17-06-2012 21:09 Emiya Kiritsugu vs Kotomine Kirei from episode 24/ season 2 episode 11, i don't care if i may get a strike i had to upload this, i even added a little mind fuck at the end and before you ask, yes, he really did do that
Read the rest here:
Copyright 2010. The Associated Press. Produced by NewsOK.com All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The NBA's Jim Poorten stands on the basketball court of the Chesapeake Arena and uses an iPhone to snap a photo of the action on the court. He runs deep into the arena to connect to Wi-Fi and upload it as quickly as possible to one of the NBA's official Twitter accounts.
NBAs Jim Poorten, right, uses his iPhone to take a picture of Oklahoma Citys James Harden before a recent game. Poorten will post it within minutes to one of the NBAs social media sites like Twitter and Facebook. PHOTO BY NATHANIEL S. BUTLER / NBAE
Within three minutes, more than 50 people have reposted retweeted the photo to their own fans as they watch the NBA Finals action between the Miami Heat and Oklahoma City Thunder unfold on Twitter.
As Poorten bounces around the arena snapping photos and taking video with more access than most to the players, he wants to give the public the fly on the wall viewpoint, he said. As he shoots, he keeps in mind the stories and scenes in the arena that he would retell to his friends after the game one photo offering courtside includes rapper Lil Wayne and NBA super fan James Jimmy Goldstein.
Poorten's actions mimic the thousands of fans throughout the arena who are telling the NBA Finals story in their own ways to friends via their preferred social media sites. The NBA's extensive social media web, however, is in place to cater to an audience of millions of people around the world who want to feel as if they are in Oklahoma City and Miami for the NBA Finals, watching and analyzing the games courtside.
This operation involves cameras placed high in arena rafters, video teams and photographers on the ground, people as far away as New Jersey and New York monitoring trending topics and other social media activity and editing photos, former NBA players-turned-TV analysts keeping NBA TV vibrant with new shows, others updating stats for the NBA mobile applications and NBA.com and more. The teams come from NBA Digital, NBA Entertainment, league partner Turner Sports Digital and from throughout the NBA operation.
Photos from Game 2 of the NBA Finals between the Oklahoma City...
89 photos
Original post:
NBA Finals: League uses social media to take fans courtside during finals in Oklahoma City
HONG KONG (Reuters) - Hou Zhihui breaks open a cold-medicine capsule, pours the powder on to a piece of steamed dough and folds it together. He passes the miniature bun to a colleague who pops it in her mouth. That is his response to the discovery of 77 million capsules made of industrial gel containing chromium, a carcinogenic heavy metal, the latest in a series of safety problems blighting ...
Link:
The following error was encountered while trying to retrieve the URL: http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?
Access Denied.
Access control configuration prevents your request from being allowed at this time. Please contact your service provider if you feel this is incorrect.
Your cache administrator is webmaster.
Link:
Not long after Michigan State University started a medical school in 1964, officials realized that they needed more hospitals or clinics where students could get hands-on experience.
Link:
The content you requested is only available to subscribers.
If you are a current subscriber, please log in to continue:
Medical school is workload enough for most students. But not for Enea Gjoka, who will start his second year of med school at Wayne State University this summer.Gjoka, 22, is also something of a...
If you have a current print subscription, you can enter your subscriber number to link it to your account and get access to the Web site.
Online-Only Trial Subscription
Print Subscription
See more here:
HuffPost's QuickRead...
Loading...
HuffPost's QuickRead...
Edition: U.S.
33k
71k
45k
54k
22k
53k
Read the original:
TORTOLA, British Virgin Islands - Billionaire entrepreneur Richard Branson says he is reintroducing a flame-red bird to the British Virgin Islands.
More here:
Tycoon Richard Branson says he is reintroducing flame-red bird to the British Virgin Islands
"Massachusetts has long given the U.S. a glimpse of what the future of American health care might look like.
See more here:
Health care spending has eased up recently, a welcome respite for government and corporate budgets. But why has it? And will relief last or are medical costs on a roller coaster, like gas prices?
Go here to see the original:
June 17, 2012
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Some are already anticipating the Supreme Court's ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law as the "decision of the century." But the justices are unlikely to have the last word on America's tangled efforts to address health care woes. The problems of high medical costs, widespread waste, and tens of millions of people without insurance will require Congress and the president to keep looking for answers, whether or not the Affordable Care Act passes the test of constitutionality.
