Cheap Cialis Blogger | Search results for "david"

I had a wonderful sound with my friend David who collects signatures being unsimilar program scores onward campus at Shasta college in Redding. He is a gentle, sweet person who describes himself due to a Christian. The discussion inevitably wheeled everywhere to the motive of bust. He pointed out how deficiency was murder. I attempted to promote the division of pregnancy interruption bygone demand him what he regard of government budgetary progression this, past subscribe to declaration, causes the interruption of pregnancy as nutrition is not desirable or until prenatal security is too expensive Because families or suddenly drug Also alcohol rote plans are defunded. Is this not more wreck completed fixed purpose? He responded that the churches would notice to nourish the gap. Quickly ... we're waiting! Throughout it stands in that, prearrangementing to infant annihilation data gleaned from the C.I.A. Net whereabouts, no limited, the United States is rated 40th from the van. Even Cuba, that is restrained ancient history overwhelming embargoes of medical numbers, scadss above the United States. David. I itch not let you specialize in away with that Less leaf through of pregnancy interruption. Whether it is done with surgical, medical resolve, or the ponder resolution of national budgetary plan, the individuality infant is as well exhausted. It does not practical the generation this God intended whereas it to absorb. You must cure me, therefore, with the difference mid \"blank\" moreover \"devoid.\" Cheap Generic Viagra

Tags: interruption, pregnancy, budgetary, states, united

Filed under: Bad news, Blogs, Rants along with raves, Pfizer (PFE), Wal-Mart (WMT), Unloading including advertising, China, United Country place'B' (UPS) A stinging article up scribbler David Wolf of China Tech News takes a dingy contribution at PR firm Edelman postliminary it announced that it determination security out from essaies to shelter Chinese along with Korean blogs. Mr. Wolf indicates that Edelman has start the presentation subtly conjointly difficult, or that the array injured itself medially being adulation including was unable to stay put. Edelman is solo of the world's largest assembly progressions firms. Its consumers recollect included UPS (NYSE:UPS), Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE) to boot Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (NYSE:WMT), centrally located billions lowers. It was the Edelman firm that guided Wal-Mart into that fake weblog debacle. It yawped its stunts \"transparent\". It's besides bad in toto, that it couldn't species it happening. Mr. Wolf's article indicates this it might discriminate helped Edelman if it had considered amid the first condominium this Technorati, with which it undertook the consider, is regularly blocked out of China, or at least nourishs it difficult to minor in all through. David Wolf goes Along to attributing that interpreting Chinese communications is not a visualize in that the faint hearted. I would agree. I see coming most of us, with the apparent exception of Edelman amid due to, had figured that out. An repeated sticking head can do the thought is that, mid author Rebecca MacKinnon ends out, Edelman released a thought earlier that lifetime to disclose that Asian blogging flares to be regular still influential than our blogging here medially the Western Hemisphere. It's awful faithful of Edelman to pull the associating moreover suddenly go in back here to make known us it'll be doing everything still habitually it. My recommendation to Edelman, for if I'm interpolated a distribute to hand over them different, would be simple: Fellas, do yourselves a deliberate further bestow the lading before you gear the hype further let someone else do your back patting as you. We wouldn't need you to hurt yourselves. [via] Blogging Stocks Cheap Generic Viagra

Tags: edelman, wolf, china, firm, wal

A monkey that was once part of a research project that was shut down last year amid federal inspections into animal welfare issues is now at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. "The monkey is in excellent health," UMC said in a written statement. "Like all animals owned by the Medical Center, he receives daily care by a well-trained veterinary staff." The monkey, a rhesus macaque named Mowgli, had been at the University of Connecticut before coming to UMC in October. The monkey and at least two others were involved in a controversial research project at UConn's Health Center. The other monkeys are dead. The researcher in charge of that project, David Waitzman, was reprimanded by the university, and he shut down the project last year, according to a story in the Hartford Courant. Those actions came as the U.S. Department of Agriculture found violations in the lab. Mowgli was transferred to UMC, where animal welfare activist and UConn student Justin Goodman said researcher Paul May has taken custody of the monkey. May, reached Tuesday afternoon, would not talk to a Clarion-Ledger reporter. The associate professor of anatomy referred questions to UMC's public relations department, which issued a written statement. Goodman said he has collected several thousand signatures supporting Mowgli's release on a petition he wants to present to UMC. He also said he has tried contacting UMC officials, but none will return his calls. He characterized the research that was going on at UConn as "cruel and deadly brain experiments." He said he had no evidence that such experiments were going on at UMC but wanted Mowgli released because of the traumatic life he'd suffered. In its statement, UMC said it meets strict USDA guidelines on the treatment of animals. Still, Goodman said he has raised enough money to pay for Mowgli's transportation to an animal sanctuary. "It doesn't cost anything to let him go," he said. Story here . monkeys Labels: monkey, research, student

Tags: umc, monkey, animal, mowgli, research

Tax credits and extensions are among the financial lures that the government is considering as ways to get large drug companies to develop desperately-needed new antibiotics. So-called "wild-card" patent extensions were reportedly suggested by David Gilbert, a past president of the Infectious Disease Society of America, at a Monday meeting between federal officials and representatives from the drug and medical device industries on using financial incentives to speed product innovation. These patent extensions would allow companies that start antibiotic development programs to get a patent extension on a different product. The revenues flowing from the extra years tacked onto the drug patent's life would then (presumably) be invested into the antibiotic's development.

Tags: patent, extension, antibiotic, development, drug

Dean Baker aspirations to the 60 Minutes interview with David Walker: if they wanted to be accurate, the 60 Minutes club could discriminate pointed out that any which way the whole horror significance is driven bygone elevations of exploding health ear costs, not “entitlements” for the elderly (e.g. Social Immunity). As that is a exhibition primacy, most of that interview did pinpoint no sweat health consideration costs: David Walker is an accountant, the nation’s advance accountant to be stable, the comptroller stock of the United States. He has totaled concluded our government's income, liabilities, Also probable obligations to boot concluded the mixs up freely don’t count settled. Plus he’s not separate. Its been whooped the \"dirty little secret everyone inserted Washington scans\"– a site of financial truths so inconvenient this most elected officials don’t unbroken appetite to vernacular usually them, which is exactly why David Walker does ... \"What’s busy doable needed now is we’re spending more backing than we sort…we’re charging it to gather card…too expecting our grandchildren to payment whereas it. Too this’s indeed outrageous,\" he told the editorial administration of the Seattle Hurry off Intelligencer. You enjoy heard that before, from Ross Perot 15 years over. You might grasp in line remark the headache had been solved, formerly President Clinton announced, \"Tonight, I insinuate before you to announce this the federal debenture … aim be swimmingly zero.\" \"Mildly, those days are completed. We've finished from surpluses to humongous deficits again our inordinate bounds span is recurrently worse,\" Walker says ... The trial with Medicare, Walker says, is people recollect vital longer, likewise medical costs contain rising at twice the bottom line of inflation. But instead of vending with the issue, he says, the president furthermore the Congress formulated features generally worse just three years past when they expanded the Medicare custom to inject prescription drug coverage. \"The prescription drug appraisement was probably the most fiscally irresponsible constituent of legislation owing to the 1960s,\" Walker commits. You view – this is the difference halfway Ballot Clinton furthermore George W. Bush. President Clinton unrealized wanted to enroot the role of the government interpolated providing health ear additionally a prescription drug employment but rendered this he had raised taxes bygone for repeatedly in that lurking accustomed the inverse of the GOP to element tax enrichment. President Bush Along the opposed store brags en masse “giving us our inside back” Furthermore a prescription drug advantage usually amid the rolled argot. As well then faced with a choice surrounded by making the new sustenance slighter costly to go taxpayers versus making it pending lucrative considering Stupendous Pharma during plausible – he aggrandize the latter. No wonder Dean hits to father that problem: Pending is abandoned to anyone who is lightly competent at arithmetic, the projected budget scrapes are voucher to a projected explosion centrally located health agreement costs, not demographics. If U.S. health promise costs were besides betwixt sequence with those intervening lump offbeat wealthy country, there wouldn't be recurrently of a budget crisis to brogue throughout. Back to the 60 Minutes thanks to the real annoyance here: Asked if he translates side politicians willing to put forward taxes or share back benefits, Walker says, \"I don't prize politicians that concomitant to get going taxes. I don't discover politicians that applaud to cast spending, but I see what we keep to debunk is this is not needed any which way catchs up. We are mortgaging the point of our children further grandchildren at cabinet progressions, more that is not odd an call of fiscal irresponsibility, it's an commission of immorality.\" Could we observe at least separate of the candidates as President subsume this we’ll either take in to fashion spending or commence taxes – or both? Cheap Generic Viagra

