Sotheby's to Offer John F. Nash, Jr.'s 1994 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences

Sotheby's to Offer John F. Nash, Jr.'s 1994 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences

"For John F. Nash, the accolade of the Nobel Prize was a transformative event, particularly in the context of his struggles with mental illness. During an interview at a 2004 meeting of Nobel Laureates in Economic Sciences, Nash acknowledged that the Nobel Prize “had a tremendous impact on my life, more than on the life of most Prize winners because I was in an unusual situation. I was unemployed at the time...And so I was in a position to be very much influenced by the recognition of my earlier work...I had become widely known, but in a sense it wasn’t officially recognized. I was quoted very frequently in the literature of economics and mathematics, but it’s quite different to get official recognition”.

With its gold medal in its original red morocco case, accompanying calligraphic diploma with an original watercolor drawing by Bengt Landin, the original box and attaché case for the diploma, and official letters from the Nobel Foundation and the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, John F. Nash, Jr.'s 1994 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is one of the most complete documentations of the Nobel Prize to ever be offered for auction (estimate $2.5/4 million)."

A perfect match--documentary on the medical match by Dr Trisha Pasricha

Here's a description of a forthcoming documentary on the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP), the resident match : A Perfect Match. And here's a piece on the doctor-filmmaker behind it, Dr. Trisha Pasricha, who graduated from Vanderbilt's medical school and went through the 2016 match: The Envelope, Please.

Apparently the film is scheduled for release around the time of the 2017 match, so look for it in March (Match Day will be March 17, 2017).

Reinhard Selten (1930-2016)

Reinhard Selten, a pioneer in both game theory and experimental economics, passed away last week. Rosemarie Nagel and Eyal Winter wrote this morning with the news. Here is an obituary from the Frankfurter Allgemeine
Trauer um berühmten Ökonom
Wirtschaftsnobelpreisträger Reinhard Selten gestorben
Der Mathematiker und Ökonom Reinhard Selten ist tot, wie die F.A.Z. aus seinem Umfeld erfuhr. Er war der bisher einzige Deutsche, der jemals den Ökonomie-Nobelpreis erhalten hat. 
Google translates the headline this way:
"Mourning famous economist
died Nobel laureate Reinhard Selten
The mathematician and economist Reinhard Selten is dead, as the FAZ learned from his environment. He was so far the only German who has ever received the Nobel Prize in economics."

That obit comes with this undated  photo:

Here's a picture of the two of us that Axel Ockenfels took in Cologne in 2006

Reinhard Selten and Al Roth

***************
Update: further obituaries
Reinhard Selten, German Nobel economist, dies aged 85

Reinhard Selten, Game Theorist Who Won Nobel Prize, Dies at 85
"Reinhard Selten was born on Oct. 5, 1930, in Breslau, a German city before World War II and now called Wroclaw in present-day Poland. His father ran a magazine-lending business, which the Nazi regime forced him to sell because he was Jewish.
"Selten and his mother were Protestant, yet his father’s Jewish roots forced Selten to leave school at 14 and he was refused entry to a trade. They left Breslau and became refugees in the German states of Saxony and Hesse as well as in Austria, where he worked as a farm hand after the war. His life in a village in Hesse required walking 3 ½ hours to and from school, during which he solved mathematical problems, he said in his biography for the Nobel Foundation.

“My situation as a member of an officially despised minority forced me to pay close attention to political matters very early in my life,” he said. “I had to learn to trust my own judgment rather than official propaganda or public opinion. This was a strong influence on my intellectual development.”
...
"Selten and his wife, the former Elisabeth Langreiner, were proficient in Esperanto, an invented language devised in the 19th century to assist international communication."


Reinhard Selten, Deutschlands einziger Ökonomie-Nobelpreisträger ist tot
Google t: Reinhard Selten, Germany's only Nobel laureate in economics is dead
"Reinhard Selten was like many older men with disheveled white hair and a little too big, held by suspenders suit. He chose his words carefully. But his eyes lit up when he talked about current projects, for example, a new experiment on decision theory. Even many years after his retirement, he devoted himself every day for two to three hours of research. Therefore he remained scientific coordinator and founder of the Laboratory of Experimental Economics at the University of Bonn.
...
" Finally ... he came to economic laboratory experiments. "I was familiar through my psychology studies with experiments that approach made sense to me." His credo: "Who wants to know what is in the real world going on, must make empirical and experimental work, the reality can be devised at the desk no."
"Not for nothing, the economist is therefore regarded as a pioneer of experimental economics. After receiving his doctorate in Frankfurt and lectureships in Berlin and Bielefeld was rare in 1984 to Bonn, where he founded the first European laboratory for economic experiments."


