Emerging economies must act immediately to halt rising obesity rates before the epidemic becomes as severe as it is in first-world countries, according to new report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

The OECD report was published in the Lancet. It characterizes the prevalence of obesity in Brazil, China, India, Mexico, Russia and South Africa. Obesity rates were found to vary dramatically across these 6 countries. In Mexico, a stunning 70% of adults were reported to be overweight or obese. Nearly half of all Brazilians, Russians and South Africans fell into these categories. China and India had a lower prevalence of overweight and obesity, but were moving rapidly in the wrong direction, according to the OECD.
 
Developing nations don’t have enough resources to handle the health consequences of obesity, which include an increased risk of cardiac disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes, arthritis and disability from all causes.
 
As a result, the OECD has implored these countries to head-off the worsening crisis now, “as part of wider comprehensive health prevention strategies, rather than (waiting) until the costs of treating obesity-related illness (becomes) much more expensive.”
 
The OECD estimates that the per capita cost per year of a national campaign to prevent obesity and other health threats like cigarette smoking, excessive alcohol intake and high blood pressure would be less than $2 per-person in China and India, about $3 in Brazil, and $4 in Mexico, Russia and South Africa.
 
The campaign would include a mass media blitz designed to promote healthy lifestyles, taxes and subsidies aimed at improving diet, improved federal regulation of food labeling, and restrictions on advertising for fast food. It would add 1 million years of life in good health in India alone, and 4 million years in China during the next 2 decades. It would pay for itself immediately via reduced health care costs in 3 of the 6 countries surveyed, and would become cost-effective in the other three within 15 years.
 
“A multiple intervention strategy would achieve substantially larger health gains than individual programs, with better cost-effectiveness,” OECD health policy analyst and lead author Michele Cecchini said in a press release.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for a “new beginning” after claiming victory in Iran’s presidential election, a contest that smells worse than Florida, 2000, and has motivated tens of thousands to take the streets in protest.

The beginning of what remained uncertain as supporters of the flaky incumbent’s opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi continued throw stones, burn cars, and in some cases absorb a whuppin’ by police as the violent disturbances, a rarity in normally staid Tehran, continued unabated for a third day.

Ahmadinejad says he scored 63% of the vote, in which a record 86% of the nation’s 46 million eligible voters participated.

The tainted re-election of a whack-job in the nearly nuclear-tipped nation has created an Excedrin moment for the Big O and his legions. Ahmadinejad routinely calls for the destruction of Israel while denying the Holocaust and refusing to clean up the world’s most unattractive beard.

The Obama administration has kept its hands in its pockets as the cameras have rolled in Tehran. Not Your Average Joe Biden voiced “doubts” about the outcome on NBC’s “Meet the Press,”  but then added “we’re going to withhold comment” pending a review that might or might not materialize.

The Big O believes he can’t simply condemn the election since in all likelihood he’s going to have to deal with Ahmadinejad when the dust finally settles.

The biggest loser in the election might be the Shiite cleric Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who is the real power broker in the country whose economy is in the toilet.

Meanwhile, Mousavi’s whereabouts are unknown. Mousavi had promised greater rights for women and a more conciliatory tone in international affairs. He had claimed victory on Friday and posted a statement on his Web site claiming the vote was rigged.

“I’m warning that I won’t surrender to this manipulation,” he said. “The outcome… is shaking the pillars of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s sacred system and governance of lies and dictatorship.”

A new survey of national innovation and competitiveness puts the US sixth among 40 nations. Singapore leads the pack.

The Washington-based Information Technology & Innovation Foundation ranked countries using indicators in 6 categories:  economic performance, economic policy, entrepreneurship, human capital, innovation capacity and IT infrastructure.

Singapore came out on top or near the top for dozens of indicators, notably the ease of doing business and trade balance. The city-state’s trade balance as a percentage of GDP is a plus 29%, while the US’ stands at -6%.

The US aced GDP per working age adult at $ 83,422, and was second in a photo finish on key indicators like e-government, productivity and contributions to global scientific and technical publications.
 
But we scored only 7th in broadband connectivity and were dead last in corporate tax rates, with a whopping 32%. Ireland topped that category at 9.6%.

The Foundation lauds Singapore, where, according to the report technological innovation has become a “national obsession.” 

“The rise of global economic competition means that the United States (needs to) proactively put in place national or continental economic development strategies,” the report warned.
 
The Foundation’s methodology differs from those in other analyses because it relies on hard data only, foregoing surveys. It also controls for country size rather than relying on aggregate data, according to BurrillReport.
 
To improve its standing, the Foundation recommends that the US enact tax incentives that stimulate R&D, welcome highly skilled immigrants, foster entrepreneurship development programs and expand funding for university research, among other things.
 
Sweden came in second in the survey, followed by Luxembourg, Denmark, and South Korea. The EU limped in at 18.

al-Qaeda has been in a rut lately. It hasn’t been able to strike the West since London, 2005. Its top dogs are pinned down by Predator drones in Pakistan, and the Pushtun are pretty much fed up with their guests.