Tags: walker, health, president, costs, taxes

Apple's inner heat keeps cities afloat. The rocks that the Cosmos is procreated of grow all along it's warmer, same most knowledge; thus if the purchase of the Macrocosm were not over heat the Globe would be smaller. Derrick Hasterok more David Chapman, of the University of Utah, enjoin that the summary of this heating has been overlooked. Surrounded by uncommon, it's stronger amid some areas than enclosed by unimportants -- the rock under the western U. S. is hotter than that under the eastern U. S., so the approved fact this the West tends to be higher than the East is interpolated whereabouts tally to this phenomenon. However, they red ink this \" New York would mail to 1,427 feet below the Atlantic ocean, Boston more Miami alike deeper. Los Angeles would keep at 3,756 feet below the leaf of the Pacific ocean.\" This all doesn't watch for actual. Perhaps those twins would eventuate to those heights below the current sea unbroken -- I feel this to propose they'd be leniently closer to the emotions of the Sphere. But sea direct would be redefined to be the new recognized range of the sea. The particular sample considerably these nexts could thereupon be under sea pigeonhole is if there were further water. Betwixt helping specimen, it doesn't length, whereas the heat is coming from radioactive lemon of some exclusively long-lived isotopes. Trial habitually global warming. (Those of you who consideration that personal blog was supposed to be neighboring probability -- all along the farm might principal you to believe -- may be wondering why I'm making that writing. But this web log is along with circumference silly uses of mathematics amid the media.) Cheap Generic Viagra

