to bringing out the flavor of wines is that warming or chilling wine can unlock different layers of flavors within the wine. Serving wine at a temperature too far from its ideal range may overpower desirable flavors with alcohol or tannins. When wine is served too warm, the dominant flavor can be that of alcohol, masking the subtler flavors of the wine’s ingredients. This effect is particularly noticeable with strong red wines that have a higher alcohol content to begin with. On the other hand, chilling a wine brings out greater astringency, which means the wine tastes sharp and tart as the flavor of tannins is emphasized. The trick is to find the happy medium for each wine, especially important in bringing out a wine’s aroma. Goldilocks had it right about more than just porridge when she said, “Too hot, too cold….just right.” The good news is that there are no hard and fast rules for the “exact” correct temperatures for serving wines; it truly is to the preference of the individual. The chart above page can be used as a guideline, but by experimenting with a wine’s temperature, wine enthusiasts can fine tune their favorite “flavor sweet spot” of aromas and flavors. Even my habit of dumping ice cubes into my red wine turns out to not be completely unrefined, although the practice is definitely a point of contention between wine experts. Famous chef Mario Batali, who was featured on the Food Network’s “Iron Chef America” and his own cooking show “Molto Mario,” has been noted to chill and dilute his wine with fruit-juice-based ice cubes. I’ll consider that permission enough to continue my controversial use of ice.	I Put Ice in My Wine Because You Don’t Serve it at the Right Temperature Is there one perfect temperature to serve red or white wine? Perhaps not, but here are some good guidelines Kat J. McAlpine August 2, 2012 Photo courtesy of Flickr user 96dpi “A glass of the Chianti. With ice on the side.” While I’ve had more than a few raised eyebrows shot in my direction for willingly diluting my red wines with ice, my distaste for the acetic sting that accompanies warm wine far outweighs my concern for thinning out my drink with a cube or two of ice. I’ve often wondered about the age-old “rule” that red wine should be served at room temperature, while white wines should be served chilled. Personally, I’ve always found room temperature red wine to be, well, repulsive. It turns out that my uncouth icing of the reds is not completely unjustified. Most red wines are served too warm; the “room temperature” rule originated in Europe, where room temperature is between 60 and 65 degrees Fahrenheit. On the other hand, chilled white wine came from the European cellar, where temperatures hover around 55 degrees Fahrenheit. In America, to achieve the ideal wine temperature you actually have to cool red wines and warm white wines, assuming your reds are stored in a room temperature wine rack and your whites are kept cold (too cold!) in the refrigerator. Average room temperatures can be over 70 degrees and most refrigerators are a frosty 35 degrees Fahrenheit. One critic recommends putting a bottle of red wine in the fridge for 45 minutes before serving while taking a bottle of white wine out of the fridge 30 minutes prior to serving. The reason temperature is so important to bringing out the flavor of wines is that warming or chilling wine can unlock different layers of flavors within the wine. Serving wine at a temperature too far from its ideal range may overpower desirable flavors with alcohol or tannins.	no
Viniculture	Should red wine be served at room temperature?	yes_statement	"red" "wine" should be "served" at "room" "temperature".. it is recommended to "serve" "red" "wine" at "room" "temperature".. "room" "temperature" is the ideal "serving" "temperature" for "red" "wine".	https://hopefamilywines.com/blog/red-white-wine-proper-storage-and-serving-temperature/	Red & White Wine – Proper Storage and Serving Temperature	Red & White Wine – Proper Storage and Serving Temperature Knowing how to properly store your wine can make a huge difference in the taste and how long it will last on the shelf. There’s nothing worse than opening a bottle of wine that has been in storage only to find out that the taste has changed for the worse. You want to make sure that your wine is properly stored for the long term, and the short term, so that you preserve the flavor and quality of the bottle. It’s also important to know which types of wines should be served and what temperatures. This will also help produce the best flavors possible, while maintain the intention of the winemaker. When it comes to long-term storage, red and white wines can be stored in similar fashion, but for short term storage, meaning you intend to drink the wine within a few days/weeks, there are different ways to store each type of wine, and different temperatures you should keep the bottles at in order to maintain their intended flavor profiles. Let’s take a look at how to properly store your wine for different situations, and at what temperatures you should be serving your wine at so you get the most out of that bottle. Properly Storing Red & White Wine If you are the type of person that likes to buy multiple bottles of wine at a time, or like to always make sure you have a bottle on hand for any occasion, then you’re most likely going to be storing some bottles for longer periods of time. In the case of long-term storage, there are some things you’ll want to make sure you do to keep the wine from going bad. Unlike serving temperature, which we’ll discuss further down, there is no difference in the long-term storage of red versus white wine. All of your wine can be stored in the same way as long as you adhere to the following rules. 1. You want to make sure that your wine is stored in a cool, dark, location. A wine cellar or a basement are perfect places to store your wine. If you don’t have either of those, a wine cabinet with a door that shields the bottle from light, is another great option. Light can cause damage the wine and cause it to lose the flavor that the winemaker created. By keeping it away from sunlight, you can ensure that your wine is protected. Temperature wise, you want to make sure that your wine is stored somewhere where the temperature remains between 45-65 degrees Fahrenheit. You also want to make sure that the humidity level is around 70 percent. The humidity will help prevent the cork from drying out, which leads us to our next tip. 2. You always want to store your wine on a very slight angle with the cork side down. Obviously, this won’t matter as much if you’re bottle of wine is a screw top, but you want to do whatever you can to prevent the cork from drying out. If the cork on your bottle starts to dry out and crack, it could lead to oxygen entering the bottle causing oxidation. Oxidation is the enemy of wine and can significantly change the flavor of your wine. This is the same reason why a bottle of wine that has been opened, doesn’t taste nearly as good a few days later than when it was first opened. You want to do all that you can to prevent the cork from drying out and storing the bottle on a slight angle will keep the wine up against the cork and will keep it moist. 3. Finally, you want to avoid a location that has a lot of vibration. If you plan to store the wine for a long period of time, we suggest putting it onto your wine rack and then trying not to jostle the bottle around as much as possible. This is also why we suggest not storing the wine in your refrigerator until shortly before you intend to drink it. The vibrations from the fridge, or from picking up the bottle multiple times, can also affect the flavor. So if you’re really looking to preserve that special bottle, just set it and forget it. What Temperature Should I Serve Wine at? Most people will argue that, in general, white wine is supposed to be served chilled and red wine is supposed to be served at around room temperature, but that’s not always the case according to wine experts. Red Wine Serving Temperature This notion that red wine is supposed to be served at “room temperature” has been floating around for ages. And because this idea has been around for so long, the ideal “room temperature” has changed over the years. While today our “room temperature” usually hovers around 72-73 degrees Fahrenheit, in the past it would refer to temperatures in the mid-50’s to low 60’s. And because of this change over the years, you’re probably serving your red wine a bit too warm. Most red wine is meant to be served between 55-65 degrees Fahrenheit to help maintain the intended flavor of the wine. If you’re wine is too warm the alcohol taste can push through making it sting a bit when drank, while too cold and the tannins in the wine can shine through too much. The temperature in which red wine should be served can be subjective depending on your personal tastes, but in general 55-65 degrees is the sweet spot for red wine. This will allow the wine flavors to balance nicely without throwing off the taste. We suggest serving something like our Austin Hope Cabernet Sauvignon at a temperature between 60-65 degrees Fahrenheit to get the full flavor of the wine. White Wine Service Temperature Opposite of red wine, most people will tell you that white wine needs to be served chilled rather than at room temperature. And while this is true, there is also a sweet spot in terms of the best temperature for white wines. Serving white wines between 45-50 degrees Fahrenheit will give you the best flavor profile possible for these types of wines. This is why it’s also important not to store your white wines in your traditional refrigerator. Typical household refrigerators will keep your food at around 35-37 degrees. At this temperature your food is just warm enough to not freeze, but cool enough to keep it preserved for longer periods of time. The downside to this though is that your wine will also end up at those temperatures, which is a touch cooler than you’d like to serve it. We suggest storing your white wine outside of the refrigerator and then placing in the fridge about 30 minutes or so before you intend to serve it. This will allow the temperature of the white wine to cool down without giving it a chance to reach the lowest point. The exception to this is if you have a wine cooler/fridge. Wine coolers or wine refrigerators are specifically designed to keep your wines at a certain temperature. So you can set your wine cooler to hold at around 45 degrees and it will keep your white wine cool up until you serve it. If your white wine gets too cold it can cause it to lose some of its flavor, while serving white wine warm will cause it to become dull. So while it is true that red wine should be served warmer than white wine, it’s a common misconception that red wine should never be stored in any sort of cooler. Wine flavor ultimately comes down to personal preference though. If you prefer your red wine served at a modern-day room temperature, then by all means go for it. And if you like your white wine as cold as you can possibly get it, more power to you. But if you’re looking for the winemaker’s intended flavor, then it’s important to serve your wine at the right temperature. Do what makes you happy, but if you think your wine tastes different than usual, or maybe that bottle of wine you bought after having a glass at a nice restaurant isn’t how you remember, play around with the serving temperature. You’d be surprised at how a few degrees can change the flavor of your wine.	Finally, you want to avoid a location that has a lot of vibration. If you plan to store the wine for a long period of time, we suggest putting it onto your wine rack and then trying not to jostle the bottle around as much as possible. This is also why we suggest not storing the wine in your refrigerator until shortly before you intend to drink it. The vibrations from the fridge, or from picking up the bottle multiple times, can also affect the flavor. So if you’re really looking to preserve that special bottle, just set it and forget it. What Temperature Should I Serve Wine at? Most people will argue that, in general, white wine is supposed to be served chilled and red wine is supposed to be served at around room temperature, but that’s not always the case according to wine experts. Red Wine Serving Temperature This notion that red wine is supposed to be served at “room temperature” has been floating around for ages. And because this idea has been around for so long, the ideal “room temperature” has changed over the years. While today our “room temperature” usually hovers around 72-73 degrees Fahrenheit, in the past it would refer to temperatures in the mid-50’s to low 60’s. And because of this change over the years, you’re probably serving your red wine a bit too warm. Most red wine is meant to be served between 55-65 degrees Fahrenheit to help maintain the intended flavor of the wine. If you’re wine is too warm the alcohol taste can push through making it sting a bit when drank, while too cold and the tannins in the wine can shine through too much. The temperature in which red wine should be served can be subjective depending on your personal tastes, but in general 55-65 degrees is the sweet spot for red wine. This will allow the wine flavors to balance nicely without throwing off the taste.	no
Viniculture	Should red wine be served at room temperature?	yes_statement	"red" "wine" should be "served" at "room" "temperature".. it is recommended to "serve" "red" "wine" at "room" "temperature".. "room" "temperature" is the ideal "serving" "temperature" for "red" "wine".	https://www.wsetglobal.com/knowledge-centre/blog/2022/april/26/ideal-serving-temperatures-and-top-tips-for-wine-storage	Ideal serving temperatures and top tips for wine storage	Ideal serving temperatures and top tips for wine storage When you hear the expression serve at room temperature, what number comes to mind? While the Oxford English Dictionary states that room temperature is conventionally taken as about 20 °C (68 °F), it might actually surprise you to discover that what's referred to as ‘room temperature for wines’ might leave you reaching for a sweatshirt, as it's actually, a bit cooler: 15 to 18 °C (59–64 °F). What we've come to expect as normal room temperature for us is actually quite a bit warmer than the optimal serving temperature for wines. With the widespread use of air conditioning and central heating, rooms can often be either too hot or even sometimes too cold. How to serve wine at the correct temperature So why do we talk about service temperature? Generally speaking, wines show their best and the fullest expression of their styles and flavours when served at particular temperatures. What temperature should you serve red wines? Full-bodied red wines should be served at room temperature. If reds are too cold, they may taste thin and harsh. Although you might be tempted to warm a red quickly, perhaps by placing it near a radiator, sudden exposure to extreme heat can permanently damage the wine. Instead, a good way to gently warm a wine is to hold the bowl of the glass in your hands. If these wines are served at a temperature, exceeding 18°C (64 °F), they can appear to lose their freshness and their flavour structure can become muddled. However, so long as they haven’t been heated too quickly, once they’ve cooled to the optimal service temperature, they should regain their balance. Top Tip: Remember that an ice bucket should always be three-quarters filled with equal quantities of ice and water so that the bottle of wine is fully surrounded by iced water. The water is then able to transfer the heat from the bottle to melt the ice. Air acts as an insulator and a bottle in ice alone will chill very slowly until some of the ice has melted. What temperature should you serve sparkling, white and rosé wines ? As sparkling, white and rosé wines are best served chilled, ice buckets are commonly used in restaurants or bars to keep these wines cold at the table. However, there are some differences in the ideal temperature to serve white wines. A full-bodied white, such as an oaked Chardonnay may only need to be lightly chilled (around 10-13°C,50-55 °F), whereas light or medium-bodied whites, such as a Pinot Grigio will benefit from being served a little colder. Just as wines can be served too warm (losing their freshness), it should be noted that over-chilling, to below 6°C (43°F), can mask the flavours in white, rosé and sparkling wines. Dreaming of becoming a sommelier or interested in landing the basics of wine service? Read our exclusive blog on the day in the life of a sommelier. We gained exclusive access to what a somm’s day consists of at a top London restaurant. Tap here. How to store wine for ageing Have you ever considered building or starting your own wine cellar? Some wines will develop and improve with age but to age a wine effectively you must store it in optimal conditions. If a wine is stored incorrectly, it can affect the flavour and, in some cases, can cause the wine to become faulty. If you are fortunate enough to have the space to start building your own wine collection, it can be a great way to buy wines when they are a little more affordable. Remember to consider the following: Cool, constant temperatures If you want to store a wine for a long time to get the best development inside the bottle, the temperature must be controlled and regulated. Your storage area must be kept at a lower than room temperature at 10-15 °C (50-59°F). It might surprise you but one of the worst place to store wine is in your kitchen. This room commonly experiences large fluctuations in temperature. If wines are stored in the fridge for too long, corks can lose their elasticity and become hard. This affects the seal and can cause wines to become stale and even sparkling wines to lose their fizz. If sealed with a cork, lay on its side Imagine you are putting the bottle to bed. It needs to sleep in the dark and usually on its side. This is most important when the bottle is sealed with a cork as over time the cork will dry out. If stored vertically, the cork can crumble into the bottle and also let air in thus oxidising the wine and spoiling its flavours. If the bottle is laid flat, the cork is constantly in contact with moisture, preventing it from drying out. If your wine has a screwcap or stelvin it can be stored standing vertically. It is a common myth that screwcap wines can’t be aged. Many wines are now sealed using this method (around 25-30%) and some of the best wines from Australia and New Zealand have screwcaps. If you want to age a wine with a screwcap closure, it is best to pick a wine that already has body, tannins, alcohol and structure like a Central Otago Pinot Noir. Let it rest in the dark As previously mentioned, wines should be stored without exposure to bright light. This includes UV sunlight or fluorescent LED lighting. Lighting can often contribute to causing the wine to heat up and, as we discussed in temperature fluctuations, this is not good for long-term storage. There is also substantial research that shows that light causes chemical restructuring in the bottle, hence why wine is rarely bottled in clear glass bottles! The basis of this is that sulphurous compounds are created at a faster rate which essentially speeds up ageing and can develop unpleasant flavours. No ‘good vibrations’ ✌ Providing you can avoid earthquakes or storing your wines below a really loud nightclub, this shouldn’t be an issue for you. But vibrations can disturb wines and unsettle the flavours inside. You might have seen some home improvement projects where someone has literally created wine draws in their staircase. While this might have seemed like a great space-saving idea, it’s not great for the wine. Essentially vibrations disturb the sediment in a wine and cause chemical reactions to take place which can lead to a reduction in certain acids and esters! If you’d like to learn the principles behind what makes a wine have ageing potential, then the Level 3 Award in Wines will teach you the factors contributing to the style and quality of a wine. Tap here to find out more. WSET wine, spirit and sake qualifications at Levels 1 to 3 (with the exception of the Level 3 Award in Spirits) are regulated by Ofqual. WSET qualifications are not a guarantee of employment or career progression, nor do they form part of any regulated qualifications framework outside the UK.	Ideal serving temperatures and top tips for wine storage When you hear the expression serve at room temperature, what number comes to mind? While the Oxford English Dictionary states that room temperature is conventionally taken as about 20 °C (68 °F), it might actually surprise you to discover that what's referred to as ‘room temperature for wines’ might leave you reaching for a sweatshirt, as it's actually, a bit cooler: 15 to 18 °C (59–64 °F). What we've come to expect as normal room temperature for us is actually quite a bit warmer than the optimal serving temperature for wines. With the widespread use of air conditioning and central heating, rooms can often be either too hot or even sometimes too cold. How to serve wine at the correct temperature So why do we talk about service temperature? Generally speaking, wines show their best and the fullest expression of their styles and flavours when served at particular temperatures. What temperature should you serve red wines? Full-bodied red wines should be served at room temperature. If reds are too cold, they may taste thin and harsh. Although you might be tempted to warm a red quickly, perhaps by placing it near a radiator, sudden exposure to extreme heat can permanently damage the wine. Instead, a good way to gently warm a wine is to hold the bowl of the glass in your hands. If these wines are served at a temperature, exceeding 18°C (64 °F), they can appear to lose their freshness and their flavour structure can become muddled. However, so long as they haven’t been heated too quickly, once they’ve cooled to the optimal service temperature, they should regain their balance. Top Tip: Remember that an ice bucket should always be three-quarters filled with equal quantities of ice and water so that the bottle of wine is fully surrounded by iced water. The water is then able to transfer the heat from the bottle to melt the ice. Air acts as an insulator and a bottle in ice alone will chill very slowly until some of the ice has melted. What temperature should you serve sparkling, white and rosé wines ? As sparkling,	yes
Viniculture	Should red wine be served at room temperature?	no_statement	"red" "wine" should not be "served" at "room" "temperature".. "serving" "red" "wine" at "room" "temperature" is not advisable.. "room" "temperature" is not suitable for "serving" "red" "wine".	https://winery.ph/blogs/wineryph-blog/wine-to-chill-or-not-to-chill-that-is-the-question	Wine: To Chill or Not to Chill, That is the Question \| Winery.ph	Wine: To Chill or Not to Chill, That is the Question As wine drinkers we are aware of some incontrovertible wine related truths such as “Ice cubes with wine are a no-no” or “You don’t need mixers with your wine” and many others that may or may not be relevant to you or the general wine drinking public. While we’ve said again and again that there are no hard and fast rules when it comes to drinking wine, there are some recommendations that we feel will never go out of style. One wine rule that we’ve all read at one time or another is that red wine should always be served at “room temperature”. Likewise, white wine should always be chilled before serving. Whilst we agree that white wine should be chilled, we believe red wine should be as well. After all, most wine producing countries have room temperatures much lower than what we experience here in the Philippines. Think about it, what is the temperature of your home on a normal day with the air conditioning off? We're guessing that on average it's somewhere in the mid to high 20's rather than the lower 20's or 10's as in the USA or in Europe. Now with that in mind, when red wine is recommended to be drank at room temperature it's this latter temperature that is being referred to. So here in the Philippines, we would definitely need to chill our red wines before drinking. With that being said, let’s do a rundown of the main types of wine and what their best serving temperature's are. Sweet Wine & Sparkling Wine Sweet or sparkling wine should be refrigerated before serving. The ideal serving temperature for these wines should be 10°C or lower: we recommend refrigerating for an hour to two before serving. Add some flair to your presentation and serve it in a pretty ice bucket to maintain this temperature. No ice bucket? Use a wine cooler. White Wine White wine such as Pinot Grigio, Sauvignon Blanc, and other lighter colored white wines should be served between 7-12°C , chilling it at least 1 and a half hours before serving. By chilling white wines it helps maintain the acidity as well as its fresh and crisp flavor. Chardonnay, on the other hand, considered more full-bodied in flavor, does not need to be served as cold as the other white wines on this list. Simply chill for an hour before serving to maintain the bold and fruity flavor. Red Wine Red wine such as Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, and Shiraz need to be served at room temperature (in cold countries, that is!). Therefore, refrigerating them for 30 minutes is recommended. When wine such as these are served too warm, the acid overpowers your taste buds. Chianti, Pinot Noir, and other light to medium-bodied red wines may be chilled to reach up to 16°C or for a maximum of one hour. While these suggestions may seem like an overwhelming amount of information to keep in mind, the most convenient way to keep wine at its ideal temperature no matter what type of wine it is, is with a wine chiller What we love about wine chillers is that they not only keep your wine at the best temperature, they also showcase your wine collection in a sophisticated and contemporary way. Wine chillers send a clear message that you’re not only a wine lover, but you know the best way to serve wine and you also happen to have great taste in home appliances! So to answer the question, to chill or not to chill — the answer is for us in the Philippines is yes! Volcan Tequila stands as a beacon of heritage, innovation, and excellence. From its humble beginnings in the volcanic soils of Jalisco to its global acclaim, every drop of Volcan Tequila narrates a tale of passion, dedication, and artistry. Immerse yourself in the all that Volcan Tequila has to offer — where the harmonious blend of history and craftsmanship sets an unparalleled tequila experience. Whether you choose the refined elegance of Volcan Cristalino or the unwavering purity of Volcan Blanco, each bottle encapsulates the soul of Mexico's treasured heritage, waiting to be savored and cherished. Experience the enchantment of Volcan Tequila, where tradition meets innovation, and extraordinary spirits come to life. Check out the entire collection at Winery.ph From the multi-awarded Ube Cream Liqueur to crowd-favorite beers like Engkanto Live It Up Lager, the local alcohol scene in the Philippines is slowly evolving and changing its ways. More than the lush landscapes brimming with natural beauty and cultural diversity, this country also takes immense pride in its local delicacies, and the world of beverages is no exception. Each bottle is crafted with imagination, passion, and creativity, all while being proudly Pinoy. And as much as beer bottles remain a staple in each Filipino household, it doesn’t hurt to expand one’s horizons and discover delicious and exceptional liquors that genuinely capture the essence of the Philippines. Footer Menu Winery.ph Winery.ph curates the best wine in the Philippines for our community of wine lovers through our online wine store or ‘cellar door’. We offer a full range of red wine, white wine, rose wine, and sparkling wine from around the world - carefully selected with you in mind. Buy wine online with confidence with reliable delivery, cash on delivery, and our Winery.ph Wine Quality Guarantee. Mailing List Get ₱500 off on your first order by signing up to our mailing list! Our Promise We promise to always sell you great wine at a great price, every time. We stand by our quality and if you ever feel a wine was not of high quality and value for money, we’ll replace it or refund it. When it comes to buying wine, it’s a trust thing. Read the Winery.ph Wine Quality Guarantee for more information.	20's or 10's as in the USA or in Europe. Now with that in mind, when red wine is recommended to be drank at room temperature it's this latter temperature that is being referred to. So here in the Philippines, we would definitely need to chill our red wines before drinking. With that being said, let’s do a rundown of the main types of wine and what their best serving temperature's are. Sweet Wine & Sparkling Wine Sweet or sparkling wine should be refrigerated before serving. The ideal serving temperature for these wines should be 10°C or lower: we recommend refrigerating for an hour to two before serving. Add some flair to your presentation and serve it in a pretty ice bucket to maintain this temperature. No ice bucket? Use a wine cooler. White Wine White wine such as Pinot Grigio, Sauvignon Blanc, and other lighter colored white wines should be served between 7-12°C , chilling it at least 1 and a half hours before serving. By chilling white wines it helps maintain the acidity as well as its fresh and crisp flavor. Chardonnay, on the other hand, considered more full-bodied in flavor, does not need to be served as cold as the other white wines on this list. Simply chill for an hour before serving to maintain the bold and fruity flavor. Red Wine Red wine such as Cabernet Sauvignon, Merlot, and Shiraz need to be served at room temperature (in cold countries, that is!). Therefore, refrigerating them for 30 minutes is recommended. When wine such as these are served too warm, the acid overpowers your taste buds. Chianti, Pinot Noir, and other light to medium-bodied red wines may be chilled to reach up to 16°C or for a maximum of one hour. While these suggestions may seem like an overwhelming amount of information to keep in mind, the most convenient way to keep wine at its ideal temperature no matter what type of wine it is, is with a wine chiller What we love about wine chillers is that they not only keep your wine at the best temperature,	yes
Pedagogy	Should sex education be taught in schools?	yes_statement	"sex" "education" should be "taught" in "schools". "schools" should teach "sex" "education". it is important to teach "sex" "education" in "schools"	https://www.healthyteennetwork.org/news/sex-education-is-essential/	Sex Education Is Essential (Sex Ed for All Talking Points) - Healthy ...	Together, by advocating in our communities, we can ensure Sex Ed for All. April 27, 2023 As April winds down, and as we look ahead to the start of May next week, we wanted to take a moment to share with you the history behind May as Sex Ed for All Month. We also wanted to share–for you to also use and adapt–some of the main reasons why sex education is essential and we should join together to advocate for Sex Ed for All. Background Since 2019, May has been recognized as Sex Ed for All Month. Healthy Teen Network is proud to have been one of the original partners to plan this new initiative and move away from the stigmatizing and non-inclusive observance of Teen Pregnancy Prevention Month. Sex Ed For All Month is an opportunity to raise awareness and call for real investment in sex education in schools and communities across the country. Sex Ed For All Month is coordinated by the Sex Education Collaborative, in collaboration with a national coalition of sexual and reproductive health, rights, and justice organizations committed to ensuring equitable and accessible sex education for ALL young people nationwide. Too many young people fail to receive the sexual health information, education, and access to the care they need to live healthy lives—oftentimes based on who they are and where they live. Each May, we invite you to join us as we collectively (and loudly!) voice our commitment to work toward a world where all young people—no matter where they live or how they identify—get equitable access to the education and care they deserve. Sex education gives young people age-appropriate, medically accurate information and answers to their questions about sex and relationships, without being shamed or judged. It has been proven to positively impact young people’s lives. While May was formerly known as Teen Pregnancy Prevention Month, the shift to Sex Ed for All Month marked a dramatic turn away from what was previously often stigmatizing and problematic messaging. Instead, we want to stand with young people, so they have the power and the right to access the sex education and health care they need to achieve the best positive outcomes for themselves. Sex education is about so much more than risk reduction and disease prevention. Shifting to Sex Ed for All Month provides an opportunity to adjust the lens through which our field has historically viewed adolescent sexual and reproductive health, and address more holistically the sex education young people deserve so they can have healthy relationships, make healthy decisions, and have positive health outcomes. Main Message Sex education gives young people age-appropriate, medically accurate information and answers to their questions about sex and relationships, without being shamed or judged. It has been proven to positively impact young people’s lives. But too many young people don’t have access to sex education, or the programs in their school are shaming or inaccurate. Together, by advocating in our communities, we can ensure Sex Ed for All. Talking Points We all want the best education for our kids, including sex education. Sex education helps young people learn how to have healthy relationships, make informed decisions, think critically about the world, be a good ally to those who are marginalized, and love themselves for who they are. Sex education is more than just putting condoms on bananas. And it’s even more than STI prevention and avoiding unintended pregnancy. Sex education teaches young people the importance of treating everyone with dignity and respect, with racial justice, fairness, and compassion for others as core values. Sex education in elementary school covers foundational building blocks around things like consent and boundary setting with friends, understanding our bodies, and the beautiful diversity in the ways people form and have families. Sex education in middle school addresses relevant issues such as puberty, healthy peer relationships and anti-bullying, and media literacy skills to support kids in developing a healthy body image. Sex education in high school covers everything from birth control and safer sex, to sexual decision-making and communication skills, to understanding how society and culture shape our ideas about sex, gender, and race, and how we can work towards more equitable communities. Sex education works. Sex ed gives young people the knowledge and skills they need for a lifetime of good health and happiness, and it sets them up for success in a diverse society. Research shows that sex education that is culturally responsive and inclusive helps young people develop the social and emotional skills they need to become caring and empathetic human beings. This type of sex education early and often leads to prevention of child sex abuse, development of healthy relationships, appreciation of sexual diversity, dating and intimate partner violence prevention, improved social/emotional learning, and increased media literacy. The overwhelming majority of Americans want young people to get sex education—including parents and young people themselves. Parents/caregivers want their kids to have honest information and feel safe, welcome, and acknowledged at school. Inclusive lessons create a positive effect on all students and have been shown to reduce bullying, discrimination, and harassment. Sex education at school lays the groundwork for honest conversations at home. When families have the facts, it’s easier to talk honestly about safety, consent, and contraception so young people are equipped with the knowledge and skills they need inside and outside of the classroom. Sex education is at risk. Sex education has never been universally accessible, but now it’s even more at risk due to funding of anti-sex education movements by powerful groups. Where you live shouldn’t determine the quality of the education you receive. But without a national sex education program or full funding at the federal level, the quality of programs varies across the country, if they exist at all. Young people deserve answers to their questions about sex and relationships, free of shame and stigma no matter who they are, where they live, or what their income is. Opposition to honest education is nothing new. There has always been a vocal minority intent on stopping honest, equity-centered education that could lead to positive social change. In the 1950s, this same vocal minority focused on keeping Black kids out of all-white schools. In the 1990s, the goal was to censor facts regarding evolution in science classes. Now, this very same vocal minority is creating a false panic about sex education and all equity work in schools. Extreme groups are funding and organizing a vocal minority of individuals—wrongly portrayed as a grassroots effort—to stoke fear and outrage around sex education in communities across the country. They blatantly lie to cause panic so they can dictate what is and isn’t allowed in schools—including pushing for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs and banning students from safely using the bathroom that matches their gender identity. To create an illusion of grassroots resistance, these groups have brought people from other towns or states to pretend they live locally and take over school board meetings. They fund big social media misinformation campaigns and harass young people, parents, and school staff who advocate for real education and safe schools. Eliminating or censoring sex education puts young people at risk and sets them up for failure instead of success. You can take action to advocate for sex education in your community, starting today. All you need to do is ask the right questions and join with others in your community to ensure sex education for all. Parents and caregivers can ask their children what, if any, sex education they’ve gotten in school. They can find out if their children are happy with what they’re taught, if they feel included in it, and what they wish school would teach that they currently don’t. Parents, caregivers, and students can find out who is making decisions about sex education at their local school. It may be a health coordinator or individual teacher, or a district-wide School Health Advisory Committee (SHAC). You can contact the teacher, coordinator, or chair of the committee to learn about how decisions about sex education are made and what is currently being taught. You can find out from local decision-makers about how sex education is taught in your community. This includes how often and when sex education is being taught, as well as what topics are being taught, what curriculum is being used, and who is teaching the program. You can contact your representatives and senators and tell them to support the Real Education and Access for Healthy Youth Act (REAHYA) and federal funding for sex education like the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program (TPPP) and the Personal Responsibility Education Program (PREP), and to remove funding for so-called “Sexual Risk Avoidance,” aka Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage, programs. At Healthy Teen Network, we believe that every young person has a right to live their authentic sexuality. And we see you, the professionals and caring adults, helping them do this. We know you do your best when you're connected to great opportunities and resources. That's why we're here...to help make those connections and support you. Read more about us.	And it’s even more than STI prevention and avoiding unintended pregnancy. Sex education teaches young people the importance of treating everyone with dignity and respect, with racial justice, fairness, and compassion for others as core values. Sex education in elementary school covers foundational building blocks around things like consent and boundary setting with friends, understanding our bodies, and the beautiful diversity in the ways people form and have families. Sex education in middle school addresses relevant issues such as puberty, healthy peer relationships and anti-bullying, and media literacy skills to support kids in developing a healthy body image. Sex education in high school covers everything from birth control and safer sex, to sexual decision-making and communication skills, to understanding how society and culture shape our ideas about sex, gender, and race, and how we can work towards more equitable communities. Sex education works. Sex ed gives young people the knowledge and skills they need for a lifetime of good health and happiness, and it sets them up for success in a diverse society. Research shows that sex education that is culturally responsive and inclusive helps young people develop the social and emotional skills they need to become caring and empathetic human beings. This type of sex education early and often leads to prevention of child sex abuse, development of healthy relationships, appreciation of sexual diversity, dating and intimate partner violence prevention, improved social/emotional learning, and increased media literacy. The overwhelming majority of Americans want young people to get sex education—including parents and young people themselves. Parents/caregivers want their kids to have honest information and feel safe, welcome, and acknowledged at school. Inclusive lessons create a positive effect on all students and have been shown to reduce bullying, discrimination, and harassment. Sex education at school lays the groundwork for honest conversations at home. When families have the facts, it’s easier to talk honestly about safety, consent, and contraception so young people are equipped with the knowledge and skills they need inside and outside of the classroom. Sex education is at risk.	yes
Pedagogy	Should sex education be taught in schools?	yes_statement	"sex" "education" should be "taught" in "schools". "schools" should teach "sex" "education". it is important to teach "sex" "education" in "schools"	https://www.usnews.com/education/k12/articles/sex-ed-in-schools-what-parents-need-to-know	Sex Ed in Schools: What Parents Need to Know	Sex education in schools can be taught by a classroom teacher, school nurse or an outside speaker, and often begins in fifth grade.(Getty Images) For some parents, the term "sex ed" conjures memories of dated videos and cringe-inducing lessons on puberty or how babies are made. But a good school-based sex education curriculum should be much more than that, encompassing multiple issues related to human growth and development, experts say. In addition to basic facts about puberty, sex and contraception, lessons can cover topics like healthy relationships, sexual violence prevention, body image, sexual orientation and gender identity. "Just because you teach a young person about how to stay safe and what sex and sexuality is, you're not encouraging them to become sexually active," says Michelle Slaybaugh, director of social impact and strategic communications at SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change, a national group that advocates for inclusive sex education. "You're giving them the tools to make decisions about their bodies and their lives that best suit them as individuals." Why Sex Education Matters Research shows that comprehensive, culturally responsive and inclusive sex education programs help prevent intimate partner violence and help young people develop healthy relationships. These programs have also been shown to reduce rates of sexual activity, sexual risk behaviors, adolescent pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. Sex ed "promotes healthy behaviors," says Laurie Dils, associate director of content, health and sexual health education at the Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. "That's really what we are aiming for as educators, equipping young people with education and skills so that they can make healthy decisions that fit with their own values and their family's values." But in public school, the quality of sex education your child will receive – or whether they will receive any at all – depends largely on the state and district you live in. There are no federal guidelines for sex education, and currently only 18 states require program content to be medically accurate, according to recent data from the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy organization focused on sexual health and reproductive rights. "Most young people have access to the internet," Slaybaugh says. "So if we are not providing them instruction that is medically accurate and age-appropriate, we are leaving it to chance for them to find something on the internet, i.e., porn, and then they think that's what sex and sexuality is." Sex Education Requirements by State Sex education standards vary by state – with some not having any curriculum requirements in schools. As of June 2022, 39 states plus Washington, D.C., mandate sex education, HIV education or both, according to Guttmacher Institute data. Unlike sex education, HIV and STI instruction only focus on concepts like pregnancy prevention and risk reduction. "But sexuality touches our lives in so many other ways, especially when it comes to being inclusive to diverse people, families and experiences," Slaybaugh says. Thirty-nine states and D.C. either stress or require abstinence to be covered when sex education is taught. Meanwhile, only 20 states require provision of information on contraception, Guttmacher Institute research found. Slaybaugh says that abstinence-only teachings, sometimes referred to as sexual risk avoidance, are often "rooted in shame." For example, she points to one common lesson in which youth are asked to chew up gum and spit it out, then told the chewed up gum is a representation of a person who had sex before marriage. "Abstinence-only programs do not teach communication and negotiation for consent," she adds. "It does not teach about what healthy relationships should look like and what they don't look like. They do not include affirming lessons around LGBTQIA+ individuals. They're ostracizing a large part of the youth population." Health experts including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommend that sex education include information about gender and sexual orientation. But only a small handful of states – 10 plus D.C. – require inclusive content with regard to sexual orientation. Meanwhile, five states – Alabama, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas – allow only negative information to be shared about homosexuality and place a positive emphasis on heterosexuality, according to Guttmacher Institute data. And recently, some states have banned or are seeking to ban the discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in school, especially in the younger grades. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, for example, signed a bill in March 2022 prohibiting instruction about sexual orientation or gender identity in K-3 classrooms. Chris Sprowls, speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, said in a press release that such instruction "does not belong in the classroom where 5- and 6-year-old children are learning. It should be up to the parent to decide if and when to introduce these sensitive topics." But "not seeing yourself reflected at any time is always detrimental to young people. Certainly seeing yourself negatively portrayed would be devastating," says Stephanie Hull, president and CEO of Girls Inc., a nonprofit youth development organization. "When we don't have an LGBTQ inclusive health curriculum, then we don't reduce homophobic attitudes, we don't reduce the bullying and we don't reduce harassment. Those students are already unsafe, so it increases their lack of safety." Curriculum by Age Sex education in schools can be taught by a classroom teacher, school nurse or an outside speaker, and often begins in fifth grade, according to Dils. But some experts say age-appropriate instruction should begin earlier. For instance, the National Sex Education Standards developed by SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change, Answer and Advocates for Youth, a group that works to advance sex education, say that sex education should begin in kindergarten. Based on those standards, early conversations are not about the act of sex, but cover basic information about male and female anatomy and concepts like consent and personal boundaries. From kindergarten to third grade, curricula may also include lessons to help children understand their own emotions and develop good communication skills, boundaries and respect for others, Dils says. Then, in third to fifth grade, curriculum can shift to discussing what healthy friendships look like. "If a young person doesn't know how to identify an unhealthy friendship, how can we assume that they will be able to identify and find a healthy romantic relationship later on?" says Slaybaugh. Additionally, schools should start preparing students for puberty, to help them understand what's going to happen as they get older. The first questions that typically arise from children are: Am I normal? Are these changes that are happening to me normal? "A big part of sex education, if it's done well, is just helping to normalize what they're going through and to give them enough understanding and tools so that they can manage whatever they're going through," Dils says. "It's different for every young person." As students enter middle school and high school, discussions should dive deeper into puberty, romantic relationships, partner violence, STIs, gender orientation and sexual identity, experts advise. Parent Involvement in Sex Education Currently 40 states plus D.C. require school districts to involve parents in sex education and/or HIV education. Thirty-six states and D.C. give parents the option to remove their child from instruction, while five states require parental consent for students to participate in a program, according to recent data from the Guttmacher Institute. Critics claim that comprehensive sex education oversexualizes children and is not age-appropriate. American Life League, a Catholic pro-life organization, states on its website that "because of sex education programs, schools have been taking away the parents’ responsibilities of teaching their child about human sexuality." But proponents of comprehensive sex say parents should be involved. "Parents are the most influential people in an adolescent's decisions about sexuality, and we encourage family discussions about their values related to sexuality," Tazmine Weisgerber, training and technical assistance manager at Answer, a national nonprofit housed within Rutgers University that aims to promote access to comprehensive sex education for youth, wrote in an email. Experts advise parents to find out what's being taught in the classroom and express any concerns about their child's program to administrators at the school or within the district. Issues can also be brought up during their local school board meetings. Additionally, start having conversations around sex education with your children at home at an early age. Familiarize yourself with the subject by reading the National Sex Ed Standards, Slaybaugh says. There are many other resources parents can refer to, including: "At the end of the day, I think all sex educators want parents to be involved," Slaybaugh says. "We want to help parents understand that this is not a scary subject and it's just as important as math, science or reading. It takes all of us to participate in the process to be successful at seeing sex ed as an important lesson."	Sex education in schools can be taught by a classroom teacher, school nurse or an outside speaker, and often begins in fifth grade.(Getty Images) For some parents, the term "sex ed" conjures memories of dated videos and cringe-inducing lessons on puberty or how babies are made. But a good school-based sex education curriculum should be much more than that, encompassing multiple issues related to human growth and development, experts say. In addition to basic facts about puberty, sex and contraception, lessons can cover topics like healthy relationships, sexual violence prevention, body image, sexual orientation and gender identity. "Just because you teach a young person about how to stay safe and what sex and sexuality is, you're not encouraging them to become sexually active," says Michelle Slaybaugh, director of social impact and strategic communications at SIECUS: Sex Ed for Social Change, a national group that advocates for inclusive sex education. "You're giving them the tools to make decisions about their bodies and their lives that best suit them as individuals. " Why Sex Education Matters Research shows that comprehensive, culturally responsive and inclusive sex education programs help prevent intimate partner violence and help young people develop healthy relationships. These programs have also been shown to reduce rates of sexual activity, sexual risk behaviors, adolescent pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. Sex ed "promotes healthy behaviors," says Laurie Dils, associate director of content, health and sexual health education at the Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. "That's really what we are aiming for as educators, equipping young people with education and skills so that they can make healthy decisions that fit with their own values and their family's values." But in public school, the quality of sex education your child will receive – or whether they will receive any at all – depends largely on the state and district you live in. There are no federal guidelines for sex education, and currently only 18 states require program content to be medically accurate, according to recent data from the Guttmacher Institute, a research and policy organization focused on sexual health and reproductive rights.	yes
Pedagogy	Should sex education be taught in schools?	yes_statement	"sex" "education" should be "taught" in "schools". "schools" should teach "sex" "education". it is important to teach "sex" "education" in "schools"	https://www.edweek.org/education/opinion-should-sex-education-be-taught-in-schools/2015/06	Should Sex Education Be Taught in Schools? (Opinion)	Thinking about sex education conjures up all of those uncomfortable moments as an adolescent when we had to sit at our desks and listen to our health teachers talk about things that we joked about with friends but never wanted to have a conversation about with adults. But things have changed a lot since then. There has been an increase in the number of LGBT students who have come out while in high school, or sometimes, even middle school. We are surrounded images that inspire conversations about sex education and other images created by fashion that offer so much skin that there is nothing left to the imagination. the process of acquiring information and forming attitudes and beliefs about sex, sexual identity, relationships and intimacy. Sex education is also about developing young people's skills so that they make informed choices about their behaviour, and feel confident and competent about acting on these choices." First and foremost, there is a debate between the use of sexual education programs, where they openly teach about sex and prevention, and abstinence-only programs, which Advocates for Youth say, “has as its exclusive purpose teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity; teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside of marriage is the expected standard for all school-age children; teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems; teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of sexual activity; teaches that sexual activity outside the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical side effects; teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child’s parents, and society; teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increase vulnerability to sexual advances, and teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity.” Accurate, balanced sex education - including information about contraception and condoms - is a basic human right of youth. Such education helps young people to reduce their risk of potentially negative outcomes, such as unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Such education can also help youth to enhance the quality of their relationships and to develop decision-making skills that will prove invaluable over life. This basic human right is also a core public health principle that receives strong endorsement from mainstream medical associations, public health and educational organizations, and - most important - parents." All states are somehow involved in sex education for public schoolchildren. As of Jan. 1, 2015: 22 states and the District of Columbia require public schools teach sex education (20 of which mandate sex education and HIV education). 33 states and the District of Columbia require students receive instruction about HIV/AIDS. 19 states require that if provided, sex education must be medically, factually or technically accurate. State definitions of "medically accurate" vary, from requiring that the department of health review curriculum for accuracy, to mandating that curriculum be based on information from "published authorities upon which medical professionals rely." Many states define parents' rights concerning sexual education: 37 states and the District of Columbia require school districts to allow parental involvement in sexual education programs. Three states require parental consent before a child can receive instruction. 35 states and the District of Columbia allow parents to opt-out on behalf of their children. Of course, if it’s taught in schools, how properly are the students being educated? This debate between whether it’s the school’s job or a parent’s job will last for a very long time, and quite frankly it is an area that many parents and teachers may agree. There are parents who do not want their children to be taught sex education in schools, just as there are some teachers who don’t think it is their job to teach it. On the other side are parents and teachers who agree it should be taught in schools and at home because it is a topic that we all cannot escape. And I’m sure there are a bunch of people in the middle who do not even want to discuss the topic at all and just hope for the best. NPR The NPR story, called Beyond The Birds And The Bees: Surviving Sex Ed Today (which can be heard here) inspired me to think about all of the places that the topic of sex comes up in conversation. Sometimes it’s through jokes on television or social media, other times it’s in stories on the news, and most times it’s the center of the conversation on the back of a school bus. Whether it makes us uncomfortable or not, we can’t seem to escape the topic. In the NPR story, Lena Solow, a teacher of ten years, Covers the topics you'd expect: how to prevent STDs, pregnancy. But Solow talks about way more than going all the way. "One of my biggest goals as a sex educator is to be sex-positive," she explains, "to talk about pleasure and to talk about sex not just as something that just makes babies." Listening to the story made me blush a little as I drove alone in my car through Massachusetts, and made me laugh a bit when Solow said that when she was a student her sex education class was taught by the physical education teacher and revolved around spelling tests. Yes, spelling tests. She said, I definitely had spelling tests as a big part of my sex-ed when I was in middle school: 'Spell gonorrhea. Spell gonococcus. Now you pass or don't pass health.' Literally, that was what was prioritized." She wants her students to have a much more knowledgeable experience, and she also explores topics that are unfortunately still controversial in today’s schools, which is the topic of LGBT students. In the NPR story, Garsd writes, Beyond the basics, Solow is delving into topics that many teachers would skirt. Things like tolerance. Solow recently asked her students if they thought LGBT people would feel comfortable at the school. A lot of the kids say they didn't think so." It’s definitely a complicated debate, which will last for a very long time. What are your thoughts? The opinions expressed in Peter DeWitt’s Finding Common Ground are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.	Thinking about sex education conjures up all of those uncomfortable moments as an adolescent when we had to sit at our desks and listen to our health teachers talk about things that we joked about with friends but never wanted to have a conversation about with adults. But things have changed a lot since then. There has been an increase in the number of LGBT students who have come out while in high school, or sometimes, even middle school. We are surrounded images that inspire conversations about sex education and other images created by fashion that offer so much skin that there is nothing left to the imagination. the process of acquiring information and forming attitudes and beliefs about sex, sexual identity, relationships and intimacy. Sex education is also about developing young people's skills so that they make informed choices about their behaviour, and feel confident and competent about acting on these choices. " First and foremost, there is a debate between the use of sexual education programs, where they openly teach about sex and prevention, and abstinence-only programs, which Advocates for Youth say, “has as its exclusive purpose teaching the social, psychological, and health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity; teaches abstinence from sexual activity outside of marriage is the expected standard for all school-age children; teaches that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and other associated health problems; teaches that a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in the context of marriage is the expected standard of sexual activity; teaches that sexual activity outside the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical side effects; teaches that bearing children out-of-wedlock is likely to have harmful consequences for the child, the child’s parents, and society; teaches young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increase vulnerability to sexual advances, and teaches the importance of attaining self-sufficiency before engaging in sexual activity.” Accurate, balanced sex education - including information about contraception and condoms - is a basic human right of youth.	yes
Pedagogy	Should sex education be taught in schools?	yes_statement	"sex" "education" should be "taught" in "schools". "schools" should teach "sex" "education". it is important to teach "sex" "education" in "schools"	https://nursing.usc.edu/blog/americas-sex-education/	America's Sex Education: How We Are Failing Our Students ...	America’s Sex Education: How We Are Failing Our Students When only 13 states in the nation require sex education to be medically accurate, a lot is left up to interpretation in teenage health literacy. Research published by the Journal of Adolescent Health shows that when sex education is comprehensive, students feel more informed, make safer choices and have healthier outcomes — resulting in fewer unplanned pregnancies and more protection against sexually transmitted diseases and infections. Of course, many young students pick up sexual health information from sources other than school: parents, peers, medical professionals, social media and pop culture. However, public school is the best opportunity for adolescents to access formal information. So what happens when that information isn’t regulated by the state? Teachers are left to interpret vague legislative guidelines, meaning information might not be accurate or unbiased. State-by-State Sex Education Policies The chart below compares the legislative policies of all 50 states, including how they mandate specific aspects of sex education like contraception, abstinence and sexual orientation. What Does Comprehensive Sex Ed Look Like? Even when sex education is required, state policies still vary widely regarding the inclusion of critical information. In short, comprehensive sex ed programs include “developmentally and culturally responsive, science-based and medically accurate information on a broad set of topics related to sexuality, including human development, relationships, personal skills, sexual health and society and culture,” according to the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (PDF, 7.1MB). “It’s about focusing on the emotional, psychosocial and economic impacts of what happens when youth and adolescents engage in sexual intercourse and other sexual practices,” she said. Granger said that in order to be comprehensive, sex education programs have to consider the whole student. But many states leave issues like sexual orientation and contraception unaddressed, and some even prohibit public schools from addressing them. “It’s hard to get legislators behind comprehensive sex ed,” said Nash, who explained that campaigning on controversial and sensitive topics can make lawmakers uncomfortable. The legislation is part of a nationwide trend — albeit a slow and deliberate one — to transform disjointed sex education laws into comprehensive requirements that lead to better health outcomes for adolescents in public schools, says Nash, who has tracked sex education policies for over a decade. Other states have a more volatile history with regulating sex education. In 2010, Wisconsin’s governor and legislature passed a law mandating comprehensive sex ed. Two years later, it was replaced with Wisconsin’s current abstinence-focused policy. In recent years, states have begun to mandate sex ed to include information about learning life skills for family communication, avoiding coercion and making healthy decisions. According to Nash, including these skills is part of progressive trends across the country, where states have begun to require discussions of sexual consent, harassment and sexual orientation. Overall, most trends are slow to change. “Most states will tweak the policies they already have to be more inclusive or double down on conservative regulations,” Nash said. Even though the United States falls behind other industrialized nations in preventing teen births, its teen pregnancy rates hit an all-time low in 2016, a decade-long trend that has been attributed by many studies to increased education about contraception in public schools. A report on comprehensive sex-ed published in the Journal of Adolescent Health in 2008 concluded that when sex education included information about contraception, teens had a lower risk of pregnancy than adolescents who received abstinence-only or no sex education. The findings could alleviate a common fear of parents and teachers who worry that students are more likely to increase their sexual activity after receiving comprehensive sex education. The more students can access accurate information from a trusted provider, the more prepared they can be when making decisions about their bodies and relationships. Granger said that in her clinical experience, teens will make a decision to engage in sexual activity whether or not they feel adequately informed, leaving health professionals with an opportunity to promote sexual health literacy. “Teens will often reach out for education after they have made their decision,” Granger said. “When they reach out, it’s important for this education to be accurate and comprehensive, not biased or based on judgment.” Some states expect that sexual orientation will get discussed at home, but the reality is that many students feel they lack the relationships to comfortably ask parents, teachers or peers about health information related to orientation. “Teens who are healthy and in supportive relationships involving friends and family will often make much different decisions than those who aren’t,” said Granger, who has conducted research on the impact of relationships on adolescent development. “Stable, present and meaningful relationships with parents and other family members are all protective factors from a variety of interrelated risky behaviors.” “In some states, teachers are allowed to answer questions from students, even if it focuses on a forbidden topic like STDs or sexual orientation,” Nash said. Though this loophole is disappearing in some states like Tennessee, it allows students to stay engaged in discussions that would otherwise exclude them because of focus on heterosexual relationships. “More students are becoming open about their sexual identities and preferences, and schools have to address that,” Nash said. But discrepancies persist across communities over the responsibility of providing meaningful sex education. Granger said assigning responsibility for “The Talk” is part of the problem that leaves teens uninformed. One of the weaknesses in our current system is that we’re trying to assign primary responsibility, and it is too tall of an order for any single entity to try to tackle,” she said. When there’s a disconnect between the information students get at school and what they can find on the internet, mixed messaging makes it harder for teens to rely on the people they trust. When there’s a disconnect between the information students get at school and what they can find on the Internet, mixed messaging makes it harder for teens to rely on the people they trust. That’s where medical professionals can step in, according to Granger. She currently practices inWashington, one of few states that allows minors to seek testing and treatment for STDs, as well as contraception, without consent from a parent or guardian, as indicated in a document on providing health care to minors in Washington state (PDF, 92KB). “I do, however, tell patients’ parents about the minor’s consent to treatment law, and the fact that it was designed to help youth seek treatment for communicable disease,” Granger said. Though the conversations can be difficult, she said acknowledging the awkwardness can alleviate the tension around discussions of sexual health for parents and their children. “Every practitioner handles this differently,” she said. “However, I always try to talk to the parents separately, the child separately, and then the parents and the child together.” Encouraging openness and compassion helps parents and teens keep communication flowing with honesty, says Granger, and it is something all family nurse practitioners can do with their patients. Sometimes the best place to start can be asking pediatric patients to talk about what they already know. Granger recommends asking, “What does having sex mean to you?” as a jumping-off point to deeper conversations. “People developing these curricula, myself included, need to think about the common goal to help youth maintain a positive sense of self-esteem, work toward healthy life goals and make responsible decisions with their bodies,” Granger said. “We all need to do our part. We need to educate teens whenever and wherever they are.” The following section contains tabular data from the graphics in this post. Legislation for sex education falls under the jurisdiction of states’ rights, creating disparities in what public school students learn in classrooms across the country. The chart below indicates which states require critical components of comprehensive sex education and whether they mandate sex education at all. States Where Sex Education Is Mandated California Delaware District of Columbia Georgia Hawaii Iowa Kentucky Maine Maryland Minnesota Mississippi Montana Nevada New Jersey New Mexico North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oregon Rhode Island South Carolina Tennessee: Sex education is required if the pregnancy rate for women ages 15-17 is at least 19.5 or higher. Utah: State also prohibits teachers from responding to students’ spontaneous questions in ways that conflict with the law’s requirements. Vermont West Virginia States Where Sex Education Must Be Medically Accurate When Taught California Colorado Hawaii Illinois Iowa Maine Michigan: Sex education “shall not be medically inaccurate.” New Jersey North Carolina Oregon Rhode Island Utah Washington States Where Sex Education Must Cover Contraception Alabama California Colorado Delaware District of Columbia Hawaii Illinois Maine Maryland Mississippi: Localities may include topics such as contraception or STIs only with permission from the State Department of Education. New Jersey New Mexico North Carolina Oregon Rhode Island South Carolina Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia States Where Sex Education Must Cover Abstinence California Colorado Hawaii Kentucky Maryland Minnesota Montana New Mexico North Dakota Vermont Virginia West Virginia States Where Sex Education Must Stress Abstinence Alabama Arizona Arkansas Delaware Florida Georgia Illinois: Sex education is not mandatory, but health education is required and includes medically accurate information on abstinence. Indiana Louisiana Maine Massachusetts Mississippi Missouri New Jersey North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Rhode Island South Carolina Tennessee Texas Utah Washington Wisconsin States Where Sex Education Must Be Inclusive of Sexual Orientation California Colorado Connecticut Iowa New Jersey New Mexico Oregon Rhode Island Washington States Where Sex Education Must Be Negative Toward Sexual Orientation Alabama Arizona: If HIV education is taught in Arizona, it cannot “promote” a “homosexual lifestyle” or portray homosexuality in a positive manner. Oklahoma: Mandated HIV education in Oklahoma teaches that, among other behaviors, “homosexual activity” is considered to be “responsible for contact with the AIDS virus.” Though the teen pregnancy rate has hit a historic low in the United States, the nation still holds one of the highest rates in the developed world. This chart shows states’ disparate birth rates for women ages 15 to 19 in 2015, according to the CDC. 2015 Teen Birth Rates Births per 1,000 women ages 15 to 19 estimated in each state Alabama 30.1 Alaska 29.3 Arizona 26.3 Arkansas 38 California: 19 Colorado: 19.9 Connecticut: 10.1 Delaware: 18.1 District of Columbia: 25.6 Florida: 20.8 Georgia: 25.6 Hawaii: 20.6 Idaho: 22.5 Illinois: 21.1 Indiana: 26 Iowa: 18.6 Kansas: 25.5 Kentucky: 32.4 Louisiana: 34.1 Maine: 15.4 Maryland2: 17 Massachusetts: 9.4 Michigan: 19.4 Minnesota: 13.7 Mississippi: 34.8 Missouri: 25 Montana: 25.3 Nebraska: 22 Nevada: 27.6 New Hampshire: 10.9 New Jersey: 12.1 New Mexico: 34.6 New York: 14.6 North Carolina: 23.6 North Dakota: 22.2 Ohio: 23.2 Oklahoma: 34.8 Oregon: 19 Pennsylvania: 17.7 Rhode Island: 14.3 South Carolina: 26.2 South Dakota: 26.4 Tennessee: 30.5 Texas: 34.6 Utah: 17.6 Vermont: 11.6 Virginia: 17.1 Washington: 17.6 West Virginia: 31.9 Wisconsin: 16.2 Wyoming: 29.2 Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2015 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr66/nvsr66_01.pdf People ages 15 to 24 only make up 25% of the American population, but they account for 50% of all new STDs reported in 2013, which raises concerns from medical professionals about the scope of sex education. Total STD Rate per 1,000 cases People can report having more than one STD within a year; this data reflects the rate of cases per 1,000 people in the 15–24 age group estimated in a state. Alabama: 40.388 Alaska: 36.139 Arizona: 25.274 Arkansas: 34.465 California: 20.683 Colorado: 21.065 Connecticut: 20.662 Delaware: 34.614 District of Columbia: 42 Florida: 25.963 Georgia: 31.347 Hawaii: 22.959 Idaho:17.112 Illinois: 31.336 Indiana: 26.039 Iowa: 19.793 Kansas: 21.67 Kentucky: 24.424 Louisiana: 40.515 Maine: 14.916 Maryland: 27.75 Massachusetts: 17.29 Michigan:28.32 Minnesota: 20.877 Missouri: 28.951 Montana: 20.241 Nebraska: 21.84 Nevada: 23.897 New Hampshire: 12.944 New Jersey: 19.689 New Mexico: 29.765 New York: 25.651 North Carolina: 31.963 North Dakota: 20.577 Ohio: 30.583 Oklahoma: 29.578 Oregon: 19.3 Pennsylvania: 26.032 Rhode Island: 20.014 South Carolina: 34.17 South Dakota: 26.481 Tennessee: 30.013 Texas: 28.406 Utah: 11.157 Vermont: 15.603 Virginia: 23.954 Washington: 18.619 West Virginia: 18.32 Wisconsin: 24.407 Wyoming: 18.596 Data Source: National Electronic Telecommunications System for Surveillance, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2013. https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/2014/std-surveillance-report.html	America’s Sex Education: How We Are Failing Our Students When only 13 states in the nation require sex education to be medically accurate, a lot is left up to interpretation in teenage health literacy. Research published by the Journal of Adolescent Health shows that when sex education is comprehensive, students feel more informed, make safer choices and have healthier outcomes — resulting in fewer unplanned pregnancies and more protection against sexually transmitted diseases and infections. Of course, many young students pick up sexual health information from sources other than school: parents, peers, medical professionals, social media and pop culture. However, public school is the best opportunity for adolescents to access formal information. So what happens when that information isn’t regulated by the state? Teachers are left to interpret vague legislative guidelines, meaning information might not be accurate or unbiased. State-by-State Sex Education Policies The chart below compares the legislative policies of all 50 states, including how they mandate specific aspects of sex education like contraception, abstinence and sexual orientation. What Does Comprehensive Sex Ed Look Like? Even when sex education is required, state policies still vary widely regarding the inclusion of critical information. In short, comprehensive sex ed programs include “developmentally and culturally responsive, science-based and medically accurate information on a broad set of topics related to sexuality, including human development, relationships, personal skills, sexual health and society and culture,” according to the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (PDF, 7.1MB). “It’s about focusing on the emotional, psychosocial and economic impacts of what happens when youth and adolescents engage in sexual intercourse and other sexual practices,” she said. Granger said that in order to be comprehensive, sex education programs have to consider the whole student. But many states leave issues like sexual orientation and contraception unaddressed, and some even prohibit public schools from addressing them. “It’s hard to get legislators behind comprehensive sex ed,” said Nash, who explained that campaigning on controversial and sensitive topics can make lawmakers uncomfortable.	yes
Pedagogy	Should sex education be taught in schools?	yes_statement	"sex" "education" should be "taught" in "schools". "schools" should teach "sex" "education". it is important to teach "sex" "education" in "schools"	https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-sex-ed-should-taught-schools-sonali-rawat	Why Sex ed should be taught in schools?	Why Sex ed should be taught in schools? Sonali Rawat Sex education is crucial for teenagers, but it is beneficial to people of all ages. It covers not only physiological functioning and self-esteem, but also relationships. Lessons in sex education should be taught in a style that is appropriate for utter novices as well as older individuals, so that they can participate in activities in a healthy and safe setting. Why should schools discuss relationships, care, and consent as part of a holistic approach to sex education? Safety is created via sex education. If you have been sexually attacked or have suffered sexual violence, you should tell a trusted adult right away. This makes it easier for people to process their emotions. Lessons on prevention help kids who participate in sexual activities understand how to protect themselves from diseases and avoid circumstances where they might be exploited. Consent Information is Provided through Sex Education You will gain confidence in yourself as you gain a better understanding of sex and how it impacts your body. When children are confronted with sexual circumstances that are inappropriate for their age, this helps them make the best decision possible. Consent is the agreement of both partners to participate in a given activity in a sexual relationship. This makes it easier for individuals to stop participating in things they don't enjoy. Unplanned Pregnancy Can Be Avoided With Sex Education Teens who engage in sexual activity without sufficient information are more likely to become pregnant unintentionally. comprehensive sex education enhances student judgement and conduct while also lowering danger. This reduces the frequency of unplanned births while also increasing protection against sexually transmitted diseases and infections. Infection Awareness Through Sex Education Every child should be informed of the illnesses that can be transmitted via sexual interaction. The more you understand about it, the less risk you pose to yourself and others. A primary priority is one's health. Without any reservations, everyone should be aware of sexually transmitted illnesses (STIs). If students are unclear about any of these concerns, sex education encourages them to speak out and ask questions. Conclusion Create a moral framework for sex education. Make it a priority to teach pupils how to look out for and encourage one another. This lowers their chances of committing or becoming a victim of sexual violence. Encourage kids to think about why ideas like consent are important rather than just telling them how to ask for it. It's not just about getting out of trouble with the law; it's also about treating others with respect and compassion. With the support of organisations like Safe BAE, students, parents, and educators may work together to create talks about sexual violence prevention through clubs even if they don't have access to a curriculum.	Why Sex ed should be taught in schools? Sonali Rawat Sex education is crucial for teenagers, but it is beneficial to people of all ages. It covers not only physiological functioning and self-esteem, but also relationships. Lessons in sex education should be taught in a style that is appropriate for utter novices as well as older individuals, so that they can participate in activities in a healthy and safe setting. Why should schools discuss relationships, care, and consent as part of a holistic approach to sex education? Safety is created via sex education. If you have been sexually attacked or have suffered sexual violence, you should tell a trusted adult right away. This makes it easier for people to process their emotions. Lessons on prevention help kids who participate in sexual activities understand how to protect themselves from diseases and avoid circumstances where they might be exploited. Consent Information is Provided through Sex Education You will gain confidence in yourself as you gain a better understanding of sex and how it impacts your body. When children are confronted with sexual circumstances that are inappropriate for their age, this helps them make the best decision possible. Consent is the agreement of both partners to participate in a given activity in a sexual relationship. This makes it easier for individuals to stop participating in things they don't enjoy. Unplanned Pregnancy Can Be Avoided With Sex Education Teens who engage in sexual activity without sufficient information are more likely to become pregnant unintentionally. comprehensive sex education enhances student judgement and conduct while also lowering danger. This reduces the frequency of unplanned births while also increasing protection against sexually transmitted diseases and infections. Infection Awareness Through Sex Education Every child should be informed of the illnesses that can be transmitted via sexual interaction. The more you understand about it, the less risk you pose to yourself and others. A primary priority is one's health. Without any reservations, everyone should be aware of sexually transmitted illnesses (STIs). If students are unclear about any of these concerns, sex education encourages them to speak out and ask questions. Conclusion Create a moral framework for sex education.	yes
Pedagogy	Should sex education be taught in schools?	yes_statement	"sex" "education" should be "taught" in "schools". "schools" should teach "sex" "education". it is important to teach "sex" "education" in "schools"	https://mcasa.org/newsletters/article/comprehensive-sex-education-in-schools-as-primary-prevention	Comprehensive Sex Education in Schools as Primary Prevention	Comprehensive Sex Education in Schools as Primary Prevention By Morgan Descoteau, Program Intern, with contributions from Beth Wynkoop, Prevention and Education Policy Advocate As of 2019, only twenty-four states require that sex education be taught, only ten of those states require that this education be medically accurate, and only nine states require that consent is included in sex education (Fay, 2019). Health and sex education is an important and valuable subject taught in school because it impacts every student. Inadequate sex education can lead to a myriad of physical, emotional, and mental consequences that could affect an individual for a lifetime. For example, states that have abstinence-only education have higher pregnancy and STI rates than states with more comprehensive sex education (Stanger-Hall & Hall, 2011). A lack of comprehensive sex education is also directly linked to higher rates of sexual violence. One study found that when students received comprehensive sexual education before entering college, they were significantly less likely to be sexually assaulted while in college (Santelli et al., 2018) In September, MCASA held a session featuring one of the authors of Sexual Citizens, Jennifer S. Hirsch, who cited comprehensive, sex-positive health education as one of the most fundamental prevention interventions for young adults. Fortunately, Maryland can be counted among the twenty-four states that require that sex education be taught. With the support of MCASA, Maryland passed Erin’s law in 2016, which requires that public schools implement a prevention-oriented sexual abuse program that teaches children how to recognize abuse and how to access resources and reporting if they have experienced sexual violence. While there are guidelines in place to support school districts in implementing Erin’s Law, most implementation details are left to the school districts to allow flexibility and customization for their unique student body. In the age of COVID-19 and distance learning, it is particularly important to incorporate best practices of comprehensive sex education into school curriculum. According to an article written by Planned Parenthood (2018), sex-positive education focuses on how to have safe sex and healthy relationships. The curriculum is based on age-appropriate lessons. An example of sex-positive education for younger students is a lesson identifying activities that make students feel good like playing with their friends or helping their parents with chores. By doing this, children practice normalizing talking about what makes them feel good. While many parents may be afraid that introducing sex-positive education in schools will encourage sexual activity, the opposite is true. When schools acknowledge that sexuality is a part of being human, students have healthier relationships. Another necessary area of sex-positive education, where many schools fall short, is LGBTQ education. Schooling in general fails to teach about LGBTQ people and experiences, but it is most apparent in health education (Humans Right Campaign). In 2015, a survey showed that only 12% of students received education on LGBTQ topics in their sex education classes (Jones & Cox, 2015). Combining inadequate education on LGBTQ experiences with the lack of trusted adults for children and teens to talk to about LGBTQ sexual health, they turn to the internet or peers where they have a higher chance of getting inaccurate and inappropriate information. This could put these students at greater risk of experiencing sexual violence or more difficulty seeking support, which is particularly concerning since research shows that LGBTQ individuals are disproportionately likely to experience sexual violence (Walters, Chen, & Breiding, 2011). Inclusive sex education helps students understand sexual orientation and gender identity at an age-appropriate level. Comprehensive sex education should have positive examples of LGBTQ individuals, relationships, and families embedded in curriculum and work to dismiss common myths and stereotypes of the LGBTQ community (Human Rights Campaign). Overall, comprehensive, LGBTQ-inclusive sex education not only benefits LGBTQ students by giving them a safe space to learn and ask questions, but all students by exposing them to different types of people and relationships. Comprehensive sex education is an often overlooked, but powerful form of sexual assault prevention, and one of our greatest opportunities to create a generation of informed, empowered youth dedicated to violence-free communities. SUPPORT OUR WORK Your donation supports Maryland sexual assault survivors and their families through programs such as the Sexual Assault Legal Institute (SALI), which offers free legal services, as well as our work to pass tough legislation that holds sexual assault offenders accountable for their crimes.	Comprehensive Sex Education in Schools as Primary Prevention By Morgan Descoteau, Program Intern, with contributions from Beth Wynkoop, Prevention and Education Policy Advocate As of 2019, only twenty-four states require that sex education be taught, only ten of those states require that this education be medically accurate, and only nine states require that consent is included in sex education (Fay, 2019). Health and sex education is an important and valuable subject taught in school because it impacts every student. Inadequate sex education can lead to a myriad of physical, emotional, and mental consequences that could affect an individual for a lifetime. For example, states that have abstinence-only education have higher pregnancy and STI rates than states with more comprehensive sex education (Stanger-Hall & Hall, 2011). A lack of comprehensive sex education is also directly linked to higher rates of sexual violence. One study found that when students received comprehensive sexual education before entering college, they were significantly less likely to be sexually assaulted while in college (Santelli et al., 2018) In September, MCASA held a session featuring one of the authors of Sexual Citizens, Jennifer S. Hirsch, who cited comprehensive, sex-positive health education as one of the most fundamental prevention interventions for young adults. Fortunately, Maryland can be counted among the twenty-four states that require that sex education be taught. With the support of MCASA, Maryland passed Erin’s law in 2016, which requires that public schools implement a prevention-oriented sexual abuse program that teaches children how to recognize abuse and how to access resources and reporting if they have experienced sexual violence. While there are guidelines in place to support school districts in implementing Erin’s Law, most implementation details are left to the school districts to allow flexibility and customization for their unique student body. In the age of COVID-19 and distance learning, it is particularly important to incorporate best practices of comprehensive sex education into school curriculum. According to an article written by Planned Parenthood (2018), sex-positive education focuses on how to have safe sex and healthy relationships.	yes
Pedagogy	Should sex education be taught in schools?	no_statement	"sex" "education" should not be "taught" in "schools". "schools" should not teach "sex" "education". it is not necessary to teach "sex" "education" in "schools"	https://catholicparents.org/ten-good-reasons-oppose-public-school-sex-education/	TEN GOOD REASONS TO OPPOSE PUBLIC SCHOOL SEX ...	TEN GOOD REASONS TO OPPOSE PUBLIC SCHOOL SEX EDUCATION The primary teachers of children are their parents. It is their right and responsibility to teach sexual morality to their children. Public school sex ed classes ignore individual differences among children and break down the natural modesty of boys and girls. When children are taught academics, such as math and reading, they are given material suitable to their level of readiness for this material. Yet, when it comes to the extremely sensitive area of sexuality, all children in the same grade level are given the same material, even if some are not yet physically or psychologically ready for the material. This is insensitive and harmful. Forcing boys and girls to listen to, view and openly discuss the sexual functioning of the opposite sexâ€™s anatomy while in their presence is embarrassing and contributes to the breakdown of the modesty that is natural and appropriate in human beings. What is taught behind the closed doors of the sex ed classroom can never be known by parents. Learner out-comes and curriculum objectives do not tell parents the teacherâ€™s words, actions, attitudes, and responses that occur as the sex ed lesson is actually taught. This means there is absolutely no way parents can control – or even find out – what their children are being taught about sex unless they sit in the classroom alongside their children for each and every sex lesson. Public school sex ed has never been shown to reduce teen pregnancy or abortion. As a matter of fact, a study in the March 2002 issue of the Journal of Health Economics, entitled â€œThe Economics of Family Planning on Underage Conceptions,â€ debunks the typical sex-ed theory that providing contraceptives to teens will reduce underage conceptions and abortions. Indeed, the study found some evidence that greater access to contraception is associated with an increase in underage conceptions. The public school has no right to judge the quality of information on sexuality that parents provide their children. Some do a good job, some do a poor job. The school has no right to say they must teach sex because they donâ€™t like the job parents do. The school should stay out of the bedroom. Sexuality involves more than plumbing and birth control pills. The school sends the wrong message to students when their sex ed courses are mere “how to do it and how not to get caught” lessons. The best lesson in sex parents can provide their children is the love and respect they show for each other. When proponents of public school sex ed say kids need to know more, what they really mean is they want to teach our kids to use condoms, the pill, and the IUD, and if they fail, where to get an abortion. These people just don’t want any more babies. They never talk about reducing fornication or meeting the spiritual needs of our children. They focus on bodies when the real concern is souls. Children don’t need sex ed, they need chastity ed. Kids need to learn how to say no and why saying no is in their best interest – physically, emotionally, spiritually. The biology of sex takes ten minutes to teach, so what are the teachers talking about in a five or ten-week course? There is no such thing as â€œvalue-freeâ€ sex ed. When anything more than the biology is taught, someone’s values are going to be presented. Telling students to “make up your own minds” tells them there are no standards to go by. Telling students â€œit’s best to say ‘no,’ but if you’re going to be sexually active, be protected” sends them the message that the teacher doesn’t really expect them to control themselves. Presenting birth control without saying itâ€™s wrong for them to use it tells the students the teacher doesnâ€™t think itâ€™s wrong. Public school sex ed attacks and undermines the religious faith of many students. Catholic and Christian students who have been taught by their parents that premarital sex, birth control and abortion are wrong must sit in class and hear an authority figure contradict their beliefs. Please join with us and prayerfully consider making a donation to help in CPO’s important work dedicated to authentic Catholic education (see more) All donations are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated!	This means there is absolutely no way parents can control – or even find out – what their children are being taught about sex unless they sit in the classroom alongside their children for each and every sex lesson. Public school sex ed has never been shown to reduce teen pregnancy or abortion. As a matter of fact, a study in the March 2002 issue of the Journal of Health Economics, entitled â€œThe Economics of Family Planning on Underage Conceptions,â€ debunks the typical sex-ed theory that providing contraceptives to teens will reduce underage conceptions and abortions. Indeed, the study found some evidence that greater access to contraception is associated with an increase in underage conceptions. The public school has no right to judge the quality of information on sexuality that parents provide their children. Some do a good job, some do a poor job. The school has no right to say they must teach sex because they donâ€™t like the job parents do. The school should stay out of the bedroom. Sexuality involves more than plumbing and birth control pills. The school sends the wrong message to students when their sex ed courses are mere “how to do it and how not to get caught” lessons. The best lesson in sex parents can provide their children is the love and respect they show for each other. When proponents of public school sex ed say kids need to know more, what they really mean is they want to teach our kids to use condoms, the pill, and the IUD, and if they fail, where to get an abortion. These people just don’t want any more babies. They never talk about reducing fornication or meeting the spiritual needs of our children. They focus on bodies when the real concern is souls. Children don’t need sex ed, they need chastity ed. Kids need to learn how to say no and why saying no is in their best interest – physically, emotionally, spiritually. The biology of sex takes ten minutes to teach, so what are the teachers talking about in a five or ten-week course? There is no such thing as â€œvalue-freeâ€ sex ed.	no
