seen from T1

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Germany

seen from Netherlands

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from T1
seen from Türkiye
seen from Hungary
seen from Morocco
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Spain
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
Consumption in wealthy countries including US and UK is responsible for 13% of global forest loss beyond their borders, study finds
The world’s wealthiest nations are “exporting extinction” by destroying 15 times more biodiversity internationally than within their own borders, research shows. Most wildlife habitats are being destroyed in countries with tropical forest, according to the study which looked at how wealthy countries’ demand for products such as beef, palm oil, timber and soya beans is destroying biodiversity hotspots elsewhere. It found that high-income nations were responsible for 13% of global loss of forest habitats outside their own borders. The US alone was responsible for 3% of the world’s non-US forest habitat destruction. “That just underscores the magnitude of the process,” said lead researcher Alex Wiebe, a doctoral student in ecology and evolutionary biology at Princeton University in the US. Countries that had the most significant impacts abroad included the US, Germany, France, Japan, China and the UK, according to the paper, published in Nature. Globally, habitat loss is the biggest threat to most species and about 90% is caused by conversion of wild habitats to agricultural land. “By importing food and timber, these developed nations are essentially exporting extinction,” said Prof David Wilcove, co-author of the study from Princeton University. “Global trade spreads out the environmental impacts of human consumption, in this case prompting the more developed nations to get their food from poorer, more biodiverse nations in the tropics, resulting in the loss of more species.” A lot of deforestation occurs in places with high levels of biodiversity, such as Indonesia, Brazil or Madagascar. Researchers say that analysing these patterns could help promote more targeted conservation and sustainable food production.
continue reading
Across most metrics of health care, the U.S. ranked last compared to 10 other high-income countries.
Excerpt:
Everywhere else, though, the U.S. was completely abysmal at safeguarding the health and longevity of its residents.
It ranked last in infant mortality rate, with 5.7 deaths per 1,000 live births (Norway, the top ranked, has a rate of 2 deaths per 1,000 live births);
last in maternal mortality, with 17.4 deaths per 100,000 live births (more than twice the rate of its closest peer, France),
and last in life expectancy past the age of 60, at 23.1 years (people over 60 in Australia are expected to live over two years longer than those in the U.S.).
It fared worst at equity as well, with the gap in various health care outcomes substantially larger between the rich and poor in the U.S. All of this, it should be noted, was despite the U.S. as a whole actually spending more money in health-care related costs than any other country.
Instead of focusing on racism and shit that divides us in this country, why not focus on real problems like how we have to pay for healthcare or college when literally all countries around our level of development have those for free? Why are we not rioting about this?
Lovely Norway
Non-Firearm vs. Firearm Homicide Rate in Developed Countries