DealBook Column: Relationship Science Plans Database of Names and Connections

It sounds like a Rolodex for the 1 percent: two million deal makers, power brokers and business executives — not only their names, but in many cases the names of their spouses and children and associates, their political donations, their charity work and more — all at a banker’s fingertips.

Such is the promise of a new company called Relationship Science.

Never heard of it? Until recently, neither had I. But a few months ago, whispers began that this young company was assembling a vast trove of information about big names in corporate America. What really piqued my interest was that bankrolling this start-up were some Wall Street heavyweights, including Henry R. Kravis, Ronald O. Perelman, Kenneth G. Langone, Joseph R. Perella, Stanley F. Druckenmiller and Andrew Tisch.

It turns out that over the last two years, with a staff of more than 800 people, mostly in India, Relationship Science has been quietly building what it hopes will be the ultimate business Who’s Who. If it succeeds, it could radically change the way Wall Street does business.

That’s a big if, of course. There are plenty of other databases out there. And there’s always Google. Normally I wouldn’t write about a technology company, but I kept hearing chatter about it from people on Wall Street.

Then I got a glimpse of this new system. Forget six degrees of Kevin Bacon. This is six degrees of Henry Kravis.

Here’s how it works: Let’s say a banker wants to get in touch with Mr. Kravis, the private equity deal maker, but doesn’t know him personally. The banker can type Mr. Kravis’s name into a Relationship Science search bar, and the system will scan personal contacts for people the banker knows who also know Mr. Kravis, or perhaps secondary or tertiary connections.

The system shows how the searcher is connected — perhaps a friend, or a friend of a friend, is on a charitable board — and also grades the quality of those connections by identifying them as “strong,” “average” or “weak.” You will be surprised at the many ways the database finds connections.

The major innovation is that, unlike Facebook or LinkedIn, it doesn’t matter if people have signed up for the service. Many business leaders aren’t on Facebook or LinkedIn, but Relationship Science doesn’t rely on user-generated content. It just scrapes the Web.

Relationship Science is the brainchild of Neal Goldman, a co-founder of CapitalIQ, a financial database service that is used by many Wall Street firms. Mr. Goldman sold CapitalIQ, which has 4,200 clients worldwide, to McGraw-Hill in 2004 for more than $200 million. That may explain why he was able to easily round up about $60 million in funds for Relationship Science from many boldface names in finance. He raised the first $6 million in three days.

“I knew there had to be a better way,” Mr. Goldman said about the way people search out others. Most people use Google to learn about people and ask friends and colleagues if they or someone they know can provide an introduction.

Relationship Science essentially does this automatically. It will even show you every connection you have to a specific company or organization.

“We live in a service economy,” Mr. Goldman said. “Building relationships is the most important part for selling and growing.”

Kenneth Langone, a financier and co-founder in Home Depot, said that when he saw a demonstration of the system he nearly fell off his chair. He used an unprintable four-letter word.

“My life is all about networking,” said Mr. Langone, who was so enthusiastic he became an investor and recently joined the board of Relationship Science. “How many times do I say, ‘How do I get to this guy?’ It is scary how much it helps.”

Mr. Goldman’s version of networking isn’t for everyone. His company charges $3,000 a year for a person to have access to the site. (That might sound expensive, but by Wall Street standards, it’s not.)

Price aside, the possibility that this system could lead to a deal or to a new wealth management client means it just might pay for itself.

“If you get one extra deal, the price is irrelevant,” Mr. Goldman said.

Apparently, his sales pitch is working. Already, some big financial firms have signed up for the service, which is still in a test phase. Investment bankers, wealth managers, private equity and venture capital investors have been trying to arrange meetings to see it, egged on, no doubt, by many of Mr. Goldman’s well-heeled investors. Even some development offices of charities have taken an interest.

The system I had a peek at was still a bit buggy. In some cases, it was missing information; in other cases the information was outdated. In still other instances, the program missed connections. For example, it didn’t seem to notice that Lloyd C. Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs, should obviously know a certain senior partner at Goldman.

But the promise is there, if the initial kinks are worked out. I discovered I had paths I never knew existed to certain people or companies. (Mr. Goldman should market his product to reporters, too.)

One of the most vexing and perhaps unusual choices Mr. Goldman seems to have made with Relationship Science is to omit what would be truly valuable information: phone numbers and e-mail addresses.

Mr. Goldman explained the decision. “This isn’t about spamming people.” He said supplying phone numbers wouldn’t offer any value because people don’t like being cold-called, which he said was the antithesis of the purpose of his database.

Ultimately, he said, as valuable as the technology can be in discovering the path to a relationship, an artful introduction is what really counts.

“We bring the science,” he said. “You bring the art.”

