• The latest summaries in reverse chronological order.
• To see the earlier reviews, please click on Summaries Database in the Menu the left.

Dr. Marks opened with a discussion of progress in Public Health from the 18th through the 20th century including: Sanitation, Vaccination, Harm/Risk Reduction, Infection Source Control and Reduction of Disease Burden.  He cited some notable examples including Scrotal Cancer among child chimney sweeps and regulations in the late 18th century; the now famous case of Dr. John Snow and the discovery of a fecal contaminated well as the source of a Cholera outbreak in London; Mosquitos and Yellow Fever and fumigation/removal of standing water/netting which controlled not just Yellow Fever but also Malaria to a large extent; Smallpox vaccination which eliminated a deadly disease as a risk; and others.  

In the 21st century we are at risk of losing progress as many diseases are no longer in our collective memory and concern or fear is replaced by complacency.  Success has become a public health problem as public health achievements are no longer appreciated.  The result is less commitment to public health measures such as vaccination as a collective good, resulting in the return of diseases thought eliminated such as measles, which is highly contagious and can spread if even a small portion of the population is not immune.  Our enormous advances in Public Health are not always appreciated and have begun to fail us as a result.  The spread of misinformation on social media has contributed to this problem, as Dr. Marks has explained.  

Dr. Marks expressed fear that the spread of misinformation is putting Public Health at risk, with the possibility of losing much of the progress we have made over centuries.  He suggests some things we should do to try to counteract this beginning with better science education for children.  We need to broadly emphasize the benefits of Public Health for our people including the social contract - meaning we are responsible not just for ourselves but for not spreading disease to others.  Dr. Marks feels we are now losing the war on information in Public Health and this must be reversed by communicating powerfully and prolifically - especially the importance of vaccination for us and also our neighbors - and robustly address misinformation.  Right now the institutions we have relied on for this are at best not helpful.  The results can be the return of deadly diseases we considered extinct.

©2025 Randy Krakauer

How does disease change history? When it strikes leaders? When it kills many people? When it causes fear and a desire to reassess everything? In 1918 the flu killed more people than the First World War. Recently COVID killed 1.2 million Americans and drove some unusual social and government reactions. We bought more guns and ammo. And there was opposition to lockdowns and vaccines. Are there lessons for us from history?

Venice experienced 22 episodes of Plague between 1361 and 1528 and began isolating newcomers on an island for 40 days; the original Quarantine. After 1620 Venice never had another epidemic, though they raged elsewhere in Europe. Quarantine became a way of dealing with such issues after this.

Dr. Mangione reviewed three great epidemics of history. The first was Athens 5th century BCE. First in two great land and one naval battles Athens defeats the Persian Empire, holding off their invasion of Greece; which launches an Athenian empire. This results eventually in a war with Sparta in which some Greek city-states support Sparta – the Peloponnesian War. Athens is put under siege, triggering a plague inside the city originating in the Near East. This kills 25% of the population, including the leader, Pericles. Athens' defeat follows, and with it; Athenian Democracy. John Adams – "all democracies die by suicide." Based on the symptoms and epidemiology as described by Thucydides, this epidemic appears to have been Measles – a version that existed at the time, but different from most Measles today. Measles at the time was not known in Greece.

The next plague occurred in Rome under Marcus Aurelius – the philosopher Emperor. It was brought to the city by soldiers returning from a successful war with the Persian Empire. The plague was described in detail by Galen, a famous Roman physician whose description of bloodletting was used into the 19th century, and as late as 1923. He was convinced this was the same infection as the plague of Athens. He did provide a detailed medical description of the symptoms and epidemiology. Based on his detailed description, particularly of the skin lesions, it appears this plague was Smallpox. Although the Roman Empire persisted long after this plague; it never truly recovered.

This plague originated in China, and came to Rome through trade. The mortality was up to 25%; and probably greater among soldiers, which weakened the empire, resulting in political instability, and collapse of the Western Empire – though the Eastern Empire persisted for 1000 years with the capital in Constantinople.

