text:
Nancy Wilson
New Horizons: June 1997
Also in this issue
The Fear of Man: When People Are Big and God Is Small
by Edward Welch
by Alan D. Strange
What if I wrote a column about the spiritual value of scrubbing your floors twice a day and all the health benefits for your family associated with the practice? And suppose it was all backed up with verses in Leviticus? What if I then went on to point out that such hard work, commitment, dedication, and sacrifice would reap for you great satisfaction here and a reward in heaven? And suppose further I followed it up with testimonies from women whose families were changed as a result of the practice? I hope you would think I was out to lunch. But unfortunately, some women would probably either begin to implement my suggestions, or begin to feel guilty because they hadn't.
Today there is no lack of innocent-looking Christian books with friendly titles making the rounds among Christian women which go far, far beyond my floor scrubbing example. They set down absolute rules for Christian households on everythinginfant feeding, potty training, television ownership, homeschooling, and hand washingas though they had a verse from the Bible for each petty regulation. I am amazed and saddened at how many Christian women quickly adopt these methods and believe they are doing their Christian duty when they make a chore list and post it on the fridge. Did God actually say in his Word that this is the Christian way?
Why is it so many Christian women want a list of rules, a set of directions, for every aspect of their lives? And if they find a set of "holy rules" in a sweet-looking Christian book, they adopt it as though it were Scripture itself, even if it says we shouldn't drink pop, or that we should begin potty training our children at birth. What is it in us that wants such detailed rules, and what is it that prompts us to adopt them?
The desire for authoritative rules springs from two sources. First, it comes from a desire to please, a desire not to mess up. Many women want to color within the lines, they want to be "good Christians," and they want to please God, but they don't want to figure this out by thinking through biblical principles. They just want someone to hand them a list of rules. There is a false sense of security in adopting a method"so and so's child-rearing method." If it worked for them, it will work for you. When you go to bed at night, you can feel good about your Christian life.
The "system" can become a source of security. "I am doing fine with God because today I cut sugar out of the kid's diet, I'm breast-feeding on a schedule, and I'm having my next baby with a midwife at home." Approached this way, this is false comfort and is dangerous. Not only is it self-righteousness, works-righteousness, but if this really is God's way, then everyone else who isn't doing it this way is not pleasing God. In fact, they are in sin. This then leads to a feeling of superiority over those saints who do not adopt the "method."
Works-righteousness, a sense of spiritual security based upon my lifestyle, undercuts justification by faith. Jesus Christ is the only One who ultimately works. His work is perfect; his work is finished. Our salvation is based totally upon his work, and not upon any work of mine, no matter how righteous I may believe my work to be. My work may make my life more pleasant (or painful), but it will not save me, or make me any more secure before God. Christ's work alone is our only true security.
The second reason these "how-to" books gain such a hearing is that women can be gullible. When you read a statement that your children will grow up to be self-centered and demanding if you feed them snacks between meals, you need to ask an important question, like, "Says who?" Does Scripture require you to serve only carrots and apples as snacks? Is it more holy than serving cookies and milk? Do you look down on your sisters who have a loaded, accessible cookie jar? Contemporary Christian women, created by God to be responsive, are vulnerable to temptations to be deceived. We must learn to think like Christians and resist the temptation to believe everything we read or hear. Things are not true because they are bound in a cute little book or broadcast on a Christian radio station. We must stop being muddleheaded and be more closely dependent upon the Scriptures. In the light of Scripture, we must look beyond our methods to principles. When we adopt a scriptural principle, our methods (for methods are inescapable) may or may not look like every other family's in the church.
Every form of works-righteousness is rebellious at the bottom. It does not matter if it is tithing spices, or praying on street comers, or home-educating or home-birthingif you are feeling good about your standing before God because of anything you are doing, you are not looking to Christ or trusting in him.
Christian women must learn that justification is not found in long dresses, long hair, gardening, vitamins, or herbal medicine. These are all "things indifferent." But if you are looking to these things instead of to Christ, seeing your acceptance before God because of these externals, or feeling superior to your Christian sisters who have different methods, then these "things" are no longer indifferentthey have become wicked.
Mrs. Wilson is a regular contributor to the magazine Credenda/Agenda (a ministry of Community Evangelical Fellowship in Moscow, Idaho), in which this article first appeared (vol. 9, no. 1). Reprinted from New Horizons, June 1997.
New Horizons: June 1997
Also in this issue
The Fear of Man: When People Are Big and God Is Small
by Edward Welch
by Alan D. Strange
© 2024 The Orthodox Presbyterian Church


text:
I want to run Selenium on a Windows server and have multiple testers connect to it.
If two users connect at the same time and both ask to run a test against a browser, will Selenium start two separate instances of the browser and run the two sets of tests independently? What if the browser requested is IE?
If two users are connected at the same time, can one see what tests the other is running?

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Cross-posted at Weekly Scoresheet, for which I still want your scoresheets.
Most scoring systems endeavor to keep a chronological account of the game (at least in theory--only the Project Scoresheet system is purely linear, but one can reconstruct the game in order from a traditional scoresheet). However, what if one was only interested in recording the basic box score statistics of individual players, and not about preserving the game play-by-play?
For starters, you could certainly save a lot of paper. You could eliminate a lot of codes--there would be no need to record wild pitches, passed balls, balks, and the like (remember, I said basic box score statistics). It would be possible to describe each batter's plate appearance in just a few characters.
As is the case with so many other baseball topics, one can turn to Bill James for a creative idea about how to do this. In the 1983 Abstract, he introduced what he called the account-form box score. It was a box score that retained much of the data from a scoresheet, yet was compact enough to be printed in a space no larger than that devoted to traditional box scores.
I recently threw together a new scoresheet that records only the information necessary to create an account-form box score of a game. I made a few tweaks to James' coding system, but for the most part I just used it as is.
First, the ways to reach base:
S = single
D = double
T = triple
H = home run
W = walk
I = intentional walk
B = hit batter
E = error
f = fielder's choice (at end of code)
Three baserunning events are noted, by use of a lowercase letter after the on-base code:
s = steal
c = caught stealing
x = other out on base (That is charged to the runner, like a pickoff or out advancing when not forced. If the runner is retired on a force, no "x" is added).
Outs are recorded in typical scorekeeping notation--a ground out to short is "63", a fly to right is "9", a strikeout is "K". Double plays get a D prefix--"D643". A sacrifice hit gets a b suffix (for bunt); a sac fly needs no modifier because it will involve a RBI. If a fielder's choice results in a batter-runner not reaching base (i.e. it is the third out of the inning, so the batter-runner never actually gains first), then it is recorded with a "f" suffix (for example, 46f).
When a batter gets a RBI for driving in someone other than himself, James uses a ', so D' is a RBI double. D" would be a two-run double. When three other runners score, an exclamation point is used, so a bases-clearing double is D!. Thus, a solo homer is just H, a three-run homer is H", and a grand slam is H! A sac fly to left is 7'.
In James' system, batter-runners that reached base and do not end up scoring are given lower case symbols...s, d, t, etc. If you are keeping a paper scoresheet in this style, this is problematic, as you'll have to do a lot of erasing. So what I did instead was embolden the codes of batter-runners who scored. When paper scoring, this is easily accomplished by tracing a pencil marking with black ink. When keeping a paper scoresheet, it is also helpful to mark off the innings, which I did with a number in the far left portion of the box.
The biggest drawback to the account-form box as James envisioned it was that pitcher records are hard to read. James simply noted the pitchers by the number of batters they faced each time through the order. Suppose for instance that CC Sabathia faced 32 hitters, Phil Hughes faced one, and Mariano Rivera faced five. James notation would be:
Sabathia (9995), Hughes(xxx1), Rivera (xxx32)
Sabathia faced nine hitters the first three times through the order, than five the fourth. Hughes faced no batters the first three times through, and one on the fourth. Rivera faced no batters the first three times, the final three on the fourth, and two on the fifth.
This makes it a chore to read through the account and tally up a pitcher's statistics (the same issue exists for batters of course, but it is a lot easier to read across a row to take in the result of three to six plate appearances than it is to read up and down column to take in the result of potentially dozens of plate appearances). There's no easy solution--the best option might be to just give each pitcher a basic line, perhaps in the format of (IP H R ER W K Dec), like:
Sabathia (7.2 8 3 2 2 6 W) or Sabathia (7.2, 8, 3, 2, 2, 6, W)
Also, I tend to think that a better notation to indicate batters faced for the above example would be something like:
Sabathia (1-32), Hughes (33), Rivera (34-38)
This does not solve the problem with reading a pitcher's performance I described above, and it may force you to count off by nine (9, 18, 27, 36, etc.) in order to figure out where to start reading the scoresheet to find a particular pitcher, but I think it's more intuitive and it saves a little space that is being given back by listing out pitcher lines. Of course, counting off by nine shouldn't be a problem for those versed in systems (such as Project Scoresheet) that use numbered boxes.
Another issue is how to list substitutions. When printing a box score, it is easy to insert an extra line for substitutes and indent it. But with a pre-printed scoresheet, it's trickier. What I've done is use letters (a, b, c, d, etc.) to show substitutions. The timing of the substitutions is noted by using the first time through the batting order that the player appeared. For example:
[a Giambi 4] indicates that Giambi pinch hit, with his first PA coming the fourth time through the order in the batting order slot where a is listed.
[d PR Guzman 5] indicates that Guzman pinch-ran the fifth time through the order.
[c 6 Everett 3] indicates that Everett was a defensive replacement at shortstop, and that his first PA (if in fact he got one) would come the third-time through the order. The exact time he entered the game defensively is not recorded, as it isn't on a typical basic box score.
This allows the scoresheet to be more compact, but it does make it a little tougher to quickly read batting lines for lineup slots in which multiple players appeared.
Honestly, I don't have a lot of use for an account-form scoresheet myself; it's not detailed enough for my tastes as a scorekeeper. It's the box score that I want--I want to be able to get on the internet in the morning and read a mini-scoresheet rather than a box score. Which line tells you more, and more importantly IMO tells you a better story:
4 1 1 3 1 1
with a note below saying HR: Player X
as the more helpful Baseball-Reference box score does?
