Dr Pierre Kory

[T]his case [of six-year-old Kayley Fehr in Texas] was tragic and really had nothing, I shouldn’t say nothing to do with measles. But she did not die of measles by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, she died of a pneumonia. But it gets worse than that because she didn’t really die of the pneumonia. She died of a medical error. And that error was a completely inappropriate antibiotic. It was an insufficient antibiotic.

And in reviewing cases, I’ve reviewed cases of pneumonias that went unrecognized or mistreated. And normally when you review a case, it’s difficult to pinpoint blame unless you know exactly what the organism was. And in this case, we did know what the organism was. She died of mycoplasma.

And the tragedy is that mycoplasma is an extremely common what we call immunity acquired organism. This is very commonly circulating in the community. It causes pneumonias. And when you admit someone to the hospital for pneumonia, what you need to do is you treat what’s called empirically, meaning you put them on antibiotics that you think will cover the most common organism.

And that’s why this case is absolutely enraging. It’s infuriating because she died because she got an inappropriate antibiotic. The most common antibiotics that we use, it’s in every guideline. Infectious disease, pulmonary. Every guideline in the country tells you that for a hospitalized child or adult who gets admitted to the hospital, you put them on two antibiotics. One is from a category called beta lactams, which is like penicillin, cephalosporins.

And they got that part correct. They put her on something called ceftriaxone, which was excellent. But you always need to pair it with an antibiotic from a different category, which is called a macrolide or a quinolone. And they did neither of those things. They didn’t put her on the most common, which is azithromycin.

The tragedy is that mycoplasma is an organism that doesn’t have a cell wall. Penicillins and cephalosporins work by disrupting the organism cell wall. But if you don’t have a cell wall, you need a different mechanistic antibiotic, which is azithromycin, which interrupts the protein synthesis and messes with the formation of proteins in the ribosome. But I don’t want to get too geeky with that. I mean, this is like medicine 101. You put them on two antibiotics to cover all the possibilities.

And unfortunately, this case gets a lot worse than that because not only did they use an inappropriate antibiotic, so they used ceftriaxone, which was correct. They added something called vancomycin to it, which works similarly. And it covers very drug resistant organisms like MRSA. There’s no reason to think that this child would come in with MRSA from the community, from a Mennonite community. She’s not coming from a facility where a lot of antibiotics are used. So it was a really a grievous error, and it’s an error which led to her death.

And so when I say it gets worse, she’s in the hospital deteriorating. One of the fundamental teaching points that I’ve made throughout my career to my residents, to my fellows, to my students, is I always tell them, if what you’re doing is not working, change what you’re doing. Although this child was declining, they never changed what they were doing until the test came back from mycoplasma.

This is where it gets really troubling because as an ICU doctor, when I need a new antibiotic, I uncover, identify an organism in someone who’s critically ill when I order that antibiotic. That antibiotic has standards, it should arrive within at least two hours. And from my review of the records, the A\antibiotic was ordered 11pm, approximately 11 pm and as far as I can tell, it was not administered until 9 am the next morning. It was actually written to start the next day.

And so not only did you have several days delay of decline without the appropriate antibiotic, but then when they realized that they were missing the appropriate antibiotic, it took them, as far as I can tell, 10 hours to administer it. And by that time she was already on a ventilator. And approximately 24 hours later, actually less than 24 hours later, she died. And she died rather catastrophically.

As she was declining, she was in a state of what’s called shock and she needed medicines to maintain her blood pressure. And suddenly her blood pressures crashed and she arrested. And that kind of suddenness in an infection suggest some other cardiac event. And in a child like that, with that amount of inflammation, infection and disturbances in the bloodstream, I can only surmise that she died of a catastrophic pulmonary embolism.

But by the time that happened, there’s not a lot you can do. There’s some stuff you can do, you can use clot busting medications. And I’ve done that in the middle of cardiac arrest before and I’ve had a couple of rescues, but it’s not a high probability that you do that. But rather than focusing on that final event that caused her death, it really was all of the missteps that occurred.