Justinian became Emperor of the Eastern Empire in 458. He tried to reconquer the East, but the plague of Justinian occurred which resulted in the loss of the reconquered west and the weakening of the East. The origin appears to be the Ivory trade from Africa and wheat from Egypt. The wheat was stored in granaries where rats bred. A volcanic eruption in the S Pacific resulted in serious cooling, darkening and atmospheric dust worldwide. This further damaged the Empire and helped spread plague. Infected rodents from Ethiopia reached Constantinople through Egypt. Based on the clinical description and the epidemiology this plague appears to have been Bubonic. Unlike the Athenian plague this was not spread through the air, but by rat fleas.

This plague involved three continents – it was a pandemic. Bubonic Plague continued to recur in Europe every 10-20 years for centuries. This eventually destroys the Eastern Roman Empire and results in Arab conquest of N Africa and Spain. The bacteria was ultimately identified as Yersinia Pestis; found in human remains.

The Black Death or recurrent Bubonic Plague (1347 – 1750 in periodic waves) ended feudalism – and helped trigger the Renaissance. It killed approximately 100 million in total.

The Columbian Exchange: New World to Europe – Syphilis; Old World to New World – Measles, Smallpox Malaria, TB – resulting in death of about 80% of the native population.

Napoleon was defeated in Russia by Typhus

Typhus and Spanish Flu (1918) influenced the end of WWI and the Russian Revolution

What is and will be the impact of COVID-19?

©2025 Randy Krakauer

During the course of the COVID epidemic as the vaccine developed and treatments dramatically improved serious illness incidence and deaths diminished and we started seeing symptoms that persisted long after it appeared the infection was over. As it seemed the primary cause of death was encephalitis, it seemed likely COVID infected the brain, or caused a reaction in the brain that caused such lingering symptoms. MRI's showed brain inflammation which supported this. There were several such reported lingering symptoms including fatigue, "brain fog" (difficulty to think clearly or concentrate), dizziness and others. It was necessary to standardize the evaluations in this situation to enable it to be diagnosed and studied. It was initially estimated that 16% of COVID patients developed Long COVID, and that in about half the cases it still persists. Data then showed it as primarily a disease of middle age, age 35 to 49, but also relatively common age 50 to 64. In the 64 plus group this should be read with caution since it's a diagnosis of exclusion, and there are other causes of cognitive dysfunction here that confound such data. During the course of the epidemic, though treatment and prevention improved, the proportion of cases that developed Long COVID remained the same. In terms of total cases Long COVID is significantly more prevalent than all other causes of cognitive dysfunction such as Alzheimer's, Epilepsy, Parkinson's, ALS, etc. Since it was first reported it now appears the incidence of Long COVID in infected children is similar to those of adults.

A post COVID recovery program evaluation was begun at Rutgers. In this selected group about ? reported their memories were worse after COVID infection. Most of these had objective cognitive abnormalities on simple testing, not associated with depression. There were also MRI changes suggestive of Encephalitis. More detailed assessment of these cases did not suggest Alzheimer's.

Dr. Wu studied cells and DNA genes in the CSF of Long COVID patients and identified particular patterns that were present in Long COVID and not other CNS conditions. These findings strongly suggested continued brain infection rather than recovery associated inflammation. The findings were not typical of other conditions such as Alzheimer's, and certainly not of depression or other explanations other than infection. So far we don't have long term follow up, but those with pre-existing brain conditions or who are immune compromised who develop Long COVID are less likely to recover in two years of observation. Based on this work by Dr. Wu, a test was developed to help identify Long COVID. This test requires a lab capable of identifying material identified by Dr. Wu, which is not available in medical testing labs.

Comparing recovery to continued symptoms, shows that recovery is associated with activation of a second immunological line of defense - certain types of T cells, triggered by the first line - or macrophages. Those who do not recover seem to lack such triggering communication and T cell activation.

Since Long COVID seems to be associated with continued infection there is a possibility of a treatment for this. There is a potential drug, but it missed the Emergency Authorization period and needs full FDA testing for approval, and the company went bankrupt - the drug is now in limbo. Dr. Wu plans to arrange for a way to pursue this.

Patients with Alzheimer's have some changes similar to Long COVID. It's possible there is overlap (both conditions occurring simultaneously). Another open question is whether Long COVID increases the possibility of future dementia risk.