A version of this article appeared in print on 02/12/2013, on page B1 of the NewYork edition with the headline: A Database Of Names, And How They Connect.

Read More..

Report Faults Priorities in Breast Cancer Research

Too little of the money the federal government spends on breast cancer research goes toward finding environmental causes of the disease and ways to prevent it, according to a new report from a group of scientists, government officials and patient advocates established by Congress to examine the research.

The report, “Breast Cancer and the Environment — Prioritizing Prevention,” published on Tuesday, focuses on environmental factors, which it defines broadly to include behaviors, like alcohol intake and exercise; exposures to chemicals like pesticides, industrial pollutants, consumer products and drugs; radiation; and social and socioeconomic factors.

The 270-page report notes that scientists have long known that genetic and environmental factors contribute individually and also interact with one another to affect breast cancer risk. Studies of women who have moved from Japan to the United States, for instance, show that their breast cancer risk increases to match that of American women. Their genetics have not changed, so something in the environment must be having an effect. But what? Not much is known about exactly what the environmental factors are or how they affect the breast.

“We know things like radiation might cause breast cancer, but we don’t know much that we can say specifically causes breast cancer in terms of chemicals,” said Michael Gould, a professor of oncology at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and a co-chairman of the 23-member committee that prepared the report.

At the two federal agencies that spend the most on breast cancer, only about 10 percent of the research in recent years involved environment and prevention. From 2008 to 2010, the National Institutes of Health spent $357 million on environmental and prevention-related research in breast cancer, about 16 percent of all the financing for the disease. From 2006 to 2010, the Department of Defense spent $52.2 million on prevention-oriented research, about 8.6 percent of the money devoted to breast cancer. Those proportions were too low, the group said, though it declined to say what the level should be.

“We’re hedging on that on purpose,” Dr. Gould said. “It wasn’t the role of the committee to suggest how much.”

He added, “We’re saying: ‘We’re not getting the job done. We don’t have the money to get the job done.’ The government will have to figure out what we need.”

Jeanne Rizzo, another member of the committee and a member of the Breast Cancer Fund, an advocacy group, said there was an urgent need to study and regulate chemical exposures and inform the public about potential risks. “We’re extending life with breast cancer, making it a chronic disease, but we’re not preventing it,” she said.

“We have to look at early life exposures, in utero, childhood, puberty, pregnancy and lactation,” Ms. Rizzo said. “Those are the periods when you get set up for breast cancer. How does a pregnant woman protect her child? How do we create policy so that she doesn’t have to be a toxicologist when she goes shopping?”

Michele Forman, a co-chairwoman of the committee and an epidemiologist and professor of nutritional sciences at the University of Texas, Austin, said the group found that breast cancer research at various government agencies was not well coordinated and that it was difficult to determine whether there was duplication of efforts.

She said that it was essential to study how environmental exposures at different times of life affected breast-cancer risk, and that certain animals were good models for human breast cancer and should be used more.

The report is the result of the Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act, which was passed in 2008 and required the secretary of health and human services to create a committee to study breast cancer research. A third of the members were scientists, a third were from government and a third were from advocacy groups. The advocates, Dr. Forman said, brought a sense of urgency to the group

“People who are not survivors need to have that urgency there,” she said.

Pointing to the vaccine now being offered to girls to prevent cervical cancer, Dr. Forman said, “I look forward to the day when we have an early preventive strategy for breast cancer.”

Read More..

Report Faults Priorities in Breast Cancer Research

Too little of the money the federal government spends on breast cancer research goes toward finding environmental causes of the disease and ways to prevent it, according to a new report from a group of scientists, government officials and patient advocates established by Congress to examine the research.

The report, “Breast Cancer and the Environment — Prioritizing Prevention,” published on Tuesday, focuses on environmental factors, which it defines broadly to include behaviors, like alcohol intake and exercise; exposures to chemicals like pesticides, industrial pollutants, consumer products and drugs; radiation; and social and socioeconomic factors.

The 270-page report notes that scientists have long known that genetic and environmental factors contribute individually and also interact with one another to affect breast cancer risk. Studies of women who have moved from Japan to the United States, for instance, show that their breast cancer risk increases to match that of American women. Their genetics have not changed, so something in the environment must be having an effect. But what? Not much is known about exactly what the environmental factors are or how they affect the breast.

“We know things like radiation might cause breast cancer, but we don’t know much that we can say specifically causes breast cancer in terms of chemicals,” said Michael Gould, a professor of oncology at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and a co-chairman of the 23-member committee that prepared the report.