It's true that the account-form style requires you to do a little counting in your head if you want to know H-AB, or runs scored, or the other box score categories. However, I'd argue that it's very easy to do that sort of addition, and that it also is a cosmetic improvement--there are an awful lot of zeros in box scores.
Incidentally, this is the same reason that all of the scoresheets I design myself omit columns in which to record batting lines. I'd rather devote that space to larger scoreboxes and do some math in my head than waste a bunch of space on columns I'll have to fill in to create a box score that I could just as easily read on the internet. Pitchers are a different story, as it is much harder to get a quick read on their performance as the number of scoreboxes under consideration is much larger (and more spread out) than for a batter.
Any site that implemented an account-form box score would instantly get all of my morning box score hits. I'm a little surprised that someone hasn't implemented it or something similar on online just to stand out, as there are so many places that you can go to get box scores. As it stands now, only Baseball-Reference offers something truly unique.
Below is an account-form scoresheet for Cincinnati @ Milwaukee, 4/10/2008, copied from a scoresheet I kept in a different format. I simply typed the account into Excel, although ideally I would have paper-scored it and scanned. It will be easier to read this way though. A drawback is that since I am using the cells in the spreadsheet, if a leadoff hitter scored, the inning number is in bold as well. I did not include pitcher lines, just the batters they faced:
Let me go through batter-by-batter and write what they did in English:
Patterson: grounded to second, grounded to second, grounded to second, grounded to second, flied to center
Keppinger: grounded to short, popped to short, grounded to pitcher, intentional walk, grounded to pitcher
Griffey: struck out, flied to center, walk, hit into double play
Phillips: flied to right, flied to right, struck out, grounded to second
Dunn: grounded to first (a pop to first would have been marked 3^; although James used 3 for a pop to first and 3- for a grounder to first), grounded to first (pitcher covering), single (scored), grounded to short
Encarnacion: grounded to third, walk (scored), two-run home run, single
Hatteberg: walk, single (put out on base), double (scored), grounded to second
Bako: struck out, RBI double, RBI single, walk
Harang: sac bunt to first, struck out, single
Votto: flied to center
Weeks: popped to third, flied to center, hit into fielder's choice at second, popped to second
Gross: double, flied to center, grounded to second
Counsell: hit into fielder's choice at short
Fielder: grounded to short, flied to left, flied to right, popped to third
Braun: grounded to short, popped to third, grounded to third, struck out
Hall: double (scored), grounded to short, grounded to short, grounded to second (via pitcher)
Hart: sac bunt to first, grounded to short, struck out
Villanueva: sac bunt to pitcher, struck out
Kapler: grounded to first (pitcher covering)
Kendall: grounded to short, single, single
Here is a link to download the account-form scoresheet in Excel format (scroll down to Account-Form scoresheet).


text:
The FINANCIAL — Dell on October 21 announced the expansion of its cloud portfolio with a new hybrid cloud solution, featuring technology jointly developed with Microsoft, designed to break down the barriers customers experience on their path to cloud. Additionally, Dell also is offering an industry-unique payment solution to help customers simplify and minimize risks associated with cloud adoption.
According to a recent Dell worldwide poll of IT decision makers (ITDM)[1], 9 in 10 say a hybrid cloud strategy is important to achieve a Future-Ready Enterprise. And, the recently unveiled Dell Global Technology Adoption Index (GTAI 2015) revealed that 55 percent of organizations globally indicated use of more than one type of cloud. The GTAI 2015 also cites cost and security as the biggest barriers to adopting and implementing cloud, and complexity is the barrier most often associated with hybrid cloud.
"The challenges most customers face on their cloud journey are clear. They tell us it's too complex, the cost-risk is too high, and control isn't transparent," said Jim Ganthier, vice president and general manager of engineered solutions and cloud at Dell. "When you couple Microsoft's unique Azure consistency from public to private cloud and Dell Cloud Manager integrated with the Dell Hybrid Cloud System for Microsoft, customers now have unparalleled cloud governance and control. With our new Cloud Flex Pay program, cost-risk is all but eliminated. These Dell innovations demonstrate we're the only company today to provide the full range of cloud infrastructure, software, services and payment solutions to help customers unlock the promise of hybrid cloud."
Dell Hybrid Cloud System for Microsoft Rapidly Deploys in Less Than Three Hours
Extending the success of Dell's exclusive collaboration with Microsoft on its Cloud Platform System Premium, Dell has announced the availability of the Dell Hybrid Cloud System for Microsoft, which is built around the new Microsoft Cloud Platform System Standard, highlighted today in a Dell World keynote discussion between Michael Dell and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella. This new system is designed to break through the hybrid cloud adoption barriers of complexity, cost and control.
The Dell Hybrid Cloud System for Microsoft is the industry's first integrated, modular hybrid cloud solution. This new system delivers simplified, automated deployment and maintenance capabilities; a unique payment solution to reduce customer investment risk; and unparalleled hybrid cloud governance, control, and policy-based automation for Microsoft Azure and other cloud environments.
"Customers want to simplify and accelerate their journey to the cloud, and today Microsoft and Dell are extending their collaboration to remove many of the traditional barriers to hybrid cloud," said Scott Guthrie, Executive Vice President, Cloud and Enterprise, Microsoft. "With CPS Standard, which is at the heart of the Dell Hybrid Cloud System for Microsoft, we've worked together to deliver a solution that goes beyond other integrated systems on the market today, by providing Azure-consistent hybrid cloud services and a fast time to value to help customers enable their hybrid cloud strategy."
The Dell Hybrid Cloud System for Microsoft provides customers with:
On-premises private cloud, with consistent Azure public cloud access in less than three hours, and minimized downtime with unified system updates that are non-disruptive, fully automated, dependency-aware and smart-sequenced.
The ability to build and provision workload templates and flexibly deploy business services and governance models of multiple cloud environments from one management construct, via out-of-the-box integration with Dell Cloud Manager (DCM).
Unified, simplified private-with-public cloud management and consumption control across Windows Azure Pack (WAP), Azure and other cloud services.
The Dell Hybrid Cloud System for Microsoft is built around CPS Standard, which combines optimized Dell modular infrastructure with pre-configured Microsoft CPS software, including Microsoft's proven software stack and Azure Services for back-up, site recovery and operational insights. Additional services from Dell include ProSupport and Managed Cloud Services.
Dell Creates Differentiated Payment Solution for Hybrid Cloud System for Microsoft
Dell today added Dell Cloud Flex Pay to its portfolio of Scale Ready Payment Solutions, which Dell uniquely designed to accelerate customer adoption of cloud solutions wherever they are on their cloud journey.
The Dell Cloud Flex Pay program provides customers with an industry-first option to deploy the Dell Hybrid Cloud System for Microsoft in a flexible, cost-effective way. Dell is making this payment solution available for the Dell Hybrid Cloud System for Microsoft so customers can experience the benefits of hybrid cloud without making a long-term commitment. This cost-risk relief helps customers experience hybrid cloud usage levels before committing to the purchase.
For example, an IT decision maker may be challenged in predicting test and development usage levels. Issues such as underuse and unanticipated demand can increase investment risk, lead to services gaps and not maximize capital budgets. Cloud Flex Pay eliminates these risks, gaps and inefficiencies, enabling the IT decision makers to gain practical experience, greater certainty in planning, and make sound future cloud solution investments.
At the end of the initial six-month term, customers have several options available, including the ability to extend the evaluation period, continue to use the solution, return it or take ownership of it.
Dell Cloud Solutions Momentum and Investment
Dell's investment and innovation in cloud solution development supports varied enterprise data center workloads, applications and operating systems, addressing new customer demands and industry trends that allow customers to find value in cloud wherever they are on their cloud journey. Dell this week unveiled new products and milestones to its cloud solutions portfolio:
New Dell Administrator for Office 365 enables secure, effective control of Office 365, SharePoint and OneDrive for business through a consolidated, intuitive console that empowers IT administrators to better manage, report on, and utilize existing collaboration platforms to improve ROI of the Microsoft stack across the business. IT Admins can extend their management to on-premises deployments making this the perfect adaptable platform for any deployment type.
New Dell Foglight for Virtualization 8.3 gives organizations the power to manage performance from the virtual and physical server layer and optimize to increase the performance of private cloud environments running on Dell servers, all from a single-pane-of-glass view. New Dell OpenManage Essentials integration with patented analytics now found in Foglight for Virtualization allow customers to visually correlate virtual workloads down to the server environment in real-time, as well as historical views to detect performance issues before they impact the business.
Dell has been chosen by Markit, a leading global financial information services company, to power and support its new platform, Know Your Third Party (KY3P).
The Dell Cloud Clinical Archive is the industry's largest cloud-based, vendor-neutral clinical archive, and now manages more than 10 billion images and 100 million medical studies. Dell's understanding of the current demands on IT, as well as future demands around breakthroughs in healthcare such as genomics, has prompted customers to move their imaging systems to the Dell Cloud Clinical Archive.
Dell's fully-managed cloud solution for medical practices and providers has helped lower costs, manage complex healthcare IT systems, address security requirements and handle staffing challenges for hundreds of physicians. During the past four years, Dell has doubled its physician business from 21,000 users to 43,000 users and from 8.6 million to 16.7 million logins.


text:
You can use the top search bar to explore products by selecting a store or category from the drop-down boxes. You can also paste the URL of an original product page. Can't find what you're looking for? Describe your item below and we'll respond shortly!
Cheaper than mail forwarding!
- We charge only 500 JPY per item.
- Consolidation is free!
Easier than mail forwarding!
- We will buy everything for you!
- Easy sign up. No documents needed.
- Automatic translation.
- We'll help you find things you want.
Goods from Japan
Musical Instruments
Cheap musical instruments from Japanese makers: Yamaha, Roland, Akai, Korg, Komaki etc.
