text:
Justin Trudeau's Victory in Canada and Its Lesson for Center-Left Parties Worldwide: Win By Going Progressive, Keynesian Bold and Ditching Third Way's Austere Fiscal Conservatism
The latest article from my website, The American Liberal Review:
For much of their modern history, especially during the postwar years of the 20th century, center-left parties (whether under the political banner of social liberalism or social democracy) have confidently advocated for progressive economics. Specifically, these parties embraced the expansionary fiscal policies of Keynesianism with its countercyclical focus on demand management through constructive deficit spending during times of economic contraction to keep the economy humming.
However, with the string of electoral defeats suffered by center-left parties during the 1980s brought about, in part, by the ascendancy of Reaganism and Thatcherism that paved the way for the neoliberal revolution, these parties during the 1990s came to reject their Keynesian tradition that led them to accept the idea—the third way (or as some call it, compassionate neoliberalism)—that to be politically viable in the age of neoliberalism they had to adjust to the new settlement and move to the economic center-right. In essence, embracing an economics of tight fiscal policy (austerity) under the rubric of "sound finance" (that's actually, well, quite unsound), aversion to Keynesian demand management, market-centric approaches to public policy, financial deregulation, and privatization, while ameliorating some of neoliberalism's harsh edges. This trajectory toward the economic center-right was famously embodied by the rise of New Labour in the U.K. and New Democrats in the U.S. during the 1990s, and the rise of Orange Book Liberalism (emphasizing classical liberalism) within the traditionally social liberal British Liberal Democrats, in 2004, that culminated in leading that party to become junior partners with the Conservative Party of the U.K. during Prime Minister David Cameron's coalitional premiership from 2010-2015.
Now, despite the 2008 global financial crisis discrediting neoliberalism, it seemed that the firm grip of third way economic thinking on center-left parties would remain unchallenged with progressive Keynesianism continually marginalized.
(It must be said, though, Keynesianism did make a comeback with some of the center-left parties immediately after the global financial crisis. However, this resurgence was short-lived as many of these parties soon reverted back to the default third way posture during 2010 and afterward where they soon administered the harsh medicine of austerity without, tragically, healing their ailing economies that unnecessarily resulted in devastating human suffering.)
But then a funny thing happened along way that finally broke the all-too-familiar narrative of center-left parties still clinging to their neoliberal ways.
That thing being Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party's seismic landslide victory in Canada, this past Monday, over the unpopular incumbent Conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. An election where the Liberals won a solid governing majority government on a platform that rejected austere, third way economics and boldly embraced pro-growth, progressive Keynesianism. This is all the more remarkable when one considers the backstory that led to Trudeau and the Liberals' smashing victory last week.
When the dropping of the writ occurred on August 2, 2015 that dissolved Parliament by the Governor General of Canada and ushered in the longest federal election in Canadian history (78 days or 11 weeks), the electoral prospects for Trudeau (the son of the legendary Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau) and the Liberal Party were quite, well, daunting, to say the least. With a meager caucus of only 36 sitting MPs out of 308 seats in the 41st Canadian Parliament (the parliamentary session at the time of its dissolution that inaugurated the election) and coming bleakly into the race initially mired in third place, the Liberal prospects of coming into second place over the social-democratic New Democratic Party (NDP) to become the Official Opposition, let alone toppling the then-ruling Conservative Party of Canada to form a government, were dim.
But then came the bold, game-changing policy pivot in late summer championed by Gerald Butts (Trudeau's close confident and principal adviser), and other Liberal Party advisors and MPs to isolate, at that time, the frontrunner NDP (led by Thomas Mulcair) in order to become the leading progressive party that captured the all-important anti-Harper voting bloc among center-left and left-wing voters. The Liberals—rather than succumbing to the economic conventional wisdom peddled by austerians within the Canadian business, media, and political establishment in thrall with a "balanced budget fetish"—intelligently rejected all that. Instead, Trudeau and the Liberals essentially embraced the following campaign posture: Go progressive, Keynesian bold or go home!
In one fell swoop, Trudeau and the Liberals wisely rejected almost three decades of anti-deficit hysteria that, for far too long, has plagued the Canadian political landscape (as outlined brilliantly in a piece penned by noted Toronto Star columnist Rick Salutin) by narrowing national economic debate. During much of that time, even significant segments within the major center-left parties in Canada, the Liberals and NDP, succumbed to the hysteria; most notably then-Finance Minister Paul Martin's austerity policies during the 1990s, under Jean Chretien's premiership, that famously reneged on some of the Liberals' major public investment promises in their then-touted 1993 campaign manifesto, the Red Book, and then-NDP Ontario Premier Bob Rae's imposition of austerity measures on the civil service workforce through his widely criticized Social Contract. The anti-deficit hysteria, for almost three decades, has circumscribed the ability of Canadian center-left parties to offer a coherent progressive, pro-growth Keynesian alternative as the Overton Window—the range of acceptable discourse and ideas in the political public square—has long been dominated by elite austerian delusions.
So, on August 27, at a televised campaign event in Oakville, Ontario, Trudeau publicly shifted left, in the economic sphere, and unveiled the Liberals' Keynesian program of much-needed, robust public investments in infrastructure to revitalize the sluggish Canadian economy. To further drive home the Liberals' emphasis on their shift to the left, on economic policy, they strategically—and brilliantly—showcased their infrastructure program by holding its announcement at an NDP-friendly locale to win the game of optics and symbolism to favorably drive home their campaign message. Their message being that Trudeau, not Mulcair, is the true progressive change agent in this election for the important left-wing and center-left anti-Harper voting bloc split between the red Grits and the orange Dippers. John Geddes, writing in Maclean's, perceptively noted Trudeau's campaign trajectory to the left (emphasis added):
Trudeau made his unexpected vow to spill red ink at the headquarters of Local 793 of the International Union of Operating Engineers, located in Oakville, Ont., which bargains for thousands of heavy-equipment operators in the province's construction industry. And the Liberal leader wasn't there just to pose for the cameras at the controls of a Manitowoc crawler crane. By staging his campaign-disrupting announcement at a labour-run training facility, Trudeau left no doubt that he means to challenge the traditionally union-allied NDP on its left flank.
As highlighted by Martin Patriquin's piece in Maclean's, the point of Trudeau and the Liberals' pro-growth Keynesian program was to make a sharp contrast, on a substantive policy-level, between their plan's robust focus on constructive deficit spending (that would, again, jump-start the slowing Canadian economy) and the austerity measures outlined in both economic plans offered by the Conservatives and NDP:
On Aug. 27, Trudeau pounced, announcing $125 billion in infrastructure spending [an ambitious increase; up from $65 billion (Cdn) currently spent]—"the largest infrastructure investment in Canadian history," as the Liberal campaign put it. Of course, spending oodles of money on bridges, roads and the like is nothing new, particularly during a campaign. The main difference is that the party plans on going into deficit to fund it, a marked difference from the NDP and the Conservatives. (Emphases and italics added.)
Specifically, as pointed out by Maclean's reporter Nick Taylor-Vaisey, Trudeau's plan called for the following:
In 2013, Conservatives claimed that their New Building Canada Plan offered the "largest and longest federal infrastructure plan in our nation's history." Liberals similarly claim that their infrastructure pitch would comprise the "largest new infrastructure investment in Canadian history." The difference? The Liberal plan augments existing Building Canada funding, eventually to the tune of $9.5 billion a year. It parcels the money into three categories: public transit infrastructure, social infrastructure (e.g., affordable housing, child care and seniors' facilities), and green infrastructure (e.g., wastewater facilities, clean energy, dams). (Emphases added.)
With their late summer pivot, Trudeau and the Liberals, with unapologetic boldness, embraced and renewed the traditional center-left progressive Keynesian economic position that, again, for the past three decades, had been (for far too long) superseded by center-right third way economic thinking among many of the world's center-left parties. Alas, a center-left progressive party finally making a decisive break with the past.
With that embrace, the Liberals, with laser-like focus, hit home the following message to Canadian voters: We are the party of progressive liberalism who will not be tied down by the empty economic conventional wisdom of neoliberal austerity. And, as such, we will be offering Canadians a real alternative this election.
In other words, the Liberals offered to Canadians a real alternative that embraced responsible economic growth through stimulative Keynesian deficit spending (running a modest deficit of less than $10 billion [Cdn] a year for three consecutive years) to make the critical, constructive public investments to get the sluggish Canadian economy "moving again" (to borrow the key words from JFK's 1960 campaign mantra). (It is interesting to note that the Liberals' election platform of Keynesian deficit spending in the area of public investments in infrastructure was drafted, as reported in the Toronto Star, in consultation with members of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities; individuals who, more than anyone else, are at the frontlines in knowing the direct, adverse economic impact from Canada's crumbling national infrastructure and the harsh effects of federal cuts to public investments.)
Throughout the campaign, Trudeau and the Liberals, with tight message discipline, kept emphasizing their embrace of the tried-and-true progressive Keynesian approach of "pump priming" to stimulate the Canadian economy in the throes of an economic slowdown. In fact, the Liberals went so far as to preach their gospel of Keynesianism on major Canadian television networks, such as CBC and CTV, as well as putting out one of the election's most memorable ads, "Escalator: Harder to get ahead," that is, perhaps, the best explanation of Keynesian economics in 30 seconds ever produced. (In regard to the Liberals' campaign ad, the National Post went so far as to implicitly put it on par with LBJ's memorable 1964 "Daisy" commercial in its impact to convey a potent metaphor that defines an election.)
To drive their policy pivot firmly into the minds of the Canadian electorate, the Liberals also kept pounding on Mulcair for his inexplicable decision to embrace the Tory narrative on economic priorities the emphasized austerity and balanced budgets over Keynesian stimulative policies that lead to economic growth.
As such, during the summer, Toronto-area star Liberal MP (and a former internationally acclaimed business journalist who's part of Trudeau's economic team of advisors), Chrystia Freeland, attacked Mulcair's embrace of center-right economics by accusing him of advocating austerity: "Thomas Mulcair talks a lot about looking out for average Canadians, but his only path to a balanced budget so quickly is massive cuts and backing away from the NDP's spending promises."
Joining in on Freeland's line of attack, Trudeau made the following devastating point: "Let me tell you this my friends, the choice in this election is between jobs and growth or austerity and cuts. Tom Mulcair chose the wrong side." And during the French language leaders' debate hosted by Quebec network TVA in early October, Trudeau honed in on his attack on Mulcair's embrace of the austere Tory economic playbook of balanced budgets over investments by pointing out the latter's conservative-lite posture (italics added): "Mr. Mulcair, you made bad choices. You chose to balance Mr. Harper's budget at all cost which means you can't invest right now in the help that Canadians and Quebecers need. We have made another choice — three modest deficits to give help to children and pull 315,000 kids out of poverty."
In fact, Mulcair's bewildering reaction to Trudeau's Keynesian program did more to emphasize the Liberals' campaign argument that they, not the NDP, were the credible progressive alternative in the race. As reported in Tom Wells' brilliant long-form Maclean's article (a recollection of the 2015 Canadian election), Mulcair's response to the Liberals' progressive pivot on the economy sounded as if a Milton Friedman acolyte had handed the NDP leader a right-wing talking point:
Mulcair took a question about the Trudeau deficit plan. "Governing is about priorities, and we've watched the Conservatives run up eight deficits in a row," he said. "Now the Liberals are telling us that they want to run several years of deficits."
And? And? "I'm tired of watching governments put that debt on the backs of future generations," Mulcair went on. "Stephen Harper's approach has always been, 'Live for today, let tomorrow take care of itself.' At some point, you have to start having different priorities."
This was the sort of reply that Liberal strategists wanted insofar as it accomplished three critical things. First, it isolated the NDP away from the large bloc of center-left and left-wing anti-Harper voters. Second, it blurred the distinction between Harper and Mulcair on the economy (notwithstanding the anti-progressive attacks by the former against the latter). Third it boxed in the NDP into the right-wing, budget-cutting corner that would prevent the social-democratic party from credibly running as Canada's progressive change agent this election.
Furthermore, as Wells' article points out, Mulcair's reaction to Trudeau's pivot devastatingly undermined the NDP's traditional political brand as being the authentic progressive conscience of Canada of the two center-left parties:
When they heard Mulcair's answer, Liberal campaign staffers were jubilant.
"It was a huge blessing when Mulcair went on the other side," the Liberal who had followed public opinion on the deficit question said later. Not even a competent salesman like Mulcair could sell the notion that Liberals and Conservatives were peas in a pod. Not when he was joining Harper in insisting that budgets must be balanced henceforth. "Now we had the change lane all to ourselves," the Liberal said. (Emphases added)
Moreover, Mulcair and the NDP's head-scratching posture, throughout the election, to campaign against the Liberals to their right on a program of sound finance made no sense from a sober economic standpoint. As pointed out by Slate's senior business and economics correspondent, Jordan Weissmann, the present economic climate in Canada (in particular on the monetary side) favors a fiscal expansionary policy rather than one of retrenchment:
Last [Monday] night, the Liberals and Trudeau surged to victory, largely on the strength of their economic platform. This is good news for Canada: Given the state of the world economy, it is absolutely insane that more rich countries aren't running larger deficits.
How come? Because this is an incredibly inexpensive moment for governments to borrow money. In fact, it may be the best time in recorded history [italics in original] for sovereigns to load up on debt. Interest rates have been hovering around zero more or less since central banks cut rates during the recession, and given the many economic headwinds before us, it may be a long while before they rise much higher. At points this year, countries have issued bonds with negative interest rates—meaning investors are literally paying governments to hold their money because they can't think of anything safer to do with it. In circumstances like that, when the global bond markets are basically shouting "treat yo'self" at just about every finance minister in the developed world, the only reasonable move for a government is to borrow and use the free or nearly free money to make investments that might help the economy grow long-term, like building or fixing up roads, bridges, and other infrastructure. (Emphases and italics added.)
Former U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Lawrence H. Summers, writing in the Washington Post, perfectly summed it up in his reflection of the 2015 Canadian federal election by echoing Weissmann's point (emphases added):
[I]n an era of extraordinarily low interest rates and slow growth, it is becoming increasingly clear that progressives do best when they reject austerity and embrace public investment. The British Labour Party and the Canadian NDP sought to demonstrate their soundness by embracing budget balancing as an objective. Their results were terrible.
(The title to a commentary, published in The Globe and Mail, penned by University of Ottawa economist, Marc Lavoie, also perfectly sums up Mulcair's mystifying decision to go right: "The NDP goes down the 'sound finance' rabbit hole.")
At the end of the day, Mulcair and the NDP committed an unforced political error by outmaneuvering themselves when they ceded their economic left flank to the center-left Liberals—and thus weakened their traditional social-democratic identity as the progressive conscience of Canada—by making one of the most stupefying decisions ever committed by a center-left political party: undermining its own progressive brand and credibility by embracing a narrative dictated by the right. In other words, in the political and cognitive linguistic sense, the NDP committed what UC Berkeley Prof. George Lakoff—in his Toronto Star piece, "How progressives can take back Canada," published earlier this year—described as the following: "When you speak your moral language, you strengthen your political frames. When you speak in the language of your opponents, regardless of what you say, you only strengthen theirs" (italics added).
In light of Lakoff's shrewd cognitive linguistic analysis, it is only fitting that the dueling campaign slogans for the Liberals and NDP were a study in contrasts as to who would decisively carry the anti-Harper banner as the authentic progressive change agent in the Canadian federal election. The Liberals ran under the emphatic banner of "Real Change" [italics added], while the NDP merely ran on "Ready for Change"—a difference with tremendous distinction that Canadian voters clearly understood when they voted for a Liberal majority government in a landslide last Monday.
Alas, that was the problem with Mulcair's calculation. By veering right on economics to build up the NDP's fiscal credibility that would appease austerians within the establishment commentariat (who, with unfathomable intellectual gusto, still embrace neoliberalism as if the 2008 financial crisis never happened), Mulcair and the NDP undermined another point of credibility: the credibility to be viewed by the vitally important bloc of center-left and left-wing anti-Harper voters as the progressive alternative in the best position to unseat the Tories.
Mulcair and the NDP's tight embrace of the ideologically exhausted—and politically feckless—third way route to social democracy, in this election, is even more mystifying since they should have seen the Liberal "go left" playbook coming. Their provincial party in Ontario, the Ontario NDP, led by Andrea Horwath went down to ignominious defeat at the politically nimble hands of Premier Kathleen Wynne and the Ontario Liberal Party when the former allowed the latter to outflank them on the left during the 2014 Ontario provincial election. This defeat generated tremendous NDP grassroots backlash that manifested itself in a strongly worded public letter penned by party activists, during the provincial campaign, that excoriated Horwath for giving up on the party's progressive base in a vain attempt to win over conservative voters in Ontario.
At the end of the day, by veering right during this year's federal Canadian election, on a major economic policy issue, the NDP lost the all-important "progressive primary" to the Liberals that resulted in the center-left and left-wing bloc of Canadian voters to massively coalesce around the latter, during the late stages of the election, to be the standard-bearer of the progressive anti-Harper vote. A decision that proved quite decisively costly for Mulcair and the NDP such that it, alone, may have very well cost them the opportunity to become Canada's governing party this past Monday. Theirs is a cautionary tale for center-left parties around the world: by moving to the center-right on the economy, you not only lose your credibility, you also lose your progressive brand that alienates both supporters and potential supporters on the left and center alike—that, ultimately, lead to losing elections.
On the other hand, the lesson of Trudeau and the Liberals' victory for the center-left is this: it's time to bury the losing, timid and uninspired ways of austere third way economics and embrace the winning path of bold, optimistic and progressive (pro-growth) Keynesianism. At their best, for center-left parties, embracing progressive economics is not just a laundry list of sound, constructive policies that will do much to economically lift up the many (rather than just the few), but it also goes to heart of the social liberal and social-democratic project: fighting for a hopeful and just vision of society where—to borrow the memorable words from the election victory speech of Prime Minister-designate Justin Trudeau—it means rejecting "good enough is good enough and that better just isn't possible" and fighting for a future where the "better is always possible."
"Victory Speech – Election Night" from the Liberal Party of Canada
"A look back at the key moments of the election campaign" from The Canadian Press
(Photo: Justin Trudeau at the Toronto Centre campaign office opening of Liberal Chrystia Freeland, October 2, 2013. Photo by Joseph Morris on Flickr under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic license.)


