George Groves insisted he would come back “better and stronger” following his loss to Carl Froch at Wembley.His first attempt to become super-middleweight world champion, in November, ended in controversy when he was stopped in the ninth round, having floored Froch early in the fight and continued to dominate.But the rematch was a very different affair, with IBF and WBA title holder Froch, 36, performing much better in an even fight before knocking the Hammersmith man out with devastating shot in the eighth round.Groves said: “It’s back to the drawing board. I’m 26 years old and I’ve just boxed in front of 80,000 fans.Froch ended the fight in emphatic fashion at Wembley“I didn’t get the result I wanted but I’m sure I’m going to have a long and successful career ahead of me.“It was a split-second mistake. Up until that I was boxing very well. I got just it wrong in that split second.“It’s very disappointing and frustrating. I feel like that fight was there for me to win. I made a mistake and need to eradicate that from my game.“I can’t thank my supporters enough and I hope they’ll carry on supporting me. I’ll do them proud as quickly as possible.”Groves’ promoter Kalle Sauerland added that they would assess their options following the defeat and that WBC champion Sakio Bika was “on the radar”.“It will be a quick process. He’s just sold out Wembley in his 21st fight, at 26 years of age, and we’ll have him back very soon,” said Sauerland.See also:DeGale wins to secure world title shotGroves crushed by Froch in Wembley clashGroves is lined up for September returnGroves to fight in world title eliminatorFollow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook
As reported here numerous times (e.g., 06/14/2004, 12/04/2003, 04/14/2003, 03/28/2003, 02/25/2003, 12/17/2002, 09/26/2002, 03/26/2002, 02/01/2002, 12/06/2001, 08/17/2001, 06/19/2001, 02/21/2001), cells have an elaborate interstate highway system with molecular trucks hauling cargo back and forth. Scientists have known that the cellular highways have polarities labeled plus and minus, and that molecular motors typically go one way. Some motors, like kinesin, drive only in the plus direction, while others, like dynein, go in the minus direction. Now, it is becoming apparent that most pieces of cargo have at least one of each kind of motor, with a stickshift that allows it to drive in forward or reverse. The state of our knowledge about bidirectional transport is explored by Michael Welte in the July 13 issue of Current Biology.1 Welte examines the evidence that many, maybe all, moving cargoes have bidirectional ability. In the microscope, certain organelles like mitochondria and melanosomes are seen to move back and forth rapidly, eventually making it to their target. Why is this, and how is it done? Does the organelle grab motors out of the cytoplasm? Are both motors working in a tug-o’war? Welte cites evidence against these possibilities, and suggests (although hard evidence needs to be found), that the cargo carries both motors, and a “complex coordination machinery … ensures that when one motor is actively engaged with the microtubule, the other motor is turned off.” Moreover, this coordination machinery, whatever it is, may be under the influence of regulatory enzymes. “If the coordination machinery can attach to cargo independent of the motors,” he surmises, “distinct variants of the coordination machinery could be targeted to different cargoes, thus allowing cargo-specific coordination and regulation.” It seems odd, though, that cargoes would undergo a back-and-forth random walk instead of making a beeline to the target. Welte figures there must be biological justification for this behavior, so he examines some possibilities:Economy: “If cargoes always carry motors for both directions, net transport can easily be adjusted or even reversed by simply tweaking the relative activity of the two motors. This is likely to be much quicker than assembling a new set of motors on a cargo, and also allows transport to be abruptly altered depending on cellular needs. It even makes it possible to tune the overall speed of transport by altering the relative contribution of trips in the non-dominant direction.”Setting Up Polarized Distributions: “Sometimes it is necessary to set up a distribution rather than to confine the organelles to a single point …. Even if cargoes accumulate at a certain point (e.g. near plus-ends when motion is biased in the plus-end direction), trips in the non-dominant direction will tend to spread the cargoes out along the tracks, away from the point of accumulation. Modeling shows that by altering the relative contributions of plus- and minus-end trips, a wide range of steep to flat steady-state distributions can be