A Running Start for a U.S.-Europe Trade Pact

BRUSSELS — Embarking on what could be the biggest trade agreement ever in its economic sweep, officials from the United States and the European Union indicated Wednesday that they had already resolved some of the stickiest issues behind closed doors.

But the sheer ambition of the trade negotiations, which aim not only to eliminate import duties but also synchronize regulations governing products like cars, drugs and medical devices, leaves plenty of room for the talks to bog down in the type of parochial concerns that have derailed past efforts at a trans-Atlantic trade pact.

Ron Kirk, the U.S. Trade Representative, said by telephone Wednesday that this time things would be different. Already, he said, preliminary discussions between him and top E.U. officials have made “very good progress” on issues that have stymied trade relations for years, like health and safety standards applied to food. A final agreement is possible before the end of 2014, he said.

But, Mr. Kirk acknowledged, “we’ve still got a lot of work ahead of us.”

President Barack Obama endorsed a trade pact during his State of the Union address Tuesday, answering pleas from European leaders desperate for a way to speed up economic growth. Though Mr. Obama devoted only a single sentence to the topic, it was the green light that proponents of a trade deal had been hoping for.

“And tonight, I’m announcing that we will launch talks on a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union,” Mr. Obama said, giving the potential pact a name. He added, “Because trade that is fair and free across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs.”

European officials on Wednesday agreed with Mr. Kirk that the timing is favorable for an agreement. And officials in both Brussels and Washington noted that the rising economic might of China gave them further incentive. A broad trade agreement could help ensure that Americans and Europeans, and not the Chinese government, would set standards on product safety or protection of intellectual property in years to come.

“You will now be setting what the rules of the road are for trade that are going to shape the global trading system,” said Karan Bhatia, a former deputy U.S. trade representative who is now vice president for global government affairs at General Electric in Washington.

Unless the United States and Europe are in agreement, in too many future trade cases, “we would be forced to accept Chinese standards,” Karel De Gucht, the trade commissioner who is expected to lead the talks on behalf of Europe, said during an interview. “That’s what it is about.”

José Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Commission — the Union’s administrative arm — said at a news conference here that a trade pact would bolster the economies of the United States and Europe.

“Both of us need growth, and both us also have budgetary difficulties,” Mr. Barroso said. “Trade is the most economic way of promoting growth.”

But Mr. De Gucht, interviewed later, added a note of caution. “The low-hanging fruit doesn’t exist here any more,” he said. “All the easy topics are off the table.”

European leaders, including Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, have been pushing for a trade deal as a low-cost way of stimulating their struggling economies. Mr. Obama’s statement Tuesday will help put to rest complaints by some Europeans that the U.S. president has not paid enough attention to his country’s largest trading partner.

“A deal will create jobs on both sides of the Atlantic and make our countries more prosperous,” Mr. Cameron said in statement. “Breaking down the remaining trade barriers and securing a comprehensive deal will require hard work and bold decisions on both sides.”

Between them, the United States and Europe account for about half of global economic output and one-third of world trade. Trade in goods between the Union and America totaled $646 billion last year, according to U.S. government figures.

According to Mr. Kirk, the trade representative, the Union is the best customer for U.S. exports, buying $459 billion in goods and services and supporting 2.4 million American jobs.

“I don’t know if I would call it the biggest trade agreement in the history of the planet,” Mr. Kirk said, “but it is really a very big deal.”

Read More..

Bits Blog: Apple Chief Hints at Shareholder Rewards to Come

Investors want more cash from Apple.

Timothy D. Cook, Apple’s chief executive, wasn’t ready to give it to them on Tuesday. But recent history and Mr. Cook’s tendency to foreshadow events before they occur strongly suggest he will reward them soon.

Speaking for the second consecutive year in at a Goldman Sachs technology investor conference, Mr. Cook said Apple’s management team and board were discussing how to return more of the company’s enormous stockpile of cash to shareholders.

If those words sound familiar, it’s because Mr. Cook said almost the same thing a year ago at the Goldman Sachs conference. A month later, the company announced a plan to return more than $45 billion to shareholders over three years in the form of dividends and share repurchases.

That plan only served to slow the swelling of Apple’s cash hoard, not to reduce it. Last year around this time, Apple had nearly $100 billion in cash. Now it has around $137 billion.

“We do have some cash,” Mr. Cook said at the Goldman conference on Tuesday, in a moment of deliberate understatement that set off chuckles from his audience.

Some investors — like the hedge-fund manager David Einhorn — are cranky that Apple’s cash is sitting around earning so little interest.

Mr. Cook said Apple had looked at making some big acquisitions but never seriously enough to follow through on the deals. With its cash, Apple could afford one Amazon or two Facebooks and still have billions in spare change.

Instead, Apple buys smaller companies, mostly for their talent or intellectual property, Mr. Cook said. He said Apple has averaged about one acquisition every other month for the last three years.

How to send more cash to shareholders is the tricky part. Much of Apple’s cash is generated overseas and can’t be paid out to shareholders without being subject to repatriation taxes. In a recent research note, Toni Sacconaghi, an analyst at Bernstein Research, said  Apple could not meaningfully increase its return of cash to shareholders without paying the taxes or issuing debt.