At the two federal agencies that spend the most on breast cancer, only about 10 percent of the research in recent years involved environment and prevention. From 2008 to 2010, the National Institutes of Health spent $357 million on environmental and prevention-related research in breast cancer, about 16 percent of all the financing for the disease. From 2006 to 2010, the Department of Defense spent $52.2 million on prevention-oriented research, about 8.6 percent of the money devoted to breast cancer. Those proportions were too low, the group said, though it declined to say what the level should be.

“We’re hedging on that on purpose,” Dr. Gould said. “It wasn’t the role of the committee to suggest how much.”

He added, “We’re saying: ‘We’re not getting the job done. We don’t have the money to get the job done.’ The government will have to figure out what we need.”

Jeanne Rizzo, another member of the committee and a member of the Breast Cancer Fund, an advocacy group, said there was an urgent need to study and regulate chemical exposures and inform the public about potential risks. “We’re extending life with breast cancer, making it a chronic disease, but we’re not preventing it,” she said.

“We have to look at early life exposures, in utero, childhood, puberty, pregnancy and lactation,” Ms. Rizzo said. “Those are the periods when you get set up for breast cancer. How does a pregnant woman protect her child? How do we create policy so that she doesn’t have to be a toxicologist when she goes shopping?”

Michele Forman, a co-chairwoman of the committee and an epidemiologist and professor of nutritional sciences at the University of Texas, Austin, said the group found that breast cancer research at various government agencies was not well coordinated and that it was difficult to determine whether there was duplication of efforts.

She said that it was essential to study how environmental exposures at different times of life affected breast-cancer risk, and that certain animals were good models for human breast cancer and should be used more.

The report is the result of the Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act, which was passed in 2008 and required the secretary of health and human services to create a committee to study breast cancer research. A third of the members were scientists, a third were from government and a third were from advocacy groups. The advocates, Dr. Forman said, brought a sense of urgency to the group

“People who are not survivors need to have that urgency there,” she said.

Pointing to the vaccine now being offered to girls to prevent cervical cancer, Dr. Forman said, “I look forward to the day when we have an early preventive strategy for breast cancer.”

Read More..

Finmeccanica Chief Is Arrested in Bribery Case

Italy awoke Tuesday to yet another corporate scandal with political overtones, as Milan prosecutors arrested the head of the state-controlled aerospace company Finmeccanica in an investigation related to the sale of 12 helicopters to India in 2010.

The Finmeccanica chairman and chief executive, Giuseppe Orsi, was taken in for questioning by prosecutors, as was Bruno Spagnolini, head of Finmeccanica’s Augusta Westland helicopter unit. Prosecutors also raided the Augusta Westland corporate offices in Milan.

The investigation is focused on whether company executives violated bribery and corruption laws in seeking the helicopter deal with the Indian military.

Prime Minister Mario Monti said Tuesday that the government — owner of a 30 percent stake in Finmeccanica – was prepared to do whatever necessary to clean up the company, the second-largest industrial group in Italy after Fiat.

“There is a problem with the governance of Finmeccanica at the moment and we will face up to it," Reuters quoted Mr. Monti as saying on RAI television.

Finmeccanica said Tuesday that “the operating activities and ongoing projects of the company will continue as usual.” In addition, the company expressed “support for its chairman and C.E.O., with the hope that clarity is established quickly,” while “reaffirming its confidence in the judges.”

The Indian Defense Ministry said in a statement that in “view of media reports” linking it with Finmeccanica’s Augusta Westland unit in Britain, it “had sought information” from the Italian and British governments, but that “no specific inputs” were received substantiating the allegations. The ministry said it was referring the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation, the Indian agency responsible for investigating corruption cases.

Italian press reports said two others, residents of Switzerland, were being sought by Milan prosecutors on suspicion that they had acted as middlemen.

A spokeswoman for Finmeccanica in London, Clare Roberts, declined to comment beyond the company’s official statement.

Prosecutors could not immediately be reached for comment.

Consob, the Italian stock market regulator, banned short selling of Finmeccanica shares for Tuesday and Wednesday, after the company's shares fell more than 10 percent in early trading.

The news was first reported by the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera.

With national elections just two weeks away, the Italian establishment has been unnerved recently by a series of high-profile corporate investigations.

In one, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena, a Tuscan bank, has acknowledged using secret derivatives deals to mask hundreds of millions of euros in losses.

That investigation has focused attention on the role played by the Bank of Italy and its then-chairman, Mario Draghi, who is now president of the European Central Bank.

It has also given the former prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, an issue with which to attack his political enemies as he angles for a comeback. The bank is based in Siena, in a part of northern Italy that is a stronghold of the leftist Democratic Party. Mr. Berlusconi, the conservative former prime minister who hopes to be a spoiler in the elections this month, has been trying to lay blame for the scandal at the Democratic Party’s doorstep.