©2025 Randy Krakauer

Our speaker on June 5 was Ross Baker, Distinguished Professor (Emeritus), Political Science Department at Rutgers. He discussed the Founders of the USA, including the Federalists Washington, Hamilton and Madison. They wrote and supported the Federalist Papers, which urged the adoption of the Constitution. They were opposed by the anti-Federalists, led by Thomas Jefferson, who argued that a robust central government would grow at the expense of the states. Both sides agreed that "civic virtue" was essential and that it was necessary to have a virtuous people in order to have a virtuous government. The anti-Federalists, however, were concerned that the separation of powers and checks and balances would not be sufficiently robust to resist tyrants. They believed that once liberty was secured, the temptations of private life and the withdrawal from public life would take precedence over good citizenship. Hamilton, as Secretary of the Treasury, wanted to enlarge the power of the new federal government with a vigorous presidency. Madison then formed an alliance with Jefferson to thwart Hamilton's design.

In 1830, French diplomat and political philosopher, Alexis de Tocqueville, came to the USA. He worried about maintaining the engagement of citizens in the destiny of the country. He felt, nonetheless, that Americans were willing to sacrifice a portion of their time and property for the greater welfare of the State. He believed in the civic integrity of America. Ironically, de Tocqueville arrived here during the presidency of our 7th president, Andrew Jackson. None of the first 6 presidencies was tarnished by public corruption. It was Jackson who developed the "Spoils System", as in "To the victor go the spoils." He took federal jobs out of the hands of the well-educated and delivered them to the hands of Democratic politicians, who doled them out solely on the basis of party loyalty. Public office was no longer a public trust.

An earlier decision by the Supreme Court, known as The Dartmouth College Case, prevented the State of New Hampshire from invalidating Dartmouth's charter granted by King George III. New Hampshire wanted to make Dartmouth a state college. The Court held that the college was protected from governmental interference. As a result there was "a torrent" of newly formed corporations to shield entities from governmental meddling.

After the Civil War, governmental corruption converged with shady corporations. There was no "civic virtue", as envisioned by our founders. There was a decline of civic rectitude and a rise of unprincipled politicians. Among the historical examples furnished by Professor Baker, was the collusion by the Internal Revenue Service. They took payoffs from the entities which they taxed. The Federal Government sold public offices to the highest bidders. This was the logical outgrowth of President Jackson's "Spoils System."

In 1881, President Garfield was assassinated, after he had signed a statute known as the Civil Service Act, which required merit, passing tests and other qualification for Federal jobs. The assassin was a disgruntled office seeker, who had been denied a government appointment. The rise of progressive parties and Teddy Roosevelt's antitrust campaign caused corporations to retreat from their close relations with the public sector. By the 1920's, however, the corruptors were back in business. Professor Baker took us from the Teapot Dome Scandal in 1921-1923, dealing with oil leases in Wyoming, through the current administration. Influence peddling involved the use of one's official position to induce governmental actions in return for "gratuities". By the 1950's and 1960s, campaign finance was a major part of the moral slippage in American politics.

Arguably, the Supreme Court made things worse. It ruled that political campaign contributions were a form of speech protected by the First Amendment. That case led to Citizens United and another case allowing an individual to make unlimited contributions to political candidates. After giving examples of corruption under Clinton and George W. Bush, Professor Baker said that we are now in an ethical free-fall zone. President Trump "seems to be feathering his own nest." Reference was made to the $400 million airplane given by the Sultan of Qatar to Trump, which eventually will repose in the Trump library. While some of us fear that we are headed toward dictatorship under Trump, that is not Professor Baker's fear. Madison's checks and balances and separation of powers will avert a dictatorship. The professor's greater concern is that 8 years of a Trump administration will witness the complete extinction of civic virtue. We will be left with a morally degraded citizenry, inured to corruption, oblivious to conflicts of interest, nepotism and self-dealing, beguiled by pompous displays, accepting specious reasoning, tolerant of falsehoods and morally distant from public spirit without which no government of free people can survive.

©2025 Bert Busch

Dr. Noah Goldman is a Gynecologic Oncologist and the director of the Princeton Cancer Center currently in development. He spoke on gynecologic cancer and the new cancer center.

He began with a review of GYN cancer, accounting for about 15% of all cancers. He discussed Cervical Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Uterine Cancer, and Vulval and Vaginal Cancers. He discussed the conditions themselves, risk factors, their prevalence and symptoms, their treatments, current informative statistics and important recent advances. For details - the lecture itself is available on line.