And so she was recovering from measles, getting a secondary bacterial pneumonia. Let me give the hospital some credit. They correctly diagnosed her, they very quickly on admission realized that she was coming in with a secondary bacterial pneumonia. And I think that was an absolutely correct diagnosis. The treatment was absolutely incorrect. And this, when I say it has little to do with measles… secondary bacterial pneumonias can happen after any viral infection. And so this is, not everyone’s grandstanding.

And all this outrage over this measles. You see, the media is going nuts about how everyone needs to get vaccinated. I would tell you just simple, straightforward, correct medical care. We’ve been treating pneumonias for decades with antibiotics. And this was Just a tragic error of an insufficient and incorrect antibiotic regimen on admission.

[…]

Via https://vaccinesbytheoutliers.wordpress.com/2025/11/26/no-the-six-year-old-mennonite-girl-in-texas-did-not-die-of-measles/

Episode 33 How Far Back Can We Trace Languages

Dr John McWhorter (2019)

Film Review

Writing emerged independently in the Middle East, China and the Mayan empire.

Middle East

Cuneiform was a semi-alphabetic (part pictographs and part phonetic) writing system used by many language families (including IndoEuropean, Afroasiatic and Sumerian) over 3,000 years. Only social elites learned it.

Cuneiform first emerged around 3500 BC in the area comprising modern Iraq and Iran. It was derived from a token-based counting system dating from 8,000 BC.

The earliest surviving cuneiform manuscript is the Behistun Inscription from the sixth century BC. Transcribed (in cuneiform) in Old Persian, Acadian (a Semitic language spoken in Mesopotamia) and Elamite (possibly related to Dravidian), it describes the military exploits of the Persian emperor Darius. It’s written in three languages,

Hieroglyphics (also combining pictographs and phonetic sounds) developed as a parallel writing system in Egypt. The first Proto-Canaanite alphabet was devised by laborers in a turquoise mine in the Sinai desert. They need a way to communicate with workers on other shifts and found hieroglyphics too hard to learn.

Around 900 BC. Phoenician traders elaborated on it to transcribe Phoenician (which had no vowels.). Greeks adapted it by adding vowels.

The Phoenician alphabet was mainly spread via Aramaic, (the language Persia used in their diverse colonies) between 1,000 BC – 200 AD. Aramaic would provide the model for Hebrew, Ethiopian, Brahmi, Burmese, Lao, Thai and Javanese writing.

China

Chinese, which is based entirely on pictographs, provided the model for Japanese and old Korean script.

Mayan Empire

Mayas wrote in hieroglyphics, a combination of pictographs and phonetic sounds.

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/6120000/6120068

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro (photo via Venezuela’s Presidential Press Office)

by Dave DeCamp | November 24, 2025

The US State Department on Monday formally designated the Cartel de los Soles, or Cartel of the Suns, a group that doesn’t actually exist, as a “Foreign Terrorist Organization,” providing a pretext for a potential attack on Venezuela.

The term “Cartel of the Suns” was first used in the 1990s to describe two Venezuelan military generals with sun insignias on their uniforms who were involved in cocaine trafficking [Ed: the name predates Venezuela’s current socialist government, which first came to power under Hugo Chavez in 1999]. According to a 60 Minutes report that aired in 1993, one of the generals was working with the CIA at the time. 

Today, the term is used to describe a loose network of Venezuelan military and government officials allegedly involved in drug trafficking, but the Cartel of the Suns doesn’t actually exist as a structured organization.

According to InSight Crime, a think tank that receives grants from the State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, recent US sanctions mischaracterized the Cartel of the Suns, which InSight described as “a system of corruption wherein military and political officials profit by working with drug traffickers.”

Despite the reality, the US is now calling the Cartel of the Suns a terrorist organization and claims that Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro is its leader, a push being led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has long sought regime change in Caracas.

President Trump has claimed that the terror designation would allow him to target Maduro or his assets, but any US attack on Venezuela would be illegal without congressional authorization. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said in an interview last week that the designation gives the Pentagon “new options” to go after the “cartel,” meaning the Venezuelan government.

The real allegation against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, according to InSight Crime, is that he allows lower-level officials to profit from the drug trade to keep them content. InSight said that the Venezuelan officials aren’t necessarily directing drug shipments but rather use their “positions to protect traffickers from arrest and ensure that shipments pass through a territory.”

