Blissfully, BBC Earth: Arctic Sea Ice [Infographic] agrees. They've taken decades of stats and put them into two, count 'em 2, easily understood images that show - graphically - the dramatic changes in age and expanse.

Age of Arctic Ice (1984-2011)

This is a statistic I had never considered - how old is the ice in the Arctic? In mid-1985, for example, more than 30% of the ice was more than 5 years old; by 2011, that number was more like 10%. Meaning, to my mind, that less and less ice is surviving from year to year.

The chart bears this out. More than 85% of the ice was more than 2 years old in 1985; compared to less than 50% today. Although there has been a steady decline since 1985, the absolute worst periods seem to be mid-1995 through late-1996, and late-2007 through 2008 Frightening, isn't it?

Average of Arctic Sea Ice Extent (1979-2011)

Now, this is the more common measurement, in my experience: how far does the Arctic ice extend? The answer is a little surprising. Not because there's less now than 25 years ago, but because of the variance within any given decade.

From 1978 to 1981, there wasn't much change - over 7 million square kilometers. Then, 1984 saw a bit of a reduction and 1987 a huge increase in area. In 1990 and 2002, the extent dropped more than a million square kilometers.

The worst year, so far, was 2008 at barely over 4 million square kilometers. But the year that saw the greatest spread of Arctic sea ice was 1996 with over 8 million square kilometers measured.

Good News?

While it would appear that the ice is not lasting several years anymore and the older ice is not-so-slowly disappearing, there might be some good news: this newer ice seems to be covering a bit larger area. Between 2008 and 2011, the extent of the sea ice has increased moderately, as has the age of the remaining ice.

I hope this means that there are changes happening in the world having a bit of a positive impact on the Arctic. Although, having lost about half of the sea ice in a short 12 years does not bode well for the flora and fauna of the area - as well as the rest of the planet.

What do you think? Is the message getting through? Or are these tiny improvements a fluke of nature?

Sunset Reusable Tote Bag

This image is one of Arizona's amazing sunsets, taken from our parking lot. The colors are almost as beautiful in reality.

The tote is made from 100% cotton and has strong handles with reinforced stitching and measures 15.75"h x 15.25"w.

2012 Arizona Scenery Calendar

Spend a year in beautiful Arizona, with images that can only be found in the amazing Grand Canyon State.

This calendar comes in 13 different styles and 3 different sizes, with wire binding in 7 different colors.

And now for some brand new products:

Birds/Proverb Laptop Sleeve

Our latest Bird-in-a-Tree product also offers a humorous Chinese Proverb:

You cannot prevent the birds of sorrow from flying over your head, but you can prevent them from building nests in your hair.

Made from 100% neoprene, this waterproof laptop sleeve comes in 3 sizes to fit every laptop.

Purple/Aqua Star Gel Mousepad

Sometimes it's deliberate; sometimes it's an accident. This star is the result of flipping and combining copies of a single graphic image. Who knew?!

This contoured oval mousepad features an ergonomic gel-pad wrist support and non-skid black plastic base, and measures 9 ¼"x10 ½";.

Hope that you have as much fun with our newest designs as I did making them. Leave a comment and let me know what you think.

Good News

According to Jay Zagorsky, research scientist at Ohio State University's Center for Human Resource Research and co-author of the study, "Not only is there not a 'Freshman 15,' there doesn't appear to be even a 'college 15' for most students." Apparently, only about 10 percent of students put on that much weight and - even better - about ¼ actually lose weight in their first year.

Bad News

Comparing non-college young adults to freshmen, it appears that weight gain is tied to aging more than school. Both groups gained weight in the equivalent year, with students putting on about ½ pound more than their non-studious counterparts. An average of 3.5 pounds for men hitting the books; 3.0 pounds for the non-matriculators. (Women gained about a pound less than the men.)

Reasoning

It is believed that the reasons college-age youth put on weight - regardless of post-secondary pursuits - are the same. They've, frequently, moved away from home and are living on a tight budget. They can't afford more expensive healthy foods, like fruits and veggies. They also, finally away from Mom and Dad, don't have to eat said fruits and veggies, if they don't want to. And many of them don't want to.

Additionally, at this point in their lives, they may be less active than they were in high school. Few athletes go on to play college sports and there are minimal phys-ed requirements in college. Not to mention, non-collegiates have fewer opportunities for rigorous, organized athleticism.

Bottom Line

Eighteen- and nineteen-year-olds can expect to put on a few pounds once they get out of school. How many pounds will depend on diet, activity, and metabolic luck. Just one more reason to eat healthy and exercise - early, and often.

Me? I ate a lot of pasta al burro and had a wicked metabolism that first year of college. What about you?

The Bill

The official summary states:

Amends the federal criminal code to authorize a person who is carrying a government-issued photographic identification document and a valid permit to carry a concealed firearm in one state, and who is not prohibited from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm under federal law, to carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) in another state in accordance with the restrictions of that state.

The OpenCongress summary simplifies that:

Would require all states to allow out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms as long as the laws of the vistors' home states allow them to do so.

Sponsors of HR 822 cite the Second "Right to Bear Arms" Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment as reasoning behind the bill [emphasis mine]:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

How It's Done Now

As was explained by a New York congresswoman, currently, states legislate their own requirements for individuals to be granted a concealed-carry permit. Some states are strict; others more relaxed. In keeping with those regulations, states form agreements with other states, related to carrying weapons across state lines.

For example, New York has some of the most restrictive concealed-carry regulations of all states. They have partnered with states whose laws mirror or are compatible with their own to recognize each other's carry permits. Meaning, if Colorado has regulations similar to New York's, the two states might agree that residents of Colorado could legally travel into New York carrying a concealed weapon. And vice versa.

Conversely, if another state's laws were significantly different, New York could choose to not allow those residents to carry a concealed weapon in the state. As I haven't read the statutes for any state, I don't know the specifics on any agreements or possible repercussions for violations.

What Would Change

If this bill, introduced in February of this year, were to pass - all of these regulations and agreements would be out the window. The federal government would be legislating how the states run things. A step that could set a precedent for other intrusions into, and violations of, states' express rights.

With this (potential) change, in direct violation of the Tenth Amendment, New York (or any state) couldn't say or enforce: "Gee, we don't think convicted felons should be allowed to carry a concealed weapon in our state, no matter what state ABC thinks is right for their state."

My (Personal) Opinion

Any legislation that protects the rights of citizens has always seemed like a good idea to me.

As far as the Fourteenth Amendment? In my limited understanding, I imagine that the intent was much different at the time of adoption - given that it's one of the Reconstruction Amendments adopted in the five years following the Civil War. Undoubtedly, the goal was to stop former slave-holding states from arresting free blacks who traveled into or through their states.

But, that's just my opinion. And, please, don't get me started on the impact of stomping on the Tenth Amendment.

Newborn Hat, Sweater, & Shoes

This newborn set consists of a cloche-style (brimless) hat, sleeveless sweater, and lace-up bootie shoes.

Crocheted in 3-ply baby yarn, this set is soft, comfy for baby, and easy on and off. Designed for little girls, there is a cute little flower on the hat with a simple bow in the center.

The main color makes up the bodice, trim, and ties on the sweater, as well as the upper on the shoes. We've crocheted the soles and ties of the shoes in the accent color - and just love the look!

Because not everyone wants / likes more than one color, we offer the option of ordering the set in a single color. It's just as lovely. And, as always, shipping is included in the price.

Hats, Mittens, and Booties

These sweet, warm baby hats, mittens, and booties simply must be seen to be believed. They are so cute, no matter what color.

This newborn set consists of a cloche-style (brimless) hat, mittens, and booties. Crocheted in 3-ply baby yarn, this set is soft, comfy, and stretches just enough to fit all newborns. All ties are done in white.

The booties and mittens are appropriate for boys, girls, and when you don't know yet. Simply pick the right colors for your baby / grandbaby, and we'll take it from there.

The flower is optional, as you can see. For boys, simply check 'No' and we'll leave it off.

With winter on it's way, it's a good time to think about keeping warm. And, because these items are small, they ship within 3 days of your order - for Free.

We are so excited about these new items. Hopefully, you will be, too. Please let us know what you think.

Newborn Hat, Sweater, & Shoes

This newborn set consists of a cloche-style (brimless) hat, sleeveless sweater, and lace-up bootie shoes.

Crocheted in 3-ply baby yarn, this set is soft, comfy for baby, and easy on and off. Designed for little girls, there is a cute little flower on the hat with a simple bow in the center.

The main color makes up the bodice, trim, and ties on the sweater, as well as the upper on the shoes. We've crocheted the soles and ties of the shoes in the accent color - and just love the look!

Because not everyone wants / likes more than one color, we offer the option of ordering the set in a single color. It's just as lovely. And, as always, shipping is included in the price.

Hats, Mittens, and Booties

These sweet, warm baby hats, mittens, and booties simply must be seen to be believed. They are so cute, no matter what color.

This newborn set consists of a cloche-style (brimless) hat, mittens, and booties. Crocheted in 3-ply baby yarn, this set is soft, comfy, and stretches just enough to fit all newborns. All ties are done in white.

The booties and mittens are appropriate for boys, girls, and when you don't know yet. Simply pick the right colors for your baby / grandbaby, and we'll take it from there.

The flower is optional, as you can see. For boys, simply check 'No' and we'll leave it off.

With winter on it's way, it's a good time to think about keeping warm. And, because these items are small, they ship within 3 days of your order - for Free.

We are so excited about these new items. Hopefully, you will be, too. Please let us know what you think.

Since 1992, fifty-two journalists have been murdered in the former Soviet Union; eighteen of those deaths are still unsolved. And that doesn't begin to approach the number of journalists who are routinely beaten, jailed, harassed, and threatened for exposing crimes and corruption in the political and military leadership of the pseudo-democratic country.

Politkovskaya was arrested by Russian military forces in Chechnya, subjected to a mock trial and torture, and later poisoned on her way to Belan. She survived and continued to report on the wars. One can only assume that it was desperation to silence her voice that led to the brutal shooting, in the elevator of her apartment building, five years ago.

Please, on this sad day, share her story and don't let the world forget what happened to her and continues to happen to journalists who speak out against Russia.

In a nutshell, this was intended to be similar to the Pizza Hut pasta switch. You've seen those commercials, right? People are invited to a nice restaurant for a pasta dinner, only to find out - after the fact - that it wasn't haute cuisine, but Pizza Hut's new pasta offerings.

Chuckle, chuckle. "Ooh, you fooled me." New ad campaign is launched.

In this case, the bloggers invited to dinner were somewhat seduced with talk of preservative-free food and community-supported agriculture prior to the meal. The implication was, apparently, that the food they would be served would exemplify those concepts. Instead, the diners were treated to Marie Callender's new lasagna meal and Razzleberry pie - soon to be found in the freezer section of your local market.

It wasn't so much the deception by ConAgra/Marie Callender's that I found upsetting. They were attempting to prove that, if you removed the labels, most people couldn't tell chef-made from frozen. Unfortunately, they also scripted and controlled conversations, leading people to believe that they were not just getting chef-made, but healthy chef-made. That was the hook for the ad campaign.

While we don't know if there were outraged consumers after the Pizza Hut pasta meal, we do know that the bloggers (by and large) were not amused by what many felt was a bait-and-switch. There are posts all over the 'Net attesting to their dissatisfaction. And a great number of comments attached to those posts.

The comments are what triggered my ire. Many of them read like plants; highly negative, personal attacks on the bloggers. I don't know if they're damage control by ConAgra or not. But if you look at Chubby Chinese Girl or Mom Confessionals or Food Mayhem, all quoted in the NYT article, there are a number of snarky commenters jumping from blog to blog.

This was a PR stunt that went badly. Bloggers who pride themselves on the veracity of their work were duped. They have the right to voice an opinion of the event; a responsibility, in fact.

They don't deserve to be attacked for expressing their displeasure. Well, I don't think they do, anyway. What do you think?

I must admit, I loved the article from snopes.com. No one knows where the eight-glasses-a-day rule came from, and there are most certainly experts on both sides of the issue, pointing fingers and crying foul. But I was looking for information about how much fluid we lose on a daily basis. This quote, I think covers it:

To replace daily losses of water, an average-sized adult with healthy kidneys sitting in a temperate climate needs no more than one liter of fluid, according to Jurgen Schnermann, a kidney physiologist at the National Institutes of Health.

Food

Not all of the fluids that we take in during an average day come from beverages. Depending on our diet, we could be adding two or three of those 8 oz. glasses through fruits and vegetables, alone.

Foods with high fluid content include:

• 1 medium Apple - 4 oz.
• ½ medium Cucumber - 5 oz.
• ½ medium Grapefruit - 4 oz.
• 1 small Potato, baked 5 oz.
• 1 small Potato, boiled 6 ⅓ oz.
• ¾ cup Soup, average - 5 ⅓ oz.
• 1 small Tomato - 4 oz.
• ½ cup Watermelon - 2 ½ oz.

It's easy to see, with just these few items, how simple it is - especially right now when produce is at its best - to keep hydrated. All without guzzling copious amounts of water.

Bad Beverages

Not all fluids are created equal.

Caffeine

For years, we have been told that drinking coffee and tea leads to dehydration. This is apparently based on the fact that coffee and tea contain caffeine, and caffeine has a diuretic effect on the body. However, a 2003 review of medical and scientific literature for the period of January 1966–March 2002 found that, in simple terms, if you indulge in caffeine on a regular basis, you are likely to be immune to the mildly diuretic effects.

