Coalition to Modify NOTA (the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984)

 Elaine Perlman forwards the following discussion points:

Coalition to Modify NOTA Talking Points

modifyNOTA.org

What is the Coalition to Modify NOTA proposing? The Coalition to Modify NOTA proposes providing a $50,000 refundable tax credit to remove all disincentives for American non-directed kidney donors who donate their kidney to a stranger at the top of the kidney waitlist in order to greatly increase the supply of living kidney transplants, the gold standard for patients with kidney failure.

What is the value of a new kidney? The value of a new kidney, in terms of quality of life and future earnings potential, is between $1.1 million and $1.5 million.

What is the American kidney crisis? Fourteen Americans on the waiting list for a kidney transplant die each day. That number does not include the many kidney failure patients who are not placed on the waiting list but would have benefited from a kidney transplant if we had no shortage. The total number of Americans with kidney failure will likely exceed one million by 2030. 

Why not rely on deceased donor kidneys to end the shortage? A living kidney transplant lasts on average twice as long as a deceased donor kidney. Fewer than 1 in 100 Americans die in a way that their kidneys can be procured. Currently, the 60% of Americans who are registered as deceased donors provide kidneys for 18,000 Americans annually. Even if 100% of Americans agreed to become organ donors, this would raise donations by only about 12,000 per year. In the USA, 93,000 Americans are on the kidney waitlist. A total of 25,000 people are transplanted annually, two-thirds from deceased donors and one-third from living donors. The size of the waitlist has nearly doubled in the past 20 years, while the number of living donors has not increased.

What is the extra value that non-directed kidney donors provide? Non-directed kidney donors often launch kidney chains that can result in a multitude of Americans receiving kidneys. Fewer than 5% of all living kidney donations are from non-directed kidney donors who are an excellent source of organs for transplantation because they are healthier than the general population. 

 

How much does the taxpayer currently spend on dialysis? Kidney transplantation not only saves lives; it also saves money for the taxpayer. The United States government spends nearly $50 billion dollars per year (1% of all $5 trillion collected in annual taxes) to pay for 550,000 Americans to have dialysis, a cost of approximately $100,000 per year per patient, a treatment that is far more expensive than transplantation.

 

How many more lives will be saved with the refundable tax credit for non-directed donors? The number of non-directed donors increased from 18 in 2000 to around 300 each year. After our Act becomes law, we estimate that we will add approximately 7,000 non-directed donor kidneys annually. That is around 70,000 new transplanted Americans by year ten. 

 

How much tax money will be saved once the Act is passed? The refundable tax credit will greatly increase the number of living donors who generously donate their kidneys to strangers. We estimate that in year ten after the Act is passed, the taxpayers will have saved $12 billion. 

 

What is a refundable tax credit? A refundable tax credit can be accessed by both those who do and those who do not pay federal taxes. 

 

What do Americans think about compensating living kidney donors? Most Americans favor compensation for living kidney donors  to increase donation rates. 

 

Who is able to donate their kidneys?  Donation requires potential organ donors to undergo a comprehensive physical and psychological evaluation, and each transplant center has its own rigorous criteria. Only around 5% of those who pursue evaluation actually end up donating, and only about one-third of Americans are healthy enough to be donors. Providing financial incentives will encourage more Americans to donate their kidneys to help those with kidney failure.

 Do kidney donors currently have expenses that result from their donation? The medical costs of donation are covered by the recipients' insurance, but donors are responsible for providing for the costs of their own travel, out-of-pocket expenses, and lost wages. Programs like the federal NLDAC and NKR's Donor Shield can help offset these costs, making donation less expensive.

Is it moral to compensate kidney donors? Compensation for kidney donors can be viewed as a way to address the current kidney shortage and save lives. Americans are compensated for various forms of donation such as sperm, eggs, plasma, and surrogacy, all of which involve giving life. 

How long do we need to compensate living kidney donors? Compensation should continue until a xenotransplant or advanced kidney replacement technology becomes available. In the meantime, it's crucial to prevent further loss of lives due to the shortage.

