UK Libertarians defend Tory MP who refuses to meet with Burqa, Nijab-wearing Muslim women

Posted on by

Prevention of Crime, Public Safety and a simple case of Common Courtesy

From Eric Dondero:

A Kettering Member of Parliament, Conservative Philip Hollobone, is refusing to hold constituent meetings with Muslim women dressed in a Hijab or Burqa. Though, he will continue to meet their concerns through the mail. The MP says he does not feel comfortable holding face-to-face meetings with a woman whose face is entirely covered. He believes it is a great hinderance to communications. He is also sponsoring a bill to ban face-covering clothing on the grounds that it presents a threat to public safety and for just plain-old common courtesy. Said Hollobone:

I just take what I regard as a common sense view. If you want to engage in normal, daily, interactive dialogue with your fellow human beings, you can only really do this properly by seeing each other’s face.
Seventy-five per cent of the usual communication between two human beings is done with personal experience. God gave us faces to be expressive. It is not just the words we utter but whether we are smiling, sad, angry or frustrated. You don’t get any of that if your face is covered.

Meanwhile, a fellow Tory is opposing Hollobone. From the BBC:

Immigration minister Damian Green has said banning the full Islamic veil in public would be "at odds with the UK's tolerant society".

The Libertarian case for Burqa Ban

Some prominent UK Libertarians are coming to Hollobone's defense.

Claire Khaw, an Ayn Randian and self-described "libertarian secularist" (source: benwoodhams.wordpress.com) of Voice of Reason blog blasts Damian Green:

Damian Green is a cowardly piece of shit, but then he is a Tory MP and we can expect no better from the likes of him... I am a Libertarian and want a ban on the grounds that it brings Islam into hatred, ridicule and contempt...

It is for the prevention of crime and the protection of the reputation of Islam that feminine neurosis should not be indulged in this way.

Respect the Host Country's Culture - "When in Rome..."

And this from Roger Helmer of (the UK) CentreRight July 29, "Why France and Philip Hollobrone are right on the Burqa ban":

As an instinctive libertarian, I must admit that my first thought was to oppose any ban on the burka. We want the government off our backs, not telling us what to wear.

But the libertarian argument works both ways. There certainly are Muslim women who choose voluntarily to wear the burka, perhaps as an expression of identity, or of faith, or perhaps out of a misplaced sense of modesty. On the other hand there is good evidence that many Muslim women wear the burka involuntarily, because of cultural, or religious, or peer pressure, or indeed because they are forced to do so by their husbands or other male relatives. So a burka ban would be an imposition on the first group, but would liberate the second.

Hollobone is not a hater of Islam. In fact, he supports Muslim modesty, but he also recognizes that immigrants should respect the values of a host country. From the FreeThinker:

When in Rome, do as the Romans do … They say that when women come to this country, they ought to adapt to our way of life. The Muslim population is growing across western Europe, as is Islamic fundamentalism. It is important to stress I am a respecter of Islam as one of the world’s great religions. I also respect the right of Muslim women to protect their modesty.

Glucosamine: The Unsinkable Rubber Duck

Posted on by

Glucosamine is widely used for osteoarthritis pain. It is not as impossible as homeopathy, but its rationale is improbable. As I explained in a previous post,

Wallace Sampson, one of the other authors of this blog, has pointed out that the amount of glucosamine in the typical supplement dose is on the order of 1/1000th to 1/10,000th of the available glucosamine in the body, most of which is produced by the body itself. He says, “Glucosamine is not an essential nutrient like a vitamin or an essential amino acid, for which small amounts make a large difference. How much difference could that small additional amount make? If glucosamine or chondroitin worked, this would be a medical first and worthy of a Nobel. It probably cannot work.”

Nevertheless, glucosamine (alone or with chondroitin) is widely used, and there are some supporting studies. But they are trumped by a number of well-designed studies that show it works no better than placebo, as well as a study showing that patients who had allegedly responded to glucosamine couldn’t tell the difference when their pills were replaced with placebos. The GAIT trial was a large, well-designed, multicenter study published in The New England Journal of Medicine that showed no effect in knee osteoarthritis. A subsequent study of hip osteoarthritis also showed it worked no better than placebo.

A new study shows that glucosamine works no better than placebo for osteoarthritis pain in the low back. It was published in the JAMA: Effect of Glucosamine on Pain-Related Disability in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain and Degenerative Lumbar Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial, by Wilkens et al.