If you rarely drink tea or coffee, when you do indulge, you may spend more time in the bathroom than your neighbor - the caffeine junkie. But there is no evidence, according to this review, that simply having a cup or two of coffee will cause you to pee out more than you drank. You probably don't need to drink extra water to counteract the caffeine.

Alcohol

Like caffeine, alcohol has a diuretic effect on the body. However, it's just a little more aggressive. (If you've ever had two beers and peed out four, you know what I mean.)

To paraphrase this article on kidney function: to conserve water, the pituitary gland excretes vasopressin (also called anti-diuretic hormone or ADH) which, in turn, increases permeability of the nephrons in the kidneys. More water is kept in the bloodstream; less is released in urine. Alcohol causes dehydration by blocking release of ADH, removing fluid from the system and sending it to the bladder.

If you regularly consume large amounts of alcohol, you are regularly at risk for dehydration. You may very well need those 6 to 8 glasses of water per day, just to keep up. That glass of wine with dinner? Probably not an issue.

Fluid Loss

Perspiration

People who live in the desert or exercise regularly, know that excessive sweating leads to excessive fluid loss. By the time you're thirsty, according to common wisdom, you are already 2% dehydrated. So, for us desert dwellers and you exercisers, 6 to 8 glasses of some sort of fluid every day is already the norm.

If not, it probably should be.

Illness

Vomiting, diarrhea, and/or a sweaty fever are other ways we suffer fluid loss. In the midst of a nasty bout of the flu or a wicked virus, it's not always easy to get enough fluids. Your stomach may simply reject everything you try to swallow.

Even if it's only a few sips of water, followed by a few more, fluids are critical when you're sick.

Conclusion

What I have tried to do is look at fluid intake and common causes of dehydration - whether they hold water (pardon the pun) or not. I'm no medical expert, but it seems to me that, when clean drinking water is readily available, hydration is reasonably simple. And, despite the hue and cry from some quarters, I believe that few of us are at risk of imminent death from dehydration.

I don't suppose that taking in 48 to 64 ounces (6 to 8 8-oz glasses) of fluids over the course of the day is going to hurt anyone. I just don't see it as some do-it-or-you'll-die mandate. Especially when there's really no scientific basis for it.

What do you think? Good or bad? Sane or silly?

Disturbing Sunscreen Secrets

Originally published in Women's Health , this article looks at 10 things the average consumer may not know about sunscreens. Here are four of them:

Ingredients

Retinyl palmitate, a vitamin-A compound found in almost half of all American sunscreens, is added to help reduce the signs of aging caused by sun exposure. Sounds good, doesn't it? However, in truth, it "may speed up the development of skin cancer–related tumors and lesions when used on skin hit with sunlight." In a nutshell, retinyl palmitate and sunshine look like a bad combination.

Oxybenzone and octinoxate, common block chemicals, are linked to allergic contact dermatitis and photocontact dermatitis (irritation caused when certain chemicals are on skin that’s exposed to sunlight), as well as hormone disruption, in lab animals.

UVA vs. UVB

Just a quick reminder: UVA rays cause wrinkles, UVB rays cause sunburns, and both have been linked to skin cancer.

The SPF number on that bottle of sunscreen relates only to protection against sunburn. To protect against those wrinkle rays, you need something entirely different.

Titanium dioxide and zinc oxide have been around for a number of years. The solid white, Kabuki-mask effect was so unpopular that many manufacturers started adding colors. (Yeah, that was a lot better. Not.) Today, most preparations are transparent.

There are also two chemical-based ingredients, now available: Avobenzone (a.k.a. Parsol 1789) and Ecamsule (a.k.a. Mexoryl SX). Avobenzone is one of the most effective of its type and is fairly easy to find in U.S. sunscreens. Ecamsule, a more recent addition to the American sunscreen arsenal, is even more effective; it is also harder to find and much more expensive.

Expiration Dates

Something I didn't realize or even consider, sunscreens expire. Ingredients, designed to maintain the potency of the product, are only effective for a limited time. Generally, three years is the outside limit. After that, you're not going to get the same level of protection.

In addition, lying around in the sun at the beach or the pool is just as bad for your sunblock as it is for your skin. Heat in general is the enemy. So, store it in a cool place indoors and, outdoors, try to keep it in the shade. (Pretty much the only way to survive summer in Arizona. {winks} )

Labels Lie

Not surprisingly, not everything you read on a bottle of sunblock is the god's truth. One of the more common misrepresentations has to do with SPF factors. The assumption is that the higher the number, the greater the protection. That isn't necessarily the truth:

“People think they’re doing themselves a favor by using high SPF, but the difference is incremental. SPF 15 filters out 93 percent of UVB rays; SPF 30 protects against 97 percent; SPF 50, 98 percent; and SPF 100, 99 percent–and that’s only if you apply enough of it.”

Another crossed-my-fingers-when-I-said-that issue relates to coverage. The terms 'waterproof' and 'all-day' sound impressive and reassuring, but may be far from the truth. In fact, common wisdom says sunscreen should be reapplied every 2 hours, no matter what's on the bottle.

New Sunscreen Regulations from the FDA

Directly related to these sunscreen issues, the FDA has issued new regulations for sunscreen manufacturers. They officially go into effect in 2012. And I quote:

The new regulations promote a change in terminology:

• Sunscreens that have UVA and UVB protection will be known as broad spectrum. SPF, which protects from UVB radiation, will remain on the package.
• SPF ratings 15 and above will be permitted to state that they protect against early skin aging and reduce the risk of skin cancer. SPF’s below 15 help prevent sunburn but offer no other protection.
• The highest SPF rating will be 50+ as studies have shown there is no additional benefit gained beyond this.
• Waterproof or sweat proof sunscreens will be vigorously tested to determine the exact amount of time they provide sun protection. This helps consumers know how often it’s necessary to reapply in order to reduce the risk of burning. Most sunscreens should be reapplied every two hours, which is the longest amount of time allowed.

The hope is that sunscreen makers won't wait until next year to make these changes. I can imagine that there would be some marketing benefit to being the first to comply.

Let's hope that, by next summer, we'll know what we're really getting in that bottle of sunscreen.

Asbestos Removal

I've written about asbestos before - major health issues, mesothelioma, lung cancer. It's incredibly bad stuff that, thus far, the government hasn't quite managed to out-and-out ban. They have, however, put in place some serious guidelines for dealing with it - especially in renovations and rehabs where removal is legally required before new construction can take place.

Notices must be posted; current occupants/tenants must be told of the findings.

And I quote:

The Clean Air Act requires that owners of public buildings that contain asbestos follow federally established work practice standards to ensure the safe removal of the asbestos. The required standards include providing notice to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) before starting asbestos removal, adequately wetting the asbestos during the removal and before disposal, and properly disposing of the asbestos at an EPA-approved disposal site.

From what I've seen, rooms and buildings found to contain asbestos are, virtually, sealed up. Only experts, certified and approved by the government, are allowed to perform removal of this hazardous waste. And, believe me, if you've ever seen a team descend on a home to get the stuff out - it looks like a biohazard SWAT strike.

Violations

Rather than reinvent the wheel, I'll simply present the EPA charges:

[...] while Knapp was overseeing the project, material containing asbestos was removed from the building and disposed of in an uncovered dumpster. [...] demolition work was performed by workers who were not provided with personal protective equipment to reduce exposure to the asbestos. [...] building workers, one of whom was disabled ^[1], and tenants, were exposed to large amounts of dust that resulted from the demolition. A worker testified that the workers were not instructed to wet tiles containing asbestos before and during the demolition process, which increased their exposure to dust.

Mr. Knapp pleaded (pled? plead?) guilty to one count of conspiracy and one count of failing to remove all material containing asbestos before beginning renovation of the building. The renovation took place between 2005 and 2008. Which says, to me, lots of violations and lots of exposure for workers and tenants.

Part of the plea agreement (you knew, after all this, that there had to be one, didn't you?), good ol' Bobby Joe admitted that he and Russell Coco, also charged, conspired to get the asbestos out of the building without adhering to government requirements.

Sentencing

In addition to 41 months in prison, the sentence provides for "two years of supervised release and 300 hours of community service. [Mr. Knapp] must also pay a $12,500 fine and $200 crime victim special assessment fee ^[2]."

Bottom Line

I don't mean to pooh-pooh 3 years and 5 months in prison; wouldn't want to do it, myself. But the release doesn't mention whether Bobby Joe will be required to do the full 41 months. And, heaven knows, he won't be doing it in Walla Walla or Corcoran.

Frankly, it's the financial slap on the wrist  that caught my attention. Given the cost of proper (and legal) asbestos removal, especially on a building with more than 10 floors, the fine is small potatoes. As a deterrent to future offenders, it simply doesn't work.

I've been slapping at the EPA for months over their inability or reluctance to P the E. This doesn't do much to improve my opinion of them.

What do you think? Did Mr. Knapp get what he deserved? Did the punishment fit the crime? Or was this a token action, meant to make it appear as though the government and the EPA are actually doing their jobs?

1. There was no clarification as to whether the worker was disabled before, or disabled by, the exposure.
2. "Since 1984, the federal government has collected a small monetary assessment from all convicted defendants for each federal crime committed. This "special assessment on convicted persons" ranges from five to two hundred dollars depending on the seriousness of the crime and the status of the criminal."

   Marie T. Farrelly, Special Assessments and the Origination Clause: A Tax on Crooks?, 58 Fordham L. Rev. 447 (1989), http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol58/iss3/5

Definitions

Stepping away from the article and into the study itself, there are some basic definitions that impact the understanding of this study.

It is important to note that there are differences between screening and clinical surveillance. With screening, apparently healthy people are targeted to help them make better-informed health care choices. ... Clinical surveillance, on the other hand, involves the targeted use of diagnostic tests and questionnaires to either rule out or rule in a diagnosis among people who have a relatively high probability of having that condition by virtue of having already been identified in some way.

Testing

Another question in the study was the effectiveness of current testing methods.

Some tests are incredibly good at determining children who are not at risk, but frequently fail to diagnose those who are: Checklist for Autism Spectrum Disorders in Toddlers (CHAT). Even with modifications, M-CHAT, the test is unable to diagnose 15% of children with autism.

Other tests generate a number of false positives, in addition to false negatives: Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ). The SCQ, according to the study, suffers from 15% false positives (not identifying children who don't have autism) and 25% false negatives (not identifying children who do have autism).

For routine community-wide testing, the available testing options were deemed insufficient. And, as the accuracy of the results are questionable, the "potential burdens on families of receiving a misdiagnosis (either a false-positive or a false-negative) may be enormous, and there might be labeling effects that can be hard to remove."

Treatment

Along with the question of accurately assessing which children have autism, there is the question of severity and treatment.

There are varying (widely varying) differences in the abilities and disabilities of children with autism. This is not measles or whooping cough, where you either have it or you don't. Each child is unique and must be treated according to his/her needs. Therein lies the problem.

Unlike interventions for phenylketonuria or congenital thyroid disease, there is no strong evidence of the effectiveness of the various autism therapies currently provided. In addition, the availability of these therapies is limited (there are waitlists often as long as >1 year in many therapy centers), and the cost is often prohibitive.

Conclusions

Strictly from the standpoint of testing all children for Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASDs), it appears that this study of current literature makes a valid point. Lacking accurate testing and readily available treatment options, arbitrarily subjecting children and families to testing seems pointless.

Ongoing research is certainly needed to assess the effectiveness and acceptability of screening programs for ASDs. ... [B]ecause the implications of instituting a major program without sound research-based evidence are so enormous, we believe that the child health community has an important responsibility to undertake [such] clinical trials as a matter of priority. At this time we recommend careful surveillance and assessment of all preschoolers who present with impairments in their development of language, social function, or cognitive skills that result in activity limitations, but we believe that community screening of all preschoolers is premature.

I repeat: "We recommend careful surveillance and assessment of all preschoolers who present with impairments in their development of language, social function, or cognitive skills that result in activity limitations." No one should, for a moment, take this study to mean that children should never be tested and families should not demand all available support and assistance. That would simply undo all of the progress that has been made.

And that, my friends, would be a crime against our children.

* This link to the full [PDF] article in Pediatrics  is valid as of this posting. Journals frequently limit access to full articles and, subsequent to this writing, access may be removed.

Tribute

The film fest begins (if you have LMN) with Tribute, published in 2008 and filmed in 2009. I remember, from the synopsis, that I have read an excerpt of this one. (Off to the bookstore for me.)

From myLifetime.com:

Cilla McGowan is a former child star who has found more satisfying work restoring old houses. In search of a normal life, Cilla buys her grandmother’s farmhouse in Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley to rescue it from ruin. Her hope for serenity is soon eclipsed by haunting dreams of her famous grandmother, who died of a supposed overdose in the house more than 30 years ago. Cilla soon forges a romantic relationship with Ford Sawyer, her handsome new neighbor, who ultimately comforts and protects her when her dark dreams and family secrets spiral into a real-life nightmare.

Blue Smoke

Next in the line-up (if you get LMN), Blue Smoke was published in 2005 and became a Lifetime movie in 2007. It gets a lot of TV time and, although not my favorite novel-turned-movie, is pretty well done.

I'm actually in the process of revisiting Baltmore and the Hale family. Let me tell you, if you haven't read it (yet), Ms. Roberts packs a lot of action into this one volume.

From myLifetime.com:

The blaze that destroyed her family's pizzeria changed the life of young Reena Hale, forcing her family to start over from scratch. But the fire's brutal beauty and destructive power would seduce her into learning to understand and master its terrible force, leading her to become a fire investigator herself. This line of work proves to be exciting, but also has a dangerous side -- and she soon finds herself caught in a hotbed of trouble!

