text:
Making HerStory, the annual exhibition series by Michelle D. Parrish celebrates the vast and diverse forms of creativity offered by women artists. This year's focus celebrates the journey women artist travel in their quest to explore their inner creativity. Making HerStory 8 is the final destination of this journey and we can't be more elated to share it with you, our many friends, and supporters. The theme, Patience for Spring represents this final culmination as Spring is the slow regeneration of the earth, life, and its bounty. It is only through the seemingly long dormant season of Winter can Spring occur and thus, we must be patient…and that patience pays off.
Featuring Elise Perry as DJ Bhungri
Prudence Bonds
Zandra Chestnut
Jennifer Judelsohn
Dehejia Maat
Sadrea Muhammad
Antwanyce Richardson
Heather Schmaedeke
Patricia Steck
Shawn Yancy


text:
Count Maria Bello among the out and proud. (And add her to the list of stars who have made a major statement by way of a New York Times op-ed.)
The 46-year-old star of "A History of Violence" and "Prisoners" revealed in an essay printed Sunday in the Times that she has a serious girlfriend, recalling in her first-person account how she told her 12-year-old son that she was in a relationship with a woman.
Bello remembered how Jackson, her son with producer Dan McDermott, asked her if she was romantically involved with anybody.
U.S. & World
"He was right; I was with someone romantically and I hadn't told him," the actress wrote, noting that her therapist had advised her to wait until Jackson asked about her personal life to divulge the details. "I had become involved with a woman who was my best friend, and, as it happens, a person who is like a godmother to my son."
PHOTOS: Celebs who've come out as gay
Bello writes that she had been in one relationship with a woman before she got together with her girlfriend, Clare, but that men made up the rest of her romantic history.
About a year before her talk with her kid, she was looking through photos of old boyfriends. "As I continued to look through photos, I came across a black-and-white one of my best friend and me taken on New Year's Eve," Bello remembered. "We looked so happy, I couldn't help but smile. I remembered how we had met two years before...We had an immediate connection but didn't think of it as romantic or sexual. She was one of the most beautiful, charming, brilliant and funny people I had ever met, but it didn't occur to me, until that soul-searching moment in my garden, that we could perhaps choose to love each other romantically."
Bello recalled how she immediately was concerned about how getting together with Clare would affect her son--and next, she admitted, she wondered how it would affect her career. (So far, so good for the dramatic actress, who was most recently on the big screen as Hugh Jackman's wife in the kidnapping thriller "Prisoners.")
READ: Angelina Jolie's double mastectomy reveal and 5 more headline-making op-eds
When she came out to her "large, Italian-Polish, 'traditional' Philadelphia family," her father told her, "'She's a good girl, good for you.'"
"My mother and family echoed his sentiments. Maybe they weren't so traditional after all," Bello wrote.
She did not specify her condition, but the statuesque blond also revealed in her op-ed that she fell seriously ill this past summer ("At one point it looked as if I might not survive," she wrote), and that Clare joined Jackson, her parents, her brother and McDermott ("the best father and the most wonderful man I know") at her hospital bedside every day.
It was during her recovery when Jackson asked about her love life, she wrote, and the tween told her in response to her big reveal: "'Mom, love is love whatever you are.'"
Writing how she and Clare and Jackson and Dan spend most weekends together, she wrote that she would like to consider herself a "whatever," as her son suggested.
Bello concluded, "Whomever I love, however I love them, whether they sleep in my bed or not, or whether I do homework with them or share a child with them, 'love is love.'"
PHOTOS: Same-sex celebrity couples
Giving thanks for my modern family. Happy thanksgiving for whatever kind of family you have. @nytimes pic.twitter.com/Mty9FPNHh4 — maria bello (@maria_bello) November 30, 2013

