We often forget that mental illness is a disease like any other disease and can be cured or contained with care and proper treatment
6-FEB-2012
Anjali Ojha
Ignorance, stigma and lack of doctors have long marred mental healthcare in India. But with stressful lifestyles and ever increasing cases of depression, this much neglected segment is now gaining importance in the country’s medical scenario.
According to an estimate by the World Health Organisation, depression will become the second largest illness in terms of morbidity in another decade. It already affects one out of every five women and one in every 12 men. “Social awakening towards mental diseases and their cure has finally started to come,” Anindita Paul, director of Sanjivini Society for Mental Health, said.
“In terms of the urban society, there is lot of awakening which is coming now. Still as a country a lot more needs to be done,” Ms Paul said. Globally, mental disorders account for 13 per cent of the burden of diseases.
In India, according to the National Institute of Mental Health, the prevalence of schizophrenia, a severe mental disorder, is prevalent among 1.1 per cent of the total population while the overall lifetime prevalence rate of mental disorders is 10 to 12 per cent.
While the Government has a separate programme for mental health, the segment is marred by a lack of adequate doctors and infrastructure. According to the latest figures provided by the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, India has a mere 4,500 psychiatrists. National Human Rights Commission member PC Sharma said that a lack of proper care for mental patients is a major cause of concern. “In today’s world, everyone is living under constant stress. Still we have just 40 major mental health institutes,” Mr Sharma told IANS.
Mr Sharma said he had personally called the chief of the Medical Council of India and requested him to consider making psychiatry compulsory for all medical students. “The mental institutions are in a pathetic condition and the common perception is that these are ‘mad houses’,” he said.
Ms Paul agrees, but adds that the perspective is changing. “More rehabilitation centres are coming up, but the Government needs to take major steps,” she said.
The WHO preamble states, “Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”, suggesting there is no health without mental health.
Stress is seen as a major cause of worry as far as mental health is concerned, with studies showing a constant increase in stress, especially in the urban population.
The WHO, in its 130th session of its executive board, adopted a resolution on ‘Global Burden of Mental Disorders and the need for a comprehensive, coordinated response from health and social sectors at the country level’. The draft resolution in the matter was moved by India on January 20.
Sanjivini runs counselling centres, a rehabilitation centre and group consultations for those suffering from mental problems ranging from stress, depression, social problems to severe mental illness.
According to figures tabulated by the organisation, of all the patients who have come to them in the last nine years, some 19 per cent came to discuss issues pertaining to problems with people around them.
Another 17 per cent came to discuss their marital issues, 15 per cent for problems related to their personality, 18 per cent suffered from different mental ailments while one percent had suicidal tendencies.
Statistics also show women are more vulnerable to mental health-related problems as compared to men. Some 57 per cent of the patients in the last nine years have been women.
In 1982, India launched a special National Mental Health Programme to ensure the availability of minimum mental healthcare, encourage application of mental health knowledge in general healthcare and in social development and to promote community participation in mental health service.
“We are still somewhere in the middle of totally de-stigmatising mental illness. There is a need to understand that mental patients can be treated and can lead a normal life again,” Ms Paul said.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/item/51005-ignorance-stigma-mar-mental-healthcare.html
“Diabetic mothers-to-be have high risk of giving birth to children with congenital abnormality,” The Guardian said today.
The news is based on UK research that compared the rates of birth defects in women with and without diabetes. It found that about 7% of pregnancies in women with diabetes were affected by birth defects that were not caused by problems with the number or structure of the chromosomes. This was 3.8 times higher than the rate in women without diabetes. The study also found that women who have worse control over their blood sugar around the time of conception were at greater risk.
It has been known for some time that
diabetes in pregnancy is associated with a higher risk of various complications, and this large study provides further evidence on the link between diabetes and birth defects. UK medical guidance already addresses this risk, and recommends that from adolescence onwards, women with diabetes should be routinely given information on the importance of planning any future pregnancies and on getting specialist care and advice when they decide to have a baby. Women with very poor control of their diabetes are also advised not to become pregnant until their blood sugar control has improved.
Women with diabetes are likely to already be aware of these risks. However, this study provides another reminder that diabetic women who are thinking about becoming pregnant should discuss their options with their doctor first.
Where did the story come from?
The study was carried out by researchers from Newcastle University, the Regional Maternity Survey Office in Newcastle, and the South Tees NHS Trust. It was funded by Diabetes UK, the Department of Health, the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership, and the four primary care trusts in northeast England. The study was published in the
peer-reviewed medical journal Diabetologica.
The Guardian provided good coverage of this story, and put it into context of what is already known about how a woman’s diabetes can affect her pregnancy. The shorter news article in The Independent covered the basics of the story, but could be taken to suggest that the study was the first to discover the risk. In fact, this risk has been known for some time.
What kind of research was this?
Pregnancies in women with diabetes are already known to be at increased risk of various complications, including stillbirth and birth abnormalities. This
cohort study aimed to clarify the extent to which diabetes increases the risk of major birth defects, and how this risk is affected by other factors such as maternal age, smoking and socioeconomic status.
A cohort study is the best way to assess this type of question, which could not be answered by a
randomised controlled trial. Clearly, women with diabetes differ from women without diabetes in terms of their medical condition, but the two groups may also vary in other ways. It is important that researchers take such differences into account during their analyses.
What did the research involve?
The researchers used data collected on approximately 401,000 pregnancies that occurred between 1996 and 2008. They looked at whether mothers had diabetes, and if their babies had birth defects. The researchers then looked at whether birth defects were more common in babies born to mothers with diabetes.
The researchers obtained their data from the north of England, collected by the Northern Diabetes in Pregnancy Survey (NorDIP) and the Northern Congenital Abnormality Survey (NorCAS). NorDIP contains data on pregnancies in women diagnosed with diabetes at least six months before conception. It does not include women with gestational diabetes (diabetes that only occurs in pregnancy).
The study excluded multiple pregnancies (twins or triplets) and included pregnancies where the baby died at or before 20 weeks of pregnancy, or where the pregnancy was terminated due to a foetal abnormality. It included all eligible births in the study region in the study period. Abnormalities were classified according to standard definitions, and could be recorded up to the age of 12 years. Some birth abnormalities are caused by problems with the number or structure of chromosomes (the structures in the cell that contain our DNA). These abnormalities were looked at separately.
The researchers looked at the effect of various diabetes-related factors including how well the woman’s blood sugar was controlled at around the time of conception, whether she had type 1 or type 2 diabetes, and diabetes complications diagnosed before pregnancy (such as kidney or eye problems). They also looked at the effect of maternal age at the time of delivery, gestational age at time of delivery, folic acid intake before conception, foetal gender, number of previous babies, pre-pregnancy care, and smoking during pregnancy. Any significant factors were taken into account in the analyses to determine the effect of the individual factors.
What were the basic results?