With a decision by the court expected this month, here is a look at potential outcomes:
Q: What if the Supreme Court upholds the law and finds Congress was within its authority to require most people to have health insurance or pay a penalty?
A: That would settle the legal argument, but not the political battle.
The clear winners if the law is upheld and allowed to take full effect would be uninsured people in the United States, estimated at more than 50 million.
Starting in 2014, most could get coverage through a mix of private insurance and Medicaid, a safety-net program. Republican-led states that have resisted creating health insurance markets under the law would face a scramble to comply, but the U.S. would get closer to other economically advanced countries that guarantee medical care for their citizens.
Republicans would keep trying to block the law. They will try to elect presidential candidate Mitt Romney, backed by a GOP House and Senate, and repeal the law, although their chances of repeal would seem to be diminished by the court's endorsement.
Obama would feel the glow of vindication for his hard-fought health overhaul, but it might not last long even if he's re-elected.
More:
As the country awaits and debates the Supreme Court's pending decision on health care reform, about the only thing insurers, providers and patients can agree on is the need for clarity.
The court's decision, expected within the month and perhaps as soon as today, could give direction to a health care system that has been in a holding pattern since challenges to the law's constitutionality were heard in March.
Some aspects of the Affordable Care Act that passed in 2010 have already launched, such as extended coverage for young adults on their parents' insurance. Others, like the more controversial requirement for all Americans to buy insurance, would take effect in 2014. Most states are waiting on the court's move to start organizing insurance markets as called for by next year.
"Everybody is ready for this decision to come down," said Ryan Barker, director of health policy for the Missouri Foundation for Health. "Regardless of what the decision is, we need to move forward."
The ruling is certain to produce a torrent of reaction and election-year posturing no matter what the decision. Both political parties have been preparing for the possible outcomes, distributing talking points and laying contingency plans for piecemeal legislation if all or part of the law is struck down.
Some experts believe that the potential of a split decision striking down the individual insurance mandate while leaving other portions of the law intact would trigger an especially chaotic political situation.
"It would be a colossal mess, even if we assume good faith on the part of our elected officials," remarked Gregory Magarian, a law professor at Washington University. "As a practical matter, it would be almost the worst of all political worlds."
Insurance companies have rushed to ease fears about the more popular aspects of the law. Several of the industry's major players have vowed to continue covering dependents until age 26 and free preventive care such as immunizations, regardless of the court's decision.
"Health plans' top priorities are providing peace of mind and continuity of coverage to their beneficiaries," said Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, in a statement. "No matter what the Supreme Court decides, individuals and families should rest assured that their current coverage will remain in effect."
What's less clear is how much the cost of insurance premiums will change if any or all of the law is tossed out.
Read the original here:
Associated Press
(AP) Congressional Republicans intend to seek quick repeal of any parts of the health care law that survive a widely anticipated Supreme Court ruling, but don't plan to push replacement measures until after the fall elections or perhaps 2013.
Instead, GOP lawmakers cite recent announcements that some insurance companies will retain a few of the law's higher-profile provisions as evidence that quick legislative action is not essential. Those are steps that officials say Republicans quietly urged in private conversations with the industry.
Once the Supreme Court issues a ruling, "the goal is to repeal anything that is left standing," said Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., a member of the party's leadership.
Beyond that, "we ought to go step by step to lower the cost" of health care, he added, a formula repeated by numerous other Republicans interviewed in recent days.
Across the political aisle, neither President Barack Obama nor congressional Democrats have said how they will react to a high court ruling that could wipe out the legislation they worked so hard to enact.
"We're not spending a whole bunch of time planning for contingencies," Obama said this spring at the annual meeting of The Associated Press. He expressed confidence the court would uphold the law, and neither he nor his aides have said what fallback plans are under discussion. "We will be prepared in any eventuality," White House aide David Plouffe said Sunday on ABC's "This Week," although he declined to elaborate.
Among Republicans, aides to Speaker John Boehner, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell and other key lawmakers have convened a series of meetings in recent weeks to plan a post-ruling strategy.
A Supreme Court ruling is expected within the next two weeks on a challenge to the law, which has drawn fierce opposition among most Republicans for its requirement that most individuals carry health insurance.