 Will incentivizing donors undermine altruism?  Financial compensation for donors can coexist with altruism. Donors can opt out of the funds from the tax credit or choose to donate those funds to charity. The majority of donors support financial compensation, and relying solely on altruism has led to preventable deaths.

 In addition to ending the kidney shortage, what are other benefits of the Act? The Act can help combat the black market for kidneys and reduce human trafficking because we will have an increased number of transplantable kidneys. It can also motivate individuals to become healthier to pass donor screening, potentially further reducing overall healthcare costs.

 Why provide non-directed donors with a refundable tax credit of $50,000? The compensation is designed to attract those who are both healthy and willing to donate. Given the commitment, time, and effort involved in the donation process, this compensation recognizes the value of those who save lives and taxpayer funds.

 When more donors step forward, can transplant centers increase the number of surgeries?  There is considerable unused capacity at most U.S. transplant centers, and increasing the number of donors is likely to lead to more surgeries. The goal is to perform more kidney transplants and reduce the waitlist, benefiting patients in need.

 In what way does the Act uphold The Declaration of Istanbul?  While the Act deviates from one principle of the Declaration of Istanbul by offering compensation, it aligns with the other principles and is expected to standardize compensation and reduce worldwide organ trafficking.

 What about dialysis as an alternative to transplant?  Dialysis, while a treatment option, can be a challenging and uncomfortable process for patients. For those who could have been transplanted if there were no kidney shortage, dialysis can result in needless suffering and an untimely death.

 Why not compensate living liver donors? Liver donation is riskier and not as cost-effective as kidney donation. While the Act currently focuses on kidney donors, it's possible that compensation for liver donors could be considered in the future.

 What about the argument that providing an incentive to donate will exploit the donors, especially low income donors? 

Primarily middle and low income kidney failure patients are dying due to the kidney shortage. People with lower incomes tend to have social networks with fewer healthy people because health is related to income level. In addition, being placed on a waitlist often costs money. Kidney donation also costs money, an estimated 10% of annual income. The refundable tax credit will help low income donors and recipients the most by making donation affordable and increasing the number of kidneys for those waiting the longest on the waitlist, frequently middle and low income Americans. The tax credit aims to help those most affected by the kidney shortage, as poorer and middle-income individuals often bear the brunt of the kidney crisis’s consequences. The Act will level the playing field, making it easier for those at all income levels to receive a life-saving kidney. 

Please examine this chart:

 

Decline and decay of nudges

 Here's the latest paper to suggest that small "nudges" can have much less of a lasting effect than was initially thought.

The Semblance of Success in Nudging Consumers to Pay Down Credit Card Debt  by Benedict Guttman-Kenney, Paul D. Adams, Stefan Hunt, David Laibson, Neil Stewart & Jesse Leary, NBER WORKING PAPER 31926 DOI 10.3386/w31926  December 2023

Abstract: We run a field experiment and a survey experiment to study an active choice nudge. Our nudge is designed to reduce the anchoring of credit card payments to the minimum payment. In our field experiment, the nudge reduces enrollment in Autopaying the minimum from 36.9% to 9.6%. However, the nudge does not reduce credit card debt after seven payment cycles. Nudged cardholders tend to choose Autopay amounts that are only slightly higher than the minimum payment. The nudge lowers Autopay enrollment resulting in increasing missed payments. Finally, the nudge reduces manual payments by cardholders enrolled in Autopay.

Blood use in the U.S., in JAMA

 Here are a collection of articles, some of which suggest that we may in the not so distant future face a shortage of whole blood in the U.S., the need for which is so far filled by uncompensated donors (unlike the need for plasma, which is presently filled by compensated donors...).  One issue is that apparently ambulance companies aren't easily compensated for beginning transfusion on the way to the hospital, which could save lives.

