A Daily news digest by Jasper van Santen

Archive for May, 2012|Monthly archive page

For Some, Exercise May Increase Heart Risk – NYTimes.com

In News on May 31, 2012 at 03:52

For Some, Exercise May Increase Heart Risk

Intuitively this sounds a little ridiculous.

Could exercise actually be bad for some healthy people? A well-known group of researchers, including one who helped write the scientific paper justifying national guidelines that promote exercise for all, say the answer may be a qualified yes.

By analyzing data from six rigorous exercise studies involving 1,687 people, the group found that about 10 percent actually got worse on at least one of the measures related to heart disease:blood pressure and levels of insulin, HDL cholesterolortriglycerides. About 7 percent got worse on at least two measures. And the researchers say they do not know why.

“It is bizarre,” said Claude Bouchard, lead author of the paper, published on Wednesday in the journal PLoS One, and a professor of genetics and nutrition at the Pennington Biomedical Research Center, part of the Louisiana State University system.

Dr. Michael Lauer, director of the Division of Cardiovascular Sciences at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the lead federal research institute on heart disease and strokes, was among the experts not involved in the provocative study who applauded it. “It is an interesting and well-done study,” he said.

Others worried about its consequences.

“There are a lot of people out there looking for any excuse not to exercise,” said William Haskell, emeritus professor of medicine at the Stanford Prevention Research Center. “This might be an excuse for them to say, ‘Oh, I must be one of those 10 percent.’ ”

But counterbalancing the 10 percent who got worse were about the same proportion who had an exaggeratedly good response on at least one measure. Others had responses ranging from little or no change up to big changes, seen in about 10 percent, where risk factor measurements improved anywhere from 20 percent to 50 percent.

“That should make folks happy,” said Dr. William E. Kraus, a co-author of the study who is a professor of medicine and director of clinical research at Duke. He was a member of the committee providing the scientific overview for the Department of Health and Human Services’ national exercise guidelines, which advise moderate exercise for at least 150 minutes a week.

The problem with studies of exercise and health, researchers point out, is that while they often measure things like blood pressure or insulin levels, they do not follow people long enough to see if improvements translate into fewer heart attacks or longer lives. Instead, researchers infer that such changes lead to better outcomes — something that may or may not be true.

Some critics have noted that there is no indication that those who had what Dr. Bouchard is calling an adverse response to exercise actually had more heart attacks or other bad health outcomes. But Dr. Bouchard said if people wanted to use changes in risk factors to infer that those who exercise are healthier, they could not then turn around and say there is no evidence of harm when the risk factor changes go in the wrong direction.

“You can’t have it both ways,” Dr. Bouchard said.

The national guidelines for exercise are based on such inferences and also on studies that compared the health of people who exercised with that of people who did not, a weak form of evidence often said to be hypothesis-generating rather than proof.

“We do not know whether implementing exercise programs for unfit people assures better outcomes,” said Dr. Lauer of the heart institute. “That has not been established.” And so, he said, “there is a lot of debate over how strong the guidelines should be in light of weak evidence.”


How Exercise Can Jog the Memory – NYTimes.com

In News on May 31, 2012 at 03:46

How Exercise Can Jog the Memory.

It’s well established that exercise substantially changes the human brain, affecting both thinking and emotions. But a sophisticated, multifaceted new study suggests that the effects may be more nuanced than many scientists previously believed. Whether you gain all of the potential cognitive and mood benefits from exercise may depend on when and how often you work out, as well as on the genetic makeup of your brain.

For the experiment, published last month in Neuroscience, researchers in the department of psychology and neuroscience at Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H., recruited 54 adults, ages 18 to 36, from the college and the surrounding community. The volunteers were healthy but generally sedentary; none exercised regularly.

During their first visit to the lab, they completed a series of questionnaires about their health and mood, including how anxious they were both at that moment and in general.

They also gave blood for genetic testing. Earlier studies had shown that exercise can increase levels of a protein called brain-derived neurotropic factor, or BDNF, which is thought to play a role in the positive effects of exercise on thinking. But some people produce less BDNF after exercise than others because they have a variation in the gene that controls BDNF production, though it’s unknown whether they derive less cognitive benefit from exercise as a result. So the scientists wanted to determine each volunteer’s BDNF gene status.