Mr. Draghi asserted last week that the Bank of Italy had “done everything it should” with respect to the bank, adding that much of the criticism was “part of the regular noise that elections produce.”

In another case, Eni, the country’s biggest oil company, said last week that Milan prosecutors had expanded an investigation of alleged corruption at one of its subsidiries, Saipem, to include the parent company and its chief executive, Paolo Scaroni.

In a country that is rarely held up as a technological leader, Finmeccanica’s trendsetting AgustaWestland helicopter division and Alenia Aermacchi aeronautics unit are sources of national pride. Finmeccanica is among the world’s largest aerospace, defense and security companies, employing 70,000 people worldwide and reporting first-half 2012 revenue of about €8 billion, or about $10.7 billion.

Since taking over in May 2011, Mr. Orsi has sought to restore investor confidence by cutting debt and selling off nonstrategic operations, but the restructuring has lagged behind market hopes. On Jan. 18, Standard & Poor’s cut Finmeccanica’s credit rating to junk status and said the outlook was negative, citing the company’s failure to reduce its debt more quickly.

Mr. Orsi’s problems mark just the latest troubling chapter for Finmeccanica. He took over in May 2011 after his predecessor, Pier Francesco Guarguaglini, was himself felled by allegations involving the role of his wife, Marina Grossi, while she was chief executive of Finmeccanica’s Selex unit.

Reporting was contributed by Hari Kumar in New Delhi, Elisabetta Povoledo in Rome and Jack Ewing in Frankfurt.

Read More..

The Lede: Latest Updates on Pope's Resignation

The Lede is providing updates on Pope Benedict XVI’s announcement on Monday that he intends to resign on Feb. 28, less than eight years after he took office, the first pope to do so in six centuries.

Read More..

Gadgetwise Blog: Q.& A.: Checking a PC's Graphics Card

How can I tell how much memory I have for graphics and video on my Windows 7 PC?

You can check out the video card your computer uses by going to the Start menu to Control Panel, selecting Appearance and Personalization and clicking on “Adjust screen resolution.” If you want a quicker way to get the same Control Panel, just right-click on the Windows desktop and select Screen Resolution.

Once you land in the Screen Resolution box, click the link for Advanced Settings. When the Advanced Settings box appears, click the Adapter tab to see more information about your computer’s video card, including the make, model and the amount of available memory it has.

Some desktop computers — especially those designed for gaming and other video-intensive activities — may have a dedicated or “discrete” video card installed inside the machine. Laptops and more modest desktop machines tend to use integrated graphics processors built into the computer’s motherboard that typically share some of the overall system memory.

Upgrading a laptop’s graphics card is difficult (if not impossible) depending on the model and the motherboard, but many desktop computers can be upgraded. Microsoft has a guide to upgrading a graphics card in a Windows 7 computer that outlines the process.

Read More..

Well: Getting the Right Addiction Treatment

“Treatment is not a prerequisite to surviving addiction.” This bold statement opens the treatment chapter in a helpful new book, “Now What? An Insider’s Guide to Addiction and Recovery,” by William Cope Moyers, a man who nonetheless needed “four intense treatment experiences over five years” before he broke free of alcohol and drugs.

As the son of Judith and Bill Moyers, successful parents who watched helplessly during a 15-year pursuit of oblivion through alcohol and drugs, William Moyers said his near-fatal battle with addiction demonstrates that this “illness of the mind, body and spirit” has no respect for status or opportunity.

“My parents raised me to become anything I wanted, but when it came to this chronic incurable illness, I couldn’t get on top of it by myself,” he said in an interview.

He finally emerged from his drug-induced nadir when he gave up “trying to do it my way” and instead listened to professional therapists and assumed responsibility for his behavior. For the last “18 years and four months, one day at a time,” he said, he has lived drug-free.

“Treatment is not the end, it’s the beginning,” he said. “My problem was not drinking or drugs. My problem was learning how to live life without drinking or drugs.”

Mr. Moyers acknowledges that treatment is not a magic bullet. Even after a monthlong stay at a highly reputable treatment center like Hazelden in Center City, Minn., where Mr. Moyers is a vice president of public affairs and community relations, the probability of remaining sober and clean a year later is only about 55 percent.

“Be wary of any program that claims a 100 percent success rate,” Mr. Moyers warned. “There is no such thing.”

“Treatment works to make recovery possible. But recovery is also possible without treatment,” Mr. Moyers said. “There’s no one-size-fits-all approach. What I needed and what worked for me isn’t necessarily what you or your loved one require.”

As with many smokers who must make multiple attempts to quit before finally overcoming an addiction to nicotine, people hooked on alcohol or drugs often must try and try again.

