text:
Editorial: Saving Butts and Taking Names
By: Kristina Ackermann
In this first issue of 2013, E&P has resurrected our Production All-Stars feature, and I couldn't have had more fun reading through all the entries we received.
The things that go wrong at your papers at 1:00 in the morning are almost beyond comprehension. One of this year's nominees saved the life of a coworker who suffered a heart attack while on the job. Another one doubles as a copy editor, regularly catching errors before the paper goes to press. Several said they make sure to keep good relationships with the neighborhood electrician, handyman, and plumber so that they can always make a late-night call when help is needed.
As usual with our recognition features, determining the top All-Stars was a difficult feat, mostly because the production manager's job is so critical to a paper's operations. In a job whose description calls for mechanical skills, computer smarts, strong management ability, obsessive levels of organization, and complete disregard for being home in time for dinner, it's not surprising to read phrases such as, "he saves our butts every day," and "he can fix a press and a computer in the same day, and often does."
Tablets, apps, and social media may be dominating the conversation in many corners of the industry, but print's not dead — far from it. Publishers from across the country shared with us the many ways their production crew is actually bringing in additional revenue, from commercial printing business to creative partnerships with other nearby papers.
It also seems that production departments have been hit particularly hard by the staff reductions that so many papers have had to rely on to get their financials back in order. Many nominees were commended by their superiors for the transparency and professionalism with which they handled such situations. The effect of layoffs was intensified in some of the smaller markets we heard from, where letting go of one person can mean as much as a 30 percent reduction in staff. Doing less with more is a top requirement of today's production professionals, and our all-stars have all risen to the challenge.
Across the board, your production and mailroom managers were described as being cool and level-headed. One was nominated based solely on his ability to remain courteous to other employees when under pressure from deadlines. Another nominee periodically pretends to get hopping mad about some issue and makes a point of demonstrating this faux-anger within earshot of all the mailroom employees — just to keep them on their toes. It might not be one of the seven habits of highly effective people, but it's a strategy at least one publisher swears by.
I was also impressed by the diversity of entries we received. A full third of nominees are women, showing that the gender gap in newspaper management, while still present, is at least shrinking. Age was also a diverse characteristic of our nominees. One production manager is 81-years-old and says that he wants to slow down, but because the newspaper industry is changing so rapidly, he still finds the work fascinating and exciting. He's even learning InDesign.
For 2013, we have chosen to recognize five production all-stars who demonstrate leadership, flexibility, and reliability. Read their stories here.


text:
Brennan: Don't concede Open to Martin Kaymer just yet
PINEHURST, N.C. – After the second round of the U.S. Open, we're left rooting for the sports equivalent of a train wreck.
If that doesn't happen, this tournament is over.
LEADER BOARD:Brendon Todd in second
A Saturday 80? Or matching 75s? Scores like that seem to be the only way Germany's Martin Kaymer can lose the 2014 U.S. Open after opening up a six-shot lead with the lowest 36-hole score in the 114-year history of this event.
This Open has the distinct look and feel of a rout. Even Kaymer admits it.
"It gets boring the words that I use," Kaymer said with a smile in describing how he played Friday while shooting his second consecutive 5-under 65. "But, I mean, there's not much to say. It's just good right now the way I play golf."
It's very good for him, not so good for entertainment value. It seems a shame to describe golf greatness with the term "boring," but if Kaymer keeps playing this well, this highly-anticipated golf weekend is going to become nothing but anti-climatic.
History sneaks up on the game of golf. It doesn't come in blasts, like home runs or Hail Mary touchdowns. It's not anyone's fault that Kaymer was playing a rain-soaked, receptive course with admirable and methodical precision, one hole after another.
Kaymer himself never expected this. After shooting 65 on Thursday, he said there was no way he'd be able to do that again. But then came torrential rains Thursday night that dumped nearly an inch of water on the course within 15 minutes. It was the best thing that could have happened to Kaymer.
"I was expecting the golf course playing a lot firmer and obviously that rain helped a lot last night and you could still be aggressive today," said Kaymer, who teed off at 8:02 a.m. Friday. "We had perfect greens in the morning, but still you have to hit good shots. But you know what I said, it's very rare, obviously the record shows that it's very rare that somebody shoots 10-under par after two rounds. And it just happened in my case now."
Kaymer, 29, may be from Europe, but he is well known on this side of the pond now. He won the 2010 PGA Championship when Dustin Johnson controversially grounded his club in a bunker on the 72nd hole. He became the No. 1 player in the world the next year. He sank the winning putt in the 2012 Ryder Cup. And he just won The Players Championship last month.
But he's still European through and through. And Pinehurst No. 2, now without its high rough and narrow fairways, plays right to his strengths, he said.
"I actually like the way it plays now," he said. "I didn't play in 2005, so for me, it's very difficult to compare it, but I actually enjoy a different U.S. Open right now. Usually coming to the U.S. Open, you know it's going to be tight fairways, thick rough, fast greens. This week, it's a little bit different. I think for us Europeans, or especially the guys from the U.K., we're more used to playing those golf courses than the thick rough and long fairway or long holes with tight fairways. So I think it's a little bit of a favor for the European players."
This might become a topic for a future U.S. Golf Association meeting.
For now, though, it could become the pathway to coronation for another European at the U.S. national championship. If Kaymer carries on to victory, he will become the fourth European winner in the last five years, following Graeme McDowell in 2010, Rory McIlroy in 2011 and Justin Rose last year, with Webb Simpson as the lone American winner in this decade.
That said, anything can happen over the weekend, obviously. The last time the U.S. Open was played at Pinehurst, in 2005, two-time Open champion Retief Goosen entered the final round with a three-stroke lead, shot 81 and ended up finishing 11th. "I obviously threw this one away," he said afterward.
Then there were the U.S. Open romps of Tiger Woods in 2000 and McIlroy in 2011. They held six-stroke leads at the halfway point of their Opens and never looked back.
There's no way to know for sure, but Kaymer seems to have more Tiger and Rory in him at the moment than Retief.
Asked how good it felt to be playing so well, Kaymer replied, "I said to my caddie, there were a couple of shots today that I was surprised how good they were."