He described new forms of effective immunotherapy including CAR T-cells, currently provided through the Abramson Cancer Center in Philadelphia that should be available in Princeton in the next 2-3 years.

Programs in Princeton that he described include the Geriatric Oncology Program which impacts personalized patient care for the older population in particular, minimally invasive surgery that has simplified and shortened recovery, improvements in surgery preparation and processing which have improved patient comfort, enhanced recovery techniques, reconstructive and fertility preserving surgery and other techniques (such as egg freezing).

He described the facilities, personnel and plans for Oncology at Princeton Medical Center, including a close relationship with the University of Pennsylvania Abramson Cancer Center for sharing of programs and patients needing services not currently available at Princeton.

All patients have an individual case manager contact to provide advice, support, and access to appropriate professionals and services including psychological professionals via visit and/or telehealth - made possible by a generous grant. There are also support services for patients and family and survivor support services by social workers, psychologists and others.

The population of central New Jersey is getting older, and has a higher cancer rate than the rest of the state. The purpose of the new Princeton Cancer Center is to bring state of the art cancer expertise and treatment to our region to obviate the need to travel to receive such treatment, including travel for urgent treatment-related issues. Dr. Goldman is recruiting additional oncologists with expertise and experience to provide the latest in diagnosis, treatment, and research. The center will include a cafe, a meditation area, valet parking - all elements of the best possible “cancer journey” experience.

The building will include space for all elements of this journey, including all the subspecialties - medical and surgical. Some specialized procedures - such as bone marrow transplants - will remain in Philadelphia due to procedure volume requirements.

There is already a large, well-respected Palliative Medicine group - both inpatient and outpatient - with experience to do this as outpatient whenever possible.

Integrative medicine capabilities that help patients will be available such as wig fitting (and hair cutting), prosthesis fitting, aromatherapy, etc., all under one roof.

The buildings will include the cancer center building, and a radiology center with separate entrances. The radiology center will include a breast imaging center. The new parking garage is almost complete now. The cancer center building will be ready in May of 2028.

The work of the center will be coordinated with the Abramson Cancer Center in Philadelphia for joint management or occasional transfer, for the few patients who require this.

©2025 Randy Krakauer

On May 1, 2025, our speaker was Ambassador Adela Raz. She is the last ambassador from the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan to the United States as well as having been the first female ambassador and permanent representative of Afghanistan to the United Nations. She had been her country's deputy foreign minister was the vice president of the 75th session of the General Assembly and was also appointed by the president of the UN's General Assembly to serve as the coordinator for COVID-19 related activities.

Afghanistan has a long history and rich culture but has faced many years of conflict and political problems. These issues have vastly affected the lives of its people, especially women and girls. Under the Taliban's rule, women and girls have faced many restrictions, such as not being allowed to go to school or work and having to follow strict dress codes.

Afghan women continue to show strength and determination despite these difficulties by fighting for their rights and finding ways to help their communities. The international community has been important in helping Afghan women and girls by creating programs to improve their education, healthcare, and job opportunities. However, security challenges and political uncertainty remain persistent.

Hence, the international community needs to continue supporting Afghan women and girls to ensure their rights are protected and that they can fully participate in the social, economic, and political affairs of their country. Her talk addressed five questions about why democracy failed in Afghanistan, and what went wrong.

• What does it take for Democracy to take Hold after decades of conflict
• Is it possible to build Democracy from the outside? If so, How? If not, Why not?
• When is promoting women's rights seen as empowerment, and when does it risk being seen as an imposition?
• What is most important for Democracy -- strong institutions or strong citizen engagement?
• Can a Democracy survive without trust? Why and Why Not?

Recently Adela Raz wrote an essay "Why Democracy Failed in Afghanistan," one of the 11 essays published in the book Democracy: eleven writers and leaders on what it is--and why it matters; all 11 essayists are women. The essays were written just before 2024, the year when there were elections in so many countries worldwide.

Please check the recording of Amb. Adela Raz's on our website for more information about the book and to hear the full talk and Q&A.