Then the group submitted to a memory test, consisting of pictures of objects flashed across a computer screen. Soon after, another set of pictures appeared, and the volunteers were asked to note, with keystrokes, whether they’d seen each particular image before.

This task involves a different part of the brain from the one most often focused on in studies of exercise and memory, says David Bucci, an associate professor of psychology and brain science at Dartmouth, who oversaw the study. Other experiments typically examine the effect of exercise on the hippocampus, the brain’s primary memory center, he says, but the object-recognition task involves activity in the perirhinal cortex, a portion of the brain essential to remembering particular things or objects and whether they happen to be new in your experience. Without a healthy perirhinal cortex, you might recall where you’ve put your car keys (a hippocampal memory task), but not what car keys are.

Finally, after completing the tests, the volunteers were randomly assigned to exercise or not during the next four weeks. Half began a supervised program of walking or jogging four times a week for at least 30 minutes. The other half remained sedentary.

After a month, the volunteers returned to the lab for retesting. But first, some exercised. Half of the exercising group walked or jogged before the testing; half did not. Ditto for the sedentary group: Half exercised that day for the first time since the start of the study; the rest did not.

The earlier tests of memory and mood were repeated.

The results were, in certain aspects, a surprise. As expected, many of the volunteers who’d been exercising for the past month significantly improved their scores on the memory and mood tests. But not all of them did. In general, those volunteers who had exercised for the past month and who worked out on the day of retesting performed the best on the memory exam. They also tended to report less anxiety than other volunteers.

Those who had exercised during the preceding month but not on the day of testing generally did better on the memory test than those who had been sedentary, but did not perform nearly as well as those who had worked out that morning.


As College Graduates Cluster, Some Cities Are Left Behind – NYTimes.com

In Economy, News on May 31, 2012 at 03:43

As College Graduates Cluster, Some Cities Are Left Behind .

As cities like this one try to reinvent themselves after losing large swaths of their manufacturing sectors, they are discovering that one of the most critical ingredients for a successful transformation — college graduates — is in perilously short supply.

Just 24 percent of the adult residents of metropolitan Dayton have four-year degrees, well below the average of 32 percent for American metro areas, and about half the rate of Washington, the country’s most educated metro area, according to a Brookings Institution analysis. Like many Rust Belt cities, it is a captive of its rich manufacturing past, when well-paying jobs were plentiful and landing one without a college degree was easy.

Educational attainment lagged as a result, even as it became more critical to success in the national economy. “We were so wealthy for so long that we got complacent,” said Jane L. Dockery, associate director of the Center for Urban and Public Affairs at Wright State University here. “We saw the writing on the wall, but we didn’t act.”

Dayton sits on one side of a growing divide among American cities, in which a small number of metro areas vacuum up a large number of college graduates, and the rest struggle to keep those they have.

The winners are metro areas like Raleigh, N.C., San Francisco and Stamford, Conn., where more than 40 percent of the adult residents have college degrees. The Raleigh area has a booming technology sector and several major research universities; San Francisco has been a magnet for college graduates for decades; and metropolitan Stamford draws highly educated workers from white-collar professions in New York like finance.

Metro areas like Bakersfield, Calif., Lakeland, Fla., and Youngstown, Ohio, where less than a fifth of the adult residents have college degrees, are being left behind. The divide shows signs of widening as college graduates gravitate to places with many other college graduates and the atmosphere that creates.

“This is one of the most important developments in the recent economic history of this country,” said Enrico Moretti, an economist at the University of California, Berkeley, who recently published a book on the topic, “The New Geography of Jobs.”


Robert Mugabe asked to be UN ‘leader for tourism’ | World news | The Guardian

In Nonsense, Really?!? on May 30, 2012 at 02:09

Robert Mugabe asked to be UN ‘leader for tourism’ 


With a line-up that includes Drew Barrymore, David Beckham, Orlando Bloom, and Ricky Martin, the UN’s choice of ambassadors has been known to cause raised eyebrows or the odd smirk.

Seldom, however, has there been such anger, or questioning of the organisation’s credibility, as that greeting the appointment of a new international envoy for tourism: Robert Mugabe.

Improbable as it seems, the Zimbabwean president, who is widely accused of ethnic cleansing, rigging elections, terrorising opposition, controlling media and presiding over a collapsed economy, has been endorsed as a champion of efforts to boost global holidaymaking.

