Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Father's Day Breakfast This Saturday
Jenny and I are planning a Fathers Day Breakfast on Saturday June 17 from 10:30-1:00 at Jenny's house.
On the menu: pancakes, eggs, meat of some sort, fruit, coffee, juice etc.....
Please RSVP by Friday June 16th.
Hope to see you there.
Sara
Sara Jorde Photography
612-338-6923
www.jorde.com
Thursday, June 08, 2006
A word of warning to asthma sufferers
By Nancy Shute
Posted 6/7/06
Are long-acting beta-agonists a lifesaving drug for people with asthma, or do they harm more than help? That's a question that has bedeviled asthma patients and their doctors almost since the powerful inhaled drugs came into use more than 50 years ago. Since 2003, spurred by evidence that some people who used the drugs to reduce the frequency of asthma attacks actually had their attacks become severe, the Food and Drug Administration has issued increasingly stern warnings about the risks posed by salmeterol and formoterol, sold as Advair Diskus, Foradil Aerolizer, and Serevent Diskus.
But the agency has kept the drugs on the market. Now a study in the June 6 online Annals of Internal Medicine, which analyzed existing data from 19 clinical trials involving 33,826 patients, suggests... the drugs shouldn't be used at all. The study, led by Shelley Salpeter, a clinical professor of medicine at the Stanford University School of Medicine, found that patients using long-acting beta-agonists were twice as likely to have life-threatening asthma attacks as patients on a placebo and 2.5 times more likely to be hospitalized. Death from asthma was rare, with only 16 patients studied dying. But those using LABAs were 3.5 times more likely to die, with 13 deaths as opposed to three in the placebo group.
What really snapped wide the eyelids of asthma researchers, however, was Salpeter's estimate that one LABA, salmeterol, could be responsible for 4,000 of the 5,000 asthma deaths in the United States each year. That conclusion seems "a little strong," says Thomas Platts-Mills, head of the department of asthma and allergic disease at the University of Virginia. If salmeterol were responsible for 80 percent of asthma deaths, Platts-Mills says, the mortality rate from asthma should have risen in recent years, as the drugs have been aggressively marketed. Instead, death rates have fallen in the past three to five years. That's not to say there aren't serious concerns about the drugs' safety, he says.
"I don't think it changes where we were when the FDA put a black box on any drug with salmeterol in it," Platts-Mills says. "But the idea that there's a national problem seems very unlikely." Patients should stick with current treatment guidelines for using LABAs, in the opinion of Jeffrey Glassroth, vice dean for academic and clinical affairs at Tufts University in Boston, who wrote an editorial accompanying the Salpeter study. That is, use inhaled corticosteroid drugs first to control asthma; these drugs help reduce inflammation that contributes to asthma. If symptoms don't improve, increase the dosage of corticosteroids before turning to LABAs. For many people, particularly those with severe asthma, LABAs, which relax muscles around the lung's airways, are very effective, Glassroth says. But for some, LABAs can make symptoms worse. "We don't have a way of predicting who's in that group," he says.
In the past, doctors worried that patients might be trying to use LABAs as rescue inhalers, which they are not. In its November 2005 health alert, the FDA urged patients to use only short-acting bronchodilators such as albuterol to treat wheezing during attacks, and to let their doctors know if wheezing got worse while using a LABA. Another theory is that LABAs mask asthma symptoms, and that patients taking them without corticosteroids may not realize their asthma is worsening in time to seek treatment. Many patients worry about using big doses of corticosteroids indefinitely, because the drugs can have serious side effects, particularly in children.
Other recent research suggests that people with a specific genetic variation may be less able to tolerate LABA drugs, but a test doesn't yet exist that makes it easy to screen people for that susceptibility.
Posted 6/7/06
Are long-acting beta-agonists a lifesaving drug for people with asthma, or do they harm more than help? That's a question that has bedeviled asthma patients and their doctors almost since the powerful inhaled drugs came into use more than 50 years ago. Since 2003, spurred by evidence that some people who used the drugs to reduce the frequency of asthma attacks actually had their attacks become severe, the Food and Drug Administration has issued increasingly stern warnings about the risks posed by salmeterol and formoterol, sold as Advair Diskus, Foradil Aerolizer, and Serevent Diskus.
But the agency has kept the drugs on the market. Now a study in the June 6 online Annals of Internal Medicine, which analyzed existing data from 19 clinical trials involving 33,826 patients, suggests... the drugs shouldn't be used at all. The study, led by Shelley Salpeter, a clinical professor of medicine at the Stanford University School of Medicine, found that patients using long-acting beta-agonists were twice as likely to have life-threatening asthma attacks as patients on a placebo and 2.5 times more likely to be hospitalized. Death from asthma was rare, with only 16 patients studied dying. But those using LABAs were 3.5 times more likely to die, with 13 deaths as opposed to three in the placebo group.
