Corona\u27s Bio-Economic Crisis and the Post-Corona World

While pandemics are pervasive, this is for the first time that the capitalist mode of production reached the outer limits of biology, biosphere, ecology, economy, geography, and international relations in unison resulting in an all-encompassing crises that devastated the entire planet. The upshot of this pandemic has overwhelmed the infrastructure of public health across the globe with stunning speed and with infections in millions in just a few months and the velocity of economic damage and devastation much worse than the Great Depression of the last century. It is also the “proof of the pudding” for the “conquest of mode of production”—à la Marx and against the view of majority on the left that incorrectly identify globalization as neoliberalism—i.e., holding a doctrine as an epoch. It is implicit that this crisis must alarm those assembling within the Cox-Robinson group in heterodox international relations theory that seemingly holds unto a mirage of “neoliberal international order”—amounting to self-delusion that indeed may have its own Catch-22. Precise periodization of capitalism is inseparable from value theory. This paper underscores the authenticity of value-theoretic periodization toward the identity of our epoch

Specter of Globalization: Marx, Gramsci and Disjointed Time

This paper aims to combine a critique of political economy with that of transnational polity in a unified theoretical foundation. It begins by (1) exploring the development of capitalism into stages, (2) showing that this should necessarily lead to globalization, and (3) validating that in the epoch of globalization no hierarchical interstate (hegemonic or not) political order may stand a chance for survival. These highly abstract theoretical queries, on the one hand, follow Karl Marx's critique of capitalism, and on the other hand obtain further theoretical and historical concretization in Antonio gramsci's hegemony, before their realization at observable levels via the rise and fall of the postwar Pax Americana (1945–1979). Marx's “conquest of mode of production” and gramsci's hegemony set the context for a synthetic approach to the rise and fall of American power. Finally, the force of globalization is the arbiter of time, despite the declining power syndrome, in this disjointed polity. </p

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Lecture I: US Foreign Policy: Donald Trump and Bashing of Iran Deal

As the subtitle of this lecture relates, clobbering of Iran Deal (authorized by the Obama administration in July 14, 2015) is originally has its ownership by Benjamin Netanyahu even before there would be any deal. Republicans utilized the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) - its real title - as a stratagem to bash Obama, supposedly, on foreign policy front, as they did in parallel to “affordable care” (known as Obama care) on the domestic. Aimed at Obama bashing, following Netanyahu’s footsteps, Donald Trump cooked-up and weaponized the JCPOA in his presidential campaign, in 2016, in order to bolster the sentiments of those (his so-called base) who by and large could not even identify the country of Iran on the geographical map, let alone having sufficient knowledge of the plan. For full text and other pertinent documents concerning the JCPOA, see Council of the European Union: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions/iran/jcpoa-restrictive-measures/. And/or The Washington Post: https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/full-text-of-the- iran-nuclear-deal/1651/

Nacimiento del Estado paranoico: aprietos y parodia de la seguridad petrolera en Estados Unidos post-hegemónico

La crisis del petróleo de 1973 fue un marcador histórico, preámbulo a la globalización competitiva del petróleo y de la decadencia y caída de la hegemonía global estadounidense. La renta petrolera alcanzó el estatuto de categoría, independientemente de que la OPEP haya existido o no. La renta petrolera se desembolsa al propietario del lugar donde se encuentra el petróleo, público o privado, independientemente de su pertenencia a la OPEP. Entre otros elementos marca el nacimiento de un Estado paranoico, mucho más peligroso y autodestructivo que la cacería de brujas de la era de McCarthy. Una primera versión de este trabajo se presentó en EPS Roundtable: Security Economics, Enero, 3-5, 2014 –ASSA, Philadelphia, PA. La traducción del Inglés al Español de Wesley Marshall y Eugenia Corre