Japanese goods
Japanese Cameras Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus
Products from Japan
Fishing rods, reels and accessories from Shimano, Daiwa, etc.
Add item URLs to your Cart from any online Japanese shop and place your order.
ZenMarket will confirm item prices and their availability.
Once prices are confirmed you can pay for your items.
ZenMarket will order your items from the shop you selected. Then we will wait for your items to be delivered to our warehouse.
Once items arrive at the warehouse, specify the shipping method and your address.
Once the parcel has been weighed, you can pay for international shipping.
Wait 1-2 weeks for the parcel to get delivered to your address.
Add some funds to your ZenMarket account to be able to place a bid.
Place a bid on an auction item you like.
If you have won an auction, we will buy your item from the seller. Wait for the item to arrive at our warehouse. This usually takes several days but sometimes the delivery takes a week or more because many are individual sellers.
Buying with ZenMarket you can save a lot on shipping costs, because we will consolidate your parcels for free.
It appears that the e-mail address linked to your Facebook/Google+ account is not registered in our system. If you click "OK", a new account will be created. Would you like to proceed?
Please note that having multiple ZenMarket accounts is not allowed for safety reasons.


text:
The difference between overriding and overloading in Java is a common source of confusion – but it is fairly easy to understand with the examples we present below. Let's start the discussion by talking more about method overloading first. Method overloading in Java occurs when two or more methods in the same class have the exact same name but different parameters (remember that method parameters accept values passed into the method).
Now, two or more methods with the same name in the same class sounds simple enough to understand. But, what do we mean exactly by different parameters? Well, let's consider a very simple example.
Suppose we have a class called TestClass which has two methods, and both methods have the same name. Let's say that name is "someMethod". Those two methods would be considered to be "overloaded" if if one or both of these conditions is true:
The conditions for method overloading:
- The number of parameters is different for the methods.
- The parameter types are different (like changing a parameter that was a float to an int).
How to NOT overload methods
It's also very important to understand that method overloading is NOT something that can be accomplished with either, or both, of these two things:
- Just changing the return type of the method. If the return type of the method is the only thing changed, then this will result in a compiler error.
- Changing just the name of the method parameters, but not changing the parameter types. If the name of the method parameter is the only thing changed then this will also result in a compiler error.
Well, here are some very helpful examples of where overloading would be both valid and invalid – pay attention to the comments as well:
Examples of Method Overloading in Java (valid and invalid)
//compiler error - can't overload based on the //type returned - //(one method returns int, the other returns a float):
int changeDate(int Year) ; float changeDate (int Year);
//compiler error - can't overload by changing just //the name of the parameter (from Year to Month):
int changeDate(int Year); int changeDate(int Month) ;
//valid case of overloading, since the methods //have different number of parameters:
int changeDate(int Year, int Month) ; int changeDate(int Year);
//also a valid case of overloading, since the //parameters are of different types:
int changeDate(float Year) ; int changeDate(int Year);
Another important point to remember is that overloading is a compile time phenomenon. This just means that the compiler determines whether a given method(s) is correctly overloaded, and if not a compiler error is returned as shown in the examples above.
Another important point to remember is that overloading is a compile time phenomenon. This just means that the compiler determines whether a given method(s) is correctly overloaded, and if not a compiler error is returned as shown in the examples above.
What about method overriding?
Overriding methods is completely different from overloading methods. If a derived class requires a different definition for an inherited method, then that method can be redefined in the derived class. This would be considered overriding. An overridden method would have the exact same method name, return type, number of parameters, and types of parameters as the method in the parent class, and the only difference would be the definition of the method.
Example of method overriding
Let's go through a simple example to illustrate what method overriding would look like:
public class Parent { public int someMethod() { return 3; } } public class Child extends Parent{ // this is method overriding: public int someMethod() { return 4; } }
In the sample code above, someMethod is an overridden method in the Child class, because it has the exact same name, number of parameters, and return type as the someMethod method defined inside it's parent class (conveniently named Parent).
Another important point to remember is that overriding is a run time phenomenon – not a compile time phenomenon like method overloading.
Summary of differences between overloading and overriding
Let's summarize the differences between overloading and overriding.
When overloading, one must change either the type or the number of parameters for a method that belongs to the same class. Overriding means that a method inherited from a parent class will be changed.
But, when overriding a method everything remains exactly the same except the method definition – basically what the method does is changed slightly to fit in with the needs of the child class. But, the method name, the number and types of parameters, and the return type will all remain the same.
And, method overriding is a run-time phenomenon that is the driving force behind polymorphism. However, method overloading is a compile-time phenomenon.


text:
Persons using assistive technology might not be able to fully access information in this file. For assistance, please send e-mail to: email@example.com. Type 508 Accommodation and the title of the report in the subject line of e-mail.
Announcements: Epidemiology in Action Course
CDC and the Rollins School of Public Health at Emory University will cosponsor the course, Epidemiology in Action, to be held May 16--27, 2011, at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia. This course is designed for state and local public health professionals.
The course emphasizes practical application of epidemiology to public health problems and consists of lectures, workshops, classroom exercises (including actual epidemiologic problems), and roundtable discussions. Topics scheduled for presentation include descriptive epidemiology and biostatistics, analytic epidemiology, epidemic investigations, public health surveillance, surveys and sampling, and Epi Info training, along with discussions of selected diseases. Tuition is charged.
Additional information and applications are available by mail (Emory University, Hubert Department of Global Health [Attn: Pia], 1518 Clifton Rd. NE, CNR Bldg., Rm. 7038, Atlanta, GA 30322); telephone (404-727-3485); fax (404-727-4590); Internet (http://www.sph.emory.edu/epicourses); or e-mail (email@example.com).
Use of trade names and commercial sources is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services.
References to non-CDC sites on the Internet are
provided as a service to MMWR readers and do not constitute or imply
endorsement of these organizations or their programs by CDC or the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services. CDC is not responsible for the content
of pages found at these sites. URL addresses listed in MMWR were current as of
the date of publication.
All MMWR HTML versions of articles are electronic conversions from typeset documents.
This conversion might result in character translation or format errors in the HTML version.
Users are referred to the electronic PDF version (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr)
and/or the original MMWR paper copy for printable versions of official text, figures, and tables.
An original paper copy of this issue can be obtained from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), Washington, DC 20402-9371;
telephone: (202) 512-1800. Contact GPO for current prices.
**Questions or messages regarding errors in formatting should be addressed to


text:
Jason Fraley, WTOP film critic
WASHINGTON – The Academy Awards had just gone to commercial break, and inside Los Angeles' Dolby Theatre, a couple from Chevy Chase, Md. knew their category was next.
Sean Fine and Andrea Nix Fine turned to their 19-year-old guest, the namesake of their 40-minute film "Inocente" (2012), and saw she was nervous about the prospect of winning for Best Documentary Short.
"I don't know if I really want to go on stage," Inocente Izucar said.
"You don't have to say anything, but I think it'll be great if you came up," the married filmmakers replied.
When Kerry Washington called their names, they took the stage in shock. Andrea tried thanking a list of people before the "Jaws" cutoff music. Sean donned a pair of RG3 socks, nimbly evading the shark's fin by getting to the heart of their gratitude.
"Most of all, we want to thank this young lady, who was homeless just a year ago, and now she's standing in front of all of you," he said, drawing cheers from the Hollywood crowd.
"She's an artist, and all of you are artists, and we feel like we need to start supporting the arts. They're dying in our communities and all of us are artists, and we need to stand up and help girls like her be seen and heard. It's so important."
Four days later, the Fines brought their Oscars to WTOP.
"I think these Oscars mean so much to us because this film was really hard," Sean said. "It took three years. We almost didn't make it a few times. We almost got funding pulled. It was just hard scraping everything together for this one. They're all hard, but this one was really hard, so it means a lot to us to be recognized for all the hard work."
Filmmaker Origins
Awards are in Sean Fine's burgundy and gold blood. His parents, Paul and Holly Fine, met at WJLA and won four Peabody Awards while collaborating on pieces for "60 Minutes" and "Primetime."
"I grew up tying action figures to editing equipment," Sean said.
He spent summers on the Chesapeake Bay, gaining appreciation for wildlife, and looked up to his grandfather, the late Nate Fine, a photographer for the Redskins for 51 years. He applied both passions to a double major in Zoology and Filmmaking at Connecticut College.
The clincher was a summer filmmaking class at NYU.
"I never worked so hard and enjoyed myself so much," he said. "I think I worked 72 hours straight on something without sleeping, and I remember leaving the editing room when it was done, feeling so fantastic, and I was like, 'I have to do this.'"
Meanwhile, Andrea grew up in Rochester, New York, where the last semester of senior year, she took a documentary course and was inspired to work at a PBS station in Rochester.
"I realized that (with documentaries) you could do a different subject on just about anything, so you kind of learn the rest of your life," she said.
Cinematic Romance
The two eventually made their way to National Geographic in D.C., where Andrea was asked to retrieve him from the lobby on his first day.
Their brief encounter was no "thunderbolt" moment, a la "The Godfather" (1972), but after hanging out with the same group of people, they hit it off talking about movies.
"We were out having drinks with people and I went on some kind of rant about film. I was going on and on about the idea that National Geographic was transitioning at the time out of using film and I was upset about it. I was saying we need to not lose sight that what we do is an art form," Sean said.
"He was so quiet all the time and then finally I saw him get really passionate," Andrea said. "I remember thinking, 'There you are.'"
Before long, the two were going on constant movie dates just so they could hang out in a movie theater. These movies ranged from embarrassing romances like "Message in a Bottle" to serious documentaries like "Hoop Dreams" (1994) and "Microcosmos" (1996) at the since-closed Key Theater in Georgetown. Eventually, it became hard to juggle work and play.
"We worked at National Geographic long enough that we were making our own films independently there and we were traveling so much to far-flung crazy places," Andrea said. "We would just be like ships passing in the night, and it was great professionally, but it wasn't great for us. So, we sooner or later said, 'Let's get married.'"
