« June 2009 | Main | August 2009 »
07/31/2009
You are what you eat - not who you meet
From the BBC ...
Teenagers who have overweight friends tend to develop a weight problem themselves, mounting evidence suggests. Latest research from the US found a strong link between teenagers own weight and that of their closest peers. A UK obesity expert said the link is likely to be causal and down to catching bad habits.
The journal Economics and Human Biology work adds weight to the notion of imitative obesity - mimicking of friends who pile on the pounds. It looked at data on nearly 5,000 teenagers, many of whom were later followed up after two-year interval.
From this the researchers found friendships between the adolescents tended to cluster according to weight, meaning overweight children tended to hang out together. When they looked at weight changes over time, they found having a fat friend could lead to weight gain for a child.
The study authors from the University of Hawaii say they cannot tell from their work whether overweight teens influence their friends to become overweight or whether obese adolescents simply choose to flock together. If gaining weight causes one's friends to gain weight, this knowledge will be important for policy makers working on targeted campaigns, says Dr Sally Kwak and her team.
The journal Economics and Human Biology work adds weight to the notion of imitative obesity - mimicking of friends who pile on the pounds. It looked at data on nearly 5,000 teenagers, many of whom were later followed up after two-year interval.
From this the researchers found friendships between the adolescents tended to cluster according to weight, meaning overweight children tended to hang out together. When they looked at weight changes over time, they found having a fat friend could lead to weight gain for a child.
The study authors from the University of Hawaii say they cannot tell from their work whether overweight teens influence their friends to become overweight or whether obese adolescents simply choose to flock together. If gaining weight causes one's friends to gain weight, this knowledge will be important for policy makers working on targeted campaigns, says Dr Sally Kwak and her team.
07/30/2009
What is it?
Game On!
07/29/2009
El ' ninguÌn shit' historia del día.
From Rice University ...
A new study released by Rice University in Houston finds that California newspapers located closer to the border of Mexico routinely provide a more negative slant on immigration in general news reporting and on their opinion pages than the state’s newspapers located further away from the border. The study, “Slanted Newspaper Coverage of Immigration: The Importance of Economics and Geography,” was conducted by Rice University political scientist Regina Branton and Johanna Dunaway of Louisiana State University and published in the Policy Studies Journal.
Using content analysis, geographic information systems and contextual data, Branton and her research staff examined 1,227 California newspaper news articles and opinion pieces from 2004-05. “We found that newspapers located closer to the Mexican border often report the more negative side of the immigration issue,” Branton said. “Moreover, we found corporate-owned newspapers are more likely to report a negative slant to the issue than privately owned newspapers.”
Branton said that the reason for the difference is that newspapers are trying to please their audience – the readers – and thus maximize profits. “While all news organizations are driven somewhat by the need to make profits, a public group of shareholders seeks to maximize profits and considers that the main goal,” she said.“It’s been well-documented that the media report heavily on sex, violence and crime to appeal to readers,” she said. “The immigration issue is an emotional national issue that newspapers can sensationalize and provide influence on.” While the study looked at California specifically, Branton believes that further studies would likely confirm the same trend in other U.S.-Mexico border states, like Texas and Arizona.
Using content analysis, geographic information systems and contextual data, Branton and her research staff examined 1,227 California newspaper news articles and opinion pieces from 2004-05. “We found that newspapers located closer to the Mexican border often report the more negative side of the immigration issue,” Branton said. “Moreover, we found corporate-owned newspapers are more likely to report a negative slant to the issue than privately owned newspapers.”
Branton said that the reason for the difference is that newspapers are trying to please their audience – the readers – and thus maximize profits. “While all news organizations are driven somewhat by the need to make profits, a public group of shareholders seeks to maximize profits and considers that the main goal,” she said.“It’s been well-documented that the media report heavily on sex, violence and crime to appeal to readers,” she said. “The immigration issue is an emotional national issue that newspapers can sensationalize and provide influence on.” While the study looked at California specifically, Branton believes that further studies would likely confirm the same trend in other U.S.-Mexico border states, like Texas and Arizona.
In other words; 'capitalism is evil'. So why are all those beaners headed this way?
07/27/2009
John Conyers - high functioning illiterate
From Cybercast News Service ...
During his speech at a National Press Club luncheon, the chairman
of the House Judiciary Committee, Democratic Congressman John
Conyers (D-Mich.), questioned the point of lawmakers reading the health
care bill.
“I love these members, they get up and say, ‘Read the bill,’” said Conyers.
“What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you
don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you
read the bill?”
I'm speechless. They put horses down for being less lame.
07/24/2009
Hittin' it Big Time
_____________
My nephew plays in a band - he's been playing and performing for years now. He just found out that the band he's in has been asked to open for Sublime. That's like being asked to open for The Animals in 1970.
