Thursday, October 30, 2025
Wednesday, October 29, 2025
In Harbour Green Park in Downtown Vancouver. Summer of 2017.
Harbour Green Park is situated at the edge of Coal Harbour, a scenic waterfront area in downtown Vancouver, British Columbia. It stretches along the seawall, just west of the Vancouver Convention Centre, and is accessible via the Vancouver Seawall or nearby streets like West Cordova Street. The park spans approximately 3.1 hectares (about 7.7 acres), offering a compact yet inviting greenspace amidst the urban core.
The park features rolling lawns, appealing views of the harbor, and a well-maintained waterfront setting. Tripadvisor reviews highlight a notable fountain at water level, adding to its aesthetic and functional appeal as a resting spot. It connects seamlessly to the Vancouver Seawall, a popular pathway for pedestrians and cyclists, making it a key link in the city’s waterfront network. The Vancouver Park Board’s park finder notes easy access from the seawall or adjacent streets. Described as “floating at the edge of Coal Harbour,” the park offers a tranquil escape with panoramic views of the water, mountains, and downtown skyline, ideal for relaxation or light recreation.
Tripadvisor ranks Harbour Green Park No. 64 out of 619 attractions in Vancouver, with 59 reviews and 317 photos as of the latest data. It earns praise for its “nice park and fountain” and is often included in three-day Vancouver itineraries, alongside Stanley Park and the Vancouver Harbour. Some visitors express mild surprise at its high ratings given its small size, but its location and views consistently receive positive feedback. Popular for leisurely walks, picnics, or photography, especially during sunset. Its proximity to the Convention Centre also makes it a convenient stop for tourists or business travelers.
While specific historical details aren’t detailed in the provided results, the park’s integration into Coal Harbour reflects Vancouver’s post-industrial transformation, turning former industrial waterfronts into public spaces. As a public park, it’s generally open from dawn to dusk, though exact hours may vary with seasonal adjustments. Easily reachable by foot, bike, or public transit (e.g., buses along West Cordova or the SeaBus nearby). Parking is limited, so walking from downtown is recommended. Adjacent to luxury condos, the Coal Harbour Community Centre, and the bustling Convention Centre, it blends urban sophistication with natural beauty. Fall weather (mild, around 10-12°C) would enhance its appeal with colorful foliage and crisp harbor views, though rain is possible, so visitors might need umbrellas. Harbour Green Park is a charming, compact waterfront oasis in downtown Vancouver, celebrated for its scenic views, fountain, and seawall connectivity. It’s a must-visit for a quick escape or as part of a broader exploration of the city’s coastal attractions.
Sunday, October 26, 2025
Friday, October 24, 2025
What to know about "Ozempic Face"
 |
| https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/ozempic-face |
Key takeaways
- “Ozempic face” refers to the facial changes, such as sagging skin and increased wrinkles, that can occur due to rapid weight loss with Ozempic.
- Although Ozempic is not FDA-approved for weight loss, doctors sometimes prescribe it off-label for this use. Loss of facial fat, which supports skin elasticity and structure, causes the facial side effects from the drug.
- To help reduce facial side effects, your doctor may want to reduce your Ozempic dosage. Or they may have other suggestions, such as increasing your water and protein intake.
Ozempic is a brand-name medication that’s prescribed to treat type 2 diabetes in adults. Ozempic can decrease appetite. As a result, many people with diabetes who receive the drug lose weight.
Ozempic comes as a liquid solution in prefilled single-patient-use pens. The drug is given as a subcutaneous injection. After a healthcare professional has shown you how to inject Ozempic correctly, you may be able to give yourself the injections at home. Your doctor will typically start with a low dosage of Ozempic and adjust it over time to reach an amount that’s right for you.
Many people use Ozempic without a prescription to try to reach their desired body weight. Ozempic is not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for weight management. However, doctors may sometimes prescribe this drug off-label for weight management. (Off-label drug use means prescribing a drug for a purpose other than what it’s been approved for by the FDA.) To learn more, see the “Ozempic off-label use for weight loss” section.