Here's hoping that's not the only surprise left in this tournament.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
sharpstuff wrote:It is well-known that over 80% of pharmaceutical drugs are ineffective to begin with.
sharpstuff wrote:Correctly or incorrectly, I am voicing my observations and opinions within my experience and readings over many years.
Seneca wrote:So far you have only voiced your opinions and readings. I am more interested in your observations and experience. What observations have you made that formed your opinion about Geerd Hamer's hypothesis?"
flabbergasted wrote:"Boy, I am glad you are not my physician!
I like the idea of a thread about different concepts of health and disease, but your post is not very sharp stuff. Not up to CF standards."
"sharpstuff wrote:
It is well-known that over 80% of pharmaceutical drugs are ineffective to begin with. "
If you say so."
sharpstuff wrote:I have no need of a 'physician'. I have been nowhere near no 'doctor' for over fifty years and that was A & E. I am not registered with such a person nor have a need for one. I could tell you why. And I am in perfect health. I could also tell you why.
Health Through Nutrition By Dr. Joel Robbins
In the field of health, there are a few good rules to follow to achieve health.
1) Follow the laws of Nature
2) Let Truth be your authority, not authority your truth.
One of the Laws of Nature is that the innate intelligence of the body strives to keep the body alive, regardless of the cost. The "cost" is what we call "disease". Disease is the effort of the body to keep us alive.
Disease or "dis-ease" is defined as a lack of health. Disease results when any cell is not functioning 100% of its designed duty whether due to trauma, toxicity, lack of communication or a combination thereof. Disease is due to stress.
Whether due to ignorance or laziness, exposing the body to stress will produce a diseased state of the body. Stress is the only means of tearing down health resulting in disease, our bodies paying the price for violating the laws of nature (our wrong doings). We do not "catch" a disease or illness, we earn it. We must "work" for disease.
Disease is nothing more than the body responding to the wrong we have done to it. It is the body's attempt at keeping us alive in response to the wrongs we have inflicted on our bodies.
Pathological changes are the cell's response to stress. These changes or compensations allow the body to survive - maintain homeostasis - as long as the stress continues. These tissue changes which result in disease, are the outward manifestation of internal compensation to stress. Until the cause is removed, the condition will remain in one form or another.
Is there such a thing as an incurable disease? From a medical standpoint many diseases are incurable.
The only reason some diseases are deemed incurable by the medical profession is because they have yet to get out of the body's way and let it work in restoring itself to health.
They have yet to learn about removing the cause.
The medical profession is bent on "curing" the body. This is done by providing symptomatic relief. In so doing, they not only hinder all or most healing activity of the body, but actually produce a more stressful condition for the body, lowering its immune system, leading to a more serious diseased condition.
The War Between Orthodox Medicine and Alternative Medicine - R. Webster Kehr
1. Introduction To The War in Medicine
2. The Foundation Of The War in Medicine
3. Case Study of Scientific Corruption [Pauling and Cameron]
4. Remission, Cure Rates and Other Deceptions
5. The Approval of Chemotherapy Drugs
6. The Scientific Evidence For Alternative Medicine
7. Cancer Research
8. Case Study of Media Corruption
9. How The Media and Establishment Control The Public
10. Other Control Tactics
11. The Role of the FDA
12. The FDA Versus Freedom of Speech
13. Who Do You Believe - Follow The Money Trail
kickstones wrote:It's by G. Edward Griffin ( I'm aware he's got a dodgy roll of honor on his freedom site, but I still think the book has merit)
Alive and Well: One Doctor's Experience with Nutrition in the Treatment of Cancer Patients - Philip E. Binzel Jr., M.D.
Chapter Four - Preparing for Battle
To the best of my knowledge, there was no law in the State of Ohio which would prevent me from
using Laetrile. I had checked with several attorney friends. I had asked them to see what the law
was. They reported that there were no laws in the State of Ohio regarding the use of Laetrile.
I called the Ohio State Medical Association. A woman answered the phone. Our conversation went
something like this:
"I would like to know the present legal status of Laetrile in Ohio."
"Laetrile is illegal," I was told.
"If Laetrile is illegal, there must be some statute which says it is illegal. Would you please give me
that statute number so that my attorney can look it up for me."
"Laetrile is illegal," I was told again.
"Yes, I understand that, but what is the statute number that makes it illegal?"
"Laetrile is illegal," I was told for the third time.
"You have told me that three times now, but you have not given me the precise law that makes it illegal."
"Well, it is not approved by the FDA," was the reply this time.
"Does that make it illegal?"
"Why, then, did you tell me three times that it was illegal?"
"Because that was what I was told to say if anyone inquired about Laetrile," was her reply.
Chapter Five - The Battle Begins
The trial between Mr. Rutherford and the Government went on for several weeks. Federal Judge
Luther Bohanon presided. Each day the FDA attorneys would tell the court that the FDA had
hundreds and hundreds of studies that proved that Laetrile would not work. Toward the end of the
trial Judge Bohanon said to the FDA attorneys, "Tomorrow, when you come into court, I want you
to bring with you all of these studies that have been done by the FDA on Laetrile."
The following morning, when the trial began again, the Judge asked for the studies. The FDA
attorneys said, "Your Honor, we did not bring the studies because they are so scientific that we
don't think you can understand them." This, as you can well imagine, did not please the Judge. He
insisted that all of the studies must be in his court room the following morning.
The next morning there were no studies. When the Judge asked why, the FDA attorneys said the
studies were so voluminous they were not sure that all of the studies would fit in his court room.
The Judge then stated that, if necessary, he would empty the entire court house, but he wanted all of
those studies in his court the following morning.
The following morning there were no studies. Again, the Judge asked why. The FDA attorney said
very simply, "Because, Your Honor, there are no studies." Of course, the Judge was irate. The FDA
attorneys explained that each evening after the trial they would call Washington. Each evening the
Washington office of the FDA would assure the attorneys that they had all of these studies. When
the attorneys finally pinned down the Washington office, they said that they had done no studies at
all on Laetrile. This was when Judge Bohanon called for Administrative Hearings.