She offered insight on many issues about the challenges they faced trying to build a democracy in-between the Taliban regimes as well as ideas on how to improve things if they get another chance. She also provided a wide variety of insights on Afghanistan and particularly her experiences both growing up and professionally.

©2025 Jim Thursby

Marna Seltzer began with some history. She grew up in Princeton, attended Princeton, and though she planned to become a professional musician she found her best talent and opportunity as director of Princeton University Concerts, in the ability to reach out to people and the community through the power of music, expanding the opportunity to use music to be life changing for people.

She opened by playing a recording of Hayden's first string quartet to demonstrate how music can express feeling and can pierce the heart directly.

She described some history of Princeton University Concerts starting in 1894, and how it engendered wide community support. The organization has a long history, including the introduction of new artists who later became famous. She described their events as "a big hug."

Some discussion of chamber music followed. She sees this as music with particular intimacy and closeness. There is no conductor - the musicians are in direct contact with the people.

Today PUC continues with what she describes as intimate contact. Quartets continue, but PUC also presents concerts, parts of opera and other forms with nationally recognized programming. The focus is on communal experience.

PUC has 29 events this season. Some special features include music and healing, music and meditation, and others. There are also opportunities to join performers on stage for more intimate connections. There are concerts for children and parents. A goal is integration into the Princeton community. They also make concerts accessible to the disadvantaged, including special pricing for those on various forms of assistance.

The next speaker was Dasha Koltrenick. Her work includes bringing more students into the fold. Programs include the "Breathe in Music" music meditation series. She played an example, showing music, bells, and meditation. Participants conclude by sharing the experience with each other. Some programs also relate to current events.

The next speaker was Alexis Barnigan, events coordinator. She described community engagement initiatives, and deepening the impact of programs. An example she described is the National Bone Marrow Registry drive. There are also events designed to support impacted communities. Another example - music and dance programs (with the audience on the stage), Dance for Parkinsons, music for singles and music for LGBTQ.

She invited those who have not experienced PUC to do so this season.

©2025 Randy Krakauer

Our speaker on April 3 was Allan Westreich, Ph.D., DNA Doe Project. His topic was "To Catch a Serial Killer: A Visual Introduction to Investigative Genetic Genealogy", or IGG. This is a tool which we can actually use to track down serial killers. While the main use is to identify perpetrators of violent crimes, IGG can also help to identify otherwise unknown human remains of John and Jane Does. More than 1,000 actual cases have been resolved.

IGG is useful when you have a crime scene where there is some DNA. Law enforcement keeps a big data base of people convicted of violent crimes. When they get DNA at a crime scene, they try to determine if they can find a "match." But what happens if the subject, a potential suspect, is a first offender or someone who has not yet been caught? Their DNA is not yet in the data base. Unless you have a direct hit, you are not really going anywhere with your DNA. For other subjects, DNA can help you look for their cousins and piece together a family tree for a solid lead.

As a sleuth, your first objective would be to build a family tree up through older generations and then build it down to zero in on the suspect. Then you figure out how much DNA the subject shares with a relative in order to make a connection. Dr. Westreich referred to Ancestry.com and 23andMe, but he relied more on FT, (as in Family Tree,) DNA, and GEDMatch. From these sources, you would try to get a list of family matches, which includes names and how much DNA the subject shares with them. You would then try to make the connection from the top to the bottom of the tree.

What about chromosomes? There are 23 pairs of chromosomes in the nucleus of each of our cells. One chromosome is used to determine males and females and the other 22 are used in IGG. Each child inherits 50% of their DNA from each parent, about 25% from each grandparent, and about 12.5% from each great-grandparent. In other words, the closer we are related to people, the more DNA we share. Next we learned about centiMorgans (cMs), a unit of measurement of DNA. The higher the number of cMs, the closer you come to a match. When you get a match, you look for a name and how much DNA the subject shares with the match.

Dr. Westreich discussed a study based, in part, on an actual case. A serial killer was at large in Nassau and Suffolk Counties, in Long Island, where 11 sets of human remains were found. Detective work established that all the deaths had been caused by murders, which had taken place between 1993 and 2010. The subject appeared to have been between 20 and 40 years old. Their date of birth was believed to be between 1953 and 1973. The subject was described by an eye witness as "a giant man". The ethnicity was unknown. We understood that Law Enforcement had DNA from the crime scene.

