text:
And the temporary fix ignored America's underlying fiscal problems. It did nothing to control the unsustainable path of "entitlement" spending on pensions and health care (the latter is on track to double as a share of GDP over the next 25 years); nothing to rationalise America's hideously complex and distorting tax code, which includes more than $1 trillion of deductions; and virtually nothing to close America's big structural budget deficit. (Putting up tax rates at the very top simply does not raise much money.) Viewed through anything other than a two-month prism, it was an abject failure. The final deal raised less tax revenue than John Boehner, the Republican speaker in the House of Representatives, once offered during the negotiations, and it included none of the entitlement reforms that President Barack Obama was once prepared to contemplate.
The reason behind this lamentable outcome is the outsize influence of narrow interest groups—which marks a second, unhappy parallel with Europe. The inability of Europeans to rise above petty national concerns, whether over who pays for bail-outs or who controls bank supervision, has prevented them from making the big compromises necessary to secure the single currency's future. America's Democrats and Republicans have proved similarly incapable of reaching a grand bargain; both are far too driven by their parties' extremists and too focused on winning concessions from the other side to work steadily together to secure the country's fiscal future.
The third parallel is that politicians have failed to be honest with voters. Just as Chancellor Angela Merkel and President François Hollande have avoided coming clean to the Germans and the French about what it will take to save the single currency, so neither Mr Obama nor the Republican leaders have been brave enough to tell Americans what it will really take to fix the fiscal mess. Democrats pretend that no changes are necessary to Medicare (health care for the elderly) or Social Security (pensions). Republican solutions always involve unspecified spending cuts, and they regard any tax rise as socialism. Each side prefers to denounce the other, reinforcing the very polarisation that is preventing progress.


text:
We have only reached midsummer, and Westmont's faculty have already been around the world on various teaching or scholarly endeavors. For the "Academic Accomplishments" in this report, I've focused on the international work that has been done prior to July.
Among the "Updates and Initiatives," there are some invitations to participate in new programs or endeavors during the coming academic year. Do let me know if you are interested.
I will be back in New England for the first weeks of July, enjoying some family time, preparing for the moving van, and basking in the humidity. We may cool off by catching the fireworks over the Charles River. Enjoy your Fourth, wherever you are in the world.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Complete Duty Belt Rig Medium
Lightweight, Durable, & Comfortable duty belt rig contains:
- Medium Size Belt: 32-36″
- Key Ring Holder
- Flashlight Case
- 21″ Baton Case
- Handcuff Case
- Utility Pouch
- Radio Case
- Protective Spray Case
- Black: 81-302BL
- Tan: 81-302TN
Rely on Drago Duty Gear to secure your equipment with a belt rig system that is tough, durable, and comfortable to wear. Engineered to meet the highest performance standards of law enforcement and security personnel.
Drago Gear warrants each product sold by Drago Gear ("Product") to be free of defects in materials or workmanship for as long as you own the Product, or for the maximum period allowed by the laws of your jurisdiction.
Exclusions from Coverage
Excluded from coverage under this warranty are the following:
- Products purchased other than from Drago Gear or from an authorized Drago Gear dealer.
- Damage resulting from abuse or misuse.
- Damage resulting from extended wear and tear.
- Damage resulting from tampering or a customer modification.
- Damage resulting from exposure to a caustic substance.
- Consequential, incidental, indirect, punitive, exemplary, and/or special damages (although some states in the United States do not allow the exclusion or limitation of consequential or incidental damages, so this exclusion might not apply to you).
SKU: N/A - Need Help? Contact Us Leave Feedback
Category: Duty Gear.
Contact Us
Enter your contact details or email form shortcode here. (Text/HTML/Shortcodes accepted).
Leave Feedback
Enter your feedback modal content here. (Text/HTML/Shortcodes accepted).


text:
What more you need to know about GSD
Did you know... a white German Shepherd dog named Daz has been crowned to be the world's loudest dog?
Did you know that there are tons of technical words which can be found in German Shepherd Dog dictionary?
Did you know you can learn a lot about the GSD breed from German Shepherd Dog FAQ?
Starting from German Shepherd Dog standard to anything about German Shepherds, you can get to know more about the breed. If you want to be a better owner for your dog you need to know your shepherd better. We have just stepped out of the alfa phase and entered the beta version with our GSD portal - About German Shepherd Dog.
About German Shepherd Dog is my dream child for which I have been gathering information from rare of the rarest sources. You can find any information on the breed on this website, which is run by me and my team - a group of GSD people who have been studying on the breed for years now. This makes me feel that we can make this GSD portal the largest online resource for information on German Shepherd Dog.
We have come up with an opportunity for owners, breeders, trainers and any person related to the breed to promote their profile or kennel or name through this German Shepherd Dog website. If you are willing promote yourself and your bloodline you can write on this website about the breed where you can have your own article page where you can put the link of your blog or website in your Author Bio. You articles will be featured under the section "Featured Articles". Check out our FAQ page to know more about this feature.
We are in the beta stage and we are developing gradually. GSD people are cordially invited to our website. Thank you...


text:
|Syntactic Confectionery Delight
comment on
|( #3333=superdoc: print w/replies, xml )
|Need Help??
i am trying to write a program that searches the documents in a foreign website simply because no body puts a search engine in their site themselves. i get how to search for words in documents in my own site, but how do i do it in someone elses? my dream is to be able to just put in; search:www.whatever.com for:perl, and then it will search all the documents in that directory for the word perl and then send back links. IS THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK?!?!?! : )
In reply to search a foreign directory by Anonymous Monk


text:
6 Lou Malnati's Deep Dish Pizzas
Lou Malnati's legendary pizzas are hand-made from scratch with mozzarella cheese, vine ripened plum tomatoes, and fresh toppings layered upon a tasty crust.
Six 9-inch Lou Malnati's deep dish pizzas (each pizza serves two adults)
Pizzas available: Cheese, Sausage, Pepperoni, Veggie, Spinach, and Crustless (Gluten Free made with a lean sausage base).
For the ultimate pizza, bake from a frozen state according to the following instructions:
Preheat oven to 425 degrees. Remove lid and lift pizza out of the pan. Wipe away condensation from the pan and lightly oil the pan. Return pizza to the pan and bake on the middle rack until cheese melts and crust becomes crispy and golden brown. Baking times vary for each type of pizza and length of bake time is indicated on the lid of each pizza. If the pizza has thawed decrease bake time by 5 minutes. Microwave cooking is not recommended.
Real reviews from customers just like you!
John From Olympia, WA
Missing Lou's"We live in Washington state. My wife loves lou's. So for Mother's day I ordered her 6 cheese pizzas. Just for herself. She said it was the best gift I have gotten her yet."
Christine From Waldport, OR
Cheese Pizza is Great!"This is the third time I've ordered the cheese pizza six pack. I keep them in the freezer and we have one for dinner around once a week. They taste great! The one thing I missed when we moved to Oregon from the Chicago area was the great food. Now some of the great Chicago pizza can come to us! It's a wonderful treat!"
linda From charlotte, NC
Best food, best service"We order pizzas to keep on hand for when we're just too tired to cook. They make the BEST quick meals. Real food, fantastic ingredients, and always, always, always delicious. They arrive right on time. We even sent them as gifts, and our friends have been delighted every time."


text:
Results 1 to 1 of 1
Thread: Hybrid batteries in Florida
Hybrid View
- Join Date
- Sep 2012
- Posts
- 0
Hybrid batteries in Florida
I'm considering buying a mid-size hybrid. My concern is that for "normal" vehicles, Florida is very rough on the battery. If you get 3 years out of a battery, you're beating the curve. Does this also apply to the crucial batteries for hybrids? Since hybrids have been around a little while now, can folks chime in if they're seeing (or not seeing), issues the batteries, esp in Florida? Thanks!


