A Note to My Readers: Got Travel Plans?

I have been in many places, but I've never been in Cahoots. Apparently, you can't go alone. You have to be in Cahoots with someone.

I've also never been in Cognito. I hear no one recognizes you there.
I have, however, been in Sane. They don't have an airport; you have to be driven there. I have made several trips there, thanks to my friends, family and work.
I would like to go to Conclusions, but you have to jump, and I'm not too much on physical activity anymore.
I have also been in Doubt. That is a sad place to go, and I try not to visit there too often.

I've been in Flexible, but only when it was very important to stand firm.
Sometimes I'm in Capable, and I go there more often as I'm getting older.

One of my favorite places to be is in Suspense! It really gets the adrenalin flowing and pumps up the old heart! At my age I need all the stimuli I can get!
I may have been in Continent, and I don't remember what country I was in. It's an age thing.

Life is too short for negative drama & petty things. So laugh insanely, love truly and forgive quickly!

I think we’re safe: It looks like 'Frankenfish' may never make it to your plate

      Good Day World!

I, for one, am glad to hear that “Frankenfish” probably won’t be served in America anytime soon. The reason is the genetically modified salmon haven’t been approved by the FDA yet, and time is running out on the process.

 I don’t like the direction these biotech scientists are taking the American food supply. It gets creepier all the time.

 I don’t trust steroids, especially in my food! I realize they’re already in my meat supply and milk products, and other foods, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. Or trust steroids. I stay away from them whenever possible.

Messing with nature never ends up well. I know these biotech geeks mean well, and are looking to increase the food supply, but they don’t even know what the long-term effects of digesting salmon stuffed with growth enhancers will be. To me, that’s scary.

So here’s what’s going on:

“Salmon that's genetically modified to grow twice as fast as normal could soon show up on your dinner plate. That is, if the company that makes the fish can stay afloat.

After weathering concerns about everything from the safety of humans eating the salmon to their impact on the environment, Aquabounty was poised to become the world's first company to sell fish whose DNA has been altered to speed up growth.

The Food and Drug Administration in 2010 concluded that Aquabounty's salmon was as safe to eat as the traditional variety. The agency also said that there's little chance that the salmon could escape and breed with wild fish, which could disrupt the fragile relationships between plants and animals in the wild. But more than two years later the FDA has still not approved the fish, and Aquabounty is running out of money.

"It's threatening our very survival," says CEO Ron Stotish, chief executive of the Maynard, Mass.-based company. "We only have enough money to survive until January 2013, so we have to raise more. But the unexplained delay has made very difficult."

The FDA says it's still working on the final piece of its review, a report on the potential environmental impact of the salmon that must be published for comment before an approval can be issued. That means a final decision could be months, even years away. While the delay could mean that the faster-growing salmon will never wind up on American dinner tables, there's more at stake than seafood.” (Read the rest here)

Time for me to walk on down the road…

Dave Stancliff

Ahhhhh! Choooo! Health officals warn this may be a bad Flu season

    Good Day World!

The flu bugs have raised their ugly little heads across the country earlier than usual. Everyone I’ve talked with in the last week either had a bout with that obnoxious bug or knew someone who did. My wife and I were going to go to dinner with a couple of friends, but one of them fell victim to that nasty bug and we had to postpone it.

I got an email from friend and Learnist colleague, Crystal Morgan, who fought the bug over the weekend, and then her kids got it too! Talk about a double whammy! It comes and goes – generally running it’s course in 48 hours- like an extended bad dream. Depending on your age and health, it could last longer.  

According to officials:

"It looks like it's shaping up to be a bad flu season," said Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The percentage of aching, feverish folks who went to the doctor with influenza-like illness had reached the national baseline of 2.2 percent, the earliest that has happened in the regular flu season in nearly a decade, the 2003-2004 season. Flu season may start as early as October, but typically peaks in January or later.

Five states reported high levels of flu activity -- Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee and Texas. Widespread activity was reported in four states, regional activity was seen in seven states and 19 states reported local flu activity, CDC officials said. That was up from eight states that reported local flu activity the previous week.

By contrast, last year's flu season started late, with an uptick in cases not starting until February.

Health officials are urging people to get their flu shots now, including babies older than six months, and all adults and children. Every year, about a quarter of the U.S. population gets the flu and an average of about 36,000 people die.

The strains making people sick are influenza A -- both H3N2 and the 2009 H1N1 or pandemic swine flu strain -- and influenza B. So far, the vaccines manufactured for this season appear to be a good match, health officials said.

But the H3N2 virusmay  typically cause more severe symptoms than the other flu bugs, noted Dr. William Schaffner, chairman of the Department of Preventive Medicine at Vanderbilt University. His staff has already started seeing flu patients in Tennessee.