In a gesture straight out of a movie, Sean proposed to Andrea with the same engagement ring his maternal grandfather had used to propose to his grandmother, which he bought from Tiny Jewel Box in D.C. She said yes, and the two were hitched in 2003.
Career vs. Marriage
Marriage is one thing. Being married to your co-director is another.
While an individual filmmaker might wake up in the middle of the night to jot down an idea, Sean and Andrea can simply elbow the person on the other pillow.
"I think it's great we can always talk about an idea. I think we've also learned there are times not to talk about ideas," Sean said.
"There are times we have to be a family, or there are times we have to be husband and wife, and we have to turn it off. But for me, my biggest critic and my biggest fan is the person I'm married to, so it pushes me to work even harder," he said.
Both co-direct their films, while Andrea focuses on writing, and Sean focuses on cinematography.
"Sean's an incredible cinematographer," Andrea said. "I'm always so lucky, because the footage I sit down to work with is some of the most incredible footage anybody could ever bring home."
"Andrea's an amazing writer," Sean said. "A lot of people don't realize how much writing is involved, even in documentaries. Everything from treatments to proposals … and being able to go through hundreds of pages of transcripts and find the nuggets, the best bytes, and string them together."
The Film
The two dabbled in documentary shorts and TV documentaries from 2002 to 2006, before co-directing their Oscar-nominated feature documentary "War Dance" (2007) about three displaced Ugandan kids competing in a national music and dance festival.
Then came the Oscar-winning idea: a documentary on child homelessness and the arts.
"We read that one in 45 kids in American experience homelessness, which is insane," Andrea said.
The two thought making a film would help bring attention to the crisis. They decided to find a kid who was not only homeless but was also a talented artist; a sort of diamond in the rough.
"It was a way to give them a voice and a face and express themselves," she said.
Finding that kid was a three-month process, as Sean and Andrea called schools, shelters and social programs across the country, including D.C. and Baltimore.
The search brought them to Inocente, a 15-year-old undocumented immigrant from San Diego who had been homeless for nine years after fleeing abusive parents.
She takes refuge in her painting, aided by San Diego's ARTS program, which chooses her among thousands of young artists to host her first art show. Every painting sells, except a special painting she keeps for herself. In the end, we learn ARTS helped Inocente obtain legal status in 2011.
Like the great documentary filmmaker Errol Morris ("The Thin Blue Line"), Sean and Andrea allow young Inocente to speak directly into the camera. Nothing she says is scripted; it's all from the heart, with tears flowing from the colorful swirls of face paint around her eyes.
"I think it's a very intimate way for them to share their stories; especially for kids," Sean said. "I always think, 'Man, this is gonna be very hard,' but people really open up this way. I feel like they're not talking to us; they're talking to the lens and it really opens up and it becomes personal."
Style and Substance
"Are documentary filmmakers filmmakers first or are they activists?" Sean said. "We see ourselves as filmmakers. We love film, the art of it, the language of it."
Here, the substance of child homelessness is beautifully layered with cinematic style. While Andrea fell for Sean's rant on film versus digital, "Inocente" was ironically shot digitally with a Panasonic Varicam and a Canon 5D for interviews. The filmmakers use fast motion to see Inocente create a piece of art in time lapse, and slow motion to focus on tiny details, like glitter falling from her hand.
"We love playing around with the different film speeds," Andrea said. "The speed of the shot sends a different message. When things are slowed down, you tend to focus on it and pay attention to it in a different way, and I think sometimes there's a different weight and it has a totally different emotion."
"With your normal eyes, you don't pay attention to details, but with the camera, you string together a bunch of details," Sean said. "Those details are the things that I find the most interesting, because they're things we pass by in our normal, quick-paced lives. That's cinematic. That's the language of film … And you put that with the right music and the right voiceover, and you have a whole scene that just moves you. I don't know any other medium you can do that with."
Shooting the film was only half of the battle, as post-production labored on for months. The film was edited in the basement of their Chevy Chase home with the help of go-to editor Jeff Consiglio. Here, they carefully worked out the film's structure, pacing, plot points and how to present a devastating scene, only to pick the audience back up and carry them into the next scene.
"It just twists you up for so long and you never feel like you're gonna get it," Andrea said. "The first few minutes is always the part you rip up 10,000 times, because that's the 'who, what, why, when' that you gotta get right on the money."
The hard work paid off, as the film breathes life with every brush stroke and every tiny detail.
"I always thought Sean would make a great cop," Andrea said, "He always notices all the details about people all the time."
Now they don't need no stinkin' badges. They have Oscar statues.
Oscar Night
The limo ride to the Oscars allowed Sean and Andrea to watch young Inocente take in the life-changing moment. She played with the electric windows, talked to people outside the limo and looked the part, thanks to a stylist who offered to do her hair and makeup for free. When her high heels began hurting her feet, she pulled a Shoeless Joe and went barefoot most of the night.
"It was a no-brainer to bring her," Sean said. "Oscar tickets are hard to come by and we had a lot of people who worked on this film, but everybody rallied and was like 'That's the right thing to do.' The whole thing was just amazing with her, to see it through her eyes and see her embrace it, because you never know if this is gonna make somebody turn into a little cocoon, especially a kid."
When the big moment came, Sean and Andrea were glad to have Inocente on stage with them.
"Being up on stage with Inocente herself, she's been through so much, and to have her up there, it meant the world to us, and it meant the world to her," Andrea said. "Here you are looking at each other's faces like, 'I can't believe this is really happening.'"
"I remember looking down in front of us and there's Ben Affleck and Jack Nicholson, all these famous people, and I remember bringing her up and I remember their faces looking like, 'Who's this?'" Sean said. "Then I remember saying the words, 'A year ago she was homeless,' and I remember many of their mouths opened. … I felt them feel her, so it was a big moment."
The adulation continued after the ceremony, as the Oscar statues served as tickets to the Vanity Fair after party. There, Sean and Andrea brushed elbows with Quentin Tarantino and Steven Tyler, while Inocente met her "Harry Potter" hero Daniel Radcliffe.
But there was no time for starstruck gawking; there were teachable moments to be had. Daniel Day-Lewis told Inocente, 'It's not always best to listen. It's better to sometimes follow your own heart." Peter Fonda said, "We gotta support the arts," and Sean gasped, "'Easy Rider' just talked to us!"
"I realized at that party, she moved all these artists," Sean said. "They remembered her on stage, and that to me showed these aren't all self-involved people. … Sometimes I think we get lost in what people are wearing, did this person fall down. … I think sometimes it's refreshing to have something real. Not going up there as a documentary filmmaker and preaching, 'You gotta do this' as an activist, but just being real. Laying it out there. And I think it did that for some of those people that night."
The Future
The sky is the limit now for young Inocente. The day before the Oscars, she got offered a big art show in New York. The day after, a college reached out with a potential scholarship offer.
"Her phone's lighting up right now," Andrea said of Inocente. "She wants to be an advocate for other kids. She wants to be able to help connect people to the issues of homelessness, the need for art, immigration. She launched her own website to sell her artwork. She's also doing speaking engagements, and they're talking about maybe even having a day in San Diego being Inocente Day."
As for Sean and Andrea, their filmmaking careers will never be the same. Their HBO documentary "Life According to Sam" (2013) just premiered at Sundance about a young boy with a rare disease called progeria, which causes parts of his body to age rapidly, like Robin Williams in "Jack" (1996).
"It's meddling a little bit with the fountain of youth idea," Andrea said. "This disease creates a crazy abnormal protein that builds up very rapidly in these kids. A baby is born with almost none of it. An old person has a good deal of it. And these kids have a ton of it. So trying to figure out the mechanism that will help them also looks at the same mechanism that makes us all age, so I'm very interested in what happens with that side of the science."
The couple also came to the Oscars prepared to hock four fiction feature scripts, which are getting some traction. Sean loves fiction filmmakers like Martin Scorsese and Terrence Malick; Andrea is a fan of Ridley Scott's "Blade Runner" (1982).
"As directors for documentaries, we've witnessed birth, we've witnessed death, we've witnessed every emotion you can imagine in real time, filming it with real people," Sean said. "So I think we'll be able to bring that when we make something that's fiction. We have a grab bag of emotions we can pull from."
Bleeding Burgundy and Gold
Tucked somewhere in that grab bag is a passion for the burgundy and gold, which they're not afraid to share with their new Oscar-winning L.A. brethren.
"People ask, 'Oh, Washington! You must know all about politics.' But if you ask me the one thing I associate with Washington, it's the Redskins," Sean said. "I wish the stadium was still here. I miss RFK. To take the Metro to your stadium in your city, that's where it should be, not a day's trip out."
His first Redskins game came against the Giants when he was 4 years old. He was in the locker room during the 1983 NFC Championship against the Cowboys, where the RFK bleachers shook with chants of 'We want Dallas.' Art Monk, Darrell Green and John Riggins were his heroes, and he has the jerseys to prove it. Such are the perks of being the grandson of the team's official photographer.
When he and Andrea were nominated for "War Dance," he wore his grandfather's two Super Bowl rings to the Oscars. When they lost to a film called "Taxi to the Dark Side" (2007), their defeat brought painful memories of the Redskins 5-11 record the previous season. As the team struggled for 15 years, Sean and Andrea had their faith tested, like many 'Skins fans.
All that changed last year with the arrival of Robert Griffin III.
"On the one hand, he's a physical specimen and watching him play is electric," Andrea said.
"He's also somebody my kids can watch and I want my kids to learn from," Sean added. "His actions speak louder than his words. And so, at the Oscars, deciding to wear RG3 socks, it was a no-brainer to me. It's bringing Washington with me. It's bringing part of my kids' hero and a guy I'm a big fan of, too. You gotta bring something of your home to Hollywood."
And so, Sean wore burgundy and gold socks with the RG3 motto: "No Pressure, No Diamonds." Andrea wore jewelry donated by Tiny Jewel Box. Together, they're using a camera to achieve what RG3 is doing with his playbook: inspiring a D.C. community.
When they returned home from the Oscars, they discovered their neighbors had brought them cards and flowers. Even the local grocery store Brookville Super Market brought congratulatory champagne.