While three big insurance companies announced plans this past week to retain certain protections for an estimated 40 percent of all individuals who receive their coverage through work, there has been no advance word from the drug industry on how prescription costs for older people might be affected by a finding that the law is unconstitutional.
See more here:
WASHINGTON
Some are already anticipating the Supreme Court's ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law as the "decision of the century." But the justices are unlikely to have the last word on America's tangled efforts to address health care woes. The problems of high medical costs, widespread waste, and tens of millions of people without insurance will require Congress and the president to keep looking for answers, whether or not the Affordable Care Act passes the test of constitutionality.
With a decision by the court expected this month, here is a look at potential outcomes:
---
Q: What if the Supreme Court upholds the law and finds Congress was within its authority to require most people to have health insurance or pay a penalty?
A: That would settle the legal argument, but not the political battle.
The clear winners if the law is upheld and allowed to take full effect would be uninsured people in the United States, estimated at more than 50 million.
Starting in 2014, most could get coverage through a mix of private insurance and Medicaid, a safety-net program. Republican-led states that have resisted creating health insurance markets under the law would face a scramble to comply, but the U.S. would get closer to other economically advanced countries that guarantee medical care for their citizens.
Republicans would keep trying to block the law. They will try to elect presidential candidate Mitt Romney, backed by a GOP House and Senate, and repeal the law, although their chances of repeal would seem to be diminished by the court's endorsement.
Obama would feel the glow of vindication for his hard-fought health overhaul, but it might not last long even if he's re-elected.
Read this article:
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Washington (CNN) -- Winners and losers are the natural consequence of the American legal system. In the Supreme Court, five majority votes among the nine members are enough to fundamentally change lives and legacies.
The high court in coming days will issue rulings in perhaps its most important appeal in a dozen years: whether the sweeping health care law championed by President Barack Obama will be tossed out as an unconstitutional exercise of congressional authority.
The stakes cannot be overstated -- what the justices decide on a quartet of separate questions will have immediate and long-term impact on every American, not only in the field of medicine but in vast, untold areas of "commerce." Health care expenditures alone currently make up 18% of the U.S. economy, and the new law promises to significantly expand that share.
Five scenarios: Health care options before the justices
"I think the justices probably came into the argument with their minds made up. They had hundreds of briefs and months to study them," said Thomas Goldstein, publisher of SCOTUSblog.com and a prominent Washington attorney. "The oral arguments [in March] might have changed their minds around the margin. But we won't find out until the end of June."
A century of federal efforts to offer universal health care culminated in the 2010 passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. After months of bare-knuckled fights over politics and policy, the legislation signed by Obama reached 2,700 pages, nine major sections and 450-some provisions.
At issue is the constitutionality of the "individual mandate" section -- requiring nearly all Americans to buy health insurance by 2014 or face financial penalties. Twenty-six states in opposition say if that linchpin provision is unconstitutional, the entire law must go. The partisan debate around such a sweeping piece of legislation has encompassed traditional hot-button topics: abortion and contraception funding, state and individual rights, federal deficits, end-of-life care, and the overall economy. The high court now has the final word.
The court will not say precisely when the health care opinions will be released, but the last scheduled public session of the term is set for June 25. Depending on how long it takes the justices to finish up, that deadline could easily slip a few days.
The justices have already secretly voted on the health care cases, as well as a dozen or so other separate appeals. They met privately as a group just days after the late March arguments, voting preliminarily. Individual justices were assigned to write the one or more opinions, as well as separate dissents. Only they and their law clerks know how this will end.
Continue reading here:
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Washington (CNN) -- Winners and losers are the natural consequence of the American legal system. In the Supreme Court, five majority votes among the nine members are enough to fundamentally change lives and legacies.
The high court in coming days will issue rulings in perhaps its most important appeal in a dozen years: whether the sweeping health care law championed by President Barack Obama will be tossed out as an unconstitutional exercise of congressional authority.
The stakes cannot be overstated -- what the justices decide on a quartet of separate questions will have immediate and long-term impact on every American, not only in the field of medicine but in vast, untold areas of "commerce." Health care expenditures alone currently make up 18% of the U.S. economy, and the new law promises to significantly expand that share.