"We're all a bit antsy," he said.

About 120 million doses of flu vaccine are available this year, Frieden said. About 112 million people have received their flu shots so far, officials said.

The key to is getting the shot, the experts emphasized.

"We are particularly encouraging people who haven't gotten vaccinated to do it," said Dr. Melinda Wharton, acting director of the CDC's Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. (Source)

Time for me to walk on down the road…

New site to guide veterans into civilian work force launches Thursday

       Good Day World!

Unemployment is higher for veterans than any other sector in our society. It’s hard for me to understand because these people make great employees. They’ve learned about teamwork and loyalty, values coveted by most companies. Many have special skills than can be converted to civilian applications. There’s a lot of good reasons to hire veterans.

Our recession-rattled workplace needs good reliable workers like veterans. It’s all about matching employers up with the large veteran pool already out there seeking jobs. There are a number of programs, sponsored by the VA and non-profit groups that target finding jobs for veterans.

Now Google is stepping into the picture by offering a large online resource for those veterans seeking jobs.  

Google is aiming its search-engine horsepower at homecoming veterans, launching Thursday what may be the largest online hub to help men and women exiting the military as American armed forces draw down.

Called VetNet, the site offers veterans three distinct “tracks” to plot and organize their next life moves – from “basic training” which aids job hunters to “career connections” which links users to corporate mentors and other working veterans to “entrepreneur” which offers a roadmap to starting a business.

To arm the new site with some heavy-hitting experts, Google partnered with three leading nonprofits in the veteran-employment space: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Hiring Our Heroes program, the Institute for Veterans and Military Families, and Hire Heroes USA.

“We asked: What else can we be doing with our technology to help these folks transition home?” said Carrie Laureno, founder of the Google Veterans Network, the company’s employee-volunteer community which seeks to make Google a military-friendly work environment.

“We wanted to really move the needle in the right direction. And working with our three partners, we asked: What can we do together to help you reach more people?” Laureno said. “How do we help these millions of people who are in this situation get the resources they need (to land civilian jobs) in a much easier, more straightforward way that’s ever been possible before?”

After clicking a button to connect with VetNet, users gain access to a weekly snapshot of “what’s happening” in the veteran-employment arena as well as to a ready group of business advisers and to an ongoing array of virtual “hangouts” that train people on basics from resume writing to making “elevator pitches” or that allow veterans to hear insights from leaders in retail, transportation, retail and entrepreneurship, Laureno said.

The venture drew a favorable review Thursday from a key congressional member.

“I am especially pleased to see companies like Google and their partners take the initiative to bring together these various resources to help veterans navigate the employment opportunities together,” said Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla., chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs.

“I am confident their combined efforts will be especially helpful to those who may not know where to start their job search. This is the least we can all do for our veterans who have served our nation so honorably,” Miller said in an email.

Miller’s words hint at the fresh irony of post-war life for thousands of ex-service members: Their initial challenge is not a lack of help; it is the over-abundance of nonprofits seeking to guide veterans from their once-super-structured schedules and tight packs of buddies to the wide-open, ultra-competitive job market.

According to an April 2012 study by the Center for a New American Security, more than 40,000 nonprofit groups now exist in this country with missions focused on filling the various needs of active-duty troops, veterans and their families.

That giant-yet-fragmented bundle of organizations — while striving to do well by veterans — must also battle for the same funding dollars. And that jostling hasn’t fostered a cohesive landscape for veterans to navigate as they begin their new career journeys, Laureno said. Given that mish-mash of helping hands, some veterans simply don’t know where to go first.

“I’ve heard occasionally people (in the veteran-helping field) use the word ‘competitors.’ They are competing for funds. They are competing for awareness. They are competing to be in the spotlight,” Laureno said. “It’s also a well-documented issue in this community that there are some people, just like anything else, who got involved because wanted to help but that emerged as sort of looking for press.

“The founding partners here are not of that ilk. These are partners who have stuck with their original mission, who are focused on getting the help out to the people who need it, and who recognize that technology can help them take that help to a completely different level than ever before possible,” she added.

Google and VetNet are hoping to attract new partners from that sea of 40,000 groups. But they’re still hammering out the best ways to assess prospective collaborators — and their larger intensions — before they are invited to join, Laureno said.

“That’s one of the biggest challenges all of us are facing in this issue, and that’s why there has been this proliferation of 40,000-plus (veterans organizations),” she said. “We are going to need to have a some sort of vetting process. That is something the partners are working on right now: What will be the criteria they use to judge who comes on board and who doesn’t?