Original Investigation Caring for the Critically Ill Patient Red Blood Cell Transfusion in the Intensive Care Unit Senta Jorinde Raasveld, MD; Sanne de Bruin, MD, PhD; Merijn C. Reuland, MD; et al. "RBC transfusion was common in patients admitted to ICUs worldwide between 2019 and 2022, with high variability across centers in transfusion practices." Editorial: Precision in Transfusion Medicine ; Matthew D. Neal, MD; Beverley J. Hunt, MD "blood transfusion practice has come a long way, but further efforts toward precision medicine are required to ensure that patients receive the most effective components. These products should be matched to patients as individuals who have unique antigens and a variable host response, and how to use the appropriate blood components in different clinical settings must be understood." Caring for the Critically Ill Patient Small-Volume Blood Collection Tubes to Reduce Transfusions in Intensive Care: The STRATUS Randomized Clinical Trial Deborah M. Siegal, MD; Emilie P. Belley-Côté, MD, PhD; Shun Fu Lee, PhD; et al. Caring for the Critically Ill Patient Emergency Department Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta in Trauma Patients With Exsanguinating Hemorrhage: The UK-REBOA Randomized Clinical Trial Jan O. Jansen, PhD; Jemma Hudson, PhD; Claire Cochran, MSc; et al. Editorial: Contemporary Adjuncts to Hemorrhage Control ; Samuel A. Tisherman, MD; Megan L. Brenner, MD Caring for the Critically Ill Patient Early and Empirical High-Dose Cryoprecipitate for Hemorrhage After Traumatic Injury: The CRYOSTAT-2 Randomized Clinical Trial Ross Davenport, PhD; Nicola Curry, MD; Erin E. Fox, PhD; et al. Editorial: Contemporary Adjuncts to Hemorrhage Control; Samuel A. Tisherman, MD; Megan L. Brenner, MD Special Communication Red Blood Cell Transfusion: 2023 AABB International Guidelines Jeffrey L. Carson, MD; Simon J. Stanworth, MD, DPhil; Gordon Guyatt, MD; et al. Earn CME credit Viewpoint From Product to Patient—Transfusion and Patient Blood Management Matthew A. Warner, MD; Linda Shore-Lesserson, MD; Carolyn Burns, MD "Recent years have also exposed vulnerabilities in blood inventories. As the most prominent example, the COVID-19 pandemic led to cancellations of many community-based and mobile blood collections, culminating in the declaration of a national blood crisis by the American Red Cross for the first time in history. In response, the American Medical Association, in partnership with the American Hospital Association and American Nurses Association, issued a joint statement in January 2022 describing the worst blood shortage in more than a decade and urging blood donation from all eligible persons. Not long after, the AABB, in collaboration with 17 leading US health care and blood collection organizations, launched the Alliance for a Strong Blood Supply to track and coordinate information and public communications about blood inventories and explore mechanisms to improve blood supply resilience." The Bloody Transfusion Problem John B. Holcomb, MD; William K. Hoots, MD; Travis M. Polk, MD "Preventable death after injury is a national crisis. Worldwide, injury accounts for more deaths than malaria, tuberculosis, and HIV combined and is increasing.1 Trauma is largely a condition of young people and is the leading cause of life-years lost between 1 and 75 years of age, and costs to the US are estimated at $4.2 trillion a year.2 As is always the case, lessons learned on recent battlefields have improved civilian care, and the most impactful intervention has been the increased use of blood products as a primary resuscitation fluid. "During the past decade several large, prospective, multicenter, randomized, federally funded studies have improved outcomes and changed practice.3,4 Transfusing blood as early as possible to patients with hemorrhagic shock saves lives, and fewer patients die from exsanguination when receiving