In truth, as time has gone on, I have found much evidence to make me believe that the FDA had,
indeed, done a great many studies on Laetrile. The problem was they apparently had found that —
when properly used with other vitamins, minerals, enzymes and diet — Laetrile could be very
beneficial to many cancer patients. There was no way the FDA was going to admit this! For more
than fifteen years they had been saying that Laetrile was of no value. To come out now and say that
they had been wrong was unthinkable. The fuss and furor that would have come from the people of
this country would have been tremendous. Congress, rapidly, would have been forced to do away
with the FDA. To the government, this would have been a terrible loss. After all, the "most
important" function of any government bureaucracy is to perpetuate itself. It is my opinion, and
only an opinion, that it was easier for the FDA to say that they had done no studies than to reveal
what their studies had actually shown. It was far less dangerous to go through Administrative
Hearings than to admit that they were wrong.
The Flexner Report is a book-length study of medical education in the United States and Canada, written by Abraham Flexner and published in 1910 under the aegis of the Carnegie Foundation. Many aspects of the present-day American medical profession stem from the Flexner Report and its aftermath.
Flexner Report
Two years later, he published the Flexner Report, which examined the state of American medical education and led to far-reaching reform in the training of doctors. The Flexner report led to the closure of most rural medical schools and all but two African-American medical colleges in the United States, given his adherence to germ theory, in which he argued that if not properly trained and treated, African-Americans and the poor posed a health threat to middle/upper class whites. His position was:
"The practice of the Negro doctor will be limited to his own race, which in its turn will be cared for better by good Negro physicians than by poor white ones. But the physical well-being of the Negro is not only of moment to the Negro himself. Ten million of them live in close contact with sixty million whites. Not only does the Negro himself suffer from hookworm and tuberculosis; he communicates them to his white neighbors, precisely as the ignorant and unfortunate white contaminates him. Self-protection not less than humanity offers weighty counsel in this matter; self- interest seconds philanthropy. The Negro must be educated not only for his sake, but for ours. He is, as far as the human eye can see, a permanent factor in the nation."
Ironically, one of the schools, Louisville National Medical College, was located in his home town. In response to the report, some schools fired senior faculty members in a process of reform and renewal.
Influence on Europe
Flexner soon conducted a related study of medical education in Europe. According to Bonner (2002), Flexner's work came to be "nearly as well known in Europe as in America." With funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, Flexner "...exerted a decisive influence on the course of medical training and left an enduring mark on some of the nation's most renowned schools of medicine." He worried that "the imposition of rigid standards by accrediting groups was making the medical curriculum a monstrosity," with medical students moving through it with "little time to stop, read, work or think." Bonner (2002) calls Flexner "the severest critic and the best friend American medicine ever had."
Osteoporosis Myth: The Dangers of High Bone Mineral Density - Sayer Ji
The present-day definitions of Osteopenia and Osteoporosis were arbitrarily conceived by the World Health Organization (WHO) in the early 90's and then projected upon millions of women's bodies seemingly in order to convince them they had a drug-treatable, though symptomless, disease.
Deviant Standards: Aging Transformed Into a Disease
Within the WHO's new BMD definitions the aging process is redefined as a disease, and these definitions targeted women, much in the same way that menopause was once redefined as a "disease" that needed to be treated with synthetic hormone replacement (HRT) therapies; that is, before the whole house of cards collapsed with the realization that by "treating" menopause as a disease the medical establishment was causing far more harm than good, e.g. heart disease, stroke and cancer.
As if to fill the void left by the HRT debacle and the disillusionment of millions of women, the WHO's new definitions resulted in the diagnosis, and subsequent labeling, of millions of healthy middle-aged and older women with what they were now being made to believe was another "health condition," serious enough to justify the use of expensive and extremely dangerous bone drugs (and equally dangerous mega-doses of elemental calcium) in the pursuit of increasing bone density by any means necessary.
One thing that cannot be debated, as it is now a matter of history, is that this sudden transformation of healthy women, who suffered no symptoms of "low bone mineral density," into an at-risk, treatment-appropriate group, served to generate billions of dollars of revenue for DXA device manufacturers, doctor visits, and drug prescriptions around the world.
WHO Are They Kidding?
Osteopenia is, in fact, a medical and diagnostic non-entity. The term itself describes nothing more than a statistical deviation from an arbitrarily determined numerical value or norm. According to the osteoporosis epidemiologist Dr. L. Joseph Melton at the Mayo Clinic who participated in setting the original WHO criteria in 1992, "[osteopenia] was just meant to indicate the emergence of a problem," and noted that "It didn't have any particular diagnostic or therapeutic significance. It was just meant to show a huge group who looked like they might be at risk." Another expert, Michael McClung, director of the Oregon Osteoporosis Center, criticized the newly adopted disease category osteopenia by saying ''We have medicalized a nonproblem."
In reality, the WHO definitions violate both commonsense and fundamental facts of biological science (sadly, an increasingly prevalent phenomenon within drug company-funded science). After all, anyone over 30 years of age should have lower bone density than a 30 year old, as this is consistent with the normal and natural healthy aging process. And yet, according to the WHO definition of osteopenia, the eons-old programming of our bodies to gradually shed bone density as we age, is to be considered a faulty design and/or pathology in need of medical intervention.
How the WHO, or any other organization which purports to be a science-based "medical authority," can make an ostensibly educated public believe that the natural thinning of the bones is not normal, or more absurdly: a disease, is astounding. In defense of the public, the cryptic manner in which these definitions and diagnoses have been cloaked in obscure mathematical and clinical language makes it rather difficult for the layperson to discern just how outright insane the logic they are employing really is.
Bone Mineral Density is NOT Equivalent to Bone Strength
As you can see there are a number of insurmountable problems with the WHO's definitions, but perhaps the most fatal flaw is the fact that the Dual energy X-ray absorpitometry device (DXA) is only capable of revealing the mineral density of the bone, and this is not the same thing as bone quality/strength.
While there is a correlation between bone mineral density and bone quality/strength – that is to say, they overlap in places -- they are not equivalent. In other words, density, while an excellent indicator of compressive strength (resisting breaking when being crushed by a static weight), is not an accurate indicator of tensile strength (resisting breaking when being pulled or stretched).