achieved.”Avoiding Obstacles and Exploring Space: “As cytoplasmic dynein often steps sidewise to adjacent proto-filaments, a bidirectional cargo could find itself on the opposite side of the microtubule even after a short minus-end excursion. If it now switches back to kinesin I, it can pass the obstacle. Bidirectionally moving cargoes should, therefore, be less likely to contribute to disastrous traffic jams …. The random walk of bidirectional cargoes allows a single cargo to explore a large region of cellular space, especially if tracks are disordered.”Error Correction: “During unidirectional transport, the critical event that determines directionality of motion is the attachment to either a plus- or minus-end motor. A wrong attachment will cause misdelivery of the cargo. During bidirectional transport, the net direction of transport is determined by the balance of plus- and minus-end trips and can, therefore, be continually evaluated and even altered if physiological conditions change. Thus, bidirectional transport may facilitate error correction.It must be remembered that these motors are operating in the dark without eyes, like automated railroad cars. They don’t have sentient drivers on radios, but rather respond to chemical signals in the environment. Apparently these behaviors achieve the best solution to many complex problems. “Bidirectional transport by opposite-polarity microtubule motors is just one example of multiple motors working together to achieve carefully choreographed transport,” Welte says, as he concludes with a list of open problems needing further elucidation.1Michael A. Welte, “Bidirectional Transport along Microtubules,” Current Biology, Volume 14, Issue 13, 13 July 2004, Pages R525-R537, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2004.06.045.Think of a 12-year-old kid on motorized rollerblades, one foot going forward, the other reverse. Imagine the tricks he could accomplish (with a little practice) switching from one foot to the other (or the bloody knees as he experiments the first time). Now make the wheels run on monorails. Imagine a complex tangle of rails, some blue, some red, going off in all directions, more dizzying than an amusement park roller coaster. The kid is supposed to put the left foot on the red rails and the right foot on the blue rails (one foot at a time, of course). Now hand him a package to deliver, and put a thousand other kids on the system going in all directions with packages of their own. The rails are also in constant motion, some growing and some shrinking. If the mental picture is becoming too complicated to dwell on further, just realize that something like this is happening in every cell of your body right now. This intracellular transport system is only a small part of a miniaturized city with many other vital tasks being performed flawlessly. The transportation system alone has a large infrastructure of support services. There are linemen for the monorails, pit crewmen for motor repair, traffic cops, construction crews, shippers, receivers and much more, without even considering what the cargoes are and what they do when they arrive. The interior of a cell is a whirlwind of constant activity, all necessary just to sustain life. Rocks do not do this. Evolutionists may jawbone about these systems emerging from chance and natural selection over millions of years of purposeless motion, but the more we can exhibit the details of cellular perfection, the less plausible their story is going to seem to any rational observer. This system is crying out for visualization. The wonder of intracellular transport would come alive if magnified a million times.2(Visited 10 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
File retaliation complaints with theDepartment of Labor, and/orSeek relief in the federal courts. Employees Can’t Waive Whistleblower Remedies An IRS whistleblower has 90 days afteran employer reprisal to file a complaint with the DOL. The DOL then has 60 daysto investigate. If it concludes that there is reasonable cause to believe theemployer retaliated against the whistleblower, the DOL issues a preliminaryorder to grant relief. Administrative Whistleblower Remedy The DOL and the parties canterminate the administrative process at any time by entering into a settlement. Not a subscriber? Sign up for a free trial or contact us for a representative. the Treasury Secretary,Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), U.S. ComptrollerGeneral, or Department of Justice;the U.S. Congress; a person with supervisory authorityover the employee; or any other person who works for theemployer and has the authority to investigate, discover or terminatemisconduct. IRS Whistleblower’s Administrative and Judicial Remedies If