Politics	Should the electoral college system be abolished?	yes_statement	the "electoral" "college" "system" should be "abolished".. abolishing the "electoral" "college" "system" is necessary.	https://sos.iowa.gov/news/2019_03_26.html	Abolishing the Electoral College would be devastating to Iowa	Guest Editorial from Secretary Pate: Abolishing the Electoral College would be devastating to Iowa When I hear politicians talk about abolishing the Electoral College, it immediately makes me think about the impact on the state of Iowa. It would be devastating. The ripple effects would render Iowansâ voices moot in the general election and bring an end to Iowaâs first-in-the-nation caucus status. The framers of the U.S. Constitution knew a pure form of democracy could be dangerous. That is why they set up a system of checks and balances, including the Electoral College. It ensures a president has broad support throughout the entire country, not just the largest metropolitan areas. All states deserve representation within the federal government. We would lose that voice if certain candidates get their wish and the Electoral College is abolished. The assumption that a national popular vote for president would require the candidates to campaign in every state Is false. In fact, presidential hopefuls would campaign in fewer states than they do now, focusing only on the most heavily populated centers of our country, like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles. Candidates would ignore rural America and our concerns. Winning individual states would not matter. Iowa and the majority of the Midwest would be rendered irrelevant by a national popular vote. If they do not need our votes in the general election to win, the political parties would drastically alter the state-by-state presidential nomination process. Iowaâs first-in-the-nation status would end. The issues Iowans care about, particularly on rural matters, would be ignored. If presidential candidates donât need our votes, they are not going to care a whole lot about our problems. Iowa relies on our farm economy, and our farmers feed the world. A bloated federal government that focuses only on major metropolitan areas would do very little to protect Iowa and other rural states. A national popular vote would have a dramatic, negative impact on our state and our country. Iowans take the vetting process of presidential candidates very seriously. We make them earn our vote. That means candidates need to come here, share their views and vision, listen to our concerns, and answer tough questions. Iowans are very good at testing presidential candidates of both parties. We donât determine the eventual presidential nominees, but we weed out the pretenders from the contenders. That is a very important step in the process. Iowa is a purple state. We voted for Trump in â16, Obama in â12, Obama in â08, Bush in â04, and Gore in 2000. Preserving the Electoral College is not about protecting one party over the other. This is about protecting our state and I will fight to the end to protect Iowa. That means opposing any efforts to abolish or circumvent the Electoral College. I hope those that truly care about the state of Iowa will join me in this fight.	Guest Editorial from Secretary Pate: Abolishing the Electoral College would be devastating to Iowa When I hear politicians talk about abolishing the Electoral College, it immediately makes me think about the impact on the state of Iowa. It would be devastating. The ripple effects would render Iowansâ voices moot in the general election and bring an end to Iowaâs first-in-the-nation caucus status. The framers of the U.S. Constitution knew a pure form of democracy could be dangerous. That is why they set up a system of checks and balances, including the Electoral College. It ensures a president has broad support throughout the entire country, not just the largest metropolitan areas. All states deserve representation within the federal government. We would lose that voice if certain candidates get their wish and the Electoral College is abolished. The assumption that a national popular vote for president would require the candidates to campaign in every state Is false. In fact, presidential hopefuls would campaign in fewer states than they do now, focusing only on the most heavily populated centers of our country, like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles. Candidates would ignore rural America and our concerns. Winning individual states would not matter. Iowa and the majority of the Midwest would be rendered irrelevant by a national popular vote. If they do not need our votes in the general election to win, the political parties would drastically alter the state-by-state presidential nomination process. Iowaâs first-in-the-nation status would end. The issues Iowans care about, particularly on rural matters, would be ignored. If presidential candidates donât need our votes, they are not going to care a whole lot about our problems. Iowa relies on our farm economy, and our farmers feed the world. A bloated federal government that focuses only on major metropolitan areas would do very little to protect Iowa and other rural states. A national popular vote would have a dramatic, negative impact on our state and our country. Iowans take the vetting process of presidential candidates very seriously. We make them earn our vote. That means candidates need to come here, share their views and vision, listen to our concerns, and answer tough questions.	no
Politics	Should the electoral college system be abolished?	yes_statement	the "electoral" "college" "system" should be "abolished".. abolishing the "electoral" "college" "system" is necessary.	https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/12/04/abolish-electoral-college-george-wallace-trump-bayh/	Of the 700 attempts to fix or abolish the electoral college, this one ...	In 1969, Congress almost approved a constitutional amendment to get rid of the electoral college, which meets Dec. 14 to ratify Joe Biden’s election, despite President Trump’s refusal to concede. Presidential candidate and former Alabama governor George Wallace arrives in Boston for a rally in June 1968. (AP) Share Comment The fight to reform or abolish the electoral college began almost as soon as it was created, by those who created it. In 1802, Alexander Hamilton, one of the original architects of the electoral college, was so displeased with how it was being executed that he helped draft a constitutional amendment to fix it. Since then there have been more than 700 efforts to reform or abolish it, according to the Congressional Research Service. The electoral college is once again confounding the country as it prepares to meet Dec. 14 to ratify the election of Joe Biden as the 46th president of the United States. Just one problem: President Trump refuses to concede to Biden, making baseless claims of fraud while his surrogates urged Michigan legislators to overturn the election by appointing their own electors. On Saturday, Trump phoned Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) and urged him to call a special session of the state legislature and persuade lawmakers to appoint electors that would back him instead of Biden, The Washington Post reported. Since Nov. 4, President Trump has repeatedly claimed his election loss as a result of massive fraud. The following is a roundup of his claims. (Video: The Washington Post) Biden is expected to win the electoral college by the same margin Trump did in 2016. Back then, Trump declared his victory a landslide, though he trailed in the popular vote by nearly 3 million while this time Biden leads the popular vote by more than 7 million. Advertisement The closest the country has ever come to abolishing the electoral college was after segregationist Gov. George Wallace’s presidential campaign nearly threw the 1968 election. Wallace was a man accustomed to winning power on technicalities. The state constitution in Alabama forbade governors from serving two consecutive terms. When his first term as governor was running out in 1966, his wife Lurleen ran to succeed him, promising to “continue, with my husband’s help, the same type of government.” She won in a landslide. So, when he decided to run for president in 1968 as a third-party candidate, he had a trick up his sleeve there, too. His goal wasn’t to beat the Democratic or Republican candidates for the White House; it was to deprive both men of the 270 electoral votes needed to win, thus kicking the decision to the House. Then, as his biographer Dan Carter put it in a 2001 PBS documentary, Wallace would be “in a position to dictate to either candidate, ‘Alright, if you support me on the following issues, then I’ll deliver the presidency.’ ” And what were those issues? An end to federal desegregation efforts, for starters. By this time, Wallace had learned the art of the dog whistle and was no longer saying things like “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever” out loud. But he still inflamed rally crowds with his talk of rioters, hippies and anarchists. In the chaos of 1968, many White voters flocked to him. By October, polls showed him with 22 percent support nationally, more than enough for his electoral college hack to work. Advertisement But then Wallace dealt himself his own October surprise. He announced his running mate, Curtis LeMay, a retired Air Force general, who promptly told a room full of reporters he wasn’t opposed to nuking Vietnam. In the end, Wallace got 14 percent of the popular vote, and 46 electoral votes, carrying most of the South. But Republican Richard M. Nixon got 301 electoral votes, foiling Wallace’s plan. Had Wallace gotten 50,000 more votes in Tennessee and had Democrat Hubert Humphrey gotten 91,000 more votes in Ohio, it would have been successful. The near miss was enough to spur Congress to action. Enter Birch Bayh. In 1963, the young senator from Indiana had been assigned to chair a subcommittee on constitutional amendments — usually a sleepy gig, but not so for him. First, he wrote the 25th Amendment, which outlines rules for presidential replacement due to incapacitation, resignation or death. Later, he did the same with the 26th Amendment, lowering the voting age to 18. He also wrote the Equal Rights Amendment, which fell just short of ratification in the 1970s. Advertisement President Lyndon B. Johnson had asked Bayh to work on reforming the electoral college, but after studying it, he decided it couldn’t be reformed and had to be abolished. He had first introduced legislation to replace it with a direct popular vote in 1966. But other lawmakers didn’t pay much attention until Wallace’s wake-up call. Suddenly it had bipartisan support, as well as popular sentiment; Gallup polling showed public support for the direct vote of the president at 80 percent, up 22 points in two years. American history showed that the franchise was constantly expanding — to White men without property, to women, to African Americans — and moving toward a direct vote, as it had for the Senate. So it was natural this pattern should continue, Bayh said. The electoral college and the winner-take-all system made one person’s vote in a swing state matter more than other votes elsewhere; all votes counting equally would encourage more people to vote, he said. “We are at long last arriving at the place and time in our history where meaning has been brought to the preamble of our Constitution — ‘We, the People of the United States,’ ” he argued in a Senate speech. Advertisement In September 1969, the proposed amendment sailed through the House, passing 339 to 70. Nixon, a Republican, threw his support behind Democrat Bayh’s proposal, and it appeared a majority of state legislatures would ratify it. So what happened to the senator’s bill? The Senate. Southern senators led by South Carolina’s Strom Thurmond were perfectly happy with the system as it was. As Wallace had demonstrated, the electoral college increased the importance of the Southern White vote; and the winner-take-all system effectively canceled out the Black vote so long as Southern Blacks remained the minority. The group blocked the amendment from moving forward with a filibuster. (For what it’s worth, the filibuster is another old convention that many argue should be abolished.) The amendment died on the Senate floor the next year. Advertisement Bayh tried throughout the 1970s to bring it to a vote, which finally happened in 1979 after President Jimmy Carter expressed support for direct election. It received a majority vote but not the two-thirds majority needed to pass a constitutional amendment. Bayh, who died in 2019, lived long enough to see his worst fears — the loser of the popular vote winning the electoral college — realized.	In 1963, the young senator from Indiana had been assigned to chair a subcommittee on constitutional amendments — usually a sleepy gig, but not so for him. First, he wrote the 25th Amendment, which outlines rules for presidential replacement due to incapacitation, resignation or death. Later, he did the same with the 26th Amendment, lowering the voting age to 18. He also wrote the Equal Rights Amendment, which fell just short of ratification in the 1970s. Advertisement President Lyndon B. Johnson had asked Bayh to work on reforming the electoral college, but after studying it, he decided it couldn’t be reformed and had to be abolished. He had first introduced legislation to replace it with a direct popular vote in 1966. But other lawmakers didn’t pay much attention until Wallace’s wake-up call. Suddenly it had bipartisan support, as well as popular sentiment; Gallup polling showed public support for the direct vote of the president at 80 percent, up 22 points in two years. American history showed that the franchise was constantly expanding — to White men without property, to women, to African Americans — and moving toward a direct vote, as it had for the Senate. So it was natural this pattern should continue, Bayh said. The electoral college and the winner-take-all system made one person’s vote in a swing state matter more than other votes elsewhere; all votes counting equally would encourage more people to vote, he said. “We are at long last arriving at the place and time in our history where meaning has been brought to the preamble of our Constitution — ‘We, the People of the United States,’ ” he argued in a Senate speech. Advertisement In September 1969, the proposed amendment sailed through the House, passing 339 to 70. Nixon, a Republican, threw his support behind Democrat Bayh’s proposal, and it appeared a majority of state legislatures would ratify it. So what happened to the senator’s bill?	yes
Politics	Should the electoral college system be abolished?	yes_statement	the "electoral" "college" "system" should be "abolished".. abolishing the "electoral" "college" "system" is necessary.	https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/05/23/killing-electoral-college-means-rural-americans-would-be-serfs-column/3770424002/	Rural Americans would be serfs if we abolished the Electoral College	Rural Americans would be serfs if we abolished the Electoral College If the National Popular Vote drive kills the Electoral College, rural and small town Americans who supply our food and energy will lose their voice. Should rural and small-town Americans be reduced to serfdom? The American Founders didn’t think so. This is one reason why they created checks and balances, including the Electoral College. Today that system is threatened by a proposal called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, or NPV. Rural America produces almost all our country’s food, as well as raw materials like metals, cotton and timber. Energy, fossil fuels but also alternatives like wind and solar come mostly from rural areas. In other words, the material inputs of modern life flow out of rural communities and into cities. This is fine, so long as the exchange is voluntary — rural people choose to sell their goods and services, receive a fair price, and have their freedom protected under law. But history shows that city dwellers have a nasty habit of taking advantage of their country cousins. Greeks enslaved whole masses of rural people, known as helots. Medieval Europe had feudalism. The Russians had their serfs. Credit the American Founders with setting up a system of limited government with lots of checks and balances. The U.S. Senate makes sure all states are represented equally, even low-population rural states like Wyoming and Vermont. Limits on federal power, along with the Bill of Rights, are supposed to protect Americans from overreaching federal regulations. And the Electoral College makes it impossible for one population-dense region of the country to control the presidency. Skipping the constitutional amendment process This is why Hillary Clinton lost in 2016. Instead of winning over small-town Americans, she amassed a popular vote lead based on California and a few big cities. She won those places with huge margins but lost just about everywhere else. And the system worked. The Electoral College requires more than just the most raw votes to win — it requires geographic balance. This helps to protect rural and small-town Americans. Now a California millionaire named John Koza is trying to undo this system. He is leading and funding the National Popular Vote campaign. Their plan is to get state governments to ignore how their own citizens vote in presidential elections and instead get them to cast their electoral votes based on the national popular vote. If it works, this will be like getting rid of the Electoral College but without actually amending the Constitution. '2 wolves and a lamb' voting on lunch California has already passed NPV, along with 13 other states plus Washington, D.C. Nevada, with six electoral votes, could be next. NPV only takes effect if it is joined by enough states that they control 270 electoral votes, which would then control the outcome of all future presidential elections. If that happens (NPV needs 81 more electoral votes), and if the courts do not strike it down, big cities will gain more political power at the expense of everyone else. The idea that every vote should count equally is attractive. But a quote often attributed to Benjamin Franklin famously reminds us that democracy can be “two wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for lunch.” (City dwellers who think that meat comes from the grocery store might not understand why this is such a big problem for the lamb.) And when you think about it, every check on government power, from the Electoral College to the Bill of Rights, is a restraint on the majority. The Electoral College makes it even harder to win the presidency. It requires geographic balance and helps protect Americans who might otherwise have their voices ignored. All Americans should value constitutional protections, like the Electoral College, that remind us that the real purpose of government is to protect our individual rights. Trent England, host of The Trent England Show podcast, is executive vice president of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs and director of its Save Our States project. Follow him on Twitter: @TrentEngland	Rural Americans would be serfs if we abolished the Electoral College If the National Popular Vote drive kills the Electoral College, rural and small town Americans who supply our food and energy will lose their voice. Should rural and small-town Americans be reduced to serfdom? The American Founders didn’t think so. This is one reason why they created checks and balances, including the Electoral College. Today that system is threatened by a proposal called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, or NPV. Rural America produces almost all our country’s food, as well as raw materials like metals, cotton and timber. Energy, fossil fuels but also alternatives like wind and solar come mostly from rural areas. In other words, the material inputs of modern life flow out of rural communities and into cities. This is fine, so long as the exchange is voluntary — rural people choose to sell their goods and services, receive a fair price, and have their freedom protected under law. But history shows that city dwellers have a nasty habit of taking advantage of their country cousins. Greeks enslaved whole masses of rural people, known as helots. Medieval Europe had feudalism. The Russians had their serfs. Credit the American Founders with setting up a system of limited government with lots of checks and balances. The U.S. Senate makes sure all states are represented equally, even low-population rural states like Wyoming and Vermont. Limits on federal power, along with the Bill of Rights, are supposed to protect Americans from overreaching federal regulations. And the Electoral College makes it impossible for one population-dense region of the country to control the presidency. Skipping the constitutional amendment process This is why Hillary Clinton lost in 2016. Instead of winning over small-town Americans, she amassed a popular vote lead based on California and a few big cities. She won those places with huge margins but lost just about everywhere else. And the system worked. The Electoral College requires more than just the most raw votes to win — it requires geographic balance. This helps to protect rural and small-town Americans. Now a California millionaire named John Koza is trying to undo this system.	no
Politics	Should the electoral college system be abolished?	yes_statement	the "electoral" "college" "system" should be "abolished".. abolishing the "electoral" "college" "system" is necessary.	https://www.theshorthorn.com/opinion/opinion-electoral-college-s-outdated-system-needs-to-be-abolished/article_f5fb81ea-c1e1-11ed-a569-0b5a32c521ad.html	Opinion: Electoral College's outdated system needs to be abolished ...	Opinion: Electoral College’s outdated system needs to be abolished When voting for the U.S. president, the public does not vote directly — instead, its votes are represented by individuals at a higher level who make up the Electoral College. The Electoral College is a board of electors equal to the number of representatives in Congress who votes for the president on behalf of their constituents. For example, if the majority of a state’s population votes for a Democratic candidate, then all of said state’s electors would vote for the same candidate. While a good theoretical concept, the Electoral College’s existence has multiple problems, and it should be eliminated altogether. The Electoral College was designed to limit the power of the people. According to History.com, the Founding Fathers were concerned that Congress voting for president could lead to government corruption, but a straight popular vote could lead to a mass of uninformed voters electing a president with dangerous amounts of populist power. A compromise was made, where electors equal the number of Congress representatives — 538 — vote on behalf of the people. But this system is problematic. Although a person can win the popular vote, the 538 electors could vote a different way. In the 2016 presidential election, even though Hillary Clinton won 48% of the popular vote and Donald Trump received 46%, the latter still won the presidency because of the Electoral College. Today’s Americans are more educated than when the Electoral College was created. The concern that the general public were not educated or politically informed enough to vote for America’s highest office has become outdated. From 1960 to 2020, the U.S. high school graduation rate had increased from 41% to 91%, and the college graduation rate from 7.7% to 37.9%. Americans are now more educated and deserve the right to vote directly for their president. Americans also favor abolishing the Electoral College. In a study published in August, 63% of Americans supported its abolishment, an increase from 55% in January 2021, according to the Pew Research Center. Eliminating the Electoral College would lead to a simple majority electing the U.S. President, something most Americans seem to have agreed with. Those believe in a more traditional approach to the government have a good point in that the Electoral College forces presidential hopefuls to represent everyone rather than those in large urban centers. This means voters in Lincoln, Nebraska, would have the same power as voters in Los Angeles, California. However, having the number of Electoral College members be tied to the number of U.S. Representatives in each state creates the same problem regardless. In the 2020 election, California had 55 Electoral College members and Texas had 38, while Delaware had four and Wyoming had three. The Electoral College minimizes the role of the American voter, and its outdated nature shows that it should be abolished. The average American is more educated and politically active now than when the Electoral College was created, so its existence is no longer needed in the modern American system. Watch this discussion.Stop watching this discussion. (0) comments Welcome to the discussion. Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything. Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person. Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts. Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.	Opinion: Electoral College’s outdated system needs to be abolished When voting for the U.S. president, the public does not vote directly — instead, its votes are represented by individuals at a higher level who make up the Electoral College. The Electoral College is a board of electors equal to the number of representatives in Congress who votes for the president on behalf of their constituents. For example, if the majority of a state’s population votes for a Democratic candidate, then all of said state’s electors would vote for the same candidate. While a good theoretical concept, the Electoral College’s existence has multiple problems, and it should be eliminated altogether. The Electoral College was designed to limit the power of the people. According to History.com, the Founding Fathers were concerned that Congress voting for president could lead to government corruption, but a straight popular vote could lead to a mass of uninformed voters electing a president with dangerous amounts of populist power. A compromise was made, where electors equal the number of Congress representatives — 538 — vote on behalf of the people. But this system is problematic. Although a person can win the popular vote, the 538 electors could vote a different way. In the 2016 presidential election, even though Hillary Clinton won 48% of the popular vote and Donald Trump received 46%, the latter still won the presidency because of the Electoral College. Today’s Americans are more educated than when the Electoral College was created. The concern that the general public were not educated or politically informed enough to vote for America’s highest office has become outdated. From 1960 to 2020, the U.S. high school graduation rate had increased from 41% to 91%, and the college graduation rate from 7.7% to 37.9%. Americans are now more educated and deserve the right to vote directly for their president. Americans also favor abolishing the Electoral College. In a study published in August, 63% of Americans supported its abolishment, an increase from 55% in January 2021, according to the Pew Research Center.	yes
Politics	Should the electoral college system be abolished?	yes_statement	the "electoral" "college" "system" should be "abolished".. abolishing the "electoral" "college" "system" is necessary.	https://www.lwv.org/blog/electoral-college-what-it-good	The Electoral College: What is it good for? \| League of Women Voters	The Electoral College: What is it good for? Breaking down the Electoral College — its origins and issues Next week, the Electoral College will convene as is required by the Constitution to formally elect the next president and vice president of the United States. Every four years this part of the complicated process once again comes to the forefront of discussion. The Electoral College is often not a well-understood entity. For starters, it isn’t a place, but rather a group of individuals known as ‘electors’ who cast their votes for electing the president. And it wasn’t created by our Founding Fathers, either. I recently sat down with ELLE magazine to discuss the Electoral College and the history behind this system. As the electors prepare for their meeting on December 14, I want to highlight some of the history and shortcomings of this process, as well as offer some possible solutions to replacing this flawed system for the good of the nation and the health of our democracy. ORIGINS AND WHY IT WAS FORMED The presidential election of 1876 between Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel J. Tilden was highly contested. Tilden won the popular vote, but electoral votes in a few key states were disputed when Congress met to finalize the results. It was the middle of reconstruction and the first time since the Civil War that a Democrat, Samuel Tilden, had won the popular vote. But the election ultimately came down to three Southern states — all under the fragile control of Reconstruction Republican governments — which had each sent to Congress multiple competing electoral returns. If those states went to Hayes, then Tilden would lose by a single electoral vote. At the time, Congress had no existing procedures to decide which of the disputed returns from each state should be counted, so it functionally delegated the decision to an ad hoc Electoral Commission composed of five senators, five representatives, and five Supreme Court justices. Congress later passed the Electoral Count Act to prevent another Hayes-Tilden debacle and to avoid partisan paralysis in presidential elections. THE COLLEGE TIES TO SLAVERY One dirty secret of the Electoral College is the direct relationship to racism and slavery in this country. More specifically, southern states wanted enslaved persons to count toward the population for the purposes of political representation, even when those in slavery had no voting rights or voice in government. The three-fifths compromise allowed for three-fifths of slaves to be counted which resulted in more representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives and more votes in the Electoral College. The system rewarded slave owners by giving their states more power while holding millions and millions of people powerless. PROBLEMS SURROUNDING THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE In addition to its ominous origins, the Electoral College was surely not what the Founding Fathers would have wanted. They had already spelled out the electoral process in the Constitution, designed as such to be a more democratic system than it is today. Thus, the Electoral College is not reflective of a true democracy in which the people directly decide their leaders. The system overrepresents some states and underrepresents others, creating campaigns that focus on a few “swing states.” Five times in our history, a presidential candidate has WON the popular vote but LOST the Electoral College count: 1. Hillary Clinton (2016) 2. Al Gore (2000) 3. Grover Cleveland (1888) 4. Samuel Tilden (1876) 5. Andrew Jackson (1824) Today, most states have a ‘winner take all’ method for awarding their electoral votes. In 48 states the winner of the state popular vote gets ALL of the electoral votes for that state, no matter how close the popular vote might be. Maine and Nebraska are the only states that award their electoral votes proportionally. Large states like California and Texas have dozens of congressional districts, while Maine has 2 and Nebraska has 3. Another issue is that the Electoral College doesn't support a multi-party system, wherein there would be additional candidates from other parties (e.g., Green, Libertarian), as opposed to just the two mega parties (Democrat and Republican). Yes, there are sometimes Green or Libertarian candidates on the ballot, but they aren't included in the main debates or given much airtime. The Electoral College doesn't allow for a multi-party system of elections, because, with four or more candidates it wouldn't be possible for any one candidate to achieve 270 necessary electoral votes. There is also the problem of “faithless electors.” The individuals are elected to the Electoral College by their political party and they are expected to pledge their vote in alignment with their official party. That doesn’t always happen. There have been a few situations where "faithless electors" stray from their party commitment. These individuals have never had enough influence to successfully change the outcome of an election, but it is a factor whenever any one individual has this level of power and influence. THE LEAGUE’S POSITION AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS At the League, we believe that the direct-popular-vote method for electing the President and Vice President is essential to representative government. Therefore, the League believes that the Electoral College should be abolished. There is a lot of controversy around abolishing the current process, which would require a constitutional amendment. But instead of abolishing the Electoral College, there’s an alternative — a state-based approach called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. It's an agreement among states that their electors will vote for whoever has won the national popular vote, regardless of who won the state's popular vote. The League supports the use of the National Popular Vote Compact as one acceptable way to achieve the goal of the direct popular vote for election of the president until the abolition of the Electoral College is accomplished. The League also supports uniform voting qualifications and procedures for presidential elections. One “reform” which the League specifically rejects is the voting by electors based on proportional representation in lieu of the present “winner-takes-all” method. Such a system would apportion the electoral votes of a state based on the popular vote in that state. There have been more than 700 pieces of legislation offered to abolish or modify the Electoral College. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, supported by the League, will guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The Compact ensures that every vote, in every state, will matter in every presidential election. More importantly, the League advocates for electoral process reform. As I told the ELLE Magazine last month, “if we want to get to a place of reconciliation and healing in this country, beyond the systems that were set up to give advantage to certain people over others, we need to make sure we are fixing the things that went wrong from the beginning. It comes down to being able to have equal representation, and it comes down to one person, one vote. In a true democracy, that's what happens.”	Clinton (2016) 2. Al Gore (2000) 3. Grover Cleveland (1888) 4. Samuel Tilden (1876) 5. Andrew Jackson (1824) Today, most states have a ‘winner take all’ method for awarding their electoral votes. In 48 states the winner of the state popular vote gets ALL of the electoral votes for that state, no matter how close the popular vote might be. Maine and Nebraska are the only states that award their electoral votes proportionally. Large states like California and Texas have dozens of congressional districts, while Maine has 2 and Nebraska has 3. Another issue is that the Electoral College doesn't support a multi-party system, wherein there would be additional candidates from other parties (e.g., Green, Libertarian), as opposed to just the two mega parties (Democrat and Republican). Yes, there are sometimes Green or Libertarian candidates on the ballot, but they aren't included in the main debates or given much airtime. The Electoral College doesn't allow for a multi-party system of elections, because, with four or more candidates it wouldn't be possible for any one candidate to achieve 270 necessary electoral votes. There is also the problem of “faithless electors.” The individuals are elected to the Electoral College by their political party and they are expected to pledge their vote in alignment with their official party. That doesn’t always happen. There have been a few situations where "faithless electors" stray from their party commitment. These individuals have never had enough influence to successfully change the outcome of an election, but it is a factor whenever any one individual has this level of power and influence. THE LEAGUE’S POSITION AND PROPOSED SOLUTIONS At the League , we believe that the direct-popular-vote method for electing the President and Vice President is essential to representative government. Therefore, the League believes that the Electoral College should be abolished. There is a lot of controversy around abolishing the current process, which would require a constitutional amendment. But instead of abolishing the Electoral College, there’s an alternative — a state-	yes
Politics	Should the electoral college system be abolished?	no_statement	the "electoral" "college" "system" should not be "abolished".. abolishing the "electoral" "college" "system" is not the solution.	https://edubirdie.com/examples/why-the-electoral-college-should-not-be-abolished-essay/	Why the Electoral College Should Not be Abolished? Essay - Free ...	Should the electoral college be abolished? Many people within the American electorate believe that they, themselves, vote for the president of the United States. Little do they know, the president is elected by one of the most undemocratic political institutions in this country – the Electoral College. Presidential elections are determined not by popular vote but by an electoral college in which, in all but a few states, electors are assigned on a winnertake-all basis. Representation in the Electoral College is based on population, which is assessed every ten years by the census. Each state receives a minimum of three electoral votes. Additional votes are assigned for each seat a state holds in Congress above that minimum. The Electoral College is the greatest threat to our democracy because it contradicts the very foundations of any democratic system if democracy means that the majority rules. The replacement of the Electoral College by a national popular vote would reduce the likelihood of contentious outcomes and transform the electoral process into one with democratic ideals. Three characteristics of democracy can be identified of which are necessary for a democratic institution to persist. The first characteristic of a democracy, at the level of government, is a system in which the laws are essentially made by and governed by the same individuals. Our current system does allow for the first characteristic of democracy to persist because our nation is governed by the rule of law. The rule of law states that every person is subject to the law, including lawmakers, law enforcement officials, and judges. The rule of law separates our political system from a monarchy or an oligarchy in which the ruler or head of state is held above the law. The rule of law, however, can still fail to serve its intended function if there aren’t mechanisms to protect it from corruption. The founding fathers, when drafting the constitution, addressed this issue by employing the tactic of separation of powers to ensure that there was a system of checks and balances on every institution of the government. The second characteristic essential for democracy’s existence is that, at the level of society, the political system must be characterized by equality. The tenet “One person, one vote” is fundamental in achieving political equality. With the establishment of the Electoral College, however, the path towards political equality is hindered because the idea of one person, one vote is suppressed. Firstly, there exists a different weighting of votes in different states, with less populous states receiving greater representation. According to the 2000 census, California’s population was 33,871,648, giving it fifty- five electoral votes, Wyoming, the least populous state, had only 493,782 residents, earning it three electoral votes. To sum it up, California gets one electoral vote per 615,848 residents; Wyoming receives one vote per 164,594 residents. That is nearly a 4:1 ratio in favor of Wyoming. The fact that an individual from one state can have four times the voting power as an individual from another state clearly proves that there is no political equality. Secondly, within state congressional and legislative elections, the determination of district boundaries is another potential source of effectively distorted representation. There exists gerrymandered congressional and legislative districts within each state which directly affect the results of local precincts and, ultimately, the decision of the electors representing the entire state. Partisan and self-protective redistricting has led the outcomes of most seats to be largely predetermined: lines are frequently drawn to protect incumbents and/or to maximize the expected number of seats that the majority party will retain. Where the latter goal predominates, this typically leads to a small number of districts in which the opposition party has an overwhelming advantage, a larger number of districts in which the majority party has a smaller, but still “safe,” margin, and few if any districts that are truly competitive. In a homogeneous society governed by majority rule, every individual would have an equal voice in making decisions or laws. But as society becomes heterogeneous, members of minorities risk becoming consistently marginalized and effectively disenfranchised. Single-member first-past-the-post electoral systems such as the legislative elections in states can cause members of minority groups to be underrepresented. Finally, at the level of the individual, democracy implies both self-efficacy and engagement. This is the third characteristic necessary for a democracy to exist. The Electoral College, however, fails to pass this specific litmus test. The chief executive of our country can be entirely decided by the swing states. Campaigning is reduced to these few selective states because the other states don’t have as significant an effect on influencing an election. In addition to the limited campaigning, if democracy is characterized by an autonomous citizenry in which citizens act as equals, then when significant numbers of citizens abstain or are denied the right to participate, government becomes less democratic. Many people abstain from elections because they believe that their vote doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things because a state’s electors, excluding swing states, will traditionally vote in a certain manner. Consequently, a democratic ideal can be described in which all citizens would exercise the voting franchise. While it is well known that this ideal is far from being achieved in the United States, it is less well known that this has long been the case: In the 1954 presidential election, only 63% of voting-age Americans went to the polls. Sixty years later, despite innumerable changes in media, culture, and politics, 55% of eligible-age voters participated in the 2004 presidential contest. Finally, the Electoral College doesn’t equate to self-efficacy and engagement because it doesn’t reflect the collective will of the nation’s citizens. Throughout this country’s history, five times the winner of the popular vote lost the presidential election, two of those times have been within our lifetime. This situation can more easily be comprehended through a different lens like a basketball game for example. If a basketball team were to score more points than the opposition and still end up losing the game, there would be an outrage. It’s a system that in no way reflects democracy. Even though the Electoral College is an undemocratic institution, there are still many people who support its establishment within our political system. Many of these proponents of the Electoral College object that a national popular vote, the democratic alternative, would confine campaigning to the great metropolitan areas, to the exclusion of the heartland. Candidates and resources would flock to the great urban-suburban communities of the coasts and Great Lakes, leaving the smaller cities, towns, and rural areas of the great interior to wither in political isolation. It is quite evident, however, that this is exactly what’s occurring today in political campaigning: political candidates and resources are all concentrated in swing states. 94 percent of campaigning by the presidential candidates in 2016 took place in 12 States Since the Electoral College doesn’t favor a more nationalizing style of campaigning and doesn’t require candidates to assemble multistate and multiregional coalitions, why should campaigning be focused in swing states, of which typically have a smaller population, instead of focusing their political efforts on the largest, most concentrated communities. Candidates should have to campaign to a larger swath of people if our country expects to attain an educated electorate of which is essential in a democracy. Many proponents of the Electoral College also mention the two-party system, which was an unintended consequence, to defend the established system. The proposed argument is that The United States has not been plagued by splinter parties and third parties, as have many European nations, which helps prevent gridlock between the branches of government and instead promotes bipartisan cooperation. The notion of gridlock stems from the idea that the present system requires a base of support sufficient to carry a majority in a few states in order to procure a modicum of electoral votes. Theoretically, this has discouraged parties that support one issue to take extreme ideological positions. The status quo, however, has proven that the twoparty system does lead to gridlock instead of bipartisan cooperation. Excessive political conflict and gridlock are negative characteristics of the current polarized environment that need to be minimized or eliminated. In two-party systems, politicians in leftist parties will often be perceived as highly differentiated from politicians in right-wing parties. Yet, in multiparty systems, there is greater complexity and potential for confusion since there are often multiple parties on the left and/or right. The option for voters to select a candidate that most aligns with their political ideology and views is more prevalent in multiparty systems than in a two-party system. In a multiparty system, voters will have to choose from two ideologically polarized candidates increasing the polarization in congress thus creating gridlock instead of cooperation. Multiparty systems, similar to those prevalent in Europe are forced to work together to form a coalition of many different views. This increases the amount of cooperation within the many different parties. This cooperation has ultimately brought about social change and progress in certain sectors within our society that weren’t necessarily prevalent issues when the electoral college was established. So should the electoral college be abolished? This essay proves it should. The vast majority of the electorate believes that the Electoral College is undemocratic and unrepresentative of American ideals. Approximately 62 percent of the people in this country, regardless of party, think the electoral college should be abolished and transitioned to one where the winner wins. The new system in which we choose to replace the electors or the Electoral College is what this country needs to come to a consensus on. Many different proposals have been brought to the table including a direct popular election plan, a proportional electoral plan, and a district electoral vote plan. One plan, in particular, has gained massive national attention as states have begun to individually adopt it: the automatic electoral vote plan. This plan would retain the electoral college but abolish the office of the elector. All of a state’s electoral votes would be cast for the winning candidate in that state. This would ensure that the presidency is won by the winner of the national popular vote. Regardless of any system adopted by our country in order to elect our president, it needs to be one that represents this country’s ideals of equality. It must be a system that adheres to democratic characteristics because this is the only type of system that respects political equality. It must not be the Electoral College because it is inherently undemocratic. Make sure you submit a unique essay Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions. Cite this Page Why the Electoral College Should Not be Abolished? Essay. (2022, September 15). Edubirdie. Retrieved August 14, 2023, from https://edubirdie.com/examples/why-the-electoral-college-should-not-be-abolished-essay/ “Why the Electoral College Should Not be Abolished? Essay.” Edubirdie, 15 Sept. 2022, edubirdie.com/examples/why-the-electoral-college-should-not-be-abolished-essay/ Why the Electoral College Should Not be Abolished? Essay. [online]. Available at: <https://edubirdie.com/examples/why-the-electoral-college-should-not-be-abolished-essay/> [Accessed 14 Aug. 2023]. Most Popular Essays The Electoral College is a group of representatives derived from each state and the District of Columbia, whose major role is to elect the president and the vice president of the United States of America. The College is established by the constitution of the United States, and it has been a critical part of America’s political system for decades. The candidate who gets the majority of the electoral votes is given authority to lead the country after the outcome of... Have you ever imagined a person who earned more votes than the other candidate but did not win the election ? Today, I am planning to focus on the topic popular people’s vote and electoral vote for my paper. NPV, as stated by Wikipedia, is, “ The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is an agreement among a group of U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the overall... The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in Congress and the election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. The Electoral College process consists of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by Congress. The Electoral College... Everyone would like a fair voting system, that is what the Founding Fathers intended for the United States. This paper is going to go over the type of voting system the United States uses compared to the voting system in Canada. Is one more democratic than the other? Should the United States change the way it votes and runs its elections? Let us find out. The type of voting system in the United States is called the Electoral System. “The... The electoral college has been an important part of our election system for over two hundred years. This is a call to fix an antique system, that is holding us back from social progression. We must eliminate the electoral college, and further prepare our society for all challenges ahead. The electoral college is far broken than repair, and by replacing it we’ll achieve the benefits of direct popular vote. By abolishing the electoral college, we would be improving our democracy.... The electoral college must be abolished. It is an antiquated system devised in an era completely unrelatable to our current political system, outdated and antiquated. The Electoral College is poorly suited for an era of high-income inequality and widespread geographic disparities. At a time of high-income inequality and significant geographical gaps across states, the Electoral College will operate systematically to overrepresent the views of relatively small numbers of people due to the structure of the Electoral College. As currently established,... Is the Electoral College fair? This debate has been dividing the opinions of Americans ever since it was first established by the Founding Fathers in 1804. In all honesty, the concept does not make a great deal of sense; the US is the only democracy in the world where the candidate can win the popular vote and still lose the election. 538 members have been deemed as responsible for one of the most significant tasks in the USA – and... Every four years our country participates in the most thrilling and suspenseful race of all time, the Presidential elections. One of the most anxious times that leaves all Americans anxious and eager to know who will be elected President. On the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, every four years the presidential election is held. Around 138 million voters race to their local voting polls to submit their ballots for who they want to be their next President.... Every government has a system in place to effectively chose a leader. This system for the United States is described as the Electoral College. Composed by the Founding Fathers, the process provides a modus operandi of election. The Electoral College allows smaller states to have a say and was created to prevent political manipulation. It has been the electoral system for the United States for over 200 years. In 1787, towards the end of the Constitutional Convention, the electoral college... EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].	This increases the amount of cooperation within the many different parties. This cooperation has ultimately brought about social change and progress in certain sectors within our society that weren’t necessarily prevalent issues when the electoral college was established. So should the electoral college be abolished? This essay proves it should. The vast majority of the electorate believes that the Electoral College is undemocratic and unrepresentative of American ideals. Approximately 62 percent of the people in this country, regardless of party, think the electoral college should be abolished and transitioned to one where the winner wins. The new system in which we choose to replace the electors or the Electoral College is what this country needs to come to a consensus on. Many different proposals have been brought to the table including a direct popular election plan, a proportional electoral plan, and a district electoral vote plan. One plan, in particular, has gained massive national attention as states have begun to individually adopt it: the automatic electoral vote plan. This plan would retain the electoral college but abolish the office of the elector. All of a state’s electoral votes would be cast for the winning candidate in that state. This would ensure that the presidency is won by the winner of the national popular vote. Regardless of any system adopted by our country in order to elect our president, it needs to be one that represents this country’s ideals of equality. It must be a system that adheres to democratic characteristics because this is the only type of system that respects political equality. It must not be the Electoral College because it is inherently undemocratic. Make sure you submit a unique essay Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions. Cite this Page Why the Electoral College Should Not be Abolished? Essay. (2022, September 15). Edubirdie. Retrieved August 14, 2023, from https://edubirdie.com/examples/why-the-electoral-college-should-not-be-abolished-essay/ “Why the Electoral College Should Not be Abolished? Essay.” Edubirdie,	yes
Politics	Should the electoral college system be abolished?	no_statement	the "electoral" "college" "system" should not be "abolished".. abolishing the "electoral" "college" "system" is not the solution.	https://www.teenvogue.com/story/whats-wrong-with-the-electoral-college	The Electoral College Should Be Abolished, Reformers Say \| Teen ...	The Electoral College Should Be Abolished, Reformers Say The way that the United States elects its president doesn’t necessarily make a whole lot of sense. And according to people like Colorado state Senator Mike Foote, “It does not have to be this way.” “If we were running a governor’s race under the same principles of the Electoral College…there would be a huge uproar,” Foote recently told Teen Vogue. “People would be really upset about it, and rightfully so.” Because of the Electoral College, Americans have spent a good chunk of the past two decades with a president who did not win the popular vote: Donald Trump in 2016 and George W. Bush in 2000. The country could face this possibility again in 2020. That’s why there’s a growing movement to do away with the Electoral College and make the United States a true representative democracy. Teen Vogue spoke to some of the lawmakers and activists who are advocating for this fundamental change in how we elect the most powerful official in our country. But first, a little more background on how things currently work. Americans do not have a direct election system — “one person, one vote” — for the presidency. Instead, that power is reserved for 538 “electors.” As such, the presidential election is portrayed as a fight to win states and their accompanying electoral votes. A presidential campaign must accumulate a majority — 270 — to win the election. Forty-eight out of 50 states use a winner-take-all system, in which the candidate with the highest number of votes in a state claims all of that state’s electoral votes, and sometimes by a very slim margin. (Maine and Nebraska are the exceptions, and use the congressional district method, where as electoral reform organization FairVote explains, “the winner of each district is awarded one electoral vote, and the winner of the state-wide vote is then awarded the state’s remaining two electoral votes.”) Defenders of the framework have praised its anti-democratic values and have otherwise applauded its supposed protection of small states. But small states are, in fact, overrepresented in the system: “States like Wyoming have three times more Electoral College votes than they would have if each state’s voting power was proportionate to its population size,” said Darling-Hammond. The compact is an agreement among states and Washington, D.C., to award all their electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the national popular vote — guaranteeing that the popular-vote winner would also win the Electoral College. It has so far been adopted by 15 states and D.C. — although it is currently suspended in Colorado, pending a referendum on the 2020 ballot. Including Colorado, these states now have 196 electoral votes, or about 72% of the 270 votes needed to give the compact legal force. “We think that by 2024, the candidate for president should be forced to campaign in all 50 states,” said Eileen Reavey, the national grassroots director of National Popular Vote, the main organization behind the compact. State Senator Foote, a sponsor of the bill in Colorado, agrees the compact is the best way forward: “An amendment to abolish the Electoral College is, well, I just cannot see a scenario where that would actually be successful. But an interstate agreement is a real possibility. Like I said, we’re two-thirds of the way there,” said Foote, who is not seeking reelection this year. Reavey explained that while many people who support the bill also support full abolishment of the Electoral College, “many of them do not.” The compact offers a compromise. Saul Anuzis, a consultant and former chairman of the Michigan Republican Party, opposes “the elimination of the Electoral College,” but advocates for the compact, calling it the most “non-partisan, fair reform that has been contemplated in decades.” “When Democrats are able to win Texas at the presidential level, Republicans are going to want to get rid of the Electoral College too,” said Darrell M. West, vice president and director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution. “It’s an admirable effort, but I have serious questions about it,” said Alex Keyssar, author of Why Do We Still Have the Electoral College? and professor of history and social policy at Harvard University. “I’m not a constitutional lawyer myself, but I think that there will be wrangling over it...I think it’s inherently unstable and can give rise to more political jockeying,” Keyssar said. The surefire way to guarantee more free and fair elections, he said, is through a constitutional amendment. Going this route would require overcoming political inertia and a long constitutional process, Keyssar acknowledges. “I’ve just written a book about 220 years of failure to get rid of the Electoral College or to reform it. So it’s not like I’m a wild-eyed optimist about this,”he said. “But, I also know from that history, we’ve come very close a couple of times.” The Founding Fathers left an amendment process that has historically been “an important way to produce political change,” according to the Brooking Institution’s West, like granting many women the right to vote via the 19th Amendment. With questions over fair representation and good governance swirling in this chaotic political year, advocates for Electoral College reform think it might be their moment. “Get informed” and “volunteer,” suggests Lily Cahill, 16, a volunteer with the National Popular Vote in Denver. Cahill, who is also a ballet dancer and member of her school’s debate team, says she phone banks for the organization to help dispel misconceptions about Proposition 113 — the bill on the ballot in Colorado. “It takes a lot of time to really understand what the Electoral College is, the problems with it, and what can be done to adjust it,” Cahill said. “It’s one of those extremely complex systems in the U.S. that are just so difficult to really grasp.” If you find the current system confusing, Cahill recommends doing research on the topic as well as reaching out to campaigns or organizations that are supportive of the work. Reavey, of National Popular Vote, said, “the number-one thing that people can do is contact their state legislators” to support the compact. Some voters may be more sympathetic to the complete eradication of the Electoral College or not be quite sure how to feel about it at all. The electoral system, it seems, is designed to make you feel this way. “It’s part of a larger story about entrenched power,” said Sophia Lin Lakin, deputy director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, “and the manipulating of antiquated systems.”	The Electoral College Should Be Abolished, Reformers Say The way that the United States elects its president doesn’t necessarily make a whole lot of sense. And according to people like Colorado state Senator Mike Foote, “It does not have to be this way.” “If we were running a governor’s race under the same principles of the Electoral College…there would be a huge uproar,” Foote recently told Teen Vogue. “People would be really upset about it, and rightfully so.” Because of the Electoral College, Americans have spent a good chunk of the past two decades with a president who did not win the popular vote: Donald Trump in 2016 and George W. Bush in 2000. The country could face this possibility again in 2020. That’s why there’s a growing movement to do away with the Electoral College and make the United States a true representative democracy. Teen Vogue spoke to some of the lawmakers and activists who are advocating for this fundamental change in how we elect the most powerful official in our country. But first, a little more background on how things currently work. Americans do not have a direct election system — “one person, one vote” — for the presidency. Instead, that power is reserved for 538 “electors.” As such, the presidential election is portrayed as a fight to win states and their accompanying electoral votes. A presidential campaign must accumulate a majority — 270 — to win the election. Forty-eight out of 50 states use a winner-take-all system, in which the candidate with the highest number of votes in a state claims all of that state’s electoral votes, and sometimes by a very slim margin. (Maine and Nebraska are the exceptions, and use the congressional district method, where as electoral reform organization FairVote explains, “the winner of each district is awarded one electoral vote, and the winner of the state-wide vote is then awarded the state’s remaining two electoral votes.”) Defenders of the framework have praised its anti-democratic values and have otherwise applauded its supposed protection of small states.	yes
Politics	Should the electoral college system be abolished?	no_statement	the "electoral" "college" "system" should not be "abolished".. abolishing the "electoral" "college" "system" is not the solution.	https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/out-with-the-electoral-college-in-with-the-national-popular-vote/	Out With the Electoral College, In With the National Popular Vote ...	Out With the Electoral College, In With the National Popular Vote Last month, Minnesota brought the U.S. one step closer to reforming the Electoral College and ushering in a national popular vote for president. How? By passing a little-known legislative provision called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. The Compact is an ingenious workaround to the frustrating reality that fully abolishing the Electoral College requires a constitutional amendment — a nonstarter in this political moment. Instead of scrapping the Electoral College, the Compact simply requires that participating states award all of their presidential electors to whichever candidate wins the most votes nationally. But critically, the Compact doesn’t go into effect until states representing the majority of Electoral College votes — that’s 270 votes — have signed on. At that point, each state’s law will kick into action, and the winner of the popular vote will be guaranteed a presidential victory. Minnesota is the 16th state to join. That brings the Compact’s total number of electoral votes up to 205 — just 65 short of a majority. It’s an exciting development, for sure. But without significant shifts in party control of state legislatures, it’s unlikely to be repeated more than a couple of times. Most of the pro-democracy states — which, at this point, are states controlled by Democrats — have already joined the Compact, and the remaining blue states are too small to contribute many electoral votes. That leaves Electoral College reformers reliant on passing the Compact in states at least partially governed by lawmakers hostile to democratic reform unless new leaders take over. Strategically, then, the path to a national popular vote demands getting laser-focused on electing pro-democracy lawmakers in state legislatures. Flip the states, and ending the Electoral College as we know it comes within reach. The Electoral College is an undeniably problematic institution. It was created to assuage the founders’ fear that a leader elected by the full public, not just the privileged elite, would enact “bad” laws. Southern states in particular lamented that a popular vote would put them at a disadvantage, since about a third of their population was enslaved and therefore ineligible to vote. The proposed solution? Have presidents be elected not directly by the voting public but rather by “electors.” States would receive a set number of electors in proportion to their congressional delegation — that is, their representatives in both the U.S. House and Senate. Southern states liked this plan since their delegations were inflated by the three-fifths compromise, which let them bolster their congressional representation by counting each enslaved individual as three-fifths of a person — without having to give those individuals any voting rights or direct political representation. But today, democracy is fully polarized, and Republicans widely believe that the Electoral College serves their interests. While the three-fifths compromise has since been abolished, this process of electing presidents continues to skew election outcomes. It gives disproportionate voting power to small-population states, which get a minimum of three congressional representatives and therefore three electoral votes. As a result, a vote cast by a person in Wyoming is more politically influential than a vote cast in any other state. Moreover, nearly every state uses a “winner-take-all” system, in which all of the state’s electoral votes go to the candidate who wins the majority of votes in the state. (This is in contrast to a proportional system, where if a candidate wins 60 percent of votes, they get about 60 percent of the state’s electors.) This approach drives America’s infamous “swing state” problem: Since candidates can count on most states to hand all of their electors to one party or the other, they focus the vast majority of their campaigning on only a handful of closely contested states. The problem isn’t just that voters outside of swing states are marginalized — though they undoubtedly are. It’s that across the entire country, anyone who is part of the political minority in their state effectively has their vote invalidated, regardless of whether they are actually part of the national majority. You’re a conservative in New York or a liberal in Texas? Sorry, but the Electoral College fully disregards your vote. These dynamics drive voter apathy, undermine public confidence in the democratic process and weaken the perceived legitimacy of the elected president. They also degrade democracy by fomenting minority rule. In the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton won nearly 2.9 million more votes than Donald Trump, and yet she lost the presidency. The people spoke — but the system did not listen. The Compact would fix these problems in a single stroke. All that would matter in determining the presidency is who won the support of the most Americans. It would be heartwarming if a popular vote could be enacted with broad bipartisan support. Historically, there were enough pro-democracy lawmakers in both major parties to adopt essential reforms in red, purple and blue states. But today, democracy is fully polarized, and Republicans widely believe that the Electoral College serves their interests. By necessity, the path to a national popular vote runs through Democratic states. The set of potentially winnable states falls into two tiers. Tier 1 is currently solid-blue states that haven’t joined the Compact yet. There are only two left: Michigan (16 electoral votes), where the House Elections Committee recently approved a National Popular Vote bill, and Maine (four votes), where popular vote legislation passed both chambers in 2019 but failed a final House vote. If both states passed national popular vote provisions, we’d still be 45 electors away from the 270-vote tipping point. Tier 2 consists of states currently under Republican or divided-party control that could plausibly achieve a Democratic trifecta in the near future. These include Pennsylvania (20 votes), Virginia (13 votes), Arizona (11 votes), Wisconsin (10 votes), Nevada (six votes) and New Hampshire (four votes). Any path to victory requires bringing on Pennsylvania, where Republicans currently hold the Senate; even if every other Tier 1 and Tier 2 state were to join the Compact, we would still be one vote short of 270. To be sure, even a successful red-to-blue state strategy doesn’t guarantee a national popular vote. Some skeptics have raised serious concerns about the Compact’s constitutionality, while others argue the Compact can only go into effect with the consent of Congress. While there are thoughtful rebuttals to these concerns, it is not entirely clear whether the Compact will stand up to judicial scrutiny once it tips into effect. All the more reason to pursue a state-flipping strategy: Even if the Compact is ultimately deemed a political no-go, the work of electing pro-democracy legislators will have lasting downstream benefits for other important policies, including much-needed election and voting reforms. Now more than ever, democracy advocates need to seek out and seize opportunities to break out of their policy silos and improve the political feasibility of all democracy innovations. Charlotte Hill is the interim director of the Democracy Policy Initiative at UC Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy. As a contributor to Democracy Docket, Hill writes about how structural reforms impact American democracy. Subscribe We depend on your support to keep bringing you the latest information and insight on the fight for democracy – always free and available for all. After all, we can’t fight for the future of our democracy unless we know what’s happening.	It’s an exciting development, for sure. But without significant shifts in party control of state legislatures, it’s unlikely to be repeated more than a couple of times. Most of the pro-democracy states — which, at this point, are states controlled by Democrats — have already joined the Compact, and the remaining blue states are too small to contribute many electoral votes. That leaves Electoral College reformers reliant on passing the Compact in states at least partially governed by lawmakers hostile to democratic reform unless new leaders take over. Strategically, then, the path to a national popular vote demands getting laser-focused on electing pro-democracy lawmakers in state legislatures. Flip the states, and ending the Electoral College as we know it comes within reach. The Electoral College is an undeniably problematic institution. It was created to assuage the founders’ fear that a leader elected by the full public, not just the privileged elite, would enact “bad” laws. Southern states in particular lamented that a popular vote would put them at a disadvantage, since about a third of their population was enslaved and therefore ineligible to vote. The proposed solution? Have presidents be elected not directly by the voting public but rather by “electors.” States would receive a set number of electors in proportion to their congressional delegation — that is, their representatives in both the U.S. House and Senate. Southern states liked this plan since their delegations were inflated by the three-fifths compromise, which let them bolster their congressional representation by counting each enslaved individual as three-fifths of a person — without having to give those individuals any voting rights or direct political representation. But today, democracy is fully polarized, and Republicans widely believe that the Electoral College serves their interests. While the three-fifths compromise has since been abolished, this process of electing presidents continues to skew election outcomes. It gives disproportionate voting power to small-population states, which get a minimum of three congressional representatives and therefore three electoral votes.	yes
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://www.gardeners.com/how-to/top-watering-myths/7688.html	The Top 5 Watering Myths \| Gardener's Supply	This Free Shipping offer expires 8/28/23 and requires a $124 minimum purchase amount. This offer cannot be applied to previous purchases or combined with any other offer. This offer applies to Economy Shipping only for orders shipped within the lower 48 states; it cannot be applied to items with additional shipping charges, faster shipping or delivery services from our garden centers More Articles Other Article Categories Garden Watering Myths, Squashed Wondering about watering? Let's clear things up! I've been gardening and writing about gardening for more than 20 years, yet I find I'm always learning new things about the plants, insects and other critters that call my backyard home. That's the great thing about gardening — it's never boring! I've worked as a landscaper, on an organic farm, as a research technician in a plant pathology lab and ran a small cut-flower business, all of which inform my garden writing. Someone once asked me when I'll be finished with my gardens, to which I replied, "Never!" For me, gardening is a process, not a goal. Overhead watering isn't the most efficient from a water conservation standpoint, but there are times when it's called for. Photo: Suzanne DeJohn During the hottest part of the summer, it's especially important to make the most of every drop of water. With so much information available it can be challenging to separate fact from fiction. Here are five common myths about watering: 1. Myth: Plants need 1 inch of water per week Although the "inch-a-week" recommendation is often cited as a rule of thumb, the truth is that plants vary widely in their water needs. Young seedlings and new transplants have limited root systems and need a consistent supply of moisture, so they may need daily watering if the weather is sunny and hot. Established trees and shrubs, on the other hand, may need supplemental watering only during extended dry spells because they have more extensive root systems. The amount of water a plant needs depends on a number of factors, including the type of plant, its stage of growth, type of soil, weather and time of year. The best way to water most plants is by applying enough to moisten the plant's entire root system, and then letting the soil dry out slightly before watering again. Apply water slowly so it's absorbed by the soil rather than running off — a soaker hose is ideal. Avoid daily light sprinklings, which encourage roots to grow near the soil surface where they're vulnerable to drying out. Rather than relying on a schedule, water plants when they need it. (Besides, how do you know when you've applied an inch of water with a soaker hose?) 2. Myth: Wilting is a sign that it's time to water Yes, wilting is a sign that the leaves aren't getting enough moisture, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the soil is dry. Anything that damages plant roots can cause wilting. Plant roots need a fairly constant supply of both air and water. Too little water and the roots die from lack of moisture. Too much water and the spaces between soil particles remain filled with water, suffocating roots. Both situations reduce a plant's ability to deliver enough water to stems and leaves, resulting in wilting. Root diseases, physical damage (such as disturbing roots while you're hoeing) and soil-borne insects can also harm roots to the point that they can't fully hydrate the plant. Damage to stems can also cause wilting. Some diseases and insects (especially borers) prevent water distribution throughout the plant, causing some or all of it to wilt. The only way to tell if lack of water is causing wilting is to check soil moisture. The soil was plenty moist, but this hydrangea still wilted in the heat of the day. Water droplets won't scorch leaves, even on the sunniest day. 3. Myth: Overhead watering on a sunny day can scorch leaves There are good reasons to avoid watering your garden on a sunny afternoon, but causing scorched leaves isn't one of them. The myth that water droplets act like tiny magnifying glasses and burn plant leaves has no basis in fact, and anyone who has watched the sun come out after a summer shower knows that the water quickly evaporates. Leaf damage can be caused by all sorts of things, including: Too much or too little soil moisture Fertilizer burn from improperly diluted synthetic fertilizer Insect or disease problems Weather conditions such as wind or frost So, is it ok to water your plants in the sun? Try to avoid watering on sunny afternoons to minimize the amount of moisture lost to evaporation — but don't worry about leaf scorch. 4. Myth: Avoid overhead watering with a sprinkler It's usually best to apply water directly to the soil around plants rather than watering with a sprinkler. Less water is lost to evaporation, especially on hot, sunny days. Foliage stays dry, minimizing disease problems. But there are times when an overhead shower is called for. During dry, windy weather a fine layer of dust can build up on leaves, reducing the plants' ability to photosynthesize efficiently. Some insects, including aphids and spider mites, can be kept in check by simply hosing them off plants. Finally, heat-stressed plants that have wilted even though their roots are moist can benefit from a cooling shower — the effect won't last long on a sunny day but it may provide some relief. Overhead watering isn't the most efficient from a water conservation standpoint, but there are times when it's called for. 5. Myth: Drought-tolerant plants don't need to be watered Many young echinacea and yarrow plants have perished because these "drought-tolerant" plants didn't get sufficient water at planting time and during their first season of growth. When you set out a new container-grown plant, the roots are confined to the shape of the pot. The plants need a consistent supply of water during their first growing season, until their roots grow out into the surrounding soil. Water them as you would your annual flowers in their first season. During their second and subsequent growing seasons, drought-tolerant plants may need supplemental water only during extended dry spells. Note — just because a plant is drought-tolerant doesn't mean it doesn't fare better with a regular supply of moisture!	Leaf damage can be caused by all sorts of things, including: Too much or too little soil moisture Fertilizer burn from improperly diluted synthetic fertilizer Insect or disease problems Weather conditions such as wind or frost So, is it ok to water your plants in the sun? Try to avoid watering on sunny afternoons to minimize the amount of moisture lost to evaporation — but don't worry about leaf scorch. 4. Myth: Avoid overhead watering with a sprinkler It's usually best to apply water directly to the soil around plants rather than watering with a sprinkler. Less water is lost to evaporation, especially on hot, sunny days. Foliage stays dry, minimizing disease problems. But there are times when an overhead shower is called for. During dry, windy weather a fine layer of dust can build up on leaves, reducing the plants' ability to photosynthesize efficiently. Some insects, including aphids and spider mites, can be kept in check by simply hosing them off plants. Finally, heat-stressed plants that have wilted even though their roots are moist can benefit from a cooling shower — the effect won't last long on a sunny day but it may provide some relief. Overhead watering isn't the most efficient from a water conservation standpoint, but there are times when it's called for. 5. Myth: Drought-tolerant plants don't need to be watered Many young echinacea and yarrow plants have perished because these "drought-tolerant" plants didn't get sufficient water at planting time and during their first season of growth. When you set out a new container-grown plant, the roots are confined to the shape of the pot. The plants need a consistent supply of water during their first growing season, until their roots grow out into the surrounding soil. Water them as you would your annual flowers in their first season. During their second and subsequent growing seasons, drought-tolerant plants may need supplemental water only during extended dry spells.	yes
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://www.bobvila.com/articles/watering-plants/	The Dos and Don'ts of Watering Plants	The Dos and Don’ts of Watering Plants How, when, and where you water your garden and houseplants can critically impact their greenery and blooms. Read on for the best ways to ensure success. We may earn revenue from the products available on this page and participate in affiliate programs. Photo: istockphoto.com Whether you’re a green thumb or not, you probably already know that all plants need water to thrive—after all, that basic knowledge goes back to introductory middle-school science class. What you might not know is that incorrect watering techniques can put plants at risk for disease and even kill them. Whether you want to cultivate pretty outdoor perennials or you just want to properly care for your new houseplant, heed these best and worst practices for watering plants and you’ll reap healthy, happy specimens. Watering Outdoor Plants DO hydrate plants in the morning. Photo: istockphoto.com The most efficient time to water outdoor flowers and vegetables is early in the day, when the soil is cool and water has the best chance of seeping down to the roots of the plants before it evaporates. Watering plants in the morning will ensure that they have sufficient store of moisture beneath the soil to withstand the heat of a hot summer day. DON’T water too frequently—or not frequently enough. Especially during hot weather, it may be tempting to water just enough—and often enough—to keep the soil damp. Shallow surface watering, however, discourages deep root development. Instead, opt for a less frequent watering routine that thoroughly saturates the soil. This method encourages the plants’ roots to reach deeply for residual water, even when the surface of the soil appears dry. The standard rule of thumb is to give your flowers and vegetables the equivalent of at 1 inch of water per week (and as much as double that amount in the peak of summer). DO water plants at soil level. Directing water at the base of your plants delivers the hydration right where it’s needed: the roots. Consider winding a soaker hose between plants in a flower or vegetable bed to soak the soil slowly and deeply, and ensure healthy growth. DON’T use broadcast sprinklers. In addition to soaking the plant’s leaves, which can increase the risk of a fungal disease, broadcast lawn sprinklers are simply inefficient. On a hot or windy day, much of the water distributed by this type of sprinkler can evaporate before it reaches the plant. What’s more, sprinklers are likely to dampen plants’ leaves, and wet leaves can make the plant prone to mold and disease. DO water outdoor container plants at least once per day. Soil in container gardens and flowerpots dries out more quickly than soil in a garden plot or flower bed. The smaller the container, the more frequently you need to water the plant inside it. Soak potted plants’ soil in the morning, and, if the mercury in the thermometer climbs to 90 or above, give it another soaking in the afternoon. Alternatively, outfit the pot with an automatic plant waterer, which is basically a hollow spike attached to a water bottle or bulb. When the spike is inserted in the pot, water slowly seeps into the soil, offering the plant a steady supply of moisture. Photo: istockphoto.com DON’T forget that trees need water, too. Newly planted trees and shrubs should be thoroughly soaked with water two or three times per week for the first month. After that period, water weekly during their first growing season. Established trees and shrubs that are at least two years old only need to be watered once every two weeks during the growing season when rain is scarce. DO use a wand to water container plants. A watering wand extends the reach of your arm, allowing you to direct water at soil level in overhead hanging plants and in short, ground-level flowerpots without having to stretch or stoop. You’ll save yourself some backaches to be sure—and you’ll conserve water by aiming only as much water as you need at the base of the plant. DON’T water container plants with a jet-type spray nozzle. Pressurized nozzles are great for washing off driveways and sidewalks, but the powerful spray that they deliver can damage tender foliage and blossoms. It can also disturb the soil around the roots of a container plant. If you don’t have a watering wand, just remove the nozzle from the garden hose, hook the hose into the hanging pot or container, and let the water run out slowly. DO check the soil’s moisture level. Garden plants can suffer when the soil dries out. On the flip side, they don’t like “wet feet,” meaning they also suffer if their roots are sitting in water and not getting sufficient oxygen. On a hot, windy day, the soil’s surface may appear dry, while the ground beneath is still moist, so it’s essential to perform a quick check to ensure you don’t overwater. Keep a wooden dowel handy and insert it a few inches into the garden soil and then pull it out and check it. Moist soil will stick to the dowel, but if it comes out clean, the soil is dry, and it’s time to water. DON’T rely on rain. Most garden plants, flowers, and shrubs flourish when they receive at least 1 inch of water per week, although they may need more during hot, dry spells. In many parts of the country, there isn’t always enough rainfall for plants to thrive, so don’t count on it to keep your plants healthy. Using a rain gauge in the garden can help you monitor how much weekly rainfall you’re getting. If the gauge indicates that you’re getting less than 1 inch of rain, supplement by watering. Watering Indoor Plants DO use a watering can for houseplants. Trying to water a leafy houseplant from a drinking glass or carafe is just asking for water to spill out over the rim and onto your table or windowsill. Not only does a watering can‘s long spout eliminate spills, but it also allows you to direct water right at the base of the plant even if you’re watering plants that hang overhead. DON’T water houseplants with treated, softened water. Home water softeners impart sodium into your tap water, which, over time, can negatively affect the mineral makeup of a houseplant’s soil. Depending on your plumbing, your water softener may connect only to the hot water faucets or to all the faucets in your home, both hot and cold. If it’s the latter (or you aren’t sure), stick to filling your watering can at an outdoor spigot to minimize the amount of sodium you introduce to the soil. Photo: istockphoto.com DO choose the right soil. Houseplants will benefit from an indoor potting mix that’s made for the particular type of plant being grown. Avoid filling houseplants’ pots with soil that you brought in from your outdoor garden because it can contain pathogens, insects, and fungi. Leave plant diseases and gnats outside where they belong! Another good option for indoor plants is to use a soilless houseplant mix that contains a mixture of peat moss and perlite or vermiculite. These mixes won’t pack down so roots can reach deep, and they often come with fertilizer that will boost plant growth. DON’T use a potting mix that’s too water-retentive. Most houseplants need a well-draining potting mix that doesn’t remain soggy for hours after watering. When shopping for potting soil for houseplants, look for products that contain either coconut coir, vermiculite or perlite. All three ingredients are used in potting mixes to help aerate the soil and encourage good drainage. For best results, use a potting mix that does not contain more than 1 part peat moss. DO invest in a soil moisture gauge. Most soil moisture gauges cost less than $20. These gadgets help gardeners determine whether their soil is dry, moist, or wet as many as several inches deep by the roots. (In our researched guide to the best soil moisture meters, our contributors conducted hands-on tests to find the best meters on the market.) Large houseplants in small pots absorb water more quickly than small plants in large pots. When you use a moisture gauge as opposed to following a watering schedule, your plants will get the water they need, when they need it. Photo: istockphoto.com DON’T put houseplants in pots that don’t have drainage holes. Most houseplants need well-drained soil in order to grow and thrive. If water cannot drain out through the bottom of the pot, the plant’s roots will sit in water and will be prone to rotting. Check the undersides of your plants’ pots, and repot any without drainage holes into more appropriate containers. DO water less in winter and more in spring. In winter, days are shorter and indoor houseplants receive less ambient light through windows. When this happens photosynthesis (the process in which a plant turns light into food) slows down and the plant enters a resting phase, during which it needs less water. As spring approaches, however, longer days signal the plant to start growing, at which point its water needs increase. Adjust your habits for watering plants accordingly so as not to cause distress or thirst. DON’T forget to dump the water collection tray. When watering indoor plants, excess H2O will drain into the collection tray under your houseplant almost immediately. Don’t pour the water out right away—the plant may reabsorb some of it within the next few minutes. After about half an hour, go ahead and dump it. Allowing a plant to sit in standing water increases its risk of root rot, which could potentially kill the plant. DO wick your plants while you’re away. Even the healthiest houseplants will suffer from not being watered for a week or two when the family goes on vacation. Avoid setting them in the tub or sink filled with a couple of inches of water, or they could perish from wet feet. Wicking is a simple way of ensuring the plant gets enough water without flooding it. Place a large jar of water next to the plant. Cut a section of cotton rope or even a strip of absorbent fabric long enough to reach from the plant to the bottom of the water jar. Poke one end into the top of the soil and insert the other in the water jar. The rope acts as a wick, slowly transferring water to the plant while you’re away. DON’T overwater. Overwatering is one of the main causes of houseplant failure. Houseplant newbies have a tendency to water houseplants too often, thinking that’s just what they need. Overwatering, however, increases the risk of root rot and fungal disease. If you see droopy stems, wilting leaves, a whitish coating (fungus), or fungus gnats in the home—pests that thrive on consistently wet soil—it’s a good bet that you’re watering plants too much. On the other hand, when the bottom leaves on your houseplant dry out and drop and edges of the leaves elsewhere on the plant become crisp and brown, it’s probably not getting enough water. Again, refer to the soil moisture gauge for that happy medium. Photo: istockphoto.com FAQs Indoor houseplants add beauty and bring a touch of natural décor to the home, while outdoor garden plants enhance landscapes. However, keeping them healthy and lush means giving them adequate water. Those who are new to gardening or keeping houseplants will likely have some questions. Q. How often should plants be watered? Water once or twice per week, using enough water to moisten the soil to a depth of about 6 inches each time. It’s okay if the soil’s surface dries out between waterings, but the soil beneath should remain moist. Q. How much water do plants need a day? Plants don’t need daily watering. Instead, water deeply but less frequently. Deep waterings allow the water to seep beneath the roots, which encourages the roots to grow downward. Q. How do you properly water plants? The general rule is to water plants at ground level rather than using a sprinkler, which can leave water on the foliage, increasing the risk of harmful fungal growth. Q. Is it better to water plants or depend on rain? Outdoor plants love natural rain, but if it doesn’t rain at least 1 inch per week where you live, considering watering to supply enough moisture for healthy plant growth. Final Thoughts In addition to light and oxygen, plants need water to thrive. Good watering practices will result in healthy plants—both indoors and out—that add to a home’s décor or landscaping. Regular watering is also essential for producing healthy fruits and vegetables in the garden.	The Dos and Don’ts of Watering Plants How, when, and where you water your garden and houseplants can critically impact their greenery and blooms. Read on for the best ways to ensure success. We may earn revenue from the products available on this page and participate in affiliate programs. Photo: istockphoto.com Whether you’re a green thumb or not, you probably already know that all plants need water to thrive—after all, that basic knowledge goes back to introductory middle-school science class. What you might not know is that incorrect watering techniques can put plants at risk for disease and even kill them. Whether you want to cultivate pretty outdoor perennials or you just want to properly care for your new houseplant, heed these best and worst practices for watering plants and you’ll reap healthy, happy specimens. Watering Outdoor Plants DO hydrate plants in the morning. Photo: istockphoto.com The most efficient time to water outdoor flowers and vegetables is early in the day, when the soil is cool and water has the best chance of seeping down to the roots of the plants before it evaporates. Watering plants in the morning will ensure that they have sufficient store of moisture beneath the soil to withstand the heat of a hot summer day. DON’T water too frequently—or not frequently enough. Especially during hot weather, it may be tempting to water just enough—and often enough—to keep the soil damp. Shallow surface watering, however, discourages deep root development. Instead, opt for a less frequent watering routine that thoroughly saturates the soil. This method encourages the plants’ roots to reach deeply for residual water, even when the surface of the soil appears dry. The standard rule of thumb is to give your flowers and vegetables the equivalent of at 1 inch of water per week (and as much as double that amount in the peak of summer). DO water plants at soil level. Directing water at the base of your plants delivers the hydration right where it’s needed: the roots. Consider winding a soaker hose between plants in a flower or vegetable bed to soak the soil slowly and deeply, and ensure healthy growth.	yes
