FIFA Chooses 2018 and 2022 World Cup Hosts

 
Amid controversy and accusations of corruption, soccer’s world governing body FIFA selected the host countries for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups this week. The 2018 host will be Russia, and the 2022 host will be Qatar. Already there is lots of talk about what these selections mean, and many observers are wondering aloud whether corruption was a factor in these selections.
In any event, FIFA officials have long been talking about how they’d like to take the World Cup into areas where the tournament has not traditionally been held. Their selection of South Africa for the 2010 tournament and Brazil for the 2014 cup shows this commitment, and these new selections seem to continue this pattern. Russia has never held a World Cup, nor has any Middle Eastern country.
As FIFA president Joseph Blatter put it at this week’s announcement ceremony in Zurich, “We go to new lands. Never has the World Cup been in Russia and Eastern Europe, and the Middle East and Arabic world has been waiting for a long time.”
Of course, with any selection of this nature there are disappointed also-rans. Perhaps the highest-profile contenders were England for the 2018 cup and the U.S. for 2022. Given the unorthodox announcement of two future cups at the same time, host hopefuls will now have to wait several years before they can enter new bids. Countries hoping to host cups now have to look 16 or 20 years in the future, which is a difficult proposition.
Officials in the U.S. had hoped to use the World Cup to continue to further soccer in the U.S., but FIFA representatives found the U.S.’s bid lacking passion and short on convincing arguments. After all, FIFA gave the tournament to the U.S. in 1994, and many worthy potential host countries have missed out in the intervening years.
Ultimately, Qatar probably benefited from the amazing success of this year’s World Cup in South Africa, which apparently galvanized FIFA officials to continue delivering their event to parts of the world where it has not traditionally been held.

Qatar officials are reportedly excited to present a new image of the Middle East to the world. Of course, many observers are pointing to the fact that the country can get up to 120 degrees Fahrenheit on typical summer days, which means the country will have to build air-conditioned stadiums. Such facilities aren’t cheap.
Russia, meanwhile, sees their opportunity to host the 2018 World Cup as a chance to boost their emergence from the collapse of the Soviet Union. Detractors have pointed to Russia’s poor infrastructure and far-flung geography, which may make logistics difficult.
In the weeks leading up to the announcement, 6 of 24 members of FIFA’s selection committee were accused of corruption, with two ultimately being barred from voting. The announcement came amid calls for postponement, but FIFA pushed forward regardless. The organization, which has always faced frequent criticism for its perceived lack of transparency, probably didn’t help its cause by ignoring concerns.
The accusations against FIFA mainly focused on alleged cash bribes requested by FIFA members in exchange for support of host countries. Nigerian official Amos Adamu and French FIFA vice-president Reynald Temarii allegedly asked for $800,000 in exchange for full support of the U.S. bid. FIFA announced the two officials’ suspension shortly thereafter.
Also high in the running for the 2018 tournament were joint bids from Netherlands/Belgium and Spain/Portugal. Australia, Japan, and South Korea all had high hopes for 2022. In these disappointed countries, the selection announcement has done nothing to assuage accusations of corruption against FIFA. The story is likely to continue.

Original Source:  http://sportsarticlesonly.com/footballsoccer/fifa-chooses-2018-and-2022-world-cup-hosts/

6 Warning Signs of a Bad Diet

These days there's a new diet almost weekly, and it's easy to find their glittering promises alluring. "People are sick of their old habits and being overweight, and they're looking for something new," says registered dietitian Jessica Crandall, a spokesperson for the American Dietetic Association (ADA). But embark on a bad diet and you could pay a price beyond fleeting results. Some diets can cause a range of side effects, from bad breath and frequent urination, to fatigue and slowed metabolism.
That's why it's important to choose your diet wisely. For a diet that's going to yield long-term, healthy results, steer clear of these attributes:

1. It's too restrictive. Diets are supposed to be restrictive, right? Well, yes and no. A healthy diet does entail some calorie cutting and self-discipline. But a diet that has too many rules spells trouble, Crandall says. "Extreme food restrictions are hallmark signs of a quick-fix plan," she says, adding that you shouldn't have to cut out your favorite foods completely—and doing so can intensify cravings. That's one reason diets that strictly limit food options, such as the Atkins and raw food diets, tend to have higher drop-out rates than, say, the Mediterranean diet, whose general guidelines leave room for variety.
2. It bans whole food groups. Removing food groups—or worse, entire macronutrients (carbohydrates, fats, and proteins)—can catch up with you quickly. These diets eliminate nutrients the body needs to function optimally. "The brain and muscles need carbohydrates," says registered dietitian Andrea Giancoli, a nationally known nutrition expert and nutrition policy consultant for the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, which helps cities develop and adopt healthful food and beverage polices. That's why low-carb, high-protein diets often cause weakness, irritability and fuzzy-headedness, she explains. And short-term fasts and detox diets, like the popular Master Cleanse diet (a hot water with lemon and maple syrup variation), can have lasting side effects, including slowed metabolism and lower bone density from calcium loss. "Diets that allow you to incorporate all foods in healthy portions are the ones people stick with long term," says Giancoli, who is one of 22 members of a panel assembled by U.S. News to rate diets.
3. It's the opposite of what you're doing. People often start a diet in desperation. "They feel so bad about what they've been eating that they want to make a drastic change," says Crandall. But you didn't form your habits overnight, so how can you expect an instant reversal? Better to start slow, reducing portion sizes and making simple substitutions like switching to a lower-calorie bread, she suggests. Small changes will help you avoid diet shock, which can quickly sour even the best plan.
4. It calls for extensive prep work. "Be cautious of plans that involve labor-intensive cooking or prep work," Crandall says. "With any diet, it shouldn't be too challenging." You still have to make a commitment to planning meals in advance, she says, but following 20-ingredient recipes, or cutting up four apples a day because it's in the diet is excessive—and likely won't help you stay on the wagon.
5. It comes in a package. Just as complex food preparation can be a diet's downfall, so too can over-simplified preparation, Giancoli says. Programs that hinge on prepackaged foods can leave you without an idea of how to prepare healthy meals on your own. "You don't know how to shop and cook for yourself. They don't leave you with any tools to adopt a healthful lifestyle," Giancoli says.
6. It touts a magic bullet. If a diet rules out obvious components of a healthy regimen, such as exercise or calorie monitoring, Giancoli's advice: run. "Some of these fad diets just talk about a certain food you need to eat. But when you consume too many calories of any food you're going to gain weight," she says. As for exercise, you can lose weight without it, but the body needs physical activity to be healthy, Giancoli says. Also, be wary of diets that promise drastic weight loss in a short time frame; as a general rule, healthy weight loss means losing 1 to 2 pounds per week.

Original Source:  http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-fitness/2011/09/02/6-warning-signs-of-a-bad-diet

Why Online Education Is Growing

Distance education of one sort or another has been around for a long time. Correspondence courses helped people learn trades on their own free time, while radio or taped television courses educated students in remote areas. Now, with the rapid expansion and evolution of the Internet, online education has become a reality. What began as a convenient means of offering internal training to employees via corporate intranets has now spread to the general public over the worldwide web.

Online-only colleges and career schools have flourished, and traditional ground-based universities are moving courses and degree programs onto the Internet.  It’s now possible to earn a degree from an accredited college without ever setting foot on campus, and more people enroll every year.

Evidence of Growth

The Sloan Consortium, a non-profit foundation, conducts yearly surveys investigating online education. Their most recent report captured the online learning landscape as it stood in 2007-2008, revealing that

• 20% of all US college students were studying online at least part-time in 2007;
• 3.9 million students were taking at least one online course during Fall 2007, a growth rate of 12% on the previous year;
• This growth rate is much faster than the overall higher education growth rate of 1.2%.

Higher Education: Meeting The Need For A Skilled Workforce

Higher education in general has grown greatly. Census data shows that in 1980, only 32% of US adults under 25 had earned a degree or completed any college coursework. By 2000, this number had jumped to 52%. Prosperity has played a role in this growth: as median incomes have risen over the past several decades, more people have been able to afford to send their children to college. Political support for putting people into college education, via Federal funding such as Pell Grants and loans, has also helped increase access to higher education.

However, the main driver behind the increase in higher education is the huge change in the overall economy of the US over the last fifty years. Changes in technology and globalization of the economy means the once-large manufacturing base of the United States has dwindled. Those jobs accounted for 40% of workers in 1950, but by 2000 had shrunk to include only 18% of the workforce. Most workers are now employed by the service sector, where more specialized skills are often a necessary requirement for finding a job. As a result, some post-secondary education is now seen as critical for workplace viability by a majority of the population.

Online Education: Meeting The Needs of the Skilled Workforce

And a majority of the population is now online: in 1997, less than 20% of US households had Internet access. By 2007, that percentage had grown to 61.7%. Internet access took only 7 years to reach 25% of US households, compared with 35 years for the television and 46 for household electricity. As with music, television, and newspapers, higher education needs to move to where the people are if it wants to expand its user base. Also, traditional campuses are having trouble maintaining facilities that meet the growing college population’s needs.  While the cost savings of running an online degree program aren’t tremendous (or at least aren’t a driving concern for university officials), it’s generally easier for colleges to move programs online than it is for them to build extensions to their campuses.

The sagging economy has also been good for online education.  The Sloan Consortium’s findings revealed that many institutions expect more working adults to turn to continuing education to build new skills or enhance existing ones to better their chances in the job marketplace, and also to avoid paying higher fuel costs as commuter students.

This is probably a safe bet: nearly 90 million adults participate in some form of continuing education every year even during good times, according to Census data. The convenience of being able to complete a degree without giving up employment makes online education attractive to working adults. As those adults strive to continue earning, they’ll want to continue learning.

Original Source:   http://www.edarticle.com/article.php?id=1125