It is well-designed, randomized and double blind, with 250 subjects, a low drop-out rate, a 6 month duration with a one year follow-up, appropriate clinical criteria for improvement (disability, pain, quality of life, use of rescue medications), intention-to-treat analysis, and even an “exit poll” to insure that blinding had been effective, that patients couldn’t guess which group they were in. It used the doses of glucosamine sulfate that had been called for by critics of previous studies. It was done in Norway, where glucosamine is a prescription drug (in the US it is marketed as a diet supplement under DSHEA regulations so there is a greater possibility of dosage variations and impurities); it was independently funded, with no involvement of industry.

Although no one study can be definitive, this one is pretty convincing when viewed in the context of all the other published data. The authors rightly conclude that glucosamine doesn’t work any better than placebo, but they go on to say some rather strange things. They say it should not be recommended for “all” patients with osteoarthritic low back pain, implying that it might still be recommended for “some” patients. But if so, which patients and according to what criteria? They seem strangely defensive. They stress that glucosamine caused no side effects and could be used safely. They suggest that glucosamine might work for a subset of patients or for joints other than the spine. For instance, the knee. But another new study has confirmed that it is ineffective for the knee.

I don’t understand this. If they had found that a new antibiotic worked no better than a placebo for pneumococcal pneumonia, would they say it should not be recommended for “all” patients with pneumococcal pneumonia or would they simply say it should not be used for pneumococcal pneumonia? Would they speculate that it might work for a small subset of pneumonia patients or for infections in other parts of the body? Probably not. They thought glucosamine worked; they tested it; it didn’t. Why not just say so? Are they letting a prior belief in glucosamine influence their thinking? Unbiased science-based researchers are not usually so hesitant to give up on a treatment that repeatedly fails to pass tests.

I must be psychic, because I had predicted this in a post I wrote two and a half years ago (about the study showing that glucosamine didn’t work for hip pain). I said:

They can always complain that maybe it works for knees but not for hips, or that a different dosage might have worked better, or that it works for some small sub-set of patients. There will always be “one more study” to do.

This new study confirms my opinion that we shouldn’t spend any more research dollars doing “one more study” on glucosamine.


[Slashdot]
[Digg]
[Reddit]
[del.icio.us]
[Facebook]
[Technorati]
[Google]
[StumbleUpon]

Crew to Perform Spacewalk Monday Night

Posted on by

The members of the International Space Station’s Expedition 24 crew shifted their sleep schedule Monday in preparation for their mission’s first spacewalk, waking up at about 2:40 p.m. EDT.

Flight Engineers Fyodor Yurchikhin, a veteran of three spacewalks in 2007 during Expedition 15, and Mikhail Kornienko, a spacewalk rookie, will perform the six-hour spacewalk. The pair will exit the Pirs docking compartment and work outside the Zarya and Zvezda modules. The Pirs Docking Compartment hatch is slated to open at 11:45 p.m. to begin the excursion.

The pair will outfit the Rassvet module’s Kurs automated rendezvous system, install cables and remove and replace a video camera. Kurs is a Russian radio telemetry system that allows automated dockings of unmanned spacecraft such as the Progress resupply vehicle. The new video camera will document the rendezvous and docking of future Automated Transfer Vehicles to the aft end of the Zvezda service module.

The next spacewalk will take place Aug. 5 with Flight Engineers Tracy Caldwell Dyson and Doug Wheelock. The astronauts will exit the Quest airlock and install a Portable Data Grapple Fixture (PDGF) on the Zarya module extending the reach of Canadarm2, the station’s robotic arm, and increasing a spacewalker’s capabilities. They also will jettison old multi-layer insulation removed for the PDGF install and mate power connectors to Zarya.

Flight controllers will decide Tuesday whether or not to proceed with the robotic work by the Dextre Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator to replace a failed Remote Power Control Module, or RPCM, on the station’s P1 truss. The RPCM replacement was slated for July 21, but during a test extraction procedure on July 20, ground teams determined that the force needed to remove the RPCM was higher than demonstrated with ground testing. The team is working towards the next attempt of the test extraction on Wednesday and the full replacement procedure Thursday of this week pending Tuesday’s review.

