text:
Hi Doctor,
You do a wonderful service here and I have question regarding an eposure at a strip club in SF. I received an uprotected blowjob and did rapid test bout 14 weeks after the exposure which was negative. Can I take this as conclusive and do a woohooo? I see in some of your answers you say test at 3 and 6 months. For this exposure I see you say 13 weeks is definitive SO is my 14 week test conclusive can I woohooo and move on from this.
I would consider your negative rapid HIV test at 14 weeks post-blowjob by a Bouncing Bertha at the Badda Bing in SF to be conclusive, definitive and WOO-HOO-able. The option to test again at six months is always open to you, but I do not feel it is necessary or warranted.
As for the ongoing discussion (and confusion) surrounding the HIV window period (six weeks v. three months v. six months), I've discussed this topic frequently in this forum. I'll repost below a small sample of what can be found in the archives.
Be well.
Dr. Bob
Captain Pee Pee, Poo Poo (3 MONTHS VERSUS 6 MONTHS 2009) Jul 1, 2009
Your awesome!
I just wanted to know what generation the BioRad HIV 1/2 with O was, as I can't seem to find the answer from the laboratory who uses it. At three months, is it comparable to an Oraquick Advance?
Also, only if you want to answer this, what causes seroconversion past three months? Should we all test until 6 months to be 100 percent positive?
My risk came from a one time unprotected vaginal exposure I had with a prostitute in New York.
Captain Pee Pee, Poo Poo
P.S. I love you!
Response from Dr. Frascino
Hi Captain Pee Pee, Poo Poo,
The BioRad HIV 1/2 and O is considered a third generation HIV-antibody assay (very accurate and sensitive).
Are the BioRad 1/2 and O comparable to an OraQuick Advance Test? Yes, it is.
As for reasons for seroconversion beyond three months and whether someone should test out to six months, I've discussed these topics ad nauseum. Consequently I'll refer you to the archives for that information. I have nothing new to add to the discussion or to what I previously said. I'm trying hard not to become "The Department of Redundancy Department." I'll reprint a small sample below of what you can find in the archives.
Finally Pee Pee, Poo Poo, we need to seriously consider doing something a bout your name!
Love you too Poo!
Dr. Bob
Big weenie guy once again (6 WEEKS VS 3 MONTHS VS 6 MONTHS, 2009) May 26, 2009
Dr.Bob, hope you remember me. I have a 2 questions for you. 1. I had protected sex with a retired transexual porn actress. Came to find out she also escorts. I don't know if condom broke or not but I did test at 45 days, test came back negative. I have read that New York and State Of Mass have adopted the 6 week test as conclusive. What do you think about this? My next question is this. I had sex with a transexual model who I also found out escorts. Condom was used and this time I did check it, not broken. The only thing is there was blood everywhere. When I washed up I accidently wiped my penis head and under my penis head with the same paper towel that had blood on it. The blood was then on my foreskin and under my penis head, not sure if I actually got the blood on me, but I did rub it all over my penis head. About a month later after this I started getting diarrhea, nausea, cough and I did vomit. I still feel sick after a week of coming down with this. Any risk from that? I'm nervous as hell. Your answer is deeply appreciated. I have sent several donations already and still will. Thanks Dr.Stud
Response from Dr. Frascino
Welcome back to the forum. I'll bet you think that putting "Big Weenie" in the title of your post would make it more likely that I would respond, right? Well, as you can see, your thinly veiled strategy actually worked.
Were you actually surprised to discover that a retired transsexual porn actress and a transsexual model turned out to be escorts? It seems to me all one would need is a keen sense of the obvious to come to such a conclusion.
Regarding your trannyshacking sexcapade #1, assuming you used a latex (or polyurethane) condom properly and it did not break, your HIV-acquisition risk would be essentially nonexistent. A negative test at 45 days is extremely encouraging but not yet definitive based on the U.S. testing guidelines. Yes, I'm aware of the New York State and Massachusetts guidelines; however, these have not yet been universally (or even nationally) accepted. Also, the specific type of HIV-screening test performed at various locations around the country (and the world) varies considerably. For the time being I continue to support the national guidelines. (See below.)
Turning now to trannyshack sexperience #2, if fresh blood came into contact with your foreskin and/or urethra (pee hole), HIV testing would be warranted at the three-month mark. Symptoms, as your previous experience should have taught you (see below), are notoriously unreliable. The only reason to worry about HIV or to consider HIV testing is HIV-exposure risk!
Thanks for your post and continuing support of the Robert James Frascino AIDS Foundation (www.concertedeffort.org). In return I'm sending you my good-luck karma that your definitive three-month HIV test is negative.
Good luck. Be well.
Dr. Bob
if Dr. Bob was French... ? (SIX WEEKS VERSUS THREE MONTH HIV TESTS) Feb 10, 2009
Doctor Bob,
suppose for a minute you were French - or just being in doctor in France. The authorities there consider an Antibody/Antigen test conclusive at 6 weeks. (For standard Ab tests, they say 3 months, like CDC). Ok. Now, someone asks you in this forum, is a 6-week Ab/Ag test conclusive? Do you still reply that only a 3-month test is conclusive?
(My exposure: wild making out with another guy - but no penetration of any kind (neither oral nor anal). We did however deep kissed and tight embracing while naked, in the possible presence of cuts on our bodies. Got an 8-week negative Ab/Ag test).
Would French Dr.Bob advise me to retest? What about the real Dr.Bob?!
Thank you. You're an awesome person.
Response from Dr. Frascino
Bonjour Monsieur Dan!
Je parle la langue de Molière. Alors, peut-être je suis français !!!??
My job as "Dr. Bob," whether French, Italian or Zimbabwean, is to provide science-based factual information. I'm really not here to criticize or support one set of guidelines versus another. Also, guidelines are only that: "guide"-lines. They are not absolutes. For instance, if someone decides to calculate three months as 90 days (3 months x 30 days) rather than 84 days (7 days x 12 weeks), does that make his method more accurate or definitive than the other? And of course if someone is comfortable with an 84-day test result, what about a negative test at 83 days? If I were to say 83 days is fine, then someone would write in immediately and ask about 82.5 days, etc., etc., etc.
That was a longwinded introduction to a specific answer to your question. I don't make the guidelines and I have no reason to criticize the French guidelines. Obviously those who devised and approved these guidelines have sufficient data using their specific type of combination HIV-antibody plus HIV p24 antigen tests to support their recommendations. One of the reasons I cannot/do not generalize this recommendation is that all the eyeballs currently reading this response do not reside in France. HIV testing is not exactly the same worldwide. The availability of different generations of HIV tests varies considerably from place to place. So if you and I were both in Paris, I would advise if the French guidelines suggest a six-week "test" is conclusive, then a six-week test is conclusive; however, I would also advise many other published guidelines recommend a three month test for a definitive result. I would then review the level of HIV risk and make a recommendation for the specific situation. The patient, of course, always has the option to retest at three months or six months (old guidelines), if he so desires. That said, if you showed up in my office in Paris, San Francisco or Zimbabwe with a risk of "wild making out with another guy but with no penetration of any kind . . ." I would advise "A l'aise Blaise," (in Paris) "Relax Max" (in San Francisco) or "whatever relax is in Ndebele, the language of Zimbabwe" (in Chitungwiza), your HIV risk is nonexistent and HIV testing of any type is not warranted medically. The only reason to consider testing is a psychological one: to put your unwarranted HIV fears permanently to rest.
Hope that helps.
Dr. Bob
Ever retracted a WOO HOO? UK HIV advisor (3 MONTHS VERSUS 6 MONTHS) May 2, 2009
Doctor Bob,
I have noticed a bit of an anomaly in the window period advice you give different people. The way I read some of your recent answers is that a 12 week test is 'no way, no how' conclusive if you're not aware that your sleeping partner has HIV. But if he/she does have HIV you always write 'the CDC recommends a follow up at 6 months'. So what of those people who write to you unaware of their partner's status and are given a WOO HOO, then maybe find out a day later that they did in fact have HIV? Is the WOO HOO retracted? Is there any reason you would give them the absolute all clear if you thought that there was any way seroconversion could take up to six months? After all, you have advised in the past that we must all assume our partners are HIV postive, yet your responses don't assume this unless you are told by the questioner that their partner has HIV. As British HIV trust telephone advisors, myself and my colleagues continually field calls from worried people asking about the 'American 6 months window period' which they read about on the net, and immediately freak out about. We are trained to reply that 3 months is absolutely conclusive irrespective of whether the partner is confirmed to be HIV positive; provided a recent generation of test was taken. This is backed up by the observation that in over 12 years of the application of the 3 month rule in the UK and Europe, not once has it been shown to have failed. You have been asked about the 3 month rule in the UK before and replied: 'The CDC is a branch of the U.S. Government. Look at who we currently have at the helm. Do I need to say more? No, I thought not.
BRAVO to the UK HIV guidelines folks for their clear and concise statement. I wholeheartedly agree!
Yet your advice of a 6 month follow up does not 'wholeheartedly agree' with how we are trained to advise callers at all!
Ps apart from the occasional 6 month recommedations you give, which I suspect may be for CYA reasons, I think you do an absolutely fantastic job, and I have learned so much from reading your advice.
Response from Dr. Frascino
Hi British HIV Trust Telephone Advisors,
I receive a number of questions on a nearly continual basis asking for an absolute black-and-white answer to this perennially confusing and often anxiety-provoking question. Unfortunately, like many things in the field of medicine (as in life) the truth has a grayish tinge. I certainly do not fault your guidelines or the consistent message you give to your British callers and I stand by previous statements about those guidelines. Just as I will stand by my statements concerning the eight-week cutoff guideline established in parts of Australia. (See below.) Have you received letters from the former penal colony (Oz) asking why you stick to three months while their data suggest eight weeks is definitive?? How are you going to reply to them when they do begin questioning you (if they haven't already)? I suppose you could state "that's what we are taught". Or you might quote a set of British guidelines that states three months is definitive. But that doesn't really answer the question, right?
Returning to your question I should point out your callers are primarily British citizens and you add the qualifying statement that three months is definitive "provided a recent generation of (the) test was taken." Your response is also going to one person and not the entire cyber universe. Approximately 1.5 million folks read my comments every month. Some of them may not have access to the latest generation of HIV tests. Many of them and presumably at least some of your callers may not know if the test they took was a "recent generation." Would a second generation test in Africa qualify?
It's also important to point out the immune system is not a calendar or a stopwatch. It doesn't tell time or count days. Immune integrity and the robustness of a specific immune response vary considerably from person to person for a whole host of reasons. Add to that variability in viral strains and you may begin to understand the black-and-white model is too inflexible to cover all contingencies when dealing with a worldwide audience.
The potential problem with setting a strict timeframe for a definitive result is that you might miss an infection in someone who takes a bit longer to seroconvert due to some type of extenuating circumstance not immediately identifiable in a format such as a question submitted over the Internet. The consequences of missing a true infection can, of course, be catastrophic. The consequences of someone getting an additional (perhaps unwarranted) test at six months are inconvenience and additional cost. The reason I stipulate that the CDC recommends an additional follow-up test at the six-month mark for individuals who have had a significant exposure to someone confirmed to be HIV positive is that it is exactly what their current guidelines recommend. However, for the extremely common worried-well questioner ("grandma farted in her Barcalounger, could I catch AIDS?") certainly a test at three months is more than sufficient. Testing these folks out to six months is a waste of resources. Many of them, of course, don't need any testing but until they see their negative results they are absolute basket cases. Similarly all the folks who have a paper cut and touched a stripper while cheating on their wife or jacked off a closeted gay Republican in an airport restroom on their way to Bible class demand some type of closure that their minimal to nonexistent exposure isn't going to kill them (often their guilt is the real problem). And although my comments may appear at first glance to be contradictory, in essence they are not. I give my personal opinion based on facts established in large epidemiological studies and also include the CDC's current stance on special circumstances where the potential risk is theoretically somewhat higher (confirmed significant exposure). This six-month recommendation also applies to occupational exposures in healthcare settings.
The important thing to remember here is that because the actual amount of virus circulating in the blood is relatively small, we are not measuring it directly but rather indirectly by assaying for anti-HIV antibodies. These are the immune system's response to being invaded by HIV. It's a more complex concept than most questioners (or even HIV counselors) realize. It would be much easier for me to ascertain the true level of risk and validity of a test result if I had the patient in my office where I could ask questions and see exactly what test assay was performed. Unfortunately that is not the case. Consequently I choose my words carefully and attempt to give the wisest answer to an individual that also won't be misinterpreted by the millions of worried eyeballs scanning for information to apply to their own unique situation.
I hope that helps settle the confusion. Maybe not. But that's my story and I'm sticking to it (at last for now).
Take good care mates and keep up the great work across the pond.
Dr. Bob
AltaMed Conflicting (3 MONTHS VS 6 MONTHS, 2009) Mar 14, 2009
I recently spoke to 2 altamed hiv counselors, and they both said 6 months is the appropriate time to have a test done. They use OraQuick Advance.
I remember going in the summer time, and they said 3 months. Did standards change recently for that specific test?
I also read a post that you said "An extremely small number of people who are HIV infected will have negative OraQuick Advance test results." Then in another post you said "The OraQuick Advance rapid tests (oral fluid and finger prick) are very accurate."
I'm just a bit confused with that, as well as the window period of being 3 months or 6?
Donation will be sent to The Robert James Franscino AIDS Foundation!! Thanks for your help, you're amazing :)
Response from Dr. Frascino
I realize this topic can be quite confusing. Here's what we know. The majority HIV-infected folks will have detectable levels of anti-HIV antibodies their blood (therefore will test HIV positive) within two to eight weeks after primary HIV infection. Large epidemiological studies have shown at least 97% test positive within three months and virtually 100% within six months. Since these observational studies were done, there have been improvements in the HIV testing techniques, such that many guidelines now consider a negative HIV-antibody test at three months to be "conclusive". Certainly the option of retesting at six months remains open to all and is even recommended in some situations (occupational exposure, for example). I'll reprint some information from the archives that addresses this topic. See below.
Dr. Bob
the 3 month mark (3 MONTHS VS. 6 MONTHS) Mar 5, 2008
Hello DR...I get mixed answers to my question and was hoping you could help. Is the definitive mark 3 months after possible exposure to get tested or six months? Thanks in advance