text:
Quote:This article is intended to provide information for new growers using the ``ScrOG'' or ``Screen of Green'' method in mini or micro cabinets under small HPS lights, in the range of 70 to 250 watts. I won't spend too much time on 400, 600 and 1000 watt grows, as that's outside the scope of my experience. See the ``links'' post below for further materials regarding 400 watt and other scrogs.Small HPS lights, alternativesSmall HPS lights are perfect for growing cannabis in restricted space conditions, as they produce the most light from a given amount of electricity of any suitable lamp for cultivation, and produce a spectrum that is favorable for flower growth. The spectrum is not the best for vegetative growth, but that isn't really important to scrog growing, as the vegetative period is so short. Lights as small as 35 watts are available by stripping components from security lights commonly available at discount hardware stores. 250 watt lights can produce as much per foot in scrog conditions as 1000 watt lights in room growing. A single 70 watt light can produce enough for an average pot smoker in a space as small as 1 sq. ft.MH lights are available in small sizes, but they produce less light and more heat than their HPS counterparts, and heat is an important consideration in cabinet-style growing. Some growers like the MH spectrum for vegetative growth, but there is no real vegetative period in most scrog growing. Some believe the MH spectrum produces tighter buds. I tried a 250 MH and found it to be very hot and much weaker than the HPS. In fact, the 220 HPS conversion bulb has performed better than the MH with the same ballast.I should note that oldtimer1 states that some MH spectrum should be included in the flowering phase in order to fully develop the complexities of the psychoactive profile of a suitable plant. Perhaps a supplemental small MH could be included at the empty end of a 150-250 HPS hood.Regarding fluorescents, the light to heat ratio is even worse than an MH, and I am not aware of any situation in micro and mini growing where I would favor them over small HPS lights (see second part for a discussion of small-scale fluorescent scrogs). Compact fluorescents have been quite popular on the boards recently, and they look quite bright to the eye, even the 20 watters. But the plants aren't fooled, and the dull yellow glow of the small HPS lamps is manna to cannabis.Note that these lights are quite weak compared to 400, 600 or 1000 watt lights used in production growing. Intensity means that the light can be farther away from the plant and still be bright enough at the bud surface to produce. Intensity is necessary for tight bud formation.To get the most out of a small HPS light, you must keep the bud sites within the productive range of the bulb, a lopsided sphere extending out from the lamp source. For a 250 watt light, that circle of light extends out about 20" from the lamp. For a 70 watt light, the maximum distance is apparently around 8". A group of tall, skinny plants under such a light would only be properly lit at the very tops of the plants, leaving the bottom parts shaded out and in a low intensity light field, producing small, lightweight buds at best.Ideally you would like all the buds within that magic circle of light intensity, and you would like that sphere of light completely filled with buds. How can that be accomplished?The scrog methodThe essential detail of the scrog method is a screen, usually poultry netting, typically suspended between the planting medium and the lamp. The plants grow up to the screen and then are ``trained'' under the screen, resulting in a flat table of plant growth, a field rather than a forest. Because all the buds are growing at the same height, it is possible to get all the growth within the effective circle of light from the lamp, maximizing production from the space. It's really that simple.Well, nothing new under the sun, the method has been used for years. In modern terms, the method was first popularized on the internet by the work of pH on the usenet group Alt Drugs Pot Cultivation, or ``ADPC'' for short. You can access ADPC from several web-based sources, and pH still posts there regularly. But the method as initially used by pH was designed to tweak production from a large area under fluorescent lights, like the ``multi-shelf'' method explained in his article on N.P. Kaye's Lycaeum site. N.P. Kaye is in fact credited with the term ``screen of green'', which pH shortened to ``ScrOG''.I am aware of a least two growers who used scrog and HID lights before that time, one based on a mention in Robert Clarke's book ``Marijuana Botany'', which was also a source for pH. But most work involving scrog and HID lights is quite recent. It is noted by pH that the first ``yield-o-rama'' post for HID scrog was in July of 1997. I became aware of the method from a medical grower in the final days of the Hemp B.C. boards, Savapalet, a posting buddy of Aeric 77.Before discussing the method in detail, let's explore the other alternative for small HPS lights, the plantlet sea of green method.Sea of greenThe plantlet sea of green method was developed to maximize the speed of cannabis growing in limited height situations. In a typical sea of green setup of this type, clones are planted at densities as high as 9 per sq. ft. Within a short time after being established, the lights are switched to a 12 hour dark period. What happens to the planted clone?The clone could just sit there, stretch a bit under the light regime, and flower, producing a tiny little bud with a couple of seeds. But that rarely, if ever, happens. Instead the clone takes off in a rush of growth, forming a woody main stem and branches. If the plant is suitable for sea of green growing, it will stop short of the lights and flower. Most indica dominated plants stop short enough to be grown using this method. That process is at the heart of the sea of green method, as it results in the smallest possible plant flowering in the quickest possible time.Why does the clone act in this manner? The actual process is subject to debate. Your author suspects that the clone reads the light switch as fall, and has a mechanism that recognizes that it's too small to produce seed. So the clone goes into a furious growth mode that stops when the plant reaches a minimum height set within its genetic software, and then flowers. Others argue that the clone's response is just a variation on the normal stretching process that happens when flowering is forced in any size plant. For purposes of the discussion here, it doesn't really matter why the response occurs, just that you can rely on it.The problem with the sea of green method under small HPS lamps is that it produces a number of small spikes under the lamp, a forest rather than a field. The plants crowd each other out and shade the lower portions, which in any event are too far from the light source. As we discussed above, tall and skinny is not productive under a small light. I grew initially using this method, based on books and magazines that I read before designing my 250 watt system, and it worked well for many years, yielding just over 1 oz. per ft. Not bad, but it can be so much better.Note that in the mid-90's, the term ``sea of green'' started being applied to much larger plants and grows, even multiple 1000 watt installations over room-sized grow tables, with 3 foot plants spaced at one per foot. It seems the original meaning of the term, the SSSC plantlet method, has been almost forgotten.Basic flat, fast scrogThe screen method used by pH relied on a long vegetative period for the plants to cover a large area of screen held close to a series of fluorescent tubes. The method I will describe here uses the same sort of growth process that occurs in a plantlet method sea of green plant, and is very fast. The screen should be set about 8-12" above the planting medium, if possible. There are two purposes for that gap. First, you have to get your hands underneath the screen in order to handle the plant shoots and to remove excess growth shaded out under the screen. Second, there needs to be sufficient space for the plant to branch. Branching is essential to scrog. I prefer a space of about 10" for a 250 watt light, but some growers prefer shorter gaps for smaller lights, as little as 4-6".Note that the screen does not have to be absolutely flat, and there are good arguments for dishing the screen to match the curvature of the light field. I don't radically dish my screen, but I do tie down the middle of the screen to prevent the screen from being pushed up, which would be counter-productive.The clones are set under the screen at a density of about 1 plant per sq. ft. Experience in using the method with various types of plants may result in more or fewer plants, but 1 per ft. is a good starting point. Note that plant density is much lower than for plantlet-method sea of green. That means fewer clones to manage and fewer plants to be holding in a bust, a factor in sentencing guidelines.Why clones, by the way? By the time you find out which plants are male and female from seed, it would be impossible to extract the males from the foliage wound into the screen and fill in the gaps with female shoots, without a real mess on your hands. Seed plants also waste several inches of height before a mature stem section is reached from which branching can begin, whereas clones branch right from the medium. Height control is typically a limiting factor in cabinet growing. With female seeds it may be possible to grow a predictable scrog by raising the screen height, making up for the wasted stem length. Seed plants may react differently to forcing as well. I have no experience in scrog from seed.The clones are established and kicked into vegetative growth. Assuming an 8-12" gap, just about the time where the growing tips penetrate a few inches above the screen, say at two weeks, the lights are switched to a 12 hour dark period. Ideally a response similar to the sea of green method kicks in as explained above. Instead of stopping and flowering, the plants take off, filling the screen with growth. At a density of 1 plant per ft., it usually works out that the plants stop and ``crown off'' just as the screen is filled. It's really magic to see it happen. Note that this timing method is not universal. Different plants may require more vegetative growth, or perhaps even less. My advice is to start by forcing early, because overgrowth creates an unproductive canopy, more salad than buds.The timing is so critical. You must be around during this period to guide the growth under the screen, and to make sure all gaps in the screen are filled, one bud site per screen hole with standard poultry netting (2 x 3 inch holes). I have no position on removing fan leaves in general, but in a small scrog grow, fan leaves would overwhelm the neighboring buds, and normally they are removed. Get a good sharp, clean set of pruning scissors and just leave them with the grow. You'll need them every couple of days during this period. Note that some growers disagree, so feel free to experiment. I'm no expert on the matter, but I haul out tubs of leaves and get pretty decent results, I think.Training really isn't difficult. With a limber plant I usually let the shoots grow vertically above the screen and then pull them under by the stem, re-orienting the stem horizontally under the screen to line up bud sites with screen holes. You don't have to tie anything down, as the upward pressure of the stem will nail the foliage to the screen, but some growers like to tie off stems to the screen during the early phases of screen filling. Here's what one grower, Ultimate, has to say on the subject:``I swear by twist ties and have a huge stock. They can be found just about anywhere. Purchase ties which are most flexible (wire with the smallest diameter) and coated with plastic not paper, as the paper will eventually mold.``So why twist tie? Two reasons when training for in any screen application.1. Pre-training. (Exact placement of main stems, growth shoots and branches)2. Bud-training. (Bending, stem crushing/crimping, and repositioning)``When initially induced to 12/12, the main tip/tips that hit the netting are immediately trained 90 degrees perpendicular to the netting. This allows for the light to concentrate the most productive part of the plant, forcing the most efficient production the plant can dish out. Branches under the netting are allowed some time to reach the light, but less than half will see light because you're concentrating on efficiency. The most efficient growth will occur where the main stem bends on a 90 degree and beyond, which receives the most light.``I like to leave the ties long enough for the plant hold the shape desired. Main stem usually around the second week (give or take) , and branches will always vary. Branches coming off the main stem parallel to the netting are spread as far from the main stem as possible making for a even canopy, more bud sites per square, and controlling overall height.