For his part, Maduro and his government strongly deny the allegations, pointing to their recent operations targeting cocaine shipments. The Venezuelan government on Monday rejected the US designation and said that it was meant to justify a regime change war.

“Venezuela categorically, firmly and absolutely rejects the new and ridiculous fabrication of the secretary of the US Department of State Marco Rubio, who designates the non-existent Cartel of the Suns as a terrorist organization, thus reviving an infamous and vile lie to justify an illegitimate and illegal intervention against Venezuela under the classic US regime-change formula,” said a statement from Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yvan Gil.

Gil urged the US “to correct this erratic policy of aggressions and threats, forcefully rejected by the American people themselves, which harms the development of Caribbean nations and does nothing to contribute to a true and genuine fight against illicit drug trafficking.”

While Venezuela neighbors Colombia, where most of the world’s cocaine is produced, very little of the cocaine that arrives in the US transits through the country. Venezuela is also not a producer or a transit point for fentanyl, which has caused the most overdose deaths in the US in recent years.

[…]

Via https://news.antiwar.com/2025/11/24/us-designates-non-existent-cartel-as-a-foreign-terrorist-organization-to-justify-attacks-on-venezuela/

Prince Kapone

Europe’s Clean Hands Fantasy in the New Scramble for Africa

[…]

The article under excavation, “In the new scramble for Africa’s resources, Europe tries to right old wrongs,” published by Politico Europe on November 24, 2025, presents itself as a straightforward piece of international reporting. At its surface level, the article narrates how the European Union—with Ursula von der Leyen as chief spokesperson—is attempting to reposition itself in Africa by modernizing the Lobito Corridor, a railway system first built by Belgium and Portugal to siphon minerals from the interior toward Atlantic export hubs.

The reporting frames Europe’s renewed presence on the continent as a morally conscious alternative to China’s expansive footprint, emphasizing “mutual benefits,” “ethical partnerships,” and “value chain development.” It acknowledges African skepticism, cites a few NGO critiques, and suggests that the EU still struggles to turn its lofty promises into grounded change.

But beneath this journalistic scaffolding lies a dense ideological choreography. Politico begins by briefly recalling the colonial origins of the Lobito railway—rubber, ivory, minerals extracted under the boots of Europe’s imperial administrators—only to immediately reframe that same infrastructure as a potential vehicle for European redemption.

The colonial railway is reborn as a “model initiative,” cleansed of its past through the application of Brussels’ new moral vocabulary. Europe, we are told, is not returning to Africa to extract but to atone, to “right old wrongs,” to engage in a “reset” with African countries celebrating fifty years of independence. The text performs this pivot quickly, the way a stage magician diverts the audience’s eyes just before the reveal.

Even without drawing on any outside context, the propaganda techniques surface clearly. The first is the moral reframing of continuity. Politico acknowledges history only as a backdrop, a somber prelude that allows Europe to appear enlightened in the present. T

he same extractive infrastructure is described now as a promising “lifeline” for sustainable development, as if the tracks themselves were not engineered for extraction but for some benevolent future partnership waiting patiently to be discovered. Brussels is cast as a penitent actor, struggling—not with its own long-standing interests—but with the burden of its own righteousness.

The second device is a soft erasure of power. The article speaks in the language of partnership: mutual benefits, shared prosperity, value chains built “together.” Nowhere in the narrative does the reader find clarity on who controls the financing, who sets the standards, who owns the corridors, or who ultimately profits from the movement of cobalt and copper down these rehabilitated colonial tracks. The structural asymmetry between Europe and the African nations it courts dissolves into a fog of technocratic goodwill.

[…]

Throughout the article, the language of extraction is sanitized. Cobalt and copper are framed not as resources whose exploitation has historically generated displacement and violence, but as essential ingredients in the green transition—neutralized commodities necessary for the functioning of Europe’s industries.

[…]

Russia’s foreign minister condemned the US media leak of a draft peace agreement, referring to it as ‘hype’ and ‘megaphone diplomacy’

The Cradle

The Ukrainian government has “agreed to a peace deal” to end the nearly three-year war between Moscow and Kiev, a US official told CBS News on 25 November.

“The Ukrainians have agreed to the peace deal. There are some minor details to be sorted out, but they have agreed to a peace deal,” the US official said.