Response from Dr. Frascino
I know this seems like a straightforward question, but the answer unfortunately is not always quite so straightforward. See below.
Dr. Bob
HIV Testing (3 MONTHS VS, 6 MONTHS TESTING ) Jan 17, 2007
Hello to my favorite doctor in the world,
I have a question about HIV testing. In a couple recent posts, such as the one titled "Just Diagnosed - Partner at Risk," you recommended testing at 3 and 6 months.
In most of the other posts, however, you state that a test a 3 months is considered conclusive.
If a test at 3 months is indeed conclusive, shouldn't it be so for everybody, regardless of the situation?
I am sure that you have a good reason for these recommendations. I am just hoping that you will help me to understand it.
Thank you Dr. Bob
Response from Dr. Frascino
This is really a QTND (question that never ideas) and as such has an ATNC (answer that never changes). I'll reprint a post from the archives that addresses your concern.
Dr. Bob
Again with the 3/6 Months Dec 15, 2006
Dr. Bob -
I have found that although I tested negative at the 3-month mark, my anxiety is creeping back. Part of that for me is the on-and-off diarrhea that I am experiencing; my other "symptoms" have all resolved.
So, I just read your response to the guy who had 4 unprotected encounters and your wishing him well at his 6-month test; this was the first I've ever heard you put so much emphasis on the 6-month follow-up.
My activity was low- risk (receptive oral/no ejac. and frottage), but I'm thinkin', "Hey, Dr. Bob's backing off on his 3-month woo-hoos." It seems to me that either the 3-month test is conclusive or it's not, regardless of the activity that preceded it. Participating in risky activity should not affect whether one is a late seroconverter or not. Reminds me of the term "fuzzy math."
Freaking again,
Response from Dr. Frascino
Hello Freaking-Again Mike,
My opinion on testing has not changed, nor is it as black and white as you might have imagined. I'll repost a question from the archives that's several years old that hopefully will clear up any confusion and show you my opinion really hasn't changed.
Regarding your situation, I would consider your negative three-month test definitive and conclusive, OK?
Stop worrying. Return to WOO-HOOing.
Happy Holidays.
Dr. Bob
Window Period Sep 6, 2006
Dear Dr. Frascino: I just recently made a contribution to your foundation. The only reason I mention it, is to encourage others to do so. Your work on this site and elsewhere is greatly appreciated and should be recognized.
My question is regarding window periods. I had an incident in April that put me at risk for HIV (relatively low). I was tested at three weeks, six weeks, and again after 16 weeks. Why is it that some people reccommend a definitive test after three months and others suggest that you need to wait for six months. Is my test at 4 months conclusive or should I go again at six months.
Also, what is the difference between the blood tests I got the first two times from my doctor, and the oral test I received at a clinic after 16 weeks (I couldn't wait for the blood test to come back, the 20 minute window helped my peace of mind).
Thank you!
Response from Dr. Frascino
Thanks for your donation! (www.concertedeffort.org)
The three-month versus six-month question is definitely a QTND (question that never dies). I have tried to explain this conundrum many times in the past; however, I do realize it continues to be a source of confusion and worry for folks. I'll reprint just one of my attempts at explaining the rationale for the three-month window period below. If you're an avid forum reader, you might have noticed the current controversy has now been focusing on six weeks versus three months! You can catch up on that discussion in the archives, if you're interested.
Regarding the differences between tests, again this has been addressed many times in the archives. Have a look. The FDA-approved rapid tests are both accurate and reliable. We use them at the Frascino Medical Group (650-917-1357) on a daily basis.
Congratulations on your negative 16-week test. It is definitive, conclusive and WOO-HOO-able.
Stay well.
Dr. Bob
Robert James, this is your Mother talking Jul 26, 2004 okay so I am not your mother, but I do need some advice. You have said over and over if you think you were exposed test at 3 months, but you also say if you know you were exposed test to 6 months??? What gives? Don't quote the CDC. I want you to be straight with me, (there is a joke in there) Why are you not consistent? 3 months if I think and 6 months if I know! What is your opinion? I have had the works when it comes to symptoms and was diagnosed for 1 STD, all are gone except for the PN. This after a 1 time insertive exposure with a female who I fear has HIV. I had a neg elisa at 5 months. Do I need another test or not? And why the 3 or 6 months answers? P.S. and don't be straight the world loves you the way you are!
Response from Dr. Frascino
Hello Not My Mother, I do realize this issue is more than a bit confusing, so let me try once again to explain the rationale behind our advice. The question seems simple enough: three months or six months for a definitive result. The answer, however, is far from "straight" forward. The confusion results from variability in the immune response (time to produce anti-HIV antibodies) which is different from person to person, limitations in the test's sensitivity and specificity (ability of the test to pick up all true positives or eliminate all true negatives), and clinical judgment. In addition, there are special circumstances where our general recommendations for testing might not be applicable. For instance, when folks are simultaneous exposed to hepatitis C and HIV or when folks have previously received experimental HIV vaccines, consultation with an HIV specialist is often required to provide guidance on when to test and how to interpret the test results. Added to his are many very anxious folks who are absolutely certain they have contracted HIV, but in reality, have no identifiable risk. You know the type: "Grandma farted while trying to get out of her Barco-lounger chair. It smelled worse than usual. Now I'm convinced I've got AIDS." Of course, these folks require basic HIV prevention counseling and education, not HIV testing. But that doesn't stop them from getting tested "just to be sure," etc. So what would the answer be to these folks' "three months versus six months" question? In reality, neither, since they didn't need testing in the first place. And what about folks with some degree of potential ongoing exposure? How do we monitor their HIV status? So you can see this is not as straight forward as you might originally think. OK, back to your questions. The best I can do is take all the information provided to me from an individual questioner, apply the information concerning the limitations of HIV testing, the results of large-scale epidemiological studies, and the scientific facts pertaining to how HIV is transmitted, and then give the questioner my expert opinion and advice. Whether that person chooses to accept my advice or follow my recommendations is, of course, totally up to him or her. The reason I quote the CDC's published guidelines is that they are perhaps the most conservative set of published and well-referenced recommendations I have seen. So what can I, in good conscience and backed by science, advise? I can say that following a single possible or known exposure, the vast majority of infected persons will develop detectable HIV antibodies within three months of exposure. If the initial negative HIV test was performed within the first three months after exposure, repeat testing should be done at three or more months to rule out the possibility of a false-negative result within the window period. If the ELISA test is negative at three months or more after an exposure, the individual is extremely likely to be HIV negative. This is all based on statistical risk analysis and large-scale epidemiological studies. Now comes the confusing part. If a person was significantly exposed to a known HIV-infected person, the estimated statistical risks change and a second repeat test "might" be considered at six months or more from the exposure depending on the circumstances. And yes, there are very rare reports of seroconversion 6-12 months after a known exposure. The exact details of these very rare historical cases are a bit sketchy, but the reports do indeed exist in the medical literature. Today, however, extended follow-up testing beyond six months after exposure to rule out the extremely rare possibility of delayed seroconversion is not recommended, except under exceedingly rare circumstances that should be based on the clinical judgment of an HIV specialist. I realize some folks may find this response unsatisfying and perhaps unsettling. However, I'm here to provide you with the best confirmed scientific knowledge that we have, and that's the extent of our knowledge at this time. I'm also here to provide you with an expert opinion about that science. So let's proceed "straight ahead" (or should that be "gaily forward?") to your question. I would consider a negative ELISA test at five months following a "1 time insertive exposure with a female" of unknown HIV status to be definitive. I would not recommend additional testing. However, as always, the choice to follow my advice or not is totally up to you, whether you are my mother or not.
Good luck.
Dr. Bob
Big Weenie guy again Mar 20, 2008
HI BOB... I just called my for my home access test results. I know it wasn't six months but I took the the test at five months, results were negative... Can I celebrate? or do I have to wait one more month. My exposure was real... Topped an hiv positive tranny with broken condom. I just want to feel better.
I got my sisters to donate to your charity and other HIV charities instead of our usual charities.I want to do all I can to help with this. Volunteer or whatever it takes. I will donate on a monthly basis $20. I know it's not much but the way I see it if 20,000 of us give $20 a month thats quite a large amount. I wish you the best with your health and relationship. You are one a kind you're partner is lucky to have you. I know you are lucky to have him too because of the way you talk about him. Thank you sir and I will continue to have safe sex always. NO matter how horny I am. Your message wont be lost on me. Big hugs from me and my sisters.
Response from Dr. Frascino
Hi Big-Weenie Guy,
Welcome back to the forum. (Big Weenies are always welcome here.) A negative Home Access at five months is extremely, extremely encouraging, but not quite "WOO-HOOable," based on current U.S. testing guidelines. (However it may be worth noting that if you lived in Australia, the guidelines there would advise you are definitively negative.) There is no doubt that the vast majority of those infected with HIV will have detectable levels of anti-HIV antibodies in their blood by four to six weeks. Extremely rarely, seroconversion is delayed out to beyond three months. Improved testing techniques are allowing us to pick up anti-HIV antibodies earlier. However, the guidelines are the guidelines and the U.S. guidelines have not been revised for quite some time. So if you want to be U. S. guideline-certified WOO-HOOable, you'll need to get one additional test at the six-month mark. Can you celebrate now? Sure, I'm quite confident your definitive six-month test will remain negative. So buy the champagne, put it in the ice bucket and start practicing your WOO-HOO yell. Keep the bubbly and your celebratory yell on ice for just a few more weeks, but rest assured you'll be popping that cork and screaming WOO-HOO like a banshee in heat very soon, OK?
Thank you (and your sister) for their donations to the Robert James Frascino AIDS Foundation. Wow, if the foundation received $20 per month from 20,000 of you, we could indeed work miracles!
I'm sending you my very best good-luck/good-health karma. (It's never failed yet!)
Good luck.
Dr. Bob
Big weenie guy again. Feb 10, 2008
Thank you Doctor for your response. Made my wait a little easier. I just wanted to add other physical symptoms I had during my first 2 to 7 weeks after exposure. I had severe dandruff and dry itchy skin everywhere. My skin was flaky and I even got a flaky dry looking rash on my arm near my shoulder, it was the size of a quarter. Muscle twitching all over and I even had a blood blister looking thing in my mouth which disappeared the next day.Ear ache also. My stress, anxiety and depression were awfully high during those weeks. I never had these things happen to me in my life. Adding these symptoms do you still stand on your first comment about it not being worried some of ARS? Can my stress and depression make me have sudden physical symptoms like these. Skin changes and joint pain that I never had before. Don't worry Doc I will get tested soon so please don't sugar coat your response. I'd like to apologize for the morons that write to you and come out saying insensitive stuff like, I will kill myself if I have HIV. They don't know any better sir. You are one of a kind and I hope you live a long life and keep giving hope and advice to everyone. Keep on smiling...
Response from Dr. Frascino
Hi Big Weenie Guy,
I stand by my initial comments, with or without sugar coating.
Dr. Bob
My big weenie got me in trouble...I think Feb 1, 2008
I wont start by kissing your ass. You already know how cool you are. This will be my third time I submit this to you, hopefully third time is the charm. About two and half months ago I had insertive anal sex with a hiv positive tranny. I did use the condom but when I finished the condom had a hole right about where my crown starts. Dont know if my urethra was exposed but the hole was close to it. I didn't know his status until like one week after. My symptoms started about 2 weeks after. It all started with several bumps on my butt that itched I think. Followed by joint pain and stiff neck for about 5 days. Never in my life haave I ever had joint paint so this one scares me. I didn't have a fever at all. I had about one or two nights of sweating. When these pains went away I developed an itchy throat. Slight cough came with it. I had nasal congestion and runny nose too. This lasted about one week . After I got over this I started getting headaches for about 4 days. They were in the back of my head. Again no fever at all during these symptoms. When my headaches went away I noticed mouth ulcers, about two. I don't think I ever had a rash through all this but I did have folliculitis. I still do actually. I had several bumps on my arms that itched really bad. They look like goosebumps but itch.Don't think I had swollen lymph nodes either. I did have pains in my armpits and in my abs. About two days of diarrhea. Never had fever. I know symptoms are not a way to tell if I was infected by this person. Just want to know if this sounds like ARS? I don't know if I saw any blood but I was drunk so I can't say. Does having a big member increase my risk. I am not huge but I am big. I model for a living so my looks are kind of important. I hope to hear something from you before I go test. I will get my 3 month test in about two to three weeks. I have not tested yet at all. I didn't even know of PEP before this. Thank you kind sir. Looking forward to your response Doc. A donation will come soon. Hope that you live many more years of happiness with your man. One of your biggest fans saying thanks y sigue tenendio ese sexo tan bueno de que tanto hablas.
Response from Dr. Frascino
Hi Big Weenie Guy,
Say, you wouldn't happen to be the 2xist underwear hottie, would you? Or perhaps one of those amazing "International Male" catalogue guys??? (The catalogue that everyone gets, but from which no one would every purchase anything. Great looking models, but anyone else wearing those fashions would have to be gay enough to bottom for Liberace.) OK, back to your question. Insertive anal sex with a positive tranny and broken condom does put you at some degree of risk for STDs, including HIV. The array of symptoms you describe ("several bumps on my butt that itched I think," etc.) are not worrisome for HIV ARS (acute retroviral syndrome). However, because the condom failed, HIV testing is definitely warranted. Symptoms in and of themselves are notoriously unreliable in determining who is and is not HIV infected. The reason to worry and/or test is HIV risk. Your broken-condom, poz-tranny, backdoor-action sexcapade does have risk associated with it, so testing is certainly recommended.
Does having a big member increase your risk? Well, would that be big as in "big as a beer can" or big as in "needs its own zip code?" Having an Italian-sized salami may certainly increase your odds of getting laid, but it does not increase your odds of getting HIV relative to those of your average small-dicked Republican.
Thank you for your donation to the Robert James Frascino AIDS Foundation (www.concertedeffort.org). In return I'm sending you my best good-luck/good-health karma that your definitive HIV tests are negative. Also you might want to try Magnum condoms in the gold foil wrap. They're made for Italians and those with Italian-sized equipment.
Good luck!
Dr. Bob