“Anyone who would like to get involved, who has effective services, and who is willing to make the commitment to providing them on this platform who will be supportive of the community, they’re all welcome,” she added. “But if somebody wants to advertise on a one-off basis about their particular program, this probably isn’t the right place for them.” (Source)

Time for me to walk on down the road…

AS IT STANDS: Afghanistan: Our Never - Ending War

 By Dave Stancliff/For The Times-Standard
  Regardless of the sound bytes and vague promises you may have heard, there’s no end date for the war in Afghanistan. Another holiday season will go by as our troops fight a never-ending war overseas.
If you look at what President Obama said about our involvement in Afghanistan in June of 2011 you’ll see that he promised the “combat” mission would end at the close of 2014.
That’s not when he plans to end the war. Big difference. No one knows when, if at all, this war will ever end.
Obama said the US mission in Afghanistan would become a “support” mission. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney has since confirmed that President Obama never said US troops would be completely withdrawn by the end of 2014.
  The question Americans should ask right now is “What is a support mission? How many troops will be involved, and how long will it last?”

  A "support" mission sounds so much more reassuring than a combat mission, but look what happened in Iraq with our “support troops.” The term was nothing more than a euphemism for extended combat troops.
If the Pentagon gets its way, 25,000 US troops may be left in Afghanistan from 2015 until at least 2024 and possibly longer.
Fact: the Strategic Partnership Agreement, struck between the United States and Afghanistan in June 2012, provides for a US military presence after 2014, although the magnitude of the presence was not specified.
On November 12, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters the Obama administration would come to a decision within the next few weeks about the magnitude of the post-2014 US military presence in Afghanistan. Panetta would not comment on the troop levels being considered.
If the Pentagon gets its way, the US will be at war in Afghanistan for at least 13 additional years - that's three more years than we've been at war to this point - which means we aren’t even at the half-way mark today, let alone nearing the end!In September 2012, it was widely reported that Obama's "troop surge" in Afghanistan was over, leaving 68,000 troops in the country.

But when President Obama took office, there were roughly 34,000 US troops in Afghanistan. In two "surges," he added to this figure over 66,000 additional troops. By reducing the US troop presence by 33,000, his drawdown plan has removed only half the number of troops that he sent to Afghanistan, not all of them.
I was surprised to learn out our military command says there are less than 100 al Qaeda left in all of Afghanistan. If memory serves, our original mission was to get ride of al Qaeda. According to the latest Brookings Institute Afghanistan Index, they face a combined force (US and allies) of 694,108. To put it mildly, that’s a case of overkill.
  One of the reasons this war is not winding down is the Taliban have made it quite clear that peace requires a willingness by the US to leave. Period. Our war hawks don’t want to leave and that’s why they’ve been negotiating with the current Afghanistan government to keep our troops there.

   Here’s the thing, the majority of Americans want the war to end and they don’t want to leave troops behind forever. The demand for a complete withdrawal hasn’t been greater partly because many Americans are confused about President Obama’s plan for withdrawal. Polls have tended to equate the withdrawal of all “combat” troops with the withdrawal of all troops. The implied message: just a couple more years and the war will be over.  
This confusion has worked in the favor of the Pentagon and its war hawks for over a decade. The truth about Afghanistan needs to be brought into the light. Knowledge is power, and it’s up to sane-thinking people to demand a real end to this war. Too many lives are at stake to allow such a vague future for our troops and their families.
Talk with your senators and representatives. Let them know how you feel. Challenge the media to present all the facts about this never-ending war. Go to social medias like FaceBook and Twitter and tell our politicians you’re tired of their lies and vague truths and you want the war to end sooner, rather than later.
  As It Stands, the presidential candidates managed to avoid talking about ending the war. We can’t allow the winner to do the same thing, or to placate us with vague promises.

The Case for Treating PTSD in Veterans With Medical Marijuana

Researchers are one bureaucratic hurdle away from gaining approval for the first clinical examination on the benefits of marijuana for veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD).

The Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), working under the auspices of the University of Arizona College of Medicine, are preparing a three-month study of combat veterans who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. The plan is on hold until the National Institute on Drug Abuse and Public Health Service (part of the Department of Health and Human Services) agrees to sell researchers the marijuana needed for research -- or until the marijuana can be legally imported. Social and political intrigue surrounding this research is far reaching, attracting opposing factions who must cede biases for the greater good and well-being of servicemen and servicewomen.