While the latter option sounds nonsensical for a company with as much cash in the bank as Apple, a number of cash-rich technology companies, including Microsoft and Cisco, have issued debt, taking advantage of low interest rates. Mr. Sacconaghi suggested that the most attractive option for Apple shareholders would be for the company to borrow money, perhaps in the range of $50 billion to $100 billion, and use it to buy back stock or increase the dividend. He said increasing the return of cash was critical for Apple to attract a new class of dividend-hungry value investors as the company’s growth slows. Apple’s shares have declined about 33 percent since their high in September.

Mr. Cook called a lawsuit filed against the company by Mr. Einhorn, president of Greenlight Capital, a “silly sideshow.”

Mr. Einhorn has claimed that a change Apple is proposing to make to its corporate charter would limit the option of returning more cash to shareholders through the issuing of preferred stock. Apple has said that even with the charter change, it could issue preferred stock with shareholder approval.

Mr. Cook danced around the rumors that Apple would create an inexpensive iPhone for emerging markets, where income levels and a lack of subsidies by wireless carriers have put the company’s smartphone out of reach for many consumers. But he noted Apple’s history of coming up with creative new products, like the iPod shuffle and the iPad Mini, that appeal to budget-minded shoppers.

“The only thing we’ll never do is make a crappy product,” he said. “That’s the only religion we have.”

Read More..

Well: Straining to Hear and Fend Off Dementia

At a party the other night, a fund-raiser for a literary magazine, I found myself in conversation with a well-known author whose work I greatly admire. I use the term “conversation” loosely. I couldn’t hear a word he said. But worse, the effort I was making to hear was using up so much brain power that I completely forgot the titles of his books.

A senior moment? Maybe. (I’m 65.) But for me, it’s complicated by the fact that I have severe hearing loss, only somewhat eased by a hearing aid and cochlear implant.

Dr. Frank Lin, an otolaryngologist and epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, describes this phenomenon as “cognitive load.” Cognitive overload is the way it feels. Essentially, the brain is so preoccupied with translating the sounds into words that it seems to have no processing power left to search through the storerooms of memory for a response.

---

Katherine Bouton speaks about her own experience with hearing loss.

A transcript of this interview can be found here.

---

Over the past few years, Dr. Lin has delivered unwelcome news to those of us with hearing loss. His work looks “at the interface of hearing loss, gerontology and public health,” as he writes on his Web site. The most significant issue is the relation between hearing loss and dementia.

In a 2011 paper in The Archives of Neurology, Dr. Lin and colleagues found a strong association between the two. The researchers looked at 639 subjects, ranging in age at the beginning of the study from 36 to 90 (with the majority between 60 and 80). The subjects were part of the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. None had cognitive impairment at the beginning of the study, which followed subjects for 18 years; some had hearing loss.

“Compared to individuals with normal hearing, those individuals with a mild, moderate, and severe hearing loss, respectively, had a 2-, 3- and 5-fold increased risk of developing dementia over the course of the study,” Dr. Lin wrote in an e-mail summarizing the results. The worse the hearing loss, the greater the risk of developing dementia. The correlation remained true even when age, diabetes and hypertension — other conditions associated with dementia — were ruled out.

In an interview, Dr. Lin discussed some possible explanations for the association. The first is social isolation, which may come with hearing loss, a known risk factor for dementia. Another possibility is cognitive load, and a third is some pathological process that causes both hearing loss and dementia.

In a study last month, Dr. Lin and colleagues looked at 1,984 older adults beginning in 1997-8, again using a well-established database. Their findings reinforced those of the 2011 study, but also found that those with hearing loss had a “30 to 40 percent faster rate of loss of thinking and memory abilities” over a six-year period compared with people with normal hearing. Again, the worse the hearing loss, the worse the rate of cognitive decline.

Both studies also found, somewhat surprisingly, that hearing aids were “not significantly associated with lower risk” for cognitive impairment. But self-reporting of hearing-aid use is unreliable, and Dr. Lin’s next study will focus specifically on the way hearing aids are used: for how long, how frequently, how well they have been fitted, what kind of counseling the user received, what other technologies they used to supplement hearing-aid use.

What about the notion of a common pathological process? In a recent paper in the journal Neurology, John Gallacher and colleagues at Cardiff University suggested the possibility of a genetic or environmental factor that could be causing both hearing loss and dementia — and perhaps not in that order. In a phenomenon called reverse causation, a degenerative pathology that leads to early dementia might prove to be a cause of hearing loss.

The work of John T. Cacioppo, director of the Social Neuroscience Laboratory at the University of Chicago, also offers a clue to a pathological link. His multidisciplinary studies on isolation have shown that perceived isolation, or loneliness, is “a more important predictor of a variety of adverse health outcomes than is objective social isolation.” Those with hearing loss, who may sit through a dinner party and not hear a word, frequently experience perceived isolation.

Other research, including the Framingham Heart Study, has found an association between hearing loss and another unexpected condition: cardiovascular disease. Again, the evidence suggests a common pathological cause. Dr. David R. Friedland, a professor of otolaryngology at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, hypothesized in a 2009 paper delivered at a conference that low-frequency loss could be an early indication that a patient has vascular problems: the inner ear is “so sensitive to blood flow” that any vascular abnormalities “could be noted earlier here than in other parts of the body.”