And, in the NY Times:
Reinhard Selten, Whose Strides in Game Theory Led to a Nobel, Dies at 85
By Sam Roberts

"Alvin E. Roth, another Nobel laureate in economics who teaches at Stanford University, wrote in 1999 that game theory and experimental economics were two of the most important developments in the field in the second half of the 20th century.
“Reinhard Selten is one of the pioneers in both of these endeavors, and he has been a leader in each of them throughout his career,” Professor Roth wrote. “This makes him unique: No one else in the world has made such important or such sustained contributions to both fields.”

More recently, from Andreas Ortmann in Australia:
In Memoriam Reinhard Selten (1930 – 2016), September 2, 2016 by Andreas Ortmann

India considers a Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2016 (banning commercial surrogacy, and restricting surrogacy to traditional couples)

Here's the government press release:
Cabinet approves introduction of the "Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2016" 

"The Union Cabinet chaired by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has given its approval for introduction of the "Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2016".

The Bill will regulate surrogacy in India by establishing National Surrogacy Board at the central level and State Surrogacy Boards and Appropriate Authorities in the State and Union Territories. The legislation will ensure effective regulation of surrogacy, prohibit commercial surrogacy and allow ethical surrogacy to the needy infertile couples. "

**********

Needless to say, there is lots of press reaction, on both sides, for multiple reasons. A sampling of headlines pro and con, with links:

The surrogacy bill is dangerous overreach

Ideological bias has trumped economic and ethical logic

Draft surrogacy bill violates fundamental right of people to choose modes of parenthood

Overseas Indians, foreigners, unmarried couples, single parents, live-in partners and gay couples are barred from commissioning the services of surrogate mothers.

Why the Surrogacy Bill is necessary

No more rent-a-womb: Why India needs to regulate surrogacy

********************
Update: and here's the bill: Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2016

Google knocks on Uber's door with a ride-sharing service using Waze

The WSJ has the story about how Google/Alphabet will capitalize on Waze/Google Maps to offer drivers ride shares with people on their routes:
Google Takes on Uber With New Ride-Share Service -- Alphabet’s carpooling program in San Francisco offers rides at cheaper rates

"Google, a unit of Alphabet Inc., began a pilot program around its California headquarters in May that enables several thousand area workers at specific firms to use the Waze app to connect with fellow commuters. It plans to open the program to all San Francisco-area Waze users this fall, the person said. Waze, which Google acquired in 2013, offers real-time driving directions based on information from other drivers.

"Unlike Uber and its crosstown San Francisco rival Lyft Inc., which each largely operate as on-demand taxi businesses, Waze wants to connect riders with drivers who are already headed in the same direction. The company has said it aims to make fares low enough to discourage drivers from operating as taxi drivers. Waze’s current pilot program charges riders at most 54 cents a mile—less than most Uber and Lyft rides—and, for now, Google doesn’t take a fee.
...
"In the San Francisco pilot, any local Waze user can sign up as a driver, but ridership is limited to roughly 25,000 San Francisco-area employees of several large firms, including Google, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Adobe Systems Inc. Riders are limited to two rides a day—intended to ferry them to and from work.

"In the planned expansion, anyone with the Waze app in the San Francisco area could sign up to be a rider or driver, the person said. Though Google currently doesn’t collect a fee, the company is exploring different rates in Israel and San Francisco, the person familiar with the matter said."
***********

I can't say I'm completely surprised. Here's an earlier post (which ended with "Stay tuned...":

Monday, July 6, 2015

Straw in the wind: Google's Waze is piloting a ridesharing marketplace in Israel

The American Economic Association celebrates Hal Varian as a Distinguished Fellow

Hal R. VarianDistinguished Fellow2015 

"Hal R. Varian is the Chief Economist at Google, which he joined first as a consultant in 2002. He is also an emeritus Professor in the School of Information, the Haas School of Business, and the Department of Economics at the University of California, Berkeley. Varian’s work has covered a wide range of topics during his 45 years of academic publications. He has made pioneering contributions in the area of industrial organization, including models of price discrimination, consumer search, and an important model of sales. In the area of public economics, he is the author of a very significant paper on optimal conditions for the public contribution to public goods.