This article will explain the term “Ozempic face,” including how Ozempic affects the face, other possible side effects of the medication, and how to avoid the facial effects of Ozempic.
Dr. Paul Jarrod Frank, a cosmetic and celebrity dermatologist, coined the term “Ozempic face” after treating many individuals with this symptom.
How can Ozempic affect the face?
Semaglutide, the generic name for Ozempic, is part of a class of medications known as incretin mimetics. These ensure the pancreas releases sufficient insulin when the blood glucose level is high.
Additionally, Ozempic acts as a long lasting and effective glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 agonist). This means it makes you feel fuller and delays gastric emptying so you can consume fewer calories.
While Ozempic is safe to use with your doctor’s recommendation, it can cause rapid weight loss that is often more pronounced on the face.
Facial fat serves a protective function and affects facial aesthetics and elasticity. Weight loss can cause dermatological changes and shrinking because the fat that stretches and cushions the skin is no longer in place.
The skin of the face also loses its ability to retract after an episode of rapid weight loss due to reduced levels of elastin and collagen, which are essential for structural integrity.
As a result, using Ozempic may have the following facial symptoms:
- increased signs of aging, such as more lines and wrinkles
- loss of fat, which can lead the skin to become loose and sag
- a hollowed-out appearance
- lipodystrophy, which affects how the body accumulates and stores fat
Ozempic off-label use for weight loss
Sometimes, doctors may prescribe Ozempic off-label. This means prescribing a drug for a purpose other than what it’s been approved for by the FDA.
Ozempic is not FDA-approved for treating type 1 diabetes and has not been studied in people with this condition. However, in some cases, Ozempic may be used off-label to treat type 1 diabetes.
Some experts say that Ozempic and other medications in the same class should not be used in people with type 1 diabetes. They believe that the risk of side effects from these drugs outweighs the potential benefits when used by people with type 1 diabetes.
Ozempic may also be prescribed off-label for help with weight management. However, the drug is not FDA approved for this purpose.
Other possible side effects of Ozempic
Side effects that have been reported with Ozempic can include:
- nausea and vomiting
- flatulence
- constipation
- diarrhea
- abdominal pain
- fatigue
- injection site reactions
In rare instances, you may also experience serious side effects such as:
- vision changes
- kidney problems
- gall bladder disease
- severe allergic reactions
- an increased risk of thyroid cancer
- hypoglycemia (low blood sugar)
- pancreatitis (inflammation of the pancreas)
Preventing facial side effects
In some cases, you may be unable to prevent facial side effects from Ozempic. If these are a cause of concern, your doctor may recommend any of the following:
- reducing your dosage
- changing to a different medication
- drinking 1 to 2 liters of water every day
- improving protein intake with a protein-rich diet
- using dermatological fillers
- lifestyle modifications to maintain a healthy weight
If you decide to stop using Ozempic, it can take about 5 weeks from the last dose for the drug to clear from your system.
What happens after stopping Ozempic?
A 2022 study explored changes in body weight and metabolic risk factors among 1,961 participants 1 year after semaglutide treatment.
The study found that stopping Ozempic treatment can cause you to regain lost weight.
After you stop using Ozempic, you may also notice the following:
- increased cravings
- an absence of side effects
- blood sugar spikes
When to contact a doctor
You should contact a doctor if you experience any severe side effects from using Ozempic. Be sure to document your symptoms and share them with your doctor.
It’s also important to note that Ozempic has a boxed warning for the risk of thyroid cancer. (A boxed warning is the most serious warning from the FDA.)
Animal studies showed an increased risk of thyroid cancer in animals given semaglutide (the active drug in Ozempic). Animal studies don’t always predict what happens in humans. It isn’t known for certain whether Ozempic increases the risk of thyroid cancer in humans.