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://www.thespruce.com/how-often-to-water-outdoor-plants-6750808	How Often Should You Water Outdoor Plants?	Water is essential for plant growth but too much can be just as detrimental to plant health as too little. Even if overwatering doesn't damage your plants, it’s a waste of a precious resource that can be avoided. Watering efficiently to meet your garden's needs can be tricky, because how often and how much to water depends on a whole range of factors. Here are a few key considerations. The weather (amount of precipitation, sun or overcast skies, temperature) The microclimate (topography, sun and wind exposure) This article walks you through the watering needs of different plant types and explains why some plants need more frequent watering than others. When and How to Water Your Plants If a plant looks like it’s under drought stress, do not delay watering. Otherwise, watering in the early morning hours is ideal. In the late afternoon or early evening is second best. If you have kept a consistent watering routine and a plant looks wilted, the problem may not be due to underwatering. Wilting can also be a sign of overwatering. Checking the soil moisture is the best way to decide whether you should water. How you water your plants is just as important as watering often enough. Water needs to reach the roots, so it is crucial to water deeply. Target the base of the plant and apply water slowly. When you water the soil surface too fast, a lot will be lost to evaporation and run-off, especially when the soil is dry. You want to avoid wet leaves for most outdoor plants since this can lead to fungal problems. If it is necessary to use an overhead system, watering in the morning gives leaves a chance to dry before nighttime temperatures drop. Vegetables Gardens The rule of thumb for watering a vegetable garden is one or two inches per week Include rainfall amounts and reduce the water you need to provide accordingly. In the spring and fall, one to two inches can serve as a baseline but it is not enough during summer when many vegetables are flowering and fruiting. Watering more often supports the nutrient uptake needed to produce a healthy harvest. Checking soil moisture is a much more reliable indicator than going only by the one inch rule. Insert your index finger about an inch deep into the soil. If it's dry, water until it feels moist. During a heat wave, a vegetable garden might require daily watering. Waiting until crops look wilted can lead to drought stress which, in turn, can lead to pests and diseases. Also, if crops don’t get enough water during key times of their development, such as fruit set, it will affect the quality of the crop. Another exception to the one inch rule is moisture needed for vegetable seeds. Depending on soil type and weather conditions, they may need to be watered lightly but daily to keep them from drying out during germination. Even seeds that need light to germinate will not produce a plant if they are allowed to dry out. Young seedlings also require more frequent watering than established plants. Insufficient water leads to stunted growth and poor crops, as well as higher susceptibility to pests and diseases. It is not possible to put a number on how many times per week vegetable seedlings need watering—let the soil moisture be your guide. Zbynek Pospisil / Getty Images Herbs Water requirements for herbs depend on the type of herb. Most herbs are fairly drought tolerant and require infrequent to no watering but there are exceptions. Herbs with thin, delicate leaves such as parsley, cilantro, dill, and basil need watering during dry spells, about one inch per week, or enough to soak the soil around the base of the plant. Mediterranean herbs with woody or fibrous stems and thick leaves or needles such as rosemary, sage, and thyme can make it through an entire summer with very little applied water, unless there is an extended drought. Potted Plants Plants in pots, whether moved outdoors only during summer, or in containers that remain on your patio year-round, have the highest watering needs of all outdoor plants. Several factors cause container plants to dry out much faster than those grown in the ground: full sun exposure, hot weather, small container size, container material that heats up, such as black plastic, and surfaces that radiate heat such as stone or asphalt. To determine if a potted plant needs water, insert your index finger into the soil up to the second knuckle. If the soil feels dry, it's time to water. In the spring and fall and in cooler climates, it might be sufficient to water container plants every two to three days. In the summer and in warm climates, container plants usually require daily watering, unless they are succulents or other drought-tolerant xeriscape plants. Water deeply and slowly until water runs out of the drainage holes. GarysFRP / Getty Images Plants in hanging baskets are another step up in terms of watering needs. Exposed to sun and wind with virtually no root protection, they dry out even faster, especially those with coir liners. Count on having to water them at least daily and even twice a day in hot weather. Raised Beds What applies to container plants also applies to raised beds—they need more frequent watering than in-ground vegetable gardens because the soil heats up and dries out faster. The frequency of watering depends on the size of the raised bed. The smaller the raised bed, the more frequently water is needed. A small, raised bed in hot summer weather might need daily watering, where a large, raised bed may only need to be watered twice a week. You might also find that soil towards the outside of a large, raised bed dries out faster than in the center, which is better insulated from heat. You need to adjust your watering schedule accordingly. simonkr / Getty Images Tip Watering and mulching can work synergistically to help retain soil moisture. Mulching around your plants also keeps the soil cool, and suppresses weeds that compete with plants for water. Trees and Shrubs Whether ornamental trees and shrubs need watering and how often depends very much on your plant choices. If your plants are a good fit for local growing conditions, you shouldn’t have to water mature plants at all unless they are newly planted or when there’s a drought. Native plants are superior in this respect because they are the best outfitted for the precipitation levels in your climate. Non-native tree and shrub species, that require more water than average precipitation in your area, are likely to need watering during the growing season—about once in week in the absence of rain, until the soil is saturated within the dripline of the tree. Fruit trees and fruit-bearing shrubs have different watering needs than landscape trees. They need water during the six week period before, during, and after bloom, and in the weeks before harvest. If there is a dry spell or a drought during those times, water them deeply until the soil is saturated and repeat as needed, depending on how fast the soil dries out. Simon McGill / Getty Images Flowerbeds Water needs for flower beds also depend largely on whether you choose species and varieties that are suitable for your climate and soil type. For example, if you plant a cardinal flower, which requires wet soil, in consistently dry soil, you will have to water it regularly. Annuals, especially those purchased as flats, tend to need more frequent watering because their entire growth happens in only one short season. In the absence of rain, or in hot weather, they may need watering two to three times a week. Perennials, grow slower and should only need watering once a week. New Plants and Transplants New plants and transplants need watering right after planting and for an extended period of time until they become established. Water herbaceous perennials at least twice a week in the absence of rain. Once you see new growth, you can switch to a weekly watering schedule for the rest of the growing season. Trees and shrubs need longer to get established and require additional watering during this time to make up for any lack of regular precipitation. A new tree or shrub should be watered daily for the first two weeks after planting, then twice to three times per week during the first three months, and weekly after that for the remainder of the first growing season. In the second growing season, water it at least once every two weeks in the absence of rain. Issarawat Tattong / Getty Images Winter and Dormancy Watering When plants enter dormancy, their roots are still very much alive, and need water to survive. Usually, fall, winter, and spring are the seasons with increased precipitation but there are winter droughts during which watering might be required. Desiccating winter winds can dry out the soil even more, especially if there is no snow cover. This can lead to root damage and plant death. Trees and shrubs with shallow root systems such as dogwoods require supplemental watering during extended dry fall and winter periods. All newly planted trees are also susceptible to winter drought injury. If there is a three week stretch without precipitation, water trees with about ten gallons of water for each inch of trunk diameter. A three foot shrub needs about five gallons and large shrub of six feet or more needs about 18 gallons. Apply the water at the dripline and repeat monthly if drought persists. If you have planted perennials late in the fall and they did not fully establish before dormancy, water them once a month during winter droughts. Make sure to water only when air and soil temperatures are above 40 degrees Fahrenheit and there is no snow cover. Do not water when the soil is frozen, as it won’t absorb water. The warmest mid-day hours are the best time to water so the water has time to soak in before nighttime freezing temperatures. The Spruce uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read our editorial process to learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.	How you water your plants is just as important as watering often enough. Water needs to reach the roots, so it is crucial to water deeply. Target the base of the plant and apply water slowly. When you water the soil surface too fast, a lot will be lost to evaporation and run-off, especially when the soil is dry. You want to avoid wet leaves for most outdoor plants since this can lead to fungal problems. If it is necessary to use an overhead system, watering in the morning gives leaves a chance to dry before nighttime temperatures drop. Vegetables Gardens The rule of thumb for watering a vegetable garden is one or two inches per week Include rainfall amounts and reduce the water you need to provide accordingly. In the spring and fall, one to two inches can serve as a baseline but it is not enough during summer when many vegetables are flowering and fruiting. Watering more often supports the nutrient uptake needed to produce a healthy harvest. Checking soil moisture is a much more reliable indicator than going only by the one inch rule. Insert your index finger about an inch deep into the soil. If it's dry, water until it feels moist. During a heat wave, a vegetable garden might require daily watering. Waiting until crops look wilted can lead to drought stress which, in turn, can lead to pests and diseases. Also, if crops don’t get enough water during key times of their development, such as fruit set, it will affect the quality of the crop. Another exception to the one inch rule is moisture needed for vegetable seeds. Depending on soil type and weather conditions, they may need to be watered lightly but daily to keep them from drying out during germination. Even seeds that need light to germinate will not produce a plant if they are allowed to dry out. Young seedlings also require more frequent watering than established plants. Insufficient water leads to stunted growth and poor crops, as well as higher susceptibility to pests and diseases. It is not possible to put a number on how many times per week vegetable seedlings need watering—let the soil moisture be your guide.	yes
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://www.almanac.com/when-water-your-vegetable-garden-watering-chart	When to Water Your Vegetable Garden	When to Water Your Vegetable Garden How Often Should a Garden be Watered? For daily wit & wisdom, sign up for the Almanac newsletter. When is the best time to water your vegetables? How much should you water? See this helpful chart on how much water each vegetable needs and critical times to water. Plus, we’ll help you avoid some rookie gardening mistakes! First: If you ensure your soil is amended with organic matter (such as compost), you are well on your way to healthy soil. Regular applications of modest amounts of compost—one-quarter inch per season—will dramatically improve your soil’s water retention and help suppress disease. See our articles and videos on soil types, soil testing, and the basics of amending your soil with NPK fertilizers and organic amendments. When to Water If your plants are in the ground (versus a pot), the general rule is that plants need one inch of water per week. However, this does NOT mean watering one time per week. That doesn’t usually do the job. Plants do best when watered deeply about three times a week, factoring in the rain. If the plants are seedlings, water them twice a day until established. Read Next But don’t just water without thinking. Feel your soil! When the soil sticks in your hand and you can form it into a ball, it is moist enough. But, if it barely holds together in the palm of your hand, or if the surface looks hard, baked, or cracked, it is probably dry, and it’s time to water. See if the soil is dry an inch below the surface; that suggests it needs water. It’s best to water early in the day while the dew is still on the leaves so the foliage dries off by evening. However, if you can not water in the morning, watering in the evening is fine, too. Just avoid the middle of the day to avoid water loss to evaporation. Believe it or not, sometimes the best time to water is during or immediately after a rainfall, especially if the rain shower amounts only to a half-inch or so of water. The reason for this is that you want to add sufficient water at the same time to ensure penetration down to 5 or 6 inches. If you wait another day or two to water, you will be adding only surface water, which evaporates rapidly. Light rain showers do not build up a reserve of water in the soil. Lose Your Guilt About Wilt Another sign is that the plants may wilt and look especially droopy. However, temporary wilting during the heat of midday does not mean that it’s time to water. Some plants go through an obvious midday slump, especially on very hot days, which is an indication of the plant’s natural adaptation to its environment. Visit your garden again in the early evening and see if the wilted plants have regained some turgidity. If they have come back—that is, if they look perkier—do not water. How to Measure One Inch of Water So what is “one inch of water” per week? First, an inch of water is defined as a one-inch deep layer of water over the entire soil surface that needs watering. To measure one inch of water, you can either purchase an inexpensive rain gauge or try this DIY trick: Place 4 or 5 small containers (straight-sided) around the garden while the water during the rainfall. A tuna can is a good container to use. Mark 1 inch up from the bottom of the can. When 1 inch of water from rain or irrigation collects in the containers, that indicates that 1 inch of water was applied to the garden. Again, don’t just rely on the “one-inch” guideline. If the soil is dry an inch beneath the surface, your garden probably needs watering. We also find it helpful to keep the following watering formula in mind: 1 inch of water per 1 square foot = 0.62 gallons. How to Water Your Garden What you want in a healthy plant is deep root penetration, and the only way that you’re going to get deep roots is if there is water down deep. Start at the very beginning: Saturate each plant hole when you transplant seedlings. When you do water, make sure that you get the soil saturated enough that the moisture percolates at least several inches down. Water at the soil level if you can; watering from above causes leaf disease. The disadvantage of using a sprinkler is that foliage is wetted by water dispersed via overhead application. This could lead to foliar diseases since the foliage remains wet for extended periods of time. For a small garden, it’s fine to use a watering can, a watering wand, or a hose with a good nozzle that allows you to water right at the soil level near the plant. If you have more dense plantings or larger plants, lay your hose directly on the ground near the plant so the water goes where it is needed. A board or rock placed under the water flow will prevent the water from eroding the soil. A good way to direct the water to the plants is to dig a little trench around the plants and allow water to flow into them. If you have a larger garden with plants spaced one foot or more apart, consider investing in “drip irrigation.” This is done mainly with hoses or plastic tubes with small holes in them that deliver a relatively small amount of water directly to the root zone; by supplying optimum moisture, periods of water stress can be avoided. The hoses or tubes are placed down the rows, and water slowly trickles out. Don’t Forget to Mulch! Mulching is perhaps the #1 water-conserving technique for areas that receive less than 40 inches of rainfall annually. Organic mulches reduce evaporative moisture losses from the soil surface, and because the soil stays cooler, they also reduce transpiration water losses. Lay a thick layer of mulch down on top of the soil. (Do not mix with soil.) Renew mulches that are in place for the entire growing season. How Much to Water the Garden by Vegetable We recognize that folks with small mixed vegetable gardens aren’t going to water each vegetable differently. However, it’s very helpful to understand which vegetables are water lovers and the critical times when vegetables need water to thrive. If you plant vegetables in separate beds as we do (or in separate crop fields), it’s critical to give certain vegetables water at certain times. Here’s a guide to help you estimate when and how much to water, assuming rich, well-balanced soil and little to no rainfall. Increase frequency during hot, very dry periods. (Note: Watering Formula: 1 inch of water per 1 square foot per week = 0.62 gallons) In Conclusion… Don’t baby your crops; plants are incredibly adaptable. They have the ability to draw water from deep in the soil. Periodically, take a trowel and dig down several inches into the zone where the roots are most active. If the soil there is still moist, there would be no benefit from watering. Free Online Gardening Guides We’ve gathered all of our best beginner gardening guides into a step-by-step series designed to help you learn how to garden! Visit our complete Gardening for Everyone hub, where you’ll find a series of guides—all free! From selecting the right gardening spot to choosing the best vegetables to grow, our Almanac gardening experts are excited to teach gardening to everyone—whether it’s your 1st or 40th garden. This list is nice but I know VERY few gardeners that plant vegetables according to how they will be watered. Many (like myself) have small gardens and mix plantings. The "three sisters" Beans Corn and squash, have two that don't need heavy watering and one that does! So am I to no longer grow these three together? My peas have carrots and lettuce between them, so which do I pick for watering advice? I pretty much water when they look thirsty and when the soil is dry an inch or two below the mulch. When I wrote promotional materials for Peters Professional Potting Soil and Plant Food, I discovered 30% of water is lost when irrigating by spraying water as opposed to using irrigation hoses. I also find it interesting when experts suggest not to water a garden just before dusk, which supposedly can cause disease on wet plants. If this was true, then it had better not rain after 5 PM ever again in my garden! Plants seem to weather evening rain just fine. The last two years or so, we have been plagued with mushrooms coming up between the sidewalks and the lawn and in-between planted pots. The varieties are unknown to us (one is the common looking white button-top and the other is an elongated pink, pointy-top one). We have two young dogs who seem very curious and we are afraid they might eat them and become sick. How can we rid ourselves of the "schrooms" once and for all. We have tried soap, salt, weed killer, and shovel to no avail. We live in Albuquerque, NM so no overmoisture here!	When to Water Your Vegetable Garden How Often Should a Garden be Watered? For daily wit & wisdom, sign up for the Almanac newsletter. When is the best time to water your vegetables? How much should you water? See this helpful chart on how much water each vegetable needs and critical times to water. Plus, we’ll help you avoid some rookie gardening mistakes! First: If you ensure your soil is amended with organic matter (such as compost), you are well on your way to healthy soil. Regular applications of modest amounts of compost—one-quarter inch per season—will dramatically improve your soil’s water retention and help suppress disease. See our articles and videos on soil types, soil testing, and the basics of amending your soil with NPK fertilizers and organic amendments. When to Water If your plants are in the ground (versus a pot), the general rule is that plants need one inch of water per week. However, this does NOT mean watering one time per week. That doesn’t usually do the job. Plants do best when watered deeply about three times a week, factoring in the rain. If the plants are seedlings, water them twice a day until established. Read Next But don’t just water without thinking. Feel your soil! When the soil sticks in your hand and you can form it into a ball, it is moist enough. But, if it barely holds together in the palm of your hand, or if the surface looks hard, baked, or cracked, it is probably dry, and it’s time to water. See if the soil is dry an inch below the surface; that suggests it needs water. It’s best to water early in the day while the dew is still on the leaves so the foliage dries off by evening. However, if you can not water in the morning, watering in the evening is fine, too. Just avoid the middle of the day to avoid water loss to evaporation. Believe it or not, sometimes the best time to water is during or immediately after a rainfall, especially if the rain shower amounts only to a half-inch or so of water.	no
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://www.gardensillustrated.com/plants/summer/hot-weather-water-plants	When to water plants in hot weather - Gardens Illustrated	When to water plants in hot weather High noon, the cool of the morning or the shade of the evening; there are many theories about the best time of day to water your plants. And in a heatwave it’ll pay to get it right. According to Stuart Thompson, senior lecturer in plant biochemistry at the University of Westminster, plants go through their own weight in water on a sunny day. He explains that plants that are not in pots will benefit most from being watered morning or evening, when droplets have time to soak down into the soil. The common belief that water drops act like magnifying glasses and scorch leaves if they are wet is incorrect, according to Thompson, with the exception of leaves with hairs which could hold drops far enough away from the leaf for sun rays to be focused on the leaf surface. General advice is to avoid watering in full sun, however, because water will evaporate before it can properly wet the soil. Potted plants will use up water very quickly, so moving them into shade would be advisable, or watering several times a day may be necessary. Top tips for watering in hot weather Water plants a lot on a sunny day Water plants in the soil in the garden in the morning or evening Avoid watering in full sun Put potted plants in shade, or water several times a day Cold water from the tap is fine for plants Pay most attention to shade plants and those from cooler or damper areas which will be less adapted to the weather we are experiencing Thompson added: “Plants have systems to reduce their water loss, which are very effective in species from arid environments where light is intense, such as succulents and yuccas, and so these will need less care.”	When to water plants in hot weather High noon, the cool of the morning or the shade of the evening; there are many theories about the best time of day to water your plants. And in a heatwave it’ll pay to get it right. According to Stuart Thompson, senior lecturer in plant biochemistry at the University of Westminster, plants go through their own weight in water on a sunny day. He explains that plants that are not in pots will benefit most from being watered morning or evening, when droplets have time to soak down into the soil. The common belief that water drops act like magnifying glasses and scorch leaves if they are wet is incorrect, according to Thompson, with the exception of leaves with hairs which could hold drops far enough away from the leaf for sun rays to be focused on the leaf surface. General advice is to avoid watering in full sun, however, because water will evaporate before it can properly wet the soil. Potted plants will use up water very quickly, so moving them into shade would be advisable, or watering several times a day may be necessary. Top tips for watering in hot weather Water plants a lot on a sunny day Water plants in the soil in the garden in the morning or evening Avoid watering in full sun Put potted plants in shade, or water several times a day Cold water from the tap is fine for plants Pay most attention to shade plants and those from cooler or damper areas which will be less adapted to the weather we are experiencing Thompson added: “Plants have systems to reduce their water loss, which are very effective in species from arid environments where light is intense, such as succulents and yuccas, and so these will need less care.”	no
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://scotts.com/en-ca/how-to-care%2Fmaintain/how-to-water-your-lawn-properly-and-effectively.html	How to Water Your Lawn Properly and Effectively \| Scotts Canada	How to Water Your Lawn Properly and Effectively Watering your lawn sounds simple although there are a lot of things to consider when watering your lawn effectively. Get watering tips and take care of your lawn with Scotts It seems like such a simple task, but there is more to it than meets the eye. Watering the lawn takes balance. Too much or too little can damage the grass, encourage certain diseases, and lead to weed and pest infestations. Use these tips to learn the right amount of water to keep your lawn healthy and beautiful all season long. Types of Grass Grown in Canada First, let's take a quick look at the type of grass on your lawn. Canadian homes typically include a mix of cool-season grasses blended for sunny or shady yards or customized for your lawn’s specific needs. Here's what you are likely growing out back: Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) Canada bluegrass (Poa compressa) Ryegrass (Lolium perenne) Tall Fescue (Festuca arundinacea The Best Time of Day to Water Your Lawn In the spring and summer, afternoon heat can evaporate up to 30% of the water as it jets out of the sprinklers. And watering in the late evening doesn't give the grass enough time to dry, leaving it vulnerable to fungal disease. So what is the best time to water the grass? The #1 best time to water is before 10 a.m. The #2 best time to water is 4-6 p.m. Tips for Watering the Lawn Properly Make sure your grass gets 2.5 cm of water each week. Let the grass dry between waterings. More water is not better for your lawn. Overwatering can lead to fungal disease, weeds, and pests. Stick to weekly watering. In the spring and summer, you may find yourself watering flowers, veggies, and landscape plants every day. Don't put your lawn on the same schedule. Frequent, shorter waterings will leave you with shallow roots and more vulnerable grass. Buy or DIY a rain gauge. You can purchase one at a gardening store or mark 2.5 cm on a can or cup that you already have. Place the rain gauge within range of your sprinkler system and time how long it takes for the water line to reach 2.5 cm. Once you have this information, you can add a timer to your sprinkler system that will shut it off automatically. Try the screwdriver test. The water you add to your lawn should go at least 15 cm into the soil. To check this, shove a long screwdriver into the ground after you water. If it goes to that depth easily, the soil is in good shape. If not, it needs more water. Check the soil. If puddling occurs while you water, use shorter cycles to give the ground time to catch up—for example, 10 minutes on, 10 minutes off—until you meet the time it takes to reach 2.5 cm. Top dress your lawn in the fall. Golf pros taught us this trick. A thin layer of nutrient-rich compost holds onto moisture, so your lawn will require less watering. How Often to Water Newly Planted Grass When watering a newly seeded lawn, keep the top layer of soil consistently moist but not soggy. Mist the seeded area one or more times a day. Then, once the seeds start to germinate, make sure the top 5 cm of soil is moist until the grass reaches around 8 cm. After that, you can water deeply two times a week, which will encourage the roots to grow down farther. Signs of an Overwatered Lawn Adding too much water to your lawn prevents the grass from accessing the other elements it needs to survive. It also keeps the grass from growing deeper roots because water is so available higher in the ground. Look for these signs to determine if you're watering too much: Mini streams of water running off your lawn A lawn that squishes when you step on it Thatch or weeds crowding out the grass Discoloration from fungus Insect infestation Not Watering Your Lawn at All We want your grass to look as good as it can for as long as possible, but it's worth noting that you don't necessarily have to water your lawn. Whether it's a personal choice, drought advisory, or water-use ban, you can let the grass go dormant. Lawns are resilient, and a properly cared-for lawn can survive for up to 6 weeks without water. Then, once the rain comes, your yard will recover. Watering in Sunny vs. Shady Areas The amount of sun your grass receives has an impact on how much water it needs. For shady lawns, you'll still water deeply but you’ll do so less often. Sunny areas require more frequent, deep waterings. Water early in the day, so the water has time to absorb or evaporate. Be sure not to water a little at a time. This encourages shallow grass roots, but deeper roots lead to a strong, healthy lawn. You can also buy grass seed that is formulated to thrive in shade, partial shade, or full sun. Watering Grass Each Season Spring Whether you see red-winged blackbirds flying overhead or prairie crocus starting to bloom, signs of spring are always welcome after a harsh Canadian winter. Spring grass should be watered as early as possible when it comes out of its dormant state. In rainy climates and coastal areas, Mother Nature may do the work for you; otherwise, it's up to you to make sure it gets 2.5 cm a week. Be careful not to water too much, though. Overwatering can lead to pests and disease. Summer When summer arrives, you’ll continue with weekly, deep waterings, but as the heat rises, you may need to water more frequently. How do you know if your grass needs a drink? The grass has a grayish cast or appears to be dull green. If you can see your footprints when you walk across your yard, it's time to water. Well-hydrated grass springs back quickly. Fall As temperatures start to cool and days become shorter, lawn watering often falls by the wayside, but it's not time to stop just yet. Canada's cool-season grass grows throughout the autumn months, but much of the work happens below the surface. Grass roots are busy absorbing nutrients and recovering from a summer of heat, sun, and footprints. So give them a boost by watering 2.5 cm per week until the ground freezes. Of course, in Canada, that can be as early as August if you live in Whitehorse and as late as November if you're on Vancouver Island. Winter In most places, you can take a break from watering once the ground freezes. Once that happens, water won’t be absorbed into the soil or reach the grass roots. Use the winter months to service your lawnmower, trimmer, and other tools, so everything is in tip-top shape for the spring. Using Sprinklers and Irrigation Systems There are hundreds of watering tools online and at gardening stores. Here's a quick guide to different types of sprinklers and irrigation systems: A hose with a nozzle or wand Pulsating sprinklers Permanent or built-in irrigation systems Drip irrigation JOIN OUR MAILING LIST Be the first to know about giveaways and contests, get expert tips for your lawn, advice, product promotions and more from Scotts Canada Ltd. Email Postal code By providing your information, you consent to receive promotional communications from Scotts Canada Ltd. and its affiliates. You may withdraw your consent at any time. Please review Scotts Canada Ltd.'s Privacy Policy for more information about how we collect and use personal information.	How to Water Your Lawn Properly and Effectively Watering your lawn sounds simple although there are a lot of things to consider when watering your lawn effectively. Get watering tips and take care of your lawn with Scotts It seems like such a simple task, but there is more to it than meets the eye. Watering the lawn takes balance. Too much or too little can damage the grass, encourage certain diseases, and lead to weed and pest infestations. Use these tips to learn the right amount of water to keep your lawn healthy and beautiful all season long. Types of Grass Grown in Canada First, let's take a quick look at the type of grass on your lawn. Canadian homes typically include a mix of cool-season grasses blended for sunny or shady yards or customized for your lawn’s specific needs. Here's what you are likely growing out back: Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) Canada bluegrass (Poa compressa) Ryegrass (Lolium perenne) Tall Fescue (Festuca arundinacea The Best Time of Day to Water Your Lawn In the spring and summer, afternoon heat can evaporate up to 30% of the water as it jets out of the sprinklers. And watering in the late evening doesn't give the grass enough time to dry, leaving it vulnerable to fungal disease. So what is the best time to water the grass? The #1 best time to water is before 10 a.m. The #2 best time to water is 4-6 p.m. Tips for Watering the Lawn Properly Make sure your grass gets 2.5 cm of water each week. Let the grass dry between waterings. More water is not better for your lawn. Overwatering can lead to fungal disease, weeds, and pests. Stick to weekly watering. In the spring and summer, you may find yourself watering flowers, veggies, and landscape plants every day. Don't put your lawn on the same schedule. Frequent, shorter waterings will leave you with shallow roots and more vulnerable grass.	no
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://www.gardenbetty.com/surviving-a-heat-wave-6-hot-weather-watering-tips/	7 Hot-Weather Watering Tips to Survive a Heat Wave – Garden Betty	7 Hot-Weather Watering Tips to Survive a Heat Wave How hot is too hot for your plants? And can you accidentally burn your plants by watering in the middle of the day? When summer rolls around, it's important to use good irrigation techniques that also conserve water. Here are 7 science-backed tips for keeping your plants healthy and hydrated in a heatwave, plus common watering myths that do your garden more harm than good. It’s here—summer summer summertiiiime. Or should I say, it’s been here, as we’ve been feelin’ the heat for the past few weeks with seemingly no end in sight. My high desert garden is accustomed to the sultry weather this time of year, but it’s not any easier on the plants than it is on me. We have a full south-facing garden and July through August are generally the hottest months for us. Low precipitation this year has meant a dry, dusty summer and rationing of our local irrigation. In this sweltering weather, keeping the garden cool and well-watered is key to helping plants survive. Even with drip irrigation installed in my yard, I find that I still need to supplement with hand watering during drought and heat spells. Disclosure: All products on this page are independently selected. If you buy from one of my links, I may earn a commission. Having tested all types of nozzles over the years, I’ve discovered that I really like having a thumb control. The water turns on and stays on, without me needing to squeeze a trigger—no more achy hand after a day in the garden! It’s almost life-changing when you’re someone who spends a considerable amount of time outside (and I’ve actually started replacing all my trigger squeeze nozzles with this thumb control model). I can easily adjust the water flow with my thumb as I move from plant to plant, and I’m always a fan of pattern nozzles, which offer so much more versatility than a standard spray nozzle. As for the hose, well, it’s a hose—it works, it’s relatively lightweight, and so far it’s burly enough to take some abuse in the garden. (I am definitely not one to be gentle on my gardening gear!) The thickness of the material also seems to help keep the hose from kinking. But the thing I like most about it is actually the neutral gray color and glossy coating. While this may sound superficial, the color and coating resists dirt very well—a huge plus in my book. I have some lighter-colored hoses, and a slight annoyance with them is the fact that they seem to grab onto every speck of dirt and look really grubby pretty fast. (I use and abuse my hoses, remember?) I guess some people would prefer function over form, but putting my hands on a grimy hose deflates the fun of watering a bit (which, for me, is already more a chore than a meditation). So if a hose can stay clean and sharp-looking as well as get the job done, I’m all for it. 1. Time your watering for the morning or late afternoon. The best time to water your garden in summer is from 6 am to 10 am—before the heat of the day sets in, giving your plants plenty of time to drink up and any moisture on the leaves to dry off before nightfall. If watering in the morning isn’t possible, the next best time—in general—is from 5 pm to 7 pm. This will depend on your local climate, as people in warmer regions will still experience pretty hot temperatures during those late afternoon hours, and can get away with watering in the evening. But unless you live in an arid climate, try to avoid watering too late at night, as cool and wet conditions could encourage fungi and bacteria, slugs and snails, sow bugs, earwigs, and other pests into your garden. But all told, don’t worry if all you can do is a midday watering—any water is better than none at all, and the oft-repeated belief that watering on a hot sunny day will damage your plants is a gardening myth that’s been debunked by science. Sunburn (which often appear as bleached areas on the foliage of young transplants, heat-sensitive plants, and distressed, underwatered plants) is caused by simple overexposure to the sun, not by water droplets that supposedly magnify the sun and scorch the leaves. There are good reasons for not watering in the middle of the day under a blazing hot sun, but leaf scorch is not one of them. In the morning, the air and soil are cooler, which minimizes evaporation. The lack of wind means you avoid wasting water to wind drift. And most importantly, plants absorb water more readily when they’re not under heat stress—a condition that’s more likely to occur when the sun is at its peak. So while it’s perfectly okay to water plants while they’re in full mid-day sun, it’s not the most efficient way to go about it. 2. Water well and water deeply. Just like people, plants need thorough hydration during times of excess heat. This is especially true of outdoor container plants, as well as new plantings that haven’t yet established their roots. Container plants—particularly those in smaller pots, fabric pots, clay pots, and baskets lined with coco fibers or sphagnum peat moss—are more susceptible to drying out than their in-ground counterparts. In the height of summer, these potted plants need special attention and may require watering every day or even up to three times a day. A good rule of thumb is to water when the first 2 inches of potting soil feels dry. The smaller or more porous your container, the more you’ll have to water it. Both annual and perennial plants in the ground benefit from a good deep soaking up to three times a week. Allowing the water to penetrate slowly and fully into the soil (to a depth of at least 6 inches) encourages roots to grow deeper and stronger and protects them from the parched soil surface. Remember: Infrequent deep soakings are better than frequent light sprinklings. Aim the water right where it’s needed—at the root zone of your plants—to reduce the chances of runoff and evaporation. How do you know when to water? Establish an “indicator” plant in your garden—one with large, succulent leaves that are prone to drooping when the soil is dry. Squash and melons are good indicator plants, as their leaves lose a lot of moisture fast. When you see your squash leaves start to wilt, it’s a sign that your garden could use a good soak. During periods of extremely dry, hot weather, I also like to give my plants (especially the more fragile or heat-sensitive ones) a gentle overhead shower using the “garden” setting on Gilmour’s thumb control watering nozzle (a full, consistent spray similar to a soft rain), or running a sprinkler over my garden beds. 3. Use drip irrigation or soaker hoses. Don’t get me wrong, there’s always a place for garden hoses and manual watering in the yard (especially for newly seeded beds, young seedlings, and tempering the effects of crazy heat waves). But to make sure all your plants receive consistent moisture throughout the year, the best way to water them is with drip irrigation or soaker hoses. I put mine on an automatic timer with a rain sensor, so on days I forget or don’t have time to water, I’m not worrying about my plants wilting. I like to use a combination of drip lines and soaker hoses—they both water at the root zone, but emit the moisture differently. Soaker hoses aren’t as configurable as drip systems, but are much easier to set up if you want to start small first (or have simple needs). If it’s particularly breezy, you may need to mist them a couple times a day and give the garden a second watering in the late afternoon to increase humidity. Container plants should be grouped together to increase humidity, and they especially benefit from being placed under the canopy of larger plants or trees. 5. Shield heat-sensitive plants from excessive sun. A heat wave is hardest on new transplants that haven’t had time to develop a strong root system (including drought-tolerant transplants, which—contrary to popular belief—still need regular watering for the first year while they get established). If your plants are in containers, move them to an area of the yard that’s partially shaded in the afternoon. Transplants that need to go in the ground sooner than later should be hardened off first, then planted in the garden where they get only dappled light or afternoon shade. Quick tip: Grow new transplants next to taller annuals or deciduous perennials that offer some cover. By the time the new plants establish roots and require full sun, those taller plants will have died back. Other plants in the ground can be protected by shade cloth or row cover, which still lets in light and water but blocks a specific amount of sun (called a “shade factor”) from 25 percent to 90 percent, depending on its configuration. In a pinch, even a white (or light-colored) bed sheet strung across your garden bed or draped over your plant cages will work. The sheet lets in all the warmth and light of the day while shading your plants and reflecting light off of them at the same time. (If you don’t have any old bed sheets laying around, check your local thrift shops.) 6. Don’t fertilize during a heat wave. Very high soil temperatures (above 85°F) can cause plants to go semi-dormant, so they use very few nutrients while they’re in survival mode and aren’t prepared to make use of them. If you fertilize your plants while they’re stressed, it may even damage them. Sounds counterintuitive, right? But fertilizing stressed plants just stresses them even more. That’s because fertilizers fuel new growth, and a heat-stressed plant simply cannot keep up with the pressure of putting out new leaves. An increase in the amount of water needed to move nutrients through a plant can also take its toll if a plant is already suffering from dry or inconsistently moist soil. Withhold the fertilizers (or apply a weaker diluted solution) until the weather cools off a bit and your plants have a chance to recover. When I need to give my plants a quick nutritional boost in high summer, I make sure the soil is evenly moist first (to reduce heat stress and improve absorption) and use a half-strength organic liquid fertilizer right at the root zone. Common questions about watering in hot weather Is it bad to water plants with hot water? It’s probably happened to all of us at some point: You left the garden hose out in the sun all day, then turned on the water and inadvertently showered your plants with hot water. Are they doomed? Well, it depends. Boiling hot water is a very effective remedy for controlling weeds and pests when poured directly on them. But… If the hot water merely splashed on your plant or landed on the leaves for just a couple seconds, your plant will likely survive. If the hot water ended up on the soil only, then it’s even less of a concern. As long as the soil was mulched to protect the crown and roots of the plant from overheating, and the leaves remained dry, it’s okay if you (unintentionally or not) watered your plants with hot water. How hot is too hot for plants? In temperatures that are consistently above 85°F, most plants start to lose moisture fast, a condition that’s manifested by a drooping leaf. This is also the tipping point for vegetable crops like tomatoes, squash, and cucumbers, which may not flower or fruit in excessively hot weather. What do overwatered plants look like? When a plant is overwatered, the color of the leaves starts to change. You might see splotches of yellow appearing on the surface, or vibrant green leaves turning pale green or yellow. This happens because the plant can’t photosynthesize properly when the soil is too wet. Plants need oxygen and overwatering effectively suffocates them. How much water do vegetables need in hot weather? A general guideline is to give your vegetables at least 1 inch of water per week, either by rain or irrigation. In dry climates or dry sandy soil, double that number (up to 2 inches per week). And in hot weather, vegetables need even more water, up to a 1/2 inch extra per week for every 10 degrees that the average temperature is above 60°F. You can calculate the average temperature by adding the daytime high plus the nighttime low, then dividing by 2. So if your daytime high is 95 and nighttime low is 70, the average is 82.5. In this case, your garden would need at least another inch of water in peak summer. Does watering grass in the sun burn it? Even if you water your grass on the hottest, sunniest day, your grass will not burn. In fact, it will only make it healthier. Just like the myth about watering leaves on a hot day, water droplets on grass will not magnify the sun and scorch the blades. You’re more likely to burn your grass by not watering during extreme heat, or by applying too much fertilizer. I'm a plant lover, passionate road-tripper, and cookbook author whose expert advice and bestselling books have been featured in TIME, Outside, HGTV, and Food & Wine. The No-Waste Vegetable Cookbook is my latest book. Garden Betty is where I write about modern homesteading, farm-to-table cooking, and outdoor adventuring—all that encompass a life well-lived outdoors. After all, the secret to a good life is... Read more » 7 Comments crazysquirrel June 24, 2022 at 6:45 pm I moved my potted tomato plants from the driveway to the east side of the garage. They get the 1st 1/2 day of full sun, then light shade the rest of the day. Temps here around 100F. After watering things, I spray the roof and sides of the house with water. It can cool down the house a little on a hot day and save a little on A/C. Croyden Aimee Absolutely love the bedsheet idea – we started doing that a few years ago, going down to Goodwill to pick up a few white queen/king size sheets and it works perfectly as a shadecloth over our tomatoes and bell peppers. However, I’d disagree strongly with watering in a heatwave from 4-7pm – at least here in Oregon, that’s the hottest part of the day and during summer, is when the direct sunlight is on the plants and the water evaporates very quickly. We prefer to water in early morning, but our alternative is 7-9pm when the sun is not directly beating down on everything. Linda from Garden Betty The suggested times should only be used as a guideline — northern and southern climates will differ in the intensity of sunlight their garden receives throughout the day, as well as when sunset actually occurs, so everyone should exercise reasonable judgment when watering their plants. Karen Fergason Great tips. Early this spring I planted an apple seed and have watched the young tree grow like a weed….until I left town for a weekend and it died in the desiccating winds, crisped like fall leaves. My lesson learned: make sure you have the appropriate size pot for your plant because it will suck the soil dry. Linda from Garden Betty Lucie Love your reviews. My tomatoes are planted in large fabric bags as you recommended. The leaves look great in the morning but will turn inward and start dropping later in the day when it’s warmer but the soil is still humid as of I don’t need to water yet. However if I water then they get back to normal. I’m not sure what to do as over watering is suppose to be bad for the plants. Help please! Welcome friends! Hi, I'm Linda Ly I live and play in beautiful Bend, Oregon, where I write about urban homesteading, farm-to-table cooking, and outdoor adventuring—all that encompass a life well-lived outdoors. I believe the secret to a good life is... Read more Disclosure Garden Betty independently selects products to feature on this site. I may receive a commission when you buy something through one of my links. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. More details	6 am to 10 am—before the heat of the day sets in, giving your plants plenty of time to drink up and any moisture on the leaves to dry off before nightfall. If watering in the morning isn’t possible, the next best time—in general—is from 5 pm to 7 pm. This will depend on your local climate, as people in warmer regions will still experience pretty hot temperatures during those late afternoon hours, and can get away with watering in the evening. But unless you live in an arid climate, try to avoid watering too late at night, as cool and wet conditions could encourage fungi and bacteria, slugs and snails, sow bugs, earwigs, and other pests into your garden. But all told, don’t worry if all you can do is a midday watering—any water is better than none at all, and the oft-repeated belief that watering on a hot sunny day will damage your plants is a gardening myth that’s been debunked by science. Sunburn (which often appear as bleached areas on the foliage of young transplants, heat-sensitive plants, and distressed, underwatered plants) is caused by simple overexposure to the sun, not by water droplets that supposedly magnify the sun and scorch the leaves. There are good reasons for not watering in the middle of the day under a blazing hot sun, but leaf scorch is not one of them. In the morning, the air and soil are cooler, which minimizes evaporation. The lack of wind means you avoid wasting water to wind drift. And most importantly, plants absorb water more readily when they’re not under heat stress—a condition that’s more likely to occur when the sun is at its peak. So while it’s perfectly okay to water plants while they’re in full mid-day sun, it’s not the most efficient way to go about it. 2. Water well and water deeply. Just like people, plants need thorough hydration during times of excess heat. This is especially true of outdoor container plants, as well as new plantings that haven’t yet established their roots.	yes
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://www.rhs.org.uk/garden-jobs/watering	Watering / RHS Gardening	Our people Work with us Support us Contact us Watering Watering Watering is key to growing plants well, so here we look at how to get it just right. This not only means providing the water our gardens need, but using it wisely. Water is a precious resource and supplies in the UK are under pressure from the effects of climate change, population increase and the need to protect the environment, such as river levels for wildlife. Jump to When to water Water in the mornings, if you can, as this is when the sun comes up and plants will start to use water. The foliage and soil surface is also likely to stay drier for longer than evening watering, discouraging slugs, snails and mildew diseases. Plants start to transpire in sunlight, drawing water from the soil, through their roots, up their stems and out through tiny pores on their leaves called stomata. Evening watering is also fine, as the cooler conditions mean less water is lost to evaporation. Watering in the heat of the day is not a good idea as much water is lost through evaporation from the surface of the soil and the plants will use water more efficiently if watered in the cooler parts of the day. Watering frequency We're frequently advised to 'keep plants well watered' but just how often should that be and how do we know if a plant is getting enough water? There is no simple rule of thumb for watering as each plant has different needs - for example, a container plant in hot sunny weather may need watering daily, whereas a mature shrub might only need a drink in extreme drought. But below are some things to think about and look for to help you get it right for your plants. It's good to remember, plants will use more water if more water is made available to them, so you can allow them to dry out a little between watering and they don't need to be wet all the time. Factors that affect how often you need to water: Size, species and stage of growth of the plant - the larger and more leaves a plant has, the more water it is likely to lose and the more nutrients are needed to grow flowers and fruit. These are mainly taken up through the roots, dissolved in water, so more water is generally needed to produce flowers and fruit Texture, structure and compaction of the soil or growing media and its organic matter content. Plants cannot extract every drop of water from soil and some soils may still feel damp even though plants have started to wilt. This tends to happen in clay soil. A clay soil can hold more water than a sandy one but plants are able to extract more water from sand than clay. In contrast, sandy soil can feel dry even though there may be moisture still available to plant roots. Sandy soils tend to need smaller amounts of more frequent watering than clay. Caring for your soil by adding organic matter will improve its water holding capacity Whether the plant is growing in a border or container or with root restriction e.g. next to a wall. A large plant in a small pot will need more frequent watering than one planted in a border. In a border, the roots are free to grow wherever they are able to find water and hence draw moisture from a much larger volume of soil than if the roots are confined in a pot. Plants that are potbound (i.e. have more roots than compost in the pot) dry out particularly quickly Season and weather (e.g. rainfall, hours of sunshine, temperature, wind and humidity) will affect the rate of water use. Generally speaking, plants use more more water in the warmer summer months and less in the cooler winter months. They will also use more in hot, sunny and windy weather. And watering will need to be more frequent during prolonged dry spells with no decent rain (light showers are of little use to plants as the water simply evaporates or only wets the very surface of the soil where there are few roots) Signs that your plants may need more frequent watering Less than expected growth of foliage, or production of fruit or flowers Leaves or stems that look dull or lost their shine, sometimes darker or paler than normal Change in position of leaves, they may angle downwards or start to curl If the surface of the soil or compost is dry, that does not necessarily mean that the plant needs water. Water is needed at the root tips, so surface moisture is not always a good indicator. If using the touch test, push your finger down into the compost or soil to at least knuckle depth to see if it is damp, rather than just feeling the surface. How to water Plants can only effectively use water through their roots, taking water from the surrounding soil or compost. So water needs to get to where it’s needed, at the tip of the roots and not the leaves. Wet or humid foliage will encourage fungal problems and evaporation from the surfaces. Watering more thoroughly, but less frequently helps get the water down to the deeper root tips. It is better to water the garden before drought really sets in, to keep the soil moisture levels even and avoid the soil being continuously dry. But, equally important, the soil doesn’t have to be really wet all the time because plants roots need air as well as water to grow well. Consider the way we drink a glass of water, it doesn’t have to be full all the time, but we might prefer it was topped up half way rather than it becoming completely empty. Where plant roots are restricted for example in containers or growing next to a wall or fence post, more frequent watering may be needed as the roots are extracting water from a smaller volume of soil than if they were growing freely in the border soil. Once drought has set in to border, it is futile to try and remedy this by light watering over a wide area. Light watering may encourage surface rather than deep roots, leaving plants more susceptible to drought. Instead, make a single thorough watering of the plants that are suffering. Try to water in the cool of the evening or the very early morning, so that less water is lost immediately to evaporation. Watering effectively where drainage is poor is very difficult. It’s better to improve the drainage or choose plants that are appropriate for the conditions such as those suited to both wet and dry conditions. Roots are very susceptible to airless conditions, particularly when the soil is warm in summer. How much water to apply How much water is needed will depend largely on the water requirements of that particular plant and how actively it is growing. The type of soil or growing media as well as weather are also important considerations. Light sandy or chalk soils need watering more frequently than heavy clay soils, but less water can be applied at each watering, as the excess will drain away easily. Heavier, clay-based soils can be watered less frequently, but need heavier applications of water because they hold more water within their structure. Adding organic matter increases the water holding capacity of most soils. When watering containers, try adding 10% of the volume of the container at each watering. So for a 10 litre patio pot, add 1 litre of water. Pour it on slowly, aiming to keep it in the pot and not allow it to drain out of the bottom. A saucer placed under the pot will catch any excess and allow it to be re-absorbed. For small containers, gently lift the pot after watering to see if it feels heavy, and if not, add a little more water. You will soon gauge how light the pots are when they are in need of water. If plants have wilted between waterings, you may need to water more often, but slowly and thoroughly so that the water reaches the root zone. Avoid disturbing the soil surface if you can, by slowing the flow. Pop a rose attachment on your watering can, a variable nozel on your hose or simply reduce the pressure at the tap. This will allow water to infiltrate into the soil more slowly. Sources of water Rainwateris an excellent choice for plants and the first ‘go to’ for gardeners as it is freely available if you are able to store it. Tap water requires treatment and energy to deliver it to our homes and can contain more minerals than many plants need, especially ericaceous plants. Grey water from our homes can also be used in very dry spells. Methods of watering Watering cans: Most garden watering can be aimed specifically at the stem bases beneath the foliage canopy using a watering can, leaving the surrounding soil dry. This helps to limit weed problems and ensures all the water goes where it is needed, to the roots. Self watering pots and containers: These have an in-built reservoir that stores water away from the root zone but is connected by a capillary system or wick. The plants will draw water into the root zone as they need it, prolonging the time between watering and collecting and storing rain water. These containers are best watered directly into the reservoir rather than from the surface of the soil so that fines of compost and nutrients are not washed into the reservoir where it can make the water anaerobic and smelly. Seep hoses: These hoses or pipes with holes in them deliver water accurately to established plants and plants in rows. They can be hidden beneath soil or mulch, which also avoids evaporation losses. Water doesn’t move much sideways from seep hoses. Therefore the lengths of hose need to be positioned across plant root systems, such as going under a shrub, or the lines placed 30-45cm (12-18in) apart in denser plantings. They work best on heavy soil where the water spreads further sideways than on lighter soils. Automated irrigation systems: To save time and labour on bigger or more water-demanding areas such as fruit and veg plots, install a drip or trickle irrigation system. Only the root zone should be wetted - water that penetrates deeper will be inaccessible to most plant roots, and leach nutrients into the deeper layers of soil. Suppliers can advise on installation of these systems. They can be operated on timers or with moisture or rain sensors but still need checking especially when setting up if wastage is to be avoided. They can be particularly useful if you go away on holiday. Solar powered pumped systems can make use of stored rainwater whereas most drip irrigation needs mains pressure to work well. Sprinklers: These have only limited use in gardens, as they need mains pressure to work and can use as much water in an hour as a family of four people would normally use in two days. To use water in the most economical way, it's good to learn your plants' watering requirements. Here are some tips for getting it right: Annual flowers and vegetables produced in the spring are likely to need more watering than self-sown or autumn grown plants as they have new and shallow root systems Established trees and shrubs do not generally need watering, as they have such wide-ranging roots that they are drought-proof. But their growth may be improved by watering when they are under drought-stress Trees and shrubs planted less than five years ago have increased water requirements and may suffer drought-stress without watering Newly sown or newly planted areas are very vulnerable to water-stress, and watering these should be high priority. Ideally, watch the weather forecast and aim to plant when rain is forecast Herbaceous perennials often need watering to boost their performance in hot, dry spells. Plant choice is crucial if you want to achieve a drought-proof border. See our advice on drought-resistant plants for more on plant choice Edible produce yields and quality are greatly improved by watering at times when drought stress would affect the part of the plant that is gathered. Leafy crops such as lettuce and spinach should never be short of water. Onions require little or no watering. Most other crops need watering at sowing and transplanting time, and then again as the fruits, roots or tubers are developing. It is also a good idea to give a single, thorough watering about two weeks before harvest. Organic surface mulch laid between rows can help reduce moisture losses Lawns require great quantities of water for thorough irrigation, and this is a questionable use of a scarce resource for any other than high quality lawns or sports turf. Instead of watering in dry periods, mow less closely and less frequently. Brown patches usually recover when the autumn rains return Make life easier for yourself! Here are 3 simple tips to minimise the need to water; Choose the right plant, in the right place and plant it at the right time using our RHS Find a Plant tool Plant new plants between autumn and spring to give them the best chance of growing roots before dry weather begins Add organic matter to the soil before planting and mulch them afterwards. Mulching with a layer of organic matter or gravel at least 5cm (2in) thick, or using opaque mulching sheets, reduces moisture loss from the upper layers of the soil. This may amount to as much as the equivalent of 2cm (0.75in) of rain How much water could be saved? Rainwater should be the first choice for gardens, you can find ways to make the best use of rain water and estimate the amount of mains water that could be saved each year in your garden, by following this link and pledging to make the switch from using mains to rains.	Our people Work with us Support us Contact us Watering Watering Watering is key to growing plants well, so here we look at how to get it just right. This not only means providing the water our gardens need, but using it wisely. Water is a precious resource and supplies in the UK are under pressure from the effects of climate change, population increase and the need to protect the environment, such as river levels for wildlife. Jump to When to water Water in the mornings, if you can, as this is when the sun comes up and plants will start to use water. The foliage and soil surface is also likely to stay drier for longer than evening watering, discouraging slugs, snails and mildew diseases. Plants start to transpire in sunlight, drawing water from the soil, through their roots, up their stems and out through tiny pores on their leaves called stomata. Evening watering is also fine, as the cooler conditions mean less water is lost to evaporation. Watering in the heat of the day is not a good idea as much water is lost through evaporation from the surface of the soil and the plants will use water more efficiently if watered in the cooler parts of the day. Watering frequency We're frequently advised to 'keep plants well watered' but just how often should that be and how do we know if a plant is getting enough water? There is no simple rule of thumb for watering as each plant has different needs - for example, a container plant in hot sunny weather may need watering daily, whereas a mature shrub might only need a drink in extreme drought. But below are some things to think about and look for to help you get it right for your plants. It's good to remember, plants will use more water if more water is made available to them, so you can allow them to dry out a little between watering and they don't need to be wet all the time. Factors that affect how often you need to water: Size, species and stage of growth of the plant - the larger and more leaves a plant has, the more water it is likely to lose and the more nutrients are needed to grow flowers and fruit.	no
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://albopepper.com/breaking-garden-rule-04--dont-water-at-mid-day.php	Breaking Garden Rules: "Don't Water at Mid-Day" or Can You Water ...	Garden Rule: Don't Water at Mid-Day in the Sun "Don't Water Your Plants in the Middle of the Day!" How many times have you heard that? "Only water your plants in the early mornings or late evenings." THE CHALLENGE: That's easy to say, but not always easy to do. Do you have time in your busy schedule to water at these "optimal" times? I especially loath the "early in the morning" recommendation. If you have a full time job you might know what I mean. And the "late evening" hardly seems like an advantageous time. Mosquitoes are most active. And plant foliar diseases are more likely (see below). WATER CONSERVATION: Water will evaporate faster in the intense, mid-day sun. And so the soil surface tends to dry faster. But if water conservation is your prime concern, why not focus on applying a layer of mulch to the soil of your garden bed? This will reduce soil evaporation, no matter what time of the day you water. Rather than using a garden sprinkler, installing a drip irrigation system would be a better option. A timer could be used to water automatically, at just the right time of day. Or would a self-watering planter be a good fit for your garden? When you water the reservoir of a sub-irrigated system, the water is pumped straight down to the bottom. No waste! Video: Self-Watering Garden Bed: How the watering system works The water reservoir in this SIP planter conserves water & can be topped off at any time of the day! Can You Water Plants in the Sun? LEAF DAMAGE: I've read that watering plants at mid-day will "burn" the leaves of plants. Apparently, that's a big reason we should wait until late evening. I've personally never observed such damage. Furthermore, researchers have found this to be a common garden myth in most instances. This is only plausible on plants that have hairy leaves. And just because it's "plausible," that doesn't mean it should be a major concern. If it's hot, windy and sunny your plants can dry out extremely quickly. This is especially true for young plants and ones grown in pots. It might be sunny, but that might be the exact moment the plants need watered. So do it! Don't let them dry out and wilt. This could result in damage to the plant tissues. It will halt growth and in the end, it will reduce yield. If the sun comes out after a rainfall, plants don't get all burned up from incendiary water droplet prisms. Should you water plants at night? Regardless of what time you water them, it's a good idea to avoid getting your plants' leaves wet when watering. Minimizing leaf spray might reduce salt exposure and cold water shock. But in particular keeping leaves dry can reduce fungal and bacterial disease. Could this be one advantage for watering in the mid-day? The warmth of the day will help to evaporate any water that unavoidably splashes onto your plants. Isn't that better than having the water resting on the leaves all night long, encouraging pathogens? That might be a drawback of watering at night. Certainly, if you're going to top irrigate, try to avoid splashing plant leaves. What's the Best Time to Water Outdoor Plants? The bottom line: Preventing water stress is crucial. If I see that plants need watered, I'm going to do it immediately. The "best time" to water has nothing to do with the time of day. It's all about the moisture level of your soil. If the ground is soaking wet, then you get the day off. But if it's dry, then it's time to irrigate. Do it as soon as your schedule permits. By having the flexibility of watering when it's convenient, your plants will actually get that water when they need it! What is Albopepper? Albopepper.com is the gardening blog of Al Gracian 3. Designed for urban gardeners who enjoy the science of plant growing, this site shows not just what to do, but also WHY we do it. These gardening techniques are for open-minded people who like to learn and want to get a high yield.	Garden Rule: Don't Water at Mid-Day in the Sun "Don't Water Your Plants in the Middle of the Day!" How many times have you heard that? "Only water your plants in the early mornings or late evenings. " THE CHALLENGE: That's easy to say, but not always easy to do. Do you have time in your busy schedule to water at these "optimal" times? I especially loath the "early in the morning" recommendation. If you have a full time job you might know what I mean. And the "late evening" hardly seems like an advantageous time. Mosquitoes are most active. And plant foliar diseases are more likely (see below). WATER CONSERVATION: Water will evaporate faster in the intense, mid-day sun. And so the soil surface tends to dry faster. But if water conservation is your prime concern, why not focus on applying a layer of mulch to the soil of your garden bed? This will reduce soil evaporation, no matter what time of the day you water. Rather than using a garden sprinkler, installing a drip irrigation system would be a better option. A timer could be used to water automatically, at just the right time of day. Or would a self-watering planter be a good fit for your garden? When you water the reservoir of a sub-irrigated system, the water is pumped straight down to the bottom. No waste! Video: Self-Watering Garden Bed: How the watering system works The water reservoir in this SIP planter conserves water & can be topped off at any time of the day! Can You Water Plants in the Sun? LEAF DAMAGE: I've read that watering plants at mid-day will "burn" the leaves of plants. Apparently, that's a big reason we should wait until late evening. I've personally never observed such damage. Furthermore, researchers have found this to be a common garden myth in most instances. This is only plausible on plants that have hairy leaves. And just because it's "plausible," that doesn't mean it should be a major concern.	yes
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://fgsdurham.com/blog/watering-tips-extreme-heat/	Watering Tips During Extreme Heat – For Garden's Sake	Watering Tips During Extreme Heat You might be thinking that you wish you would have had this to read before the week’s heat wave, but I can pretty much guarantee this heat wave won’t be the last that we will see here in central NC. Y’all, in case you haven’t been outside, it’s HOT. And if you get hot and dehydrated outside, guess what? So are all of those lovely plants in your garden. Although your plants need water no matter what, they will definitely need some extra attention in the form of watering during these especially hot times. While you may be tempted to stay seated on top of the AC vent with a cool drink in your hand, “for garden’s sake”, take one for the team and go water your plants. We know you probably have some questions about when to water, how much, and all that…so here ya go: How much should I water and how often? Lawn When the weather is as hot as it is right now, you really should be watering your lawn every day if you can. However, there are watering restrictions in place for some of the area, so simply water as often as you can. (Wondering about watering restrictions in your community? Check here for Durham, here for Cary) A sprinkler system is great for watering, however, if you don’t have one, you will need to water by hand or get a sprinkler you can attach to a hose and move around so that all of your lawn reaps the benefits. Vegetable and Flower Gardens Water deeply at least two to three times a week. When we say deeply, that means at least an inch of water every time you water. Not sure how much that is? Place a cup under the sprinkler/hose where you are watering and when it is close to an inch, you should be pretty good. For larger gardens, an irrigation system would be a huge help. To conserve water, you may want to consider a rain barrel. A rain barrel like this one hooks up to a hose and may come in handy when watering your garden. Containers Your containers need to be watered every day, especially when temperatures are so high. Sometimes you might even have to water in the morning and the late afternoon like we do in our Garden Center. If your containers are in a spot where they get full sun for many hours throughout the day, you might want to consider moving them to a spot that gets only partial sun or covering them with a shade cloth for portions of the day. A shade cloth can be used in your flower gardens and vegetable gardens if needed as well. When and where do I water? When Hands down, the best time of day to water is early in the morning. Watering during the day can increase risk of disease. If you can’t water early in the morning, water late in the evening, especially before days forecasted to have dangerously high temps. Where Water at the base of the plant. While you can’t avoid getting some water on the leaves, avoid pointing your hose or sprinkler system directly at the plant. Watering the leaves can also increase the risk of disease. If you are hose watering, use the “shower” setting. Focus on one plant at a time instead of simulating a rain shower. When/if water starts to puddle, move to another plant and then return back to that plant when puddle has subsided. Think of your soil like a sponge. If you dip a sponge quickly, the edges only retain the water. But dipping multiple times, eventually the sponge (soil) will become saturated. What else should I know? Mulch Having a 2-3 inch layer of mulch around your plants will help keep water in the ground longer. If you have an especially large area (1,000 sq. ft+) that needs mulching, our landscape team would be happy to set up a consultation and make that happen for you. Tomatoes Love your tomato and mayo sandwiches with a fresh tomato from your garden? Make sure your tomatoes are being watered well and consistently. When tomatoes go from being really dry to wet and that cycle is repeated, they are more like to get disease and to crack. And no one wants those ugly cracks in their beloved tomatoes. Droopy Leaves Many of your plants will have droopy leaves in the heat of the day. If you are watering, and finding that the leaves are the plant are still droopy in the morning, that means you are not watering enough or you are watering too much. Check the soil around those plants. If the soil is moist, you are probably giving the plant too much water. If the soil is dry, you are probably not giving it enough water. Hopefully, you will keep all your lovely plants alive during these heat spells. But if the worst were to happen and your plants die, come and see us. We still have many beautiful plants that would love to make their forever home in your garden.	If your containers are in a spot where they get full sun for many hours throughout the day, you might want to consider moving them to a spot that gets only partial sun or covering them with a shade cloth for portions of the day. A shade cloth can be used in your flower gardens and vegetable gardens if needed as well. When and where do I water? When Hands down, the best time of day to water is early in the morning. Watering during the day can increase risk of disease. If you can’t water early in the morning, water late in the evening, especially before days forecasted to have dangerously high temps. Where Water at the base of the plant. While you can’t avoid getting some water on the leaves, avoid pointing your hose or sprinkler system directly at the plant. Watering the leaves can also increase the risk of disease. If you are hose watering, use the “shower” setting. Focus on one plant at a time instead of simulating a rain shower. When/if water starts to puddle, move to another plant and then return back to that plant when puddle has subsided. Think of your soil like a sponge. If you dip a sponge quickly, the edges only retain the water. But dipping multiple times, eventually the sponge (soil) will become saturated. What else should I know? Mulch Having a 2-3 inch layer of mulch around your plants will help keep water in the ground longer. If you have an especially large area (1,000 sq. ft+) that needs mulching, our landscape team would be happy to set up a consultation and make that happen for you. Tomatoes Love your tomato and mayo sandwiches with a fresh tomato from your garden? Make sure your tomatoes are being watered well and consistently. When tomatoes go from being really dry to wet and that cycle is repeated, they are more like to get disease and to crack. And no one wants those ugly cracks in their beloved tomatoes. Droopy Leaves Many of your plants will have droopy leaves in the heat of the day.	no
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://swanhose.com/blogs/general-watering/how-to-water-plants-in-hot-weather-protect-them-from-a-heat-wave	A Guide to Watering Your Plants in Hot Weather	A Guide to Watering Your Plants in Hot Weather Watering plants or a vegetable garden in hot weather can be a challenge. Many plants are vulnerable during times of extreme heat. It is vital that you water properly to protect the health of your plants. The good news is that a little planning and the right tools will make the job easy. Understanding How Plants Lose Water in High Heat Being informed about how your plants absorb and process water will help you understand the principles behind watering in hot weather. Knowledge is a powerful ally when it comes to plant care. Evapotranspiration is the process by which plants cool themselves with water. It requires that water be transferred to the surface of the plant. The hotter the conditions, the more transfer is required. You can compare this process to your own need to cool off in the heat of the day. You are able to dial down the air conditioner. Plants have to depend upon the proper utilization of water and other elements. The short of it is that your plants need more water in extreme heat, but it’s not just the amount of water that matters. Plants also need water to be applied in the most beneficial way. Plants are amazing organisms. They will do most of the heavy lifting. All you need to do is make sure to provide water at proper intervals and in proper amounts. Here are the steps to successful watering in hot temperatures. Water Early You may have received conflicting advice on this subject. Let us clarify it once and for all. In hot weather you need to water in the mornings when it is cooler. This will allow more water to reach the root system before it evaporates in the heat. There may be times when you cannot schedule watering in the morning. In this case, water the plants in the late evening before bed. Don't oversaturate if you need to schedule an evening watering, and be sure to keep the water off of the plants’ leaves. Be Consistent Contrary to what some people think, you cannot make up for a week of missed watering in a single day. Whenever your plants are deprived of water, they suffer. You may be able to revive them multiple times, but sooner or later the damage will be too much. You should check the moisture level around the base of your plants. Determine the watering schedule you need to keep in order to maintain the right level of moisture. Watering every day or every two days doesn't matter nearly as much as consistent watering. Make a schedule and stick to it. If you notice that plants look ailing or dry, it is a sign that your schedule needs to be amended. Soaker Hoses for Deeper Irrigation Water on the leaves of your plants is not going to help them during hot weather. The water on the surface of a plant is the first to evaporate. You need to make sure you are getting water to the base of the plant where it can reach the root system. A well-placed soaker hose is an excellent way to make sure the ground beneath your plants is being saturated. Even better, you can turn on a slow soaker hose and let it do the work while you go about your other chores. Soakers are affordable to buy, and they are also better for the environment. Slow Down the Application of Water Another benefit of using a soaker hose is that it allows you to slow down the application of water to your plants. Watering too fast creates too much runoff, leaving the soil around your plants poorly irrigated. There are many excellentlow-pressure hose optionsavailable today. Slow and steady definitely wins the race when you are going for maximum watering efficiency in hot weather. Know Your Plants’ Behavior Smart gardeners and home landscapers are those who can spot changes in a plant's behavior. Specifically, you need to realize when a plant is in need of water and when it has received too much moisture. Some plants are prone to drooping during the day when there are hot temperatures. This is a type of defense mechanism. Slowing down allows the plant to more efficiently use its resources. It will typically revive in the morning hours when more water can be absorbed. Other plants only droop when they have not had enough water. When these plants begin to droop, they may be stressed. It is imperative that you provide water immediately. It is possible to maintain a beautiful garden in hot weather. Indeed, some plants even thrive when the temperatures are extreme. Arm yourself with the right tools and the proper knowledge for successful hot-weather gardening. For passionate gardeners, we help nurture. For proud homeowners, we help beautify. And for hardworking farmers, we help grow. As evidenced by the knowledge, experience and ingenuity that flows through every hose we make, Swan has been the leader of innovative and environmentally-friendly watering-solution systems since 1927, bettering the world with best-in-class products that deliver water to where it’s needed most. Click here	Plants are amazing organisms. They will do most of the heavy lifting. All you need to do is make sure to provide water at proper intervals and in proper amounts. Here are the steps to successful watering in hot temperatures. Water Early You may have received conflicting advice on this subject. Let us clarify it once and for all. In hot weather you need to water in the mornings when it is cooler. This will allow more water to reach the root system before it evaporates in the heat. There may be times when you cannot schedule watering in the morning. In this case, water the plants in the late evening before bed. Don't oversaturate if you need to schedule an evening watering, and be sure to keep the water off of the plants’ leaves. Be Consistent Contrary to what some people think, you cannot make up for a week of missed watering in a single day. Whenever your plants are deprived of water, they suffer. You may be able to revive them multiple times, but sooner or later the damage will be too much. You should check the moisture level around the base of your plants. Determine the watering schedule you need to keep in order to maintain the right level of moisture. Watering every day or every two days doesn't matter nearly as much as consistent watering. Make a schedule and stick to it. If you notice that plants look ailing or dry, it is a sign that your schedule needs to be amended. Soaker Hoses for Deeper Irrigation Water on the leaves of your plants is not going to help them during hot weather. The water on the surface of a plant is the first to evaporate. You need to make sure you are getting water to the base of the plant where it can reach the root system. A well-placed soaker hose is an excellent way to make sure the ground beneath your plants is being saturated. Even better, you can turn on a slow soaker hose and let it do the work while you go about your other chores. Soakers are affordable to buy, and they are also better for the environment.	no
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	https://www.apartmenttherapy.com/5-things-you-might-not-know-ab-115950	Should I Water Plants At Night? And 4 Other Watering Facts ...	We independently select these products—if you buy from one of our links, we may earn a commission. All prices were accurate at the time of publishing. Not many around these parts are new to the idea of gardening or the growing of plants. Even though we’ve all been around the block a time or two, we thought it was a good time to brush up on some quick tips and facts about keeping things watered properly. Do you know the best time to water your plants is? This answer and more after the jump! 1. Watering Plants At Night Isn’t Needed: Although the idea has been around for years, most plants don’t need extra care by watering them at night. There are a few exceptions, but 99% of your plants, indoors and out should only be watered during the day. If you’re worried about leaves burning in the noon day sun, make sure to water the roots only instead of casting a wide spray across things. Night time watering promotes disease — and no one wants to deal with that now do they? Try early morning or early evening waterings for the most absorption. 2. Water ALL The Roots, Not Just Some: Most often we think about watering plants at the base of the stem where they grow out of the ground. Most plants, however, have roots that grow up to 1 foot or more out from the main stem. Make sure to water more than just the center of things and give a little water to the outlying roots as well. 3. Water Slow: Watering plants is great, but only if the soil can absorb what you’re applying. Instead of drenching things fast, try a slower stream if you’re using a hose, or multiple waterings if using a watering can. Your plants will thank you! 4. Roots Need As Much Water As They Do Air: To help find the balance between the two, make sure to allow your plants the chance to dry out between waterings and make sure your containers or soil has good drainage. 5. New Versus Old: New plants require less water more frequently and older, more mature plants do great with heavier waterings at less frequent intervals. The right attention to the right age of plant can make a world of difference when it comes to the health of your greenery. Do you have a tip you’ve picked up along the way? Make sure to let us know!	We independently select these products—if you buy from one of our links, we may earn a commission. All prices were accurate at the time of publishing. Not many around these parts are new to the idea of gardening or the growing of plants. Even though we’ve all been around the block a time or two, we thought it was a good time to brush up on some quick tips and facts about keeping things watered properly. Do you know the best time to water your plants is? This answer and more after the jump! 1. Watering Plants At Night Isn’t Needed: Although the idea has been around for years, most plants don’t need extra care by watering them at night. There are a few exceptions, but 99% of your plants, indoors and out should only be watered during the day. If you’re worried about leaves burning in the noon day sun, make sure to water the roots only instead of casting a wide spray across things. Night time watering promotes disease — and no one wants to deal with that now do they? Try early morning or early evening waterings for the most absorption. 2. Water ALL The Roots, Not Just Some: Most often we think about watering plants at the base of the stem where they grow out of the ground. Most plants, however, have roots that grow up to 1 foot or more out from the main stem. Make sure to water more than just the center of things and give a little water to the outlying roots as well. 3. Water Slow: Watering plants is great, but only if the soil can absorb what you’re applying. Instead of drenching things fast, try a slower stream if you’re using a hose, or multiple waterings if using a watering can. Your plants will thank you! 4. Roots Need As Much Water As They Do Air: To help find the balance between the two, make sure to allow your plants the chance to dry out between waterings and make sure your containers or soil has good drainage. 5. New Versus Old: New plants require less water more frequently and older, more mature plants do great with heavier waterings at less frequent intervals. The right attention to the right age of plant can make a world of difference when it comes to the health of your greenery.	yes
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	yes_statement	it is advisable to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is recommended.. "plants" should be "watered" during the "day".	http://www.weedingwildsuburbia.com/keeping-plants-alive-in-extreme-heat/	Keeping Plants Alive in Extreme Heat - Weeding Wild Suburbia	Keeping Plants Alive in Extreme Heat We are currently enjoying a balmy 99+ degree day. After the record breaking heat of 114º F on Friday, this is somewhat of an improvement. In this blog post I will 1) suggest practices to help your plants make it through the extreme heat; 2) share temperature data from my garden; and 3) give an update (and pictures) on how my plants are doing on day 3 of extreme heat. Tips Before extreme heat arrives Water deeply during the cool part of the day to hydrate plants. Spray leaves in early morning to remove pests and dust. The leaves will dry off quickly as the day proceeds, reducing the chance of excessive fungal and bacterial growth. Trim young, tender growth if you think the plant will have trouble maintaining hydration. It is so hot out there! Shield young plants with screen, shade cloth, or white sheet. If your plant is stressed, check the soil to make sure it is dry and then water deeply. If soil is moist, more water will not help. Most plants shut down during extreme heat, so if it is over 100 degrees, it may be best to wait to water even if your plant is stressed. Throw a damp sheet over it, or mist it lightly to bring the temperature down. Mist leaves with a spray nozzle to cool down plant and reduce transpiration. Desert plants can be watered in the late afternoon to mimic the summer monsoonal rains that they are adapted to. Post Apocalypse Once it has cooled down, water plants deeply. Do not remove wilted leaves just yet. They will serve as sun shield if another heat wave is on the way. If plants that exhibit summer dormancy have lost most or all of their leaves, allow them to continue into dormancy by not watering. Extra water now could pull them out of dormancy. These stressed plants may then expend a lot of energy growing a new set of leaves only to be faced with the likelihood of more heat and no natural rainfall. If they do not emerge from dormancy, they will be susceptible to fungal pathogens that grow in moist, hot soil. Please comment with your own tips and suggestions. If you disagree with mine, let me know how and why so we can learn together. Temperature Data A friend, Drew Ready, posted some interesting data on Facebook’s Southern California Native Plant Gardeners Group during this heat wave. He measured surface temperatures for areas that were covered with organic mulch, asphalt, gravel, cement and brick. The winner, surprisingly, was above an organic mulched bed (177.2º F)! Next was asphalt (170.4º), followed by cement (159.2º), then brick (156.7º), and gravel (149.9º). These surprising numbers led me to take my (actually it belongs to my husband) trusty meat thermometer outside today to see what gives. First I must make a disclaimer. A meat thermometer does not do a good job of measuring air temp. Nevertheless, I was more interested in measuring the soil temperature right below the surface. Here are my results: * It should be noted that in photo D, although the area was in sun when the measurement was made, it probably was shaded earlier in the day, while photo C probably was exposed to the sun longer. It is likely that this accounts for the temperature difference as much as the thin layer of mulch in photo D. My Garden Finally for a preliminary report on how things look in my garden. As the heat continues more plants may succumb to the stress but here is a quick review followed by a slideshow. Significant leaf/plant damage Agave attenuata – likely to recover, though it will look ugly for some time Vitis ‘Roger’s Red’ – will recover Ribes speciosum – leaves dried and curled, plant will go dormant and be fine Heuchera ‘Wendy’ – very scorched, despite having been watered well before, not likely to make it Constancea nevinii ‘Snowflake’ – some look fine, two younger plants were cooked; not sure how these will do Some leaf damage Avocado trees – these worry me the most, little damage, but this causes a lot of stress to these old tree Ribes viburnifolium – not much damage, should be fine Epilobium canum – some damage, should make it Post navigation More Articles 12 thoughts on “Keeping Plants Alive in Extreme Heat” Well, I have done everything wrong during this heat and now have my Myer lemon VERY stressed with major curling and some yellowish leaves. When temperatures soared, I panicked and watered during the heat of the day and last night removed most of the the curled and brittle leaves within reach. This morning I will hose the tree to get rid of the insects but will hold off on watering. Barbara, any advice? weedingwildsuburbia July 9, 2018 I’d suggest deep watering in the morning, now that it has cooled down a small bit. Make sure you have a layer of mulch beneath the tree (keeping the base of the tree clear of mulch). If we get triple digits again (not if, when…) water thoroughly before the heat. If possible drape a white sheet over the tree during the heat wave. You can even mist the sheet – anything to try to keep the tree from getting too hot again. Meyer lemons are really tough plants – it will probably be fine. We are all learning! Okay…after hosing off the lemon, it looked a little better. Then next day, as per your suggestion, I deep watered in one place at drip line and it looked a little better. However, I examined the curling and damaged leaves a little closer and I think I have an insect problem, too. Pulled some leaves and took a shot and will email it to you. Thank you for this blog! What do you plan to do with your avocado tree? Most of my tree looks pretty good but one small branch that had about a dozen ping pong ball sized avos is really bad off. Not sure how far back it needs to be pruned or when to do it. weedingwildsuburbia July 10, 2018 I plan to leave the scorched branches where they are for now. The biggest danger is that they will crack and bring down branches beneath them. There are no structures or cars that could be damaged by fallen branches. I will then have someone come and prune the dead limbs in the fall – the tree is way too tall for me to be able to get at them. In the short-term, I watered both of these avocados deeply today. They are not going to look very good when the leaves turn brown! Don’t know how old or large your tree is, but like I said, I’d wait a bit unless the damaged branch looks dangerous or likely to crack and cause damage to the tree. If it is a mature tree you may want to consult an arborist. Avocado trees are very brittle so proceed with care. Mona Erhardt July 11, 2018 Two days of 113+, followed be several days of 100 F heat in Oak View (near what used to be “Lake” Casitas), all properly watered/not watered and mulched, on the SCORCHED list: Quercus agrifolia; Romneya coulteri; Salvia apiana; Heteromeles arbutifolia; Juniperus; Lavatera maritima; Agapanthus; Rhaphiolepis indica; Calandrinia grandiflora; apricot; apple; plum. Looking relatively happy: Helianthus annuus; Oenothera biennis L; Oleander; Rhamnus alaternus; Heterotheca grandiflora; Lepidospartum squamatum; Eschscholzia californica (heavily mulched); Gnaphalium microcephalum thermale; Anaphalis margaritacea; Pennisetum ‘Fairy Tails’; Ceanothus arbutifolia ‘Ray Hartman; Ceanothus thyrsiflorus; Agave americana; Nicotiana glauca; Pine trees; Albizia julibrissin; Eucalyptus;. COMPLETE GONER: Camellia japonica. There are more to report, but my brain is also scorched. All I know is that there are several natives that I’ve NEVER seen burned like this in my 55+years living in this area. Thank you so much for this! I’ve been trying to figure out what to do with a ceanothus – largish, but planted last fall so it hasn’t had as much winter water as it probably needed, due to low rainfall. I did water it last winter but now I’m wishing I’d done more…. it’s now looking very very stressed, with some curling and some burnt leaves. Seems like it needs water but I’m leery of watering ceanothus in summer…. Any advice? weedingwildsuburbia June 29, 2021 Hi Heather. Do you know which Ceanothus it is? My experience is that Ray Hartman is one of the easiest ones to grow. About 10 years ago I planted 2 Conchas. The first summer after planting, one of them did what you describe. I watered it well and it promptly died. The following summer Concha number 2 did the same thing. This time I held off on watering, and it promptly died. I’m telling you this because sometimes watering or not does not help. It may be root rot or some other disease or stress. Having said this, I’d suggest checking the soil around the rootball carefully. If it is dry, water during the cool part of the day (early morning is best), and let the chips fall where they will. Also, while checking the soil for moisture, gently push your fingers into and around the rootball to check for gaps in the soil. If you find any, try to fill them in with you fingers. If it seems to respond positively to water, then let the area dry out and water deeply again – could be in 2 weeks depending on weather and soil type. Young plants like this usually need summer water (and winter water during dry seasons). Hi! Thank you so much – I’m giving this a try and fingers crossed (especially as there’s a heat wave this weekend). I’m not 100% sure but I think it is a Ray Hartman – it’s one of the larger tree-style ones, rather than a groundcover or shrub. There were indeed gaps in the soil, mostly gopher-related (although it’s planted in a large gopher basket, so hopefully the core roots are OK). I’ll try soaking it again in another week or so! Categories Archive Barbara Eisenstein Author of Wild Suburbia - Learning to Garden with Native Plants, Barbara created and runs Friends of South Pasadena Nature Park. Each month with other volunteers, she weeds and cares for the park. She continues to garden with natives, give talks, and write. Grow native - let your garden go wild.	Keeping Plants Alive in Extreme Heat We are currently enjoying a balmy 99+ degree day. After the record breaking heat of 114º F on Friday, this is somewhat of an improvement. In this blog post I will 1) suggest practices to help your plants make it through the extreme heat; 2) share temperature data from my garden; and 3) give an update (and pictures) on how my plants are doing on day 3 of extreme heat. Tips Before extreme heat arrives Water deeply during the cool part of the day to hydrate plants. Spray leaves in early morning to remove pests and dust. The leaves will dry off quickly as the day proceeds, reducing the chance of excessive fungal and bacterial growth. Trim young, tender growth if you think the plant will have trouble maintaining hydration. It is so hot out there! Shield young plants with screen, shade cloth, or white sheet. If your plant is stressed, check the soil to make sure it is dry and then water deeply. If soil is moist, more water will not help. Most plants shut down during extreme heat, so if it is over 100 degrees, it may be best to wait to water even if your plant is stressed. Throw a damp sheet over it, or mist it lightly to bring the temperature down. Mist leaves with a spray nozzle to cool down plant and reduce transpiration. Desert plants can be watered in the late afternoon to mimic the summer monsoonal rains that they are adapted to. Post Apocalypse Once it has cooled down, water plants deeply. Do not remove wilted leaves just yet. They will serve as sun shield if another heat wave is on the way. If plants that exhibit summer dormancy have lost most or all of their leaves, allow them to continue into dormancy by not watering. Extra water now could pull them out of dormancy. These stressed plants may then expend a lot of energy growing a new set of leaves only to be faced with the likelihood of more heat and no natural rainfall.	no