Five scenarios: Health care options before the justices
"I think the justices probably came into the argument with their minds made up. They had hundreds of briefs and months to study them," said Thomas Goldstein, publisher of SCOTUSblog.com and a prominent Washington attorney. "The oral arguments [in March] might have changed their minds around the margin. But we won't find out until the end of June."
A century of federal efforts to offer universal health care culminated in the 2010 passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. After months of bare-knuckled fights over politics and policy, the legislation signed by Obama reached 2,700 pages, nine major sections and 450-some provisions.
At issue is the constitutionality of the "individual mandate" section -- requiring nearly all Americans to buy health insurance by 2014 or face financial penalties. Twenty-six states in opposition say if that linchpin provision is unconstitutional, the entire law must go. The partisan debate around such a sweeping piece of legislation has encompassed traditional hot-button topics: abortion and contraception funding, state and individual rights, federal deficits, end-of-life care, and the overall economy. The high court now has the final word.
The court will not say precisely when the health care opinions will be released, but the last scheduled public session of the term is set for June 25. Depending on how long it takes the justices to finish up, that deadline could easily slip a few days.
The justices have already secretly voted on the health care cases, as well as a dozen or so other separate appeals. They met privately as a group just days after the late March arguments, voting preliminarily. Individual justices were assigned to write the one or more opinions, as well as separate dissents. Only they and their law clerks know how this will end.
More here:
Health care ruling will be among high court's most important
By Anna Edney - 2012-06-18T04:00:01Z
Venture capitalists seeking to profit from innovations in health care are turning to startups that make smartphone and tablet applications for doctors and hospitals.
Two years ago, patients would be surprised to see their doctors pulling out an Apple Inc. (AAPL) iPhone to check their blood sugar, or cardiogram results. Now theyre finding such practices commonplace as investment in the kinds of companies that make health information apps rose 78 percent in 2011 to $766 million. Qualcomm Inc. (QCOM) has started a $100 million fund, Insight Venture Partners is putting $40 million into a startup and Oprah Winfrey is dipping in as well, with her company investing in a website that helps doctors and patients interact.
Were at a sea change, said David Jahns, managing partner of Galen Partners LP, a Stamford, Connecticut-based private equity firm that invested in a company called Sharecare.
Demand for apps that let doctors and nurses see test results quickly and monitor vital signs remotely, combined with a push from government and insurers to collect better data to contain rising medical costs, is propelling investor interest in an array of health information technology, Jahns said.
We really have to improve our costs, he said. The best thing that our country can do is invest in technology that gets better outcomes with fewer procedures.
Timothy Kreth, a cardiologist at TriStar Summit Medical Center in Hermitage, Tennessee, uses an application from AirStrip Technologies that lets him view emergency room patients electrocardiograms on his iPhone.
Its more convenient for the patient, Kreth said in a telephone interview. I can look at it and determine some of the subtle nuances the emergency room doctor maybe could not. It gives us the opportunity to make diagnoses quicker.
Kreth and the five other cardiologists have used the AirStrip technology for about six weeks at his hospital, which is part of HCA Holdings Inc. (HCA) Previously, emergency room doctors faxed cardiologists the EKGs, Kreth said.
AirStrip, based in San Antonio, Texas, was the first investment from the $100 million Qualcomm Life Fund that formed in December. Qualcomm Life doesnt disclose how much it invests, though typically puts down $2 million to $5 million, Jack Young, who manages the fund, said by telephone.
The rest is here:
Why Genetically Engineered Food Is Dangerous
New report by genetic engineers Press release for immediate release Earth Open Source 17 June 2012
LONDON, UK - Aren't critics of genetically engineered food anti-science? Isn't the debate over GMOs (genetically modified organisms) a spat between emotional but ignorant activists on one hand and rational GM-supporting scientists on the other?
A new report released today, "GMO Myths and Truths",[1] challenges these claims. The report presents a large body of peer-reviewed scientific and other authoritative evidence of the hazards to health and the environment posed by genetically engineered crops and organisms (GMOs).
Unusually, the initiative for the report came not from campaigners but from two genetic engineers who believe there are good scientific reasons to be wary of GM foods and crops.
One of the report's authors, Dr Michael Antoniou of King's College London School of Medicine in the UK, uses genetic engineering for medical applications but warns against its use in developing crops for human food and animal feed.