a balanced transfusion of platelets, red blood cells, and plasma or whole blood. This is true in the hospital but is especially so in the prehospital setting, where blood products decrease mortality from 33% to 23%.4 When all indicated blood products are available and given early, deaths due to hemorrhage decrease and care is cost-effective. However, of the 2045 hospitals to which the American Red Cross supplied blood components in 2019, 33% did not routinely have platelets ready to transfuse to bleeding patients, and more than 78% of those hospitals are in a rural setting.4 Emergency medical services (EMS) agencies and hospitals that do not have all blood products immediately available cannot provide optimal care. Unfortunately, the blood products required to save lives are not uniformly available to all persons, and implementation of these proven lifesaving interventions is uneven, largely because of supply and policy reasons. "To remedy this disparity, we believe there are 3 significant hurdles to overcome: (1) enabling a reliable strategy for insuring an adequate blood product supply by developing new shelf-stable blood products and by providing greater financial support for donor blood collection and processing; (2) insuring adequate reimbursement for current and new blood products in the hospital setting and removing the limitation of prehospital provider scope of practice and ability to bill for all blood products; and (3) sustaining consistent and appropriate research funding for trauma studies of hemorrhagic shock in both pediatric and adult populations.  ... "Blood collection and processing centers are operating at a loss because remuneration has not kept pace with ever-increasing costs of regulatory required infectious disease testing. ... "More than 55 000 additional donors will be required for just the prehospital blood program implementation.6 Increasing the blood supply will require novel solutions combining remuneration for donors, increased reimbursement for blood collection centers, modern efforts to recruit younger donors, and streamlined regulatory and financial reimbursement pathways for new blood products that are shelf stable at room temperature for years. ... "scope of practice, reimbursement barriers, and the inability to bill for transfusions provided in air or ground ambulances are significant obstacles to the widespread availability of prehospital blood programs." Redefining Blood Donation—Path to Inclusivity and Safety Pampee P. Young, MD, PhD; Paula Saa, PhD Video: Gay and Bisexual Men Can Now Donate Blood—Why This Matters "The journey to establish equitable blood donation policies can be likened to the myth of Theseus navigating the Labyrinth. Just as Theseus ventured into the complex maze to save Athenians from the Minotaur, the blood industry has been navigating the intricacies of research, regulation, and public sentiments to secure a safe blood supply and equitable policies. With the advancements in testing and the changing policies as our guiding thread, we are dedicated to ensuring fairness, equality, and safety, led by evidence and a deep commitment to humanity." Editorial Precision in Transfusion Medicine Matthew D. Neal, MD; Beverley J. Hunt, MD Contemporary Adjuncts to Hemorrhage Control Samuel A. Tisherman, MD; Megan L. Brenner, MD Medical News & Perspectives Could Universal Donor Blood Be Made in the Laboratory? Bridget M. Kuehn "In the face of chronic national and international blood supply shortages, scientists are renewing efforts to achieve the holy grail of transfusion—laboratory-made universal donor blood." JAMA Revisited The Status of Blood Transfusion "Originally Published September 29, 1923 | JAMA. 1923;81(13):1114- 1115." JAMA Patient Page Blood Donation Kristin Walter, MD, MS Video: Gay and Bisexual Men Can Now Donate Blood—Why This Matters Video Gay and Bisexual Men Can Now Donate Blood—Why This Matters