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The daughter of Billy Joel and Christie Brinkley, Alexa Ray, downed a handful of sleeping pills in an apparent suicide attempt but is going to recover, police sources and media reports said.
Pop star Billy Joel said today his daughter "is going to be fine."
A law enforcement official says Alexa Ray was rushed to St. Vincent's after after taking eight pills at her West Village apartment.
U.S. & World
The official says a friend frantically called 911 shortly after noon Saturday from the aspiring singer's apartment saying the 23-year-old had taken several pills and was "an emotionally disturbed person" who was "having trouble breathing."
Two law enforcement sources told the Daily News the overdose appeared to be intentional, though a person close to Alexa Ray said she only ingested a homeopathic antihistamine.
Brinkley swept into the hospital about 4:20 p.m. and Alexa Ray was released a few hours later, a source said. It was not clear where she was taken, the News said.
A source said she has been an emotional wreck since breaking up with her boyfriend, former bandmate Jimmy Riot, a few years ago.
"She has battled depression," the source told the News. "She had a rough breakup with a boyfriend . . . It was her first love."
Alexa Ray is the only daughter of Joel and Brinkley, whose nine-year marriage ended in divorce in 1994.


text:
APIs are necessarily a communal endeavor — the community fostered between the users, the providers, and those who depend on the API for the functions of their own services drives the development environment of the API space.
Accordingly, developer outreach is absolutely essential for cultivating an API's network of users and agents. Read more


text:
Telecommunications service provider AAPT is now offering medium to large enterprise customers cloud services following the expansion of its 10-year partnership with NetApp.
According to AAPT CEO David Yuile, customers have access to high speed cloud-based services, underpinned by the carrier's network, which offer lower costs and greater flexibility than on-premise IT services.
AAPT to acquire Nextep from NEC
FTTN makes sense for NBN, AAPT says
AAPT launches 100G Sydney to Melbourne network
He added that it expects many of the customers for its cloud services will be organisations wanting to supplement their existing NetApp storage with an off-site offering.
"[AAPT] customers will also be able to access the security and disaster recovery benefits of NetApp's products and the security features of AAPT's network, at any scale," Yuile said.
"We're now seeing customers want dedicated storage but don't have the skills to manage it so we're looking to offer managed services where customer data will be housed in one of our six data centres."
AAPT's data centres are based in Sydney and Melbourne. It also makes use of third party data centres operated by Global Switch and Polaris.
"We've been re-factoring our data centres so we can deploy some of the [NetApp] technology in there and leverage it as part of our network offering," Yuile said. "The idea is that when you have storage in a data centre, you need high speed connectivity to it and that is a big part of our business as a telco."
Turning to the attack by hackitvists associated with Anonymous in July 2012, which affected some historical AAPT sales data stored on servers in Melbourne, Yuile said the company had undertaken a review of its data retention policy.
"The review included a full assessment of where our data is kept and we've moved all of that data inside the AAPT network," he said.
"We've also written to the small number of customers who were affected by it and worked with our security people to review our procedures and processes," he said.
Yuile pointed out that at no point in time during the incident was AAPT's network breached.
"We take these incidents very seriously and our customers were very understanding when we explained to them what happened," he said.
Follow Hamish Barwick on Twitter: @HamishBarwick
Follow Computerworld Australia on Twitter: @ComputerworldAU, or take part in the Computerworld conversation on LinkedIn: Computerworld Australia