"Varian has also published a series of influential contributions on nonparametric approaches to consumer demand, including developing a widely-used measure of consumer deviations from the Generalized Axiom of Revealed Preferences. Interestingly, this measure has been employed recently in an area he may not have envisioned, as a measure of deviation from rationality in laboratory experiments.

"Hal Varian has also been a household name for generations of both undergraduate and graduate students studying economics, as his two textbooks Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach and Microeconomic Analysis have been read by many economists at the beginning of their careers, distilling in his trademark voice the range of diverse topics which comprise the basics of economics. One could hardly find a better person to write such textbooks, given his wide range of interests, his omnivorous curiosity, and his clarity in exposition, including, to the delight of the reader, the well-placed witty remark.

"Remarkably, Varian has not only established himself as a towering figure in economics, but has also contributed to other scientific disciplines. His book Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy (authored with Carl Shapiro) has become an influential early guide to the information economy. In this vein, Varian has also made a number of contributions to strategic choices at Google, including work on the design of Google’s IPO which was executed as an auction.

"His most recent research has focused, among other topics, on how the information embedded in Internet searches contains very valuable information for future outcomes. In his work on nowcasting, Varian (with Hyunyoung Choi) shows that the number of searches online for cars or unemployment benefits allows one to obtain measures, respectively, for car sales and jobless claims weeks ahead of the official data release. This research has spawned substantial interest in the area, including the widespread use of the Google Trends service.

"Hal Varian started his career as an economist at the University of California, Berkeley where he earned his PhD in 1973. After teaching at MIT and at the University of Michigan, he returned to UC Berkeley in 1995 as the founding dean of the School of Information. He was a coeditor for the American Economic Review from 1987 to 1990, and is a fellow of the Guggenheim Foundation, the Econometric Society, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He also holds honorary doctorates from the University of Oulu, Finland and the University of Karlsruhe, Germany."

French court suspends burkini ban: repugnant or protected (or both)?

There was something appropriate about swim suits being banned in France for being insufficiently revealing, but it turns out French citizens may have rights...

French court suspends burkini ban
Highest administrative court says prohibition goes against ‘fundamental liberties’ of citizens

"France’s highest administrative court has suspended a ban on the body-covering burkini swimsuits, saying that it went “against fundamental liberties” of French citizens to choose what to wear in public.

"The Conseil d’Etat said on Friday the ban in the Mediterranean town of Villeneuve-Loubet was “illegal”, adding that the ruling set a precedent that applied to all of the towns that have banned the garment this summer.

"The debate over the burkini has split France’s government and society. It has also drawn anger abroad after images showed French police appearing to force a Muslim woman to take off her tunic on a beach.

"Debates over Muslim integration in France have been tense following a series of terrorist attacks in the country by Islamist extremists. The discourse over the issue has been particularly polemical as politicians are gearing up for the presidential elections next year.

"Socialist prime minister Manuel Valls came out in support of the local burkini bans earlier this month, saying the swimsuit, which typically covers the body but not the face, reflects a world view based on “the enslavement of women”.

"The court on Friday said the decree to ban burkinis in Villeneuve-Loubet “seriously, and clearly illegally, breached the fundamental freedoms to come and go, the freedom of beliefs and individual freedom”.

"The suspension of the ban comes pending a definitive ruling. The court will take more time to prepare a judgment on the underlying legality of the case."
***************

Some other photos from recent news stories come to mind.
Here's one from Roger Cohen in the NYT on the Olympics:

And here's one recovered from the archives, of a policeman giving a bikini-clad woman a ticket for inappropriate beach attire in Italy in 1957.

These days we've seen the opposite picture in France:

Harvard and Stanford compared and contrasted, in French: la guerre de l’excellence

Les Echos has the story: Harvard-Stanford, la guerre de l’excellence, by
Lucie Robequain

Ms. Robequain spent some time on both campuses, and so her article is full of quotes from people you may know, about universities and university design...