For More information visit http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/main/index.html

Getting Out of the Gravity Well on One Thin Dime

Posted on by

Frank Sietzen, Jr.: Seemingly lost among the noise following last week's actions of the House Commerce and Science Committee and the Senate Appropriations Committee on marking up a NASA budget is the issue of the agency's proposed new technology programs. Both the House and Senate sharply cut the Obama Administration's original request.

As of this writing no dissent has been heard from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, so the cuts might stick. It might be useful to review what the Obama Administration originally asked for - and why.

From the Administration's original FY2011 budget submission:

"The transformational technologies highlighted in this budget for development and demonstration address critical capabilities for sending crews to a variety of exciting destinations beyond low Earth orbit. By allowing for flight demonstrations, some at a flagship caliber, this ESMD budget resolves the achievement gap between lab demonstration and flight testing that might otherwise prevent NASA from implementing exciting new technologies. Prior to base lining them for crewed missions, these demonstrations will validate new technologies that are not yet fully developed, but are essential for mission success, such as automated and autonomous rendezvous and docking, in situ resource utilization, aero capture, large mass entry descent and landing, highly efficient in-space propulsion, precision landing and hazard avoidance, cryogenics storage and transfer, lightweight/inflatable modules, and others. And before sending humans on extended missions beyond low Earth orbit, accelerated biomedical research will help us to ensure crew health and safety."

The whole thing was to be run by ESMD - again, from the budget detail release:

"Activities within ESMD's Technology Demonstration Program will be aimed at advancing technologies needed to expand our human exploration opportunities, reduce mission costs, and contribute NASA innovation to broader national challenges and applications. This will be accomplished through investment in demonstration of flagship technology projects, as well as enabling technology development and demonstration. NASA will provide an assessment of the highest leverage technologies and demonstrations.

Flagship Technology Demonstrations: Projects selected as in-space, flagship demonstrations will be significant in scale, and offer high potential to demonstrate new capability and reduce the cost of future exploration missions. These missions will demonstrate such critical technologies as in-orbit propellant transfer and storage, inflatable modules, automated/autonomous rendezvous and docking, closed-loop life support systems, and other next generation capabilities key to sustainably exploring deep space.

In FY 2011, NASA will initiate several Flagship Technology Demonstrators, each with an expected lifecycle cost in the $400 million to $1 billion range, over a lifetime of five years or less, with the first flying no later than 2014. In pursuit of these goals, international, commercial, and other government agency partners will be actively pursued as integrated team members where appropriate. NASA will not give responsibility for all demonstrations to any single NASA center but rather looks forward to engaging with the expertise of various centers to accomplish these objectives. Specific architecture and approach for missions to demonstrate key capabilities will be developed for initiation in FY2011. Technologies targeted for demonstration will likely include:

In-Orbit Propellant Transfer and Storage: The capability to transfer and store propellant--particularly cryogenic propellants--in orbit can significantly increase the Nation's ability to conduct complex and extended exploration missions beyond Earth's orbit. It could also potentially be used to extend the lifetime of future government and commercial spacecraft in Earth orbit. This technology demonstration, building on previous ESMD technology investments and prior demonstrations such as Orbital Express, could test technologies and processes such as long-term storage of cryogenic propellant, automated physical connections between fuel lines in orbit, and verification of fuel acquisition, fuel withdrawal, and fuel transfer.

Lightweight/Inflatable Modules: Inflatable modules can be larger, lighter, and potentially less expensive for future use than the rigid modules currently used by the International Space Station (ISS). Working closely with industry and international partners who have already demonstrated a number of capabilities and interest in this arena, and building on previous ESMD investments, NASA will pursue a demonstration of lightweight/inflatable modules for eventual in-space habitation, transportation, or even surface habitation needs. The demonstration could involve tests of a variety of systems, including closed-loop life support, radiation shielding, thermal control, communications, and interfaces between the module and external systems. Use of the ISS as the testbed for this technology is an option being considered to potentially benefit both programs.

Automated/Autonomous Rendezvous and Docking: The ability of two spacecraft to rendezvous, operating independently from human controllers and without other back-up, requires advances in sensors, software, and real-time on-orbit positioning and flight control, among other challenges. This technology is critical to the ultimate success of capabilities such as in-orbit propellant storage and refueling, complex operations in assembling mission components for challenging destinations, in-space construction, and exploration operations far from Earth where the communications delay does not allow for effective human involvement.

