性爱大师

一 |     

    Illustration: Xia Qing/GT
The yen has weakened in recent days, edging closer to the psychologically important 160 level against the US dollar. The decline comes despite the widely watched move by Washington to join Tokyo in supporting the currency. Less than two weeks after the US-Japan intervention, the yen has given up roughly half of its gains, raising fresh questions over the effectiveness of coordinated efforts to stabilize the exchange rate.
Japan and the US had previously confirmed coordinated foreign exchange intervention to prop up the yen after the currency tumbled to a nearly 40-year low. At the time, some observers saw the move as potentially stabilizing the yen in the short term, although its longer-term impact remained uncertain. 
However, the subsequent market reaction suggests that even the short-term effect may have been limited. After strengthening to about 155 per dollar in the days following the intervention from above 163, the yen had slipped back above 159 by Wednesday, less than two weeks later.
Questions have emerged over whether further support for the yen may soon be needed, and whether Washington would consider stepping in again. The previous intervention was seen by some observers as a test of market confidence: the unusual coordinated move had the potential to influence market expectations and discourage bets against the yen. But if market expectations remain largely unchanged, repeated interventions could deliver diminishing returns. The US may face a difficult trade-off. Another intervention could require greater resources and come at a higher cost, while refraining from further action could raise questions over the lasting impact of the previous effort.
Market commentary has added to the uncertainty. Axios published a report headlined "Yen's weakness shows market isn't done pushing," while some reports suggested that the impact of the US-Japan intervention was beginning to fade. Such narratives could weigh on sentiment toward the yen and reinforce market expectations that the currency's weakness may persist.
Washington's involvement in supporting the yen may reflect broader economic and policy considerations. These could include avoiding a scenario in which Japan sells US Treasury holdings to support the currency, as well as concerns that a weaker yen could give Japanese exporters a greater competitive advantage. These possible considerations suggest that the intervention alone does not fully address the underlying forces behind the yen's weakness. This may help explain why the market has so far been reluctant to view the move as a turning point for the currency.
Washington's decision to join the intervention may have reflected concerns, as some observers suggest, that the yen's prolonged weakness had begun to affect US interests. If markets remain unconvinced by the US-Japan intervention, one possible outcome is that Washington could push Japan to take more costly measures to support the yen. Such a scenario could instead create some strain between Washington and Tokyo.
Beyond short-term market dynamics, the yen's weakness also reflects deeper challenges facing the Japanese economy, making a sustained reversal difficult. The currency's prolonged weakness has been influenced by the interest rate gap between Japan and the US, while also reflecting longer-term concerns over the diminishing returns of Japan's traditional growth model.
This leaves Japan facing a delicate policy balance between supporting growth and stabilizing the currency. While lower interest rates could help boost economic activity, continued weakness in the yen may strengthen calls for Japan's central bank to consider further rate increases to narrow the interest rate gap with the US.
Japan's structural challenges mean that a sustained appreciation of the yen will not be easy to achieve. The question of whether to pursue stronger measures, even at the cost of some economic growth, has become more complicated as the US takes a role in the issue. Japan may face greater pressure to support the currency, even though doing so would be difficult and could carry broader economic costs.
The author is a reporter with the Global Times. [email protected]

。

二 | 北京时间1月14日，据外媒报道，抗癌斗争达到了一个新的里程碑：美国的癌症死亡率已经下降了25年。根据美国癌症协会（ASC）的数据，从1991年到2016年，美国的癌症死亡率一直在稳步下降，年增长率约为1.5%，25年来累计下降了27%。研究人员说，这相当于减少了约260万癌症死亡人数。然而，尽管取得了这一进展，不同社会经济地位之间癌症死亡率的差异也在增加。报告指出，癌症对更经济弱势群体的压力正在增加。尽管癌症死亡率总体下降是个好消息，“坏消息是，报告强调了社会不平等的加剧，尤其是在社会经济地位较低的群体中。”俄亥俄州立大学综合癌症中心癌症健康平等中心副主任达雷尔·格雷二世博士说。没有参与这项研究的达雷尔·格雷二世说：“这强调了卫生服务提供者、研究人员和公众的重要性，以及继续促进健康平等的重要性。

三 | ”在1月8日发表的年度报告中，美国癌症协会分析了癌症发病率、死亡率的最新数据。

四 | 以及在美国的生存。2016年，每10万人中有156人死于癌症，而1991年为215人。报告指出，25年来癌症死亡率一直在下降，主要是由于吸烟者人数的减少（吸烟会增加患多种癌症的风险，特别是肺癌），以及早期检测和癌症治疗技术的进步。例如，1990年至2016年男性肺癌死亡率下降了48%，2002年至2016年女性肺癌死亡率下降了23%。1989-2016年女性乳腺癌死亡率下降40%，1993-2016年男性前列腺癌死亡率下降51%，1970-2016年男性和女性结直肠癌死亡率下降53%。然而，近年来，其他几种癌症的死亡率一直在上升，如子宫内膜癌（2012-2016年增长2.1%）和男性胰腺癌（同期每年增长0.3%）。2012年至2016年，肝细胞癌死亡率男性增加1.2%，女性增加2.6%。

五 | 格雷指出，尽管乳腺癌和结肠癌等癌症可以通过相关体征进行筛查，但胰腺癌和膀胱癌缺乏此类筛查的基础。”格雷说：“我们正在根据指导方针制定筛查方案，但与此同时，这些癌症的死亡率可能会继续上升。”社会经济差异研究还发现，不同种族之间癌症死亡率的差异正在缩小，但不同社会经济地位之间的差异继续增加。例如，美国较贫困地区的妇女死于宫颈癌的人数是美国较富裕地区妇女的两倍。贫困地区男性肺癌和肝癌的死亡率也比富裕地区高40%以上。为了解决这一差距，还需要作出更多努力。”报告总结说，这些贫困地区非常适合地方重点癌症控制倡议，例如改善获得基本医疗服务的机会、加强戒烟干预、促进健康生活方式和开展癌症筛查活动等。格雷同意这一观点，并指出社会经济地位较低的患者在预防癌症方面可能面临许多障碍，例如不能抽出时间去看医生或买健康食品。”这些都很重要。我们必须帮助人们解决这些问题。

六 | ”格雷说。

七 |