Despite that fact Mugabe, 88, is under a travel ban, he has been honoured as a “leader for tourism” by the UN’s World Tourism Organisation, along with his political ally, Zambian president Michael Sata, 75. The pair signed an agreement with UNWTO secretary general Taleb Rifai at their shared border at Victoria Falls on Tuesday.

Zimbabwe’s state-owned Herald newspaper quoted Rifai urging tourists from around the world to visit : “I was told about the wonderful experience and the warm hospitality of this country … By coming here, it is recognition, an endorsement on the country that it is a safe destination.”

The agreement will also see the two southern African countries co-host the UNWTO general assembly in August next year.

UNWTO said it had not appointed Mugabe to any formal position but acknowledged he would receive an open letter like other heads of state who have joined its leaders for tourism campaign.

The development has stunned human rights campaigners and political opponents, who regard Mugabe as a tyrant.

Kumbi Muchemwa, a spokesman for the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), said: “I can’t see any justification for the man being an ‘ambassador’. An ambassador for what? The man has blood on his hands. Do they want tourists to see those bloody hands?”

Meanwhile, British MP Kate Hoey, chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Zimbabwe, said: “It is an absolute scandal – and an affront to the people of Zimbabwe, who didn’t vote for Mugabe as their president but had him imposed because he used violence and the armed forces to hang onto power in defiance of the democratic will of the people of Zimbabwe.

“For a man who has destroyed his country’s infrastructure and cynically engineered hunger to be an ‘ambassador’ for tourism is disgraceful – particularly as he has been personally responsible for the downward spiral of the economy and destroyed the hotel, travel and tourism industry in the process.”


Wealthy French Flee to London Amid Fear of Hollande – SPIEGEL ONLINE

In News on May 20, 2012 at 09:51

Property for sale in London: Wealthy French are interested in buying homes in Britain.

Wealthy French Flee to London Amid Fear of Hollande

It began in 2010, when wealthy Greeks started coming to London and buying up expensive townhouses in upmarket neighborhoods. Amid fears that Greece might leave the euro zone, they believed their money would be safe in Britain in its splendid isolation from the euro and the Continent’s sovereign debt crisis.

Then rich Spaniards started arriving. They were following by well off Italians, who at the start of the year overtook Russians as the biggest group of foreign buyers snapping up property in London, according to a survey.

Whenever the euro crisis heats up somewhere in Europe, the demand for expensive homes increases in Western Europe’s largest city particularly among well-heeled foreigners beset by asset angst.

London real estate agents are like the canary in the coalmine for the debt crisis. They can sense early on the next country to get sucked into the vortex. So who’s up next? Apparently it’s the French.

Real estate agents have been aware of a new wave of interest for months, but it’s been especially noticeable since Feb. 28. The night before, the then Socialist candidate for French president, François Hollande, who famously said “I don’t like the rich,” announced that, if elected, he would raise the top rate of tax on incomes over €1 million to 75 percent. At home, he got much applause for the announcement. But in London, the news produced a reaction that was noticeable on the computers of the London-based property company Knight Frank.

“Since February, when Hollande announced his wealth tax, there has been a large rise in web searches from French customers,” Liam Bailey, head of residential research at Knight Frank, recently told the Daily Telegraph.

A lot of people were searching for solidly luxurious properties in a price range of up to 5 million pounds (€6.2 million). But what was particularly strong was the interest in so-called “super prime” properties, dream homes that go for between 5 million and 15 million pounds.

To meet the demand, the property company Douglas & Gordon has just opened an office in South Kensington, where four native French speakers will be available to help out their house-hunting compatriots. Hollande’s tax speech immediately led to a 40 percent increase in inquires from worried French citizens, says David Blanc from the London asset management firm Vestra Wealth.

Now, that the Socialist politician has moved into the Élysée Palace an exodus of the wealthy is on the horizon. Geneva and Brussels are also profiting from the rush of tax refugees. But no other city is as successful at attracting wealthy immigrants as London, whether it’s oligarchs from Russia, China’s nouveau riche, oil princes from the Middle East — or rich French fleeing Hollande.

Britain offers wealthy foreigners incentives that are practically unparalleled in Europe. For example, the state exempts foreign residents from having to pay tax on income generated outside Britain. For some, having a British residence can save them millions.

London Mayor Boris Johnson, who speaks perfect French, recently encouraged workers in France’s financial sector to move to the City. “Bienvenue à Londres,” he said in February. “This is the global capital of finance. It’s on your doorstep.”