Nor does treatment have as good a chance at succeeding if it is forced upon a person who is not ready to recover. “Treatment does work, but only if the person wants it to,” Mr. Moyers said.

Routes to Success

For those who need a structured program, Mr. Moyers described what to consider to maximize the chances of overcoming addiction to alcohol or drugs.

Most important is to get a thorough assessment before deciding where to go for help. Do you or your loved one meet the criteria for substance dependence? Are there “co-occurring mental illnesses, traumatic or physical disabilities, socioeconomic influences, cultural issues, or family dynamics” that may be complicating the addiction and that can sabotage treatment success?

While most reputable treatment centers do a full assessment before admitting someone, it is important to know if the center or clinic provides the services of professionals who can address any underlying issues revealed by the assessment. For example, if needed, is a psychiatrist or other medical doctor available who could provide therapy and prescribe medication?

Is there a social worker on staff to address challenging family, occupational or other living problems? If a recovering addict goes home to the same problems that precipitated the dependence on alcohol or drugs, the chances of remaining sober or drug-free are greatly reduced.

Is there a program for family members who can participate with the addict in learning the essentials of recovery and how to prepare for the return home once treatment ends?

Finally, does the program offer aftercare and follow-up services? Addiction is now recognized to be a chronic illness that lurks indefinitely within an addict in recovery. As with other chronic ailments, like diabetes or hypertension, lasting control requires hard work and diligence. One slip need not result in a return to abuse, and a good program will help addicts who have completed treatment cope effectively with future challenges to their recovery.

How Families Can Help

“Addiction is a family illness,” Mr. Moyers wrote. Families suffer when someone they love descends into the purgatory of addiction. But contrary to the belief that families should cut off contact with addicts and allow them to reach “rock-bottom” before they can begin recovery, Mr. Moyers said that the bottom is sometimes death.

“It is a dangerous, though popular, misconception that a sick addict can only quit using and start to get well when he ‘hits bottom,’ that is, reaches a point at which he is desperate enough to willingly accept help,” Mr. Moyers wrote.

Rather, he urged families to remain engaged, to keep open the lines of communication and regularly remind the addict of their love and willingness to help if and when help is wanted. But, he added, families must also set firm boundaries — no money, no car, nothing that can be quickly converted into the substance of abuse.

Whether or not the addict ever gets well, Mr. Moyers said, “families have to take care of themselves. They can’t let the addict walk over their lives.”

Sometimes families or friends of an addict decide to do an intervention, confronting the addict with what they see happening and urging the person to seek help, often providing possible therapeutic contacts.

“An intervention can be the key that interrupts the process and enables the addict to recognize the extent of their illness and the need to take responsibility for their behavior,”Mr. Moyers said.

But for an intervention to work, Mr. Moyers said, “the sick person should not be belittled or demeaned.” He also cautioned families to “avoid threats.” He noted that the mind of “the desperate, fearful addict” is subsumed by drugs and alcohol that strip it of logic, empathy and understanding. It “can’t process your threat any better than it can a tearful, emotional plea.”

Resource Network

Mr. Moyer’s book lists nearly two dozen sources of help for addicts and their families. Among them:

Alcoholics Anonymous World Services www.aa.org;

Narcotics Anonymous World Services www.na.org;

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration treatment finder www.samhsa.gov/treatment/;

Al-Anon Family Groups www.Al-anon.alateen.org;

Nar-Anon Family Groups www.nar-anon.org;

Co-Dependents Anonymous World Fellowship www.coda.org.

---

This is the second of two articles on addiction treatment. The first can be found here.

Read More..

Well: Getting the Right Addiction Treatment

“Treatment is not a prerequisite to surviving addiction.” This bold statement opens the treatment chapter in a helpful new book, “Now What? An Insider’s Guide to Addiction and Recovery,” by William Cope Moyers, a man who nonetheless needed “four intense treatment experiences over five years” before he broke free of alcohol and drugs.

As the son of Judith and Bill Moyers, successful parents who watched helplessly during a 15-year pursuit of oblivion through alcohol and drugs, William Moyers said his near-fatal battle with addiction demonstrates that this “illness of the mind, body and spirit” has no respect for status or opportunity.

“My parents raised me to become anything I wanted, but when it came to this chronic incurable illness, I couldn’t get on top of it by myself,” he said in an interview.

He finally emerged from his drug-induced nadir when he gave up “trying to do it my way” and instead listened to professional therapists and assumed responsibility for his behavior. For the last “18 years and four months, one day at a time,” he said, he has lived drug-free.

“Treatment is not the end, it’s the beginning,” he said. “My problem was not drinking or drugs. My problem was learning how to live life without drinking or drugs.”