A common pathological cause might help explain why hearing aids do not seem to reduce the risk of dementia. But those of us with hearing loss hope that is not the case; common sense suggests that if you don’t have to work so hard to hear, you have greater cognitive power to listen and understand — and remember. And the sense of perceived isolation, another risk for dementia, is reduced.

A critical factor may be the way hearing aids are used. A user must practice to maximize their effectiveness and they may need reprogramming by an audiologist. Additional assistive technologies like looping and FM systems may also be required. And people with progressive hearing loss may need new aids every few years.

Increasingly, people buy hearing aids online or from big-box stores like Costco, making it hard for the user to follow up. In the first year I had hearing aids, I saw my audiologist initially every two weeks for reprocessing and then every three months.

In one study, Dr. Lin and his colleague Wade Chien found that only one in seven adults who could benefit from hearing aids used them. One deterrent is cost ($2,000 to $6,000 per ear), seldom covered by insurance. Another is the stigma of old age.

Hearing loss is a natural part of aging. But for most people with hearing loss, according to the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, the condition begins long before they get old. Almost two-thirds of men with hearing loss began to lose their hearing before age 44. My hearing loss began when I was 30.

Forty-eight million Americans suffer from some degree of hearing loss. If it can be proved in a clinical trial that hearing aids help delay or offset dementia, the benefits would be immeasurable.

“Could we do something to reduce cognitive decline and delay the onset of dementia?” he asked. “It’s hugely important, because by 2050, 1 in 30 Americans will have dementia.

“If we could delay the onset by even one year, the prevalence of dementia drops by 15 percent down the road. You’re talking about billions of dollars in health care savings.”

Should studies establish definitively that correcting hearing loss decreases the potential for early-onset dementia, we might finally overcome the stigma of hearing loss. Get your hearing tested, get it corrected, and enjoy a longer cognitively active life. Establishing the dangers of uncorrected hearing might even convince private insurers and Medicare that covering the cost of hearing aids is a small price to pay to offset the cost of dementia.

---

Katherine Bouton is the author of the new book, “Shouting Won’t Help: Why I — and 50 Million Other Americans — Can’t Hear You,” from which this essay is adapted.

---

This post has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: February 12, 2013

An earlier version of this article misstated the location of the Medical College of Wisconsin. It is in Milwaukee, not Madison.

Read More..

Well: Straining to Hear and Fend Off Dementia

At a party the other night, a fund-raiser for a literary magazine, I found myself in conversation with a well-known author whose work I greatly admire. I use the term “conversation” loosely. I couldn’t hear a word he said. But worse, the effort I was making to hear was using up so much brain power that I completely forgot the titles of his books.

A senior moment? Maybe. (I’m 65.) But for me, it’s complicated by the fact that I have severe hearing loss, only somewhat eased by a hearing aid and cochlear implant.

Dr. Frank Lin, an otolaryngologist and epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, describes this phenomenon as “cognitive load.” Cognitive overload is the way it feels. Essentially, the brain is so preoccupied with translating the sounds into words that it seems to have no processing power left to search through the storerooms of memory for a response.

---

Katherine Bouton speaks about her own experience with hearing loss.

A transcript of this interview can be found here.

---

Over the past few years, Dr. Lin has delivered unwelcome news to those of us with hearing loss. His work looks “at the interface of hearing loss, gerontology and public health,” as he writes on his Web site. The most significant issue is the relation between hearing loss and dementia.

In a 2011 paper in The Archives of Neurology, Dr. Lin and colleagues found a strong association between the two. The researchers looked at 639 subjects, ranging in age at the beginning of the study from 36 to 90 (with the majority between 60 and 80). The subjects were part of the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. None had cognitive impairment at the beginning of the study, which followed subjects for 18 years; some had hearing loss.

“Compared to individuals with normal hearing, those individuals with a mild, moderate, and severe hearing loss, respectively, had a 2-, 3- and 5-fold increased risk of developing dementia over the course of the study,” Dr. Lin wrote in an e-mail summarizing the results. The worse the hearing loss, the greater the risk of developing dementia. The correlation remained true even when age, diabetes and hypertension — other conditions associated with dementia — were ruled out.

In an interview, Dr. Lin discussed some possible explanations for the association. The first is social isolation, which may come with hearing loss, a known risk factor for dementia. Another possibility is cognitive load, and a third is some pathological process that causes both hearing loss and dementia.

In a study last month, Dr. Lin and colleagues looked at 1,984 older adults beginning in 1997-8, again using a well-established database. Their findings reinforced those of the 2011 study, but also found that those with hearing loss had a “30 to 40 percent faster rate of loss of thinking and memory abilities” over a six-year period compared with people with normal hearing. Again, the worse the hearing loss, the worse the rate of cognitive decline.

Both studies also found, somewhat surprisingly, that hearing aids were “not significantly associated with lower risk” for cognitive impairment. But self-reporting of hearing-aid use is unreliable, and Dr. Lin’s next study will focus specifically on the way hearing aids are used: for how long, how frequently, how well they have been fitted, what kind of counseling the user received, what other technologies they used to supplement hearing-aid use.

What about the notion of a common pathological process? In a recent paper in the journal Neurology, John Gallacher and colleagues at Cardiff University suggested the possibility of a genetic or environmental factor that could be causing both hearing loss and dementia — and perhaps not in that order. In a phenomenon called reverse causation, a degenerative pathology that leads to early dementia might prove to be a cause of hearing loss.