Dr Antoniou said: "GM crops are promoted on the basis of ambitious claims - that they are safe to eat, environmentally beneficial, increase yields, reduce reliance on pesticides, and can help solve world hunger.
"I felt what was needed was a collation of the evidence that addresses the technology from a scientific point of view.
"Research studies show that genetically modified crops have harmful effects on laboratory animals in feeding trials and on the environment during cultivation. They have increased the use of pesticides and have failed to increase yields. Our report concludes that there are safer and more effective alternatives to meeting the world's food needs."
Another author of the report, Dr John Fagan, is a former genetic engineer who in 1994 returned to the National Institutes of Health $614,000 in grant money owing to concerns about the safety and ethics of the technology. He subsequently founded a GMO testing company.
Read the original:
Scientists at the University of California at Irvine and and the Pasteur Institute in Paris say theyve used genetic engineering to create mosquitoes that cant infect people with malaria. They used Anopheles stephensi mosquito a major source of malaria in India and the Middle East but say the technique could be used on dozens of different types of mosquitoes. Malaria parasites picked up by these mosquitoes are killed by the the mosquitoes immune systems. So the insects cant transmit malaria through their bites. The scientists made their announcement on June 17, 2012, and their paper was published in the Proceedings for the National Academy of Sciences.
Scientists have genetically altered the Anopheles stephensi mosquito so that their immunes systems kill the malaria parasite. They say their technique could be used with dozens of different types of mosquitoes.
More than 40 percent of the worlds population lives in areas where there is a risk of contracting malaria. The World Health Organization says there were about 216 million cases of malaria and an estimated 655,000 deaths in 2010. The deaths are largely infants, young children and pregnant women. Most deaths occur among children living in Africa where a child dies every minute from malaria.
Anthony James of UC Irvine said:
Our group has made significant advances with the creation of transgenic mosquitoes But this is the first model of a malaria vector with a genetic modification that can potentially exist in wild populations and be transferred through generations without affecting their fitness.
I did not talk to these scientists, and I have questions. What happens to the mosquitoes already in the wild, which carry the malaria parasite? Do they breed with the genetically modified mosquitoes so that some inherit malaria-killing immune systems? There will be another question for some. Is it wise to release genetically modified mosquitoes into the wild? For the families of children who might die of malaria, the answer is clear: pursue this promising line of research. The rest of us will need to acknowledge that we live in a world where the questions themselves are getting tougher.
Bottom line: Scientists at the University of California at Irvine and and the Pasteur Institute in Paris have used genetic engineering to create mosquitoes whose immune systems kill the malaria parasite. These mosquitoes, then, cant transmit malaria.
Follow this link:
Gulf Organisation for Research and Development (GORD), the government entity aiming to position Qatar as the capital of green building, will construct an Eco Villa as an example of a sustainable, smart and healthy living environment. The open-to-the-public landmark project will reinforce Qatars reputation as a leading advocate of sustainable development, Dr Yousef Mohamed al-Horr, founding chairman of GORD, announced yesterday. The Green Villa has been designed to achieve a minimum score of four stars based on the GORD developed Global Sustainability Assessment System (GSAS), which has six stars as its highest rating. GORD has selected three consulting firms; LSI Architects, MYAA Architects & RHWL Architects to design the Eco Villa on a public space. A committee has been formed with representatives from Qatar Museums Authority, Ministry of Culture, Arts & Heritage, Qatar University, Private Office of Emiri Diwan, and regional experts. The Eco Villa exemplifies the vision of Qatar to be one of the global leaders in the pursuit of sustainable socioeconomic growth and development, Dr al-Horr explained. The sustainable features of the Eco Villa include on-site renewable energy generation system, water-efficient plumbing fixtures and irrigation system, energy reduction, indoor lighting design, and intelligent building control system. The Eco Villa will be constructed using sustainable and recycled eco-friendly building materials that have low Volatile Organic Compounds emission rates. Indoor and outdoor gardens, water features, wind towers, wood panelling, smart use of daylight to provide indoor illumination through latticework and skylights, and a high roof to reduce the impact of heat are among the features of the Eco Villa. The design has been finalised and construction will begin soon, Dr al-Horr added. Once the Eco Villa is ready, members of the public would be able to visit the facility and learn about the sustainable, smart and healthy living environment.
Continue reading here: