Uh-oh, Spaghetti-Os!

This is the ultimate insult. Dag, people get it right! Do your jobs! There are enough of us out here needing a job who would actually do it the way it's meant to be done... We don't need you screwing up and putting a bunch of people's lives in danger- and defaming Spag-Os in the process.

(from Togus the Cat, who is supah cool, like the Big Orange, only it seems not so ornery):

Texas Firm Recalls Three Varieties of "Spaghettios" With Meatballs That May Be Underprocessed

Recall Release CLASS I RECALL FSIS-RC-035-2010 HEALTH RISK: HIGH Congressional and Public Affairs (202) 720-9113 Atiya Khan WASHINGTON, June 17, 2010 - Campbell Soup Supply Company, LLC, a Paris, Texas, establishment is recalling approximately 15,000,000 pounds of "SpaghettiOs with Meatballs" canned products due to possible under-processing, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced today. The following products are subject to recall: [View Labels] 14.75-ounce cans of "SpaghettiOs" with Meatballs, bearing the identifying product code "U5" on the bottom of the can. 14.75-ounce cans of "SpaghettiOs" A to Z with Meatballs, bearing the identifying product code "4N" on the bottom of the can. 14.75-ounce cans of "SpaghettiOs" Fun Shapes with Meatballs (Cars), bearing the identifying product code "KS" on the bottom of the can. The products subject to recall bear the establishment number "EST 4K," as well as a "Use By" date between June 2010 and December 2011 ink-jetted on the bottom of each can. These products were manufactured between December 2008 and June 2010 and distributed to retail establishments nationwide. When available, the retail distribution list(s) will be posted on FSIS' website at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/FSIS_Recalls/ Open_Federal_Cases/index.asp. The problem was discovered through a routine warehouse inspection by the company and its subsequent investigation. FSIS has received no reports of illnesses from consumption of these products. FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer available to consumers. Consumer questions regarding the recall should be directed to Campbell's Hotline at (866) 495-3774; media inquiries should be directed to the company's Director of Corporate Communications, Anthony Sanzio at (856) 968-4390. Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS virtual representative available 24 hours a day at AskKaren.gov. The toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline 1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in English and Spanish and can be reached from l0 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Eastern Time) Monday through Friday. Recorded food safety messages are available 24 hours a day

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_035_2010_Release/index.asp

Hey! Fatty Fatty 2 by 4!

OK, peeps, guess what? Ronald McDonald has been asked to retire because he directly appeals to kids, therefore stimulating childhood obesity. Of course, the parents (or other care givers) who drive the kids to McD's on however regular a basis are in no way responsible for their weight.

http://www.wcsh6.com/news/watercooler/story.aspx?storyid=118069&catid=108

And Gawd forbid that Mama Obama try to encourage people to get educated about and end childhood obesity. That's the gubmint interfering in our lives! Offering help and encouraging people to be healthy is "interfering." Yup.

Since 26% of Americans nationwide are obese and maybe could use a little help, it seems Michelle could do little harm with her campaign.

And guess where the fattest damn towns are in this country? According t0 a May 2010 report in WebMD the Magazine:
8. Kingsport/Bristol, TN/VA, 32.9%
7. (tie) Lynchburg, VA, and Huntington/Ashland, WV/KY/OH, 33%
6. Bakersfield, CA, 33.6%
5. McAllen/Edinburg/Mission, TX, 33.7%
4. Flint. MI, 33.9%
3. York/Hanover, PA, 34%
2. Visalia/Porterville, CA, 34.1%
1. (tie) Montgomery, AL, and Stonckton, CA, 34.6%

Undoubtedly, ole Ronnie is standing right around every street corner beckoning with his irresistible gloved hand. Lord help us all; clowns truly are evil!

Baaaaahhh! We are sheep, and shock media is our shepherd.

I have two things to mention today.