The University-controlled study Sisley advocates calls for a triple-blind and placebo-controlled environment. A meticulously prepared proposal recommends a sample base of 50 veterans, whosePTSD symptoms have not improved under current standard medical practices. All participants must agree to abstain from marijuana use for 30 days prior to participation. In two ensuing 60-day periods, the veterans are asked to either smoke or vaporize a maximum of 1.8 grams of marijuana a day (the equivalent of two marijuana cigarettes). The test group will be furnished a weekly supply of various strains of marijuana, with THC levels ranging from 0 percent to 12 percent. Sisley's study objectives are twofold. "With this research, we can actually figure out which symptoms it might help with, and what an optimal dosing strategy might look like." She is also mindful of public opinion regarding medical marijuana. "If we get a chance to do this, we're not taking liberties. This is a carefully controlled, rigorous scientific study. We're not sitting around trying to get these vets high."

If anecdotal evidence were the standard, acceptance of marijuana's calming properties among psychologically scarred soldiers would be a topic relegated to the past. Statistical evidence to support that hypothesis could be petitioned from the state of New Mexico, where medical marijuana is legally prescribed for PTSD. The state's number one diagnosis for a medical marijuana license, a noteworthy 27 percent of the total, lists PTSD as the qualifying criteria for issuance. That statistic comes as no surprise to Sisley, but she stresses circumstantial evidence is not enough to sway the wide range of government agencies she deals with. "We really believe science should supersede politics," she said. "This illness needs to be treated in a multidisciplinary way. Drugs likeZoloft and Paxil have proven entirely inadequate."

In neighboring Colorado, the state's legislature failed to pass a proposal mirroring New Mexico's. It effectively forbade Colorado's large veteran population from citing PTSD on medical marijuana applications. Brian Vicente, of the Sensible Colorado organization, became an advocate for veterans after the legislative rejection. Vicente has watched the government fight itself over this issue. "The federal government is, in some ways, divided," Vicente said. "Agencies like theVeterans Administration have taken some fairly decent stances of medical marijuana." Quickly, he adds a qualifier: "But, then you have the DEA [Drug Enforcement Administration] and NIDA [the National Institute on Drug Abuse] and organizations like them blocking research that other parts of the government are authorizing. It's another example of the federal government being schizophrenic and flat-out wrong on marijuana as medicine." This is a frustrating scenario Sisley has encountered first-hand. "I can't help but think they simply don't want to move forward," she said. "Maybe they figure if they stall long enough, we'll give up and go away."

As arguments among American government agencies continue, other nations are taking the lead generating medical arguments that advance Sisley's theory. A study at Israel's University of Haifashowed that marijuana administered to rats within 24 hours of suffering psychological trauma effectively blocked the development of post-traumatic stress disorder. Dr. Irit Akirav's study even concludes there is a time-frame that has to be taken into consideration. "There is a critical window of time after trauma, during which synthetic marijuana can help prevent symptoms similar to PTSD in rats," Akirav stated at the time. "It does not erase the experience, but can help prevent the development of PTSD symptoms." In Germany, Switzerland, and Spain there are currently programs, some government funded, utilizing MDMA (from which the "ecstasy" drug is derived) as a possible inhibitor of PTSD symptoms.

A governmental lack of decisiveness has created unintended consequences and casualties in the medical field. One is Dr. Phil Leveque, a World War II veteran who had his medical license revoked based on the large number of medical marijuana permits he issued for PTSD in Oregon. Leveque estimates he signed 1,000 permits for PTSD, and said he did so with a clear conscience. "Whether they were World War II, Korea, Vietnam or vets from the current conflicts, 100 percent of my patients said it was better than any drug they were prescribed for PTSD," he said. Sixteen states and the District of Columbia currently have laws permitting marijuana for medical use. However, Veterans Affairs physicians are expressly prohibited from recommending patients for enrollment in any state's medical marijuana program. This, again, highlights contradictions at different levels of government agencies.

Veterans Affairs data disclosed that from 2002 to 2009 one million troops left active duty in Iraq or Afghanistan and became eligible for VA care. That's a number that will rise annually, revealing a need for effective treatment of PTSD that cannot be overstated. PTSD remains an enormous consideration with combat troops still serving in Afghanistan, where an estimated six to 11 percent are currently suffering symptoms of PTSD. Statistics among Iraq War veterans are more disturbing, with between 12 to 20 percent of returning vets suffering PTSD-related anxieties. Those are government statistics, and some non-governmental studies suggest that as many as one in every five military personnel returning from Iraq and Afghanistan could suffer various forms of PTSD. Veteran Affairs recognizes these facts, and to its credit funds unconventional studies of PTSD, employing therapy dogs and yoga.