text:
Glen Gulutzan happy to return 'home' with Canucks
Dallas Stars head coach Glen Gulutzan speaks to players on the bench during NHL training camp in Frisco, Texas, Tuesday, Jan. 15, 2013.
Photograph by: ... , AP
VANCOUVER — Glen Gulutzan will be the voice of Western Canada on the new Vancouver Canucks' coaching staff.
Gulutzan was born in The Pas, Man., but raised in Hudson Bay, Sask. He played junior for the Moose Jaw Warriors, Brandon Wheat Kings, Saskatoon Blades and then university hockey for the Saskatchewan Huskies.
He joins a staff that includes a head coach from Boston (John Tortorella), an assistant coach from Marshfield, Mass. (Mike Sullivan), a goalie coach from Moncton (Rollie Melanson) and a video coach from Newfoundland (Darryl Williams).
Gulutzan is a father of four – three girls and one boy between the ages of 6-12 – and they all play hockey. Moving to Canada from Dallas, where Gulutzan was the Stars head coach the last two seasons, has the whole family fired up.
"I've been down in the United States for a very long time and my wife, who is Canadian, and my four kids are really excited about coming back to Canada," Gulutzan said Wednesday. "It's going to be something neat for our family."
Gulutzan will be a true newcomer to the five-man group that will be guiding the Canucks in 2013-14. Tortorella and Sullivan were together with the New York Rangers for four seasons and, prior to that, for a year in Tampa. Melanson and Williams have coached together in Vancouver for three years.
Gulutzan, 42, isn't yet certain what his defined role will be on the staff.
"I think Sully will be looking after the defence and I'll be working with the forwards and maybe the power play and penalty kill, or maybe we'll split those duties," he said. "We've talked about it a little but the three of us haven't sat down and finalized anything yet. The Canucks are a very exciting team to be a part of."
Sullivan, 45, has two college-age children and one in high school. As a player, he spent most of his career out west skating for the San Jose Sharks, Calgary Flames and Phoenix Coyotes. He was the Boston Bruins head coach for two seasons, in 2003-04 and 2005-06.
"Obviously it's an exciting opportunity for us when you look at the team," Sullivan said. "It's a terrific team. As a player in Calgary, we had a great rivalry with the Canucks so I know about the market. I've worked with Torts for a few years now and he obviously respects what I bring to the table."
Commented Tortorella: "Mike and I have been together for quite a bit and I think we're looking for another coach to join us with some fresh ideas. I think Glen is going to bring that."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Annual competition has moved from Del Mar to Valley Center
Is your hound homely? Your pug pathetic?
Then load him into the car on Sunday and head over to Bates Nut Farm, where he'll be in very good company.
This weekend, the Kiwanis Club of Del Mar hosts its 18th annual Ugly Dog Contest. But this year, it is being presented for the first time outside of Del Mar. Organizers have moved the long-running show east to Valley Center because it's more affordable and more accessible.
For its first 17 years, the Ugly Dog Contest was held at the Del Mar Fairgrounds, because the contest's founder, Sheila McDonnell, was a fairgrounds employee and got a $3,800 discount when booking the venue. But when McDonnell passed away a week before last year's event, the discount evaporated and the Kiwanis Club can no longer afford the venue.
"It's a family event, and it was getting too expensive for people to participate. The parking at the fairgrounds is $10 now, and parking at Bates is free. Plus, Bates is so open and pretty," said Leslie Jackson, president of Kiwanis Club of Del Mar and chair of the San Diego Coastal Chamber of Commerce (which is co-sponsoring this year's contest).
Jackson said the new inland North County location is also more accessible for drivers who come down from Riverside County and other Northern California locations.
"When Sheila started the contest, we thought it would just be a Del Mar thing with some local high-end dogs, but now we get people from all over the state who come to show," Jackson said.
The contest is expected to draw between 1,500 and 2,000 people, as well as a couple hundred dogs that range from cute to cringe-worthy.
Rascal, a hair- and dentally challenged Chinese crested owned by Dane Andrew of Sunnyvale, will once again surrender his crown (Rascal won in both 2010 and 2012) to a new canine eyesore in a contest that will be emceed by CBS newsman Larry Himmel.
Although the Ugly Dog category draws 45-50 contestants, there are plenty of other categories for canines that aren't as beauty-challenged. There's also the Cutest Dog (adult and child categories), Best Trick, Best Mutt, Dog Who Looks Like Its Owner, Most Unusual Markings, Cutest Puppy, Most Beautiful Female, Most Handsome Male, and Best Costume (adult and child categories). Preregistration is available online.
New this year is the Kiwanis Mascot category, where each of the Kiwanis clubs in the local district will enter a dog to compete for the role of district mascot, Jackson said.
To compete, dog owners should check in between 10 and 11 a.m. Contests begin at 11:15 a.m. and continue through the day. Owners can enter their dogs in as many categories as they wish at a cost of $10 per category. Proceeds from the contest will benefit Rady's Childrens Hospital, Kiwanis Club of Del Mar and the San Diego Coastal Chamber of Commerce.
Jagger & Kristi of Magic 92.5 FM radio will broadcast live from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. and will hand out some prizes. Entertainment will be provided by the "Ugly Dog Band" (also known as the Cheeky Monkeys), and there will be a clown and face painting.
Ugly Dog Contest
When: 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. Sunday
Where: Bates Nut Farm, 15954 Woods Valley Road, Valley Center
Tickets: $12 adults; $8 children 10 and under
Phone: (858) 755-4844