Cocks Not Glocks at the University of Texas: Repugnant and protected transactions

The law allowing students to bring their guns to campus (if they are licensed and at least 21 years old) has now gone into effect, and has been greeted by protesters carrying dildos, which as it happens are banned on campus as obscene. The Chronicle of Higher Ed has the story (actually two):

A Provocative Protest Pits Pro- and Anti-Gun Activists

"Students rallying behind the "Cocks Not Glocks" theme distributed nearly 5,000 donated sex toys, which they encouraged students to brandish during a raucous daylong protest on Wednesday.
"By calling attention to the idea that displaying a sex toy could violate university rules, but carrying a gun into a classroom might not, "we wanted to fight absurdity with absurdity," said Ana López, a sophomore who opposes a state law expanding gun rights on campus."


Meet the Sex Shops in Austin, Tex., That Put the Cocks in ‘Cocks Not Glocks’

"Until 2008 it was illegal in Texas to sell or promote sex objects such as dildos and fake vaginas. The store’s legal problems and Texas’ law, Ms. Raridon said, attracted a film crew to document Forbidden Fruit’s story, eventually producing Dildo Diaries.

"In Texas, guns were legal but dildos were not," she said.

A similar scenario is playing out this year at the University of Texas at Austin, where, because of the state’s new campus-carry law, university rules allow students with permits to carry concealed guns, but prohibit the display of dildos, sex toys that resemble penises.

In protest, on Wednesday afternoon, the first day of classes, many Austin students strapped dildos to their backpacks. Their aim? To "fight absurdity with absurdity." The protest was dubbed "Cocks Not Glocks," after a popular brand of handgun.

Ever since the state ban on sex objects was overturned, Forbidden Fruit has made its mission not just the sale of sex toys but the destigmatization of sex and sexuality, Ms. Raridon said."

The Iranian market for kidneys

The AP has published this descriptive story about the Iranian market for kidneys:
IN IRAN, UNIQUE SYSTEM ALLOWS PAYMENTS FOR KIDNEY DONORS BY NASSER KARIMI AND JON GAMBRELL

Some paragraphs from the story:

"The AP gained rare access to Iran's program, visiting patients on dialysis waiting for an organ, speaking to a man preparing to sell one of his kidneys and watching surgeons in Tehran perform a transplant. All of those interviewed stressed the altruistic nature of the program - even as graffiti scrawled on walls and trees near hospitals in Iran's capital advertised people offering to sell a kidney for cash.
...
Iran started kidney transplants in 1967 but surgeries slowed after the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, in part due to sanctions. Iran allowed patients to travel abroad through much of the 1980s for transplants - including to America. But high costs, an ever-growing waiting list of patients and Iran's grinding eight-year war with Iraq forced the country to abandon the travel-abroad program.

In 1988, Iran created the program it has today. A person needing a kidney is referred to the Dialysis and Transplant Patients Association, which matches those needing a kidney with a potential healthy adult donor. The government pays for the surgeries, while the donor gets health coverage for at least a year and reduced rates on health insurance for years after that from government hospitals.

Those who broker the connection receive no payment. They help negotiate whatever financial compensation the donor receives, usually the equivalent of $4,500. They also help determine when Iranian charities or wealthy individuals cover the costs for those who cannot afford to pay for a kidney.

Today, more than 1,480 people receive a kidney transplant from a living donor in Iran each year, about 55 percent of the total of 2,700 transplants annually, according to government figures. Some 25,000 people undergo dialysis each year, but most don't seek transplants because they suffer other major health problems or are too old.

Some 8 to 10 percent of those who do apply are rejected due to poor health and other concerns. The average survival rate of those receiving a new kidney is between seven to 10 years, though some live longer, according to Iranian reports.

In the United States, about a third of kidney donations come from living donors. The average kidney from a deceased donor lasts 10 years, while one from a living donor averages about 15 years, according to Dr. David Klassen of the United Network for Organ Sharing, or UNOS, which oversees the U.S. transplant system. Recipients of living-donor kidneys in the U.S. fare better in part because they haven't been on dialysis as long before their transplant."

John Dickerson defends his Ph.D. thesis at CMU, on kidney exchange

John Dickerson will defend today:
Computer Science Thesis Defense, Friday, August 26, 2016 - 2:00pm to 3:30pm
8102 Gates-Hillman Center (or, via Skype, for those of us who are far away).