First, I have been thinking since yesterday morning when I got to campus and saw the backpacks all over Prexy's Pasture, about suicide and how sad it is that so many people, including young people, get to a point that they feel like there is no reason to live. There were backpacks all over the field out there, for Pack in the Silence (do I have that name correct?), demonstrating the number of college students who kill themselves in this country every year. It was an impressive and very moving sight. We need to think more about why people are so desperate. Not just the social and socio-economic inequities that make people feel hopeless, but the fact that depression is still stigmatized.

So, the next issue just arose. I was on Facebook a couple minutes ago and saw a post from my conservative friend Silvie about having returned from WalMart, where she saw people of all ages who were just huge- obese, and opening up to conversation the fact that we need to take better care of our kids in this country because this just isn't healthy. So, I commented that we harp on Michelle Obama to leave our kids alone, but we don't care for them ourselves.

And I was attacked immediately. This guy Tom jumped to the conclusion that I want "Mama Obama" to take care of my kids instead. Now, how the hell do you come to that conclusion based on my words?

So, I am going to copy for you my response right here because, frankly, I am sick and tired of being attacked from all sides for trying to have reasoned discourse with people. My blood pressure rises, I feel it, and I get anxious every time someone throws some offhand comment without truly hearing what the other person says- without listening.

Here it is, and I dare you to misinterpret because you are a slave to the media shock talkers:

Tom, don't read what you think my lips are saying; read the words: WE DON'T TAKE CARE OF THEM. I don't think someone else should. As I told Sylvie (re: her comment... "unless we help ourselves first,") "WELL SAID." I'm a libertarian, man; I believe firmly it is OUR RESPONSIBILITY to take care of our own.

Sorry if I sound grumpy, but honestly, I am getting tired of trying to have a reasonable, thoughtful conversation with people and having them jump to conclusions. The radio and tv shock show hosts are doing too damn good a job getting people all up in arms in this country and we aren't talking and solving problems, just placing blame and making assumptions.

Boo, Dems. Have you no integrity left whatsoever?

In an effort to maintain fairness and balance, unlike the first source listed here, which claims such, please note that below the Republican media facade of FoxNews is provided the Liberal Dem media facade, MSNBC.

C-SPAN Challenges Congress to Open Health Care Talks to TV Coverage
FOXNews.com

The head of C-SPAN has implored Congress to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public, as top Democrats lay plans to hash out the final product among themselves.

The head of C-SPAN has implored Congress to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public, as top Democrats lay plans to hash out the final product among themselves.

C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb wrote to leaders in the House and Senate Dec. 30 urging them to open "all important negotiations, including any conference committee meetings," to televised coverage on his network.

"The C-SPAN networks will commit the necessary resources to covering all of the sessions LIVE and in their entirety," he wrote.

Congressional leaders, however, reportedly are expected to bypass the traditional conference committee process, in which lawmakers from both parties and chambers meet to reconcile differences between the House and Senate versions of a bill. Instead, The Associated Press reports that top Democrats at the House, Senate and White House will figure out the final product in three-way talks before sending it back to both chambers for a final vote.

This format would seem ideal for closed-door meetings, which congressional Democrats have used many times to figure out sensitive provisions in the health care bill -- though President Obama pledged during the campaign to open up health care talks to C-SPAN's cameras.

Lamb urged Congress in his letter to fling open the doors in the final stretch of the negotiations.

"President Obama, Senate and House leaders, many of your rank-and-file members, and the nation's editorial pages have all talked about the value of transparent discussions on reforming the nation's health care system," he wrote. "Now that the process moves to the critical stage of reconciliation between the chambers, we respectfully request that you allow the public full access, through television, to legislation that will affect the lives of every single American."