"That's what it's about for us living in Washington," Sean said. "We come home and there's a community that embraces us and embraces what we do. It feels good."
No pressure, no diamonds, and Oscar wins are a long time coming. To quote "Shawshank," that's all it takes sometimes: pressure and time. That and a big RG3 poster.
Follow WTOP Film Critic Jason Fraley on Twitter @AboveTheJFray or check out his blog The Film Spectrum.


text:
I am so excited to share another fun craft project I made for Shutterstock! Head over to their blog to check out the full tutorial. I used Photoshop for this one, but if you don't have the program you can simply print out your patterns & use stencils to cutout your letters.
(if you're liking the neon animal mobile, you can find that tutorial here)


text:
Baseball's Active Leaders, 2023
What Trump Said When About COVID
Recent Reviews
Everything Everywhere All at Once (2022)
Black Panther: Wakanda Forever (2022)
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022)
Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)
The Cagneys
A Midsummer Night's Dream (1935)
Something to Sing About (1937)
Angels with Dirty Faces (1938)
A Lion Is In the Streets (1953)
Man of a Thousand Faces (1957)
Never Steal Anything Small (1959)
Shake Hands With the Devil (1959)
How Hollywood Portrayed Terrorism Before 9/11
"The Siege," a 1998 thriller starring Denzel Washington and Annette Bening, was Hollywood's attempt to imagine a realistic terrorist attack on New York City, but in the end, on the big issues, they got it backwards. They assumed the terrorists would think small (buses, schools) and our reaction would be loud (martial law, herding Arab-Americans into stadiums). Instead the terrorists thought big (four years ago this month), and our reaction, at least in rounding up suspects, has been relatively quiet and secretive. Put it this way: We're not doing it in stadiums with the lights on.
No, the movies that got it right — the movies that made us feel we were just watching a movie on September 11, 2001, adding to the horrible unreality of that day — were the big-budget disaster flicks. In the five years prior to the destruction of the World Trade Center we thrilled at the destruction of the following landmarks: The White House, the U.S. Capitol, the Statue of Liberty, Madison Square Garden, the Brooklyn Bridge, the Flatiron Building, the Chrysler Building (twice), and, in "Deep Impact," the twin towers themselves, which died not by fire but water. We last see them bobbing in the surf. This kind of thing used to be called "escapist entertainment" and was quite popular.
The most prescient film is actually one of the most cartoonish: Michael Bay's "Armageddon," another of those big-meteor-hurtling-towards-earth movies. In this case the big meteor is preceded by a lot of little meteors, which, of all places on our planet, just happen to land in midtown Manhattan during rush hour. After the destruction we get a chilling wide-angle shot of New York City, against a deep blue sky, with smoke billowing from the top of one of the World Trade towers. Earlier, while the meteors were pelting Manhattan, the coming decade was presaged by a black cabdriver:
Cabbie: Whoa! What's that?
CUT TO: Shots of carnage
Cabbie: We at war!
CUT TO: More meteors strike
Cabbie: Saddam Hussein is bombing us!
So President Bush wasn't the first to make this mistake.
After Boris
Disaster films such as "Armageddon" were just one way Hollywood dealt with the end of the Cold War. The fall of the Soviet Union not only opened up long dormant ethnic rivalries around the world but it closed off the chief source of Hollywood's action movie villains. The Russians had been good to Hollywood, and they had been preceded by Nazis, who had been preceded by Indians, who had been proceeded by handlebar-mustachioed landlords. Most of these wouldn't do anymore.
Giant meteors, on the other hand, worked great. So did volcanoes and aliens and mutated lizards, particularly if they were accompanied by the aforementioned landmark destruction. Who could forget 1996's "Independence Day" with the White House exploding? That so-called "money shot" premiered during the 1996 Super Bowl and had moviegoers buzzing for months. The buzz paid off. Domestically the film grossed $306 million, but that was nothing compared to how well it did overseas, where it grossed over $500 million. Apparently some people wanted to see the White House blow up more than others.
The movies where famous landmarks didn't blow up were, of course, the terrorist movies, which had been around for a while ("Black Sunday" in the 1970s, "Die Hard" in the 1980s), but which gained steam after the fall of the Soviet Union. Despite the complaints of some Arab-American groups, Hollywood was an Equal Opportunity Employer with its terrorists. Sure, Arab terrorists wanted U.S. troops out of the Persian Gulf ("True Lies"), and one Arab extremist wanted to strike the sword of Allah deep into the heart of the infidel ("Executive Decision"), but our cinematic heroes were also threatened by terrorists from England ("Passenger 57"), Kazakhstan ("Air Force One"), Bosnia ("The Peacemaker"), Germany ("The Sum of All Fears") and Colombia ("Collateral Damage"), each with their own set of demands, each with their own brand of crazy, each meeting their own horrible ends. Before it was Donald Trump's idiotic trademark line, it was Arnold Schwarzenegger's in "True Lies": "You're fired." Boom.
A right-wing agenda
What are the lessons of the pre-9/11 terrorist movies? Here's a few. If you capture the head of a terrorist organization it only leads to more terrorism ("Executive Decision," "Air Force One," and "The Siege"). When all else fails, resort to Morse code ("Independence Day" and "Executive Decision"). Also, anyone who tries to negotiate with terrorists is a sap and dies quickly. In "Executive Decision" it's Sen. Mavros (J.T. Walsh). In "Air Force One," it's National Security Advisor Jack Doherty (Tom Everett). Both get shot in the forehead. Never negotiating with terrorists is obviously good policy but Hollywood stacks the deck by portraying negotiators as not only weak-willed but politically-motivated — and thus, in the filmmakers' eyes, worthy of getting shot in the forehead.
Watching these movies, in fact, one wonders all over again about right-wing attacks on Hollywood. These movies encourage patriotism, faith in our leaders and an-eye-for-an-eye. They encourage a simple absolutist view of the world. There are good guys and bad guys and never the twain shall meet. The hero is always right, and the people who disagree with the hero are always wrong, and if the hero needs to — and he usually does — he can go it alone. Sometimes the hero is the President of the United States. Sometimes he wears a flight suit. Sometimes he says tough things like "Get off my plane!" I know: It's all so anti-Republican.
The one film besides "The Siege" that presented a more nuanced approach to terrorism was, ironically, Arnold Schwarzenegger's "Collateral Damage." In it, Schwarzenegger plays a Los Angeles firefighter who loses his wife and child to terrorists and travels to Colombia to get revenge. For a moment the film raises the possibility that in destroying our enemies we become like our enemies — and then the terrorist forces a live snake down the throat of a subordinate and that idea is forgotten. Although, oddly, not by Schwarzenegger. A few months ago, presidential advisor Karl Rove made headlines by implying that Republicans saw the savagery of 9/11 and wanted to fight the enemy while Democrats wanted to understand the enemy. But here's the future Republican Governor of California in a special feature on the "Collateral Damage" DVD called "The Hero in a New Era":
"Collateral Damage" was written in such an exciting way, and gave us a little insight into how it happens. Why do terrorists attack our country? What are the things that our country does to make those people do those things?
How infantile our national dialogue has become when even Arnold Schwarzenegger is too complex for it.
The wrong men
After 9/11 the movie industry famously removed every image of the World Trade Center from their upcoming films, and with good reason. Hollywood is a dream factory and those towers had become part of our sad reality. They sadden even throwaway shots in older films. "Pushing Tin" opens with a jet airliner banking toward the twin towers on yet another sky-blue day. You get shivers. "Fight Club" ends with the protagonist happily blowing up tall financial buildings. Ditto.
But you don't need to see tall buildings crashing to the ground to be reminded of 9/11 and its aftermath. "The Ox-Bow Incident" was made and released during World War II. It concerns a western town's reaction when a local rancher is murdered and his cattle rustled. One townsperson says, "Down in Texas where I come from, we just go out and get a man and string him up." Which is what they do. They capture three men — innocent, it turns out — one of whom (Dana Andrews) says the following before being hanged:
Justice? What do you care about justice? You don't even care whether you've got the right men or not. All you know is you've lost something and somebody's got to be punished.
Four years ago this month we lost something.
—Erik Lundegaard was in Detroit, visiting his sister, on September 11, 2001. This piece was originally published 9/6/05 on MSNBC.com.


text:
It all started with curiosity and intrigue. I have been enjoying ultra running for several years now and have become comfortable with the 50-mile distance. I started training for a 100 miler in the winter of 2008, but then got sick and injured. This past winter, I ran the Bandera 100k in Texas and won a spot into this year's Western States 100. After much thought and discussion, I declined the entry although I promised myself that I would try the 100-mile distance in a race closer to my Vermont home.
Preparation and Pre-Race
In the end, I decided that it made the most sense for me to train for the Vermont 100. I felt that I needed some guidance with training, because I wanted to be prepared and to be honest I wanted to suffer as little as possible. I turned to iRunFar.com's Bryon Powell to help guide me along my journey. From the start, it was apparent that our personalities would work well together. He listened and tailored my regime taking into account my personal life, work schedule and training style. This was wonderful because it gave me one less thing to worry about.
Worry. That is what I do, so running is a double-edged sword for me. Running can calm me down and bring a smile to my face, but it can also produce a lot of anxiety within me. Three weeks before the race, things started to fall apart. I got giardia and leptospirosis and missed a solid week of training, my left knee hurt every time I ran, and my go to pacer informed me that he had a work conflict arise with the race date. I like predictability in my life and there seemed to be none of that.
As the race date got closer, I got more and more nervous. Five days out from the race, I recall my husband asking "Is it going to be like this all week?" I responded, "It is only going to get worse." Even though the week felt bumpy, I did get good news that my intended pacer, Kevin Sullivan who placed second in the Vermont 100 in 2008, was back on to pace me and this brought me some needed relief.
Driving down to the race on Friday morning, I was trying to convince myself that I could take a wrong turn or say I got a flat tire. I tried working out in my mind what I feared so much since running is my escape. I knew if I could just get to the start line, I would be fine. I had done the training and had already put in a solid season of racing. Well before the race I had set several goals for myself and knew I wouldn't be content unless I actually tried to accomplish them.