The work of John T. Cacioppo, director of the Social Neuroscience Laboratory at the University of Chicago, also offers a clue to a pathological link. His multidisciplinary studies on isolation have shown that perceived isolation, or loneliness, is “a more important predictor of a variety of adverse health outcomes than is objective social isolation.” Those with hearing loss, who may sit through a dinner party and not hear a word, frequently experience perceived isolation.

Other research, including the Framingham Heart Study, has found an association between hearing loss and another unexpected condition: cardiovascular disease. Again, the evidence suggests a common pathological cause. Dr. David R. Friedland, a professor of otolaryngology at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, hypothesized in a 2009 paper delivered at a conference that low-frequency loss could be an early indication that a patient has vascular problems: the inner ear is “so sensitive to blood flow” that any vascular abnormalities “could be noted earlier here than in other parts of the body.”

A common pathological cause might help explain why hearing aids do not seem to reduce the risk of dementia. But those of us with hearing loss hope that is not the case; common sense suggests that if you don’t have to work so hard to hear, you have greater cognitive power to listen and understand — and remember. And the sense of perceived isolation, another risk for dementia, is reduced.

A critical factor may be the way hearing aids are used. A user must practice to maximize their effectiveness and they may need reprogramming by an audiologist. Additional assistive technologies like looping and FM systems may also be required. And people with progressive hearing loss may need new aids every few years.

Increasingly, people buy hearing aids online or from big-box stores like Costco, making it hard for the user to follow up. In the first year I had hearing aids, I saw my audiologist initially every two weeks for reprocessing and then every three months.

In one study, Dr. Lin and his colleague Wade Chien found that only one in seven adults who could benefit from hearing aids used them. One deterrent is cost ($2,000 to $6,000 per ear), seldom covered by insurance. Another is the stigma of old age.

Hearing loss is a natural part of aging. But for most people with hearing loss, according to the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, the condition begins long before they get old. Almost two-thirds of men with hearing loss began to lose their hearing before age 44. My hearing loss began when I was 30.

Forty-eight million Americans suffer from some degree of hearing loss. If it can be proved in a clinical trial that hearing aids help delay or offset dementia, the benefits would be immeasurable.

“Could we do something to reduce cognitive decline and delay the onset of dementia?” he asked. “It’s hugely important, because by 2050, 1 in 30 Americans will have dementia.

“If we could delay the onset by even one year, the prevalence of dementia drops by 15 percent down the road. You’re talking about billions of dollars in health care savings.”

Should studies establish definitively that correcting hearing loss decreases the potential for early-onset dementia, we might finally overcome the stigma of hearing loss. Get your hearing tested, get it corrected, and enjoy a longer cognitively active life. Establishing the dangers of uncorrected hearing might even convince private insurers and Medicare that covering the cost of hearing aids is a small price to pay to offset the cost of dementia.

---

Katherine Bouton is the author of the new book, “Shouting Won’t Help: Why I — and 50 Million Other Americans — Can’t Hear You,” from which this essay is adapted.

---

This post has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: February 12, 2013

An earlier version of this article misstated the location of the Medical College of Wisconsin. It is in Milwaukee, not Madison.

Read More..

Media Decoder Blog: Time Warner in Talks to Sell Off Majority of Magazines

3:53 p.m. | Updated Time Warner, the $49 billion media conglomerate built on the foundation of the printed word, is in early talks with Meredith Corporation to sell its publishing division Time Inc., shedding itself of the vast majority of its magazines, according to three people briefed on the discussions who could not comment publicly on preliminary and private conversations.

The deal being discussed would allow Time Warner to hang onto three flagship magazines, Time, Fortune and Sports Illustrated, while selling the majority of its portfolio, including magazines like Real Simple, Entertainment Weekly, Cooking Light and InStyle. The titles, which amount to essentially a women’s magazine company, make a good fit for Meredith Corporation, based in Des Moines, Iowa, and the publisher of such titles as Better Homes and Gardens and Ladies’ Home Journal. Jack Griffin, a former chief executive at Meredith, served a brief and stormy reign as chief of Time Inc. before Laura Lang took over in January.

Meredith would also gain People magazine, the celebrity weekly and crown jewel of Time Inc.’s stable of 21 magazines.
But Meredith did not express interest in purchasing Time Inc.’s sluggish news titles, said a person briefed on the discussions.

A Time Warner spokesman declined to comment. News of the talks was first reported by Fortune, a magazine owned by Time Inc.

The talks come weeks after Time Inc. announced it would lay off 6 percent of its global work force of more than 8,000 employees during an industrywide decline in subscription and advertising revenue. Overall revenue at Time Inc. has declined roughly 30 percent in the last five years.

Time Warner’s history is rooted in Time, the weekly news  magazine founded by Henry Luce in 1923 on which the giant media conglomerate got its start. But lately the publishing company’s sluggish performance has stood in sharp contrast to the strong performance at Time Warner’s cable channels like HBO, TBS and TNT.

In the last several years, the company has tried to trim some assets unrelated to the television and movie production business. That included shedding AOL, Time Warner Cable, the Warner Music Group and the Time Warner Book Group.

Jeffrey L. Bewkes, chief executive of Time Warner, has denied reports that he would sell Time Inc. He frequently talks about the division’s strongest brands essentially as cable television channels and has aggressively mandated that Time Inc. make its magazines available on digital devices.