Mr. Moyers acknowledges that treatment is not a magic bullet. Even after a monthlong stay at a highly reputable treatment center like Hazelden in Center City, Minn., where Mr. Moyers is a vice president of public affairs and community relations, the probability of remaining sober and clean a year later is only about 55 percent.

“Be wary of any program that claims a 100 percent success rate,” Mr. Moyers warned. “There is no such thing.”

“Treatment works to make recovery possible. But recovery is also possible without treatment,” Mr. Moyers said. “There’s no one-size-fits-all approach. What I needed and what worked for me isn’t necessarily what you or your loved one require.”

As with many smokers who must make multiple attempts to quit before finally overcoming an addiction to nicotine, people hooked on alcohol or drugs often must try and try again.

Nor does treatment have as good a chance at succeeding if it is forced upon a person who is not ready to recover. “Treatment does work, but only if the person wants it to,” Mr. Moyers said.

Routes to Success

For those who need a structured program, Mr. Moyers described what to consider to maximize the chances of overcoming addiction to alcohol or drugs.

Most important is to get a thorough assessment before deciding where to go for help. Do you or your loved one meet the criteria for substance dependence? Are there “co-occurring mental illnesses, traumatic or physical disabilities, socioeconomic influences, cultural issues, or family dynamics” that may be complicating the addiction and that can sabotage treatment success?

While most reputable treatment centers do a full assessment before admitting someone, it is important to know if the center or clinic provides the services of professionals who can address any underlying issues revealed by the assessment. For example, if needed, is a psychiatrist or other medical doctor available who could provide therapy and prescribe medication?

Is there a social worker on staff to address challenging family, occupational or other living problems? If a recovering addict goes home to the same problems that precipitated the dependence on alcohol or drugs, the chances of remaining sober or drug-free are greatly reduced.

Is there a program for family members who can participate with the addict in learning the essentials of recovery and how to prepare for the return home once treatment ends?

Finally, does the program offer aftercare and follow-up services? Addiction is now recognized to be a chronic illness that lurks indefinitely within an addict in recovery. As with other chronic ailments, like diabetes or hypertension, lasting control requires hard work and diligence. One slip need not result in a return to abuse, and a good program will help addicts who have completed treatment cope effectively with future challenges to their recovery.

How Families Can Help

“Addiction is a family illness,” Mr. Moyers wrote. Families suffer when someone they love descends into the purgatory of addiction. But contrary to the belief that families should cut off contact with addicts and allow them to reach “rock-bottom” before they can begin recovery, Mr. Moyers said that the bottom is sometimes death.

“It is a dangerous, though popular, misconception that a sick addict can only quit using and start to get well when he ‘hits bottom,’ that is, reaches a point at which he is desperate enough to willingly accept help,” Mr. Moyers wrote.

Rather, he urged families to remain engaged, to keep open the lines of communication and regularly remind the addict of their love and willingness to help if and when help is wanted. But, he added, families must also set firm boundaries — no money, no car, nothing that can be quickly converted into the substance of abuse.

Whether or not the addict ever gets well, Mr. Moyers said, “families have to take care of themselves. They can’t let the addict walk over their lives.”

Sometimes families or friends of an addict decide to do an intervention, confronting the addict with what they see happening and urging the person to seek help, often providing possible therapeutic contacts.

“An intervention can be the key that interrupts the process and enables the addict to recognize the extent of their illness and the need to take responsibility for their behavior,”Mr. Moyers said.

But for an intervention to work, Mr. Moyers said, “the sick person should not be belittled or demeaned.” He also cautioned families to “avoid threats.” He noted that the mind of “the desperate, fearful addict” is subsumed by drugs and alcohol that strip it of logic, empathy and understanding. It “can’t process your threat any better than it can a tearful, emotional plea.”

Resource Network

Mr. Moyer’s book lists nearly two dozen sources of help for addicts and their families. Among them:

Alcoholics Anonymous World Services www.aa.org;

Narcotics Anonymous World Services www.na.org;

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration treatment finder www.samhsa.gov/treatment/;

Al-Anon Family Groups www.Al-anon.alateen.org;

Nar-Anon Family Groups www.nar-anon.org;

Co-Dependents Anonymous World Fellowship www.coda.org.

---

This is the second of two articles on addiction treatment. The first can be found here.

Read More..

DealBook: S.E.C.'s Revolving Door Hurts Its Effectiveness, Report Says

Robert S. Khuzami took a step through Washington’s revolving door on Friday, departing his post as one of Wall Street’s top enforcers en route to the private sector, where he is expected to reap millions.

A new report suggests that Mr. Khuzami, like other Securities and Exchange Commission officials who pass between Washington and Wall Street, will be well worth the pay.