Indeed, in some cases having higher bone density indicates that the bone is actually weaker. Glass, for instance, has high density and compressive strength, but it is extremely brittle and lacks the tensile strength required to withstand easily shattering in a fall. Wood, on the other hand, which is closer in nature to human bone than glass or stone is less dense relative to these materials, but also extremely strong relative to them, capable of bending and stretching to withstand the very same forces which the bone is faced with during a fall. Or, take spider web. It is has infinitely greater strength and virtually no density. Given these facts, having "high" bone density (and thereby not having osteoporosis) may actually increase the risk of fracture in a real-life scenario like a fall.
Essentially, the WHO definitions distract from key issues surrounding bone quality and real world bone fracture risks, such as gait and vision disorders. In other words, if you are able to see and move correctly in our body, you are less likely to fall, which means you are less prone to fracture. Keep in mind also that the quality of human bone depends entirely on dietary and lifestyle patterns and choices, and unlike x-ray-based measurements, bone quality is not decomposable to strictly numerical values, e.g. mineral density scores. Vitamin K2 and soy isoflavones, for instance, significantly reduce bone fracture rates without increasing bone density. Scoring high on bone density tests may save a woman from being intimidated into taking dangerous drugs or swallowing massive doses of elemetal calcium, but it may not translate into preventing "osteoporosis," which to the layperson means the risk of breaking a bone. But high bone mineral density may result in far worse problems....
[Note: Soy 'milk' is shit & vitamins, at best, are useless!]
High Bone Density: More Harm Than Good
The present-day fixation within the global medical community on "osteoporosis prevention" as a top women's health concern, is simply not supported by the facts. The #1 cause of death in women today is heart disease, and the #2 cause of death is cancer, particularly breast cancer, and not death from complications associated with a bone fracture or break. In fact, in the grand scheme of things osteoporosis or low bone mineral density does not even make the CDC's top ten list of causes of female mortality. So, why is it given such a high place within the hierarchy of women's health concerns? Is it a business decision or a medical one?
Regardless of the reason or motive, the obsessive fixation on bone mineral density is severely undermining the overall health of women. For example, the mega-dose calcium supplements being taken by millions of women to "increase bone mineral density" are known to increase the risk of heart attack by between 24-27%, according to two 2011 meta-analyses published in Lancet, and 86% according to a more recent meta-analysis published in the journal Heart. Given the overwhelming evidence, the 1200+ mgs of elemental calcium the National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) recommends women 50 and older take to "protect their bones," may very well be inducing coronary artery spasms, heart attacks and calcified arterial plaque in millions of women. Considering that the NOF name calcium supplement manufacturers Citrical and Oscal as corporate sponsors, it is unlikely their message will change anytime soon.
Now, when we consider the case of increased breast cancer risk linked to high bone mineral density, being diagnosed with osteopenia or osteoporosis would actually indicate a significantly reduced risk of developing the disease. What is more concerning to women: breaking a bone (from which one can heal), or developing breast cancer? If it is the latter, a low BMD reading could be considered cause for celebration and not depression, fear and the continued ingestion of inappropriate medications or supplements, which is usually the case following a diagnosis of osteopenia or osteoporosis.
We hope this article will put to rest any doubts that the WHO's fixation on high bone density was designed not to protect or improve the health of women, but rather to convert the natural aging process into a blockbuster disease, capable of generating billions of dollars of revenue.
The Great Cholesterol Myth - DR. Malcolm Kendrick
The Development of the Cholesterol Hypothesis
Landmark developments:
Rudolf Virchow notes the presence of cholesterol in atherosclerotic plaques, and suggests that excess cholesterol in the bloodstream may be the cause.
Early 1900s
Ashoff feeds rabbits on fat and cholesterol, and notes the development of atheroma.
First heart attack described by Herrick.
Epidemic of heart disease hits the USA, and interest in the area explodes. Many researchers blame the high fat/cholesterol diet.
The Framingham study on heart disease begins. It is still running today.
Ancel Key's seminal Seven Countries Study is published, demonstrating clear links between saturated fat intake and heart disease.
Framingham confirms the link between raised cholesterol levels and heart disease.
The first cholesterol-lowering drugs are developed.
Brown and Goldstein find the gene leading to extremely high cholesterol levels (Familial Hypercholesterolaemia) and premature heart disease.
Statins are launched.
The Nobel Prize is awarded to Brown and Goldstein.
Statins trials demonstrate that cholesterol lowering protects against heart disease.
Presented in this way, it's not difficult to see how the cholesterol hypothesis became the dominant hypothesis, effortlessly swatting alternative ideas. Indeed, to question this theory is to risk being placed on the same shelf as flat-earthers and creationists.
However, all is not what it seems. The cholesterol hypothesis can be likened to a cathedral built on a bog. Rather than admit they made a horrible mistake and let it sink, the builders decided to try and keep the cathedral afloat at all costs. Each time a crack appeared, a new buttress was built. Then further buttresses were built to support the original buttresses.
The Cholesterol Theory of Heart Disease is Nonsense - Anthony Colpo
Where's Your Head At?
Some of you reading this will do further investigation and will conclude of your own volition that what I have reported above is factual. Some of you will be confused and will not know what to make of what I have just reported; it sounds compelling but at the same time you have great difficulty accepting that so many "prestigious" health authorities, government bodies, medical associations, doctors, journalists, authors, and numerous other assorted talking heads could be so wrong. Such a mindset reveals a rather naïve understanding of human nature. No matter how prestigious and well-funded the organization or profession, it is still comprised of fallible human individuals with a deep-rooted evolutionary-programmed tendency to follow the herd and subscribe to groupthink.
A minority of readers will even become angry at what I have just written, offended by my temerity to report facts which so blatantly contradict what they have come to believe. My response to those who fall into this category is…too bad. [ ] After years of coming under attack from the disgruntled worshipers of various scientifically untenable nutrition paradigms, I'm totally over trying to reason with the unreasonable. My aim is simply to relay research findings to those who may find the information useful, not to pander to the fragile sensibilities of those who attain emotional solace in certain diet and health beliefs.
Life, if you allow it to be so, is a fascinating voyage of continual discovery. If you wish to make any meaningful progress during this voyage, you will frequently need to re-examine beliefs that you have become comfortable with, and you must be prepared to discard these beliefs if the evidence dictates.