text:
Sources / More info: http://ift.tt/1fI2L4H
We learned that our president and founder is considering running for office.
News and opinions from the Jane & Sheppard area of Metropolitan Toronto. The news will usually reflect the views of the Sheppard West Neighbourhood Association (http://sheppardwest.org). This blog may also feature at times guest views and opinions.


text:
Vitamin D is vital for calcium absorption in bones and to
improve muscle strength. Not getting enough vitamin D in childhood can slow
growth or cause misshapen bones (rickets), and not getting enough vitamin D
throughout life increases the risk for bone thinning (osteoporosis) in later
Many people can get the amount of vitamin D needed each day through food and sunlight. Vitamin D is in foods such as egg yolks,
liver, saltwater fish, and vitamin D-fortified dairy products. Vitamin D also
is available in supplements, often in combination with calcium.
Last Revised:
January 25, 2013
Healthwise Staff
Medical Review:
Kathleen Romito, MD - Family Medicine & Rhonda O'Brien, MS, RD, CDE - Certified Diabetes Educator
This information does not replace the advice of a doctor. Healthwise, Incorporated disclaims any warranty or liability for your use of this information. Your use of this information means that you agree to the Terms of Use. How this information was developed to help you make better health decisions.
To learn more visit Healthwise.org
© 1995-2012 Healthwise, Incorporated. Healthwise, Healthwise for every health decision, and the Healthwise logo are trademarks of Healthwise, Incorporated.


text:
IL Treasurer's Intimidation of National Bank, and Union's Invocation of TARP, Is Not National News
Shoot, he's only talking about pulling $8 billion in state-controlled money because a bank won't go easy on a business borrower who can't pay. What's the big deal?
Well, the story involves the company that makes suits for President Barack Obama (pictured at right). Beyond that, the union at that company is citing the US Treasury Department's Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) as a reason that company's bank should in essence bail it out.
You might think that these two factors, combined with what I'm characterizing as a loyalty oath all financial institutions who do business with the State of Illinois must soon agree to (covered later), might make the Treasurer's and union's threats a national story. You would be wrong.
Here is most of the very short AP item, carried at the Springfield (IL) State Journal-Register, and referred to me by a NewsBusters commenter:
Giannoulias threatens bank over Obama suit-maker
Posted May 08, 2009 @ 06:06 AM
Illinois Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias is threatening to pull state business from Wells Fargo & Co. unless the bank stops trying to liquidate a company that makes suits for President Barack Obama.
….. The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Jan. 23. It employs about 3,000 workers represented by the Service Employees International Union.
Giannoulias spokesman Scott Burnham says Wells Fargo is custodian of an $8 billion state portfolio. Bank spokeswoman Jessica Walstrom says Wells Fargo empathizes with Hartmarx's employees.
Union officials say the bank should help since it received a $25 billion federal bailout.
In a free media bias bonus, the AP item did not name the Illinois Treasurer's party.
This would appear to be a replay of sorts of the Republic Window company situation last December, when union workers occupied their employer's closed plant and demanded that the company's lenders make them whole for lost vacation pay and other items. Under considerable public pressure, including that of a grandstanding, soon to be indicted, impeached, and removed Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich, Bank of America and Chase Bank did just that, though they were under no legal obligation to do so, after Republic filed for bankruptcy. The banks' decisions were surely influenced by President-elect Obama's statement supporting the occupiers: "they're absolutely right and understand that what's happening to them is reflective of what's happening across this economy."
In a free media bias bonus, the AP item did not name the Illinois Treasurer's party.
In related underplayed news yesterday, Giannoulias also introduced the near-equivalent to a loyalty oath that he expects banks to agree to if they expect to continue to do business with the State of Illinois (excerpt is from the Treasurer's press release; bolds are mine):
State to deny banks that refuse community investment pledge
Illinois State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias is demanding that Illinois financial institutions reinvest in the communities they serve if they expect future state money.
Beginning June 1, Giannoulias will require all financial institutions to sign a three-point community reinvestment pledge before receiving or renewing state deposits.
Currently, Illinois has deposits worth $1.4 billion in 205 banks, 26 credit unions and 20 savings and loans. The new pledge goes further than what's required under current state and federal laws.
"This is the anti bailout," Giannoulias said. "We are going to hold financial institutions" 'feet to the fire" and ensure that state deposits go to good corporate citizens."
Giannoulias worked in conjunction with the Monroe Foundation to develop the pledge that will specifically benefit traditionally underserved, low- to moderate-income and rural areas.
A Google News search on Giannoulias's unique last name, with a grand total of 51 results (a very low number for almost any story of significance) shows that The Giannoulias-Wells Fargo story has not gained significant national coverage outside of Illinois, and that his "community investment pledge" intimidation campaign is virtually invisible.
As of 10:10 a.m. this morning, this preserved copy of AP's raw national news feed containing stories that go back to early Thursday evening does not have a story related to either item listed, meaning that local readers ordinarily be the ones to catch wind of what Giannoulias is up to. The raw national feed as of 3:25 p.m. (also preserved is similarly barren.
It would appear that we're beginning to get a handle on the real reasons why the Treasury Department won't accept TARP repayments. They want to give a club to any and every activist and politician who wishes to use it to impose their will on any financial institution that might get in their way.
And this isn't of interest to anyone outside of Illinois?
Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.


text:
They're all great...but I just had to vote for Crucified.
How Much Is Enough?
Yesterday, Today
They're all great...but I just had to vote for Crucified.
It's pretty clear that How Much Is Enough? is the winner in this poll.
However, if you haven't voted yet, please do so.
This poll will end February 4.
Oh cmon... look past the groove tune HMIE?
All is Fair, NoOne-Cry, shut it Out, and All the Best things.....
"There can be no tradition without innovation."
- Earle Hitchner, Irish music journalist
I went with How Much Is Enough, my friends and I were blaring this song in my room the other day. I love Cy's commentaries as Kim said and it's an awesome live song!
My vote would have been. How Much Is Enough or Ships Are Safe In Harbour.
I think that Ink is such a fantastic album - completely blows me away.
Make No Plans is my new favorite from that album. Listen to it again!
Voted for "Yesterday, Today". Other favorites were How Much Is Enough, No One Has To Cry, and Crucified.
Crucified is of my taste..