The Project on Government Oversight, or POGO, a nonprofit watchdog group long critical of the revolving door, is set to release a study on Monday highlighting a pattern of S.E.C. alumni going to bat for Wall Street firms — and winning. The report, similarly skeptical of Wall Street lawyers joining the S.E.C., cites recent enforcement cases and scuttled money market regulations to underscore its concerns.

“Former employees of the Securities and Exchange Commission routinely help corporations try to influence S.E.C. rule-making, counter the agency’s investigations of suspected wrongdoing, soften the blow of S.E.C. enforcement actions, block shareholder proposals and win exemptions from federal law,” the report says.

By way of example, it says that in three cases against UBS, after enforcement actions threatened to limit the giant Swiss bank’s ability to issue new securities, the bank hired former S.E.C. lawyers. Each time, the report says, the agency granted relief. (The S.E.C. has defended such decisions as being in the best interest of investors, who might suffer if an otherwise stable bank was suddenly unable to sell securities.)

The watchdog report provides only anecdotal evidence of bias and does concede that the S.E.C. adopted checks on influence peddling. Nonetheless, it raises questions about the rising consequences of the revolving door.

Even as Mr. Khuzami is leaving as the S.E.C.’s enforcement chief, President Obama recently named Mary Jo White as his choice to run the agency. Ms. White is a former federal prosecutor who built a lucrative legal practice defending Wall Street executives.

The POGO report’s findings were based on interviews with current and former S.E.C. officials and thousands of federal records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. It is the second major report the group has issued on the topic, and it comes on the heels of other research yielding mixed conclusions about the importance of the revolving door.

The Government Accountability Office issued a report in 2011 chastising the S.E.C. for failing to keep track of ethics advice the agency gives past and current employees, which the report argued could minimize postemployment conflicts of interest. The study, which described the S.E.C.’s policies as being consistent with those of other agencies, did go on to note that the financial system might benefit from the agency hiring outsiders well versed in Wall Street minutiae.

In a study last year, a group of accounting experts concluded that, contrary to public concerns, the revolving door actually toughened enforcement results. S.E.C. lawyers enforce a hard line at the agency, that study said, partly to showcase their investigative prowess to future employers.

The accounting professors’ study lent support to the S.E.C.’s argument that it goes to great lengths to prevent conflicts of interest. Mr. Khuzami, who has not announced his next job, will face at least a one-year “cooling off” period preventing him from lobbying the S.E.C. on behalf of a client. For an additional year, he must file certain documentation with the S.E.C. before facing off with the agency.

S.E.C. officials have also argued that despite Mr. Khuzami’s Wall Street résumé — he served as a top lawyer for Deutsche Bank — he oversaw one of the most aggressive periods of prosecution in the agency’s history. He revamped the agency’s enforcement unit in the wake of the financial crisis, the officials noted, and took aim at Wall Street giants like Goldman Sachs.

“We follow governmentwide regulations and laws that deter conflicts and ensure impartiality,” John Nester, the agency’s spokesman, said in an e-mail. “We decide issues on their merits according to the rules and regulations governing the securities industry regardless of whether the requesters have an S.E.C. background or not.”

For decades, lawyers have passed through the revolving door on their way to government posts and back again.

The POGO report found that from 2001 through 2010, 419 alumni of the S.E.C. filed almost 2,000 disclosure forms saying they planned to represent an employer or client before the agency. William R. Baker III, a former associate director of enforcement and now a lawyer at Latham & Watkins, was the top filer, submitting 46 notices.

The report also found that former employees had helped companies avoid certain penalties and thwart regulatory initiatives, including an effort by Mary L. Schapiro, then its chairwoman, to reform money market funds, a sector central to the financial crisis. The report noted that former S.E.C. employees had lobbied to block the plan, and added that Luis Aguilar, an S.E.C. commissioner who previously was an executive at Invesco, a money management firm, played a role in “derailing” Ms. Schapiro’s effort.

The watchdog group was also critical of last year’s study by accounting researchers who found that S.E.C. actions were not harmed but strengthened by the revolving door.

That study, POGO said in its report, looked at “only a sliver” of the S.E.C.’s work. “They did not examine, for instance, how the revolving door affects the S.E.C.’s regulation of Wall Street, its granting of relief to specific companies, its handling of cases related to the financial crisis or its decisions to drop investigations without bringing charges.”

Shivaram Rajgopal of Emory University, the lead author of the accounting group’s study, defended its findings, saying it spanned 17 years. He added that while it did not include the financial crisis, it did look at investigations like the one into Enron, the energy company that filed for bankruptcy in 2001 amid an accounting scandal.

“Studies by definition are limited,” he added.