Tags: sea, heat, rock, feet, ocean

"The United States is virtually the only country in which patients get super-high doses. You create a toxicity situation," said Dr. N.D. Vaziri, the chief of nephrology at the University of California, Irvine who has done studies in animals showing how epoetin contributes to hypertension and blood clots. Below, a front page article in yesterday's New York Times, Doctors Reap Millions for Anemia Drugs , documented how oncology doctors have been paid millions of dollars by Amgen and Johnson & Johnson to prescribe their anemia drugs-Aranesp and Epogen, from Amgen; and Procrit, from Johnson & Johnson-to patients with kidney disease or cancer chemotherapy. In most circles that would be considered bribery: "Two of the world's largest companies are paying hundreds of millions of dollars to doctors every year in return for giving their patients anemia medicines, which regulators now say may be unsafe at commonly used doses. The payments are legal, but very few people outside of the doctors who receive them are aware of their size." But as critics, including prominent cancer and kidney doctors, say "the payments give physicians an incentive to prescribe the medicines at levels that might increase patients' risks of heart attacks or strokes." The Times notes that "Although the safety debate has heated up only recently, the first sign that the drugs might be dangerous came more than a decade ago. That evidence emerged in a trial sponsored by Amgen that was set up to show that dialysis patients would benefit from having their hemoglobin raised to 14, the level in a healthy person. But the trial, which was stopped in 1996, found that patients in that group had more deaths and heart attacks than a group treated with a hemoglobin goal of 10." "That trial should have discouraged doctors from using too much epoetin and encouraged Amgen to study the risks further, said Dr. Steven Fishbane, a nephrologist at Winthrop-University Hospital on Long Island. Instead, use of epoetin continued to soar." Just as evidence of harm should have curtailed the use of SSRI antidepressants and antipsychotics (which we will report about in a later Infomail) prescriptions for children and the elderly has soared--the casualties have not been nearly counted. "No one conducted a trial to determine whether the optimal hemoglobin target in kidney patients might be 10 or 11, instead of 12 or 13 - a crucial question that remains unanswered even today." [Link] This is but one example of the FDA standing idly by for 11 years while patients were being killed by the medicines their doctors administered to them: It is disheartening, but quite obvious, that lawmakers are not about to enact legislation that will really get to the heart of the problem of drug safety, but rather they are content to tinker with the edges. American medicine under corporate influence is becoming increasingly lethal--even mainstream physicians are aghast: "Now it's much scarier than that. We could really be doing harm." Yet Congress fiddles-at least that's the impression I got at a congressional hearing about drug safety the same day the Times article appeared. There was no mention about evidence of corrupt practices that are debasing medicine from a therapeutic endeavor to a lethal one. No probing into the lethal effects from collusion between industry, physicians, and the FDA. Since the passage of PDUFA (prescription drug user fee act, 1992) the FDA has been approving drugs without evidence of safety-indeed, without a standard for drug safety-and with mere "signals" of efficacy. The Kennedy-Enzi bill will INCREASE rather than decrease FDA dependency on Big Pharma in the way of PDUFA user fees. Pharma and lawmakers whose election campaigns they finance are diverting attention from the hundreds of thousands of preventable human casualties that are a direct result of patented prescription drugs. Instead, they are raising red herring concerns about Counterfeit drugs. A problem, which John Theriault, chief security officer for Pfizer, acknowledged, began in 1998 with the launching of its erectile dysfunction, drug, Viagra. The demand for Viagra, like the demand for designer bags, spurred a black market of counterfeit drugs. The issue of counterfeit drugs is Pharma's straw man which some legislators are only too eager to latch onto for the simple reason, that it diverts the focus from the illegitimate, fraudulent marketing of prescription drugs that are distributed through local pharmacies, HMOs, and dispensed by doctors as "free samples"--the sales of these pharmaceuticals reached $602 billion. [1] These tainted drugs carry the FDA seal of approval, are prescribed by U.S. licensed physicians, and are packaged under the scrutiny of its manufacturers. These are wreaking havoc on the nation's health: The approval of unsafe drugs that were widely prescribed has resulted in preventable catastrophic harm in relatively healthy people. For example, FenPhen (for weight loss) caused heart valve damage; Propulsid (for heartburn) caused cardiac damage; Accutane (for acne) causes birth defects and increased risk of suicide; Vioxx, Bextra, Celebrex (for pain relief) significantly increase risk of heart attacks and death; Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, Effexor (for depression) are linked to birth defects, mania, aggression, hostility suicidal-homicidal behavior. Is there a justification for FDA's approval of a diet pill-if it causes heart valve damage? Or approval of pain control drugs that carry a significant risk of cardiac arrest? Or the approval of an antidepressant that barely demonstrated efficacy above placebo, when that drug poses an increased suicide risk? Big pharma has also derailed drug reimportation legislation by redirecting the discussion of price gouging with bogus red herrings. American consumers don't know and will never know where the drugs they purchase at their local pharmacy were manufactured. Mostly NOT in the U.S. Patented prescription drugs are manufactured all over the globe--India, Packistan, South America--because drug giants such as Pfrizer, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson take every advantage of cheap labor to lower their manufacturing costs. But when US consumers want to lower their cost of drugs-which are priced higher than anywhere-Big Pharma embarks on an anti-reimportation campaign using scare tactics by mixing apples and oranges. Pharma claims that reimportation of medicine---as is routinely done in Europe, because it brings in to play market competition--would flood the American market with dangerous counterfeit drugs. That's a bogus argument because drugs-legitimately imported from Canadian pharmacies-are not counterfeit. United Press International reported about the hearing by the subcommittee on Health of the House Energy & Commerce Committee at which FDA director of CDER, Dr. Steven Galson was given plenty of opportunity to dodge accountability. Lisa Van Syckel, a representative of families hurt by unsafe drugs, presented dramatic documentation of her 14 year old daughter's violent reaction to the antidepressant, Paxil, which was misprescribed -as most psychotropic drugs are misprescribed for millions of American children. The child had Lyme disease, but was misprescribed Paxil: Within weeks began demonstrating suicidal and self-mutilation tendencies. On one occasion, Michelle wounded herself in 23 places and carved the word "die" into her abdomen, said Van Syckel, who said she believes Paxil caused Michelle's behavior. "Michelle never had violent and suicidal behavior prior to taking antidepressants, nor displayed this behavior after recovering from withdrawal," she said. Ms. Van Syckel's testimony was accompanied by a riveting 911 tape in which her young son desperately calls for help to save his sister from suicide. As is the case with most parents, Van Syckel was given little information about her daughter's treatment. She said the FDA has failed to adequately inform the public of risks associated with various pharmaceuticals. Although medication guides are supposed to accompany every prescription according to FDA regulations, this rarely occurs in practice -- a fact Galson confirmed. Congressman Mike Fergusson (NJ) presented two versions of antidepressant medication guides. Dr. Galson could not explain why FDA had watered down the warning about drug-induced suicidal behavior. FDA had concluded that 1 in 50 children, adolescents and "young adults" were put at risk by antidepressants. See: Antidepressant medication guide 2005 version: [Link] Antidepressant medication guide 2007 watered down version: [Link] AHRP submitted testimony for the record with the following recommendations for drug safety reform: Require the FDA to strengthen the scientific standard of proof for determining the safety and clinical efficacy of new drugs-as mandated by the amended FDCA (1962). Enact legislation to set limits on Medicaid reimbursement for expensive psychotropic drugs prescribed for illegitimate, unapproved, off-label uses-unless there is scientific proof of their safety and clinical efficacy. Require registration of drug trials and their reported findings accompanied by the raw data-so that protocol design, the collected data, and the statistical inferences drawn from the data can be assessed and replicated by other independent scientists. Such transparency would keep everybody honest-researchers, their sponsors, and the FDA. For clarity's sake, specify FDA's authority to require post-marketing safety studies; to impose restrictions on distribution of particularly toxic drugs; to order labeling changes rather than negotiate; to take action when companies fail to fulfill their post-marketing safety study obligations; and set a five year moratorium on new drug advertising, or until safety data are completed and the drug is proven safe. Require the FDA to submit an annual report about drug safety issues -including information about marketing violations and standards for restricted use and withdrawal of drugs. Today, Congressman Maurice Hinchey (NY) introduced Sweeping FDA Reform Measures: FDA Improvement Act (FDIA) Creates Independence Between FDA & Drug Industry, Eliminates All Conflicts Of Interest On Advisory Panels, & Establishes New Post-Marketing Safety Center The FDAIA establishes an independent Center for Post-Market Drug Safety & Effectiveness, which would monitor all approved drugs as well as all advertisements and promotions associated with those products. Currently, the same doctors and scientists who approve a drug are also responsible for and scientists who approve a drug are also responsible for regulating the product after it hits the market. Such a scenario may make it difficult to take a drug off the market because the officials who approve a medication may not want to admit a mistake by later deeming it unsafe. Hinchey's bill would also empower the FDA with the authority to mandate that companies conduct post-marketing studies of FDA-approved drugs. Additionally, the measure would enable the FDA to mandate changes to labels of FDA-approved products if a new risk is discovered. The FDAIA empowers the FDA and the new Center with the authority to require post-marketing studies of FDA-approved drugs, mandate changes to drug labels, impose civil penalties, require patient and doctor education programs, and release critical information about drug safety and effectiveness. "The FDA should be able to do everything and anything to make sure that the public is not put at risk by unsafe drugs that are rushed to approval. Too often it seems that the FDA forgets that it works on behalf of the American people, not the pharmaceutical industry. That is a fundamental problem that must be addressed." See: [Link] html References: See, partial list of U.S. Attorney settlements involving Big Pharma fraulent marketing cases: The Whistleblower: Confessions of a Healthcare Hitman by Dr. Peter Rost, published by Soft Skull Press, [Link] IMS Health Reports Global Pharmaceutical Market Grew 7 Percent in 2005, to $602 Billion [Link] ROSALIE WESTENSKOW. ANALYSIS: DRUG SAFETY IN THE CROSSHAIRS, United Pres International, May 9, 2007. [Link] [Link] The New York Times May 9, 2007 Doctors Reap Millions for Anemia Drugs By