Sisley has found an ally in Rick Doblin, executive director of the leading psychedelic studies group. Doblin has the unenviable job of lobbying Congress under the umbrella of the non-profit MAPS. The pair share a common frustration dealing with the multitude of government agencies, some of whose interests are diametrically opposed. Doblin addresses apprehensions from the administrative standpoint: "We're asking for marijuana from an agency [National Institute on Drug Abuse] designed to prevent people from using marijuana. There's something fundamental that just doesn't work here," he said. Sisley's concerns revolve around medical studies in the field, which often fail to gain approval because of political motives instead of science. "The doctors I know think this war on marijuana is awful, and they're tired of being in the middle of it," she said. "They just want to do real research, or read real research, and not operate around all of these agendas."

Veterans endure a framework of care for PTSD that has not changed since 1980, when PTSD was added to American Psychiatric Association's dictionary of maladies. Federal agencies are clearly confused, unable to reconcile the illegality of marijuana with the benefits it could have on the lives of soldiers and their extended families. These issues are not being addressed in an open forum; instead, they remain hidden behind committee doors or special panels of anonymous voices with unknown prejudices. Medical marijuana remains one of the nation's biggest political hot potatoes, and when combined with our veterans' health creates a unique conundrum for politicians. Disturbingly, the people caught in this crossfire of self-interest are veterans who risked their lives for the system that may be stifling their medical options now. (Source)

‘Gag me with a spoon!’ Even Nurses Have Their Moments and Hurl

         Good Day World!

My wife calls me a big “wuss” when it comes to my dealing with certain smells. Since I tried changing our first son’s diaper and upchucked on him and everything nearby she has had to assume the smellier details of our lives.

Every time I tried to help clean up the dog poo, I made more of a mess! It wasn’t pretty, and the reason I gave up trying to help her.

If the garbage really stinks – like rotting fish for example – I have to take a deep breath, pinch my nose with one hand and run outside swinging the plastic trash bag at my side until I can toss it into the steel outdoor trash can. If the weather’s bad, this is really a sight to behold – especially if I slip and have to clean up the mess! (Yes, it’s happened)

I shouldn’t feel so bad however. Even nurses can’t take certain sights and smells without vomiting like dogs! Or me. We all have our trigger point it seems (okay I have a half dozen!) when it comes to things that induce us to hurl the contents of our guts.

“The triggers span green, brown and all the vibrant colors of the digestive rainbow. Sudden squeamishness is prompted, for some, by fountains of phlegm and, for others, by certain fragrant excretions.

In the profession, it’s often just called “the one thing” -- that single human function or unappealing appendage that can instantly disgust and distress seasoned medical professionals who otherwise handle all sorts of discharges, emissions and oozing with barely a wince.

“Even though very little in the way of bodily fluids bother me, I do have one thing that sparks the heebie-jeebies,” said Barb Dehn, a women’s health nurse practitioner who has often lectured at Stanford University.

“Despite years of attending births with gushing amniotic fluid, blood and other slimy secretions, doing gynecologic exams on sex workers, and changing dressings for people with gangrene, the one thing that makes me gag is … wait for it … the sight of dentures in a glass. No kidding, I can't stand it and begin to retch every time,” said Dehn, who works at El Camino Hospital in Mountain View, Calif.

“When I was caring for some elderly relatives, I could do everything else: change diapers, change oozing dressings, give enemas. But brushing their dentures was just too much for me. Go figure.”

Ask 10 nurses the same question – what is your “one thing?” – and you may hear 10 different answers.

Warning for the easily grossed out: This is stomach-turning stuff.

For Terry Ann Black, who spent 46 years nursing in Vermont and Maryland, it’s “anything having to do with the eyes,” including punctures and foreign bodies.

“Why do eyes bother me? Not really sure, but I think I am afraid that something will gush out of them,” said Black, author of a “Caring is Not Enough,” an end-of-life planning workbook. “I also had a recurring patient who had a fake eye and he would pop it out just to get a reaction. I accommodated him.”

For Sandy Navalta, a certified in San Francisco, the problem is way at the other end.

"The one thing that absolutely grosses me out are situations where a patient has been constipated for days. When the patient is given a stool softener, what comes out is three days of hard stool followed by projectile diarrhea,” Navalta said. “And that diarrhea flows down the leg and into the cast, if the patient is wearing one – and, yes, that has happened to me. I've had to clean it up.”

And for Deonne Brown Benedict, a family nurse practitioner and owner of Charis Family Clinic in Edmonds, Wash., the human juice that makes her woozy her is something with which many of us also struggle.

Her impetus is vomitus.

“I almost didn't become a nurse because I figured I might come in contact with vomit more than once in my career. Thankfully, it hasn't been as frequent as I had envisioned,” said Benedict, who has invested 17 years in the medical profession.

She vividly recalls an early, nursing-student moment when one of her first patients began to hurl. As the woman upchucked, Benedict tossed her an emesis basin, “and went running out of the room so that I wouldn't be the next person to lose it,” she said.