What really snapped wide the eyelids of asthma researchers, however, was Salpeter's estimate that one LABA, salmeterol, could be responsible for 4,000 of the 5,000 asthma deaths in the United States each year. That conclusion seems "a little strong," says Thomas Platts-Mills, head of the department of asthma and allergic disease at the University of Virginia. If salmeterol were responsible for 80 percent of asthma deaths, Platts-Mills says, the mortality rate from asthma should have risen in recent years, as the drugs have been aggressively marketed. Instead, death rates have fallen in the past three to five years. That's not to say there aren't serious concerns about the drugs' safety, he says.
"I don't think it changes where we were when the FDA put a black box on any drug with salmeterol in it," Platts-Mills says. "But the idea that there's a national problem seems very unlikely." Patients should stick with current treatment guidelines for using LABAs, in the opinion of Jeffrey Glassroth, vice dean for academic and clinical affairs at Tufts University in Boston, who wrote an editorial accompanying the Salpeter study. That is, use inhaled corticosteroid drugs first to control asthma; these drugs help reduce inflammation that contributes to asthma. If symptoms don't improve, increase the dosage of corticosteroids before turning to LABAs. For many people, particularly those with severe asthma, LABAs, which relax muscles around the lung's airways, are very effective, Glassroth says. But for some, LABAs can make symptoms worse. "We don't have a way of predicting who's in that group," he says.
In the past, doctors worried that patients might be trying to use LABAs as rescue inhalers, which they are not. In its November 2005 health alert, the FDA urged patients to use only short-acting bronchodilators such as albuterol to treat wheezing during attacks, and to let their doctors know if wheezing got worse while using a LABA. Another theory is that LABAs mask asthma symptoms, and that patients taking them without corticosteroids may not realize their asthma is worsening in time to seek treatment. Many patients worry about using big doses of corticosteroids indefinitely, because the drugs can have serious side effects, particularly in children.
Other recent research suggests that people with a specific genetic variation may be less able to tolerate LABA drugs, but a test doesn't yet exist that makes it easy to screen people for that susceptibility.
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
Gay marriage amendment sheer nonsense
By Lou Dobbs
CNN
Wednesday, June 7, 2006; Posted: 9:09 a.m. EDT (13:09 GMT)
NEW YORK (CNN) -- President Bush this week urged Congress to pass a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, at a time when the United States faces some of the greatest challenges in our nation's history.
So, logically, what could possibly better ensure the prosperous and bright future of working men and women and their families than for the Senate to work on a constitutional amendment that is guaranteed to fail?
It's clear that cynical, patronizing White House political strategists are... trying to rally a conservative base that they believe is more base than conservative. They're wrong on all counts.
We're fighting a war against radical Islamist terrorists with ongoing campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, we're drowning in debt from our growing record trade and budget deficits and we're watching our public education system fail a generation of students. Congress has yet to act on an effective solution to our illegal immigration crisis as millions of illegal aliens flood our borders every year, and our nation's borders and ports are still woefully insecure, four and a half years after the September 11 attacks.
I believe most Americans are far more concerned about their declining real wages and the lack of real creation of quality jobs than the insulting insertion of wedge issues into the national dialogue and political agenda.
But President Bush and the Senate have decided they should take up a constitutional ban of gay marriage. Polls tell us most of us oppose gay marriage. Those same polls are also shouting to our elected representatives in Washington that we want real leadership and real solutions to real problems.
The president and the Senate's Republican leadership are now claiming that an amendment to our Constitution is necessary to save the American family. No matter how you feel about the issue, and many of us feel deeply, a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage is utter and complete nonsense. It's an insult to the intelligence of every voter, Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative.
The president and the Senate are focusing on one of the few reasons that has not been proven to cause divorce. They instead should look to financial hardships, and the lack of communication about family finances. The median family income is stagnating while gasoline costs and higher interest rates are eating up the family budget.
Nor is the Senate looking at the national tragedy of out-of-wedlock births: In seven states, more than 40 percent of our children are born out of wedlock. Nationally, more than one out of three of our children are born to unmarried parents.
Both political parties love to excite and enliven their so-called "bases" by focusing on wedge issues like gay marriage, abortion, gun control, school prayer and flag burning. Both the Republicans and Democrats raise these issues to distract and divert public attention from the pressing issues that affect our way of life and our nation's future.