Claudia Goldin wins the 2023 Nobel Prize in Economics

 The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2023 was awarded  today to the indefatigable

Claudia Goldin "for having advanced our understanding of women’s labour market outcomes"

Here's her latest NBER working paper, which appeared yesterday:

Why Women Won

Claudia Goldin

WORKING PAPER 31762, DOI 10.3386/w31762, October 2023

Abstract: How, when, and why did women in the US obtain legal rights equal to men’s regarding the workplace, marriage, family, Social Security, criminal justice, credit markets, and other parts of the economy and society, decades after they gained the right to vote? The story begins with the civil rights movement and the somewhat fortuitous nature of the early and key women’s rights legislation. The women’s movement formed and pressed for further rights. Of the 155 critical moments in women’s rights history I’ve compiled from 1905 to 2023, 45% occurred between 1963 and 1973. The greatly increased employment of women, the formation of women’s rights associations, the belief that women’s votes mattered, and the unstinting efforts of various members of Congress were behind the advances. But women soon became splintered by marital status, employment, region, and religion far more than men. A substantial group of women emerged in the 1970s to oppose various rights for women, just as they did during the suffrage movement. They remain a potent force today.

 Here's the concluding paragraph:

"Women won some of their most important workplace rights in the 1960s because of a set of fortuitous events. They continued to win in the early 1970s because of a movement that gave them influence. They won yet more because groups that were supportive of their cause—college graduates, single women, Black women—expanded relative to others. They won when they had the political clout to get men, especially those in Congress and the White House, to see that women’s rights were as valid as civil rights. Yet, women’s rights had setbacks when, in light of many gains, women abandoned the movement. Women’s rights has had a truly “strange career.”

Compensating kidney donors: a call to action by Brooks and Cavanaugh in the LA Times

 Here's a clarion call for compensation of living kidney donors, from two nondirected kidney donors.  It's not the first, and very likely not the last, given the difficulty of modifying the existing law.  But it makes the case very clearly (and proposes that a tax credit spread over ten years might be the way to move foreward).

Opinion: A single reform that could save 100,000 lives immediately BY NED BROOKS AND ML CAVANAUGH, JULY 9, 2023 

"Never in the field of public legislation has so much been lost by so many to one law, as Churchill might’ve put it. The National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 created the framework for the organ transplant system in the United States, and nearly 40 years later, the law is responsible for millions of needless deaths and trillions of wasted dollars. The Transplant Act requires modification, immediately.

"We’ve got skin in this game. We both donated our kidneys to strangers. Ned donated to someone who turned out to be a young mother of two children in 2015, which started a chain that helped an additional two recipients. And Matt donated at Walter Reed in 2021, after which his kidney went to a Seattleite, kicking off a chain that helped seven more recipients, the last of whom was back at Walter Reed.

"Ned founded, and Matt now leads, an organization that represents nearly 1,000 living donors

...

"eight years ago, when Ned donated, the number of living kidney donors was 6,000. With all the work we’ve done since, the number of living donors is still about 6,000 annually. In the United States, nearly 786,000 people suffer from end-stage kidney disease, more people than can fit in the 10 largest NFL stadiums combined.

...

"More Americans die of kidney disease than of breast or prostate cancer, and one in three of us is at risk. This illness is widespread, but what makes it worse is the staggering financial burden borne by everyone. The head of the National Kidney Foundation testified in March that Medicare spends an estimated $136 billion, nearly 25% of its expenditures, on the care of people with a kidney disease. Of that, $50 billion is spent on people with end-stage kidney disease, on par with the entire U.S. Marine Corps budget.

...

"The National Organ Transplant Act prohibits compensating kidney donors, which is strange in that in American society, it’s common to pay for plasma, bone marrow, hair, sperm, eggs and even surrogate pregnancies. We already pay to create and sustain life

...

"The ethical concerns regarding compensation are straightforward. Nobody wants to coerce or compel those in desperate financial straits to do something they would not have done otherwise. The challenge, then — until artificial or nonhuman animal substitutes are viable options — is to devise a compensation model that doesn’t exploit donors.

"Compensation models have been proposed in the past. A National Institutes of Health study listed some of the possibilities, including direct payment, indirect payment, “in kind” payment (free health insurance, for example) or expanded reimbursements. After much review, we come down strongly in support of indirect payment, specifically, a $100,000 refundable federal tax credit. The tax credit would be uniformly applied over a period of 10 years, in the amount of $10,000 a year for those who qualify and then become donors.

"This kind of compensation is certainly not a quick-cash scheme that would incentivize an act of desperation. Nor does it commoditize human body parts. Going forward, kidney donation might become partly opportunistic rather than mostly altruistic, as it is now. But would it be exploitative? Not at all."

...

Ned Brooks and ML Cavanaugh are living kidney donors, and Brooks is the founder of the Coalition to Modify NOTA.

********

Here are all my posts that mention Ned Brooks, starting with this one:

Friday, February 26, 2016

A Freakonomics listener was inspired to become a non-directed kidney donor by the podcast on kidney exchange

Eric van Damme is moving on

 It appears that the great Dutch game theorist Eric van Damme is retiring from Tilburg.

Here's the announcement from Tilburg:

Outgoing professor Van Damme: Economics serves people, 20th June 2023

"Game theory supports design markets

"Game theory is a mathematical theory that allows us to better understand how people resolve conflicts and can benefit from cooperation. Game theory is used in designing markets so that they function well, and auctions (such as this summer's auction of FM radio frequencies) to ensure that predetermined goals are met. The theory is also important in competition policy, such as in detecting cartels and preventing the abuse of dominant positions.