“I happened to see a group of eager medical students looking for a good ‘case study,’ so I pointed them right to my patient. They went right in, probably wondering what had happened to the nurse on duty.” Benedict “recovered,” she said, from her guilt and her own wave of nausea and forced herself to “toughen up in this area.”

At least in terms of cookie tossings, some people gag when they see others vomit because it’s believed that mirror neurons in their brains make them more empathetic and cause their bodies to emulate what they see. Like forming tears when you see someone crying, experts say.

Following similar logic, Stanford lecturer Dehn theorizes that many nurses have varied causes for their on-the-job cases of the cold sweats because they all are wired differently, and have had distinct life experiences that they can't check at the examination-room door.

She points to the brain’s limbic system, which help control the body’s reactions to and actions during perceived moments of self-preservation.

“In my own opinion, it must derive from an imprinting that occurs early on in life, and that there are neural pathways that get laid down early and maybe get reinforced throughout life,” Dehn said.

This may explain why Becki Hawkins, a nurse who worked for 30 years in oncology and hospice in the Tulsa area, sites just one aversion when it comes to hands-on human care.

“Not the blood, not the open wounds, not the poo, not the body odor, nor the feet,” Hawkins said.

“The only thing that would really make me scoot out of a room real quick was,” she added, “when a tracheotomy patient would cough up a huge, green ball of phlegm into my face – accidentally and without warning.”

Let's be honest, though, that's going to make pretty much anyone scoot.” (Source)

Time for me to walk on down the road…

Gotcha! Powerball prize-sharing joke hits 1M shares on Facebook

Some people have to feel real stupid tonight. Or, maybe not. Anything is worth a shot right?

A joke Facebook post by a man claiming to have a winning Powerball lottery ticket has been shared 1 million times just in the 24 hours since it was posted.

Nolan Daniels posted an image of himself on the social network holding a Powerball ticket Thursday evening. He claimed it was a winning ticket and that if his friends shared the photo, he would give a million dollars to one of them at random. As the post was made public (and remains so as of this writing), it went viral, spreading from Facebook to blogs and various websites.

Even a cursory examination of the photo shows it to be the crudest of manipulations, with the telltale signs of simple copying and pasting to make the numbers appear to be a winning permutation. And those familiar with the rules may also have noticed that the numbers are not printed in numerical order, as they would be on a real ticket.

Despite the ruse being glaringly obvious, the photo — and some folks' hopes for a cut of the dough — has spread like wildfire. NBC News has contacted Daniels for comment, and will update this post if we hear back from him. (Source)

From the Marijuana Files: Why Are We Testing Newborns for Pot?

       Good Day World!

It seems I don’t have to look far nowadays to find a story dealing with marijuana. Some are strange. Some are ridiculous. Some are funny. Some are shocking. Some leave you shaking your head in dull wonder. I’ll leave it to you to decide which the following story about marijuana is:

  “The science is alarmingly inconclusive, but the punishment for mothers is severe. Employees at US hospitals are testing more and more newborns for cannabis exposure. And, with alarming frequency, they are getting the wrong results. So say a pair of recent studies documenting the unreliability of infant drug testing.

  In the most recent trial, published in the September edition of the Journal of Clinical Chemistry , investigators at the University of Utah School of Medicine evaluated the rate of unconfirmed "positive" immunoassay test results in infant and non-infant urine samples over a 52-week period.

  Shockingly, authors found that positive tests for carboxy THC, a byproduct of THC screened for in immunoassay urine tests, were 59 times less likely to be confirmed in infant urine specimens as compared to non-infant urine samples.       Overall, 47 percent of the infant positive immunoassay urine samples evaluated did not test for the presence of carboxy THC when confirmatory assay measures were later performed.

  “No child-health expert would characterize recreational drug use during pregnancy as a good idea,” writes Time.com columnist Maia Szalavitz. “But it’s not at all clear that the benefits, if any, of newborn marijuana screening – particularly given how selectively the tests are administered – justify the potential harm it can cause to families.”
Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform agrees, telling Time.com that the emotional damage caused by removing an infant child from their mothers, as well as the risk of abuse inherent to foster care, far outweigh any risks to the child that may be caused by maternal marijuana use during pregnancy.

   In fact, the potential health effects of maternal marijuana use on infant birth weight and early development have been subject to scientific scrutiny for several decades. One of the earliest and most often cited studies on the topic comes from Dr. Melanie Dreher and colleagues, who assessed neonatal outcomes in Jamaica, where it is customary for many women to ingest cannabis, often in tea, during pregnancy to combat symptoms of morning sickness.