Lamb said his network would use "the latest technology" to be "as unobtrusive as possible" during the talks.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/05/c-span-challenges-congress-open-health-care-talks-tv-coverage/

Dems to bypass tradition on final health deal
House, Senate negotiations to complete legislation will cut out Republicans

updated 4:35 p.m. ET Jan. 4, 2010

WASHINGTON - House and Senate Democrats intend to bypass traditional procedures when they negotiate a final compromise on health care legislation, officials said Monday, a move that will exclude Republican lawmakers and reduce their ability to delay or force politically troubling votes in both houses.

The unofficial timetable calls for final passage of the measure to remake the nation's health care system by the time President Barack Obama delivers his State of the Union address, probably in early February.

Democratic aides said the final compromise talks would essentially be a three-way negotiation involving top Democrats in the House and Senate and the White House, a structure that gives unusual latitude to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California.

These officials said there are no plans to appoint a formal House-Senate conference committee, the method Congress most often uses to reconcile differing bills. Under that customary format, a committee chairman is appointed to preside, and other senior lawmakers from both parties and houses participate in typically perfunctory public meetings while the meaningful negotiations occur behind closed doors.

Continue at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34692080/ns/health-health_care/

This is not OK!

A Read-Aloud in the Senate — Or Not

By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN

Update | 2:58 p.m. In a counter-maneuver to thwart an effort by Senate Republicans to stall the health care debate, Senator Bernard Sanders, independent of Vermont, has withdrawn his amendment that would create a fully government-run health care system.

The Republicans, engaging in parliamentary warfare, had been forcing the clerks to read the entire 767-page amendment. That move threatened to grind the Senate to a halt for the rest of the day, and perhaps longer.

Read the earlier version of this article below, published before Mr. Sanders withdrew the amendment:

http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/16/a-read-aloud-public-option/?nl=us&emc=politicsemailema1

No, Bernie, no!

Look, people, what the hell are we doing here? Paying a bunch of people to argue about something that doesn't exist and never will exist because those people won't stand up and say, "Quit playing games, jerks. I'm not playing games. No more business as usual."

I am sad and sick about this. And I was just telling a friend this morning that I can't stand to talk about this issue. Well, I finally said something. Don't get me wrong; I'm a freedom-loving libertarian who would like to be able to choose my healthcare option. But I'd at least like us all to have a choice.

Let the bastards stall the debate until we say, "We don't want you to stall the debate any more, you assholes, and even though the pharmaceuticals and other 'health' lobbyists really pay your tab, you answer to the people who elected you and whom you serve..."

What the hell is the sense, if we are just going to get what we have had, and we all know it's not good enough? KICK YOUR GODDAM CAREER POLITICIANS OUT OF OFFICE AND TAKE BACK THIS COUNTRY. Am I the only one who wants that?

Doling for Dollars

New York City

Doling Out Doses of H1N1 Vaccine

The New York City department of health has come under fire for distributing rations of the still scarce H1N1 vaccine to corporate health centers--including those of Wall Street firms--despite shortages faced by hospitals and pediatricians. Officials defended the decision, arguing that they are simply increasing the types of locations where the shot is available.

[The following text appears within a chart. Please see hardcopy or PDF for actual chart.]

H1N1 tally

• Requested

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1938716-1,00.html#ixzz0XgwwJoCn

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

27,400/1,200

Citigroup Inc.

7,200/1,200

Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

5,400/200

Columbia University

11,100/200

SOURCE: NYC DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1938716-2,00.html#ixzz0XgwgGIqX
from TIME, Vol. 174, No. 20, November

Mean People

I have an ex-BF who used to say, pretty frequently, that the US is a "mean" country. Mostly in reference to our correctionals system, which in my mind has the punishment down pat, but forgets the "correct"ing part. And today I would like to provide one more tangent example from my own life- well, more accurately, the life of someone very close and therefore affecting me as well- that proves my ex was right- even though, ironically, he is a mean American. Only in his case, I think he really doesn't get that.