All that leaves bin Laden and al Zawahiri trying to exploit the news rather than making it.

bin Laden’s most recent diatribe for example claims his jihad caused America’s economic collapse and that’s funny because we thought it was bad real estate bets in Las Vegas and Stockton.

And the Big O can’t win according to bin Laden, because if he pulls out of Bush War I and Bush War II, he loses militarily and if he fights on it worsens our economy.

bin Laden thought he could get his mojo back when the Israelis ransacked Gaza but that’s probably not going to work, either.

Israel’s brutal march has surely radicalized thousands more Muslims, but when they look around for someone or something to follow they see plenty of groups that have fought harder against Israel than al-Qaeda.

Hamas and Hezbollah, for example.

Foolishly, al-Qaeda dismisses these groups. They’ve participated in elections meaning they’ve put human laws above God’s. And the Hez and Hamas are Shia meaning they’re apostates.

Oh really? Even former al-Qaeda members are nailing bin Laden and al Zawahiri for these gaffes. For example, Sayyid Imam al-Sharif, an al-Qaeda founder who left the organization after a spat with Zawahiri, has launched a blistering ideological attack against al-Qaeda using a pen-name, Dr. Fadl.

The good doctor says al-Qaeda does “not offer Palestine anything except words,” and that Zawahiri is a yellow-bellied sapsucker who incites others to die for the cause while he enjoys soup with his buddies in a mountain getaway.

Graveyards and prisons overflow with jihadists, writes Dr. Fadl, but al-Qaeda leaders headed for the hills.

Days before the New Year, Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed resigned from his position as president of Somalia’s transitional government. No one knows what will happen next, but many say it can’t get much worse.

Yusuf had been holding up a peace deal with the nation’s increasingly powerful Islamist groups which is odd since his government controlled no more than a few city blocks in a country the size of New Mexico. 

That’s quite a come down for one of Somalia’s original warlords who tends to approach political challenges with rocket-propelled grenades.

Rashid Abdi, who analyzes Somalia for the International Crisis Group believes Yusuf’s resignation is “good news” according to the New York Times, because “it may create the opportunity to put a more conciliatory figure in charge.”

But who might that be? The transitional government is a power-sharing deal involving 4 clans, and the moderate Islamic cleric that many believe can unite the country comes from the same clan as the prime minister. That’s a non-starter for the other clans.

It probably doesn’t matter though because it’s not clear anyone wants a job that involves staring down famine poised once again to engulf millions and mediating the grievances of multiple Islamist factions that have been duking it out for 2 years, displacing one in 9 Somalis in the process. 

Not to mention those friggin’ pirates off the coast.

Radical Islamic militias like the Shabab control most of Somalia right now. These lunkheads behead enemies, beat people that don’t attend Friday prayers and stone to death girls claiming to have been raped.

That’s exactly what the US was trying to prevent 2 years ago when it backed an Ethiopian invasion of Somalia. As of today however, the Ethiopians have packed up and are outta’ there.

For 8 years, the Bush administration has systematically dismantled America’s reputation. People see us as arrogant and out of touch, as the country that brought you Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.

Colin Powell had this in mind when he endorsed the Big O last week. An Obama election, he said, “will not only electrify our country…it’ll electrify the world.”

The global impact of next week’s election will be huge no matter who wins, because “cooperation is essential to address 21st-century challenges,” according to NY Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. “You can’t fire cruise missiles at the global financial crisis.”

Indeed. So what do people in other countries think about the two candidates running for president of the United States of America?

It could not be clearer. Respondents in all 22 countries polled by the BBC World Service indicated they prefer Obama. Among those who expressed a preference, the average margin was four to one: 49% want the Big O, 12% favor Top Gun. The rest are undecided.

The biggest Obama backers were Kenya (87%), Italy (76%), France (69%), Australia (67%), Canada (66%), and Germany (65%).

People in 17 of the 22 countries think Obama can improve America’s international relations, whereas those in 19 of 22 countries believe things will remain unchanged during a McCain administration.

With respect to Obama’s African-American heritage, a majority in 15 countries indicated that his ascent to the presidency would fundamentally change their perception of America. 

For lots of people, next Tuesday can’t come soon enough.

We will never forget what happened seven years ago today.

Sometimes we do forget how long it’s been since the US government set out to capture or kill Osama bin Laden. It’s been ten years.  bin Laden issued a fatwa against Americans and ordered the bombings of US embassies in East Africa back in 1998, and that’s when the hunt began.

There hasn’t been so much as confirmed siting of bin Laden since the CIA nearly had him in Tora Bora in December, 2001.

Recently, the US government seems to have changed its tactics. It had focused primarily on developing human intelligence along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border but this has failed completely. Now it has stepped up Predator drone attacks on al-Qaeda operatives and command posts in the region. This year the US has launched 11 attacks so far, including four in the last month alone. All last year there were three.

Of course when it comes to bin Laden himself, you can’t hit what you can’t see.

It’s frustrating, no question. Consider though what it will actually mean when we capture or kill the criminal. In terms of bringing an evil coward murderer to justice, it means everything. But should we expect any impact on the global jihad that he and others launched against us? A movement isn’t much of a movement if it can’t survive the loss of its leader. We’re not naïve enough to think things are that easy.