text:
WMF uses cookies in order to be able to best adapt the website to the needs of our visitors. By using this website you agree to cookies being stored on your computer. Further information: Privacy statement
Your advantages:
Easily manage your addresses, orders and personal wishlist in your customer account. myWMF Grand Gourmet customers receive 5% off all orders in the WMF online shop.
* Grand Gourmet status is awarded to myWMF members who have spent over 100 euros in the last 12 months.The figure is calculated from your purchases in the online shop less returns. If the annual figure is not reached, you automatically return to Gourmet status.
Quickview Cart
You have no items in your shopping cart.
1 Item(s)
Proven Quality
Certified by the EHI Retail Institute GmbH.
Fast Delivery
Secure Payment
Earn PAYBACK Points with WMF
WMF Social Media
WMF Mobile Apps
WMF CookAssist WMF PhotoSimu
Consumer Care
Legal terms
Professional ContactsWMF CoffeemachinesWMF Professional Hotel Equipment+49 (0) 7331 257 257Mo-Fr: 08:00 - 18:00

subset: commoncrawl


text:
All words about spiritual values are just hints. Don′t hold onto the words as if they are realities. They are hints, almost the way I can point to the moon with my finger - but don′t catch hold of my finger. My finger is not the moon. Although my finger was pointing to the moon, it was only a hint.
In one of the temples of Japan, there is no statue of Gautama Buddha in the temple. Instead of a statue, there is a finger pointing to a far away moon. It is a temple of its own kind - because Buddha is nothing but a finger pointing to the moon. Don′t go on worshiping the finger - that will not help. Look at the moon where the finger is pointing. Forget the finger, forget the scriptures, forget the masters, forget all your religions; just try to find out what they are hinting at, and you will be surprised to find that thousands of fingers are pointing at the same moon.
If you pay too much attention to the finger, there is every possibility you will forget the purpose. The purpose was not the finger, the purpose was the moon. All the differences are in the fingers, in their expressions. The experience of truth is one.And the followers of these fingers are fighting and killing each other, and nobody bothers that you are fighting for fingers. The fingers may be different, but the moon is the same. The angles of the fingers may be different - because people were standing in different places at different times, in different ages. How can Krishna point exactly the way Jesus is pointing? How can Buddha point in the same way Zarathustra is pointing?
The person who seeks knowledge from these indications in the scriptures, in words, in statues is a fool. The search has to be with inwards - because they are all pointing that the kingdom of God is within you. And unless you go inwards, unless you close your eyes and relax your mind; unless your heart, your mind, your body all become a synchronicity, a harmony, a deep accord - you will not be able to hear the still small voice within you. And that voice is nobody else′s voice, it is your own. And remember, only the truth that is your own, liberates. Anybody else′s truth always becomes a bondage.
Every master is bound to be unique in his expressions. They are all saying the same thing, they are all indicating towards the same moon, but their fingers are different. They are bound to be different. The finger of Buddha, the finger of Lao Tzu, the finger of Chuang Tzu, are bound to be different. If you pay too much attention to the finger, there is every possibility you will forget the purpose. The purpose was not the finger, the purpose was the moon. All the differences are in the fingers, in their expressions. The experience of truth is one, but to bring it to expression, every master has to find his own device.
The qualities of the finger do not matter; any finger can point towards the moon. But people have got too much attached to the fingers. Jainas are holding the finger of Mahavir – they worship that finger, they have forgotten the moon. And Buddhists are worshiping the finger of Buddha. Exactly, there is a temple in Japan where Buddha's statue is not in the shrine but a finger, a marble finger, pointing somewhere into the unknown. Those who made that temple must have been very perceptive; but you don't know people – people are worshiping that finger. They go and put their flowers there and bow down. Nobody is bothered where the finger is pointing at.
Existence does not understand your language. Language is human, existence is far wider (it is not restricted to the human)
Source: Osho Lectures


text:
FAQs and Troubleshooting
Login Access
How Do I Configure Wireless?
Wireless Performance Improvements
Firewall Troubleshooting Tips
Key Web Page Information Screens
Ubee Products
Ubee Products
Solutions-oriented products for cable, telecommunications and mobility markets.
Contact Your Service Provider
Contact Your
Service Provider
Contact your cable or internet service provider's support organization for specific configuration and troubleshooting information or customer service contact information.


text:
You can now easily win a set of premium, quality new spices. Submit one Pesach recipe and get a chance to win 14 new spices. Each additional recipe increases your chances to win! Once you submit a recipe, please leave a comment on this post.
If you are in the US or Canada - we'll ship it directly to your door.
If you are in Israel - we'll get it to anywhere Jerusalem or Bnie Brak.
If you are in Brazil - it will be in Sao Paula
If you are in the UK - we can have it London.
The draw will take place on May 1, and we'll announce the winner on the blog.
Photo by Dan Engongoro
Just posted a recipe! Enjoy.
Posted a coffee cream thats good for pesach.
Posted two recipes - hope to add some more...
Posted a French Roast
Just posted a brownie. I really want to win the spices....
I've submitted 2 recipes. A kosher'n freilich'n Pesach!
I've added another recipe
I just posted 3 recipes, main, side, & dessert & hope ot post more!
I just posted 2 more recipes!


text:
Proving that fashion is more than clothing, the end of London Fashion Week fall/winter 2014 brought collections that reflected the world around them in cozy knits and quilting details (Issa, Pringle of Scotland and Belstaff) and subdued palettes (Erdem, Mary Katrantzou and Tom Ford), architectural references (Peter Pilotto, Christopher Kane and JW Anderson) and arty textiles (Temperley London, Issa and Roksanda Ilincic).
And nearly all the lines incorporated several of these trends at once, sometimes mixing somber with splashy art gallery prints, as at Ilincic, or architectural tailoring with painterly flourishes, as at Giles (modeled by Kardashian sibling Kendall Jenner).
Ford's finely tailored pieces in leather and velvet broke from the pack by largely ignoring print in favor of a streamlined silhouette (and color story) that created its own architecture. But he was not alone in referencing the Old West (or American Southwest) with his sophisticated take on cowboy boots and a poncho-topped evening gown. Burberry Prorsum and Issa channeled a Western vibe with blanket shawls, and Barbara Casasola topped her sleek city separates with an updated take on the 10-gallon hat.
SOMBER: black, wines, muted blues and yellow at Erdem, Tom Ford and
ART SCHOOL: hand-painted flowers, op-art textiles, graphics at Burberry Prossum
Issa, Temperley London.
ARCHITECTURE: Silhouettes worthy of buildings at Peter Pilotto, Christopher Kane and Simone Rocha.
Contact the writer: firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
Take a tour of our brewery and learn about our history, how we brew our beers and what makes us different. On this tour we'll show you the steps needed to make each our of 7,000 litre batches starting with grain and ending up with finished beer! Adult tickets include a tasting flight of six different beers, each beer 1/3 pint size, so that's nice.
Each of our tour can hold a maximum of 10 people. If there's a group of you and whole tour is available you can book it all, or just buy the tickets you need. If there's 11+ of you, then do get in touch, we can accommodate bigger groups but need to make special arrangements to ensure you get the full experience!
For safety reasons please ensure you visit with closed toe shoes. Additional safety equipment (such as safety glasses) will be provided by us as necessary which may vary week to week and depend on the brewery operational status. We will need you to comply with safety requirements of the site and stay with your host throughout.
We are family friendly and there is no cost for children to come on the tour with you (without beer!) however this is subject to space and operational risks. Please try to advise us in advance to avoid disappointment.
Come up to the bar on arrival at the brewery to let us know you are here!