Where will they fly US?
From the Independent ...
A pregnant woman critically ill with swine flu was being treated in a Swedish hospital today after being transferred from Scotland for specialized treatment. The 26-year-old suffered a rare complication and was flown to Stockholm because no beds were available in the UK for the procedure she needed. The Scot was admitted to Crosshouse Hospital in Kilmarnock, East Ayrshire, last week where she was put on a ventilator because of an extreme reaction to the H1N1 virus.
Earlier yesterday, a new website to diagnose people with swine flu crashed within minutes of launching after it was deluged with thousands of hits a second. NHS Ayrshire and Arran's specialist intensive care team recommended that the pregnant Scot received a highly-specialised procedure known as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. This involves circulating the patient's blood outside the body and adding oxygen to it artificially. ECMO is a relatively new technique that is used when a patient's lungs are functioning very poorly even with ventilation and high levels of oxygen. The UK has a national ECMO unit in Leicester but all five beds there are currently being used.
Earlier yesterday, a new website to diagnose people with swine flu crashed within minutes of launching after it was deluged with thousands of hits a second. NHS Ayrshire and Arran's specialist intensive care team recommended that the pregnant Scot received a highly-specialised procedure known as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. This involves circulating the patient's blood outside the body and adding oxygen to it artificially. ECMO is a relatively new technique that is used when a patient's lungs are functioning very poorly even with ventilation and high levels of oxygen. The UK has a national ECMO unit in Leicester but all five beds there are currently being used.
In the absence of evidence - create it!
From EurekAlert ...
Psychopharmaceutical use has risen over recent years. This is fact, but what is not clear is the reason why. Researchers from four Madrid-based health centres have shown that family conflict is not a significant factor. However, the results published in the journal Atención Primaria are striking: in Spain, 24% of women take antidepressants and more than 30% take tranquillizers. "The use of psychopharmaceuticals is often related to family or work-related problems. We wanted to see if there was actually a positive link between the consumption of antidepressants and benzodiazepines and any kind of family dysfunction", said Sonsoles Pérez, lead author of the study.
The authors studied 121 women aged between 25 and 65, using family dysfunction surveys (the Apgar test), and the additive scale used to evaluate social readjustment (SLE). The psychopharmaceuticals analyzed were antidepressants and benzodiazepines (anxiolytics such as lorazepam and bromazepam). "Although one might think that family conflicts lead to greater consumption of psychopharmaceuticals among women, we did not find any such relationship", the researcher says, adding that the use of such drugs depends a lot on the population segment taking them. "Some people with family, work-related or financial problems do not feel able to tackle their problems and fall back on the use of drugs", Pérez points out.
The results show that 24% of women in Spain use antidepressants and 30.6%, benzodiazepines, which are sometimes also used to help people sleep. In 78.6% of cases, these drugs are prescribed in primary health centers. The diagnosis is recorded in the patient's medical records in 64.5% of cases, with the primary causes being depression (11.6%), anxiety (9.9%) and insomnia (3.3%). The scientists also found that benzodiazepine use increases with age. However, they did not find the same with antidepressant use. "We think that greater training is needed in identifying SLE and family dysfunction, and recording these in patients' records in order to help psychologists, psychiatrists and primary healthcare specialists", Pérez concludes.
The authors studied 121 women aged between 25 and 65, using family dysfunction surveys (the Apgar test), and the additive scale used to evaluate social readjustment (SLE). The psychopharmaceuticals analyzed were antidepressants and benzodiazepines (anxiolytics such as lorazepam and bromazepam). "Although one might think that family conflicts lead to greater consumption of psychopharmaceuticals among women, we did not find any such relationship", the researcher says, adding that the use of such drugs depends a lot on the population segment taking them. "Some people with family, work-related or financial problems do not feel able to tackle their problems and fall back on the use of drugs", Pérez points out.
The results show that 24% of women in Spain use antidepressants and 30.6%, benzodiazepines, which are sometimes also used to help people sleep. In 78.6% of cases, these drugs are prescribed in primary health centers. The diagnosis is recorded in the patient's medical records in 64.5% of cases, with the primary causes being depression (11.6%), anxiety (9.9%) and insomnia (3.3%). The scientists also found that benzodiazepine use increases with age. However, they did not find the same with antidepressant use. "We think that greater training is needed in identifying SLE and family dysfunction, and recording these in patients' records in order to help psychologists, psychiatrists and primary healthcare specialists", Pérez concludes.
Reread that very carefully. They assumed it was due to 'family dysfunction and conflict' ie. MEN. But when they conducted the research, no evidence to support that supposition was found. So what do they conclude? The 'dysfunction and conflict' - male oppression - must have been unreported and they recommend improved training for those who keep records in order to better 'find' those instances of male oppression.
Ain't science grand?