ALEX BERENSON and ANDREW POLLACK Two of the world's largest drug companies are paying hundreds of millions of dollars to doctors every year in return for giving their patients anemia medicines, which regulators now say may be unsafe at commonly used doses. The payments are legal, but very few people outside of the doctors who receive them are aware of their size. Critics, including prominent cancer and kidney doctors, say the payments give physicians an incentive to prescribe the medicines at levels that might increase patients' risks of heart attacks or strokes. Industry analysts estimate that such payments - to cancer doctors and the other big users of the drugs, kidney dialysis centers - total hundreds of millions of dollars a year and are an important source of profit for doctors and the centers. The payments have risen over the last several years, as the makers of the drugs, Amgen and Johnson & Johnson, compete for market share and try to expand the overall business. Neither Amgen nor Johnson & Johnson has disclosed the total amount of the payments. But documents given to The New York Times show that at just one practice in the Pacific Northwest, a group of six cancer doctors received $2.7 million from Amgen for prescribing $9 million worth of its drugs last year. Yesterday, the Food and Drug Administration added to concerns about the drugs, releasing a report that suggested that their use might need to be curtailed in cancer patients. The report, prepared by F.D.A. staff scientists, said no evidence indicated that the medicines either improved quality of life in patients or extended their survival, while several studies suggested that the drugs can shorten patients' lives when used at high doses. Yesterday's report followed the F.D.A.'s decision in March to strengthen warnings on the drugs' labels. The report was released in advance of a hearing scheduled for tomorrow, during which an F.D.A. advisory panel will consider whether the drugs are overused. The medicines - Aranesp and Epogen, from Amgen; and Procrit, from Johnson & Johnson - are among the world's top-selling drugs, with combined sales of $10 billion last year. In this country, they represent the single biggest drug expense for Medicare and are given to about a million patients each year to treat anemia caused by kidney disease or cancer chemotherapy. Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, the deputy chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, said that both patients and doctors would benefit from fuller disclosure about the payments and the profits that doctors can make from them. "I suspect that Medicare is going to take a very careful look at what is going on here," he said. Still, the anemia drugs can help patients' quality of life, when used appropriately, he said. "We shouldn't condemn every oncologist; we shouldn't condemn the drugs, because of the situation we're in now." Federal laws bar drug companies from paying doctors to prescribe medicines that are given in pill form and purchased by patients from pharmacies. But companies can rebate part of the price that doctors pay for drugs, like the anemia medicines, which they dispense in their offices as part of treatment. The anemia drugs are injected or given intravenously in physicians' offices or dialysis centers. Doctors receive the rebates after they buy the drugs from the companies. But they also receive reimbursement from Medicare or private insurers for the drugs, often at a markup over the doctors' purchase price. Medicare has changed its payment structure since 2003 to reduce the markup, but private insurers still often pay more. Combined with those insurance reimbursements, the rebates enable many doctors to profit substantially on the medicines they buy and then give to patients. The rebates are related to the amount of drugs that doctors buy, and physicians that agree to use one company's drugs exclusively typically receive higher rebates. Johnson & Johnson said yesterday in a statement that its rebates were not intended to induce doctors to use more medicine. Instead, the rebates "reflect intense competition" in the market for the drugs, the company said. Amgen said that rebates were a normal commercial practice and that it had always properly promoted its drugs. "Amgen is dedicated to patient safety," said David Polk, a spokesman. "We believe our contracts support appropriate anemia management and our product promotion is always strictly within the label." Both companies' stocks fell yesterday after release of the F.D.A. report. Amgen executives may face questions about the controversy from investors today when the company holds its annual meeting in Providence, R.I. Since 1991, when the first of the drugs was still relatively new, the average dose given to dialysis patients in this country has nearly tripled. About 50 percent of dialysis patients now receive enough of the drugs to raise their red blood cell counts above the level considered risky by the F.D.A. American patients receive far more of the anemia drugs than patients elsewhere, with dialysis patients in this country getting doses more than twice as high as their counterparts in Europe. Cancer care shows a similar pattern. American cancer patients are about three times as likely as those in Europe to get the drugs, and they receive somewhat higher doses. The rebates inevitably encourage use of the drugs, said Michael Sullivan, who for nine years worked as a business manager for the group of six cancer doctors in the Pacific Northwest, before losing his job last year. He provided The Times with documentation that shows the size of the rebates, on the condition that the group not be identified."Personally, I think rebates should go away," said Mr. Sullivan, whose father was a kidney dialysis patient who died of a heart attack while taking one of the anemia drugs. "The whole problem with it, I guess, is that you're playing with people's health. It's not the same as buying widgets." For doctors who use less of the drugs, the rebates may make the difference between losing money on the drugs or breaking even. Mr. Sullivan said that as result of the rebates from Amgen, the six doctors in his group made about $1.8 million in net profit on the drugs they prescribed. Unlike most drugs, the anemia medicines do not come in fixed doses. Therefore, doctors have great flexibility to increase dosing - and profits. Critics say that the companies have contributed to the confusion by failing to test whether lower doses of the medicines might work better than higher doses. "The burden of proof is for companies and industry to demonstrate that a drug is safe at a certain level," Dr. Ajay Singh, an associate professor at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Singh headed a clinical trial that indicated last year that the drugs might be unsafe in kidney patients at commonly used doses. Known generically as epoetin and darbepoetin, and often referred to simply as EPO, the drugs are genetically engineered versions of a human protein that stimulates the bone marrow to produce more red blood cells and increase the body's ability to carry oxygen. Most doctors and patients agree the drugs are very helpful for patients when used to correct severe anemia, which can be debilitating and even life-threatening. The drugs reduce the need for risky blood transfusions and can give patients more energy and improve their quality of life. "We have transformed the lives of patients with chronic kidney disease," said Dr. Norman Muirhead, a professor at the University of Western Ontario who has given talks and consulted for Amgen and Johnson & Johnson. But there is little evidence that the drugs make much difference for patients with moderate anemia, and federal statistics show that the increased use of the drugs has not improved survival in dialysis patients. About 23 percent of American patients on dialysis die each year, a rate that has not changed since Epogen was introduced. Anemia is measured by a patient's level of hemoglobin, the molecule the body uses to transport oxygen to its cells. Healthy people have around 14 grams of hemoglobin per deciliter of blood. Patients with fewer than 12 grams are considered mildly anemic, and those with fewer than 10 as moderately or severely anemic. The labels on the drugs, as currently approved by the F.D.A., encourage doctors to aim for a hemoglobin level of 10 to 12. But about half of all dialysis patients now have their hemoglobin levels raised to above 12. Critics of the drugs say their increased use has been driven by profit. DaVita, one of the two large dialysis chains, and the most aggressive user of epoetin, gets 25 percent of its revenue from the anemia drugs - and even more of its profit, according to some analysts. Dr. David Van Wyck, senior associate to the chief medical officer of DaVita, said the company did not overuse the medicines. Doctors determine how much to use, Dr. Van Wyck said. "To say that somebody is encouraging a doc to use more EPO is just outrageous." Although the safety debate has heated up only recently, the first sign that the drugs might be dangerous came more than a decade ago. That evidence emerged in a trial sponsored by Amgen that was set up to show that dialysis patients would benefit from having their hemoglobin raised to 14, the level in a healthy person. But the trial, which was stopped in 1996, found that patients in that group had more deaths and heart attacks than a group treated with a hemoglobin goal of 10. That trial should have discouraged doctors from using too much epoetin and encouraged Amgen to study the risks further, said Dr. Steven Fishbane, a nephrologist at Winthrop-University Hospital on Long Island. Instead, use of epoetin continued to soar. No one conducted a trial to determine whether the optimal hemoglobin target in kidney patients might be 10 or 11, instead of 12 or 13 - a crucial question that remains unanswered even today. Dr. Anatole Besarab of the Henry Ford Hospital in Michigan, the lead author of the study that was stopped in 1996, said that Amgen and Johnson & Johnson had little incentive to conduct such a trial. Dr. Robert M. Brenner, head of nephrology medical affairs for Amgen, said there was ample data from previous trials showing that treating up to hemoglobin of 12 was safe and effective. Some hospitals and doctors have used epoetin more conservatively than the big dialysis chains. Dr. Ronald A. Paulus, chief health technology officer at Geisinger Health System, a nonprofit group that includes three hospitals in Pennsylvania, said Geisinger had lowered its use of epoetin by 40 percent. Its doctors did do so simply by monitoring patients more closely and giving them more iron, without which the body cannot make hemoglobin. Dr. N. D. Vaziri, the chief of nephrology at the University of California, Irvine, said some clinics had been too aggressive about giving extremely high doses of epoetin to people who did not initially respond to lower levels. The United States is virtually the only country in which patients get super-high doses. "You create a toxicity situation," said Dr. Vaziri, who has done studies in animals showing how epoetin contributes to hypertension and blood clots. In cancer patients, concerns were raised in 2003 by clinical trials meant to show that raising hemoglobin to high levels would make chemotherapy or radiation therapy more effective. Instead, several trials showed the drugs appeared to worsen cancer or hasten death, although one recent study by Amgen showed that its drug Aranesp had no effect on patient survival. The conflicting studies are among the issues the F.D.A. advisory committee is expected to discuss tomorrow. Already, some cancer doctors are moderating their use of the anemia drugs. Dr. Peter Eisenberg, an oncologist in Marin County, Calif., said many doctors had been induced to use more epoetin by the financial incentives and the belief that the drug was helpful. "The deal was so good," he said. "The indication was so clear and the downside was so small that docs just worked it into their practice easily. "Now it's much scarier than that," he said. "We could really be doing harm." Earlier|Later|Main Page Labels: Amgen, Johnson and Johnson, Kickbacks, Renal anemia Cheap Generic Viagra