text:
The military match results are in. No one cares.
Every year medical students in the HPSP program as well as students from the Uniformed Services University (USUHS) must participate in the military's residency match program. The military's match program is loosely based upon its civilian counterpart. For example, program directors take into consideration grades, board scores, research publications, interviews, etc… However, just like everything else in the military, the armed forces has found away to formalize the process to such a high degree of micromanagement that the entire system is no longer meaningful. For medical students entering in the military match program, they have to wade through a confusing point system that churns out an score for all applicants based on factors such as class rank, prior military service, and "ability to become an officer." Further, residency program directors have no control over who actually gets selected to attend their particular institute. Instead, a group of the three services' top leaders convene one week during the fall and decide the fate of all military medical students. The whole process is rather nerve-racking for those of us in the HPSP program. This past week, the military once again held its annual match and crushed the dreams of many people seeking to enter their desired specialties.
The Air Force released its results on a public website in the form of an Excel spreadsheet. Out of privacy concerns for others, I will not reproduce that website here. However, I'm sure that he do some searching around you can find it yourself. Looking over that chart I noticed that over 25% of medical students are matching into flight surgery. For those of you who don't know, flight surgery involves a one-year internship, six weeks of flying lessons and aerospace medicine, and then it's off to the clinic to work as an attending. Certainly, anyone reading this blog will instantly realize that flight surgeons are missing out on a lot of valuable training in residency. By granting only one year of training, the military is creating an entire generation of physicians who aren't fully prepared to become doctors.
For the Air Force, flight surgery is a wastebasket to force all non-matching students into a particular field of medicine. The title "flight surgery" is a misnomer. It has little to do with flying, and nothing to do with surgery. While I will grant that some people are willing to enter this field, surely 1/4 of applicants do not want to have an internship serve as their terminal training.
For the rare student who did match to his chosen field, he can breathe a sigh of relief as his senior year in school is over. But for those students who did not match into their chosen field or location, the next 5+ years are going to be very difficult. Each year that passes I grow more and more nervous about not getting the field that I want, and getting forced into flight surgery. While the prospect of learning how to fly is appealing, more than anything I just want to be a practicing physician. I've mentioned earlier on this website about the problems of taking the HPSP scholarship. However, money is not the only issue. Upon learning that I have no control over my future training, I feel as if the military has led us all into one great big lie.
I'm bound to get hate mail from the "patriots." I signed up with every intention to serve. However I didn't think that the military would deceive me over the amount of education that I would receive. Further, my role in the military is to be the best doctor I can be. And without that extra training, I'm doing a real disservice to the nation's soldiers.
38 Comments
Anon said,
I've had several former military doctors assist and deliver some of my children. They were some of the finest doctors anywhere. Their training was pre-1980's so probably didn't have the option of "flight surgery" as you have seen it and I'm sure they'd have not done it.
I will never say anything bad about them, but I think that your reasoning is worthy of consideration. Why would a doctor need to know how to fly? Do they fly Otters in and land on sand bars and operate? It doesn't quite make sense.
Anon said,
Recruiters routinely bill flight surgery as, "You'll be in the back of a cockpit with one hand flying a plane in the other hand performing surgery—with rock 'n roll playing in the background!"
At some point, recruiters will be joked about like used car salesmen. (My ex husband was both.)
REO SpeedDealer said,
Unfortunately you fell for the lie of military medicine like so many others. Are they still spewing that garbage that 98% of applicants get their top choices for residency? The military medicine system has been rotten for decades. Why people make such an enormous decision with only the recruiter's word just kills me. In the unlikely event that the recruiter even knows what a flight surgeon is, he will still tell you how cool it is because he has been taught to sell it that way. I'm sorry for you. Just do your time and get out like everybody else does.
Speed9BS said,
I wonder where your information comes from… Whoever told you that flight medicine has little to do with flying doesn't really have a clue what he is talking about. I spent 4 years as an active duty flight surgeon assigned to a B-1 squadron and am currently a flight surgeon assigned to an F-16 squadron in the Reserves while completing residency. When the Air Force advertises flight medicine as the "best thing since sliced bread", they are correct. There is no other field in medicine that affords you the opportunity to do the things you can do in flight medicine. I have been around the world, flown in combat defending the country that gives it's citizens the right to bad-mouth the very organization and troops that provide for that freedom, flown multimillion-dollar aircraft, dropped live weapons, and had the privilege to provide medical care for those troops and their families both at home and while deployed. Flight medicine is a field that is poorly understood except by those who have practiced it. Until you've walked a mile in my shoes, don't speak as if you know what you are talking about. "Flight surgery" is not surgery – you are correct in that regard. It is basically primary care for anyone on special operational duty status and their families. In addition to that, the flight surgeon is the expert on "the man" and his relation to the flying environment. Why does a physician need to know how to fly? It is so he can understand how a pilot's mind works in order to be the most effective physician he can be for that pilot. USAF flight surgeons are NOT trained to fly! I have no idea where this assumption comes from. The Navy teaches their flight surgeons to fly, but not the Air Force. We are given training on the basics of flying as then expected to learn the rest as you go. Each flight surgeon should learn the intricacies of their particular airframe, so they can be more effective in their job. I have not been forced to practice medicine with an intership as me terminal training, and to suggest that to be the case for any other flight surgeon is ludicrous. All flight surgeons can apply for the match at any point in their career after their initial 2 years of service. In fact, no one is permitted to continue to be a GMO flight surgeon after 4 years, unless the circumstances are dire and manning is extremely low. The HPSP is NOT a raw deal. I am the only member of my entire residency program that is DEBT FREE. As a result of my experience as a flight surgeon, I also have more experience than every other resident in my program, even though I am still a junior resident. Do yourself and everyone else a favor and drop your assumptions about flight medicine until you get the facts straight. Don't speak until you know what you are talking about. It will make you a much better physician in the end.
REO SpeedDealer said,
Hey Speed, I think I replaced you in Diego Garcia a few years back. Doogie here. A lot of halfmd's info is correct, but you two are talking in different contexts. I have grown pretty anti-military medicine as I feel that military docs get a raw deal most of the time. However, being a flight doc does have its cool moments when you aren't stuck grinding out sick call in the clinic. Flight docs fly in the sense that they are crewmembers on the jet and that once the pilots trust you, you can take the controls. You are not, and will never be a pilot unless you go through formal pilot training. That said, I have flown several airframes during my own time as a flight surgeon. Yes, these are multi-million dollar airplanes. halfmd, we do fly with live weapons and we do drop live weapons… usually on a bombing range. I did, however, ask to waive my Geneva Convention rights as a non-combatant in order to fly in combat. It was a choice I was willing to make in order to fly with my guys. Plus the jihadis don't really give a damn about the Geneva Convention or anything else that smacks of civilized behavior. If we punched out over badguy land and were caught, we knew we would probably have been beheaded.
As for being forced into flight med. I was. I applied to a competitive specialty after completing HPSP. I, and 25% of my year group ended up getting deferred for 1 year of training and forced into GMO billets. I met physical standards and thus became a flight doc. Immediately after my internship, I again applied for the same competitive residency. I was told, "No, you have to do a 2 year GMO tour before you can apply again." OK, so I did 2 years, applied again, was passed over again, and at that time decided to get the hell out ASAP and never look back. By now you're probably figuring that I'm a total dumbass and too retarded to match. Wrong. In the civilian match, I got my first choice. I am anti-military medicine because they continue to lie and count on the naive med students to believe everything the recruiter says. I think the military has to start honoring some of the promises it has been making and breaking for so many years. There is a complete vacuum of leadership in military medicine because good people recognize the BS and get out. I'm not trying to start a war, just give some perspective.
Speed9BS said,
Hey Doogie – sorry you've had such a raw deal from the Air Force. I won't deny that the Air Force Medical Service does have a tencency to eat it's young – that was why I enjoyed being a member of the Operations side of the house. Good luck with your endeavors – I heard great things about you from other docs that worked with you (you apparently fit right in with the crewdogs) – give my regards to Wendi and Dan the next time you talk to them.
Halfmd – in answer to your questions – no I did not choose Flight Med, but I took the opportunity that was given to me and ran with it – and I wouldn't trade it for the world. And, yes, I am still in the Air Force. I am currently an active Reservist, drilling one weekend a month and 2 weeks a year while I complete my civilian residency program. As to why I didn't stay active duty and complete the Residency in Aerospace Medicine – I have no interest in becoming an administrator or squadron commander – my preference is to actually practice medicine.
With regard to the assertions made in your post, I return to my previous statement – unltil you've walked a mile in my shoes, don't try to speak as if you know what you are talking about. I'm not going to justify cheapshots and attempts to discredit the life and career I have lived with a response. All I will add is good luck to you, and I hope your Air Force career is as enjoyable and fulfilling as mine was.
music said,
very interesting.
i'm adding in RSS Reader
Navymedstudent said,
Navy program directors choose who they want in the new match. They quote a 90% match I believe, although that's for GME-1. Then there's the whole GMO thing (our flight surgery track starts after GME-1, so you don;t match right into it)…. Supposedly the the GMO's are filled with primary care docs and not just fresh GME-1 meat anymore…. Also, maybe states now not letting docs practice with less than 2 years of residency will help this whole issue.
BP said,
This comment is a little late, as I only recently discovered your blog. I am enlisted in the USAF, and as I much as I wish I could tell you things are better here than you have heard, I can't. I do not trust the average military doctor. I have watched so many of my fellow airmen pushed out of the air force because of a doctors misdiagnosis or mistreatment. (One of my close friends will never be able to run or bear heavy weights again because of a bungled diagnosis of his fractured ankle, the doctor decided an x-ray was unnecessary. It was three months later that the true nature of his injury was revealed) I have seen pregnant women unable to see their PCP/OBGYN because the wait to get an appointment is several days long and Tricare (the only medical insurance provided) will not approve anything outside of a routine visit unless there is an immediate threat of loss of life, limb, or sight. That means that pain she felt in her abdomen which could have been diagnosed and treated that day, had to wait until the following week, after her fetus died. It is also not uncommon to see a qualified doctor's opinion ignored simply because he/she is outranked by a mid-level provider. I rarely meet a physician who smiled or had any sort of bedside manner. They all seem stretched too thin, simply pushing through to get done with the days patients. I do not mean to discourage you, but rather to give you more insight into the world you are entering. I hope it helps you to find the drive to become the doctor you wish to be. I will be leaving the Air Force in two years to enter medical school. I know my experiences will help me to be the doctor that many Airmen and their families wish they could have seen.