Ukrainian National Security Advisor Rustem Umerov also said that an understanding has been reached, expressing optimism that Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky would travel to the US by the end of November in order to finalize the deal.

Negotiators reached “a common understanding on the core terms” of a deal discussed among US, European, and Ukrainian officials in Switzerland over the weekend.

“We now count on the support of our European partners in our further steps. We look forward to organizing a visit of Ukraine’s president to the US at the earliest suitable date in November to complete final steps and make a deal with [US] President [Donald] Trump,” Umerov added.

According to CBS, this comes after US–Russia negotiations in Moscow. US Army Secretary Dan Driscoll met with Russian officials in Abu Dhabi, two anonymous diplomatic sources told the news channel.

“We remain very optimistic. Secretary Driscoll is optimistic. Hopefully, we’ll get feedback from the Russians soon. This is moving quick,” the US official went on to tell CBS News.

Meanwhile, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has slammed the leak of information from US media.

Lavrov said that while Russia “appreciates the US position, which is taking the initiative in resolving the Ukrainian conflict,” the country “operates professionally, not leaking information before formal agreements are reached.”

“Russia expects the US to inform it of the results of consultations with Ukraine and Europe in the near future,” he added.

“It was leaked on purpose to fan the media hype. Those who direct this hype certainly want to undermine Donald Trump’s efforts, to distort the plan according to their wishes,” Lavrov added.

The foreign minister also said Moscow did not receive any official messages from Washington on the matter. Russia will confidentially discuss whatever US proposal is submitted and will do so without “resorting to megaphone diplomacy,” he went on to say.

The CBS report came the same day as a phone call between Zelensky and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer. The conversation preceded a virtual meeting of the Coalition of the Willing scheduled for Tuesday.

“We have coordinated our positions and the priority issues for discussion, as well as some of our next steps and contacts,” Starmer said.

According to an Axios report released on Monday, Zelensky has been presented with a 28-point US plan. The report says the Ukrainian president was briefed on the plan by US envoy Steve Witkoff and President Donald Trump’s former advisor and son-in-law, Jared Kushner, during a phone call.

It adds that efforts to draft the 28-point plan began last month.

A draft of the plan seen by Axios last week calls on Ukraine to give up additional territory in the east, introduce a cap on the size of its army, and agree never to join NATO.

“The plan is not easy for Ukraine, but the US believes the war must end and that if it doesn’t, Ukraine is likely to lose even more territory,” a White House official told the outlet.

The 28-point US plan is reportedly inspired by Trump’s post-war plan for Gaza. It focuses on “peace in Ukraine, security guarantees, security in Europe, and future US relations with Russia and Ukraine,” Axios wrote.

Since the start of the war in February 2022, Russian forces have successfully occupied much of, but not all of, the territory of four eastern Ukrainian oblasts: Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia.

In September 2022, Russia passed legislation formally annexing them.

Ukraine is demanding that Russia withdraw from these territories entirely, including areas with pro-Russian Ukrainian populations.

Europe remains determined to keep Ukraine war going

Ana Vračar
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a meeting with government officials. Photo: Volodymyr Zelenskyy / X

European leaders scrambled to resist a US-backed draft plan for Ukraine that includes no NATO membership, recognizing Russian-held territories, and capping Ukraine’s military.

European leaders spent a restless weekend reacting to a draft peace plan for Ukraine backed by US President Donald Trump. The original 28-point document includes provisions that both EU governments and Prime Minister Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s administration condemned as “maximalist,” insisting the proposal concedes too much to Russia: long-requested assurances that Ukraine will not join NATO, recognition of territories currently held by Russian forces, and a cap on Ukraine’s military at 600,000 troops – still making it one of the largest in the region.

Mainstream commentators quickly proposed that accepting such terms would amount to Ukraine’s capitulation. Yet other analysts noted that European leaders’ concerns appear less about Ukraine’s future and more about shielding themselves from fallout. Ukrainian researcher Volodymyr Ishchenko suggested in a social media post that the EU’s real fear is that Russia might actually accept the deal – and that European governments may therefore try to make it unacceptable to Moscow. “It’s especially telling that this fear persists even as Russia enjoys the upper hand and can prolong the war to pursue its perceived ‘maximalist’ goals, while Ukraine descends even deeper into military, economic, political, social, and international crises,” he wrote.