"You are correct, **(name witheld because I don't want this person to get some further punishment) is back in his regular cell, but then the infirmary did not send his medical chart back down, so he didn't get his heart medicine or blood sugar medicine again yesterday. I am so frustrated with the jail system. When he moved back to his cell block his old bed (read: slab) was taken, and people were sleeping on the floor, but a few people were released, and an empty bed became available. So he asked the guard, "Could I please move to bed 17? It's empty.' and the guard just looked him in the face and said 'FUCK YOU'. Can you believe that? **(Yes, actually, I can.) So he waited a little while and politely asked again, and the same guard slammed the door in his face. What an asshole, huh? I told him to wait to the 11:00 shift change and just ask someone else.

"I guess I never realized how flagrantly human rights were violated in a correctional system. I know that people who commit crimes have to have consequences, but to treat a non-violent small-time offender so poorly and in a manner which is inherently life-threatening (by refusing necessary medication) just sickens me. In my mind, keeping a human being confined against their will and refusing them the medication they need to live is nothing short of ATTEMPTED MURDER on the part of the Sheriff's Office, and they should be prosecuted as such. If funding does not allow for proper medical care for NONVIOLENT inmates as the Head Nurse explained to me, then they should be sentenced to HOUSE arrest with an electronic monitering anklet. He has a whole basket of medication sitting here that he bought and paid for. He has had three heart surgeries, has 2 stents in his heart, high blood pressure, depression/anxiety, and diabetes. He works out every day, eats properly, and does everything he can to maintain good health. He should have to pay for his crime with his time, not his physical health.

"In fact, I am so angry that I would like to address this issue on a political level, as I wonder how many people have died as a result of receiving inadequate medical care in jail. I think that if it is determined by medical proof that a NONVIOLENT offender cannot receive adequate medical care in jail, and that it could result in serious bodily injury or death to the individual, that they should be sentenced to house arrest with electronic monitering. In my mind the same would not apply to violent offenders, as this would pose a threat to the general public. Maybe you could give me some advice as to how I could go about trying to pass a bill like this. "

Well, babe, welcome to America. Sorry to say, but I don't feel terribly patriotic right now, on top of the fact that I don't feel particularly like returning as a grad student again to a university that is not in keeping with its proposed mission.

But, this jail incident gave me an opportunity to divert my attention to some other infraction of humanity, and I replied to this intimate with yet another rant, but it's someone who takes my words seriously, so I felt better, in the sense that I am now raving mad about something else, but at least know I'm being heard on some level.

"Wow, **(person I love), that has me all pissed off, and finally something to take my mind off the museum closing. **(hurtful ex) used to say that this is such a mean country. Ironically, he is a mean person and doesn't even realize it. But, anyway, that's beside the point. It's true. Look at a major case like Abu Ghraib or Gitmo, the way we treat other people we think maybe might have done something that offends us but we aren't sure but that's OK because even if we suspect it we can act with such hubris as to think those people are not human and can be held in horrible tortuous and neglectful and abusive circumstances as we like, just to get revenge- just in case- and to prove how **(for the faint of heart and the religiously and morally horrified by swear words- when in fact there are far huger misappropriations of behavior out there) f*ing great we are. Because we are just a bunch of great f*ing people who can ruin the entire economic system of the world and then insist that we still know best and the people who ruined it for the rest of us know more than the rest of us so should get a whole bunch of money from us that doesn't technically exist so they can 'fix it.'

"I want to puke. Actually, all of what's going on in the big world (GM) and the state world (the museum) was enough on my soul that I've been struggling really bad with my own depression and having anxiety attacks, which I had finally been able to get under control after having been with **(hurtful ex). So, anyway, this whole thing about **(name witheld to avoid further punishment) is just one more instance of people in power abusing it.

"Here is where I would start, and all of the research can be done online:"

In fact, this could be a difficult thing to do. I mean, in my own research for a photo of abuse in American jails, I have found mostly extremely lenthy lists of Iraqi mention. We're so stuck over there we don't have any idea, or care, it seems, about what we do to our own people in our own country. I am so checking out, right after I give you this link to a relevant report, which I did find:

http://www.prisoncommission.org/report.asp

(Hooray for technology, right? At least I'm not howling about my laptop these days.)