Among the 401,149 pregnancies, 1,677 were in women with pre-existing diabetes. Most of these women (78.4%) had type 1 diabetes. Overall, 9,488 pregnancies were affected by at least one major birth defect, and 129 of these were in women with diabetes.
In women with diabetes, 71.6 per 1,000 pregnancies were affected by non-chromosomal major birth defects. This was 3.8 times higher than the rate in women without diabetes. Women with diabetes did not have an increased risk of having a baby with birth defects caused by chromosomal abnormalities.
When looking at specific factors linked to the risk of birth defects, the researchers found that women who had worse blood sugar control at around the time of conception were at increased risk of having babies with birth defects. Blood sugar control is often calculated using a measure called HbA1c level. This represents the levels of haemoglobin in the blood with a sugar molecule attached.
Doctors generally try to keep HbA1c levels below 7%. In this study, each increase of 1% in HbA1c over 6.3% was associated with a 30% increase in the odds of birth defects (
odds ratio [OR] 1.3, 95%
confidence interval [CI] 1.2 to 1.4). Women who already had kidney problems as a result of their diabetes also had an increased risk of having babies with birth defects (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.1 to 5.3).
Some other factors were associated with an increased risk of birth abnormalities when looked at in isolation, such as low intake of folic acid and lower socioeconomic status. However, once all other factors were taken into account, these were no longer
statistically significant.
How did the researchers interpret the results?
The researchers concluded that the main modifiable factor associated with birth defects in women with diabetes is their blood sugar control at around the time of conception. They say that the association with diabetes-related kidney problems needs to be studied further.
Conclusion
This study supports the existence of an association between maternal diabetes and increased risk of birth abnormalities, and helps quantify the size of the association. The study’s strengths include its large size and ability to include the entire population in the study area. However, there are a number of points to note:
- The researchers took into account various factors that could influence the results. However, as with all studies of this type, it is possible that unknown or unmeasured factors, other than maternal diabetes, could have affected the risk of birth defects.
- From this study we cannot say what effect diabetes arising in pregnancy (gestational diabetes) might have on risk of birth defects, as these women were not included in this analysis.
- The study relied on registry-recorded data, and there may be some omissions or inaccuracies in this data. That said, the registries used standard systems for recording data that should increase the reliability of their records.
The link between maternal diabetes and an increased risk of birth defects is already established. Better blood sugar control can help reduce this risk, although it cannot eliminate the risk completely. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) recommends that women with diabetes who are trying to conceive should aim for an HbA1c of less than 6.1%, if this can be achieved safely. It also suggests that women with an HbA1c of over 10% should avoid becoming pregnant.
NICE also recommends that:
- Women with diabetes who are planning to become pregnant should be informed of the need to establish good blood sugar control before conception, and that maintaining it throughout pregnancy will reduce the risk of miscarriage, birth defects, stillbirth and neonatal death. They also say that it is important for healthcare providers to explain that these risks can be reduced, but not eliminated entirely.
- The importance of avoiding unplanned pregnancy should be an essential component of diabetes education from adolescence onwards for women with diabetes.
- Women with diabetes who are planning to become pregnant should be offered pre-conception care and advice before they stop using contraception.
This study supports the need for specialist information and planning for pregnancy in women with diabetes. Women with diabetes who are thinking about becoming pregnant should discuss this with their doctor if they have not already done so.
Links To The Headlines
Women with diabetes warned to take precautions when having a baby. The Guardian, February 6 2012
Diabetes lifts birth defect risk. The Independent, February 6 2012
Diabetes quadruples birth defects risk, say researchers. BBC News, February 6 2012
Mothers-to-be with diabetes ‘four times more likely to have baby with birth defects’. Daily Mail, February 6 2012
Links To Science
Bell R, Glinianaia SV, Tennant PWG et al. Peri-conception hyperglycaemia and nephropathy are associated with risk of congenital anomaly in women with pre-existing diabetes: a population-based cohort study. Diabetologia (awaiting publication)
Pharmageddon has been defined as, "the prospect of a world in which medicines and medicine produce more ill-health than health, and when medical progress does more harm than good".
We see the need to investigate and explore that risk and to identify the factors and features that describe it.
Pharmageddon embraces the arguments of Ivan Illich (1976) but extends his focus. He warned of the risks of medicalisation, the generally dehumanising and damaging effects of professional interventions: "the medical establishment has become a major threat to health". Beyond direct drug injury (clinical iatrogenesis), he was concerned about the ill-effects of medicine on culture and community, "the paralysis of healthy responses to suffering, impairment and death" that resulted from "the expropriation of health".
But since Illich wrote, the whole shape of medicine has changed – both the knowledge base and its applications - and the pharmaceutical industry has come to dominate the medical establishment and the thrust and ethos of drug research, regulation, prescribing, availability and use.
The values of the market increasingly count. Now the leading companies, ‘the Pharmas’, have the driving influence on lifestyle, well-being and health outcomes. Their interests and investments have a major impact on the nature and availability of drug treatments, and on the essence and conduct of medicine, worldwide.
The surge towards globalisation since the 1990s has placed the pharmaceutical industry where it is today. The Pharmas are now centred in the USA – which represents half the
global market – and mainly reflect American health values and ways of doing things. The Pharmas are also major instruments of US foreign policy, and their interests are well defended as such.
Pharmageddon stands for the lament that the state of world health represents a colossal waste of what medicine and medicines could accomplish, by structurally harnessing all the talent, energy and commitment that is there. Increasingly this is not happening, which is neither morally defensible, nor in the best interests of our future. It is damaging to the climate of health, the oxygen of community and the core of personal well-being.
Pharmageddon is marked by the contrast between over-medication and drug deprivation; it also implies a strong causal link between the two. Under-medication in poorer communities, and over-medication in richer ones, are connected as closely as obesity and malnutrition, like two sides of the same coin.
Intensive drug marketing and excessive drug consumption has produced an industry whose capacity to innovate and provide is compromised, and whose viability seems increasingly to depend on systematic exaggeration of drug benefits and suppression of evidence of risks and harm. In place of transparency, the industry has now largely taken into its own hands the role of providing information to the public and professionals, filling the air with messages about health priorities, expectations and needs. The net result is a drug supply system that starves national health and sustains global health deprivation.
Outside the major drug markets, populations suffer and die because drugs they need are completely unaffordable, because trade rules block access, and/or for lack of relevant innovation. Elsewhere, the obsession with drug treatment, health observance and disease awareness, is producing nothing like the desired effects. The USA exemplifies this trend: it is beset by diseases of affluence, most obviously by obesity, with diabetes and related complications. But in spite, and no doubt also because, of all the treatment options, fewer than one in twenty citizens manages to maintain a normal weight, eat a nutritious diet, take adequate exercise and not smoke.