Are these wedge issues really how Congress should be spending its time, especially given how little time politicians spend in Washington, D.C., these days? I'd rather see our 535 elected representatives and this president use their time to combat poverty, fix our crumbling schools, secure our broken borders and ports and hold employers accountable for hiring illegal aliens. And like millions of Americans, I am desperate for a resolution to our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
How can we tolerate elected officials who press wedge issues when 37 million people in the United States live in poverty, one in every eight Americans? Almost 18 percent of children under the age of 18 live in poverty -- 13 million children.
Nearly 46 million people live without health insurance, about 16 percent of the population, a number that has risen by 6 million since 2000. More than one in 10 children are uninsured, and one-quarter of people with incomes below $25,000 also lack any health insurance.
College costs are skyrocketing. There's been a 40 percent jump (inflation-adjusted) in tuition and fees at public four-year colleges and universities over the past five years, according to the College Board. The costs for brand-name prescription drugs have also increased twice as fast as the rate of inflation. In fact, over the past six years, the average rise in the price of brand-name drugs is 40 percent, according to the AARP.
But while these increases in the price of the basics make it harder for hard-working men and women to make ends meet, the president and Congress would rather drive wedge issues than work toward real solutions.
I wonder if the president's political advisers know just how ill-advised and smarmy this wedge issue looks to the millions of us who want solutions to the critical, urgent problems facing this nation. Worse, I wonder if they even care.
CNN
Wednesday, June 7, 2006; Posted: 9:09 a.m. EDT (13:09 GMT)
NEW YORK (CNN) -- President Bush this week urged Congress to pass a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, at a time when the United States faces some of the greatest challenges in our nation's history.
So, logically, what could possibly better ensure the prosperous and bright future of working men and women and their families than for the Senate to work on a constitutional amendment that is guaranteed to fail?
It's clear that cynical, patronizing White House political strategists are... trying to rally a conservative base that they believe is more base than conservative. They're wrong on all counts.
We're fighting a war against radical Islamist terrorists with ongoing campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, we're drowning in debt from our growing record trade and budget deficits and we're watching our public education system fail a generation of students. Congress has yet to act on an effective solution to our illegal immigration crisis as millions of illegal aliens flood our borders every year, and our nation's borders and ports are still woefully insecure, four and a half years after the September 11 attacks.
I believe most Americans are far more concerned about their declining real wages and the lack of real creation of quality jobs than the insulting insertion of wedge issues into the national dialogue and political agenda.
But President Bush and the Senate have decided they should take up a constitutional ban of gay marriage. Polls tell us most of us oppose gay marriage. Those same polls are also shouting to our elected representatives in Washington that we want real leadership and real solutions to real problems.
The president and the Senate's Republican leadership are now claiming that an amendment to our Constitution is necessary to save the American family. No matter how you feel about the issue, and many of us feel deeply, a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage is utter and complete nonsense. It's an insult to the intelligence of every voter, Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative.
The president and the Senate are focusing on one of the few reasons that has not been proven to cause divorce. They instead should look to financial hardships, and the lack of communication about family finances. The median family income is stagnating while gasoline costs and higher interest rates are eating up the family budget.
Nor is the Senate looking at the national tragedy of out-of-wedlock births: In seven states, more than 40 percent of our children are born out of wedlock. Nationally, more than one out of three of our children are born to unmarried parents.
Both political parties love to excite and enliven their so-called "bases" by focusing on wedge issues like gay marriage, abortion, gun control, school prayer and flag burning. Both the Republicans and Democrats raise these issues to distract and divert public attention from the pressing issues that affect our way of life and our nation's future.
Are these wedge issues really how Congress should be spending its time, especially given how little time politicians spend in Washington, D.C., these days? I'd rather see our 535 elected representatives and this president use their time to combat poverty, fix our crumbling schools, secure our broken borders and ports and hold employers accountable for hiring illegal aliens. And like millions of Americans, I am desperate for a resolution to our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
How can we tolerate elected officials who press wedge issues when 37 million people in the United States live in poverty, one in every eight Americans? Almost 18 percent of children under the age of 18 live in poverty -- 13 million children.
Nearly 46 million people live without health insurance, about 16 percent of the population, a number that has risen by 6 million since 2000. More than one in 10 children are uninsured, and one-quarter of people with incomes below $25,000 also lack any health insurance.
College costs are skyrocketing. There's been a 40 percent jump (inflation-adjusted) in tuition and fees at public four-year colleges and universities over the past five years, according to the College Board. The costs for brand-name prescription drugs have also increased twice as fast as the rate of inflation. In fact, over the past six years, the average rise in the price of brand-name drugs is 40 percent, according to the AARP.