Now, this is dedication to the sport:

You're Out:

The national pastime's shocking death toll.

By Jon Mooallem

I caught a foul ball once. Sort of. It was in the fall of 1998, at Coors Field in Denver, and I was sitting on the third-base side. The ball blazed over my head, then thudded into a woman's left breast a few rows back. A second later, it shot out from under my seat and rolled into my foot, as though it had just finished a trip through the interior of a miniature golf course obstacle. I reached down and picked it up.

I did the whole ecstatic exercise. I held the ball over my head. I turned right, then left, showing off my trophy. Then I caught sight of the woman behind me. A small crowd of loved ones and wincing strangers had huddled around her. I decided the only gentlemanly thing to do was to toss her the ball. But I had to wait a moment, until she straightened up and stopped moaning.

More at:

http://www.slate.com/id/2218733/

photo credit: http://www.funnypictures.net.au/images/bat-out-of-hell-baseball-bat-hits-fan-in-the-head1.jpg

Why Am I Here?

We are in Yuma. I just read my weekly MegaVote report. Cynthia Lummis, our Wyoming US House Representative, voted NO on the Water Quality Investment Act of 2009, designed to authorize funding for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, which helps states build water treatment facilities. That's right; she said NO. I asked her why, in an e-mail, but also let her know that I didn't expect an answer, since this concerned constituent has never yet received one from her. And I have written several times since she took office. Several.

But Wyoming was not the only state to vote NO. Also voting NO were: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah.

Utah... I would like to wax rude on Utah for a while because I have been itching to do so since we entered that state sometime like early evening on Saturday and those brahims in their giant 4WD pickup trucks started acting all rude at us. I would like to begin by acknowleding that I know I am generalizing, though it was the predominance of our experience in Utah, and that there likely are some nice people in Utah, just like there are some nice folks who are locked up in prison for absolutely no reason except for human error or manipulation.

Utah is home to the Wise Use Movement. You know, wise use, meaning the use of your dirt bike and old Jeep with the big tires, and your ATV (ATV meaning "All Terrain Vehicle," which you should drive on ALL TERRAIN, especially delicate arid desert soil because that is everywhere in Utah and it's your public lands all over the place, so use them, dammit, because you do pay your taxes)... Well, that's that.

These people won't actually be able to pay their taxes pretty soon because they have all, every single one of them, lost their jobs, thanks to Ken Salazar. I know this because I saw one of those signs people set up outside restaurants and change the big black letters on to tell you what is the special of the day and how much percentage you receive off your bill if you are over 55. And the one I saw, and the FFM also saw this so you know it's true, said, "Thanks, Salazar, for taking away our jobs." Or something that means exactly the same thing. That could just be a paraphrase.

I am done busting on Utah. I am in Yuma and would like to take a shower and go outside and enjoy the sun and the warmth.

Privacy is WAY Overrated.

OK, so you go to a doctor appointment. You don't like going to the doctor anyway (I think most people don't, unless they are hypochondriacs and dig the attention), but today you are going to a clinic that is under construction to meet a doctor you have never seen before. Thankfully, you know your condition; this isn't an emergency or something that's got you completely skeezed out like you're sure you're on your death bed.

So, you go in the entrance you always used in the past, several years ago, since there are no construction signs telling you not to. But you find yourself facing sheetrock walls and a door that won't open into the hall inside. So, you exit the building, go around to the front and find a way in that isn't locked out by chainlink fence and those big white and black and red signs that say, "KEEP OUT." No big deal, but you want to be on time and honestly are a little nervous and don't have insurance, like so many people. So, it's a pain in the ass and throws you off a little now to enter the building to face construction everywhere and no signs telling you where the hell the doctor and the nurses and all that are- until you get in the elevator (because you can't even see any stairs.)