the DOL does not issue a decision within 180 daysafter the whistleblower files a complaint, the whistleblower may sue theemployer in the U.S. District Court. If the DOL holds a hearing after a party objects toits preliminary findings, the whistleblower or the employer may appeal theDOL’s final order in the U.S. Court of Appeals. The parties have 30 days to objectto the order. If no one objects, the preliminary order becomes final, andcannot be challenged in the courts. An IRS whistleblower may also seekjudicial remedies for employer reprisal in two circumstances: Judicial Whistleblower Remedies Broad Reach for IRS Whistleblower Remedies Kelley Wolf, JD, LLM Inaddition to these judicial remedies for the parties, the DOL can also sue indistrict court to enforce its own orders. Login to read more on CCHAnswerConnect. However, if the DOL concludes thata complaint is frivolous, the whistleblower may have to pay up to $1,000 of theemployer’s legal fees. To challenge employer retaliation,an employeewhistleblower must first file a complaint withthe Department of Labor (DOL). The employee may then seek judicial relief froma contrary DOL decision or the DOL’s failure to act. The whistleblower remedies are notlimited to employees who cooperate with the IRS. They also apply when aninformant provides information or assistance to: Similarly, the employer is notjust the party that employs the whistleblower. Employers include officers,employees, contractors, subcontractors and agents of the informant’s employer. tax underpayments, or conduct that the informantreasonably believes violates internal revenue laws or any federal laws relatedto tax fraud. Any party to the proceeding mayobject to the preliminary order and request a hearing. The DOL has 120 days afterthe hearing to issue a final order that either provides relief to thewhistleblower or denies the complaint. Whistleblower’s Redress After Employer Reprisal These administrative proceduresare based on anti-reprisal remedies for whistleblowers who report violations offederalaviation laws and regulations. Perhaps even more importantly, these new remedies cannot be waived by any agreement, policy form, or condition of employment, including a predispute arbitration agreement. In fact, a predispute arbitration agreement is not valid or enforceable if it requires arbitration of an employee whistleblower dispute that arises under these rules. These employer whistleblowerremedies apply to an informant who provides information or otherwise assists ininvestigations and actions related to: An employee whistleblower whoprevails in an employer reprisal complaint, either with the DOL or in thedistrict court, is entitled to all relief necessary to make the employee whole.This relief includes: Finally, employer retaliationincludes discharge, demotion, suspension, threats, harassment, and any otherdiscrimination against an employee in the terms and conditions of employment,including acts in the ordinary course of the employee’s duties. Thesenew rights and remedies do not diminish or limit any employee’s rights, privilegesor remedies under any federal law, state law, or collective bargainingagreement. Some IRS whistleblowers have significant new administrativeand legal remedies against employer retaliation. Employeewhistleblowers can now: These remedies took effect on July 1, 2019.They are largely based onremedies for employer reprisals against whistleblowersunder the False Claims Act. reinstatement with the samesecurity status; 200% of back pay and 100% of alllost benefits, plus interest; and compensation for special damages,including litigation costs, expert witness fees, and reasonable attorney fees.
Kashmir is all set to receive hundreds of migrant Kashmiri Pandits on the occasion of Mela Khir Bhawani, an annual festival, in Ganderbal district in north Kashmir on Friday.Raising slogans Mata Kheer Bhawani Ki Jai, nearly 500 Pandits on 15 buses started their journey from Jammu to Tulmul on Thursday morning.Traditionally, the Pandits perform special prayers on the occasion of the annual holy day of ‘Jyeshtha Ashtami’ at Khir Bhawani temple at Tulmul, 20 kilometre from Srinagar. However, it became a low-key affair after a sizeable population of Pandits left the valley during the tumultuous period of raging militancy in 1989.The festival has also become an occasion of bonhomie between the communities as many Muslims set up flower and food stalls outside the temple for puja.J&K government spokesman Naeem Akhtar, whoo took stock of the arrangement being made at the Kheer Bhawani Shrine, said, “I appeal to the Pandits to visit the shrine en masse to revive the age old brotherhood. Local Muslims too are waiting to welcome their brothers. People need not pay any heed to rumours.”