“They’re printing pages right now, but they’re also on electronic screens with moving pictures,” Mr. Bewkes said in a previous interview. He added that “a cable channel like TNT or TBS” is “pretty much the same as what People or Time or InStyle should do.”

The company’s exploration of a deal that would allow it to keep male-oriented titles like Sports Illustrated, Time and Fortune would let it maintain its name and historical roots.

“Time’s name is on the door. I think Jeff feels it would be better to hang onto it and not sell it for what would be a low price,” said a person briefed on Mr. Bewkes’s thinking who could not discuss private conversations on the record.

Ms. Lang, previously the chief executive of the digital advertising company Digitas, stepped in at a tumultuous time after Mr. Griffin was forced out after less than six months on the job. She hired Bain & Company, a consultancy based in Boston, to assess the business.

Many of  Time Inc.’s magazine titles have been struggling as more readers have been reading material online, and newsstand sales have dropped. Even titles like People, which long helped financially bolster Time Inc.’s less lucrative titles, has suffered. People’s newsstand sales declined 12.2 percent in the second half of 2012 compared to the year before, according to figures released last week by the Alliance for Audited Media. Its advertising pages dropped by 6 percent in 2012 compared to the year before, according to the Publishers Information Bureau.

Last month, Ms. Lang said she was cutting staff 6 percent, or about 480 people. Magazines like Time and People asked employees to take buyouts and said they would lay people off if they did not meet those numbers. Wednesday is the last day for employees to raise their hands for buyouts.

On a conference call with analysts last week, John K. Martin, chief financial and administration officer at Time Warner, said that “very challenging industry conditions weighed” on the company’s results.

The talks come as News Corporation prepares to sever its publishing assets, including newspapers like The Wall Street Journal and The New York Post, from its more lucrative entertainment division, which includes the cable channels FX and Fox News. The separation is expected to be complete this summer.

Christine Haughney, Michael de la Merced and David Carr contributed reporting.

Read More..

Apple’s Cook Calls Hedge Fund Manager’s Lawsuit a ‘Sideshow’

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Apple Inc Chief Executive Tim Cook said the board is carefully considering David Einhorn's proposal for the company to issue preferred stock and return more cash to investors, but he called a lawsuit brought by the star hedge fund manager against Apple a "silly sideshow."

Waving aside Einhorn's assertion that Apple is clinging to a "Depression-era" mentality, Cook said on Tuesday the board is in "very active discussions" on how to dole out more of its $137 billion hoard of cash and marketable securities.

Einhorn and his Greenlight Capital are suing Apple as part of a wider effort to get the iPhone maker to share more of its cash pile, one of the largest among technology companies. They are challenging "Proposal 2" in Apple's proxy statement, which would abolish a system for issuing preferred stock at its discretion.

The lawsuit, the first major challenge from an activist shareholder in years, calls on Apple to issue perpetual preferred shares that pay dividends to existing shareholders. Such a vehicle, the Einhorn says, would be superior to dividends or share buybacks.

Cook gave Einhorn credit for a novel idea, but the usually unflappable chief executive turned slightly impatient when discussing the lawsuit. He was also dismissive of Einhorn's media and legal blitz - which included the lawsuit as well as multiple television and media interviews.

"This is a waste of shareholder money and a distraction, and not a seminal issue for Apple. That said, I support Prop 2. I am personally going to vote for it," Cook told a packed hall at Goldman Sachs' annual technology industry conference in San Francisco.

The conflict over Prop 2 "is a silly sideshow," added Cook, who on Tuesday traded in his usual casual jeans attire for slacks and a dark suit jacket, in a nod to Wall Street. Cook said he thought it "bizarre that we would find ourselves being sued for doing something good for shareholders."

Einhorn's clash with Apple centers on a proposed change to its charter that would eliminate the company's ability to issue "blank check" preferred stock at its discretion. Apple, which said the change would not preclude future issuance of preferred shares, is recommending shareholders vote in favor at its annual meeting on February 27.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. district court in Manhattan, objects to the bundling of the charter change with two other corporate governance-related proposals in "Proposal 2."

The hedge fund manager, a well-known short-seller and Apple gadget fan, counters that striking the preferred-share mechanism from the charter would make it more difficult to issue such securities down the road.

Apple's share price has tumbled in recent months from a high of just over $700 last September. In late afternoon trade on Tuesday, the shares were down around 2.2 percent at $469.30.

DIMINISHING CLOUT

Investors were disappointed that Cook - who rarely makes lengthy public-speaking engagements - did not provide a "more substantial" view on returning cash.

"The only thing that would substantially move the stock would be him saying they were returning cash to shareholders or hinting at a new product," said a manager from a mid-size Dallas hedge fund that owns Apple shares.

"There was a small chance of that happening."

Apple stock is a mainstay of many fund managers' portfolios, with research firm eVestment estimating that 75 percent of U.S. large-cap growth managers had invested more than 5 percent of their portfolios in Apple as of the end of the third quarter of 2012.

But that also increases the pressure on Apple to give away a bigger portion of its cash hoard, which is rising as the share price declines and its outlook grows murkier.

Last March, Apple announced a quarterly cash dividend and a share buyback that would pay out $45 billion over three years. At the time, it was sitting on $98 billion in cash. It has so far returned $10 billion of that, but investors want more.