Horticulture	Should you water your plants during the day?	no_statement	it is not recommended to "water" your "plants" during the "day".. watering your "plants" during the "day" is not advisable.. "plants" should not be "watered" during the "day".	https://site.extension.uga.edu/lowndesecholsag/2019/09/wilted-leaves-not-always-a-sign-plants-need-water/	Wilted Leaves Not Always a Sign Plants Need Water \| Lowndes ...	Wilted leaves aren’t always a sign that the plant needs water As summer slowly melts into fall, temperatures are still reaching the high 90s and many plants wilt in the afternoon sun. Plants with big leaves, such as hydrangeas and angel trumpets, are often the first to get a little droopy in the hotter part of the day. It’s very tempting to water plants that are wilted at the end of the day, but late afternoon is not the best time of day to determine whether your landscape plants need water. There are two problems with watering in the afternoon. First, water that remains on the leaves of plants throughout the evening is more likely to invite disease problems. For example, hydrangeas and roses are highly susceptible to leaf spot diseases such as Cercospora, anthracnose or black spot. Watering in the morning as the sun rises allows leaves to dry more quickly and minimizes these disease problems. It is even better to avoid wetting the leaves at all and just water the roots with a drip irrigation system. If you hand-water your plants, invest in a watering wand with a water breaker nozzle that can be used to apply water directly to the roots. Remember, don’t water the leaves. The second problem with watering in the afternoon is that people have a tendency to water plants that don’t actually need watering. Although many plants appear wilted in the afternoon, that doesn’t always mean they need water. Wilting is an adaption that many plants use to reduce water loss during the hottest part of the day. A wilted leaf has less surface area exposed to sunlight and therefore will not lose water as quickly. Plants that are wilted in the afternoon will often perk back up at night and look perfectly happy by morning. If the plants’ leaves do not appear stressed in the morning, they can probably go another day or two before needing water. In some situations, plants that are watered every afternoon may get too much water from their well-intentioned caretaker. Georgia red clay soil can hold water for several days after a good soaking rain. One inch of rain or irrigation will soak clay soil several inches deep. Established landscape plants and mature trees can extract this water and maintain their water needs without needing any additional rain or irrigation for seven to 10 days. Newly planted trees and shrubs may need supplemental water more often for the first couple of years until their roots grow deep enough to seek out water in the subsoil. Let the plants tell you when they need water. Even new trees and shrubs can go a couple of days without being watered. When you do water, soak the soil deeply to encourage deeper rooting — this will pay off in the long run as the plant acclimates to its new environment and is able to take care of itself for extended periods of time without rain. Adding a few inches of mulch around trees and shrubs will conserve soil moisture and help reduce extreme temperatures and drying of surface roots. Permanent wilt may happen if plants remain wilted even after you water them. There are certain soilborne diseases — such as Fusarium wilt, bacterial wilt, and Phytophthora — that can infect the stems or roots of plants and literally stop the flow of water. This is a common problem in vegetables like tomatoes and certain landscape plants such as rhododendrons. The plants might start out with one or two branches that wilt and then eventually the entire plant wilts. Unfortunately, there are no effective treatment options for plants infected with one of these permanent wilt diseases. Ironically, infected plants often wilt more dramatically in the early stages of the disease, especially in the afternoon. This causes people to water them more often. Excessive watering actually helps these diseases spread. To remove the fungal disease, dead or dying plants, along with the soil around the roots, should be completely removed. The spores of these diseases can survive in the soil for many years and infect the next plants you try to grow there. Sometimes, these diseases hitchhike on infected plants bought from nurseries. It’s always a good idea to inspect the roots before you buy a plant. Gently slip the plant out of the nursery pot and examine the roots all the way to the bottom. A healthy plant will have white, healthy roots throughout the soil. An unhealthy plant will often have black or brown roots on the lower third of the root ball. This could indicate the plant was overwatered at the nursery or may already be infected with a root disease. For more information on growing healthy plants and other agriculture topics, see the University of Georgia Cooperative Extension publications at extension.uga.edu/publications. Paul Pugliese is the agriculture & natural resources agent for the University of Georgia Extension office in Bartow County.	Wilted leaves aren’t always a sign that the plant needs water As summer slowly melts into fall, temperatures are still reaching the high 90s and many plants wilt in the afternoon sun. Plants with big leaves, such as hydrangeas and angel trumpets, are often the first to get a little droopy in the hotter part of the day. It’s very tempting to water plants that are wilted at the end of the day, but late afternoon is not the best time of day to determine whether your landscape plants need water. There are two problems with watering in the afternoon. First, water that remains on the leaves of plants throughout the evening is more likely to invite disease problems. For example, hydrangeas and roses are highly susceptible to leaf spot diseases such as Cercospora, anthracnose or black spot. Watering in the morning as the sun rises allows leaves to dry more quickly and minimizes these disease problems. It is even better to avoid wetting the leaves at all and just water the roots with a drip irrigation system. If you hand-water your plants, invest in a watering wand with a water breaker nozzle that can be used to apply water directly to the roots. Remember, don’t water the leaves. The second problem with watering in the afternoon is that people have a tendency to water plants that don’t actually need watering. Although many plants appear wilted in the afternoon, that doesn’t always mean they need water. Wilting is an adaption that many plants use to reduce water loss during the hottest part of the day. A wilted leaf has less surface area exposed to sunlight and therefore will not lose water as quickly. Plants that are wilted in the afternoon will often perk back up at night and look perfectly happy by morning. If the plants’ leaves do not appear stressed in the morning, they can probably go another day or two before needing water. In some situations, plants that are watered every afternoon may get too much water from their well-intentioned caretaker. Georgia red clay soil can hold water for several days after a good soaking rain. One inch of rain or irrigation will soak clay soil several inches deep.	no
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	yes_statement	"australia" was "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch "discovered" "australia".	https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1933/the-dutch-discovery-of-australia/	The Dutch Discovery of Australia - World History Encyclopedia	The Dutch Discovery of Australia Contents Article 17th-century Dutch East India Company (Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie or VOC) navigators were the first Europeans to set foot on Australian soil. Although there is a strong theory that the Portuguese explorer, Cristóvão de Mendonça (1475-1532), may have discovered Australia in 1522, the first recorded European landfall was made by the Dutch Willem Janszoon in 1606. The VOC was a trading company founded by the States-General in the Netherlands on 20 March 1602. The VOC was the merger of six private East India companies and was mainly formed to challenge the Spanish and Portuguese. The States-General granted the VOC a 21-year monopoly over all trade east of the Cape of Good Hope, which led to Dutch dominance of the spice trade in Southeast Asia from 1602-1670. The European demand for spices such as nutmeg, mace, pepper, and cloves, as well as porcelain and silk from China and Japan, fuelled the emergence of a global trading market that connected Europe with Southeast Asia. The VOC was the first multinational corporation with the powers of a nation-state. It could maintain an army, wage war, negotiate treaties, and settle colonies in the name of the Dutch Republic. By 1637, the VOC was worth 78 million Dutch guilders (around USD 8.2 trillion), and before its dissolution in 1799, due to corruption and diminishing profits, the company had sent over 4,700 ships to Asia. The VOC ships were bound for the two main spice trading centres in the Indonesian archipelago – the Moluccas and Batavia (Jakarta) – as well as trading posts in Taiwan, Siam (Thailand), and Tonkin (northern Vietnam). Curiously, the vast southern landmass known as New Holland (specifically, the western and northern coastline of Australia) was not the focus of VOC voyages. Willem Janszoon Janszoon's mapping was the first of the Dutch voyages that would chart almost two-thirds of the Australian coastline in the 17th century. The VOC's connection with the Australian continent began on 26 February 1606 when Willem Janszoon (c. 1570 to c. 1630) made landfall at Pennefather River, near modern-day Weipa on the west coast of the Cape York peninsula (northern Queensland). Janszoon, a mariner from Amsterdam, had been instructed by the VOC to explore the Nova Guinea (New Guinea) coast in search of trading opportunities and gold. He captained the Duyfken (Little Dove), setting sail from Bantam (northeast coast of Java) in November 1605 to the Kei Islands. He then sailed along the south coast of New Guinea, which he charted before heading southeast, past the entrance to Torres Strait (separating the Cape York Peninsula and New Guinea). Janszoon did not realise it was a strait, and its discovery was left to the Spanish mariner, Luis Váez de Torres (fl. 1605-1607), who successfully sailed through it in 1606 on his way to Manila in the Philippines. The Dufyken reached the Cape York Peninsula, which Janszoon took to be a continuation of southern New Guinea and mapped 250 kilometres (155 mi) of coastline from Weipa to Cape Keer-Weer (Turn-Again or Turn-Around). Heading south, Janszoon sailed into Vliege Bay (now Albatross Bay) – the Dutch word vliege means "fly", suggesting that Janszoon and his crew encountered the annoying Australian blowfly. Love History? Sign up for our free weekly email newsletter! Janszoon's mapping was the first of the Dutch voyages that would chart almost two-thirds of the Australian coastline in the 17th century. The official ship log of the voyage no longer exists, and Janszoon's original map was later lost, but the VOC had it copied when the Duyfken returned to Bantam. This map, known as the 'Duyfken Chart', was discovered in the Austrian National Library in Vienna in 1933. It had been included in the Secret Atlas of the East India Company, which was only used by VOC navigators and not available commercially until its publication in 1670. The Duyfken in the Gulf of Carpentaria Fred. B Sibed (Public Domain) The Dutch cartographer, Hessel Gerritsz (c. 1581-1632), bundled many of his maps into the atlas. He was appointed official cartographer of the VOC in 1617, and all ship journals, maps, and charts had to be submitted to him. This gave Gerritsz unprecedented access to the VOC archives, and the earliest map showing the part of Australia charted by the Duyfken was the Gerritsz map of 1622, 'Mar del Sur, Mar Pacifico' (South Sea, Pacific Sea), which authenticated Janszoon's Duyfken as the first Dutch voyage to Australia and confirmed the existence of Terra Australis Incognita (Unknown Southern Land). The Duyfken Chart shows that Janszoon visited the Kei and Aru Islands (in the Moluccas or Spice Islands) before making landfall at Pennefather River, which he named R. met het Bosch (River with the Bush). Cape Keer-Weer is positioned on the chart as the point where the Dufyken had to turn around after a clash with indigenous peoples, the Wik – the first Aboriginals to have recorded contact with Europeans. Of the Duyfken's 20 crew members, nine were killed in a skirmish, with Janszoon later reporting: there were nine of them killed by the Heathens, which are man-eaters; so they were constrained to return finding no good to be done there. (quoted in Sharp, 17). However, the clash most likely occurred because of the attempted abduction of indigenous people. VOC authorities in Batavia gave instructions to crews that followed Janszoon's voyage to capture adults and children so that indigenous languages could be learned for trade purposes. The oral histories of Wik elders have preserved stories of this early encounter with the Dutch. Willem Janszoon's Expedition 1605-1606 Lencer (CC BY-NC-SA) Janszoon was unaware that he and his crew were the first Europeans to visit Australian shores. He carried out the VOC instructions of exploring and identifying trade opportunities, but he found nothing of value, and after being at sea for nearly four months, the Dufyken headed back to a Dutch base at Banda, south of Ambon, arriving in June 1606. In October 1623, Janszoon was appointed Governor of Banda, but his place in Australian history has been overshadowed by the second Dutch voyage to reach Australian shores – that of Dirk Hartog aboard the Eendracht. The Brouwer Route & Dirk Hartog In 1611, Dutch explorer Hendrik Brouwer (c. 1581-1643) devised a shorter route from Europe to Southeast Asia that also avoided the Portuguese Malacca (in Malaysia) and Ternate (in Indonesia). The average voyage of twelve months was halved by taking advantage of the Roaring Forties winds across the southern Indian Ocean before turning northeast to Batavia. The faster route, known as the Brouwer Route, became the preferred Dutch route around the Cape of Good Hope to Southeast Asia, but because chronometers were yet to be introduced, navigational instruments could not calculate longitude very well. Strong westerly winds sometimes forced Dutch ships off course, or they sailed too far east before turning north and were wrecked on the western Australian coast during the 17th century. The Brouwer Route most likely led to the discovery of the western part of Australia by the Dutch in 1616. A decade after Janszoon's 1606 visit to the northeastern corner of Australia, Dutch explorer Dirk Hartog (1580-1621) sailed into Shark Bay on Australia's west coast, 850 kilometres (528 mi) north of Perth. His ship, the Eendracht (Concord) at 700 tonnes and with a crew of 200, made landfall on 25 October 1616 at the northern tip of an island in Shark Bay, now known as Dirk Hartog Island. Dirk Hartog, whose name also appears in history as Dijrck Hartoochz and Dirck Hatichs, was the son of a skipper and a successful private shipping merchant before being commissioned by the VOC in 1616 to sail from Texel (an island northwest of the coast of the Netherlands) to Batavia on a spice trade run. VOC ships would be anchored and provisioned off Texel and await favourable weather conditions. The Eendracht was one of five ships that sailed on 23 January 2016 laden with chests of Dutch guilders. The Brouwer Route was not enforced by the VOC until 1617, but Dutch ships had increasingly adopted it, sailing east from the Cape of Good Hope across the ocean for 1,000 Dutch miles (7,400 km or 4,598 mi), before heading north to the Sunda Strait between Java and Sumatra. Historical sources are silent on whether Hartog was instructed by the VOC to take the Brouwer Route or decided to do so himself since, before the formal adoption of the route, Dutch ship captains could plot their own course. Accidental Discovery or Purposeful Exploration? It is an important historical question: was Hartog's discovery of the west coast of Australia accidental or purposeful exploration? Unfortunately, the Eendracht's logs are not in the VOC archives, but Hartog's journal, crew manifest, and notes would have been submitted back in the Netherlands, as required by the VOC. Hessel Gerritsz used these to create the first chart of the west coast of Australia – a chart that took ten years to produce (1618-1628). Hartog's landing site was noted, and 'Eendrachtsland', one of the earliest names for Australia, was recorded on the chart. It is likely that Hartog, an experienced sailor, would have known of the Brouwer Route, even though the VOC had not yet endorsed its use. The senior merchant on the Trouw, one of the five ships in the fleet, was Pieter de Carpentier (1586-1659), who would become the fifth Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies in 1627. The command structure of the VOC meant that a senior merchant, or opperkoopman, who was responsible for the profitability of the voyage and recording business on and off a ship, ranked higher than a captain. De Carpentier had sailed the Brouwer Route and was a firm supporter of the VOC's adoption of the faster way to Southeast Asia. The Trouw and the Eendracht had stopped for provisioning at the Cape of Good Hope and remained there for three weeks in August 1616. The Eendracht also had a senior merchant – Gilles Mibais (b. 1571). While it is highly possible that de Carpentier or Mibais, being senior officers, influenced Hartog to take the Brouwer Route, in light of no supporting historical sources, Hartog's discovery of Australia must be viewed as an accidental one. Map of Shark Bay Area Showing Dirk Hartog Island and Cape Inscription OpenStreetMap contributors (CC BY-NC-SA) Hartog spent three days exploring the coast and nearby islands, finding them uninhabited. Before leaving, he acknowledged the Eendracht’s landfall by nailing a flattened pewter plate to a tree. This plate, known to generations of Australian schoolchildren, is called Dirk Hartog's Plate and is kept at the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. The place where it was nailed is called Cape Inscription, and Hartog inscribed (translated): 1616 the 25 October is here arrived the ship the Eendracht of Amsterdam, the upper-merchant Gillis Mibais of Liege, skipper Dirck Hatichs of Amsterdam; the 27 ditto set sail again for Bantam, the junior merchant Jan Stins, the first steersman Pieter Dookes van Bill, Anno 1616. (quoted in Van Duivenvoorde, 11). 81 years later, in 1697, the Dutch captain Willem de Vlamingh (1640-1698) found Hartog's badly weathered plate when he landed at Cape Inscription on the De Geelvinck (Yellow Finch) in search of a VOC ship that had run aground on the western Australian coast. Recognising its historic value, he sent the plate to authorities in Batavia. Dirk Hartog's Plate Anonymous (Public Domain) Curiously, the nailing of the pewter plate did not claim the discovered land for the Dutch. It simply confirmed their arrival and was a 'postal stone' – a visual message left for another ship and its crew – but it became the most tangible proof of an early Dutch presence in Australia 154 years before Captain James Cook (1728-1779) sailed into Botany Bay on 29 April 1770 and claimed Australia for the British. The Eendracht sailed north as far as North West Cape, charting the coastline before sailing to Bantam. Hartog's late arrival in December 1616 had significant financial implications for the VOC, particularly because he found nothing of interest for Dutch trade. He left Bantam in December 1617 for the Netherlands, the Eendracht carrying silk and benzoin (balsamic resin used in medicine). In 1619, Hartog entered into the service of Elias Trip (c. 1570-1636), a VOC director, and Jacques Nicquet (c. 1571-1642), a merchant and art collector, and sailed to the Adriatic Sea before aiding in the defence of the city of Venice against the Spanish Habsburgs. He returned home, dying in 1621 at the age of 40 from an unknown illness. Before 1770 & Cook's discovery of eastern Australia, 54 European ships sailed into Australian waters - 42 of those were VOC ships. After Janszoon's and Hartog's explorations, a series of Dutch ships sailed along the northern, southern, and western coastline of Australia, putting the unknown southern land on the map and surveying 4,000 kilometres (2485 mi) by 1628. In 1619, Frederick de Houtman (1571-1627) sighted and charted the Abrolhos Islands, 80 kilometres (49 mi) west of Geraldton, Western Australia. In 1627, Pieter Nuyts (1598-1655), who became the Dutch ambassador to Japan, entered the Great Australian Bight and charted St Peter and St Francis Islands in what is now called Nuyts Archipelago (South Australia). However, many VOC ships simply ran aground on reefs after being blown off course in the Roaring Forties. In 1628, for example, monsoonal winds drove the Vianen, en route from Batavia to the Netherlands, down along the Pilbara Coast and Barrow Island region of Western Australia. Before 1770 and Cook's discovery of eastern Australia, 54 European ships sailed into Australian waters, and 42 of those were VOC ships. This might imply that the VOC had a purposeful plan to explore the southern continent, but the company sought profit over settlement. The focus was the lucrative spice trade, which led to establishing trading posts all over Southeast Asia, but the VOC did not set up a trading post in Australia because Dutch voyages brought no rewards in trade, especially when compared to the easy exploitation of the East Indies. Abel Tasman National Library of Australia (Public Domain) Abel Janszoon Tasman (1603-1659) used the VOC's secret atlas to chart a long section of the western Australian coast before discovering Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania) in 1642. Thanks to Tasman's chief pilot deciding to sail eastward from Mauritius on the 44th parallel rather than the 48th parallel, they made landfall in November 1642 and named the island Anthoonij van Diemenslandt in honour of the Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies, Anthony van Diemen (1593-1645). Tasman had been instructed to find a route between Batavia and South America, and should he come across the great southern land, he was to find out: …what commodities their country yields, likewise inquiring after gold and silver, whether the latter are by them held in high esteem; making them believe that you are by no means eager for precious metals, you will pretend to hold the same in slight regard, showing them copper, pewter, or lead, and giving them an impression as if the minerals last mentioned were by us set greater value on. (quoted in Salmond, 8). The VOC desired geographic knowledge and shorter routes that would speed their ships across the Pacific to the riches of South America, particularly Staten Landt (Chile). The last VOC ships to be sent to Australia were the Rijder and the Buis in 1756, and they explored the Gulf of Carpentaria (northern Australia). The 150-year history of VOC ships exploring and charting Australia highlights the VOC's lack of systematic and purposeful exploration of Australia. By 1642, however, the outline of Australia's north and west coasts had been established by VOC voyages – a significant contribution to Australian history. Unknown European Colonies? An intriguing aspect of the Dutch discovery and exploration is that around 200 people were marooned when VOC ships sailing the Brouwer Route were wrecked off the Western Australian coastline, or people found themselves unwillingly stranded. Indigenous oral histories refer to Europeans who reached shore cohabiting and integrating with local tribes and becoming the first permanent European presence in Australia. a colony or colonies of Dutch stranded in Australia remains conjecture. The first instance of Dutch sailors being unwillingly marooned was in 1629 when two mutineers from the VOC ship Batavia were abandoned at Wittecarra Gully, near Kalbarri, Western Australia. The Batavia had been bound for Batavia and struck Morning Reef (Abrolhos Islands) in June 1629 with 320 people on board. Around 275 survivors made it to shore on nearby islands, but the mutineers attacked and murdered 125 survivors. A rescue ship, the Sardam, marooned the mutineers as punishment. Four skeletons – one of them headless – were found on Beacon Island, part of the Abrolhos Islands, in 2015 and are believed to be those of Batavia survivors. In 1656, the Vergulde Draeck (Gift Dragon), bound for Batavia, was wrecked off Ledge Point, 105 kilometres (65 mi) north of Perth, Western Australia, and 68 sailors were stranded. Evidence from these strandings suggests a Dutch influence on indigenous peoples. There are oral histories about Aboriginal people with European features and light or reddish hair and indigenous languages with Dutch-sounding words. For example, 'Arnhem,' used in the name Arnhem Land (Northern Territory), was the name of the VOC vessel Arnhem, which sailed into the Gulf of Carpentaria in 1623 and is also a city in the Netherlands. In the Perth Gazette in 1834, there was a report that Aboriginals had contact with a group of white people inland of the Swan River said to be descendants of VOC mariners. However, a colony or colonies of Dutch stranded in Australia remains conjecture. Chart of the Malay Archipelago and the Dutch Discoveries in Australia National Library of Australia (Public Domain) Captain James Cook's landing in Botany Bay in 1770 has eclipsed the fact that the first Europeans to make recorded landfall in Australia were Dutch explorers employed by the VOC. More than half of Australia’s coastline had been charted by the Dutch before Cook discovered eastern Australia and started to shape the complete outline of the southern continent. About the Author Kim is a freelance writer based in New Zealand. She has a B.A. (Hons) in History and an MA in Chaos & Complexity Science. Her special interests are fables and mythology, as well as exploration throughout the ancient world. Free for the World, Supported by You World History Encyclopedia is a non-profit organization. For only $5 per month you can become a member and support our mission to engage people with cultural heritage and to improve history education worldwide. MLA Style License & Copyright Submitted by Kim Martins, published on 26 January 2022. The copyright holder has published this content under the following license: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike. This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon this content non-commercially, as long as they credit the author and license their new creations under the identical terms. When republishing on the web a hyperlink back to the original content source URL must be included. Please note that content linked from this page may have different licensing terms.	Four skeletons – one of them headless – were found on Beacon Island, part of the Abrolhos Islands, in 2015 and are believed to be those of Batavia survivors. In 1656, the Vergulde Draeck (Gift Dragon), bound for Batavia, was wrecked off Ledge Point, 105 kilometres (65 mi) north of Perth, Western Australia, and 68 sailors were stranded. Evidence from these strandings suggests a Dutch influence on indigenous peoples. There are oral histories about Aboriginal people with European features and light or reddish hair and indigenous languages with Dutch-sounding words. For example, 'Arnhem,' used in the name Arnhem Land (Northern Territory), was the name of the VOC vessel Arnhem, which sailed into the Gulf of Carpentaria in 1623 and is also a city in the Netherlands. In the Perth Gazette in 1834, there was a report that Aboriginals had contact with a group of white people inland of the Swan River said to be descendants of VOC mariners. However, a colony or colonies of Dutch stranded in Australia remains conjecture. Chart of the Malay Archipelago and the Dutch Discoveries in Australia National Library of Australia (Public Domain) Captain James Cook's landing in Botany Bay in 1770 has eclipsed the fact that the first Europeans to make recorded landfall in Australia were Dutch explorers employed by the VOC. More than half of Australia’s coastline had been charted by the Dutch before Cook discovered eastern Australia and started to shape the complete outline of the southern continent. About the Author Kim is a freelance writer based in New Zealand. She has a B.A. (Hons) in History and an MA in Chaos & Complexity Science. Her special interests are fables and mythology, as well as exploration throughout the ancient world. Free for the World, Supported by You World History Encyclopedia is a non-profit organization.	yes
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	yes_statement	"australia" was "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch "discovered" "australia".	https://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-map/map-proves-portuguese-discovered-australia-new-book-idUSSYD3449720070321	Map proves Portuguese discovered Australia: new book \| Reuters	Map proves Portuguese discovered Australia: new book SYDNEY (Reuters) - A 16th century maritime map in a Los Angeles library vault proves that Portuguese adventurers, not British or Dutch, were the first Europeans to discover Australia, says a new book which details the secret discovery of Australia. A copy of a 16th century maritime map of the east coast of Australia is seen in this handout picture. The copy of the map, taken from a Los Angeles library vault, proves that Portuguese adventurers, not British or Dutch, were the first Europeans to discover Australia, according to a new book which details the secret discovery of Australia. The book "Beyond Capricorn" says the map, which accurately marks geographical sites along Australia's east coast in Portuguese, proves that Portuguese seafarer Christopher de Mendonca lead a fleet of four ships into Botany Bay in 1522 -- almost 250 years before Britain's Captain James Cook. REUTERS/Handout The book “Beyond Capricorn” says the map, which accurately marks geographical sites along Australia’s east coast in Portuguese, proves that Portuguese seafarer Christopher de Mendonca lead a fleet of four ships into Botany Bay in 1522 -- almost 250 years before Britain’s Captain James Cook. Australian author Peter Trickett said that when he enlarged the small map he could recognize all the headlands and bays in Botany Bay in Sydney -- the site where Cook claimed Australia for Britain in 1770. “It was even so accurate that I found I could draw in the modern airport runways, to scale in the right place, without any problem at all,” Trickett told Reuters on Wednesday. Trickett said he stumbled across a copy of the map while browsing through a Canberra book shop eight years ago. He said the shop had a reproduction of the Vallard Atlas, a collection of 15 hand drawn maps completed no later than 1545 in France. The maps represented the known world at the time. Two of the maps called “Terra Java” had a striking similarity to Australia’s east coast except at one point the coastline jutted out at right angles for 1,500 km (932 miles). “There was something familiar about them but they were not quite right -- that was the puzzle. How did they come to have all these Portuguese place names?,” Trickett said. Trickett believed the cartographers who drew the Vallard maps had wrongly aligned two Portuguese charts they were copying from. It is commonly accepted that the French cartographers used maps and “portolan” charts acquired illegally from Portugal and Portuguese vessels that had been captured, Trickett said. “The original portolan maps would have been drawn on animal hide parchments, usually sheep or goat skin, of limited size,” he explained. “For a coastline the length of eastern Australia, some 3,500 kms, they would have been 3 to 4 charts.” “The Vallard cartographer has put these individual charts together like a jigsaw puzzle. Without clear compass markings its possible to join the southern chart in two different ways. My theory is it had been wrongly joined.” Using a computer Trickett rotated the southern part of the Vallard map 90 degrees to produce a map which accurately depicts Australia’s east coast. “They provided stunning proof that Portuguese ships made these daring voyages of discovery in the early 1520s, just a few years after they had sailed north of Australia to reach the Spice Islands -- the Moluccas. This was a century before the Dutch and 250 years before Captain Cook,” he said. Trickett believes the original charts were made by Mendonca who set sail from the Portuguese base at Malacca with four ships on a secret mission to discover Marco Polo’s “Island of Gold” south of Java. If Trickett is right, Mendonca’s map shows he sailed past Fraser Island off Australia’s northeast coast, into Botany Bay in Sydney, and south to Kangaroo Island off southern Australia, before returning to Malacca via New Zealand’s north island. Mendonca’s discovery was kept secret to prevent other European powers reaching the new land, said Trickett, who believes his theory is supported by discoveries of 16th century Portuguese artifacts on the Australian and New Zealand coasts.	Map proves Portuguese discovered Australia: new book SYDNEY (Reuters) - A 16th century maritime map in a Los Angeles library vault proves that Portuguese adventurers, not British or Dutch, were the first Europeans to discover Australia, says a new book which details the secret discovery of Australia. A copy of a 16th century maritime map of the east coast of Australia is seen in this handout picture. The copy of the map, taken from a Los Angeles library vault, proves that Portuguese adventurers, not British or Dutch, were the first Europeans to discover Australia, according to a new book which details the secret discovery of Australia. The book "Beyond Capricorn" says the map, which accurately marks geographical sites along Australia's east coast in Portuguese, proves that Portuguese seafarer Christopher de Mendonca lead a fleet of four ships into Botany Bay in 1522 -- almost 250 years before Britain's Captain James Cook. REUTERS/Handout The book “Beyond Capricorn” says the map, which accurately marks geographical sites along Australia’s east coast in Portuguese, proves that Portuguese seafarer Christopher de Mendonca lead a fleet of four ships into Botany Bay in 1522 -- almost 250 years before Britain’s Captain James Cook. Australian author Peter Trickett said that when he enlarged the small map he could recognize all the headlands and bays in Botany Bay in Sydney -- the site where Cook claimed Australia for Britain in 1770. “It was even so accurate that I found I could draw in the modern airport runways, to scale in the right place, without any problem at all,” Trickett told Reuters on Wednesday. Trickett said he stumbled across a copy of the map while browsing through a Canberra book shop eight years ago. He said the shop had a reproduction of the Vallard Atlas, a collection of 15 hand drawn maps completed no later than 1545 in France. The maps represented the known world at the time.	no
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	yes_statement	"australia" was "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch "discovered" "australia".	https://trishansoz.com/trishansoz/australia/australia-discovery.html	Who Discovered Australia? \| When was Australia Discovered?	Discovery of Australia Who Discovered Australia First? Willem Janszoon was the first European to discover Australia on 26 February 1606. However, the Aboriginal people were the first to arrive in Australia about 50,000 years earlier. Therefore, the Aboriginals were the first humans to find Australia. However, the concept of "discovery" is not as straightforward as it may seem when it comes to Australia. To truly grasp who can be credited with discovering the vast continent, we need to understand the world-view of ancient Europeans and the meaning behind the term "discovery." Only then can we accurately determine who discovered Australia and when. What Does 'Discovery' Mean? Explanation of Terms Dictionaries define ‘discovery’ as the act of finding something new, or something "old" that was unknown. Europeans frequently used the term ‘discovery’ in the context of their Age of Exploration when they visited new places for the first time. Now the funny thing is, these Europeans had a habit of sailing about, claiming to have ‘discovered’ places. But, in actual fact, these places had been found thousands of years earlier by others, especially the native inhabitants already living there. So the questions we should really ask are: 1. Why was Australia important? 2. Who were the first humans to arrive in Australia? 3. Who were the first Non-natives to visit Australia? 4. Who were the first Europeans to see Australia? 5 . Who were the first Europeans to set foot (come ashore and walk around) in Australia? 5. Who realised that the land they encountered was indeed the place we call Australia today. These questions and lots of other interesting facts are explored below. Why was Australia Important? Terra Australis Incognita Ptolemy's map of the world with Australia at the bottom In about 150AD, a Greek mapmaker named Claudius Ptolemy believed that the world was a sphere—round like a tennis ball and had to be balanced, or it would topple over. So, he drew in an imaginary land on the bottom of his maps to balance the world he knew on top (see photo). Over time, this unknown land came to be referred to as Terra Australis Incognita meaning the Unknown Southern Land. For hundreds of years, Europeans were very curious about this land they had never seen. They expected to find vast quantities of gold and treasure there. Finally, in the 15th century, European explorers set across the seas in search of this huge unknown southern land. Who Found Australia First? Aboriginals Arrived in Australia First Photo: Aborigines fishing The Aborigines found Australia first. But they had no idea where, in the world, they were. Nor had they been looking for the place. They merely happened to stumble upon the land we call Australia today. They probably arrived on the Australia continent about 50,000 years ago. The ancestors of the Aborigines walked out of Africa around 60,000 years ago and migrated through India, Malaysia, Borneo, Papua New Guinea, and Timor before they were confronted by an ocean that separated Australia from the rest of the world. Since humans had not invented canoes and boats at this time, it is uncertain how they crossed the ocean to Australia. It is most likely that they arrived here by accident, carried on drifting debris or even by a tsunami that may have transported them clinging on to flotsam as it swept across the ocean. So while Europeans were searching for the unknown southern land, the Aborigines had already found Australian and had been living there for over 50,000 years. There is some evidence that fishermen and traders from Indonesia, India, and China may have visited northern Australia and traded with the local aborigines for thousands of years. This contact was sporadic and inconsequential. The Dingo, the wild dog of Australia, may have first arrived in Australia about 5,000 years ago during such a visit. These early visitors never recorded their visits or had any knowledge of the vastness of Australia. They thought it was just another one of the many islands in the area. Portuguese — First Europeans to See Australia Date: 1515 (approximately) Photo: Portuguese caravel The Portuguese were the first great European explorers. Having found a way to Asia through the Cape of Good Hope, they travelled far and wide in search of spices that were worth their weight in gold back in Europe. Portuguese sailors reached the island of Timor just 700 km from Australia in 1515. So it is conceivable that they may have sailed along the coastline of Australia around that time. But there is no definite proof that they did. Some Portuguese maps from this time seem to show parts of what appear to be the Australian coastline. Whilst the Portuguese may have been the first European to see parts of the Australian coastline; they didn't realise that they were sailing past Terra Australis Incognita. Willem Janszoon - 1st European to "Discover" Australia Willem Janszoon was the first European to discover Australia. On 26 February 1606, the Dutch sailing ship Duyfken, captained by Janszoon, arrived off the Pennefather River in the Gulf of Carpentaria. The crew found the land swampy and the people there hostile. They lost ten of their crew during various expeditions ashore. Janszoon named the place "Nieu Zeland" (New Zealand) and departed. Janszoon didn't realise he had discovered Australia. He thought the land was part of the island of New Guinea, which is further north. Dirk Hartog - 2nd European to Land in Australia In 1616 a Dutch sailing ship, Eendracht, on its way to Indonesia sailed off course and bumped into the west coast of Australia. Captain Dirk Hartog landed at Shark Bay on the Western Australian coastline, looked around, and didn't find anything interesting there. He nailed an inscribed pewter dish (now at the Rijksmuseum in Holland) to a post on top of a cliff to record his visit and departed. He too, did not realize that he had found Australia. This was the second recorded European landing in Australia. Dutch sailors continued to sail along the coastline and called this land New Holland, but they didn't bother to visit it. To them, it seemed just an empty and barren place with no commercial benefit. On the 4 July, 1629 VOC ship Batavia was shipwrecked near Houtman Abrolhos some coral islands near Geraldton, Western Australia. There was a mutiny, and some of the crew built a small fort to protect themselves. This was the first structure built by Europeans in Australia. Abel Tasman - 3rd European to land in Australia Photo: Abel Tasman In 1642, a Dutchman named Abel Tasman sighted an island he called Van Diemen's Land (later renamed Tasmania in honour of Abel Tasman). He didn't realise that this island was a part of Australia. He also went on to 'discover' the islands he named New Zealand (Able Tasman reused this earlier name), Tonga Islands, and Fiji. None of these Dutch sailors realised that they had reached TerraAustralisIncognita . But they have the distinction of being the first Europeans to set foot on the continent. British — First to Establish that Australia was an Island Continent Date: 29 April 1770 Photo: British East Indiaman ship John Brooke - 1st Britisher to Land in Australia On 1 May 1622, the Tryall, a ship of the East India Company, was the first British vessel to sight the Australian coastline. On 22 May 1622, it had the dubious distinction of being the first recorded British shipwreck in Australian waters. The crew was stranded on Montebello Islands off the Pilbara coast of north-western Australia for seven days before sailing back to Banten Indonesia in a longboat. They too didn't realise that they had landed on TerraAustralisIncognita. James Cook - 1st to Claim the East Coast of Australia for the British In 1770 an expedition from England, lead by Lieutenant James Cook, sailed to the south Pacific on board the sailing ship Endeavour. Their official mission was to make astronomical observations, but Captain Cook also had secret orders from the British Admiralty to find the southern continent. This expedition landed on the east coast of Australia on the 29th of April 1770. Cook first called this place Stingray Bay, then he changed it to Botanist Bay and finally called it Botany Bay because of all the unusual plants there. Cook wasn't impressed with the place and noted in his journal ' so far as we know [it] doth not produce any one thing that can become an Article in trade to invite Europeans to fix a settlement upon it’. (Translation: As far as I can tell, there doesn't seem to be anything of worthwhile around here that would encourage Europeans to settle here). Photo: Captain James Cook He named this new land New Wales and then changed the name to New South Wales. Captain Cook was also the first European to visit the Great Barrier Reef. Actually, he ran into it and damaged his ship pretty badly. He had to spend seven weeks repairing his ship. Cook's greatest accomplishment was that he charted the east coast of Australia. Cook, himself, didn't believe he had found Terra Australis Incognita. He thought the land was New Holland, the same land the Dutch were referring to. To quote his own words in his journal Cook wrote: " ..and altho' I failed in discovering the so much talked of Southern Continent (which perhaps does not exist)..." So it is apparent that he didn't believe the place he was surveying was Terra Australis Incognita. Nevertheless, like many European explorers of the time, he laid claim to the land on behalf of the British. He wrote in his journal ' ...took possession of the whole Eastern Coast from â¦ Latitude 38Â° South down to this place by the Name of New South Wales together with all the Bays, Harbours Rivers and Islands situate upon the said coast...' One of the crew members of this voyage was a man named Joseph Banks and on his recommendation the British returned, in 1788, to colonise this new land they claimed Cook had discovered, even though the land was already occupied by the Aborigines. Who Really Discovered Australia & When? First Human Arrival & First European 'Discovery' The First People to Arrive in Australia The Aboriginals were the first people to arrive in Australia. They did so around 50,000 years ago. The First Asians to Arrive in Australia The first Asian people to visit Australia were probably early traders from Indonesia, and possibly China and India. They had no idea it was a huge continent. They thought it was just another island. No records exist of their visits. The First Europeans to See Australia Portuguese sailors travelling to and from Timor and other islands around Indonesia were probably the first Europeans to see Australia. They saw the seemingly barren coastline of North-western Australia as they sailed past. There is no solid evidence to suggest that they ever come ashore or named the land they saw. The First Europeans to Land on Australia This honour goes to the Dutch. The Duyfken captained by Willem Janszoon anchored off the Gulf of Carpentaria and came ashore on 26 February 1606 and named the place "Nieu Zeland" (New Zealand). He thought the land was part of New Guinea. Another Dutch ship, the Eendracht arrived at Shark Bay in 1616, but they too didn't realise this was Terra Australis. Dutch sailors continued to sail along the coastline on their trips and called this land New Holland. Another Dutchman, Abel Tasman, sighted the island we call Tasmania today. He called it Van Diemen's Land, but he too didn't realise it was part of Australia. The First to Realise this was Australia The British, led by James Cook, arrived at Botany Bay on the east coast of Australia on 29 April 1770. They were definitely not the first to discover Australia. However, the British went on to chart the entire coastline of Australia and were the first to realise that this land was indeed Terra Australis. The Winner is! People and Dates When Australia was Discovered First Prize – The Aboriginals - 50,000 BC. They were the first humans to arrive in Australia around 50,000 years ago and settled throughout the continent. (Strictly speaking, however, they didn't discover Australia in the true sense of the word when used in the context of European exploration). Second Prize – The Dutch (Willem Janszoon) - 26 February 1606 . Janszoon came ashore, named the place "Nieu Zeland", and didn't realise he had discovered Australia. He thought the land was part of the island of New Guinea, which is further to the north. So he only gets credit for being the first European to set foot on the Australian continent. Third Prize –The British (James Cook) - 29 April 1770. They claimed the east coast of Australia for themselves and went on to finally determine that this place was indeed Terra Australis. They also colonised and settled the whole continent, and eventually named it Australia. What is Colonialism & Imperialism? Exploitation and Displacement of Native Peoples During the Age of Discovery Europeans sailed the seas 'discovering' new lands that had been unknown to them till then. Columbus sailed to America, Magellan found the Philippines, and James Cook visited Australia. These visitors had a nasty habit of claiming these new lands as belonging to their home countries. Columbus claimed America for Spain. Magellan too, claimed the Philippines for Spain. James Cook claimed Australia for England and so on. In doing this, the European completely disregarded the local inhabitants who have lived in these lands for thousands of years. This practice came to be known as "imperialism" and "colonialism".	Portuguese sailors reached the island of Timor just 700 km from Australia in 1515. So it is conceivable that they may have sailed along the coastline of Australia around that time. But there is no definite proof that they did. Some Portuguese maps from this time seem to show parts of what appear to be the Australian coastline. Whilst the Portuguese may have been the first European to see parts of the Australian coastline; they didn't realise that they were sailing past Terra Australis Incognita. Willem Janszoon - 1st European to "Discover" Australia Willem Janszoon was the first European to discover Australia. On 26 February 1606, the Dutch sailing ship Duyfken, captained by Janszoon, arrived off the Pennefather River in the Gulf of Carpentaria. The crew found the land swampy and the people there hostile. They lost ten of their crew during various expeditions ashore. Janszoon named the place "Nieu Zeland" (New Zealand) and departed. Janszoon didn't realise he had discovered Australia. He thought the land was part of the island of New Guinea, which is further north. Dirk Hartog - 2nd European to Land in Australia In 1616 a Dutch sailing ship, Eendracht, on its way to Indonesia sailed off course and bumped into the west coast of Australia. Captain Dirk Hartog landed at Shark Bay on the Western Australian coastline, looked around, and didn't find anything interesting there. He nailed an inscribed pewter dish (now at the Rijksmuseum in Holland) to a post on top of a cliff to record his visit and departed. He too, did not realize that he had found Australia. This was the second recorded European landing in Australia. Dutch sailors continued to sail along the coastline and called this land New Holland, but they didn't bother to visit it. To them, it seemed just an empty and barren place with no commercial benefit.	yes
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	yes_statement	"australia" was "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch "discovered" "australia".	https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20171113-the-australian-island-discovered-by-accident	The Australian island discovered by accident - BBC Travel	The Australian island discovered by accident Dirk Hartog Island is a remote piece of wilderness most Australians have never heard of – and only a few have been there. Dirk Hartog Island, Australia More than four centuries ago, this island off Australia’s remote west coast was accidentally discovered by a wayward Dutch mariner. In 1616, Dirk Hartog was on his way to the Dutch East Indies, now Indonesia, when he miscalculated a turn and made landfall in the natural harbour of what’s now called Turtle Bay, opposite a beach where 3,000 loggerhead turtles nest each year. His observation of Terra Australis Incognita – the unknown southern land – led world maps to be re-drawn. It wasn’t until more than 150 years later that Captain James Cook claimed Australia’s eastern side for Britain. (Credit: Fleur Bainger) Dirk Hartog Island, Australia Today Dirk Hartog Island is inhabited by one resourceful family – the Wardles – who operate the sole barge transporting visitors to their remote, rugged crust of land. Neither Kieran nor Tory Wardle (pictured here with her parents) planned to live on this lone finger of land halfway up the vast West Australian coastline. Kieran came in 1993 to cover for a sick stock hand on what was his grandfather’s sheep station. Tory later arrived from Melbourne to work as a cook on the property. She never returned to finish her chef’s apprenticeship: the teenagers fell in love, building their home from limestone ferried across on the barge and bringing three children into the world. Little comes easily on Western Australia’s largest island. Solar panels generate power, a windmill pumps water from a bore 7km away and meat supplies arrive once a month on the barge, though fresh fruit and vegetables come weekly and fish is caught just metres from the kitchen. (Credit: Fleur Bainger) Dirk Hartog Island, Australia, eco lodge, dog Kieran and Tory have turned the old shearer’s quarters into a six-room eco lodge that faces an extraordinarily bountiful ocean of migrating whales, grazing dugongs and rare sea turtles. And today, they have a new, sturdier barge. The Hartog Explorer is used to bring four-wheel drive vehicles and trailers across the gap from Steep Point, Australia’s westernmost point, to Dirk Hartog Island. Most exploring is done by self-drive and anyone not staying at the eco lodge must bring everything from camping equipment to water, food and fuel. The drive from Western Australia’s capital city, Perth, to Steep Point takes around 14 hours, yet 80% of the Wardle’s guests are return visitors. “People ask if it’s isolated up here,” Tory said. “I think it’s more isolated in Perth: we’re surrounded by 20 guests each day.” (Credit: Fleur Bainger) Dirk Hartog Island, Australia, pink lake Hartog wasn’t the only sailor to anchor in the harbour. Fellow Dutchman, Willem de Vlamingh replaced an inscribed pewter plate left by Hartog with his own, as testimony of both visits. British explorer William Dampier visited during his botanical collection of Australian plants, which is today held in London’s [Royal Society Picture Library](https://pictures.royalsociety.org/home). Louis François Marie Aleno de Saint Aloüarn, the Frenchman who claimed the country for France in 1772, also dropped in. In 1818, fellow Frenchman Louis de Freycinet was leading a scientific expedition around the world when his crew stopped to procure Vlamingh’s plate. The island’s spectacular pink lakes are named Rose Lakes, both for their colour and for de Freycinet’s wife, Rose, who was a stowaway on his ship. Finding the idea of separation unbearable, the 23-year-old disguised herself as a man until the port of Gibraltar, when they were safely on their global journey. (Credit: Fleur Bainger) Dirk Hartog Island, Australia, road, lizard Life on Dirk Hartog Island is very different to what it would have been 400 years ago when the Dutch explorer arrived. Of the 13 mammals and marsupials that were once found on the isle, only three survive today. All that’s left of the others – such as the boodie, mulgara and desert mouse – are fossilized remains. But that’s about to change. A massive ecological restoration project called [Return to 1616]( https://www.sharkbay.org/) has seen tens of thousands of introduced animals – including predatory cats and sheep and goats who graze and trample on the island’s vegetation – removed from the fragile landscape. From August 2017, the island is being turned into an ark for rare and endangered animals, with native species reintroduced instead. It’s the one of Australia’s most ambitious wildlife rehabilitation efforts, and a monumental step for the World Heritage-listed region of [Shark Bay](http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/578), where the island lies. (Credit: Fleur Bainger) Dirk Hartog Island, Australia, banded hare-wallaby The small, furry creatures that will soon again bounce and scurry over the low, shrubby terrain include the banded hare-wallaby (pictured), western barred bandicoot, Shark Bay mouse and chuditch. There’s also the woylie, which looks like a small wallaby; and the dibbler, a carnivorous possum-like marsupial that’s the size of a human hand. Some of the species are extinct on mainland Australia and have been translocated from two uninhabited islands nearby. In time, it’s hoped they will regenerate into significant numbers, just as the island’s delicate vegetation has already started to reform. Since the removal of farm animals and the eradication of feral species began, these habitats have shown noticeable signs of returning Dirk Hartog Island to the untouched wilderness it once was. (Credit: Linda Reinhold/Parks and Wildlife) Dirk Hartog Island, Australia, coast, ocean To be involved in the island programme, eradicating ferals and starting reintroductions, it’s one of the pinnacles of my (20-year) career,” said Shane Heriot, project operations officer with [Western Australia’s Parks and Wildlife Service](https://www.dpaw.wa.gov.au/). “It’s also one of the most challenging jobs I’ve had.” Heriot has coordinated the removal of goats and cats from the island, a massive task involving pheromone lures, mouse sound effects, radio tracking collars and automated infra-red cameras. A 1.8m-high cat-proof fence, erected in 2014, stretches 13km between the island’s eastern and western cliffs, essentially splitting the landmass in two. Successful eradication of feral species was achieved in early 2017. (Credit: Fleur Bainger) Dirk Hartog Island, Australia, farm, lighthouse Sheep have also disappeared from the isle. At the population’s peak in the 1920s, 26,000 sheep roamed the land. Over time, the numbers fell and in 2007, most of the remaining sheep were barged off the island in preparation for its designation as a national park, two years later. Now, empty yards, barren watering troughs and the repurposed shearing shed serve as visible signposts to recent history. For Kieran and Tory Wardle, it has meant a shift away from farming to eco-tourism. “At the moment, people come to Shark Bay and Monkey Mia for the dolphins, but in the future they’ll come to see these rare and endangered animals being bred on Dirk Hartog Island,” Kieran said. “A ranger said to me, ‘The biggest problem you’ll have, is you’ll have them hopping about on your front lawn’.” (Credit: Fleur Bainger) Dirk Hartog Island, Australia, coast While much of the current focus is on Dirk Hartog Island’s terrestrial flora and fauna, its marine life is just as extraordinary. Thousands of whales breach from the ocean on their annual migration; threatened sea turtles dart and manta rays wing into the blues. One of the world’s largest populations of dugongs graze on the mass of seagrasses. In keeping with the Shark Bay region’s name, there are at least 28 species of shark, yet locals jest that they’re too well fed to bother with people – there are some 320 fish species below the waterline. Looking out across the Indian Ocean is a mesmerising and meditational pastime: waves crashing, wind blowing and birds chirping are the only sounds, and it’s tempting to think that this is how Dirk Hartog would’ve experienced it four centuries ago. While human interference has scarred the land, the Return to 1616 project is slowly mending the damage, and in time, this modern-day ark just might return to the wilderness the Dutchman saw. (Credit: Fleur Bainger)	The Australian island discovered by accident Dirk Hartog Island is a remote piece of wilderness most Australians have never heard of – and only a few have been there. Dirk Hartog Island, Australia More than four centuries ago, this island off Australia’s remote west coast was accidentally discovered by a wayward Dutch mariner. In 1616, Dirk Hartog was on his way to the Dutch East Indies, now Indonesia, when he miscalculated a turn and made landfall in the natural harbour of what’s now called Turtle Bay, opposite a beach where 3,000 loggerhead turtles nest each year. His observation of Terra Australis Incognita – the unknown southern land – led world maps to be re-drawn. It wasn’t until more than 150 years later that Captain James Cook claimed Australia’s eastern side for Britain. (Credit: Fleur Bainger) Dirk Hartog Island, Australia Today Dirk Hartog Island is inhabited by one resourceful family – the Wardles – who operate the sole barge transporting visitors to their remote, rugged crust of land. Neither Kieran nor Tory Wardle (pictured here with her parents) planned to live on this lone finger of land halfway up the vast West Australian coastline. Kieran came in 1993 to cover for a sick stock hand on what was his grandfather’s sheep station. Tory later arrived from Melbourne to work as a cook on the property. She never returned to finish her chef’s apprenticeship: the teenagers fell in love, building their home from limestone ferried across on the barge and bringing three children into the world. Little comes easily on Western Australia’s largest island. Solar panels generate power, a windmill pumps water from a bore 7km away and meat supplies arrive once a month on the barge, though fresh fruit and vegetables come weekly and fish is caught just metres from the kitchen.	yes
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	yes_statement	"australia" was "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch "discovered" "australia".	https://thegaystraighttalker.medium.com/who-really-discovered-australia-2dc05e26ada4	Who Really Discovered Australia?. Captain James Cook? Don't ...	Who Really Discovered Australia? Captain James Cook? Don’t make me laugh… Would you believe me if I said that Captain James Cook didn’t discover Australia first? Would you also believe me if I said that he’s not the reason we celebrate Australia Day? And that he didn’t circumnavigate Australia? It’s time to face the truth, Australia. Who Really Discovered Australia First? Aside from the fact that Australia was already inhabited by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, the first person to discover Australia was Willem Janszoon. Who? you may ask. And for good reason, too. I, myself, was never taught this, either. So I guess we’ve both learned something new recently! Willem Janszoon was a Dutch explorer who first made landfall on Queensland’s Cape York Peninsula in 1606. Following his brief landing, Janszoon decided to map out a third of the continent. Then Dirk Hartog, another dutch explorer, came along and discovered the far western side of Australia in 1616. Then there was Frederick de Houtman, another Dutch explorer, who discovered more coastline on the western side in 1619. And then along came Abel Tasman, another Dutch explorer who, if you can tell by the name, was the first to discover Tasmania (it was originally called Van Diemen’s Land). His notable voyage took place between 1642–1644, where he also discovered New Zealand, Tonga and the Fiji Islands. And then Willem de Vlamingh, another Dutch explorer, retraced Dirk Hartog’s route in 1696, simply to find the inscribed plate that was left there in 1616 and replace it with a new one. (The original plate can be seen in a museum in Amsterdam.) It wasn’t until 1699 when the first British explorer witnessed the harsh coastline of Western Australia. His name was William Dampier, and he landed at Shark Bay. He must’ve got homesick quickly, as he was back out on the sea in no time, returning to England in 1700. And finally, after several decades, Captain James Cook was tasked with a secret mission to find and conquer the great southern land “in the Name of the King of Great Britain.”	Who Really Discovered Australia? Captain James Cook? Don’t make me laugh… Would you believe me if I said that Captain James Cook didn’t discover Australia first? Would you also believe me if I said that he’s not the reason we celebrate Australia Day? And that he didn’t circumnavigate Australia? It’s time to face the truth, Australia. Who Really Discovered Australia First? Aside from the fact that Australia was already inhabited by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, the first person to discover Australia was Willem Janszoon. Who? you may ask. And for good reason, too. I, myself, was never taught this, either. So I guess we’ve both learned something new recently! Willem Janszoon was a Dutch explorer who first made landfall on Queensland’s Cape York Peninsula in 1606. Following his brief landing, Janszoon decided to map out a third of the continent. Then Dirk Hartog, another dutch explorer, came along and discovered the far western side of Australia in 1616. Then there was Frederick de Houtman, another Dutch explorer, who discovered more coastline on the western side in 1619. And then along came Abel Tasman, another Dutch explorer who, if you can tell by the name, was the first to discover Tasmania (it was originally called Van Diemen’s Land). His notable voyage took place between 1642–1644, where he also discovered New Zealand, Tonga and the Fiji Islands. And then Willem de Vlamingh, another Dutch explorer, retraced Dirk Hartog’s route in 1696, simply to find the inscribed plate that was left there in 1616 and replace it with a new one. (The original plate can be seen in a museum in Amsterdam.) It wasn’t until 1699 when the first British explorer witnessed the harsh coastline of Western Australia. His name was William Dampier, and he landed at Shark Bay. He must’ve got homesick quickly, as he was back out on the sea in no time, returning to England in 1700.	yes
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	yes_statement	"australia" was "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch "discovered" "australia".	https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/oceania/australia/how-dutch-explorers-antipodean-muddle-changed-course-world-history/	How a Dutch explorer's antipodean muddle changed the course of ...	We have all been there, caught in a moment of distractedness, nervously aware that we are missing a detail that is part of a bigger picture. Perhaps it is a conversation at work, an overheard comment hinting at developments to which we are not party; maybe it is a nagging feeling that we are not in possession of the full facts in a given situation – that something greater is going on beyond our reach. But we carry on regardless, hoping that clarity will emerge in due course. Sometimes it does. Very often, it doesn't. It is impossible to second-guess the mindset of 17th-century explorers 380 years after the event. But it is also easy to wonder whether, amid the salt spray and breaking waves of December 5 1642, Abel Tasman looked up from the deck of his ship as it rocked back and forth in a furious ocean, and swallowed down a similar sensation. Whether he re-scanned the grey horizon, re-examined his compass, and chewed again at that lingering thought in his mind that somehow, somewhere, he was missing a trick. He would have been justified in doing so, for he found himself at a pivotal moment in history – one that might not only have altered the global map, but could have seen this Dutch seafarer anointed as one of the planet's greatest explorers, a navigator to stand alongside Columbus as a re-drawer of atlases and a re-shaper of worlds. As it was, the wind blew harder, and Tasman acceded to its wishes, abandoning his plans to continue north – going east instead. In doing so, he fell short of a giant prize, becoming – with certain historical caveats – "the man who discovered Tasmania, but missed Australia". It is probably worth offering a little recap here. General opinion – certainly general opinion based on the British school curriculum – has it that Australia was "discovered" by Captain James Cook, who slipped into Botany Bay – and a place in eternity – on April 20 1770. But while it is true that Cook was the first European to lay eyes on the east coast of the Australian landmass – and was certainly the explorer who finished the jigsaw of the Southern Hemisphere – what is now the vast country of sunshine and surf had been espied by westerners long before HMS Endeavour dropped anchor at 33°S. The Dutch, long busy in warmer waters, knew of the huge island in the bottom corner of the Indian Ocean. They had even given it a name – New Holland. They just hadn't appreciated how big a place was at their fingertips, nor how close it was to their grasp. The East Indies Credit: Getty By the early 17th century, Amsterdam had established a firm foothold at the lower tip of south-east Asia. A trading post had been set up at Banten, on the west coast of Java, as early as 1603 – while Batavia, the settlement now better known as the Indonesian capital Jakarta, found its groove on the map in 1619. It would grow to become the headquarters of the Dutch East India Company, a powerful trade hub from which ships would scurry back and forth across the Indian Ocean. On occasion, Dutch boats would also go south. In November 1605, the navigator Willem Janszoon sailed his vessel the Duyfken east from Banten. He had been instructed to explore the shoreline of New Guinea (modern-day Indonesia and Papua New Guinea) – but he inadvertently passed the Torres Strait, landing at the mouth of the Pennefather River on the west side of the Cape York peninsula (in what is now Queensland) on February 26 1606. However, he believed that he had merely stumbled on a southerly extension of New Guinea, an island of which the Dutch were already knowledgeable. And, fearful of the indigenous Australians, who killed 10 of his men in the course of the voyage, he returned to Banten unaware that he had set foot on a continent of which the maps had no record. Dutch ships off Batavia Credit: Getty Nor did the penny drop 12 years later in July 1618 when Janszoon charted some of the North West Cape in what is now Western Australia, thinking it part of a small island. And it failed to fall even in 1627, when the sea captain Francois Thijssen and the mariner Pieter Nuyts forged east from the Cape of Good Hope (in South Africa), sighted the south-west corner of Australia, Cape Leeuwin – and mapped some 1,300 miles of the south coast, making it all the way to what is now Ceduna in South Australia. The Dutch were on the cusp of a game-changing realisation, but the truth eluded them. Tasman's voyage, 15 years later, was part of the same fumbling in the dark. He was seeking the "Terra Australis" – the mythical sweep of dry ground, stretching across the lower half of the globe, which, some geographers believed, had to exist in the Southern Hemisphere as a counterbalance to the Northern. He would not, of course, do this – but he would find a good deal else, without ever fully understanding what he had achieved. His party set out aboard two ships (the Heemskerck and the Zeehaen) on August 14 1642, and went west to Mauritius – which was seen a viable start-point for the voyage proper; a safe harbour, also in Dutch hands, where the vessels could stock up with provisions. Then, on October 8, the party departed to the south-east, eventually picking up the Roaring Forties – the powerful west-to-east wind currents found in the Southern Hemisphere between the latitudes of 40°S and 50°S – to speed themselves on their way. And speed they did – so much so that they moved into previously unseen waters, then passed all the way along the bottom of the Australian mainland without ever once glimpsing the bays and coves that Thijssen and Nuyts had mapped. When Tasman finally made land, on November 24 1642, he did so just north of what is now Macquarie Harbour, on the west coast of Tasmania. He was expecting to run into the Soloman Islands, in the relative calmness of the South Pacific. Instead, he was confronted by an outpost that no European had ever witnessed. Macquarie Harbour Credit: Getty Was it an island? Was it part of a greater whole? Was it attached to New Guinea? He christened it "Van Diemen's Land" in honour of Antonio van Diemen, the Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies, and set about trying to answer those questions. The Heemskerck and the Zeehaen inched south along the west coast of Tasmania, rounded its south end, then tried to make headway north-east in difficult conditions. Tasman did not manage to dock at South Bruny Island, where he was blown back out to sea by a storm – and he would struggle to drop anchor off the Forestier Peninsula, Marion Bay and North Bay as his vessels battled the elements. So he would redouble his efforts and continue north – and, on December 5, would make it all the way to Eddystone Point, at Tasmania's north-east corner. By this point, he was just 200 miles from the lower edge of what is now Victoria – a sighting of which – coupled with the earlier labours of Thijssen and Nuyts – might just have sparked a lightbulb moment. Instead, the Roaring Forties kicked in again, rushing east through the Bass Strait – clear demonstration to a seaman as able as Tasman that there was no land directly to the west, and that Tasmania was an island rather than the "Southern Continent" he had been tasked with finding. So he let the wheel spin in his hands, and allowed the wind to take him east, away from his "discovery" – until, on December 13, the group became the first Europeans to lay eyes on the South Island of New Zealand. Bass Strait Credit: Getty He would come closer still on a second voyage in 1644, picking up where Janszoon had left off 38 years earlier in tracking some of Australia's north coast – specifically the Gulf of Carpentaria (the enclosed sea which lies above what is now Queensland and the Northern Territory) – over seven hard months. But like Janszoon before him, he did not identify the Torres Strait, nor that it was a dividing line between continents. Instead, believing that he was still looking at New Guinea – and that the hot, sandy soil of upper Australia was a poor basis for colonial settlement anyway – he returned to Batavia with reports that left his paymasters at the Dutch East India Company unimpressed. The puzzle would go unsolved until James Cook sailed into the picture 13 decades later, and what had been under several explorers' noses became an opportunity that Britain swiftly seized. Would the history of the world have been different had Tasman persevered north in those gloomy hours of December 1642? Almost certainly not for aboriginal Australia – which could have faced a different set of colonial overlords a century-and-a-half sooner, but the same set of infectious diseases to which they had no immunity. But Britain may have taken a different path. The Australian colonies set up in the late 18th century were perfectly timed replacements for the America which had just been lost. Would the ultimate legacy of a Dutch Australia have been a far smaller British Empire, on which the sun most definitely set? Would there have been a different calibration of global powers when the World Wars began? Would Holland have been transformed? There can be nothing but conjecture in answering any of those questions. What is for certain, however, is that Tasmania – which was renamed in tribute to its Dutch "discoverer" in 1856 – is a fine destination for a getaway; a calmer, cooler, greener, more rustic version of Australia, where rare birds sing sweetly in the trees and the fabled – although sadly endangered – Tasmanian devil scratches in the undergrowth. And if you so choose, it is not so difficult to retrace Tasman's journey – though he would surely be the first to agree that it is easier to do so by land. Macquarie Harbour remains a great natural bay, opening its arms placidly as it gazes into the sunset. The Bruny Islands and the Forestier Peninsula are untrammelled and lovely, both within day-trip's reach of the capital Hobart. And if you meander all the way up to Eddystone Point, you can admire the lighthouse placed here in 1884, feel the force of the wind which howled into Tasman's sails in 1642 – and ask yourself whether you would have done any differently.	Willem Janszoon sailed his vessel the Duyfken east from Banten. He had been instructed to explore the shoreline of New Guinea (modern-day Indonesia and Papua New Guinea) – but he inadvertently passed the Torres Strait, landing at the mouth of the Pennefather River on the west side of the Cape York peninsula (in what is now Queensland) on February 26 1606. However, he believed that he had merely stumbled on a southerly extension of New Guinea, an island of which the Dutch were already knowledgeable. And, fearful of the indigenous Australians, who killed 10 of his men in the course of the voyage, he returned to Banten unaware that he had set foot on a continent of which the maps had no record. Dutch ships off Batavia Credit: Getty Nor did the penny drop 12 years later in July 1618 when Janszoon charted some of the North West Cape in what is now Western Australia, thinking it part of a small island. And it failed to fall even in 1627, when the sea captain Francois Thijssen and the mariner Pieter Nuyts forged east from the Cape of Good Hope (in South Africa), sighted the south-west corner of Australia, Cape Leeuwin – and mapped some 1,300 miles of the south coast, making it all the way to what is now Ceduna in South Australia. The Dutch were on the cusp of a game-changing realisation, but the truth eluded them. Tasman's voyage, 15 years later, was part of the same fumbling in the dark. He was seeking the "Terra Australis" – the mythical sweep of dry ground, stretching across the lower half of the globe, which, some geographers believed, had to exist in the Southern Hemisphere as a counterbalance to the Northern. He would not, of course, do this – but he would find a good deal else, without ever fully understanding what he had achieved. His party set out aboard two ships (the Heemskerck and the Zeehaen) on August 14 1642,	yes
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	yes_statement	"australia" was "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch "discovered" "australia".	https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/were-the-british-really-the-first-europeans-to-sight-australia/news-story/7bd162249d1c84e1921df52935380df2	Australia Day: Historians claim Portuguese discovered us before the ...	We’ve long been taught that the British were the first Europeans to land on Australian waters. Popular history dictates that Australia was first visited by the Dutch in the early 17th century, and later fully explored by Captain Cook. But some theorists claim our pubs and shepherd’s pies could just as easily could have been Oportos and caldo verde on every block. DID THE PORTUGUESE FIRST ‘DISCOVER’ AUSTRALIA? Some historians have claimed Portuguese navigators were the first Europeans to sight Australia in the 16th century. In his 2007 book Beyond Capricorn, Canberra-based science journalist Peter Trickett made the startling claim that Australia was actually discovered in 1522 by a Portuguese seafarer named Christopher de Mendonca. The book points to a 16th century maritime map showing that Portuguese adventurers — rather than the British or Dutch — were actually the first Europeans to hit Australian land. A copy of a 16th century maritime map of the east coast of Australia, which proves that Portuguese adventurers — not British or Dutch — were the first Europeans to discover Australia. The map, which accurately marks geographical sites along Australia’s east coast in Portuguese, appears to prove that de Mendonca lead a fleet of four ships into Botany Bay almost 250 years before Britain’s Captain James Cook. In the mid-1500s, the Dieppe mapmakers created elaborate hand-drawn world maps, which were beautifully preserved. The world maps depicted a large landmass located between Indonesia and Antarctica, labelled as Java la Grande. Part of one of the maps, which bore a close resemblance to the coast of Queensland, featured 120 place names in Portuguese. Trickett, who bought a rare portfolio of these maps in the late 1990s, argued that the atlas compliers in Dieppe may have made an alignment error in the Portuguese charts they were copying from. When a computer expert cut the map in two and rotated the bottom half, it revealed the east coast of Australia — stretching right down to Kangaroo Island — in great detail, The Sydney Morning Herald reported. In Kenneth McIntyre’s 1977 book The Discovery of Australia, he notes that the chart scripts were written in both French and Portuguese. The Australian historian suggested the Portuguese may have been searching for Marco Polo’s fabled Isles of Gold and sighted Australia in the process. That’s not the only relic that suggests the Portuguese beat the Dutch and English to the punch. In 2014, a document was acquired by a New York gallery, Les Enluminures, which appeared to show a sketch of a kangaroo curled in the letters of a Portuguese manuscript. Some have speculated that this is a drawing of a kangaroo. That manuscript dates back to the 16th century — hundreds of years before the British officially entered Australian waters. But despite objection from several critics, McIntyre stands firm that the Portuguese discovered Australia before the Dutch. “Every critic who seeks to deny the Portuguese discovery of Australia is faced with the problem of providing an alternative theory to explain away the existence of the Dieppe maps. If the Dauphin is not the record of real exploration, then what is it?” he wrote in his book. RARE MAP SHEDS DOUBT ON PORTUGUESE THEORY In 2017, a rare 17th-century wall map was rediscovered that directly contradicted the Portuguese theory. According to Sotheby’s, it was the very first map to call Australia “Nova Hollandia” and was “extremely rare”. A rare 17th-century wall map was rediscovered that directly contradicted the Portuguese theory. It was the first to put Tasmania on the map, quite literally, following the findings of Dutch explorer Abel Janszoon Tasman during his explorations in 1642-1643 and 1644. Tasman spotted the west coast of Tasmania on November 24, 1642, naming his discovery Van Diemen’s Land, after Antonio van Diemen, Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies. He set foot on its shores in Blackman Bay, approximately 50 kilometres east of metropolitan Hobart, and proceeded to plant the Dutch flag in his newly discovered land. He returned on a second voyage in 1644, mapping the north coast of Australia and “making observations”. Tasman gave Australia the name New Holland, which remained popular until the mid-1850s. Just a few years later, Tasman’s discoveries would be added to the map. In his book, Australia Unveiled, Dutch author Günter Schilder said it was “possibly the best general map of Dutch sea power in South-East Asia executed in the seventeenth century. It contains all Dutch discoveries in Australia and those in Tasmania and New Zealand of Tasman’s first voyages”. The map was chartered after the Dutch became attracted to new areas of trade and were looking for new routes across the world in the hope to expand their operations. Dutch trading interests “already extended to the Moluccas in the east, to China and Japan in the north and to the Coromandel Coast and Surat in the west. The expansion to the south was immanent”, wrote Mr Shilder in his book. But despite basically discovering an entire new country, the Dutch were disappointed by Tasman’s explorations; to them he returned empty-handed, he hadn’t found a useful shipping route and didn’t fully explore this new land. After this, for more than 100 years, until James Cook’s explorations in 1770 and the subsequent landing of the First Fleet in 1788, Australia was largely untouched by Europeans. Our News Network Our Partners A NOTE ABOUT RELEVANT ADVERTISING: We collect information about the content (including ads) you use across this site and use it to make both advertising and content more relevant to you on our network and other sites. Find out more about our policy and your choices, including how to opt-out.Sometimes our articles will try to help you find the right product at the right price. We may receive payment from third parties for publishing this content or when you make a purchase through the links on our sites.	In Kenneth McIntyre’s 1977 book The Discovery of Australia, he notes that the chart scripts were written in both French and Portuguese. The Australian historian suggested the Portuguese may have been searching for Marco Polo’s fabled Isles of Gold and sighted Australia in the process. That’s not the only relic that suggests the Portuguese beat the Dutch and English to the punch. In 2014, a document was acquired by a New York gallery, Les Enluminures, which appeared to show a sketch of a kangaroo curled in the letters of a Portuguese manuscript. Some have speculated that this is a drawing of a kangaroo. That manuscript dates back to the 16th century — hundreds of years before the British officially entered Australian waters. But despite objection from several critics, McIntyre stands firm that the Portuguese discovered Australia before the Dutch. “Every critic who seeks to deny the Portuguese discovery of Australia is faced with the problem of providing an alternative theory to explain away the existence of the Dieppe maps. If the Dauphin is not the record of real exploration, then what is it?” he wrote in his book. RARE MAP SHEDS DOUBT ON PORTUGUESE THEORY In 2017, a rare 17th-century wall map was rediscovered that directly contradicted the Portuguese theory. According to Sotheby’s, it was the very first map to call Australia “Nova Hollandia” and was “extremely rare”. A rare 17th-century wall map was rediscovered that directly contradicted the Portuguese theory. It was the first to put Tasmania on the map, quite literally, following the findings of Dutch explorer Abel Janszoon Tasman during his explorations in 1642-1643 and 1644. Tasman spotted the west coast of Tasmania on November 24, 1642, naming his discovery Van Diemen’s Land, after Antonio van Diemen, Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies.	yes
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	yes_statement	"australia" was "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch "discovered" "australia".	https://www.britannica.com/biography/Abel-Tasman	Abel Tasman \| Facts, Map, Biography, Ships, & Exploration \| Britannica	Abel Tasman, in full Abel Janszoon Tasman, (born 1603?, Lutjegast, Netherlands—died probably before October 22, 1659; certainly before February 5, 1661), greatest of the Dutch navigators and explorers, who was the first European to sight Tasmania, New Zealand, Tonga, and the Fiji Islands. On his first voyage (1642–43) in the service of the Dutch East India Company, Tasman explored the Indian Ocean, Australasia, and the southern Pacific; on his second voyage (1644) he traveled in Australian and South Pacific waters. Tasman entered the service of the Dutch East India Company in 1632 or 1633 and made his first voyage of exploration to Ceram (modern Seram) Island (in modern Indonesia) as captain of the Mocha in 1634. He sailed in 1639 under Commander Mathijs Hendrickszoon Quast on an expedition in search of the “islands of gold and silver” in the seas east of Japan. After a series of trading voyages to Japan, Formosa (Taiwan), Cambodia, and Sumatra, he was chosen by the governor-general of the Dutch East Indies, Anthony van Diemen, to command the most ambitious of all Dutch voyages for the exploration of the Southern Hemisphere. Tasman’s voyage of 1642–43 By 1642 Dutch navigators had discovered discontinuous stretches of the western coast of Australia, but whether these coasts were continental and connected with the hypothetical southern continent of the Pacific remained unknown. Tasman was assigned to solve this problem, following instructions based on a memoir by Frans Jacobszoon Visscher, his chief pilot. He was instructed to explore the Indian Ocean from west to east, south of the ordinary trade route, and, proceeding eastward into the Pacific (if this proved possible), to investigate the practicability of a sea passage eastward to Chile, to rediscover the Solomon Islands of the Spaniards, and to explore New Guinea. Leaving Batavia (modern Jakarta) on August 14, 1642, with two ships, the Heemskerk and Zeehaen, Tasman sailed to Mauritius (September 5–October 8), then southward and eastward, reaching his most southerly latitude of 49° S at about 94° E. Turning north he discovered land on November 24 at 42°20′ S, and he skirted its southern shores, naming it Van Diemen’s Land (now Tasmania). A council of officers on December 5 decided against further investigation, so he missed the opportunity of discovering Bass Strait. Continuing eastward, he sighted on December 13, at 42°10′ S, the coast of South Island, New Zealand, and explored it northward, entering the strait between North Island and South Island, supposing it to be a bay. He left New Zealand on January 4, 1643, at North Cape, under the impression that he had probably discovered the west coast of the southern continent, which might be connected with the “Staten Landt” (Staten Island) discovered by W.C. Schouten and Jacques Le Maire south of South America—hence the name of Staten Landt, which Tasman gave to his discovery in honour of the States General (the Dutch legislature). Convinced by the swell that the passage to Chile existed, Tasman now turned northeast, and on January 21 he discovered Tonga and on February 6 the Fiji Islands. Turning northwest, the ships reached New Guinea waters on April 1 and Batavia on June 14, 1643, completing a 10-month voyage on which only 10 men had died from illness. Tasman had circumnavigated Australia without seeing it, thus establishing that it was separated from the hypothetical southern continent. Tasman’s voyage of 1644 The council of the company decided, however, that Tasman had been negligent in his investigation of the lands that he discovered and of the passage to Chile. They sent him on a new expedition to the “South Land” in 1644 with instructions to establish the relationships of New Guinea, the “great known South Land” (western Australia), Van Diemen’s Land, and the “unknown South Land.” Tasman sailed from Batavia on February 29, steering southeast along the south coast of New Guinea, sailing southeast into Torres Strait (which he mistook for a shallow bay), coasting Australia’s Gulf of Carpentaria, and then following the north coast and then the west coast of Australia to 22° S. Get a Britannica Premium subscription and gain access to exclusive content. Although he was rewarded with the rank of commander and was made a member of the Council of Justice of Batavia, his second voyage was also a disappointment to the company because it had failed to reveal lands of potential wealth. In 1647 Tasman commanded a trading fleet to Siam (now Thailand), and in the following year he commanded a war fleet against the Spaniards in the Philippines. He left the service of the Dutch East India Company several years later.	After a series of trading voyages to Japan, Formosa (Taiwan), Cambodia, and Sumatra, he was chosen by the governor-general of the Dutch East Indies, Anthony van Diemen, to command the most ambitious of all Dutch voyages for the exploration of the Southern Hemisphere. Tasman’s voyage of 1642–43 By 1642 Dutch navigators had discovered discontinuous stretches of the western coast of Australia, but whether these coasts were continental and connected with the hypothetical southern continent of the Pacific remained unknown. Tasman was assigned to solve this problem, following instructions based on a memoir by Frans Jacobszoon Visscher, his chief pilot. He was instructed to explore the Indian Ocean from west to east, south of the ordinary trade route, and, proceeding eastward into the Pacific (if this proved possible), to investigate the practicability of a sea passage eastward to Chile, to rediscover the Solomon Islands of the Spaniards, and to explore New Guinea. Leaving Batavia (modern Jakarta) on August 14, 1642, with two ships, the Heemskerk and Zeehaen, Tasman sailed to Mauritius (September 5–October 8), then southward and eastward, reaching his most southerly latitude of 49° S at about 94° E. Turning north he discovered land on November 24 at 42°20′ S, and he skirted its southern shores, naming it Van Diemen’s Land (now Tasmania). A council of officers on December 5 decided against further investigation, so he missed the opportunity of discovering Bass Strait. Continuing eastward, he sighted on December 13, at 42°10′ S, the coast of South Island, New Zealand, and explored it northward, entering the strait between North Island and South Island, supposing it to be a bay.	yes
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	yes_statement	"australia" was "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch "discovered" "australia".	https://etaaustraliaonline.com/blog/when-was-australia-discovered/	When was Australia Discovered? - Full answer	When was Australia discovered? In ancient times, explorers traveled from place to place far from their home looking for new wealth and treasure. Some of them claimed that the earth was flat as they moved around. However, Greek astronomers, later on, concluded that the world is spherical with southern and northern hemispheres. In 150AD, a mapmaker and Greek astronomer, Claudius Ptolemy, came up with the idea that the earth is kept balanced by the unknown land in the south. He then drew an imaginary land that represented the unknown land on the map. Over this time, it was referred to as the unknown land in the south. During this century, Europeans were certain about this land in the south, but they were yet to figure out how to get there. In 1570, a map was drawn with a vast imaginary landmass located in the south that was proportional to the land on the top of the earth. For about 200 years, European explorers searched for this unknown southern land. Some of them sailed past it while others bumped into it, but they didn’t realize as they expected a lot of wealth over there. Aborigines in Australia While explorers from Europe still search for the unknown land, Aborigines had already settled there. The Aborigines were the first people to settle in Australia. They are expected to have arrived in the Australia continent 50, 000 years ago. Aborigines’ ancestors are believed to have left Africa about 60,000 years ago, and they went through Asia before they stumbled in the ocean between Australia and other continents. Since there were no boats and canoes, it is still uncertain how they crossed to Australia. Some suggest that they could arrive there by accident, tsunami, or drifting debris through flotsam. First native people in Australia There is evidence that there are some traders and fishermen from India, China, and Indonesia who were in northern Australia thousands of years ago. This visit was inconsequential and sporadic to the way aborigines lived. The first wild dog, the Dingo, is believed to have arrived about 5, 000 years in Australia through such visits. The earlier explorers never heard knowledge of how Australia was vast and others thought this continent was just like any other island. Portuguese in Australia The first European explorers to be in Australia were the Portuguese. They were mainly traveling across the world looking for fortune and wealth. They were traveling to Asia through the Good Hope Cape as they ventured wide looking for spices. In 1515, the Portuguese sailors arrived at the Timor island that is 700km to Australia. Some of them are believed to have sailed through the Australia coastline without their knowledge, but no definite proof available. Dutch- first European explorers to arrive on Australia A small sailing ship named Duyfken that was captained by Willen Janszoon landed in Australia in 1600. They were sailing from Banten, Indonesia, searching for new trading opportunities. They landed on the shore of river Pennefather that is located in Carpentaria before they went ashore. They then found the swampy land and people living there were unfriendly. On various expeditions, this ship lost ten members of its crew, and Willen Janszoon named this place “Nieu Zealand” now called New Zealand. Now then, Janszoon is considered as the first European in Australian soil. However, Janszoon never realized he had set foot in Australia as he thought the land was part of the New Guinea that is located further in the north. In 1616, another Dutch ship, Eendracht, while on the way to Indonesia landed on the west of the Australian coast. This ship was sailed by captained Dirk Hartog when it arrived at Shark Bay. Hartog then looked around but never found anything interesting. He then recorded his visit on top of the cliff at Rijksmuseum, but Hartog never realized he was in Australia. Most Dutch sailors continued to sail along this coastline during this period and called this place New Holland though they did not bother to explore it. To them, they thought Australia is just a barren place that had no commercial importance. In July 1629, a VOC ship named Batavia was shipwrecked when it was near the Houtman Abrolhos near Geraldton located in Western Australia. The crew faced a mutiny, and they had to build a small fort where they protected themselves. This happened to be the first structure to be built by the Dutch in Australia. A Dutchman by the name Abel Tasman in 1942 discovered an island that he called Van Diemen’s Land but never realized it was in Australia. However, this island was renamed later on to Tasmania in remembrance of the Abel Tasman. This man also went ahead to find Fiji, New Zealand, and Tonga Islands. British in Australia In May 1622, a ship, Tryall, owned by East Company from India was the first British ship to pass through the Australian coastline. On 22 May that year, it also became the first ship of British origin to shipwreck on the coastline of Australia. The ship crew sort refuge on Montebello Islands in north-western Australia for about seven days before they headed back to Indonesia. In 1770, there was an expedition that was lead by James Cook from England. They sailed through the south of the Pacific on a ship named Endeavour. They were set for an astronomical purpose, but Lieutenant cook had secret orders to look for the southern continent. Their ship landed on the eastern coastline of Australia in April 1770. Cook named this Bay Stingray, but they, later on, modified it to Botanist Bay before it was called Botany Bay. Captained Cook also named this place New Wales and changed it later to be New South Wales. He claimed this land was for Britain amid the Aborigines who had already occupied. However, Cook never had an idea that he had discovered a continent that was about 32 times Britain itself. He also became the first person from Europe to land on the Great Barrier Reef where he spent seven days. In 1977, the British return to colonize this southern land today known as Australia.	Zealand. Now then, Janszoon is considered as the first European in Australian soil. However, Janszoon never realized he had set foot in Australia as he thought the land was part of the New Guinea that is located further in the north. In 1616, another Dutch ship, Eendracht, while on the way to Indonesia landed on the west of the Australian coast. This ship was sailed by captained Dirk Hartog when it arrived at Shark Bay. Hartog then looked around but never found anything interesting. He then recorded his visit on top of the cliff at Rijksmuseum, but Hartog never realized he was in Australia. Most Dutch sailors continued to sail along this coastline during this period and called this place New Holland though they did not bother to explore it. To them, they thought Australia is just a barren place that had no commercial importance. In July 1629, a VOC ship named Batavia was shipwrecked when it was near the Houtman Abrolhos near Geraldton located in Western Australia. The crew faced a mutiny, and they had to build a small fort where they protected themselves. This happened to be the first structure to be built by the Dutch in Australia. A Dutchman by the name Abel Tasman in 1942 discovered an island that he called Van Diemen’s Land but never realized it was in Australia. However, this island was renamed later on to Tasmania in remembrance of the Abel Tasman. This man also went ahead to find Fiji, New Zealand, and Tonga Islands. British in Australia In May 1622, a ship, Tryall, owned by East Company from India was the first British ship to pass through the Australian coastline. On 22 May that year, it also became the first ship of British origin to shipwreck on the coastline of Australia. The ship crew sort refuge on Montebello Islands in north-western Australia for about seven days before they headed back to Indonesia. In 1770, there was an expedition that was lead by James Cook from England. They sailed through the south of the Pacific on a ship named Endeavour. They were set for an astronomical purpose, but Lieutenant cook had secret orders to look for the southern continent.	yes
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	no_statement	"australia" was not "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch did not "discover" "australia".	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Australia	History of Australia - Wikipedia	The history of Australia is the story of the land and peoples of the continent of Australia. People first arrived on the Australian mainland by sea from Maritime Southeast Asia between 50,000 and 65,000 years ago, and penetrated to all parts of the continent, from the rainforests in the north, the deserts of the centre, and the sub-Antarctic islands of Tasmania and Bass Strait. The artistic, musical and spiritual traditions they established are among the longest surviving such traditions in human history. The first Torres Strait Islanders – ethnically and culturally distinct from the Aboriginal people – arrived from what is now Papua New Guinea around 2,500 years ago, and settled in the islands of the Torres Strait and the Cape York Peninsula forming the northern tip of the Australian landmass. The first known landing in Australia by Europeans was in 1606 by Dutch navigator Willem Janszoon on Australia's northern coast. Later that year, Spanish explorer Luís Vaz de Torres sailed through, and navigated, what is now called Torres Strait and associated islands.[1] Twenty-nine other Dutch navigators explored the western and southern coasts in the 17th century and named the continent New Holland. Macassan trepangers visited Australia's northern coasts after 1720, possibly earlier. Other European explorers followed until, in 1770, Lieutenant James Cook charted the east coast of Australia and claimed it for Great Britain. He returned to London with accounts favouring colonisation at Botany Bay (now in Sydney). The First Fleet of British ships arrived at Botany Bay in January 1788 to establish a penal colony, the first colony on the Australian mainland. In the century that followed, the British established other colonies on the continent, and European explorers ventured into its interior. Aboriginal people were greatly weakened and their numbers diminished by introduced diseases and conflict with the colonists during this period. Gold rushes and agricultural industries brought prosperity. Transportation of British convicts to Australia was phased out from 1840 to 1868. Autonomous parliamentary democracies began to be established throughout the six British colonies from the mid-19th century. The colonies voted by referendum to unite in a federation in 1901, and modern Australia came into being. Australia fought as part of British Empire and later Commonwealth in the two world wars and was to become a long-standing ally of the United States when threatened by Imperial Japan during World War II. Trade with Asia increased and a post-war immigration program received more than 6.5 million migrants from every continent. Supported by immigration of people from almost every country in the world since the end of World War II, the population increased to more than 25.5 million by 2020, with 30 per cent of the population born overseas. Humans are believed to have arrived in Australia 50,000 to 65,000 years ago.[2][3] As hunter-gatherers, they established enduring spiritual and artistic traditions and used a range of implements adapted to their environments. Recent estimates of the population at the time of British settlement range from 500,000 to one million.[4][5] There is considerable archaeological discussion as to the route taken by the first population. People appear to have arrived by sea during a period of glaciation, when New Guinea and Tasmania were joined to the continent; however, the journey still required sea travel, making them among the world's earliest mariners.[6]Scott Cane wrote in 2013 that the first wave may have been prompted by the eruption of Lake Toba. If they arrived about 70,000 years ago, they could have crossed the water from Timor, when the sea level was low, but if they came later, around 50,000 years ago, a more likely route would have been through the Moluccas to New Guinea. Given that the likely landfall regions have been under approximately 50 metres of water for the past 15,000 years, it is unlikely that the timing will ever be established with certainty.[7] The oldest known sites of human occupation in Australia are in Arnhem Land in the north of the continent and have been dated to between 50,000 and 65,000 BP. The population spread into a range of very different environments. Devil's Lair in the extreme south-west of the continent was occupied around 47,000 BP and Tasmania by 39,000 BP.[8] The earliest known human remains in Australia, found at Lake Mungo, a dry lake in the southwest of New South Wales, are about 40,000 years old.[9] Remains found at Mungo suggest one of the world's oldest known cremations, thus indicating early evidence for religious ritual among humans.[10] The spread of the population also altered the environment. There is evidence of the deliberate use of fire to shape the Australian environment 46,000 years ago. In many parts of Australia, firestick farming was used to clear vegetation to make travel easier, drive animals into ambushes, and create open grasslands rich in animal and vegetable food sources.[11] More than 60 species of animals, including Australian megafauna, became extinct by 10,000 ago. Researchers have variously attributed these extinctions to human hunting and firing practices, climate change or a combination of these factors.[12] Kolaia man wearing a headdress worn in a fire ceremony, Forrest River, Western Australia. Aboriginal Australian religious practices associated with the Dreamtime have been practised for tens of thousands of years. The inhabitants developed other technologies to better exploit diverse environments. Fibre and nets for use in watercraft and fishing developed before 40,000 BP. More complex tools, such as edge-ground axes hafted to wooden handles, appeared by 35,000 BP.[13] Elaborate trade networks also developed. Ochre was transported 250 kilometres from the Barrier Range to Lake Mungo 40,000 years ago. Shells (for decorative beads) were transported 500 kilometres by 30,000 BP.[13] More extensive trade networks developed in later times.[14] The earliest Aboriginal rock art consists of hand-prints, hand-stencils, and engravings of circles, tracks, lines and cupules, and has been dated to 35,000 years ago. Around 20,000 year ago Aboriginal artists were depicting humans and animals.[15] However, the dating is contentious and some researchers believe that known examples of Aboriginal rock art are possibly more recent.[16] The Aboriginal population was confronted with significant changes to climate and environment. About 30,000 years ago, sea levels began to fall, temperatures in the south-east of the continent dropped by as much as 9 degrees Celsius, and the interior of Australia became more arid. About 20,000 years ago, New Guinea and Tasmania were connected to the Australian continent, which was more than a quarter larger than today.[17] About 19,000 years ago temperatures and sea levels began to rise. Tasmania became separated from the mainland some 14,000 years ago, and between 8,000 and 6,000 years ago thousands of islands in the Torres Strait and around the coast of Australia were formed.[17] Josephine Flood writes that the flooding and loss of land as coastlines receded might have led to greater emphasis on territorial boundaries separating groups, stronger clan identity, and the development of the Rainbow Serpent and other mythologies.[18] The warmer climate was associated with new technologies. Small back-bladed stone tools appeared 15–19 thousand years ago. Wooden javelins and boomerangs have been found dating from 10,000 years ago. Stone points for spears have been found dating from 5–7 thousand years ago. Spear throwers were probably developed more recently than 6,500 years ago.[19] A Luritja man demonstrating his method of attack with a large curved boomerang under cover of a thin shield (1920) Sea levels stabilised at around their current level about 6,500 years ago. Warmer weather, wetter conditions and the new coastlines led to significant changes in Aboriginal social and economic organisation. New coastal societies emerged around tidal reefs, estuaries and flooded river valleys, and coastal islands were incorporated into local economies.[20] There was a proliferation of stone tool, plant processing and landscape modification technologies. Elaborate fish and eel traps involving channels up to three kilometres long were in use in western Victoria from about 6,500 years ago. Semi-permanent collections of wooden huts on mounds also appeared in western Victoria, associated with a more systematic exploitation of new food sources in the wetlands.[20] Aboriginal Tasmanians were isolated from the mainland from about 14,000 years ago. As a result, they only possessed one quarter of the tools and equipment of the adjacent mainland and were without hafted axes, grinding technology, stone tipped weapons, spear throwers and the boomerang. By 3,700 BP they had ceased to eat fish and use bone tools. Coastal Tasmanians switched from fish to abalone and crayfish and more Tasmanians moved to the interior.[21] The Tasmanians built watercraft from reeds and bark and journeyed up to 10 kilometres offshore to visit islands and hunt for seals and muttonbirds.[22] Around 4,000 years ago the first phase of occupation of the Torres Strait Islands began. By 2,500 years ago more of the islands were occupied and a distinctive Torres Strait Island maritime culture emerged. Agriculture also developed on some islands and by 700 years ago villages appeared.[23] One genetic study in 2012 has suggested that about 4,000 years ago, some Indian explorers settled in Australia and assimilated into the local population.[24] However, more recent studies do not support this view.[25] Nevertheless, some innovations were imported to the mainland from neighbouring cultures. The dingo was introduced about 4,000 years ago. Shell fish hooks appeared in Australia about 1,200 years ago and were probably introduced from the Torres Strait or by Polynesian seafarers. From the mid-1660s fishing vessels from Indonesia regularly visited the north coast of Australia in search of trepang (sea cucumber). Trade and social relationships developed which were reflected in Aboriginal art, ceremonies and oral traditions. Aboriginal people adopted dugout canoes and metal harpoon heads from the Indonesians which allowed them to better hunt dugong and turtle off the coast and nearby islands.[26] Despite these interactions with neighbouring cultures, the basic structure of Aboriginal society was unchanged. Family groups were joined in bands and clans averaging about 25 people, each with a defined territory for foraging. Clans were attached to tribes or nations, associated with particular languages and country. At the time of European contact there were about 600 tribes or nations and 250 distinct languages with various dialects.[27][28] Aboriginal society was egalitarian with no formal government or chiefs. Authority rested with elders who held extensive ritual knowledge gained over many years. Group decisions were generally made through the consensus of elders. The traditional economy was cooperative, with males generally hunting large game while females gathered local staples such as small animals, shellfish, vegetables, fruits, seeds and nuts. Food was shared within groups and exchanged across groups.[29] Aboriginal groups were semi-nomadic, generally ranging over a specific territory defined by natural features. Members of a group would enter the territory of another group through rights established by marriage and kinship or by invitation for specific purposes such as ceremonies and sharing abundant seasonal foods. As all natural features of the land were created by ancestral beings, a group's particular country provided physical and spiritual nourishment.[30][28] The extent to which some Aboriginal societies were agricultural is controversial. In the Lake Condah region of western Victoria the inhabitants built elaborate eel and fish traps and hundreds gathered in semi-permanent stone and bark huts during the eel season. However, these groups still moved across their territory several times a year to exploit other seasonal food sources.[32] In semi-arid areas, millet was harvested, stacked and threshed and the seeds stored for later use. In tropical areas the tops of yams were replanted. Flood argues that such practices are better classified as resource management than agriculture and that Aboriginal societies did not develop the systematic cultivation of crops or permanent villages such as existed in the Torres Strait Islands. Elizabeth Williams has called the inhabitants of the more settled regions of the Murray valley "complex hunter gatherers".[33] The Dutch contributed a great deal to Europe's knowledge of Australia's coast.[43] In 1616, Dirk Hartog, sailing off course, en route from the Cape of Good Hope to Batavia, landed on an island off Shark Bay, Western Australia.[43] In 1622–23 the ship Leeuwin made the first recorded rounding of the southwest corner of the continent, where Cape Leeuwin was later named after her (the name of the ship's captain is lost).[44] Abel Tasman's voyage of 1642 was the first known European expedition to reach Van Diemen's Land (later Tasmania) and New Zealand, and to sight Fiji. On his second voyage of 1644, he also contributed significantly to the mapping of the Australian mainland (which he called New Holland), making observations on the land and people of the north coast below New Guinea.[46] Following Tasman's voyages, the Dutch were able to make almost complete maps of Australia's northern and western coasts and much of its southern and south-eastern Tasmanian coasts, as reflected in the 1648 map by Joan Blaeu, Nova et Accuratissima Terrarum Orbis Tabula.[47] British and French exploration Lieutenant James Cook, the first European to map the eastern coastline of Australia in 1770 William Dampier, an English buccaneer and explorer, landed on the north-west coast of New Holland in 1688 and again in 1699, and published influential descriptions of the Aboriginal people.[48] In 1769, Lieutenant James Cook in command of HMS Endeavour, travelled to Tahiti to observe and record the transit of Venus. Cook also carried secret Admiralty instructions to locate the supposed Southern Continent.[49] This continent was not found, a disappointment to Alexander Dalrymple and his fellow members of the Royal Society who had urged the Admiralty to undertake this mission.[50] Cook decided to survey the east coast of New Holland, the only major part of that continent that had not been charted by Dutch navigators.[51] On 19 April 1770 the Endeavour reached the east coast of New Holland and ten days later anchored at Botany Bay. Cook charted the coast to its northern extent and formally took possession of the east coast of New Holland on 21/22 August 1770 when on Possession Island off the west coast of Cape York Peninsula.[52] He noted in his journal that he could "land no more upon this Eastern coast of New Holland, and on the Western side I can make no new discovery the honour of which belongs to the Dutch Navigators and as such they may lay Claim to it as their property [italicised words crossed out in the original] but the Eastern Coast from the Latitude of 38 South down to this place I am confident was never seen or viseted by any European before us and therefore by the same Rule belongs to great Brittan" [italicised words crossed out in the original].[53][54] In March 1772 Marc-Joseph Marion du Fresne, in command of two French ships, reached Van Diemen's land on his way to Tahiti and the South Seas. His party became the first recorded Europeans to encounter the Indigenous Tasmanians and to kill one of them.[55] In the same year, a French expedition led by Louis Aleno de St Aloüarn, became the first Europeans to formally claim sovereignty over the west coast of Australia, but no attempt was made to follow this with colonisation.[56] Colonisation Plans for colonisation before 1788 Two of the Natives of New Holland, Advancing To Combat (1784), lithograph based on 1770 sketch by Cook's illustrator Sydney ParkinsonA General Chart of New Holland including New South Wales & Botany Bay with The Adjacent Countries and New Discovered Lands, published in An Historical Narrative of the Discovery of New Holland and New South Wales, London, Fielding and Stockdale, November 1786 Although various proposals for the colonisation of Australia were made prior to 1788, none were attempted. In 1717, Jean-Pierre Purry sent a plan to the Dutch East India Company for the colonisation of an area in modern South Australia. The company rejected the plan with the comment that, "There is no prospect of use or benefit to the Company in it, but rather very certain and heavy costs".[57] In contrast, Emanuel Bowen, in 1747, promoted the benefits of exploring and colonising the country, writing:[58] It is impossible to conceive a Country that promises fairer from its Situation than this of TERRA AUSTRALIS, no longer incognita, as this Map demonstrates, but the Southern Continent Discovered. It lies precisely in the richest climates of the World... and therefore whoever perfectly discovers and settles it will become infalliably possessed of Territories as Rich, as fruitful, and as capable of Improvement, as any that have hitherto been found out, either in the East Indies or the West. John Harris' Navigantium atque Itinerantium Bibliotheca, or Voyages and Travels (1744–1748, 1764) recommended exploration of the east coast of New Holland, with a view to a British colonisation, by way of Abel Tasman's route to Van Diemen's Land.[59] John Callander put forward a proposal in 1766 for Britain to found a colony of banished convicts in the South Sea or in Terra Australis to enable the mother country to exploit the riches of those regions. He said: "this world must present us with many things entirely new, as hitherto we have had little more knowledge of it, than if it had lain in another planet".[60] Sweden's King Gustav III had ambitions to establish a colony for his country at the Swan River in 1786 but the plan was stillborn.[61] Sixteen years after Cook's landfall on the east coast of Australia, the British government decided to establish a colony at Botany Bay. The American Revolutionary War (1775–1783) saw Britain lose most of its North American colonies and consider establishing replacement territories. Britain had transported about 50,000 convicts to the New World from 1718 to 1775 and was now searching for an alternative. The temporary solution of floating prison hulks had reached capacity and was a public health hazard, while the option of building more jails and workhouses was deemed too expensive.[62][63] In 1779, Sir Joseph Banks, the eminent scientist who had accompanied James Cook on his 1770 voyage, recommended Botany Bay as a suitable site for a penal settlement. Banks's plan was to send 200 to 300 convicts to Botany Bay where they could be left to their own devices and not be a burden on the British taxpayer.[64] Landing of Lieutenant James Cook at Botany Bay, 29 April 1770 Under Banks's guidance, the American LoyalistJames Matra, who had also travelled with Cook, produced a new plan for colonising New South Wales in 1783.[65] Matra argued that the country was suitable for plantations of sugar, cotton and tobacco; New Zealand timber and hemp or flax could prove valuable commodities; it could form a base for Pacific trade; and it could be a suitable compensation for displaced American Loyalists.[66] Following an interview with Secretary of State Lord Sydney in 1784, Matra amended his proposal to include convicts as settlers, considering that this would benefit both "Economy to the Publick, & Humanity to the Individual".[67] The London newspapers announced in November 1784 that: "A plan has been presented to the [Prime] Minister, and is now before the Cabinet, for instituting a new colony in New Holland. In this vast tract of land....every sort of produce and improvement of which the various soils of the earth are capable, may be expected".[68] The major alternative to Botany Bay was sending convicts to Africa. From 1775 convicts had been sent to garrison British forts in west Africa, but the experiment had proved unsuccessful. In 1783, the Pitt government considered exiling convicts to a small river island in Gambia where they could form a self-governing community, a "colony of thieves", at no expense to the government.[69] In 1785, a parliamentary select committee chaired by Lord Beauchamp recommended against the Gambia plan, but failed to endorse the alternative of Botany Bay. In a second report, Beauchamp recommended a penal settlement at Das Voltas Bay in modern Namibia. The plan was dropped, however, when an investigation of the site in 1786 found it to be unsuitable. Two weeks later, In August 1786, the Pitt government announced its intention to send convicts to Botany Bay.[70] The Government incorporated the settlement of Norfolk Island into their plan, with its attractions of timber and flax, proposed by Banks's Royal Society colleagues, Sir John Call and Sir George Young.[71] There has been a longstanding debate over whether the key consideration in the decision to establish a penal colony at Botany Bay was the pressing need to find a solution to the penal management problem, or whether broader imperial goals — such as trade, securing new supplies of timber and flax for the navy, and the desirability of strategic ports in the region — were paramount.[72] Leading historians in the debate have included Sir Ernest Scott,[73]Geoffrey Blainey,[74] and Alan Frost.[75] The decision to settle was taken when it seemed the outbreak of civil war in the Netherlands might precipitate a war in which Britain would be again confronted with the alliance of the three naval Powers, France, Holland and Spain, which had brought her to defeat in 1783. Under these circumstances a naval base in New South Wales which could facilitate attacks on Dutch and Spanish interests in the region would be attractive.[76][77] Specific plans for using the colony as a strategic base against Spanish interests were occasionally made after 1788, but never implemented.[78] Macintyre argues that the evidence for a military-strategic motive in establishing the colony is largely circumstantial and hard to reconcile with the strict ban on establishing a shipyard in the colony. Karskens points out that the instructions provided to the first five governors of New South Wales show that the initial plans for the colony were limited.[79] The settlement was to be a self-sufficient penal colony based on subsistence agriculture. Trade, shipping and ship building were banned in order to keep the convicts isolated and so as not to interfere with the trade monopoly of the British East India Company. There was no plan for economic development apart from investigating the possibility of producing raw materials for Britain.[80] Christopher and Maxwell-Stewart argue that whatever the government's original motives were in establishing the colony, by the 1790s it had at least achieved the imperial objective of providing a harbour where vessels could be careened and resupplied.[81] The colony of New South Wales Establishment of the colony: 1788 to 1792 The perilous situation of The Guardian Frigate as she appeared striking on the rocks of ice (c. 1790) – Robert Dighton; depicting the Second Fleet The territory of New South Wales claimed by Britain included all of Australia eastward of the meridian of 135° East. This included more than half of mainland Australia and reflected the line of division between the claims of Spain and Portugal established in the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494.[82]Watkin Tench subsequently commented in A Narrative of the Expedition to Botany Bay, "By this partition, it may be fairly presumed, that every source of future litigation between the Dutch and us, will be for ever cut off, as the discoveries of English navigators only are comprized in this territory".[83] The claim also included "all the Islands adjacent in the Pacific" between the latitudes of Cape York and the southern tip of Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania).[84] King argues that an unofficial British map published in 1786 (A General Chart of New Holland) showed the possible extend of this claim. In 1817, the British government withdrew the extensive territorial claim over the South Pacific, passing an act specifying that Tahiti, New Zealand and other islands of the South Pacific were not within His Majesty's dominions.[82] However, it is unclear whether the claim ever extended to the current islands of New Zealand.[85] The colony of New South Wales was established with the arrival of the First Fleet of 11 vessels under the command of Captain Arthur Phillip in January 1788. It consisted of more than a thousand settlers, including 778 convicts (192 women and 586 men).[86] A few days after arrival at Botany Bay the fleet moved to the more suitable Port Jackson where a settlement was established at Sydney Cove on 26 January 1788.[87] This date later became Australia's national day, Australia Day. The colony was formally proclaimed by Governor Phillip on 7 February 1788 at Sydney. Sydney Cove offered a fresh water supply and a safe harbour, which Philip described as being, 'with out exception the finest Harbour in the World [...] Here a Thousand Sail of the Line may ride in the most perfect Security'.[88] Governor Phillip was vested with complete authority over the inhabitants of the colony. His personal intent was to establish harmonious relations with local Aboriginal people and try to reform as well as discipline the convicts of the colony. Phillip and several of his officers—most notably Watkin Tench—left behind journals and accounts of which tell of immense hardships during the first years of settlement. Often Phillip's officers despaired for the future of New South Wales. Early efforts at agriculture were fraught and supplies from overseas were scarce. Between 1788 and 1792 about 3546 male and 766 female convicts were landed at Sydney. Many new arrivals were sick or unfit for work and the conditions of healthy convicts only deteriorated with hard labour and poor sustenance in the settlement. The food situation reached crisis point in 1790 and the Second Fleet which finally arrived in June 1790 had lost a quarter of its 'passengers' through sickness, while the condition of the convicts of the Third Fleet appalled Phillip; however, from 1791 the more regular arrival of ships and the beginnings of trade lessened the feeling of isolation and improved supplies.[89] In 1788, Phillip established a subsidiary settlement on Norfolk Island in the South Pacific where he hoped to obtain timber and flax for the navy. The island, however, had no safe harbour, which led the settlement to be abandoned and the settlers evacuated to Tasmania in 1807.[90] The island was subsequently re-established as a site for secondary transportation in 1825.[91] Phillip sent exploratory missions in search of better soils, fixed on the Parramatta region as a promising area for expansion, and moved many of the convicts from late 1788 to establish a small township, which became the main centre of the colony's economic life. This left Sydney Cove only as an important port and focus of social life. Poor equipment and unfamiliar soils and climate continued to hamper the expansion of farming from Farm Cove to Parramatta and Toongabbie, but a building program, assisted by convict labour, advanced steadily. Between 1788 and 1792, convicts and their gaolers made up the majority of the population; however, a free population soon began to grow, consisting of emancipated convicts, locally born children, soldiers whose military service had expired and, finally, free settlers from Britain. Governor Phillip departed the colony for England on 11 December 1792, with the new settlement having survived near starvation and immense isolation for four years.[89] A number of foreign commentators pointed to the strategic importance of the new colony. Spanish naval commander Alessandro Malaspina, who visited Sydney in March–April 1793 reported to his government that: "The transportation of the convicts constituted the means and not the object of the enterprise. The extension of dominion, mercantile speculations and the discovery of mines were the real object."[92] Frenchman François Péron, of the Baudin expedition visited Sydney in 1802 and reported to the French Government: "How can it be conceived that such a monstrous invasion was accomplished, with no complaint in Europe to protest against it? How can it be conceived that Spain, who had previously raised so many objections opposing the occupation of the Malouines (Falkland Islands), meekly allowed a formidable empire to arise to facing her richest possessions, an empire which must either invade or liberate them?"[93] King points out that supporters of the penal colony frequently compared the venture to the foundation of Rome, and that the first Great Seal of New South Wales alluded to this. Phillip, however, wrote, "I would not wish Convicts to lay the foundations of an Empire...[.]"[94] Consolidation: 1793 to 1821 After the departure of Phillip, the colony's military officers began acquiring land and importing consumer goods obtained from visiting ships. Former convicts also farmed land granted to them and engaged in trade. Farms spread to the more fertile lands surrounding Paramatta, Windsor and Camden, and by 1803 the colony was self-sufficient in grain. Boat building developed in order to make travel easier and exploit the marine resources of the coastal settlements. Sealing and whaling became important industries.[95] The New South Wales Corps was formed in England in 1789 as a permanent regiment of the British Army to relieve the marines who had accompanied the First Fleet. Officers of the Corps soon became involved in the corrupt and lucrative rum trade in the colony. Governor William Bligh (1806 -– 1808) tried to suppress the rum trade and the illegal use of Crown Land, resulting in the Rum Rebellion of 1808. The Corps, working closely with the newly established wool trader John Macarthur, staged the only successful armed takeover of government in Australian history, deposing Bligh and instigating a brief period of military rule prior to the arrival from Britain of Governor Lachlan Macquarie in 1810.[96][97] Macquarie served as the last autocratic Governor of New South Wales, from 1810 to 1821, and had a leading role in the social and economic development of New South Wales which saw it transition from a penal colony to a budding civil society. He established a bank, a currency and a hospital. He employed a planner to design the street layout of Sydney and commissioned the construction of roads, wharves, churches, and public buildings. He sent explorers out from Sydney and, in 1815, a road across the Blue Mountains was completed, opening the way for large scale farming and grazing in the lightly-wooded pastures west of the Great Dividing Range.[98][99] Central to Macquarie's policy was his treatment of the emancipists, whom he considered should be treated as social equals to free-settlers in the colony. He appointed emancipists to key government positions including Francis Greenway as colonial architect and William Redfern as a magistrate. His policy on emancipists was opposed by many influential free settlers, officers and officials, and London became concerned at the cost of his public works. In 1819, London appointed J. T. Bigge to conduct an inquiry into the colony, and Macquarie resigned shortly before the report of the inquiry was published.[100][101] Expansion: 1821 to 1850 Map of the south eastern portion of Australia, 1850 In 1820, British settlement was largely confined to a 100 kilometre radius around Sydney and to the central plain of Van Diemen's land. The settler population was 26,000 on the mainland and 6,000 in Van Diemen's Land. Following the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 the transportation of convicts increased rapidly and the number of free settlers grew steadily.[102] From 1821 to 1840, 55,000 convicts arrived in New South Wales and 60,000 in Van Diemen's Land. However, by 1830, free settlers and the locally born exceeded the convict population of New South Wales.[103] From the 1820s squatters increasingly established unauthorised cattle and sheep runs beyond the official limits of the settled colony. In 1836, a system of annual licences authorising grazing on Crown Land was introduced in an attempt to control the pastoral industry, but booming wool prices and the high cost of land in the settled areas encouraged further squatting. By 1844 wool accounted for half of the colony's exports and by 1850 most of the eastern third of New South Wales was controlled by fewer than 2,000 pastoralists.[104][105] In 1825, the western boundary of New South Wales was extended to longitude 129° East, which is the current boundary of Western Australia. As a result, the territory of New South Wales reached its greatest extent, covering the area of the modern state as well as modern Queensland, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia and the Northern Territory.[106][85] By 1850 the settler population of New South Wales had grown to 180,000, not including the 70–75 thousand living in the area which became the separate colony of Victoria in 1851.[107] Establishment of further colonies Van Diemen's Land After hosting Nicholas Baudin's French naval expedition in Sydney in 1802, Governor Phillip Gidley King decided to establish a settlement in Van Diemen's Land (modern Tasmania) in 1803, partly to forestall a possible French settlement. The British settlement of the island soon centred on Launceston in the north and Hobart in the south. For the first two decades the settlement relied heavily on convict labour, small-scale farming and sheep grazing, sealing, whaling and the "dog and kangaroo" economy where emancipists and escaped convicts hunted native game with guns and dogs.[108][109] From the 1820s free settlers were encouraged by the offer of land grants in proportion to the capital the settlers would bring. Almost 2 million acres of land was granted to free settlers in the decade, and the number of sheep in the island increased from 170,000 to a million. The land grants created a social division between large landowners and a majority of landless convicts and emancipists.[110][111] Van Diemen's Land became a separate colony from New South Wales in December 1825 and continued to expand through the 1830s, supported by farming, sheep grazing and whaling. Following the suspension of convict transportation to New South Wales in 1840, Van Diemen's land became the main destination for convicts. Transportation to Van Diemen's Land ended in 1853 and in 1856 the colony officially changed its name to Tasmania.[112] Victoria Pastoralists from Van Diemen's land began squatting in the Port Phillip hinterland on the mainland in 1834, attracted by its rich grasslands. In 1835, John Batman and others negotiated the transfer of 100,000 acres of land from the Kulin people. However, the treaty was annulled the same year when the British Colonial Office issued the Proclamation of Governor Bourke stating that all unalienated land in the colony was vacant Crown Land, irrespective of whether it was occupied by traditional landowners. Its publication meant that from then, all people found occupying land without the authority of the government would be considered illegal trespassers.[113] In 1836, Port Phillip was officially recognised as a district of New South Wales and opened for settlement. The main settlement of Melbourne was established in 1837 as a planned town on the instructions of Governor Bourke. Squatters and settlers from Van Diemen's Land and New South Wales soon arrived in large numbers, and by 1850 the district had a population of 75,000 Europeans, 2,000 Indigenous inhabitants and 5 million sheep. In 1851, the Port Phillip District separated from New South Wales as the colony of Victoria.[114][115] Western Australia In 1826, the governor of New South Wales, Ralph Darling, sent a military garrison to King George Sound (the basis of the later town of Albany), to deter the French from establishing a settlement in Western Australia. In 1827, the head of the expedition, Major Edmund Lockyer, formally annexed the western third of the continent as a British colony.[116] In 1829, the Swan River colony was established at the sites of modern Fremantle and Perth, becoming the first convict-free and privatised colony in Australia. However, much of the arable land was allocated to absentee owners and the development of the colony was hampered by poor soil, the dry climate, and a lack of capital and labour. By 1850 there were a little more than 5,000 settlers, half of them children. The colony accepted convicts from that year because of the acute shortage of labour.[117][118] South Australia Adelaide in 1839. South Australia was founded as a free-colony, without convicts. The Province of South Australia was established in 1836 as a privately financed settlement based on the theory of "systematic colonisation" developed by Edward Gibbon Wakefield. The intention was to found a free colony based on private investment at little cost to the British government. Power was divided between the Crown and a Board of Commissioners of Colonisation, responsible to about 300 shareholders. Settlement was to be controlled to promote a balance between land, capital and labour. Convict labour was banned in the hope of making the colony more attractive to "respectable" families and promote an even balance between male and female settlers. The city of Adelaide was to be planned with a generous provision of churches, parks and schools. Land was to be sold at a uniform price and the proceeds used to secure an adequate supply of labour through selective assisted migration.[119][120][121] Various religious, personal and commercial freedoms were guaranteed, and the Letters Patent enabling the South Australia Act 1834 included a guarantee of the rights of 'any Aboriginal Natives' and their descendants to lands they 'now actually occupied or enjoyed'.[122] The colony was badly hit by the depression of 1841–44, and overproduction of wheat and overinvestment in infrastructure almost bankrupted it. Conflict with Indigenous traditional landowners also reduced the protections they had been promised. In 1842, the settlement became a Crown colony administered by the governor and an appointed Legislative Council. The economy recovered from 1845, supported by wheat farming, sheep grazing and a boom in copper mining. By 1850 the settler population had grown to 60,000 and the following year the colony achieved limited self-government with a partially elected Legislative Council.[119][120][123] Queensland In 1824, the Moreton Bay penal settlement was established on the site of present day Brisbane as a place of secondary punishment. In 1842, the penal colony was closed and the area was opened for free settlement. By 1850 the population of Brisbane had reached 8,000 and increasing numbers of pastoralists were grazing cattle and sheep in the Darling Downs west of the town. However, several attempts to establish settlements north of the Tropic of Capricorn had failed, and the settler population in the north remained small. Frontier violence between settlers and the Indigenous population became severe as pastoralism expanded north of the Tweed River. A series of disputes between northern pastoralists and the government in Sydney led to increasing demands from the northern settlers for separation from New South Wales. In 1857, the British government agreed to the separation and in 1859 the colony of Queensland was proclaimed. The settler population of the new colony was 25,000 and the vast majority of its territory was still occupied by its traditional owners.[124][125][126] Convicts and colonial society Convicts and emancipists Between 1788 and 1868, approximately 161,700 convicts (of whom 25,000 were women) were transported to the Australian colonies of New South Wales, Van Diemen's Land and Western Australia.[127] Historian Lloyd Robson has estimated that perhaps two-thirds were thieves from working class towns, particularly from the Midlands and north of England. The majority were repeat offenders.[128] The literacy rate of convicts was above average and they brought a range of useful skills to the new colony including building, farming, sailing, fishing and hunting.[129] The small number of free settlers meant that early governors also had to rely on convicts and emancipists for professions such as lawyers, architects, surveyors and teachers.[130] Black-eyed Sue and Sweet Poll of Plymouth, England mourning their lovers who are soon to be transported to Botany Bay (published in London in 1792) The first governors saw New South Wales as a place of punishment and reform of convicts. Convicts worked on government farms and public works such as land clearing and building. After 1792 the majority were assigned to work for private employers including emancipists (as transported convicts who had completed their sentence or had been pardoned called themselves). Emancipists were granted small plots of land for farming and a year of government rations. Later they were assigned convict labour to help them work their farms.[131] Some convicts were assigned to military officers to run their businesses because the officers did not want to be directly associated with trade. These convicts learnt commercial skills which could help them work for themselves when their sentence ended or they were granted a "ticket of leave" (a form of parole).[132] Convicts soon established a system of piece work which allowed them to work for wages once their allocated tasks were completed. Due to the shortage of labour, wage rates before 1815 were high for male workers although much lower for females engaged in domestic work.[133] In 1814, Governor Macquarie ordered that convicts had to work until 3 p.m. after which private employers had to pay them wages for any additional work.[134] By 1821 convicts, emancipists and their children owned two-thirds of the land under cultivation, half the cattle and one-third of the sheep.[135] They also worked in trades and small business. Emancipists employed about half of the convicts assigned to private masters.[136] After 1815 wages and employment opportunities for convicts and emancipists deteriorated as a sharp increase in the number of convicts transported led to an oversupply of labour. A series of reforms recommended by J. T. Bigge in 1822 and 1823 also sought to change the nature of the colony and make transportation "an object of real terror". The food ration for convicts was cut and their opportunities to work for wages restricted.[137] More convicts were assigned to rural work gangs, bureaucratic control and surveillance of convicts was made more systematic, isolated penal settlements were established as places of secondary punishment, the rules for tickets of leave were tightened, and land grants were skewed to favour free settlers with large capital.[138] As a result, convicts who arrived after 1820 were far less likely to become property owners, to marry, and to establish families.[139] Free settlers The humanitarian Caroline Chisholm was a leading advocate for women's issues and family friendly colonial policy. The Bigge reforms also aimed to encourage affluent free settlers by offering them land grants for farming and grazing in proportion to their capital. From 1831 the colonies replaced land grants with land sales by auction at a fixed minimum price per acre, the proceeds being used to fund the assisted migration of workers. From 1821 to 1850 Australia attracted 200,000 immigrants from the United Kingdom. Although most immigrants settled in towns, many were attracted to the high wages and business opportunities available in rural areas. However, the system of land grants, and later land sales, led to the concentration of land in the hands of a small number of affluent settlers.[140] Two-thirds of the migrants to Australia during this period received assistance from the British or colonial governments.[141] Healthy young workers without dependants were favoured for assisted migration, especially those with experience as agricultural labourers or domestic workers. Families of convicts were also offered free passage and about 3,500 migrants were selected under the English Poor Laws. Various special-purpose and charitable schemes, such as those of Caroline Chisholm and John Dunmore Lang, also provided migration assistance.[142] Women Colonial Australia was characterised by an imbalance of the sexes as women comprised only about 15 per cent of convicts transported. The first female convicts brought a range of skills including experience as domestic workers, dairy women and farm workers. Due to the shortage of women in the colony they were more likely to marry than men and tended to choose older, skilled men with property as husbands. The early colonial courts enforced the property rights of women independently of their husbands, and the ration system also gave women and their children some protection from abandonment. Women were active in business and agriculture from the early years of the colony, among the most successful being the former convict turned entrepreneur Mary Reibey and the agriculturalist Elizabeth Macarthur.[143] One-third of the shareholders of the first colonial bank (founded in 1817) were women.[144] One of the goals of the assisted migration programs from the 1830s was to promote migration of women and families to provide a more even gender balance in the colonies. The philanthropist Caroline Chisholm established a shelter and labour exchange for migrant women in New South Wales in the 1840s and promoted the settlement of single and married women in rural areas where she hoped they would have a civilising influence on rough colonial manners and act as "God's police".[145][146] Between 1830 and 1850 the female proportion of the Australian settler population increased from 24 per cent to 41 per cent.[147] Religion The early chaplains of the colony were also civil magistrates with the power to discipline convicts and grant tickets of leave. The Church of England was the only recognised church before 1820 and its clergy worked closely with the governors. Richard Johnson, (chief chaplain 1788–1802) was charged by Governor Arthur Phillip, with improving "public morality" in the colony and was also heavily involved in health and education.[148]Samuel Marsden (various ministries 1795–1838) became known for his missionary work, the severity of his punishments as a magistrate, and the vehemence of his public denunciations of Catholicism and Irish convicts.[149] About a quarter of convicts were Catholics and they frequently requested a Catholic priest to perform their rites. The lack of official recognition of Catholicism was combined with suspicion of Irish convicts which only increased after the Irish-led Castle Hill Rebellion of 1804.[150][151] Only two Catholic priests operated temporarily in the colony before Governor Macquarie appointed official Catholic chaplains in New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land in 1820.[152] The Bigge reports recommended that the status of the Anglican Church be enhanced as source of stability and moral authority in the colony. An Anglican archdeacon was appointed in 1824 and allocated a seat in the first advisory Legislative Council. The Anglican clergy and schools also received state support. This policy was changed under Governor Burke by the Church Acts of 1836 and 1837. The government now provided state support for the clergy and church buildings of the four largest denominations: Anglican, Catholic, Presbyterian and, later, Methodist.[152] The Church Acts did not alleviate sectarianism as many Anglicans saw state support of the Catholic Church as a threat. The prominent Presbyterian minister John Dunmore Lang also promoted sectarian divisions in the 1840s.[153][154] State support, however, led to a growth in church activities. Charitable associations such as the Catholic Sisters of Charity, founded in 1838, provided hospitals, orphanages and asylums for the old and disabled. Religious organisations were also the main providers of school education in the first half of the nineteenth century, a notable example being Lang's Australian College which opened in 1831. Many religious associations, such as the Sisters of St Joseph, co-founded by Mary MacKillop in 1866, continued their educational activities after the provision of secular state schools grew from the 1850s.[155][156] Exploration of the continent In 1798–99 George Bass and Matthew Flinders set out from Sydney in a sloop and circumnavigated Tasmania, thus proving it to be an island.[157] In 1801–02 Matthew Flinders in HMS Investigator led the first circumnavigation of Australia. Aboard ship was the Aboriginal explorer Bungaree, of the Sydney district, who became the first person born on the Australian continent to circumnavigate the Australian continent.[157] Matthew Flinders led the first successful circumnavigation of Australia in 1801–02. In 1798, the former convict John Wilson and two companions crossed the Blue Mountains, west of Sydney, in an expedition ordered by Governor Hunter. Hunter suppressed news of the feat for fear that it would encourage convicts to abscond from the settlement. In 1813, Gregory Blaxland, William Lawson and William Wentworth crossed the mountains by a different route and a road was soon built to the Central Tablelands.[158] Charles Sturt led an expedition along the Macquarie River in 1828 and discovered the Darling River. A theory had developed that the inland rivers of New South Wales were draining into an inland sea. Leading a second expedition in 1829, Sturt followed the Murrumbidgee River into a 'broad and noble river', which he named the Murray River. His party then followed this river to its junction with the Darling River. Sturt continued down river on to Lake Alexandrina, where the Murray meets the sea in South Australia.[160] Surveyor General Sir Thomas Mitchell conducted a series of expeditions from the 1830s to 'fill in the gaps' left by these previous expeditions. Mitchell employed three Aboriginal guides and was meticulous in recording the Aboriginal place names around the colony. He also recorded a violent encounter with traditional owners on the Murray in 1836 in which his men pursued them, "shooting as many as they could."[161][162] John Longstaff, Arrival of Burke, Wills and King at the deserted camp at Cooper's Creek, Sunday evening, 21 April 1861 European explorers penetrated deeper into the interior in the 1840s in a quest to discover new lands for agriculture or answer scientific enquiries. The German scientist Ludwig Leichhardt led three expeditions in northern Australia in this decade, sometimes with the help of Aboriginal guides, identifying the grazing potential of the region and making important discoveries in the fields of botany and geology. He and his party disappeared in 1848 while attempting to cross the continent from east to west.[165]Edmund Kennedy led an expedition into what is now far-western Queensland in 1847 before being speared by Aborigines in the Cape York Peninsula in 1848.[166] In 1860, Burke and Wills led the first south–north crossing of the continent from Melbourne to the Gulf of Carpentaria. Lacking bushcraft and unwilling to learn from the local Aboriginal people, Burke and Wills died in 1861, having returned from the Gulf to their rendezvous point at Coopers Creek only to discover the rest of their party had departed the location only a matter of hours previously. They became tragic heroes to the European settlers, their funeral attracting a crowd of more than 50,000 and their story inspiring numerous books, artworks, films and representations in popular culture.[167][168] In 1879, Alexander Forrest trekked from the north coast of Western Australia to the Overland Telegraph, discovering land suitable for grazing in the Kimberley region.[169] Impact of British settlement on Indigenous population When the First Fleet arrived in Sydney Cove with some 1,300 colonists in January 1788 the Aboriginal population of the Sydney region is estimated to have been about 3,000 people.[172] The first governor of New South Wales, Arthur Phillip, arrived with instructions to: "endeavour by every possible means to open an Intercourse with the Natives and to conciliate their affections, enjoining all Our Subjects to live in amity and kindness with them."[173] Alexander Schramm's A Scene in South Australia (1850) depicts German settlers with Aborigines Disease The relative isolation of the Indigenous population for some 60,000 years meant that they had little resistance to many introduced diseases. An outbreak of smallpox in April 1789 killed about half the Aboriginal population of the Sydney region while only one death was recorded among the settlers. The source of the outbreak is controversial; some researchers contend that it originated from contact with Indonesian fisherman in the far north and spread along Aboriginal trade routes while others argue that it is more likely to have been deliberately spread by settlers.[174][175] There were further smallpox outbreaks devastating Aboriginal populations from the late 1820s (affecting south-eastern Australia), in the early 1860s (travelling inland from the Coburg Peninsula in the north to the Great Australian Bight in the south), and in the late 1860s (from the Kimberley to Geraldton). According to Josphine Flood, the estimated Aboriginal mortality rate from smallpox was 60 per cent on first exposure, 50 per cent in the tropics, and 25 per cent in the arid interior.[176] Other introduced diseases such as measles, influenza, typhoid and tuberculosis also resulted in high death rates in Aboriginal communities. Butlin estimates that the Aboriginal population in the area of modern Victoria was around 50,000 in 1788 before two smallpox outbreaks reduced it to about 12,500 in 1830. Between 1835 (the settlement of Port Phillip) and 1853, the Aboriginal population of Victoria fell from 10,000 to around 2,000. It is estimated that about 60 per cent of these deaths were from introduced diseases, 18 per cent from natural causes and 15 per cent from settler violence.[177] Venereal diseases were also a factor in Indigenous depopulation, reducing Aboriginal fertility rates in south-eastern Australia by an estimated 40 per cent by 1855. By 1890 up to 50 per cent of the Aboriginal population in some regions of Queensland were affected.[178] Conflict and dispossession Mounted police engaging Indigenous people during the Slaughterhouse Creek Massacre of 1838, during the Australian frontier wars. The British settlement was initially planned to be a self-sufficient penal colony based on agriculture. Karskens argues that conflict broke out between the settlers and the traditional owners of the land because of the settlers' assumptions about the superiority of British civilisation and their entitlement to land which they had "improved" through building and cultivation.[179] Broome argues that the British claims of exclusive possession to land and other property was irreconcilable with Aboriginal concepts of communal ownership of land and its food resources.[181] Flood points out that conflict between British law and Aboriginal customary law was also a source of conflict; for example, Aboriginal groups considered they had a right to hunt all animals on their traditional land whereas British settlers considered the killing of their livestock as poaching. Conflict also arose from cross-cultural misunderstandings and from reprisals for previous actions such as the kidnapping of Aboriginal men, women and children. Reprisal attacks and collective punishments were perpetrated by colonists and Aboriginal groups alike.[182] Sustained Aboriginal attacks on settlers, the burning of crops and the mass killing of livestock were more obviously acts of resistance to the loss of traditional land and food resources.[183] As the colony spread to the more fertile lands around the Hawkesbury river, north-west of Sydney, conflict between the settlers and the Darug people intensified, reaching a peak from 1794 to 1810. Bands of Darug people, led by Pemulwuy and later by his son Tedbury, burned crops, killed livestock and raided settler huts and stores in a pattern of resistance that was to be repeated as the colonial frontier expanded. A military garrison was established on the Hawkesbury in 1795. The death toll from 1794 to 1800 was 26 settlers and up to 200 Darug.[184][185] Conflict again erupted from 1814 to 1816 with the expansion of the colony into Dharawal country in the Nepean region south-west of Sydney. Following the deaths of several settlers, Governor Macquarie despatched three military detachments into Dharawal lands, culminating in the Appin massacre (April 1816) in which at least 14 Aboriginal people were killed.[186][187] In the 1820s the colony spread to the lightly-wooded pastures west of the Great Dividing Range, opening the way for large scale farming and grazing in Wiradjuri country.[98] From 1822 to 1824 Windradyne led a group of 50-100 Aboriginal men in raids on livestock and stockmen's huts resulting in the death of 15-20 colonists. Martial law was declared in August 1824 and ended five months later when Windradyne and 260 of his followers ended their armed resistance. Estimates of Aboriginal deaths in the conflict range from 15 to 100.[188][189] After two decades of sporadic violence between settlers and Aboriginal Tasmanians in Van Diemen's land, the Black War broke out in 1824, following a rapid expansion of settler numbers and sheep grazing in the island's interior. When Eumarrah, leader of the North Midlands people, was captured in 1828 he said his patriotic duty was to kill as many white people as possible because they had driven his people off their kangaroo hunting grounds. Martial law was declared in the settled districts of Van Diemen's Land in November 1828 and was extended to the entire island in October 1830. A "Black Line" of around 2,200 troops and settlers then swept the island with the intention of driving the Aboriginal population from the settled districts. From 1830 to 1834 George Augustus Robinson and Aboriginal ambassadors including Truganini led a series of "Friendly Missions" to the Aboriginal tribes which effectively ended the Black War.[190] Flood states that around 200 settler and 330 Aboriginal Tasmanian deaths in frontier violence were recorded during the period 1803 to 1834, but adds that it will never be known how many Aboriginal deaths went unreported.[191] Clements estimates that colonists killed 600 Aboriginal people in eastern Van Diemen's Land during the Black War.[192] Around 220 Aboriginal Tasmanians were eventually relocated to Flinders Island.[193] Fighting near Creen Creek, Queensland in September 1876 As settlers and pastoralists spread into the region of modern Victoria in the 1830s, competition for land and natural resources again sparked conflict with traditional landowners. Aboriginal resistance was so intense that it was not unusual for sheep runs to be abandoned after repeated attacks. Broome estimates that 80 settlers and 1,000–1,500 Aboriginal people died in frontier conflict in Victoria from 1835 to 1853.[194] The growth of the Swan River Colony (centred on Fremantle and Perth) in the 1830s led to conflict with a number of clans of the Noongar people. Governor Sterling established a mounted police force in 1834 and in October that year he led a mixed force of soldiers, mounted police and civilians in a punitive expedition against the Pindjarup. The expedition culminated in the Pinjarra massacre in which some 15 to 30 Aboriginal people were killed.[195][196] According to Neville Green, 30 settlers and 121 Aboriginal people died in violent conflict in Western Australia between 1826 and 1852.[197] The spread of sheep and cattle grazing in grasslands and semi-arid regions of Australia after 1850 brought further conflict with Aboriginal tribes more distant from the closely settled areas. Aboriginal casualty rates in conflicts increased as the colonists made greater use of mounted police, Native Police units, and newly developed revolvers and breech-loaded guns. Civilian colonists often launched punitive raids against Aboriginal groups without the knowledge of colonial authorities. Conflict was particularly intense in NSW in the 1840s and in Queensland from 1860 to 1880. In central Australia, it is estimated that 650 to 850 Aboriginal people, out of a population of 4,500, were killed by colonists from 1860 to 1895. In the Gulf Country of northern Australia five settlers and 300 Aboriginal people were killed before 1886.[198] The last recorded massacre of Aboriginal people by settlers was at Coniston in the Northern Territory in 1928 where at least 31 Aboriginal people were killed.[199] The spread of British settlement also led to an increase in inter-tribal Aboriginal conflict as more people were forced off their traditional lands into the territory of other, often hostile, tribes. Butlin estimated that of the 8,000 Aboriginal deaths in Victoria from 1835 to 1855, 200 were from inter-tribal violence.[200] Broome estimates the total death toll from settler-Aboriginal conflict between 1788 and 1928 as 1,700 settlers and 17–20,000 Aboriginal people. Reynolds has suggested a higher "guesstimate" of 3,000 settlers and up to 30,000 Aboriginals killed.[201] A project team at the University of Newcastle, Australia, has reached a preliminary estimate of 8,270 Aboriginal deaths in frontier massacres from 1788 to 1930.[202] Accommodation and protection In the first two years of settlement the Aboriginal people of Sydney, after initial curiosity, mostly avoided the newcomers. Governor Phillip had a number of Aboriginal people kidnapped in an attempt to learn their language and customs. One of these, Bennelong, led the survivors of several clans into Sydney in November 1790, 18 months after the smallpox epidemic that had devastated the Aboriginal population.[203]Bungaree, a Kuringgai man, joined Matthew Flinders in his circumnavigation of Australia from 1801 to 1803, playing an important role as emissary to the various Indigenous peoples they encountered.[204] Portrait of the Aboriginal explorer and diplomat Bungaree in British dress at Sydney in 1826, by Augustus Earle. Governor Macquarie hoped to "effect the civilization of the Aborigines" and reclaim them "from their barbarous practices".[205] In 1815, he established a Native Institution to provide elementary education to Aboriginal children, settled 15 Aboriginal families on farms in Sydney and made the first freehold land grant to Aboriginal people at Black Town, west of Sydney. In 1816, he initiated an annual Native Feast at Parramatta which attracted Aboriginal people from as far as the Bathurst plains.[206] However, by the 1820s the Native Institution and Aboriginal farms had failed. Aboriginal people continued to live on vacant waterfront land and on the fringes of the Sydney settlement, adapting traditional practices to the new semi-urban environment.[205][207] Escalating frontier conflict in the 1820s and 1830s saw colonial governments develop a number of policies aimed at protecting Aboriginal people. Protectors of Aborigines were appointed in South Australia and the Port Phillip District in 1839, and in Western Australia in 1840. While the aim was to extend the protection of British law to Aboriginal people, more often the result was an increase in their criminalisation. Protectors were also responsible for the distribution of rations, delivering elementary education to Aboriginal children, instruction in Christianity and training in occupations useful to the colonists. However, by 1857 the protection offices had been closed due to their cost and failure to meets their goals.[208][209] Colonial governments established a small number of reserves and encouraged Christian missions which afforded some protection from frontier violence. In 1825, the NSW governor granted 10,000 acres for an Aboriginal mission at Lake Macquarie.[210] In the 1830s and early 1840s there were also missions in the Wellington Valley, Port Phillip and Moreton Bay. The settlement for Aboriginal Tasmanians on Flinders Island operated effectively as a mission under George Robinson from 1835 to 1838.[211] In New South Wales, 116 Aboriginal reserves were established between 1860 and 1894. Most reserves allowed Aboriginal people a degree of autonomy and freedom to enter and leave. In contrast, the Victorian Board for the Protection of Aborigines (created in 1869) had extensive power to regulate the employment, education and place of residence of Aboriginal Victorians, and closely managed the five reserves and missions established since self government in 1858. In 1886, the protection board gained the power to exclude "half caste" Aboriginal people from missions and stations. The Victorian legislation was the forerunner of the racial segregation policies of other Australian governments from the 1890s.[212] In more densely settled areas, most Aboriginal people who had lost control of their land lived on reserves and missions, or on the fringes of cities and towns. In pastoral districts the British Waste Land Act of 1848 gave traditional landowners limited rights to live, hunt and gather food on Crown land under pastoral leases. Many Aboriginal groups camped on pastoral stations where Aboriginal men were often employed as shepherds and stockmen. These groups were able to retain a connection with their lands and maintain aspects of their traditional culture.[213] From autonomy to federation Colonial self-government and the gold rushes Towards representative government Imperial legislation in 1823 had provided for a Legislative Council nominated by the governor of New South Wales, and a new Supreme Court, providing additional limits to the power of governors. A number of prominent colonial figures, including William Wentworth. campaigned for a greater degree of self-government, although there were divisions about the extent to which a future legislative body should be popularly elected. Other major issues in the public debate about colonial self-government were traditional British political rights, land policy, transportation and whether colonies with a large population of convicts and former convicts could be trusted with self-government. The Australian Patriotic Association was formed in 1835 to promote representative government for New South Wales.[214][215] The opening of Australia's first elected Parliament in Sydney (c. 1843) The British government abolished transportation to New South Wales in 1840, and in 1842 granted limited representative government to the colony by establishing a reformed Legislative Council with one-third of its members appointed by the governor and two-thirds elected by male voters who met a property qualification. The property qualification meant that only 20 per cent of males were eligible to vote in the first Legislative Council elections in 1843.[216] The increasing immigration of free settlers, the declining number of convicts, and the growing middle class and working class population led to further agitation for liberal and democratic reforms. Public meetings in Adelaide in 1844 called for more representative government for South Australia.[217] The Constitutional Association, formed in Sydney in 1848, called for manhood suffrage. The Anti-Transportation League, founded in Van Diemen's Land in 1849, also demanded more representative government.[218] In the Port Phillip District, agitation for representative government was closely linked to demands for independence from New South Wales.[219] In 1850, the imperial parliament passed the Australian Colonies Government Act, granting Van Diemen's Land, South Australia and the newly-created colony of Victoria semi-elected Legislative Councils on the New South Wales model. The Act also reduced the property requirement for voting. Government officials were to be responsible to the governor rather than the Legislative Council, so the imperial legislation provided for limited representative government rather than responsible government.[220] The gold rushes of the 1850s Although gold had been found in Australia as early as 1823 by surveyor James McBrien, a gold rush began when Edward Hargraves widely publicised his discovery of gold near Bathurst, New South Wales, in February 1851. Further discoveries were made later that year in Victoria, where the richest gold fields were found. By British law all minerals belonged to the Crown, and the governors of New South Wales and Victoria quickly introduced laws aimed at avoiding the disorder associated with the California gold rush of 1848. Both colonies introduced a gold mining licence with a monthly fee, the revenue being used to offset the cost of providing infrastructure, administration and policing of the gold fields. As the size of allowable claims was small (6.1 metres square), and much of the gold was near the surface, the licensing system favoured small prospectors over large enterprises.[221] The gold rush initially caused some economic disruption including wage and price inflation and labour shortages as male workers moved to the goldfields. In 1852, the male population of South Australia fell by three per cent and that of Tasmania by 17 per cent. Immigrants from the United Kingdom, continental Europe, the United States and China also poured into Victoria and New South Wales. The Australian population increased from 430,000 in 1851 to 1,170,000 in 1861. Victoria became the most populous colony and Melbourne the largest city.[222][223] Chinese migration was a particular concern for colonial officials. There were 20,000 Chinese miners on the Victorian goldfields by 1855 and 13,000 on the New South Wales diggings. There was a widespread belief that they represented a danger to white Australian living standards and morality, and colonial governments responded by imposing a range of taxes, charges and restrictions on Chinese migrants and residents. Anti-Chinese riots erupted on the Victorian goldfields in 1856 and in New South Wales in 1860.[224] According to Stuart Macintyre, "The goldfields were the migrant reception centres of the nineteenth century, the crucibles of nationalism and xenophobia[.]"[225] The Eureka stockade As more men moved to the gold fields and the quantity of easily-accessible gold diminished, the average income of miners fell. Victorian miners increasingly saw the flat monthly licence fee as a regressive tax and complained of official corruption, heavy-handed administration and the lack of voting rights for itinerant miners. Protests intensified in October 1854 when three miners were arrested following a riot at Ballarat. Protesters formed the Ballarat Reform League to support the arrested men and demanded manhood suffrage, reform of the mining licence and administration, and land reform to promote small farms. Further protests followed and protesters built a stockade on the Eureka Field at Ballarat. On 3 December troops overran the stockade, killing about 20 protesters. Five troops were killed and 12 seriously wounded.[226] Following a Royal Commission, the monthly licence was replaced with an annual miner's right at a lower cost which also gave holders the right to vote and build a dwelling on the gold fields. The administration of the Victorian goldfields was also reformed. Stuart Macintyre states, "The Eureka rebellion was a formative event in the national mythology, the Southern Cross [on the Eureka flag] a symbol of freedom and independence."[227] However, according to A. G. L. Shaw, the Eureka affair "is often painted as a great fight for Australian liberty and the rights of the working man, but it was not that. Its leaders were themselves small capitalists...and even after universal suffrage was introduced...only about a fifth of the miners bothered to vote."[228] Self-government and democracy Elections for the semi-representative Legislative Councils, held in New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Van Diemen's Land in 1851, produced a greater number of liberal members. That year, the New South Wales Legislative Council petitioned the British Government requesting self-government for the colony. The Anti-Transportation League also saw the convict system as a barrier to the achievement of self-government. In 1852, the British Government announced that convict transportation to Van Diemen's Land would cease and invited the eastern colonies to draft constitutions enabling responsible self-government. The Secretary of State cited the social and economic transformation of the colonies following the discoveries of gold as one of the factors making self-government feasible.[229] The constitutions for New South Wales, Victoria and Van Diemen's Land (renamed Tasmania in 1856) gained Royal Assent in 1855, that for South Australia in 1856. The constitutions varied, but each created a lower house elected on a broad male franchise and an upper house which was either appointed for life (New South Wales) or elected on a more restricted property franchise. Britain retained its right of veto over legislation regarding matters of imperial interest. When Queensland became a separate colony in 1859 it immediately became self-governing, adopting the constitution of New South Wales. Western Australia was granted self-government in 1890.[230] The secret ballot, adopted in Tasmania, Victoria and South Australia in 1856, followed by New South Wales (1858), Queensland (1859) and Western Australia (1877). South Australia introduced universal male suffrage for its lower house in 1856, followed by Victoria in 1857, New South Wales (1858), Queensland (1872), Western Australia (1893) and Tasmania (1900). Queensland excluded Aboriginal males from voting in 1885 (all women were also excluded).[231] In Western Australia, where all women were disenfranchised, a property qualification for voting existed for male Aboriginals, Asians, Africans and people of mixed descent.[230] Societies to promote women's suffrage were formed in Victoria in 1884, South Australia in 1888 and New South Wales in 1891. The Women's Christian Temperance Union also established branches in most Australian colonies in the 1880s, promoting votes for women and a range of social causes.[232] Female suffrage, and the right to stand for office, was first won in South Australia in 1895.[233] Women won the vote in Western Australia in 1900, with some restrictions based on race.[234] Women in the remainder of Australia only won full rights to vote and to stand for elected office in the decade after Federation, although there were some racial restrictions.[235] The long boom (1860 to 1890) Land reform In the 1860s New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia introduced Selection Acts intended to promote family farms and mixed farming and grazing. Legislation typically allowed individual "selectors" to select small parcels of unused crown land or leased pastoral land for purchase on credit.[236] The reforms initially had little impact on the concentration of land ownership as large landowners used loopholes in the laws to buy more land. However, refinements to the legislation, improvements in farming technology and the introduction of crops adapted to Australian conditions eventually led to the diversification of rural land use. The expansion of the railways from the 1860s allowed wheat to be cheaply transported in bulk, stimulating the development of a wheat belt from South Australia to Queensland.[237] Land under cultivation increased from 200,000 hectares to 2 million hectares from 1850 to 1890.[238] Bushrangers The period 1850 to 1880 saw a revival in bushranging. The first bushrangers had been escaped convicts or former convicts in the early years of British settlement who lived independently in the bush, often supporting themselves by criminal activity. The early association of the bush with freedom was the beginning of an enduring myth. The resurgence of bushranging from the 1850s drew on the grievances of the rural poor (several members of the Kelly gang, the most famous bushrangers, were the sons of impoverished small farmers). The exploits of Ned Kelly and his gang garnered considerable local community support and extensive national press coverage at the time. After Kelly's capture and execution for murder in 1880 his story inspired numerous works of art, literature and popular culture and continuing debate about the extent to which he was a rebel fighting social injustice and oppressive police, or a murderous criminal.[239] Economic growth and race From the 1850s to 1871 gold was Australia's largest export and allowed the colony to import a range of consumer and capital goods. More importantly, the increase in population in the decades following the gold rush stimulated demand for housing, consumer goods, services and urban infrastructure.[240] By the 1880s half the Australian population lived in towns, making Australia more urbanised than the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada.[241] Between 1870 and 1890 average income per person in Australia was more than 50 per cent higher than that of the United States, giving Australia one of the highest living standards in the world.[242] The size of the government sector almost doubled from 10 per cent of national expenditure in 1850 to 19 per cent in 1890. Colonial governments spent heavily on infrastructure such as railways, ports, telegraph, schools and urban services. Much of the money for this infrastructure was borrowed on the London financial markets, but land-rich governments also sold land to finance expenditure and keep taxes low.[243][244] In 1856, building workers in Sydney and Melbourne were the first in the world to win the eight hour working day. The 1880s saw trade unions grow and spread to lower skilled workers and also across colonial boundaries. By 1890 about 20 per cent of male workers belonged to a union, one of the highest rates in the world.[245][246] Economic growth was accompanied by expansion into northern Australia. Gold was discovered in northern Queensland in the 1860s and 1870s, and in the Kimberley and Pilbara regions of Western Australia in the 1880s. Sheep and cattle runs spread to northern Queensland and on to the Gulf Country of the Northern Territory and the Kimberley region of Western Australia in the 1870s and 1880s. Sugar plantations also expanded in northern Queensland during the same period.[247][248] The gold discoveries in northern Australia attracted a new wave of Chinese immigrants. The Queensland sugar cane industry also relied heavily on indentured South Sea Island workers, whose low wages and poor working conditions became a national controversy and led to government regulation of the industry. Additionally, a significant population of Japanese, Filipinos and Malays were working in pearling and fishing. In 1890, the population of northern Australia is estimated at about 70,000 Europeans and 20,000 Asians and Pacific Islanders. Indigenous people probably outnumbered these groups, leaving white people a minority north of the Tropic of Capricorn.[248] From the late 1870s trade unions, Anti-Chinese Leagues and other community groups campaigned against Chinese immigration and low-wage Chinese labour. Following intercolonial conferences on the issue in 1880–81 and 1888, colonial governments responded with a series of laws which progressively restricted Chinese immigration and citizenship rights.[249] 1890s depression "The labor crisis. – The riot in George Street, Sydney" (c.1890)The Oriental Bank in Melbourne, an ornate bank built during the height of Melbourne's gold boom. The bank went out of business in around 1884 and was demolished shortly afterwards. Falling wool prices and the collapse of a speculative property bubble in Melbourne heralded the end of the long boom. When British banks cut back lending to Australia, the heavily indebted Australian economy fell into economic depression. A number of major banks suspended business and the economy contracted by 20 per cent from 1891 to 1895. Unemployment rose to almost a third of the workforce. The depression was followed by the "Federation Drought" from 1895 to 1903.[250] In 1890, a strike in the shipping industry spread to wharves, railways, mines and shearing sheds. Employers responded by locking out workers and employing non-union labour, and colonial governments intervened with police and troops. The strike failed, as did subsequent strikes of shearers in 1891 and 1894, and miners in 1892 and 1896. By 1896, the depression and employer resistance to trade unions saw union membership fall to only about five per cent of the workforce.[251] The defeat of the 1890 Maritime Strike led trade unions to form political parties. In New South Wales, the Labor Electoral League won a quarter of seats in the elections of 1891 and held the balance of power between the Free Trade Party and the Protectionist Party. Labor parties also won seats in the South Australian and Queensland elections of 1893. The world's first Labor government was formed in Queensland in 1899, but it lasted only a week.[252] From the mid-1890s colonial governments, often with Labor support, passed acts regulating wages, working conditions and "coloured" labour in a number of industries.[253] At an Intercolonial Conference in 1896, the colonies agreed to extend restrictions on Chinese immigration to "all coloured races". Labor supported the Reid government of New South Wales in passing the Coloured Races Restriction and Regulation Act, a forerunner of the White Australia Policy. However, after Britain and Japan voiced objections to the legislation, New South Wales, Tasmania and Western Australia instead introduced European language tests to restrict "undesirable" immigrants.[254] By the late 1880s, a majority of people living in the Australian colonies were native born, although more than 90 per cent were of British and Irish heritage.[255] The Australian Natives Association, a friendly society open to Australian-born males, flourished in the 1880s. It campaigned for an Australian federation within the British Empire, promoted Australian literature and history, and successfully lobbied for the 26 January to be Australia's national day.[256] Australian nationalists often claimed that unification of the colonies was Australia's destiny. Australians lived on a single continent, and the vast majority shared a British heritage and spoke English. Many nationalists spoke of Australians sharing common blood as members of the British "race".[257]Henry Parkes stated in 1890, "The crimson thread of kinship runs through us all...we must unite as one great Australian people."[258] A minority of nationalists saw a distinctive Australian identity rather than shared "Britishness" as the basis for a unified Australia. Some, such as the radical magazine The Bulletin and the Tasmanian Attorney-General Andrew Inglis Clark, were republicans, while others were prepared to accept a fully independent country of Australia with only a ceremonial role for the British monarch. In 1887, poet Henry Lawson wrote of a choice between "The Old Dead Tree and the Young Tree Green/ The Land that belongs to the lord and the Queen,/And the land that belongs to you."[259] A unified Australia was usually associated with a white Australia. In 1887, The Bulletin declared that all white men who left the religious and class divisions of the old world behind were Australians.[260] The 1880s and 1890s saw a proliferation of books and articles depicting Australia as a sparsely populated white nation threatened by populous Asian neighbours.[261] A white Australia also meant the exclusion of cheap Asian labour, an idea strongly promoted by the labour movement.[262] According to historian John Hirst, "Federation was not needed to make the White Australia policy, but that policy was the most popular expression of the national ideal that inspired federation."[263] The growing nationalist sentiment in the 1880s and 1890s was associated with the development of a distinctively Australian art and literature. Artists of the Heidelberg School such as Arthur Streeton, Frederick McCubbin and Tom Roberts followed the example of the European Impressionists by painting in the open air. They applied themselves to capturing the light and colour of the Australian landscape and exploring the distinctive and the universal in the "mixed life of the city and the characteristic life of the station and the bush".[264] In the 1890s Henry Lawson, Banjo Paterson and other writers associated with The Bulletin produced poetry and prose exploring the nature of bush life and themes of independence, stoicism, masculine labour, egalitarianism, anti-authoritarianism and mateship. Protagonists were often shearers, boundary riders and itinerant bush workers. In the following decade Lawson, Paterson and other writers such as Steele Rudd, Miles Franklin, and Joseph Furphy helped forge a distinctive national literature. Paterson's ballad "The Man from Snowy River" (1890) achieved popularity, and his lyrics to the song "Waltzing Matilda" (c. 1895) helped make it the unofficial national anthem for many Australians. According to Macintyre, however, even in the 1890s the "bush legend was just that, a myth that enshrined lost possibilities[.]"[265] Federation movement Growing nationalist sentiment coincided with business concerns about the economic inefficiency of customs barriers between the colonies, the duplication of services by colonial governments and the lack of a single national market for goods and services.[266] Colonial concerns about German and French ambitions in the region also led to British pressure for a federated Australian defence force and a unified, single-gauge railway network for defence purposes.[267] Sir Henry Parkes delivering the first resolution at the federation conference in Melbourne, 1 March 1890 An obstacle to federation was the fear of the smaller colonies that they would be dominated by New South Wales and Victoria. Queensland, in particular, although generally favouring a white Australia policy, wished to maintain an exception for South Sea Islander workers in the sugar cane industry.[269] Another major barrier was the free trade policies of New South Wales which conflicted with the protectionist policies dominant in Victoria and most of the other colonies. Nevertheless, the NSW premier Henry Parkes was a strong advocate of federation and his Tenterfield Oration in 1889 was pivotal in gathering support for the cause. Parkes also struck a deal with Edmund Barton, leader of the NSW Protectionist Party, whereby they would work together for federation and leave the question of a protective tariff for a future Australian government to decide.[270] In 1890, representatives of the six colonies and New Zealand met in Melbourne and agreed in principle to a federation of the colonies and for the colonial legislatures to nominate representatives to attend a constitutional convention. The following year, the National Australasian Convention was held in Sydney, with all the future states and New Zealand represented. A draft constitutional Bill was adopted and transmitted to the colonial parliaments for approval by the people. The worsening economic depression and parliamentary opposition, however, delayed progress.[271] In early 1893 the first citizens' Federation League was established in the Riverina region of New South Wales and many other leagues were soon formed in the colonies. The leagues organised a conference in Corowa in July 1893 which developed a new plan for federation involving a constitutional convention with directly elected delegates and a referendum in each colony to endorse the proposed constitution. The new NSW premier, George Reid, endorsed the "Corowa plan" and in 1895 convinced the majority of other premiers to adopt it.[272] Most of the colonies sent directly elected representatives to the constitutional convention, although those of Western Australia were chosen by its parliament. Queensland did not send delegates. The convention held sessions in 1897 and 1898 which resulted in a proposed constitution for a Commonwealth of federated states under the British Crown.[273] Referendums held in 1898 resulted in solid majorities for the constitution in Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. However, the referendum failed to gain the required majority in New South Wales after that colony's Labor Party campaigned against it and premier Reid gave it such qualified support that he earned the nickname "yes-no Reid".[274] The premiers of the other colonies agreed to a number of concessions to New South Wales (particularly that the future Commonwealth capital would be located in that state), and in 1899 further referendums were held in all the colonies except Western Australia. All resulted in yes votes.[275] In March 1900, delegates were dispatched to London, including Barton and the Victorian parliamentarian Alfred Deakin, who had been a leading advocate for federation. Following intense negotiations with the British government, the federation Bill was passed by the imperial government on 5 July 1900 and gained Royal Assent on 9 July. Western Australia subsequently voted to join the new federation.[276] The Immigration Restriction Act 1901 was one of the first laws passed by the new Australian parliament. This centrepiece of the White Australia policy aimed to extend the restrictions on the immigration of Asians that had previously been enacted by the colonies. Like the colonial legislation, the Immigration Restriction Act used a dictation test in a European language to exclude Asian migrants, who were considered a threat to Australia's living standards and majority British culture. The government also ended the use of indentured South Sea Islander labour in the Queensland sugar cane industry and announced that the workers would be repatriated to their islands by 1906.[278][279] Deakin stated that White Australia, "is not a surface, but a reasoned policy which goes to the roots of national life, and by which the whole of our social, industrial and political organisation is governed."[280] In 1902, the government introduced female suffrage in the Commonwealth jurisdiction, but at the same time excluded Aboriginal people from the franchise unless they already had the vote in a state jurisdiction.[281] The Barton government also introduced a tariff on imports designed to raise revenue and protect Australian industry. However, the tariff was lower and less extensive than many protectionists wanted due to the need to attract sufficient support from Labor parliamentarians, who had a free vote on the issue and many of whom favoured free trade.[282] The three major parties all supported a system of Commonwealth conciliation and arbitration to settle industrial disputes extending across state borders, but Labor insisted that railway workers should be included in the system and preference be given to unionised labour. Disagreements about the legislation were instrumental in the fall of Deakin's Protectionist government in April 1904 and the appointment of the first national Labor government under prime minister Chris Watson. The Watson government itself fell in April and a Free Trade government under prime minister Reid successfully introduced legislation for a Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Court.