Shortly after I arrived to the start/finish where we would camp, so did my crew that included my husband, my mother, stepfather and friend, Mark. After meeting up with and chatting with my Inov-8 teammates, I made sure everything was ready for the 4 a.m. start, had dinner and then quickly dove into our hot and humid tent to try to sleep. It was only 7:30 p.m., but I knew it was what I needed.
Running with Jill: The Early Miles
At 2 a.m. my eyes opened and the stars were amazing. There was not a cloud in the sky. The early wake up allowed me to slowly get ready, have a small breakfast and make my way down to the start area. Once in the start area I quickly found my friend, Jill Perry, and we tried to work our way up towards the front of the pack before we got the go signal.
Before we made it very far, the race started. Jill and I did our best to maneuver our way up towards the front before we hit trail. We had 21 miles to settle in before we would hit the first crewed aid station. I was wearing my Garmin Forerunner and kept an eye on our pace. When Jill and I came to a larger hill, we would look ahead and pick out a landmark where we would start walking. We would both then agree to that spot and take off running to get there while the male runners around us just laughed.
As the early miles ticked away, it became very clear that it was going to be a hot and humid day. I was going through my fluids a lot faster than anticipated. Despite not feeling the need, I started eating Gu's early on to stay on top of my energy levels. After my first Gu, I realized it was going to be a battle with my stomach all day. My stomach cramped and became a huge knot. I felt like I was carrying a bowling ball in my abdomen and it probably looked that way too.
We arrived at mile 21 around 3:17 and I was well ahead of my intended splits while still running with ease. Jill and I continued to work together and knew we were running in second and third with Kami Semick about 13 minutes in front of us. My husband informed me she was looking strong, but was running alone. There was too much race left for me to worry about her and I was hoping that maybe being alone would eventually wear on her.
On My Own: The Second 25
Somewhere over the next miles Jill and I parted ways. I was now alone running in second and just focused on getting to my crew again. When I pulled into mile 30.1, they were prepared with all my supplies and told me I was now 19 minutes back from Kami. To my surprise it really didn't bother me and I was calm. I was here to run my race and to try the new distance.
Last year's male winner, Jack Pilla, wasn't racing this year, but rather crewing and I took a moment to check in with him to verify that my splits were ok. Jack knows the course and my running well and he assured me that I was doing alright. (We had both feared I would go out too hard.)
After I left the aid station I wouldn't see my crew for 17 miles and going this long without seeing them worried me. I continued to drink and eat like planned, but still was having stomach issues. It hurt, but I knew if I didn't stay on top of my calories, I would be in a bigger world of hurt. At times I would come across another runner or two and chat for a few minutes and then we would part ways.
At mile 47.2 I got on the scale and felt like I would be 8 pounds heavy. Not wanting to waste time, I took control and set the scale to where I weighed in and was down two pounds. My crew reloaded me and off I went again as I looked at my watch and had arrived there in 7 hours and 35 minutes.
Running with Rusiecki: Getting to 70
Eventually I could see Brian Rusiecki in front of me and got close enough to yell, "Yeah Brian" and he turned and waved. For a few miles I kept him in my sights along with the other male he was running with. At one point Brian turned back and waved to me to hurry up and catch him. I opened up my stride and joined him. It was good to be side by side with someone again that I knew.
Brian and I stuck together and it felt great to have someone who I could be honest with about how I felt. Reality was that I was being very negative about the distance. It felt so silly to be to be walking so much; it was making me mad. I hate walking, probably because I am so bad at it. Even when I travel from my house to my neighbors, I prefer to run rather then slink a quarter of a mile. (I have a difficult time walking like I mean it.) Brian and I both stuck with it and stayed together. We focused on making it to mile 70 where we would pick up our pacers, although we still had many miles to go.
Somewhere around mile 57, I decided I was done with drink mix and Gu. In actuality, my stomach made that decision for me. I turned to water with Endurolyte powder and tried to convince myself to eat one or two Shot Bloks at a time. I always struggle with fueling, so this wasn't a huge surprise. For about a year I have been looking to nutritionist Meredith Terranova to help with my fueling and we had planned on things turning south for me. Having a back up plan gave me some comfort so I wasn't scrambling to figure out what next.
Mentally, I was getting sick of roads and the conditions were so dry that the even the dirt roads were extremely firm. I wondered if my body would continue to hold up to all the pounding. I was so tempted to push the downhills, but wanted to have legs left for the last 30 miles.
As Brian and I got closer to mile 70, I saw runners coming towards us and I panicked. Did we take a wrong turn? What was going on? Brian reassured me that we were fine and that we had already run down the hill we were climbing. I was unaware that for a small portion the course did double back on itself. Obviously I didn't study the course.
In the Company of Kevin: The Final Miles
We entered the aid station and I literally lost all of my manners, jumped in front of Brian and hopped on the scale. Just up one pound from my starting weight. I grabbed my fresh bottle and Shot Bloks from my crew, got a big hug from Mike Silverman (the Vermont 50 race director) and was greeted by my pacer Kevin. I said, "Ok, let's go," but Kevin had something else in mind. Kevin said, "drink," as he handed me a bottle. I tried to assure him that I was fine, but it became clear we weren't moving a step till I drank from that bottle. I took a sip and he said, "Four more." All I could think was, "Man, who invited this guy?" I did as I was told, and we took off running and I had now been on the move for 11 hours and 33 minutes.
We made quick use of a short road section and then made a left hand turn onto a trail that was a climb from the start. I dropped into a walk and started apologizing for it. I knew I should be walking this hill, but I hated it. At this point I found myself very present inside my head. I had been looking forward to getting my pacer, but now wanted to be alone. I didn't want to talk or even be spoken to. I didn't want to be pushed; I guess I didn't want much.
Hello red flag and welcome to my first low. By no means was it rock bottom or a bad low, but I knew things had to change. I didn't say anything and ate a Gu. I hate hurting, feeling weak and sharing it with others, but told myself it was important that Kevin know. I informed him of my stomach issue and kept walking. At that moment, I wanted for him to be sympathetic, but he wasn't. Looking back it was good he wasn't.
We kept moving forward, running as hard as my stomach would allow and taking walk breaks on the larger hills. Finally, I was back to a more comfortable place and happy to have him with me. I remember at one point saying, "Kevin, I thought you were my friend…why would you encourage me to do this?" I was joking again and in my mind that was a good sign.
At the next crew station I was told I had made up a bit of ground on Kami and that she was struggling a little with stomach issues. Still, I was content with running my race and just worked on getting to mile 88, which was the next weigh in. The miles leading up to getting there were rather uneventful, loads of more dirt roads with long climbs and descents.
At one point Kevin wanted me to take four salt pills and I bargained with him that I start with 2. I was worried about my stomach and I have a hard time swallowing pills, especially on the move. I got the first one down and then put the second in my mouth. Just as I swallowed it Kevin said something funny and everything came back up. For some reason it made every part of me hurt and I wanted no part of trying to do that again. Luckily, I wasn't cramping, so we continued forward although food or vomit talk was not allowed.
Finally, we approached the barn at mile 88 that I remembered so well from pacing last year. I ran into the barn and got on the scale and was right on the money, so off I went with just 12 miles to go.
Just 12 miles, just 12 miles, that is all I could think. I envisioned in my mind the 12 miles loops I did in training, trying to convince myself that 12 miles wasn't all that far. I looked at my watch and thought to myself that 12 miles at this pace is far; this could take forever. I had been racing for 15 hours and a minute and for the first time all day started to try and project my finish time. As I did this, I started to get anxious so I stopped trying to figure out when the end would come. I told myself I would get there when I got there and it was as simple as that.
I need something to focus on and knew Inov-8 teammate Chris Reed wasn't too far in front of me. At times I could see him. I didn't really want to catch and pass him, but wanted to reel him in a little and then see how things progressed as we got closer to the finish. We did just that, but as soon as we would get close my stomach would go and I would come to what felt like a halting stop. He would again put some distance on me and I would get closer and then my stomach would disagree or I would get dizzy. I still had legs and energy, but how hard was I willing to push myself? What was I willing to accept on this day?
Kevin and I came into the last crew station at mile 95.5 and just had a bit of road left and then a few miles of trail. In the woods it got dark quickly. I turned on my headlamp and had plenty of light, but realized my eyes weren't cooperating all that well. I wasn't really seeing straight and my footwork wasn't stellar. I could see Chris in front of me along with the last aid station before the finish. I ran past the station and then my stomach again made me turn from a run into a walk. At this point I allowed myself to settle for just finishing comfortably. I kept telling myself just to stay upright and moving forward.
Finally, glow jugs and sounds of music and voices got my attention and this time they were real voices not ones that I imagined were catching me from behind. The last quarter mile Kevin congratulated me. It was my moment and I had worked hard for months for it. At no point did I feel alone out there. Even when I was literally alone, I always had thoughts of family, friends and training partners. Everyone had believed in me even when I didn't believe in myself.
As I crossed the finish line in a time of 17:20:47, which placed me seventh overall and second female, I was greeted by my family and friends. It was over, but was it? Of course the first question was "Will you do it again?" For now I am keeping that answer a secret!


text:
The Ingredients in Shampoos and Conditioners and their Significance
I love doing articles like these. For one, they help provide information to the many, many people who read it. Second, they settle some very common questions. Third, the ingredient names are awfully long, and are really fun to say with your mouth full of cranberry cheesecake! (Momma's cheesecake! Yippee!!!) :toothygrin:
First, the very popular silicone debate – Bad or Good? :)? Keep reading to find out!
What are silicones?
According to trusty ol' Wikipedia, Silicones are inert, synthetic compounds with a variety of forms and uses. Typically heat-resistant and rubber-like, they are used in sealants, adhesives, lubricants, medical applications (e.g., breast implants), cookware, and insulation.
They normally end in -cone, -conol or -xane, and are abundantly found in hair conditioners, and even in many shampoos.