Hollande, for his part, declared the banks to be his “enemy” during the election campaign. He hopes to collect up to €300 million with his wealth tax. But it’s just a short journey from Paris to the tax haven on the other side of the English Channel — on the Eurostar train service, it takes just two hours and 17 minutes. More than 300,000 French people are believed to already be living in London — more than the population of Rennes, Reims or Avignon.


Bright children should start school at six, says academic – Telegraph

In News on May 19, 2012 at 06:50

Dr Richard House said that formal schooling should be delayed until six to allow children to develop naturally.

Bright children should start school at six, says academic 

I could not agree more. Five year olds don’t need homework.

Pupils should not be subjected to full classroom tuition until the age of six to off-set the effects of premature “adultification”, it was claimed.

Dr Richard House, a senior lecturer at Roehampton University’s Research Centre for Therapeutic Education, said gifted pupils from relatively affluent backgrounds suffered the most from being pushed “too far, too fast”.

He quoted a major US study – carried out over eight decades – that showed children’s “run-away intellect” actually benefited from being slowed down in the early years, allowing them to develop naturally.

Many bright children can grow up in an “intellectually unbalanced way”, suffering lifelong negative health effects and even premature death, after being pushed into formal schooling too quickly, he said.

Most British schoolchildren already start classes earlier than their peers in many other European nations. Children are normally expected to be in lessons by five, although most are enrolled in reception classes aged four.

Dr House, who was due to present his findings at a major conference in central London on Wednesday, called on the Government to launch an independent inquiry into England’s school starting age.

He said: “The conventional wisdom is that naturally intelligent children should have their intellect fed and stimulated at a young age, so they are not held back.

“Yet these new empirical findings strongly suggest that exactly the opposite may well be the case, and that young children’s run-away intellect actually needs to be slowed down in the early years if they are not to risk growing up in an intellectually unbalanced way, with possible life-long negative health effects.

At the moment, most English children start school in nursery or reception classes at the age of three or four and are taught using the Early Years Foundation Stage – a compulsory “nappy curriculum”. They then move into formal lessons at the age of five.

The Government has already unveiled a radical overhaul of the EYFS, including a significant cut in the number of targets all children are supposed to hit.

But critics claim the revised pre-school curriculum still places an over-emphasis on desk-based tuition, with children forced to spend too much time practicing reading, writing, spelling and basic numeracy.

Earlier this year, a coalition of 50 leading academics, authors and childcare organisations launched a campaign group – Early Childhood Action – to push for an alternative curriculum focused almost entirely on a play-based approach.

Dr House said the new EYFS should be used up to six, with parents given the option to keep children out of school until this age. Ministers should consider the move as part of a wholesale review of the school starting age, he said.

Speaking before the Westminster Education Forum on Wednesday, he claimed the case for change was supported by a longitudinal study of gifted children who started in school in the US in the 1920s.

Prof Howard Friedman, a psychologist at the University of California, analysed their progress over 80 years and found that “early school entry was associated with less educational attainment, worse midlife adjustment and, most importantly, increased mortality risk”.

Prof Friedman told the Telegraph that formal education usually began at six but early starters entered education at four or five.

He added: “Most children under age six need lots of time to play, and to develop social skills, and to learn to control their impulses. An over-emphasis on formal classroom instruction – that is, studies instead of buddies, or staying in instead of playing out – can have serious effects that might not be apparent until years later.”


Sorry, Mark Zuckerberg, but I’ve got a bad case of Facebook fatigue – Telegraph

In Nonsense on May 19, 2012 at 04:18

Sorry, Mark Zuckerberg, but I’ve got a bad case of Facebook fatigue 

Yesterday, when it was floated on the stock market, Facebook was valued at $104 billion (£65.8 billion). That’s the greatest amount of money any US company has been worth on its market debut. Evidently, there are quite a lot of people, some of them very rich, who believe that Facebook is worth investing in. I hope that after buying their shares in Facebook they’ve got some money left over, because I’m hoping they’ll also buy shares in the brilliant new company I’m about to float. It’s a unicorn sanctuary run by Santa.