But while these increases in the price of the basics make it harder for hard-working men and women to make ends meet, the president and Congress would rather drive wedge issues than work toward real solutions.
I wonder if the president's political advisers know just how ill-advised and smarmy this wedge issue looks to the millions of us who want solutions to the critical, urgent problems facing this nation. Worse, I wonder if they even care.
Friday, June 02, 2006
Wildfire nears famed Arizona town--Sedona
Friday, June 2, 2006; Posted: 12:18 p.m. EDT (16:18 GMT)
A forest fire burns Thursday night south of Sedona, Arizona.
SEDONA, Arizona (AP) -- Firefighters battled a 1,500-acre wildfire Friday that had burned at least four buildings and forced the evacuation of about 30 homes near the scenic northern Arizona town of Sedona.
Investigators said early Friday that the fire appeared to have been started by sparks from the grinder of a fencing company that was working on a fence post Thursday afternoon.
U.S. Forest Service officials said the company... could be held responsible for some of the cost of fighting the blaze.
Thirty homes out of about 200 in the Pine Valley subdivision near the Village of Oak Creek were evacuated because of the fire, which quickly grew from 40 acres. Some homeowners were allowed to return midmorning Friday.
"It could have been much worse," said Sedona Fire District Chief Matt Shobert. "Once it hit the forest, it took off."
Two homes, a small shed and an outbuilding burned before the fire moved into the wilderness Thursday night, Shobert said.
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press.
Snake Bites Woman Walking Through The Wal-Mart There Then
POSTED: 12:33 pm EDT June 1, 2006
UPDATED: 12:36 pm EDT June 1, 2006
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- All she wanted was a flower, but instead a woman said she got a snake bite.
Delaine Jarrell was looking through the plants in the garden center at a Jacksonville Wal-Mart on Wednesday, when a snake sunk its fangs into her arm and didn't let go without a fight.
"He finally broke loose and, thank goodness for sweat pants with elastic on them, because he tried to climb up my britches' leg," Jarrell said.
Jarrell went to the emergency room two days later when she noticed red streaks running down her arm.
Fortunately, the snake wasn't poisonous.
Copyright 2006 by wftv.com. All rights reserved.
UPDATED: 12:36 pm EDT June 1, 2006
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- All she wanted was a flower, but instead a woman said she got a snake bite.
Delaine Jarrell was looking through the plants in the garden center at a Jacksonville Wal-Mart on Wednesday, when a snake sunk its fangs into her arm and didn't let go without a fight.
"He finally broke loose and, thank goodness for sweat pants with elastic on them, because he tried to climb up my britches' leg," Jarrell said.
Jarrell went to the emergency room two days later when she noticed red streaks running down her arm.
Fortunately, the snake wasn't poisonous.
Copyright 2006 by wftv.com. All rights reserved.
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Coma woman mix-up pains US family
Whitney Cerak and Laura VanRyn
Whitney Cerak (left) was mistaken for Laura VanRyn (right)
A US family has spent weeks caring for a comatose crash victim only to learn their daughter died in the crash and the survivor is someone else.
The family of Laura VanRyn realised a mistake had been made as the.... crash victim emerged from her coma.
Tests showed the woman in hospital was not their daughter but a college mate of hers, Whitney Cerak, who was in the same accident and resembled Ms VanRyn.
The Cerak family had buried Ms VanRyn's body, thinking it was their daughter.
The two women looked similar.
She's been saying and doing things that made us question whether or not she was Laura
VanRyn blog
Both were students at Taylor University, Indiana, and were travelling together on 26 April when their vehicle was involved in a collision that left five people dead.
Ms VanRyn was among those killed. Ms Cerak was rescued alive from the crash and taken to hospital, where she was incorrectly identified as Ms VanRyn.
She had suffered facial swelling, cuts and bruises and fractures and her neck was held in a brace.
'A fairy tale'
A web journal posted by the VanRyns documented their vigil by the hospital bedside of the woman they thought was their daughter.
On Monday, the journal described how the woman was beginning to regain her memory but "still has times where she'll say things that don't make much sense".
On Wednesday, a journal entry said: "Our hearts are aching as we have learned that the young woman we have been taking care of over the past five weeks has not been our dear Laura but instead a fellow student of hers, Whitney Cerak."
"As Whitney had been becoming more aware of her surroundings, she'd been saying and doing things that made us question whether or not she was Laura," the journal said.
Ms Cerak's grandfather told the Associated Press news agency he was shocked by the news of her survival.
"I still can't get over it," he said. "It's like a fairy tale."
A spokesman for Taylor University told the agency: "We rejoice with the Ceraks. We grieve with the VanRyns."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)