Typically not soluble in water, there are a few silicones that are soluble in water – if any silicone in the ingredients list has 'PPG' or 'PEG' in front of it, it is soluble in water. The rest of them, on the other hand, are insoluble in water. With regular usage, they build up on the hair and scalp, leading to dull, lifeless and tired hair. They create a layer on your hair that does not allow any product you use on it to touch the hair strands and actually work. Some common silicones of this kind are dimethicone, dimethiconol, cetyl dimethicone, cetearyl methicone, and stearyl dimethicone.
Then there are those silicones that do not lead to much build-up, but are still not water soluble, like amodimethicone, trimethylsilylamodimethicone, cyclomethicone and cyclopentasiloxane, stearoxy dimethicone, etc. The only silicones I'm personally comfortable using are: Anything with PPG or PEG in front of it. Also, lauryl methicone copolyol, dimethicone copolyol.
What Silicones do to Hair:
Silicones by themselves do not harm hair. They don't corrode it. They don't make it turn purple (even though that would be really, really cool!). In fact, they make hair easier to comb, making it shinier and smoother all the while. Sounds like fun? Well, it isn't. Over time, silicones build up on the hair shaft and seal out moisture, leading to hair that is non-eceptive to any products you may use further.
One very interesting thing is that silicones take different time to build up on different people's hair. For some people, they have to use a silicone hair product for a few months before they can see the effects of any build-up. For others, just 2-3 washes leads to hair being suffocated with the silicone. In order to remove the silicone from hair (to prevent any build-up from forming), we need to use cleansers that are detergents or surfactants containing sulphates like Sodium Lauryl/Laureth Sulphate (SLES), Ammonium Lauryl/Laureth Sulphate.
As I said above, sulphates will remove silicones. Thus, you won't have any nasty build-up from the silicones accumulating on your head. Sulphates are generally harsh – for instance, SLES, ALES, Ammonium or Sodium Xylenesulfonate, Sodium C14-16 (Olefin Sulfonate), Dioctyl Sodium Sulfosuccinate, Sodium Myreth Sulphate, Sodium Lauryl Sulfoacetate.
So, to solve this problem, what you need to do: As I have said so far, silicones cause build-up, which needs to be removed with sulphates. Sulphates, in turn, are harsh on hair and very drying – this leads to us feeling the need for MORE silicones, which need more sulphates, and so on. It's a very vicious cycle, as you can see. Thus, most shampoos and conditioners are interdependent!
What I mainly want to do is avoid sulphates. If I do that and still continue to use silicone conditioners, I will have build-up. Thus, in order to avoid sulphates, I avoid silicones. I do use a sulphate shampoo once in a blue moon, but I am convinced that using sulphates almost never is way better than using them regularly to remove silicone build-up.
Always remember, silicones are mainly in conditioner, but sometimes in shampoo as well. Sulphates are in shampoo only. So, if you do like I do and not use a silicone conditioner, but if you use a shampoo (whether with or without sulphates) that contains silicones, there will be build-up caused. Thus, even your shampoo must be silicone-free.
Now, I know this sounds very confusing and pretty skewed. In order to avoid sulphates (my main goal), I avoid silicones at all costs, and use shampoo which is silicone free (but which contains sulphates) occasionally! 🙂
The key to avoiding sulphates is to avoid silicones at ALL COSTS. This is because it's okay to use sulphates very rarely, than to use silicones and have build-up which will necessitate sulphates being used frequently. Our main aim is to escape from the drying effects of sulphates!
What are the Ingredients in Sulphate-Free Shampoos?
You might wonder what makes the shampoo clean your hair if it doesn't contain sulphates. Well, there are other ingredients that are surfactants or detergents, which can clean hair effectively, without stripping it of moisture like sulphates do. For instance, Cocoamphodipropionate, Coco Betaine, Disodium Cocoamphodiacetate, Sodium Cocoyl Isethionate, Cocoamphoacetate, Lauroamphoacetate, etc.
Conditioner Can Clean Hair:
If you take a look at this article here, you will notice I've mentioned that I "co-wash." That means, I don't shampoo, but I use conditioner instead to CLEAN my hair. It is the conditioner itself combined with the mild scrubbing action that helps to loosen dirt and lift it away from the scalp. Again, no using silicone-conditioners.
Humectants, according to Wikipedia are hygroscopic substances. It is often a molecule with several hydrophilic groups, most often hydroxyl groups, but amines and carboxyl groups, sometimes esterified, can be encountered as well; the affinity to form hydrogen bonds with molecules of water is crucial here. Since hygroscopic substances absorb water from the air, they are frequently used in desiccation or for humidity buffering. They can be both bad, and good for our hair. It all depends on the amount of moisture in the air, aka humidity level. Humectants wick water to themselves, from either the air, or from your hair; i.e. from whichever one has more moisture. So, if your hair is drier and the air is humid, the humectants you've applied to your hair will draw moisture from the atmosphere, and will keep your hair moisturized, since it is, after all, applied on your hair!
However, if your hair pretty well moisturized and the air is dry outside, it will draw moisture away from your hair, leading to drier hair. You have to see what your hair needs. If you have a problem with "poofy" hair (hair that poofs outward into a big mess), you must not use humectants, since they will attract moisture from the air, onto your hair and we all know what happens to hair with moisture, it gets bigger and poofier. Don't quite see it yet? Imagine flat-ironing your hair, and then going out on a humid day and sweating your face off. Now, do you get it? 😛
If your hair is limp and needs a bit of moisture for volume, then by all means, use humectants. Think of it this way; frizz and humectants are friends. You want frizz to go away, then you mustn't use its friend – Mr. Humectant. If you want frizz, then by all means get Mr. Humectant along and have a ball! :toothygrin:
Examples of humectants are glycerine, propylene glycol, butylenes glycol, panthenol and that's just off the top of my head.
These are exactly the opposite! They lock out moisture from a humid environment into the hair shaft, which means that hair is basically unaffected by humid weather. Also, they flatten, coat and seal the hair shaft. Sounds familiar? Yes, I said the exact same thing about silicones. Now I would love some anti-humectants in my hair. But, I do not want to use silicones.
Luckily, there are other ingredients that also are anti-humectant, eg. isopropyl palmitate, castor oil, shea butter, beeswax, coconut oil, sunflower oil, almond oil, olive oil etc. These I use occasionally in my hair products and routine. Now, assess the climate of the place you live in, and follow these three points given below for help. 🙂
• Basically, if the dew point is low, use less humectants (because your hair has more moisture than in the air), and moisturize your hair well (low dew point means a dry day with no much humidity in the air). If you use too much humectant, there is a chance that they will suck the moisture from your hair, leaving you with dry hair. Your best bet is to moisturize and then seal with some anti-humectant. Oils like those I mentioned above will help seal in moisture and protect hair from the dry air.
• If the dew point is moderate, use a little bit of humectant. There is a good amount of moisture in the atmosphere for your humectants to suck in and thus make your hair soft and bouncy (not too dry, not too humid either).
• When the dew point is high (very humid days), use anti-humectants to counter the effect of the moisture in the air, on your hair. If you use a humectant, it will draw all that moisture from the air and could make your hair poofy and frizz. However, if you use anti-humectants, (eg. a little bit of castor oil or almond oil mixed in with your leave-in conditioner), the hair is protected by them, and, as a bonus, anti-humectants (except for silicones) are easily washed away with a co-wash or a mild shampoo.
So yes, in conclusion, for extreme dew points (high or low), use anti-humectants, and on balanced days, use a little bit of humectant. Humectants will affect your hair mainly in your leave-in. If a product you'll be rinsing out contains humectants, there is less chances of that affecting your hair. Also, the lower it is in the ingredients list means the less the product contain it.
Damaged Hair:
Damaged hair is porous and thus more vulnerable to climatic conditions, the torture you might subject it to by blow-drying and/or flat-ironing. Remember the Andre Walker System I wrote about a few weeks ago? Well, that's only a generic classification. What actually determines if your hair is damaged (and thus what you need to use for it to regain its health) is the porosity of your hair.
If your hair is overly porous, it has an open cuticle, which means it needs more moisture, as it releases moisture easily and remains dry. (it absorbs moisture easily, because it is porous, but it also releases it just as easy!)
If your hair has low porosity, it tends to resist any product you apply to it, rather than absorb it into the hair shaft. According to Tiffany Anderson, "To determine your own hair's porosity, grasp a hair strand firmly between your fingers. Slide the thumb and index finger of your other hand from end to scalp (opposite direction as for texture test). If your fingers "catch" going up the strand, or feel like they are ruffling up the hair strand, your hair is overly porous. If it is smooth, you have normal porosity. If your fingers move very fast up the hair strand and it feels exceptionally slick, you have low porosity."
Thus, you hair could be even Type 4, but it may not be able to deal with heavy moisturization; or it could be Type 2, but might need heavy-duty moisturizing product! The hair classification is mainly to explain to people what your hair looks like, and not the state of its health.
Thus, if you have, say, Type 2a hair, and you use products that are light and not intensely moisturizing, but your hair feels coarse and dry, it is probable that you have overly porous hair, which is why your hair easily releases all the moisture in it.
In the same way, if you have Type 4b hair (for which heavy moisturization is normally recommended) but it is very fine and wispy, then you need light moisture, and not intense moisture.
My hair needs moisture. If I add more protein in my hair, it'll turn brittle and will look like straw. Normal hair can withstand both, moisture addition and protein addition. Mine cannot withstand protein addition. My hair becomes rough and fragile if I use hair products with a lot of protein in them. However, my hair simply loves and thrives upon moisture!
If you find that you seem to be doing everything fine, but your hair is still dry and brittle, try cutting down on the protein treatments and products heavy on protein, and see if your hair becomes better. Examples of protein are amino acids, keratin, hydrolyzed silk protein, egg masks etc. Now, how do you tell if your hair needs protein or moisture? Check this link out.