[283] In July 1905 Deakin withdrew his support for the Reid government and again formed a Protectionist government with the support of Labor. The new government embarked on a series of social reforms and a program dubbed "new protection" under which tariff protection for Australian industries would be linked to their provision of "fair and reasonable" wages. In the Harvester case of 1907, H. B. Higgins of the Conciliation and Arbitration Court set a fair and reasonable wage based on the needs of a male breadwinner supporting a wife and three children. In 1908, the High Court of Australia struck down the New Protection legislation as unconstitutional. However, the Harvester case set a standard for a basic wage which was subsequently used by the Conciliation and Arbitration Court when settling industrial disputes. By 1914 the Commonwealth, New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia used arbitration courts to settle industrial disputes and fix wages and conditions, while Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania used wage boards to achieve the same goals.[284][285] Labor and anti-Labor The base of the Labor Party was the Australian Trade Union movement which grew from under 100,000 members in 1901 to more than half a million in 1914.[286] The party also drew considerable support from clerical workers, Catholics and small farmers.[287] In 1905, the Labor party adopted objectives at the federal level which included the "cultivation of an Australian sentiment based upon the maintenance of racial purity" and "the collective ownership of monopolies". In the same year, the Queensland branch of the party adopted an overtly socialist objective.[288] In 1906, the federal Free Trade Party changed its name to the Anti-Socialist party and in the December 1906 elections became the largest party with 38 per cent of the vote (compared with 37 per cent for Labor and 21 per cent for the Protectionists). Deakin's Protectionist government remained in power, but following the passage of legislation for old age pensions and a new protective tariff in 1908, Labor withdrew its support for the government and in November Andrew Fisher became the second Labor prime minister. In response, the Liberal-Protectionists, Anti-Socialists and conservative "Corner" group entered into a coalition known as the Fusion which formed a government under prime minister Deakin in June 1909. Reid stated that the question was whether Australia should follow a course of free enterprise or state control.[289] In the elections of May 1910, Labor won a majority in both houses of parliament and Fisher again became prime minister. The Labor government introduced a series of reforms including a progressive land tax (1910), invalid pensions (1910) and a maternity allowance (1912). The government established the Commonwealth Bank (1911) but referendums to nationalise monopolies and extend Commonwealth trade and commerce powers were defeated in 1911 and 1913. The Commonwealth took over responsibility for the Northern Territory from South Australia in 1911.[290][291] External affairs and defence With Federation, the Commonwealth inherited the small defence forces of the six former Australian colonies. By 1901, units of soldiers from all six Australian colonies had been active as part of British forces in the Boer War. When the British government asked for more troops from Australia in early 1902, the Australian government obliged with a national contingent. Some 16,500 men had volunteered for service by the war's end in June 1902.[293][294] In 1884, Britain and Germany had agreed to partition the eastern half of New Guinea.[295] In 1902, British New Guinea was placed under the authority of Australia which saw the territory as vital for the protection of shipping lanes. With the passage of the Papua Act of 1905, British New Guinea became the Australian Territory of Papua. Formal Australian administration of the territory began in 1906.[296] Under a 1902 agreement, Australia contributed to the cost of a Royal Navy Pacific fleet to provide for the nation's defence, but Britain reserved the right to deploy the fleet outside Australian waters. Following Japan's defeat of Russia in the 1904–05 war, concern about Japanese naval power led to calls for an Australian fleet. Deakin proposed the purchase of destroyers in 1906 and his government's Surplus Revenue Act of 1908 provided £250,000 for naval expenditure.[297][298] The Fisher Labor government increased the naval budget and in 1911 established the Royal Australian Navy.[299] In October 1913, the navy's first battle cruiser, Australia, arrived in Sydney harbour, accompanied by the new light cruisers Sydney and Melbourne.[300] In 1907, Deakin proposed compulsory military training for home defence, a measure that was supported by Watson and Hughes of the Labor party. The Labor party adopted the measure at its 1908 annual conference and in 1911 the Fisher government expanded the system of compulsory military training which had been introduced by the Deakin government the previous year. Defence expenditure increased from £1 million in 1908–09 to £4.3 million in 1913–14, when it accounted for a third of the Commonwealth budget.[301][302] Economy and population The breaking of the Federation Drought in 1903 heralded a period of strong economic growth. The economy grew by 75 per cent in the fourteen years to the outbreak of the First World War, with pastoralism, construction, manufacturing and government services leading the way. Rural industries were still the major employer (accounting for a quarter of all jobs) but manufacturing was fast catching up. While employment grew by 30 per cent during the period, employment in manufacturing increased by almost 70 per cent.[303] The Australian population also grew strongly, driven by a fall in infant mortality, increasing adult life expectancy, and a revival in state-subsidised immigration. The population increased from four million in 1901 to five million in 1914. From 1910 to 1914 just under 300,000 migrants arrived, all white, and almost all from Britain.[304] Australia at war 1914–18 When the United Kingdom declared war on Germany on 4 August 1914, the declaration automatically involved all of Britain's colonies and dominions.[305] The outbreak of war came in the middle of the 1914 federal election campaign during which Labor leader Andrew Fisher promised to defend Britain "to the last man and the last shilling."[305] Both major parties offered Britain 20,000 Australian troops. As the Defence Act 1903 precluded sending conscripts overseas, a new volunteer force, the Australian Imperial Force (AIF), was raised to meet this commitment.[306][307] 8 August 1918, by Will Longstaff. A depiction of the Battle of Amiens in which Australian commanders and forces played a major role in inflicting the "Black day of the German Army". The Anzacs, along with French, British and Indian troops, landed on the Gallipoli peninsula on 25 April 1915. The Australian and New Zealand position at Anzac Cove was vulnerable to attack and the troops suffered heavy losses in establishing a narrow beachhead. After it had become clear that the expeditionary force would be unable to achieve its objectives in the face of determined Turkish resistance, the Anzacs were evacuated in December, followed by the British and French in early January.[309][310] The Australians suffered about 8,000 deaths in the campaign.[311] Australian war correspondents variously emphasised the bravery and fighting qualities of the Australians and the errors of their British commanders. By 1916, Australian servicemen were commemorating 25 April, and the date soon became an Australian national holiday known as Anzac Day, centring on themes of "nationhood, brotherhood and sacrifice".[312][313] In 1916, five infantry divisions of the AIF were sent to the Western Front. In July 1916, at Fromelles, in a diversionary attack during the Battle of the Somme, the AIF suffered 5,533 casualties in 24 hours, the most costly single encounter in Australian military history.[314] Elsewhere on the Somme, 23,000 Australians were killed or wounded in seven weeks of attacks on German positions. In Spring 1917, as the Germans retreated to the Hindenburg Line, pursuing Australian troops engaged them at the First Battle of Bullecourt and the Second Battle of Bullecourt, suffering 10,000 casualties. In the summer and autumn of 1917, Australian troops also sustained heavy losses during the British offensive around Ypres. Overall, almost 22,000 Australian troops were killed in 1917.[315] In November 1917 the five Australian divisions were united in the Australian Corps, and in May 1918 the Australian general John Monash took over command. The Australian Corps was heavily involved in halting the German Spring Offensive of 1918 and in the allied counter-offensive of August that year. Constituting about one tenth of the British and dominion soldiers on the Western Front, the Australian Corps was responsible for more than 20 per cent of the territory reconquered, prisoners captured and field guns taken in the counter offensive.[316] In the Middle East, the Australian Light Horse brigades were prominent in halting the Ottoman and German threat to the Suez Canal at Romani in August 1916. In 1917, they participated in the allied advance through the Sinai Peninsula and into Palestine. This included a light horse mounted charge at Beersheba in October which helped win the Third Battle of Gaza. In 1918, they pressed on through Palestine and into Syria in an advance that led to the Ottoman surrender on 31 October.[317] By the time the war ended on 11 November 1918, 324,000 Australians had served overseas. Casualties included 60,000 dead and 150,000 wounded—the highest casualty rate of any allied force. Australian troops also had higher rates of unauthorised absence, crime and imprisonment than other allied forces.[318] The home front Few Australians publicly opposed the war in 1914, and volunteers for the AIF outstripped the capacity to enlist and train them.[319][320] There was also a surge in female participation in voluntary organisations such as the Red Cross and patriotic groups such as the One Woman, One Recruit League.[321] Anti-German leagues were formed and 7,000 Germans and other "enemy aliens" were sent to internment camps during the war.[322][323] Prime Minister W. M. Hughes in 1919 In October 1914, the Fisher Labor government introduced the War Precautions Act which gave it the power to make regulations "for securing the public safety and defence of the Commonwealth".[324] After Billy Hughes replaced Fisher as prime minister in October 1915, regulations under the act were increasingly used to censor publications, penalise public speech and suppress organisations that the government considered detrimental to the war effort.[323][325] Business uncertainty, the enlistment of young male workers, and the disruption of shipping and export markets led to a decline in economic output. The economy contracted by 10 per cent during the course of hostilities. Inflation rose in the first two years of war and real wages fell.[326][327] Soon after becoming prime minister, Hughes abandoned a promised referendum to give the Commonwealth the power to control prices, although the government later used its wartime powers to regulate the prices of some basic goods. Lower wages and perceptions of profiteering by some businesses led, in 1916, to a wave of strikes by miners, waterside workers and shearers.[328] Enlistments also declined, falling from 35,000 a month at its peak in 1915 to 6,000 a month in 1916.[329] Hughes returned from a trip to England and the Western Front in July 1916 and narrowly won a Cabinet vote to hold a referendum on conscription for overseas service. In September the New South Wales Labor Party expelled Hughes on account of the issue. Following the narrow defeat of the October 1916 conscription referendum, the state branches of the Labor party began expelling other prominent pro-conscriptionists. In November, Hughes and 23 of his supporters left the parliamentary party, and in January 1917 they formed a new Nationalist government with the former opposition. The Nationalists comfortably won the May 1917 elections and Hughes continued as prime minister.[330] Political and industrial unrest intensified in 1917. From August to October there was a major strike of New South Wales railway, transport, waterside and coal workers which was defeated after the Commonwealth and New South Wales governments arrested strike leaders and organised special constables and non-union labour. The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) was declared an unlawful organisation and more than 100 of its members were arrested. In September, protests by the Women's Peace Army in Melbourne resulted in extensive damage to shops and offices.[331] Following further falls in enlistments in 1917, Hughes announced a second referendum on conscription to be held in December. The referendum campaign proved divisive, with Hughes denouncing opponents of the measure as "the Germans of Australia, the Sinn Féin and the IWW." The Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne, Daniel Mannix, and the Labor premier of Queensland T. J. Ryan were prominent campaigners against conscription. The referendum was defeated by a wider margin than in 1916. An April 1918 recruiting conference including representatives of the Commonwealth government, State governments, employers and labour leaders also failed to reach agreement on measures to increase troop numbers.[332] Enlistments in 1918 were the lowest for the war, leading to the disbandment of 12 battalions and mutinies in the AIF.[333] Paris peace conference Hughes attended the Imperial War Conference and Imperial War Cabinet in London from June 1918 where Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa won British support for their separate representation at the eventual peace conference.[334][335] At the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, Hughes argued that Germany should pay the full cost of the war, but ultimately gained only £5 million in war reparations for Australia. Australia and the other self-governing British dominions won the right to become full members of the new League of Nations, and Australia obtained a special League of Nations mandate over German New Guinea allowing Australia to control trade and immigration. Australia also gained a 42 per cent share of the formerly German-ruled island of Nauru, giving access to its rich superphosphate reserves. Australia argued successfully against a Japanese proposal for a racial equality clause in the League of Nations covenant, as Hughes feared that it would jeopardise the White Australia policy.[336] As a signatory to the Treaty of Versailles and a full member of the League of Nations, Australia took an important step towards international recognition as a sovereign nation.[337] The success of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia posed a threat in the eyes of many Australians, although to a small group of socialists it was an inspiration. The Communist Party of Australia was formed in 1920 and, though remaining electorally insignificant, it obtained some influence in the trade union movement and was banned during World War II for its support for the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact and the Menzies Government unsuccessfully tried to ban it again during the Korean War. Despite splits, the party remained active until its dissolution at the end of the Cold War.[339][340] The Country Party (today's National Party) formed in 1920 to promulgate its version of agrarianism, which it called "Countrymindedness". The goal was to enhance the status of the graziers (operators of big sheep ranches) and small farmers, and secure subsidies for them.[341] Enduring longer than any other major party save the Labor party, it has generally operated in Coalition with the Liberal Party (since the 1940s), becoming a major party of government in Australia—particularly in Queensland. Other significant after-effects of the war included ongoing industrial unrest, which included the 1923 Victorian Police strike.[342] Industrial disputes characterised the 1920s in Australia. Other major strikes occurred on the waterfront, in the coalmining and timber industries in the late 1920s. The union movement had established the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) in 1927 in response to the Nationalist government's efforts to change working conditions and reduce the power of the unions. The consumerism, entertainment culture, and new technologies that characterised the 1920s in the United States were also found in Australia. Prohibition was not implemented in Australia, though anti-alcohol forces were successful in having hotels closed after 6 pm, and closed altogether in a few city suburbs.[343] Stanley Bruce became Prime Minister in 1923, when members of the Nationalist Party Government voted to remove W.M. Hughes. Speaking in early 1925, Bruce summed up the priorities and optimism of many Australians, saying that "men, money and markets accurately defined the essential requirements of Australia" and that he was seeking such from Britain.[346] The migration campaign of the 1920s, operated by the Development and Migration Commission, brought almost 300,000 Britons to Australia,[347] although schemes to settle migrants and returned soldiers "on the land" were generally not a success. "The new irrigation areas in Western Australia and the Dawson Valley of Queensland proved disastrous"[348] In Australia, the costs of major investment had traditionally been met by state and Federal governments and heavy borrowing from overseas was made by the governments in the 1920s. A Loan Council was set up in 1928 to co-ordinate loans, three-quarters of which came from overseas.[349] Despite Imperial Preference, a balance of trade was not successfully achieved with Britain. "In the five years from 1924. .. to ... 1928, Australia bought 43.4% of its imports from Britain and sold 38.7% of its exports. Wheat and wool made up more than two-thirds of all Australian exports", a dangerous reliance on just two export commodities.[350] Australia embraced the new technologies of transport and communication. Coastal sailing ships were finally abandoned in favour of steam, and improvements in rail and motor transport heralded dramatic changes in work and leisure. In 1918, there were 50,000 cars and lorries in the whole of Australia. By 1929 there were 500,000.[351] The stage coach company Cobb and Co, established in 1853, finally closed in 1924.[352] In 1920, the Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Service (to become the Australian airline Qantas) was established.[353] The Reverend John Flynn, founded the Royal Flying Doctor Service, the world's first air ambulance in 1928.[354] Daredevil pilot, Sir Charles Kingsford Smith pushed the new flying machines to the limit, completing a round Australia circuit in 1927 and in 1928 traversed the Pacific Ocean, via Hawaii and Fiji from the US to Australia in the aircraft Southern Cross. He went on to global fame and a series of aviation records before vanishing on a night flight to Singapore in 1935.[355] Australia was deeply affected by the Great Depression of the 1930s, particularly due to its heavy dependence on exports, especially primary products such as wool and wheat.[358] Exposed by continuous borrowing to fund capital works in the 1920s, the Australian and state governments were "already far from secure in 1927, when most economic indicators took a turn for the worse. Australia's dependence of exports left her extraordinarily vulnerable to world market fluctuations", according to economic historian Geoff Spenceley.[359] Debt by the state of New South Wales accounted for almost half of Australia's accumulated debt by December 1927. The situation caused alarm amongst a few politicians and economists, notably Edward Shann of the University of Western Australia, but most political, union and business leaders were reluctant to admit to serious problems.[360] In 1926, Australian Finance magazine described loans as occurring with a "disconcerting frequency" unrivalled in the British Empire: "It may be a loan to pay off maturing loans or a loan to pay the interest on existing loans, or a loan to repay temporary loans from the bankers..."[361] Thus, well before the Wall Street Crash of 1929, the Australian economy was already facing significant difficulties. As the economy slowed in 1927, so did manufacturing and the country slipped into recession as profits slumped and unemployment rose.[362] At elections held in October 1929, the Labor Party was swept into power in a landslide victory; Stanley Bruce, the former Prime Minister, lost his own seat. The new Prime Minister, James Scullin, and his largely inexperienced government were almost immediately faced with a series of crises. Hamstrung by their lack of control of the Senate, a lack of control of the banking system and divisions within their party about how best to deal with the situation, the government was forced to accept solutions that eventually split the party, as it had in 1917. Some gravitated to New South Wales Premier Lang, others to Prime Minister Scullin. Various "plans" to resolve the crisis were suggested; Sir Otto Niemeyer, a representative of the English banks who visited in mid-1930, proposed a deflationary plan, involving cuts to government spending and wages. Treasurer Ted Theodore proposed a mildly inflationary plan, while the Labor Premier of New South Wales, Jack Lang, proposed a radical plan which repudiated overseas debt.[363] The "Premier's Plan" finally accepted by federal and state governments in June 1931, followed the deflationary model advocated by Niemeyer and included a reduction of 20 per cent in government spending, a reduction in bank interest rates and an increase in taxation.[364] In March 1931, Lang announced that interest due in London would not be paid and the Federal government stepped in to meet the debt. In May, the Government Savings Bank of New South Wales was forced to close. The Melbourne Premiers' Conference agreed to cut wages and pensions as part of a severe deflationary policy but Lang renounced the plan. The grand opening of the Sydney Harbour Bridge in 1932 provided little respite to the growing crisis straining the young federation. With multimillion-pound debts mounting, public demonstrations and move and counter-move by Lang and then Scullin, then Lyons federal governments, the Governor of New South Wales, Philip Game, had been examining Lang's instruction not to pay money into the Federal Treasury. Game judged it was illegal. Lang refused to withdraw his order and, on 13 May, he was dismissed by Governor Game. At June elections, Lang Labor's seats collapsed.[365] May 1931 had seen the creation of a new conservative political force, the United Australia Party formed by breakaway members of the Labor Party combining with the Nationalist Party. At Federal elections in December 1931, the United Australia Party, led by former Labor member Joseph Lyons, easily won office. They remained in power until September 1940. The Lyons government has often been credited with steering recovery from the depression, although just how much of this was owed to their policies remains contentious.[366]Stuart Macintyre also points out that although Australian GDP grew from £386.9 million to £485.9 million between 1931 and 1932 and 1938–39, real domestic product per head of population was still "but a few shillings greater in 1938–39 (£70.12), than it had been in 1920–21 (£70.04)."[367] 21-year-old Don Bradman is chaired off the cricket pitch after scoring a world record 452 runs not out in 1930. Sporting success lifted Australian spirits through the Depression years. Australia recovered relatively quickly from the financial downturn of 1929–1930, with recovery beginning around 1932. The Prime Minister, Joseph Lyons, favoured the tough economic measures of the Premiers' Plan, pursued an orthodox fiscal policy and refused to accept the proposals of the Premier of New South Wales, Jack Lang, to default on overseas debt repayments. According to author Anne Henderson of the Sydney Institute, Lyons held a steadfast belief in "the need to balance budgets, lower costs to business and restore confidence" and the Lyons period gave Australia "stability and eventual growth" between the drama of the Depression and the outbreak of the Second World War. A lowering of wages was enforced and industry tariff protections maintained, which together with cheaper raw materials during the 1930s saw a shift from agriculture to manufacturing as the chief employer of the Australian economy—a shift which was consolidated by increased investment by the commonwealth government into defence and armaments manufacture. Lyons saw restoration of Australia's exports as the key to economic recovery.[368] The extent of unemployment in Australia, often cited as peaking at 29 per cent in 1932 is debated. "Trade union figures are the most often quoted, but the people who were there...regard the figures as wildly understating the extent of unemployment" wrote historian Wendy Lowenstein in her collection of oral histories of the depression; however, David Potts argued that "over the last thirty years ...historians of the period have either uncritically accepted that figure (29% in the peak year 1932) including rounding it up to 'a third', or they have passionately argued that a third is far too low."[369][370] Potts himself though suggested a peak national figure of 25 per cent unemployed.[371] Measurement is difficult in part because there was great variation, geographically, by age and by gender, in the level of unemployment. Statistics collected by historian Peter Spearritt show 17.8 per cent of men and 7.9 per cent of women unemployed in 1933 in the comfortable Sydney suburb of Woollahra. (This is not to say that 81.9 per cent of women were working but that 7.9 per cent of the women interested/looking for work were unable to find it, a much lower figure than maybe first thought, as many women stayed home and were not in the job force in those years, especially if they were unable to find work.) In the working class suburb of Paddington, 41.3 per cent of men and 20.7 per cent of women were listed as unemployed.[372] Geoffrey Spenceley stated that apart from variation between men and women, unemployment was also much higher in some industries, such as the building and construction industry, and comparatively low in the public administrative and professional sectors.[373] In country areas, worst hit were small farmers in the wheat belts as far afield as north-east Victoria and Western Australia, who saw more and more of their income absorbed by interest payments.[374] Extraordinary sporting successes did something to alleviate the spirits of Australians during the economic downturn. In a Sheffield Shield cricket match at the Sydney Cricket Ground in 1930, Don Bradman, a young New South Welshman of just 21 years of age wrote his name into the record books by smashing the previous highest batting score in first-class cricket with 452 runs not out in just 415 minutes.[375] The rising star's world beating cricketing exploits were to provide Australians with much needed joy through the emerging Great Depression in Australia and post-World War II recovery. Between 1929 and 1931 the racehorse Phar Lap dominated Australia's racing industry, at one stage winning fourteen races in a row.[376] Famous victories included the 1930 Melbourne Cup, following an assassination attempt and carrying 9 stone 12 pounds weight.[377] Phar Lap sailed for the United States in 1931, going on to win North America's richest race, the Agua Caliente Handicap in 1932. Soon after, on the cusp of US success, Phar Lap developed suspicious symptoms and died. Theories swirled that the champion race horse had been poisoned and a devoted Australian public went into shock.[378] The 1938 British Empire Games were held in Sydney from 5–12 February, timed to coincide with Sydney's sesqui-centenary (150 years since the foundation of British settlement in Australia). Indigenous policy Following federation Aboriginal affairs was a state responsibility, although the Commonwealth became responsible for the Aboriginal population of the Northern Territory from 1911. By that date the Commonwealth and all states except Tasmania had passed legislation establishing Protectors of Aborigines and Protection Boards with extensive powers to regulate the lives of Aboriginal Australians including their ownership of property, place of residence, employment, sexual relationships and custody of their children. Reserves were established, ostensibly for the protection of the Aboriginal population who had been dispossessed of their land. Church groups also ran missions throughout Australia providing shelter, food, religious instruction and elementary schooling for Indigenous people.[379] Some officials were concerned by the growing number of Aboriginal children of mixed heritage, particularly in northern Australia where large Indigenous, South Sea Islander and Asian populations were seen as inconsistent with the white Australia policy. Laws concerning Aboriginal Australians were progressively tightened to make it easier for officials to remove Aboriginal children of mixed descent from their parents and place them in reserves, missions, institutions and employment with white employers.[380] The segregation of Aboriginal people on reserves and in institutions was never systematically accomplished due to funding constraints, differing policy priorities in the states and territories, and resistance from Aboriginal people. In the more densely settled areas of Australia, about 20 per cent of Aboriginal people lived on reserves in the 1920s. The majority lived in camps on the fringes of country towns and a small percentage lived in cities. During the Great Depression more Aboriginal people moved to reserves and missions for food and shelter. By 1941 almost half of the Aboriginal population of New South Wales lived on reserves.[381] In northern Australia, the majority of employed Aboriginal people worked in the pastoral industry where they lived in camps, often with their extended families. Many also camped on the margins of towns and reserves where they could avoid most of the controls imposed by the administrators of reserves, compounds and missions.[382] The 1937 Native Welfare conference of state and Commonwealth officials endorsed a policy of biological absorption of mixed-descent Aboriginal Australians into the white community. [T]he destiny of the natives of aboriginal origin, but not of the full blood, lies in their ultimate absorption by the people of the Commonwealth and it therefore recommends that all efforts be directed to that end.[383] The officials saw the policy of Aboriginal assimilation by absorption into the white community as progressive, aimed at eventually achieving civil and economic equality for mixed-descent Aboriginal people.[383] "... efforts of all State authorities should be directed towards the education of children of mixed aboriginal blood at white standards, and their subsequent employment under the same conditions as whites with a view to their taking their place in the white community on an equal footing with the whites."[384] The following decades saw an increase in the number of Aboriginal Australians of mixed descent removed from their families, although the states and territories progressively adopted a policy of cultural, rather than biological, assimilation, and justified removals on the grounds of child welfare.[385] In 1940, New South Wales became the first state to introduce a child welfare model whereby Aboriginal children of mixed descent were removed from their families under general welfare provisions by court order. Other jurisdictions introduced a welfare model after the war.[384] Defence policy in the 1930s Until the late 1930s, defence was not a significant issue for Australians. At the 1937 elections, both political parties advocated increased defence spending, in the context of increased Japanese aggression in China and Germany's aggression in Europe; however, there was a difference in opinion about how the defence spending should be allocated. The United Australia Party government emphasised co-operation with Britain in "a policy of imperial defence". The lynchpin of this was the British naval base at Singapore and the Royal Navy battle fleet "which, it was hoped, would use it in time of need".[386] Defence spending in the inter-war years reflected this priority. In the period 1921–1936 totalled £40 million on the Royal Australian Navy, £20 million on the Australian Army and £6 million on the Royal Australian Air Force (established in 1921, the "youngest" of the three services). In 1939, the Navy, which included two heavy cruisers and four light cruisers, was the service best equipped for war.[387] Fearing Japanese intentions in the Pacific, Menzies established independent embassies in Tokyo and Washington to receive independent advice about developments.[388]Gavin Long argues that the Labor opposition urged greater national self-reliance through a buildup of manufacturing and more emphasis on the Army and RAAF, as Chief of the General Staff, John Lavarack also advocated.[389] In November 1936, Labor leader John Curtin said "The dependence of Australia upon the competence, let alone the readiness, of British statesmen to send forces to our aid is too dangerous a hazard upon which to found Australia's defence policy."[390] According to John Robertson, "some British leaders had also realised that their country could not fight Japan and Germany at the same time." But "this was never discussed candidly at...meeting(s) of Australian and British defence planners", such as the 1937 Imperial Conference.[391] By September 1939 the Australian Army numbered 3,000 regulars.[392] A recruiting campaign in late 1938, led by Major-General Thomas Blamey increased the reserve militia to almost 80,000.[393] The first division raised for war was designated the 6th Division, of the 2nd AIF, there being 5 Militia Divisions on paper and a 1st AIF in the First World War.[394] On 3 September 1939, the Prime Minister, Robert Menzies, made a national radio broadcast: "My fellow Australians. It is my melancholy duty to inform you, officially, that, in consequence of the persistence by Germany in her invasion of Poland, Great Britain has declared war upon her, and that, as a result, Australia is also at war."[395] Thus began Australia's involvement in the six-year global conflict. Australians were to fight in an extraordinary variety of locations, including withstanding the advance of German Panzers in the Siege of Tobruk, turning back the advance of the Imperial Japanese Army in the New Guinea Campaign, undertaking bomber missions over Europe, engaging in naval battles in the Mediterranean. At home, Japanese attacks included mini-submarine raids on Sydney Harbour and very heavy air raids on and near the Northern Territory's capital, Darwin.[396] The recruitment of a volunteer military force for service at home and abroad was announced, the 2nd Australian Imperial Force and a citizen militia organised for local defence. Troubled by Britain's failure to increase defences at Singapore, Menzies was cautious in committing troops to Europe. By the end of June 1940, France, Norway, Denmark and the Low Countries had fallen to Nazi Germany. Britain stood alone with its dominions. Menzies called for "all-out war", increasing federal powers and introducing conscription. Menzies' minority government came to rely on just two independents after the 1940 election.[397] In January 1941, Menzies flew to Britain to discuss the weakness of Singapore's defences. Arriving in London during The Blitz, Menzies was invited into Winston Churchill's British War Cabinet for the duration of his visit. Returning to Australia, with the threat of Japan imminent and with the Australian army suffering badly in the Greek and Crete campaigns, Menzies re-approached the Labor Party to form a War Cabinet. Unable to secure their support, and with an unworkable parliamentary majority, Menzies resigned as prime minister. The Coalition held office for another month, before the independents switched allegiance and John Curtin was sworn in as prime minister.[388] Eight weeks later, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. A patrol from the 2/13th Infantry Battalion at Tobruk in North Africa, (AWM 020779). The 1941 Siege of Tobruk saw an Australian garrison halt the advance of Hitler's Panzer divisions for the first time since the commencement of the war. The war came closer to home when HMAS Sydney was lost with all hands in battle with the German raider Kormoran in November 1941. With most of Australia's best forces committed to fight against Hitler in the Middle East, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the US naval base in Hawaii, on 8 December 1941 (eastern Australia time). The British battleship HMS Prince of Wales and battlecruiser HMS Repulse sent to defend Singapore were sunk soon afterwards. Australia was ill-prepared for an attack, lacking armaments, modern fighter aircraft, heavy bombers, and aircraft carriers. While demanding reinforcements from Churchill, on 27 December 1941 Curtin published an historic announcement:[399] "The Australian Government... regards the Pacific struggle as primarily one in which the United States and Australia must have the fullest say in the direction of the democracies' fighting plan. Without inhibitions of any kind, I make it clear that Australia looks to America, free of any pangs as to our traditional links or kinship with the United Kingdom."[400] British Malaya quickly collapsed, shocking the Australian nation. British, Indian and Australian troops made a disorganised last stand at Singapore, before surrendering on 15 February 1942. Around 15,000 Australian soldiers became prisoners of war. Curtin predicted that the "battle for Australia" would now follow. On 19 February, Darwin suffered a devastating air raid, the first time the Australian mainland had ever been attacked by enemy forces. For the following 19 months, Australia was attacked from the air almost 100 times. Dutch and Australian PoWs at Tarsau, in Thailand in 1943. 22,000 Australians were captured by the Japanese; 8,000 died as POWs. Two battle-hardened Australian divisions were already steaming from the Middle East for Singapore. Churchill wanted them diverted to Burma, but Curtin refused, and anxiously awaited their return to Australia. US President Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered his commander in the Philippines, General Douglas MacArthur, to formulate a Pacific defence plan with Australia in March 1942. Curtin agreed to place Australian forces under the command of General MacArthur, who became "Supreme Commander of the South West Pacific". Curtin had thus presided over a fundamental shift in Australia's foreign policy. MacArthur moved his headquarters to Melbourne in March 1942 and American troops began massing in Australia. In late May 1942, Japanese midget submarines sank an accommodation vessel in a daring raid on Sydney Harbour. On 8 June 1942, two Japanese submarines briefly shelled Sydney's eastern suburbs and the city of Newcastle.[401] The Battle of Buna–Gona, between November 1942 and January 1943, set the tone for the bitter final stages of the New Guinea campaign, which persisted into 1945. The offensives in Papua and New Guinea of 1943–44 were the single largest series of connected operations ever mounted by the Australian armed forces.[403] On 14 May 1943, the Australian Hospital Ship Centaur, though clearly marked as a medical vessel, was sunk by Japanese raiders off the Queensland coast, killing 268, including all but one of the nursing staff, further enraging popular opinion against Japan.[404][405] MacArthur largely excluded Australian forces from the main push north into the Philippines and Japan. It was left to Australia to lead amphibious assaults against Japanese bases in Borneo. Curtin suffered from ill health from the strains of office and died weeks before the war ended, replaced by Ben Chifley. Of Australia's wartime population of seven million, almost one million men and women served in a branch of the services during the six years of warfare. By war's end, gross enlistments totalled 727,200 men and women in the Australian Army (of whom 557,800 served overseas), 216,900 in the RAAF and 48,900 in the RAN. More than 39,700 were killed or died as prisoners of war, about 8,000 of whom died as prisoners of the Japanese.[408] While the Australian civilian population suffered less at the hands of the Axis powers than did other Allied nations in Asia and Europe, Australia nevertheless came under direct attack by Japanese naval forces and aerial bombardments, particularly through 1942 and 1943, resulting in hundreds of fatalities and fuelling fear of Japanese invasion. Axis naval activity in Australian waters also brought the war close to home for Australians. Austerity measures, rationing and labour controls measures were all implemented to assist the war effort.[409] Australian civilians dug air raid shelters, trained in civil defence and first aid, and Australian ports and cities were equipped with anti aircraft and sea defences.[410] The Australian economy was markedly affected by World War II.[411] Expenditure on war reached 37 per cent of GDP by 1943–44, compared to 4 per cent expenditure in 1939–1940.[412] Total war expenditure was £2,949 million between 1939 and 1945.[413] Although the peak of army enlistments occurred in June–July 1940, when more than 70,000 enlisted, it was the Curtin Labor government, formed in October 1941, that was largely responsible for "a complete revision of the whole Australian economic, domestic and industrial life".[414] Rationing of fuel, clothing and some food was introduced, (although less severely than in Britain) Christmas holidays curtailed, "brown outs" introduced and some public transport reduced. From December 1941, the Government evacuated all women and children from Darwin and northern Australia, and more than 10,000 refugees arrived from South East Asia as Japan advanced.[415] In January 1942, the Manpower Directorate was set up "to ensure the organisation of Australians in the best possible way to meet all defence requirements."[414] Minister for War Organisation of Industry, John Dedman introduced a degree of austerity and government control previously unknown, to such an extent that he was nicknamed "the man who killed Father Christmas". In May 1942 uniform tax laws were introduced in Australia, ending state governments' control of income taxation. "The significance of this decision was greater than any other... made throughout the war, as it added extensive powers to the Federal Government and greatly reduced the financial autonomy of the states."[416] Manufacturing grew significantly because of the war. "In 1939, there were only three Australian firms producing machine tools, but by 1943 there were more than one hundred doing so."[417] From having few front line aircraft in 1939, the RAAF had become the fourth largest allied Air force by 1945. A number of aircraft were built under licence in Australia before the war's end, notably the Beaufort and Beaufighter, although the majority of aircraft were from Britain and later, the US.[418] The Boomerang fighter, designed and built in four months of 1942, emphasised the desperate state Australia found itself in as the Japanese advanced. Australia also created, virtually from nothing, a significant female workforce engaged in direct war production. Between 1939 and 1944 the number of women working in factories rose from 171,000 to 286,000.[419] Dame Enid Lyons, widow of former Prime Minister Joseph Lyons, became the first woman elected to the House of Representatives in 1943, joining the Robert Menzies' new centre-right Liberal Party of Australia, formed in 1945. At the same election, Dorothy Tangney became the first woman elected to the Senate. As in the United States in the early 1950s, allegations of communist influence in society saw tensions emerge in politics. Refugees from Soviet dominated Eastern Europe immigrated to Australia, while to Australia's north, Mao Zedong's Chinese Communist Party won the Chinese Civil War in 1949 and in June 1950, Communist North Korea invaded South Korea. The Menzies government responded to a United States led United Nations Security Council request for military aid for South Korea and diverted forces from occupied Japan to begin Australia's involvement in the Korean War. After fighting to a bitter standstill, the UN and North Korea signed a ceasefire agreement in July 1953. Australian forces had participated in such major battles as Kapyong and Maryang San. 17,000 Australians had served and casualties amounted to more than 1,500, of whom 339 were killed.[421] Elizabeth II inspecting sheep at Wagga Wagga on her 1954 Royal Tour. Huge crowds met the Royal party across Australia. Menzies remained a staunch supporter of links to the monarchy and Commonwealth of Nations and formalised an alliance with the United States, but also launched post-war trade with Japan, beginning a growth of Australian exports of coal, iron ore and mineral resources that would steadily climb until Japan became Australia's largest trading partner.[428] When Menzies retired in 1965, he was replaced as Liberal leader and Prime Minister by Harold Holt. Holt drowned while swimming at a surf beach in December 1967 and was replaced by John Gorton (1968–1971) and then by William McMahon (1971–1972). Post-war immigration Postwar migrants arriving in Australia in 1954After World War II and by the 1950s, Australia had a population of 10 million, and the most populous urban centre was its oldest city, Sydney. It has retained its status as Australia's largest city ever since. Following World War II, the Chifley Labor government instigated a massive programme of European immigration. In 1945, Minister for Immigration, Arthur Calwell wrote "If the experience of the Pacific War has taught us one thing, it surely is that seven million Australians cannot hold three million square miles of this earth's surface indefinitely."[429] All political parties shared the view that the country must "populate or perish". Calwell stated a preference for ten British immigrants for each one from other countries; however, the numbers of British migrants fell short of what was expected, despite government assistance.[430] Migration brought large numbers of southern and central Europeans to Australia for the first time. A 1958 government leaflet assured readers that unskilled non-British migrants were needed for "labour on rugged projects ... work which is not generally acceptable to Australians or British workers".[431] The Australian economy stood in sharp contrast to war-ravaged Europe, and newly arrived migrants found employment in a booming manufacturing industry and government assisted programmes such as the Snowy Mountains Scheme. This hydroelectricity and irrigation complex in south-east Australia consisted of sixteen major dams and seven power stations constructed between 1949 and 1974. It remains the largest engineering project undertaken in Australia. Necessitating the employment of 100,000 people from more than 30 countries, to many it denoted the birth of multicultural Australia.[432] Some 4.2 million immigrants arrived between 1945 and 1985, about 40 per cent of whom came from Britain and Ireland.[433] The 1957 novel They're a Weird Mob was a popular account of an Italian migrating to Australia, although written by Australian-born author John O'Grady. The Australian population reached 10 million in 1959–with Sydney its most populous city. In May 1958, the Menzies Government passed the Migration Act 1958 which replaced the Immigration Restriction Act's arbitrarily applied dictation test with an entry permit system, that reflected economic and skills criteria.[434][435] Further changes in the 1960s effectively ended the White Australia Policy. It legally ended in 1973. Economic growth and suburban living Australia enjoyed significant growth in prosperity in the 1950s and 1960s, with increases in both living standards and in leisure time.[436][437] The manufacturing industry, previously playing a minor part in an economy dominated by primary production, greatly expanded. The first Holden motor car came out of General Motors-Holden's Fisherman's Bend factory in November 1948. Car ownership rapidly increased—from 130 owners in every 1,000 in 1949 to 271 owners in every 1,000 by 1961.[438] By the early 1960s, four competitors to Holden had set up Australian factories, employing between 80,000 and 100,000 workers, "at least four-fifths of them migrants".[439] In the 1960s, about 60 per cent of Australian manufacturing was protected by tariffs. Pressure from business interests and the union movement ensured these remained high. Historian Geoffrey Bolton suggests that this high tariff protection of the 1960s caused some industries to "lapse into lethargy", neglecting research and development and the search for new markets.[439] The CSIRO was expected to fulfil research and development. Prices for wool and wheat remained high, with wool the mainstay of Australia's exports. Sheep numbers grew from 113 million in 1950 to 171 million in 1965. Wool production increased from 518,000 to 819,000 tonnes in the same period.[440] Wheat, wool and minerals ensured a healthy balance of trade between 1950 and 1966.[441] The great housing boom of the post war period saw rapid growth in the suburbs of the major Australian cities. By the 1966 census, only 14 per cent lived in rural Australia, down from 31 per cent in 1933, and only 8 per cent lived on farms.[442] Virtual full employment meant high standards of living and dramatic increases in home ownership, and by the sixties, Australia had the most equitable spread of income in the world.[443] By the beginning of the sixties, an Australia-wide McNair survey estimated that 94% of homes had a fridge, 50% a telephone, 55% a television, 60% a washing machine, and 73% a vacuum cleaner. In addition, most households had now acquired a car.[444] According to one study, "In 1946, there was one car for every 14 Australians; by 1960, it was one to 3.5. The vast majority of families had access to a car."[436] Car ownership flourished during the postwar period, with 1970/1971 census data estimating that 96.4 per cent of Australian households in the early Seventies owned at least one car; however, not all felt the rapid suburban growth was desirable.[445] Distinguished Architect and designer Robin Boyd, a critic of Australia's built surroundings, described Australia as "'the constant sponge lying in the Pacific', following the fashions of overseas and lacking confidence in home-produced, original ideas".[446] In 1956, dadaist comedian Barry Humphries performed the character of Edna Everage as a parody of a house-proud housewife of staid 1950s Melbourne suburbia (the character only later morphed into a critique of self-obsessed celebrity culture). It was the first of many of his satirical stage and screen creations based around quirky Australian characters: Sandy Stone, a morose elderly suburbanite, Barry McKenzie a naive Australian expat in London and Sir Les Patterson, a vulgar parody of a Whitlam-era politician.[447] Some writers defended suburban life. Journalist Craig Macgregor saw suburban life as a "...solution to the needs of migrants..." Hugh Stretton argued that "plenty of dreary lives are indeed lived in the suburbs... but most of them might well be worse in other surroundings".[448] Historian Peter Cuffley has recalled life for a child in a new outer suburb of Melbourne as having a kind of joyous excitement. "Our imaginations saved us from finding life too humdrum, as did the wild freedom of being able to roam far and wide in different kinds of (neighbouring) bushland...Children in the suburbs found space in backyards, streets and lanes, playgrounds and reserves..."[449] In 1954, the Menzies Government formally announced the introduction of the new two-tiered TV system—a government-funded service run by the ABC, and two commercial services in Sydney and Melbourne, with the 1956 Summer Olympics in Melbourne being a major driving force behind the introduction of television to Australia.[450] Colour TV began broadcasting in 1975. Indigenous assimilation and child removal The 1951 Native Welfare Conference of state and Commonwealth officials agreed on a policy of cultural assimilation for all Aboriginal Australians. Paul Hasluck, the Commonwealth Minister for Territories, stated: "Assimilation means, in practical terms, that, in the course of time, it is expected that all persons of aboriginal blood or mixed blood in Australia will live like other white Australians do."[384][385] Controls over the daily lives of Aboriginal people and the removal of Aboriginal children of mixed descent continued under the policy of assimilation, although the control was now largely exercised by Welfare Boards and removals were justified on welfare grounds. The number of Aboriginal people deemed to be wards of the state under Northern Territory welfare laws doubled to 11,000 from 1950 to 1965.[451] The policy of assimilation attracted increasing criticism from Aboriginal people and their supporters on the grounds of its negative effects on Aboriginal families and its denial of Aboriginal cultural autonomy. Removals of Aboriginal children of mixed descent from their families slowed by the late 1960s and by 1973 the Commonwealth had adopted a policy of self-determination for Indigenous Australians.[452] In 1997, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission estimated that between 10 per cent and one-third of Aboriginal children had been removed from their families from 1910 to 1970. Regional studies indicate that 15 per cent of Aboriginal children were removed in New South Wales from 1899 to 1968, while the figure for Victoria was about 10 per cent.[453] Robert Manne estimates that the figure for Australia as a whole was closer to 10 per cent.[454] Summarising the policy of assimilation and forced removals of Aboriginal children of mixed descent, Richard Broome concludes: "Even though the children's material conditions and Western education may have been improved by removal, even though some removals were necessary, and even though some people were thankful for it in retrospect, overall it was a disaster....It was a rupturing of tens of thousands of Aboriginal families, aimed at eradicating Aboriginality from the nation in the cause of homogeneity and in fear of difference."[453] Alliances 1950–1972 In the early 1950s, the Menzies government saw Australia as part of a "triple alliance" in concert with both the US and traditional ally Britain.[455] At first, "the Australian leadership opted for a consistently pro-British line in diplomacy", while at the same time looking for opportunities to involve the US in South East Asia.[456] Thus, the government committed military forces to the Korean War and the Malayan Emergency and hosted British nuclear tests after 1952.[457] Australia was also the only Commonwealth country to offer support to the British during the Suez Crisis.[458] Menzies oversaw an effusive welcome to Queen Elizabeth II on the first visit to Australia by a reigning monarch, in 1954. He made the following remarks during a light-hearted speech to an American audience in New York, while on his way to attend her coronation in 1953: "We in Australia, of course, are British, if I may say so, to the boot heels...but we stand together – our people stand together – till the crack of doom."[459] As British influence declined in South East Asia, the US alliance came to have greater significance for Australian leaders and the Australian economy. British investment in Australia remained significant until the late 1970s, but trade with Britain declined through the 1950s and 1960s. In the late 1950s the Australian Army began to re-equip using US military equipment. In 1962, the US established a naval communications station at North West Cape, the first of several built during the next decade.[460][461] Most significantly, in 1962, Australian Army advisors were sent to help train South Vietnamese forces, in a developing conflict in which the British had no part. According to diplomat Alan Renouf, the dominant theme in Australia's foreign policy under Australia's Liberal–Country Party governments of the 1950s and 1960s was anti-communism.[462] Another former diplomat, Gregory Clark, suggested that it was specifically a fear of China that drove Australian foreign policy decisions for twenty years.[463] The ANZUS security treaty, which had been signed in 1951, had its origins in Australia's and New Zealand's fears of a rearmed Japan. Its obligations on the US, Australia and New Zealand are vague, but its influence on Australian foreign policy thinking, at times has been significant.[464] The SEATO treaty, signed only three years later, clearly demonstrated Australia's position as a US ally in the emerging Cold War.[465] As Britain struggled to enter the Common Market in the 1960s, Australia saw that its historic ties with the mother country were rapidly fraying. Canberra was alarmed but kept a low profile, not wanting to alienate London. Russel Ward states that the implications of British entry into Europe in 1973: "seemed shattering to most Australians, particularly to older people and conservatives."[466] Carl Bridge, however, points out that Australia had been "hedging its British bets" for some time. The ANZUS treaty and Australia's decision to enter the Vietnam War did not involve Britain and by 1967 Japan was Australia's leading export partner and the US her largest source of imports. According to Bridge, Australia's decision not to follow Britain's devaluation of her currency in 1967 "marked the demise of British Australia."[465] Vietnam War By 1965, Australia had increased the size of the Australian Army Training Team Vietnam (AATTV), and in April the Government made a sudden announcement that "after close consultation with the United States", a battalion of troops was to be sent to South Vietnam.[467] In parliament, Menzies emphasised the argument that "our alliances made demands on us". The alliance involved was presumably, the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), and Australia was providing military assistance because South Vietnam, a signatory to SEATO, had apparently requested it.[468]Documents released in 1971 indicated that the decision to commit troops was made by Australia and the US, not at the request of South Vietnam.[469] By 1968, there were three Australian Army battalions at any one time at the 1st Australian Task Force (1ATF) base at Nui Dat in addition to the advisers of the AATTV placed throughout Vietnam, and personnel reached a peak total of almost 8,000, comprising about one third of the Army's combat capacity. Between 1962 and 1972 almost 60,000 personnel served in Vietnam, including ground troops, naval forces and air assets.[470] In July 1966, new Prime Minister Harold Holt expressed his government's support for the US and its role in Vietnam in particular. "I don't know where people would choose to look for the security of this country were it not for the friendship and strength of the United States."[471] While on a visit in the same year to the US, Holt assured President Lyndon B. Johnson "...I hope there is corner of your mind and heart which takes cheer from the fact that you have an admiring friend, a staunch friend, [Australia] that will be all the way with LBJ."[472] The Liberal-CP Government was returned with a massive majority in elections held in December 1966, fought over national security issues including Vietnam. The opposition Labor Party had advocated the withdrawal of all conscripts from Vietnam, but its deputy leader Gough Whitlam had stated that a Labor government might maintain regular army troops there.[473] Arthur Calwell, who had been leader of the Labor Party since 1960, retired in favour of Whitlam a few months later. Despite Holt's sentiments and his government's electoral success in 1966, the war became unpopular in Australia, as it did in the United States. The movements to end Australia's involvement gathered strength after the Tet Offensive of early 1968 and compulsory national service (selected by ballot) became increasingly unpopular. In the 1969 elections, the government hung on despite a significant decline in popularity. Moratorium marches held across Australia in mid-1970 attracted large crowds- the Melbourne march of 100,000 being led by Labor MP Jim Cairns. As the Nixon administration proceeded with Vietnamization of the war and began the withdrawal of troops, so did the Australian Government. In November 1970 1st Australian Task Force was reduced to two battalions and in November 1971, 1ATF was withdrawn from Vietnam. The last military advisors of the AATTV were withdrawn by the Whitlam Labor government in mid-December 1972.[470] The Australian military presence in Vietnam had lasted 10 years, and in purely human cost, more than 500 had been killed and more than 2,000 wounded. The war cost Australia $218 million between 1962 and 1972.[470] The Whitlam government: 1972–75 Elected in December 1972 after 23 years in opposition, Labor won office under Gough Whitlam, introducing significant reforms and expanding the Federal budget. Welfare benefits were extended and payment rates increased, a national health insurance scheme was introduced, and divorce laws liberalised. Commonwealth expenditure on schools trebled in the two years to mid-1975 and the Commonwealth assumed responsibility for funding higher education, abolishing tuition fees. In foreign affairs the new government prioritised the Asia Pacific region, formally abolishing the White Australia Policy, recognising Communist China and enhancing ties with Indonesia. Conscription was abolished and the remaining Australian troops in Vietnam withdrawn. The Australian national anthem was changed from God Save the Queen to Advance Australia Fair, the imperial honours system was replaced at the Commonwealth level by the Order of Australia, and Queen Elizabeth II was officially styled Queen of Australia. Relations with the US, however, became strained after government members criticised the resumption of the US bombing campaign in North Vietnam.[474] In Indigenous affairs, the government introduced a policy of self-determination for Aboriginal people in economic, social and political affairs. Federal expenditure on Aboriginal services increased from $23 million to $141 million during the three years of the government.[475] One of the first acts of the Whitlam government was to establish a Royal Commission into land rights in the Northern Territory under Justice Woodward. Legislation based on its findings was passed into law by the Fraser government in 1976, as the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976.[475] As the Whitlam government did not control the Senate, much of its legislation was rejected or amended. After Labor was re-elected with a reduced majority at elections in May 1974, the Senate remained an obstacle to its political agenda. The government's popularity was also harmed by deteriorating economic conditions and a series of political scandals. Increased government spending, rapid wage growth, booming commodity prices and the first OPEC oil shock led to economic instability. The unemployment rate reached post-war high of 3.6 per cent in late 1974 and the annual inflation rate hit 17 per cent.[476] In 1974–75 the government began negotiations for US$4 billion in foreign loans to fund state development of Australia's mineral and energy resources. Minister Rex Connor conducted secret discussions with a loan broker from Pakistan, and the Treasurer, Jim Cairns, misled parliament about the issue. Arguing the government was incompetent following the Loans Affair, the opposition Liberal-Country Party Coalition delayed passage of the government's money bills in the Senate, until the government would promise a new election. Whitlam refused and the deadlock ended when his government was controversially dismissed by the Governor-General, John Kerr on 11 November 1975. Opposition leader Malcolm Fraser was installed as caretaker Prime Minister, pending an election.[477] Fraser government: 1975–83 The Federal elections of December 1975 resulted in a landslide victory for the Liberal-Country Party Coalition and Malcolm Fraser continued as Prime Minister. The coalition government won subsequent elections in 1977 and 1980, making Fraser the second longest serving Australian Prime Minister up to that time.[478] The Fraser government espoused a policy of administrative competence and economic austerity leavened by progressive humanitarian, social and environmental interventions. The government enacted the Whitlam government's land rights bill with few changes, increased immigration, and resettled Indochinese refugees. It promoted multiculturalism and in 1978 established the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) as a multicultural broadcaster. In foreign policy, the government continued Labor's friendly relations with China and Indonesia, repaired the frayed relationship with the US and opposed white minority rule in South Africa and Rhodesia. The government also attempted to use its influence with the US and China to limit Soviet expansionism. Environmental policies included banning resource development on Fraser Island and the Great Barrier Reef, creating Kakadu National Park and banning whaling. However, the government refused to use Commonwealth powers to stop the construction of the Franklin Dam in Tasmania in 1982 and the resulting grassroots campaign against the dam contributed to the emergence of an influential Environmental movement in Australia,[479][478] On the economic front, the Fraser government followed a "fight inflation first" strategy centred on budget cuts and wage restraint. Welfare benefits were restricted, the universal healthcare system was partially dismantled, and university funding per student cut. However, by the early 1980s economic conditions were deteriorating. The second oil shock in 1979 increased inflation which was exacerbated by a boom in commodity prices and a sharp increase in real wages. An international recession, the collapse of the resources boom and a severe drought in eastern Australia saw unemployment rise. The government responded with Keynesian deficit spending in its 1982 Budget, but by 1983 both unemployment and annual inflation exceeded 10 per cent. At the Federal elections in March 1983 the coalition government was comfortably defeated by Labor under its popular new leader Bob Hawke.[480] Labor governments: 1983–1996 The Hawke government pursued a mixture of free market reforms and consensus politics featuring "summits" of government representatives, business leaders, trade unions and non-government organisations in order to reach consensus on key issues such as economic policy and tax reform. The centrepiece of this policy mix was an Accord with trade unions under which wage demands would be curtailed in return for increased social benefits. Welfare payments were increased and better targeted to those on low incomes, and a retirement benefits scheme (superannuation) was extended to most employees. A new universal health insurance scheme, Medicare, was introduced.[481] The Treasurer Paul Keating oversaw a program of deregulation and micro-economic reforms which broke with the Keynesian economics that had traditionally been favoured by the Labor party.[482] These reforms included floating the Australian dollar, deregulating capital markets and allowing competition from foreign banks. Business regulation and competition policy was streamlined, tariffs and quotas on Australian manufactured goods and rural commodities were gradually reduced, and a number of government enterprises and services were progressively privatised. The higher education system was restructured and significantly expanded, partly funded by the reintroduction of fees in the form of student loans and "contributions" (HECS).[483] Paul Kelly concludes that, "In the 1980s both Labor and non-Labor underwent internal philosophical revolutions to support a new set of ideas—faith in markets, deregulation, a reduced role for government, low protection and the creation of a new cooperative enterprise culture."[484] The Hawke government courted the growing environmental movement with a series of actions including using Federal powers to stop the Franklin Dam development in Tasmania, banning new uranium mines at Jabiluka, and proposing Kakadu National park for world heritage listing.[481] In foreign policy, the Hawke government maintained strong relations with the US and was instrumental in the formation of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) group. Australia contributed naval ships and troops to UN forces in the Gulf War after Iraq had invaded Kuwait in 1990.[481][485] The government complemented its consensus politics with other initiatives aimed at fostering national unity. The Australia Act 1986 eliminated the last vestiges of British legal authority at the Federal level. The Australian Bicentenary in 1988 was the focus of year-long celebrations with multicultural themes. The World Expo 88 was held in Brisbane and a new Parliament House in Canberra was opened.[486] Strong economic growth, falling unemployment, an unstable opposition, and Bob Hawke's popularity with the public contributed to the re-election of the Hawke government in 1984, 1987 and 1990. However, the economy went into recession in 1990 and by late 1991 the unemployment rate had risen above 10 per cent. With the government's popularity falling, Paul Keating successfully challenged for the leadership and became Prime Minister in December 1991.[481] In May 1994 a more ambitious "Working Nation" jobs program was introduced. The Keating government also pursued a number of "big picture" issues throughout its two terms including increased political and economic engagement in the Asia Pacific region, Indigenous reconciliation, an Australian republic and "efficiency with equity". The government engaged closely with the Indonesian President, Suharto and other regional partners, and successfully campaigned to increase the role of APEC as a major forum for strategic and economic co-operation.[488] A Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation was established and, following the High Court of Australia's historic Mabo decision in 1992, the first national Native Title legislation was introduced to regulate claims and provide compensation for loss of native title.[489] In 1993, Keating established a Republic Advisory Committee to examine options for Australia becoming a republic. The government also introduced family payments and a superannuation guarantee with compulsory employer contributions.[490] Under the Hawke government the annual migration intake had more than doubled from 54,500 in 1984–85 to more than 120,000 in 1989–90. The Keating government responded to community concerns about the pace of immigration by cutting the immigration intake and introducing mandatory detention for illegal immigrants arriving without a valid visa. Immigration fell to 67,900 in 1992–93.[491][492] With foreign debt, inflation and unemployment still stubbornly high, and after a series of ministerial resignations, Keating lost the March 1996 Election to the Liberals' John Howard.[493][494] Australia in a globalised world: 1996 – 2022 Howard government: 1996–2007 John Howard with a Liberal–National Party coalition served as Prime Minister from 1996 until 2007, winning re-election in 1998, 2001 and 2004 to become the second-longest serving prime minister after Menzies. One of the first programs instigated by the Howard government was a nationwide gun control scheme following a mass shooting at Port Arthur. The new government saw industrial relations and taxation as two key areas of economic reform which had been left undone by the Hawke-Keating governments. The coalition introduced industrial relations reforms in 1996 which promoted individual contracts and enterprise bargaining. In 2006, it controversially introduced the WorkChoices legislation, which made it easier for small businesses to terminate employment. After the 1996 election, Howard and treasurer Peter Costello proposed a Goods and Services Tax (GST) which they successfully took to the electorate in 1998 and implemented in July 2000.[495] A political concern for the new government was the significant public support for Pauline Hanson and, later, her One Nation party, which espoused populist policies including winding back free market reforms, Asian immigration and programs for Indigenous Australians. The government responded with public messaging criticising elites and political correctness and emphasising Australian values.[496][497] The coalition initially cut immigration intakes, abolished the Office of Multicultural Affairs and other multicultural agencies, and introduced citizenship tests for migrants.[498] Following a sharp increase in unauthorised arrivals by boat from 1999, the government opened new mandatory detention centres in remote areas of Australia and issued temporary visas for those found to be refugees. Following the Children Overboard affair and the Tampa Affair in 2001, the government introduced the Pacific Solution, which involved detaining unauthorised immigrants in detention centres in Nauru and Papua New Guinea while their refugee status was determined, as well as a policy of turning back vessels intercepted at sea.[499] In Indigenous affairs the Prime Minister rejected calls for a treaty with Indigenous Australians and an apology for past actions which had harmed them. Instead, the government pursued a policy of "practical reconciliation" involving specific measures to improve Indigenous education, health, employment and housing. In response to the High Court's decision in Wik Peoples v Queensland, in 1996, the Howard government amended native title legislation to limit native title claims. In 2007, following the release of the "Little Children are Sacred" report detailing widespread abuse in Aboriginal communities, the Howard government launched the Northern Territory Intervention in order to create a safe environment for Indigenous children. The government's response was criticised by the co-chairs of the report, received a divided response from the Indigenous community, but was supported by the Labor opposition.[500] Honouring a commitment made during the 1996 election campaign, the Howard government set up a people's convention on an Australian republic. The resulting 1999 referendum on a republic failed. Howard, an avowed monarchist, became the only Australian Prime Minister to publicly oppose a constitutional amendment he had put to the people.[501][502] In foreign affairs, the government advocated a policy of "Asia first, but not Asia only", emphasising traditional links to the Commonwealth and the US. Relations with Indonesia became strained over East Timor but generally improved after the Bali bombings. Australia's support of US policy during the War on Terror was followed by an Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement in 2004. Trade agreements with Singapore and Thailand were also secured and relations with China improved. Australia joined the US in refusing to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gas emissions, arguing that it would harm Australia's economy and would be ineffective without the participation of China and India.[504] After initial cuts, the immigration intake increased from 92,270 in 1999–2000 to 157,000 in 2005–06, with a bias towards skilled workers to meet the needs of a rapidly growing economy. The immigration intake also became increasingly diverse, with the proportion of immigrants from South Asia increasing from 8 per cent in 1996–97 to 20 per cent in 2007–08. Inbound tourism also grew, helped by the Sydney Olympic games in 2000.[505] The economy continued its uninterrupted expansion since the early 1990s recession, with record jobs growth and the lowest unemployment rates since the 1970s. Exports and imports grew from a value of about a third of Australia's economic output in the early 1990s to 40 per cent in 2005. China became Australia's second largest trading partner after Japan, and foreign investment in Australia more than doubled. The coalition delivered Budget surpluses in most years which, along with the proceeds of government asset sales – most notably of Telstra – were partly invested in a Future Fund to reduce the national debt. Income inequality and private debt increased as the economy expanded, with the biggest increase in incomes accruing to the top 10 per cent of income earners.[506] By 2007 the Howard government was consistently trailing the Labor opposition in opinion polls, with key issues being rising interest rates, the unpopular Work Choices industrial relations reforms, and climate change policy. The government was also hampered by leadership tensions between Howard and Costello and opinion polls indicating a desire for a generational change in leadership (opposition leader Kevin Rudd was eighteen years younger than Howard and widely seen as more vibrant). Labor won the November 2007 election with a swing of more than 5 per cent and Howard became only the second sitting Prime Minister to lose his seat in an election.[507] Labor governments: 2007–2013 Kevin Rudd became Prime Minister in December 2007 and held office until June 2010, when he was replaced as leader by Julia Gillard, Australia's first female Prime Minister. Following the August 2010 federal election, Gillard formed a minority Labor government with the support of the Australian Greens and three independents. Gillard was replaced as Prime Minister by Rudd in June 2013, and Labor lost the subsequent September 2013 election.[508][509] The first Rudd government moved quickly to ratify the Kyoto protocols, dismantle the previous government's Work Choices industrial relations reforms, and issue an apology to Aboriginal Australians for past policies, particularly the removal of Aboriginal children from their families.[508] The government was soon confronted by the Global Financial Crisis and subsequent global recession, responding with a series of economic stimulus measures worth A$75 billion. Although economic growth slowed in 2008, Australia was one of the few advanced economies in the world to avoid recession.[510] Rudd declared climate change "the great moral challenge of our generation" and his government proposed an emissions trading scheme (ETS) to address the issue. The necessary legislation, however, was twice rejected in the Senate when the Opposition and Greens refused to support it. After the December 2009 UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen failed to produce an agreed international response to global warming the government decided to postpone its ETS until 2013, a decision which saw Labor lose some electoral support to the Greens.[511] The government also lost some public support when it proposed a Resources Super Profits Tax following the release of the Henry Tax Review in May 2010. The resulting media campaign against the tax by the mining industry particularly affected Labor's support in the resource-rich states of Queensland and Western Australia.[512] Illegal immigration policy proved another difficult issue for the government, which initially closed the Nauru processing centre, abolished temporary protection visas and took measures to improve the legal rights and processing time for applicants for asylum. However, unauthorised arrivals by boat increased sharply from 2009 and the number in mandatory detention stretched capacity. The new leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbot, promised that a Coalition government would "stop the boats."[513][514] In June 2010, with the government behind the Opposition in polls and Rudd's popularity rating falling, the Labor caucus replaced Rudd with Gillard as leader.[514] The new leader was able to negotiate concessions on a new mining tax with large mining companies but failed to reach agreement with East Timor on a proposed migration processing centre there.[515] Following the September 2010 election, the Gillard government passed a series of legislation with the support of the Greens who now held the balance of power in the Senate. This included enabling legislation for a National Broadband Network, a carbon pricing scheme, a mining tax, a National Disability Insurance Scheme, and school funding reforms.[509] Illegal immigration policy, however, remained a politically sensitive issue. The government negotiated an agreement with Malaysia to process some people there but the plan did not gain the support of the Opposition or the Greens and was struck down by the High Court. As the number of unauthorised immigrants arriving by boat continued to climb, the government reopened offshore processing centres on Manus Island and Nauru.[516] In Indigenous affairs, the government introduced, in 2012, a modified policy in the Northern Territory ('Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory') under a 10-year funding agreement. The new policy retained many features of the Northern Territory Intervention but was broader in scope and involved more collaboration with Indigenous stakeholders.[517] Following mounting leadership speculation and poor polling for the government, Rudd defeated Gillard in a leadership ballot in June 2013 and returned as Prime Minister, promising to replace the carbon tax with an emissions trading scheme and to ensure that people arriving without authority by boat would not be settled in Australia.[518] The Opposition, promising to "stop the boats," abolish the carbon tax and mining tax, and reduce the Budget deficit and government debt, won the September 2013 election.[519] Liberal-National Coalition governments: (2013–2022) The return of the Liberal-National Coalition to power after six years in opposition initially failed to restore stability to the office of prime minister. Prime Minister Tony Abbott's rival Malcolm Turnbull challenged for and won the leadership of the Liberals within Abbott's first term. After Turnbull narrowly returned the Coalition to office in 2016, Party dissatisfaction with his leadership saw him replaced by Scott Morrison in 2018. The government's May 2014 Budget, which included measures such as the deregulation of university fees, welfare cuts and projected cuts to funding to the states for health and education, proved unpopular, with the perception that it had involved breaking a number of election promises.[526] The government secured the passage of legislation abolishing the carbon tax (July 2014) and the mining tax (September 2014).[522] The Prime Minister announced a number of decisions – most notably the reintroduction of knighthoods and a knighthood for Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh – which had not been approved by cabinet and which were widely criticised in the media.[527][528] By September 2015 the government had lost 30 Newspolls in a row and Malcolm Turnbull successfully challenged for the leadership.[529] The new Turnbull government promised to promote a "smart, agile and innovative Australia" and "jobs and growth".[530] The government announced a National Innovation and Science Agenda and delivered a Budget featuring cuts to company tax.[531] However, the elections of July 2016 saw the government returned with a majority on only one and a minority in the Senate, making it more difficult to secure the passage of government legislation. Following a national postal plebiscite, the government legalised same-sex marriage in December 2017.[532] In foreign affairs, Australia signed a refugee exchange deal with the US in September 2016, allowing those in detention on Manus Island and Nauru to be settled in the US.[533] There was increased tension with China because of Australia's criticism of China's policies in the South China Sea, Australia's new laws targeting foreign influence in domestic politics, and a ban, on national security grounds, on Chinese companies supplying Australia's 5G communications network. Trade with China, however, continued to grow.[534] The government lost five by-elections in July 2018. When, in August, the government sought to introduce legislation for a National Energy Guarantee, including a commitment to meet Australia's emissions target under the Paris Agreement, a number of Coalition members vowed to vote against the bill. The resulting controversy further harmed the government, which had already lost more than 30 consecutive Newspolls. The parliamentary Liberal Party elected Scott Morrison as its new leader and he was sworn in as Prime Minister.[537] Morrison government (2018–2022) A barricade in Coolangatta enforcing the border closure between Queensland and New South Wales in April 2020 that was implemented by the Queensland Government in response to the COVID-19 pandemic[538] The Morrison government committed to remaining in the Paris Agreement, but promised a greater focus on reduction of energy prices.[539] In foreign affairs the government signed the Indonesia–Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (IA-CEPA) in March 2019.[540] In April, the treasurer delivered a Budget focusing on tax cuts, increased spending on roads and other infrastructure, and a forecast return to a surplus.[541] The government was returned at the elections of May 2019 with a three-seat majority. In 2017, a constitutional convention of 250 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander delegates had issued the Uluru Statement from the Heart, calling for the recognition of Indigenous sovereignty, a Makarrata (truth telling and agreement-making) Commission, constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians and a "voice to parliament". In 2019, the government announced a process to "develop options for a model that will ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are heard at all levels of government".[542] Within a year the government was confronted with the international COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent recession, Australia's first in 29 years.[543] From 1 February 2020, Australia progressively closed its borders to foreign nationals who had recently visited high-risk countries, culminating, on 20 March, in a general ban on the entry of foreign nationals.[544] On 13 March 2020, a National Cabinet, including Australian government, state government and territory government leaders, was created to address the crisis.[545] The national cabinet announced a series of increasingly tighter restrictions on non-essential business, travel and gatherings of people with the aim of suppressing COVID. These restrictions were progressively eased from early May, although individual states and territories intermittently reimposed restrictions in response to particular outbreaks of COVID-19.[546][547] The Australian government made provision for $267 billion in economic stimulus measures, and $16.6 billion in health measures in response to COVID-19.[548] As a result of the COVID-19 recession, the unemployment rate rose from about 5 per cent in February 2020 to 7.5 per cent in July 2020. As the economy began to recover from the second half of 2020, the unemployment rate fell to 5.6 per cent in March 2021 and hours worked returned to pre-recession levels.[547][549] As at 17 April 2021, Australia was ranked 134 out of 177 countries in the number of COVID-19 deaths per capita.[550] In June 2021 Australia and the United Kingdom announced that they had struck a preliminary deal on a free-trade agreement.[551] On 16 September 2021, the government announced that Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States had agreed to the creation of an enhanced trilateral security partnership, dubbed AUKUS. The first initiative under AUKUS would be for Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarine technology. As a result of the agreement, Australia cancelled its 2016 contract for the diesel-electric Attack-class submarine with the French company Naval Group.[552] China condemned the AUKUS agreement, stating it "seriously undermines regional peace and stability and intensifies the arms race".[553] France announced it would withdraw its ambassador from Australia in protest against the lack of consultation on the security agreement and the cancellation of the $90 billion dollar contract for French submarines.[554] Post-pandemic: 2022 to present Albanese government (2022– present) On 23 May 2022, Anthony Albanese was sworn in as Australia's new prime minister. His Labor Party defeated Scott Morrison's conservative government in the election. Prime Minister Albanese formed Australia's first Labor government in almost a decade.[555] In December 2022, the prime minister announced that a referendum for an Indigenous Voice to parliament would be held before December 2023.[556] On 30 January 2023, Albanese unveiled a new national cultural policy 'Revive' with $286 million in funding over four years, labelled the most significant investment in Australian culture since the Keating government.[557] The Revive policy's centrepiece establishes 'Creative Australia', with four new bodies; a First Nations-led body, Music Australia, Writers Australia and the Centre for Arts and Entertainment Workplaces. Revive's legislation also granted protection for First Nations culture as well as funding toward a First Nations languages partnership between First Nations representatives and Australian governments and funding the establishment of a National Aboriginal Art Gallery in Alice Springs and an Aboriginal Cultural Centre in Perth.[558] The policy also provided regulation for a revenue levy for streaming services to reinvest in locally produced cinema and television productions.[559] Revive policy also included the first establishment of a poet laureate for Australia.[560] Society and culture: 1960s to present Social developments Indigenous Australians In 1960, Aboriginal affairs were still regulated by state governments and, in the Northern Territory, by the Australian government. In most states Aboriginal Australians were banned from drinking alcohol and their freedom of association, movement and control of property was restricted. Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory banned Aboriginal people from voting and Queensland and Western Australia controlled their right to marry. Aboriginals were often subjected to unofficial "colour bars" restricting their access to many goods, services and public facilities, especially in country towns.[561] The official policy of the Australian government and most state governments, however, was the assimilation of Aboriginal people into mainstream culture: "all aborigines and part-aborigines are expected to eventually attain the same manner of living as other Australians and to live as members of a single Australian community enjoying the same rights and privileges, accepting the same responsibilities, observing the same customs and influenced by the same beliefs, hopes and loyalties as other Australians."[562] In 1963, the Yolngu people of Arnhem Land sent a bark petition to the Australian parliament asking for recognition of their traditional land rights. They subsequently took their case to the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory which ruled against them in September 1971.[566] In 1966, the Australian government gave Aboriginal people the same rights to social security benefits as other Australians.[568] A 1967 referendum called by the Holt government saw Australians vote by a 91 per cent majority to change the Australian constitution to include all Aboriginal Australians in the national census and allow the Federal parliament to legislate on their behalf.[569] A Council for Aboriginal Affairs was established.[570] Demands for Indigenous self-determination and the preservation of cultural identity were increasingly promoted. In January 1972 Aboriginal activists erected an Aboriginal "tent embassy" on the lawns of parliament house, Canberra and issued a number demands including land rights, compensation for past loss of land and self-determination. The leader of the opposition Gough Whitlam was among those who visited the tent embassy to discuss their demands.[571] The Land Rights Act only applied to the Northern Territory, but Aboriginal communities could also acquire land through various state land rights acts or other legislation. By the early 1980s Aboriginal communities had gained title to about 30 per cent of Northern Territory land and 20 per cent of South Australian land. In 1982, the Queensland government granted Aboriginal reserve land to its occupiers but the grants gave limited rights and was revocable at any time. Only a small proportion of land in other states had been transferred to traditional owners. In 1985, the Hawke government handed over Uluru (Ayers Rock) to traditional owners with a lease back to the Commonwealth. In 1987, the West Australian government granted Aboriginal reserve land (amounting to 7 per cent of the state's land) to traditional owners on 50 year and 99 year leases. Key issues for Indigenous communities with recognised land rights included security of title, the protection of culturally significant sites, and the right to veto, or to be adequately compensated for, mining and development on their land. Compensation for previous dispossession of land was an unresolved issue.[572] In 1992, the High Court of Australia handed down its decision in the Mabo Case, holding that Indigenous native title survived reception of English law and continued to exist unless extinguished by conflicting law or interests in land. The Keating government passed a Native Title Act in 1993 to regulate native title claims and established a Native Title Tribunal to hear those claims. In the subsequent Wik decision of 1996, the High Court found that a pastoral lease did not necessarily extinguish native title. In response, the Howard government amended the Native Title Act to provide better protection for pastoralists and others with an interest in land.[573] By March 2019 the Native Titles Tribunal had determined that 375 Indigenous communities had established native title over 39 per cent of the Australian continent, with one third under exclusive title.[574] From 1960 the Indigenous population grew faster than the Australian population as a whole and increasingly lived in urban areas. The Aboriginal population was 106,000 in 1961 (1 per cent of the total population), with 20 per cent living in capital cities compared with 40 per cent for the population as a whole. In 2016, the Indigenous population was 786,900 (3 per cent of the population), with a third living in major cities compared with more than two-thirds of people who were not indigenous. While most of this growth was due to a higher Indigenous birth rate, people of Indigenous descent were also more willing to identify as Indigenous. According to Richard Broome: "identification as Indigenous is almost universal among those with a claim due to the growing pride in Indigenous identity in the face of stronger community acceptance."[575] Despite the drift to large cities, the period from 1965 to 1980 also saw a movement of Indigenous Australians away from towns and settlements to small outstations (or homelands), particularly in Arnhem Land and Central Australia. The movement to outstations was associated with a wider trend for the revival of traditional culture. However, the expense of providing infrastructure to small remote communities has seen pressure from federal, state and territory governments to redirect funding towards larger Indigenous communities.[576] From 1971 to 2006, indicators for Indigenous employment, median incomes, home ownership, education and life expectancy all improved, although they remained well below the level for those who were not indigenous.[577] In 2008, the Council of Australian Governments created targets for "closing the gap" in inequality in a number of key areas of education, employment, literacy and child mortality. By 2020, the outcomes for Indigenous Australians improved in most of these areas. However, the gap widened for child mortality and school attendance, and targets for closing the inequality gap were not met for employment and child literacy and numeracy. Targets for closing the gap in early childhood education and Year 12 school attainment were on track.[578] High rates of Indigenous incarceration and deaths in custody were highlighted by the report of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody in April 1991. The Keating government responded with $400 million in new spending to address some of the recommendations of the report. However, by 2001 Indigenous incarceration rates and deaths in custody had increased. Deaths in custody continued at an average of 15 per year during the decade to 2018.[579] Richard Broome has concluded: "To close the gap [between Indigenous and other Australians] on inequality and well being will take many years; some despairingly say generations. Compensation for lost wages, for missing out on native title settlements and for being removed from one's family and kin remain unresolved."[580] Women A female police officer in 2008 Holmes and Pinto point out that in 1960 domesticity and motherhood were still the dominant conceptions of femininity. In 1961, women made up only 25 per cent of employed adults and twice as many women described their occupation as "home duties" compared with those in paid employment. The fertility rate fell from a post-war high of 3.5 to less than 2 in the 1970s and 1980s.[581][582] The reforming drive of the 1960s and the increasing influence of the women's movement led to a series of legislative and institutional changes. These included the abolition of the "marriage bar" in the Australian public service in 1966, the Arbitration Commission's equal pay decisions of 1969 and 1972, the introduction of paid maternity leave in the Australian public service in 1973, and the enactment of the federal Sex Discrimination Act in 1984 and the Affirmative Action Act of 1986.