Now, I freely confess that I’m no financial expert. But my extremely woolly understanding is that for companies to be worth a lot of money they need to be able to bring in a lot of money. And, although I’ve been using Facebook for more than five years, I’m not sure how it’s going to do that. I don’t pay anything to use it, nor would I, and I’ve never so much as glanced at its paid-for adverts. I don’t mean that I actively ignore the ads. I mean that I don’t even notice they’re there.

When you look at Facebook, your eyes, whether by instinct or by custom, focus on the feed of information in the middle of the page (messages and updates from friends and so on), and any photos featuring people you know. And that’s it. Your eyes somehow refuse to take in the ads. I couldn’t tell you the name of any product that’s ever been advertised on Facebook. Very much against my will, I can recall three decades’ worth of advertising jingles and slogans I’ve heard on TV and radio, and adverts I’ve seen in newspapers and magazines. But not adverts on Facebook. One day, advertisers will realise their efforts are as good as invisible. And I suspect they won’t like it.


Facebook IPO: as it happened 18 May 2012

How do I buy shares in Facebook? 18 May 2012

Mark Zuckerberg mocked Facebook users in student messages 18 May 2012

Facebook charges users for prominent posts 14 May 2012

Facebook: the sale of the century? 12 May 2012

But that’s not the reason I’m bored with Facebook. After all, it makes no odds to me whether the site is a sound investment, because I’m not investing in it. (My money’s tied up in the unicorn sanctuary, thanks.) I’ve simply grown tired of Facebook as a user. It’s slow. People hardly have anything to say on it – compared with Twitter, which incessantly breaks and circulates news, and inspires instant discussion of (and bad puns about) that news between friend and stranger alike. This speed makes it frenziedly addictive. It takes a feat of serious willpower not to check it every two minutes at the dinner table. And as more and more people join it (its 10 millionth British user leapt aboard this week), it’ll only become more magnetic.

On Facebook, meanwhile, you’re stuck with just your friends. Friends who, increasingly often, don’t seem to be there. Facebook is beginning to feel like the world’s loneliest party.

As if to drive us out of that party all the faster, a few months ago Facebook’s makers gave it a redesign that leaves people’s profile pages all but unreadable. You feel as if you’re being confronted by a Dadaist’s holiday snaps. Maddeningly off-putting for snoopers and stalkers (i.e. all Facebook users).

I used to check Facebook all the time. Now I barely look at it. Here’s a tip: 10 years from now, Greece will buy Facebook. It’ll cost 50 drachmas and a bottle of ouzo.


Facebook is being abandoned by its core market. You’d be better off investing in Greek government bonds – Telegraph Blogs

In News, Nonsense, Really?!? on May 18, 2012 at 12:01

Facebook is being abandoned by its core market. You’d be better off investing in Greek government bonds

I agree with this guy!

In 2005, Rupert Murdoch made one of his greatest business mistakes: the media mogul bought MySpace for $580 million. Until 2008, MySpace was the world’s most visited website, and until 2009, America’s, pulling in 70 million unique US users a month. And then all of a sudden, it died, as users fled. Despite being profitable in 2005, by 2010, the website was losing money at a rate of $180 million a year. News Corporation was so desperate to get rid of it that it sold for just $35 million.

The reason why MySpace died was simple: its users migrated to Facebook, which had a cleaner user interface and fewer adverts. But where MySpace was, at its peak, valued at half a billion dollars, now we are told that its successor is worth 200 times as much. In its initial public offering (IPO), which is happening today, the firm is expected to be valued at $104 billion. One Hundred And Four Billion Dollars.

That’s nuts, but let’s just explain why. Ordinarily, an investor would hope to earn at least 5 per cent on an investment – ideally more, since historically, you can earn that just buying Government bonds. So for a company to be worth $104 billion, you would hope for at least $5 billion a year of profit. Really, to justify the risk of owning shares, you’d want more – $10 billion perhaps. Every year. Forever.

But Facebook’s revenue is currently just $3.7 billion, and its profit is just $500 million. So the website is making less than one tenth of the profit you would hope it to earn in the long run. By contrast, Google earns 10 times as much revenue – $37 billion – and 20 times as much profit, and yet is only valued at around $200 billion.

OK, so investment decisions are a little more complicated than that. But if investors value the company at $104 billion, then they must think that Facebook will eventually be able to increase its profits by a factor of, at the barest of bare minimums, ten. That would mean tripling revenue, at least, probably more, since it seems unlikely that even Facebook can increase revenue without increasing costs.