Our speaker then analyzed clues of ethnicity. Matches showed 28% West Slavic, 58% Central Europe, and 14% Irish. Dr. Westreich compared those percentages with the percentages of chromosomes and DNA from the family tree. He next identified the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA) between the match and the subject. He looked for people who shared the most centiMorgans of DNA with the subject. By moving down from two clusters of family trees he found what he called the union couple. He identified the possible subject as their child, Rex Heuermann, the subject who became the suspect.

We thought that we had come a long way from reading Perry Mason mysteries. Just when we were learning how to use the latest techniques to catch a real serial killer, Dr. Westreich warned us of Caveats of the Case Study. While it was based on the Long Island Serial Killer, it was partially simulated for educational purposes. IGG was not used to move Heuermann from subject to suspect. Initially there was no DNA related to the 22 pairs of chromosomes located at the crime scene. While Dr. Westreich used the actual family tree of the suspect, the evidence was based on old-fashioned detective work, including a car traced to Heuermann, burner cell phones linked to 3 victims, a match of hair linked to Heuermann's, and a discarded pizza box. Heuermann has been indicted for 7 murders and awaits trial this year. When the trial starts, we can brag to our friends that we have inside information concerning the evidence.

©2025 Bert Busch

Professor Matto teaches civic engagement, which has tremendous implications for democracy and for higher education. She transported us to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia. As Ben Franklin emerged from the Convention Hall, people asked "What did we create, a republic or a monarchy?" Legend has it that his response was "A republic, if you can keep it." She then said with a smile, "There's a good chance this didn't happen." But, she continued, the American version of democracy, a constitutional republic, is fragile. The power to keep it is within the power of the people. How do we pass on democracy to the next generation?

Prior to the November 2024 election, the Siena/New York Times poll showed that 76% said American democracy is under threat. An Eagleton poll showed that 47% were very worried about the future of democracy and 39% were somewhat worried. 59% said that political violence is a major problem in the US and 28% said it is at least a minor problem.

The concern of a peaceful transfer of power was not unique to 2024. In a 2017 study the Rs were twice as likely as the Ds to hold that when the country is facing very difficult times, it is justifiable for the President to close Congress and govern without Congress. Professor Matto then asked "What are we seeing in American politics in the last 2 or 3 months?" She quoted a professor at The Brookings Institution, who said that "the scope and the brazenness with which our administration has acted is the shocking part." Creating a perfect segue between the huge shift in the political reality and her teaching position, she quoted John Dewey (1859-1952), who said "Democracy needs to be born anew in every generation and education is the midwife."

How do we prepare students to be democratic (with a small "d") citizens? She presented 3 strands to fostering democratic citizenship: Knowledge; Skills; and Disposition. Students have to understand the structure of government, checks and balances, and the separation of powers. She then narrowed her focus with a series of questions. What does it mean to have a federal system? What is the Constitution? Who serves in office? Who represents us in Congress? The state legislatures? The city councils? How does a bill become a law? Do you know how to register to vote or how to update your registration? Because we have a federal system of government, every state has its own system of elections, such as when you have to register. At Eagleton, the professors try to teach what's normal and what is not; what's legal and what is not; and what's constitutional and what is not. Her students learn that the President has the power to issue executive orders, but there's also a Constitution. There are checks or limits on these orders. The Constitution provides that only Congress can appropriate money. Eagleton teaches the students the skills they need to become democratic citizens.

Professor Matto then quoted Harvard professor and author, Steven Levitsky, who wrote How Democracies Die. The book addresses timely issues. When do you know that you're still in a democracy? When are you moving over to something closer to a competitive authoritarian system? She warned us that what we currently see daily represents a threat to higher education. Professor Levitsky recently wrote that our ability to conduct research, teach and speak freely is under threat. Professor Matto told us that we may be living in an existential moment for higher education. Colleges and universities are a key part of the fabric of American society. What university teachers do is critical for the US economy, technology, public health and scientific advancement generally. We have to keep democracy going and higher education plays an important role. We face a tremendous challenge right now.