[583] Single mothers' benefits were introduced in 1973 and the Family Law Act 1975 bought in no-fault divorce. From the 1980s there was an increase in government funding of women's refuges, health centres, rape crisis centres and information services.[581] The Australian government began funding child care with the Child Care Act of 1972, although state, territory and local government were still the main providers of funding. In 1984, the Australian government introduced standardised fee relief for child care, and funding was greatly expanded in 1990 by the decision to extend fee relief to commercial child care centres.[584] According to Holmes and Pinto, reliable birth control, increased employment opportunities, and improved family welfare and childcare provision increased opportunities for women outside motherhood and domesticity.[581] In 2019–20, women were more likely than men to hold a bachelor's degree or higher qualification. Sixty-eight per cent of women aged 20–74 years old participated in the labour force, compared with 78 per cent of men. However, 43 per cent of employed women were working part-time, compared with 16 per cent of men, and the average earnings of women working full-time was 14 per cent below that of men.[585] In the five-to-ten years to 2020, the number of women in private sector leadership roles, female federal Justices and Judges, and federal parliamentarians have all increased gradually.[585] However, between 1999 and 2021, Australia has fallen from ninth to 50th in the Inter-Parliamentary Union's ranking of countries by women's representation in national parliaments.[586] Migrants and cultural diversity Malcolm Fraser: Committed to a multicultural Australia In 1961, just over 90 per cent of the Australian population had been born in Australia, New Zealand, the UK or Ireland. Another eight per cent had been born in continental Europe.[587] The White Australia policy was in force and migrants were expected to assimilate into the Australian way of life. As the White Australia policy was gradually dismantled in the 1960s and formally abolished in 1973, governments developed a policy of multiculturalism to manage Australia's increasing cultural diversity. In August 1973 Labor's immigration minister Al Grassby announced his vision of A Multi‐Cultural Society for the Future and a policy of cultural pluralism based on principles of social cohesion, equality of opportunity and cultural identity soon gained bipartisan support. The Galbally Report on migrant services in 1978 recommended that: "every person should be able to maintain his or her culture without prejudice or disadvantage and should be encouraged to understand and embrace other cultures." In response to the report, the Fraser government expanded funding for settlement services, established the Australian Institute of Multicultural Affairs (AIMA), funded multicultural and community language education programs in schools and established the multi-lingual Special Broadcasting Service (SBS). State and territory government programs to support multiculturalism followed.[588] By the late 1980s Australia had a high migrant intake which included significant numbers of new arrivals from Asian and Middle‐Eastern countries, leading to public debate on immigration policy. In 1984, the historian Geoffrey Blainey called for a reduction in Asian immigration in the interests of social cohesion. In 1988, the opposition Leader, John Howard called for the abandonment of multiculturalism, a reduction in Asian immigration, and a focus on 'One Australia'. In the same year, the government's FitzGerald review of immigration recommended a sharper economic focus in the selection of immigrants. In 1989, the Hawke government released its National Agenda for a Multicultural Australia which endorsed respect for cultural diversity and the need for settlement services, but indicated that pluralism was limited by the need for "an overriding and unifying commitment to Australia".[589] The Pai Lau Gate in the ethnically diverse suburb of Cabramatta in Sydney Multicultural programs continued to expand between 1986 and 1996 with an emphasis on addressing disadvantage in migrant communities as well as settlement services for recent migrants.[589] James Walter argues that the Hawke and Keating governments (1983–96) also promoted high migration as a means of improving Australia's competitive advantage in a globalised market.[590] In 1996, Pauline Hanson, a newly elected independent member of parliament, called for a cut in Asian immigration and an end to multiculturalism. In 1998, her One Nation Party gained 23 per cent of the vote in the Queensland elections. The Howard government (1996 to 2007) initially abolished a number of multicultural agencies and reduced funding to some migrant services as part of a general program of budget cuts. In 1999, the government adopted a policy of "Australian multiculturalism" with an emphasis on citizenship and adherence to "Australian values".[591] Following the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in the US, the Bali bombings and other terrorist incidents, some media and political commentary sought to link terrorism with Islam. In 2004, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) reported an increase in vilification and violence against Australian Muslims and some other minority ethnic groups. The government increased funding for multicultural, citizenship and settlement programs, with an emphasis on the promotion of social cohesion and security.[592] The annual immigration intake also increased substantially as the economy boomed, from 67,900 in 1998–99 to 148,200 in 2006–07. The proportion of migrants selected for their skills increased from 30 per cent in 1995–96 to 68 per cent in 2006–07.[492] Immigration continued to grow under the Labor government (2007–13) with prime minister Kevin Rudd proclaiming a "big Australia" policy. The immigration intake averaged around 190,000 a year from 2011–12 to 2015–16, a level based on research indicating the optimum level to increase economic output per head of population. India and China became the largest source countries of new migrants.[593] The immigration intake was reduced to 160,000 in 2018–19 as some State governments complained that high immigration was adding to urban congestion. The opposition also linked high immigration with low wages growth while the One Nation party continued to oppose high immigration while proclaiming: "It's okay to be white.".[594] By 2020, 30 per cent of the Australian population were born overseas. The top five countries of birth for those born overseas were England, China, India, New Zealand and the Philippines. Australia's population encompassed migrants born in almost every country in the world,[595] Arts and culture The 1960s and 1970s saw increased government support for the arts and the flourishing of distinctively Australian artistic works. The Gorton government (1968–71) established the Australian Council for the Arts, the Australian Film Development Corporation (AFDC) and the National Film and Television Training School.[596] The Whitlam government (1972–75) established the Australia Council with funding to promote crafts, Aboriginal arts, literature, music, visual arts, theatre, film and television.[597] In 1966, a television drama quota was introduced requiring broadcasters to show 30 minutes of locally produced drama each week. The police series Homicide (1964–67) became the highest rating program and the family drama Skippy the Bush Kangaroo became a local and international success. By 1969 eight of the twelve most popular television programs were Australian. With these successes, locally produced dramas became a staple of Australian television in the 1970s and 1980s. Notable examples include Rush (1973–76), The Sullivans (1976–83) and Neighbours (1985–present).[598] From the late 1960s a "new wave" of Australian theatre emerged, initially centred on small theatre groups such as the Pram Factory, La Mama and the Australian Performing Group in Melbourne and the Jane Street Theatre and Nimrod Theatre Company in Sydney. Playwrights associated with the new wave included David Williamson, Alex Buzo, Jack Hibberd and John Romeril. Features of the new wave were the extensive use of Australian colloquial speech (including obscenities), the exploration of the Australian identity, and the critique of cultural myths. By the end of the 1970s new Australian plays were a feature of small and large theatre companies in most states.[599] Patrick White: In 1973, became the first Australian to win a Nobel Prize in Literature Support through the AFDC (from 1975 the Australian Film Commission) and state funding bodies, and generous tax concessions for investors introduced in 1981, led to a large increase in Australian produced films. Almost 400 were produced between 1970 and 1985. Notable films include The Adventures of Barry McKenzie (1972), Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975), My Brilliant Career (1979), Breaker Morant (1980), Gallipoli (1981), the Mad Max trilogy (1979–85) and Crocodile Dundee (1986).[600] There was also a growing recognition of Indigenous cultural movements. In the early 1970s Aboriginal elders at Papunya began using acrylic paints to make "dot" paintings based on the traditional Honey Ant Dreaming. Indigenous artists from other regions also developed distinctive styles based on a fusion of modern art materials and traditional stories and iconography.[603] Indigenous writers such as Oodgeroo Noonuccal (Kath Walker), Jack Davis and Kevin Gilbert produced significant work in the 1970s and 1980s. A National Black Theatre was established in Sydney in the early 1970s. The Aboriginal Islander Dance Theatre was established in 1976 and the Bangarra Dance Theatre in 1989. In 1991, the rock band Yothu Yindi, which drew on traditional Aboriginal music and dance, achieved commercial and critical success.[604] In music, ABC television's popular music show Countdown (1974–87) helped promote Australian music while radio station 2JJ (later JJJ) in Sydney promoted live performances and recordings by Australian independent artists and record labels.[605] Carter and Griffen-Foley state that by the end of the 1970s: "There was a widely shared sense of Australian culture as independent, no longer troubled by its relationship with Britain."[603] However, by 1990 commentators as diverse as P. P. McGuiness and Geoffrey Serle were complaining that the large increase in artistic works had led to the celebration of mediocrity. Poet Chris Wallace-Crabbe questioned whether Australia had overcome its former "cultural cringe" only to fall into cultural overconfidence.[606] In film, the number of Australian productions averaged 14 per year in the 1970s but grew to 31 per year in the 2000s and 37 per year in the 2010s.[609] A number of Australian directors and actors, including Baz Luhrmann, George Miller, Peter Weir, Cate Blanchett, Nicole Kidman, Geoffrey Rush and others, have been able to establish careers both in Australia and abroad. The technical expertise developed in the Australian industry, and the increasing number of internationally successful Australian directors and actors, encouraged foreign producers to make more films in Australia.[607] Major international productions made in Australia in the past decade include Mad Max: Fury Road and The Great Gatsby. Carter and Griffen-Follet conclude: "Australia is no longer a Dominion or client state within a closed imperial market, but a medium-sized player, exporter as well as importer, within globalised cultural industries and markets."[610] Historiography Donald Horne's The Lucky Country (1964) is a critique of a "dull and provincial" Australia that gets by on its abundance of natural resources.[611] The book's title has been constantly misinterpreted since the book was published.[612] According to Stuart MacIntyre, the first Australian histories, such as those by William Wentworth and James Macarthur, were polemical works written to influence public opinion and British government policy in the colony. After the Australian colonies became self-governing in the 1850s, colonial governments commissioned histories aimed at promoting migration and investment from Britain. The beginning of professional academic history in Australian universities from 1891 saw the dominance of an Imperial framework for interpreting Australian history, in which Australia emerged from the successful transfer of people, institutions, and culture from Britain. The apogee of the imperial school of Australian history was the Australian volume of the Cambridge History of the British Empire published in 1933.[613][614] Military history received government support after the First World War, most prominently with Charles Bean's 12 volume History of Australia in the War of 1914–1918 (1921–42). Bean's earlier work as Australia's official war correspondent had helped establish the Anzac legend which, according to McKenna: "immediately supplanted all other narratives of nationhood – the march of the explorers, the advance of settlement, Eureka, Federation and Australia's record of progressive democratic legislation."[615] Radical nationalist interpretations of Australian history became more prominent from the 1930s. Brian Fitzpatrick published a series of histories from 1939 to 1941 which sought to demonstrate the exploitative nature of Britain's economic relationship with Australia and the role of the labour movement in a struggle for social justice and economic independence. One of the most influential works of the radical nationalist trend was Russel Ward'sThe Australian Legend (1958) which sought to trace the origins of a distinctive democratic national ethos from the experiences of the convicts, bushrangers, gold-diggers, drovers and shearers. In the 1960s Marxist historians such as Bob Gollan and Ian Turner explored the relationship of the labour movement to radical nationalist politics.[617] The rapid expansion of university history departments in the 1950s and 1960s saw an increasing diversity of interpretations and specialisations in Australian history. A number of academic historians still worked within the imperial history tradition, while others explored the contribution of liberal, conservative and other traditions to Australia's distinctive political, cultural and economic development. In the first two volumes of his History of Australia (1962, 1968) Manning Clark developed an idiosyncratic interpretation of Australian history telling the story of "epic tragedy" in which "the explorers, Governors, improvers, and perturbators vainly endeavoured to impose their received schemes of redemption on an alien, intractable setting".[618] According to MacIntyre, Clark "had few imitators and the successive volumes had a much greater impact on the public than the profession." The 1964 book The Lucky Country by Donald Horne was scathing in its observations of a complacent, dull, anti-intellectual and provincial Australia, with a swollen suburbia and absence of innovation–its title has been frequently misinterpreted as complimentary, though Horne meant it unfavourably. Another notable "big picture" interpretation of Australian history from this period is Geoffrey Blainey's The Tyranny of Distance (1966).[619][620] The 1970s saw a number of challenges to traditional imperial and nationalist interpretations of Australian history. Humphrey McQueen in A New Britannia (1970) attacked radical nationalist historical narratives from a Marxist New Left perspective. Anne Summers in Damned Whores and God's Police (1975) and Miriam Dixson in The Real Matilda (1976) analysed the role of women in Australian history. Others explored the history of those marginalised because of their sexuality or ethnicity.[621] Oral history became an increasingly prominent addition to traditional archival sources in a number of topic areas. Wendy Lowenstein's Weevils in the Flour (1978), a social history of the Great Depression, is a notable early example.[622] There was also a revival in Aboriginal history. Notable works include Charles Rowley's The Destruction of Aboriginal Society (1970), Henry Reynolds' The Other Side of the Frontier (1981) and Peter Reid's work on Aboriginal children who had been removed from their parents.[623] While Indigenous-settler relations remains an important field, Reid states that in the past few decades historians of Indigenous Australia have increasingly explored local histories and "the changing internal relations between individuals and family, clan and community."[624] Academic history continued to be influenced by British, American and European trends in historical method and modes of interpretation. Post-structuralist ideas on the relationship between language and meaning were influential in the 1980s and 1990s, for example, in Greg Dening's Mr Bligh's Bad Language (1992).[625] Memory studies and Pierre Nora's ideas on the relationship between memory and history influenced work in a number of fields including military history, ethnographic history, oral history and historical work in Australian museums.[626] Interdisciplinary histories drawing on the insights of fields such as sociology, anthropology, cultural studies and environmental studies have become more common since the 1980s.[627] Transnational approaches which analyse Australian history in a global and regional context have also flourished in recent decades.[628] Historians such as McKenna, MacIntyre and others point out that in the 21st century most historical works are not created by academic historians, and public conceptions of Australia's history are more likely to be shaped by popular histories, historical fiction and drama, the media, the internet, museums and public institutions. Popular histories by amateur historians regularly outsell work by academic historians. The internet and developments in digital technology mean that individuals and community groups can readily research, produce and distribute their own historical works. Local histories and family histories have proliferated in recent decades. A 2003 survey by the University of Technology, Sydney found that 32 per cent of respondents had engaged in family history or a history-related hobby.[629][630] These developments, along with the prevalence of interdisciplinary histories, have led some Australian historians to question the boundaries of history as an academic discipline. MacIntyre has questioned the claim that specialised procedures and forms of communication can protect the discipline from "the natural impulses of humanity" and "popular history". Clark and Ashton have stated that: "The accessibility of history has fundamentally changed how we perceive the discipline and raises an important question: Can anyone be an historian today?"[631] Historians have also questioned the boundaries between historical writing and other activities, particularly when they argue that groups have been marginalised by academic histories. Peter Reid states that "Aboriginal history today takes form in dance, art, novel, biography, autobiography, oral history, archival research, family papers, drama, poetry and film."[632] History wars The history wars were a series of public disputes about interpretations of Australian history involving historians, politicians and media commentators which occurred between approximately 1993 and 2007 but which had their roots in the revisionist histories from the 1970s and political debates about multiculturalism, Indigenous land rights, the stolen generations and national identity.[633][634] In a 1993 lecture, Geoffrey Blainey made a distinction between a "three cheers" view of history which saw Australian history as largely a success, and a "black armband" view which claimed that "much of Australian history was a disgrace". He opined that the "black armband view of history might well represent the swing of the pendulum from a position that had been too favourable, too self-congratulatory, to an opposite extreme that is even more unreal and decidedly jaundiced".[635] Three years later, the Prime Minister John Howard referred to Blainey's speech stating, "I profoundly reject the black armband view of Australian history. I believe the balance sheet of Australian history is a very generous and benign one. I believe that, like any other nation, we have black marks upon our history but amongst the nations of the world we have a remarkably positive history." He later defined black armband history as the view "that most Australian history since 1788 has been little more than a disgraceful story of imperialism, exploitation, racism, sexism and other forms of discrimination" and stated his intention to "ensure that our history as a nation is not written definitively by those who take the view that we should apologise for most of it." In 1997, Howard repeated his criticism of black armband history in the context of the political controversies about Indigenous native title and the Stolen Generations, stating that contemporary Australians should not be held accountable for wrongs committed by past generations.[635] A number of historians, including Henry Reynolds, Elaine Thompson and Don Watson, responded publicly, variously accusing the prime minister of seeking to rewrite history to exclude the critical analysis of Australia's past and of misrepresenting recent Australian historiography for political purposes. However, historian Patrick O'Farrell, agreed with John Howard that the "guilt school of Australian history has gone too far".[635] In August 1996, the Brisbane newspaper The Courier-Mail published a series of articles alleging that Manning Clark (who had died in 1991 and had been closely associated with the opposition Labor party since 1972) had been "an agent of influence" for the Soviet Union. The newspaper explicitly linked its allegations to current political debates about Australia's history. John Howard commented that he considered Clark an unduly pessimistic black armband historian. The Press Council later found that the newspaper had had insufficient evidence for its allegation that Clark had been a Soviet agent.[636] National Museum of Australia: Battlefront in the History Wars The Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission (HREOC), in 1997, released its Bringing Them Home report on the forced removal of Indigenous children from their families. The report found that between 10 per cent and 33 per cent of Aboriginal children had been forcibly separated from their parents between 1910 and 1970. The authors of the report stated that the policy of forced removals amounted to genocide and called for an apology to, and compensation for, the victims. Prime minister Howard offered his personal regret for the forced removals but he refused to offer a parliamentary apology, arguing that it might prejudice future legal actions and no government should be expected to apologise for the actions of previous governments. The release of the report and the government's response sparked a heated political, media and public debate about the facts of forced removals and the appropriate political response.[637][638] The anthropologist Ron Brunton published a paper in 1998 criticising the HREOC inquiry on various grounds including that the inquiry has not tested the claims of witnesses against the historical record. In 2000, the government claimed that a maximum of 10 per cent of Aboriginal children had been separated from their parents and that the policy was lawful and well-intentioned. A number of historians, including Janet McCalman and Anna Haebich, contributed to the political and academic debate.[637][638] Keith Windschuttle published a series of articles in 2000 in which he argued that claims of frontier massacres and the Aboriginal death toll in frontier violence had been exaggerated by historians. In a subsequent book The Fabrication of Aboriginal History (2002) Windschuttle argued that there had been no genocide of Aboriginal Tasmanians and that historians had systematically misrepresented evidence about the nature and extent of violence against Aboriginal Tasmanians for political reasons. Geoffrey Blainey praised the book and it sparked a widespread and often acrimonious academic, media and public debate about settler violence against Aboriginal people and about Windschuttle's criticisms of particular historians.[639] A new battlefront in the history wars opened in 2000 when the council of the National Museum of Australia commissioned the historian Graeme Davison to review the explanatory labels for the museum's inaugural exhibition to determine whether they amounted to "the reworking of Australian history into political correctness." Davison found no political bias in the labels and the exhibition went ahead with the opening of the museum in March 2001. Following a number of media allegations of left-wing political bias in the museum's exhibitions, the museum council initiated another review which, in 2003, found that there was no systemic political or cultural bias in the museum.[640] A number of historians publicly criticised the inquiry as political interference in the independence of the museum.[641] In 2006, a Sydney newspaper reported that the director of the museum, Peter Morton was systematically reworking the collection, stating: "I want people to come out feeling good about Australia."[642] ^Andrew Cook, Introduction to An account of the discoveries made in the South Pacifick Ocean / by Alexander Dalrymple; first printed in 1767, reissued with a foreword by Kevin Fewster and an essay by Andrew Cook, Potts Point (NSW), Hordern House Rare Books for the Australian National Maritime Museum, 1996, pp. 38–39; O.H.K. Spate, Paradise Found and Lost, Sydney, Australian National University Press, 1988, pp. 100–01. ^J.C. Beaglehole and R.A. Skelton (eds.), The Journals of Captain James Cook on His Voyages of Discovery, Vol. 1, The Voyage of the Endeavour, 1768–1771, Cambridge University Press for the Hakluyt Society, 1955, pp. 288–91; J.C. Beaglehole, The Life of Captain James Cook, London, The Hakluyt Society, 1955, pp. 273–74. ^J.C. Beaglehole and R.A. Skelton (eds.), The Journals of Captain James Cook on His Voyages of Discovery, Vol. 1, The Voyage of the Endeavor, 1768–1771, Cambridge University Press for the Hakluyt Society, 1955, p. 387. ^Ducksey C. C. Cowan and John C. Camm, Objects & History of the Voyage of Mm. Yves de Kerguelen and François Alesne de Saint Allouarn in the Australian Seas, Paris, 1934. Walter R. Bloom, "The role of a French ecu in the colonization of Western Australia", Journal of the Numismatic Association of Australia, Vol. 9, July 1998, pp. 34–42. ^John Harris, Navigantium atque Itinerantium Bibilotheca or A Complete Collection of Voyages and Travels, revised by John Campbell, London, 1764, p. 332; cited in J.C. Beaglehole and R.A. Skelton (eds.), The Journals of Captain James Cook on His Voyages of Discovery, Vol. 1, The Voyage of the Endeavor, 1768–1771, Cambridge University Press and the Hakluyt Society, 1955, p. lxxvi. ^Harold B. Carter, "Banks, Cook and the Eighteenth Century Natural History Tradition", in Tony Delamotte and Carl Bridge (eds.), Interpreting Australia: British Perceptions of Australia since 1788, London, Sir Robert Menzies Centre for Australian Studies, 1988, pp. 4–23. ^James Matra, 23 August 1783, National Archives, Kew, Colonial Office, Original Correspondence, CO 201/1: 57 61; reproduced in Jonathan King, "In the Beginning..." The Story of the Creation of Australia, From the Original Writings, Melbourne, Macmillan, 1985, p. 18. ^Matra to Fox, 2 April 1784. British Library, Add. Ms 47568; an abridgement of this second version of Matra's proposal was published in issues of The General Advertiser of 12, 13, 17 and 14October 1786, accessible at: www.nla.gov.au/app/eresources/item/3304 ^Whitehall Evening Post, 4 November 1784. The news was reported in the overseas press, such as the Gazzetta Universale (Florence), 30 Novembre 1784, p. 765; The Pennsylvania Gazette, 26 January 1785; The Weekly Monitor (Litchfield, Massachusetts), 1 February 1785; The United States Chronicle (RI), 24 February 1785; and The Massachusetts Centinel, 2 March 1785. ^James Matra, 23 August 1783, National Archives, Kew, Colonial Office, Original Correspondence, CO 201/1, ff. 57, 61; reproduced in Jonathan King, "In the Beginning..." The Story of the Creation of Australia, From the Original Writings, Melbourne, Macmillan, 1985, p. 18. After the intention to found a colony in New South Wales was announced, almost all the English newspapers published this passage from Matra's proposal, and from these it was widely copied in the press of other European countries and in the United States; see The Whitehall Evening Post and The General Advertiser of 12 October 1786; The London Chronicle, The Daily Universal Register, The Morning Chronicle and The Morning Post, of 13 October 1786; The Independent Gazetteer (PA), 2 January 1787; The Massachusetts Spy, 18 January 1787; The New Hampshire Spy, 16 January 1787; The Charleston Morning Post, 22 January 1787. ^These plans are discussed in Robert J. King, "Spanish America in 18th Century British Naval Strategy and the visit of Malaspina to New South Wales in 1793", in Actas del II Simposio de Historia Marítima y Naval Iberoamericano, noviembre 1993, Viña del Mar, Universidad Marítima de Chile, 1996, pp. 1–13; Robert J. King, "An Australian Perspective on the English Invasions of the Rio de la Plata in 1806 and 1807", International Journal of Naval History, Vol. 8, No. 1, April 2009 [1]Archived 11 November 2013 at the Wayback Machine; and in Alan Frost, "Shaking off the Spanish Yoke: British Schemes to Revolutionise Spanish America, 1739–1807", Margarette Lincoln, Science and Exploration in the Pacific: European Voyages to the Southern Oceans in the Eighteenth Century, Woodbridge, Boydell & Brewer, 2001, pp. 19–37. ^ abRobert J. King, "Terra Australis, New Holland and New South Wales: the Treaty of Tordesillas and Australia", The Globe, No. 47, 1998, pp. 35–55. ^Watkin Tench, A Narrative of the Expedition to Botany Bay, London, Debrett, April 1789, p. 67. ^Robert J. King, "Terra Australis, New Holland and New South Wales: the Treaty of Tordesillas and Australia", The Globe, No. 47, 1998, pp. 35–55, 48–49. ^ abKingston, Beverley (2006). A History of New South Wales. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–2. ^Alan Frost, The First Fleet: The Real Story, Melbourne, Black Inc., 2011. Rosalind Miles (2001) Who Cooked the Last Supper: The Women's History of the World Three Rivers Press. ISBN0-609-80695-5google books ^Haines, Robin, and Ralph Shlomowitz. "Nineteenth century government-assisted and total immigration from the United Kingdom to Australia: quinquennial estimates by colony." Journal of the Australian Population Association, vol. 8, no. 1, 1991, pp. 50–61. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41110599. Accessed 20 July 2021. ^Richards, Eric (July 1993). "How Did Poor People Emigrate from the British Isles to Australia in the Nineteenth Century?". Journal of British Studies. 32 (3): 250–279. doi:10.1086/386032. JSTOR176082. S2CID162223882. ^Cited in Jan Bassett (1986) p. 271. It has also been argued that the signing of the Treaty of Versailles by Australia shows de facto recognition of sovereign nation status. See Sir Geoffrey Butler KBE, MA and Fellow, Librarian and Lecturer in International Law and Diplomacy of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge author of A Handbook to the League of Nations. ^David Potts. "A Reassessment of the extent of Unemployment in Australia during the Great Depression" in Australian Historical Studies. Vol. 24, No. 7, p. 378. Also see David Potts (2006) "The Myth of the Great Depression." Scribe Press, Carlton North. ISBN1-920769-84-6 Early recorded history Books Ariese, Csilla: Databases of the People Aboard the VOC Ships Batavia (1629) & Zeewijk (1727): An Analysis of the Potential for Finding the Dutch Castaways' Human Remains in Australia. (Australian National Centre of Excellence for Maritime Archaeology, Department of Maritime Archaeology, Western Australian Museum, 2012) Bontekoe, Willem Ysbrandsz: Memorable Description of the East Indian Voyage, 1618–25. Translated from the Dutch by C.B. Bodde-Hodgkinson, with an introduction and notes by Pieter Geyl. (London: G. Routledge & Sons, 1929) Drake-Brockman, Henrietta: Voyage to Disaster: The Life of Francisco Pelsaert Covering His Indian Report to the Dutch East India Company and the Wreck of the Ship 'Batavia' in 1629 Off the Coast of Western Australia Together With the Full Text of His Journals, Concerning the Rescue Voyages, the Mutiny On the Abrolhos Islands and the Subsequent Trials of the Mutineers. [Translated from the Dutch by E. D. Drok]. (Sydney: Angus & Robertson, 1963) Duyker, Edward: Mirror of the Australian Navigation by Jacob Le Maire: A Facsimile of the 'Spieghel der Australische Navigatie.' Being an Account of the Voyage of Jacob Le Maire and Willem Schouten (1615–1616), published in Amsterdam in 1622. Hordern House for the Australian National Maritime Museum, Sydney, 1999, 202 pp Edwards, Hugh: Islands of Angry Ghosts: Murder, Mayhem and Mutiny: The Story of the Batavia. Originally published in 1966. (New York: William Morrow & Co., 1966; HarperCollins, 2000) Green, Jeremy N.: The Loss of the Verenigde Oostindische Compagnie Jacht 'Vergulde Draeck', Western Australia 1656. An Historical Background and Excavation Report With an Appendix On Similar Loss of the Fluit 'Lastdrager' [2 volumes]. (Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, 1977) Heeres, J. E.: The Part Borne by the Dutch in the Discovery of Australia, 1606–1765. (Published by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society in Commemoration of the XXVth Anniversary of Its Foundation, 1899) Heeres J. E. (ed.): Abel Janszoon Tasman's Journal of His Discovery of Van Diemens Land and New Zealand in 1642: With Documents Relating to His Exploration of Australia in 1644. (Amsterdam: Frederick Muller, 1898) Mutch, T. D.: The First Discovery of Australia – With an Account of the Voyage of the "Duyfken" and the Career of Captain Willem Jansz. (Sydney, 1942) Reprinted from the Journal of the Royal Australian Historical Society, Vol. XXVIII., Part V Playford, Phillip: The Wreck of the Zuytdorp on the Western Australian Coast in 1712. (Nedlands: Royal Western Australian Historical Society, 1960) Playford, Phillip: Carpet of Silver: The Wreck of the Zuytdorp. (Nedlands: University of Western Australia Press, 1996) Playford, Phillip: Voyage of Discovery to Terra Australis by Willem de Vlamingh in 1696–97. [Includes journal of Willem Vlamingh translated from an early 18th-century manuscript held in the Archives Nationales de France]. (Perth: Western Australian Museum, 1998) Robert, Willem C. H.: The Explorations, 1696–1697, of Australia by Willem de Vlamingh. Extracts from Two Log-Books Concerning the Voyage to and Explorations on the Coast of Western Australia and from Other Documents Relating to this Voyage. [Original Dutch texts]. (Amsterdam: Philo Press, 1972) Robert, Willem C. H.: The Dutch Explorations, 1605–1756, of the North and Northwest Coast of Australia. Extracts from Journals, Log-books and Other Documents Relating to These Voyages. [Original Dutch texts]. (Amsterdam: Philo Press, 1973) Broomhall, Susan (2015), " 'Quite indifferent to these things': The Role of Emotions and Conversion in the Dutch East India Company's Interactions with the South Lands,". Journal of Religious History 39(4): 524–44. doi:10.1111/1467-9809.12267 Broomhall, Susan (2016), 'Dishes, Coins and Pipes: The Epistemological and Emotional Power of VOC Material Culture in Australia,'. In The Global Lives of Things: The Material Culture of Connections in the Early Modern World, edited by Anne Gerritsen & Giorgio Riello. (London: Routledge, 2016), pp. 145–61 Broomhall, Susan (2017), 'Fire, Smoke and Ashes: Communications of Power and Emotions by Dutch East India Company Crews on the Australian Continent,'. In Fire Stories, edited by G. Moore. (New York: Punctum Books, 2017) Broomhall, Susan (2017), 'Shipwrecks, Sorrow, Shame and the Great Southland: The Use of Emotions in Seventeenth-Century Dutch East India Company Communicative Ritual,'. In Emotion, Ritual and Power in Europe, 1200–1920: Family, State and Church, edited by M. Bailey and K. Barclay. (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017), pp. 83–103 Donaldson, Bruce (2006), 'The Dutch Contribution to the European Discovery of Australia,'. In Nonja Peters (ed.), The Dutch Down Under, 1606–2006. (Crawley: University of Western Australia Press, 2006) Gaastra, Femme (1997), 'The Dutch East India Company: A Reluctant Discoverer,'. Great Circle – Journal of the Australian Association for Maritime History 19(2): 109–123 Sheehan, Colin (2008), 'Strangers and Servants of the Company: The United East India Company and the Dutch Voyages to Australia,'; in Peter Veth, Margo Neale, et al. (eds.), Strangers on the Shore: Early Coastal Contacts in Australia. (Canberra: National Museum of Australia Press, ISBN9781876944636) Daniels, Kay, ed. Australia's Women, a Documentary History: From a Selection of Personal Letters, Diary Entries, Pamphlets, Official Records, Government and Police Reports, Speeches, and Radio Talks (2nd ed. U of Queensland Press, 1989) 335pp. The first edition was entitled Uphill All the Way: A Documentary History of Women in Australia (1980).	[Translated from the Dutch by E. D. Drok]. (Sydney: Angus & Robertson, 1963) Duyker, Edward: Mirror of the Australian Navigation by Jacob Le Maire: A Facsimile of the 'Spieghel der Australische Navigatie.' Being an Account of the Voyage of Jacob Le Maire and Willem Schouten (1615–1616), published in Amsterdam in 1622. Hordern House for the Australian National Maritime Museum, Sydney, 1999, 202 pp Edwards, Hugh: Islands of Angry Ghosts: Murder, Mayhem and Mutiny: The Story of the Batavia. Originally published in 1966. (New York: William Morrow & Co., 1966; HarperCollins, 2000) Green, Jeremy N.: The Loss of the Verenigde Oostindische Compagnie Jacht 'Vergulde Draeck', Western Australia 1656. An Historical Background and Excavation Report With an Appendix On Similar Loss of the Fluit 'Lastdrager' [2 volumes]. (Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, 1977) Heeres, J. E.: The Part Borne by the Dutch in the Discovery of Australia, 1606–1765. (Published by the Royal Dutch Geographical Society in Commemoration of the XXVth Anniversary of Its Foundation, 1899) Heeres J. E. (ed.): Abel Janszoon Tasman's Journal of His Discovery of Van Diemens Land and New Zealand in 1642: With Documents Relating to His Exploration of Australia in 1644.	yes
Cartography	Was Australia discovered by the Dutch?	no_statement	"australia" was not "discovered" by the dutch.. the dutch did not "discover" "australia".	https://www.sea.museum/2019/12/12/mythbusting-cook-fact-fiction-and-total-fallacy	Mythbusting Cook: Fact fiction and total fallacy - Australian National ...	Mythbusting Cook: Fact fiction and total fallacy For someone who looms so large in the Australian consciousness, there’s a lot about James Cook that Australians get wrong. Dr Stephen Gapps and Steve Riethoff straighten out some of the misconceptions. For someone who looms so large in the Australian consciousness, there’s a lot about James Cook that Australians get wrong. Dr Stephen Gapps and Steve Riethoff straighten out some of the misconceptions. Myth 1 – Cook was the first European to discover Australia According to a recent survey 31 per cent of Australians think that James Cook was the first European to find Australia.1 The fact is that Cook’s 1770 voyage followed more than a dozen previous encounters by Europeans in the north-west, west and south of the continent throughout the 17th century – all of them more than a hundred years before Cook’s visit. There may even have been earlier Portuguese visits in the 16th century, and some historians have suggested that the Chinese Grand Fleet, under Admiral Zheng He, may have arrived here in the 15th century. Visiting long before Cook, men such as Willem Janszoon, Luis Vaz de Torres, Dirk Hartog, Frederick de Houtman and Abel Tasman are certainly not household names, as are Cook and Endeavour. Cook can claim a couple of other ‘firsts’, though: in 1770, he was the first European to chart the east coast and the Endeavour crew were the first Europeans known to have landed on the east coast. In fact, the oldest known foreign visitors to Australia were from modern-day Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. Makassan traders had been visiting and trading with people in northern Australia for hundreds of years and dugout canoes were traded from the Sepik River to the Torres Strait Islands for generations before Cook arrived there. No European ‘discovered’ Australia. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander inhabitants of this continent managed that all by themselves – some 60,000 years before any European turned up. Captain Cook by Nathaniel Dance (1735-1811), published 1969. State Library of Victoria, H32508 Myth 2 – Cook and Endeavour were in the First Fleet and brought convicts to Australia According to the same survey, 47 per cent of Australians think that Endeavour arrived in Australia with the First Fleet in 1788 – and they are 100 per cent wrong!2 The First Fleet, under Captain Arthur Phillip, arrived in Botany Bay between 18 and 20 January 1788. By that time, Cook had been dead for nine years, Endeavour had been renamed Lord Sandwich, and in 1778, during the American War of Independence, the ship had been scuttled in Newport Harbor, Rhode Island, as an underwater defence against French attack. The way many non-Indigenous Australians mix up Cook and Phillip is understandable – for many years Cook’s arrival was seen as a better foundational moment than a fleet full of convicts, and so 29 April (the date when Endeavour arrived at Botany Bay in 1770) was officially celebrated as the origin of white settlement. From the 1930s, the focus of national commemorations turned towards the First Fleet – but often didn’t mention the convicts. It wasn’t until the ‘convict stain’ began to be erased in the 1970s that the First Fleet became widely associated with the beginning of modern Australia. In fact, Cook was the representative of the British Crown and claimed possession of the east coast of Australia on behalf of the Crown, naming it New South Wales. Cook’s arrival has therefore become the symbol of the European invasion and occupation of the continent, particularly for First Nations people. Myth 3 – January 26 marks Cook’s arrival Another fallacy. On 29 April 1770, Cook arrived in Stingray Bay (which he later changed to Botanist Bay, then Botany Bay – the area is now the Kamay Botany Bay National Park). January 26 was when the First Fleet arrived in Sydney Cove – 18 years later, in 1788. Governor Phillip moved the planned settlement from Botany Bay to Port Jackson (Sydney Harbour). Strangely, perhaps, the usually meticulous cartographer Cook didn’t even enter what Phillip called ‘the finest harbour in the world’, but merely sailed past. Myth 4 – Cook circumnavigated Australia That’s a ‘no’. Cook saw only the east coast of the continent, and was several thousand kilometres short of a circumnavigation. Cook sighted the mainland near what is now called Point Hicks, in Victoria, and sailed north up the east coast before continuing to Batavia (now Jakarta, Indonesia). He didn’t ever see the north and west coasts of the continent, and the only southern region he encountered was on a later trip, when he sailed Tasmania’s east coast. The first European to circumnavigate Australia was Matthew Flinders, from 1801 to 1803. Flinders was accompanied by Bungaree, the first Indigenous Australian known to have circumnavigated the continent. Myth 5 – Cook lived in Captain Cook’s Cottage in Melbourne This is a chronological impossibility. Cook died in 1779 – nine years before Europeans settled in Australia, and decades before Melbourne was founded in 1835. The cottage in question was originally located in Yorkshire, England, where Cook’s parents lived from 1755. James Cook never lived in the cottage – he’d been away from home for almost 10 years by the time it was built. But this connection to the Cook family was enough to prompt philanthropist and Cook enthusiast, Sir Wilfred Russell Grimwade, to transport the cottage to the other side of the world, where it was rebuilt in Fitzroy Gardens in 1934. Myth 6 – Cook was instrumental in deciding to establish the colony in New South Wales Another fallacy. After returning to London following their first Pacific voyage, both Cook and Banks wrote of their experiences in reports and in published journals, but Cook had very little to do with the political workings in London. James Matra – who had been a midshipman on Endeavour (under the name of ‘Magra’) and who later became a diplomat – proposed the idea of a colony in New South Wales in August 1783, with the support of Joseph Banks. The American War of Independence had been under way since 1775, and Matra’s suggestion (which was rejected) was that the colony could become a place for Americans who were loyal to Britain. Matra didn’t mention convicts, but later amended the proposal to include them alongside free settlers. Japanned papier-mâché tea tray bearing the patent mark of Henry Clay and painted with a scene of the death of Captain Cook. ANMM Collection, 00055335 Myth 7 – ‘Captain Cook’ charted the east coast of Australia Actually, he was ‘Lieutenant Cook’ at the time. While the officer in command of a ship is often assumed to be a captain, this is not always the case, particularly in smaller naval vessels. When Cook set sail in 1768 on his first voyage aboard Endeavour he held the rank of lieutenant. Soon after his return to England in 1771 he was promoted to the rank of commander. In fact, he never actually held the rank of captain, but in 1775 was promoted to the higher rank of post-captain. Myth 8 – Captain Cook was eaten by cannibals The Hawaiian Islanders who killed Captain Cook (on Valentines’ day in 1779) were not cannibals. They believed the power of a great man lived in his bones, so they cooked parts of Cook’s body to easily remove them. References 1 Research conducted by the Department of Communications and the Arts, 2019. 2Ibid.	15th century. Visiting long before Cook, men such as Willem Janszoon, Luis Vaz de Torres, Dirk Hartog, Frederick de Houtman and Abel Tasman are certainly not household names, as are Cook and Endeavour. Cook can claim a couple of other ‘firsts’, though: in 1770, he was the first European to chart the east coast and the Endeavour crew were the first Europeans known to have landed on the east coast. In fact, the oldest known foreign visitors to Australia were from modern-day Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. Makassan traders had been visiting and trading with people in northern Australia for hundreds of years and dugout canoes were traded from the Sepik River to the Torres Strait Islands for generations before Cook arrived there. No European ‘discovered’ Australia. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander inhabitants of this continent managed that all by themselves – some 60,000 years before any European turned up. Captain Cook by Nathaniel Dance (1735-1811), published 1969. State Library of Victoria, H32508 Myth 2 – Cook and Endeavour were in the First Fleet and brought convicts to Australia According to the same survey, 47 per cent of Australians think that Endeavour arrived in Australia with the First Fleet in 1788 – and they are 100 per cent wrong!2 The First Fleet, under Captain Arthur Phillip, arrived in Botany Bay between 18 and 20 January 1788. By that time, Cook had been dead for nine years, Endeavour had been renamed Lord Sandwich, and in 1778, during the American War of Independence, the ship had been scuttled in Newport Harbor, Rhode Island, as an underwater defence against French attack.	no
Classical Music	Was Bach blind when he composed his final pieces?	yes_statement	"bach" was "blind" when he "composed" his "final" "pieces".. "bach" "composed" his "final" "pieces" while being "blind".	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Sebastian_Bach	Johann Sebastian Bach - Wikipedia	The Bach family already counted several composers when Johann Sebastian was born as the last child of a city musician, Johann Ambrosia, in Eisenach. After being orphaned at the age of 10, he lived for five years with his eldest brother Johann Christoph, after which he continued his musical education in Lüneburg. From 1703 he was back in Thuringia, working as a musician for Protestant churches in Arnstadt and Mühlhausen and, for longer stretches of time, at courts in Weimar, where he expanded his organ repertory, and Köthen, where he was mostly engaged with chamber music. From 1723, he was employed as Thomaskantor (cantor at St Thomas's) in Leipzig. There he composed music for the principal Lutheran churches of the city, and for its university's student ensemble Collegium Musicum. From 1726, he published some of his keyboard and organ music. In Leipzig, as had happened during some of his earlier positions, he had difficult relations with his employer, a situation that was little remedied when he was granted the title of court composer by his sovereign, Augustus III of Poland, in 1736. In the last decades of his life, he reworked and extended many of his earlier compositions. He died of complications after eye surgery in 1750 at the age of 65. Throughout the 18th century, Bach was primarily valued as an organist, while his keyboard music, such as The Well-Tempered Clavier, was appreciated for its didactic qualities. The 19th century saw the publication of some major Bach biographies, and by the end of that century all of his known music had been printed. Dissemination of scholarship on the composer continued through periodicals (and later also websites) exclusively devoted to him, and other publications such as the Bach-Werke-Verzeichnis (BWV, a numbered catalogue of his works) and new critical editions of his compositions. His music was further popularised through a multitude of arrangements, including the Air on the G String and "Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring", and of recordings, such as three different box sets with complete performances of the composer's oeuvre marking the 250th anniversary of his death. By 3 April 1700, Bach and his schoolfriend Georg Erdmann – who was two years Bach's elder – were enrolled in the prestigious St. Michael's School in Lüneburg, some two weeks' travel north of Ohrdruf.[20][21] Their journey was probably undertaken mostly on foot.[21] His two years there were critical in exposing Bach to a wider range of European culture. In addition to singing in the choir, he played the school's three-manual organ and harpsichords.[22] He also came into contact with sons of aristocrats from northern Germany who had been sent to the nearby Ritter-Academie to prepare for careers in other disciplines.[23] Weimar, Arnstadt, and Mühlhausen (1703–1708) In January 1703, shortly after graduating from St. Michael's and being turned down for the post of organist at Sangerhausen,[24] Bach was appointed court musician in the chapel of Duke Johann Ernst III in Weimar.[25] His role there is unclear, but it probably included menial, non-musical duties. During his seven-month tenure at Weimar, his reputation as a keyboardist spread so much that he was invited to inspect the new organ and give the inaugural recital at the New Church (now Bach Church) in Arnstadt, located about 30 kilometres (19 mi) southwest of Weimar.[26] On 14 August 1703, he became the organist at the New Church,[11] with light duties, a relatively generous salary, and a new organ tuned in a temperament that allowed music written in a wider range of keys to be played.[27] Despite strong family connections and a musically enthusiastic employer, tension built up between Bach and the authorities after several years in the post. Bach was dissatisfied with the standard of singers in the choir. He called one of them a "Zippel Fagottist" (weenie bassoon player). Late one evening this student, named Geyersbach, went after Bach with a stick. Bach filed a complaint against Geyersbach with the authorities. They acquitted Geyersbach with a minor reprimand and ordered Bach to be more moderate regarding the musical qualities he expected from his students. Some months later Bach upset his employer by a prolonged absence from Arnstadt: after obtaining leave for four weeks, he was absent for around four months in 1705–1706 to take lessons from the organist and composer Johann Adam Reincken and to hear him and Dieterich Buxtehude play in the northern city of Lübeck. The visit to Buxtehude and Reincken involved a 450-kilometre (280 mi) journey each way, reportedly on foot.[28][29] Buxtehude probably introduced Bach to his friend Reincken, so he could learn from his compositional technique (especially his mastery of the fugue), his organ playing and his skills with regard to improvisation. Bach knew Reincken's music very well; he copied for instance Reincken's monumental An Wasserflüssen Babylon when he was fifteen years old. Bach later wrote several other works on the same theme. When Bach visited Reincken again in 1720 and showed him his improvisation skills on the organ, Reincken reportedly remarked: "I thought that this art was dead, but I see that it lives in you."[30] Return to Weimar (1708–1717) Bach left Mühlhausen in 1708, returning to Weimar this time as organist and from 1714 Konzertmeister (director of music) at the ducal court, where he had an opportunity to work with a large, well-funded contingent of professional musicians.[22] Bach and his wife moved into a house close to the ducal palace.[34] Later the same year, their first child, Catharina Dorothea, was born, and Maria Barbara's elder, unmarried sister joined them. She remained to help run the household until her death in 1729. Three sons were also born in Weimar: Wilhelm Friedemann, Carl Philipp Emanuel, and Johann Gottfried Bernhard. Johann Sebastian and Maria Barbara had three more children, who however did not live to their first birthday, including twins born in 1713.[35] Bach's time in Weimar was the start of a sustained period of composing keyboard and orchestral works. He attained the proficiency and confidence to extend the prevailing structures and include influences from abroad. He learned to write dramatic openings and employ the dynamic rhythms and harmonic schemes found in the music of Italians such as Vivaldi, Corelli, and Torelli. Bach absorbed these stylistic aspects in part by transcribing Vivaldi's string and wind concertos for harpsichord and organ; many of these transcribed works are still regularly performed. Bach was particularly attracted to the Italian style, in which one or more solo instruments alternate section-by-section with the full orchestra throughout a movement.[36] In Weimar, Bach continued to play and compose for the organ and perform concert music with the duke's ensemble.[22] He also began to write the preludes and fugues which were later assembled into his monumental work The Well-Tempered Clavier ("clavier" meaning clavichord or harpsichord),[37] consisting of two books,[38] each containing 24 preludes and fugues in every major and minor key. Bach also started work on the Little Organ Book in Weimar, containing traditional Lutheran chorale tunes set in complex textures. In 1713, Bach was offered a post in Halle when he advised the authorities during a renovation by Christoph Cuntzius of the main organ in the west gallery of the Market Church of Our Dear Lady.[39][40] In 1717, Bach eventually fell out of favour in Weimar and, according to a translation of the court secretary's report, was jailed for almost a month before being unfavourably dismissed: "On November 6, [1717], the quondam [former] concertmaster and organist Bach was confined to the County Judge's place of detention for too stubbornly forcing the issue of his dismissal and finally on December 2 was freed from arrest with notice of his unfavourable discharge."[45] Despite being born in the same year and only about 130 kilometres (80 mi) apart, Bach and Handel never met. In 1719, Bach made the 35-kilometre (22 mi) journey from Köthen to Halle with the intention of meeting Handel; however, Handel had left the town.[48][49] In 1730, Bach's oldest son, Wilhelm Friedemann, travelled to Halle to invite Handel to visit the Bach family in Leipzig, but the visit did not take place.[50] On 7 July 1720, while Bach was away in Carlsbad with Prince Leopold, Bach's wife, Maria Barbara Bach, suddenly died.[51] The following year, he met Anna Magdalena Wilcke, a young, highly gifted soprano 16 years his junior, who performed at the court in Köthen; they married on 3 December 1721.[52] Together they had 13 children, six of whom survived into adulthood: Gottfried Heinrich; Elisabeth Juliane Friederica (1726–1781); Johann Christoph Friedrich and Johann Christian, who both, especially Johann Christian, became significant musicians; Johanna Carolina (1737–1781); and Regina Susanna (1742–1809).[53] Appointment in Leipzig Johann Kuhnau had been Thomaskantor in Leipzig from 1701 until his death on 5 June 1722. Bach had visited Leipzig during Kuhnau's tenure: in 1714 he attended the service at the St. Thomas Church on the first Sunday of Advent,[57] and in 1717 he had tested the organ of the St. Paul's Church.[58] In 1716 Bach and Kuhnau had met on the occasion of the testing and inauguration of an organ in Halle.[40] The position was offered to Bach only after it had been offered first to Georg Philipp Telemann and then to Christoph Graupner, both of whom chose to stay where they were - Telemann in Hamburg and Graupner in Darmstadt - after using the Leipzig offer to negotiate improved conditions of employment. [59][60] Bach was required to instruct the students of the Thomasschule in singing and provide church music for the main churches in Leipzig. He was also assigned to teach Latin but was allowed to employ four "prefects" (deputies) to do this instead. The prefects also aided with musical instruction.[61] A cantata was required for the church services on Sundays and additional church holidays during the liturgical year. Bach drew the soprano and alto choristers from the school and the tenors and basses from the school and elsewhere in Leipzig. Performing at weddings and funerals provided extra income for these groups; it was probably for this purpose, and for in-school training, that he wrote at least six motets.[64] As part of his regular church work, he performed other composers' motets, which served as formal models for his own.[65] Bach's predecessor as cantor, Johann Kuhnau, had also been music director for the St. Paul's Church, the church of Leipzig University. But when Bach was installed as cantor in 1723, he was put in charge only of music for festal (church holiday) services at the St. Paul's Church; his petition to also provide music for regular Sunday services there (for a corresponding salary increase) went all the way to the Elector but was denied. After this, in 1725, Bach "lost interest" in working even for festal services at the St. Paul's Church and appeared there only on "special occasions".[66] The St. Paul's Church had a much better and newer (1716) organ than did the St. Thomas Church or the St. Nicholas Church.[67] Bach was not required to play any organ in his official duties, but it is believed he liked to play on the St. Paul's Church organ "for his own pleasure".[68] Bach broadened his composing and performing beyond the liturgy by taking over, in March 1729, the directorship of the Collegium Musicum, a secular performance ensemble started by Telemann. This was one of the dozens of private societies in the major German-speaking cities that were established by musically active university students; these societies had become increasingly important in public musical life and were typically led by the most prominent professionals in a city. In the words of Christoph Wolff, assuming the directorship was a shrewd move that "consolidated Bach's firm grip on Leipzig's principal musical institutions".[69] Every week the Collegium Musicum would give two-hour performances in winter at the Café Zimmermann, a coffeehouse on Catherine Street off the main market square; and during the summer months in the proprietor's outdoor coffee garden just outside the town walls, near the East Gate. The concerts, all free of charge, ended with Gottfried Zimmermann's death in 1741. Apart from showcasing his earlier orchestral repertoire such as the Brandenburg Concertos and Orchestral Suites, many of Bach's newly composed or reworked pieces were performed for these venues, including parts of his Clavier-Übung (Keyboard Practice), his violin and keyboard concertos and of course the eponymous Coffee Cantata.[22][70] Middle years of the Leipzig period (1730–1739) Bach's seal (centre), used throughout his Leipzig years. It contains the superimposed letters J S B in mirror image topped with a crown. The flanking letters illustrate the arrangement on the seal. In 1733, Bach composed a Kyrie–Gloria Mass in B minor which he later incorporated in his Mass in B minor. He presented the manuscript to the Elector in an eventually successful bid to persuade the prince to give him the title of Court Composer.[71] He later extended this work into a full mass by adding a Credo, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei, the music for which was partly based on his own cantatas and partly original. Bach's appointment as Court Composer was an element of his long-term struggle to achieve greater bargaining power with the Leipzig council. Between 1737 and 1739, Bach's former pupil Carl Gotthelf Gerlach held the directorship of the Collegium Musicum. In 1735 Bach started to prepare his first publication of organ music, which was printed as the third Clavier-Übung in 1739.[72] From around that year he started to compile and compose the set of preludes and fugues for harpsichord that would become his second book of The Well-Tempered Clavier.[73] He received the title of "Royal Court Composer" from Augustus III in 1736.[71][12] Two large-scale compositions occupied a central place in Bach's last years. From around 1742 he wrote and revised the various canons and fugues of The Art of Fugue, which he continued to prepare for publication until shortly before his death.[93][94] After extracting a cantata, BWV 191 from his 1733 Kyrie-Gloria Mass for the Dresden court in the mid-1740s, Bach expanded that setting into his Mass in B minor in the last years of his life. Although the complete mass was never performed during the composer's lifetime, it is considered to be among the greatest choral works in history.[95] In January 1749, Bach's daughter Elisabeth Juliane Friederica married his pupil Johann Christoph Altnickol. Bach's health was declining. On 2 June, Heinrich von Brühl wrote to one of the Leipzig burgomasters to request that his music director, Johann Gottlob Harrer, fill the Thomaskantor and Director musices posts "upon the eventual ... decease of Mr. Bach".[96] Becoming blind, Bach underwent eye surgery, in March 1750 and again in April, by the British eye surgeon John Taylor, a man widely understood today as a charlatan and believed to have blinded hundreds of people.[97] Bach died on 28 July 1750 from complications due to the unsuccessful treatment.[98][99][100] Musical style A handwritten note by Bach in his copy of the Calov Bible. The note next to 2 Chronicles 5:13 reads: "NB Bey einer andächtigen Musiq ist allezeit Gott mit seiner Gnaden Gegenwart" (N(ota) B(ene) In a music of worship God is always present with his grace). From an early age, Bach studied the works of his musical contemporaries of the Baroque period and those of prior generations, and those influences were reflected in his music.[103] Like his contemporaries Handel, Telemann and Vivaldi, Bach composed concertos, suites, recitatives, da capo arias, and four-part choral music and employed basso continuo. Bach's music was harmonically more innovative than his peer composers, employing surprisingly dissonant chords and progressions, often with extensive exploration of harmonic possibilities within one piece.[104] The hundreds of sacred works Bach created are usually seen as manifesting not just his craft but also a truly devout relationship with God.[105][106] He had taught Luther's Small Catechism as the Thomaskantor in Leipzig, and some of his pieces represent it.[107] The Lutheran chorale was the basis of much of his work. In elaborating these hymns into his chorale preludes, he wrote more cogent and tightly integrated works than most, even when they were massive and lengthy.[citation needed] The large-scale structure of every major Bach sacred vocal work is evidence of subtle, elaborate planning to create a religiously and musically powerful expression. For example, the St Matthew Passion, like other works of its kind, illustrated the Passion with Bible text reflected in recitatives, arias, choruses, and chorales, but in crafting this work, Bach created an overall experience that has been found over the intervening centuries to be both musically thrilling and spiritually profound.[108] Bach published or carefully compiled in manuscript many collections of pieces that explored the range of artistic and technical possibilities inherent in almost every genre of his time except opera. For example, The Well-Tempered Clavier comprises two books, each of which presents a prelude and fugue in every major and minor key, displaying a dizzying variety of structural, contrapuntal and fugal techniques.[109] Four-part harmony Four-part harmonies predate Bach, but he lived during a time when modal music in Western tradition was largely supplanted in favour of the tonal system. In this system a piece of music progresses from one chord to the next according to certain rules, each chord being characterised by four notes. The principles of four-part harmony are found not only in Bach's four-part choral music: he also prescribes it for instance for the figured bass accompaniment.[110] The new system was at the core of Bach's style, and his compositions are to a large extent considered as laying down the rules for the evolving scheme that would dominate musical expression in the next centuries. Some examples of this characteristic of Bach's style and its influence: When in the 1740s Bach staged his arrangement of Pergolesi's Stabat Mater, he upgraded the viola part (which in the original composition plays in unison with the bass part) to fill out the harmony, thus adapting the composition to his four-part harmony style.[111] When, starting in the 19th century in Russia, there was a discussion about the authenticity of four-part court chant settings compared to earlier Russian traditions, Bach's four-part chorale settings, such as those ending his Chorale cantatas, were considered as foreign-influenced models. Such influence was deemed unavoidable, however.[112] Bach's insistence on the tonal system and contribution to shaping it did not imply he was less at ease with the older modal system and the genres associated with it: more than his contemporaries (who had "moved on" to the tonal system without much exception), Bach often returned to the then-antiquated modi and genres. His Chromatic Fantasia and Fugue, emulating the chromatic fantasia genre as used by earlier composers such as Dowland and Sweelinck in D dorian mode (comparable to D minor in the tonal system), is an example of this. Modulation Modulation, or changing key in the course of a piece, is another style characteristic where Bach goes beyond what was usual in his time. Baroque instruments vastly limited modulation possibilities: keyboard instruments, prior to a workable system of temperament, limited the keys that could be modulated to, and wind instruments, especially brass instruments such as trumpets and horns, about a century before they were fitted with valves, were tied to the key of their tuning. Bach pushed the limits: he added "strange tones" in his organ playing, confusing the singers, according to an indictment he had to face in Arnstadt,[113] and Louis Marchand, another early experimenter with modulation, seems to have avoided confrontation with Bach because the latter went further than anyone had done before.[114] In the "Suscepit Israel" of his 1723 Magnificat, he had the trumpets in E-flat play a melody in the enharmonic scale of C minor.[115] The major development taking place in Bach's time, and to which he contributed in no small way, was a temperament for keyboard instruments that allowed their use in all available keys (12 major and 12 minor) and also modulation without retuning. His Capriccio on the departure of a beloved brother, a very early work, showed a gusto for modulation unlike any contemporary work this composition has been compared to,[116] but the full expansion came with the Well-Tempered Clavier, using all keys, which Bach apparently had been developing since around 1720, the Klavierbüchlein für Wilhelm Friedemann Bach being one of its earliest examples.[117] Ornamentation The second page of the Klavierbüchlein für Wilhelm Friedemann Bach is an ornament notation and performance guide that Bach wrote for his eldest son, who was nine years old at the time. Bach was generally quite specific on ornamentation in his compositions (where in his time much of the ornamentation was not written out by composers but rather considered a liberty of the performer),[118] and his ornamentation was often quite elaborate. For instance, the "Aria" of the Goldberg Variations has rich ornamentation in nearly every measure. Bach's dealing with ornamentation can also be seen in a keyboard arrangement he made of Marcello's Oboe Concerto: he added explicit ornamentation, which some centuries later is played by oboists when performing the concerto. Although Bach did not write any operas, he was not averse to the genre or its ornamented vocal style. In church music, Italian composers had imitated the operatic vocal style in genres such as the Neapolitan mass. In Protestant surroundings, there was more reluctance to adopt such a style for liturgical music. For instance, Kuhnau, Bach's predecessor in Leipzig, had notoriously shunned opera and Italian virtuoso vocal music.[119] Bach was less moved. One of the comments after a performance of his St Matthew Passion was that it all sounded much like opera.[120] Continuo instruments solos In concerted playing in Bach's time the basso continuo, consisting of instruments such as organ, viola da gamba or harpsichord, usually had the role of accompaniment, providing the harmonic and rhythmic foundation of a piece. From the late 1720s, Bach had the organ play concertante (i.e. as a soloist) with the orchestra in instrumental cantata movements,[121] a decade before Handel published his first organ concertos.[122] Apart from the 5th Brandenburg Concerto and the Triple Concerto, which already had harpsichord soloists in the 1720s, Bach wrote and arranged his harpsichord concertos in the 1730s,[123] and in his sonatas for viola da gamba and harpsichord neither instrument plays a continuo part: they are treated as equal soloists, far beyond the figured bass. In this sense, Bach played a key role in the development of genres such as the keyboard concerto.[124] Instrumentation Bach wrote virtuoso music for specific instruments as well as music independent of instrumentation. For instance, the sonatas and partitas for solo violin are considered the pinnacle of what has been written for this instrument, only within reach of accomplished players. The music fits the instrument, pushing it to the full scale of its possibilities and requiring virtuosity of the player but without bravura.[125] Notwithstanding that the music and the instrument seem inseparable, Bach made transcriptions for other instruments of some pieces of this collection. Similarly, for the cello suites, the virtuoso music seems tailored for the instrument, the best of what is offered for it, yet Bach made an arrangement for lute of one of these suites. The same applies to much of his most virtuoso keyboard music. Bach exploited the capabilities of an instrument to the fullest while keeping the core of such music independent of the instrument on which it is performed. In this sense, it is no surprise that Bach's music is easily and often performed on instruments it was not necessarily written for, that it is transcribed so often, and that his melodies turn up in unexpected places such as jazz music. Apart from this, Bach left a number of compositions without specified instrumentation: the canons BWV 1072–1078 fall in that category, as well as the bulk of the Musical Offering and the Art of Fugue.[126] Another characteristic of Bach's style is his extensive use of counterpoint, as opposed to the homophony used in his four-part Chorale settings, for example. Bach's canons, and especially his fugues, are most characteristic of this style, which Bach did not invent but contributed to so fundamentally that he defined it to a large extent. Fugues are as characteristic to Bach's style as, for instance, the Sonata form is characteristic to the composers of the Classical period.[127] These strictly contrapuntal compositions, and most of Bach's music in general, are characterised by distinct melodic lines for each of the voices, where the chords formed by the notes sounding at a given point follow the rules of four-part harmony. Johann Nikolaus Forkel, Bach's first biographer, gives this description of this feature of Bach's music, which sets it apart from most other music: If the language of music is merely the utterance of a melodic line, a simple sequence of musical notes, it can justly be accused of poverty. The addition of a Bass puts it upon a harmonic foundation and clarifies it, but defines rather than gives it added richness. A melody so accompanied—even though all the notes are not those of the true Bass—or treated with simple embellishments in the upper parts, or with simple chords, used to be called "homophony". But it is a very different thing when two melodies are so interwoven that they converse together like two persons upon a footing of pleasant equality. In the first case the accompaniment is subordinate, and serves merely to support the first or principal part. In the second case the two parts are not similarly related. New melodic combinations spring from their interweaving, out of which new forms of musical expression emerge. If more parts are interwoven in the same free and independent manner, the apparatus of language is correspondingly enlarged, and becomes practically inexhaustible if, in addition, varieties of form and rhythm are introduced. Hence harmony becomes no longer a mere accompaniment of melody, but rather a potent agency for augmenting the richness and expressiveness of musical conversation. To serve that end a simple accompaniment will not suffice. True harmony is the interweaving of several melodies, which emerge now in the upper, now in the middle, and now in the lower parts. From about the year 1720, when he was thirty-five, until his death in 1750, Bach's harmony consists in this melodic interweaving of independent melodies, so perfect in their union that each part seems to constitute the true melody. Herein Bach excels all the composers in the world. At least, I have found no one to equal him in music known to me. Even in his four-part writing we can, not infrequently, leave out the upper and lower parts and still find the middle parts melodious and agreeable.[128] Structure and lyrics Bach devoted more attention than his contemporaries to the structure of compositions. This can be seen in minor adjustments he made when adapting someone else's composition, such as his earliest version of the "Keiser" St Mark Passion, where he enhances scene transitions,[129] and in the architecture of his own compositions such as his Magnificat[115] and Leipzig Passions. In the last years of his life, Bach revised several of his prior compositions. Often the recasting of such previously composed music in an enhanced structure was the most visible change, as in the Mass in B minor. Bach's known preoccupation with structure led (peaking around the 1970s) to various numerological analyses of his compositions, although many such over-interpretations were later rejected, especially when wandering off into symbolism-ridden hermeneutics.[130][131] The librettos, or lyrics, of his vocal compositions played an important role for Bach. He sought collaboration with various text authors for his cantatas and major vocal compositions, possibly writing or adapting such texts himself to make them fit the structure of the composition he was designing when he could not rely on the talents of other text authors. His collaboration with Picander for the St Matthew Passion libretto is best known, but there was a similar process in achieving a multi-layered structure for his St John Passion libretto a few years earlier.[132] Compositions In 1950, Wolfgang Schmieder published a thematic catalogue of Bach's compositions called the Bach-Werke-Verzeichnis (Bach Works Catalogue).[133] Schmieder largely followed the Bach-Gesellschaft-Ausgabe, a comprehensive edition of the composer's works that was produced between 1850 and 1900. The first edition of the catalogue listed 1,080 surviving compositions indisputably composed by Bach.[134] According to his obituary, Bach would have composed five year-cycles of sacred cantatas, and additional church cantatas for weddings and funerals, for example.[92] Approximately 200 of these sacred works are extant, an estimated two thirds of the total number of church cantatas he composed.[63][141] The Bach Digital website lists 50 known secular cantatas by the composer,[142] about half of which are extant or largely reconstructable.[143] Church cantatas Bach's cantatas vary greatly in form and instrumentation. Many consist of a large opening chorus followed by one or more recitative-aria pairs for soloists (or duets) and a concluding chorale. The melody of the concluding chorale often appears as a cantus firmus in the opening movement.[144] Bach's earliest cantatas date from his years in Arnstadt and Mühlhausen. The earliest surviving work in the genre is Nach dir, Herr, verlanget mich, BWV 150. As a whole, the extant early works all show remarkable mastery and skill. Many feature an instrumental opening which display effective use of the limited instrumental forces available to Bach, whether it be in the subdued combination of two recorders and two viola de gamba for BWV 106, or the independent bassoon in BWV 196. Bach's compositional skills are also manifested through his daring harmonies and advanced, unprecedented chord progressions. According to Christoph Wolff, Bach's early cantatas are impressive evidence of how the modest means at his disposal did not restrain the composer in the slightest, and they compare favourably with compositions by the most talented composers from the beginning of the 18th century, such as Krieger, Kuhnau or Zachow.[145] Secular cantatas Bach also wrote secular cantatas, for instance for members of the royal Polish and prince-electoral Saxonian families (e.g. Trauer-Ode),[148] or other public or private occasions (e.g. Hunting Cantata).[149] The text of these cantatas was occasionally in dialect (e.g. Peasant Cantata)[150] or Italian (e.g. Amore traditore).[151] Many of the secular cantatas were lost, but for some of them the text and occasion are known, for instance when Picander later published their librettos (e.g. BWV Anh. 11–12).[152] Some of the surviving secular cantatas have a plot involving mythological figures of Greek antiquity (e.g. Der Streit zwischen Phoebus und Pan),[153] and others were almost miniature buffo operas (e.g. Coffee Cantata).[154] Although Bach never expressed any interest in opera,[155] his secular cantatas, or drammi per musica, would have allowed Leipzig audiences, deprived of opera since 1720, to experience musical performances comparable to the royal opera in Dresden. These were not at all "poor or makeshift substitutes for real opera" but spectacles displaying "full mastery of the dramatic genre and the proper pacing of the dialogues."[156] Bach was best known during his lifetime as an organist, organ consultant, and composer of organ works in both the traditional German free genres (such as preludes, fantasias, and toccatas) and stricter forms (such as chorale preludes and fugues).[22] At a young age, he established a reputation for creativity and ability to integrate foreign styles into his organ works. A decidedly North German influence was exerted by Georg Böhm, with whom Bach came into contact in Lüneburg, and Dieterich Buxtehude, whom the young organist visited in Lübeck in 1704 on an extended leave of absence from his job in Arnstadt. Around this time, Bach copied the works of numerous French and Italian composers to gain insights into their compositional languages, and later arranged violin concertos by Vivaldi and others for organ and harpsichord. During his most productive period (1708–1714) he composed about a dozen pairs of preludes and fugues, five toccatas and fugues, and the Orgelbüchlein or "Little Organ Book", an unfinished collection of 46 short chorale preludes that demonstrate compositional techniques in the setting of chorale tunes. After leaving Weimar, Bach wrote less for organ, although some of his best-known works (the six Organ Sonatas, the German Organ Mass in Clavier-Übung III from 1739, and the Great Eighteen Chorale Preludes, revised late in his life) were composed after leaving Weimar. Bach was extensively engaged later in his life in consulting on organ projects, testing new organs and dedicating organs in afternoon recitals.[161][162] The Canonic Variations on "Vom Himmel hoch da komm' ich her" and the Schübler Chorales are organ works Bach published in the last years of his life. Harpsichord and other stringed keyboard instruments The Art of Fugue (title page) – performed by Mehmet Okonsar on organ and harpsichord Nos. 1–12Nos. 13–20 Prelude No. 1 in C major BWV 846 performed on harpsichord by Robert Schröter Bach wrote many works for harpsichord, some of which may also have been played on the clavichord or lute-harpsichord. Some of his larger works, such as Clavier-Übung II and IV, are intended for a harpsichord with two manuals: performing them on a keyboard instrument with a single manual (like a piano) may present technical difficulties for the crossing of hands. The Well-Tempered Clavier, Books 1 and 2 (BWV 846–893). Each book consists of a prelude and fugue in each of the 24 major and minor keys, in chromatic order from C major to B minor (thus, the whole collection is often referred to as "the 48"). "Well-tempered" in the title refers to the temperament (system of tuning); many temperaments before Bach's time were not flexible enough to allow compositions to utilise more than just a few keys.[163][164] The Inventions and Sinfonias (BWV 772–801). These short two- and three-part contrapuntal works are arranged in the same chromatic order as The Well-Tempered Clavier, omitting some of the rarer keys. These pieces were intended by Bach for instructional purposes.[165] Three collections of dance suites: the English Suites (BWV 806–811), French Suites (BWV 812–817), and Partitas for keyboard (Clavier-Übung I, BWV 825–830). Each collection contains six suites built on the standard model (allemande–courante–sarabande–(optional movement)–gigue). The English Suites closely follow the traditional model, adding a prelude before the allemande and including a single movement between the sarabande and gigue.[166] The French Suites omit preludes but have multiple movements between the sarabande and gigue.[167] The partitas expand the model further with elaborate introductory movements and miscellaneous movements between the basic elements of the model.[168] The Goldberg Variations (BWV 988), an aria with 30 variations. The collection has a complex and unconventional structure: the variations build on the bass line of the aria rather than its melody, and musical canons are interpolated according to a grand plan. There are 9 canons within the 30 variations; every third variation is a canon.[169] These variations move in order from canon at unison to canon at the ninth. The first eight are in pairs (unison and octave, second and seventh, third and sixth, fourth and fifth). The ninth canon stands on its own due to compositional dissimilarities. The final variation, instead of being the expected canon at the tenth, is a quodlibet. Orchestral and chamber music Bach wrote for single instruments, duets, and small ensembles. Many of his solo works, such as the six sonatas and partitas for violin (BWV 1001–1006) and the six cello suites (BWV 1007–1012), are widely considered to be among the most profound in the repertoire.[170][125] He wrote sonatas for a solo instrument such as the viola de gamba accompanied by harpsichord or continuo, as well as trio sonatas (two instruments and continuo). The Musical Offering and The Art of Fugue are late contrapuntal works containing pieces for unspecified instruments or combinations of instruments.[171][172] Violin concertos Surviving works in the concerto form include two violin concertos (BWV 1041 in A minor and BWV 1042 in E major) and a concerto for two violins in D minor, BWV 1043, often referred to as Bach's "double concerto". Keyboard concertos Bach composed and transcribed concertos for one to four harpsichords. Many of the harpsichord concertos were not original works but arrangements of his concertos for other instruments, now lost.[173] A number of violin, oboe, and flute concertos have been reconstructed from these. The aria "Schafe können sicher weiden" (Sheep May Safely Graze), No. 9 from the Hunting Cantata, BWV 208: composed for soprano, recorders, and continuo, the music of this movement exists in a variety of instrumental arrangements. In his early youth, Bach copied pieces by other composers to learn from them.[175] Later, he copied and arranged music for performance or as study material for his pupils. Some of these pieces, like "Bist du bei mir" (copied not by Bach but by Anna Magdalena), became famous before being dissociated with Bach. Bach copied and arranged Italian masters such as Vivaldi (e.g. BWV 1065), Pergolesi (BWV 1083) and Palestrina (Missa Sine nomine), French masters such as François Couperin (BWV Anh. 183), and, closer to home, various German masters including Telemann (e.g. BWV 824=TWV 32:14) and Handel (arias from Brockes Passion), and music from members of his own family. He also often copied and arranged his own music (e.g. movements from cantatas for his short masses BWV 233–236), as his music was likewise copied and arranged by others. Some of these arrangements, like the late 19th-century "Air on the G String", helped to popularise Bach's music. Sometimes "who copied whom" is not clear. For instance, Forkel mentions a Mass for double chorus among the works composed by Bach. The work was published and performed in the early 19th century, and although a score partially in Bach's handwriting exists, the work was later considered spurious.[176] In 1950, the design of the Bach-Werke-Verzeichnis was to keep such works out of the main catalogue: if there was a strong association with Bach they could be listed in its appendix (German: Anhang, abbreviated as Anh.). Thus, for instance, the aforementioned Mass for double chorus became BWV Anh. 167. But this was far from the end of the attribution issues. For instance, Schlage doch, gewünschte Stunde, BWV 53, was later attributed to Melchior Hoffmann. For other works, Bach's authorship was put in doubt without a generally accepted answer to the question of whether or not he composed it: the best known organ composition in the BWV catalogue, the Toccata and Fugue in D minor, BWV 565, was indicated as one of these uncertain works in the late 20th century.[177] The church in Arnstadt where Bach had been the organist from 1703 to 1707. In 1935 the church was renamed "Bachkirche". Throughout the 18th century, the appreciation of Bach's music was mostly limited to distinguished connoisseurs. The 19th century started with publication of the first biography of the composer and ended with the completion of the publication of all of Bach's known works by the Bach Gesellschaft. A Bach Revival had started from Mendelssohn's performance of the St Matthew Passion in 1829. Soon after that performance, Bach started to become regarded as one of the greatest composers of all time, if not the greatest, a reputation he has retained ever since. A new extensive Bach biography was published in the second half of the 19th century. By the end of the 20th century, more classical performers were gradually moving away from the performance style and instrumentation that were established in the romantic era: they started to perform Bach's music on period instruments of the baroque era, studied and practised playing techniques and tempi as established in his time, and reduced the size of instrumental ensembles and choirs to what he would have employed. The BACH motif, used by the composer in his own compositions, was used in dozens of tributes to the composer from the 19th century to the 21st. In the 21st century the complete extant output of the composer became available online, with several websites exclusively dedicated to him.[citation needed] 18th century In his own time, Bach was highly regarded amongst his colleagues,[180] although his reputation outside of this small circle of connoisseurs was due not to his compositions (which had an extremely narrow circulation),[11] but due to his virtuosic abilities. Nevertheless, during his life, Bach received public recognition, such as the title of court composer by Augustus III of Poland and the appreciation he was shown by Frederick the Great and Hermann Karl von Keyserling. Such highly placed appreciation contrasted with the humiliations he had to cope with, for instance in Leipzig.[181] Also in the contemporary press, Bach had his detractors, such as Johann Adolf Scheibe, suggesting he write less complex music, and his supporters, such as Johann Mattheson and Lorenz Christoph Mizler.[182][183][184] After his death, Bach's reputation as a composer at first declined: his work was regarded as old-fashioned compared to the emerging galant style.[185] Initially, he was remembered more as a virtuoso player of the organ and as a teacher. The bulk of the music that had been printed during the composer's lifetime, at least the part that was remembered, was for the organ and the harpsichord. Thus, his reputation as a composer was initially mostly limited to his keyboard music, and that even fairly limited to its value in music education. Bach's surviving family members, who inherited a large part of his manuscripts, were not all equally concerned with preserving them, leading to considerable losses.[186]Carl Philipp Emanuel, his second eldest son, was most active in safeguarding his father's legacy: he co-authored his father's obituary, contributed to the publication of his four-part chorales,[187] staged some of his works, and the bulk of previously unpublished works of his father were preserved with his help.[188]Wilhelm Friedemann, the eldest son, performed several of his father's cantatas in Halle but after becoming unemployed sold part of the large collection of his father's works he owned.[189][190][191] Several students of the old master, such as his son-in-law Johann Christoph Altnickol, Johann Friedrich Agricola, Johann Kirnberger, and Johann Ludwig Krebs, contributed to the dissemination of his legacy. The early devotees were not all musicians; for example, in Berlin, Daniel Itzig, a high official of Frederick the Great's court, venerated Bach.[192] His eldest daughters took lessons from Kirnberger and their sister Sara from Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, who was in Berlin from 1774 to 1784.[192][193] Sara Itzig Levy became an avid collector of works by Johann Sebastian Bach and his sons and was a "patron" of CPE Bach.[193] While in Leipzig, performances of Bach's church music were limited to some of his motets, and under cantorDoles some of his Passions.[194] A new generation of Bach aficionados emerged: they studiously collected and copied his music, including some of his large-scale works such as the Mass in B minor and performed it privately. One such connoisseur was Gottfried van Swieten, a high-ranking Austrian official who was instrumental in passing Bach's legacy on to the composers of the Viennese school. Haydn owned manuscript copies of the Well-Tempered Clavier and the Mass in B minor and was influenced by Bach's music. Mozart owned a copy of one of Bach's motets,[195] transcribed some of his instrumental works (K. 404a, 405),[196][197] and wrote contrapuntal music influenced by his style.[198][199]Beethoven played the entire Well-Tempered Clavier by the time he was 11 and described Bach as Urvater der Harmonie (progenitor of harmony).[200][201][202][203][204] The first decades of the 19th century saw an increasing number of first publications of Bach's music: Breitkopf started publishing chorale preludes,[206] Hoffmeister harpsichord music,[207] and the Well-Tempered Clavier was printed concurrently by Simrock (Germany), Nägeli (Switzerland) and Hoffmeister (Germany and Austria) in 1801.[208] Vocal music was also published: motets in 1802 and 1803, followed by the E♭ major version of the Magnificat, the Kyrie-Gloria Mass in A major, and the cantata Ein feste Burg ist unser Gott (BWV 80).[209] In 1818, Hans Georg Nägeli called the Mass in B minor the greatest composition ever.[200] Bach's influence was felt in the next generation of early Romantic composers.[201] When Felix Mendelssohn, Abraham's son, aged 13, produced his first Magnificat setting in 1822, it is clear that he had been inspired by the then unpublished D major version of Bach's Magnificat.[210] Felix Mendelssohn significantly contributed to the renewed interest in Bach's work with his 1829 Berlin performance of the St Matthew Passion, which was instrumental in setting off what has been called the Bach Revival. The St John Passion saw its 19th-century premiere in 1833, and the first performance of the Mass in B minor followed in 1844. Besides these and other public performances and an increased coverage on the composer and his compositions in printed media, the 1830s and 1840s also saw the first publication of more vocal works by Bach: six cantatas, the St Matthew Passion, and the Mass in B minor. A series of organ compositions saw their first publication in 1833.[211]Chopin started composing his 24 Preludes, Op. 28, inspired by the Well-Tempered Clavier, in 1835, and Schumann published his Sechs Fugen über den Namen B-A-C-H in 1845. Bach's music was transcribed and arranged to suit contemporary tastes and performance practice by composers such as Carl Friedrich Zelter, Robert Franz, and Franz Liszt, or combined with new music such as the melody line of Charles Gounod's Ave Maria.[200][212]Brahms, Bruckner, and Wagner were among the composers who promoted Bach's music or wrote glowingly about it. In 1850, the Bach-Gesellschaft (Bach Society) was founded to promote Bach's music. In the second half of the 19th century, the Society published a comprehensive edition of the composer's works. Also in the second half of the 19th century, Philipp Spitta published Johann Sebastian Bach, the standard work on Bach's life and music.[213] By that time, Bach was known as the first of the three Bs in music. Throughout the 19th century, 200 books were published on Bach. By the end of the century, local Bach societies were established in several cities, and his music had been performed in all major musical centres.[200] In Germany all throughout the century, Bach was coupled to nationalist feelings, and the composer was inscribed in a religious revival. In England, Bach was coupled to an existing revival of religious and baroque music. By the end of the century, Bach was firmly established as one of the greatest composers, recognised for both his instrumental and his vocal music.[200] 20th century 1908 Statue of Bach in front of the Thomaskirche in Leipzig28 July 1950: memorial service for Bach in Leipzig's Thomaskirche, on the 200th anniversary of the composer's death A significant development in the later part of the 20th century was the momentum gained by the historically informed performance practice, with forerunners such as Nikolaus Harnoncourt acquiring prominence by their performances of Bach's music. His keyboard music was again performed more on the instruments Bach was familiar with, rather than on modern pianos and 19th-century romantic organs. Ensembles playing and singing Bach's music not only kept to the instruments and the performance style of his day but were also reduced to the size of the groups Bach used for his performances.[215] But that was far from the only way Bach's music came to the forefront in the 20th century: his music was heard in versions ranging from Ferruccio Busoni's late romantic piano transcriptions to jazzy interpretations such as those by The Swingle Singers, orchestrations like the one opening Walt Disney's Fantasia movie, and synthesiser performances such as Wendy Carlos' Switched-On Bach recordings. In 2019, Bach was named the greatest composer of all time in a poll conducted among 174 living composers.[227] Burial site Bach was originally buried at Old St. John's Cemetery in Leipzig. His grave went unmarked for nearly 150 years, but in 1894 his remains were located and moved to a vault in St. John's Church. This building was destroyed by Allied bombing during World War II, so in 1950 Bach's remains were taken to their present grave in St. Thomas Church.[22] Later research has called into question whether the remains in the grave are actually those of Bach.[228] Van Til, Marian (2007). George Frideric Handel: A Music Lover's Guide to His Life, His Faith & the Development of Messiah and His Other Oratorios. Youngstown, New York: WordPower Publishing. ISBN978-0-9794785-0-5.	On 2 June, Heinrich von Brühl wrote to one of the Leipzig burgomasters to request that his music director, Johann Gottlob Harrer, fill the Thomaskantor and Director musices posts "upon the eventual ... decease of Mr. Bach".[96] Becoming blind, Bach underwent eye surgery, in March 1750 and again in April, by the British eye surgeon John Taylor, a man widely understood today as a charlatan and believed to have blinded hundreds of people.[97] Bach died on 28 July 1750 from complications due to the unsuccessful treatment.[98][99][100] Musical style A handwritten note by Bach in his copy of the Calov Bible. The note next to 2 Chronicles 5:13 reads: "NB Bey einer andächtigen Musiq ist allezeit Gott mit seiner Gnaden Gegenwart" (N(ota) B(ene) In a music of worship God is always present with his grace). From an early age, Bach studied the works of his musical contemporaries of the Baroque period and those of prior generations, and those influences were reflected in his music.[103] Like his contemporaries Handel, Telemann and Vivaldi, Bach composed concertos, suites, recitatives, da capo arias, and four-part choral music and employed basso continuo. Bach's music was harmonically more innovative than his peer composers, employing surprisingly dissonant chords and progressions, often with extensive exploration of harmonic possibilities within one piece.[104] The hundreds of sacred works Bach created are usually seen as manifesting not just his craft but also a truly devout relationship with God.[105][106] He had taught Luther's Small Catechism as the Thomaskantor in Leipzig, and some of his pieces represent it.[107] The Lutheran chorale was the basis of much of his work. In elaborating these hymns into his chorale preludes, he wrote more cogent and tightly integrated works than most, even when they were massive and lengthy.[citation needed]	yes