Misleading Recent Papers on Statin Drugs in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals - Joel M. Kauffman, Ph.D.
Henry Lorin, D.M.D., among others, would like to see the terms "good" and "bad" cholesterol buried. Biochemists agree that LDL-C is the form of cholesterol that is carried to all the cells of the body, an essential function, so it must not be called or considered "bad cholesterol."
Duane Graveline, M.D., M.P.H., wrote an entire book on statin drug side-effects and the misguided war on cholesterol. Such side effects are not so much concealed by the statin manufacturers as simply not sought; thus, Bayer, for example, could not give bad news on cerivastatin to the FDA because Bayer claimed not to have any.
ICfreely wrote:Chapter Five - The Battle Begins[/b]
The trial between Mr. Rutherford and the Government went on for several weeks. Federal Judge
Luther Bohanon presided. Each day the FDA attorneys would tell the court that the FDA had
hundreds and hundreds of studies that proved that Laetrile would not work. Toward the end of the
trial Judge Bohanon said to the FDA attorneys, "Tomorrow, when you come into court, I want you
to bring with you all of these studies that have been done by the FDA on Laetrile."
The following morning, when the trial began again, the Judge asked for the studies. The FDA
attorneys said, "Your Honor, we did not bring the studies because they are so scientific that we
don't think you can understand them." This, as you can well imagine, did not please the Judge. He
insisted that all of the studies must be in his court room the following morning.
The next morning there were no studies. When the Judge asked why, the FDA attorneys said the
studies were so voluminous they were not sure that all of the studies would fit in his court room.
The Judge then stated that, if necessary, he would empty the entire court house, but he wanted all of
those studies in his court the following morning.
The following morning there were no studies. Again, the Judge asked why. The FDA attorney said
very simply, "Because, Your Honor, there are no studies." Of course, the Judge was irate. The FDA
attorneys explained that each evening after the trial they would call Washington. Each evening the
Washington office of the FDA would assure the attorneys that they had all of these studies. When
the attorneys finally pinned down the Washington office, they said that they had done no studies at
all on Laetrile. This was when Judge Bohanon called for Administrative Hearings.
In truth, as time has gone on, I have found much evidence to make me believe that the FDA had,
indeed, done a great many studies on Laetrile....
Ataraxia wrote:To me, the above story reads exactly like a fairy tale, complete with the traditional grouping of three events, which is a device used in fiction from the earliest stories ever created to the structure of just about every Dora the Explorer cartoon ever made. That sort of gives it away. It's even written in the same tone as any of the traditional fairy tales. Not to mention the unbelievable nature of the story itself, i.e. that the judge keeps giving them another chance.
To me, a story like the above is just part of a creation of a new mythos for modern society, with new heroes, new enemies and new cure-alls. Like how Monsanto is created to become a great super-villain of our age. Which it seems it all has to be fake since it's created for people like Alex Jones to decry and gain fame from. All invented and built upon the barebones of reality, much like how reality tv itself is created. But it's all essentially reality tv, isn't it?
The Chemistry of Essential Oils - Dr. David Stewart, Ph.D.
If you tell most medical doctors that essential oils bring about healing with no negative side effects, they won't believe you. This is because in medical school, students are repeatedly told by their professors that all effective medicines have negative side effects, and if they don't then they can't be effective.
When I was in medical school one professor emphasized this point in a colorful, graphic manner with specially prepared slides. In each slide specific drugs were depicted as evil looking demons or goblins. As he presented each picture, he explained, "Although ugly and capable of doing harm, these 'demons' are also the bearers of some good. So long as the benefits outweigh the risks, we use them," he summarized. "We have no choice," he continued, "because if a drug has no dangers, then it can have no benefits. That's just the way it is. And that's why it is essential that only qualified physicians be allowed to prescribe medicines," he concluded.
Actually, the professor was telling the truth. Within the restricted practice of allopathy (MDs) the only real medicines are physician prescribed pharmaceuticals. Such medicines always do have negative side effects. All of them. No exceptions. Hence, doctors are trained to accept the bad with the good as the price of effective medicine.
Why Companies Deliberately Sell Dangerous Products
It is illegal to patent any natural product. The way to big profits in the medicine industry is to create an unnatural substance that never before existed in nature, then patent it, and obtain a monopoly. Hence, the molecules of pharmaceutical drugs are all strange to the human body. In all the history of humankind, such molecules were never encountered or taken into any human body. Hence, the body does not easily metabolize them. God never made your body to accept and deal with these chemicals and antibiotics.
Non-toxic natural organic substances are usually easily eliminated by the body when their usefulness has run their course. Up to a point, your body can even deal with and eliminate natural toxic substances. But when your body receives a synthetic substance, even one that may seem benign or inert (like plastic), your body does not know how to metabolize and eliminate it. If sent to the liver to break it down into disposable compounds, the liver says, "Hey. What is this? I don't know what to do with it. Here kidneys, you take it." Then the kidneys react saying, "Hey liver, don't send it to us. We don't know what it is either. Send it to the pancreas. Maybe it will have an enzyme that can deal with it." Then the pancreas objects, "Hey guys, what do you think you are doing? I don't want this stuff. Dump it in the blood or the lymph or try the spleen. Maybe the spleen can filter this thing out or something." Finally, the substance ends up in the long term waste holding area of the body (usually fat tissue, including the brain) where it can remain for years and even for a lifetime, perturbing normal body functions as long as it remains. That's why you can find traces of prescription drugs in your body taken in childhood, decades ago.
On the other hand, natural molecules, such as those found in essential oils, are easily metabolized by the body. In fact, your body was created to handle them. When an essential oil molecule finds the receptor sites it was designed to fit and conveys its information to the cell, or participates in other therapeutic functions, it then goes on its way to the liver and the kidneys and moves out of the body. Its benefits have been conveyed and its job is complete.
By contrast, the unnatural molecules of man-made drugs attach themselves to various tissues, disrupting normal function for years while the body tries to figure out what to do with them. Meanwhile, they wreak mischief with our bodily functions and even our minds.
Can the Present Health Care System Change?