text:
SPRINGFIELD, La. – The Lipscomb Bisons golf team rallied to finish sixth Tuesday in the Carter Plantation Intercollegiate.
The Bisons, who had finished the second round Monday in 10th place, tied with Southeastern Louisiana, the tournament host and champion, for the best third round score. Both teams shot 287 over the final 18 holes.
"It was may be the best round we have shot since I have been coaching," said Will Brewer, Lipscomb director of golf and men's coach. "I am really proud of what they did today and how they did it.
"We played a really strong golf course against some good teams. We are learning. We are getting better. We will grow from this."
The Bisons finished two strokes out of fifth place and sixth strokes out of fourth in the 12-team tournament.
"They are believing more and more in what we are doing," Brewer said. "They believe in themselves.
"We passed a bunch of teams in the third round because we played so well. We haven't responded in a final round until today. It is a great feeling to know that they are beginning to believe in what we are trying to do and trust what we have been saying."
Ryan Terry tied for 11th place with a score of 220 (72, 79, 69). His 69 tied for the low score in the third round.
Blanton Farmer placed in a tie for 24th with a 225 (70, 80, 75).
Dustin Wilder tied for 30th with a 228 (77, 80, 71). Paul Kleine-Kracht tied for 33rd with a 229 (77, 78, 72). Taylor Combs tied for 40th with a 233 (76, 80, 77).
"Ryan, Dustin and Paul all rose to the occasion and played really well in the third round," Brewer said. "Blanton held in there with a 75. Taylor started poorly, but held on and played the last 15 holes very well."


text:
Terminal Shield for Arduino
We have 2 units in our Sydney Warehouse available for immediate dispatch.
The Terminal Shield breaks out all the Arduino headers to handy screw terminals, making it really easy to connect external wires without using a soldering iron. Ideal for quick experiments or for robust connections!
The center area of the shield is also a huge prototyping area, allowing you to add your own parts to suit your project. A blue "power" LED shows when your Arduino is powered up, and there are also red, green, and blue general-purpose LEDs with current-limiting resistors. The Terminal Shield comes with all the supporting components already fitted as surface-mount parts so you can start using it right away, and we even provide stackable headers to allow you to mount another shield on top.
- Arduino 1.0 / "R3" layout breaks out all 30 pins on current-generation Arduino boards to screw terminals.
- Plus 6 additional screw terminals providing additional ground and 5 screw connections (B1-B5) to the prototyping area.
- Stackable headers to easily add another shield on top.
- Gold-plated surface: solders easily and very resistant to finger oil, etc.
- Large prototyping area with through-plated holes.
- Clearly marked GND and 5V rails beside prototyping area.
- Blue surface-mount "power on" LED.
- 2 × 100nF power supply smoothing capacitors pre-fitted as surface-mount parts.
- Reset button wired through to the Arduino so you can reset it even with the shield mounted over the top.
- 3 general-purpose surface-mount LEDs (red, green, blue) with current limiting resistors pre-fitted: drive HIGH to illuminate.
- Overlay printed on both the top and the bottom of the board so you don't have to turn it over to see what you're soldering onto.


text:
Store Front
Claim listing is the best way to manage and protect your business
There are no reviews at the moment
Use this form to report any questionable or inappropriate reviews.
Thank you for responding to this review. A thoughtful response shows your commitment to service. Please fill out this form completely. Only your first name and response will appear on the site.
The business can be claimed by one of the owners or a legal representative
In order to perform this action you have to login
Click here to login
Choose your cause and enter an email address and a message
©2018. MJSA Education Foundation. All Rights Reserved.


text:
You may remember me tweeting about Simeon Farrar's new label Black Score during fashion week, you remember the one with the cute vests baring slogans of new fashion phrases, such as 'Dior is Dope' and "Gucci got game', well I am pleased to say that the label is gathering a celebrity following.
Yesterday Kelly Brook posted a snap of herself on Instagram wearing one of my favourite designs the 'Totes jel of my Chanel' t-shirt and she is working the hell out of it – check out her pout, her red manicure and that bejewelled mobile cover – she is too cute!!!
You can pick up the vest version of Kelly's tee on Black Score's online shop for £35, or maybe you prefer 'Tom Ford is my homeboy' or 'You had me at Prada' – or if like me you are obsessed with Choupette why not go for this 'Lagerfeld's a pussy – XOXO Choupette' t-shirt for £40.
I was trying to end this blog with a witty new fashion phrase of my own that Simeon might print on the next batch of vests – they were all terrible – which got me thinking about doing an ironic blogger line in the style of Man Repeller and her 'All blogs post the same stuff' tee from New York Fashion Week. How about – 'Blogger equals blagger', 'Dear blogger', or my all time favourite blogger put down 'Your stats are how low'.
What would you like to see in Black Score's next collection?