Writing in the journal  Pediatrics in 1994, Dreher and colleagues reported no significant physical or psychological differences in newborns of heavy marijuana-using mothers at three days old, and found that exposed children performed better on a variety of physiological and autonomic tests than non-exposed children at 30 days. (This latter trend was suggested to have been a result of the socio-economic status of the mothers rather than a result of pre-natal pot exposure.) (Source)

Time for me to walk on down the road…

Scientist warn public: Grapefruit juice can interact badly with your medication

               Good Day World!
If you kick-start your day with a glass of grapefruit juice, be careful.
Canadian scientists say the number of common drugs that can interact badly with the tart citrus is climbing, with the potential for dangerous, even deadly, results.
Twenty-six new drugs that can cause serious harm when mixed with grapefruit have been introduced in the past four years alone, bringing the total to 43, said Dr. David Bailey, a clinical pharmacologist at the Lawson Health Institute Research Center in London, Ontario. That’s an average of more than six new drugs a year.
“What I’ve seen has been disturbing,” said Bailey, lead author on a study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal. “It’s hard to avoid putting a drug out on the market that is not affected by grapefruit juice.”

More than 85 drugs that interact with whole grapefruit, grapefruit concentrate or fresh grapefruit juice have been identified, though not all have serious consequences. Those that do, however, can cause problems that include acute kidney failure, respiratory failure, gastric bleeding -- and worse.
“When I say sudden death, I’m not being sensational,” said Bailey, who said 13 drugs may be lethal when mixed with grapefruit.
The heart drug dronedarone, or Multaq, for instance, has a very high risk of interaction when taken with grapefruit, which may cause a rare form of ventricular tachycardia or rapid heart rhythm, the researchers found.
the prescription painkiller oxycodone with grapefruit can cause serious breathing problems, and adding the fruit to a dose of the popular statin simvastatin, or Zocor, can lead to rhabdomyolysis, a breakdown of muscle fibers that can lead to kidney damage.
To see a complete list of drugs that interact with grapefruit, click here.
The trouble with grapefruit has been known for two decades, ever since Bailey and his colleagues first discovered that ingestion of the fruit with certain prescription drugs can concentrate the medication in a patient’s bloodstream.
Drinking less than a cup of grapefruit juice once a day for three days, for instance, can lead to a 330 percent concentration of simvastatin, the researchers reported.
“I’ve seen a 10-fold increase in some patients,” Bailey said. And it doesn’t matter whether the grapefruit is consumed hours before the pills, the researchers found.
The problem is caused by an active ingredient in some citrus fruits, including grapefruit, limes and pomelos. Even the Seville oranges used in marmalades can trigger it. The fruits produce organic chemical compounds called furanocoumarins, which interfere with a human digestive enzyme.
That enzyme, called CYP3A4, helps metabolize toxic substances to keep them from getting into the bloodstream. Typically, that means the enzyme inactivates the effects of about 50 percent of all medications. Doctors adjust for that when prescribing drugs.

However, when the furanocoumarins in citrus inhibit that enzyme, the drugs can become concentrated in a patient’s system. In some cases, it can be like getting a triple or quadruple dose of medication, Bailey said.
Drugs known to interact with grapefruit do carry warnings, but Bailey said he believes that neither doctors nor patients may take the threat seriously enough.
“Basically, most people are sort of aware of grapefruit juice drug interactions, but I don’t think it’s in the forefront of their mind on a regular basis,” he said.
It’s not clear how many people actually are harmed by grapefruit interactions, mostly because the side effects are often not recognized as being related to the citrus, said Bailey, who included eight case reports in his study. “For every case report, there are at least 100 that have never been reported,” he said.
Part of the concern lies in the fact that people older than 45 are most likely to consume grapefruit juice -- and to take prescription drugs. Seniors older than 70 have the most trouble tolerating excessively high levels of drugs, Bailey noted.

“These are the individuals with the greatest chance of exposure," he said.
Patients worried about the interaction of grapefruit with their medications should talk with their doctors, Bailey said. And doctors should make sure to ask about grapefruit consumption when prescribing drugs.
Some grapefruit lovers may have cut back already because of the risk of drug interaction. Consumption of grapefruit juice has dropped in the past decade, falling from .44 gallons of juice per person per year in 2000 to .15 gallons per person in 2011, according to figures from the Florida Department of Citrus.
Officials there say that although some drugs do interact with grapefruit, most do not. In most cases, doctors can prescribe drugs in the same class that don’t interact, noted Karen Mathis, a department spokeswoman.
“These medications often can provide the same therapeutic effect with no need to avoid grapefruit juice,” she said in a statement. And not all citrus poses a problem, Bailey noted. Sweet oranges, such as navel and Valencia varieties, don’t contain the damaging compound.
“You have an alternative there,” he suggested. “If you want to take your medications with orange juice, you’re home free.” (Source)
Time for me to walk on down the road…

Court Calls for Corrective Ads: Tobacco Firms Ordered to Say They Lied about Smoking Dangers

            Good Day World!