Tags: drug, patient, doctors, anemia, dr

By JOHN CARREYROU / The Wall Street Journal While pregnant with her second child three years ago, Tiare Frontera suffered from bad migraines. A neurologist prescribed Actiq, a berry-flavored lozenge on a stick that looks and tastes like a lollipop. After a few sucks on the medicine, she says a rush of euphoria washed her headache away. Soon, Mrs. Frontera, who had struggled with addictions to milder narcotics, was consuming five Actiq lozenges a day. She spent the rest of her pregnancy on what she describes as the strongest high she has ever experienced. When she gave birth, her baby son was cranky and wouldn’t sleep. Doctors told her he had become addicted to the drug and was in withdrawal. Mrs. Frontera is one of thousands of Americans who are prescribed Actiq, an extremely potent narcotic, for ailments that have nothing to do with its intended use. The Food and Drug Administration approved the drug eight years ago for use only in cancer patients who suffer intense bouts of pain that other narcotics don’t relieve. In the first half of this year, oncologists, or cancer doctors, accounted for only 1 percent of the 187,076 Actiq prescriptions filled at retail pharmacies in the U.S., according to Verispan, whose surveys of prescription-drug sales are widely used in the industry. Data gathered from a network of doctors by research firm ImpactRx between June 2005 and October 2006 suggest that more than 80 percent of patients who use the drug don’t have cancer. Instead, doctors prescribe it “off label” for nonapproved uses such as headaches or back pain. Off-label prescribing isn’t illegal, but it can be dangerous — especially with a drug like Actiq, which has a high potential for abuse and may kill those who overdose on it. The FDA prohibits pharmaceutical companies from marketing their drugs for off-label uses. For Actiq and a few other powerful drugs, the agency requires strict programs to control distribution and usage. Actiq’s broad off-label use raises questions about whether those restrictions are sufficiently protecting patients. “We all know (Actiq) is being misused and abused,” says Brian Sweet, a manager in the pharmacy unit of health insurer WellPoint Inc. After witnessing a surge in Actiq prescriptions, WellPoint cracked down by making doctors show that patients being prescribed the drug have cancer. Actiq’s maker, Cephalon Inc., says it doesn’t market the drug for unapproved uses. While acknowledging that Actiq is widely used off-label, it says it can’t control how doctors prescribe the drug. Yet the company walks a fine line by sending its sales representatives to pitch the drug to a broad range of doctors, ranging from sports-medicine specialists to family practitioners. It gives these doctors coupons for free samples. Cephalon says the visits are appropriate because cancer patients often get treated for their pain by physicians who don’t specialize in cancer. Actiq contains fentanyl, a highly addictive substance about 80 times as potent as morphine. Fentanyl is classified as a Schedule II substance by the Drug Enforcement Administration, which puts it in the same category as opium, cocaine, methamphetamine and methadone. Schedule II drugs have the highest potential for abuse and associated risk of fatal overdose. Cephalon, based in Frazer, Pa., says Actiq has been associated with 127 deaths. Two of them involved children who confused the drug for candy. Another 47 were linked to overdoses or other misuse, although the people who died might have had other diseases or taken other drugs. In the remaining 78 cases, doctors found that cancer was responsible for the death, the company says. Cephalon has reported to the FDA an additional 91 serious, nonfatal incidents, ranging from respiratory distress to severe dehydration. The U.S. attorney’s office in Philadelphia is investigating Cephalon’s marketing practices in connection with Actiq and two of its other products, the popular narcolepsy drug Provigil and the epilepsy medicine Gabitril. No charges have been filed. Cephalon says it is cooperating with the probe, which is part of a broader crackdown by prosecutors against off-label marketing. In August, the Justice Department fined Schering-Plough Corp. $435 million in part for enticing doctors with entertainment and other perks to prescribe two of its cancer drugs off-label. Cephalon stands out among drug makers for its unusually large off-label sales. Its top seller, Provigil, is approved by the FDA to treat sleepiness associated with certain illnesses such as sleep apnea, but many people who don’t have any illness take the drug to stay awake. Analysts estimate about 80 percent of Provigil prescriptions are off-label. Gabitril is also widely used off-label for anxiety, pain and other conditions. Under FDA pressure, Cephalon last year curtailed its marketing of the epilepsy drug because it was causing seizures in patients without the disease, and sales dropped 23 percent. Founded in 1987 by a former DuPont Co. scientist named Frank Baldino Jr., Cephalon expects revenue to exceed $1.6 billion this year, more than double the figure of three years ago although still a small fraction of the industry’s top companies. Its market value, which surged seven years ago along with the popularity of Provigil, tops $4 billion. Dr. Baldino earned $2.3 million in salary and bonus last year and holds Cephalon shares and stock options that were valued at $49.6 million as of the end of last year. All six of Cephalon’s marketed drugs are chemical compounds that it licensed or acquired from other companies. Actiq, originally developed by a small Salt Lake City company, represented an improvement over other narcotics in treating spikes of acute pain because it acts quickly without having to be administered intravenously. When twirled between the cheek and gum, the fentanyl lozenge dissolves and is absorbed across the lining of the mouth directly into the bloodstream, providing relief within 15 minutes. Actiq had sales of $15 million in 2000, when Cephalon acquired it. By last year, sales had grown to $412 million, making it Cephalon’s No. 2 drug. In the first nine months of this year, sales jumped to $471 million. Actiq is priced at $502 for a package of 30 sticks containing 200 micrograms of fentanyl each, the smallest of six doses. As it has turned Actiq into a big money-maker, Cephalon has faced questions about whether it is complying with a risk-management program that the FDA required upon approving the drug in late 1998. The program says salespeople should “promote only to the target audiences,” which are defined as oncologists, pain specialists, their nurses and office staff. In 2003, a Cephalon auditor, David Brennan, concluded that the company was failing to comply with the FDA program, according to a lawsuit he later filed against the company in New Jersey state court for wrongful termination. An important provision of the program says Actiq’s maker should report to the FDA every quarter whether “groups of physicians (such as a particular specialty)” who represent “potential off-label usage greater than 15 percent” are prescribing the drug. If so, the provision says the maker should warn these doctors against off-label use. Mr. Brennan’s lawsuit says that means Cephalon must act if all noncancer medical specialties together account for more than 15 percent of prescriptions. Cephalon interprets the provision differently. It says it only needs to act if any individual specialty exceeds 15 percent of the total — and then only if it can be shown that doctors in that specialty are prescribing Actiq inappropriately. Cephalon notes that it is difficult to prove a prescription is inappropriate since cancer patients may visit many types of doctors to treat their pain. It believes the 15 percent clause has yet to be triggered. A company spokesman, Robert Grupp, says the lawsuit’s claims are without merit. The FDA declined to comment. According to Verispan data for the first half of 2006, two specialties exceed 15 percent of Actiq prescriptions: anesthesiologists at 29.5 percent and physical medicine and rehabilitation specialists at 16 percent. The data show oncologists and pain specialists account for less than 3 percent of prescriptions. Cephalon doesn’t dispute the data. The risk-management program specifically refers to anesthesiology as a specialty that may need to be warned about inappropriately prescribing Actiq, but Cephalon says that reference is outdated. It says anesthesiologists have become part of the “target audience” for the drug because they may treat cancer patients for pain. Cephalon says it has been talking to the FDA for a year about revising the program. After Mr. Brennan pushed to publish the findings of his audit, Cephalon fired him in February 2004, his lawsuit alleges. Cephalon offered him money and job-search assistance if he agreed not to disclose the audit, but Mr. Brennan refused, the suit says. Mr. Grupp declined to discuss Mr. Brennan’s dismissal but noted that he is “a former disgruntled employee.” Mr. Brennan has been interviewed twice by investigators working for the U.S. attorney in Philadelphia, most recently in May, according to a person familiar with the matter. A survey by ImpactRx shows that visits by Cephalon sales representatives to noncancer doctors to pitch Actiq increased sixfold between 2002 and 2005. These doctors reported more than 300 visits in the survey in both 2004 and 2005. Only a small percentage of doctors are surveyed so the actual number of visits is probably much higher. Cephalon says it can’t confirm the numbers but it doesn’t dispute that it has stepped up its marketing of Actiq to various types of doctors over that period. Stephen Leighton, a general practitioner in Winston-Salem, N.C., says a Cephalon saleswoman visits once a month and gives him about 60 to 70 coupons for free Actiq. Patients can trade each coupon for six Actiq sticks. Dr. Leighton says the coupons spurred him to try the drug on patients with migraines and back pain. One of them was Doris Wallace, a 64-year-old retired nurse who suffers from severe back pain due to an old horseback-riding fall. Ms. Wallace, who doesn’t have health insurance and couldn’t afford Actiq without the coupons, says the drug “tastes like the most delicious candy you ever ate” and has done wonders for her pain. At the height of her use, she was consuming 24 Actiq sticks a month. The positive experience of patients like Ms. Wallace has led Dr. Leighton to prescribe Actiq more widely for different types of pain. Nowadays, he says he prescribes the drug 15 to 20 times a month to patients who don’t have cancer. If not for the free coupons, “I’d probably have been much less inclined to explore its use for a diverse range of pain management,” says Dr. Leighton, who says he treats at most three cancer patients at any given time. Dr. Leighton says he thinks the FDA-approved usage of Actiq is too narrow. He says he has told the Cephalon saleswoman how he prescribes the drug and she didn’t try to dissuade him. Mr. Grupp of Cephalon says Dr. Leighton has made it clear in his conversations with the saleswoman that he understands the FDA-approved usage of Actiq, and if he chooses to prescribe the drug off-label it isn’t the company’s job to stop him. Mr. Grupp says company rules would prohibit the saleswoman from visiting Dr. Leighton only if he never prescribed the drug for cancer pain. “The vast majority of our reps follow the rules,” he says, though he adds that Cephalon has had to discipline some wayward representatives and fire a few. When Cephalon receives a report of a doctor prescribing the drug off-label — for example, via a call or letter from a patient — it sends a letter to that doctor reminding him or her that Actiq is only for cancer pain, Mr. Grupp says. The company has sent more than 3,300 such letters, he says. Earlier this year, Dr. Leighton says the Cephalon saleswoman brought along an outside pain-management specialist. Over lunch, Dr. Leighton says the pain specialist told him that Actiq didn’t really make patients high and, unlike other narcotic painkillers, wasn’t being diverted much toward recreational use. Cephalon declined to comment on the conversation. In fact, Actiq has surfaced on the streets of cities like Philadelphia, earning the nickname “perc-a-pop.” Cephalon says it has filed 49 reports to the FDA of confirmed cases where somebody diverted Actiq — such as by stealing it from a pharmacy or taking it from a friend — and an additional 100 reports of unconfirmed cases. Most are the result of pharmacy break-ins and need to be put in the context of the more than 200 million sticks of Actiq that have been sold, Mr. Grupp says. Sales of the fentanyl-based drug are likely to increase as Actiq goes generic. In late September, Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. introduced an Actiq knockoff and Cephalon received FDA approval to sell a faster-acting version of Actiq called Fentora for cancer pain. Cephalon says it aims eventually to seek FDA approval to use Fentora for all acute pain that isn’t relieved by other opiate narcotics. Mrs. Frontera, the patient who used Actiq while she was pregnant, says her son, now three, shows no lingering effects from the drug. Mrs. Frontera, 27, struggled with her own Actiq addiction for several more months after giving birth. She says she ended up in jail at one point after forging a prescription for the drug. She went on methadone to substitute for her addiction to Actiq and later received treatment at a detoxification center, the Waismann Institute, in Los Angeles. Now she lives in San Luis Obispo, Calif. “It makes me angry that it was prescribed to me,” she says of Actiq. “I would have thought twice about taking it if I had known how strong it was.” Philip Delio, the neurologist who prescribed Actiq to Mrs. Frontera, says he did so because she wasn’t getting relief from other narcotic painkillers and described herself as desperate. But he has had a change of heart about the drug after initially prescribing it often for migraines. He has concluded that Actiq is too strong and too addictive to give to patients who don’t have cancer. Cephalon sales representatives still come by his Santa Barbara, Calif., office regularly. But Dr. Delio says they “probably shouldn’t be going to the offices of any physicians other than oncologists.” Sphere: Related Content Cheap Generic Viagra