The new report from the watchdog group may be a topic at a New York City Bar Association panel on the revolving door scheduled for Tuesday in New York, a debate for which Mr. Khuzami was initially scheduled. On Friday, Mr. Khuzami caused a stir among some fellow panelists when he withdrew, citing a “conflict.”

Mr. Khuzami later clarified it was a scheduling conflict, not a conflict of interest.

A version of this article appeared in print on 02/11/2013, on page B1 of the NewYork edition with the headline: S.E.C.’s Revolving Door Hurts Its Effectiveness, Report Says.

Read More..

IHT Rendezvous: Meditations on the F1 Season to Come - and on 20 Seasons Run

PARIS — The 2013 Formula One season has not really begun. The first race takes place March 17 in Melbourne. But with the launches of the new cars and the first four days of test sessions ending Friday, the seeds have been planted. What kind of plant will grow is not easy to figure out.

I have been observing from the sidelines for a couple of weeks, watching the fanfare of the car launches — or rather, the lack of fanfare — and watching the lap-by-lap action on the track in Jerez, Spain. Every day I’ve asked myself, what is really new this year? The cars, most of them, are merely the technical evolutions of last year’s cars.

They all look fairly similar — although some, thank goodness, have smoothed out that ugly nose problem of last season. There is good reason for the familiarity; the technical regulations haven’t changed much since last season. The big changes will all occur next year, especially with the change in the engine specifications.

It is common knowledge within Formula One and to most fans that the first winter test sessions of the new cars reveal and mean very little. The engineers are not forced into running their cars to racing specifications, and they can test parts that would be deemed illegal in a race. They can run on low fuel to get great results to attract sponsors, or they can sandbag — run heavy with lots of fuel and ballast — to hide how fast their cars are to the competition.

That said, the tests often do give an idea of who is strong, and who is not. Last year, Ferrari was clearly off the pace — by 1.6 seconds, no less — and that weighed on the Italian team for the whole season. The Lotus was fast, though, and that showed early in the season too. So what about the last four days?

None of it seemed to make sense: Jenson Button started the first session as the fastest car in the McLaren Mercedes, setting his fastest time on the hard tires, which raises the question of how well he will do when racing on the faster soft tires.

Days later, when Felipe Massa was the fastest car of the day, in a Ferrari, still moaned about the speed of Button’s lap, even though it was slower than his. But it all had to do with tires and track conditions. Then there was the Lotus, with Romain Grosjean setting a fastest lap, and then Kimi Raikkonen doing the same.The new Toro Rosso car and the Force India team also posted amazingly fast laps.

Lewis Hamilton’s made his first test as part of the Mercedes team. Many people had criticized him for changing teams while he was secure in his seat at McLaren. Hamilton ended up running off the track with broken brakes after his first few laps. But he came back strongly and left the session on Friday smiling.

All these developments did add up to a conclusion, despite the story seeming to change every day. The story this season may well change from one race to another, one session to another, as it did the first part of last season.

The cars are currently so closely aligned — except for the ones like the Marussia and the Caterham, the smaller teams — that there could be a lot of shifting around of the powers that be.

If that’s the case, we’re in for another great and interesting season. On the other hand, this was just the first winter test session, and we have two more to go, starting with the one in Barcelona Feb. 19.

Another development in Formula One that gave me pause came in another venue entirely: in American journalism.

I’m talking about an 8,152-word article in the Feb. 4 issue of The New Yorker all about Formula One. “The Art of Speed; Bringing Formula One to America,” by Ben McGrath, is a well-written and entertaining, but surface-scratching story introducing Formula One to American readers.

I thoroughly enjoyed it, and felt stimulated seeing the high-brow literary colossus giving this much space and interest to the sport I have been covering for so many years for the International Herald Tribune and The New York Times. One of the things that intrigued me was that The New Yorker story read like a beginner’s guide to F1 — unlike, for instance, The Economist or other major publications that rarely cover the sport, but that when they do tend to be reporting on some kind of scandal.

It was, as the title suggested, an introduction to this sport that has never pierced the American consciousness the way other forms of auto racing — like Nascar — have, probably simply because there are no American heroes involved in it today.

On the other hand, like the season testing, it also left me wondering just how often Formula One has to be introduced in the United States after a history that goes back more than 60 years, and two Formula One world champion American drivers, one of whom is named Mario Andretti.

I’d say the article in The New Yorker is a pretty big step in that direction.

Of course, the topic of F1 and journalism reminded me that 2013 marks the 20th anniversary of my own beginning covering the sport for the International Herald Tribune. I published my first story in the paper on the series: Grand Prix Racing: 1993 Is Shaping Up Great Despite FISA

Read More..