text:
Stanford Week: Trio Of Highly Rated Recruits Arrive At StanfordPosted by Connor Pelton on July 20th, 2012
The 2012-13 version of the Cardinal will not be missing any redshirts or transfers, but coach Johnny Dawkins does welcome in three highly rated recruits. Below, we'll introduce you to each of those three newcomers, roughly in the order of impact that they'll have on their new team.
- Rosco Allen, Freshman, Wing, 6'9" 210 lbs, Bishop Gorman High School, Las Vegas, NV – Allen is a classic Johnny Dawkins wing, one who is big enough to bang on the boards but has a tremendous outside stroke as well. The one knock on Allen is his speed, especially in trying to guard the perimeter. That means he needs to bulk up this summer so he is able to guard opponents at the four. Allen should receive good minutes early on next season, but those will quickly dwindle if he isn't able to keep up on the defensive end. The Cardinal have more than their share of big and lanky defenders in the post, so it's either bulk up and play down there or improve lateral quickness in order to see more minutes at a less-filled three position on the roster. With that said, Allen didn't receive offers from North Carolina, UNLV, and UCLA for nothing. He's basically a bigger Chasson Randle, and he will definitely leave a footprint with the Cardinal by the time he leaves.
- Grant Verhoeven, Freshman, Center, 6'8" 215 lbs, Central Valley Christian High School, Visalia, CA – With the exception of Brook and Robin Lopez, Stanford has traditionally had smaller centers who have great offensive touch. Verhoeven fits perfectly within this description as he can not only knock down the elbow jumper, but has nice footwork and can turn over either shoulder and score the ball inside. Unfortunately, the one knock on the center is a big one; he has trouble scoring over bigger and more athletic post players, something he'll run into often against Pac-12 opponents. Still, he has tremendous upside, and after a year in Dawkins' system, he should be set to gain major minutes down the road. With so many players at a little-used position, Verhoeven will have a tough time earning solid minutes immediately, but down the road he is definitely someone to keep an eye on. Read the rest of this entry »


text:
This post has been revised to reflect the current status.
If you haven't heard the news, here are the direct links to various online announcements : DVinfo.net, RedUser.net and the CineForm page for this new R3D file conversion utility. So I won't need to repeat myself.
On the blog, which really needs some more posts, I will focus on why we created this new tool.
As many of you are aware, CineForm has been using Wavelets to compress RAW bayer images longer than anyone. We starting in RAW encoding over four years ago now, and have to continued to refine the compression and post production work-flow through our integration within Silicon Imaging SI-2K camera and new partners like Iridas and Weisscam. Yet there are about to be more Red cameras than any other 4:4:4 HD+ cameras on the market, so there is a lot of interest at CineForm (and from many customers) to support our work-flow with the Red camera. We waited for RedCine release just like everyone else, hoping to find good support for CineForm's work-flow. Fortunately RedCine was pretty cool, as it supported 16-bit per channel color through the QuickTime API, we feared it might be only 8-bit. The problem is that it didn't work reliably for many of are customers, likely because their PC are too old and/or the graphic cards in not sufficient. But some issues where in RedCine itself, as we weren't the only compression type impacted. We do expect these glitches to be fixed at some point, but we couldn't wait.
In addition to our impatience, there was one feature missing within RedCine that we had requested nearly a year ago (we hoped to get it while their product was under development.) That was a RAW mode out of RedCine, through the Quicktime API would have been fine. The RAW mode would decompress the camera's wavelet, but not do a demosaic to RGB, which is slow and increases the data-rate 3 times without adding anything to the image. Through our own tool we can do this direct conversion from camera wavelet RAW to CineForm RAW. This is a significant saver on disk space and conversion time.
We still hope that RedCine upgrades and/or Red's upcoming SDK will allow for this type of flexibility, but as a small company it is really hard to wait for the big guys and Red is big compared to us.
Update: CineForm has agreed with Red to withhold distribution of the R3D2DPX utility we previously released until such time as Red makes its SDK available to others in the industry. Our understanding is that these "hooks" (as referred to by Red) should be available around the NAB 2008 timeframe. CineForm intends to offer compelling workflows for Red users, so all feedback is welcome.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
CineForm's Red One Footage Convertor
This post has been revised to reflect the current status.