Now, on the flip side, I have never been to the major medical centers. (At this time the only two I am aware that are still standing are Travis AFB and Lackland AFB). I have heard great things about the care provided there (and the general attractiveness of the staff and volunteers).
Good luck in the future. I have thoroughly enjoyed your blog. Keep it up.
Air Force HPSP Student said,
I think your description of how the match works is wrong. After interviewing this fall with program directors, I was told that program directors have a very strong control of who comes into their program. The 3 man panel only assigns your application points, but in the end it is up to the program directors to decide where you go. I bet 5$ that you will match into EM and all this negativity about the match that fuels your life will have to be transferred to something else. Good Luck!
HPSP match said,
I don't understand why you put so much time and effort into complaining. I read your post about how easy fourth year is and how much drinking you can get done. These types of comments don't lead me to believe that you have done everything within your control to make yourself the most competitive person come match time. I hammered my recruiter over and over about residency match, it was my only worry about the HPSP. He didn't paint a rosy picture about getting whatever I want or throw out unbelievable numbers. He said "be the best candidate". I believe that I have residency match within my control by what I do leading up to the match. Why can't you be one of the 75% (your number) that matches and is happy?
Trying to steer people away from HPSP is irresponsible on your part. You are generalizing all your concerns and assuming everyone will have the same issues and concerns. There are HPSP students in med schools all over the country at the top of their class that will match to whathever they want and go on to a very satisfying four year payback time and maybe career. They probably didn't spend a whole lot of time blogging and complaining about something that hasn't happened yet. I agree with the post above; you may get exactly what you want and all your energy here would be moot. If you do match to what you want during the military match will you post an apology? Probably not. You'll say "well there are people who didn't match so it's still valid". I say they should have done better in school.
Also, look at the civilian match numbers. There are far more primary care residencies available than the more competitive – same as the Air Force – that's why they are more competitive. Saying the Air Force is going to force people into primary care is rediculous; it may be the only option for some. The Air Force is mostly a microcosm of the civilian medical world, it's all relative. Also, if you think that a majority of civilian physicians are happy campers, think again. Every walk of life has it's pros and cons, I'm sure civilians have their own laundry list of complaints.
When it's all said and done, the Air Force is better off with residency trained physicians. If you are among the best candidates you'll get picked up. If you are not competitive, well, it's a situation you created for yourself; hope the drinking games were fun!!
ArmyDoc said,
Just a note from the army perspective on things. While the jobs of our flight surgeons are a little different due to the dominance of the rotary wing platforms (most of which are obligatory 2-pilot aircraft, so no taking the sticks), the match and training is very similar. I trained at a multi-service med school, and went on to intern in Family Practice before deciding it wasn't for me and spooled out to do a flight surgeon gig for the past 2 years. While intimidating at first, I believe my training was entirely appropriate, and in many ways superior to my residency-trained counterparts. This seems paradoxical, but think about it: during internship you learn to handle common problems, culminating in completion of the year and (presumably) licensure. Afterwards you enter residency and become increasingly focussed on specialty and more difficult areas of medicine. The rub of flight surgery is that you're dealing with a young, healthy, pre-screened population. Your job is to advise the commander and keep them well, not deal with the types of medical management issues you'll face with the civilian population. Bunches of sports medicine complaints, upper respiratory infections, abscesses, and the occasional accidental laceration. Yes, worse will come through your door, when it is then your job to get them to someone with the resources to take care of them. Most residency-trained flight surgeons hate it because their skills atrophy so much during deployments. Talk to some of the older guys: prior to the 90's, almost all military physicans did a GMO tour between internship and residency. This is still the case in the Navy.
At any rate, it is true the military can force you into a given program, but only for internship. For residency you have more flexibility. However, it's also true that the RD's have little say during the intern match (basically they get veto priviledges), but they do get a say in the residency match, and most specialties have combined programs now.
Bottom line is that there is a lot of crummy stuff about military medicine, but the same can be said for the civilian side too. Speed makes a very good point in that things don't always work out how you planned, and you have to make the most of whatever situation you're in. Just keep in mind that many of us chose this path with our eyes open, because there are things that mean more to us than money or publications. Maybe the military will demand that you serve for a couple years doing something you didn't want to do. Try selling your sob story to a WWII vet and see how far it gets you. Being part of the military means being a servant to your country, not spending your entire time whining because you didn't manage to broker quite as good a deal as you thought you did. And btw, the senior EM docs are the most "been-there, done-that" group you'll ever meet, and if you try this riff with them they'll eat you alive and spit out the bones. Either way, good luck, and hope everything worked out well for you.
lied21 said,
I am a flight surgeon now and it SUCKS!!! I, like many other poor souls who took the HPSP scholarship, was forced to do 1 year of internship and then on to at least 2 years of flight surgery. The practice of flight medicine is hardly medicine. I can feel the medical education seeping out of my brain daily. Whenever I talk to a medical student or pre-med I strongly caution them about military medicine. It is nothing like what the recruiter says. It is HORRIBLE. There's more paperwork than there is medicine, there's no efficiency, and the support staff is not motivated to do well, because the whole organization as not incentive to do well or improve.
war_monger said,
Just a comment to the uninformed/ vocally ignorant (For the record I am HPSP AIr Force). As of Fall 2008 there were 22 pilot-physicians in the Air Force. You would know about this if you read the USAF Medical Service Newsletters. These are people that are fully-qualified pilots and physicians, so yes, physicians can fly in the Air Force. I am not sure as to how this corresponds to the Geneva Convention, but I know it happens ( adjudication of the law falls outside my scope of practice). I attended MSOAM at Brooks AFB and our CO for the ADT was a Flight Surgeon and pilot as well. Flies rotary and fixed wing platforms (F-16 when I talked to him last).
lied21 said,
Taking the HPSP scholarship has cost me both money and happiness. I took the AF HPSP scholarship, as many people do, to help pay the cost of medical school all the while having the opportunity to serve in the Air Force as an officer and a physician. I was led to believe that I could complete the residency specialty of my choosing, though I may be compelled to to an AF residency. Sounded good.
In the fall of my third year of medical school, 2006, I received a letter from the Air Force Surgeon General stating that he had instituted a new policy in effect for this year only. The policy stated that if one applies for the Air Force residency, but does not match, that individual would have to complete a PGY 1 year only then serve TWO years as a GMO or flight surgeon. Only after these two years could the person TRY to go back to residency. Of course, they would still have to apply to the AF residency and match or be granted a civilian deferral.
For the Air Force residency match in 2006 there were on 14 Emergency Medicine residency spots available, with no civilian deferrals being granted. There were at least 50 medical students hoping to get one of these 14 spots along with several other people who were already serving operational tours.
I along with all other medical students applying to EM this year (except one) did not match and were subsequently forced into flight surgery spots.
The cost to our careers and savings account is staggering. Assuming I match in the 2009 military match, my career will have "only" been delayed for 3 years. The opportunity cost for earning is about $600,000 (avg EM salary of $200,000 x 3 years).
If you factor in the money that the AF paid on my behalf during medical school ($200,000) and the current salary of a flight surgeon, about $100,000 /yr then I'm still losing out $200,000 ($600K – 100K *2 yrs – 200K).
Moreover, if the AF does not let me go back to residency in 2009, and I finish out the remainder of my obligation to the AF as a flight surgeon for a total of 4 years, I will have effectively lost out on 5 years earning potential as an attending.
The HPSP scholarship is a raw deal. The recruiters don't tel you that you can be forced into doing flight surgery for 2-4 years, they don't tell you that after all your hard work of going to med school, you can be forced into flight medicine. Do not take the HPSP scholarship, the risks very clearly outweigh the benefits.
Half M.D.: Good summary of events of what happened two years ago. The match next year will be even more competitive than this year's with all of the flight surgeons returning to apply. The amount of lying that comes from the Air Force is out of control. The new chief of physician education has already shown himself as someone who is not a student advocate.
residentinspecialty said,
I'm really happy with the airforce…matched into competitive specialty and now in great city doing my residency on the airforce dime…good luck…some people get screwed some do just fine.
ArmySurg said,
I would like to respond to all of these complaints about the military match… The only ppl I ever hear complaining about the military match are the ones who didn't get their first choices. Did you ever think you didin't get your first choice is because you weren't very qualified? I worked very hard in medical school and I got my first choice in both specialty and location. And from I've been told, all the program directors all meet in Washington, DC to decide who goes where. And even if they don't, everyone I know who had high scores and was highly qualified, went where they wanted…it's just that simple.
So maybe instead of blaming the military match process for not getting to go where you wanted or not getting the specialty you wanted, you should look in the mirror and say, "What was my Step 1 score?" "Was I one of the most qualified applicants for the spot that I was trying to match into?" Because I know at the program I am going to, all of the residents are very highly qulified (ie. Step 1 scores of at least 235 and most are around 245-260), so as an applicant, I knew that my board score needed to be in that range. it was, and I matched where I wanted to go; it's just that simple. Again, don't blame the Army or the Air Force, blame your application…
lied21 said,
Your comment is a reasonable response. However, it is not too applicable to what I experienced. As I said in my original post, out of ALL the medical school applicants applying to emergency medicine in 2006, only one got a spot. So, obviously there were many well qualified applicants with great board scores, grades, etc., who did not get to attend residency. Instead, they were forced to do flight surgery for 2-4 years after internship; a huge roadblock in one's career progression.