In my opinion, changing the medical system toward natural and spiritual forms of healing that encourage more individual responsibility is impossible. The system can't change. It won't change. It must be replaced. There was a time for horses and buggies, but when automobiles came along people gave up their former ways of transportation. There is also a time to repair your car and keep it, and a time to discard it for a new one. The medical profession is a sophisticated machine, but it rests on a fallacious foundation. Its philosophical basis is like a Model-T Ford stuck in the mud that can't move and won't change.
There is a time to repair the old car and a time to replace it. The current medical system is an old car, beyond repair, parked on a false foundation. It survives, not because it serves the good of humanity, but because it has become politically entrenched in our society. The time has come to remove its legal franchise and replace it by allowing alternative modalities to flourish free of the shackles placed upon them by allopathy's monopolistic intent.
Terry Friedmann, MD, in his book, Freedom Through Health, envisions a new holistic system to replace the current one that emphasizes personal responsibility and fosters cooperative relationships among many modalities with allopathy playing only a minor role. Dr. Friedmann's new health care model would include nutrition, exercise, stress management, and aromatherapy, to address the whole person – mentally, physically, emotionally, and spiritually. In their books, Robert Mendelsohn, MD, and Richard Gerber, MD, also foresee a new holistic medical paradigm – one not dependent on allopathic drugs and procedures as its primary focus.
The time has come to move on to paradigms and modalities based on different premises than those that underlie modern allopathy. Those of you who have opted out of the system in favor of essential oils and their physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual benefits are among the pioneers who are replacing the system.
As for those of you who have taken over-the-counter or prescription drugs over long periods of time, essential oils are your best friend because they can cleanse the residues of these toxins from your system once and for all and help restore your body back to its natural healthy state.
Return to General World Affairs
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


text:
John Lewis has revealed its latest Christmas TV advert, signaling the beginning of the Christmas shopping season.
This year John Lewis has partnered with The Wildlife Trust and hopes the campaign will encourage more children to discover a love of British wildlife.
The 2016 advert stars Buster The Boxer dog and a host of other animals in what sets out to be as schmaltzy as previous years. .
The story is about a little girl called Bridget who loves to bounce - but when her mum and dad buy her a trampoline for Christmas, they soon discover that she isn't the only one with a passion for jumping.
With music provided by electronic trio Vaults, with their cover of Randy Crawford's 1980 single One Day I'll Fly Away, this year's advert is sure to leave you with a big grin across your face.
Give it a watch and let us know what you think....


text:
90+ Rated
Christian Moreau, Chablis - 2015RP 86 WS 89FranceChardonnayWhite Wine
Looking for the 90 plus rated wines? These are some of the best white wines and best red wines that you can find. We offer wines in different styles and varities tom provide premium customer satisfaction. 90 Plus Rated Wines are cut above the rest and are worth the try. These wines are available in multiple flavors such as blackberry, cherries, fuji-apple, peach, grapefruit and many more. They are pure, crisp and can either by savored along with meat or simply on its own. The tropical fruit aromas will surely ignite your senses. Get the best wine online in mumbai right here on Wine Kart! Have a gala time with your friends and family with the 90 Plus Rated Wines.


text:
I just figured this out with some help from Arbitrator (thank you much). In my search I found that a lot of people ask how to do this, so in case anyone wants to know how; here it is.
First you are going to make 2 buttons. One of them will be the button that you want people to see, and the other will be the regular browser button. Make sure you place them in that order and do not put a line break in between
<input type="button" value="Open File"> <input type="file">
Next give the "pseudobutton" (the button you want to see) the style you want. you also want to assign layers to each button with "z-index". The pseudobutton should be z-index:1 and the browse button should be z-index:2
Note: The browse button is smaller than the usual button. For best results, resize the pseudobutton to match the browse button (width:75px; height:20px). You will have to resize the font too.
Next: You want to move the browse button OVERTOP of the pseudobutton. It should be covering it exactly. In IE you can remove the borders and the change the width to 0 to move it. In other browsers it doesn't appear the same. When you set the position of the browser button, set it EXACTLY over the pseudobutton, then in an IF comment you can set IE properties.
Now that your buttons are positioned, you need to make it so that you can see the pseudobutton. All you need to do is change the opactity (transparency) of the browse button to 0. This enables you to see through the browse button as if it were invisible, but letting you still click on it.
<style type="text/css"> input.hide { position:absolute; left:-137px; -moz-opacity:0; filter:alpha(opacity: 0); opacity: 0; z-index: 2; } input.red { background-color:#cc0000; font-weight:bold; color:#ffffff; z-index:1; width:75px; height:20px; font-size:10px; } </style> <!--[if IE]> <style type="text/css"> input.hide { position:absolute; left:10px; -moz-opacity:0; filter:alpha(opacity: 0); opacity: 0; z-index: 2; width:0px; border-width:0px; } </style> <![endif]--> <body> <input type="button" class="red" id="pseudobutton" value="Open File"> <input type="file" class="hide" id="openssme"> </body>
For added style to complete the button and make it all convincing, you need to make the button invert, like a normal button does. You will need a little piece of javascript for this.
First give each button an ID. Then you will use the javascript to change the border-style of the pseudobutton, when clicking on the browse button.
<script type="text/javascript"> function buttonPush (buttonStatus) { if (buttonStatus == "depressed") document.getElementById("pseudobutton").style.borderStyle = "inset"; else document.getElementById("pseudobutton").style.borderStyle = "outset"; } </script>
Make sure you add the appropriate javascript in with the button to make it call the function!
<input type="file" class="hide" id="openssme" onmousedown="buttonPush('depressed');" onmouseup="buttonPush('normal');" onmouseout="buttonPush('phased');">
Now your button should work just like a regular button, but it's not! yay!!
Below is a sample of the code to play with.
Attached File(s)
test2.html (1.19K)
Number of downloads: 34408


text:
Oxygen Sensor Replacement Cost
Know what price you should pay to get your vehicle fixed.
What is an oxygen sensor?
The oxygen sensor, sometimes called an O2 sensor, is a device mounted in the exhaust system that constantly monitors the oxygen content in the gases that exit the engine.