Read More..

Well: Straining to Hear and Fend Off Dementia

At a party the other night, a fund-raiser for a literary magazine, I found myself in conversation with a well-known author whose work I greatly admire. I use the term “conversation” loosely. I couldn’t hear a word he said. But worse, the effort I was making to hear was using up so much brain power that I completely forgot the titles of his books.

A senior moment? Maybe. (I’m 65.) But for me, it’s complicated by the fact that I have severe hearing loss, only somewhat eased by a hearing aid and cochlear implant.

Dr. Frank Lin, an otolaryngologist and epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, describes this phenomenon as “cognitive load.” Cognitive overload is the way it feels. Essentially, the brain is so preoccupied with translating the sounds into words that it seems to have no processing power left to search through the storerooms of memory for a response.

---

Katherine Bouton speaks about her own experience with hearing loss.

A transcript of this interview can be found here.

---

Over the past few years, Dr. Lin has delivered unwelcome news to those of us with hearing loss. His work looks “at the interface of hearing loss, gerontology and public health,” as he writes on his Web site. The most significant issue is the relation between hearing loss and dementia.

In a 2011 paper in The Archives of Neurology, Dr. Lin and colleagues found a strong association between the two. The researchers looked at 639 subjects, ranging in age at the beginning of the study from 36 to 90 (with the majority between 60 and 80). The subjects were part of the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. None had cognitive impairment at the beginning of the study, which followed subjects for 18 years; some had hearing loss.

“Compared to individuals with normal hearing, those individuals with a mild, moderate, and severe hearing loss, respectively, had a 2-, 3- and 5-fold increased risk of developing dementia over the course of the study,” Dr. Lin wrote in an e-mail summarizing the results. The worse the hearing loss, the greater the risk of developing dementia. The correlation remained true even when age, diabetes and hypertension — other conditions associated with dementia — were ruled out.

In an interview, Dr. Lin discussed some possible explanations for the association. The first is social isolation, which may come with hearing loss, a known risk factor for dementia. Another possibility is cognitive load, and a third is some pathological process that causes both hearing loss and dementia.

In a study last month, Dr. Lin and colleagues looked at 1,984 older adults beginning in 1997-8, again using a well-established database. Their findings reinforced those of the 2011 study, but also found that those with hearing loss had a “30 to 40 percent faster rate of loss of thinking and memory abilities” over a six-year period compared with people with normal hearing. Again, the worse the hearing loss, the worse the rate of cognitive decline.

Both studies also found, somewhat surprisingly, that hearing aids were “not significantly associated with lower risk” for cognitive impairment. But self-reporting of hearing-aid use is unreliable, and Dr. Lin’s next study will focus specifically on the way hearing aids are used: for how long, how frequently, how well they have been fitted, what kind of counseling the user received, what other technologies they used to supplement hearing-aid use.

What about the notion of a common pathological process? In a recent paper in the journal Neurology, John Gallacher and colleagues at Cardiff University suggested the possibility of a genetic or environmental factor that could be causing both hearing loss and dementia — and perhaps not in that order. In a phenomenon called reverse causation, a degenerative pathology that leads to early dementia might prove to be a cause of hearing loss.

The work of John T. Cacioppo, director of the Social Neuroscience Laboratory at the University of Chicago, also offers a clue to a pathological link. His multidisciplinary studies on isolation have shown that perceived isolation, or loneliness, is “a more important predictor of a variety of adverse health outcomes than is objective social isolation.” Those with hearing loss, who may sit through a dinner party and not hear a word, frequently experience perceived isolation.

Other research, including the Framingham Heart Study, has found an association between hearing loss and another unexpected condition: cardiovascular disease. Again, the evidence suggests a common pathological cause. Dr. David R. Friedland, a professor of otolaryngology at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, hypothesized in a 2009 paper delivered at a conference that low-frequency loss could be an early indication that a patient has vascular problems: the inner ear is “so sensitive to blood flow” that any vascular abnormalities “could be noted earlier here than in other parts of the body.”

A common pathological cause might help explain why hearing aids do not seem to reduce the risk of dementia. But those of us with hearing loss hope that is not the case; common sense suggests that if you don’t have to work so hard to hear, you have greater cognitive power to listen and understand — and remember. And the sense of perceived isolation, another risk for dementia, is reduced.

A critical factor may be the way hearing aids are used. A user must practice to maximize their effectiveness and they may need reprogramming by an audiologist. Additional assistive technologies like looping and FM systems may also be required. And people with progressive hearing loss may need new aids every few years.

Increasingly, people buy hearing aids online or from big-box stores like Costco, making it hard for the user to follow up. In the first year I had hearing aids, I saw my audiologist initially every two weeks for reprocessing and then every three months.

In one study, Dr. Lin and his colleague Wade Chien found that only one in seven adults who could benefit from hearing aids used them. One deterrent is cost ($2,000 to $6,000 per ear), seldom covered by insurance. Another is the stigma of old age.

Hearing loss is a natural part of aging. But for most people with hearing loss, according to the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, the condition begins long before they get old. Almost two-thirds of men with hearing loss began to lose their hearing before age 44. My hearing loss began when I was 30.

Forty-eight million Americans suffer from some degree of hearing loss. If it can be proved in a clinical trial that hearing aids help delay or offset dementia, the benefits would be immeasurable.