text:
Everyday Golf Coach by Perish the Thought Golf
32 High quality videos that have been created purposely for use on your iphone by PGA Professional Noel Rousseau. From tee shots to sloping lies and shots from the rough. No gloss, no cheap tips, just a brilliantly executed package that will ultimately improve your game.
Once purchased all videos instantly available, no WI-FI required.
All videos filmed in portrait to optimise the iphone screen size.
Developer Website: http://www.everydaygolfcoach.com/


text:
Home > Miniature Figures > Bullyland Disney
From Bullyland's Disney range of miniature figurines comes Bagheera from The Jungle Book! All of Bullyland's figures are made from PVC-free, recylable TVC plastic and colourfully painted with non-toxic paints.
Brand: BullylandSize: Approx 5.5cm tallAge: 3 years +
home | about us | blog | terms & conditions | privacy policy | site map | contact us© 2019 Daisy Daisy VAT no. 929 7675 61 webdesign by kluster


text:
Obama supporters like this woman who showed up to cheer at a campaign event in Melbourne, Fla., on Sept. 9, may not realize how much personal data the organization collected, or what it's doing with it now.
President Barack Obama's presidential campaign has turned over its most valuable asset — a massive computer database containing personal data on millions of American voters — to a new advocacy group created to advance the White House agenda on issues ranging from gun control to immigration reform.
Organizing For Action (OFA), the advocacy group set up in recent weeks by the president's top political aides, has already acquired access to the database under a leasing agreement with the Obama campaign, Katie Hogan, a former Obama campaign aide who is now serving as spokeswoman for the lobbying group, told NBC News. The information will be used to unleash an "army of the door knockers" to back the president's legislative agenda as well as raise money for "issue ads" – particularly in crucial congressional districts, she said.
As an opening salvo, the group on Friday urged the president's supporters to call members of Congress in support of Obama's gun control proposals, even offering a sample script of what they should say.
The creation of OFA, which is being chaired by former Obama campaign manager Jim Messina, is stirring controversy – both among public interest groups over the group's plans to accept unlimited corporate donations, and among privacy advocates over the transfer of the database.
"It's extremely worrisome," said Lillie Coney, associate director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, noting that Obama campaign supporters likely have no idea that personal data they voluntarily shared with the campaign has now been transferred and is being used for purposes beyond the election.
Dubbed the "nuclear codes" by campaign aides, the Obama campaign database is widely described as one of the most powerful tools ever developed in American politics. According to published reports, it contains the names of at least 4 million Obama donors – as well as millions of others (the campaign has consistently refused to say how many) compiled from voter registration rolls and other public databases. In addition, the campaign used sophisticated computer programs — with code names like "Narwhal" — to collect information through social media: Anybody who contacted the campaign through Facebook had their friends and "likes" downloaded. If they contacted the campaign website through mobile apps, cellphone numbers and address books were downloaded. Computer "cookies" captured Web browsing and online spending habits.
"I can't think of anything that rivals this data," said Coney, noting that much of the data was voluntarily supplied by voters, something that consumers are often reluctant to do when dealing with commercial companies. "The private sector would love to be able to do what the (Obama) campaign was able to do."
OFA spokeswoman Hogan said that Obama supporters have the option in emails they receive of opting out — or unsubscribing — from the list, as required by federal law. But critics say that is not necessarily an option for information collected about voters through other means (such as public databases) and note that many on the list likely don't notice the "unsubscribe" fine print on the emails.
At the same time, OFA's plans for corporate-backed lobbying of Congress have spurred sharp criticism from campaign reformers — a cause the president once championed. Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a leading reform group, called OFA "dangerous and unprecedented," noting that it has been set up under the same section of the tax code used by controversial GOP advocacy groups, such as Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS (as a 501(c)(4) "social welfare" nonprofit organization). This will allow the group to accept unlimited donations from wealthy individuals and corporations.
"With his decision to allow corporations to fund the new organizations that will operate as an arm of his presidency, President Obama has 'given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money,'" said Wertheimer in a statement that quoted Obama's own words two years ago to denounce the Citizens United Supreme Court decision striking down many campaign finance limits. "This would take President Obama about as far away as he could possibly get from the goal he set in 2008 to change the way business is done in Washington."
Related: Nonprofit spends big on politics despite IRS limitation
In response to a request for comment, a White House spokesman emailed recent comments by top Obama political adviser David Plouffe to ABC's George Stephanopoulos: "Yes, we will voluntarily disclose all of our donors," Plouffe said. "And we're very excited. The people who actually made the president's campaign in both '08 and '12, our great grassroots volunteers, were pretty clear after the election they wanted to stay with it and they want to be out there organizing, driving message, holding people accountable on issues like immigration, you know, the deficit and jobs, gun safety."
But how much the group will disclose about the source of its money is still unclear. There is no legal requirement for a 501(c)(4) group like OFA to do so. Hogan, the OFA spokeswoman, declined to say how often the group will make disclosures or whether it will report amounts that donors give or simply provide a list of contributors. (Such a list -- without amounts detailed -- was recently released by the Presidential Inaugural Committee.) "That's still being worked out," she said.
As if to underscore the role of major corporations in helping to underwrite OFA, the unveiling of the group came at a special invitation-only event on inaugural weekend at the Newseum, sponsored by Business Forward, a corporate-backed trade group close to the White House, according to a Politico account. Business Forward -- whose charter members include Citi, Dow Chemical, Duke Energy, Ford, Google and Comcast, majority-owner of NBCUniversal, parent company of NBC News -- had lobbied for the White House-backed fiscal cliff deal, specifically touting its tax breaks for businesses, such as write-offs for new capital investment and research and development credits, according to a statement on the group's website.
"We need you. This president needs you," Messina said at the launch event, according to the Politico account, adding that the national advisory board of OFA will be "filled with people in this room."
One corporate executive who attended the event told NBC News the roll out -- which featured a spirited talk by former President Bill Clinton on gun control -- drew numerous major Obama campaign bundlers and fundraisers, such as Obama campaign finance chairman Mathew Barzun (now reportedly a front-runner to be tapped for ambassador to the Court of St. James) and finance director Rufus Gifford.
"My takeaway from this was that they set this up to take advantage of the Citizens United decision and operate this outside the Democratic National Committee so they won't have to file (election) reports," said the executive, who asked not to be identified.
Hogan, the OFA spokeswoman, said that OFA will not run campaign ads — only "issue" ads that do not fall under the election laws.
But the underlying political purpose of the group is not disputed. "The way it's organized, we legally can't participate in elections," Stephanie Cutter, a top Obama campaign official who now serves on the board of OFA, said at a recent Politico-sponsored inaugural event. "But that doesn't mean the issues we're organizing around won't mobilize the American people to vote for things — to vote for that economy we've been working for, to vote for immigration reform, to vote for common sense gun reforms. I think we can affect elections, we just can't legally be involved in them — for this particular organization."
More from Open Channel:
- Fiscal cliff, elections boost spending on lobbying
- Gazing into 'dark pools,' the high-tech tool that enables insider stock trading
- Dermatologists blast tanning industry campaign to play down skin cancer fears
Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook


text:
Will 'The Hunger Games' Beat 'Breaking Dawn' For Best Kiss?
Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart vs. Josh Hutcherson and Jennifer Lawrence: Josh weighs in on the kiss-off!
It's hard not to pit The Hunger Games and Breaking Dawn, Part 1 against one another — and it'll be even harder when Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart face off against Josh Hutcherson and Jennifer Lawrence at the MTV Movie Awards this summer! Which couple will win the coveted golden popcorn for Best Kiss? "I don't know, they had a great kiss," Josh told VH1 on April 8 at the NewNowNext Awards.
"[Rob and Kristen's] was so passionate," he continued. "Ours was like — I was on my deathbed, wasn't very sexy. I don't know, we'll see. Maybe. I'd be so lucky. One can only hope!"
Josh may have given a totally diplomatic answer, but we think he can afford to be a little more confident than that. Rob and Kristen may have undeniable chemistry, but Josh's kiss with Jennifer was also pretty hot!
Which couple do YOU think will Best Kiss at the MTV Movie Awards this summer? Watch Josh's interview, then vote below!


text:
Subscribe To Jane Fonda In Talks To Join Jason Bateman And Tina Fey In This Is Where I Leave You Updates
I've already subscribed
Jason Bateman has plenty of experience dealing with difficult matriarchs. As Michael Bluth on Arrested Development he found himself going toe to toe with Jessica Walter's Lucille. In the upcoming film This is Where I Leave You Bateman once again finds himself dealing with a dysfunctional family, only this time it's Jane Fonda who is contributing to his grief.
According to Deadline, the veteran actress is now in talks to join the cast of the Shawn Levy-directed comedy, which is also set to star Tina Fey and Corey Stoll. The film is based on Jonathan Tropper's 2009 novel and is about a family that is forced back together to mourn the death of their father. Should Fonda sign on for the film she will play the "newly widowed Hillary Foxman," the mother of the three aforementioned actors' characters.
Tropper wrote the adaptation himself and Levy is aiming to start production in the late spring. The director has the Vince Vaughn/Owen Wilson comedy The Internship coming out this summer and is also attached to the sequel Night At The Museum 3 with Ben Stiller.
Most recently Fonda has been playing a recurring role on Aaron Sorkin's HBO drama The Newsroom, but she's also kept busy on the big screen as well. She co-stars alongside Sam Rockwell, Olivia Wilde, Michelle Monaghan, Ray Liotta and Ben Schwarz in the dark comedy Better Living Through Chemistry, and also has a historical role in Lee Daniels' The Butler, set to play Nancy Reagan opposite Alan Rickman as Ronald. Despite the fact that both films have stellar casts, neither has a set release date yet, but both films have finished production.


text:
NEW ORLEANS, Nov. 6 (UPI) -- Drew Brees tossed a touchdown pass in his 36th straight game Sunday and the New Orleans Saints held on to beat Tampa Bay 27-16.
Brees hooked up with Lance Moore and Darren Sproles on scoring passes in the first two quarters, tying Brett Favre for second place on the all-time NFL list for TD tosses in consecutive games.
Brees finished with 258 yards on 27-of-36 efficiency, extending his own NFL record for consecutive games with at least 20 completions to 29.
Jimmy Graham made six catches for 78 yards for New Orleans (6-3).
Josh Freeman (27-for-37, 281 yards) pulled Tampa Bay (4-4) to within 24-16 with a 5-yard touchdown pass to Kellen Winslow with 5:33 remaining in the game, but that was all the closer the Buccaneers would get.
John Kasay booted his second field goal of the game with 1:17 left to seal the Saints' win.


text:
Real Wedding | Matt and Sally
Without a doubt, this is one of the prettiest weddings you will ever see. It's sweet and sophisticated and it has all the stuff that wedding dreams are made of. In other words, it's Cape Charles done oh-so-right, complete with seaside "I do's" and a tented reception that will inspire you to no end. And lucky for us Jen Harvey Photography was there to capture every special (and pin-worthy) moment!
Why Cape Charles you ask? Well, Sally told us that it is because it was one of the first places that they visited when they first started dating. It held a very special place in their hearts. It was the kind of place that brought back all sorts of memories from early in their relationship when they were first falling in love.
I love the fact that every piece of the sea glass used at the wedding was collected by either their families or found together (they love to go "sea-glassing together). Such a sweet and special way to incorporate a bit of their love story into the day!
The dress. Those robes. The chevron table runners. And that panoramic view of the ocean? Yeah, I'm not going to lie. I totally wish I were a guest at this wedding!
Photographer: Jen Harvey Photography // Reception Venue: Bay Creek Resort // Floral Designer: Flowers by Allison // Hair Stylist: La Clinica Salon & Spa // Cake Designer: Sweet Disposition
Submitted via Two Bright Lights


text:
The Life Sciences Report: Greg, you are coming off of a pretty good year. Congratulations on that. I realize that 2012 was a good year in general for biotech. What was that about?
Greg Wade: It was about the healthy financing we saw throughout the year, which was facilitated by a couple of factors. A widespread decline in volatility globally in the marketplace was notable. Low volatility creates healthy financing environments. Risk capital was seeking an environment where growth could be generated against a backdrop of global economic uncertainty. That made healthcare an attractive place for investors to put money to work.
TLSR: Given that general wave of biotech in 2012, will that work for investors in 2013?
GW: This year seems to be starting out the way 2012 went. The index seems stable. We haven't seen any significant big moves, either in large or small caps. It's still early in the year, but the overall market has been pretty calm. We've seen a lot of financing activity, which is an ongoing positive. Money is being put to work in healthcare stocks, and we are optimistic that will continue. We are also seeing evidence that private companies will try to address the public markets. That is continued evidence of investors' belief that there is going to be strength in this group throughout the year. Yes, 2013 is starting out very strongly.
TLSR: Do you think initial public offerings (IPOs) will return to their former prominence in biotechnology?
GW: I'm not sure. We've had a healthy amount of IPO activity over the last couple of years, and they have been priced at levels that have ensured the best opportunities for investors to do well. But I don't expect we will see the feasts and famines of the more distant past. There will continue to be a healthy flow of good companies attractively priced for investors.
TLSR: Do you see a rotation out of certain disease indications into new ones?
GW: No. I don't know that our clients are picking segments of the marketplace. Most of the professional investors looking at the companies we cover are stock pickers. They're picking ideas that they think can work in the short and long term based on the company's merits versus an overall thematic idea.
TLSR: Would tell me some of the names that you like?
GW: I'll start with Oncolytics Biotech Inc. (ONCY:NASDAQ; ONC:TSX). Some interesting data were reported on Dec. 13, and the year finished with the company deciding that its phase 3 head-and-neck cancer trial, REO 018 (Reolysin [reovirus serotype 3Dearing strain] in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel in second-line patients with platinum-refractory, taxane-naïve head-and-neck cancers), has been effectively split into two different studies. One side focuses on patients with distal metastatic disease, and the other on those with locoregional recurrence, with or without distant metastatic disease. Data for progression-free survival and overall survival is expected in Q2/13.
"Money is being put to work in healthcare stocks, and we are optimistic that will continue."
Subsequently, some initial analysis was completed that suggested a positive differential effect on tumor size, and on the percentage of patients with a positive result, at an early point in the experimental arm of the study. It is a somewhat novel analysis, and because it was double-blinded, randomized data, I think it caused investors to be enthusiastic about the potential that this was an early indication of the drug working. This was actually the first endpoint to be un-blinded in REO 018.
Now we are a quarter or so away from release of important information from the phase 3 trial, which we are expecting in Q2/13. We continue to be encouraged by the potential for the drug and are very eager to see how this phase 3 study turns out.
TLSR: It's an interesting idea to look at the effect of Reolysin on distal metastatic lesions versus those that may not have metastasized as yet. These tumor colonies have different phenotypes. Do you think that's a good design?
GW: Anything that can be done to make a more homogeneous study population is likely to assist in discerning a difference. If you have an inhomogeneous group of folks, there may be important differences that aren't notable across the breadth of that group. I think this is an appropriate way to improve the chance of success for the study.
TLSR: When we spoke last, in August, we talked briefly about the difficulty of this squamous cell carcinoma of the head-and-neck indication. It is so aggressive and generally difficult to deal with, both medically and surgically. It is disfiguring, and patients lose their ability to eat. I say any progress or improvement in efficacy is good. But these recent data, while statistically significant, aren't dramatic. How will Reolysin stack up against cetuximab (Erbitux)? Does it have to show superiority or just noninferiority?
GW: We won't be able to do a direct comparison because they are different studies. There is no reason to believe that Oncolytics' approach would be exclusive of cetuximab. For investors, it is about getting that first randomized data showing that there is a treatment effect, because we believe that the disease indication and market opportunity are very broad for Reolysin. We are not going to hold up a glass right now to see whether it's better or worse than cetuximab, although some investors might look at that as being important relative to the opportunity in head-and-neck cancer treatments.
TLSR: These clinical trials with Reolysin are so numerous. It looks like maybe 30 trials are going on in the U.S., in Canada and in the U.K. How is the company funding all of these?
GW: A number of the ongoing studies for Reolysin are being sponsored by the National Cancer Institute. That is offsetting a tremendous amount of the cost. I believe about 10 studies are sponsored.
TLSR: Is the phase 3 data on Reolysin the next catalyst for Oncolytics? And what is your target price?
GW: Yes, that is the next catalyst. We expect data in Q2/13: It might slip into Q3. My target price is $11.
TLSR: That's where your target price was when we spoke in August. Can you talk about another name?
GW: We had hoped that Addex Therapeutics (ADXN:SIX; ADDXF:OTCBB) would have entered into a partnership by the end of 2012 for dipraglurant, which is for Parkinson's disease levodopa-induced dyskinesia (PD-LID). We are now a little ways into 2013 and haven't seen anything yet. It's uncertain as to whether Addex was overly optimistic, or whether the company will try to drive the product forward to the next value inflection point without a partner. It's a wait-and-see situation at this time.
TLSR: The next catalyst for Addex would be partnering dipraglurant. Is that right?
GW: Yes. I think that a potential partnershipor further phase 2 work conducted on the company's behalf with the productare the next likely catalysts.
TLSR: Could you go ahead and choose another company to talk about?
GW: We are very enthusiastic about Endocyte Inc. (ECYT:NASDAQ) for 2013. The company has a folic acid-targeted chemotherapy construct, vintafolide, in a phase 3 study (the PROCEED trial) for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. A readout is expected in H1/14. It has a non-small cell lung cancer study in phase 2 with that same drug. Again, that should read out in H1/14. Toward the end of this year, we should learn whether or not the company has been successful with its application for early approval in Europe. It is fortunate to have $200 million ($200M) plus on its balance sheet as a result of the Merck & Co. Inc. (MRK:NYSE) deal with vintafolide announced in April 2012. We will also probably get some insight into its pipeline this year.
TLSR: Another company?
GW: Pharmacyclics Inc. (PCYC:NASDAQ) continues to be on our Best Ideas list. Following the American Society of Hematology (ASH) meeting in early December, we raised our price target from $70 to $110 per share. The stock is solidly through $70 now, having pulled back a little bit after ASH to the high 50s.
"There will continue to be a healthy flow of good companies attractively priced for investors."
We believe that investors need to own Pharmacyclics, as we are expecting its Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor, ibrutinib, to be one of the biggest hematology/oncology drugs ever. The value here is in the chronic administration of the drug to patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). That is what has us and others so focused on the company. We expect this stock to work ahead of what we believe will be an early stoppage of the ibrutinib versus ofatumumab study, which we are projecting could happen in the first part of 2014.
TLSR: Ofatumumab implies B-cell disease and B-cell blockade. Is this drug going to be tested in all of the old indications that rituximab (Rituxan; Genentech USA Inc./Biogen Idec Inc. (BIBB:NASDAQ)) was developed for originally?
GW: It has shown some activity in a number of them. I don't actually have a breakdown of where Rituxan was used, but CLL will be the most important indication.
TLSR: Go ahead to your next idea.
GW: Insmed Inc. (INSM:NASDAQ) has some very important data coming out. Its product Arikace is an inhaled liposomal formulation of the aminoglycoside antibiotic amikacin, and is in phase 3 for Pseudomonas aeruginosa lung infections in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). It is in phase 2 for patients with nontuberculosis mycobacterial (NTM) lung infections. The liposome formulation penetrates the sputum in these patients, and amikacin is an approved antibiotic known already to be potent against gram-negative infections.
TLSR: When can we expect some catalyst data?
GW: The CF data are expected in the middle of 2013. The phase 2 results would suggest the potential for a superior level of efficacy to tobramycin, another aminoglycoside used in these indications. That would be attractive to patients and clinicians. Then, in the latter part of the year, the data from the NTM study should be available. If we are right, and it shows superiority in the CF setting, then we think a new drug application for Arikace potentially could be filed with the FDA. If the NTM indication subsequently shows positive phase 2 data, that market opportunity could open up.
TLSR: Your next idea?
GW: Anacor Pharmaceuticals Inc. (ANAC:NASDAQ) has announced statistically significant results for tavaborole for treatment of onychomycosis (fungal nail infections). However, top-line comparison with Valeant Pharmaceuticals International Inc.'s (VRX:NYSE; VRX:TSX) efinaconazole didn't impress investors. Importantly, the tavaborole control results suggest to us that this was a much more refractory patient population. We see merit in the data that leads us to continue to believe that tavaborole will be a successful product in onychomycosis.
TLSR: If efinaconazole is approved, you expect approval for tavaborole as well?
GW: We have the efinaconazole data in hand now, so we can see its efficacy. A well-understood set of data will be required for tavaborole approval, so the results of Anacor's phase 3 study will matter. But we don't see any barrier to approval if it shows statistical significance in phase 3.
TLSR: These are both topical products. That's of value because dermatologists hate to give patients ketoconazole and the hepatotoxic (toxic to the liver) agents that followed. Are the topical agents going to be prescription products?
GW: Yes. We expect they will be prescription for the time being.
TLSR: What can you charge patients for these topical medications?
GW: It wouldn't be surprising to us if the cost of therapy was between $70100 a month.
TLSR: I'm thinking the patient will use these products for a year, is that right?
GW: Yes. The phase 3 studies for both the Valeant product and Anacor's employed a 48-week duration of therapy. It takes about 12 months for the toenail to grow out, so clinicians want to continue to treat to ensure the growth of a clear nail. Patients will treat themselves, with some variability in timeframe.
TLSR: Let's say the patient, or the patient's insurer, spends $1,000 per year for this. Could these be billion-dollar products?
GW: Absolutely. There are 35M people in the U.S. alone with toenail fungus. It doesn't take very many market share points to project large, large numbers.
TLSR: Anacor has a market cap of less than $200M. That portends a very nice bump.
GW: We're hopeful.
TLSR: Can you mention another one?
GW: SIGA Technologies Inc. (SIGA:NASDAQ) has been a choppy stock. It has argued its case before the Delaware Supreme Court that a lower court judge erred in ruling that SIGA must share profits from its smallpox antiviral drug, ST-246 (tecovirimat), now branded Arestvyr, 50/50 with PharmAthene Inc. (PIP:NYSE) after SIGA's first $40M of net profits. We would expect the Delaware Supreme Court to rule on that appeal sometime before the middle of April. We don't see any likelihood that SIGA's position in the dispute would worsen, so it seems to us that there's only neutral to upside reaction possible following the Supreme Court ruling. That, combined with the fact that the company will start shipping its product into the U.S. government's strategic national stockpile in the earlier part of 2013 and begin recording real revenue in the middle of the year, makes this a really interesting stock at the moment.
TLSR: And that decision will come down in mid-April?
GW: Yes. Courts typically render their decisions within 90 days of the oral arguments. So we don't expect it will drag out longer than mid-April.
TLSR: We spoke about Zalicus Inc. (ZLCS:NASDAQ) back in August. It sold off and was cut in half after its drug Synavive missed its secondary endpoint in a phase 2b trial for rheumatoid arthritis. You cut your target price from $5 to $3, which still represents almost a 400% implied return from current levels. What is the Zalicus story about now?
GW: Now it's about the company's two oral drug pain programs, Z160, an N-type calcium channel blocker in phase 2, and Z944, a T-type calcium channel blocker in phase 1. What we're looking for is the first efficacy data for Z160 in its two pain settingslower back pain and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). We are very excited by the opportunity for Z160. To have a novel, non-narcotic pain therapy is very desirable. We're all aware of the limitations in terms of the narcoticsaddictions, interactions with alcohol, constipation, sedationso to have a potent pain therapy without those side effects would be tremendous for patients who live with chronic pain or have acute pain. But Zalicus must get good data from these two studies. Pain studies have been tricky.
TLSR: Who are the patients for Z160?
GW: There are two types of PHN. One is chronic, and the other is transient PHN that comes with a recurrence of the chicken pox virus. The other setting is in lower back pain.
TLSR: Best wishes, Greg. Thank you so much.
GW: Thank you very much. I enjoyed it.
Greg Wade, managing director and senior analyst with Wedbush Securities, earned an undergraduate degree with honors in medical biophysics and a doctorate in physiology from the University of Western Ontario in London, Canada. He has worked on the sellside since early 2000, first at Pacific Growth Equities and subsequently at Wedbush PacGrow LifeSciences, where he was promoted to managing director in 2011. Wade's coverage of emerging biopharmaceutical companies is supported by analyst team members David Nierengarten and Chris Marai.
1) George S. Mack of The Life Sciences Report conducted this interview. He personally and/or his family own shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: None.
2) The following companies mentioned in the interview are sponsors of The Life Sciences Report: Oncolytics Biotech Inc., Addex Therapeutics Ltd. Merck & Co. Inc. is not affiliated with Streetwise Reports. Streetwise Reports does not accept stock in exchange for services. Interviews are edited for clarity.
3) Greg Wade: I personally and/or my family own shares of the following companies mentioned in this interview: Pharmacyclics Inc., SIGA Technologies Inc., Zalicus Inc. I personally and/or my family am paid by the following companies mentioned in this interview: None. I was not paid by Streetwise Reports for participating in this interview.


text: Main Content Act 77 of 2010 friendly link Printer Friendly bills affecting index and updates Search within this Statute for PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT HEALTH CARE FUNDING ACTAct 77 of 2010AN ACT to authorize and create irrevocable trusts and individual accounts within the trusts for the purpose of holding, investing, and distributing assets to be used for certain postemployment health care benefits and reimbursement of medical expenses; to set forth certain rights that public employees have in retirement health care benefits and reimbursement of medical expenses under certain circumstances; to provide for the establishment and amendment of certain irrevocable trust agreements; and to prescribe certain powers and duties of certain retirement systems, state departments, public officials, and public employees. History: 2010, Act 77, Imd. Eff. May 19, 2010 ;-- Am. 2011, Act 265, Imd. Eff. Dec. 15, 2011 © 2017 Legislative Council, State of MichiganThe People of the State of Michigan enact: DocumentTypeDescription Section 38.2731SectionShort title; meanings of words and phrases. Section 38.2732SectionDefinitions; D to H. Section 38.2732aSectionDefinitions; M to P. Section 38.2732bSectionDefinitions; R to V. Section 38.2733SectionIrrevocable trust; authorization; creation; establishment; governing board of each retirement system as grantor; members of retirement system board as trustees; deposits; distributions; funding account; preparation of annual financial statements; establishment and maintenance of health reimbursement accounts; separate prefunding account. Section 38.2734SectionAssets as irrevocable. Section 38.2735SectionAssets; use; limitation. Section 38.2736SectionAssets not subject to certain processes of law. Section 38.2737SectionAssets; diversion for other purposes prohibited. Section 38.2738SectionRemaining trust assets; dissolution; distribution; remaining health reimbursement account assets. Section 38.2739SectionWritten trust agreement; contents. Section 38.2740SectionRetirement health care benefits; prefunding; credit to funding account; contribution or credit to health reimbursement account. Section 38.2740aSectionHealth reimbursement account; vesting; rights. Section 38.2741SectionWritten plan document; terms and conditions of payments of retirement health care benefits and reimbursements of medical expenses. Section 38.2742SectionSeverability. Section 38.2743SectionTrusts; validity. Section 38.2744SectionTaxation of assets and income; exemption. Section 38.2745SectionTrustee; exception from certain responsibilities; indemnification. Section 38.2747SectionCorrection of error by trustees.


text:
Bovine IL-6
IBI recombinant proteins are expressed in Pichia pastoris (yeast) system which provides many advantages over E. coli systems. Yeast systems promote proper protein folding and post-translational modifications for greater bio-activity. The recombinant proteins are endotoxin free and are purified without HIS-TAGS or any other TAG. IBI's yeast expression system has proven to produce more active proteins that more closely resemble their host form.
All IBI recombinant proteins are lyophilized and shipped at room temperature without carrier protein. Proteins can be reconstituted in sterile PBS with at least 0.1% of carrier protein such as BSA or cell assay media.
The IL-6 bovine protein can be used in cell culture, as an IL-6 ELISA Standard, and as a Western Blot Control.


text:
Tom Knox Skater Profile
Sponsors: Isle, Independent, Lost Art, New Balance Numeric, Kr3w, Sml. Wheels, Jessup.
Hometown: London England, Stance: Goofy, Age: , Status: Pro
Last Update: Friday, November 3, 2017 Submit an Update
Tom Knox Comments
Other Skater Links
- Full Skater Database - 6000+ skater profiles.
- Skateboarders on Instagram - browse your favorite pros and ams on Instagram.
- Skate News and Videos - daily skate news and videos from around the web.
- Media Coverage - we log all major magazine coverage by skater and photographer.
- Skate Photographers - we log all major magazine coverage by skater and photographer.
- Contest Results - over a decade's worth of contest history.


text:
Hi guys, today i am going to show you all a cool tool from Adobe Photoshop cs5 for that you need Adobe Photoshop CS5, you can download it from here. I want to keep things very simple in this tutorial because this tool is very simple to use, but first of all lest drop few lines about this tool.
What puppet Warp does?
Puppet Warp overlays a Mesh (you can specify the tightness or looseness) over your object, lets you set Control Points ("pins"), and rotate your object around those Control Points. The Mesh magically gives your object a rubber-like quality so they bend, twist and warp naturally. You can rotate sections of your object in front or behind one another.
Lets start learning, here is what i used in my tutorial.
First of all remove the white background, use Magic Eraser Tool (E), if order to control the puppet we need to erase the background.
Now select puppet layer and go to Edit > Puppet Warp.
By default Photoshop CS5 ads a mesh around the layer you just activated Puppet Warp Tool, but i disabled the mesh, if you want to disable the mesh just right click on it and you will have a menu where you can disable it, and basically you will have all the options you can use there.
Now add some points on your puppet and move them.
Here's my example.
Hope this tutorial helps.
Thanks and don't forget to be creative!
You can download trial Photoshop CS5 from here.