For all this, the notion of Pharmageddon may still seem almost inconceivable – as did the risk and threat of Climate Change, just a few years ago. It is natural to deny risks when the misery in prospect results from so much good intent and great talent, and from the enjoyment of huge benefits, valued freedoms and countless goods. And because medicines are especially precious goods, the idea of Pharmageddon offends personal and vested interests alike.
Parallels seem to exist between health and environmental catastrophe. The issues compare to the relationship between a car journey and Climate Change: they are inextricably linked, but not remotely connected in scale or relevance in the average driver’s mind. Just as Climate Change seems inconceivable as a journey outcome, so most personal experience of medicines flatly contradicts the notion of Pharmageddon.
As clinical practitioners, or individual consumers with access to medicines, most people have seen, felt, witnessed and/or imagined their sometimes miraculous effects and results. But, to pursue the analogy, the risk of Pharmageddon is to do with the way in which all drug travel changes the climate of health, even when so many individual drug journeys seem vital or worthwhile.
Both because and in spite of all the benefits of good medicine, it seems crucial to consider whether, collectively, we are rapidly losing sight and sense of health. Increasingly it seems we are. At least we need to challenge the dominant fallacy that drugs more and more resemble magic bullets and offer ever better solutions for the main trials of life.
At the same time, we need to accept that Pharmageddon is not simply the product of malevolence, but the natural outcome of something like a ‘
conspiracy of goodwill’ – a universe driven by self interest, but dominated by a complex of corporate bodies all competing to survive. If Pharmageddon seems to beckon, it is in spite of what everyone wants, not because of it.
That also applies to the Pharmas. All might be well if their products matched promise and met genuine health needs. In fact, the Pharmas are panicked by this huge shortfall and become more predatory, gluttonous, devious and oppressive, to try to compensate for it. Health outcomes drift further and further away from mainstream thinking; excessive promotion, data suppression and falsification, secrecy, bribery, fraud and deep conflicts of interest are increasingly revealed.
The consequences go far beyond the drug disasters that make the headline news. Pharmageddon implies that we have now arrived at a tipping point where leading companies devote their main energies to marketing lifestyle products, rather than on finding ways of meeting real medical needs. The brave new world in prospect is one in which commercial imperatives trump health priorities, when Pharmas and followers systematically change our understanding and experience of what it means to be human, flattening the distinctions between cultures, degrading the clinical arsenal, and developing vast numbers of drugs, most not needed and all purporting to be best. The net result is not only therapeutic disappointment, but also crushing pressures that no public health system could ever survive.
Many people have concerns about many different flaws in the present system of pharmaceutical medicine, but what do they all add up to? Our starting point is simply that the word, Pharmageddon, may mean something important and deserves to exist, if only as a description of forest rather than trees.
The etymology seems to fit. Pharmageddon conveys the idea of a battle between health and ill-health, right and wrong and for better or worse. It also challenges the tendency to take for granted that progress in pharmaceutical medicine leads naturally to better health. Armageddon was "the great symbolic battlefield of the Apocalypse, scene of the final struggle between good and evil". Apocalypse (
– APOKALYPSIS) literally means the lifting of the veil, "a term applied to the disclosure to certain privileged persons of something hidden from the mass of humankind…" (
Wikipedia, 2007).
The time has come to lift the veil: the broader significance of the risks must be explored and revealed. If Pharmageddon is part of any future reality, we all need to know.
***
SEE ALSO:
Notes and References and
CALL FOR ABSTRACTS
documents implicating Taco Bell as the restaurant likely involved in the 10-state outbreak, first reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on January 19. The CDC's summary outbreak report referred to the restaurant only as "Restaurant Chain A" and linked it to a cluster of Salmonella enteritidis infection that had sickened at least 68 individuals. The document provided by the Michigan health department summarizes statistics from a case-control study comparing outbreak victims with a control group. In interviews, 29 out of 48 victims (62 percent) reported eating at Taco Bell during the outbreak window, versus 17 out of 103 respondents (17 percent) from a general population control group taken from the ten states involved in the outbreak. The investigation compared those numbers against other fast food chains, none of which received the large disparity shown in the Taco Bell comparisons. Statistically, the study estimated an odds ratio of 9.24 to 1 that Taco Bell distributed the food contaminated with Salmonella enteritidis. CDC investigators believe the illnesses resulted from an ingredient distributed by Taco Bell that was contaminated before reaching restaurants, although the investigation could not pinpoint a single suspect ingredient. Of the victims who ate at Taco Bell, 94 percent reported eating ground beef, while 90 percent ate lettuce and 77 percent ate cheese. University of Minnesota environmental health professor Craig Hedberg, Ph.D., said that the document's data show a "reasonably strong" association between Taco Bell and the illnesses. "Elevated odds ratios and confidence intervals such as these do not prove causation, but would certainly support the hypothesis that the contaminated food item was distributed by Taco Bell to its customers," Hedberg said. Michigan reported one illness associated with the outbreak, though an epidemiologist at the Michigan Department of Community Health said the victim had not eaten at a Taco Bell during the outbreak window. Food Safety News could not confirm whether the victim had been traveling when he or she contracted Salmonella enteritidis.
The mystery behind the identity of "Restaurant Chain A" prompted some public health experts and consumers to question the transparency policies of the agencies involved in the investigation. In a response to inquiries about the Food and Drug Administration's transparency policy in such outbreaks, the FDA issued this response:
"FDA strives to provide reliable information and be as transparent and proactive as possible, particularly when there is an issue that threatens the public health," the statement read. "In situations where there are current illnesses associated with a specific food manufactured by a specific firm, or contaminated foods are distributed without known illnesses, FDA will continue to issue health advisories and press releases, as needed, to provide consumers with specific information so they may take steps to decrease their risk of illness and avoid further exposures."
"We will also continue to work with CDC and State health officials to provide support during their investigations," it added. "We are currently re-examining our practices and policies to ensure they will provide as much transparency as possible while adhering to laws and regulations." On February 1, Food Safety News received documents from the Oklahoma State Department of Health naming Taco Bell as "Restaurant Chain A," providing the first confirmation of the restaurant's identity. With 16 confirmed illnesses, Oklahoma had the second greatest number of outbreak-related cases behind Texas, which had 43. Following the release of the CDC's summary report on January 19, Food Safety News sent public records requests to the CDC, the FDA and the 10 state health departments involved in the outbreak, asking health officials for the name of the fast food chain and the locations of the three restaurants where more than one victim ate. The 10 states involved in the outbreak were: Texas (43 illnesses), Oklahoma (16), Kansas (2), Iowa (1), Michigan (1), Missouri (1), Nebraska (1), New Mexico (1), Ohio (1), and Tennessee (1). The state health departments in Nebraska and Texas have cited confidentiality for their denials of the records request. Iowa and Ohio said they did not have information on the identity of the restaurant, while the remaining state health departments have not yet responded to records requests and phone calls. The CDC has also yet to respond. For more than a week, Food Safety News has placed multiple phone calls to Taco Bell's public relations division asking for additional information on how the restaurant chain responded to the outbreak. After repeated promises to respond, Taco Bell has still not returned any calls. On Monday morning, a Taco Bell representative said the company is busy responding to many inquiries, but would put a priority on responding to Food Safety News.