This new episode of Europe’s resistance to a minimal amount of diplomacy comes at a time when most Ukrainians support a negotiated outcome to the conflict. A Gallup poll from July 2025 showed nearly 70% of respondents favoring a negotiated settlement rather than “fighting until victory,” a near-complete reversal of opinions in 2022.

European leaders have obviously not attuned themselves to the shift in public sentiment. After consultations between European and Ukrainian officials over the weekend, an alternative version of the plan removed provisions on neutrality and NATO non-expansion, and raised the troop cap to 800,000. Over the past few days, European heads of state repeatedly dismissed any peace proposal that does not amount to Russia’s full surrender, with some insisting that “Putin should be forced to the negotiating table” – apparently forgetting that it was European governments that stalled negotiations on multiple occasions.

Rather unsurprisingly, Russian authorities said the amended proposal is not acceptable.

The European counter-proposal also proposes lowered expectations about the bloc’s own commitments to Ukraine. While the original draft referenced billions of euros in support for recovery and rebuilding coming from European allies – mirroring the US administration’s push for the region to agree on more military expenditure – the rewritten version is less enthusiastic about the topic. Instead, it suggests that Ukraine’s reconstruction and stabilization should be paid for through what they refer to as reparations, specifically Russia’s frozen assets. European enthusiasm for the concept of reparations has been noticeably absent in other conflicts they have supported, including Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

These moves reinforce what has already been apparent: the EU and Britain are obstructing efforts toward a ceasefire not because they believe Ukraine can prevail militarily, but because they fear the political and financial consequences of acknowledging that their approach to the conflict has failed, causing thousands of deaths.

The fact that some interaction with last week’s plan has happened represents some space for hope compared to previous attempts. Whether this will translate into concrete results, however, remains uncertain, especially given the level of European interference.

[…]

Via https://libya360.wordpress.com/2025/11/25/ukraine-agrees-to-us-sponsored-deal-to-end-war-with-russia/

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

I think many Americans are about to learn that math is very unforgiving, and always produces the same number based on the numerical data used for mathematical calculations, regardless of beliefs, illusions, cons, and science fiction.

You can believe yourself, and try to convince others to believe that 2 + 2 does NOT equal 4, but something else like 5.

But just like AI, math has no consciousness and creates nothing. It just reports the mathematical results based on the data input, which is how the REAL world works, as opposed to the FAKE world, and their FAKE (artificial) intelligence.

Reality is now catching up to the fantasy land of “generative AI”, and we are drawing nearer to the crash of the great AI bubble every day. The money merry-go-round among Big Tech with their AI investments shows no sign of abating yet, with Nvidia currently sitting on the top of the bubble holding the largest bag of money.

But the signs are now showing that this AI show may soon be over, as the only way forward at this point is to build huge new power-hungry data centers.

And while it is debatable if the economy can come up with new ways to generate more power to run these data centers, one thing is not debatable: to build and maintain these data centers requires a huge increase in human labor, and we do not have that labor in the U.S. workforce right now.

In fact, many of these skilled jobs are currently run by immigrant labor where the supply line to this cheap labor has not only been cut off at the borders, but is decreasing with mass deportations.

The U.S., and the entire world, are about to get a rude lesson in math, and wake up to the fact that science fiction is just that – fiction, which is based on fake (artificial) intelligence.

The robot revolution to replace humans will soon be canceled, due to a lack of humans to build them and maintain them.

Data Center Construction Delays Exemplify how Reality Trumps Hype

Anissa Gardizy, writing for The Information just published an article today titled: “As AI Data Centers Face Delays, the Blame Game Begins”

Excerpts:

The mood is shifting in AI data center circles. The euphoria of record-setting, multi-gigawatt deals has given way to finger pointing as deadlines to get AI servers online slip or get dangerously close to falling behind.

For months, data center builders have told me many of the gigawatt-size AI server facilities are running behind schedule because of the complexities of putting together the biggest clusters of servers ever attempted.

[T]he stakes are different now, given the urgency to complete AI data centers.

Earlier this year, Oracle executives raised their voices at contractors in Abilene, Texas, as pressure mounted on the company to hand over working servers to its customer, OpenAI.