The Q and A session hardly gave us any comfort. Professor Matto lamented every moment the Constitution is ignored and every moment the power of the Courts is ignored. She worried about the call to impeach judges or label judges as partisan because you disagree with the decision. She agreed that all of these and other actions are indicators of a constitutional crisis. The students at Eagleton appear to be receiving excellent training to do their part to preserve democracy.

To see the slides accompanying Prof Matto's talk, please click here.

©2025 Bert Busch

Sam Daley-Harris, the speaker at our most recent 55 Plus meeting, describes himself as "Activist, Author and Founder of RESULTS & Civic Courage". His topic was "Learning to Make a Difference Between Elections." He is the author of Reclaiming Our Democracy: Every Citizen's Guide to Transformational Advocacy For Daley-Harris, transformational advocacy—the focus of his presentation—involves ordinary citizens awakening to their purpose in life, recognizing and embracing their power to advocate for the "Why?" that drives them. He cited an astronaut's declaration that "We are not passengers on Spaceship Earth—we're the crew! " Our speaker is convinced that once we shed cynicism and passive acceptance, and are transformed by the knowledge that we can make a difference, all becomes possible.

The story of his own lived experience was clearly meant to be aspirational for the 55 Plus audience members. Hearing a presentation on ending world hunger, he was converted from passivity to the realization that this was a mission he could joyfully accept.

RESULTS launched in 1980 when founder Sam Daley-Harris and a circle of concerned citizens decided the U.S. government must do more to end poverty. Forty years later, there has been a 66% decrease in global child deaths. He also founded Civic Courage, which champions the creation of citizen groups committed to respectful dialog across the aisle to solve our nation's and world's greatest challenges. Our speaker is convinced that through his work, he stands for "humanity's purpose on earth." Paraphrasing George Bernard Shaw, he sees his life as belonging to the whole community, "a splendid torch" to pass on to future generations. Would that we all could feel that sense of inspiring achievement!

Guess we need to meet with our members of Congress and convince them to grow spines, which may be even harder than reducing world hunger dramatically.

©2025 Marcia Midler

Agnieszka Markiewicz, a leader of the American Jewish Committee, began by providing background information on her organization and its core mission. The AJC is a global advocacy organization founded in 1907 in response to the situation of the Jews in Europe. The group's assumption was that Jews are safer in a world where democracy is thriving, and established ties for the region to join NATO when it wasn't popular. She reminded us that Putin regards the dismantling of the USSR as THE catastrophe of the 20th century, and acts as if it still exists and is united. Recapping prior Russian attack history, Markiewicz cited the takeover of Georgian cities in 2008, and the 2024 annexation of Crimea, when the West advised Kiev not to react, and imposed no sanctions. Then, of course, came the full scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022. Putin portrayed it as a "special military operation" to liberate Ukraine from supposed Nazi leaders like the Jewish Nazi Zelensky.

Markiewicz wondered why the United States supported Ukraine, but not enough to achieve victory. In her view, it was her native Poland which "passed the exam," opening their homes to millions, so that no refugee camps were needed. Poland transports Ukrainian products, and the presence of Ukrainians in her country remains "extraordinary," with housed refugee children attending school and their parents accepted warmly. In Ukraine, any pro-Russian sympathies are gone, since the Bucha war crimes and murders. In Warsaw, population is up by 20%. Six and half million Ukrainians have left, adding to earlier immigration woes for the beleaguered country. Sixty thousand Ukrainians have gone missing, with 20,000 children taken and put up for adoption by Russian couples.

Though Ukraine has been able to open some seaports, there is a growing fatigue, as well as a destructive impact on the Ukrainian economy. Ukrainian attacks from within Russia have had a mostly psychological effect, buoying up the attackers, and unsettling the Russians, but not influencing the course of the war. The population under constant attack is very tired after 3 years of war, but doesn't want to abandon their sovereignty or cede land to the Russians. Trump is questioning Zelensky's legitimacy and calling Ukraine the aggressor, both untrue. Our speaker concluded by citing Russian defeat as crucial to avoid destabilizing the world order, as is American commitment to the defense of democracy. Regarding European support, she added that she hopes it isn't too little too late. As for the hope of a Russian revolt, hardly likely, especially after Navalny's death in Russian custody. A proud Polish Jew, Markiewicz has long been involved in efforts to maintain Jewish heritage and community in Poland.

©2025 Marcia Midler