Half M.D.: My experience has been that the Army treats its docs better than the Air Force and Navy do. For example, it tries to get everyone into residency. Only 75% in the AF get that luxury, and the Navy is even worse. I've got the scores and publications that were listed above, but those only count for so much in the GME points system.
ArmyDoc said,
I can't site the statistics but the truth is that lied21 is correct and the Army is a lot better than the Navy and AF in getting students into their speciality.
The reason is simple: the GMO or equivalent position is used FAR FAR less frequently and therefore the system is fairer as program directors can pick who they want without factoring in the point system.
However for the past 2 years the Army HPSP has been short on scholarship recipients, therefore banning nearly all civilian residencies and essentially forcing more students into unwanted transitional years. When these interns begin to apply for residency programs it will essentially create the same problem the Navy and Air Force face with program directors unable to select desired candidates.
AF medstudent said,
I realize that some people get screwed through this process. I'm sorry for those. I, however, actually had a very good experience. I knew I wanted to do family medicine all along. I was very competitive for this residency both in the civilian world and military. I did a month at the base I asked for, the residents, staff, and I clicked. I interviewed, they thought I did a great job and said they wanted me. I ended up doing exactly what I wanted to do, exactly where I wanted to do it. So, I'm happy. When all you talk about is the negative side, I think you do almost as much disservice as recruiters. I think for what flight surgeons do, its ok to have the one year training. As you mentioned, they're not doing surgery and they're not even managing difficult patients. They are managing healthy patients. They aren't in ICU, etc. and if they need to be there, they go to more qualified doctors. I do agree there over the last few years, there was a shortage and people got screwed into it. I don't doubt that. I have a buddy that happened to. Maybe not all, but some of these were unqualified I'm sure. But, there are people that don't match on outside, too. They get screwed into specialties they don't want. My point is, I'm sorry for those with bad experiences, but I think there are many who are happy too, and that should be mentioned. As for flight surgeon, I agree that the name is misleading, but I think it is a historical title that has followed the job overtime. Maybe its too catchy and maybe recruiters lie (I would be the first to suggest not buying everything a recruiter tells you). However, I think it is naive to go into this specialty without researching it more. Not applicable to those forced into it, but then it wouldn't really matter if that was the case. They could call it world's worst job, and your still forced into it. Again, sorry to those screwed, just for those looking into military medicine, realize, there is another side, and alot of people including me are thrilled with how the process went. I advise you to do the best you can and be as competitive as you can for the field you want. God bless and Good Luck!! Hopefully, those that were screwed will get props when applying to there specialty again, I think you deserve it, and thank you for your service whether its what you wanted to do or not!!
rambo said,
I am currently a 3rd year med student and looking into doing a military residency. My husband is currently trying to enlist in the air force. Does anyone know what the odds are that if I do an Air Force residency my husband will be stationed in the same city? Does anyone know how best to approach this situation? Really we just want to be in the same city while I do residency and he is in the military (preferable the Air Force). Any thought or suggestions as to how best we can make this happen?
Venkat Mangunta said,
You sound like someone who is ready to talk with little information or experience. Go figure – another one of those. I am currently deployed as a USN Flight Surgeon with a Marine Combat Squadron. I work over 12 hour days. Yes, you are correct, we do not fly planes, but that is not what a Flight Surgeon does. The title, 'Surgeon,' given to Military Physicians goes back to the British Armed Forces, such as the Royal Navy. People who understand history understands that a "Battalion Surgeon" or "Flight Surgeon," is not a General Surgeon. A Flight Surgeon is an Aerospace Medicine Physician. The AF may get 6 weeks of training, we get 6 months. I am not doing this because I have to, I did choose to and soon I will return to Residency Training in Surgery.
Some of the best Surgeons (General Surgeons, Orthopaedic Surgeons, Head and Neck Surgeons) I have ever worked with….have been in the military. Not sure what your experience with Military Medicine is.
Anyway, maybe you should spend more time studying and less bantering.
Take care.
dadofarmydoc said,
you appear to be one angry fellow.
It's Me said,
Residency programs, civilian or military, select the best applicants for the spots they have available. Get good grades, graduate towards the top of your class, rock step 1 and you have nothing to worry about. Quit whining and buck up buddy. Choose to control your own destiny.
Lilly Cruz said,
I too feel misled by the military. As a medical student I was told that, "you can choose any specialty that you want." "You can choose to do your residency with the military, or with a civilian program." "97% of military applicants get their first specialty choice." Well if those were lies, the Air Force recruiter told them.
For everyone who would like to blame the applicant's grades as the reason that they are suffering such an injustice, I'd like to say there is a bell curve for every class of geniuses. The laws of statistics demand that some geniuses will fall towards the left of the bell curve.
As a senior in medical school I applied to the GME for a noncompetitive specialty, and only then began to understand that the statements touted by my recruiter were not entirely true after all. The year of my initial GME application, the Air Force decided to drop the number of available positions in my chosen specialty from eight to two (with no option for civilian training). That's right, only two military members (med students or flight surgeons) in the entire country would be selected. Absolutely ludicrous. I applied, and because there were more applicants than available positions, I was not selected; along with several other misled souls. I then was forced to complete an intern year. In the midst of my intern year, I again applied to the GME board for the same specialty. That year, the Air Force decided to open up 11 spots; but again I was passed over.
Now I get to become a flight surgeon. I will be taking care of people with only one year of experience. That to me is scary. Why wouldn't the Air Force want fully trained physicians taking care of the very people who risk their lives for our country? Don't our soldiers deserve well trained and competent physicians? I don't get it. I plan to do flight surgery for four years to pay back my HPSP scholarship and then get out of the military. But at that point, with no completed residency training, and no board certification, who would hire me? I could take the significant pay cut and go back to residency; or I could do something nonclinical. In hind sight, I should have taken out loans, became a specialist making >$200K per year, and by living modestly, easily paid back my loans in 3-4 years.
This post is for all the medical students who are struggling financially and think the military is the answer. The recruiters will only talk about the pros. Thank you HalfMD for making this website; now the cons can be discussed and medical students can have all the facts before they sign the dotted line. No one really understands except the people who are affected by this scholarship in a negative way. I am happy for all of those who got what they wanted from HPSP.
DS said,
I kinda felt mislead when going through the match. Thought my dreams were over. Did 3 years in flight med as GMO and had the time of my life and met the best buddies ever (pilots, techs and docs). Did I forget to mention I was the SME for a fighter squadron. By the grace of God got the NASA detailee position in Houston as a junior captain GMO. But without the detailee job I still have had the best career. I have almost completed a gas residency here in Houston and going back AD. To hear the bellyaching is nauseating. Buck up and do your GMO year if selected. It will make you a better leader and give you the experience you will NEVER get in the civilian world. When applying to my civilian residency, I had 20 pages of stuff to write down that I had done and my colleagues had nothing like that. Like I tell everyone that asks me about the military…"if you are flexible and don't get your feelings hurt, then you will be surprised at good the military will be to you." Drop me a line if you want to hear the details of how good the life can be. email@example.com
G. E. Bowlin said,
I am a Navy flight surgeon and heading for Diego Garcia. Not sure what to expect. Can someone out there give me a heads up on daily life, flight time, etc. Thanks
eizul408 said,
Thanks for the truth and preventing young people who are inspiring to be a doctor form falling in to the claws of heartless people.
Heading for GMO said,
I like many applicants was told that through the military I would get exceptional training, be debt free, and end up a better person etc… I am now a transitional year (non preselect, army) that applied again to desired specialty with the information that I would have less than a 5% chance of matching into that specialty, as there is relatively no time between starting transitional year and reapplying (basically the only thing that improved my application was getting something published that had been awaiting approval since 3rd year). As a transitional year you get placed with all of the other people currently serving GMO, which inherently have more "points", and are more likely to match (separate applicant pool than medical students – with far fewer spots available). That being said, I am trying to be upbeat, but most of these threads don't show a promising picture. I do owe 7 years, so at least a GMO will repay some of that, and I will not incur any extra time, but at the same time I will be missing out on making board certified pay later than most. I was told that I was an average to competitive applicant with Step1 of 234, Step 2 245 and GPA of 3.3 on a 4 point scale with 1 (now 2 publications) Step 3 results pending…. Unfortunately did not match, and now awaiting available billet slots for GMO.
Mark said,
I am currently a senior at an undergraduate institution and applying for the Air Force HPSP. As of late I have also been considering applying for the Army HPSP. I am fortunate to come from a wealthy family where money isn't an issue. I am applying for this scholarship (and maybe Army) solely as an opportunity to serve our country as a doctor. That being said, which branch of the military offers the best chance of obtaining your desired residency? Thanks
PriorService said,
"Certainly, anyone reading this blog will instantly realize that flight surgeons are missing out on a lot of valuable training in residency. "
This post is now 9 years old, so I'm sure the author realized by now that flight surgeon is not a residency. It's a General Medical Officer tour. After those 3 years you apply for a residency, and it actually works towards your advantage because you now have more points than applicant who have not completed a GMO tour.
The author was not even really in the Air Force when he wrote this. He was a "reservist" who probably didnt even wear his uniform longer than a week. And yet here he is online bad mouthing a service he knows nothing about. A service who at that point just invested well north of 200K on his education.
I urge those considering a military path to take these online rants with a grain of salt and reach out and speak to those with accomplished careers.
Duty said,
Born in 'khaki diapers' as one would say, and growing up going to military physicians, I know you. You are not unique. Sad as it may be, the excellent military physicians that I have known are not what inspired me to go to medical school and then the Army … you are. You are the military physician that missed my mother's diagnosis for years with your apathy. You are the military physician that can't comprehend selfless service. You are the military physician that I am both grateful for and despise.
Thank you for your service.
Sanora said,
During show-down, anyone with the finest cards extends to
takehome the money.


text:
The Insanely Great History of Apple
The Insanely Great History of Apple is a cool new poster from PopChartLabs.com, where you can purchase the $25, 18"x24" poster for yourself (and many other great ones).
The world's most comprehensive mapping of Apple products, this print shows every computer released by Apple in the last thirty years, from the original Mac through the MacBook Air. Products are sorted according to type, including the connections between various form factors which have arisen as Apple has invented—and reinvented—insanely great products.
Found on VisualNews
on 2011-11-22 14:21 by Randy
There's a great behind-the-scenes article on Fast Company Design by PopChart Labs about the effort that went into designing the poster: How Pop Chart Lab Made That Amazing Apple Infographic
I don't think they realized it would have been easy to stay in OmniGraffle to finish it up. I don't think there was any reason to move over to Adobe Illustrator to finish the design.


text:
WASHINGTON � Following are the votes of U.S. Reps. Michael Fitzpatrick, R-8, Patrick Meehan, R-7, and Allyson Schwartz, D-13, and Sens. Robert Casey (D) and Pat Toomey (R) for the week ending July 25.
Use of force in Iraq
Voting 370 for and 40 against, the House approved a measure (H Con Res 105) to prevent President Obama from deploying U.S forces to a �sustained combat role� in Iraq without specific congressional approval. At present, hundreds of U.S. troops are stationed in Iraq in a non-combat role.
A yes vote was to exert congressional control over U.S. combat deployments to Iraq.
Fitzpatrick � yes
Meehan � yes
Schwartz � yes
Child tax credit, national debt
Voting 237 for and 173 against, the House passed a bill (HR 4935) that would increase income thresholds for receiving the child tax credit while indexing those thresholds and the credit itself for inflation starting in 2015. The credit now stands at $1,000 for each child 16 and younger. The bill would add $114.9 billion to the national debt over 11 years, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. In addition, it would effectively deny the child tax credit to families where the children but not their undocumented parents are U.S. citizens. Under the bill, the threshold at which the credit begins to phase out would be raised from $110,000 to $150,000 for married couples filing jointly and from $55,000 to $75,000 for married persons filing separately, while remaining at $75,000 for single filers. Those levels would rise with inflation.
A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate, where it is likely to die.
Fitzpatrick � yes
Meehan � yes
Schwartz � no
Higher education tax credits,
national debt
By a vote 227 for and 187 against, the House passed a Republican-drafted bill (HR 3393) to change and permanently extend the American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC), which helps families and students offset a small portion of the cost of four years of higher education. The bill, which is projected to add $96.5 billion to the national debt over 11 years, drew Democratic criticism over changes such as its repeal of the Lifetime Learning tax credit and scaling back of the Hope Scholarship credit for post-secondary education. In other provisions, the bill increases the refundable portion of the AOTC while allowing a 100 percent AOTC credit for the first $2,000 of certain undergraduate expenses, including tuition, followed by a 25 percent credit for the next $2,000 of expenses.
A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate, where it is expected to stall.
Fitzpatrick � yes
Meehan � yes
Schwartz � no
Corporation for travel promotion
Voting 347 for and 57 against, the House passed a bill (HR 4450) that would renew the Corporation for Travel Promotion through fiscal 2020. Also known as Brand USA, this non-profit federal corporation places overseas advertising to attract visitors to America, among other promotional activities. Its annual budget is supplied by up to $100 million in contributions from the U.S. hospitality industry and a matching sum in fees collected by the Department of Homeland Security for granting visa waivers to foreign travelers. Because the corporation generates more tax revenue than it costs the Treasury, the bill is projected to reduce annual deficits by $231 million over 10 years.
A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate, where it is likely to advance.
Fitzpatrick � yes
Meehan � yes
Schwartz � yes
New Department of Energy program
Voting 260 for and 143 against, the House failed to reach a two-thirds majority required to pass a bill (HR 1022) aimed at reducing America�s reliance on China as a supplier of elements crucial to the development of civilian and military energy technologies. The bill would establish a Department of Energy program to oversee the mining, use and recycling of �energy-critical� elements, including rare-earth elements. The program would perform a mission largely shunned by the U.S. private sector as unprofitable. China produces more than 90 percent of the global supply of rare-earth elements.
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Fitzpatrick � yes
Meehan � yes
Schwartz � yes
Repatriation of U.S. companies, jobs
The Senate voted, 93 for and seven against, to start debate on a bill (S 2569) that would grant corporations tax credits of up to 20 percent against the cost of returning any of their operations to the United States. To qualify, a company would have to expand its full-time U.S. workforce as part of the relocation. The bill also would deny businesses a tax deduction for the cost of moving operations offshore. The bill would add $214 million to the national debt over 10 years, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.
A yes vote was to start debate on the bill.
Casey � yes
Toomey � yes
The House will take up a GOP lawsuit against President Obama, bills to scale back the Endangered Species Act and possibly a measure addressing an ongoing immigration crisis on the U.S.-Mexico border. The Senate will continue to debate tax credits to firms that return their operations to the U.S. and could also vote on easing the border crisis.
Copyright 2014, Thomas Voting Reports Inc.


text: Find this wine Find this wine Cigarzin Zinfandel 2008 Recommended Very good wine. I typically don't drink Zinfandel's that are this good. Highly recommend. Drink now. Pin It Tweet 7 years ago by Jeff and Ash More posts Cigarzin Zinfandel Consentino 2008 Cigar Zin 6 years ago by Biscorro03 Cigarzin Zinfandel 2008 With Dinner at Chris and Ami's 6 years ago by Harley Cigarzin 2007 Zinfandel Toledo 2010 7 years ago by Jbolgren Cigarzin Zinfandel 2007 Good w cigars 8 years ago by Sscandridge Cigarzin Zinfandel 2007 2007 Cali Zin Bottled by-Cosentino Winery Woodbridge, Cali 9 years ago by Jleavensfnp


text:
Consumer rights
The law protects your consumer rights when you buy goods or services. Find out who to contact for consumer protection advice.
You can get help if you're treated unfairly or when things go wrong. This includes:
- credit and store cards
- faulty goods
- counterfeit goods
- poor service
- problems with contracts
- problems with builders
- rogue traders
Get help from Citizens Advice about your consumer rights. They can also refer your complaint to local Trading Standards officers who may then investigate on your behalf.
Citizens Advice
0345 404 0506
0345 404 0505 (Welsh language)
Find out about call charges
You can also get information about complaints, refunds and repairs from Which?
Complain to an ombudsman
An ombudsman is a person who investigates complaints about organisations for free. They may be able to help you resolve a complaint without going to court.
There are different ombudsmen for different industries.
You can use the Ombudsman Association to find the right ombudsman for your complaint.
Money advice
You can get free, independent help from the Money Advice Service about anything to do with money, eg managing debt.
Northern Ireland
Contact ConsumerLine for advice about consumer law, making a complaint and avoiding scams.
Buying from another EU country
Contact the UK European Consumer Centre for help with problems buying from another EU country.


text:
- Film Note : -movie_rating-
- Release Date of film : 2010-08-03
- Average rate : 5.9
- Vote Count : 1356
- Societies of production : Millennium Films
- Status : Released
- Tagline : Choose Your Weapon.
- Duration of movie : 103
- Languages ??spoken : English
- Youtube Id : -youtube_id-
- Original title : The Expendables
- Movie genre : Action, Thriller,
- Sylvester Stallone Character (Barney Ross)
- Jason Statham Character (Lee Christmas)
- Dolph Lundgren Character (Gunnar Jensen)
- Eric Roberts Character (Monroe)
- Randy Couture Character (Toll Road)
- Steve Austin Character (Dan Paine)
- David Zayas Character (General Garza)
- Giselle Iti Character (Sandra)
- Terry Crews Character (Hale Caesar)
- Mickey Rourke Character (Tool)
- Bruce Willis Character (Mr. Church)
- Arnold Schwarzenegger Character (Trench)
- Charisma Carpenter Character (Lacy)
- Amin Joseph Character (Pirate Leader)
- Senyo Amoaku Character (Tall Pirate Leader)
- Hank Amos Character (Paul)
- Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira Character (Garza's Bodyguard #1 and #2)
- Sassa Nacimento Character (Vilena Customs Agent)
- R.A. Rondell Character (Gunner's Goon)
- Tze Yep Character (Gagged Hostage)
- Gary Daniels Character (The Brit)
- Jet Li Character (Yin Yang)
The Expendables Synopsis:
! Watch free The Expendables movie online without downloading. The film also includes the best film. You can watch online movie streaming in HD 106 min in length. watch streaming movies online free trailer below and also watch full length The Expendables Megavideo streaming movie on HD without investigation. You can watch the film with or without downloading here
... The Expendables Full HD ...
Deborah Aquila Job as : Casting, Tricia Wood Job as : Casting, Lizz Wolf Job as : Costume Design, Sylvester Stallone Job as : Director, Dave Callaham Job as : Screenplay, Sylvester Stallone Job as : Screenplay, Brian Tyler Job as : Original Music Composer, Ken Blackwell Job as : Editor, Paul Harber Job as : Editor, Trevor Short Job as : Executive Producer, Kevin King Templeton Job as : Producer, John Thompson Job as : Producer, Avi Lerner Job as : Producer, Dave Callaham Job as : Story, Jeffrey L. Kimball Job as : Director of Photography, Guymon Casady Job as : Executive Producer, Jason Constantine Job as : Executive Producer, Boaz Davidson Job as : Executive Producer, Danny Dimbort Job as : Executive Producer, Jon Feltheimer Job as : Executive Producer, Basil Iwanyk Job as : Executive Producer, Eda Kowan Job as : Executive Producer, Les Weldon Job as : Executive Producer, Franco-Giacomo Carbone Job as : Production Design,
Yes, now you can Watch The Expendables Full Movie Streaming Online and get the link to The Expendables Full Movie Online Streaming In HD Ici


text:
|Attack Power
Critical Strike
Physical Haste
Spell Haste
Spell Power
Devilsaur (exotic), Wolf, Quilen(exotic), Water Strider (exotic)
Cat, Spirit Beast (exotic)
Hyena, Serpent
Water Strider (exotic)
Silithid (exotic)
Shale Spider (exotic)
|Magic Vulnerability
Mortal Wounds
Physical Vulnerability
Slow Casting
Weakened Armor
Weakened Blows
|Dragon Hawk, Wind Serpent
Devilsaur (exotic), Hunter
Boar, Ravager, Rhino (exotic), Worm (exotic)
Core Hound (exotic), Fox, Goat, Sporebat
Raptor, Tallstrider
Bear, Carrion Bird
|Ancient Hysteria
AOE damage
Battle Ress
Water Walking
Heal, 40 sec cd
50 % damage reduction 12 sec,
1 min cd
Core Hound (exotic)
Chimaera (exotic), Worm (exotic)
Quilen (exotic)
Water Strider (exotic)
Spirit Beast (exotic)
Beetle, Turtle
|Interrupt 2 sec, 30 sec cd
Interrupt 4 sec, 1 min cd
Interrupt 2 sec, 40 sec cd
Nether Ray
Slows, snares,
|Stun 3 sec, 45 sec cd
Stun 2 sec, 45 sec cd
Stun 2 sec, 1 min cd
Petrifying Gaze 3 sec, 1 min cd
Sleep 4 sec, 1 min cd
Blind 4 sec, 1 min cd
Paralyze (AOE) 2 sec, 1 min cd
Disarm 10 sec, 1 min cd
50 % slow 5 sec, 10 sec cd
50 % movement speed reduction 6 sec, 10 sec cd
50 % movement speed reduction 6 sec, 15 sec cd
Root 5 sec, 40 sec cd
Root 4 sec, 40 sec cd
Knockback 1,5 min cd
Shale Spider (exotic)
Bird of Prey, Scorpid
Chimaera (exotic)
Warp Stalker
Silithid (exotic), Spider
Crab, Dog
Rhino (exotic)
|Fun :)
Bear, Porcupine
Bird of Prey, Crane
Cat, Spirit Beast (exotic)
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Pet Utility Table (Mists of Pandaria)
17 comments:
Thank you very much! I love having this kind of thing to refer to. :)ReplyDeleteReplies
You're very welcome, and thanks for your comment. :)Delete
- Anonymous9/8/12 22:33
This is a very nice condensed table. Thanks, Lae! I just made a post about buffs and debuffs on my blog too. Great minds think alike? :)ReplyDeleteReplies
Great minds indeed. :)Delete
- Jaeger10/8/12 02:25
Tks Lae! I was compiling the same exact info the other day after your Mopping up the stable post to figure out what stable adjustments I needed to make.ReplyDelete
I also put the Interrupts, slows, and stuns in my table but the buffs and abilities match so consider them double checked, at least for now (who knows if they'll change things before launch). :)Replies
Cool, thanks. :D I added interrupts etc as well now, I found it to be a bit thin...Delete
- Anonymous10/8/12 22:07
What about mana regen?ReplyDeleteReplies
As in Replenishment? No pets are providing that now. It wasn't on the buff/debuff list either, so it might go away? I'll keep an eye out for it.Delete
- Anonymous11/8/12 19:40
not replenishment. i thought the 2 were the same until the other night. mana regen that pallies brings with might. didn't realize this was a list for MoP :)Delete
Oh wow, editing header now, didn't realise. xDDelete
- Anonymous27/8/12 15:10
Thanks for all the info!ReplyDelete
- Anonymous27/8/12 20:51
Excellent list, very helpful. One extra thing that may be worth noting is when certain abilities are melee versus ranged. This tends to explain why some families have similar abilities to others, but with a different cooldown, such as the gorilla and nether ray interrupts (at least on live, the nether ray has a 20 yard range on the interrupt and the gorilla can only melee).ReplyDelete
I've seen other sites and forums linking here about the Sporebat giving Spell Haste. But the Sporebat's spore cloud reduces enemy cast speed.ReplyDeleteReplies
The buff from the sporebat is called Mind Quickening.Delete
- Anonymous2/12/12 03:51
According to wowhead Chimaera's slow ability is -50% just like the other ones, it could be helpful add it =)ReplyDelete
Thank you so much for the table, I don't know how I got here but this is what I was looking for!Replies
Thanks, I'll update. :)Delete
I love this table! Thank you so much for compiling and posting it!ReplyDelete


text:
Trion's Defiance, the platform-agnostic shooter-MMO that Stephen Totilo saw at E3, promises to deliver open-world action with thousands of simulataneous players. It's also supposed to sync with an in-development SyFy TV series, so that developments in the game affect the show. That's a tall order, right?
We've seen nothing of the TV show yet but the trailer above debuted at Pax East offers a glimpse at what the gameplay will look like. In the future, Earth has a bad case of the crabs and—when they're not fighting each other—humanity will have to crush those crustaceans. Why is it always crabs?


text:
STAGE TUBE: Sneak Peek - WPPAC's THE COLOR PURPLE
The White Plains Performing Arts Center (WPPAC) presents THE COLOR PURPLE, February 8 through the 24th, 2013. Get a sneak peek at the cast in rehearsal for the NY Regional Premiere below!
THE COLOR PURPLE is an inspiring family saga that tells the unforgettable story of a woman who, through love, finds the strength to triumph over adversity and discover her unique voice in the world. This musical adaptation of Alice Walker's Pulitzer Prize-winning novel (and the popular 1985 Stephen Spielberg film) spotlights Celie, a downtrodden young woman whose personal awakening over the course of 40 years forms the arc of this epic story.
With a joyous score featuring jazz, ragtime, gospel, African music and blues, THE COLOR PURPLE is a story of hope, a testament to the healing power of love and a celebration of life. With a book by Marsha Norman and music and lyrics by Brenda Russell, Allee Willis and Stephen Bray.
The cast includes Keith Antone, Nick Butler, Jasmine Coles, Najee Gabay-Knight, Joseph Ghee, Terri-Ann Gordon, Deidre Grace, Jasmine Jenkins, Jeffrey Johnson, Kayla Mattocks, Jasmine Monet, Nattalyee Randall, Laurel Richardson, Ellisha Thomas, Carlita Victoria, Bobby Walker, LaNette Wallace, DaRon Williams, Juson Williams, TAngela Wilson and Kelechi Ezie as "Celie". This New York Regional Premiere is directed by Jeremy Quinn, with musical direction by Stephen Ferri and choreography by Taavon Gamble.
Director Jeremy Quinn says "It's a story about becoming who you are, about believing in yourself and about defying the obstacles that are placed in your path. Inspirational and exhilarating, vibrant and enthralling; the show changes lives and we are thrilled to be the NY Regional Premiere of this exceptional literary masterpiece."
Nominated for eleven 2006 Tony Award's including Best Musical, Best Book, and Best Original Score, THE COLOR PURPLE will play the White Plains Performing Arts Center for six performances only February 8-10 and 22-24. (Friday and Saturday evenings at 8:00pm and Sunday at 2:00pm.) Tickets are $40 adults and $30 high school & younger. This musical is recommended for ages 10 and older.
All performances are at the White Plains theatre, located on the third level of City Center off Mamaroneck Avenue in downtown White Plains. To purchase tickets, visit the theatre box office, purchase the tickets online at www.wppac.com or call 914-328-1600. For Group Sales, call 914-328-1600.


text:
What's happening in Historic Perryville?
Bookmark us to keep up with what's going on in Perryville, Kentucky.
Posts Tagged 'ancestry in Kentucky'
This is the Craintown School class – Crain School Rd Boyle County – Perryville, KY. If you know of anyone in this photo – please post your comments so we can identify everyone.
The one image from the newspaper says the Polk School – not sure if that is one and the same or not. I am sure someone can shed some light here.


text:
What makes payday loans service way more preferred to decide on if you've got a money scenario emerges at any moment? The solution to the present question lies within the terribly edges you may get from the service itself.
The primary profit is that this payday loans service is incredibly simple to urge. It's enough for you to supply your own checking account range and a few day checks to use for the loan. Certainly, none of you'll notice this demand of any problem in any respect to supply. Moreover, this service is additionally famed to own terribly high rate of loan approvals.
This high rate makes virtually all of your proposals will definitely heal and larger probability to own every of them granted AN approval. Succeeding reason for your payday loans application is that this service will method your proposals terribly quickly. Once you create your application, it's simply attainable that you simply can have your granted approval inside but twelve hours. And this implies you may very get your cash by the terribly day you really create your own application! Currently, Go and search different services that may beat this one if you can; there merely is none, right?


text:
- About us
- Blogs
- Funding/Donations
- Challenges
- Chapters
- Papers
- Projects
- Code of Conduct
- Google SoC
- Recent posts
- Security Workshops
Our research has also shed light on how phishers use captured information about bank accounts, for example, an account number with associated TAN (transaction number used in electronic banking). Since foreign currency transfers are monitored by most banks, phishers cannot simply transfer large amounts of money from one country to another without alerting the financial authorities. Phishers therefore have to use intermediaries to transfer money for them - in a two stage process the phisher transfers money from the victim's bank account to a bank account of an intermediary in the same country. The intermediary then withdraws the money from their bank account (less a percentage remuneration for providing the service) and sends it to the phisher, for example by surface mail. Of course, the intermediary could be caught, but as the phisher's money is already in transit they do not face too much risk and can easily change to channel their funds through a replacement intermediary. An example email demonstrating some of the financial structures behind phishing attacks is show below:
This is a poor translation from English to German, probably computer-generated, and it suggests that the attackers are not native English speakers. Since the money will be transferred to Russia, the attacker probably originated from this country. This behaviour is becoming increasingly common as phishing activities become more organised.


text:
Shipping to: Luxembourg
Thanks to its special filmogenic resin, Pro Gel Mascara accentuates your eyes naturally, shaping your lashes and making them flexible, long and extraordinarily lustrous.
The light castor and sweet almond oil formula embraces your lashes and coats them one by one, without becoming sticky or drying out.
The innovative K2prolash complex, a group of biotechnological active ingredients, acts on your lashes' structure, strengthening and regenerating them from the inside out.
K2prolash complex combats the process of capillary aging and stimulates growth of your lashes.
The special "hourglass-shaped" mascara brush aids application of the gel along the entire length of your lashes, giving them more definition.
Ophthalmologically tested.
After just 2 weeks of regular use of the active ingredients, lash growth increases by 58%.*
The morphology of the lashes is as if transformed: protected and repaired, your lashes are thicker, fuller bodied and take on a seductive curvature.
* In-vitro study with repeated application twice a day.
Apply the mascara along the entire surface of your lashes.
Repeat on the base to enhance penetration of the active ingredients, working also on the lower lashes.
Repeat the application a second time.
The cost varies depending on the delivery service and the destination country of the order. For more details see the "Delivery information and costs" page.
More information
Shipping times may vary depending on the service chosen. In the countries served by Swiss Post (Asendia) only, delivery takes an average of 6-7 working days (up to a maximum of 10) from the order being dispatched. In countries where the Skynet service is also available, the shipping time is 2-4 days after being dispatched by courier. More information
Purchases made on KIKO are secure and guaranteed. All information relating to payments, including personal information and credit card information, is protected through an advanced encrypted data transmission system. Under no circumstances will KIKO file your credit card number, nor will it use or keep the information you provided on its own systems.
You have 14 business days from the date you receive the items in which to exercise your right to return the goods. Please let Customer Service know about any problems relating to the goods received.
To use a promotional code, select "Have you got a promotional code?" on the shopping cart page and insert the characters indicated in the appropriate field. If your code is inserted correctly, the amount and/or content of the Shopping Cart will be recalculated based on the promotion applied.
Weiße Base Coat Mascara für mehr Volumen
Mascara mit modellierbarem Volumeneffekt von natürlich bis intensiv
Wimpern-Verlängerungskur für +169 %* Wachstum in 30 Tagen.
Professionelle Wimpernzange aus Stahl
Neutralisierende und fixierende Grundierung für die Augen: Verbessert den Halt des Lidschattens
Très bien
Très bien
Effet naturelle
perfecta para prebase
Great for every day
Más o menos
Muy natural


text:
Board of Directors Meetings - 2011
Sign up to receive email alerts
The Board of Directors meets on the second and fourth Fridays of each month at 10:00 a.m., in the Board Room, Administration Building, Golden Gate Bridge Toll Plaza, San Francisco, CA. In each calendar year the Board may hold one or more regular meetings in each of the other five counties of the District. All meetings are subject to change, please consult the current Calendar of Meetings for the latest meeting information.
The Board of Directors is comprised of 19 members. The Board of Directors sets policy for the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District and directs staff on the maintenance and operation of the Golden Gate Bridge and management and operation of the bus and ferry systems. Directors serve on standing committees which meet regularly each month.


text:
Please login first to complete purchase/ quotation request, view custom order reports, or create favorites list.
Don't have an account with us yet? Please set up an account to place order or obtain customer services.
Drosocin is a 19-mer cationic antimicrobial peptide from Drosophila melanogaster. In Drosophila native drosocin carries a disaccharide moiety attached to a threonine residue in mid-chain position. This synthetic drosocin peptide of identical amino acid sequence without the disaccharide has an activity several times lower than the native compound.


text:
Regular price €40.00
Tax included.
Customize your order, choose between :
- Digital print on a Natural color T-shirt 100% Organic Coton
- Digital print on a Totebag 100% Organic Coton
- Digital print on a A4 art paper
Explore Regards Coupables's most famous illustrations in the "shop by drawings" collection. Once your favorite artwork has been selected, choose to print it on a t-shirt, bag or just an art paper to turn your bedroom into a love nest!
Regards Coupables ©2018, Made in France
You might also like
Regular price €40.00
Regular price €20.00
Regular price €20.00