在这世界的角落
降低罹患癌症、痴呆症、心脏病和死亡的风险 科学家建议每天走1万步_我的网站
A | "I believe the New York Times report is correct in every detail," says Philip Giraldi, a former CIA station chief and military intelligence officer. "It is what I have been hearing. There is considerable training at the Grafenwoehr, Germany army base to familiarize the Ukrainians with the new weapons arriving. Meanwhile there are cadres of special operations soldiers and intelligence personnel operating primarily in western Ukraine. They are not in uniform and many of them are working under various cover designations, including sometimes loose affiliations with foreign embassies and NGOs. All of which means that Biden and other Western leaders are lying about their active participation in the conflict.",Ahead of the Russian special operation to demilitarize and de-Nazify Ukraine, the US withdrew its own 150 military instructors. However, some CIA operatives continued their service in the country secretly, directing most of the intelligence flow the US is sharing with Ukrainian forces, according to the NYT. In addition to that, commandos from Washington's NATO allies have been managing the flow of weapons and equipment in Ukraine and providing training. The NYT specifies, citing American and other Western officials that the commandos are not on the front lines with Ukrainian troops.,Even though the US and NATO member states do not acknowledge that their personnel are operating in Ukraine, Russia and other intelligence services around the world are aware of this, according to the newspaper.,"The potential downside for the president comes when some of these soldiers in mufti get killed or, worse, captured and start to talk about their role," says Giraldi. "The Biden Administration has staked its reputation and possible political future on enabling Ukraine to survive without succumbing to Russian demands.",Deploying CIA personnel (which encompasses military as well as intelligence operatives) "is completely typical of the initial stages of a US-backed long war, and for long-term political manipulation of the target country," according to retired US Air Force Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, a former analyst for the US Department of Defense.,"This is the future that neoconservative 'strategists' in DC and their British and European allies imagine for Ukraine," Kwiatkowski highlights. "Rather than a negotiated conclusion, with a new Ukrainian role as a neutral and productive country, independent of both Russian and US political influences, the US government and CIA see Ukraine as an expendable yet useful satrap in its competition with the Russian Federation.",The ex-DoD analyst emphasizes that the effort is serious, given that the funding for CIA operations and arms sales and support and training has been flowing freely from Congress and President Biden. It also means that the intel operations in and around Ukraine are "of critical importance" to Washington, according to her.,Situation in UkraineNATO is De Facto at War With Russia but is Using Ukraine as a Tool, US Scholar Says5 April, 17:37 GMT,Ukraine is Washington's Proxy in Effort to Destroy Russia,"Ukraine was being used long before 2021 and 2022, as a US proxy, for global money laundering by multiple players, and for CIA political operations," explains Kwiatkowski. "The US diplomats and the CIA view Ukraine and its various people as pawns on a chessboard they can manage. Given that the US people are not willing to engage in a ground or air war with Russia over Ukraine, those pawns might need to be preserved for the next stage.",Washington's current interest in Ukraine dates back to at least the George W. Bush era, and probably much earlier, with the US foreign policy establishment making steady efforts to drive a wedge between Russia and its neighbor, according to the military veteran. Washington has made considerable financial, diplomatic and political investment in Ukraine over the recent decades and it cannot afford "losing" it.,"Coming on the heels of similar 'losses' in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and potentially some of the Gulf states, there are those in Washington who would find the complete loss of Ukraine unacceptable," she stresses.,The US is equally involved in former Soviet and Warsaw Pact countries, such as Lithuania, and Poland, to take the post-Soviet space under control "as part of the war to maintain US influence and contain Russian influence," according to the former Pentagon analyst. "Recent Lithuanian steps to enforce EU sanctions on the Russian Baltic Sea trade port and naval city of Kaliningrad speaks to the nature of what is to come, in the eyes of the US strategists," she points out.,"Ukraine is a proxy; the West is trying to destroy Russia, it's that simple," echoes Larry Johnson, a