A “single genetic mutation can double your risk of stroke”, the
Daily Mail
has reported. The newspaper added that scientists hope the discovery could lead to tailored treatments for the condition.
The news is based on research which looked for genetic variations that were more common in people who had had an ischaemic
stroke than in people who had not had one. Ischaemic strokes occur when the blood flow to a part of the brain is blocked. They account for 80% of stroke cases. By testing the DNA of several thousand participants, the researchers identified a new genetic variant that was associated with increased risk of a type of ischaemic stroke called a “large vessel stroke”. In large vessel strokes, one or more of the arteries supplying blood to the brain become blocked. People can carry up to two copies of the variant, and the study’s authors estimated that each copy of the variant a person carried was associated with about a 42% increase in the odds of a large vessel stroke. However, it is not yet known whether this genetic variant raises the risk of a stroke, or if it is found near to another variant that is responsible for the increased risk.
This well-designed study has identified a new association between a genetic variation and strokes. However, the study cannot confirm whether the variation itself causes the increased risk of a stroke. This key issue will need to be clarified before these findings can contribute to the development of the new treatments that many newspapers optimistically predicted.
Where did the story come from?
The study was carried out by researchers from the University of Oxford, St George’s, University of London, and a number of other UK and international universities and research institutes. It was funded by The Wellcome Trust. The study was published in the
peer-reviewed scientific journal Nature Genetics.
This study was covered by a number of newspapers. In general, the coverage of the research was good, although many news stories focused on its potential to lead to the development of screening tests and new treatments. However, there is no guarantee that this research will lead to such advances. If it does, they are likely to be some way off.
What kind of research was this?
This
case-control study aimed to identify genetic factors that are associated with an increased risk of ischaemic strokes. Ischaemic strokes occur when there is a blockage of blood flow to part of the brain. This can deprive brain cells of vital oxygen and nutrients. Around 80% of strokes are ischaemic. The remainder are haemorrhagic strokes, caused by a blood vessel rupturing in or around the brain.
To find genetic variants associated with strokes, the researchers read the DNA sequences of a group of patients who had had an ischaemic stroke. They compared them to the sequences of a group of healthy people. Their theory was that genetic variations that were more common among the stroke group could potentially be linked to stroke risk. To verify whether the variants they initially identified in these groups were associated with strokes, the researchers tested if the same pattern was seen when another group of stroke patients were compared with another group of healthy individuals (
controls). This is an accepted method that is used when performing genetic studies of this type.
Although this was a well-designed study, genetic studies like this one can only show that a particular genetic variant is associated with a disease. Further experiments are required to see if the variants identified have a role in causing strokes, or if they lie close to other genetic variants that have this effect. What these variants do still needs to be identified, so media claims that this research could lead to potential new treatments seem premature.
It is also important to remember that genetic, medical and lifestyle factors are likely to contribute to a person’s risk of a stroke. It should not be assumed that a person’s genetics mean that they will definitely have a stroke. Equally, people without high-risk genetics may still be at risk of a stroke risk because of lifestyle factors, such as smoking.
What did the research involve?
In the first phase of the study, researchers recruited 3,548 individuals who had had an ischaemic stroke (the cases) and 5,972 healthy individuals (the controls). The researchers looked for genetic variants that were more common in the stroke group. In a second phase, the researchers confirmed their findings in a new group of 5,859 cases and 6,281 controls. The new genetic variation they identified was then re-confirmed in a further 735 cases and 28,583 controls.
What were the basic results?
The researchers identified genetic variants at three locations that have been associated with different subtypes of ischaemic stroke in previous studies (near the genes PITX2 and ZFHX3, and on the short arm of chromosome 9). In addition, they identified a genetic variant at a new position within the HDAC9 gene, which was associated with a subtype of ischaemic stroke called large vessel stroke. In large vessel strokes, one or more of the large arteries supplying blood to the brain become blocked. This variant in HDAC9 occurs on about 10% of chromosomes in people in the UK. Humans have two copies of each chromosome, and therefore we can carry up to two copies of this variant (one on each chromosome). The researchers calculated that each copy of the variant that a person possessed was associated with a 42% increase in the odds of having a large vessel stroke (
odds ratio 1.42, 95%
confidence interval 1.28 to 1.57 for each copy).
How did the researchers interpret the results?
The researchers concluded that they have “identified a new association with the HDAC9 gene region in large vessel stroke”. They also stated that “the mechanism by which variants in the HDAC9 region increase large vessel stroke risk is not immediately clear.”
Conclusion
In this study, researchers have identified a genetic variant in the HDAC9 gene that is associated with a subtype of ischaemic stroke called a large vessel stroke. Large vessel strokes occur when one or more of the arteries supplying blood to the brain become blocked.
In this type of study, the genetic variants identified as being associated with a condition are not necessarily the cause of the increase in risk. Instead, they may lie near another variant that is responsible for the effect. In order to unlock the role of the HDAC9 gene, researchers will now need to study it and the region surrounding it more closely, both to confirm whether the variation in this gene is responsible for the increase in stroke risk and, if so, how it has this effect.
Genetic, medical and lifestyle factors are likely to contribute to stroke risk. In addition, multiple genetic factors may potentially contribute to the risk. It’s important to note that although having higher-risk genetic variants increases the risk of having a stroke, it does not guarantee that a person will have one. Equally, people who do not have any associated variants can still be at risk of a stroke because of lifestyles factors such as smoking, drinking and their diet.
This well-designed study found an association between a new genetic variant and one type of stroke. As yet, it is not possible to say whether this finding will lead to the development of new treatments for large vessel strokes.
Links To The Headlines
New genetic discovery could boost treatment for stroke patients. The Independent, February 6 2012
Mutant gene clue to beat strokes. Daily Express, February 6 2012
Links To Science
The International Stroke Genetics Consortium (ISGC), the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium 2 (WTCCC2), Bellenguez C et al.
Genome-wide association study identifies a variant in HDAC9 associated with large vessel ischemic stroke. Nature Genetics, February 5 2012 (published online)
On January 11, I watched aghast as my 89 year old grandfather,
Professor Ghulam Azam, was taken away by the authorities to prison. He was arrested on 62 trumped up charges of war crimes during the 1971 Bangladesh independence war, including the quite ludicrous charge of responsibility, “for all atrocities committed across the country between March 25, 1971, and December 16, 1971”.
Professor Ghulam Azam being taken to Dhaka
Central Jail having been refused bail.
Demotix/Mararshid. All rights reserved
During the war my grandfather was the political leader of what was simultaneously the largest religious group in the then East Pakistan, but a small political party with little clout in the wider political arena at the time. He supported the unity of East and West Pakistan, however he remained absolutely opposed to the military aggression on the ground, including the crimes committed by both military and paramilitary forces, and worked tirelessly to help aid those caught in the cross-fire. Nevertheless, despite his desperate attempts at reconciliation at the time, he was made a scapegoat for crimes committed by both the Pakistani military and paramilitary forces. A sustained and virulent media smear campaign has demonised his character, leading many, including those born after the war, to misjudge a man they have never met.
Now, the party my grandfather built is one of the leading opposition groups in Bangladesh and, allied with another major opposition group, represents a genuine political threat to the ruling Awami League-led regime. The ruling party is conducting a crippling
political witch hunt of the opposition in the name of seeking
justice for victims of war crimes. The International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) bears
no signs of the
international standards it lays claim to. Senior political figures condemn those who merely support the accused
as worthy of arrest and the chairman of the ICT himself has
considerable biasin the case, in the 90’s having been a member of an illegal ‘Public Enquiry Commission’ that was conducted outside any legal framework and that found my grandfather guilty. In addition, while leading members of the opposition party have been arrested and endured almost two years of
pre-trial detention and torture without charge, pro-liberation fighters, many of whom are part of the ruling party, are exempt from any charge or trial. Thus war crimes committed by the latter, such as those
against the Bihari communities, face blatant disregard. Many, from
journalists to
international lawyers, have
strongly critiquedthe glaring
legal flaws in the tribunal, including its
flawed procedure and apparent
desire to enact revenge rather than justice.
Before an international court, such as The Hague, that is observant of due process and guarantees fair treatment, our family would have no qualms about the case. Indeed, we are in no way opposed to the holding of a tribunal; our only demand is that it be impartial and fair. However,
any attempt to address these issues is sharply and passionately denounced as an attempt to undermine the tribunal.
This is reflective of a wider shift in Bangladesh. Freedom of speech is
regularly curtailed, a fact even the staunchest supporters of the government cannot deny: any critic of the tribunal or government is
swiftly punished.
Charges of sedition over the expression of political views betray a telling rise of censorship in the country. In its desperation to keep afloat a tribunal which any legal scrutiny would swiftly sink, the ire of the government does not even spare senior foreigners critical of the system: Toby Cadman, a British barrister with expertise in international human rights and war crimes, was
refused entry to the country and
vilified for his constructively critical comments.
At a hearing on January 9, my grandfather’s barrister was informed that he must present his client in court on January 11 or my grandfather would face arrest. However, upon appearing in court he was
arrested regardless. In spite of showing no signs of departure or avoidance throughout the smear campaign that has gained momentum over the past two years, it would appear the authorities still deemed an 89 year old man incapable of walking without support to be a flight risk. Bail was sought due to his old age and poor health: though granted at first it was swiftly revoked. Pro-regime news outlets across the country went wild
spewing unverified polemic: judgement was passed in the media even before he could be judged before a court.
The leftists in the ruling party are a particularly emphatic force in the campaign against my grandfather. As a student activist in Britain, for years I worked with western socialists who proved the backbone for international movements for human rights and justice. However, the Bangladeshi left
demanding the hangman’s noose rather than a fair trial as the just resolution to wartime suffering, leaves me bewildered at the brand of socialism these individuals practice.
Socio-political parties demand the death sentence for Ghulam Azam at a rally in Dhakar. Demotix/ Bayazid Akter. All rights reserved.
The government’s apparent desire for justice over the events of the 1971 war becomes particularly questionable when reflecting on the many serious cases of violent criminality the country has suffered recently that remain tellingly disregarded. A simple and glaring example lies in the 2009
siege at the Headquarters of the border security force, Bangladesh Rifles (BDR). Scores of leading
army officers were brutally killed, their wives raped and murdered. Like the infamous murder of the intelligentsia at the close of the 1971 war, the loss of army majors and brigadier generals, superior officers trained over decades, is another deeply dark and tragic space in Bangladesh’s history. Yet, the event remains unresolved, the reaction to it muted and the
legal procedures questionable. Small scale and subdued tribunals are slowly under way in
makeshift courts, a damningly inadequate response to such a heinous offence against the nation. Those bereaved officers who questioned and criticised Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina over the events of the 2009 siege were swiftly discharged from the army.
Police brutality and death in custody is commonplace in Bangladesh and
harassment of the ICT defence has been recorded by
Human Rights Watch, among others. Bangladesh also remains the only nation that not only practices execution but has in recent times
expanded its use. Add to that an extended vitriolic campaign, involving shockingly graphic posters calling for punishment and execution festooned across the country’s major cities, and the results of the tribunal seem to be a foregone conclusion. The danger of injustice and mistreatment is all too real, and deeply worrying.
Our last visit was limited to a paltry half hour with the four of us observed by eleven standing security personnel and several CCTV cameras. My grandfather was laid across the prison bed, physically weaker than I have ever seen him to be, yet encouragement emanating from his eyes and softly spoken words. I am reminded of his
last messagebefore arrest, calling on his followers to prioritise the protection of the nation and its people over any concern for him and to obey the law. It is a testament to his courage in the face of adversity, his devotion to his country and his spiritual strength while the rest of us quail. My grandfather has always been a
frank and honest man. He has remained steadfast by his ideals and his hopes for his country, dedicating his life to these causes in a way I have never witnessed from any other person. As I witness his unchanged spirit in his prison cell, I realise that a man of integrity cannot be conquered.
Prajakta Chavan
3-FEB-2012
MUMBAI : The accident in Pune on January 25, in which eight people died and 29 were injured, has compelled the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC) to focus its attention on the psychiatric condition of 37,000 MSRTC drivers working across the state.
The corporation has appointed a 12-member committee, which will focus on the drivers' stress levels, working conditions, mental agony and the effect of these on their performance.
The committee headed by Deepak Kapoor, managing director, MSRTC, includes Dr Subhangi Parkar, who is in-charge of KEM's psychiatrist department, PA Wankhede, head of VJTI's mechanical engineering department, Dr Anil Podar, MSRTC chief medical officer, Major VB Thorat, retired MSRTC general manager and senior officials from other departments.
The committee will also review the MSRTC's lock-and-key system and suggest ways to improve it. MSRTC driver Santosh Mane, had on January 25, used a master key to hijack an empty stationary bus.
This week, two committee meetings were held where members were briefed on the functioning of the MSRTC and the conditions in which the drivers work including the condition of the buses and depots.
"After studying the above aspects, the committee will deliver its report elaborating the problems, solutions and alterations within a month. This report will then be submitted to the state government," said an MSRTC official, on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing code of conduct.
So far, the corporation concentrated only on the physical health of the drivers. Routine tests were conducted to ensure good eyesight, hearing ability and cardio check-ups.
"We maintained the medical records of all our employees, but so far the need for psychiatric help was never raised. However, now we are focusing on that too," the official added.
Prominent ST bus stands to have steel barricades at exit gates
Sarang Dastane
6-Feb-2012
PUNE : The Maharashtra State Transport Corporation (MSRTC) will install steel barricades at the exit gates of prominent ST bus stops in the state, besides undertaking a basic medical check-up of all its drivers. The decision was prompted by the January 25 incident involving its driver Santosh Mane who mindlessly drove an ST bus on the city streets, killing 8 people and injuring 32 others. MSRTC's managing director and vice-president Deepak Kapoor said, "Steel barricades at exit gates would prevent any bus from leaving the depot without permission. It would be similar to the system installed at toll nakas on highways. A bus driver will be given an exit pass by the controller which has to be produced at the exit gate. Both suggestions are being discussed by a 12-member technical committee. We expect them to be implemented in the next few days."
Kapoor said that all 41,000 drivers will have to undergo a medical check-up. Blood pressure and sugar levels will be checked, besides a heart check up, tests for hypertension and basic orthopedic tests will be conducted. A schedule will be finalized in the next eight days, after which it will be implemented at all the 248 bus depots in the state.
"The next step would be a psycho-analysis test on the 41,000 drivers. We are waiting for suggestions of the technical committee. Besides, we are thinking if the psycho-analysis could be carried out under the Central government's National Mental Health Mission."
As per MSRTC officials, there is a suggestion to appoint professional counselors at each depot. The counselor would visit the depot once a week and will speak with the employees and officials. Such dialogues would help improve the work environment, said an MSRTC official.
Hilarious, weird, and educational in ways you wouldn't necessarily anticipate, Nurse Texican of
Weird Nursing Tales is a male RN working as a critical care float nurse.
Admit it: You're curious about what corpses say about the life they lived. And Caitlin Doughty of
Order of the Good Death is great at interpreting it. She also takes questions for her popular
Ask a Mortician series on YouTube.
Dr. Kevin Pho of
KevinMD.com "pulls back the curtain" on the health industry so that patients can better understand the system. An educated patient is a healthier one!
Nurse Jo, RN, of
Head Nurse puts a poignant, educational, and always hilarious face on the people who provide the backbone of our healthcare system.
Ask Toby answers all your nutrition-related questions with advice about everything from balancing good nutrition with good parenting to recipe adjustments and general food questions.
Lori Lieberman, RD, MPH, CDE and LDN, of
Drop It and Eat, specializes in helping people get out of the "diet" mentality and into eating what is best for your body. She is as gentle as she is experienced.
Delve deeper than the headlines of the latest fitness research studies. Alex Hutchinson, a post-doctoral physicist and former elite distance runner, started
Sweat Science to offer in-depth analysis and answer questions related to fitness research.
Jenny Hadfield, a personal trainer, coach, and MS in exercise science answers all your running questions in her blog
Ask Coach Jenny. Whether you're a newbie and worried about runner's tummy or a seasoned vet and want to up your game, she's got answers.
Dr. William Roberts, MD, MS, FACSM, may have a lot of letters after his name but he's also an avid runner and is currently the medical director of the Twin Cities Marathon. In his
Sports Doc column he answers all your medical questions in regards to fitness.
Nutritionist Lauren of
Food Trainers provides a great mix of humor, recipes, and healthy eating tips.
Visual source:
Newseum
Nicholas D. Kristof sounds off on turning the world upside down one petition at a time:
Ecuador, for example, used to run a network of “clinics” where lesbians were sometimes abused in the guise of being made heterosexual. A petition denouncing this practice gathered more than 100,000 signatures, leading Ecuador to close the clinics, announce a national advertising campaign against homophobia, and appoint a gay-rights activist as health minister.
The masterminds of the successful campaigns aren’t usually powerful or well-connected. Mostly, they just brim with audacity and are on a first-name basis with social media.
Kathleen Parker thinks "pro-choice advocates, including the president of the United States, are willing to tread on fundamental freedoms in order to impose and secure ideological purity." Proving once again her ability to practice a different kind of turning the world upside down.
Mike Rosen hits about 6 out of 10 on the upside-down meter, showing his skills as a master of projection:
[Warren] Buffett extracts a pound of lie from an ounce of truth while throwing in a heavy dose of half truths and convenient omissions.
John Nichols weighs in on the "stunning," much-remarked-upon Chrysler ad at the Superbowl. But at the 50-second point, he says, when images of last year's pro-union protests are featured, "something is missing: union signs. Whited out. Winston Smith would have been far more productive if he had had such tools.
Don't start fuming before you finish reading
E.J. Dionne Jr. today:
Two years ago, Citizens United tore down a century’s worth of law aimed at reducing the amount of corruption in our electoral system. It will go down as one of the most naive decisions ever rendered by the court. [...]
A more troubling interpretation is that a conservative majority knew exactly what it was doing: that it set out to remake our political system by fiat in order to strengthen the hand of corporations and the wealthy.
When it comes to national security, Michael V. Hayden is no shrinking violet. As CIA director, he ran the Bush administration's program of warrantless wiretaps against suspected terrorists.
But the retired air force general admits to being a little squeamish about the Obama administration's expanding use of pilotless drones to kill suspected terrorists around the world — including, occasionally, U.S. citizens.
"Right now, there isn't a government on the planet that agrees with our legal rationale for these operations, except for Afghanistan and maybe Israel," Hayden told me recently.
The reaction to January's jobs report shows how tragically our expectations have fallen, especially among some Democrats and their supporters. Their cheerleading isn't just bad policy or bad politics, although it is both of those things. It's also callous and insensitive to the misery of millions.
The President has learned a lot, politically and economically, from the pressure he's received from the left. He's getting better at making the rhetorical case for economic justice. Now he needs to get better at losing, by losing Congressional battles with a set of solutions that the public will understand and support. It's incomprehensible that Republicans would oppose a jobs bill for veterans, but they will.
But it's equally incomprehensible that a Democratic President would offer small responses to such a large disaster. (I include the Jobs Act in the category of "small responses," since such a large chunk of it is dedicated to ineffectual tax cuts for business. But it would help.)
Gen. Wesley Clark (Ret.) addresses the slowed spending at the Pentagon and the reduction in troops levels:
The United States will remain stronger than any other power, or combination of powers, and with our network of alliances, should be more than capable of protecting our national interests and meeting our obligations abroad. The bottom line is, this new strategy provides us the security we need with the resources that we can afford.
Cal Thomas goes macho with another of his wimp-in-the-White-House rants:
I wonder if things might be different if we had a strong president who let Iran and the rest of the Islamists know we have no intention of negotiating with them and if they attack us they will die to regret it. Just asking.
The Tumblin' Default
From
Tumblin’ Tuesday – Keep on Rolling
Got to roll debt baby,
call it the tumblin' default.
That's the theme for the week as Greece gets yet another final deadline extension to come up with more and more concessions so it can borrow even more money that it will never be able to pay back. "Honey, got no money" is the line that should be obvious to EU Stones fans as the IMF's chief economist insisted that Greece must cut wages to boost competitiveness and pull the country out of its economic quagmire. "Either you basically increase productivity growth a lot and quickly, and you keep wage growth moderate, or you decrease wages," said Olivier Blanchard.
"It is a pretence that the measures are taken to forestall bankruptcy,"
Communist party leader Aleka Papariga told the gathering crowds at today's National Strike. "On the contrary, they will lead the people to misery to benefit the plutocracy and capital," she said.
Sadly, only the Communists are telling the people the truth in Greece - the people are being sold into decades of wage slavery as a population that has already voluntarily accepted 25% wage cuts is now being forced to accept additional 30% wage cuts while the ECB and IMF shove another $192Bn worth of debt down their throats that is ONLY to be used to pay off bondholders who took advantage of them in their time of weakness to force them to roll over their debt at record high rates.
Sacrifices MUST be made, says the former VP of the ECB - who is now the Prime Minister of Greece (unelected as Papandreou was forced out) - but he's not talking to the creditors, but the Greek people, who will still, even if they work for 1/2 wages for the rest of the decade, be 120% of their GDP in debt by 2020 (down from 160% today). So the Greek people are being asked to sacrifice their own retirement and their children's future rather than telling the Banksters to take a hike.
And people wonder why we can't get a deal passed?
As I said in yesterday's post, either Greece passes a debt deal and Athens will be in flames (strike began at midnight) or Greece will not pass a debt deal and Europe will be in flames (DAX down 1% at 8:05). That simple logic allowed us to go short on the Futures in Member Chat this morning as the Dollar tested 79 and my 4am comment to Members was:
Dollar bouncing off 79 is going to be bad for the indexes. Looks like fake pumping to me and Greece not even fixed yet. I am literally scared to short these days but 2,525 is a good line to watch on the Nas (NQ) and 825 on the RUT (/TF) and $1,725 on gold (/YG) should be good for a little ride down if the Dollar can get over 79.15 (now 79.12) so let's call that the bear line with 79.20 confirming Dollar strength although not meaningful until over 79.50.
Already the Nasdaq is down to 2,517 and, at $20 per point, that's a quick $160 per contract. The Russell is down to 822 but that one pays $100 per point so $300 per contract there and gold is our star, with a drop to $1,715 at $33.20 per contact, edging out the RUT shorts with gains of $332 per contract - not bad for a morning's work, just in time to pay for 200 Egg McMuffins.
Percentage-wise, we did better with our TLT trade, also detailed in the morning post as I said there (also in conjunction with my prediction of strife in Greece: "
I am liking those TLT longs (we picked up the weekly $115 calls for $2)!
"
As long as we can keep making quick, little, hit and run trades like this - we really don't care which way the market goes, nor do we care if the VIX wants to pretend that this market isn't volatile. In fact, in this trade, we took advantage of the low VIX to buy a relatively low-premium call (the $115 for $2) which gave us tremendous leverage on this 10% move in TLT. Generally, we prefer to be sellers of premium but, when the premium is so cheap it's not attractive for us to sell - we know how to climb over to the other side of the table and make a few bets for ourselves.
Both of our other trade ideas were bullish ones yesterday, one on CSTR and one on AMX.
The CSTR trade was at 9:27, just ahead of the bell and made for an easy entry as the stock traded to lows of $48.66 at 10:20. My trade idea was just to sell the Jan $42.50 puts for $6 and we also discussed adding the Jan $45/60 bull call spread for $6 as well as a riskier way to go for a $15 profit, rather than $6 but we felt the numbers justified $60 ahead of earnings. It seems the markets already agree with our assessment as CSTR is already at $60 this morning.
We're trying to ignore the news but: "You could sell your home, owe nothing more on your mortgage and get $30K," goes a letter from JPMorgan to a delinquent homeowner. With the foreclosure process gummed up, banks are
finding it less expensive to allow short sales, forgo their right to pursue unpaid debt, and even offer cash. This should really piss you off if you're paying your mortgage like a good little drone but the same bank (Chase) won't refinance you at 4% because - for whatever ridiculous excuse - "you don't qualify."
What we need in this country is for some Communists to come over and teach the people how to organize themselves to stand up to these Corporate Monsters but, oh yeah - just the mention of the word Communist puts most of you into a Pavlovian frenzy as you've been conditioned your whole life to think anything Communist (ie. anti-Capitalist) is somehow evil. I guess bending over and taking it IS our only option - Yay Capitalism!
If the people in this country had any balls (or actual leaders of their own and not just the Corporate puppets we're allowed to vote for), we'd have a mortgage strike and simply not pay this month. That would choke off about $200Bn in monthly mortgage revenue from the Banks and I'm pretty sure it would only take one month before the banks capitulate and come back to the table with a reasonable way to share the 0.25% borrowing rate they get from the Government with those of us they are currently squeezing for 5% and higher loan payments.
Ireland is currently trying to organize a Mortgage Strike: "The nuclear weapon is for borrowers acting in concert and to say that unless proper and sustainable solutions are put in place which are fair and reasonable, then we should not continue to pay under these current conditions," says Ross Maguire, of the New Beginning Trade Union. "It is radical but it is where we are going if things don't change. It's the last option but it is better that people like us have control over it because the danger is that if that kind of people power was misdirected it could wreck the financial system. New Beginning doesn't want to smash the financial system; we merely want to reform it and re-balance power between banks and borrowers."
So far, the Greek people have been surprisingly docile as their retirement programs, health care, current wages and Government Services have been slashed, even as their tax rates have risen by over 30%. In the US, the middle class sheeple are also dying the death of 1,000 cuts with thousand more yet to come.
Should this make us bearish? Of course, not - it's a huge victory for Capitalism as getting back to free labor has been our goal ever since Lincoln screwed it up in 1863. This time, there won't be a war to defend the Capitalist's right to own slaves - this time we will get the people of nation after nation to "volunteer" to spend the rest of their lives living in squalor and servitude as our children and our grandchildren will pay for our excesses.
Because, after all, it was our own fault for buying that couch on layaway, right?
On one side are those who say anyone can drink raw milk - just buy a cow - while those on the other side push for full-blown, unrestricted retail sales for unpasteurized milk.
As in past years, there is no predicting when or where raw milk wars are going to break out. Indiana's General Assembly this year has seen one of those unexpected skirmishes, where surprise definitely has had the advantage.
Indiana Senate Bill 398 was drafted to be all about some changes in the duties and responsibilities of the state chemist. Then a
76-line amendment was proposed for SB 398.
With that language added to bill, a licensed milk producer with 20 or fewer cows would be allowed to sell raw milk without much additional regulation. The on-farm sales would have to be made under signs telling the public that "raw milk products are not pasteurized" and bottles will require "raw milk" labels.
But that's about it. Indiana's current law allows raw milk only to be sold as pet food.
The amendment language was adopted and SB 398 is on the Indiana Senate's second reading calendar, which means it could be brought to the floor for a final up or down vote whenever leaders want to bring it forward.
On-farm sales of unpasteurized milk are currently legal in 15 states. Another 10 states allow retail sales, just like pasteurized milk.
Indiana senators who want to relax restrictions on raw milk spoke fondly of their own experiences with the beverage, mostly when they were growing up.
In New Jersey, where attempts to liberalize raw milk sales have been hung up since at least 2010, advocates are trying again.
Consumers not involved with the current underworld of raw milk are getting exposed to it through some recent media reports. The Camden Courier Post, for example, paints a picture of cash being exchanged for illicit milk in a dimly lit garage. Orders are picked up in reusable bags, and driven away quickly in the night.
The garage in question is a distribution center for raw milk produced in nearby Pennsylvania, where dairy farms have long provided the product to customers who come from the New Jersey side of the border.
New Jersey has one of the oldest bans on the sale and distribution of raw milk. Those prohibitions were put in place after raw milk was found responsible for massive outbreaks of foodborne illness early in the century.
The New Jersey Assembly voted 71-6 last year to allow some commercial sales of raw milk. But the Senate Economic Growth Committee sat on the bill, waiting until December to hold a hearing before allowing the measure to die.
The measure was quickly reintroduced in the new Assembly session and assigned to the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee. Now
A-518, the New Jersey bill was approved by the committee on Friday.
In testimony before the vote, those opposed to the bill criticized it for not requiring raw milk dairies to test for pathogens, and for potentially costing the state more to oversee the dairies and investigate outbreaks.
Sponsor of the bill, Republican John DiMaio of Hackettstown, said he wasn't worried about health concerns, and that the measure establishes the standards a licensee must maintain in order to get a permit and protect consumers.
In Wisconsin, where only a veto by former Gov. Jim Doyle prevented the commercial sale of raw milk after a liberalization bill passed the Legislature, a big date for advocates will be Feb. 22.
That's the day the newly formed Wisconsin Raw Milk Association is holding its lobbying day in Madison.
The group is supporting
Senate Bill 108, which would end most state regulations for licensed producers who opt to sell raw milk to the public. This bill hardly moved in 2011, but then again, not much moved in Madison last year that was not part of the budget and benefits battle between Wisconsin's Republican Gov. Scott Walker and Democrats in the Legislature.
Spokesmen for Walker say the governor, who is currently fighting a union-backed recall, would likely sign a raw milk bill if it lands on his desk.
While Doyle set up a task force that proposed recommendations for how raw milk might be safely produced and sold in the state, that legislative sponsors of SB 108 have largely ignored that work.
In Kentucky, a bill to legitimize cow-share arrangements has been sent to the Senate floor.
Sharing ownership of a herd of cows to gain access to unpasteurized dairy products is not expressly prohibited in Kentucky, where Department of Public Health regulations ban the retail sale of milk that hasn't been pasteurized. But the bill would clarify their legality.
The measure is opposed by the Kentucky Dairy Development Council, which fears it would be a step closer to allowing raw milk sales with no regulatory oversight.
The dairy council acknowledges that some farmers want to sell raw milk because they can sell it at a premium, but cautions that all dairies get hurt whenever there's an outbreak. It points to the recent outbreak of Campylobacter infection, linked to a Pennsylvania raw milk dairy, that has sickened at least 38 people in four states.
The bill is supported by Kentucky's Community Farm Alliance.
Indiana, New Jersey, Wisconsin and Kentucky will not be the only states that see raw milk action during legislative sessions this year.
Category: Health News
Created: 2/3/2012 2:05:00 PM
Last Editorial Review: 2/6/2012
Category: Health News
Created: 2/3/2012 4:06:00 PM
Last Editorial Review: 2/6/2012
Category: Health News
Created: 2/3/2012 4:06:00 PM
Last Editorial Review: 2/6/2012
Daily Kos-Public Policy Polling survey released today captures public sentiment on the issue of Susan G. Komen's withdrawal of funding from Planned Parenthood and the subsequent firestorm. The survey was Feb 3-4, 1000 adults, margin of error of plus/minus 3.1%.
In the survey, Komen clearly takes some hits both with the decision and the response of donors and volunteers. It was widely covered, and most of the public is aware of the controversy:
One of the main services Planned Parenthood provides is breast cancer screenings. Susan G. Komen for the Cure recently announced it would no longer fund this program. Have you heard about this decision?
Yes.................................................................. 83%
No ................................................................... 17%
Most recipients first heard about the news from television (59%), with a combined 14% from Twitter/Facebook/blogs and word of mouth.
Do you support or oppose Susan G. Komen’s decision to stop funding breast cancer screenings by Planned Parenthood?
Support ........................................................... 39%
Oppose ........................................................... 53%
Not sure .......................................................... 8%
When asked a specific "image" question:
Do you think that Susan G. Komen for the Cure’s decision has helped the organization’s image, hurt it, or has it not made a difference?
It has helped the organization's image............ 30%
It has hurt it ..................................................... 53%
It hasn't made a difference.............................. 14%
Not sure .......................................................... 4%
Komen comes out on the short side, and in the "what are you going to do about it" category, note these follow-up responses:
Does this decision make you more or less likely to donate money to Susan G. Komen for the Cure in the future, or does it not make a difference?
More likely....................................................... 29%
Less likely ....................................................... 49%
Doesn't make a difference ................................. 19%
Not sure .......................................................... 2%
Does this decision make you more or less likely to purchase "Pink"- or "Pink Ribbon"-
branded merchandise from partners of Susan G. Komen for the Cure, or does it not make a difference?
More likely....................................................... 27%
Less likely ....................................................... 43%
Doesn't make a difference ................................. 29%
Not sure .......................................................... 2%
Komen's monopoly on "corporate pink" sales is damaged. The idea that conservatives will simply make up for what they've lost from the general public is not supported by these numbers.
In regard to the specific issues of the controversy:
Do you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of Planned Parenthood’s breast cancer screening services?
Favorable........................................................ 50%
Unfavorable .................................................... 32%
Not sure .......................................................... 18%
It's tough to figure who has a negative view of cancer screening, but apparently 32% do. And by ideological breakdown, only conservatives (51-25) have a majority unfavorable view. Liberals (72-17) and moderates (57-26) have a favorable view. If Komen is trying to de-politicize breast cancer screening, they've got work to do with conservatives.
Do you think that Planned Parenthood should be denied funding for breast cancer screening because Republicans in Congress are investigating them for providing access to reproductive health services like abortion and contraception?
PP should be denied funding................................ 38%
It should not .................................................... 52%
Not sure .......................................................... 11%
The full results are
here.
No comments:
Post a Comment