"In his speech, Van Damme discusses three examples from his own work: the theory of "Global Games," which predicts how coordination problems are solved and provides insights for regulating financial markets. Also, work on platform markets that played a role in a US Supreme Court ruling on the credit-card market. And finally recent research for the Ministry of Economic Affairs on the effectiveness of legislation on abuse of dominance.   

"Eric van Damme worked at Tilburg University since 1989. He started as a research professor at the then newly founded CentER and later served as director of TILEC, the Tilburg Law and Economics Center. He is a Fellow of the Econometric Society (1993) and has been a member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, KNAW, since 2003. In 2009 he was appointed Knight of the Order of the Dutch Lion for his scholarly achievements."

*********

And below is a link to and some excerpts from his valedictory speech, in which (among other things) he explains game theory and economics to non-economists, and gives very eloquent thanks to those who have influenced him.  Among those are Stef Tijs, his undergraduate mentor, who he calls "the Godfather of Game Theory in the Netherlands," and later Reinhard Selten. (Selten wrote in his 1994 Nobel autobiography that  "Eric van Damme needed very little advice and is now a well known game theorist.").

Eric's lecture has a bilingual title:

The beauty and the beast; Het spel en de knikkers, Prof. dr. Eric van Damme

"I should still explain the first part of the title. The “beauty” refers to the world of science, and the “beast” is reality (including the economy).

...

"In this lecture, I will talk about how I tried to navigate between the beauty and the beast.

...

"An example: school choice

"Let me give an example of a “market” on which I did not work on myself, but which is important and which the non-economists among you might not view as a market. The question that we want to address: how, in a given city (or region), to allocate children to (high) schools? Schools differ in quality and parents prefer their children go to good schools. Furthermore, everything else equal, a school that is closer by is more attractive. It can easily happen that some schools are oversubscribed, i.e., there are more applications than there is capacity. Hence, there is scarcity of positions. In such a case, which kids should be allowed to enter their preferred school and which one not? There will be some criteria, which will be reflected in allocation rules. But what should these rules be? Lotteries are simple but may not lead to a good allocation. We also do not want to give the places to the kids of which the parents are willing to pay the most. What should we do? Note that if we really want a good solution, we should look at all the schools in the region or city together. How can we solve this problem? And what criteria should we use for judging allocations?

"There is an active line of research on these questions, with important contributions from economists from Amsterdam, who influenced the way the allocation is done there. (De Haan et al, 2023). The current literature is based on a pure mathematics paper, Gale and Shapley (1962) that was inspired by the process by which teenagers taking their first dancing lesson were matched: the girls standing on the side and the boys asking them to dance, with each boy moving on to another girl after a rejection until he found a partner or was rejected by all. Two very different situations, but with the same solution. Based on the ideas developed in this literature, we can now also match donor organs to patients in a more efficient way, and can save more lives; see Roth (2015) for a popular account. "

...

"I thank my parents. They always stimulated me to get the best out of myself and stressed the importance of education to get a better life than had been possible for them. For somebody in my generation and coming from Koewacht (Zeeuws Vlaanderen) it certainly was not common to go to university. I am grateful that my mother can be here today, healthy and strong, and still caring, not only for me, but also for the rest of our (extended) family. If I recall well, my parents’ dream was that I would become an engineer. Being all thumbs (met twee linkerhanden), this was impossible for me, but with a PhD

from Eindhoven University of Technology and with Nobel Prize Winner Al Roth speaking about “The economist as engineer” (Roth, 2002), I think I have come reasonably close.

"My headmaster of elementary school, Meester Lammens, told my parents that my Cito-toets was not representative of my capabilities and urged them to not take it too seriously. I was fortunate that, when I went to high-school, the Mammoetwet had just entered into force so that I could go from Mavo, through Havo and Atheneum, to the university without delay.