The executives had good reason to be frustrated.

We’ve heard cloud providers’ contracts with customers include provisions in which customers can pay less if the provider misses a timeline or if the servers aren’t functioning properly, reducing their uptime.

For GPU cloud providers with already thin gross profit margins on renting out servers, these problems can materially alter their financial results.

The race to get Nvidia GPU clusters online continues to be a challenge for some firms that promised speedy timelines. And it’s likely that as power becomes harder to secure, which could also cause delays, we might see customers hedging their bets by working with multiple data center providers.

Several developers told me this week GPU shipments are outpacing construction timelines so severely that some firms are storing racks of idle GPUs in warehouses, waiting to be told where to send them.

Even Meta acknowledged this tension on its earnings call in late October. Chief Financial Officer Susan Li said the company is now “staging data center sites,” or essentially getting them ready with everything but the GPU racks, so Meta can “spring up capacity quickly in future years as we need it.”

In other words, even large data center developers like Meta are building buffers to prepare for capacity spikes.

One thing is clear: We’re entering an era where the physical limits of labor, equipment, utilities and contractor bandwidth are colliding with customer demand.

It’s going to be a bumpy ride. (Full article – subscription needed.)

Here is what Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said earlier this month:

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella didn’t mince words in his appearance on the Bg2 Pod with investor Brad Gerstner and OpenAI’s Sam Altman.

The tech leader made a startling admission that the biggest problem facing AI expansion right now isn’t chips — it’s power.

In what was a rare moment of candor, Nadella confessed that Microsoft has some of the most cutting-edge GPUs sitting idle because there’s basically nowhere to plug them in.

“I don’t have warm shells to plug into,”

he said, referring to unfinished data center facilities that don’t have power or cooling capacity.

[…]

With industries across the globe racing to build smarter machines, it’s hitting a very human limit; there might not be enough electricity to keep the dream running. (Source.)

300,000 New Data Center Jobs Unfilled due to Shortage of Human Labor

The lack of human resources to build these new data centers is well documented, but this problem is not headline news and you have to search for it to see how severe the problem is.

This is a study that was published recently on LinkedIn:
The Shortage of Skilled Personnel in Data Centres: Challenges, Causes and Mitigation Strategies

Excerpts:

Data centre sector faces a critical challenge: the growing shortage of specialised personnel. This article analyses the structural causes of the issue, the operational and strategic risks it entails, and the main mitigation measures, including training programmes, workforce reskilling, retention strategies, and the incorporation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a partial support mechanism.

Recent data from the Uptime Institute, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), and industry reports are presented to support the analysis.

The rapid digitalisation of society and the growth of cloud computing, Artificial Intelligence (AI), edge computing and 5G have exponentially increased the demand for critical infrastructure.

Data centres, as the backbone of this ecosystem, are undergoing unprecedented expansion. The global data centre services market is expected to reach USD 110 billion by 2030, up from USD 62 billion in 2024, representing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of nearly 10% (Data Center Services, 2024).

This growth contrasts with a structural limitation: the availability of specialised personnel to design, build, operate, and maintain highly critical facilities. The talent shortage represents a strategic risk that could compromise the sector’s ability to sustain its expansion.

The Uptime Institute estimates that the global data centre workforce will increase from 2 million professionals in 2019 to 2.3 million in 2025, leaving a shortfall of approximately 300,000 positions.

In Europe and North America, a significant proportion of the technical workforce is approaching retirement, exacerbating the shortage. In the United States, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) forecasts an 11% increase in demand for electricians by 2033, nearly three times the average for other professions (Barron’s, 2025).

Root Causes

1. Educational misalignment: Most engineering programmes lack specific training on data centre operations and management, leaving employers to fill the gap with on-the-job training.
2. High turnover: The demands of 24/7 availability, shift work, and operational pressure contribute to burnout and early exit.
3. Cross-sector competition: Energy, telecommunications, oil & gas, and cybersecurity industries all compete for the same technical talent, inflating salaries.
4. Limited sector visibility: Unlike fintech or AI, data centres are not widely perceived as an attractive career path for young engineers (Mission Critical Magazine, 2024).

[…]

Full article.