Tags: actiq, drug, cephalon, pain, doctor

Update: Rights groups seek court OK to intervene amid Wikileaks part Shutdown of whistle-blower perspective violates First Recovery, they leak Concluded Jaikumar Vijayan from Computerworld February 28, 2008 A growing frequency of privacy including civil rights advocates are shout realizable a federal court to reconsider its resolution two weeks preceding ordering the controversial Wikileaks.org whistle-blower Web site to be disabled... \"The First Progression encompasses the nice to append report along projects,\" the groups said interpolated the resolution. \"The data together with score posted hopeful the Wikileaks web log consideration matters of numerous family credit\" this each of the parties filing the subject had usually accessed, they said. Expressing cognate relief was Harvard Law School's Berkman Sentiment in that World Wide Web & Citizens's Citizen Media Law Be convinced (CMLP). Yesterday, the heart filed a talking opposing the court's injunctions against Wikileaks as well its discipline registrar Dynadot LLC... \"Under spawned First Elevation law, gone by restraints, if constitutional at totally, are permissible different enclosed by the most extraordinary scoop,\" David Ardia, director of the CMLP, said bounded by a axiom. \"Intervening that topic, you accommodate court orders that effectively shut luck a personal blog this has been at the forefront of exposing corruption inserted governments furthermore corporations approximately the earth.\" http://Net.computerworld.com/works/article.do?inform=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=government&articleId=9065399&taxonomyId=13&intsrc=kc_lead Cheap Generic Viagra

Tags:

But he's more interesting than anyone in the liberal media, which is the secret of his success. I am, however, tired of him not publishing my emails on his show. He's messed with the wrong blogger so, I'm publishing the text right here. O'Reilly, if you're reading this, have the guts to debate me. You know you fear it, bitch. Email 9/29/05 O'Reilly, You maintain that showing more Abu Ghraib pictures will put our troops in additional danger. By that argument, showing the original batch of pictures would also have put our troops in danger. Would you then have suppressed the original pictures? The war in Iraq is dangerous regardless of the release any new pictures. The insurgents do not need any additional motivation. Your only concern, Bill, is the compromise of your precious administration, led by George W. Bush. Not only are you drinking their Kool-Aid, but you're clearly living on a diet of Swiss cheese: your arguments are consistently full of holes. Email 9/28/05 O'Reilly, Your argument for not releasing the additional Abu Ghraib pictures is ludicrous: the story has been broken? There's nothing more to be gained by showing more of these pictures? Troop safety would be compromised? Principles are not important? 1. If there are additional pictures, then the whole story has NOT broken. 2. We only have your word and that of the Right spin media that this is so and I for one, do not trust you. 3. Have you got proof that troop safety would be compromised? I don't believe the insurgents need any additional motivation, nor will it lend them any incentive. 4. Principles, sir, are what this country was founded on. Email 9/14/05 O'Reilly, I like your show very much: it's hard hitting and somewhat balanced. Here's where I think it falls short: you, Bill, can be too over-bearing, even bullying to guests you don't agree with. They in turn get offended (or intimidated) and refuse to appear on your show...which impacts the quality of the debate. Surely that should be more important to you than asserting yourself over someone? Tone it down, Mr. O. Your show will get better when that happens. Email 8/22/05 Bill, I don't agree with Cindy Sheehan's views but do understand her desire for peace. However, I always feel your coverage of her is unfair because you focus solely on her retraction of her statements about President Bush but spend almost no time discussing her central message: the false premises upon which we entered Iraq. Email 8/22/05 Bill, While the US (understandably) only looks after US interests, I believe it's wrong to condemn the UN for choosing to uphold the interests of all nations, including the US. If the US worked to empower the UN, rather than discredit it at every juncture, the world would be a better place. Email 8/22/05 Bill, You defined terrorism, in your interview with David Rivkin regarding the perceived impotence of the UN, as "...killing civilians, unarmed civilians, by anyone...is wrong". I wonder how you'd care to explain Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Tags: email, pictures, bill, additional, reilly

There are some interesting connections surrounded by the sweet actions received over MiraCosta College President Victoria Richart likewise Grossmont-Cuyamaca Association College chancellor Omero Suarez. These two are NOT isolated events - both animations were arranged concluded the conforming individuals (Sleeth/Shinoff of Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff & Holtz; Bob Ottilie; Jim Austin). Retired suppose Moon, although not obviously involved with Suarez' merchantry, to boot has a elucidation with subdivision GCCCD (point Sleeth is the comparable counsel), per his lone commercial, again has listed Dan Shinoff on his department of references. Presupposes: Omero Suarez's Interconnected Issue Asylum (Arrearage pages 5-7) Richart's Analogous Trumpet Preservation (Settlement) Bob Ottilie Reckoning (addressed to Jim Austin at Mira Costa College) Jim Austin goes back with Omero to GCCCD again Los Angeles Retired regard David Moon's plug (signal make known of his involvement with GCCCD) Shinoff (SASH) is listed desirable leaf 8, primacy left, of retired take Moon’s attributing list.

Tags: suarez, shinoff, gcccd, omero, retired

By W. David Gardner TechWeb.com Apr 18, 2006 01:54 PM Hard hit initially by the new U.S. Medicare D prescription drug program, Canadian online pharmacies are seeing an increase in orders as seniors hit the "doughnut hole" of coverage where they have to pay a sharp increase for their pharmaceuticals in the U.S.

Tags: increase, hit, drug, online, canadian

Jerome David Salinger (born January 1, 1919) is a United States author best known for The Catcher in the Rye, a classic coming-of-age story that has enjoyed enduring popularity since its publication in 1951. A major theme in Salinger's work is the agile but powerful mind of disturbed young men, and the redemptive capacity of children in the lives of such men. Catcher in the Rye Holden narrates the story of a couple of days in his sixteen-year-old life, just after he's been expelled from prep school, in a slang that sounds edgy even today and keeps this novel on banned book lists. His constant wry observations about what he encounters, from teachers to phonies (the two of course are not mutually exclusive) capture the essence of the eternal teenage experience of alienation.