I can still remember how grouchy I was that first week of January 2000. I quit smoking cigarettes cold turkey after nearly 30 years of the bad habit. I was eating Altoids (curiously strong mints) by the handful. But as the days turned into months I saw the positive results…and was impressed.

I got my sense of smell and taste back (although it took nearly a year for my taste buds to fully recoup). I was taking deep breaths and not hacking like a chimney sweep. It felt good not hear my lungs rattle as I talked. Most of my clothes were so sodden with nicotine that I had to throw them out and start over.

Once I broke that terrible addiction, I looked into the lies the tobacco industry was telling the public with the refreshed eyes of a new found anti-tobacco zealot. It’s been a slow process getting the tobacco industry to this point but now it’s really time for them to eat crow:

A federal judge on Tuesday ordered tobacco companies to publish corrective statements that say they lied about the dangers of smoking and that disclose smoking's health effects, including the death on average of 1,200 people a day.

U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler previously had said she wanted the industry to pay for corrective statements in various types of advertisements. But Tuesday's ruling is the first time she's laid out what the statements will say.

Each corrective ad is to be prefaced by a statement that a federal court has concluded that the defendant tobacco companies "deliberately deceived the American public about the ."

Among the required statements are that more people than murder, AIDS, suicide, drugs, car crashes and alcohol combined, and that "secondhand smoke kills over 3,000 Americans a year."

The corrective statements are part of a case the government brought in 1999 under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations. Kessler ruled in that case in 2006 that the nation's largest cigarette makers concealed the dangers of smoking for decades, and said she wanted the industry to pay for "corrective statements" in various types of ads, both broadcast and print. The Justice Department proposed corrective statements, which Kessler used as the basis for some of the ones she ordered Tuesday.

Tobacco companies had urged Kessler to reject the government's proposed industry-financed corrective statements; the companies called them "forced public confessions." They also said the statements were designed to "shame and humiliate" them. They had argued for statements that include the health effects and addictive qualities of smoking.

Kessler wrote that all of the corrective statements are based on specific findings of fact made by the court.

"This court made a number of explicit findings that the tobacco companies perpetuated fraud and deceived the public regarding the addictiveness of cigarettes and nicotine," she said.

A spokesman for Altria Group Inc., owner of the nation's biggest tobacco company, Philip Morris USA, said the company was studying the court's decision and did not provide any further comment. A spokesman for Reynolds American Inc., parent company of No. 2 cigarette maker, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., said the company was reviewing the ruling and considering its next steps.

The statements Kessler chose included five categories: adverse health effects of smoking; addictiveness of smoking and nicotine; lack of significant health benefit from smoking cigarettesmarked as "low tar," "light," etc.; manipulation of cigarette design and composition to ensure optimum nicotine delivery; and adverse health effects of exposure to secondhand smoke.

Among the statements within those categories:

• "Smoking kills, on average, 1,200 Americans. Every day." 
• "Defendant tobacco companies intentionally designed cigarettes to make them more addictive." 
• "When you smoke, the nicotine actually changes the brain — that's why quitting is so hard." 
• "All cigarettes cause cancer, lung disease, heart attacks and premature death — lights, low tar, ultra lights and naturals. There is no safe cigarette." 
• "Secondhand smoke causes lung cancer and coronary heart disease in adults who do not smoke." "Children exposed to secondhand smoke are at an increased risk for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), acute respiratory infections, ear problems, severe asthma and reduced lung function." 
• "There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke."

  Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller said the department was pleased with the order.

  

  Matt Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, called it an important ruling.

  "The most critical part of the ruling is that it requires the tobacco companies to state clearly that the court found that they deceived the American public and that they are telling the truth now only because the court is ordering them to do so," Myers said in an interview. "This isn't the last word, but this is a vitally important step because this should resolve exactly what the tobacco companies are required to say."

  In July, a federal appeals court rejected efforts by the tobacco companies to overrule Kessler's ruling requiring corrective statements. The companies had argued that a 2009 law that gave the Food and Drug Administration authority over the industry eliminated "any reasonable likelihood" that they would commit future RICO violations.

  In her ruling Tuesday, Kessler ordered the tobacco companies and Justice Department to meet beginning next month to address how to implement the corrective statements, including whether they will be put in inserts with cigarette packs and on websites, TV and newspaper ads. Those discussions are to conclude by March. (source)

  Time for me to walk on down the road….and not tobacco road either!

  Time for me to walk on down