Carolina Moon

The third movie of the day (first for me) is Carolina Moon. Published in 2001 and filmed in 2007, this is one of Ms. Roberts delicious visits to the South - you can almost smell the magnolias.

I haven't read this one in a very long time, so I'm excited about revisiting the chills and thrills. (If Lifetime keeps this up, I'll be spending a lot more shopping-time at the bookstore.)

From myLifetime.com:

Tory Bodeen returns to her hometown in South Carolina, a place that holds violent memories of her childhood friend Hope Lavelle's murder. Coming back revives Tory's psychic visions of what happened that fateful night, and she becomes determined to unearth the truth, enlisting the help of Hope's hunky older brother. However, the murderer has been waiting all these years for her return -- and it may be someone closer to her than she realizes!

Carnal Innocence

Last in the line-up and published almost 20 years ago, Carnal Innocence is the newest Nora Roberts novel-become-movie. And this is its Lifetime premiere. This may have been, I'll have to check, Ms. Roberts' first trip south of the Mason-Dixon. Happily, it wasn't her last.

I haven't read this one in, at least, a dozen years. How wonderful it will be to 'see' everyone, again. (Just one more trip to the bookstore to replace my copy of this great story.)

From myLifetime.com:

After suffering a professional setback, world-renowned violinist Caroline Waverly decides to head to Innocence, Mississippi, where she spent summers as a child, for some peace and solitude away from the spotlight. Shortly after arriving, Caroline meets the arrogant but charming Tucker Longstreet, a member of one of the town’s most prominent families, who is quickly smitten by her. But Caroline’s dreams for tranquility turn into a nightmare when she discovers the body of a young woman, the possible victim of a serial killer whom the authorities suspect may be Tucker. Caroline soon discovers that even in a town called Innocence, secrets have no place to hide.

Enjoy! I intend to have a great time - just need the popcorn and my favorite afghan!

Take creatine supplements. (Actually, don't.)

Recently, I ran across a review on ConsumerLab.com that added some scientific weight to my worries. The summary information^[1] explained some of the quality problems they'd found with, what they call, muscle enhancers. (Note: While I love my readers, I chose to not pay out copious amounts of cash to read the full report.)

Not every brand was a problem - several actually passed the testing. A couple, however, didn't do as well. They were found to contain mostly creatinine ^[2] - not creatine.

And one of the two actually had more contaminant than creatine. Which is what scares the crap out of me. Supplements aren't regulated and, without testing like this, heaven only knows what's really in them.

As it is, I go to bed when I (finally) can't keep my eyes open anymore. Then, lay in bed for anywhere from 2 to 3 hours. About the time the sun is rising, I roll over (for the 53rd time) and go to sleep.

It's usually between 2pm and 5pm when I drag myself out of the bedroom, jonesing for caffeine, and looking like something the cat spit up  dragged in. After about 2 hours checking email, reviewing 12 versions of social media, and waiting for the coffee to kick in - I finally get to work on something. Sort of.

I need a schedule fix. I need to be able to sleep at night and get up at a decent hour. I really, really do. I think I need NightFood™

Just found these and, I must admit, they sound pretty darned good: “NightFood™ bars are delicious, and are formulated to help you fall asleep, and sleep better. Just as importantly, a delicious cookies n’cream NightFood™ bar can help you eliminate cravings and unhealthy snack options from your evening."

Of course, I'm always  reluctant to trust  skeptical about  proprietary ingredients - especially at doses that, reputedly, equal 80mg of caffeine. And there are a lot of sugars in here - 9g and 150 calories in a 40g bar; plus some iffy oils - fractionated palm kernel oil leads the uh-oh list. And melatonin - which does encourage relaxation - is last on the what's-in-this-list.

With that said, the NightFood™ bar didn't scare me witless (although the sugars and oils look pretty bad) - or convince me that it would help me sleep. But, I just can't get away from the proprietary cocoa derivative (Chocamine) and its apparent caffeine jolt.

Would like to try it. Just don't think I'd eat it on a regular basis.

The best part? Enter every week and you'll add 12 healthy lifestyle changes without stressing out over it. Almost a fitness guarantee, even without the incredible prizes CoolSculpting is giving away.

The other best part? At the end of the 12 weeks, you could win a FREE CoolSculpting procedure* - valued at $1,500!

So, if you're planning to drink more water, walk every day, exercise for 20 minutes each morning/evening, cut back on soda or chocolate cake (which is, IMO, just nuts!) – why not share your goals and earn some great tools to help. This week's prize is a Bodylastics Tension system that includes:

• 4 premium dipped elastics from 5 to 19 lbs,
• 2 handles
• 2 ankle straps
• 2 door anchors
• 1 user book
• 1 bonus DVD
• 1 muscle building six DVD box set
• 1 travel bag
• FREE BONUS 1 year access to Strengthbanduniversity.com (login certificate included).

Don't wait – run to Facebook and start those lifestyle changes today.

* "CoolSculpting® is the coolest, most innovative, non-invasive and natural way to quickly lose those annoying bumps and bulges of stubborn fat.

Here’s the skinny: developed by Harvard scientists, our unique, patented, clinically proven procedure involves freezing fat cells without damage to your skin. There’s no knife. No suction hoses. No needles. No lasers, even. After your treatment, you get on with your busy day. How cool is that?"

For more information visit: www.coolsculpting.com

Current Treatment Options

The best options, currently, for patients with HCV are pegylated interferon and ribavirin – a shot and a pill. But the side effects are horrendous - Alopecia, Anemia, Anorexia, Cough, Depression, Erythema, Fatigue, Myalgia, Nausea, and Pruritus; bad enough that many patients are forced to stop treatment before realizing full benefits.

Why? Because treatment is not quick – minimum 24 weeks, up to 48 weeks (or more) for resistant genotypes. Can you imagine a weekly shot that you know will hurt like the devil, make you sick to your stomach and achy (at least) all over? That will exhaust you and cause a level of over-all itching that would make a saint scream?

Add in the rarer, but more serious: "angina, arrhythmias, autoimmune conditions, blindness from optic neuritis or retinal ischemia or thrombosis, bronchiolitis obliterans, bronchoconstriction, cardiomyopathy, diabetes, gout, hepatic dysfunction, injection site necrosis, myocardial infarction, pancreatitis, pericardial effusion, pneumonia or pneumonitis, psychosis, relapse of drug addiction, renal failure, sarcoidosis, suicide attempt, thyroid dysfunction, and urticaria."^[1] It becomes obvious – quite quickly – that anything which shortens the treatment period would be a god-send.

New Treatment Options

The new medications – the first released in 10 years, I must mention – work by, basically, starving HCV. They block a protein, protease, that the virus needs in order to reproduce.

Neither Incivek nor Victrelis are designed to replace current treatments; they are taken in conjunction with pegylated interferon and ribavirin. The addition of these new drugs, is expected to shorten treatment periods and dramatically improve outcomes.

Unlike current treatment options, these new medications will be made available, not only to patients who have never been treated, but to patients who failed earlier treatments. This is huge as with interferon and ribavirin, once a patient fails to reach a "sustained viralogic response" - little or no measurable virus in the bloodstream - the treatment is considered a failure.

Rarely is a second course of treatment considered.

Bottom Line

There are millions of people in need of an effective treatment option.

Statistics: "About 170 million people around the world are infected with hepatitis C, some 3.2 million of them in the United States. The blood-borne disease can lead to liver cancer, cirrhosis, liver transplants and death."

Although a slow-growing, asymptomatic virus – it is possible to have HepC for decades without symptoms – eventually, HCV will begin to seriously damage the liver. And, due to this liver damage, cause all manner of related health issues. It is irreversible (without treatment) and is the leading cause of liver transplants in the United States.

Thousands of patients have been putting off treatment, waiting and hoping for the release of these new medications. Having gone through the current standard treatment regimen with Mark, I can certainly understand why.

Here's hoping that a cure just hit the market.

1. ©Am Fam Physician. 2005 Aug 15;72(4):655-662.

Depression

Two studies, one British and one American, have found a link to depression in the same DNA region: chromosome 3p25-26. Genetic studies of depression, historically, have a lot of trouble repeating results. For two research groups, working separately, to reach the same conclusion is pretty amazing.

This is an incredible leap forward toward, at the very least, potentially more effective treatments. With major depression hitting up to 20 percent of the population at some point and recurring depression affecting nearly 4 percent, treatment is critical. And although there are a lot of medications on the market, they're only helpful to about half of the patients who take them.

Obesity

Another British study, published in Nature Genetics, is looking at KLF14. This gene is already linked to type 2 diabetes and cholesterol, but it wasn't clear what it did. Until now.

Researchers believe that KLF14 is a type of master switch, controlling other genes found in fat tissue. Those other genes are linked to a number of metabolic functions, including body mass index, insulin, and glucose levels. In addition, there may be a connection to changes in muscles and the liver that are related to development of conditions such as diabetes.

Lots of exciting news, the impact of which will (probably) take years to realize. There will never be a 'skinny' pill or a 'happy' pill (at least I hope not), but anything that could reduce the risk of related conditions would be incredible.

Primarily, the changes seem to be related to the required existence of a swimming pool lift, sloped entry, transfer walls, and/or steps. Very detailed instructions, to say the least. I felt like I'd just taken, and failed, a course in pool design.

Makes me wonder if our complex pool is going to be receiving a makeover before March, when the required accommodations need to be in place. Since it's not technically a public or commercial operation, the complex is probably not bound by the revisions to the law. Could explain why our management has been attending a lot of classes since last year, though.

Should be interesting to watch; see what does, or doesn't, happen.

There was a brief story on the local news recently, explaining that we can expect an 8% increase in the cost of meats and produce over the coming weeks. So our effort to do the right thing, to improve the content of our diets, is being not-so-subtly undermined.

In March, the Alabama Farmer's Federation announced a 3.8 percent increase in the cost of groceries in their state, prompting an article: 5 Ways to Save on Produce & Meats, in The Birmingham News. With another increase on the way, the advice is welcome.

In a nutshell, 1.) Buy produce in season, from local sources; 2.) Cut, slice, and chop meats and veggies yourself; 3.) Non-organic is cheaper, but remember to wash well; 4.) Buy meats on sale and in bulk; 5.) Save money with coupons and by shopping at warehouse stores.

Even when prices aren't soaring out of reach, these are good shopping habits.

No Parent Present

My first thought was to question how a child could be at the doctor's office without a parent or guardian. Then, I realized that this scenario was probably more directed at exams for teens, who might prefer to keep medical appointments without Mom or Dad tagging along.

In that case, it certainly makes sense that a third-party, preferably with some sort of medical knowledge, would be present to protect teen patients.

Suspected Child Abuse

This is the sadder of the two scenarios.

In cases of suspected child abuse, the presence of a parent could easily intimidate or frighten the child into silence or outright denial. It would also, quite probably, interfere with the ability of the doctor to establish trust and help their patient.

Again, in this case, having a nurse or other medical professional present is in the best interest of the child.

In the policy statement, published in the journal Pediatrics, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) makes several recommendations.

• Clear communication as to the nature of the exam, with the parent or, in the case of a teen, with the patient;
• Pelvic, rectal, and breast exams should include a chaperone, although the patient has the right to refuse;
• If the patient refuses a chaperone, alternatives should be made available to the patient and/or parent;
• Pediatricians should develop policy, for their individual practices, on chaperones and document any non-adherence to their policy.

The language in the statement falls short of mandating chaperones; repeatedly using the word should, rather than must. I suppose not all medical practices have sufficient medical staff to allow for chaperones. Perhaps making it mandatory would create a financial hardship for them; or that may be the AAPs concern.

Whether that's the case or not, patient care should (there's that word again) take priority. What do you think?

Historians and theologians have, historically, assumed that all of the timelines in the Gospels were based on the same calendar. However, if (as this article explains) there are 2 calendars at play - things get a little clearer.

It also indicates, if I'm understanding the information, that (like Christmas) Easter could now have a fixed date - the first Sunday in April.

On the other hand, the crucifixion took place on the eve of Passover (Yom Shishi, that year) and the resurrection on the following Sunday (Yom Rishon) - making it logical (okay, stay with me) that Easter would be the second full day of Passover. Given the nature of the Hebrew calendar, Easter would frequently fall on a day other than Sunday.

Then, we have the Christian Church calendar, based on a formula from the Nicaean Council of 325AD. "In this system, Easter is celebrated on the first Sunday following the first full moon after the Spring equinox," which corresponds to the timing of the first Easter.

I'm beginning to get a serious headache and regret having read that first article. Just tell me when we're dying eggs and donning our bonnets. K?

Little changed in all these years, that law an expanded mining industry to take about $1 billion in metals from U.S. public lands every year -- without paying any royalties.

And, thanks to rising metal prices, things are not about to slow down. Claims are up 2,000 percent since 2004, in the area around the Grand Canyon. More than 60% of the claims around Yosemite, and nearly all around Arches and Canyonland in Utah, have come since 2005.

Above and beyond giving away the store - allowing mining without compensation, the government is putting every inch of public land at risk. Were they required to pay royalties, it's possible that these companies would choose carefully where they dig; stay away from 'high-priced' National Parks and Monuments.

While attempts to revise the 1872 Mining Law in 2009 got nowhere, the Secretary of the Interior has started "a process to protect approximately 1 million acres around the Grand Canyon that were threatened by uranium mining operations." The administration has called for comments.

Well, I certainly feel better. How about you?

Squirrels

ENN.com

On the same day, a federal judge reinstated endangered status for the West Virginia Northern Flying Squirrel and that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had violated the Endangered Species Act by ignoring the species recovery plan that they had established in 1990.

I guess USFWS, with the backing of the timber industry, decided that making paper and boxes was more important.

Black Coral

Gallery: USGS.gov

Two days later, the U.S. Geological Service released a report on deep-sea black corals living in the Gulf of Mexico. Fascinating creatures, over 2,000 years old, living in the deep waters of the Gulf. It is hoped that, given their growth patterns, they will offer insight into the health of the region, over decades of change.

Despite their name, black corals come in a variety of colors.

Wolves

It is, however, the wolves of the Northern Rockies who have had the most 'exciting' few days. And that isn't necessarily a good thing, if you've been following the plight of these animals.

In 2009, the federal government delisted some of the wolves in the Northern Rockies. Conservation groups complained, and sued. A U.S. district judge ruled with conservationists and, in August 2010, ordered protections for all of the wolves in the area restored.

Wikimedia Commons

Not willing to stand on legalities, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - the federal agency that is responsible for protecting endangered species in the United States - started negotiations to, once again, delist the Northern Rockies wolves. On April 9th, the same judge refused to approve the latest delisting plan. A 'settlement agreement' that would have allowed Idaho and Montana to, essentially, put 1,200 wolves on the 'most wanted list' for ranchers and hunters in their states.

It didn't last long. In fact, it never - technically - happened.

Late on the night of April 8th/9th, Congress reached an agreement on the budget. Buried in that budget bill was a "provision to strip federal protections for wolves in Idaho, Montana and portions of Oregon, Washington and Utah as part of [the] Continuing Budget Resolution". In passing the budget, Congress effectively took the potential settlement agreement off the table. Long before the Montana judge made his decision, Congress had rendered it moot.

While headlines joyously proclaimed Northern Rockies Wolves are safe for now, the government was painting a bulls-eye on virtually every Northern Rockies wolf. They opened hunting season and put these amazing animals at the top of every list.

I was under the impression that Congress had no say in listing or delisting endangered species in the United States. That job belongs (belonged?) to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service who, it must be said, isn't very good at it. Although at least they, periodically, pretend to care.

Frankly, I have to believe that this unprecedented action means big trouble for the climate, as well as protection of the environment and all endangered species. Anything that gets in the way of big business and their lobbies is now seriously threatened.

Perhaps it's my limited medical education (okay, none) that leads me down this road to ... the wrong conclusion. But, hang in there.

From what I understand of autism and ADHD, these aren't everybody's-got-it conditions. That there would be a gene - AUTS2, @#$ME, IM%$#! - linked to these conditions is a huge (in my feeble mind) discovery.

Then, someone links this gene to a person's potential for alcohol abuse - bigger and bigger hugeness. Except, if I'm reading this right, it's all backwards. Again, hang in there.

The one thing that alcoholism and ADHD, as well as some forms of autism, have in common is impulse control issues. As these are - if we can all agree - not everybody's-got-it conditions, then logic would say that the rarer form of the gene might be the one responsible. But this study indicates that it's the common form of the gene that is more prevalent in those who - potentially - abuse alcohol.

See how I'm feeling backwards - I mean how the results seem backwards?

Backers of the bill insist that in Arizona - and around the country - women are routinely aborting fetuses that are the wrong sex or color. In fact, they make it sound as though there is a virtual epidemic of such abortions. Procedures being forced on non-white pregnant women.

Apparently, minorities are statistically more likely to have an abortion - not because of poor healthcare, and sex education services - but because of massive discrimination and coercion by groups like Planned Parenthood. The proposition is that abortion clinics and providers are hunting down pregnant black and Hispanic women, like rabid dogs, and putting a metaphorical gun to their heads until they have an abortion.

Legislation like Arizona's is not new. And it's not limited to individual states.

There's H.R. 7016: Susan B. Anthony Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 which:

Imposes criminal penalties for knowingly: (1) performing an abortion knowing that the abortion is sought based on the sex, gender, color or race of the child, or the race of a parent; (2) using force or the threat of force to intentionally injure or intimidate any person for the purpose of coercing a sex-selection or race-selection abortion; or (3) soliciting or accepting funds to finance a sex-selection abortion or a race-selection abortion.

Then, there's H.R. 1822: Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2009, offering virtually the same language as H.R. 7016. With the noticeable addition that it [d]eems a violation of this act to be prohibited discrimination under title VI (Federally Assisted Programs) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (Violators of title VI lose federal funding.)

Last year, Georgia legislators presented The Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act. Again, the language is very, very similar to H.R. 7016 and H.R. 1822 - and based on the same misconceptions and propaganda. And may, in fact, create the very discrimination it claims to be fighting.

Personally, I find myself seeing both sides of the argument. Discrimination, in any form, is wrong. As is using race as a weapon to severely curtail - or outright eliminate - women's reproductive rights.

Growing up in the time before Roe v. Wade, I remember what it was like for women to have limited or no choices. Birth control fails. Women are sexually assaulted - by strangers, family members, and dates. Unplanned pregnancies happen.

If they happen more often in inner cities and poor or minority communities, is that the fault of health centers and clinics? If there are more Planned Parenthood offices in financially-repressed areas is that because PP is targeting minorities, or because they are attempting to bring options to people who may have nowhere else to turn?

There are a lot of opinions about abortion and birth control services - especially when it comes to rumors of eugenics and Margaret Sanger's work.

There's only one bottom line, for me: While I believe in the sanctity of life, I believe that the right of the mother to choose is also sacred. This whole fight is about not forcing a woman - any woman - to end her pregnancy.

Why is forcing her to continue the pregnancy any more fair?

Creatine Basics

What Is It?

Simply put (we're protecting that last brain cell, after all), creatine is an organic acid found in vertebrates, made from amino acids in the kidney and liver, and located mostly in skeletal muscle. Existing in fish and meat, creatine is not found vegetables. Because the body can make it, it's considered a non-essential (not needed in the diet) nutrient.

What Does It Do?

Naturally occuring creatine is transported in the blood to tissues, like the brain and muscles, that demand lots of energy. In those muscles, creatine combines with a phosphate to become phosphocreatine (creatine phosphate) and making rapid energy production possible. In other words, it helps feed the muscles during brief, high-intensity exercise such as sprinting and resistance training.

Creatine Supplements

Creatine has become a very popular supplement with athletes, leading to many research studies into its effectiveness. Reviews are decidedly mixed.

Do They Work?

Several studies report an increase in muscle mass with creatine use. However, because creatine tends to raise fluid levels in muscle tissue, some experts question whether this is true muscle building. In addition, many of the studies have been small (40 participants or less), so the results are generally deemed insufficient to draw conclusions.

It's interesting to note that there is no evidence that creatine provides any benefit for a) aerobic exercise, b) people over 60, and c) endurance athletes. Which, given how creatine aids in rapid energy creation, makes a great deal of sense.

Are They Safe?

Heads? They might be. Tails? They might not.

Most of my sources mentioned some level of concern about kidney and liver damage. Those sources also indicate that people with underlying kidney or liver disease should probably not take creatine supplements. At the same time - often in the same paragraph - they state that no significant changes in kidney function markers or liver enzymes were noted.

Are There Side Effects?

Digestive system upsets, muscle cramps, heat intolerance and/or dehydration, changes in insulin activity, abnormal heart rhythms, and blood clots in the legs are consistently listed as possible side effects. Less serious issues include headache, dizziness, increased thirst, anxiety, and irritability. Allergic reactions, particularly asthmatic symptoms, were also mentioned.

Conclusions?

Who knows?

From what I've read, there's no definitive proof that creatine supplements are effective, beyond a very narrow group of younger athletes. And there isn't definitive proof that they aren't. {POP!}

Aw, shoot! There went that last brain cell.

• http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/creatine/NS_patient-creatine
• http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12184144
• http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12701815
• http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/natural/873.html
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatine
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatine_supplements

But then, Ed went, for me, a step too far. His idea of helping was to provide arms to the Libyan 'freedom fighters' - an idea that I cannot ever  see as a wise one.

The problem, as I see it, in arming one side of a conflict lies not in the conflict - but in the outcome. If the 'right' side wins, what will they become, with the power of their new control? Will they be better - or much, much worse - than the regime that they have risen to replace?

And - always a possibility - what if this 'right' side loses their war for freedom? How swift and vicious will the winning side's retaliation be - and against whom?

As I sit here, thinking these thoughts, I wonder if I am simply a coward. Or if I am right.

The culprit is ... wait for it ... Nicotine.

What I found interesting is the phrasing found in of some of the news stories. (Emphasis is mine.)

... their tests showed concentrations of nicotine on the order of what is generally found in smokers causes HbA1c levels to rise.

... found that nicotine, when added to human blood samples, raised levels of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) by as much as 34%.

Using human blood samples, the scientists showed that nicotine concentrations typical of those in smokers appeared to raise long-term blood sugar levels in diabetics.

I have to say - hmmmm? Either all of the sources I read - or there's an interesting point here.

The study, as best I can surmise, was not done on diabetic or pre-diabetic smokers. Or even on the blood of diabetic or pre-diabetic smokers. It appears that the study involved adding nicotine to blood samples - in an amount that was judged to be "typical of those in smokers." Hmmmm?

Not being a scientist, I can only question what I read. As a curious soul, with a ... questioning ... mind, I do have to wonder. Is adding nicotine - a lab-created solution, I assume - to blood samples, in whatever quantity, the same as what happens to the blood in the body of a smoker?

What do you think?

• http://www.endocrineweb.com/news/type-1-diabetes/5042-researchers-uncover-first-hard-evidence-nicotine-raises-blood-sugar-levels
• http://healthland.time.com/2011/03/27/why-smoking-is-a-bad-idea-for-diabetics/
• http://www.nursingtimes.net/nursing-practice/clinical-specialisms/diabetes/smoking-linked-to-serious-complications-with-diabetes/5027831.article

There are a lot of pros and cons floating through the Webverse related to this potential merger. As a consumer, I can't say that I'm finding too many pros. Let me amend that - as an urban  consumer, there aren't many positives for me in this melding of companies.

So, I'll start with:

The Negatives

Increased Cost

Any time corporate mergers thin the options for consumers, there is little incentive for providers to be financially competitive. When you're the only game in town, people either pay what you charge or do without your products and services. Great for companies- and shareholders; crappy for consumers.

Currently, T-Mobile has the best rates (that we've been able to find) in the industry. Periodically, we check; just to make sure that we're not getting hosed. We're not. (I doubt that that will be true if the merger goes through.)

Decreased Innovation

Again, if you're the only game in town, why waste potential profits by creating/acquiring the latest and greatest products for your industry? It's simpler, and cheaper, to just barely stay ahead of the competition. And, if you're AT&T, you probably have a lock on most of the infrastructure. (Although, to be honest, my experience comes from the days of divestiture and landline service.)

Again, T-Mobile phones are some of the best out there - with the exception of those phones that are not made available to them.

Customer Service

If customers have nowhere else to go, do CSRs really have to be nice? Probably not. Will they, anyway? Probably not.

One of the reasons that we have stayed - for 7 years - with T-Mobile is customer service. When Deutsche Telekom came in, things got a little iffy; but it's still possible to find someone who knows what they're doing and - critically - cares about doing it. I have serious doubts that this will continue under the AT&T umbrella.

The Positives

Shareholders will make bundles; AT&T will make bundles; Deutsche Telekom will make bundles. (It's all goood.)

It is possible that T-Mobile USA and AT&T Merger Means Faster and More Widespread Broadband - or not. And I quote "AT&T is committing to build out to nearly every part of the U.S. within six years." I am so ... impressed ... by the organizations that are jumping on this bandwagon.

But, you know? I could be wrong. Still angry; but wrong.

We'll see what happens - if the merger goes through - and my service ... changes.

Cellphones and Brain Cells

I know it seems backwards, but I'm presenting the results before the method. Frankly, because I find the method more interesting.

Study Results

This study showed that the brain reacts to the electromagnetic radiation from a cellphone. With less than an hour of contact, brain activity increased by 7 percent in the area nearest the antenna. Whether that change was good or bad for brain health, was not a goal of the study; so we just don't know.

Study Method

In a randomized study from 2009, forty-seven participants had their brain activity measured after holding cellphones to their left and right ears for 50 minutes. Not too exciting, you say? Just you wait.

(Yeah, I have a picture in my head of a bunch of people, with electrodes stuck to their heads, cellphones on each ear, sitting around doing nothing else for nearly an hour.)

Fearing that if the subjects of the study knew when/if the phone was active, it would stimulate brain activity, researchers created a blind: On the first day, none of the phones were on. The second day, only the right was turned on - and muted. No auditory stimulation.

I think that's pretty cool. But, perhaps, could have been a little ... cooler.

Study Modifications

First, the study could have been larger. The more bodies, the better - when it comes to scientific studies. Surely they could have found a couple hundred people, or more, with nothing better to do for a couple of hours. (Pick me! Pick me!)

Second, just to increase the randomization, why not have some of the phones on the left ear active on the second day. I know, activity is activity - but, again, this is supposed to be science. Randomize the randomization.

Lastly, were certain types of brain cells stimulated? Or all cells within a specific range? The report doesn't say, so we don't know if this was part of the research.

All in all, pretty interesting stuff. (Okay, I've officially become a science nerd.)

If You Drive

I'm talking about that four-letter-word: walk. One of the reasons that we continue to live here is convenience. Most of what we need on a regular basis, as well as a few emergency items, are within walking distance.

Dollar store, smoke shop, beauty salon, bakery, two convenience and one drug stores, auto parts store, a few fast food places - all within a quarter- to half-mile of our apartment. There's even a clock repair shop, lighting store, and a chiropractor in spitting distance.

Naturally, if you don't have a little shopping community at your back door, shop-walking (walk-shopping?) isn't an option. If you're in better shape than I am, your walk-to-shop range may be a little wider.

When You Drive

One of the biggest gasoline wastes is idling in traffic. Not to mention the toll that rush-hour traffic takes on mind and body. Getting from A to B, as quickly as possible, is the best solution for everyone.

Work

If you have the luxury of getting in a little earlier, leaving a little later - avoiding the peak drive times in your area - you can save gas and cut stress. Sometimes just leaving 5-10 minutes earlier or later can make all the difference in how long it takes to get there. A total win-win.

Play

It pretty much goes without saying, (but I'll say it anyway) scheduling trips to the supermarket, doctor's office, or post office during rush hour isn't the best idea. By waiting until all the worker-bees get to their hives, you can cut a ton of time from your trip. And, again, de-stress the process.

Where You Drive

Work

There's not much fudge room here. The boss, oddly enough, actually expects you to show up for work every day. But, as things change in the world, there are some possible options.

If your work (and personality) allows it, telecommuting is a great way to avoid traffic and high fuel costs. Even if it's only a couple of days each week. Or perhaps your company would consider 4-day weeks; 10 hour days, instead of 8.

Play

This one's a little easier - don't go, if you don't have to. If you have to, plan ahead. Start at point A, travelling logically from B to C to D to home in one big loop. Know where you need to go and, if necessary, map it out in advance.

Shop online: in many cases, shipping is less than the gas it takes to run all over town. Many grocery stores will shop for you and deliver right to your door. With Safeway, for example, if you schedule delivery in a 4-hour (rather than a 2-hour) window they cut the delivery charge.

How You Drive

Okay, lead-foot - this is for you.

Every 'expert' will tell you that driving the speed limit saves fuel. It also saves money - on speeding tickets. But, from my little corner of the speedway, there's something a little different to consider: consistent speed.

Revving up and slowing down, revving up and slowing down guzzles gas. That's why city driving, with all those stop signs and red lights, is a bear on mileage. If you can't avoid city streets, at least don't race from intersection to intersection. You're gonna have to stop at the corner, whether you get there in 30 seconds or in a minute.

Part of me is relieved that we don't have a working, gas-needing vehicle right now. But the realist in me knows that even though I'm not buying gasoline directly, I'm still paying for the rise in fuel costs indirectly. Anything shipped by truck is going to get more expensive.

And once the price goes up, it takes forever to come down. Actually, in my experience, what goes up, must come down doesn't apply to the cost of anything I need to buy.

What about you? How do you save on gasoline? I'd love to hear your tips and tricks.

Sibutramine

Brand names: Ectiva / Meridia / Raductil / Reductil / Sibutral

How It Works

Like SSRIs (Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft), SNRIs (Cymbalta, Effexor, Pristiq), and DRIs (Zyban, Ritalin, Cocaine), sibutramine keeps the brain from reabsorbing serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine. This appears to help cells in the brain better send and receive signals.

Blocking serotonin and norephedrine reuptake seems to improve mood, reduce anxiety and compulsive behaviors (OCD). The increased dopamine has a stimulant effect which is believed to improve mood, reduce fatigue and anxiety, and suppress appetite.

What It Does

Although an SNRI like Cymbalta, Meridia was never proven to be an effective antidepressant. Its ability to inhibit reabsorption of dopamine (similar to the actions of amphetamines) does make it effective for some people as an appetite suppressant.

Several sources indicate that patients who lost weight immediately while taking sibutramine were most likely to continue losing weight. It was suggested, however, that those who failed to lose 4 pounds during the first 4 weeks of treatment may be advised to discontinue Meridia.

Why It's a Problem

Blood Pressure

According to the original documentation for sibutramine (see Pharmacycode link below), "Meridia substantially increases blood pressure and/or pulse rate" in some users. The WARNINGS section recommended: a.) frequent blood pressure monitoring and b.) careful prescription, possibly not at all for patients with uncontrolled or poorly controlled hypertension. By August 2010, two months before Abbott voluntarily pulled it from the market, the drug was contraindicated for anyone with heart conditions or blood pressure issues.

Interactions

According to information on Drugs.com, 804 drugs interact with sibutramine. Of those 800+ medications, more than 200 have major interactions.

Naturally, other SSRIs, SNRIs, DRIs, antidepressants, muscle relaxants, diet pills, and stimulants will increase the effects of Meridia. But many prescription and OTC allergy, cold, and migraine medications can also increase the risk of elevated pulse, blood pressure, heart attack, or stroke.

If that weren't enough, sibutramine increases the bleeding risks associated with NSAIDs (aspirin, Motrin, Aleve, Celebrex) and anticoagulants (Coumadin, Heparin). It may also add to the risk of emotional disturbances and suicidal thoughts associated with some central nervous system depressants.

Bottom Line

Now, this discontinued drug is showing up - illegally - in over-the-counter weight loss supplements. Sibutramine was risky enough, when patients knew what they were taking and were monitored by a physician. How much more dangerous will it be when people don't even realize they're taking it?

References:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_serotonin_reuptake_inhibitor
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serotonin-norepinephrine_reuptake_inhibitor
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine_reuptake_inhibitor
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serotonin–norepinephrine–dopamine_reuptake_inhibitor
• http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0000097/
• http://pharmacycode.com/fda/Sibutramine
• http://www.drugs.com/drug-interactions/sibutramine.html

Photo: Wikimedia/Michael Haferkamp

The existence of these natural cycles might lead one to believe that the Earth is going through a normal warming period. That man is not contributing, negatively, to the climate changes that we're currently experiencing. Undoubtedly, there are those who use that rationale to attack environmental beliefs.

A logical thought process that might even work, except for one minor detail: The Earth shouldn't be getting warmer.

Scientists have taken samples from a dry lake bed, the Valles Caldera in New Mexico. They developed a technique, analyzing sediment and soil bacteria, to determine temperature changes throughout the ages. Those studies tell them that, without man's intervention, we would be heading into a cooling period right now.

Perhaps we should begin with a few definitions. Just what drugs are antipsychotics and what are the problems?

Antipsychotics

There are, primarily, two 'generations' of antipsychotics: typical (older) and atypical (newer).

Typical or First-Generation

Typical antipsychotics, discovered in the 1950s, weren't considered or called typical until after the development and clinical use of the newer medications. They work by keeping dopamine from attaching to receptors; by keeping dopamine levels down. The problem with this first generation was the almost certainty of extrapyramidal symptoms^[1].

Part of this group, Compazine (prochlorperazine) is a potent antipsychotic, but is only used as a short-term treatment for nausea and vertigo.

Atypical or Second-Generation

These drugs were developed in the 1990s, with the hopes that they would cause fewer extrapyramidal side effects^[1]. They also work by blocking dopamine, but in different ways - not only from typical antipsychotics, but from each other.

Also atypical, but developed more recently: Abilify (aripiprazole) and Saphris (asenapine). Symbyax, a combination of Prozac and Zyprexa (fluoxetine and olanzapine), is also included in this group.

FDA Drug Label Changes

Evidence

Based on a review of adverse events reports, the FDA has concluded that when mothers were treated in the third trimester with any antipsychotic, there was a risk of extrapyramidal signs^[1] and/or withdrawal in their infants.

Symptoms included tremors, agitation, feeding disorders, drowsiness, abnormal changes in muscle tension, and respiratory distress. For many newborns, these effects subsided quickly; others required longer hospitalization.

Actions

Convinced that the risks apply to all antipsychotics, the FDA has modified the Pregnancy section of the labels for every drug in this class and notified healthcare professionals.

The new label offers more detailed information for psychiatrists, OB/GYNs, and their patients. It explains specific symptoms and that onset may be immediate or delayed. It reminds patients to not stop taking medications without consulting their physician and reminds physicians to closely monitor newborns.

1. Extrapyramidal signs/side effects include sustained muscle contractions, causing muscle twisting and repetitive movements (dystonias); inability to sit still (akathisia); muscle rigidity and tremor (pseudoparkinsonism); involuntary repetitive movements, primarily of the mouth and face (tardive dyskinesia).
2. About.com: Typical Antipsychotics and NIMH: Alphabetical List of Medications
3. About.com: Atypical Antipsychotics and NIMH: Alphabetical List of Medications

I was going to say that I don't understand these attacks, and I guess deep down I don't. The money invested now will only save billions in the future. Funding for NIH and CDC is not a frivolous use of taxpayers' dollars. The risk is great, if this funding is cut off.

If the proposed $1.6 billion in cuts to NIH and $1.75 billion in cuts to CDC are enacted:

- Research studies funded through the NIDDK, which are essential to move us closer to a cure and better treatments for diabetes, will be jeopardized.

- DDT's ability to help people avoid diabetes and its devastating complications would severely be reduced. This would lead to more hospitalizations and more emergency room visits, which will add to the already high cost of diabetes.

- The DDT's effort to prevent diabetes through the proven community-based National Diabetes Prevention Program will not move forward. Studies have shown this program could save $190 billion over ten years.

I guess if you're a member of the House, with all the benefits therein, you don't worry about healthcare for yourself. And, apparently, if you're a Republican you don't worry about healthcare for your constituents.

Just recently, I heard Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro speak before a congressional committee. I sat in my chair and applauded as she pointed out the disparity between healthcare coverage available to the public and healthcare coverage available to the members of Congress. Hand-in-glove with that disparity are the proposed cuts to medical research and disease prevention across so many areas.

Diabetes is just one condition that needs support, research, and a cure. Don't let the House take that away.

The site that started this didn't really have any original information. They'd copied, verbatim and without attribution, from several sources: WebMD and Amazon.com, for two. Plagarism notwithstanding, there don't seem to be many issues with acetyl L-carnitine (ALC), and some interesting potential benefits.

What It Is

ALC is an altered (acetylated) form of L-carnitine, a form of an amino acid (lysine) that helps the body make energy. It is naturally produced in the body and, although found in both plants and animals, more concentrated in meat, poultry, fish, and dairy - animal sources. In typical metabolic fashion, the body converts L-carnitine to acetyl L-carnitine, and ... wait for it ... acetyl L-carnitine to L-carnitine.

What It Does

This converted form of L-carnitine helps fatty acids enter skeletal and cardiac muscle cells to produce energy. It also helps move other compounds out of those cells to prevent accumulation. Crossing the blood-brain barrier, ALC has been shown to act as an antioxidant on brain tissue. By relaxing smooth muscle cells, acetyl L-carnitine has the ability to widen blood vessels (vasodilation) and improve blood flow.

What It Means

One study found that, because it acts on skeletal muscle cells, "the major tissue of insulin-stimulated glucose disposal^[1]," ALC may improve insulin-resistance in type 2 diabetics. Increased oxidant production and reduced L-carnitine levels are believed to contribute to negative symptoms of aging, making supplementation with ALC a potential treatment^[2].

Additionally, due to its vasodilation properties, acetyl L-carnitine may benefit patients with conditions or risk factors related to restricted blood flow^[2], such as:

• Angina
• Heart Attack
• Heart Failure
• Peripheral Artery Disease
• Diabetic Neuropathy

Caveats

Most of these studies and the information available are based on research with animals. Research on the effectiveness of acetyl L-carnitine supplementation in humans is limited and the results tend to be mixed. In addition, oral ALC supplements were often less effective than intra-venous injections^[2].

Lastly, due to the impact on blood vessels, ALC has known interactions with clotting medications, such as Acenocoumarol (Sintrom) and Warfarin (Coumadin). This could lead to excessive delays in clotting and an increased risk of bruising and bleeding^[3].

1. Acetyl-l-carnitine inhibits TNF-a-induced insulin resistance via AMPK pathway in rat skeletal muscle cells
   FEBS Letters, Volume 583, Issue 2, Pages 470-474
   Zhaofeng. Zhang, Ming. Zhao, Qiong. Li, Haifeng. Zhao, Junbo. Wang, Yong. Li
2. Linus Pauling Institute at Oregon State University: L-Carnitine
3. WebMD: Acetyl-L-Carnitine

From The Experts

Depression

According to MedicineNet.com:

Depression: An illness that involves the body, mood, and thoughts, that affects the way a person eats and sleeps, the way one feels about oneself, and the way one thinks about things. A depressive disorder is not the same as a passing blue mood. It is not a sign of personal weakness or a condition that can be wished away. People with a depressive disease cannot merely "pull themselves together" and get better. Without treatment, symptoms can last for weeks, months, or years. Appropriate treatment, however, can help most people with depression.

Depression, simply put, is not 'the blues' or a down day. It is a definable mood disorder, with causes and triggers that vary from person to person, which digs in and hangs on - like that poor kitten in the poster - by it's sharp, pointy claws.

Anxiety

The DSM-IV has a good, overall definition of Anxiety Disorders:

Anxiety Disorders categorize a large number of disorders where the primary feature is abnormal or inappropriate anxiety. Everybody has experienced anxiety. Think about the last time a loud noise frightened you and remember the feelings inside your body. Chances are you experienced an increased heart rate, tensed muscles, and perhaps an acute sense of focus as you tried to determine the source of the noise. These are all symptoms of anxiety. They are also part of a normal process in our bodies called the 'flight or flight' phenomenon. This means that your body is preparing itself to either fight or protect itself or to flee a dangerous situation.

These symptoms become a problem when they occur without any recognizable stimulus or when the stimulus does not warrant such a reaction. In other words, inappropriate anxiety is when a person's heart races, breathing increases, and muscles tense without any reason for them to do so. Once a medical cause is ruled out, an anxiety disorder may be the culprit.

An anxiety disorder is not sweaty palms and butterflies before a job interview or a first date. It is feeling like that little kitten in the poster - constantly poised on the edge of disaster, tense, frightened, shaking; crippled with fear, even when safely on the ground.

From The Layman

From where I sit, prescribing psychiatric medications without clinical evaluation is a bit like saying, "Oh, stubbed your toe? How about some Valium?" or "Hmmm? Broke a nail? Let's try a little morphine."

Rough Days

People can have a rough day; in fact, they frequently do. It's called life.

Yes, it's sad when the guy you're dating is also dating someone 20 years younger, and 20 pounds thinner. When you don't get an 'A' on that English paper you slaved over for three weeks. When the manufacturer discontinues your favorite moisturizer.

It's nerve-wracking, when the bill collectors keep calling. Or you've missed a work deadline and have to 'fess up. Or one of the kids gets into a fight at school. Or the cable goes out in the middle of the Super Bowl.

That's life and it frequently sucks. The only cure is to get up, get over it, and do what comes next. Eventually, the day ends and a new day starts, with the sincere hope that it won't be quite as crappy as the day before.

Really Bad Days

Some people also have really bad days. Days they wouldn't wish on their worst enemy; days that last for weeks, months, and years. Trust me, I know.

Bad days where the sadness and pain is so overwhelming that you hope and pray that your mind and heart will simply ... stop. Where you can find no reason to get up and go on. Where you know, through the chemical morass overwhelming your brain, that the entire world will be better off without you; that no one will miss you or notice your departure.

Days where the anxiety is so severe that you curl up in a corner and pray that your brain and heart don't simply explode. Where every noise triggers a fight-or-flight response that leaves you panicked and shaking from head to toe. Where there is no coherent thought; only fear.

That, too, may be your life; day after day after day. You can't get over it and do what comes next; you may not even be able to get out of bed. The knowledge that the day will end only fills you with the dreadful 'knowledge' that tomorrow will, somehow, be worse.

The Bottom Line

I'm no medical or mental health professional. Heck, some days I don't even feel like a mental health owner. But I know the difference between a crappy day and the crippling inability to function with no discernable cause.

Depression or Sadness

Sure, when your SO decides to move on, or you lose your job, it feels like the world has ended. You may even tell people, "I'm so depressed." Clinically? Not necessarily.

Sadness - serious, serious sadness - is a natural response in such situations. You react, mourn, and (eventually) get on with life. This is not the condition we define as depression, for one simple reason: it is an emotional reaction to a very specific problem. It runs a natural course and ends.

Of course, if both events hit within the same week, that could trigger a need for some counseling, endorphin-releasing exercise and/or chocolate therapy, or even a mild sleeping-aid. But, this is not run-for-the-Prozac depression. It's life being crappy, all over your hopes and dreams and plans for the future.

Anxiety or Nerves

I get nervous when I have to fly, speak to a crowd, or interview for a job. My palms sweat, my heart beats a little quicker, and my mouth gets dry. Anxiety? Absolutely, but not a clinical disorder.

For most of us, nerves in such situations are natural. We all have specific things we really, really hate to do or are naturally afraid of. If they aren't important, we ignore them and move along with our lives. If they can't be avoided, we suck it up and get it over with.

Concerns about driving in bad weather or anxiety over safety in a really bad neighborhood aren't over the top. Nerves are a normal and healthy response to new or potentially risky situations. They don't require medication; they require acknowledgment, analysis, and appropriate action.

This isn't the equivalent of taking an aspirin for a headache. It's more like chemotherapy, administered by a dentist, for a mosquito bite.

Attempted Adoptions

Some sources tell of attempts to adopt out the sled dogs. No report I've found has any documentation that any adoptions took place. And many of those articles are highly critical of later claims that the animals were too old to adopt out.

A Rifle, A Knife, and A Mass Grave

Either way, on two days near the end of April 2010, the drafted employee - by fair means and foul - killed upwards of 70 dogs. Not all of the dogs died quickly or easily; some ran off and had to be shot again, long distance. Rumors tell of some dogs having their throats slit or being dumped into mass graves while still alive.

The BC SPCA is investigating.

Which brings me to Eureka. In an episode from Season 2, while in the midst of a crisis (when aren't they), members of the town of geniuses start to get ... stupid. This leaves the sheriff (when doesn't it), not the sharpest of the residents, to save everyone.

It turns out that the woman who supplies chicken to the town cares just a little too much for her bird. Yup, bird. She only has one rooster that she is very, very attached to.

Rather than raise animals and have to kill them, she clones her rooster and grows 'chicken' in a building on her property. Turns out that one of the chemicals she uses in the cloning process interacts with the human brain - making everyone into idiots.

And that, boys and girls, is why we shouldn't try to 'grow' meat.

Okay, it wasn't real. But ... it could happen.

The United States Organic Deception

One line from this article says it all: "[O]f all the certified organic labels, most of them can still contain varying amounts of non-organic ingredients that will effectively negate any benefit of the organically-grown ingredients."

There are 3 labels, directly related to the food we buy and the quality/quantity of organic ingredients.

• Products labeled "100% Organic" must contain only organically produced ingredients
• Products labeled "Certified Organic" must contain at least 95 percent organic ingredients
• The label "Made with Organic Ingredients" can contain anywhere between 70 to 95 percent organic ingredients

As you can see, there's a lot of wiggle room in the last 2 groups for not-so-organic (read: pesticide-treated) items. It's a bit like buying organic lettuce, tomatoes, carrots, green peppers, celery, and onion - then dressing them with motor oil. Sure, the veggies are pesticide-free, but I still wouldn't eat the salad.

Keep Monsanto Out of Your Garden this Spring

This is another "Crap! I didn't know that!" moment for me. It isn't enough that Monsanto has given us "Roundup, genetically-engineered beets, corn, and other crops, the fact that they sue farmers after their seeds (a monopoly of their own) contaminate the farmers' own fields, Agent Orange....we could go on and on."

They now own about 40% of the seed market for home vegetable gardens. And that just can't be good.

Think about it for a minute. You're trying to feed yourself and your family the right way, maybe save some money by growing your own food. Then along comes the king of GMOs, putting heaven-knows-what in those little seed packets.

If you're planning your garden, getting a little misty at the thought of all those incredible veggies you'll be enjoying in a few months, this is the article you need to read first.

Photo: National Geographic/Joel Sartore

National Geographic: Tundra Landscapes

And something that's just plain gorgeous.

View, enjoy, download, and save these amazing pictures. I can't imagine more beautiful images to add to my wallpaper. Of course, there is the very real risk that I'll spend hours taking virtual vacations ~ around the world.

Aw, heck. There are worse ways to kill a couple of days.

Chemistry

Methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV)

Despite headlines calling MDPV 'synthetic cocaine,' it is an analog^[2] of pyrovalerone - a drug developed in the late 1960s to treat chronic fatigue and as an appetite suppressant. According to the DEA Office of Diversion Control, "MDPV is structurally related to cathinone, an active alkaloid found in the khat plant."

With a chemical structure more like MDMA (Ecstasy) than cocaine, it reportedly acts in a manner similar to Ritalin or Concerta (methylphenidate), and Wellbutrin (buproprion) - only much, much stronger. The high is more like that from cocaine - more 'selfish,' less 'social' - which may account for the comparison.

Mephedrone

From what I've read, mephedrone is also derived from (or chemically similar to)^[3] cathinone compounds found in Catha edulis (khat), a flowering plant of East Africa and the Arabian Peninsula. First synthesized in the late 1920s, mephedrone was virtually unknown until its rediscovery in 2003. By 2007, it was available on the Internet; in 2008, Israel was the first country to make it illegal. (The EU ruled it illegal across Europe in December, 2010.)

Belonging to the amphetamine and cathinone drug classes, mephedrone is reported to have a high more like MDMA (Ecstasy) (I love everyone!) than cocaine (Everyone should love me!). However, users also report a strong desire to take more before they completely come down, which seems more like the reports on cocaine.

Side Effects

Neither drug has been extensively studied, so the accounts of side effects are mostly from users.

Methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV)

Once again, from the DEA Office of Diversion Control:

The acute side effects of MDPV include tachycardia, hypertension, vasoconstriction, and sweating.  The duration of the subjective effects is about 3 to 4 hours and the side effects continuing a total of 6 to 8 hours after administration.  Higher doses of MDPV have caused intense, prolonged panic attacks in stimulant-intolerant users.  Users have reported bouts of psychosis induced by sleep deprivation and becoming addicted after using higher doses or using at more frequent dosing intervals.

Mephedrone

Medical News Today reports:

According to a survey by Mixmag, a dancing and clubbing magazine:

• 67% of users experienced hyperhidrosis (excessive sweating)
• 51% of users experienced headaches
• 43% of users experienced heart palpitations
• 27% of users experienced nausea
• 15% of users had blue or cold fingers

Non-survey (anecdotal) reports indicate mephedrone may have the following effects on some users:

• Severe panic attacks
• Hallucinations
• Paranoia

The comments section of this article adds more rather frightening, first-hand stories of mephedrone side effects and withdrawal.

Given the similarities between these two drugs, one can only imagine the potential dangers of combining them.

United States

Neither MDPV nor mephedrone are approved for medical use in the United States. Official information on users of either drug in the United States is virtually non-existent.

Sources

Officials know, based on Internet company locations, that some of these 'bath salts' are entering the United States from Europe. In an article about mephedrone last year, Guardian News and Media, quoting Druglink magazine, noted that "[d]ealers in Britain are spending £2,500 to ship one kilogram from China, then sell it at £10 a gram for a profit of £7,500." (This was before EU laws changed.)

A quick search shows that mephedrone 'research chemicals' can be purchased online from sources in Latvia, Cameroon, the US, the UK, and Malaysia. MDPV can be ordered from the same companies, as well as ones in China, Hungary, Germany, and Spain.

Illicit Distribution

While not yet illegal in the United States, state and local law enforcement in several states report encounters with MDPV. There were 75 reports from January to September, 2010; 2 in 2009. Information from the DEA on mephedrone simply mentions Internet sales and promotions.

Twenty-five states report interaction with individuals who have used 'bath salts.' Louisiana leads the nation, with almost 50% of all encounters. As a result, they have outlawed these products, rapidly reducing calls and sending shoppers across state lines. A northern Mississippi county responded to 30 calls in only two months, possibly due to an increase in cross-state traffic.

More than one state is considering following Louisiana's lead and enacting bans.

Control Status

Because they aren't marketed for human consumption, neither mephedrone nor MDPV appear on a U.S. drug schedule. However, as they are considered analog(ue)s of Schedule I drugs, a provision of the Controlled Substance Act (Title 21 United States Code 813) would allow prosecution of cases involving one or both of the substances.

Outlook

People are dying from shooting, sniffing, and smoking this stuff. Manufacturers and sellers get around laws in the United States by labeling their products "not for human consumption," though there's little doubt in anyone's mind the precise intent of these items. It can take years for the federal government to review, regulate, and get these substances off the market.

And, honestly, pulling 'bath salts' will probably do nothing more than make room for the next designer drugs.

1. AZCentral.com: Officials Fear Bath Salts are Growing Drug Problem
2. ChemiCool.com: "An analog is a drug whose structure is related to that of another drug but whose chemical and biological properties may be quite different." (Ed. note: Frequently, the term is used to describe, right or wrong, an artificial derivative of a specific drug or chemical.)
3. a.) Wikipedia: "Mephedrone ... is chemically similar to the cathinone compounds found in the khat plant of eastern Africa."
   b.) Medical News Today: "Mephedrone is a synthetic (artificial) substance based on the (cathinone) compounds that exist in the Khat plant of East Africa."

It's estimated that 150,000 tons - yes, tons - of contaminated feed may have been fed to animals. By consuming this dioxin-laced food, the contamination spread to eggs, poultry meat, and pork. (South Korea and China have already banned imports of German eggs, chicken, and pork products.)

Some of those eggs made it to the Netherlands, where they were processed and mixed with non-contaminated eggs. This liquid egg product was then shipped to the UK for use by bakeries and manufacturers in products for human consumption. Although officials said the level of dioxins in the mixed eggs didn't pose a health risk, it's still a frightening prospect - not knowing what might be in that cake, quiche, or jar of mayonnaise.

Today, Germany announced an anti-dioxin action plan that sets higher standards for the production of animal feed. This plan includes a licensing system for oil and fat producers, as well as mandatory separation of fats and oils intended for industrial use and those meant to be a component in animal feed.

In addition, animal feed producers will be required to personally test their ingredients and report the results to authorities. Private laboratories will also be required to report discovery of suspect items in food or animal feed.

"The government will investigate expanding the criminal law to food and feed safety regulations, possibly making infringements of food safety law a criminal rather than civil offence," according to the Reuters article. This comes amid suspicions that the Harles and Jentzsch plant in Schleswig-Holstein may have operated illegally. It, apparently, sought to avoid official regulations by not registering the company, according to an earlier statement by a spokesman for the German Agriculture Minister, and is now in bankruptcy (insolvency).

Today's article explains that "prosecutors in Germany are investigating the cause of the contamination and specifically whether industrial fats and feeds company Harles and Jentzsch distributed fatty acids meant for industrial paper production to animal feed processors." Dutch and EU authorities are also investigating the possible involvement of an intermediate trader.

Even if that were the case, if a third-party mixed up the shipments - delivering the industrial product to the feed manufacturer - wouldn't there be obvious labeling differences to eliminate improper application of the ingredients? I'd be willing to bet that the mandatory separation of industrial and feed ingredients is going to include some strict new labeling guidelines, as well. If not, they probably should.

1. ""Dioxins" refers to a group of chlorinated organic chemicals with similar chemical structures. Dioxins have no uses. They are formed unintentionally and released as byproducts of human activities such as waste incineration, fuels combustion, chlorine bleaching of pulp and paper, or pesticide manufacturing."
   "Scientific Facts on Dioxins." GreenFacts - Facts on Health and the Environment. 13 Dec. 2004. Web. 14 Jan. 2011. <http://www.greenfacts.org/en/dioxins/index.htm>

Hepatitis C

Basics

Hepatitis C is an infection, caused by a virus (HCV), that just loves liver cells. A member of the Flaviviridae family of viruses, HCV is related to those that cause yellow fever and dengue. It is not, however, related to other hepatitis viruses.

The virus settles into the cells of the liver and, when the immune system sends out white blood cells to attack the virus, the liver develops inflammation. Over time, usually many years, the inflammation leads to scarring of the liver tissue. This scarring, called cirrhosis , causes the liver to stop functioning and leads to a number of serious complications, even death.

Genotypes

Although they all share the same basic structure, there are a number of variations or genetic profiles (genotypes) in the hepatitis C virus. These variations are why it has been, and continues to be, extremely difficult to develop an effective vaccine.

Depending on the source, there are at least 6 or up to 11 HCV genetic variations. Within these 6 to 11 genotypes, there are further variations:

1a - mostly found in North & South America; also common in Australia
1b - mostly found in Europe and Asia.
2a - is the most common genotype 2 in Japan and China.
2b - is the most common genotype 2 in the U.S. and Northern Europe.
2c - the most common genotype 2 in Western and Southern Europe.
3a - highly prevalent here in Australia (40% of cases) and South Asia.
4a - highly prevalent in Egypt
4c - highly prevalent in Central Africa
5a - highly prevalent only in South Africa
6a - restricted to Hong Kong, Macau and Vietnam
7a & 7b - common in Thailand
8a, 8b & 9a - prevalent in Vietnam
10a & 11a - found in Indonesia

Beyond genotypes 1, 2, and 3, there isn't much information published about treatment options. As far as the first three, genotype 1 is the most difficult. It requires a longer treatment period (48+ weeks, compared to 24 weeks), with a very low cure rate; 2 and 3 each average (depending on the source) a 75-80% cure rate.

Treatment News

Merck: Boceprevir

In a January 6 news release, Merck announced that both the FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) have granted an accelerated review / assessment for boceprevir. An oral protease inhibitor^[1], boceprevir is designed for "the treatment of chronic HCV genotype 1 infection, in combination with standard therapy, in adult patients with compensated liver disease^[2] who are previously untreated or who have failed previous therapy."

What that means is the FDA and EMA both believe that boceprevir offers a potentially valuable treatment option, unlike anything currently available for genotype 1 Hep C patients. They have agreed to expedite the review and approval process to get this critically needed treatment onto the market. Great news.

Vertex: Telaprevir

Another protease inhibitor, telaprevir has been part of a number of studies involving more than 2,500 people with genotype 1 HCV. The studies included patients who had never received treatment, as well as those who failed to achieve a sustained viral response (SVR) with standard treatment.

Vertex has been accepted for acclerated assessment by the EMA and is awaiting a decision from the FDA on a Priority Review.

Pharmasset: PSI-7977 & PSI-938

These two drugs are types of nucleotide analogs^[3]. PSI-7977 has been combined with standard treatments (pegylated interferon and ribavirin) in patients with genotypes 1, 2, and 3. The primary focus appears to be treatment of individuals with genotypes 2 and 3.

There were no reports of serious adverse events and, in fact, all adverse events were consistent with those reported during treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin alone. Even better, all patients in the study experienced rapid suppression of the virus, with a viral load below detection limits through the 12 week treatment period. They will be followed for 24 weeks after treatment, to monitor SVR.

Additional studies, involving PSI-938 alone and in combination with PSI-7977, are either underway or enrolling patients.

Bottom Line?

Hepatitis C, first identified in 1979, is a slow-developing virus that can attack the liver for decades before any symptoms appear. It is the most common blood-borne infection, and the leading cause of liver transplantation, in the United States. However, the actual number of Americans infected with the virus is unknown.

At the beginning of this post, I quoted numbers from one source. Another, citing a corrected estimate from 2005, indicates 5 million Americans have been infected and 3.9 million currently have chronic HCV. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) posted similar numbers in 2008: "3.2 million persons in the United States have chronic HCV infection. Infection is most prevalent among those born during 1945–1965, the majority of whom were likely infected during the 1970s and 1980s when rates were highest."

Looking at those dates, one would think that new cases would be few and far between. However, the facts tell a different story. Due to the lack of symptoms and little routine testing, it can take decades for 'new' cases to be reported.

For those of us dealing with Hepatitis C, it's exciting to see the flurry of activity and the focus on finding a cure; especially for those suffering with, the difficult to treat, genotype 1.

What isn't mentioned, in all of these news releases about potential cures, is the incredible cost of medical care. Estimates put the annual cost for Americans with chronic Hep C at $9 billion; with a lifetime cost in the $360 billion range. The cost of liver transplantation alone is believed to be nearly $300 million per year.

With the current economy, it's not surprising that the State of Arizona (effective October 1, 2010) no longer covers liver transplants for patients with HCV. I don't know how many other states have followed suit. But, the bottom line is pretty obvious.

Patients with chronic Hepatitis C are rapidly running out of options. We need a cure.

1. Protease Inhibitor: " A compound that interferes with the ability of certain enzymes to break down proteins. Some protease inhibitors can keep a virus from making copies of itself (for example, AIDS virus protease inhibitors), and some can prevent cancer cells from spreading."
2. Compensated Liver Disease: A diseased "liver that can still perform many of its important functions. Individuals with compensated cirrhosis may be symptom-free and complication-free; however, this stage of illness can progress in severity very fast."
3. Nucleotide Analogs: "Compounds that look like the nucleotides in DNA; they are used as antiviral compounds because the nucleic acids assembled with these analogs fall apart. Therefore, the viral genome cannot be copied and the infection cycle is broken."

Dyslexia

What It Is

LD.org has a more elaborate explanation, but the basic problem is a neurological condition that interferes with the brain's ability to process and interpret information. One of the first signs seems to be difficulty identifying letters. The most commonly confused are b and d; p and q. This leads to a cascading series of problems.

By being unable to tell letters apart, kids develop problems reading, writing, and pronouncing words. Their communication skills are hampered. As these abilities become more critical to their education, they fall further and further behind their classmates.

What It Isn't

Dyslexia is not a sign of diminished intelligence. It is not laziness on the part of students. This condition is, also, not unique to or more prevalent in any particular socio-economic group.

The Latest Study

"The team used two different imaging techniques, including functional magnetic resonance imaging, which measures oxygen used by the brain during different activities, and diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging or DTI, which reveals connections between brain areas." During testing, they found some identified dyslexics had more activity in a specific part of the brain, as well as stronger connections in certain fibers that connect the front and back of the brain.

These results later correlated to improved skills in the students with increased brain activity. Interesting information and researchers are hoping that it will lead to improved teaching methods for dyslexic students.

I must agree with the only comment posted on the article: What does this mean for kids whose brainscans don't have this increased activity? Are programs going to be developed for children who might not improve?

In the study, participants who played a computer game during lunch ate more cookies, when dessert was offered 30 minutes later. Those who paid attention to the meal, and only the meal, indulged in fewer sweets. Additionally, the game players were less able to recall the order and content of their lunch, and reported feeling less full.

For me, doing other things while I'm eating generally causes me to eat less. I start feeling full and quit eating sooner when I'm paying attention to more than my meal. Undistracted, I'll eat everything but the plate.

Even eating the same amount of food, I will agree that I don't end up feeling as full when I'm multitasking. Probably because I tend to eat more slowly; nibbling at the food, while typing or reading a little between bites. My possible response to sweets, offered a half-hour later, did make me stop and think.

Because I nibbled my way through the meal and don't feel over-fed or too full, it is entirely possible that I would be more likely to nibble my way through cookies afterward. But, I am just as likely to decline. I make jokes about cookies and pies and other goodies, but really am not big on desserts or sweets on a regular basis.

What about you? Have you ever noticed that you eat more (or less) if you're doing something else while you're having a meal? (Snacks, for me, don't count. I'd eat a 20lb bag of chips or 10lbs of jelly beans without even thinking, if distracted by work or games.)

Back in my teens, my cousin developed multiple sclerosis. Over the years her condition worsened and improved, and worsened. One possible cause given, even back then, was her amalgam fillings.

Eventually, she went in and had her fillings replaced. Within a very short time, she was out of the wheelchair and walking unaided. Or so I heard through the family grapevine. I doubt that her story is unique.

There are plenty of sites screaming about the dangers of mercury fillings. The better ones link to studies on the subject. Although much of the information is rather old, it is compelling.

One study, published in 1998 in Alternative Medicine Review noted dramatic differences in cerebrospinal fluid, following removal of dental amalgam fillings. Most intriguing? "Mercury has been documented to accumulate in the very areas of the nervous system from which the most dramatic clinical symptoms of MS originate."

The researchers stated that this is not a cause-and-effect determination. Their results did not prove that metal fillings cause multiple sclerosis. However, they did suggest further research and the consideration that chronic low-grade mercury exposure may play a part in some patients' MS development.

I'm not certain what I think about this controversy. Although I did wonder about the makeup of the FDA's panel of outside experts. Are there members who depend, in any way, on the dental industry? Just how much of a personal stake do panelists have in the outcome of the amalgam decision?

I looked up the Dental Products Panel, but haven't checked employment histories for questionable relationships. It's entirely possible that dental product manufacturers contribute to the schools and departments where these panelists teach. Or that they have influences that aren't obvious to me.

Does that create a conflict of interest? Should we, as consumers, be concerned about the panel's rulings? Without a consumer representative (that I could see, anyway), who's looking out for us and our health?

Personally, I have a mouth full of fillings. There is little doubt that they are amalgam. I can't say that I suffer from any ill-effects; but I've also never had the mercury levels in my brain checked.

(How, exactly, does one do that - shy of an autopsy?)

To start, I am no health expert. When I find an article on a subject that interests me, I always need to do a lot more reading. For example, before I can even attempt to judge information on omega-3s and depression, I have to educate myself on omega-3s. And - once again - I'm taking all of you with me!

Omega-3 Fatty Acids

Definition

Omega-3s are a family of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) that the body cannot make on its own. They have been called 'essential' fatty acids (EFAs) because of their importance in normal growth and brain function. The three most common (and most studied) omega-3s are docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), and alpha-linolenic acid (ALA).

Sources

DHA and EPA are found in certain cold-water fatty fish, e.g., sardines, halibut, herring, lake trout, mackerel, salmon, striped sea bass, albacore tuna, and whitefish. ALA, on the other hand, is a plant-based Omega-3 found in soy beans, walnuts, flaxseed, and canola and olive oils. The body converts ALA to EPA, and further to DHA.

Benefits

This is where the waters get a little muddy. Depending on the source (see the Google search results below), omega-3s do everything but the dishes. Proven benefits are a little harder to find, outside cardiovascular research.

There is evidence that EPA and DHA can (especially, when taken together) reduce inflammation, improve cholesterol levels, lower triglycerides, prevent plaque build-up in arteries, and improve blood flow. ALA (the form frequently found in supplements), on the other hand, doesn't seem to offer the same benefits.

Concentrated in the brain, omega-3s are believed to play an important role in cognitive function and behavior. Studies in Great Britain, Australia, and Indonesia showed that children whose diets were higher in omega-3s performed better in school, with fewer behavior problems. Hence, the hope for benefit to people with depression and behavioral disorders.

Omega-3s and Depression

The article that inspired this post is based on an analysis (as yet, unpublished and not peer-reviewed) of previous clinical trials. Paid for by the National Institutes of Health, researchers combined the results of other studies and looked for patterns of omega-3s' impact on depression. They found a lot of information, inspiring further research; but nothing actually provided definitive conclusions.

Part of the problem is that many of the studies involved DHA alone. Few note any benefit to this solo-therapy approach. (My digging into other sources, listed below, showed similar results.) As mentioned, combining DHA and EPA seems to be more effective - regardless of the condition being treated.

Another problem? Although there is an indication that DHA-deficiencies have been linked to depression, the clinical trials failed to note whether any of the participants actually suffered from deficiencies. I quote: "However, it's unknown if the depressed people in the study were DHA-deficient and therefore the supplements were simply returning their DHA levels to normal, or if an added boost of DHA/EPA was helpful even for those with sufficient levels, Davis said."

What bothers me - rereading that last sentence - is casually comparing DHA to DHA/EPA. Over and over, I have read that adding EPA (sometimes in large amounts) to DHA is much more effective than DHA alone. Lumping them together, in the same sentence as though they were interchangeable treatments, is a serious apples-and-oranges comparison that flies in the face of valid methodology.

(Without access to the actual paper being presented this week, it's impossible to tell whether the disconnect is a flaw in the science or in the reporting. In other words, I'm not certain whether the researchers are mixing a lovely fruit salad or if the reporter failed to properly set-up the quote. Common, but frustrating.)

Conclusions

Depression is a serious condition. Improperly managed (or ignored) the implications are literally life-and-death. From where I sit, as a sufferer, any nature-based treatment is exciting. Especially one that offers other health benefits.

Chemical anti-depressants, while immensely improved since the early days, are still chemicals. Often it's a crap-shoot whether any particular drug will be effective for any particular patient. And, even then, the side effects and/or interactions can be serious.

The most, from where I sit, that can be decided by this new information is that we need more information. Hopefully, quality research will follow.

As always, arbitrarily taking supplements - of any kind - is to be avoided. If you feel that adding omega-3s to your diet is a good idea, talk to your physician. Combining these supplements with cholesterol meds or blood thinners increases the effects and carries serious risks.

In addition, know the manufacturer. Just as fish can be contaminated with mercury and other pollutants, so can fish oil supplements.

References

Google Search: Define: Omega-3 Fatty Acids

Mayo Clinic: Omega-3 Fatty Acids, Fish Oil, Alpha-linolenic Acid

Science Daily: Scientists Learn How Food Affects The Brain: Omega 3 Especially Important

University of Maryland Medical Center: Omega-3 Fatty Acids

Wikipedia: Omega-3 Fatty Acid

Why, when it was determined that the Fort Washington plant had quality control lapses, unsanitary conditions, and manufacturing 'insufficiencies' did they not immediately recall any and all products that had been made there? Seriously.

For months, J&J has been pulling products - a few here and a few there (sometimes a ton here and there) - from the market. Adult medications and children's medications; cold meds and antacids. The one constant - they all came from the same place.

Investigations continue and it is entirely possible (probable?) that new recalls will occur. "[I]t could discover lapses in its earlier processes that could warrant new product recalls, J&J cautioned." Wouldn't a complete if-it-came-from-Fort-Washington-yank-it have actually done less damage to their credibility?

Maybe. But now that we're getting contact lenses - not from Pennsylvania - that were improperly processed, I have to wonder if everything from Johnson & Johnson isn't a risk. (Especially if one lives in Asia or Europe.) After all, "[t]he company is already under criminal and congressional investigation in the United States..."

If that weren't bad enough, recent notices are not being posted publically. The justification being that consumers don't need to take action. It's sufficient that wholesalers and retailers stop shipping or pull products from their shelves.

Really? This fulfills your "claims to be striving for greater transparency?" For protecting consumers?

Social Security

What, exactly, is this Social Security? In simple terms, it is a nest egg - a percentage of every dollar earned, - taken out of our paychecks - and set aside against the day when we can't work anymore. It's not a gee-I'd-rather-go-fishing fund for 20-somethings, but a support system for people who've worked long and hard, and are ready (after 20, 30 or 40 years) to say "I've done all I can. And I am done."

Most of the people in this country aren't retiring with 5-digit pensions and guaranteed healthcare, e.g. Congressmen. (Which is a whole 'nother issue -- or maybe not.) They are the average Joes and Janes who expect that - because they paid their money - they get their benefits.

This is a bit like my employer saying:

"Hmmm. We're having a bit of a problem, financially; so we're going to need the money from your 401(k)."

Me: "Excuse me, but that's MY money, taken out of my paycheck and put aside for MY future."

Employer: "Yes, well, we truly appreciate that you have been financially responsible, but - since we haven't - we need to take your money to fix our problems. We'll pay it back {wink, wink; nod, nod} just as soon as we can."

Since the Bush administration took office, they increased the deficit to the point of a national bankruptcy. (Just look at the above chart.) They also factored in the payments to Social Security as a way to make the damage seem less severe.

Now, we have the current administration; continuing in the same vein. It has to stop. Those monies are not for the use of the government - in any way, shape, or form.

Social Security belongs to the citizens who worked hard, paid in, and expect to receive their benefits at retirement. Period.

From where I sit, it all comes down to rights. And realistic expectations.

Authors

An author has every right to throw words on pages and pay to have them bound together in something resembling a book. That's what we like to call freedom of speech. Even if that speech is spurious and specious; claiming a value and honesty that doesn't stand up to closer inspection.

However, the expectation that anyone has the right to sell (or demand that others sell) those bound musings wherever and whenever they please is a different story. Especially, when one is musing about a subject that is, to put it mildly, polarizing. In other words, Christopher Hitchens or Edmund Cooper have every right to write what they choose; expecting a shelf at the local Christian book store is unrealistic.

Businesses

Amazon, or any business, has the legal right to choose what it will and will not offer for sale. "We reserve the right to refuse service ... " in action. That business also has a basic right to not support or give the appearance of supporting illegal activities. Or, they can throw up their hands and cry "We are not the morality police."

Businesses also know that they aren't going to please all of the people all of the time. If they take controversial positions or offer products that offend, they should expect people to complain or refuse to patronize their store. If they don't see that, they are deluding themselves.

Consumers

Then, there's the public. We, as consumers, have the right to purchase what we want, without prejudice or judgement. (I must add - within the limits of the law.) At the same time, we have the right to not be assaulted by personally objectionable material while trying to find a gift for our grandchild or spouse - from a mainstream business.

Therein lies the problem. What I consider objectionable may not coincide with my neighbor's opinion. And vice versa. To exaggerate, just a bit, that is how censorship begins - and, frequently, snowballs into out-of-control loss of basic rights. Expecting everyone to kowtow to my beliefs (or yours) is unrealistic.

Bottom Line

It is, to say the least, quite a balancing act.

Everyone has the right to live their life as they see fit, as long as they don't keep anyone else from exercising that exact same right. And as long as their lifestyle choices harm no one. No one has to eat broccoli, just because I like it; and you'll never get me to touch organ meat - never.

I can practice religious or atheistic beliefs; eat lots (and lots) of meat or nothing with a face; sing the praises of heavy metal or opera. I can be a technophile or a Luddite. Someone - I promise - will disagree with whatever position I take. Strongly and vocally, in all likelihood.

But, and this is where the balance tilts away from individual liberties, when a behavior or lifestyle or belief system (or personal choice) is, by its very nature, guaranteed to cause emotional or physical harm to another living being - it is not a protected freedom. No one has the right to rape another person or beat them or lock them in a basement for years on end. Or burn down their home or steal their car or intentionally cause them harm.

Nor, in my humble opinion, do they have the right to support or glorify such behavior. I would expect the same hue and cry over something titled "How to Beat Your Spouse, Discreetly" or "Arson For Fun and Profit: What To Do When the Neighbors Won't Move". But, hey that's just me: a non-religious, steak-loving, opera-neutral geek.

From the news release and Dogwood Alliance:

Today, GP is stepping away from business-as-usual forestry practices, announcing boldly to the world its new policies to end purchasing wood from endangered forests and from any new plantations established at the expense of over 90 Million acres of natural hardwood forests. Going beyond words on a piece of paper, over the past 2 years, GP, working with Dogwood and NRDC has mapped 600,000 acres of endangered forests and special areas in the Mid-Atlantic Coastal eco-region.

“No other U.S. company has demonstrated this level of initiative in mapping unique forests across such a broad region,” said Debbie Hammel, NRDC Senior Resource Specialist. “Through this process, GP has proven that—by harnessing scientific advances and seeking conservation guidance—corporations can help protect unique places without sacrificing profitability.”

Personally, I find it ridiculous that any company (ahem ... International Paper? Are you listening?) would put whole eco-systems in danger when - as Georgia-Pacific is proving - environmental responsibility doesn't mean losing money. And the customers of IP are no better. If KFC and Yum! Brands (to name two) were to demand a change, maybe IP would man-up and do the right thing.

For me? I'm going to start voting with my wallet. Support Georgia-Pacific brands.

I can - vividly - remember the first time I had dinner with my soon-to-be in-laws. (Wow, have a hyphen!) It was, shall we say, an education? Luckily, my fiancé and his parents were amazing people who were happy to help me learn.

Before you get all - "They should have accepted you the way you were!" upset - I was 19, poorly socialized, and hungry to be taught what I saw as 'proper manners.' Gracious behavior, if you prefer.

It's entirely possible that I would have picked up some of this information, because (as I say) I was desperate to learn. I did a lot of reading and observing. But, spending time with people who lived the behaviors I wanted to emulate made it a lot easier.

I have to admire these universities who are starting to realize that students need skills beyond the core of their major to survive in the real world. Information they may not be exposed to at home. It is simply logical that the more tools we have, the more comfortable we (and those around us) will be with life's social challenges.

What to do you think? Valid studies or waste of time?

David Cassidy & DUI

The basic story is: David Cassidy arrested for DUI, swears he wasn't drunk. Okay, that's pretty much what everyone who has ever been pulled over for erratic driving swears. "Honesht, offisher. {hic}"

Of course, the fact that he blew a 0.139 and 0.141 (not sure about the order of the two tests) would seem to indicate more than "a glass of wine with lunch and a pain pill a few hours later." Then there's the half-empty bottle of bourbon in the back seat. Coincidence?

Keith Olbermann & Campaign Donations

This one is a tad trickier: Keith Olbermann Suspended From MSNBC for contributing money to three Democratic candidates. My initial reaction was - "So, what?!" His money; his choices.

But, this is where it gets tricky. NBC has a policy that employees cannot work on or contribute to political campaigns, without express permission from the news division president. I doubt this is a new policy, although the story I read didn't say. That means, Olbermann broke the rules.

Did he err so grievously that indefinite suspension, without pay, is a balanced response? NBC didn't react when Joe Scarborough donated to a Republican candidate in 2006. Or at least they didn't react publicly. They may have privately slapped his wrist; who knows?

Seems excessive, to me. Although (see? that 'tricky' thing again), as Keith makes a habit of pointing fingers, perhaps he should be more careful to keep his own hands clean. Thoughts?

Homeowners & Fed Tax Credit

Remember that tax credit the government offered to first-time home buyers, starting in 2008? Well, Surprise! the Feds want it back! Not all of it, mind you; and not all at once.

However, if you took advantage of the credit in 2008, pony up kiddos! Starting with 2010 tax returns, due in April 2011, people who bought their first house that year have to start giving the money back. Oh, the government is giving you 15 years to pay it back; but pay it back - you must.

The law was changed for 2009 and 2010, so - unless you sell your house or move out - you shouldn't have to return the credit for those years. (Check the IRS website for complete details.) Once again - if the politicos are giving something with one hand, they've probably already figured out how to take it away with the other.

Toys & Product Recalls

Always good advice, the CPSC reminds shoppers to check the product recall notices before scooping up great deals on toys. With the troubling economy, more and more people turn to thrift shops and online auction sites for savings on holiday shopping. There's where the potential problems arise.

While it is illegal to sell or resell recalled products, that doesn't mean they can't be found in second-hand stores or on personal web pages and sell-your-stuff-here sites like Craigslist or eBay. That bargain is no bargain if it's defective or dangerous.

Me & Psychology

One last, "Huh?!" for the day. How - exactly - does one get on a mailing list for a university? I know, someone somewhere bought a list. But seriously, this one is a huge disconnect:

Today, I received (by snail mail) an information package from Argosy University - to my real name, not my business or any of the 'nicks' I use all over the web. If that weren't weird enough, and it almost was, the information was on their Doctor of Psychology program. Again, seriously?!

I could probably see it, if they wanted me to sign up for therapy. (Unraveling the whys and wherefores of my second marriage alone would take years.) But, I'm pretty sure encouraging the inmates to sign up to run the asylum can't ever end well - for anyone.

And, with that said, have a great weekend. Stay safe and stay sane.

First, there are a lot of research articles. Not a bad thing, but not really where I wanted to start. I need - immediate - practical, day-to-day information and ideas; if not an actual collection of menus and recipes.

As a sidebar, the few articles I did pull up were complete. Unlike so many publication sites where you get an abstract and then have to pay for the full report. So, great news; but I'm saving the research for another day.

Off to try the Low Carb Articles. Happiness! and Joy! With titles like "Low-carb foods that every house should have as a staple?" - more news-you-can-use-now and less medical-speak.

This page also lead me to Contradictions about Carbs and Diabetes Continue, an article on About.com (not usually one of my favorite resources). The author is a prediabetic who maintains the "Low Carb Diets" section as well as the "Low Carb Diets Blog." I think I'll be spending some time with her, as well.

It feels good to have options and ideas at my fingertips. Like this may actually be a doable deal, after all. If -- big IF -- I can manage to get Mark to try spaghetti from squash (8g carbs), instead of semolina (40g carbs).

Any tips, tricks, or sneaky suggestions? He has the palate of a gourmand and the soul of a Irishman - meat and potatoes, all the way. This could be ... interesting.

The gist of the report was that 9 percent of women with incurable cancer were still getting mammograms; 5.8 percent, pap tests. Of men diagnosed with advanced cancer, 15 percent were still being screened for prostate cancer. Naturally, my first thought was, "Why?"

Some of the answers made sense. People who routinely get these exams, just keep having them done. I can, I suppose, understand that. And, yet ... If you knew you were dying, why would you bother?

One possible reason made me stop cold. Doctors may not be telling their patients that "they are not likely to benefit from having a mammogram for breast cancer because their lymphoma is so advanced." That is upsetting on so many levels.

Isn't it a doctor's responsibility to ensure that patients understand their condition, their options, and their rights? Is the desire to avoid an emotional scene or confrontation making cowards out of the medical profession? Or do they really think that ignorance is bliss?