“Could we do something to reduce cognitive decline and delay the onset of dementia?” he asked. “It’s hugely important, because by 2050, 1 in 30 Americans will have dementia.

“If we could delay the onset by even one year, the prevalence of dementia drops by 15 percent down the road. You’re talking about billions of dollars in health care savings.”

Should studies establish definitively that correcting hearing loss decreases the potential for early-onset dementia, we might finally overcome the stigma of hearing loss. Get your hearing tested, get it corrected, and enjoy a longer cognitively active life. Establishing the dangers of uncorrected hearing might even convince private insurers and Medicare that covering the cost of hearing aids is a small price to pay to offset the cost of dementia.

---

---

Katherine Bouton is the author of the new book, “Shouting Won’t Help: Why I — and 50 Million Other Americans — Can’t Hear You,” from which this essay is adapted.

---

This post has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: February 12, 2013

An earlier version of this article misstated the location of the Medical College of Wisconsin. It is in Milwaukee, not Madison.

Read More..

Apple’s Cook Calls Hedge Fund Manager’s Lawsuit a ‘Sideshow’

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Apple Inc Chief Executive Tim Cook said the board is carefully considering David Einhorn's proposal for the company to issue preferred stock and return more cash to investors, but he called a lawsuit brought by the star hedge fund manager against Apple a "silly sideshow."

Waving aside Einhorn's assertion that Apple is clinging to a "Depression-era" mentality, Cook said on Tuesday the board is in "very active discussions" on how to dole out more of its $137 billion hoard of cash and marketable securities.

Einhorn and his Greenlight Capital are suing Apple as part of a wider effort to get the iPhone maker to share more of its cash pile, one of the largest among technology companies. They are challenging "Proposal 2" in Apple's proxy statement, which would abolish a system for issuing preferred stock at its discretion.

The lawsuit, the first major challenge from an activist shareholder in years, calls on Apple to issue perpetual preferred shares that pay dividends to existing shareholders. Such a vehicle, the Einhorn says, would be superior to dividends or share buybacks.

Cook gave Einhorn credit for a novel idea, but the usually unflappable chief executive turned slightly impatient when discussing the lawsuit. He was also dismissive of Einhorn's media and legal blitz - which included the lawsuit as well as multiple television and media interviews.

"This is a waste of shareholder money and a distraction, and not a seminal issue for Apple. That said, I support Prop 2. I am personally going to vote for it," Cook told a packed hall at Goldman Sachs' annual technology industry conference in San Francisco.

The conflict over Prop 2 "is a silly sideshow," added Cook, who on Tuesday traded in his usual casual jeans attire for slacks and a dark suit jacket, in a nod to Wall Street. Cook said he thought it "bizarre that we would find ourselves being sued for doing something good for shareholders."

Einhorn's clash with Apple centers on a proposed change to its charter that would eliminate the company's ability to issue "blank check" preferred stock at its discretion. Apple, which said the change would not preclude future issuance of preferred shares, is recommending shareholders vote in favor at its annual meeting on February 27.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. district court in Manhattan, objects to the bundling of the charter change with two other corporate governance-related proposals in "Proposal 2."

The hedge fund manager, a well-known short-seller and Apple gadget fan, counters that striking the preferred-share mechanism from the charter would make it more difficult to issue such securities down the road.

Apple's share price has tumbled in recent months from a high of just over $700 last September. In late afternoon trade on Tuesday, the shares were down around 2.2 percent at $469.30.

DIMINISHING CLOUT

Investors were disappointed that Cook - who rarely makes lengthy public-speaking engagements - did not provide a "more substantial" view on returning cash.

"The only thing that would substantially move the stock would be him saying they were returning cash to shareholders or hinting at a new product," said a manager from a mid-size Dallas hedge fund that owns Apple shares.

"There was a small chance of that happening."

Apple stock is a mainstay of many fund managers' portfolios, with research firm eVestment estimating that 75 percent of U.S. large-cap growth managers had invested more than 5 percent of their portfolios in Apple as of the end of the third quarter of 2012.

But that also increases the pressure on Apple to give away a bigger portion of its cash hoard, which is rising as the share price declines and its outlook grows murkier.

Last March, Apple announced a quarterly cash dividend and a share buyback that would pay out $45 billion over three years. At the time, it was sitting on $98 billion in cash. It has so far returned $10 billion of that, but investors want more.

Read More..

Rabbi David Hartman, 81, Champion of an Adaptive Judaism

JERUSALEM — Rabbi David Hartman, an American-born Jewish philosopher who promoted a liberal brand of Orthodoxy and created a study center that expressed his commitment to pluralism by bringing together leaders from all strains of Judaism, died on Sunday at his home here. He was 81.

His son Donniel said the death came after a long illness.

Rabbi Hartman, who was a professor at Hebrew University for more than 20 years, was a leading advocate of the idea that Jews are partners with God in a covenant, and that they should therefore adapt religious observance to modern values in a multicultural world.

A charismatic teacher and prolific author, he encouraged students to question tradition and urged people of different backgrounds and ideologies to pore over Jewish texts together, a practice more common in his native United States than his adopted country.

“At the center of his thinking was a kind of counter-religious idea, where religious life is a life of affirmation, not a life of denial,” said Moshe Halbertal, a professor of philosophy at Hebrew University and Rabbi Hartman’s former son-in-law. “If human life is not denied by the force of revelation, but it’s actually a participant in revelation, then human life has to come to its full fledge, with its moral convictions, with its encounter with the world.”