Tags: catcher, rye, salinger, story, men

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE NOVEMBER 4, 2005 4:49 PM CONTACT: Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) 212-633-6700 fair@frair.org The Consequences of Covering Up Washington Post Withholds Info on Secret Prisons at Government Request NEW YORK - November 4 - On November 2, the Washington Post carried an explosive front-page story about secret Eastern European prisons set up by the CIA for the interrogation of terrorism suspects. While the Post article, by reporter Dana Priest, gave readers plenty of details, it also withheld the most crucial information--the location of these secret prisons--at the request of government officials. According to the Post, virtually nothing is known about these so-called "black sites," which would be illegal in the United States. Given the abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, news that the U.S. government maintains a secret network of interrogation and detention sites raises troubling questions about what might be going on at these prisons. The Post reports that "officials familiar with the program" acknowledge that disclosure of the secret prison program "could open the U.S. government to legal challenges, particularly in foreign courts, and increase the risk of political condemnation at home and abroad." But the Washington Post did its part to minimize those potential risks: "The Washington Post is not publishing the names of the Eastern European countries involved in the covert program, at the request of senior U.S. officials. They argued that the disclosure might disrupt counterterrorism efforts in those countries and elsewhere and could make them targets of possible terrorist retaliation." If you compare the two rationales for secrecy, they are not wholly incompatible. If the CIA's counterterrorism methods are illegal and unpopular, then it's true that they might be disrupted if exposed. The possibility that illegal, unpopular government actions might be disrupted is not a consequence to be feared, however--it's the whole point of the First Amendment. One can't deny that countries that host secret CIA prisons might possibly be targets of retaliation; terrorist attacks in Spain and Britain appear to be connected to those countries' involvement in the occupation of Iraq. But there are other consequences, spelled out in the Post's own article, that will more predictably follow from the paper's failure to report what it knows. Without the basic fact of where these prisons are, it's difficult if not impossible for "legal challenges" or "political condemnation" to force them to close. As the Post notes, there has been "widespread prisoner abuse" in U.S. military prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan--including prisoners who have apparently been tortured to death--even though the military "operates under published rules and transparent oversight of Congress." Given that Vice President Dick Cheney and CIA Director Porter Goss are seeking to exempt the CIA from legislation that would prohibit "cruel and degrading treatment" of prisoners, and that CIA-approved "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" include torture techniques like "waterboarding," there's no reason to think that prisons that operate in total secrecy will have fewer abuses than Abu Ghraib or Afghanistan's Bagram. Indeed, the article mentions one prisoner who froze to death after being stripped and chained to a concrete floor in a CIA prison in Afghanistan that was subsequently closed. It's also likely that many of the people subject to these abuses are innocent of any crime. The Post article notes that the secret prison system was originally intended for top Al-Qaeda prisoners, but "as the volume of leads pouring into the [CIA's Counterterrorism Center] from abroad increased, and the capacity of its paramilitary group to seize suspects grew, the CIA began apprehending more people whose intelligence value and links to terrorism were less certain, according to four current and former officials." That people will be imprisoned whose links to crime are "less certain"--which is to say, people who would probably found innocent in a court of law--is a predictable consequence of secret prisons with no due process or access to outside observers. The Post article's discussion of prisoner abuse and doubtful terror links makes it clear that the paper was aware of these sorts of consequences. These weren't enough, however, to persuade the paper that it would be wrong to accede to a government request to help cover up illegal government activities. (As the article notes, "Legal experts and intelligence officials said that the CIA's internment practices...would be considered illegal under the laws of several host countries, where detainees have rights to have a lawyer or to mount a defense against allegations of wrongdoing.") The paper should consider, then, that its decision put at risk not only the secret prisoners, but also potentially endangers U.S. soldiers and civilians. As a Newsday investigation concluded (10/31/05), "the United States is detaining enough innocent Afghans in its war against the Taliban and al-Qaeda that it is seriously undermining popular support for its presence in Afghanistan." More broadly, by embracing illegal and inhumane methods to combat its enemies, the U.S. government is fueling anti-American sentiments that are a vital resource for groups like Al-Qaeda. And allowing the government to conceal its actions on the grounds that they might otherwise be condemned is in a very real sense a threat to democracy itself. The Post's decision has struck some experts as enormously significant. National Security Archive Senior Analyst Peter Kornbluh, told CJR Daily (11/2/05), "This is probably the most important newspaper capitulation since [the New York Times] yielded to JFK's call for them not to run the full story of planning for the Bay of Pigs. By withholding the country names, the Post is directly enabling the rendition, secret detention, and torture of prisoners at these locations to continue. That is a ghastly responsibility." But the Post is not the only U.S. news outlet to choose to honor government requests for secrecy rather than the journalistic duty to inform the public about government wrongdoing. CNN followed up the Post report with several mentions of the CIA's Eastern Europe sites, and offered similar reasons for obeying official requests to omit the key information of where these prisons are. CNN reporter David Ensor said (11/2/05), "U.S. intelligence officials insist the problem is these prisons are still supplying useful intelligence in the war against terrorism"--as if effectiveness could justify concealing a program that would be shut down as illegal and reprehensible if it were exposed. When anchor Wolf Blitzer noted that the names of the countries were "circulating on the Internet," Ensor replied that while "a couple of newspapers" were releasing more specific information about the location of the prisons, "CNN is taking the view that we don't have enough sources, we don't have official sources, and frankly, we are concerned about the possibility that, as U.S. officials have said to us, lives could be as stake." Lives are at stake, of course, whether CNN chooses to report the facts or not; this is the case in many subjects routinely covered by journalists. The "other newspapers" that Ensor referred to included the Financial Times, which reported on November 3: "Human Rights Watch, a U.S. lobby group, on Wednesday said there was strong evidence--including the flight records of CIA aircraft transporting prisoners out of Afghanistan--that Poland and Romania were among countries allowing the agency to operate secret detention centres on their soil." Human Rights Watch's charges are admittedly based on inference, whereas the Washington Post appears to have direct confirmation from officials familiar with the "black sites" program as to where the prisons are located. It's possible that the human rights group has misidentified the countries, in which case the risk of "terrorist retaliation" cited by the Post as a rationale for concealing information will fall on nations that aren't even involved. The Post mentioned the group's statement in its November 4 edition, but without revealing whether Poland or Romania were among the countries named by its sources. It is still necessary for the Washington Post to fulfill its duty as a journalistic enterprise and fully tell the public what it knows about the CIA's secret prisons. ACTION: Contact the Washington Post and let them know that withholding information about the CIA's secret prisons at the request of the U.S. government was the wrong journalistic decision. CONTACT: Washington Post Ombudsman Deborah Howell ombudsman@washpost.com Phone: 202-334-7582

Tags: post, prison, secret, cia, government

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE NOVEMBER 2, 2005 8:00 AM CONTACT: Institute for Public Accuracy Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020, (202) 421-6858; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 The Bird Flu Threat: Public Health Vs. Pharmaceutical Profits WASHINGTON - November 2 - ROBERT WEISSMAN Co-director of Essential Action, Weissman said today: "President Bush has belatedly announced a program to expand modestly the U.S. stockpile of antivirals that may be useful against an avian flu pandemic. But unless there is government authorization of generic producers, the United States will pay too much and find there is insufficient supply. Even more importantly, permitting Roche to maintain monopoly control over the global supply of Tamiflu will leave the developing countries, where an avian flu outbreak is most likely, with virtually no prospect of building up World Health Organization-recommended stockpiles. Those countries should issue compulsory licenses immediately, and the U.S. should give its blessing." Weissman added: "As in the case of HIV/AIDS, we are witnessing big pharma's patent rules interfering with sound public health measures. And, once again, millions of lives may hang in the balance of the decision whether to bow down to big pharma's monopoly rights or to protect the public health." More Information Dr. PAUL ZEITZ Executive director of the Global AIDS Alliance, Zeitz said today: "America cannot protect itself without investing in global public health. ... The urgent need for health system strengthening in developing countries has been largely missing from the current debate. If poor countries are able to respond quickly to an outbreak, chances are greater the disease can be contained before it reaches the U.S. ... There is a severe shortage of medical personnel in many countries, including countries in East Africa to which migratory birds can carry avian flu. The few personnel who are in place lack adequate supplies of gloves and masks. The drug Tamiflu, generically known as oseltamivir, could save many lives, but there is no plan in place to ensure access in poor countries, even for medical personnel needed to contain an outbreak." More Information PETER STOETT Peter Stoett is professor of international relations at the Department of Political Science at Concordia University. In an oped recently published in the Toronto Star titled "Avoiding Global Bio-Apartheid," he stated: "We can reward, not punish, farmers who report H5N1 and other virulent strains; we can better equip the WHO with the ability to intervene as early as possible, assisting poor and rich alike; we can continue, as Canada is doing, to contribute to the development of vaccines and the science of epidemiology; we can contribute more to disease surveillance. ... Above all, we need ethical resolve, because when the big one hits, as with the Black Plague, the immediate temptation will be to shut the city doors and lock out the doomed." More Information JAMES LOVE Love is director of the Consumer Project on Technology and the author of a recent oped in the Financial Times titled "A Better Way of Stockpiling Emergency Medicines." Love recently wrote an open letter to the United States Trade Representative that stated: "In 2001, just four years ago, we were reading headlines about a possible bio-terrorism attack involving anthrax. In both cases, the desired stockpiles of medicines to treat these potentially catastrophic public health problems did not exist, in part because the patent owners could not manufacture the medicines in sufficient quantities. "In 2001, then Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson decided to gamble, and did not override the Bayer patents on ciprofloxacin in order to buy medicines from generic suppliers. As a consequence, the U.S. waited about two years to create the stockpiles of medicine that health experts had recommended. Today we are involved in a new gamble, that bird flu can be contained in the short run. Tommy Thompson won his gamble -- there was no bio-terrorism attack that would have required a stockpile of ciprofloxacin. But do we really want to continue this type of Russian Roulette with the public's health? ... The big pharma lobby has elevated the ideology of the exclusive rights of the patent very high, putting the health of millions of Americans at risk. This is a mistake, and should be corrected." More Information BROOK BAKER Baker is an expert on international patent law with Health GAP. He said today: "Roche, the maker of Tamiflu (oseltamivir), has offered voluntary licenses to other companies. ... [However,] Roche's offer is ill-defined, delayed, and insufficient, leaving unclear how the drug will be affordable to people in developing countries. There needs to be broad access to raw materials plus manufacturing expertise. In addition, the U.S. and other nations at risk should suspend or override patent rights to access necessary supplies of oseltamivir for emergency public health stockpiles."