Here's his summary of what he's preparing to defend:

"The exchange of indivisible goods without money addresses a variety of constrained economic settings where a medium of exchange — such as money — is considered inappropriate. Participants are either matched directly with another participant or, in more complex domains, in barter cycles and chains with many other participants before exchanging their endowed goods. This thesis addresses the design, analysis, and real-world fielding of dynamic matching markets and barter exchanges. We present new mathematical models for static and dynamic barter exchange that more accurately reflect reality, prove theoretical statements about the characteristics and behavior of these markets, and develop provably optimal market clearing algorithms for models of these markets that can be deployed in practice. We show that taking a holistic approach to balancing efficiency and fairness can often practically circumvent negative theoretical results. We support the theoretical claims made in this thesis with extensive experiments on data from the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Kidney Paired Donation Pilot Program, a large kidney exchange clearinghouse in the US with which we have been actively involved. Specifically, we study three competing dimensions found in both matching markets and barter exchange: uncertainty over the existence of possible trades (represented as edges in a graph constructed from participants in the market), balancing efficiency and fairness, and inherent dynamism. For each individual dimension, we provide new theoretical insights as to the effect on market efficiency and match composition of clearing markets under models that explicitly consider those dimensions. We support each theoretical construct with new optimization models and techniques, and validate them on simulated and real kidney exchange data. In the cases of edge failure and dynamic matching, where edges and vertices arrive and depart over time, our algorithms perform substantially better than the status quo deterministic myopic matching algorithms used in practice, and also scale to larger instance sizes than prior methods. In the fairness case, we empirically quantify the loss in system efficiency under a variety of equitable matching rules. Next, we combine all of the dimensions, along with high-level human-provided guidance, into a unified framework for learning to match in a general dynamic model. This framework, which we coin FutureMatch, takes as input a high-level objective (e.g., "maximize graft survival of transplants over time") decided on by experts, then automatically (i) learns based on data how to make this objective concrete and (ii) learns the "means" to accomplish this goal — a task that, in our experience, humans handle poorly. We validate FutureMatch on UNOS exchange data and make policy recommendations based on it. Finally, we present a model for liver exchange and a model for multi-organ exchange; for the latter, we show that it theoretically and empirically will result in greater social welfare than multiple individual exchanges. Thesis Committee: Tuomas Sandholm (Chair) Avrim Blum Zico Kolter Ariel Procaccia Craig Boutilier (Google/University of Toronto) Alvin Roth (Stanford University)"

He'll be teaching CS at Maryland in the Fall.

Compensating bone marrow (blood stem cell) donors: still in legal limbo

Whether it will remain legal to compensate donors of bone marrow (blood stem cells) remains in limbo (see my various posts on the subject here).  The WSJ has an op-ed that summarizes the situation: 

Pay Bone-Marrow Donors, Save Lives: Thousands of Americans are waiting for donations—and while bureaucrats fiddle, patients die. By JEFF ROWES and  BOB MCNAMARA

Briefly, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the ban on paying blood stem cell donors (if the technology was non-surgical), but the Department of Health and Human Services proposed a new regulation that would restore the ban. The regulation went out for public comment, and many comments were received, mostly against reinstating the ban.  The WSJ op-ed writes about that this way (in a way that makes me reflect on some of the oddities of news coverage):

"But a year after Ms. Flynn won her case, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that it might enact a regulation effectively nullifying the court’s ruling—and thus Ms. Flynn’s victory. In September 2013, HHS sought public comment. Hundreds of comments poured in favoring compensation for blood stem-cell donors who use apheresis, including support from Nobel Prize-winning economist Alvin Roth, who has long written on organ-donation policy. Only a handful of comments were opposed."

As you can imagine, I was one among many signers of the comment that I supported (which you can read here): the others, all economists, were

Theodore Bergstrom, University of California at S. Barbara, Stefano DellaVigna, University of

California at Berkeley, Julio J. Elias, Universidad del CEMA, Argentina,

Rodney Garratt, University of California at S. Barbara,

Michael Gibbs, University of Chicago, Judd Kessler, University of Pennsylvania, Nicola Lacetera,

University of Toronto, Stephen Leider, University of Michigan, John List, University of Chicago,

Mario Macis, Johns Hopkins University, Daniel McFadden, University of California at Berkeley, Matthew Rabin, University of California at Berkeley, Alvin Roth, Stanford University, Damien Sheehan-Connor, Wesleyan University, Robert Slonim, University of Sydney, Alex Tabarrok, George Mason University

If you have the time, you can read all 527 comments here.

Economists getting jobs as engineers

Bloomberg (Noah Smith) notices market design: All of a Sudden, Economists Are Getting Real Jobs

" Instead of holding forth on policy issues or the welfare of nations, many  are working with companies to create the kind of ideal markets that were previously confined to the pages of their academic papers. In other words, Keynes’ dream of economic dentistry -- or, more accurately, economic engineering -- might at last be coming true."

More on starting kidney exchange chains with deceased donor kidneys

Here's a forthcoming letter to the editor in the American Journal of Transplantation: We need to take the next step, by Marc L. Melcher, John P. Roberts, Alan B. Leichtman, Alvin E. Roth, and Michael A. Rees

It replies to another letter: A potential solution to make best use of living donor- deceased donor list exchange by VB Kute, HV Patel, PR Shah, PR Modi, VR Shah, HL Trivedi

which was prompted by our earlier article: Melcher, Marc L., John P. Roberts, Alan B. Leichtman, Alvin E. Roth, and Michael A. Rees, “Utilization of Deceased Donor Kidneys to Initiate Living Donor Chains,” American Journal of Transplantation, 16, 5, May 2016, 1367–1370.


Here's a post about that earlier article:

Using deceased donor kidneys to start living donor kidney exchange chains

and here's a post about the followup we hope to do:

White House Organ Summit--video and links. Deceased donor chains planned at Walter Reed

Quality control of transplant centers, and the choice of who to transplant (and which organs to accept)

Transplant centers are regulated by measures such as their one-year graft-survival rate, so they feel pressure not to transplant patients, or organs, that have too high a risk to meet the required measure of success.

Here's a recent paper from the Journal of the American College of Surgeons that discusses some of the consequences:

Decade-Long Trends in Liver Transplant Waitlist Removal Due to Illness Severity: The Impact of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Policy

Presented at the 96th Annual Meeting of the New England Surgical Society, Newport, RI, September 2015.

Natasha H. Dolgin, PhDPress enter key for correspondence informationPress enter key to Email the author

,

Babak Movahedi, MD, PhD

,

Paulo N.A. Martins, MD, PhD

,

Robert Goldberg, PhD

,

Kate L. Lapane, PhD, MS

,

Frederick A. Anderson, PhD

,

Adel Bozorgzadeh, MD, FACS

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.03.021

 |

Article Info

• Abstract

• Full Text
• Images
• References

Background

The central tenet of liver transplant organ allocation is to prioritize the sickest patients first. However, a 2007 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services regulatory policy, Conditions of Participation (COP), which mandates publically reported transplant center performance assessment and outcomes-based auditing, critically altered waitlist management and clinical decision making. We examine the extent to which COP implementation is associated with increased removal of the “sickest” patients from the liver transplant waitlist.

Study Design

This study included 90,765 adult (aged 18 years and older) deceased donor liver transplant candidates listed at 102 transplant centers from April 2002 through December 2012 (Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients). We quantified the effect of COP implementation on trends in waitlist removal due to illness severity and 1-year post-transplant mortality using interrupted time series segmented Poisson regression analysis.

Results

We observed increasing trends in delisting due to illness severity in the setting of comparable demographic and clinical characteristics. Delisting abruptly increased by 16% at the time of COP implementation, and likelihood of being delisted continued to increase by 3% per quarter thereafter, without attenuation (p < 0.001). Results remained consistent after stratifying on key variables (ie, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease and age). The COP did not significantly impact 1-year post-transplant mortality (p = 0.38).

Conclusions

Although the 2007 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services COP policy was a quality initiative designed to improve patient outcomes, in reality, it failed to show beneficial effects in the liver transplant population. Patients who could potentially benefit from transplantation are increasingly being denied this lifesaving procedure while transplant mortality rates remain unaffected. Policy makers and clinicians should strive to balance candidate and recipient needs from a population-benefit perspective when designing performance metrics and during clinical decision making for patients on the waitlist.

It drew this headline in the news:
Hospitals are throwing out organs and denying transplants to meet federal standards

Who Gets What and Why shortlisted for German Business Book Prize (to be announced in October)

Deutscher Wirtschaftsbuchpreis 2016: Die Shortlist

Google translates: Dusseldorf (ots) - The finalists of the German Business Book Prize have been announced: Ten books have made ​​it to the final round for 2016th A distinguished jury selected this year for the tenth time from the titles shortlisted the best business book of the year. The Executive Jury has Gabor Steingart, publisher of Handelsblatt. The prize will be awarded on 21 October at the Frankfurt Book Fair.

The German Business Book Award is themed "Understanding Business".Handelsblatt, the Frankfurt Book Fair and the investment bank Goldman Sachs award the prize to promote the economic literature. The three partners aim to emphasize the distinction the importance of economy section in mediating economic relationships. The selection criteria therefore include not only innovative agenda-setting or a new perspective and understanding and readability. The prize is endowed with 10,000 euros.

The ten books shortlisted provides Handelsblatt in the weeks prior to the literature page in the weekend edition. All other information on the award, the jury and of the initiators can be found at: www.deutscher-wirtschaftsbuchpreis.de

Die Shortlist 2016:

George Akerlof, Robert Shiller: Phishing for Fools. Manipulation und Täuschung in der freien Marktwirtschaft. Econ, Berlin 2016, 416 Seiten, 24 Euro

Adam Grant: Nonkonformisten. Warum Originalität die Welt bewegt. Droemer, München 2016, 384 Seiten, 22,99 Euro

Christoph Keese: Silicon Germany. Wie wir die digitale Transformation schaffen. Knaus, München 2016, 368 Seiten, 22,99 Euro

Paul Mason: Postkapitalismus. Grundrisse einer kommenden Ökonomie. Suhrkamp, Berlin 2016, 430 Seiten, 26,95 Euro

Alec Ross: Die Wirtschaftswelt der Zukunft. Plassen, Kulmbach 2016, 400 Seiten, 24,99 Euro

Alvin E. Roth: Wer kriegt was und warum? Bildung, Jobs und Partnerwahl: Wie Märkte funktionieren. Siedler, München 2016, 304 Seiten, 24,99 Euro

Wolfgang Schäuble (und Michel Sapin): Anders gemeinsam (im Gespräch mit Ulrich Wickert). Hoffmann und Campe, Hamburg 2016, 256 Seiten, 22 Euro

Mark C. Schneider: Volkswagen. Eine deutsche Geschichte. Berlin Verlag, 2016, 304 Seiten, 22 Euro

Hans-Werner Sinn: Der Euro. Von der Friedensidee zum Zankapfel. Hanser, München 2016, 560 Seiten, 24,90 Euro

Sahra Wagenknecht: Reichtum ohne Gier. Wie wir uns vor dem Kapitalismus retten. Campus, Frankfurt 2016, 292 Seiten, 19,95 Euro

Differential privacy at Apple

The MIT Technology Review has an article about Apple's use of differential privacy, that caught my eye for several reasons: Apple’s New Privacy Technology May Pressure Competitors to Better Protect Our Data: The technology is almost a decade-old idea that’s finally coming to fruition.

"On a quarterly investor call last week, Apple CEO Tim Cook boasted that the technology would let his company “deliver the kinds of services we dream of without compromising on individual privacy.” Apple will initially use the technique to track trends in what people type and tap on their phones to improve its predictive keyboard and Spotlight search tool, without learning what exactly any individual typed or clicked.
...
“It’s exciting that things we knew how to do in principle are being embraced and widely deployed,” says Aaron Roth, an associate professor at University of Pennsylvania who has written a textbook on differential privacy. “Apple seems to be betting that by including privacy protections, and advertising that fact, they will make their product more attractive.”

In the version of differential privacy Apple is using, known as the local model, software on a person’s device adds noise to data before it is transmitted to Apple. The company never gets hold of the raw data. Its data scientists can still examine trends in how people use their phones by accounting for the noise, but are unable to tell anything about the specific activity of any one individual.

Apple is not the first technology giant to implement differential privacy. In 2014 Google released code for a system called RAPPOR that it uses to collect data from the Chrome Web browser using the local model of differential privacy. But Google has not promoted its use of the technology as aggressively as Apple, which has this year made a new effort to highlight its attention to privacy (see “Apple Rolls Out Privacy-Sensitive Artificial Intelligence”)."

Interview with a kidney buyer and seller in Syria

Here's an interview with a displaced person in Syria (an internal refugee) and the Syrian woman to whom he sold his kidney:
The woman in need of a kidney and the man willing to sell one to her: ‘I’m at the end of the line’

Here's the prolog:
"Regime forces burst into a village in the east Homs countryside last November to drive the Islamic State out. Fadi a-Salamah, 36, fled Mahin with his family and headed 160 km south to Damascus.

When he arrived in the capital, a-Salamah began working the graveyard shift in a fast food restaurant. After four months, he was stopped and interrogated one night at a checkpoint.

Fearing for his life, a-Salamah quit his job.

Unable to find work, he exhausted his SP400,000 savings (about $2,000). His landlord threatened to kick him, his wife and his three young children out of their house.

Desperate to keep his family off the streets, a-Salamah turned to what he considers all he has left to sell—his kidney, for $4,000.

A-Salamah went to a nearby hospital where he conducted a kidney screening and tissue-type test. He left his number with the doctor in the event a patient with compatible blood and tissue types needed a kidney.

On June 20, a-Salamah received a call from a 50-year-old Damascene woman with failing kidneys. The woman is the aunt of Syria Direct’s Bahira al-Zarier, and asked that her name not be published.

After 20 years of kidney disease, the woman says her doctor told her that weekly dialysis treatments were no longer effective.

When the doctor told her that her and a-Salameh’s tissue were 100 percent compatible, “I almost couldn’t contain my joy.”

“At the same time, I feel guilty because I’m taking advantage of someone’s financial need.”

At the time of the interview, a-Salamah and the woman were waiting for the doctor to set an appointment for the operation."

HT: Jonathan Spencer

Transplant surgeons meet in Hong Kong amid questions about China's continued use of organs from executed prisoners

The NY Times has the story: Debate Flares on China’s Use of Prisoners’ Organs as Experts Meet in Hong Kong

It discusses a recent article in the American Journal of Transplantation:
Transplant Medicine in China: Need for Transparency and International Scrutiny Remains by T. Trey, A. Sharif, A. Schwarz, M. Fiatarone Singh, and J. Lavee

Here's the abstract of the article:
"Previous publications have described unethical organ procurement procedures in the People's Republic of China. International awareness and condemnation contributed to the announcement abolishing the procurement of organs from executed prisoners starting from January 2015. Eighteen months after the announcement, and aligned with the upcoming International Congress of the Transplantation Society in Hong Kong, this paper revisits the topic and discusses whether the declared reform has indeed been implemented. It is noticeable that China has neither addressed nor included in the reform a pledge to end the procurement of organs from prisoners of conscience, nor have they initiated any legislative amendments. Recent reports have discussed an implausible discrepancy of officially reported steady annual transplant numbers and a steep expansion of the transplant infrastructure in China. This paper expresses the viewpoint that, in the current context, it is not possible to verify the veracity of the announced changes and it thus remains premature to include China as an ethical partner in the international transplant community. Until we have independent and objective evidence of a complete cessation of unethical organ procurement from prisoners, the medical community has a professional responsibility to maintain the academic embargo on Chinese transplant professionals."
************

The NY Times story includes this:
"In an interview conducted on the messaging app WeChat, Huang Jiefu, a senior Chinese transplant official and a former deputy minister of health, appeared to defend the changes but simultaneously acknowledge they were far from perfect.

“We have finished walking the first step of a long march of 10,000 li, the task is heavy and the road far, but we are walking on a path of light,” he wrote. "

Salary negotiation: some Massachusetts market design

The NY Times has the story: Massachusetts Bans Employers From Asking Applicants About Previous Pay

"In a groundbreaking effort to close the wage gap between men and women, Massachusetts has become the first state to bar employers from asking about applicants’ salaries before making them job offers.

"The new law will require hiring managers to offer a compensation figure upfront — based on what the applicant’s worth is to the company, rather than on what he or she made at a previous position.
...
"No longer will job seekers be compelled to disclose their salary or wages at their current or previous jobs — which often leaves applicants with the nagging suspicion that they might have been offered more money if the earlier figure had been higher. Job candidates will still be allowed to volunteer their salary information.

"The Massachusetts law, which will take effect in July 2018, takes aim at the subtle factors that often play into compensation decisions. Companies will not be allowed to prohibit their workers from telling others how much they are paid, a move that advocates say can increase salary transparency and help employees uncover disparities."
*********

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. The intention is to free people from being forever constrained by their salary history. Employers will be worried about the winner's curse...