The Shalom Hartman Institute, which Rabbi Hartman founded in his father’s name in 1976, has become a theological and cultural landmark, particularly for the thousands of Diaspora Jews who attend frequent conferences or spend summers studying there. With an annual budget of $18 million and a staff of 125, the institute has sponsored two Jerusalem high schools, runs a research center, opened a branch in Manhattan and trained more than 1,000 Israeli military officers. In the last year, according to the institute, more than 5,000 people across North American participated in a Hartman learning series called iEngage.

But Rabbi Hartman’s progressive, universalistic approach was embraced more in the United States than in Israel, where some challenged his status as Orthodox and shunned his open-mindedness as heresy. He received honorary doctorates from Yale and Hebrew Union College, a Reform institution with three branches in the United States and one in Jerusalem, but not the coveted Israel Prize. His never receiving it was a source of painful regret, several people close to him said.

In recent years he had been highly critical of the growing influence of the ultra-Orthodox on public life. He described as “insane” an ultra-Orthodox boycott of a military ceremony in which women sang.

“What is happening today with religion is more dangerous than what’s happening with the Arabs — the Arabs want to kill my body, the Jews are killing my soul,” Rabbi Hartman said in a 2011 interview with the Israeli daily Yediot Aharanot. “I want to return the Torah to the Labor Party, to the entire people of Israel. I don’t want religion to be the private property of certain people. I don’t want the length of the sidelocks to be the determining factor.”

David Hartman was born on Sept. 11, 1931 in the Brownsville section of Brooklyn, one of six children of Shalom and Batya Hartman, Hasidim who had moved to New York from Israel. Donniel Hartman said that the family was poor — Shalom peddled sheets and pillowcases door to door — but that the four boys became rabbis and the two girls married rabbis.

Rabbi Hartman was ordained by Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, perhaps the most important Orthodox thinker of the 20th century, and received a doctorate of philosophy from McGill University in Montreal. He was a pulpit rabbi in the Bronx and Montreal before moving to Israel in 1971 as part of a generation of Zionists inspired by the Israeli victory in the Arab-Israeli war of 1967.

Rabbi Hartman published several books in English and Hebrew, including two about Maimonides, the Torah scholar of the Middle Ages; one on the theological legacy of Rabbi Soloveitchik; and two about his own spiritual evolution. He was an adviser to Ehud Olmert, the former prime minister; Teddy Kollek, the longtime mayor of Jerusalem; and Zevulun Hammer, Israel’s education minister from 1977 to 1984.

“He was a public philosopher for the Jewish people,” said Michael J. Sandel, a professor of political philosophy at Harvard who has written about Rabbi Hartman’s work. “As Maimonides drew Aristotle into conversation with Moses and Rabbi Akiva, so Hartman renovated Jewish thought by bringing the liberal sensibilities to bear on Talmudic argument.”

Jonathan D. Sarna, a professor of American Jewish history at Brandeis University, described the Hartman Institute as “a little island of pluralism amidst a sea of what was often religious fanaticism,” but noted that “he had to establish his own institutions precisely because, unlike Soloveitchik, he was not really welcomed” by Israel’s religious establishment.

Avi Sagi, a professor at Bar Ilan University and a Hartman fellow who edited a two-volume set on the rabbi’s work, said of him, “He gave me the opportunity to think without any limitation.”

Besides his son Donniel, who replaced him as president of the Hartman Institute, Rabbi Hartman is survived by four other children, including a daughter, Tova, who helped found Shira Hadasha, a feminist Orthodox congregation in Jerusalem; 16 grandchildren and six great-grandchildren. He is also survived by his former wife, Barbara; the couple had married twice and were divorced twice.

Yedidia Z. Stern, a law professor and vice president of the Israel Democracy Institute, said Rabbi Hartman’s charisma and curiosity were apparent even a few weeks before his death, during a Sabbath meal at Donniel Hartman’s home.

“He was ignoring the adults at the table; he was talking to my kids,” Professor Stern said. “He was asking them about school: Do they like the curriculum, what do they think should be different? Even when he was very sick, you can see the life coming out.”

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: February 11, 2013

Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this obituary misstated the number Hebrew Union College branches in the United States.  Hebrew Union College has three branches in the United States and one in Jerusalem, not four in the United States.

Read More..

Letters: Treating Addiction (2 Letters)

“Effective Addiction Treatment” (Personal Health, Feb. 5) provides suggestions on how individuals can improve their treatment, but they are aimed at people with the resources to make well-informed choices.  Currently, 44.3 percent of referrals to drug treatment come from the criminal justice system. Having worked at a public defender’s office, I know that people often have little discretion about where and what type of treatment they get.

Given the source of the bulk of referrals for rehabilitation, I hope you can focus on how to improve treatment for those individuals who have the least choice and whose failure to become sober has the greatest penalty.

Ariel Sankar-Bergmann

Brooklyn

To the Editor:

The article overlooks the fact that treatment programs do help to reduce drug use, criminal behavior, disease transmissions and health costs. In evaluating the success or failure of drug treatment programs, value should also be given to these additional benefits and not solely upon addicts staying drug-free.

Howard Josepher

Read More..