text:
The juxtaposition of events couldn't have been more stark. Nor could the message be any clearer — the current Administration has a deep-seated, inveterate hostility to religious freedom.
The first event happened just last week, in its most important religious liberty decision in decades, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the autonomy of churches to act according to their beliefs, without government intrusion. The case was Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School vs. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and I've written about it before. Essentially, the case involved the ability of churches and other religious organizations to choose their own leaders, according to their religious beliefs.
It's important to note that, in deciding the case, the Supreme Court specifically rejected the Administration's argument that churches have no special protection in the choice of their leaders, and should be given no more deference in such decisions than any other association — like a bowling league. This, despite the fact that the First Amendment grants clear, specific protection to the freedom of religion.
That was a bold example of the radicalism of this Administration, and their disdain for religious freedom. Fortunately, the Supreme Court can actually read the Constitution, and understands what it means — and handed down the clearly correct ruling.
The second event happened today. The Administration announced that it was going to issue final regulations that would require religious organizations to provide full health insurance coverage for sterilization, abortifacient drugs, and contraceptives. A very narrow exemption was granted, but it is so tiny in its coverage that few, if any, organizations will qualify. I've written about this regulation before as well.
Religious organizations of all denominations had denounced this plan, and had called for a broader exemption, in order to respect the conscience rights of those who object to being forced to pay for morally offensive drugs and procedures. Yet the Administration disdained their request, and made no changes in the proposal.
Again, you could not ask for a clearer example of the hostility of this Administration towards religious freedom. The secularist, anti-life ideology of our rulers will not compromise, and will force all others to conform.
Sometimes, things are seen most clearly from a distance. Yesterday, Pope Benedict received some of the bishops of the United States at one of their periodic "ad limina" meetings. In his remarks to the bishops, the Holy Father made some pointed observations about the threats to religious liberty:
it is imperative that the entire Catholic community in the United States come to realize the grave threats to the Church's public moral witness presented by a radical secularism which finds increasing expression in the political and cultural spheres. The seriousness of these threats needs to be clearly appreciated at every level of ecclesial life. Of particular concern are certain attempts being made to limit that most cherished of American freedoms, the freedom of religion. Many of you have pointed out that concerted efforts have been made to deny the right of conscientious objection on the part of Catholic individuals and institutions with regard to cooperation in intrinsically evil practices. Others have spoken to me of a worrying tendency to reduce religious freedom to mere freedom of worship without guarantees of respect for freedom of conscience.
Here once more we see the need for an engaged, articulate and well-formed Catholic laity endowed with a strong critical sense vis-à-vis the dominant culture and with the courage to counter a reductive secularism which would delegitimize the Church's participation in public debate about the issues which are determining the future of American society.
The Holy Father is right. We as lay Catholics need to take action to defend our freedom, and the freedom of our Church.
Remember, elections matter.
Tags: Abortion, Health Care Reform, Religious Liberty, Supreme Court


text:
Fire Alarm Panels
Fire Alarm Control Panels
Fire Alarm Control Panels (FACP) control your fire alarm system as a whole and are ideal for schools, restaurants, department stores, office spaces and apartment complexes. All of your alarm accessories- smoke detectors, heat detectors, carbon monoxide detectors, pull stations, water flow devices, sirens and strobe lights- communicate with an alarm control panel which will alert guests, employees and students if smoke or fire is within your complex. The choice of which control panel is right for you comes down to the size of your building and how much control you want to have.
To cater to the size of your commercial building, HomeSecurityStore.com stocks FACPs with sizes from two to ten zones of control. The bigger the building, the more zones you need to cover. Our hardwired systems receive and process information from input devices (accessories) and in turn trigger an alarm, sirens or strobes and dial out to the fire department if necessary.
There are four basic types of alarm control panels: Coded, Conventional, Addressable and Multiplex systems. Conventional are the most commonly used and are reliable and effective, which is why we carry some of the best in the business from such brands as Honeywell and Silent Knight. A conventional panel will detect on/off signals and they use separate wiring circuits (zones) to relay pertinent information to whoever is in charge of the system.
FACPs could be the difference between life and death. The sophistication of their new age technology speeds up evacuation time and can stop a growing fire in its tracks.
Minimal Price: $308.95


text:
Story highlights
- Prosecutors: Scammers made $500,000 selling fake Cuban birth certificates
- The scheme aimed to use a U.S. law that allows Cubans to apply for residency
- "You are Cuban from today on," the plot's alleged ringleader tells one client
It sounded like a good deal: Get a Cuban birth certificate and stay in the United States, worry-free.
But federal authorities say the birth certificates weren't legitimate, and the undocumented immigrants trying to get them weren't Cuban.
Now a federal judge in Florida has sentenced several people for conspiring to commit immigration fraud.
The defendants, authorities say, made more than half a million dollars selling forged Cuban birth certificates to undocumented immigrants and helping them fill out fraudulent U.S. immigration forms.
Their aim, investigators said, was to exploit a U.S. law that allows Cuban immigrants to apply for permanent residence if they've been in the United States for more than a year.
Authorities arrested Nelson Daniel Silvestri Soutto, Laura Maria Ponce Santos, Amelia Osorio and Fidel Morejon Vega last year. Court documents show that all four have pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit immigration fraud.
Court documents provide details about a type of scam that's becoming increasingly common, immigration lawyers say.
In one conversation with a confidential informant recorded by investigators, Morejon demanded thousands of dollars in payment for Cuban birth certificates and provided advice about how to answer questions from immigration authorities who might ask why he has a Mexican accent.
"'Uh, because I work with a lot of Mexicans and I caught it (the accent) ...'" period," Morejon said, according to a transcript of the conversation filed in federal court. "You are Cuban ... from today on ... 3:25 in the afternoon you are entering the United States and you are Cuban."
Morejon advised the informant and an undercover officer not to make conversation with officials, and to tell them they arrived "in a raft," according to the transcript.
Investigators describe Morejon as the scheme's ringleader, accusing him of recruiting the others and paying them referral fees for each undocumented immigrant who purchased his services.
He "met with numerous illegal aliens and told them that he could assist them in obtaining their residency in the United States by pretending to be Cuban," according to a court document filed along with Morejon's guilty plea agreement last year.
"To effectuate the fraud, Morejon posed as an immigration officer to impress the illegal aliens (and) also threatened some of the illegal aliens with deportation," the document said.
The day authorities arrested him, they found blank Cuban birth certificates and altered naturalization certificates in his Florida home, federal prosecutors said in a memo filed this month. In addition to selling fake Cuban birth certificates, Morejon also sold fraudulent presidential pardons, prosecutors said.
Morejon, of Kissimmee, Florida, is scheduled to be sentenced later this month. Prosecutors have asked the judge to sentence him to more than three years in prison.
"The full extent of Morejon's fraud remains unknown as his former customers continue to be identified by the government," prosecutors said. "The one conclusion that must be drawn from all the facts is that Morejon devoted his life, over a period of more than three and a half years, to extracting as much money as possible from his customers and obtaining that money by whatever means necessary."
U.S. District Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga sentenced Ponce earlier this month to six months in prison, two years on parole and nine months under house arrest. Osorio was sentenced Thursday to four months in prison, two years of parole and 11 months under house arrest. And Silvestri was sentenced to a year in prison, three years on parole and nine months under house arrest.
Morejon pleaded guilty "and acknowledged he was the organizer," said Hugo Rodriguez, an attorney representing Morejon. That means he'll likely receive a higher sentence, Rodriguez said.
Attorney Richard Serafini, who represents Osorio, declined to comment but referred to a memo he filed in court earlier this month, arguing for a lower sentence. The memo argues that Osorio, 61, paid Morejon thousands of dollars for a fraudulent presidential pardon for her son, who had been convicted of a federal drug offense.
She became involved in the conspiracy "through her efforts to help her son" and her criminal conduct was an "extreme aberration," Serafini wrote. "Her background is one of hard work, dedication to her family and, until this episode, law-abiding," the memo said.
Attorneys for Ponce and Silvestri did not respond to requests for comment.
This type of scam has been happening in Florida for years but appears to be on the rise, immigration attorney Wilfredo Allen said.
There are consequences beyond this particular case, according to Maite Hoyos, an immigration attorney in Miami.
More and more, she said, authorities are asking her Cuban clients to prove the validity of their birth certificates -- something, she says, that suggests that this type of fraud is on investigators' radar.


text:
Applying is easy and you can get started online.
Apply now
Find classes and events that enrich your faith and strengthen your congregation.
Find opportunities
Your support ensures that future church leaders can pursue their call to ministry today.
Give now
Posted by Steve McKinley on Monday, July 07, 2014 12:40 AM
At the end of May, my wife and I had a wonderful tour of Spain, during which we engaged in one of our favorite activities: buying things for our grandchildren. (We have enough things. Too many, in fact. But that is a story for another day.)
In one of the two Picasso museums we visited (Barcelona and Malaga), we bought the children's book Picasso's Trousers by Nicholas Allen. In this book, people are always saying no to Picasso, telling him what he cannot and should not do. They say he cannot paint pictures only in blue. But he does it. He cannot do pictures from the front and the side at the same time. But he does it. He cannot do a painting in under sixty seconds. But he does it.
"It took me four years to paint like Raphael, but a lifetime to paint like a child."
The title of the book comes from an occasion when Picasso decided that he wants a pair of pants with horizontal stripes to match his shirt with horizontal stripes. "Everybody" said that it couldn't be done and shouldn't be done. So he made his own. With horizontal stripes.
When Picasso was a young man, he was very much a conformist. His earliest paintings mimic the style of the old masters. As a young man he mastered the basics, and as an old man he became the wildly nonconforming genius that brought him fame. Toward the end of his life, he said of himself "It took me four years to paint like Raphael, but a lifetime to paint like a child."
I'm no genius. I'm no Picasso. I'm just a guy who was lucky enough to spend a lot of years being a parish pastor. I didn't enjoy every day, but I loved every year. As I think back, I realize that I worried too much about the details when I was a young pastor, worried about doing things the way they were supposed to be done. The older I got, the less I worried about the "musts" and the "shoulds". (Decided in my last parish that Advent was too short. We made it a six week season, and the world did not end.) It was probably a good thing that I learned the basics, but it was also a good thing to move beyond the basics and dare a little creativity.
Internship years are good for learning how to do the basics; but as students move on from internship and head toward ordination, it is time to be pushing the limits and testing the "musts" and the "shoulds." Take it from me, this is when things really start to be fun, even if a few onlookers shake their heads. It's a process of becoming more and more child-like.
Tags: Steve McKinley
Blog editor: Lisa CarpenterAdministrative email@example.com
Subscribe to Ministry in Context
Welcome Login to participate.