"Studying mathematics in Nijmegen showed me its beauty and taught me the importance of learning by doing. After the lectures, we had tutorials to practice the material, but, at first, it frequently seemed that the questions had nothing to do with what had been taught. But then discovering the link and the corresponding solution by oneself (with only a little bit of help) was always exciting. I am immensely grateful to Stef Tijs, the Godfather of Game Theory

in the Netherlands. Everybody who has interacted with Stef knows what an inspirational figure he was. After having followed his courses, it was clear that Game Theory would be my area and I wrote my thesis under his supervision. Stef also helped me on many other occasions and more than could be expected, and he also ensured that I got my first job in Eindhoven to do my PhD there.

"In Eindhoven, I had the privilege to work in the Operations Research Group of Jaap Wessels. This was a fantastic environment offering excellent conditions for research and stimulating supervision. The research culture forced me to go out at an early stage and present my work at conferences. When it became clear that I preferred to work on Game Theory problems rather than things like inventory management, Jaap allowed me to follow my interests, although it was only a side interest of the group. Jaap, however and rightly, insisted that I should find a “true expert” who was willing to testify that my work was indeed pushing the research frontier forward. When I met Reinhard Selten at a conference in Oberwolfach (Germany), he was willing to act as a second supervisor, even if at first I had tried to convince him that his concept of subgame perfect equilibrium did not make sense

and had thus demonstrated how much I still had to learn. Reinhard and I had many discussions, for which he also invited me to his home in Rheda-Wiedenbrück. I think these were the most intensive discussions I ever had. I am very, very grateful to Reinhard. Throughout my career I have kept Reinhard, Jaap and Stef in mind and I tried to treat my students as they (my teachers) had treated me."

Digital data yields suspect in Idaho murders (NYT)

 The NYT has the story of how a wide ranging search of a large variety of digital data  led to an arrest of a suspect (whose trial hasn't yet begun):

“Inside the Hunt for the Idaho Killer,” by Mike Baker, New York Times, June 10, 2023

"“Online shopping, car sales, carrying a cellphone, drives along city streets and amateur genealogy all played roles in an investigation that was solved, in the end, as much through technology as traditional sleuthing.

...

"A week after the killings, records show, investigators were on the lookout for a certain type of vehicle: Nissan Sentras from the model years 2019 to 2023. Quietly, they ran down details on thousands of such vehicles, including the owners’ addresses, license plate numbers and the color of each sedan.

"But further scrutiny of the video footage produced more clarity, and on Nov. 25 the police in Moscow asked law enforcement agencies to look for a different type of car with a similar shape: white Hyundai Elantras from the model years 2011 to 2013.

"Just across the state border, at Washington State University, campus police officers began looking through their records for Elantras registered there. 

...

"The hunt broadened as investigators vacuumed up more records and data. They had already sought cellphone data for all phones that pinged cell towers within a half-mile of the victims’ house from 3 a.m. to 5 a.m., according to search warrant filings. 

...

"after getting back data on [one of the victim]’s account on the Tinder dating app, detectives asked for details on 19 specific account-holders, including their locations, credit card information and any “private images, pictures or videos” associated with the accounts.

...

"Investigators were also working with a key piece of evidence: a Ka-Bar knife sheath, branded with a U.S. Marine Corps logo, that had been found next to two of the victims. They initially began looking for local stores that may have sold the weapon, and then fanned out.

"A request to Amazon sought the order histories of account holders who had purchased such knives. A follow-up request to eBay focused on a series of specific users, seeking their purchase histories. Some had connections to the area — including one in Idaho and two in Washington State...

...

"Forensic teams had examined the knife sheath and found DNA that did not belong to any of the inhabitants of the house. They ran the sample through the F.B.I.’s database, which contains millions of DNA profiles of past criminal offenders, but according to three people briefed on the case, they did not get a match.

"At that point, investigators decided to try genetic genealogy, a method that until now has been used primarily to solve cold cases, not active murder investigations.

...

"F.B.I. personnel ...{spent] days building out a family tree that began with a distant relative.

"By the morning of Dec. 19, records show, investigators had a name: Bryan Kohberger. He had a white Elantra. He was a student at a university eight miles from the murder scene.

...

"On Dec. 23, investigators sought and received Mr. Kohberger’s cellphone records. The results added more to their suspicions: His phone was moving around in the early morning hours of Nov. 13, but was disconnected from cell networks — perhaps turned off — in the two hours around when the killings occurred.

"Four days later, agents in Pennsylvania managed to retrieve some trash from Mr. Kohberger’s family residence, sending the material to the Idaho State Police forensic lab. Checking it against their original DNA profile, the lab was able to reach a game-changing conclusion: The DNA in the trash belonged to a close relative of whoever had left DNA on the knife sheath.

"Mr. Kohberger was arrested on Dec. 30."

Mega-Journals and scientific publishing

 Academic publishing is getting more varied. A recent article in JAMA focuses on the rise of 'mega-journals,' which seek to publish papers that are correct, without filtering for (referees' opinions about) novelty or importance.

The Rapid Growth of Mega-Journals: Threats and Opportunities  by John P. A. Ioannidis, MD, DSc1,2; Angelo Maria Pezzullo, MD, MSc3; Stefania Boccia, MSc, DSc, PhD3,4, JAMA. Published online March 20, 2023. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.3212

"Mega-journals, those that publish large numbers of articles per year,1 are growing rapidly across science and especially in biomedicine. Although 11 Scopus-indexed journals published more than 2000 biomedical full papers (articles or reviews) in 2015 and accounted for 6% of that year’s literature, in 2022 there were 55 journals publishing more than 2000 full articles, totaling more than 300 000 articles (almost a quarter of the biomedical literature that year). In 2015, 2 biomedical research journals (PLoS One and Scientific Reports) published more than 3500 full articles. In 2022, there were 26 such prolific journals (Table). The accelerating growth of mega-journals creates both threats and opportunities for biomedical science.

...

"we define mega-journals as open-access peer-reviewed journals that charge article processing fees and publish more than 2000 full articles in a calendar year. The 2 early-launched mega-journals, PLoS One and Scientific Reports, were also characterized by very broad publishing scope, covering scientific topics in general. 

...

"Mega-journals typically claim to publish articles based on whether they are scientifically sound rather than important and novel. Accordingly, their acceptance rates, when disclosed, are 20% to 70%

...

"It would be unfair, nevertheless, to dismiss mega-journals as simply a negative development. Several of their characteristics could be aligned also with desirable scientific practices. First, open access is a good starting point, and it can be coupled with greater transparency. If these journals routinely adopt transparent research practices, such as sharing of data, code, protocols, and statistical analysis plans, they can have a transformative effect, given their large output. Several older, broad-scope mega-journals (eg, PLoS One, Royal Society Open Science) have already championed such efforts. It is crucial that disciplinary-focused mega-journals do the same. Second, publishing technically sound scientific work regardless of the nature of the results is highly commendable. It offers opportunities to curb publication and selective reporting bias. Empirical studies are needed to investigate whether mega-journals do achieve this goal or still have selective reporting biases and variants thereof (eg, “spin”). Third, mega-journals may allow publication of results deemed undesirable in traditional specialty journals with entrenched, inbred publishing practices. Enhanced diversity of perspectives and opportunities to challenge orthodoxy are welcome, provided the journals publish rigorous data and safeguard against conflicts of interest. Securing editorial independence and maximizing transparency about conflicts for editors, reviewers, and authors will be key in reaping such benefits.

...

"At the publisher level, competition may have major indirect effects on medicine and science at large. Scientific publishing has an annual work cycle exceeding $30 billion and very large profit margins, which are possible in part because approximately 100 million hours of peer reviewers’ time is offered free yearly.8 The publishers behind the new generation of specialized mega-journals (Table) are taking this money-making recipe to new heights. Science and scientists may feel thwarted, if not entirely powerless, while big publishing corporations fight for field domination. However, it would be to the benefit of all if scientists, medical and research institutions, and funders gave credit to and rewarded journals (and publishers) that promote more transparent research and more rigorous research practices."