While using Ozempic, tell your doctor right away if you have any of the following symptoms:
- difficulty swallowing
- a lump or pain in the neck
- wheezing
- shortness of breath
- a hoarse voice that worsens over time
Frequently asked questions
Here are some frequently asked questions about Ozempic.
Does Ozempic change your face?
It’s possible. Ozempic can cause rapid weight loss, which can be particularly visible in the face. A sudden loss of fat cells can reduce the appearance of smoothness and fullness in the face, resulting in a gaunt appearance.
For more information about how Ozempic may change your face, talk with your doctor.
What does an Ozempic face look like?
It can vary from person to person. Changes in your face may include:
- more lines and wrinkles
- loose and sagging skin due to loss of fat cells
- a hollowed-out appearance
If you have concerns about changes to your face while using Ozempic, talk with your doctor.
Does Ozempic age your skin and your face?
It may. When experiencing rapid weight loss, your skin does not always shrink at the same time. A lack of fat cells may also affect skin elasticity. Wrinkles and lines, usually associated with aging, can appear.
For more information about how Ozempic can affect your face, talk with your doctor.
Summary
Ozempic is a treatment option for people with type 2 diabetes. While Ozempic does not have FDA approval for weight management, doctors may prescribe this drug off-label for chronic weight management among those with overweight or obesity. It can cause rapid weight loss and associated facial side effects that some call “Ozempic face.”
You should only use Ozempic as your doctor recommends. If you experience severe side effects from using Ozempic, your doctor may stop prescribing the medication and recommend lifestyle changes.
When you stop using Ozempic, you may experience increased food cravings, an absence of side effects, and blood sugar spikes. You may also regain any weight they lost while using it.
If you’re interested in using Ozempic for weight loss, which is an off-label use, talk with your doctor. They can help determine whether Ozempic might be a good choice for you.
Disclaimer: Medical News Today has made every effort to make certain that all information is factually correct, comprehensive, and up to date. However, this article should not be used as a substitute for the knowledge and expertise of a licensed healthcare professional. You should always consult your doctor or another healthcare professional before taking any medication. The drug information contained herein is subject to change and is not intended to cover all possible uses, directions, precautions, warnings, drug interactions, allergic reactions, or adverse effects. The absence of warnings or other information for a given drug does not indicate that the drug or drug combination is safe, effective, or appropriate for all patients or all specific uses.
Meet Ruth Carter: The Costume Designer Behind Marvel's Black Panther
 |
| https://www.blackenterprise.com/meet-the-hollywood-costume-designer-behind-marvels-black-panther/ |
Ruth E. Carter is an award-winning costume designer behind some of the most iconic black films of all time—Malcolm X, Amistad, Do the Right Thing, and Selma, to name a few. So it should come as no surprise that Carter was tapped to lend her incomparable talent to design costumes for Marvel’s Black Panther movie—a highly anticipated Hollywood blockbuster.
We caught up with Carter to learn more about her journey into Hollywood.
What inspired you to become a costume designer?
I discovered costume design as a career path while attending Hampton University. But costume designing was a summary of my experiences. My mom was a counselor for the city; she would stop in the street and talk to people who had all types of problems. Back then it was embarrassing but her empathy for people gave me permission to open my eyes and see people for all of their complexities. Having had that as a young person coupled with going to college and majoring in theatre, I could read a script about a person and see a version of how they might look like. Ultimately, I was groomed to be a storyteller at a young age.
When it comes to hiring you to design costumes for movies, how does the process work with film studios?
Directors hire me—but they don’t want to impede on my creativity. When I first get the script, they give me broad strokes [direction]. They may say “We want realism or this has to be incredible, intense, wild, and colorful. etc.”
First, I read through the scenes of the scripts. I get into the words and the characters. I laugh and cry with it. This helps me determine when to be pronounced. For instance, if the scene is Harlem 1940s, and Thurgood Marshall is sitting with his wife, and Langston Hughes walks in, I look up Langston Hughes in the 1940s. Then I look for great photographers of that era—I discover Teenie Harris, an accomplished black photographer. I review his body of work and notice he was photographing people candidly. But these pictures were in black and white so I go to the original collections and they give me a direct path to the tones and brightness and dullness of saturation or desaturated of colors that will create a 1940s landscape.