veteran of the CIA and the State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism, which provided training to the US Military’s Special Operations taskforce for 24 years. "It would be one thing if Russia was the most evil, oppressive, authoritarian regime in the world. It's nowhere even close. Even though the West keeps trying to portray Russia as such. The fact of the matter is, the West wants the resources that Russia has and it wants to control Russia. Russia is not about to be controlled.",Situation in UkraineEx-CIA Analyst: US Military Aid Not a Game Changer for Kiev, Ukraine Has Already Lost6 June, 16:31 GMT,US Trying to Find the Way Out of Ukraine's Mess,Despite CIA and NATO personnel being deployed in Ukraine and NATO weapons constantly flowing to the country, Ukrainian troops have been increasingly outgunned by DPR/LPR military groups backed by Russia, acknowledges the NYT.,The newspaper names a number of reasons behind the Ukrainian Armed Forces' failures, including limited time for training to use sophisticated NATO weapons; huge losses among the "most battle-hardened" and well-trained Ukrainian forces; and certain limits to the expertise of the CIA, which is traditionally focused on counter-intelligence, among other matters.,"This is the fault of Hollywood," says Johnson. "There's always the assumption that all these CIA personnel are really some terrific people. They've got magical training capabilities. They don't. The CIA hasn't won a single insurgent war in the last 40 years, except going back to supporting the mujahedeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan. They're hoping to try to recreate that miracle. But again, the problem is the people who are assigned militarily to this kind of CIA activity are either retired, special forces, special operations personnel who had to get out because they were either physically unable to perform according to military standards, or it's people who've always wanted to do that kind of thing but really have had no special training in it.",Situation in UkraineUS Military Expert: Russia to Score Major Victories in Donbass, Must Adapt to New NATO Game22 May, 17:55 GMT,The former CIA analyst raises the question about the timing of the NYT exposure. He notes that it has never been a secret that in every foreign conflict the US was interested in, the US has routinely provided training and assistance, and dispatched the CIA's Special Activities Division to operate on the ground. Why is NYT openly writing about it now?,"I think the answer lies in the very last paragraph, last sentence of the article, where it is said: 'Would the enhancement of training be worth the possible price that is going to have to be paid?' The answer is 'probably not.' In other words, this is a gesture to show 'yeah, look, we're doing everything we can do to help the Ukrainians, we've provided we've provided special forces, special operations forces, we've brought them into other countries, we're sending our own people there, the CIA and their passive intelligence, so they can target Russian positions.' But when all is said and done, doing more is not going to really help.",According to Johnson, the NYT piece is "really sending a signal that the United States is trying to figure out how to disengage from this mess.","I think the purpose of this article coming out now is just to lay the groundwork for why we can't put or shouldn't put any more US military personnel or even CIA personnel inside Ukraine," the CIA veteran emphasizes. "Because continuing to put US personnel, whether they're CIA or military, inside Ukraine to train, is becoming too risky because of Russia's success on the battlefield."。 来自澳大利亚悉尼大学和南丹麦大学的研究人员发现，每天步行1万步可以降低痴呆症、心脏病、癌症和死亡的风险。悉尼大学查尔斯-帕金斯中心和医学与健康学院的研究员马修-阿玛迪博士说："这里的启示是，为了保护健康，人们不仅可以理想地争取每天走1万步，而且还可以在过程中尝试走得更快。
B | "共同主要作者、南丹麦大学的博尔哈·德尔·波索·克鲁兹副教授和加的斯大学的健康问题高级研究员说："对于不希望太活跃的人来说，我们的研究还表明，每天低至3800步就能将痴呆症的风险减少25%。"关键数据点：每天走2000步，过早死亡的风险就会逐步降低8%到11%，在心血管疾病和癌症发病率方面也有类似的关联。每天更多的步数与较低的全因性痴呆风险有关，9800步是与痴呆症风险降低50%有关的最佳强度，然而，每天低至3800步时，风险降低只剩下25%。步行强度或更快的步伐显示出与所有结果（痴呆症、心脏病、癌症和死亡）的有益联系，超过了每日总步数。高级作者、悉尼大学身体活动、生活方式和人口健康教授Emmanuel Stamatakis说："由于健身追踪器和应用程序的日益普及，步数很容易理解，并被公众广泛用于追踪活动水平，但人们很少考虑他们的步速。这些研究的结果可以为第一个正式的基于步数的身体活动指南提供信息，并帮助制定旨在预防慢性疾病的有效公共卫生计划"。这项研究是如何进行的？该研究使用英国生物银行数据，将78500名年龄在40至79岁的英国参与者的步数数据与7年后的健康结果联系起来。在7天的时间里（至少3天，包括一个周末日和睡眠期间的监测），参与者戴着手腕上的加速器来跟踪他们的身体活动。通过一些数据来源和登记处，如住院记录、初级保健记录、癌症和死亡登记处，这些信息与参与者的健康记录相连接，并得到了伦理批准。只有在试验开始时没有痴呆症、癌症或心血管疾病病史并且在前两年保持健康的人在试验结束时被评估。
C | 还进行了统计调整，以考虑到混杂因素，如那些走得多的人通常行动也更快。
D | 研究人员指出，这些研究是观察性的，这意味着它们不能显示直接的因果关系，然而，注意到在这两项研究中，在人群层面上看到了强烈和一致的关联。马修-艾哈迈迪博士说："这些使用腕戴式追踪器的研究的规模和范围使其成为迄今为止最有力的证据，表明每天1万步是健康益处的甜蜜点，走得更快与额外的益处有关。展望未来，更多长期使用追踪器的研究将阐明与某些水平和强度的日常步行有关的健康益处。
E |
Current article:http://www.laojiusidaosenleliao.bond/asz2qe/20260826/739784.xlsx
Published on:11:35:16