NASA will also begin work in 2011 on an additional Flagship Technology Demonstrator mission to be selected within the Agency, and map out a sequence of Flagship missions to be initiated in 2012 and later. Potential candidates include but are not limited to:

Closed-loop life support system demonstration at the ISS: This would validate the feasibility of human survival beyond Earth based on recycled materials with minimal logistics supply. A follow-on demonstration could involve an integrated inflatable module/closed-loop life support system demonstration.

Aerocapture, and/or entry, descent and landing (EDL) technology: This could involve the development and demonstration of systems technologies for: precision landing of payloads on "high-g" and "low-g" planetary bodies; returning humans or collected samples to Earth; and enabling orbital insertion in various atmospheric conditions. Demonstrations could be ground-based or flight experiments."

Then there were propulsion-related demos:

"A major thrust of this research and development activity will be related to space launch propulsion technologies. This effort will include first stage engine development, in-space engine demonstrations, and foundational propulsion research in areas such as new or largely untested propellants that can result in more capable and less expensive future rockets, including heavy-lift rockets. In addition, NASA will provide $25 million annually to fund commercial, university, and other non-governmental research organizations to conduct foundational propulsion research."

Both the House and Senate budget bills have deeply cut the technology programs, although the program itself still stands. They have also mandated NASA to develop a heavy lift launch vehicle by 2016. Given the short horizon and budget this almost certainly means some form of SD HLV. While humans to Mars remains the national goal, here's my question to posters here on NASA Watch:

  1. 1. How would you reprioritize the technology program to support manned deep space missions; and
  2. 2. How would you spend funds for advanced propulsion work given the smaller budgets?

As far as launch systems are concerned, could history repeat itself?

In the late 1950s the Army, the Air Force and DARPA had large launch vehicles and new liquid rocket engines under design or test - many without a specific mission or payload in mind.

The Army actually had serious discussions underway about building a lunar surface facility or space troop transport, all for which their Huntsville team led by Von Braun thought of using the Saturns - the Saturn 1 that is. The Air Force was developing the F-1, M-1 and J-2 engines for some at the time unknown missions.

When the new President, John Kennedy, came along in 1961 and suddenly faced an ascendant Soviet space program, he had these technologies from which to choose to support a new expansive space goal. We all know how that movie ended.

Today, American Presidents routinely propose new space goals -think George W. Bush and Barack Obama-without strong defense of their rationales or budget needs (at least in the case of Obama, thus far). A manned mission to an asteroid has been proposed, but the budget to develop the launch vehicle to send the ship there, according to press reports of senior NASA officials is inadequate to actually field the launch vehicle itself for another decade.

If these technology cuts stand, what will stand between us and an asteroid investigation is a SD HLV (Shuttle-derived Heavy Launch Vehicle) and a capsule alone - since no deep space module is mandated or funded in the same time frame. While Mars is supposed to be the destination, will these technology programs be sufficient to advance the propulsion systems (VASIMR?) or life support systems (radiation hardened) to produce progress in getting there?

The problem with all this, folks, is we don't know what we don't know-and what new space discoveries, such as life on Mars or an errant asteroid, that might be cause for jump starting the space program. In the words of writer Frank Rich, none of us, then or now, can see around the corner and know what history will bring.

Medical Officials: Kids With Lice Can Go To School – WCCO

Posted on by

ABC Action News
Medical Officials: Kids With Lice Can Go To School
WCCO
(File) AP The thought may be enough to make your skin crawl but medical officials said you can be less squeamish out about head lice. ...
Blog this on:TIME (blog)
The AAP Says Children Can Be in School With Head LiceGossip Jackal
Lice shouldn't keep kids at home: ReportVancouver Sun
Spreadit -MedPage Today -ABC News
all 51 news articles »

Cannabis Science Comments on NY Times Article Regarding Major Support From … – Trading Markets (press release)

Posted on by

Washington Post
Cannabis Science Comments on NY Times Article Regarding Major Support From ...
Trading Markets (press release)
Those who fought for our freedom should not have to move to another state to get life saving medicine." On March 31 Cannabis Science issued a press release ...
Mixed MessagesMcCook Daily Gazette (blog)

all 469 news articles »

Profile: Most Low-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients Receive Aggressive Treatment – Newswise (press release)

Posted on by

CBC.ca

LPIN Podcast: Greg Knott: ‘No Bull’ in District 9

Posted on by

Greg Knott’s novel slogan ‘No Bull’ is an acronym, signifying the six pillars of his platform in his bid to unseat incumbent Baron Hill in the US House in District 9.
In this diverse district, which is home to left-of-center Bloomington, and a large right-of-center rural area, Knott plans to outflank both of his opponents by [...]