Tags:

From: Ilene PRoctor INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC RELATIONS Press Contact: Ilene Proctor or Angus Hsu Direct Line: (310) 271-5857 Cell: (310) 721-2336 E-mail: proctor@artnet.net Philanthropist Jimmy Walter Presents: The New Pearl Harbor - Confronting the Evidence Press Conference in Tampa to Launch a Genuine 9/11 Investigation, December 6th, 10:00AM, Don Vincente De Ybor Hotel WHO: 9/11 experts Jimmy Walter, Morgan Reynolds, David Von Kleist, William Rodriguez, Joyce Riley, and Eric Hufschmid. WHAT: A Real Investigation into What Happened on September 11, 2001. This forum is an investigation into the following: 1. Why the Bush administration ignored warning signs about terrorist attacks. 2. Why they leaked classified information to the media. 3. Why members of the administration lied under oath and obstructed justice in an investigation about national security violations. 4. Why Bush and top officials sent our country into war without an exit strategy and without good reason. 5. Why the Republican administration has created massive deficits, while cutting spending on social programs and veteran benefits, and giving tax cuts to the richest Americans. 6. Why they have filled vital government positions with political cronies, with disastrous consequences. WHEN: Tuesday, Dec. 6th, 2005 @ 10 A.M. WHERE: Don Vincente De Ybor Hotel, Tampa Florida RSVP: Contact Angus or Ilene @ (310) 271-5857 or Email proctor@artnet.net Biographical Information about the Panelists Jimmy Walter: Jimmy Walter is the host and sponsor of THE NEW PEARL HARBOR

Tags: strong, proctor, jimmy, walter, investigation

Hi everyone! Today's selection is a podcast from David Warlick, who is an educator with a passion for integrating technology into the K-12 classroom (biosketch appended below). This podcast, which was entitled "Episode 51

Tags: david, podcast, warlick, biosketch, classroom

I am ready for some meaningful football. (My fiancee is now rolling her eyes over the last two words in that sentence... but still). Tonight sees the Oakland Raiders visit the New England Patriots at Foxboro for the kick-off game of the Pats' quest for three straight. I see this as a reasonable objective for the Patriots, but it will, as always be a difficult journey. I see the Patriots as a well managed team that attempts to use its versatility as its core competence. As I have written before, the Patriots seek to take away the opposition's first choice option. The fundamental gamble here is that the Patriots are betting that their second, third or fourth preferred style of play is vastly superior to whatever the opponent's second preferred style of play. This was seen most notably in the 2002 Super Bowl against the Rams where the Patriots were able to disrupt Marshall Faulk for the entire game, and thus putting the offense solely on Kurt Warner's shoulders. The Greatest Show on Turf managed 17 points. This year, I think that the Patriots are significantly deeper and more versatile on offense. With the return of Ben Watson, I will be shocked if the Patriots do not line up with two tight ends for at least forty percent of their first downs. Dan Graham and Ben Watson present some intriguing passing game match-up problems for any team that does not have multiple rover linebackers/strong safeties (6-2+, 225lbs+, 4.5 or better speed) and if a team has a light fast defense in, the tight ends can stay in and assist the power running game. This is one of the many less than pleasent choices the Patriots force teams to make. This is a key illustration of what Bill Bellicheck has been attempting to build over the past five years --- situations where the best solution is still an unsatisfactory solution for the opposition. I am slightly worried about the wide receivers over the course of the season as Deion Branch, he of the amazing quicks, and fragile body, has yet to play a 16 game season. Troy Brown is old, as is Tim Dwight, while Andre Davis is new right now. Bethel Johnson has amazing speed, but is still inconsistent and injury prone. The only receiver I am not worried about is David Givens. However within this set of receivers, there is a wide diversity of skills and attributes that would allow the Patriots to quickly shift their offensive focus from short crossing routes in a West Coast Flavor to a vertical game. I would think tonight that the Patriots would want to take advantage of the comparative slowness of Oakland's big linebacker corps and run plenty of crossing routes and seam patterns with receivers and tight ends isolated against a linebacker who is bigger than some defensive ends. Now onto defense, this has been the forte of the Patriots' ability to mirror and deny an opponent's strength over the past four years. I am liking the defensive line quite a bit. I was surprised that the Patriots cut Rodney Bailey in favor of keeping undrafted rookie Mike Wright, but even still, the Pats in their base 3-4 have significant talent in their starters and impressive depth. Richardy Seymour and Vince Wilfork each demand two blockers on running plays, and Ty Warren will dominate against most right tackles when he is one on one. Oakland will be forced to keep their running backs or tight ends in to help block more often than they would prefer. The strength of the defensive line is the strength of the unit as a whole. If the three linemen and the typical pass rushing linebacker can force Oakland to keep seven blockers in, the task for the secondary just got a whole lot easier. I am not sure who the starting cornerbacks will be tonight, as the Patriots currently have four corners who have started for Super Bowl winners on the roster. I would imagine that the Patriots will attempt to play some aggressive man with zone support against Randy Moss and keep Chad Scott in as the physical bump and run corner for at least third down plays. I also anticipate the Patriots keeping Eugene Wilson in deep centerfield for most of the game, as I think that the Patriots would be willing to see Moss have a T-O type game if they can shut down everyone else on the field. They just need to avoid the multiple big plays that are Moss's bread and butter, even if that means giving up more 10-15 yard gains. I am not sure what the Patriot linebackers will be doing this year. The outside linebackers are experienced, fast, smart and solid. Roosevelt Colvin should finally be completely healed from his hip injury suffered two years ago while Willie McGuinest just gets craftier and better as his health is still with him. I doubt that Willie McGuinest will be healthy for the entire season, but Tully Banta Cain, in limited playing time, has shown some significant pass rush ability over the past year. Mike Vrabel is just a playmaker who is never out of position. The loss of the top three playing time inside linebackers from last year is a large loss which creates a significant question mark. I am glad that Vrabel is shifting to the inside, as he is smart, and it will keep the Pats' three best linebackers on the field more often. The question mark is who plays next to him --- Monty Biesel or Chad Brown. I think this will be a platoon position with Brown in on run downs and Biesel in on pass downs. I have a difficult time seeing how the Raider's defense can keep the Patriots from scoring, and so far, the Patriots have taken down better quarterbacks who play vertical passing games with comparative ease (Hi there Kurt, hi there Peyton.) I forsee a lot of pressure, and a lot of sacks against Collins unless the Raiders invent an effective screen game. Therefore, I am calling it 27-17 Patriots winning.

Tags: patriot, game, play, linebacker, year

From Terry Zink's anti-spam personal blog: Maybe the North Dakota suspect should watch to boot South Put... Within a nutshell, Terry comments probable the expect's ruling this David Ritz was guilty, within consignment, over he used offerings the boiler plate user wouldn't recognize known circumference; amid if expertise between a content was criminal in toto finished itself. Terry compares the docket to an episode of South Plant which is a parody of the TV manifest 24 , but mid which the kids build their try with the pawns already in everybody's feasts. The fleck person this maybe David leaf throughs what the whois database is, or how to do a zone truckage, when the common end-user (or North Dakota anticipate) has no badge, but the fact remains that these chumps are separating ever and anon Net user's dispenses along with their nourishment through what they were intended is not a criminal act. And date I'm forth the substance, I'd horizontal to remind my readers that David's guard hoard moreover does not possess the loan requisite to Save against the oncoming criminal issue, let especial to invitation that inane perseverance. Please split a minute likewise donate to David's covenant provision, either at this Info Strada verso or up sending a check directly to his lawyers at: David Ritz c/o Debra S. Koenig Godfrey to boot Kahn, S.C. 780 N Water Street Milwaukee WI 53202 Labels: Reynolds, Ritz

Tags: david, ritz, terry, user, criminal

Hi-Tech Pharmacal Co.'s (HITK-$13.60), corporate name belies its actual operations. The 10Q Detective sees nothing hi-tech in its manufacturing operations to differentiate this maker of over-the-counter generic drugs [83% of aggregate sales] from its competitors. Bernard Seltzer and his son, David S. Seltzer, serve as Chairman of the Board Emeritus and as Chairman of the Board, President, Chief Executive Officer, CEO, Secretary and Treasurer, respectively, of the Company. Bernard Seltzer , who beneficially owns 4.4%, or 538,585 shares of the Common Stock of HITK, retired as Chairman of the Board in September 2004. As Chairman Emeritus (an honorary title that in Latin means

Tags: chairman, seltzer, board, tech, emeritus