Brands To Use:
I am saying this now, loud and clear. It does NOT matter what brand you use. You must scout for good ingredients, not for "good brands." Brands aren't what make a product do what it does, but the ingredients are. Any brand, if it has good ingredients and doesn't have adverse effects on your hair, can be used. As long as you avoid the ingredients,you mustn't use, and try using those that are most beneficial, you're well on your way to a happy head of hair! Experimenting with products isn't bad at all. Always try different products to find what's best for your needs; for if you don't do so, you'll never know! There could be a miracle product that 98.3% of the population raves about, but unless you try it on your own hair and see what it does to YOUR hair, you cannot expect that if you were stranded on some forsaken island with a crate of that product, your hair will still live on and flourish! :haanji:
Help with ingredients:
There is a wonderful ingredients list on this site here. I don't very much agree with some of Teri's methods, but I must say this Ingredients Dictionary is indeed comprehensive and pretty accurately compiled.
Conditioners in India that are silicone-free:
1. Enliven:
This is what I'm currently using. I adore all variants of this conditioner – they work well, they moisturize my hair well, and they're great for co-washing. Not locally made, but imported from England. I have already reviewed them on IMBB, Rs. 160 for 400 mL.
2. TBS Rainforest:
I have heard that this range is silicone free. I've never used this conditioner, though, because, for one, everytime I go to TBS, they somehow never have it in stock. 🙁 Another thing, it works out kind of expensive, considering I co-wash everyday, and thus end up using a LOT of conditioner every single day. I do not know where these are manufactured. Rs. 695 for 400 ml. This has been reviewed on IMBB too.
3. Revlon Flex:
I didn't like this one. First, it smells weird. It's not a bad smell, per se, and of course it is purely personal preference, but I detest the smell. It isn't unbearable, but when I have the option to not use it, I definitely grab it! Second (and more important), it made my hair dry. This is probably due to the panthenol in it (remember I said that my hair doesn't need protein, and too much protein can make hair dry and brittle?) I can't find any other ingredient that I could blame for this, so it's probably the protein. And yes, they do mention "Protein Power" or something on the pack, but I just had to try it out to see how it worked. :toothygrin: This is manufactured in Rudrapur, and it is Rs.140 for 592 mL. This can be ordered online also.
4. Alberto VO5:
This one is something I very badly want, but it is unfortunately unavailable as of now, in my city. Very effective and they have lovely variants! Not manufactured in India; imported from outside. Around Rs. 200.
5. Suave:
Suave Naturals too has wonderful conditioners full of good stuff in them. Again, not available in my city. Not manufactured in India; imported from outside. I've never tried this, but many trusted sources say they're good.
6. Matrix Biolage:
Thanks to Jabberwocky for suggesting this one! I poked around the internet, and yes, people say that this range is silicone-free. Unfortunately, I tried looking literally everywhere for this, but just couldn't find it. I don't know where this is manufactured, and I've no idea of the price.
Expensive doesn't mean good always and cheap needn't mean bad. For instance, most of the conditioners above are very low priced, but they have good ingredients and work very well.
Final Thoughts:
When I say avoid silicones, you must follow that only if its build-up is causing you problems. By problems, I mean something you do not want your hair to do, like frizz up, or go limp on you. Always look at ingredients, and see how your hair is reacting to what you're doing to it. If silicones work for you, by all means, use them. If they don't, now you know why 🙂 There may be certain ingredients that people say are 'safe', and scientifically, they're 'good' for your hair, but your hair doesn't like them so much and frizzes out in defiance. Well, then, you must stop using those ingredients, and must only use those your hair is okay with.
If you use the right ingredients, do your hair the right way and expose your hair to minimal damage, your hair should be absolutely free of frizz, should be soft and healthy and shouldn't be rough or coarse, AND it should feel the same way even without any product in there (with allowances for frizz that's caused by curls separating from each other).
You will also find that as time goes by and your hair regains its health, you'll be needing a lesser amount of conditioner.
The science applies to all kinds of hair – whether straight or curly. However, since curly hair needs more moisture as compared to straighter hair, this routine of avoiding sulphates (and thus silicones) will help your hair immensely.
If what you're doing already is working, go ahead. If it isn't, maybe give this whole article a chance and see what your hair surprises you with!
Stay beautiful!
Image Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12.
Fab India Aloe Vera Protein Conditioner
Biotique Bio Watercress Fresh Nourishing Conditioner
L'Oreal Total Repair 5 Shampoo and Conditioner
Shampoo & Conditioner for Damaged Hair : Ask IMBB
Boots Seawood Conditioner
Avon Advance Techniques Moisture Sleek Smoothing Conditioner
The Body Shop Rainforest Shine Conditioner
Khadi Herbal Hair Conditioner with Vanilla and Honey
L'Oreal Nutri-Gloss Conditioner
Oriflame Hairx Daily Care Leave-in Conditioner
Sunsilk Hair Fall Solution Shampoo and Conditioner
Dove Intense Damage Therapy- Shampoo and Conditioner
Richfeel Scalp Cleanser Shampoo and Conditioner
Revlon Aqua Marine Hair Conditioner
Himalaya Hair Detangler and Conditioner
Schwarzkopf Repair Rescue Conditioner
Lush NEW! Shampoo Bar and American Cream Conditioner
The Body Shop Olive Glossing Shampoo and Conditioner
Kiehl's Olive Fruit Oil Nourishing Shampoo + Conditioner
Dove Daily Shine Therapy with Advanced Serum Shampoo + Conditioner
Oriflame White Nettle & Papaya 2- in- 1 Anti-Dandruff Shampoo & Conditioner


text:
Tips for Finding Foreign Films using the Library Catalog
I will admit it, creating a list of foreign films using the library's catalog can be a frustrating experience for many patrons; however, it can be done and it is simpler than you might think. Here are some tips to help you generate a list of foreign films in various languages.
Step 1: make sure you are using the "Keyword" search option of the catalog. This is the default option for the catalog.
Step 2: Enter as your keyword terms the words "motion pictures" followed by the country (not the language) in which the films you are looking for were produced. For example, to find French films you would enter the terms "motion pictures France" . The one exception to this rule is our Spanish language films which can be found using the term "Spanish"
Step 3: in the "Search by" field, using the pull down menu select the term "subject"
Step 4: in the "Limit by" field, using the pull down menu select the term "DVD"
Step 5: hit enter or select "go."
In most cases this should generate a list of films produced in the country you selected and in language or languages spoken in that country. Below I have created links for some of the more commonly asked for foreign films.
French Japanese Hindi and other Indian Laguages Chinese Spanish


text:
Saving lives – and billions – in Afghanistan
The Merkley amendment to withdraw troops will save American lives and money – and it's in line with public opinion.
The Merkley proposal could save $200bn by ending operations in Afghanistan two years early [EPA] |
Washington, DC – If Senator Jeff Merkley's "expedite the drawdown from Afghanistan" amendment to the National Defense Authorisation Act makes a strong showing, it could tip the Obama administration towards a faster drawdown.
That would likely save hundreds of US and Afghan lives – not to mention all the people who wouldn't be physically and psychologically maimed – and could easily save the US hundreds of billions of dollars, at a time when the alleged need for fiscal austerity is being touted as a reason to cut Social Security benefits and raise the Medicare retirement age.
Everyone knows the Hippocratic Oath: "First, do no harm." It's a great motto to try to live by. But, unfortunately, in this life on Earth, "do no harm" isn't always on the menu at the restaurant. Sometimes, you're already doing harm, and there's no feasible immediate path to zero harm. Sometimes the best you can do in the short run is to reduce the harm as much as possible. And if that's the best you can do, then that is what you must do. It's not politically feasible, unfortunately, to end the war tomorrow.
But we could take a big bite out of it in the next week. And that would save many lives and real money. [If you are a US citizen, you can ask your senators to co-sponsor the Merkley amendment here.] Merkley's amendment (#1174) says:
1) The president should expedite the transition of security responsibility to the government of Afghanistan;
2) The president shall devise a plan for expediting the drawdown of US combat troops in Afghanistan and accelerating the transfer of security authority to Afghan authorities prior to December 2014; and
3) Within 90 days, the president shall transmit to Congress a plan with a timetable and completion date for the accelerated transition of all military and security operations in Afghanistan to the government of Afghanistan.
Current co-sponsors of Merkley's amendment include: Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM), Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA).
Who is most likely to join these eight senators in supporting the Merkley amendment? One logical starting point is the 19 other senators, besides these eight, who signed Merkley's letter to President Obama in June calling for a "sizable and sustained" drawdown of forces: Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO), Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND), Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR).
Beyond these twenty-seven, there are other Senators who have questioned the wisdom of keeping so many troops in Afghanistan.
Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), the ranking Republican on Senate Foreign Relations, said in May: "It is exceedingly difficult to conclude that our vast expenditures in Afghanistan represent a rational allocation of our military and financial assets." The Republican presidential contest is revealing that, outside of the Beltway, most Republicans are not that jazzed about keeping a hundred thousand US troops in Afghanistan. The Merkley amendment gives us an opportunity to test whether we can induce more Republican senators to respond to Republican public opinion.
In a New York Times op-ed in July, Sens. Merkley, Paul, and Udall called for withdrawing all regular combat troops by the end of 2012, instead of by the end of 2014. The official US death figures for 2009, 2010, and 2011 are 317, 499, and 396 (so far). Shortening the war by two years could easily save a thousand American lives. At more than $100bn a year, shortening the war by two years could easily save $200bn (that's just current expenditures – it doesn't count the future cost of veterans' health care, for example.) $200bn is 1/6 of the debt reduction target of the Supercommittee, so that's real money.
Which would you rather do: cut Social Security benefits and raise the Medicare retirement age, or shorten the war in Afghanistan by two years?
Say what you want about President Obama; the decisions to withdraw uniformed troops from Iraq in compliance with the SOFA agreement and to delay the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline show that he moves in response to pressure from public opinion. Why should we let more American boys and girls die for no reason, if we can stop it? Urge your Senators to support the Merkley amendment.
Robert Naiman is Policy Director at Just Foreign Policy.
The views expressed in this article are the authors' own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.