Now you know you are to go to the second floor, or risk being shot on the spot by a combined team of medics and construction workers- with lethal injections and nail guns. You get off the elevator and see the Nurses' Station, but just as you get there, you see on the wall a sign that points in the opposite direction and tells you to go that way to the "Check-in Kiosks." So, you do a 180 and walk toward voices, but there are the Pharmacy on one side and the Check-Out Station on the other. Some lady in there looks up at you as though you are a pain in her ass and asks if she can help you?

"I doubt it," you reply, and turn around and see a closet full of computer terminals, with card swipe machines and writing pads attached. These are the "Check-in Kiosks." So, now you get to complete a check-in process with a friggin' computer, as T Rex would complain, and swipe your card and write on the pad and THEN go back to the Nurses' Station, where you can talk to a person in the flesh.

What do you do, immediately? Yell at the poor nurses who are just there to do their nursing jobs. You ask them if there is some reason you can't check in with a person anymore, and they say, "Yes; for your privacy." (Because some person sitting next to you who obviously would want to know your entire medical history- or at least where you live so he- or she- could stalk you later- wouldn't be able to look three inches in either direction at the screen next-door to his own screen while checking in.)

You tell the nurses you don't like it; that you don't like coming to the doctor anyway, and then to not be able to find where you are supposed to go, or ask a question of a real person while checking in when you are going to be talking to that real person in a couple minutes anyway. "OK," says a nurse.

You tell her, "No, it's NOT OK!" And you let the nurses know that the whole privacy crap is just that- a load of crap.

And thankfully the nurses remember to keep their polite and patient bedside manners, and the doctor ends up being a pretty cool guy.

Am I High? Or Taking the Wrong Drugs?

I don't get it. Help me, please.

Brand Name Drug Makers Could Be Liable for Injuries Caused by Generic Versions

http://www.injuryboard.com/

Brand Name Drug Makers Possibly Liable for Generics
Nov 10, 2008 Parker Waichman Alonso LLP
A California appeals court ruling that took place this past Friday is likely to generate lawsuits against many in the pharmaceutical industry. The recent ruling put brand name drug makers on notice that they can be held liable not only for injury caused by their own brand name medications, but also for injuries caused by generic drug makers that are selling generic versions of their brand name products.

The First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco, California, reinstated a lawsuit that was originally initiated by Elizabeth Conte. Conte had taken a generic version of Wyeth’s Reglan heartburn medication for nearly four years. She subsequently developed tardive dyskinesia, a condition which causes incurable and involuntary muscle movements. Although Conte only took generic versions of the medication, she accused Wyeth and three generic drugmakers of failing to warn of the risk of long-term use of the medication.

Conte’s doctor may have relied on product warnings distributed to physicians by Wyeth when he decided to prescribe the generic version, the court cited in a three-to-zero decision. Also, a Summary Judgment against the generic drugmakers—Teva Pharmaceuticals, Pliva, and Purepac Pharmaceuticals—was upheld. “As the foreseeable risk of physical harm runs to users of both name-brand and generic drugs,” Justice Peter Siggins wrote, “so too runs the duty of care and Wyeth has not persuaded us that consideration of other factors requires a different conclusion …. We believe California law supports Conte’s position that Wyeth owes a duty of care to those people it should reasonably foresee are likely to ingest metoclopramide in either the name-brand or generic versions when it is prescribed by their physicians in reliance on Wyeth’s representations.”

The case utilized a "negligent misrepresentation" theory which, if seen to fruition, could enable others to also work around the existing product liability precedant, thus enabling liability without attachment to time or "special relationship" or other concerns. Because there is no effective limitation on the scope of the theory, only "foreseeability," which essentially amounts to no limitation whatsoever, could take place. Some critics argue that this could enable a situation in which brand name manufacturers would be sued for a product for which they do not receive profits and from which generic sales could adversely affect their profits.

Apparently, a preemption argument was implemented that points to the ability for generic manufacturers' to utilize such an opton, thus placing more pressure on the product identification requirement. That requirement has long protected pioneer manufacturers from liability in these types of cases.

Given that misrepresentation is a false statement of fact made by one party to another party, in this case, the court agreed that the negligent misrepresentation is to be charged against the brand name manufacturer as well as the generic drug makers.

http://www.yourlawyer.com/articles/read/15477

I mean, I get it, the legalese, the implications that are being bandied about here, but I'm having a problem- maybe a couple. Is this me? Am I hallucinating? Because I've set this matter aside for days, hoping I'd change my mind about coming to the defense of the Big Pharmaceuticals. But, I didn't. If the guys at Wyeth are guilty of "negligent misrepresentation," aren't the guys at the generic companies, too?

"Drug manufacturers have long had to provide safety warnings for their products. Now they might have to do the same for companies piggybacking on their success...

"'As the foreseeable risk of physical harm runs to users of both name-brand and generic drugs,' Justice Peter Siggins wrote, 'so too runs the duty of care.'"
(Name-Brand Drug Makers Ruled Liable for Injuries From Other Manufacturers' Generics) http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202425895939

To me, that looks like the generic drug manufacturers are also accountable. Maybe it's a good thing I blew off law school.

But the Really Big Question I have in this scenario is, well, where is our watchful, thorough and care-driven government regulatory agency the FDA in this scenario at all? And mention of that agency's culpability? You know, the guys who deem drugs safe or not before they even go to market? I swear I learned about that in at least one of my Public Administration courses. Who the hell steered me wrong?

Double-Sided Sticky Tape

So, this year if you happen to send Christmas presents to disadvantaged kids in foreign lands- you know, the ones who don't have shoes or running water or electricity, and every single one of them peers at his or her pitiful world through big wide puppy-dog eyes waiting for an American to save the day- you can feel like you're doing an extra helpful favor:

Tape measure: X-rays detected from Scotch tape

"...Escobar, a graduate student at the University of California, Los Angeles, reports the work with UCLA colleagues in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.

"He suggests that with some refinements, the process might be harnessed for making inexpensive X-ray machines for paramedics or for places where electricity is expensive or hard to get. After all, you could peel tape or do something similar in such machines with just human power, like cranking."

Don't get me wrong. There are disadvantaged kids in foreign lands, and even in our Own Land. And kids everywhere shouldn't get Christmas presents. They should! Even if the PC Police are out again this year trying to put a moratorium on the use of the word "Christmas" in public, and to apply a hefty fine and perhaps a little jail time on those who don't comply. Presents are fun. Kids should have fun. Grownups, too. Presents for everyone, no matter what our eyes look like or where we live or whether we have shoes to wear or wear them if we have them.

"But," you may ask, "is it SAFE to use Scotch tape? Have I been irradiating myself all these years with undue amounts of x-radiation? Will I die of cancer?" Perhaps you will. Who knows? But not caused by contact with Scotch tape. If that were the case, my Aunt Joan would have shriveled up and gone long ago, and she is still kicking. And I would be bedridden by now, or using up the remainder of my credit card balances on sweet trips to Scotland and Barcelona if I could walk, just before I go.

"Escobar noted that no X-rays are produced in the presence of air. You need to work in a vacuum — not exactly an everyday situation.

"'If you're going to peel tape in a vacuum, you should be extra careful,"'he said. But 'I will continue to use Scotch tape during my daily life, and I think it's safe to do it in your office. No guarantees.'"

OK, so no guarantees on the tape, but no guarantees on anything in life, right? And come to think of it, daily life in a vacuum is a reality for some of us.

CeaseFire

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/magazine/04health-t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ei=5070&en=2895bb05f19143d2&ex=1210392000&emc=eta1