Classical Music	Was Bach blind when he composed his final pieces?	yes_statement	"bach" was "blind" when he "composed" his "final" "pieces".. "bach" "composed" his "final" "pieces" while being "blind".	https://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/05/nyregion/in-state-s-churches-celebrating-easter-with-alleluias.html	In State's Churches, Celebrating Easter With Alleluias - The New ...	In State's Churches, Celebrating Easter With Alleluias TimesMachine is an exclusive benefit for home delivery and digital subscribers. ONE of the great sacred works frequently performed during Holy Week is Bach's ''St. John Passion.'' Excerpts from it will be heard in church services around the state, but the entire work will be presented twice at The Bushnell in Hartford, on Saturday at 8 P.M. and on Easter Sunday at 4 P.M. The Hartford Symphony Orchestra, conducted by Michael Lankester, will be joined by Concora (the Connecticut Choral Artists), directed by Richard Coffey, with the tenor Frank Patterson, as the Evangelist, the baritone Daniel Lichti, as Jesus, and Anne Todd Howarth, soprano; Janis Taylor, mezzo-soprano, and John Mack, tenor. Bach, who was born in 1685, conducted the work at St. Thomas's Church in Leipzig in 1723, clinching his appointment as cantor and organist, a post that he had been denied previously; once installed he remained for the rest of his life. During that time he composed 250 cantatas, the ''St. Matthew Passion,'' the Mass in B Minor, the Christmas Oratorio, ''Goldberg Variations'' and many more works, including the unfinished ''Art of Fugue.'' During his final 10 years his eyesight grew progressively worse, leaving him almost totally blind. Bach was regarded as testy, often in conflict with the church hierarchy, and, during his lifetime, overshadowed in the musical world by Telemann. It was not until Mendelssohn conducted the ''St. Matthew Passion'' in Berlin in 1829 that Bach's work began to receive recognition, and by 1850 the first centenary of his death was observed. ESSEX -- First Congregational Church, 33 Prospect St. Today, 10 A.M., ''Lift Up Your Heads'' by Handel, with choirs. At 7:30 P.M., ''When He Rode Into Jerusalem'' by Deal. Fri., 7 P.M., ''A Scarlet Robe'' by Larson, ''Thirty Pieces of Silver'' by Beal-Carter, ''Even the Heavens Are Weeping'' by Martin, ''I'm Thirsty'' by Rojahn-Dengler, with choir. Next Sun., 9 and 11 A.M., ''Worthy Is the Lamb'' and ''Hallelujah,'' with choir. Barry Asch, organist. FAIRFIELD -- Black Rock Congregational Church, 3685 Black Rock Tpke. Today, 9:30 A.M., ''Then Will the Very Rocks Cry Out'' by McSpadden, George, Thompson and Scruggs, ''Psalm 150'' by Lewankowski, with choir and organ. At 11 A.M., contemporary service with vocal and band ensemble. Next Sun., 8 and 9:30 A.M., ''He Is Alive'' by Wilkinson and Clydesdale, ''Jesus Is Alive'' by Kenoly, ''Hallelujah,'' with choir and organ. At 11 A.M., contemporary service, vocal and band ensemble. James P. Marshall, minister of music. MILFORD -- First United Church of Christ, 34 W. Main St. Thur., 7:30 P.M., ''Deal Gently, Lord, With Thy Servants'' (Anonymous), ''Bread of the World'' by John Abdenour, ''The Lord Is My Shepherd'' from John Rutter's Requiem, with choir and organ. Fri., noon, ''Adoramus Te Christe'' by Palestrina, Chants on Psalm 22 by Wesley and Bairstow, ''Drop, Drop Slow Tears'' by Orlando Gibbons, with boys' and girls' choirs. Next Sun., 9 and 11 A.M., Dutch carol ''This Joyful Eastertide,'' ''Christ Is Our Passover'' by Abdenour, ''Hallelujah'' from Handel's Messiah, with choirs, brass quintet, drums and cymbals. John Abdenour, music director. NEW BRITAIN -- South Church, 90 Main St. Today, 10:30 A.M., ''O Vos Omnes'' by Pablo Casals, ''Lift Up Your Heads'' by Francis Jackson, Harold Darke's ''Communion Service in F Major,'' ''O Sacred Head'' by David Hurd, with choir. Thur., 7:30 P.M., ''Thy Perfect Love'' by John Rutter, ''I See His Blood Upon the Rose'' by Hugh Robertson, ''Abide With Me'' by Harrison Millard, with choir. Next Sun., Dupre's ''Cortege and Litany'' with Jubilant Ringers Bell Choir, ''Fanfare'' for organ by John Cook, ''Christ Hath Triumphed'' by W. Glen Darst, Randall Thompson's ''Alleluia,'' ''Alleluia'' from Mozart's ''Exultate Jubilate,'' with Christine Laird, soprano. Richard Coffey, organist and music director. NEW HAVEN -- United Church on the Green. Today, 10:30 A.M., ''Thy Saviour Comes, Jerusalem'' by David H. Williams, ''Hosanna to the Son of David'' by Thomas Weelkes, ''God So Loved the World'' by Stainer, with choir. ''Cortege and Litanie'' by Dupre, ''Improvisation'' by Camille Saint-Saens, for organ. Next Sun., 10:30 A.M., ''The Glory of Christ: by K. Lee Scott, ''Hilariter'' by Richard Dirksen, ''O Death, Where Is Thy Sting?'' ''But Thanks Be to God'' and ''Hallellujah,'' with choir. ''Gaudeamus'' by Richard Proulx, ''Prelude and Fugue on the Name Alain'' by Durufle, with choir, soloists, Colonial Brass Quintet and timpani, ''Toccata'' from Widor's Symphony No. 5. Dr. Mark Brombaugh, music director. NORWALK -- First Congregational Church on the Green. Today, 10:30 A.M., ''Blessed Is He Who Comes in the Name of the Lord'' by Charles Gounod, ''Ride On in Majesty'' by T. Frederick Candlyn, ''March Pontifical'' from Symphony No. 1 by Widor. Next Sun., 11 A.M., ''Jesus Christ Is Risen Again'' by Eric Thiman, ''My Soul Doth Magnify the Lord'' by Tertius Noble, ''He Is Risen'' by Joachim Leander, and ''Toccata'' from the Symphony No. 5 by Widor. Soloists Grace Kane, soprano; Meredith Fischer, mezzo-soprano, and William Bray, baritone. Joseph MacFarland, organist and music director. RIDGEFIELD -- First Congregational Church, 103 Main St. Today, 4 P.M. Handel's Messiah, Parts I and II, with orchestra and soloists. Next Sun., 8 A.M., Traditional hymns by the Hand Bell Choir, organ prelude by Bach, and ''Toccata'' from Widor's Symphony No. 5 for Organ. At 9:30 and 11 A.M., ''Hallelujah'' and other excerpts from the Messiah, with multiple choirs and brass, ''Toccata'' by Widor. Jane Wilmot, music director. STAMFORD -- First Presbyterian Church, 1101 Bedford St. Fri., 8, Brahms's Requiem, two pianos, soloists, choir and the Wilton Singers. Offering. Next Sun., 9 and 11 A.M., works by Bach, Charpentier, Leo Sowerby and Eric Thiman, with the New York Brass Quintet, choir and organ. James D. Wetherald, music director. A version of this article appears in print on , Section CN, Page 14 of the National edition with the headline: In State's Churches, Celebrating Easter With Alleluias. Order Reprints \| Today’s Paper \| Subscribe	During that time he composed 250 cantatas, the ''St. Matthew Passion,'' the Mass in B Minor, the Christmas Oratorio, ''Goldberg Variations'' and many more works, including the unfinished ''Art of Fugue.'' During his final 10 years his eyesight grew progressively worse, leaving him almost totally blind. Bach was regarded as testy, often in conflict with the church hierarchy, and, during his lifetime, overshadowed in the musical world by Telemann. It was not until Mendelssohn conducted the ''St. Matthew Passion'' in Berlin in 1829 that Bach's work began to receive recognition, and by 1850 the first centenary of his death was observed. ESSEX -- First Congregational Church, 33 Prospect St. Today, 10 A.M., ''Lift Up Your Heads'' by Handel, with choirs. At 7:30 P.M., ''When He Rode Into Jerusalem'' by Deal. Fri., 7 P.M., ''A Scarlet Robe'' by Larson, ''Thirty Pieces of Silver'' by Beal-Carter, ''Even the Heavens Are Weeping'' by Martin, ''I'm Thirsty'' by Rojahn-Dengler, with choir. Next Sun., 9 and 11 A.M., ''Worthy Is the Lamb'' and ''Hallelujah,'' with choir. Barry Asch, organist. FAIRFIELD -- Black Rock Congregational Church, 3685 Black Rock Tpke. Today, 9:30 A.M., ''Then Will the Very Rocks Cry Out'' by McSpadden, George, Thompson and Scruggs, ''Psalm 150'' by Lewankowski, with choir and organ. At 11 A.M., contemporary service with vocal and band ensemble. Next Sun., 8 and 9:30 A.M., ''He Is Alive'' by Wilkinson and Clydesdale, ''Jesus Is Alive'' by Kenoly, ''Hallelujah,'' with choir and organ.	yes
Classical Music	Was Bach blind when he composed his final pieces?	yes_statement	"bach" was "blind" when he "composed" his "final" "pieces".. "bach" "composed" his "final" "pieces" while being "blind".	https://www.baroque.org/baroque/composers	Major Baroque Composers - Music of the Baroque	Major Baroque Composers Italy Claudio Monteverdi (1567–1643): A student of Marc’Antonio Ingegneri in Cremona, Claudio Monteverdi quickly established himself as one of the most significant composers of his time. In 1592 he was appointed suonatore di vivuola (viol and/or violin player) to Duke Vincenzo I of Mantua; his third book of madrigals, published in 1592, shows the strong influence of Giaches de Wert, the maestro di cappella in Mantua. Although the several journeys Monteverdi made with the duke in the 1590s seem to suggest that his importance at court was growing, Benedetto Pallavicino was offered de Wert’s post upon its vacancy in 1596. Increasingly dissatisfied with the his situation in Mantua, Monteverdi left the court after the Duke’s death, accepting the position of maestro di cappella of St. Mark’s in Venice in 1613. Monteverdi wrote some of the most influential compositions of the early baroque, including the famous 1610 Vespro della Beate Vergine (Vespers of the Blessed Virgin) and nine books of secular madrigals published between 1587 and 1651. Monteverdi also composed the earliest operas still performed today, including Orfeo (1607) and L'incoronazione di Poppea. In addition to writing some of the most important music of his day, Monteverdi unwittingly elucidated perhaps the most critical tenet of the baroque era during the so-called “Monteverdi-Artusi controversy.” In 1600, Giovanni Maria Artusi published his L'Artusi, ovvero, Delle imperfezioni della moderna musica, which attacked the “crudities” and “license” of some of Monteverdi’s then-unpublished madrigals (including the well known “Cruda Amarilli”). Monteverdi responded to Artusi in the preface to his Fifth Book of Madrigals (1605), dividing musical practice into prima prattica (first practice), in which rules of harmony and counterpoint took precedence over the text, and seconda prattica (second practice), in which the meaning of the words drove the harmony. Girolamo Frescobaldi (1583–1643): Born in Ferrara, Girolamo Frescobaldi was a student of the organist and madrigalist Luzzasco Luzzaschi; he was also likely influenced by the maverick composer Carlo Gesualdo, who was also in Ferrara at the time. Frescobaldi was a famous keyboardist, and served as the organist at the church of Santa Maria in Trastevere in Rome before assuming the same post at St Peter's in 1608, which he held until his death. During this time he also held several other influential positions, including that of organist at the Medici court in Florence from 1628 to 1634. Frescobaldi composed a small amount of vocal music, but it was his compositions for the keyboard—which included a number of toccatas, canzonas, ricercars and capriccios—that influenced composers well into the 18th century—particularly J. S. Bach, who owned his collection of organ works for performance during Mass entitled Fiori musicali (1635). Arcangelo Corelli (1653–1713): Born in Fusignano, Arcangelo Corelli studied composition and violin in nearby Bologna. After 1675 Corelli worked for some of the most important musical patrons in Rome, including Queen Christina of Sweden, for whom he directed concerts. He also formed a close bond not typical between patron and composer with Cardinal Pietro Ottoboni (later Pope Alexander VIII), at whose palace he lived for some time. Corelli enjoyed a stellar reputation both in Rome, where he was accepted in the highest aristocratic circles, and in much of Europe. His six published collections of concertos, sonatas and other works for violin were extremely popular, and made him the first composer to gain an international reputation solely on the basis of his instrumental music. Because his music uses many of the harmonic progressions that came to form the basis of modern tonality, his works are sometimes used as early examples of this newly emergent tonal system. Along with his stature as a composer, Corelli was considered to be one of the preeminent violin virtuosos of his day. As one of his contemporaries rhapsodized after hearing him play, “I never met with any man that suffered his passions to hurry him away so much whilst he was playing on the violin as the famous Arcangelo Corelli, whose eyes will sometimes turn as red as fire; his countenance will be distorted, his eyeballs roll as in an agony, and he gives in so much to what he is doing that he doth not look like the same man.” Corelli’s style of playing influenced violin technique for centuries, and he instructed many of the leading violinist-composers of the 18th century, including the Italian Francesco Geminiani. Antonio Vivaldi (1678–1741): Born in Venice, Antonio Vivaldi was trained in music as a child, but was ordained as a priest in 1703. Although his vocation and striking red hair earned him the moniker “Il Prete Rosso” (the Red Priest), his picturesque nickname soon became the only vestige of his priestly duties. Within a year of his ordination, Vivaldi stated that he no longer wished to celebrate the mass because of “tightness of the chest,” a condition some have attributed to angina pectoris, asthmatic bronchitis—or simply to the fact that music was the Red Priest’s true calling. Around 1704, Vivaldi began his association with the Ospedale della Pietà, an institution with which he was connected for most of his life. Although the Ospedale was usually called an orphanage, it was in reality a home for the illegitimate daughters of Venetian noblemen, and was well financed by its “anonymous” benefactors. In addition to room, board, and an excellent education in music, the Pietà offered a creative outlet for women at a time when professional opportunities for female musicians were uncertain. The students of the Pietà played many different instruments (as one eighteenth-century writer observed, “[They] play the violin, the recorder, the organ, the oboe, the cello, the bassoon; in fact, there is no instrument large enough to frighten them”) and were considered to be among the most accomplished performers of their time. Because they were constantly in need of new music, the bulk of Vivaldi’s output—including almost 500 concertos, 46 sinfonias, 73 sonatas, chamber music and a small number of sacred compositions – was likely intended for these talented performers. Alessandro Scarlatti (1660–1725): A student of Giacomo Carissimi in Rome, Alessandro Scarlatti became the maestro di cappella of the viceroy of Naples in 1684 perhaps by way of his sister, an opera singer and the mistress of an influential Neapolitan noble. Scarlatti wrote over 100 operas, and his works are thought to represent the change in approach to the genre—including the standardization of forms, embellishment of arias and minimization of recitatives—that took place at the end of the 17th century, ultimately leading to the subgenre opera seria. In addition to opera, Scarlatti composed more than 600 cantatas and a number of oratorios. His fame today rests primarily on his vocal music, but Scarlatti received frequent commissions for instrumental music during his career as well. Domenico Scarlatti (1685–1757): The sixth son of Alessandro Scarlatti, Domenico Scarlatti likely received the best musical education Naples had to offer. Around 1708, the elder Scarlatti took his son to Venice to study with Francesco Gasparini (1668–1727), who had been a pupil of Corelli. From Venice the younger Scarlatti journeyed to Rome—reportedly with Handel—where the two men performed before Cardinal Pietro Ottoboni. About 1720 Scarlatti moved to Lisbon, and some ten years later to Madrid. He is known today primarily for his keyboard sonatas, in which his frequent borrowings from Hispanic folk tunes and rhythms create a unique sound that is sometimes called “Iberian Baroque.” Giovanni Battista Pergolesi (1710–1736): Born in Jesi in 1710, Pergolesi studied under Francesco Sartini. He moved to Naples in 1725, where he spent his brief career working in the Neapolitan courts. While in Naples, Pergolesi joined Alessandro Scarlatti in pioneering the changes underway in the genre of opera, particularly in the new opera buffa (comic opera). In 1733, he included within his opera Il prigioner superbo the two act buffaintermezzoLa serva padrona (The Landlady Servant), which immediately became popular in its own right. Its premiere in Paris in 1752 sparked the so-called querelle des bouffons (quarrel of the comedians), a debate between devotees of serious French opera in the style of Lully and Rameau and fans of the new style of Italian comic opera. During the course of the two-year dispute, Pergolesi’s work became the figurehead of the Italian style. In addition to numerous operas, Pergolesi composed a number of secular instrumental works and sacred pieces. His best known sacred composition is the Stabat Mater (1736), commissioned to replace a similar piece by Alessandro Scarlatti which had been performed for years on Good Friday in Naples. Reprinted more often than any other composition in the 18th century, the Stabat Mater was an inspiration to many, including J. S. Bach. Pergolesi’s instrumental compositions include a concerto and sonata for the violin. Many pieces believed to have been composed by Pergolesi were later shown to be falsely attributed, including the music on which Igor Stravinsky based the 1920 ballet Pulcinella. France François Couperin (1668–1733): Born in Paris in 1668, François Couperin was the son of Charles Couperin (1638–79), the organist at St Gervais in Paris. After inheriting his father's position at the age of 18, Couperin eventually became the harpsichordist at Versailles as well. From the start of his career, Couperin was something of a nonconformist. In his publications of harpsichord music Couperin grouped his works into ordres rather than the more typical suites, and often eschewed the usual dance movements in favor of evocative pièces de caractère. In order to ensure that his music was properly performed, Couperin published L'art de toucher le clavecin (1716), which included fingerings, instructions for ornamentation and playing dotted rhythms and eight preludes that could serve as introductions to the eight ordres of his first and second books. In addition to his keyboard music, Couperin composed a number of sacred vocal works that were heavily influenced by Italian cantatas and sonatas, and his interest in the juxtaposition of French and Italian styles continued throughout his lifetime. His publications in his final decade offer striking illustrations of this preoccupation, including the Concert instrumental à la mémoire de Monsieur de Lully (1725) in which Lully and Corelli are received by Apollo on Mount Parnassus and together compose “La paix du Parnasse” in the form of a trio sonata. An even more direct fusing of the two styles occurs in Les nations (1726) and in his suites for bass viols (1728), of which the first is a French ordre and the second an Italian sonata da chiesa. Couperin remained somewhat controversial for much of his career. While some critics dismissed him as a “dedicated servant of Italy,” others viewed the quality of his playing and compositions as the epitome of the French classical tradition. Jean-Baptiste Lully (1632–1687): One of the most dominant figures of the French baroque, Giovanni Battista Lulli (later Jean-Baptiste Lully) was actually an Italian of noble birth who arrived in Paris in 1646. In 1653, he began work at the Court of Louis XIV as an instrumental composer and dancer. Upon securing the position of superintendent of music in 1661, Lully started writing comédies-ballets with the playwright Molière, fusing the tradition of Italian pastoral opera with the French ballet du cour. In 1672 he acquired the license for the Académie de musique, and a series of highly restrictive patents gave him a total monopoly on the use of music on the French stage. Lully even persuaded the king to limit the number of singers and instrumentalists that could perform with other Parisian theater troupes. The apotheosis of Lully’s style was the tragédie-lyrique, a French opera in five acts incorporating ballet, chorus and lavish sets. The magnificence of these productions reflected the way of life in Louis XIV’s court perfectly. Machines that made angels fly and ships tackle the stormy seas transformed the performances unparalleled spectacles, and Philippe Quinault’s librettos disseminated the latest currents in royal thought and praise for the French nation. Marc-Antoine Charpentier (1645–1704): Believed to be from a family of royal painters, Charpentier studied with Carissimi in Rome in the 1660s before returning to Paris around 1670. In addition to his position as maître de musique at the residence of Marie de Lorraine, Mademoiselle de Guise, which lasted until her death in 1688, he became Molière's musical collaborator when the dramatist broke with Lully in 1672. Although Molière's death in 1673 put a premature end to their partnership, Charpentier continued working with the Comédie-française. Louis XIV liked his theater music so much that he granted him a pension in 1683. In addition to his employment in the secular realm, Charpentier held several posts in the church during the final decades of his life. After serving as the maître of the Jesuits' St. Louis church, Charpentier became the maître de musique des enfants at the Sainte Chapelle in 1698. As a result of these positions, Charpentier’s repertoire includes 11 Mass settings; a large number of Psalms, antiphons, sequences and lessons; more than 200 motets; and many instrumental works intended for performance in church. His best known works for the stage are La couronne de fleurs (1685), David et Jonathas (1688), and Médée (1693), and he also wrote three unpublished treatises. Jean-Phillippe Rameau (1683–1764): Born in Dijon in 1683, Rameau spent the first 40 years of his life working in the relative obscurity of the provinces. His move to Paris and the publication of his famous Traité de l'harmonie in 1722 brought him into the limelight, although he was still unable to secure employment. In 1726, he published his second and more contentious treatise, Nouveau système de musique théorique, which led him into rancorous public disputes in the pages of the Mercure de France (1729-30). Rameau’s early operas, including Hippolyte and Aricie(1733), were also the subject of controversy, sparking a lengthy debate between the old-fashioned Lullists and the avant-garde Ramists over the identity of “French opera.” In addition to serving as the maître de musique at the home of the financier La Poupliniere from about 1735 until 1753, Rameau began work at court as the King’s compositeur de la musique in 1745 and collaborated on several projects with Voltaire. In the final decade of his life, Rameau focused more on theory than on actual composition, corresponding with other important music theorists including Johann Mattheson. His ideas about harmony, particularly the notion that every chord has a basse fondamentale (root note) that preserves the identity of the chord even when its notes are reordered, form the basis of modern theories of tonality. Upon Rameau’s death in 1764, over 1500 people attended his memorial service, which featured over 180 musicians performing excerpts from his operas. Germany Michael Praetorius (1571–1621): A student of Martin Luther, Praetorius was theorganist at the Marienkirche in Frankfurt before he became the organist (1603) and Kapellmeister (1604) at the court in Wolfenbüttel. His post necessitated a great deal of travel, which allowed him to advertise his talents as a conductor, organist and knowledgeable expert on practical music and on musical instruments. An extremely prolific composer of Lutheran church music, Praetorius’s magnum opus is the 9-volume Musae Sioniae, which contains over a thousand chorale and song settings. His only surviving secular work is Terpsichore, a set of 312 dances. In addition to his music, Praetorius provided an invaluable reference for researchers in the form of his three volume Syntagma Musicum (1619), a detailed compendium of observations on contemporary German music, musical instruments and performance. Johann Hermann Schein (1586–1630): After studies in music and in law, Schein held positions as house music director at Schloss Weissenfels and Kapellmeister to Duke Johann Ernst the Younger at Weimar before succeeding Calvisius in 1616 as music director and cantor at the Thomaskirche in Leipzig, a position J. S. Bach was to hold over a century later. Schein was one of the major figures in the development of the sacred concerto, one of the genres that fueled Bach’s Lutheran cantatas, and also composed many spiritual madrigals, motets, songs, dance suites and chorale harmonizations. Although his early compositions favor the complex polyphony of the sixteenth century, he quickly abandoned this style in favor of the more modern trend toward emotional declamation and dramatic contrast, using them to great advantage in many of his sacred works. Schein is also known for his friendships with Scheidt and Schütz. Samuel Scheidt (1587–1653): Born in Halle, Scheidt studied music in Amsterdam with the famous composer Sweelinck. Upon returning to Halle, he became court organist and them Kapellmeister to the Margrave of Brandenburg. Unlike many other composers including Schütz, Scheidt stayed in Halle during the Thirty Years’ War, taking a series of smaller posts until the situation permitted him to return to his position as Kapellmeister. Scheidt worked with a number of other famous composers throughout his career, such as Praetorius and Schütz, and composed many volumes of sacred music that include sacred concertos and madrigals. He was also well known among his contemporaries for his instrumental music, particularly his chorale preludes and fantasias for keyboard. Heinrich Schütz (1585–1672): Born in Köstritz, Schütz first studied music with his father, who was an innkeeper. In 1598, a guest at the inn—the Landgrave Moritz von Hessen-Kassel—heard the young boy sing, and was so taken with his talent that he asked Schütz’s father if he could be in charge of his music education. In addition to his studies with the landgrave’s Kapellmeister, Schütz studied law at the University of Marburg, graduating with honors in 1608. In 1609, the landgrave gave Schütz a grant to travel to Venice, where he studied composition with Giovanni Gabrieli until 1613. After a short stint as the landgrave’s organist, Schütz became the court composer for the Elector of Saxony in Dresden in 1615, where Praetorius was also occasionally employed. Schütz held this position for the rest of his career. During the Thirty Years’ War, however, he studied briefly with Claudio Monteverdi in Venice and served as Kapellmeisterto King Christian IV of Denmark for several years. Perhaps as a result of his studies in Italy, Schütz is sometimes credited with bringing the Italianate style to Germany. Like Monteverdi, Schütz often made use of pungent dissonances to express the meaning of the text, and even employed special technical figures in analogy to or taken from classical rhetoric. His two trips to Italy yielded collections of music that show his assimilation of the Italian style, especially his Il primo libro de madrigali (1611), dedicated to the landgrave and displaying the results of his studies with Gabrieli, and the Symphoniae sacrae (1629), which were published at the end of his time in Venice. In 1627 Schütz also produced the first German opera, Dafne, the music of which no longer exists. He is best known for his sacred vocal music, however, particularly his three books of Symphoniae sacrae, the Psalms of David, the Sieben Worte Jesu Christi am Kreuz (the Seven Last Words on the Cross) and his three Passion settings, which were composed shortly before the end of his life. Georg Philipp Telemann (1681–1767): Born in Magdeburg in 1681, Telemann came from a family long connected with the Lutheran church: his father was a clergyman, his mother the daughter of a clergyman and his elder brother also followed in the family’s footsteps. Telemann’s destiny lay elsewhere, however. By the age of 10, he was proficient on the violin, flute, keyboard and zither, and even wrote an opera, Sigismundus, at twelve. Her son’s ever-increasing interest in music worried his mother, who confiscated his instruments and forced him to take up the study of jurisprudence. According to Telemann, however, on the way to Leipzig University he met none other than “Herr Georg Friedrich Handel, who was already of some importance even in those days.” This encounter was the start of a long friendship between the two men, who exchanged letters throughout their lifetimes. (On several occasions, Handel even sent Telemann, an amateur botanist, “botanical curiosities” from London). Telemann tried to keep his passion for music a secret, but he was sorely tempted “to drink Music’s philtre,” as he put it—and drink he finally did. One day, his roommate “accidentally” came across the score of Telemann's setting of the Sixth Psalm and arranged for a performance in St. Thomas's Church the following Sunday. The work was so successful that the Burgomaster of Leipzig commissioned him to write a new piece for the choir of St. Thomas every fortnight. Telemann the composer was born. In 1702, Telemann took his first official job in music as the director of Leipzig’s opera house and one of its churches. His growing reputation in Leipzig angered Kuhnau, the city’s music director and Bach’s predecessor, who was particularly unhappy that student musicians seemed more interested in working with Telemann on opera productions than in participating in church music. In 1705, Telemann left Leipzig to become Kapellmeister to the cosmopolitan court of Count Erdmann II of Promnitz at Sorau), where the vogue for the French and Italian style broadened Telemann’s musical horizons. He became well acquainted with the music of Lully and Campra, composing close to 200 ouvertures and suites during his sixteen years in the position. After briefly overlapping with Bach in Eisenach and working in several other cities, Telemann was offered the Hamburg Johanneum in 1721, a post that entailed the directorship of the city’s five principal churches as well as teaching responsibilities. He remained at Hamburg for the rest of his life, and was succeeded in the post by his godson, Carl Phillipp Emmanuel Bach. During his lifetime, Telemann enjoyed a fame that far surpassed that of his contemporary, J. S. Bach. Not only was he considered to be the better musician—and was compensated accordingly with a salary in Hamburg at least three times larger than Bach’s in Leipzig – but by all accounts he was well liked, admired for his driving ambition, impressive talent and excellent sense of humor. Often called the most prolific composer in history, Telemann’s surviving repertoire is massive, including 1043 church cantatas, 46 Passions and many operas. He also composed a large amount of instrumental music; in an autobiographical article from 1740, Telemann estimated that he had written 600 suites, about a quarter of which are extant today. One of his most ambitious was the three-installment Tafelmusik(Table Music), on whose list of subscribers was “Mr. Hendel, Docteur en Musique, Londres.” George Frideric Handel (1685–1759): Like his friend Telemann, George Frideric Handel showed a great deal of musical promise during his childhood in Halle, but was initially encouraged to study law instead. Although he entered the University of Halle in 1702, he left a year later to become a violinist in the opera house at Hamburg. It was in this city that his first two operas, Almira and Nero, were produced in 1705, followed by Daphne and Florindo in 1708. Handel then traveled to Italy, premiering Rodrigo (1707) in Florence and Agrippina (1708) in Venice, where he may also have met Vivaldi. In Rome he studied with Corelli, and performed La Resurrezione (1709) and Il Trionfo del Tempo (1710). Early in 1710, Handel left Italy to become Kapellmeister to the Elector of Hanover, George Louis, who became King George I of England in 1714. Handel moved to London in 1712, where he remained for the rest of his life. Handel arrived in London as a famous opera composer, but English audiences proved resistant to the genre’s charms. By the early 1730s, the assaults of critics and the notoriously lascivious lifestyles of the singers had worn down London audiences, and Handel needed to find a new medium for his art. The oratorio was the perfect solution. English oratorios were similar to opera in their use of recitative and aria, but were rarely staged, and were based on stories from the Bible in the vernacular. Handel’s addition of the chorus also resonated with London audiences, who were steeped in the English tradition of anthem-singing. Ultimately, the English oratorio cemented Handel’s reputation forever—and works such as Messiah, Judas Maccabeus and Israel in Egypt are still tremendously popular today. In addition to his operas, oratorios and well known Coronation Anthems, written for the coronation of George II, Handel composed a great deal of instrumental music still performed today. Some of the most famous were composed for royal occasions, including Water Music, written for concerts on the Thames, and Music for Royal Fireworks. Others were published for purchase by subscription, like the Op. 6 Concerti Grossi, based on the Op. 6 collection of Corelli. After becoming blind in 1751, Handel died eight years later in London. He is buried in Westminster Abbey. Like many composers born into a musical family, Johann Sebastian Bach received his earliest instruction from his father in Eisenach. After his father’s death in 1695, Bach studied in Ohrdruf with his brother, Johann Christoph, and also attended schools in Eisenach, Ohrdruf, and Lüneburg. In 1703, Bach attained his first post as organist in Arnstadt, where he stayed until 1707, followed by a year as organist in Mühlhausen. From 1708 to 1717 Bach worked for Duke Wilhelm Ernst of Weimar, first as court organist, and after 1714, as Kapellmeister. Many of his organ compositions were written during this period, including the Orgelbüchlein, as well as some of his cantatas. While in Weimar, Bach also came into contact with a great deal of Italian music, and was particularly influenced by Vivaldi’s concertos. Bach embarked on the next phase of his career in 1717, when he became the Music Director for the Prince Leopold of Cöthen (1717–1723). Since the court chapel was Calvinist (a religion that did not use elaborate music in its services), Bach composed a great deal of instrumental music during this time, including the Brandenburg Concertos, the Suites for solo cello, the Sonatas and Partitas for solo violin, the first volume of Das wohltemperirte Clavier (The Well-Tempered Clavier) and the Orchestral Suites. While there was no need for sacred vocal music, Bach also composed a few cantatas to commemorate special events at court. In 1723, Bach was appointed music director and cantor at the Thomaskirche in Leipzig, a position he was to hold for the rest of his career. (Bach was actually the second choice for the position, as the more famous Telemann had already refused the job). His official duties were immense, requiring him to oversee the music in the city’s four main churches, teach and provide music for municipal occasions. During his first six years in Leipzig, Bach composed four cycles of cantatas and the St. John and St. Matthew Passions. By 1729, Bach had amassed a large repertoire of music for services in Leipzig, and was able to turn his attentions elsewhere. From 1729 to 1737 (and again from 1739 to 1741), Bach served as the director of the Leipzig Collegium Musicum, a group of professional musicians and university students founded by Telemann in 1704. In addition to reviving many compositions from Cöthen for the Collegium’s weekly concerts, many of Bach’s secular cantatas from this time were probably composed for the group. Bach also published a number of more abstract, erudite works for publication, particuarly the four volumes entitled Clavier-Übung (Keyboard Practice), which hold the Six Partitas for Keyboard (Vol. I), the Italian Concerto, the French Overture (Vol. II) and the Goldberg Variations (Vol. IV); another late work along similar lines is the unfinished Die Kunst der Fuge ( The Art of Fugue). Although he was famous during his lifetime, Bach’s contemporaries had all but dismissed him as old-fashioned by the time of his death in 1750. According to anecdotal evidence, his music was still respected; Mozart and Beethoven both reportedly studied his compositions. The true revival of Bach’s works began in 1829, however, when Felix Mendelssohn conducted a famous performance of the St. Matthew Passion in Berlin. After hearing the performance, Hegel called Bach a “grand, truly Protestant, robust and, so to speak, erudite genius which we have only recently learned again to appreciate at its full value.” Mendelssohn’s efforts to promote Bach’s music continued, and eventually led to the founding of the Bach Gesellschaft (Bach Society), an organization devoted exclusively to promoting his works. England Henry Purcell (1659–1695): As the son of a musician at court, a chorister at the Chapel Royal and a composer for three different kings, Henry Purcell spent his entire life in Westminster. After showing a proclivity for music at a young age, Purcell may have studied with John Blow in the Chapel Royal. 18th century historian Charles Burney questioned the extent of the tutelage, however, writing that “…he had a few lessons from Dr. Blow, which were sufficient to cancel all the instructions he had received from other masters, and to occasion the boast inscribed on the tomb-stone of Blow, that he had been ‘Master to the famous Mr. Henry Purcell’.” As part of his royal duties, Purcell was expected to write music to celebrate special occasions, such as the birthday ode for Queen Mary entitled “Come Ye Sons of Art, Away.” Although Italian opera had not yet caught on in England, Purcell composed a number of “semi-operas,” such as King Arthur (1691) and The Fairy Queen (1692), and the only through-sung English opera of the seventeenth century, Dido and Aeneas (1689). Purcell also wrote a large amount of incidental music for the theater, which his widow published posthumously as A Collection of Ayres, Compos'd for the Theatre, and upon Other Occasions(1697). In addition to his activities at court and in the theater, Purcell was also involved with the advent of public concerts in London, and composed harpsichord suites and trio sonatas for performance at these events. In 1683, a group of amateur and professional musicians started a “Musical Society” to celebrate the Festival of St. Cecilia, “a great patroness of music,” on November 22. Purcell composed three odes for the Society. Upon his premature passing in 1695, “the English Orpheus” was buried adjacent to the organ in Westminster Abbey.	Some of the most famous were composed for royal occasions, including Water Music, written for concerts on the Thames, and Music for Royal Fireworks. Others were published for purchase by subscription, like the Op. 6 Concerti Grossi, based on the Op. 6 collection of Corelli. After becoming blind in 1751, Handel died eight years later in London. He is buried in Westminster Abbey. Like many composers born into a musical family, Johann Sebastian Bach received his earliest instruction from his father in Eisenach. After his father’s death in 1695, Bach studied in Ohrdruf with his brother, Johann Christoph, and also attended schools in Eisenach, Ohrdruf, and Lüneburg. In 1703, Bach attained his first post as organist in Arnstadt, where he stayed until 1707, followed by a year as organist in Mühlhausen. From 1708 to 1717 Bach worked for Duke Wilhelm Ernst of Weimar, first as court organist, and after 1714, as Kapellmeister. Many of his organ compositions were written during this period, including the Orgelbüchlein, as well as some of his cantatas. While in Weimar, Bach also came into contact with a great deal of Italian music, and was particularly influenced by Vivaldi’s concertos. Bach embarked on the next phase of his career in 1717, when he became the Music Director for the Prince Leopold of Cöthen (1717–1723). Since the court chapel was Calvinist (a religion that did not use elaborate music in its services), Bach composed a great deal of instrumental music during this time, including the Brandenburg Concertos, the Suites for solo cello, the Sonatas and Partitas for solo violin, the first volume of Das wohltemperirte Clavier (The Well-Tempered Clavier) and the Orchestral Suites.	no
Classical Music	Was Bach blind when he composed his final pieces?	yes_statement	"bach" was "blind" when he "composed" his "final" "pieces".. "bach" "composed" his "final" "pieces" while being "blind".	https://www.pointsdevue.com/article/musicians-and-visual-impairment-second-and-final-part	Musicians and visual impairment (second and final part) \| Points de ...	This website uses third-party cookies to offer you social share buttons. By continuing to browse this website, you consent to the use of these cookies. If you want to object such processing, please read the instructions described in our Cookie Policy. Musicians and visual impairment (second and final part) Content The creation in Paris of the National Institute for Young Blind People (INJA) and, above all, the invention in the 19th century of an alphabet for the blind and visually impaired by Louis Braille, along with its application to reading music, were discussed in the first part of this article, published in Points de Vue n°66/Spring 2012. The second and final part of this article will be given over to a presentation of musicians, composers or players, who have achieved wide renown, in some cases, with their public being unaware of the fact that they were visually impaired. The 18th century provides us with two particularly well-known examples of musicians who suffered from visual impairment: Johann Sebastian Bach and George Frideric Handel. Both of these men suffered from cataract and called on the services of the "Knight" John Taylor, an English ophthalmologist (1703-1772). Fig. 1: Joannes Taylor The son of an apothecary, John Taylor studied medicine and specialised in ophthalmology. He rose through the ranks to become the personal eye doctor of King George II of Great Britain and Ireland (1683-1760). John Taylor travelled throughout Europe and "operated" on the cataracts of the greats of this world using a rather peculiar method: after having the patient drink sufficient alcohol to anaesthetise him, the doctor struck the patient on the head once or twice: the shock wave caused luxation of the crystalline and other side effects which can be imagined and which often left the patient completely blind… Bach (1685-1750) suffered serious eye problems for many years, possibly the result of the numerous copies and transcriptions he had made throughout his life, in poor candlelight. For this reason he called on the services of John Taylor. (right) Facial reconstruction (c) Caroline Wilkinson & Janice Aitken, University Dundee, Scotland / Bachhaus Eisenach, Germany. Private use and use through public media with regard to our special exhibition is permitted Johann Nikolaus Forkel's (1749-1818) biography of Bach relates the operation and the end of Bach's life as follows: "…On the advice of some of his friends, who had a great deal of confidence in the skills of an English eye doctor who had just arrived in Leipzig, he agreed to attempt an operation, which failed twice. Not only did he lose his sight, but also his health. His health had been so strong previously, but it was thoroughly weakened by the use of medicines, which were probably harmful and which were taken prior to the operation. His health declined further for a period of six months. Ten days before his death his sight suddenly returned. But a few hours later he suffered an attack followed by acute fever, which his weak body was unable to resist, despite all his doctors' efforts …" The Cantor put the final touches to his great Mass in B minor and on his deathbed he dictated his final work to his son in law, Altnikol, "Vor deinem Thron tret ich hiermit" (I come before Your throne). He died at the age of sixty-five on 30th July 1750. In 1750, Handel's sight started to suffer increasingly seriously, just like J.-S. Bach, who had died a few months earlier. In the summer of 1758, he went to Tunbridge Wells (Kent) where he consulted John Taylor. The operation was a failure, as it had been for Bach. Handel wanted to devote himself entirely to music, but his blindness made his work very difficult. He was able, however, to play organ music and concertos from memory and improvised music scores through until his death in 1759. Born in England, Frederick Delius learned to play the violin and the piano, but his father Julius Delius, a German industrialist who ran a wool factory, did not want him to go into a career in music. He discovered Wagner's music at the age of thirteen, when he attended a concert. Later his father sent him to Florida to run an orange plantation whilst he studied composition. It was after this trip that he composed his first orchestral work, the Florida Suite. On his return to Europe, he studied at the Leipzig conservatory with Reinecke, and it was in Leipzig that he met Edvard Grieg who was to have a profound influence on his music. In 1888, thanks to the intervention of Grieg with his father, he went to live in Paris and lived in France until the end of his life. Unlike the other musicians mentioned here, who lost their sight at birth or at a very young age, Delius went blind at the end of his life after suffering from syphilis. No longer able to write his own music, it was his secretary who wrote down his final compositions for the last ten years of his life. Having gone blind at the age of three after a diphtheria epidemic, Joaquín Rodrigo began his music studies in Spain. He then went to Paris where he studied under Paul Dukas (composer of "The Sorcerer's Apprentice") at the Schola Cantorum, from 1927 to 1931. He was then part of the Paris music scene, met Maurice Ravel and Manuel de Falla, and composed his famous "Concierto de Aranjuez" for guitar and orchestra. This work was first performed in 1940 in Barcelona and its second movement was to enjoy worldwide success. Now famous and the director of the music department of the Radio Nacional de España, he never ceased composing, producing a variety of work including stage music, concert music (concertos for guitar, piano, violin, cello, harp...), choir music and chamber music. Organists André Marchal was one of the greatest organists of the 20th century. He was born in Paris on 6th February 1894 and went blind at a very young age. After a good education at the Institut National des Jeunes Aveugles in Paris, in 1911 at the age of seventeen, André Marchal was admitted to the Paris Conservatory. He became an organ teacher at the Institut National des Jeunes Aveugles where the repertoire he taught was only restricted by the possibility of obtaining scores in braille. As organist in residence at Saint Eustache, he renewed the interpretation of Bach and the organs' mechanisms and introduced French music of the 17th and 18th centuries, particularly that of Couperin. A great interpreter of César Franck and a wonderful improviser, he toured the world and had many pupils, including Jean Langlais. Jean Langlais was from a family of stone masons and went blind at the age of two. His career was very similar to that of André Marchal since he entered the INJA in 1917, where he studied the organ, and was admitted in 1927 to the Paris Conservatory. In Dukas' composition class, he was a fellow student of Olivier Messiaen. A great virtuoso, most of his career (1945- 1988) was spent on the organ of Sainte-Clotilde in Paris, built for César Franck. He taught at the Institut National Des Jeunes Aveugles (1930- 1968) and at the Schola Cantorum (1961-1976). It would be unfair not to mention here, alongside the great blind representatives of the French organ school previously mentioned, a very great German musician, Helmut Walcha. He lost his sight at the age of sixteen, following a defective smallpox vaccination, but went on to develop a major international music career. His name remains indissociable from the works of Johann Sebastian Bach, whose entire organ repertoire he recorded twice, as well as the great harpsichord music cycles. Walcha always explained that blindness had enabled him to discover the internal world of music. His performances were limpid, with a craftsman's return to the text, slowly seeking his registers, which he always refused to publish. The French organ school represented, amongst others, by artists such as Marchal and Langlais, demonstrates the essential role which the INJA has played and continues to play today. Children who attended this school at the beginning of the 20th century were blind from birth or had acquired a major visual impairment at an early age: congenital cataract, glaucoma, diabetes, oxygen deficiency at birth, defective vaccination, were all risk factors that progress today in both medicine and genetics have considerably reduced. Visually impaired musicians are not, of course, found in the world of "classical" music alone. Many personalities in the world of jazz or pop have also enjoyed exceptional careers, despite their disability. Blind Jazz and Pop musicians Art Tatum (1909-1956) composer, musician Fig. 9: Art Tatum Portrait of Art Tatum, the Vogue Room in New York. Photograph taken by William P. Gottlieb between 1946 and 1948. Source: Wikipedia Arthur Tatum was born into a musical family on 13th October 1909 in the industrial town of Toledo (Ohio). He first studied violin and guitar and then piano. Art Tatum was almost completely blind from birth, due to a cataract on one eye and very restricted vision in the other. For this reason he went to a school for the blind where he took piano lessons. Selftaught he used braille and copied down the music he heard on records. As a teenager he was already a professional piano player in Toledo, but his professional career only began in earnest in 1926. He is considered to be one of the greatest jazz pianists, the inventor of the “stride”, which he took to its utmost. His technique was amazing, and he inspired a great deal of respect amongst his "classical" pianist colleagues, notably Vladimir Horowitz and Serge Rachmaninov, themselves exceptional virtuosos Ray Charles (1930-2004) composer, musician Fig. 10: Ray Charles Last concert of Ray Charles, in Salle Wilfrid-Pelletier at Place des Arts during the Festival International de Jazz de Montreal in 2003. Photo by Victor Diaz Lamich. Date: 15 july 2003 Source: Wikipedia The young Ray began to lose his sight from the age of five and went completely blind at the age of seven. His blindness was probably due to glaucoma, which went undetected and untreated, no doubt due to the poverty in which he grew up, where medical treatment was unavailable. From 1937 he went to an institution for the deaf and blind in Sainte-Augustine, Florida. But his disability did not prevent him from learning to ride a bicycle or playing cards. Ray Charles used all his senses; he assessed distances using his hearing and learned to develop his memory. He always refused to use a guide dog or a white cane, although he did need an assistant when on tour. Some of his fans nicknamed him "the blind architect of jazz and blues". He imposed his own style in the fifties, with songs whose lyrics combined the profane with gospel sound. He was the equal of other great black voices – Louis Armstrong, Nat King Cole, Bessie Smith – and music hall stars such as Sinatra or Stevie Wonder. He used to say, with his habitual humour "I'm blind, but there's always someone worse off than yourself, I could have been black!" José Feliciano was born in Porto Rico, and has been blind from birth due to congenital glaucoma. He taught himself music by listening in his room, for up to 14 hours a day, to rock music albums from the fifties, as well as classical guitarists such as Andrés Segovia or jazzmen like Wes Montgomery. His first tour in Great Britain had to be cancelled because the authorities refused entry to his guide dog, fearing that it might be carrying rabies. Feliciano later wrote a song entitled "No dogs allowed", in reference to this first visit to London. As well as his musical talents, Feliciano is known for his great sense of humour. Like Ray Charles he has no hesitation in joking about people's reactions to his blindness. Stevie Wonder was born prematurely and an excess of oxygen in the incubator left him blind within just a few hours. Fearing for his safety his mother only very rarely let him out, so Stevie amused himself by listening to the radio. He quickly acquired some good music basics and soon began singing in the church choir. He taught himself to play the harmonica and drums at the age of five and from then on took piano lessons. He was signed by the Motown label and brought his first record out at the age of 12, a few months before a second album dedicated to his idol Ray Charles, "Tribute to Uncle Ray". Stevie Wonder introduced the use of synthesisers in pop music and his compositions are often imprinted with great optimism. Blind, but with a great deal of humour, Stevie Wonder wrote the song "Don't Drive Drunk" for the MAAD charity (Mothers Against Drunk Driving). Andrea Bocelli (1958 - ) singer Fig. 13: Andrea Bocelli Author: Dovywiarda Source: Wikipedia Bocelli was born with congenital glaucoma, aggravated by chronic diabetes. He suffered a great deal with his eyes. He underwent his first operation at the age of six months, and twenty-six other operations followed. But doctors were unable to give Andrea's family any hope; he would go blind. He lost his vision completely in 1970 after an accident when he was twelve. He was studying in Reggio de Calabre at the time and was playing football. The blind children were using balls with metal pieces on their surface, to help them locate them. A ball hit Bocelli on the head and a piece of metal went into his eyes, precipitating his blindness. Andrea's mother says that she didn't know how to react with her son. She asked a blind boy for some advice and he recommended keeping Andrea's visual memory alive, colours, shapes etc. everything her son could no longer see. During his teenage years he won numerous singing competitions but was careful to take a law degree at Pisa University whilst continuing to sing in the musical bars of the city, his repertoire running from Charles Aznavour to Frank Sinatra. The real turning point in his life as a musician came when he met the legendary tenor Franco Corelli, who agreed to take him on as a pupil, nicknaming him "the blind angel". In 1994 Luciano Pavarotti personally invited Andrea Bocelli to the Pavarotti Festival in Modena, where he sang alongside the Maestro. Since then although he has not succeeded as an opera singer he has appeared alongside international stars on the most prestigious world stages. Conclusion As we have seen, visually impaired musicians, either self-taught or through the intermediary of dedicated structures, have been able to develop their natural gifts for playing an instrument. Although the causes of blindness at birth, or during early childhood, have been identified and although today some of these can be avoided through preventive action, there still remains a great deal of work to be done by research laboratories to ensure that, in the near future, risk factors leading to a visual disability are controlled in order to ensure that the consequences are diminished as far as possible. This is the meaning of the programmes currently being carried out in genetics and biology. There is so much still to discover about how the eye works and particularly in terms of the retina! Life expectancy increases on average by about three months every year and since in most cases AMD does not today benefit from satisfactory treatment, it is unfortunately certain that the number of people with a visual impairment will increase in significant proportions in the next few years. Of course, new visual aids, the implementation of multidisciplinary protocols, specific learning techniques and dedicated host structures are already facilitating the adaptation of this new disabled population, but one cannot fail to make a parallel between the Institut National des Jeunes Aveugles created in the 19th century whose aim was to care for the consequences of visual impairment and the Vision Institute in Paris which, by working in particular on the causes of visual impairment, will result in a reduction of the consequences.	He died at the age of sixty-five on 30th July 1750. In 1750, Handel's sight started to suffer increasingly seriously, just like J.-S. Bach, who had died a few months earlier. In the summer of 1758, he went to Tunbridge Wells (Kent) where he consulted John Taylor. The operation was a failure, as it had been for Bach. Handel wanted to devote himself entirely to music, but his blindness made his work very difficult. He was able, however, to play organ music and concertos from memory and improvised music scores through until his death in 1759. Born in England, Frederick Delius learned to play the violin and the piano, but his father Julius Delius, a German industrialist who ran a wool factory, did not want him to go into a career in music. He discovered Wagner's music at the age of thirteen, when he attended a concert. Later his father sent him to Florida to run an orange plantation whilst he studied composition. It was after this trip that he composed his first orchestral work, the Florida Suite. On his return to Europe, he studied at the Leipzig conservatory with Reinecke, and it was in Leipzig that he met Edvard Grieg who was to have a profound influence on his music. In 1888, thanks to the intervention of Grieg with his father, he went to live in Paris and lived in France until the end of his life. Unlike the other musicians mentioned here, who lost their sight at birth or at a very young age, Delius went blind at the end of his life after suffering from syphilis. No longer able to write his own music, it was his secretary who wrote down his final compositions for the last ten years of his life. Having gone blind at the age of three after a diphtheria epidemic, Joaquín Rodrigo began his music studies in Spain.	yes
Classical Music	Was Bach blind when he composed his final pieces?	yes_statement	"bach" was "blind" when he "composed" his "final" "pieces".. "bach" "composed" his "final" "pieces" while being "blind".	https://human.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Music/Music_Appreciation/Understanding_Music_-_Past_and_Present_(Clark_et_al.)/04%3A_Music_of_the_Baroque_Period/4.06%3A_Music_of_Johann_Sebastian_Bach_(1685-1750)	4.6: Music of Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750) - Humanities ...	Johann Sebastian Bach (B. 1685-1750) During the seventeenth century, many families passed their trades down to the next generation so that future gen- erations may continue to succeed in a vocation. This practice also held true for Johann Sebastian Bach. Bach was born into one of the largest musical families in Eisenach of the central Germany region known as Thuringia. He was orphaned at the young age of ten and raised by an older brother in Ohrdruf, Germany. Bach’s older brother was a church organist who pre- pared the young Johann for the family vocation. The Bach family, though great in number, were mostly of the lower musical stature of town’s musicians and/or Lutheran Church organist. Only a few of the Bach’s had achieved the accomplished stature of court musicians, but the Bach family members were known and respected in the region. Bach also in turn taught four of his sons who later became leading composers for the next generation. Bach received his first professional position at the age of eighteen in Arnstadt, Germany as a church organist. Bach’s first appointment was not a good philosophical match for the young aspiring musician. He felt his musical creativity and growth was being hindered and his innovation and originality unappreciated. The congregation seemed sometimes confused and felt the melody lost in Bach’s writings. He met and married his first wife while in Arnstadt, marrying Maria Barbara (possibly his cousin) in 1707. They had seven children together; two of their sons, Wilhelm Friedemann and Carl Phillipp Emmanuel, as noted above, became major composers for the next generation. Bach later was offered and accepted another position in Műhlhausen. He continued to be offered positions that he accepted and so advanced in his professional position/title up to a court position in Weimer where he served nine years from 1708-1717. This position had a great number of responsibilities. Bach was required to write church music for the ducal church (the church for the duke that hired Bach), to perform as church organist, and to write organ music and sacred choral pieces for choir, in addition to writing sonatas and concertos (instrumental music) for court performance for his duke’s events. While at this post, Bach’s fame as an organist and the popularity of his organ works grew significantly. Bach soon wanted to leave for another offered court musician position, and his request to be released was not received well. This difficulty attests to the work relations of court musicians and their employers. Dukes expected and demanded loyalty from their court musician employees. Because musicians were looked up- on somewhat as court property, the duke of the court often felt betrayed when a court musician wanted to leave. Upon hearing of Bach’s desire to leave and work for another court for the prince of Cöthen, the Duke at Weimer refused to accept Bach’s resignation and threw Bach into jail for almost a month for submitting his dismissal request before relenting and letting Bach go to the Cöthen court. The Prince at Cöthen was very interested in instrumental music. The Prince was a developing amateur musician who did not appreciate the elaborate church music of Bach’s past; instead, the Prince desired instrumental court music, so Bach focused on composing instrumental music. In his five year (1717-1723) tenure at Cöthen, Bach produced an abundance of clavier music, six concerti grossi honoring the Margrave of Brandenburg, suites, concertos and sonatas. While at Cöthen (1720), Bach’s first wife Maria Barbara died. He later married a young singer, Anna Magdalena and they had thirteen children together. Half of these children did not survive infancy. Two of Bach’s sons birthed by Anna, Johann Christoph and Johann Christian, also went on to become two of the next generation’s foremost composers. At the age of thirty-eight, Bach assumed the position as cantor of the St. Thom- as Lutheran Church in Leipzig, Germany. Several other candidates were considered for the Leipzig post, including the famous composer Telemann who refused the offer. Some on the town council felt that, since the most qualified candidates did not accept the offer, the less talented applicant would have to be hired. It was in this negative working atmosphere that Leipzig hired its greatest cantor and musician. Bach worked in Leipzig for twenty-seven years (1723-1750). Leipzig served as a hub of Lutheran church music for Germany. Not only did Bach have to compose and perform, he also had to administer and organize music for all the churches in Leipzig. He was required to teach in choir school in addition to all of his other responsibilities. Bach composed, copied needed parts, directed, rehearsed, and performed a cantata on a near weekly basis. Cantatas are major church choir works that involve soloist, choir, and orchestra. Cantatas have several movements and last for fifteen to thirty minutes. Cantatas are still performed today by church choirs, mostly on special occasions such as Easter, Christmas, and other festive church events. Bach felt that the rigors of his Leipzig position were too bureaucratic and restrictive due to town and church politics. Neither the town nor the church really ever appreciated Bach. The church and town council refused to pay Bach for all the extra demands/responsibilities of his position and thought basically that they would merely tolerate their irate cantor, even though Bach was the best organist in Germany. Several of Bach’s contemporary church musicians felt his music was not according to style and types considered current, a feeling which may have resulted from professional jealousy. One contemporary critic felt Bach was “old Fashioned.” Beyond this professional life, Bach had a personal life centered on his large family. He had seven children by his first wife, one by a cousin, and thirteen by his second wife, Anna Magdalena, who was also a singer. He wrote a little home school music curriculum entitled The Notebook of Anna Magdalena Bach. At home, the children were taught the fundamentals of music, music copying, performance skills, and other musical content. Bach’s children utilized their learned music copying skills in writing the parts from the required weekly cantatas that Sebastian was required to compose. Bach’s deep spirituality is evident and felt in the meticulous attention to detail of Bach’s scared works, such as his cantatas. Indeed, the spirituality of Bach’s Passions and his Mass are unequaled by other composers. Bach did not travel much, with the exception of being hired as a consultant with construction contracts to install organs in churches. He would be asked to test the organs and to be part of their inauguration ceremony and festivities. The fee for such a service ranged from a cord of wood or possibly to a barrel of wine. In 1747, Bach went on one of these professional expeditions to the Court of Frederick the Great in Potsdam, an expedition that proved most memorable. Bach’s son, Carl Philipp Emanuel, served as the accompanist for the monarch of the court who played the flute. Upon Bach’s arrival, the monarch showed Bach a new collection of pianos—pianos were beginning to replace harpsichords in homes of society. With Bach’s permission, the king presented him with a theme/melody that Bach based one of his incredible themes for the evening’s performance. Upon Bach’s return to Leipzig, he further developed the king’s theme, adding a trio sonata, and entitled it. The Musical Offering attesting to his highest respect for the monarch and stating that the King should be revered. Bach later became blind but continued composing through dictating to his children. He had also already begun to organize his compositions into orderly sets of organ chorale preludes, preludes and fugues for harpsichord, and organ fugues. He started to outline and recapitulate his conclusive thoughts about Baroque music, forms, performance, composition, fugal techniques, and genres. This knowledge and innovation appears in such works as The Art of Fugue—a collection of fugues all utilizing the same subject left incomplete due to his death—the thirty-three Goldberg Variations for harpsichord, and the Mass in B minor. Bach was an intrinsically motivated composer who composed music for him- self and a small group of student and close friends. This type of composition was a break from the previous norms of composers. Even after his death, Bach’s music was ignored nor valued by the musical public. It was, however, appreciated and admired by great composers such as Mozart and Beethoven. Over the course of his lifetime, Bach produced major works, including The Well-Tempered Clavier (forty-eight preludes and fugues in all major and minor keys), three sets of harpsichord suites (six movements in each set), the Goldberg Variations, many organ fugues and chorale preludes (chorale preludes are organ solos based upon church hymns—several by Luther), the Brandenburg Concertos, and composite works such as A Musical Offering and The Art of Fugue, an excess of 200 secular and sacred cantatas, two Passions from the gospels of St. Matthew and St. John, a Christmas Oratorio, a Mass in B minor, and several chorale/hymn harmonizations, concertos, and other orchestral suites and sonatas. Focus Composition: Bach, A Mighty Fortress is Our God Cantata, BWV 80 Bach’s A Mighty Fortress is Our God cantata, like most of his cantatas, has several movements. It opens with a polyphonic chorus that presents the first verse of the hymn. After several other movements (including recitatives, arias, and du- ets), the cantata closes with the final verse of the hymn arranged for four parts. For a comparison of cantatas, oratorios and opera, please see the chart earlier in this chapter. For more information on cantatas go to: Bach composed some of this music when he was still in Weimar (BWV 80A) and then revised and expanded the cantata for performance in Leipzig around 1730 (BWV 80B), with additional re-workings between 1735 and 1740 (BWVA 80). Listening Guide For audio, go to: www.baroquecds.com/723Cantata80.mp3 performed by the Bach Chorus & Orchestra of the Amsterdam Philharmonic Society / A. Vandernoot • This is representative of Bach’s mastery of taking a Martin Luther hymn and arranging it in imitative polyphony for all four voice parts and instrumental parts Other things to listen for: them to the first verse or strophe of the hymn. He weaves these new melody lines into a beautiful polyphonic choral work. Most of the time the instruments double (or play the same music as) the four voice parts. He also has the trumpets, oboes, and cellos divide up Luther’s exact melody into nine phrases. They present the first phrase after the first section of the chorus and then subsequent phrases throughout the chorus. When they play the original melody, they do so in canon: the trumpets and oboes begin and then the cellos enter after about a measure. Also listen to see if you can hear the augmentation in the work. The original tune is performed in this order of the voices: Tenors, Sopranos, Tenors, Sopranos, Basses, Altos, Tenors, Sopranos, and then the Tenors Bach was born into a century that saw great advancements in keyboard instruments and keyboard music. The keyboard instruments included harpsichord, clavichord, and organ. The harpsichord is a keyboard instrument whose strings are put into motion by pressing a key that facilitates a plucking of a string by quills of feathers (instead of being struck by hammers like the piano). The tone produced on the harpsichord is bright but cannot be sustained without re-striking the key. Dynamics are very limited on the harpsichord. In order for the tone to continue on the harpsichord, keys are replayed, trills are utilized, embellishments are add- ed, and chords are broken into arpeggios. Harpsichords are used a great deal for counterpoint in the middle voices. During the early Baroque era, the clavichord remained the instrument of choice for the home; indeed, it is said that Bach preferred it to the harpsichord. It produced its tone by a means of keys attached to met- al blades that strike the strings. As we will see in the next chapter, by the end of the 1700s, the piano would replace the harpsichord and clavichord as the instrument of choice for residences. Bach was best known as a virtuoso organist, and he had the opportunity to play on some of the most advanced pipe organs of his day. Sound is produced on the organ with the depression of one or more of the keys which activates a mechanism that opens pipes of a certain length and pitch through which wind from a wind chest rushes. The length and material of the pipe determines the tones produced. Levers called stops provide further options for different timbres. The Baroque pipe organ operated on relatively low air pressure as com- pared to today’s organs, resulting in a relatively thin transparent tone and volume. Most Baroque organs had at least two keyboards, called manuals (after the Latin word for hand), and a pedal board, played by the two feet. The presence of multiple key- boards and a pedal board made the organ an ideal instrument for polyphony. Each of the keyboards and the pedal board could be assigned different stops and thus could pro- duce different timbres and even dynamic levels, which helped define voices of the polyphonic texture. Bach composed many of his chorale preludes and fugues for the organ. Figure $\PageIndex{5}$: Pipe Organ Gérard Janot. Source: Wikimedia Focus Composition: Bach, “Little” Fugue in G Minor (BWV 578) The fugue is one of the most spectacular and magnificent achievements of the Baroque period. During this era of fine arts innovation, scientific research, natural laws, and systematic approaches to imitative polyphony were further developed and standardized. Polyphony first emerged in the late Middle Ages. Independent melodic lines overlapped and were woven. In the Renaissance, the polyphony was further developed by a greater weaving of the independent melodic lines. The Baroque composers, under the influence of science, further organized it into a sys- tem—more on this later. The term fugue comes from the Latin word “fuga” that means running away or to take flight. The fugue is a contrapuntal (polyphonic) piece for a set number of musicians, usually three of four. The musical theme of a fugue is called the subject. You may think of a fugue as a gossip party. The subject (of gossip) is introduced in one corner of the room between to people. Another person in the room then begins repeating the gossip while the original conversation continues. Then another person picks up on the story and begins repeating the now third-hand news and it then continues a fourth time. A new observer walking into the room will hear bits and pieces from four conversations at one time—each repeating the original subject (gossip). This is how a fugue works. Fugues begin with an exposition. This is when the subject is introduced until the original subject has been played or sung in all the voices or parts. Most fugues are in the four standard voices: soprano, alto, tenor, and bass. We will refer to the parts in these voices for both voices and instruments. At the beginning of the fugue, any of the four voices can begin with the subject. Then another voice starts with the subject at a time dictated in the mu- sic while the first voice continues to more material. The imitation is continued through all the voices. The exposition of the fugue is over when all the voices complete the initial subject. Voice 1 Soprano Subject-continues in a counter subject Voice 2 Alto Subject-continues in a counter subject Voice 3 Tenor Subject-continues in a counter subject Voice 4 Bass Subject-continues in a counter subject After the exposition is completed, it may be repeated in a different order of voices or it may continue with less weighted entrances at varying lengths known as episodes. This variation provides a little relaxation or relief from the early regiment systematic polyphony of the exposition. In longer fugues, the episodes are followed by a section in another key with continued overlapping of the subject. This episode and modulation can continue to repeat until they return to the original key. Fugues are performed as a prelude to traditional worship on the pipe organ and are quite challenging to perform by the organist. Hands, fingers, and feet must all be controlled independently by the single organist and all at the same time. Often in non-fugal music, this type of polyphony is briefly written into a piece of music as an insert, called a fugato or fugato section. When voices overlap in a fugue, it is called stretto (similar to strata). When the original voice continues after the second voice jumps in, the first voice is said to be singing the countersubject. The development of musical themes or subjects by lengthening or multiplying the durations of the notes or pitches is called augmentation. The shortening or dividing the note and pitch durations is called diminution. Both augmentation and diminution are utilized in the development of the musical subjects in fugues and in theme development in other genres. The “turning up-side down” of a musical line from an ascending passage to a descending passage is called inversion. Let’s listen to one of Bach’s most famous fugues. You may immediately recognize the piece from your past. The Little Fugue in G Minor is Bach’s most famous organ piece. Nature of Text: Bach was able to take the earlier vocal polyphony of the renaissance period and apply it to the organ fugue. This is regarded as one of Bach’s great achievements. Performing Forces: Organ What we want you to remember about this composition: • Listen to how Bach weaves and overlaps the subject throughout the piece. Other things to listen for: The subject (tune) is introduced in the highest voices and then is imitated in each lower voice in order: soprano, alto, tenor and then bass in the pedals. After the exposition is completed in the bass pedals, the subject is introduced in the first voice. Upon the entrance of the second layer, the first voice goes into a counter subject. Just before the subject is introduced five more times, it is preceded by a brief episode. In each episode the subject is not played in its entirety. Even though the fugue is in G minor, the piece ends with a major chord, a practice utilized during the Baroque period. Major chords were thought more conclusive than minor chords. Timing Performing Forces, Melody, and Texture 00:00 Subject in soprano voice alone, minor key 00:18 Subject in alto, countersubject in running notes in soprano 00:42 Subject in tenor, countersubject above it; brief episode follows 01:01 Subject in bass (pedals), countersubject in tenor 01:17 Brief episode 01:28 Subject begins in tenor, continues in soprano 01:48 Brief episode, running notes in a downward sequence 01:56 Subject in alto, major key; countersubject in soprano 02:13 Episode in major, upward leaps and running notes 02:25 Subject in bass (pedals), major key, countersubject and long trill above it 02:42 Longer episode 03:00 Subject in soprano, minor key, countersubject below it 03:16 Extended episode 03:47 Subject in bass (pedals), countersubject in soprano; fugue ends with major chord The LibreTexts libraries are Powered by NICE CXone Expert and are supported by the Department of Education Open Textbook Pilot Project, the UC Davis Office of the Provost, the UC Davis Library, the California State University Affordable Learning Solutions Program, and Merlot. We also acknowledge previous National Science Foundation support under grant numbers 1246120, 1525057, and 1413739. Legal. Accessibility Statement For more information contact us at [email protected].	The fee for such a service ranged from a cord of wood or possibly to a barrel of wine. In 1747, Bach went on one of these professional expeditions to the Court of Frederick the Great in Potsdam, an expedition that proved most memorable. Bach’s son, Carl Philipp Emanuel, served as the accompanist for the monarch of the court who played the flute. Upon Bach’s arrival, the monarch showed Bach a new collection of pianos—pianos were beginning to replace harpsichords in homes of society. With Bach’s permission, the king presented him with a theme/melody that Bach based one of his incredible themes for the evening’s performance. Upon Bach’s return to Leipzig, he further developed the king’s theme, adding a trio sonata, and entitled it. The Musical Offering attesting to his highest respect for the monarch and stating that the King should be revered. Bach later became blind but continued composing through dictating to his children. He had also already begun to organize his compositions into orderly sets of organ chorale preludes, preludes and fugues for harpsichord, and organ fugues. He started to outline and recapitulate his conclusive thoughts about Baroque music, forms, performance, composition, fugal techniques, and genres. This knowledge and innovation appears in such works as The Art of Fugue—a collection of fugues all utilizing the same subject left incomplete due to his death—the thirty-three Goldberg Variations for harpsichord, and the Mass in B minor. Bach was an intrinsically motivated composer who composed music for him- self and a small group of student and close friends. This type of composition was a break from the previous norms of composers. Even after his death, Bach’s music was ignored nor valued by the musical public. It was, however, appreciated and admired by great composers such as Mozart and Beethoven.	yes
Classical Music	Was Bach blind when he composed his final pieces?	yes_statement	"bach" was "blind" when he "composed" his "final" "pieces".. "bach" "composed" his "final" "pieces" while being "blind".	https://pragueclassicalconcerts.com/en/composers/bach?presenter=Composer	J. S. Bach - biography and upcoming concerts in Prague	Johann Sebastian Bach Johann Sebastian Bach is considered by many to have been the greatest composer in the history of western music. Bach's main achievement lies in his synthesis and advanced development of the primary contrapuntal idiom of the late Baroque, and in the basic tunefulness of his thematic material. He was able to successfully integrate and expand upon the harmonic and formal frameworks of the national schools of the time: German, French, Italian and English, while retaining a personal identity and spirit in his large output. Bach is also known for the numerical symbolism and mathematical exactitude which many people have found in his music – for this, he is often regarded as one of the pinnacle geniuses of western civilization, even by those who are not typically involved with music. Bach spent the height of his working life in a Lutheran church position in Leipzig, as both organist and music director. Much of his music is overtly religious, while many of his secular works admit religious interpretations on some levels. His large output of organ music is considered to be the greatest legacy of compositions for the instrument and is the measure by which all later efforts are judged. His other solo keyboard music criticized in equally high esteem, especially for its exploration of the strictly contrapuntal fugue; his 48 Preludes and Fugues (The Well-Tempered Clavier) are still the primary means by which these forms are taught. His other chamber music is similarly lofty, the sets for solo violin and solo cello being the summits of their respective genres. Bach's large-scale sacred choral music is also unique in its scope and development, the Passions and B Minor Mass having led to the rediscovery of his music in the 19th century. His enormous output of cantatas for all occasions is equally impressive. His large output of concerti includes some of the finest examples of the period, including the ubiquitous Brandenberg Concertos. Bach came from a family with demonstrable musical talents documented at least as far back as the mid-16th century: of the seven generation of Bachs – beginning with the first-known professional musician, Veit Bach (c. 1555-1619) and ending with William Friedrich Ernst Bach (1759-1845) – less than ten of them choose a profession other than music. The Bach family's identification with music is unparalleled in Western music, as is the genius of Johann Sebastian. He was the youngest child of Johann Ambrosius Bach (1645-1695) and Elisabeth Lammerhirt (1644-1694); by the age of ten, his father had died, and many members of the household were dispersed to other more financially stable branches of the family. Bach himself together with his brother Jacob, moved from Eisenach to live with his eldest brother Johann Christoph in Ohrdruf. In early adolescence, Johann Sebastian suffered from poor health which led to an erratic attendance at school, but his outstanding boy soprano voice won him admiration and at the age of fifteen he was recommended for a position in the choir of Michaeliskirche in Lüneburg, a town more than 200 miles away. There, remote from his family, he struck up a friendship with the composer-organist Georg Böhm, a man twenty years older than himself and willing to give him material and artistic guidance. Bach's musical education was aided by his lifelong passion for studying other composer's music in manuscript and drawing his musical lessons from what he discovered. His interests were unusually wide, and he found as much pleasure and inspiration in François Couperin as he did in German or Italian composers. This intense study eventually produced the young Bach's first efforts at composition, a set of variations; with his first organ appointment at Arnstadt's Bonifaciuskirche in 1703-04, he wrote his first cantatas and a number of preludes and fugues. These early works show him already in possession of unusual melodic inventiveness within the severe forms he used. Church work was for Bach the ideal form of employment, for it combined his intense religiosity with the opportunity to create music for voice and organ in particular, the organ being his first and final fascination. In autumn 1705, Bach secured a one-month leave of absence from Arnstadt and travelled on foot to Lübeck in order to study with the renowned Danish-born German organist and composer Dietrich Buxtehude, one of the foremost living German musician and composer and whose organ music greatly influenced Bach's. The visit was so rewarding to Bach that he overstayed his leave by two months. The church authorities criticised him not only for this breach of contract but also for the extravagant flourishes and strange harmonies in his organ accompaniments to congregational singing. When his young cousin Maria Barbara (later his wife) was found to be singing in the church choir at Bach's behest, he found himself in further trouble. He was already too highly respected, however, for either objection to result in his dismissal. Within a few months, he resigned and moved to a more prestigious position at Blasiuskirche in Mühlhausen. In October 1707 he and Maria Barbara were married; they had their first baby, a daughter, the following year. The appointment at Mühlhausen proved unsatisfactory both financially and theologically. Early in 1708, he accepted an appointment as Hof-Organist and Kammer-Musikus to Duke William Ernst of Weimar. This was hardly the top position within the Court's musical circles, but it was preferable to the situation at Mühlhausen. In Weimar he composed about 30 cantatas, including the well-known funeral cantata God's Time Is the Best, Passacaglia and Fugue in C minor, BWV 582, Orgelbüchlein and also wrote organ and harpsichord works. He began to travel throughout Germany as an organ virtuoso and as a consultant to organ builders. His performance of these and other works earned him a reputation far beyond the environs of Weimar. His tasks became more specific (including the monthly delivery of new cantatas) and his duties more onerous. Bach felt his situation to be intolerable; he had now four children and was dissatisfied with his family's standard of living. He seemed to lack courtier's ability to deal advantageously with such situations, and when he was passed over in 1716 he took the opportunity to move on, this time to become Kapellmeister in the newly-established household of Duke of Weimar's son, Duke Ernst August, who had married and moved to Cöthen, where the bride's father, Prince Leopold, was a great music lover. However, Duke Wilhelm August did not give Bach up without some unpleasantness: determined to humble his proud and plain-speaking musician, he refused to give Bach permission to leave his employ, actually keeping the composer under arrest for over a month before finally relenting and allowing him to move to Cöthen. There, the demand was for chamber music in which Prince Leopold could play an active role. Thus Bach composed a series of suites, overtures and concertos as well as sonatas and other small ensemble pieces. These were to include the four orchestral suites, the Brandenburg Concertos (so-called because they were dedicated to Duke Christian Ludwig of Brandenburg) and the beautiful Violin Concertos, BWV 1041/2/3, 1064/5, which were modelled on works by Italian composers (such as Antonio Vivaldi) whom he so admired. These were relatively stable, happy years for Bach and his family, but obliged to accompany the Prince on a trip to Carlsbad in 1720. He found on his return that his wife had died and was already on her grave. From then on his desire to leave the Court became steadily more urgent, especially when in 1721 his patron married a young woman with a little musical inclination and a determination to leave her husband into other diversions. Bach himself had remarried: his new wife Anna Magdalena Wilcken, a beautiful singer and daughter of a court musician, was just 20 (Bach was now 36) and required to act as stepmother to Bach's children whose education was proving problematic in a town where the best school was Calvinist. This situation made the post as Cantor of the Thomasschule in Leipzig very appealing when it fell vacant in 1722. Bach was not first or even second choice for the position – both Christoph Graupner and Georg Philipp Telemann were offered it but had to decline. Nearly a year after the appointment was originally advertised, Bach took up the position, pledging in his contract not to supply music which was 'too theatrical' or 'too operatic'. Bach new responsibilities including teaching various groups of scholars at the school, composing music for two churches, St. Thomas and St. Nicholas, and providing the occasional piece of music for the local university. He also had to ask permission from the Council if he wished to absent himself from Leipzig for any reason. The situation must have been very bad at Cöthen for Bach to agree to these conditions. He was to remain in this post for the rest of his life, and although his pride and sense of self-worth led him into regular and bruising contact with the various authorities to whom he was responsible, he never became disenchanted enough to resign. Despite endless arguments between himself and the Thomasschule appointees over whose empire ended where, Bach continued to produce sublime music throughout the decades he was in Leipzig, and his eminence was recognized by various admirers, including the King Elector of Poland-Saxony, who in 1736 awarded him the coveted title Koniglicher Hof-Componist. His son Carl Philipp Emanuel, then 26, became attached to the Court of the music-loving (and amateur flautist) Frederick the Great of Prussia 1740. In 1741 Bach visited his son in Berlin, Frederick's capital, and six years later he was invited to attend on Frederick at Potsdam. Thus, in May 1747 "Old Bach", as Frederick fondly called him, arrived and was presented to the King. The meeting was a complete success, Bach overwhelming Frederick with his ability to extemporize at the keyboard on demand. On his return to Leipzig, Bach took one of Frederick's own themes used during the meeting and developed it into the famous A Musical Offering, dedicated (in June 1747) to "a monarch admired in music as all in the other sciences of war and peace". Bach was now in his sixties, and his general health had begun to follow the course of his eyesight, which had been damaged irreparably by the years of studying music by candlelight. By 1749 he was blind, which greatly hindered his efforts to complete the works he left to be his last. Among the many pieces left incomplete at his death (although heavily revised) was the famous Die Kunst der Fuge (The Art of Fugue); a set of fugal pieces which has fascinated musicians and commentators ever since. The great man, age 66 when he died, was buried in an unmarked grave near the south door of Leipzig's Johanneskirche. In the late 19th century his grave was rediscovered during building work. His ashes were moved inside the church where they are now marked by the somewhat undemonstrative words, "Johann Sebastian Bach, 1685-1750". In Bach, Baroque polyphony reached its apotheosis and – at least to the succeeding generation – its point of exhaustion, for by the time of his death his music had already fallen a long way behind the forefront of musical fashion. His achievements were to languish in obscurity for close to 100 years before the efforts of others, particularly Mendelssohn, revealed Bach's genius to a wider world. Bach was not an innovator and no iconoclast: what he revered above all was musical truth and beauty, and he was ready to appreciate these wherever he came across them – from the manuscripts of earlier Italian masters to the extemporizations of fellow Germans. His musicality was complete and all-embracing, and only his temperament and his natural inclination to regard music as an adjunct to his religion restrained him from composing for the theatre (as did his contemporary Handel). His oratorios demonstrated his complete grasp of what is required to write convincingly for voices and orchestra. The connection between religion and music can not be overstressed: Bach invariably added homilies to God or Jesus at the beginning or end of his scores, even when they were modest chamber pieces or exercises for his children and students. Bach's music is a colossal summation of the tradition in Western music which led to his mature style: his genius allowed him the perfect synthesizing power to create the multitude of masterpieces which came from his pen. In the body of work which is so crammed with significant achievements, the selection of the main works means that many excellent or valuable pieces of music will go unremarked, but this leaves much for the reader to explore after initial contact. Perhaps the most instructive and entertaining place to start is at the keyboard. Das Wohltemperierte Klavier (The Well-Tempered Clavier) contains two books of 48 preludes and which are an object lesson in what Bach set out to achieve in his music. The use of a single instrument also helps the listener to follow more closely the musical imagination at work. A subsequent keyboard piece with equal rewards is the Goldberg Variations (BWV 988), completed in the early 1740s at much the same time as the second book of Das Wohltemperierte Klavier. The great mass of organ works can be approached through such pieces as the Toccata & Fugue in G minor (BWV 542), Passacaglia & Fugue in C minor (BWV 582) and the Preludes & Fugues in A minor and C Major (BWV 543 & 545). The Orgelbüchlein (Little Organ Book, BWV 599-644), contains 48 pieces which explore a wide range of the organ's sonic and musical repertoire. Regarding solo instrumental music, the other key works are the astonishing and breathtaking Suites for cello (BWV 1007-1012) and the virtuoso Sonatas & Partitas for violin (BWV 1001-1006). Apart from 295 cantatas Bach wrote during his lifetime, of which they are numerous favorites, his St. John and St. Matthew Passions are deeply-felt recountings of the gospels which cannot fail to move the listener, while the Christmas Oratorio and Mass in B minor (BWV 232) demonstrate Bach's ability to deal profoundly with such occasional pieces.	Thus, in May 1747 "Old Bach", as Frederick fondly called him, arrived and was presented to the King. The meeting was a complete success, Bach overwhelming Frederick with his ability to extemporize at the keyboard on demand. On his return to Leipzig, Bach took one of Frederick's own themes used during the meeting and developed it into the famous A Musical Offering, dedicated (in June 1747) to "a monarch admired in music as all in the other sciences of war and peace". Bach was now in his sixties, and his general health had begun to follow the course of his eyesight, which had been damaged irreparably by the years of studying music by candlelight. By 1749 he was blind, which greatly hindered his efforts to complete the works he left to be his last. Among the many pieces left incomplete at his death (although heavily revised) was the famous Die Kunst der Fuge (The Art of Fugue); a set of fugal pieces which has fascinated musicians and commentators ever since. The great man, age 66 when he died, was buried in an unmarked grave near the south door of Leipzig's Johanneskirche. In the late 19th century his grave was rediscovered during building work. His ashes were moved inside the church where they are now marked by the somewhat undemonstrative words, "Johann Sebastian Bach, 1685-1750". In Bach, Baroque polyphony reached its apotheosis and – at least to the succeeding generation – its point of exhaustion, for by the time of his death his music had already fallen a long way behind the forefront of musical fashion. His achievements were to languish in obscurity for close to 100 years before the efforts of others, particularly Mendelssohn, revealed Bach's genius to a wider world. Bach was not an innovator and no iconoclast: what he revered above all was musical truth and beauty, and he was ready to appreciate these wherever he came across them – from the manuscripts of earlier Italian masters to the extemporizations of fellow Germans.	yes

Subsets and Splits

No community queries yet

The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.