Central Louisiana high school students participate in Tulane Medical School's Career MD Day

Posted on by

High school students from Central Louisiana spent a day in the life of a medical student.

It was all a part of Tulane Medical Schools Career MD Day. The hope is that at the end of the day they will have a better idea of what their career will be in the future.

Watch report

Listening to and measuring breathing and heart rates, performing CPR and laparoscopic surgery -- its all in a days work for students at the center for advanced medical simulation and learning at Tulane Med School.

But Tuesday, the lab was taken over by 30 juniors and seniors in high school.

They are with a program thats part of the Central Louisiana Health Education Center, or AHEC, aimed at exposing kids to the medical field before college to help them decided if its the right path for them

Theyre giving you the truth, said Camila Carrera, a Lavonia High School student. Theyre not like, Come to med school. Be a doctor! Theyre like, Its this, this and this. Its helpful this way, but its also stressful in this way. I feel like thats a good aspect of this program.

I really hope that today is eye-opening for them, that they get to experience -- from the med students, the passion that these medical student have for becoming a doctor and kind of reignite a passion in the med students as well -- but for our high schoolers is to really firm up the desires theyve had since they were a kid to become a doctor, said Elizabeth Sylvest, with Cenral Louisiana Area Health Education Center.

Slyvest said they track their students progress even after they graduate from high school. She says several students have decided to go into the medical field after spending time in the program and after spending time here at Tulane Med School.

Go here to read the rest:

Central Louisiana high school students participate in Tulane Medical School's Career MD Day

Anthony’s Interpretation of Patrick Henry’s "Give Me Liberty, or Give Me Death Speech" – Video

Posted on by


Anthony #39;s Interpretation of Patrick Henry #39;s "Give Me Liberty, or Give Me Death Speech"
This is my personal interpretation of Patrick Henry #39;s speech, prepared for Mrs. Howard in Rhetoric II at The Potter #39;s School.

By: Anthony Young

See the article here:

Anthony's Interpretation of Patrick Henry's "Give Me Liberty, or Give Me Death Speech" - Video

Dranoff to market, sell Residences at Two Liberty Place

Posted on by

Hoping for a repeat of the experience at 10 Rittenhouse Square, iStar Financial has handed the remaining 73 condominiums at the Residences at Two Liberty Place to developer Carl Dranoff to market and sell.

Sales of those units, on the 42d through 57th floors of the Center City skyscraper, were to have begun Wednesday after a brokers' open house that drew more than 150 area agents, but the first contract was signed Tuesday.

The number of brokers at the open house attested to the market's high demand for luxury condos and the dearth of supply.

Doug Pearson, owner and chairman of Kurfiss Sotheby's International Realty, in New Hope, said Two Liberty should "do very well, especially because they're doing it at the right time, with such a shortage of inventory."

"There's nothing new until [Dranoff's] 1 Riverside comes on line," Pascarella said.

The 58-story, 1.2 million-square-foot Two Liberty Place at 50 S. 16th St. was completed in 1990 as a primarily commercial building. The Residences at Two Liberty were carved from the upper floors in 2005 by American Capital Partners and the Falcone Group.

In 2012, iStar took title to the unsold units and raw space, and once considered turning those floors into a boutique hotel, industry sources said.

The median price for the remaining Two Liberty condos should be in the $750-per-square-foot range, Dranoff said.

Istar will fund refurbishment of the Residences at Two Liberty lobby and creation of an amenities floor on the 37th level.

Read the original here:

Dranoff to market, sell Residences at Two Liberty Place

Editorial: Mr. Pauls and Mr. Christies irresponsible comments about measles vaccinations

Posted on by

By Editorial Board February 3

TWO POTENTIAL Republican presidential candidates, Sen.Rand Paul (Ky.) and New Jersey Gov.Chris Christie, have made irresponsible comments about vaccines at a time when measles has reappeared in the United States. Their remarks call into question their judgment and their fitness for higher office.

Mr.Paul, an ophthalmologist, said in a television interview, Ive heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines. He added that he vaccinated his own children: Im not arguing vaccines are a bad idea. I think theyre a good thing. But I think parents should have some input. Mr.Christie, visiting a medical research laboratory in Cambridge, England, said that he, too, had vaccinated his children, but I also understand that parents need to have some measure of choice in things as well. So thats the balance that the government has to decide.

Both comments reflect a streak of libertarianism, a political philosophy that champions the individual and freedom to choose. In principle, this isnt irrational. The United States has often stood as a beacon of individual liberty over tyranny. But it becomes destructive when people resist government because of irrational fears and suspicions. To protect people from threats, government has a legitimate role. In the case of measles, the threat is a highly contagious virus that can bring serious consequences. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Measles is so contagious that if one person has it, 90% of the people close to that person who are not immune will also become infected. This is why states have passed laws mandating vaccination for children attending public schools (although 17 states, including California, scene of the outbreak at Disneyland, have waivers for personal beliefs, and 48 have waivers for religious beliefs).

Both the governor and senator seem to be suggesting that it is fine for parents to avoid vaccinations for their children. But is this really a matter of individual rights? Liberty does not confer the right to endanger others whether at a school or Disneyland or anywhere else.

More broadly, a president must make decisions every day about science, and it is not always easy; consider the struggle over climate change, the hard-fought debate over the impact of the Keystone XL pipeline, the promise of genetically modified foods, the intensifying threat of cyberattacks and the growing danger of antimicrobial resistance. Every one of these requires decision-makers to be rational and clear-eyed, the president most of all.

In the case of measles, proven science is well in hand. The vaccine has a half-century record of safety and effectiveness. The study linking it to autism has been discredited and retracted. Mr.Pauls reporting of anecdotes that he has heard is particularly insidious. Measles was eliminated in the United States by 2000 with widespread use of the vaccine. No presidential candidate should endorse parental choice that could reopen the door to an ugly and preventable disease.

Read this article:

Editorial: Mr. Pauls and Mr. Christies irresponsible comments about measles vaccinations

Once A Vaccine Skeptic, This Mom Changed Her Mind

Posted on by

Juniper Russo walks her dogs with her daughter Vivian (left). Courtesy of Juniper Russo hide caption

Juniper Russo walks her dogs with her daughter Vivian (left).

The ongoing measles outbreak linked to Disneyland has led to some harsh comments about parents who don't vaccinate their kids. But Juniper Russo, a writer in Chattanooga, Tenn., says she understands those parents because she used to be one of them.

"I know what it's like to be scared and just want to protect your children, and make the wrong decisions," Russo says.

Juniper Russo with her daughter Vivian. Courtesy of Juniper Russo hide caption

Juniper Russo with her daughter Vivian.

When her daughter Vivian was born, "I was really adamant that she not get vaccines," Russo says. "I thought that she was going to be safe without them and they would unnecessarily introduce chemicals into her body that could hurt her."

That's a view shared by many parents who choose not to vaccinate. And in Russo's case, it was reinforced by parents she met online.

"I had a lot of online acquaintances who claimed that their kids had become autistic because of vaccines," Russo says. "I got kind of swept up in that."

But fear of autism was only part of the reason Russo didn't want vaccines for her daughter. She says at that point in her life she identified strongly with what she calls "crunchy moms" who question mainstream medicine and things that aren't natural.

Read more here:

Once A Vaccine Skeptic, This Mom Changed Her Mind

Volokh Conspiracy: Not vaccinating = failure to reasonably avoid polluting

Posted on by

A lawyer friend of mine passed along this idea,

New cause of action: Tortious Non-Vaccination.

This is when a person who could be vaccinated but chooses not to (or his parents choose not to) becomes infected and then infects someone else who could not be vaccinated such as a someone with leukemia or some other immune deficiency or sensitivity to vaccinations. What victims of Tortious Non-Vaccination should do is file a complaint seeking to certify a defendant class action and bring a claim against all Tortious Non-Vaccinators [who had gotten the disease].

I think the kind of burden of proof shifting along the lines of Summers v. Tice would be appropriate. Thus, here, a member of the defendant class would have the opportunity to, say, prove that he could not have infected anyone.

[A]nd since its a negligence claim, you target the homeowners insurance policy. Anti-vaxers insurance rates will rise to internalize the cost of non-vaccination.

Summers v. Tice is a famous tort case in which plaintiff was allowed to recover from his two fellow hunters, when he was injured by one of them but it wasnt clear which one. Usually, a plaintiff has to show that theres a greater than 50% chance that the particular defendant he is suing caused his injury; but in this instance the court relaxed the requirement. (I include an edited version of Summers below.)

Im skeptical about my friends theory. Summers, I think, is a limited exception to the general tort law rule that the plaintiff must show that his injury was likely caused by the defendant. And I doubt that Summers would be extended to a situation such as communicable disease, given how unrelated and variegated the potential tortfeasors are, how many there are, and how unlikely each one is to have injured this particular plaintiff.

I agree that if you know that D has infected P, and D failed to take reasonable precautions to prevent this (e.g., getting vaccinated), this would be tortious under normal negligence principles. (This is often litigated in sexually transmitted disease cases, but historically that came out of other communicable disease cases, where the source of the infection was known; the principle dates back to the late 1800s and early 1900s.) But if a plaintiff is suing everyone who hasnt been vaccinated and has contracted the disease some of whom had more serious forms of the disease and some of whom had less serious forms, some of whom spent a lot of time during their illness around other people and some of whom spent less, and nearly of all whom are likely not to have caused plaintiffs illness, directly or indirectly I dont think the Summers theory would or should apply to defendants.

Indeed, this pretty closely tracks the way the law deals with pollution. In some situations, particular polluters can indeed be sued under general tort law principles for harm to particular plaintiffs. But in large part because of the difficulty proving causation, the tort route is often unavailable. The law has (generally) dealt with this not by relaxing the causation requirement, but by setting up a regulatory scheme requiring polluters to take various steps to diminish pollution.

And I think pollution in general is a good metaphor for non-vaccination. Factories sometimes emit chemical pollutants. Factory owners have a legal duty to take various reasonable steps to reduce the risk and magnitude of such emissions.

Read more from the original source:

Volokh Conspiracy: Not vaccinating = failure to reasonably avoid polluting

Pokmon Ash Gray Orange Islands – Episode 11: Meowth Rules and Tracey Gets Bugged – Video

Posted on by


Pokmon Ash Gray Orange Islands - Episode 11: Meowth Rules and Tracey Gets Bugged
Meowth gets scooped and turned into an idol while Tracey pops in a steals our thunder. Episodes: Meowth Rules! Tracey Gets Bugged Game: Pokmon Ash Gray Console: Gameboy Advanced ...

By: Jethrotex

Visit link:

Pokmon Ash Gray Orange Islands - Episode 11: Meowth Rules and Tracey Gets Bugged - Video