And I think that’s impossible. Here’s why: I’m 24, on a decent salary, relatively well-educated and a Facebook user. I should be generating lots of profit for the firm. But on my calculations, the revenue earned from me over the last month is approximately nothing. I barely use Facebook these days, and when I do, I usually log in through my phone’s Facebook app, which has no adverts. Sometimes, I used the shiny iPad app, which again, has no adverts.

My friends barely use Facebook either. When I was a student, I used to log in approximately every ten minutes. If you said “Facebook break”, everyone knew what you meant. When I logged in, I could guarantee a stream of amusing “banter” and gossip, as links and pictures were shared. Now, I log in, and it’s a wasteland. Almost all the links I click on and the online running conversation I have has migrated to Twitter, which I check religiously. So too have all the most prolific Facebook users I used to know. While we probably still count as “regular users”, for more and more of my generation, Facebook is little more than an electronic address book. That’s why big advertisers, like GM, are reducing their spend on the company.

And who is in control of this revenue-less, glorified address book? A Harvard geek, barely older than me (Mr Zuckerberg is just 28), whose last big decision was to blow $1 billion on a photo sharing website I’ve still not signed up to. Because don’t forget: those shares being sold today have no voting rights attached. You may own the company, but it will still be Zuckerberg’s plaything, not a business, intended to make money.

Facebook has no valuable real assets – no production lines or distribution networks which can be sold. It’s nothing but a bunch of servers in California and an egomaniac CEO. And increasingly, it’s boring. Even as it spreads across Brazil, it’s being abandoned by the highly educated college students who made it. Honestly, I would sooner invest in Greek government debt. Or MySpace.


Facebook IPO: Prices hit $70 – pre trading in Frankfurt.

In News, Really?!? on May 18, 2012 at 11:16


Facebook IPO: social network floats on the stock exchange

Facebook shares reported to be trading in Frankfurt at $70 ahead of market opening – giving Facebook a potential market capitalisation of nearly $192bn.

With 800 million active users… this means that each account is valued at $240. That is absurd.


Empty plinth and blank piece of paper to feature in exhibition of invisible art – Telegraph

In Nonsense, Really?!? on May 18, 2012 at 09:21

Empty plinth and blank piece of paper to feature in exhibition of invisible art: Andy Warhol, Yves Klein

Andy Warhol and Yves Klein

This is such such utter, pretentious crap.

Empty plinth and blank piece of paper to feature in exhibition of invisible art 

London’s Hayward Gallery will gather together 50 ”invisible” works by leading figures such as Andy Warhol, Yves Klein and Yoko Ono for its display of works you cannot actually see.

It is thought to be the first such exhibition staged at a major institution in the UK.

Gallery bosses say the £8 a head exhibition demonstrates how art is about ”firing the imagination”, rather than simply viewing objects.

Invisible: Art about the Unseen 1957 – 2012 opens on June 12 and includes an empty plinth, a canvas of invisible ink and an unseen labyrinth.

It includes work and documents from French artist Klein who pioneered invisible works in the late 1950s with his concept of the ”architecture of air”.

Also in the exhibition will be Warhol’s work Invisible Sculpture – dating from 1985 – which consists of an empty plinth, on which he had once briefly stepped, one of many explorations of the nature of celebrity.

Another, 1000 Hours of Staring is a blank piece of paper at which artist Tom Friedman has stared repeatedly over the space of five years, and another by the same artist Untitled (A Curse) is an empty space which has been cursed by a witch.

Ralph Rugoff, director of the Hayward Gallery, said: ”I think visitors will find that there is plenty to see and experience in this exhibition of invisible art. From the amusing to the philosophical, you will be able to explore an invisible labyrinth that only materialises as you move around it, see an artwork that has been created by the artist staring at it for 1000 hours, walk through an installation designed to evoke the afterlife, and be in the presence of Andy Warhol’s celebrity aura.

”This exhibition highlights that art isn’t about material objects, it’s about setting our imaginations alight, and that’s what the artists in this show do in many varied ways.”

The exhibition forms part of the Southbank Centre’s summer-long Festival Of The World with MasterCard.

Also featured among the exhibits will be a series of typed instructions by Ono, encouraging viewers to conjure up an artworkin their minds, Jeppe Heine’s Invisible Labyrinth in which visitors negotiate their way around a maze wearing digital headphones activated by infra-red beams.