``To a certain extent the buds freeze at a certain point and height/stem length slows. The canopy height is close to being established, but some plants are more vigorous than others and continue stretch beyond the rest of the crop. When bud training the longer colas are controlled by bending and tying down to the screen with twist ties. In extreme cases crushing/crimping is necessary. Moldy buds can be avoided by repositioning buds growing against each other. By using twist ties each bud can be positioned where air flows between each cola allowing efficient light dispersal within the canopy and better air flow.``Without ties? Yield was lower. A few larger colas had to be tied down shielding smaller buds from direct light, not to mention forcing the light to be raised higher, lowering production (This can be resolved by switching to a more intense bulb) . Some branches grew buds with LONG stems between the screen and base of the cola to compete with the large colas. Hybrid vigor in some cases, or plants which tend to "stretch" more than others eventually straighten out the 90 degree angle exposing less area of the most efficient portion on the plant and eventually stretches to a point where more stem was exposed to direct light, above the screen than desired. A view from the bottom (planter to the screen) showed that efficiency could be improved.''Some plants have brittle stems, and are difficult to train. It is possible to bend a stem by crushing it lightly at the bend. So long as the structures in the plant that carry fluids aren't damaged too much, the shoot will heal and be just fine (thanks to Uncle Ben for that trick). It may also be possible to top brittle plants under the screen, so that the future growth will be in several, more slender shoots. I have no experience in training a scrog grow by topping.After the screen is filled all growth under the screen must be clipped off. Shaded growth quickly shrivels and dies, leaving ideal growth mediums for mold. Excess leaves and shoots should be clipped close to the stem, to avoid leaving stumps as mold sites. Robert Clarke recommends pruning away from the stem, but a lot of the standard advice has to be discarded when dealing with the special conditions of a scrog grow. The space under the screen is dark and humid, and you want as little plant material under there as possible. You will haul out buckets of leaves and excess shoots from a scrog grow, but the plants can take it. Clip away.Subsequent pruning is really limited once the plant sets buds and stops growing. Some plants develop large leaves from the buds themselves, and if the leaves shade out neighboring bud sites, I find they must be removed. But that's about it. Most of the flowering time in a scrog grow the maintenance level is near zero.If everything goes well, the extra time required for the plants to reach the screen before the flowering period is lengthened by only about two weeks. No additional time is required to fill the screen, because that time is the same used by the sea of green method to add height. The plants end up just as long, but the growth is directed horizontally. Typically a flat scrog grow ends up resembling a tropical forest canopy, with all the buds in a thick carpet extending 8-10" above the screen. The area underneath the screen contains the tree trunks that support the canopy, like piping connecting the root mat to the canopy.Does it matter how the canopy is created? Not particularly, in my experience. There does not seem to be a lot of difference between buds that would come from sites lower on side branches from those at the actual tip of the plant. For the most part, a bud is a bud in this method. Note that the buds grown in a scrog field are each a piece of what would be a vertical cola. Each bud grows up vertically 90 degrees from the stem. You are familiar with how a cola is made up of individual bunches of flowers connected to the stem in an overlapping spiral, producing a structure that looks like a single unit. In scrog, each one of those florets matures into a small bud in their own right, typically 4-8" tall, about the size of a cigar. They aren't donkey dicks, and you won't impress the editors of High Times into featuring your buds in the centerfold, but weight is all we're interested in, not appearance. As I say, it all looks the same in the bong bowl.How much weight? I have shown that it is possible to reach over 2 oz. per ft. with a suitable plant and enough light density. 400 watt growers have reported up to 2.4 ounces per foot in a flat scrog. In a compressed grow, using shielded lights in a box of screen, I did nearly 2.6 ounces per foot, measured by canopy area. I suspect that 70-75 watts per sq. ft. is about the minimum to reach that kind of production, but I don't know for sure. Your results may vary, but certainly you will do better using scrog than small-scale sea of green at any light density. As an experienced plantlet-method sea of green grower, I feel comfortable stating that as a fact.Anyone can reach the benchmark production numbers, but you must concentrate on filling the screen quickly and completely. If loose and tall would yield better, then scrog wouldn't work in the first place. You want the canopy to be low and tight, except on the edges, and one bud per hole. Screen fill density is all important to making weight.A side note regarding the measurement and reporting of production is appropriate here. For the most part, growers on the boards talk in terms of so many ounces per square foot of growing area, apologies to the metric system. Some growers feel it is more appropriate to measure production in terms of HPS watts, taking into account how efficiently the grower uses the lamp, and our host, ~shabang~ has proposed a ``garden efficiency'' measurement, or ``GE''. In cabinet growing the area under cultivation cannot be expanded, and the lamps are typically very small, especially in comparison to any kind of production grow. I believe measuring output per watt would favor underlit grows, given an equal amount of space being used. Cabinet growers want to know how to produce the greatest weight of buds in the space they have, not how to conserve lamp power. Indeed, a cabinet grower should use the greatest amount of lamp power than can be cooled. Accordingly, I favor reporting production by area, but I encourage reporting a complete set of information about the grow so that light density can be taken into account by those so inclined. A ``yield-o-rama'' report or ``YOR'' is a good compromise. You can find information about the YOR on the usenet group ADPC in posts by Old Ketchup Lungs and other posters.What can go wrong with a flat scrog grow? The worst thing you can do is to allow the plants to grow too long. You would think that excess growth could be cut out or moved to vertical screens, but in practice I find it's difficult to recover from a badly overgrown screen. Plants that grow into and fill the screen seem to put on better bud weight than overgrown plants that are tied down and whacked back to fit. Error on the side of forcing early, learn from what happens and adjust on the next crop.Vegetative fills, FIM and toppingThe fast, flat method relies on the flowering stretch to fill. It's the fastest, most reliable method, and the most likely to produce a short and dense canopy.Sometimes it is not possible to use one plant per foot, particulary for grows with feminized seeds, where the grower cannot afford room to clone and hold mothers. Some growers believe vegetative fills are beneficial, but I haven't seen the weight reports to prove it.Other growers believe that topping or FIM treatment might be beneficial in producing more branching. I think that might be true for some stiff indica's that do not branch well, but most plants will produce more than sufficient branches under the fast method at one plant per foot.My advice is to stick with the proven method at least the first few times out. Make the benchmark weight, learn what that takes and then you can experiment. For growers who must make fewer plants cover the screen, be cautious and do not let the plant grow too long. Error on the side of short filling the screen the first time, and then adjust accordingly. An overgrown screen is difficult to recover from, particularly in the tight quarters in which a low plant density grow is likely to occur (no room, no money, usually means a micro grow).When judging a scrog grow you see posted on this board, ignore the look of the buds and concentrate on weight. Scrog is a production method, and it's not designed to produce photogenic buds. A fair number of grows I have seen recently on the boards used the screen more to locate and support tall bud wands. You can get away with that with lights of 400 watts and over, but even then I haven't seen the kind of weight a tight, short scrog canopy can produce.Interrupted floweringAlso known as ``buddus interruptus'', the procedure is to switch the lights to 24/0 for a day or two about at the end of the fifth week of flowering, when the buds seem to stall out. It should only be done once during the crop, and for no more than two days. The best technique is to switch for one day, wait a couple of days to observe the effect, and then give it one more day if the buds haven't responded. This is not the same as ``double budding'', as the plant is never actually kicked into vegetative growth.If the plants react well, you will see tufts of additional flowering parts standing out from the sides of the buds like little towers. Done early enough, these extra parts should finish in time, and they will add extra weight to the crop. This technique can be particularly valuable in scrog, given the large number of smaller buds.A caveat is in order, not all plants respond well. Some don't react to the light change at all, and a very few may be disturbed into uncontrolled growth from the tops of the buds. You might be concerned with a tendency for male parts to be produced, but I've been practising this method for a long time, and I've never seen a ``hermie''.Bog methodsMany people have been excited about the scrog method and have dreamt up all sorts of ways to expand production, myself included in the mad scientist crowd. The most common variation is the ``bog'' method.Bog for ``box of green'', was first coined by Kunta and further developed by chthonic and several other growers. Added to the horizontal screen are vertical screens around the perimeter. Either additional plants are used at the edges, or the scrog field plants are grown longer, but either way, the additional foliage is allowed to grow up the outside of the vertical screen, taking advantage of wasted air space above the field. It also allows plants at the edge of the field to get into the circle of intensity from the bulb.Imagine the light field as a circle sitting tangent to a horizontal line. Imagine your plant as a point on the line outside of the circle. How can the plant get inside the circle? By going up. You might equate this method to an ``arena'' grow in this regard. An extension on the bog theme is spiral bog, first coined by chthonic. In a spiral bog the plants are allowed to add considerable vegetation, which is trained around the box in a laid-down spiral, like this (but flatter): //////. This method allows all the screen area to be densely filled with bud sites.There are two ways to fill the vertical bog screens, as I mentioned. The first is to use more plants, which are added to the edges of the grow. When the horizontal scrog field plants are forced to flower, the plants on the edge are allowed to grow vertically like sea of green plants, the resulting growth being trained to the vertical screens. If the growth is too tall for the screens, it can be laid down at an angle, like a spiral bog grow. The advantage of this type of bog grow is reliability and speed, since the horizontal field is filled in exactly the same manner as in a normal scrog grow. The disadvantage is that the number of plants is increased to near plantlet-method sea of green levels.The second method is to use the same number of plants as in a standard scrog grow, or thereabouts, but to allow them to grow longer before forcing, around another week or two of growth seems to be about right. This process proved to be tricky for me at first, but once I piled up some experience in timing and training, I found the method to be superior. Several growers have been successful at 70 watts. Here's what chthonic, a pioneer in the method, had to say about his experiences with 70 watt HPS lights:``The quickest and most successful approach that I have found to train a bog grow is to lower the horizontal screen to within 6" of the soil and grow 2 plants per sq. ft. straight up to the vertical training screens. As it's a box driven by a 70-watt bulb, the height from the horizontal screen to the roof is only 12". The plants grow unhindered 18" from the soil up through a narrow band of the horizontal screen and onto the verticals until they touch the roof. Then they are laid down horizontally and trained in a spiral fashion /// around the vertical training screens. Spiral bog or s/bog. The cabinet is small; spiral training is the only way to direct the shoots so it just happens...``The spiral training can go one of two ways. The entire plant can be bent over in one direction and trained along with the rest of the plants in a clockwise or counter-clockwise fashion around the vertical training screens. Or the plant can be trained as it naturally branched, trained in opposite directions along the vertical training screens.''Any method of growing should be analyzed not only for production over the space used, but also for production over time. Just for the sake of argument, let's suppose a plantlet-method sea of green method produces 1 ounce per ft., and the subject plant takes 60 days to complete its life cycle. That would be .017 oz. per ft./day. Let's suppose a scrog grow takes two weeks longer, 74 days, and produces 1 1/2 oz. That would be .020 oz. per ft/day, advantage scrog. Let's suppose than an extended bog grow takes two more weeks than a scrog grow, 88 days, and produces 2 oz. That would be .023 oz. per ft. day., advantage extended bog.Note that it's possible to shorten the cycle by growing plants in a separate area for about two weeks and then adding them to the scrog setup. But most micro and mini growers don't have room for a separate growing area.The ``bog'' term is subject to some debate. Chthonic believes that the term should be used for a box of foliage that surrounds a light held in a vertical position. Such a setup can be an outstanding way to get the most of out small security lights in the 70-100 range. But I think for a larger light, like a 150 or 250, it is necessary for the light to be in the normal horizontal position above the box. Personally, your author thinks that bog can be used as a general term to describe such a grow, and I don't really know what other term to use. Chthonic believes this type of grow can be referred to as an arena grow, but I've usually seen that term applied to free-standing plants rather than a box of screen. In my recent compressed grows using shielded lights, I coined the terms ``h/bog'' and ``v/bog'', stealing from chthonic's notation, but no one else has picked up on the lingo. Time will tell what terms become attached to these methods. Most people just use the generic term ``scrog''. Fair enough.Finally, hollow screen forms do not have to be in the shape of square-cornered boxes. I've seen one grower using small HPS lights who shaped his screen into a deep bowl shape, with the light suspended in the middle. Posts on ADPC describe inverted V shapes, and cylinder forms have sprung up at Cannabis World. A single ``correct'' way to do this probably doesn't exist.At this point, these methods are so new that every grow provides significant information. My advice to those new to the scrog method is to get a few fast, flat scrog grows under your belt first to get used to the process. But do add the vertical screens regardless, and capture whatever excess growth you can on the verticals, as there is no reason not to handle as much growth as you can.V-scrogThe final extension of this concept was thought up by Kunta, and dispenses with the horizontal screen entirely. I coined the term for the method, ``v-scrog'', for vertical scrog. Vertical screens extend from the plant medium all the way up to the top of the growing space. The light is not in a reflector at the top of the space, but is suspended vertically in the middle of a tube of foliage, approaching peg's Rama concept for zero-g cannabis growing. Note that the entire light field is used, not just from the bottom half of the lamp and what comes off the reflector. The foliage area is stunning. Imagine a 2 x 2 cabinet with a v-scrog screen held 4" from the walls, with a gap in the front screen for maintenance. Suppose the buds fill up about 3' of the vertical screen. We're talking 4 screens, each 4' in area (16" x 36"). Take off a couple of inches for corner overlap and a gap in the front for access, and that's nearly 14 sq. ft. of screen in the same space that supports 4' of flat screen. Even if the production per foot were half, and it would be less due to the loss of the 3D flat scrog field, you're still talking 3 ½ ounces per foot!Can that really be possible? Not so far. I have grown two v-scrog's that were mostly failures, but I have modified the growing space to correct the problems and I will continue testing sometime in the future. The problems so far involve the time needed to fill the screen area, which could reduce the production over time substantially, and the ability to handle the moisture load produced by the massive amount of foliage. I am also not the world's most talented trainer, but chthonic, Ultimate, Eugene and others have done very well in tiny vertical box forms with 70 watt lamps.Even if production isn't dramatically better than horizontal methods, v-scrog is a promising solution to growing in very restricted height conditions. It might be possible to grow a productive crop with 150 and 250 watt lamps in as little as 2', maybe less. Since the light-to-foliage gap is horizontal, the only absolute vertical needs are for the plant container and a gap between the end of the downward-pointing bulb and the planting medium. Plant growth could be controlled by training it across the vertical screen, which could be any reasonable height.Soil or hydro?I have read nearly every scrog post on this board, and a lot of the activity on other boards and at ADPC, and it appears that a successful scrog can be done using plants in pots as well as with more exotic hydroponic systems. But there are a few elements of scrog growing that tend to favor an active hyrdroponic setup.Once you get past a small, flat scrog grow, it becomes very difficult to train a more complex grow by reaching into the cabinet space. I would never design a sizable scrog system, or any bog-type grow, without the capability of rolling or sliding out the plant container and screens as a single unit. Obviously that means that the screen should be connected to the plant container, or possibly to a common substrate, like a plywood base. The screen does not need to be sturdy, it's just a guide, so there are many ways this could be done. But obviously it is much easier to slide out an empty container than one full of water (DWC) or soil.Although I lack experience in using soil intensively, active hydro systems allow freshly rooted clones to have direct access to very high levels of nutrients immediately. That may mean that active hydro scrogs will evolve quicker than soil or DWC grows. I don't believe there is enough experience available to express a firm opinion on this matter, and certainly I have seen many fine DWC grows recently. For that matter, the best 400 HPS production number I've seen was accomplished in soil.First-time growers, fluorescent lightsScrog is not a difficult method to use, and new growers should not hesitate to try it. In fact, because most new growers are using small lights, often fluorescents, getting a reasonable harvest almost requires scrog, or a similar method such as paper-clip training or FIM (look it up). I favor scrog training over FIM because it is easier and quicker. FIM is probably a better method for larger lights, 400 and up, where the height of the bud wand can be handled.New growers are probably going to use soil or DWC, both of which produce good results with scrog. Soil growers should avoid pots, which restrict the size of the root mat and take up precious vertical space. Instead, a plastic pan about the size and shape of the growing space should be used, which will maximize the root mat. It doesn't need to be very deep, about 6" would be suitable.A good first choice would be a 70 HPS lamp or two in a space about 1-3 square foot, using soil or DWC. The cost of the materials needed is minimal, and the output from 70 HPS lamps is proven. You can expect to get 1-2 ounces per foot, and in presentable buds.If fluorescents must be used, avoid compact bulbs and stick with tubes. As mentioned above, scrog as envisioned by pH was designed to be used with fluorescent tubes, stacking multiple grows in a single space to make up for the lower production. The design keeps the canopy flat and a few inches away from the surface of the bulb. Compact fluorescents tend to wrap the tube surface inside themselves, making the light from those surfaces available only by reflection. Further, by being compact they act as a point source without the required intensity to back it up.A fluorescent tube grow could be accomplished in a space as small as 2' square, to accomodate a series of tubes, or a footlocker-type space, maybe the bottom of a closet, to take 4' tubes. It would be wise in either case to mount the ballasts outside the growing space to help with heat.Getting the most from a fluorescent grow requires keeping the canopy tight and close to the tubes. Use one plant per foot, an 8-12" screen gap and force when the plants hit the screen, which will produce the fastest and most predictable screen fill, and will tend to keep the canopy in check. Using vegetative growth to fill the screen is an advanced technique, and I would avoid it unless you are restricted to a fewer number of plants by circumstances.There are several myths floating around the boards about fluorescents vs. HPS lamps. It is often said that HPS lamps are expensive, but it isn't really so. Security lights containing HPS bulbs and ballasts can be purchased at discount hardware stores, and separate ballasts are available from online sources at very reasonable prices. 70 HPS security lamps go as low as $30-50. Remember also that HPS lamps have a higher mean output over time compared to their rating, and last much longer than fluoros.It is often said that HPS lamps are hotter than fluorescents, but that too is a myth. Fluorescent lamps, aside from corporate b.s. by Lights of America, are less efficient than small HPS lamps, and therefore produce more heat per watt. To say an HPS lamp is hotter in the context of growing is to say a burning match is hotter than a radiator; it's true, but which will heat a room? A fluorescent spreads the heat over a larger area and therefore feels less hot to the hand. HPS and fluorescent tubes have an advantage in separate ballasts that can mounted outside the growing space. Compact electronic ballast fluorescents are more efficient than magnetic ballast tubes, but all of the heat they produce is confined in the growing space.If you must use fluorescents, be realistic and don't expect to be bowled over by the buds. Depending on the plant they will either be light and feathery, or hard, but very small. You can grower larger and harder buds with fluorescents, but only by stacking up a wasteful amount of wattage on a very few bud sites. If you would like to compare some fluorescent and small HPS grows by wattage, there is a link below that will lead you to a post that compiles the best near-harvest pictures on a non-judgemental basis. People get very heated on this board pro and con regarding fluorescents (guilty), so look and make your own decision based on real grows.Scrog growing works best with clones, but that requires a mother area which may not be possible for a new grower. Feminized seeds from Dutch Passion should work as well, though I would provide a couple more inches of screen gap to allow for the portion of the seed plant stem that will not produce branches. Branching is fundamental to scrog.If it is not possible to produce clones or to acquire feminized seeds, then I would not use scrog. An alternate method would be to grow each seed in separate soil containers and use plantlet method sea of green, paper-clip training or FIM to control height. When the males show, they can be removed from the growing area, and the remaining females re-arranged to best suit the light source. Using a plantlet method pretty much requires an HPS lamp to get decent production, as much of the growing surface will be vertical. Fluorescent tube lamps lack intensity, as they spread their light over a large area, and compact fluorescents simply lack enough punch to act as point-source lights. Use a small HPS lamp and keep the plants trained low and flat as possible, and you should yield at least an ounce per foot.Basic design elementsThere are essentially two classes of HPS lamps when it comes to scrog growing, the small ``security light'' types, in the 50-100 range, and larger lamps in the 150-250-400 range. The best way to plan your own design is to see what others are doing. Exercise the search engine and look for scrog grows with similar-sized areas and lamps, analyze their results and plan accordingly.The smaller lamps need to be held quite close to the canopy, as the effective range in which they will produce tight buds is limited. A 70 HPS has a range of about 8", for example. That means the distance from the screen to the light should be only an inch or two outside the range, to allow for some vertical stretch, and the distance from the lamp to the edge of the space has to be computed keeping in mind that the light is traveling on the longer diagonal out and down to the canopy. Using the standard of 50 HPS watts per square foot of canopy will produce good results, but I would shoot for more like 70-75, meaning that a 70 would be perfect for a square foot of screen. If you wished to grow with two or more 70-100 HPS lamps, the lights should be distributed over the canopy, not bunched together.The 50-70 watts per square foot rule applies to the larger lights as well, but as power increases the limit is more negotiable. Within the confines of a scrog cabinet or box, a 400 watt lamp has a lot of power directly underneath it. Asking a 400 watt lamp to light an 8 square foot area means skirting the lower limit of the lamp power, but for the areas close to the lamp the intensity is far greater. By keeping the canopy directly under the lamp short, and by allowing the growth on the fringes to get taller, one can leverage the power of the 400 to a larger space. 400 watt lamps are therefore an excellent match with an arena, or bog type of grow. It is also possible, but not confirmed, that 400 HPS lamps could produce better with a supercropping type method, like FIM, instead of scrog. It's probably a close thing, and maybe a mixture of a horizontal scrog canopy under the lamp and FIM-type plants around the edges would be superior, a true ``arena'' grow.The 150 and 250 watt lamps don't have that kind of power, and the canopy must be kept relatively close. The 250 has a reach of 20" within which it can tighten up buds, and therefore a 2' x 2' space is about as far as you can push the lamp and keep the production per foot up. Because the area under the lamp is relatively small, using a bog or arena type of grow becomes more difficult, as the most productive area, the horizontal field, becomes pinched down. These lamps are probably better used with a basic flat scrog, although there is no reason not to allow some growth on the vertical walls if it can be arranged within the space. Certainly, in any flat scrog grow, you have nothing to lose by letting the very outside row of buds grow tall, even to the extent of using additional plants to get that result. I see a lot of flat scrog grows where the growth thins out on the edges with bare walls surrounding the bulb. Error on the side of higher plant densities, and use the outside space to your advantage.Note that while the smaller ``security light'' HPS lamps lack reach alone, added to a larger lamp's light field they can be useful as supplements to balance out a light field and to add some punch. For example, in a 2'x 2' cabinet, a 70 HPS added to the empty end of a 250 HPS hood would provide a combination of 80 HPS watts per foot, and would illuminate the overall space more evenly. If you are inclined to try a small MH light, perhaps you could add both light and some spectrum balance. I've also seen compact and tube fluorescents added as supplements, but that's like lighting a candle in sunlight; not much help, unless some extra heat is needed. If you're adding watts, make them count.Height is often a restrictive element when designing a cabinet grow, particularly if mother and cloning space is needed in the same space. An unshielded (open bulb) 250 grow is perfectly suited to a space 2' x 2' x 4'. But by using a horizontal shield of tempered glass, or a plastic like lexan or plexiglass, the heat from the lamp can be confined and controlled, and up to a foot of space can be recovered by tightening up all the other elements as much as possible. Lexan or plexiglass sheets are available at discount hardware stores, can be cut with normal tools (sawed, or scored and snapped), and are modestly priced. Designing such a grow means using an extra fan to cool each compartment space, or providing for airflow from the growing area through the barrier.Designing a cabinet in terms of the vertical space needed is best done by working backwards. Start with the known dimensions of the basic elements, the height of the plant container, the medium to screen gap and the thickness of the lamp/hood assembly. That leaves the growing space above the screen, which is somewhat negotiable. If you keep your canopy low and tight, using the flowering stretch to fill the screen in the classic fast, flat scrog fashion, none of the buds will get much bigger than 8-10" above the screen.There has to be a gap between the top of the buds and the lamp for two reasons. First, obviously, the whole canopy must see the lamp. Second, the tops of the buds can't be fried by the lamp. Even with shielding some gap is necessary, as the tops of some varieties react badly to being in close proximity to an intense light source, producing thick stem growth that erupts from the bud tops.Cooling and airflow are the final design element. Even with shielding there must be adequate airflow through the canopy to avoid mold, and to carry off the moisture load created by the plants. A 4' canopy under a 250 HPS will pull about a half gallon per day through the leaves, and that water has to be removed, regardless of the temperature. With the smaller HPS lamps probably ``muffin'' type axial fans are sufficient, available at many hardware stores, all growstores, and online at sites like Grainger.com, which sells Dayton and Comair fans for reasonable prices. The Comair ball-bearing axials last much longer than the solid bearing Daytons, but they are noisier; my 115 CFM 5N471 Comair's sound like a helicopter starting up.Note that Grainger apparently checks for obvious individual accounts, so be cautious. Use a valid federal tax number (like your employer's), a business address if you can, or at least use the term ``suite'' rather than apartment, and a phone number that answers at the business name. Not everyone can accept packages at work of course, so you may not be able to access Grainger, which is a shame.Larger setups require more fan power, say about .5 to 1 CFM per HPS watt as a decent guide, and are usually best ventilated with an industrial ``squirrel cage'' type blower, available from the same sources. Grainger has a nice selection at reasonable prices, with several different configurations to match the requirements of cabinet growing. Usually room has to be made available in the cabinet for the hardware, so look for designs that are compact and easy to mount in a given space. The Dayton 4C754 200 CFM axial is an excellent choice, $80-90 at Grainger, but using the Overgrow search engine with the word ``Dayton'' should provide a wealth of other examples. Dayton and Rubbermaid make a lot of money from pot growers; I wonder if they realize that?Usually the fan is mounted to blow the air out, sucking it up through the canopy from an inlet into the box. It would be better in theory for the fan to blow into the confined space, to produce an over-pressure rather than a partal vacuum. But it's easier to light-proof a space with the fan power sucking the door against the seals than to be fighting air pressure.Fans for smaller grows can simply be controlled by the light timer, always on when the lights are burning. Larger grows with squirrel cage fans need to be controlled by a line thermostat. I would avoid the cheapo hardware store models and go with something decent, like the Dayton 2E728 at Grainger for about $40-50. If you're using a shielded grow with outside air inlets, you may find humidity is the problem rather than temperature. In that case a line humidistat or a thermostat and humidistat in parallel might provide the best control.Fresh or room air inlets should be a match with the space and the airflow. A general guide is to provide about .03-.05 square inch of inflow space per HPS watt. For example, a 3" circular plastic tube inlet would be a minimum requirement for a 250 HPS grow. Air inlets and outlets need to be arranged to avoid light leaks into the growing space. Turning the air duct 90 degrees and avoiding reflections with flat-black paint inside the duct is sufficient. For example, a ABS plastic plumbing elbow seems to be popular these days.The prototypical scrog screen is poultry netting, which consists of 2" x 3" irregular hexagons, about 24 per foot. Poultry netting seems to space out the buds just right, in my experience. I see other growers using various types of square plastic netting, and quite a few weaving their own between sticks with wire or fishing line. If you use square holes, I would tend to size them at about 2 1/2" or a little less, but in no case would I go smaller than 2". Poultry netting costs nothing, but it does have the disadvantage of cut wire ends around the edges which always seem to be diabolically placed to slice up your hands and arms. Whatever you use, remember it doesn't have to be very sturdy. Don't steal growing space with wide wood pieces around the edges. Use something like a thin dowel, or stiff heavy-gauge wire to secure the screen.Finally, don't neglect safety in any grow. When using electrical devices around water, a GFCI-protected outlet is a must. Before doing anything else, learn a few basics about electricity. Most of the basic grow guides do a reasonable job, but plenty of information is available online. This is suppose to be fun, but it's not a daredevil sport, so don't kill yourself doing it!ConclusionHopefully this will give you an idea of where we stand on small level scrog methods and will answer some of the basic questions. In spite of the long history of the use of screens and netting in cannabis growing, accelerated scrog growing under HID lights is a wide open field, and each new grower can add experience and ideas to the mix.Editorial assistance by newbie, except for the last three sections, which are all my fault. Additional input by chthonic and Ultimate as noted. Thanks to pH, Uncle Ben, Ganja Baron and Teahead for assistance and suggestions on specific topics. I should also acknowledge indirect input by Bongo and Shuzzit, as well as the other growers mentioned in the article.Note: I have retired from internet posting activities. Anyone who cares to copy this post and continue with it is welcome, but remember it should always be open to edits from the community, rather than being one poster's opinion. - SCW
Generated in 0.059 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 13 queries.


text:
NEW YORK - There are only two shows that I have ever officially 'recapped,' which is to say written about each week come rain or shine or snow or Abu Nazir: 'Homeland' and 'Downton Abbey.' Do you see the problem there? Both 'Homeland' and 'Downton Abbey' are, to my mind, shining, glittering examples of complete and total quality collapse. Both are series that I once loved and adored on a kind of incommunicable level; I had to force myself to rave about them using complete sentences because my initial thoughts were pure animal cognition: 'Ahhh. So. Good. Must. Watch. Now.'
Both shows had excellent first seasons, anchored by powerful, prickly performances from their leading ladies (put Lady Mary and Carrie Mathison in a room and Carrie Mathison is the one who leaves crying) and scene-stealing turns from cagey and experienced actors (Dowager Countess, I introduce to you Saul Berenson). Both shows had flawed second seasons punctuated by a few wonderful moments that kept me believing they could turn things back around. This year, both shows aired third seasons that pushed my nose into the new grim reality of their awfulness, and hard.
If only both of these shows had been just one season long! I understand that commercial imperatives make shows go on and on, but that doesn't mean I can't decry the structures of capitalism while typing on a computer made in questionable working conditions and getting ready to pledge to a Kickstarter to bring back 'Happy Endings.' So many times this year I wished for TV shows to be more rigorous, less like floppy, extra-long noodles. (A month or so ago I fell in love with movies anew: Guys, they are only two hours and then they are done.)
It's not just 'Homeland' and 'Downton.' 'Broadchurch' and 'The Fall' are two lithely constructed crime dramas that, for some reason, are going to have second seasons. (And 'Broadchurch,' God help us, an American remake.) Watching 'Sleepy Hollow,' Fox's wacky procedural about Ichabod Crane, I got preannoyed thinking about how dull the sparky chemistry between the show's leads will be in three seasons, when they are stuck in rote will-they-won't-they positions, hacking out cases with no momentum. Meanwhile, the most perfectly crafted show of the year was, I thought, 'Top of the Lake,' which is seven episodes long and will never be one more. 'American Horror Story' reinvented itself, audaciously, for the third time. And 'Breaking Bad' achieved the sort of narrative propulsion it did because creator Vince Gilligan knew where he was going and didn't take extra time getting there.
I even felt a little bit like 'Mad Men' this season was biding its time. We know how it will feel and look with its moody and elliptical lines and metaphors, the punctuating joke, the drinking and the smoking and the smoldering, and this season anyway, Don's psychological rut? I am not trying to downplay 'Mad Men's' excellence, but I think that there is a tendency to overstate any TV show's originality, especially one going into its seventh season. Part of the pleasure of TV is, at some point, you know what you are getting into, know that you are slinking into a bath of a certain temperature with some familiar bath toys arrayed about you. The critical establishment may scoff at the movies' current thrall to sequels and reboots, but in a way, every single episode of a TV show is a sequel.


text:
Navy coach Ken Niumatalolo calls starting middle linebacker Cody Peterson "soft spoken." Inside linebackers coach Steve Johns refers to the senior as "quiet." Peterson describes himself as "introverted."
Senior wide receiver Matt Aiken paints a different picture of his teammate and co-captain.
"He's got a tough-guy mentality, and he definitely brings that every day to practice," Aiken said last week. "He comes ready to play every day, just 100 percent every practice. Even yesterday, he was getting into a fight at practice with one of our younger guys. I think that's definitely one of the biggest things he brings to the team."
Peterson, who will lead the Midshipmen (7-4) into their 114th meeting with Army (3-8) Saturday at Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia, said he prefers to lead by example.
"I'm a little bit more introverted by nature," he said. "So [leadership] was something for me that was kind of a challenge. But I've done a fine job of it this year. I've come out of my shell, and I've been able to call guys out when I need to."
Asked to elaborate on what he has said, a sly smile crept across Peterson's face before he replied, "If I think they're slacking a little bit or they're not focused, I'll firmly tell them to focus and do your job."
No one would accuse Peterson of not doing his job. After a 2012 season in which he made 67 tackles in 13 games (eight starts), he has flourished in his first year as a full-time starter.
Peterson ranks second in the Football Bowl Subdivision in average solo tackles per game (7.6), and he's tied for second in total solo tackles (84). He ranks fourth in the country in average tackles (11.3) and is tied for 11th in total stops (124).
Niumatalolo said Peterson exemplifies the qualities of a Naval officer and football player.
"He doesn't come to practice saying, 'I'm a captain, I'm a senior, let me jog around here,'" Niumatalolo said. "He works harder than our freshman. So if you're a young guy and you're trying to get on the field at any position, you're like, 'Here's our team leader and that's how he practices?' So it makes you feel like you can't goof around, you can't slack because here are the leaders that have set the standard of this is how we work here. So I think for him, that's the big thing. He's led by example."
For a time, Peterson was a player without a position. An athlete who played basketball and did track and field at AG West Black Hills High School in Tumwater, Wash., Peterson was an All-State first-team selection at running back and joined Navy as a fullback.
But the 6-foot-3, 228-pound Peterson was too tall and not heavy enough to line up at fullback in the Midshipmen's triple-option offense. He moved to outside linebacker, but injuries impeded his development there. In the spring of 2012, he made the switch to inside linebacker and finally found his home.
Johns, who doubles as the team's special teams coordinator, recruited Peterson out of high school and pegged him as linebacker material.
"I knew he was tough and athletic, and he just didn't seem to fit anywhere else," Johns said. "So I said I'll take him. He wasn't immediately very good, but that's because we were running against option stuff all the time. But once we started running against more traditional offenses, where it was a little more normal with run reads, that toughness started to show through."
Peterson acknowledged that there were times when he questioned whether he would ever see the football field in a meaningful role.
"I'd love to say that I was gung-ho the whole time and positive, but there were some times when you get a little discouraged," he said. "But I just stayed the course, I trusted my coaches and my teammates, and I kept working and it ended up working out for me."
Last fall, Peterson was a reserve through the first five games before supplanting senior Brye French as a starter. Peterson said he surprised himself with a six-tackle effort in a 31-30 win over Indiana last year.
"Things just kind of slowed down for me," recalled Peterson, who was poked in the eye in the third quarter and had to get four stitches before finishing the game. "Indiana's pretty tough, they're a good team. They have big boys on the offensive line, and I was smacking these guys and blasting them back, and I thought, 'These guys aren't so tough, I can do this.' I had a pretty good game that day. … I felt like I made a statement to myself and to my team about what Navy football is about."
Peterson made 14 tackles in Navy's 17-13 win over Army last year.
In the offseason, Peterson and Aiken were voted co-captains by their teammates, which the academy's media guide touts as "the highest honor a Navy football player can receive."
Peterson certainly felt that way.
"I've embraced it fully," he said. "It's been a lot of fun. Our senior group on the team, we're a bunch of really close guys. The fact that they all voted for me, I was really honored by that, and it's just worked out. It's fallen into place."
Peterson is enjoying his final moments in his Navy uniform. There is still the matter of the Army game and the Armed Forces Bowl on Dec. 30 in Fort Worth, Texas, but Peterson — who plans on becoming a surface warfare officer after his graduation this spring — is savoring his experience.
"Even before I came to the Naval Academy, I was sold when I saw them run out with the American flag," he said. "Now that I'm a part of that, I have a huge sense of pride."


text:
Citizen Initiative (CI) is my internet project commenced in 2007. I am a British writer, born in 1950, with twelve published books to date, including those under the self-publishing logo of CI. My formulation of a citizen philosophy (in Pointed Observations, 2005) is ongoing. I view citizen independence in philosophy as a relevant option in the current situation, though without negating various traditional factors in the philosophical heritage.
My version of citizen initiative has included an incentive to confront drawbacks in "alternative" thought and practice relating to "new spirituality." This website (my first) appeared in August 2007, and includes various documents which dispute factors in malfunctioning British organisations. Evasive political and bureaucratic agendas were also encountered. Issues relating to drugs and alternative therapy are incorporated in the coverage. There is also a webpage on Wikipedia issues, arising from a problem of sectarian activist editing.
In relation to British events and epistolary efforts, some assessors have generously credited me with starting an unprecedented form of confrontation with trends and doctrines that are elsewhere beginning to be accepted without question, and to the detriment of the public. Whatever the case, I hope that the information provided will be of interest and use.
The second of six websites is kevinrdshepherd.net (2008), featuring 25 articles. See also kevinrdshepherd.info and independentphilosophy.net. My fifth website is citizenphilosophy.net, commenced in 2010. The varied content of these sites link with my project of a philosophy of culture, first appearing in the book Meaning in Anthropos (1991). I also maintain Commentaries. See further my bibliography at the sixth website.
A citizen encounter with the provocative and widely read book by Professor Richard Tarnas entitled The Passion of the Western Mind (1991). That work reviews Western philosophy from a perspective that posits a contemporary "epochal transformation," and there is scope for disagreement in some of the themes employed. The controversial Epilogue favours a neo-Jungian trend as the current solution, and more specifically, the psychedelic and related therapy of Stanislav Grof. The book ends with the reflection that "today we are experiencing something that looks very much like the death of modern man, indeed that looks very much like the death of Western man" (p. 445).
Such themes can obviously evoke a critical response. Some forms of academic literature create confusions amongst the public, and the related "postmodernist" trend is a source of confusion amongst academics themselves. There is also the factor that Grof holotropic therapy became part of the commercial "workshop" vogue. Despite the original "new age" intention to detour materialism and capitalist habit, contrary tendencies mean that the favoured word "holistic" is acutely devalued by diverse entrepreneurial "workshop" enthusiasms that are critically viewed by many observers.
Among the topics covered in this webpage is the argument of Immanuel Kant (d. 1804) in his Critique of Pure Reason, a book which proved influential in the formation of academic philosophy. Tarnas tends to depict Kant as being part of a sequence in science and philosophy that led to contemporary alienation. It can be argued that, despite certain limitations of viewpoint and the consequences, Kant had some redeeming features, and furthermore was not a major cause of contemporary problems.
Tarnas tends to glorify Friedrich Nietzsche and Carl Gustav Jung, who represent "Romantic" factors that are open to dispute. The contemporary Nietzsche myth is not realistic, and conceals a very disturbing mentality. The confusion about these subjects is currently extensive. Furthermore, the attendant theme of postmodernism allows for critical treatment of a subject notorious in some academic quarters for a relativist attitude, a drawback associated with Jacques Derrida and other exponents.
Sathya Sai Baba (c.1926-2011) created the wealthy ashram of Puttaparthi in South India. His many devotees included politicians and court judges. His followers celebrate the multi-volume work Sathya Sai Speaks. He claimed to be a God-man, to perform miracles, and to be a reincarnation of Shirdi Sai Baba (died 1918). From the early 1970s, many Westerners became devotees of the "miracle" guru. Yet there were numerous defections in the West after adverse internet reports commenced in 2000. It is strongly alleged that many Indian boys and also Western males were the victims of homosexual molestation. Sathya Sai Baba has even been called a paedophile. There are other accusations also. The allegations are denied by the Sathya Sai movement.
Basava Premanand (1930-2009) was the representative of a growing Indian Rationalist party in reaction to Sathya Sai Baba, and he pioneered exposure of the "miracles" claimed by the guru. Premanand complained of a terrorist dimension to local support for the guru, himself having suffered violent beatings as reported to the BBC. However, the notorious "bedroom murders" of 1993 are more salient in the web archives. A lengthy book on those controversial murders was contributed by Premanand (Murders in Sai Baba's Bedroom, 2001). A basic complaint of the Indian Rationalists is that socially prominent devotees in India obstructed the due investigation of allegations.
Influential devotees like Dr. Michael Goldstein repudiated many allegations of sexual abuse made against Sathya Sai Baba. These allegations were strongly profiled in the BBC documentary The Secret Swami (2004), and are represented by numerous web commentaries. A problem emerged on Wikipedia during 2006, involving web tactics of the American branch of the Sathya Sai Baba sect. In my case, the attacking User page of SSS108 was contrived, and several years later deleted by Jimmy Wales.
The original Citizen Initiative webpage (of August 2007) was a defence against the Wikipedia User page of 2006. The Pro-Sai activist Gerald Joe Moreno (SSS108, Equalizer) countered with another attack resorting to libel. The extension entitled Kevin R. D. Shepherd in response to Gerald Joe Moreno answered the renewed offensive of Pro-Sai activism. See further The Internet Terrorist Gerald Joe Moreno and Not Exposed.
The role of Wikipedia as an internet encyclopaedia has met with a strong degree of criticism, primarily because of the "anyone can edit" policy. See Wikipediocracy and Wikipedia Flaws.
Dr. Stanislav Grof is the author of numerous controversial books such as LSD Psychotherapy (1980) and Beyond the Brain (1985). His name is strongly associated with LSD therapy and MDMA therapy, two very disputed practices which became illegal in America many years ago. The most commonly visible Grof "therapy" is now Holotropic Breathwork, a trademark exercise which is also contested. This very commercial package was developed by Dr. Grof at the Esalen Institute in California when LSD therapy became illegal.
The original title of this webpage was Criticism of Holotropic Breathwork and MAPS. There are many references to Holotropic Breathwork in my letters described below. The ideology of MAPS (Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies) is also described, MAPS being a Grof-related project of Rick Doblin. MAPS has depicted the legal restriction on psychedelic drugs in terms of political misinformation, and urges that those drugs should be used in "scientific research and spiritual exploration."
In another avenue, Grof's influential disciple Dr. Christopher Bache has advocated LSD therapy to a marked extent. A critical response to Grof theory is necessary, not least because there are current indications that many people are resorting to psychoactive drugs in the belief that these confer spiritual experiences. This deceptive belief is insidiously furthered by Grof and his disciples.
This webpage analyses the Findhorn Foundation from their inception in 1962, together with antecedents. The co-founders of the 1960s were Eileen and Peter Caddy, who established themselves in the Findhorn Bay caravan park of Moray, Scotland. The account describes accumulating problems and discrepancies attending this "new age" community, and which became acute during the 1990s and after. One feature that emerges is the contradictory role of Eileen Caddy (died 2006); details supplied by dissidents serve to accentuate omissions in the Times online obituary and other sources. Factors covered include community economic problems, the promotion of commercial therapy by the management, and the severe treatment of dissidents.
The article also mentions a disputed elevation of the Findhorn Foundation to CIFAL status via the Ecovillage extension. The presiding personnel named in promotionalism for the Ecovillage project include individuals associated with suppression of the dissident Kate Thomas and her maligned friends. The dissident problem tends to strongly contradict Findhorn Foundation sentiments and catchphrases relating to intentional communities and the commercial "conflict resolution." A society or grouping which stifles dissent and creates stigma is basically questionable. See further Findhorn Foundation Discrepancies.
The Findhorn Foundation ecology project (an extension of Findhorn Ecovillage) became officially known as CIFAL Findhorn in 2006. This investiture occurred via UNITAR, the UN branch based in Geneva. Critics maintain that relevant data was suppressed by the various bodies involved. In such respects, the "low carbon footprint" theme promoted by CIFAL Findhorn and the Ecovillage is not regarded as proof of surpassing accomplishment. Anomalies are observed in the closely attendant commercial workshops of "new spirituality" occurring within the Findhorn Foundation, an ongoing matter persisting over decades. CIFAL Findhorn is a facet of the Findhorn Foundation Ecovillage, and is not effectively a separate entity in real life. The Ecovillage has the same shared identity as the Foundation, existing on the same territory. Close attention must be given to the hindrances and exploitation for which the ecological themes provide a questionable camouflage.
CIFAL Findhorn has described itself as "an International Training Centre for knowledge sharing on integrated sustainable development and other global goals of the United Nations." Such claims were promoted via CIFAL Findhorn Company Ltd (alias CIFAL Scotland). The operative patron is UNITAR (United Nations Institute for Training and Research). UNITAR have been called "the UN training arm for social and economic development, environmental services and multilateral diplomacy." The diplomacy has involved total neglect of varied complaints about the inauguration of CIFAL Findhorn, including a warning from a professional accountant about former Findhorn Foundation accounts.
These seven epistles of complaint revolve around deficiencies visible in "new age" or "alternative" trends. The seven letters are reproduced in their entirety, along with introductions for the guidance of readers. Those letters include two to Tony Blair during his term as Prime Minister in Britain.
The First Letter to Tony Blair (April 2006) argues against the partiality for controversial Grof therapy doctrines visible in the Scientific and Medical Network (SMN) and associated with the nonjudgmentalism of David Lorimer, a key figure in both the Wrekin Trust and the SMN. These are prominent "new spirituality" organisations in Britain. In addition, an extension dwells upon alternative trends of "Mind, Body, Spirit" that are commercially misleading.
The Second Letter to Tony Blair (September 2006) continued the identification of problems attaching to "new spirituality" in Britain, and also complained at bureaucratic inefficiency. The primary argument is pitched against the Findhorn Foundation, who are strongly associated with the promotion of alternative therapy and pop-mysticism of a lucrative kind. Findhorn Foundation promotions have been observed to charge high fees for these indulgences. Yet this organisation gained the benefit of closely related CIFAL status in 2006 via the Ecovillage project associated with Craig Gibsone, Alex Walker, and other Findhorn Foundation celebrities. This project amounts to a telling compromise when the situation is closely analysed. Several of the other epistles also dwell upon the discrepancies involved.
I was a supporter of the Club of Rome in my first published work Psychology in Science (1983), and have commented upon the vindication of that approach in Pointed Observations (2005), Part 8. I have urged that purist ecology is not reducible to, and nor compatible with, the cause of alternative therapy (which has created misleading doctrines and health problems in some directions). It is now well known that alternative therapy relies heavily upon the subscription of affluent people who are beguiled by the ads for weight loss and other presumed benefits. The ecological cause should be separated from such commercial considerations.
In 1983, the ecological cause was viewed as speculative (even in the most sober versions) by politicians and industry. Yet the cause has since been validated by climate scientists (after costly and potentially fatal delays). See further Climate Change Complexities. My conclusion is that ecology must comprise a science, not a convenience supporting commercial "workshops" of the Esalen variety. There are also other considerations which support the verdict that UNITAR, based in Geneva, did not accomplish due research into events occurring in north Scotland by 1996. Busy bureaucrats frequently overlook relevant data from other countries.
A document sent to the Home Office was About the Findhorn Foundation and United Nations (2006). That message was also circulated to various other bodies, including Moray Council, who failed to respond. The political and economic agenda created to support CIFAL Findhorn was committed to ignoring details that contradicted Findhorn Foundation promotionalism. The Home Office document affords information about obscured matters consigned to oblivion elsewhere. The oblivion was largely preferred by the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR).
The two Letters to OSCR (2006) attest the reluctance of that body to duly intervene in some doubtful tactics of the Findhorn Foundation, even though this organisation was officially discovered to be evasive about the promotion of Holotropic Breathwork. The OSCR was overawed by UNITAR and Moray Council, declining to reply further. The status of Scottish Charity regulation is currently in dispute.
Two earlier epistles were circulated to a wide audience of politicians, academics, and other categories. The results are still ongoing. Noticeably failing to respond (save in one isolated instance) were the Scientific and Medical Network (SMN), whose pivotal figure was addressed in the Letter of Complaint to David Lorimer (2005). This lengthy epistle is now considered to be significant in British commentary pertaining to the "nonjudgmentalism" and "new spirituality" trends. The accompanying Letter to BBC Radio (2006) queries the activities of alternative therapy as visible in the curriculum of the Findhorn Foundation and their exemplar William Bloom, both being linked to the SMN and the Wrekin Trust. That letter arose in response to a radio chat programme considered to be misleading by some assessors.
This webpage relates to the "LSD neoshamanism" issue associated with Stanislav Grof's American disciple Dr. Christopher Bache, and as contested by the British writer Kate Thomas, whose contributions have been neglected by the British organisation calling itself the Scientific and Medical Network (SMN). The SMN chose to favour a contribution by Bache on their website for six years, ignoring the warnings against LSD therapy (and the strongly associated recreational use of LSD and MDMA in Grof circles). The Grof movement is inseparable from the subject of psychoactive drugs. The books of Stanislav Grof are based upon LSD sessions which have been given misleading interpretations in the "perinatal" idiom devised by Grof. An influential book by Bache describes experiences of the latter arising in LSD sessions and Holotropic Breathwork. Thomas supplies a different interpretation of those experiences.
The Thomas version of mysticism is attended by an unusually realistic assessment of shamanism in counter to new age romanticism. SMN "nonjudgmentalism" discarded the Thomas version in preference for Bache's LSD neoshamanism, which remained an influence in public view on the SMN website until 2010. The two neglected but relevant articles of Thomas are here reproduced. In addition, a paper by Stephen Castro, appearing in 1995, is included as testimony to the drawbacks in Holotropic Breathwork that were observed at the Findhorn Foundation during 1989-93, before official intervention occurred.
Shortly after, Castro wrote his significant book Hypocrisy and Dissent within the Findhorn Foundation (Forres, 1996). That work was published in the face of overwhelming misconception, created by deceptive promotionalism, but has since gained acknowledgment from close analysts as a courageous stand against bad management. The Castro report was favourably reviewed in some well known journals before the Findhorn Foundation internet ploy of 2002 discrepantly declared that Hypocrisy and Dissent was not worthy of review, a dogmatic verdict which showed no awareness of other published viewpoints.
The Scientific and Medical Network (SMN) is a British organisation having the anomalous reputation of being a haven for alternative therapy and "new spirituality." Kate Thomas was a member for some years until she resigned in 2004. She here describes her encounters with the SMN, the Wrekin Trust, and the Findhorn Foundation. These three organisations are interlinked in terms of affiliations and some degree of shared conceptualism. The account of Thomas has been considered a unique insight into the problems denoted by "new spirituality." In particular, she describes her contact with David Lorimer, the leading organiser of the SMN and a major official of the Wrekin Trust.
A crisis occurred when Lorimer sanctioned the inclusion of Dr. Christopher Bache as a speaker in 2003, making no objection to Grof doctrines of LSD therapy. Lorimer had penned an enthusiastic review of Bache's LSD book Dark Night, Early Dawn (2000). The eminent neuropsychiatrist Dr. Peter Fenwick, a presidential figure of the SMN, was in private agreement with the counter-argument of Thomas, but was not prepared to openly contradict David Lorimer.
When Thomas resigned in 2004, Lorimer instigated the inclusion of a controversial pro-LSD article by Bache on the SMN website, and neglected to include the opposing article by Thomas which had appeared in the SMN journal in 2003. The pro-Bache tendencies of David Lorimer were thus confirmed in an obvious gesture of favouritism. The Bache article advocates LSD therapy as a spiritual path, and is far more decisive on this issue than the questioning title suggests ("Is the Sacred Medicine Path a Legitimate Spiritual Path?").
The extremist pursuit of LSD therapy, via the Bache article, was still being openly promoted on the SMN website (www.scimednet.org) in 2010. This was the sixth year running that the SMN were openly celebrating LSD therapy, despite a trite disclaimer of responsibility for views expressed on their website. The absence of appropriate social responsibility has been perturbing. That same year, the Articles Archive was moved from public view to a log-in procedure for SMN members, with only the article titles being publicly visible. The title of the Bache article was still openly listed, with no accompanying details.
Critics say that the SMN form of "new spirituality" nonjudgmentalism is potentially disastrous for the younger generation, and also very inadvisable for the older generation (especially the gullible sector frequently recruited by the SMN, the Wrekin Trust, and the Findhorn Foundation). The absence of a due sense of moral responsibility is a frequent hallmark of new age nonjudgmentalism. Six years of public view web advocacy of LSD ingestion, ignoring all the complaints made during that period, is something not easily forgotten. See further David Lorimer, SMN and Contesting New World Values.
In September 2007, Kate Thomas sent a substantial letter of complaint to the Director General of UNESCO at Paris. That document describes discrepant policies and attitudes maintained by the Findhorn Foundation, an organisation here revealed in a very different light to the promotionalism favoured by the management. This promotionalism has influenced official parties who have taken no account of drawbacks in a suppressive milieu undertaking continual commercial expansion since the 1970s. However, the dissident complaint has gained influential support. A belated reply from UNESCO was evoked in an ongoing situation of confrontation with the Findhorn Foundation, a situation involving a complaint via British solicitors. See further Kate Thomas and the Findhorn Foundation.


text:
In researching this I have found many references to the opposite, creating elevation data from contours, but nothing regarding contour creation. Preferably, I am looking for open source solutions like QGIS, Grass or command line tools but I am open to any suggestions that will get me pointed in the right direction.
I am planning to take the contour data into a vector drawing app for line formatting but if the app can do some of that as well it would be a major time saver.


text:
The Serenade system consists of a handheld device, earphones, and proprietary treatment sounds that research has suggested may address the underlying neurological cause of tinnitus. This novel technology is simple to use and customized specifically to your tinnitus. It may be used to seek immediate relief, as well as long term benefit when used as part of an ongoing tinnitus treatment program. After an audiologist evaluates your tinnitus, your Serenade device is programmed to play the sounds most likely to be effective for you.
Features of Serenade®:
- Unlike other approaches, this treatment is customized to your specific tinnitus.
- Includes 4 separate sound tracks so you can select the one that works best for you, day or night.
- New treatment sounds known as S-Tones® were developed by independent leading university hearing experts and only recently commercialized.
- This technology is based on advanced research and solid science, and is FDA cleared.
- The device is small, portable, and easy to use.
- Includes SleepAssist – a 60 minute, auto-off timer to help you fall asleep.
- Independent left and right volume controls offer maximum flexibility, comfort and customization.
Ask us about Serenade and whether it may be right for you.
Did You Know?
– 1 in 10 adult Americans suffer from tinnitus.
– Many patients are not offered treatment and are told to "just live with it."
– Tinnitus can almost always be treated and its symptoms improved.
Tinnitus is a condition in which a person perceives sound that is not actually present in the environment. It is often described as "ringing in the ears" but can include virtually any type of sound including whooshing, hissing, or whistling. There are many possible causes for tinnitus but most cases are related to damage to the auditory system.


text:
Buprenorphine; Naloxone oral dissolving film
What is this medicine?
BUPRENORPHINE; NALOXONE (byoo pre NOR feen; nal OX one) is used to treat certain types of drug dependence.
How should I use this medicine?
For sublingual use (Suboxone): Drink water to moisten the mouth. Then, place the medicine under the tongue and let it dissolve. Follow the directions on the prescription label. Leave this medicine in the sealed foil pack until you are ready to use it. If your dose requires you to take more than 1 film, place the second film under the tongue on other side of the mouth. If your dose requires you to take more than 2 films, place the third film under your tongue on either side after the first 2 films have dissolved. Do not let the films touch in your mouth. After you put this medicine in your mouth, do not move it. Do not swallow, cut, or chew the film. Take your medicine at regular intervals. Do not take your medicine more often than directed.
For buccal use (Suboxone or Bunavail): Drink water to moisten the inside of the cheek. Then, place the medicine against the inside of the moistened cheek and let it dissolve. Follow the directions on the prescription label. Leave this medicine in the sealed foil pack until you are ready to use it. If your dose requires you to take more than 1 film, place the second film on the inside of the other cheek. If your dose requires you to take more than 2 films, place the third film on the inside of your right or left cheek after the first 2 films have dissolved. After you put this medicine in your mouth, do not move it. Do not swallow, cut, or chew the film. Take your medicine at regular intervals. Do not take your medicine more often than directed.
A special MedGuide will be given to you by the pharmacist with each prescription and refill. Be sure to read this information carefully each time.
Talk to your pediatrician regarding the use of this medicine in children. Special care may be needed.
What side effects may I notice from receiving this medicine?
Side effects that you should report to your doctor or health care professional as soon as possible:
allergic reactions like skin rash, itching or hives, swelling of the face, lips, or tongue
breathing problems
signs and symptoms of a dangerous change in heartbeat or heart rhythm like chest pain; dizziness; fast or irregular heartbeat; palpitations; feeling faint or lightheaded, falls; breathing problems
signs and symptoms of liver injury like dark yellow or brown urine; general ill feeling or flu-like symptoms; light-colored stools; loss of appetite; nausea; right upper belly pain; unusually weak or tired; yellow of the eyes or skin
signs and symptoms of low blood pressure like dizziness; feeling faint or lightheaded, falls; unusually weak or tired
trouble passing urine or change in the amount of urine
Side effects that usually do not require medical attention (report to your doctor or health care professional if they continue or are bothersome):
dry mouth
nausea, vomiting
What may interact with this medicine?
Do not take this medication with any of the following medicines:
certain medicines for fungal infections like ketoconazole and itraconazole
This medicine may interact with the following medications:
antihistamines for allergy, cough and cold
antiviral medicines for HIV or AIDS
certain antibiotics like clarithromycin, erythromycin, linezold, rifampin
certain medicines for anxiety or sleep
certain medicines for bladder problems like oxybutynin, tolterodine
certain medicines for depression like amitriptyline, fluoxetine, sertraline
certain medicines for migraine headache like almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan, zolmitriptan
certain medicines for nausea or vomiting like dolasetron, ondansetron, palonosetron
certain medicines for Parkinson's disease like benztropine, trihexyphenidyl
certain medicines for seizures like phenobarbital, primidone
certain medicines for stomach problems like cimetidine, dicyclomine, hyoscyamine
certain medicines for travel sickness like scopolamine
general anesthetics like halothane, isoflurane, methoxyflurane, propofol
local anesthetics like lidocaine, pramoxine, tetracaine
MAOIs like Carbex, Eldepryl, Marplan, Nardil, and Parnate
medicines that relax muscles for surgery
methylene blue
other medicines that prolong the QT interval (cause an abnormal heart rhythm)
other narcotic medicines for pain or cough
phenothiazines like chlorpromazine, mesoridazine, prochlorperazine, thioridazine
What if I miss a dose?
If you miss a dose, take it as soon as you can. If it is almost time for your next dose, take only that dose. Do not take double or extra doses.
Where should I keep my medicine?
Keep out of the reach of children. This medicine can be abused. Keep your medicine in a safe place to protect it from theft. Do not share this medicine with anyone. Selling or giving away this medicine is dangerous and against the law.
Store at room temperature between 15 and 30 degrees C (56 and 86 degrees F).
This medicine may cause harm and death if it is taken by other adults, children, or pets. Return medicine that has not been used to an official disposal site. Contact the DEA at 1-800-882-9539 or your city/county government to find a site. If you cannot return the medicine, flush it down the toilet. Do not use the medicine after the expiration date.
What should I tell my health care provider before I take this medicine?
They need to know if you have any of these conditions:
brain tumor
drink more than 3 alcohol-containing drinks per day
head injury
heart disease
kidney disease
liver disease
lung or breathing disease, like asthma
an unusual or allergic reaction to buprenorphine, naloxone, other medicines, foods, dyes, or preservatives
pregnant or trying to get pregnant
What should I watch for while using this medicine?
Tell your doctor or healthcare professional if your symptoms do not start to get better or if they get worse.
Do not stop taking except on your doctor's advice. You may develop a severe reaction. Your doctor will tell you how much medicine to take.
If you are also taking a narcotic medicine for pain or cough or another medicine that also causes drowsiness, you may have more side effects. Give your health care provider a list of all medicines you use. Your doctor will tell you how much medicine to take. Do not take more medicine than directed. Call emergency for help if you have problems breathing or unusual sleepiness.
You may get drowsy or dizzy. Do not drive, use machinery, or do anything that needs mental alertness until you know how this medicine affects you. Do not stand or sit up quickly, especially if you are an older patient. This reduces the risk of dizzy or fainting spells. Alcohol may interfere with the effect of this medicine. Avoid alcoholic drinks.
Wear a medical ID bracelet or chain, and carry a card that describes your disease and details of your medicine and dosage regimens.
This medicine may cause constipation. Try to have a bowel movement at least every 2 to 3 days. If you do not have a bowel movement for 3 days, call your doctor or health care professional.
Your mouth may get dry. Chewing sugarless gum or sucking hard candy, and drinking plenty of water may help. Contact your doctor if the problem does not go away or is severe.
Online Medical Reviewer:
Date Last Reviewed: Unavailable
NOTE:This sheet is a summary. It may not cover all possible information. If you have questions about this medicine, talk to your doctor, pharmacist, or health care provider. Copyright© 2019 Elsevier
Related Conditions
- Buprenorphine buccal film
- Buprenorphine injection
- Buprenorphine intradermal implant
- Buprenorphine; Naloxone Sublingual Tablet
- Buprenorphine sublingual tablets
- Buprenorphine transdermal patch
- Methadone dispersible tablets for oral suspension
- Methadone injection
- Methadone oral solution
- Methadone tablets
- Naltrexone injection
- Naltrexone tablets