Aegean Sea Opportunity

Posted on by

kardiotissa-greece-11Ever dream of owning a piece of property in the tranquil and historic Aegean Sea? If so the perfect opportunity awaits you on Kardiotissa Island an impressive 280 acre island located in the Folegandros and Sikinos island chain.

The development possibilities are limitless in this region which has recently become a hotspot for resort development. A perfect tourist destination, area for holiday homes, and above all, a sought-after locale for permanent residence. Facilities for sailing, diving and adventure sports would take excellent advantage of the deep blue Aegean waters, and the rich sealife of the area could even sustain an off-shore aquarium or centre for oceanographic research.

The island is located between Folegandros (7min with speed boat) and Sikinos(10min with speed boat) in the heart of Cyclades. There is an every day all-year round link with ferries to Piraeus from both islands. With 280 acres of land ( 800 stremma) Absolute clear and solid titles and Greec State documentation.

For more information on this property visit Private Islands Online.

Uh-oh! Rothenberg moves 3 top Dem Senators to "Toss-up"

Posted on by

From Eric Dondero:

Three hateful ultra-liberals are now extremely vulnerable according to Democrat strategist Stuart Rothenberg. He blogs:

Right now, Democrats look poised to lose five to eight seats, and any net loss short of that would have to be regarded with relief by Democratic strategists.

Moving from the Lean Democrat category to "Toss-up":

Toss-Up/Tilt Democrat ( 0 R, 3 D)
Boxer (D-CA) *
Feingold (D-WI) *
Murray (D-WA) *

With help from Independent and 2008 McCain supporter Sen. Joe Lieberman, a sweep of 8 seats by the Republicans could hand the GOP a Senate majority.

Recent polls within the last two weeks have shown Boxer falling behind Carly Fiorna by 3 points, Murray behind her two likely GOP challengers by 3 points each, and even Feingold a 3 points behind Republican Ron Johnson. (All within the margin of error.)

(H/t Jim Antle, AS)

Michele Bachmann "goes all Ayn Rand" at Vegas conservative conference

Posted on by

Every American should be a Wealthy Capitalist

Conservative bloggers met over the weekend in Las Vegas for the RightOnline conference. The two top speakers were Reps. Mike Pence and Michele Bachmann.

A liberal blog, AlterNet snarkily describes Bachmann's role:

LAS VEGAS, NEV. — In two major speeches and in the scuttlebutt of break-out sessions, Tea Party movement activists yesterday witnessed a subtle melding of their ideology with the sensibilities of the religious right and the cold capitalism of libertarian she-ro Ayn Rand.

Over dinner, the RightOnline conference — which is sponsored by Americans for Prosperity — heard from Michele Bachmann...

Resplendently evoking the Gadsden flag — otherwise known as the “Don’t Tread on Me Flag” — in a yellow-and-black ensemble, Bachmann served up the usual dish about the deficit, and how the rescue of the auto industry amounted to some form of “gangster government.” (You can find my live Tweets of Bachmann’s speech here – hashtag #ro10 .)

But Bachmann also defined the Tea Party coalition this way: disaffected Democrats, conservative Republicans, libertarians and “Constitution Party types.”

The social safety net came in for more than its usual share of contempt: Bachmann actually called for ending Social Security and Medicare — which she defined as “welfare” — for all but “the truly needy and the truly disabled.” And then she went all Ayn Rand on her audience. “It is possible for every American to be able to retire a millionaire. It’s entirely possible to do that…if you put away money, and there are alternatives that we can offer.”

Major Development!! Christian Democrats agree to talks with Geert Wilders for coalition government

Posted on by

Radio Netherlands is reporting:

The Christian Democrats have agreed to join informal talks with the free-market VVD party and Geert Wilders’ far-right Freedom Party (PVV) to determine whether it would be possible to form a rightwing coalition.

From Israel News"Wilders anti-Islam party to enter government talks" July 26:

Anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders has emerged as a possible member of the next Dutch government after the centrist Christian Democrats agreed to informal talks with Wilders and the VVD party that won recent Dutch elections.

Wilders says the Christian Democrats' move is "positive news" and he is prepared to start the talks as soon as possible. (AP)

Wilders' Freedom Party came in third and won 24 seats in June elections.