Oxygen sensors are located before and after the catalytic converter. A vehicle may have two to five oxygen sensors, and sometimes even more.
How does the oxygen sensor work?
The information from the oxygen sensor is used by the engine's computer to help determine how much fuel is needed so that the engine will run efficiently. The sensor sends this information by producing voltage when the sensor is heated. The voltage rises and falls as oxygen levels in the exhaust rise and fall.
What are the symptoms related to a bad oxygen sensor?
A faulty oxygen sensor is one of the most common causes of a check engine light. Symptoms may include a decrease in fuel mileage, hesitation or misfiring from the engine, rough idling or even stalling. A faulty sensor may cause the vehicle to fail an emissions test.
Can I drive with a oxygen sensor problem?
A vehicle that has a bad oxygen sensor can be driven safely until the sensor can be replaced. But the car will not run as well until the repair is made.
Oxygen sensors can fail if they are contaminated with oil, coolant or silicone. If fluid contamination has caused an oxygen sensor to fail, the leak must be fixed or the new sensor may be ruined too.
How often do oxygen sensors need to be replaced?
On cars manufactured since 1996, oxygen sensors can go 100,000 or more before needing to be replaced. That mileage decreases on older cars.
How are oxygen sensor issues diagnosed?
A faulty oxygen sensor is usually diagnosed by a technician using a diagnostic scan tool. The sensors are arranged in banks, usually on the right and left sides of the engine, and the scan tool alerts a technician to which sensor is not working properly.
Oxygen Sensor Replacement Cost Estimates
The average cost for an Oxygen Sensor Replacement is between $763 and $863 but can vary from car to car.
How is a oxygen sensor replaced?
Once the bad sensor has been found, the vehicle typically must be lifted to provide access to the exhaust system. The bad sensor is disconnected from the wiring harness and replaced.
RepairPal recommendations for oxygen sensor issues
We recommend using only high-quality OEM oxygen sensors as opposed to cheaper replacements that may not be recognized by a vehicle's computer.
Can I replace the oxygen sensor myself?
This repair doesn't require a lot of tools, but it still can be tricky. You'll need a scan tool to determine which oxygen sensor needs to be replaced, the ability to safely lift and support the vehicle, and often an oxyacetylene or propane torch to aid in removal of the oxygen sensor.
If you're not comfortable with these aspects, it's best to take the car to a repair shop for a sensor replacement.
- Repair shops in Sterling, VA
- Repair shops in Dulles, VA
- Repair shops in Leesburg, VA
- Repair shops in Herndon, VA


text:
For November Notes the Day 9 song is called " 1-800 – 273 – 8255″ Logic featuring Alessia Cara and Khalid. I reversed the songs for Day 8 and Day 9 so Day 9's actual song was completed yesterday. As per usual combining prompts with Sarah from MindLoveMisery's Menagerie Saturday Mix Prompt of a shadorma form poem about emotion.
Credit: Ricardo Gomez Angel via Unsplash
"1-800 – 273 – 8255" by Logic featuring Alessia Cara and Khalid
"The Shadorma is a Spanish poetic form made up of a stanza of six lines
(sestet) with no set rhyme scheme.
It is a syllabic poem with a meter of 3/5/3/3/7/5.
It can have many stanzas, as long as each follows the meter" (Popular Poetry Forms).
You're on the —
Low of life that's fine,
Just take time,
Realize —
No one can see the future,
Sit down, stay awhile.
Take your time,
Value the time you have,
So your low,
Many more —
Are deeper in dirt than you,
So, rise another day.
If you're here,
You matter a lot,
Building life —
Takes much time,
Nothing is perfect, it hurts,
Rise to the challenge.
You don't want —
To be alive but —
You don't know,
What it is
Truly breathing free, inhaling —
Life is tough, rise up.
Find your help —
Seek out others to —
Stop the thoughts;
Those anxious,
Murmurs insecure and bleak,
Rise you are not weak.
Emotion's bleed,
Guy or girl life hurts.
Healing is —
A process.
Don't quit, don't give in; fight on —
Sun always rises.
Your life is —
Precious but, —
You hear what you feel;
Alone with —
No hope or —
Reason to survive, find faith —
God cares, she cares, rise.
You matter,
You'll see put down your —
Weapon, don't inflict —
Dying wounds.
Breath, seek help,
There are phones beyond no home,
Let her in and rise.
She wants you —
To feel the light's glare,
Sunshine with,
Delightful —
Rays of hope; fight on, don't end —
Your life, rise up, swim.
You don't want —
To try anymore,
But there's her,
Heart beating —
Next to yours, so hope, believe,
Rise for tomorrow's.
Never dies, the —
Words are true.
Life is yours,
Your legs tremble so walk on,
Rise, you're valuable.
Innately you;
If you left,
Her heart would —
Shatter; others too would wonder,
Why such promise fell.
Let them in,
They can't see inside,
Thoughts rolling,
So fast, get —
Their attention, ask 'til —
Taking their hands you rise.
You want life,
You choose it crying,
Not easy —
To admit,
You want to be alive, not dead,
Rise up, live well.
©Mandibelle16. (2017) All Rights Reserved.


text:
At Bon Secours, we know that minutes matter, especially for seriously injured or critically ill patients. Timely treatment can have a major impact on medical outcomes. That's why we created our Critical Care Transport program. Using specially designed and equipped ambulances, our highly skilled and experienced professionals can provide your patients with basic or intensive care en route to our state-of-the-art facilities.
Our team members routinely deliver world-class care by combining clinical excellence and technological expertise. They also know the importance of compassion – and the healing human touch.
To activate the Critical Care Transport team, call: 1-800-806-2236.
Our Team
Critical Care Transport Team members include:
- Critical Care Nurses
- Critical Care Respiratory Therapists
- Paramedics
- Emergency Medical Technicians
Our Specialties
- Adult Critical Care
- Cardiac
- Maternal Fetal Medicine (high risk OB)
- Neonatal Intensive Care
- Pediatric Critical Care
- Stroke
All have received advanced training in transport medicine. Medical control physicians oversee the team's work. These doctors are board certified in each of their specialties. Our transport services are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Our Technology
Each Bon Secours Critical Care Transport ambulance is a fully equipped Mobile Intensive Care Unit. Sophisticated monitoring devices, ventilators and emergency medicines are standard on all vehicles. Also available are web cameras and electronic stethoscopes that allow hospital-based physicians to give guidance and feedback to an ambulance team while a patient is on the road.
Other onboard state-of-the-art technology includes:
- GlideScopes™
- Invasive hemodynamic monitoring
- Intra-aortic balloon pump therapy
- Noninvasive external fetal monitors
- Vasoactive medications, blood and blood products, surfactant, and inhaled nitric oxide
In addition, our Critical Care Transport Team has the equipment – and the training – to perform advanced airway procedures and hypothermic therapies. The latter includes induced hypothermia for post-cardiac arrest patients and brain cooling for neonate and and pediatric patients.


text:
This is one that's been rambling around in my brain for a good few weeks; and I mean "driving in the car, creating ingredients in my head" kind of rambling.
Pumpkin meet cupcake form. Ever since I spied even one touch of red in the treetops this fall, this autumn flavor has been coming together in my brain. You see, fall in New England comes and goes in the blink of an eye. For the few weeks it's actually with us, I actually feel a strange sense of calm as the air gets crisper and the trees erupt in this mad dash of color before shedding their clothes for winter.
Pumpkin, maple, apple cider all show up and there's a few weeks where I barely eat anything else. I had fresh, roasted pumpkin leftover from Canadian Thanksgiving and I knew this recipe is for which it was destined.
You usually see a pumpkin cupcake with some kind of cream cheese frosting to accompany it. I love me some cream cheese frosting, but I wanted something smoother to go with this. I already had the maple taste in mind for it, but after tasting the brandied whipped cream that went along with the pumpkin pie this past week, well, I knew brandy had to be part of this excursion as well.
I hope you enjoy, my co-workers certainly did. As a side note - if you want more of a "spice" flavor to the cupcake, this recipe can certainly handle a bit more of the cinnamon, nutmeg, clove and ginger if that's what you're looking for. It can also be easily doubled since this recipe only makes a dozen. The base recipes that I adapted for this creations are: Classic Yellow Cupcakes from Gas.tron.o.my and the Vanilla Buttercream from Beantown Baker.
Pumpkin Cupcakes with Maple-Brandy Buttercream
Makes: 12 cupcakes
1.5 cups cake flour (6 ounces)
1/2 teaspoon baking powder
1/2 teaspoon salt (I always use table salt in baking)
1/4 teaspoon baking soda
2 large eggs at room temperature
1/2 teaspoon vanilla extract
1/2 cup granulated sugar
1/4 cup dark brown sugar
6 tablespoons unsalted butter, melted and cooled
1/2 + 1/8 cups buttermilk
1/8 teaspoon ground cloves
1/8 teaspoon ground ginger
1/2 teaspoon ground nutmeg
1.5 teaspoon cinnamon
1 1/4 cup pumpkin puree
10 tablespoons (1 1/4 sticks) unsalted butter, softened
1 1/4 cups Confectioners' sugar (5 ounces)
a little less than 1/8 teaspoon table salt
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
1 tablespoon heavy cream
2 teaspoons maple syrup (I used Vermont Fancy, really light, if you use Grade A, you might want to cut back by 1/2 a teaspoon and add to taste)
1.5 tablespoons brandy
Adjust an oven rack to the middle position and heat to 325 degrees and line a muffin pan with cupcake liners.
Whisk the flour, baking powder, salt, and baking soda together in a large bowl and set aside.
Whisk the eggs and vanilla together in a large bowl. Slowly whisk in white sugar until combined, then slowly whisk in brown sugar until combined. Whisk in the buttermilk.
Sift one-third of flour mixture over the batter and whisk it in until a few streaks of flour remain. Repeat twice with remaining flour mixture. Add pumpkin, cloves, ginger, nutmeg and cinnamon and whisk until most lumps are gone. Do not over mix.
Fill the cupcake liners about two-thirds of the way full. Bake until a toothpick inserted into the center comes out with a few crumbs attached. You'll be baking them about 18 minutes, remember to rotate the pan halfway through baking so it all bakes evenly.
Allow to cool on a wire rack, in cupcake pan for 5 minutes. Pop cupcakes out of pan and allow to cool on wire rack completely before frosting.
For the frosting - in a standing mixer with whisk or paddle attachment (original recipe calls for whisk, but I've never had an issue just using the paddle) beat butter at medium-high speed until smooth, about 20 seconds.
Add confectioners' sugar and salt; beat at medium-low speed until sugar is moistened, about 45 seconds. Scrape down sides of bowl and beat at medium speed until mixture is combined, about 15 seconds.
Scrape bowl, add vanilla and heavy cream, and beat at medium speed until incorporated, about 10 seconds. Add maple syrup and brandy, then increase speed to medium-high and beat until light and fluffy, about 4 minutes, scraping down bowl once or twice.
Frost the cupcakes and enjoy!


text:
We're looking for a script (perl or php or javascript we're guessing) that will take a user's check box selection(s) from a form (or something like) and create a new page (by selecting submit) with just those items selected showing on the new page - to be used as a training reference for the user and user's manager.
It doesn't need to be fancy (we don't want it database driven if we can help it, our tech support is very low). It's for training compliance.


text:
Talk:Neo 1973 audio subsystem
From Openmoko
m (Talk:Neo1973 Audio Subsystem moved to Talk:Neo1973 audio subsystem: proper capitalization)
m (Talk:Neo1973 audio subsystem moved to Talk:Neo 1973 audio subsystem: See Openmoko Wiki Editing Guidelines)
Revision as of 10:25, 13 July 2008
It is possible to do stereo recording? At least, there are unsoldered pin's for stereo microphone on PCB?
Output at Headset and Speaker at the same time
Is it possible to output some audio stream on the headset and in case of an incoming call to (optionally) lower this output, and additionally output the ringtone on the stereo speaker? Or is this not possible due to hardware limits (guess this would require full-duplex output)?
- Look at the block diagram for the wolfson codec. It looks like this is not possible. You could eventually do it by using a bluetooth a2dp headset or with some hacking with a bluetooth voice headset.