Which moments have been most helpful in getting you to this point in your career?
When I started there were very few people who were doing costume design. My mentors were unconventional people like Spike Lee. He said, “Attend the University of Southern California, and go to UCLA for training and sign up for a student film that way you’ll be on a set with all the professional equipment used by major studios.
He also taught me about buying in multiples. For instance, for a scene where people get into a fight—you might need to buy five of the same shirt because movies shoot out of sequence, so if the actor bloodies or dirties that shirt—that shirt has to stay exactly like it is for the scenes that follow. But if we haven’t shot the scenes that come before it—you need a clean version. Nobody else told me this.
Spike Lee was my greatest support and biggest mentor. I am indebted to him for the life and career I have now.
Marvel’s Black Panther movie is one of the most highly anticipated films of 2018. But beyond a star-studded lineup of incredible black talents such as Michael B. Jordan, Angela Bassett, Forest Whitaker, and Lupita Nyong’o, the film also includes an action-packed storyline equipped with a variety of jaw-dropping costumes. So we caught up with Ruth E. Carter, the Academy Award-nominated designer behind the film to talk about how the ancient tribes of Africa inspired her designs of the superhero costumes.
Carter is no stranger to recreating representations of blacks in films—she’s also the creative mastermind behind some of the most iconic black films in history—School Daze, Malcolm X, Amistad, Do the Right Thing, Roots (2016) and Selma, to name a few. Below she shares her design process and inspiration behind the film’s costumes.
Ruth E. Carter on working with the film production team and planning for the design process.
Marvel Studios gave me a blueprint. They had a lot of plans for the costumes, whether it was visual effects, special effects, or photo doubles. So they told me the elements the costume needed to have. From rich saturated colors and beautiful prints to textures—these things were rooted in African culture.
So we researched all of these wonderful different ancient tribes from the continent of Africa such as the Xhosa, Zula, Himba, and Maasai, and learned about their secrets and the reason behind doing things a certain way. For instance, when The Himba Tribe used this beautiful red clay that they put all over their bodies (including, jewelry hands, and hair) it was for the desert dwellers to have moisturizer. It also made your skin and hair really soft. It even had Shea butter—it was also so colorful and intense. It could even be bottled and sold today as a moisturizer.
On the other hand, the Maasai Tribe was known for all of this beautiful beadwork—so we wanted to direct the costumes towards that look. The stacked rings are a very prominent visual jewelry and were worn by ancient African tribes—that was also part of the framework that Marvel said we would like to have. I hired a jewelry designer who does African-inspired jewelry. She created rings, and necklaces—featuring a hand-tooled element that really pulled the looks together. We also pulled inspiration for the costumes from the draped robe attire that you often see in the Nigerian culture.
Wednesday, October 22, 2025
Why AuDHD people-pleasers must ask ‘what do I need?’
As ever I’m navigating this conversation from my personal lived experience only, so I’m very open to discussion in the comments :)
Monday, October 20, 2025
On Smithe Street in Downtown Vancouver. Summer of 2018.
Smithe Street is a prominent street in Downtown Vancouver, British Columbia, running east-west through several key neighborhoods, including Yaletown, the Central Business District (CBD), and the Arts + Events District. It’s named after William Smithe, a former Premier of British Columbia, and is known for its blend of residential, commercial, and cultural significance.
Smithe Street cuts through Yaletown, a trendy, revitalized area that was once an industrial zone. Today, it’s a hub of modern luxury developments, upscale dining, and vibrant nightlife. Developments like One Pacific at 68 Smithe Street are part of Concord Pacific’s newest luxury projects, offering proximity to the Seawall, Roundhouse Community Centre, and Yaletown Canada Line Station. Further east, Smithe Street passes through the CBD, where office workers, food trucks, and high-end shopping on Robson and Alberni streets define the area. It’s a central connection point for SkyTrain routes, the West Coast Express, and the SeaBus to North Vancouver. The Arts + Events District area, intersecting Smithe Street, is rich with cultural landmarks and is walkable to neighborhoods like Gastown, Chinatown, and False Creek.
Properties like One Pacific and The Smithe highlight the street’s appeal for luxury living. These buildings offer modern amenities, stunning views, and easy access to parks, the Seawall, and public transit. Yaletown along Smithe Street is home to popular brunch spots like Chambar, Jam Cafe, and Cafe Medina, as well as The Dirty Apron, a culinary institution. The CBD section features Pacific Centre Mall and high-end boutiques. The street’s location provides quick access to Stanley Park, the West End, and Coal Harbour, making it ideal for outdoor enthusiasts. Gastown’s heritage charm and the Arts + Events District add a cultural layer with galleries and events.
Originally part of Vancouver’s industrial landscape, Yaletown (where Smithe Street is a key artery) has transformed into a model of livability. The mix of brick-and-beam heritage buildings with modern architecture reflects the city’s evolution, tied together by the iconic Seawall and waterfront parks. Smithe Street remains a dynamic part of Vancouver’s real estate market and lifestyle scene. Luxury developments continue to attract buyers, and its central location supports a bustling urban environment. Real estate platforms like REW.ca provide up-to-date listings and strata details for properties like One Pacific, reflecting ongoing interest in the area.
Saturday, October 18, 2025
Thursday, October 16, 2025
Military History of the First World War 1914-1918
 |
| Storming Of The Hill In The Argonne Forest by Georg Schobel, 1915 |
I'm still re-reading 'Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time' (1966) by Carroll Quigley. Another bit of information that I found to be interesting this time is in the chapter about World War I, and, therefore, I will post a quote of it. "This discrepancy existed for many years before the war and began to disappear only in the course of 1918. As a result of its existence, the first three years of the war witnessed the largest military casualties in human history. These occurred as a result of the efforts of military men to do things which were quite impossible to do. The German victories of 1866 and 1870 were the result of theoretical study, chiefly by the General Staff, and exhaustive detailed training resulting from that study. They were emphatically not based on experience, for the army of 1866 had had no actual fighting experience for two generations, and was commanded by a leader, Helmuth von Moltke, who had never commanded a unit so large as a company previously. Moltke’s great contribution was to be found in the fact that, by using the railroad and the telegraph, he was able to merge mobilization and attack into a single operation so that the final concentration of his forces took place in the enemy country, practically on the battlefield itself, just before contact with the main enemy forces took place. This contribution of Moltke’s was accepted and expanded by Count von Schlieffen, chief of the Great General Staff from 1891 to 1905. Schlieffen considered it essential to overwhelm the enemy in one great initial onslaught. He assumed that Germany would be outnumbered and economically smothered in any fighting of extended duration, and sought to prevent this by a lightning war of an exclusively offensive character. He assumed that the next war would be a two-front war against France and Russia simultaneously and that the former would have to be annihilated before the latter was completely mobilized. Above all, he was determined to preserve the existing social structure of Germany, especially the superiority of the Junker class; accordingly, he rejected either an enormous mass army, in which the Junker control of the Officers’ Corps would be lost by simple lack of numbers, or a long-drawn war of resources and attrition which would require a reorganized German economy. The German emphasis on attack was shared by the French Army command, but in a much more extreme and even mystical fashion. Under the influence of Ardant Du Picq and Ferdinand Foch, the French General Staff came to believe that victory depended only on attack and that the success of any attack depended on morale and not on any physical factors. Du Picq went so far as to insist that victory did not depend at all on physical assault or on casualties, because the former never occurs and the latter occurs only during flight after the defeat. According to him, victory was a matter of morale, and went automatically to the side with the higher morale. An artillery barrage as a necessary preliminary to infantry assault was used almost from the beginning. It was ineffectual. At first no army had the necessary quantity of munitions. Some armies insisted on ordering shrapnel rather than high-explosive shells for such barrages. This resulted in a violent controversy between Lloyd George and the generals, the former trying to persuade the latter that shrapnel was not effective against defensive forces in ground trenches. In time it should have become clear that high-explosive barrages were not effective either, although they were used in enormous quantities. They failed because: (1) earth and concrete fortifications provided sufficient protection to the defensive forces to allow them to use their own firepower against the infantry assault which followed the barrage; (2) a barrage notified the defense where to expect the following infantry assault, so that reserves could be brought up to strengthen that position; and (3) the doctrine of the continuous front made it impossible to penetrate the enemy positions on a wide-enough front to break through. The efforts to do so, however, resulted in enormous casualties. At Verdun in 1916 the French lost 350,000 and the Germans 300,000. On the Eastern Front the Russian General Aleksei Brusilov lost a million men in an indecisive attack through Galicia (June-August, 1916). On the Somme in the same year the British lost 410,000, the French lost 190,000, and the Germans lost 450,000 for a maximum gain of 7 miles on a front about 25 miles wide (July-November, 1916). The following year the slaughter continued. At Chemin des Dames in April, 1917, the French, under a new commander, Robert Nivelle, fired 11 million shells in a 10-day barrage on a 30-mile front. The attack failed, suffering losses of 118,000 men in a brief period. Many corps mutinied, and large numbers of combatants were shot to enforce discipline. Twenty-three civilian leaders were also executed. Nivelle was replaced by Petain. Shortly afterward, at Passchendaele (Third Battle of Ypres), Haig used a barrage of 4.25 million shells, almost 5 tonnes for every yard of an 11-mile front, but lost 400,000 men in the ensuing assault (August-November, 1917). The failure of the barrage made it necessary to devise new methods, but military men were reluctant to try any innovations. In April, 1915, the Germans were forced by civilian pressure to use poison gas, as had been suggested by the famous chemist Fritz Haber. Accordingly, without any effort at concealment and with no plans to exploit a breakthrough if it came, they sent a wave of chlorine gas at the place where the French and British lines joined. The junction was wiped out, and a great gap was opened through the line. Although it was not closed for five weeks, nothing was done by the Germans to use it. The first use of gas by the Western Powers (the British) in September, 1915, was no more successful. At the terrible Battle of Passchendaele in July 1917, the Germans introduced mustard gas, a weapon which was copied by the British in July 1918. This was the most effective gas used in the war, but it served to strengthen the defense rather than the offense, and was especially valuable to the Germans in their retreat in the autumn of 1918, serving to slow up the pursuit and making difficult any really decisive blow against them. The tank as an offensive weapon devised to overcome the defensive strength of machine-gun fire was invented by Ernest Swinton in 1915. Only his personal contacts with the members of the Committee of Imperial Defence succeeded in bringing his idea to some kind of realization. The suggestion was resisted by the generals. When continued resistance proved impossible, the new weapon was misused, orders for more were canceled, and all military supporters of the new weapon were removed from responsible positions and replaced by men who were distrustful or at least ignorant of the tanks. Swinton sent detailed instructions to Headquarters, emphasizing that they must be used for the first time in large numbers, in a surprise assault, without any preliminary artillery barrage, and with close support by infantry reserves. Instead they were used quite incorrectly. While Swinton was still training crews for the first 150 tanks, fifty were taken to France, the commander who had been trained in their use was replaced by an inexperienced man, and a mere eighteen were sent against the Germans. This occurred on September 15, 1916, in the waning stages of the Battle of the Somme. An unfavorable report on their performance was sent from General Headquarters to the War Office in London and, as a result, an order for manufacture of a thousand more was canceled without the knowledge of the Cabinet. This was overruled only by direct orders from Lloyd George. Only on November 20, 1917, were tanks used as Swinton had instructed. On that day 381 tanks supported by six infantry divisions struck the Hindenburg Line before Cambrai and burst through into open country. These forces were exhausted by a five-mile gain, and stopped. The gap in the German line was not utilized, for the only available reserves were two divisions of cavalry which were ineffective. Thus the opportunity was lost. Only in 1918 were massed tank attacks used with any success and in the fashion indicated by Swinton. The year 1917 was a bad one. The French and British suffered through their great disasters at Chemin des Dames and Passchendaele. Romania entered the war and was almost completely overrun. Bucharest being captured on December 5th. Russia suffered a double revolution, and was obliged to surrender to Germany. The Italian Front was completely shattered by a surprise attack at Caporetto and only by a miracle was it reestablished along the Piave (October-December, 1917). To weaken Germany the Entente Powers began a blockade of the Central Powers, controlling the sea directly, in spite of the indecisive German naval challenge at Jutland in 1916, and limiting the imports of neutrals near Germany, like the Netherlands. To resist this blockade, Germany used a four-pronged instrument. On the home front every effort was made to control economic life so that all goods would be used in the most effective fashion possible and so that food, leather, and other necessities would be distributed fairly to all. The success of this struggle on the home front was due to the ability of two German Jews. Haber, the chemist, devised a method for extracting nitrogen from the air, and thus obtained an adequate supply of the most necessary constituent of all fertilizers and all explosives. Before 1914 the chief source of nitrogen had been in the guano deposits of Chile, and, but for Haber, the British blockade would have compelled a German defeat in 1915 from lack of nitrates. Walter Rathenau, director of the German Electric Company and of some five dozen other enterprises, organized the German economic system in a mobilization which made it possible for Germany to fight on with slowly dwindling resources. On the military side Germany made a threefold reply to the British blockade. It tried to open the blockade by defeating its enemies to the south and east (Russia, Romania, and Italy). In 1917 this effort was largely successful, but it was too late. Simultaneously, Germany tried to wear down her Western foes by a policy of attrition in the trenches and to force Britain out of the war by a retaliatory submarine blockade directed at British shipping. The submarine attack, as a new method of naval warfare, was applied with hesitation and ineffectiveness until 1917. Then it was applied with such ruthless efficiency that almost a million tons of shipping was sunk in the month of April 1917, and Britain was driven within three weeks of exhaustion of her food supply. This danger of a British defeat, dressed in the propaganda clothing of moral outrage at the iniquity of submarine attacks, brought the United States into the war on the side of the Entente in that critical month of April, 1917. In the meantime the German policy of military attrition on the Western Front worked well until 1918. By January of that year Germany had been losing men at about half her rate of replacement and at about half the rate at which she was inflicting losses on the Entente Powers. Thus the period 1914-1918 saw a race between the economic attrition of Germany by the blockade and the personal attrition of the Entente by military action. This race was never settled on its merits because three new factors entered the picture in 1917. These were the German counterblockade by submarines on Britain, the increase in German manpower in the West resulting from her victory in the East, and the arrival on the Western Front of new American forces. The first two of these factors were overbalanced in the period March-September, 1918, by the third. By August 1918 Germany had given her best, and it had not been adequate. The blockade and the rising tide of American manpower gave the German leaders the choice of surrender or complete economic and social upheaval. Without exception, led by the Junker military commanders, they chose surrender. The most important diplomatic event of the latter part of the First World War was the intervention of the United States on the side of the Entente Powers in April 1917. The causes of this event have been analyzed at great length. In general there have been four chief reasons given for the intervention from four quite different points of view. These might be summarized as follows: (1) The German submarine attacks on neutral shipping made it necessary for the United States to go to war to secure “freedom of the seas”; (2) the United States was influenced by subtle British propaganda conducted in drawing rooms, universities, and the press of the eastern part of the country where Anglophilism was rampant among the more influential social groups; (3) the United States was inveigled into the war by a conspiracy of international bankers and munitions manufacturers eager to protect their loans to the Entente Powers or their wartime profits from sales to these Powers; and (4) Balance of Power principles made it impossible for the United States to allow Great Britain to be defeated by Germany. Whatever the weight of these four in the final decision, it is quite clear the neither the government nor the people of the United States were prepared to accept a defeat of the Entente at the hands of the Central Powers. Indeed, in spite of the government’s efforts to act with a certain semblance of neutrality, it was clear in 1914 that this was the view of the chief leaders in the government with the single exception of Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan. Without analyzing the four factors mentioned above, it is quite clear that the United States could not allow Britain to be defeated by any other Power. Separated from all other Great Powers by the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, the security of America required either that the control of those oceans be in its own hands or in the hands of a friendly Power. For almost a century before 1917 the United States had been willing to allow British control of the sea to go unchallenged, because it was clear that British control of the sea provided no threat to the United States, but on the contrary, provided security for the United States at a smaller cost in wealth and responsibility than security could have been obtained by any other method. The presence of Canada as a British territory adjacent to the United States, and exposed to invasion by land from the United States, constituted a hostage for British naval behavior acceptable to the United States. The German submarine assault on Britain early in 1917 drove Britain close to the door of starvation by its ruthless sinking of the merchant shipping upon which Britain’s existence depended. Defeat of Britain could not be permitted because the United States was not prepared to take over control of the sea itself and could not permit German control of the sea because it had no assurance regarding the nature of such German control. The important fact was that Britain was close to defeat in April 1917, and on that basis the United States entered the war. The unconscious assumption by American leaders that an Entente victory was both necessary and inevitable was at the bottom of their failure to enforce the same rules of neutrality and international law against Britain as against Germany. They constantly assumed that British violations of these rules could be compensated with monetary damages, while German violations of these rules must be resisted, by force if necessary. Since they could not admit this unconscious assumption or publicly defend the legitimate basis of international power politics on which it rested, they finally went to war on an excuse which was legally weak, although emotionally satisfying."
_(SM_stf78).jpg)
Tuesday, October 14, 2025
Sunday, October 12, 2025
On Seymour Street in Downtown Vancouver. Summer of 2018.
Seymour Street stretches from Pacific Boulevard in the south (near the False Creek area) to the edge of Stanley Park in the north, where it transitions into a residential and commercial corridor. It crosses key east-west streets like West Georgia Street and Dunsmuir Street, making it a central artery in the downtown grid. It passes through vibrant districts such as Yaletown (south of False Creek), the central business district, and the West End, offering a mix of commercial, residential, and cultural spaces.
The Vancouver Heritage Site Finder highlights 1295 Seymour Street, a former Federal Motor Company showroom and Chapman’s Garage built in 1920. This structure is noted as a rare surviving example of early 20th-century industrial-commercial architecture in Vancouver, reflecting a minimalist, functional design typical of automotive workshops from that era. The 1200-block of Seymour Street once housed a cluster of similar workshops, though most have been replaced by modern developments, making 1295 Seymour a valuable historical relic.
The WeWork location at 333 Seymour Street is a well-regarded coworking hub, spanning seven floors with amenities like a fitness center, showers, and pet-friendly policies. Reviews praise its central location, modern design, and community-driven atmosphere, with staff like Sade, Yammy, and Vera enhancing its appeal. It’s easily accessible via public transit (e.g., buses at Cordova Street) and bike stations, reflecting Vancouver’s emphasis on sustainable transport. The Mark at 1372 Seymour Street is a notable condominium development in the Downtown Vancouver West area, near Pacific Street. Recent sales data (e.g., #1503 sold for $30K under asking on July 19, 2025) indicate a competitive market, with the building offering luxury units in a prime location. This reflects ongoing urban densification and investment in the area.
Seymour Street’s proximity to the SeaBus terminal and major transit routes makes it a hub for commuters. The street map data confirms its role as a navigable, pedestrian-friendly corridor with Google Street View available for exploration. The street blends historic charm with contemporary urban life, hosting a mix of offices, shops, and residential towers. Its central location near Gastown and the waterfront adds to its appeal for professionals and residents alike.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)