text:
South Central China and Tibet: Hotspot of Diversity
Map and Gazetteer
Historic Map
Joseph Rock traced his travels for the Arboretum's 1924-1927 expedition in a colorful, hand-drawn map entitled "Ch'ing-Hai upper Yellow River expedition." The pen-and-ink drawing was made on ten sheets that when joined form a single, irregularly-shaped map, approximately six by eight feet in size. The individual sheets are numbered, using roman numerals; on sheet VII is a second title, "Choni Territory, Upper and Lower T'ieh-Pu country and route to Sung-Pan, J. F. Rock, 1925-1927." Topographical and other features are identified using a combination of English, Chinese characters, Wade-Giles transliterations and Tibetan script. Rock's attractive cursive style and use of hachures, spot heights, and landform drawings to depict relief add character to the map.
Rock's maps are available individually also.
Modern Gazetteer
A handwritten key entitled "Index to Rock's Map of Kansu and Tibet" accompanied Rock's map. This index, not in Rock's hand, identifies place names and cites the map sections in which they appear. B. Armstrong Clayton of the Division of Orientalia at the Library of Congress, may have prepared the index; he prepared the index and gazetteer for Rock's redrafted maps published in The Ancient Na-khi Kingdom of Southwest China.
A gazetteer that references the map and the index is now available as a searchable database. It contains data fields that include Rock's map grid numbers and his place names, with Wade-Giles, Pinyin, Modern Chinese, and Tibetan equivalents when available, as well as latitude and longitude, geographic site type, and province (historic and modern). The data for this gazetter was gathered by Gray Tuttle.


text:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Consider the Source!
One of the things I highlight when I am entering information into my genealogy program is where the person lived when he died and are there vital records online that I can search. Also, obituaries, where available are such a great resource since they often list other family members, ancestors, occupations, church affiliations and birth, death and burial places.
So I was really pleased when a search of Kentucky death records online at Ancestry.com yielded a death certificate in Kentucky for Joseph Chambers. Since the Chambers/Tousey lines was one I was working on, I pulled this record, just checking the year to see if it was feasible. It was. The puzzling thing was the place of death: Cincinnati, Ohio! On a Kentucky death record. Okay, this is not that unusual, as some states require a death certificate for burial, and you will often find a derivative in the Kentucky records. A check of the Ohio Death Certificates (1908-1953) on the Family Search Record Search Site would hopefully yield the "official" death certificate.
Well, I'd like to say that it proved everything I thought. But alas, it opened a can of worms. While the date of death and burial and the cause of death were all the same, the only other items that were identical were the place of death - Grand Hotel, Cincinnati, Ohio and the cause of death. There were nine years difference in the age, and Ohio had his father's name as Joseph and Kentucky had his father's name as Charles!
When faced with this type of problem, I look to the informant. The Ohio certificate gave Donnelly Bros. as the informant. Donnelly Bros. was the name of the undertaker in Covington, Kentucky. The Kentucky Death certificate had no informant.
This is where census work comes in. The 1900 census for Cincinnati, Ohio at the Grand Hotel, clearly shows Joseph Chambers, birth date Mar 1834, born in Kentucky, parents born in Kentucky. The 1880 census shows him enumerated with his wife, Elvira and son Vactor, along with his mother-in-law Elvira Gaines and he is 46 years old - birth year 1834 in Kentucky. I found him only becauses his wife was indexed with him. He was indexed as Jas. instead of Jos.The 1870 and 1860 census are still consistent with that 1834 birth date and children. The 1860 census shows him with his wife and his household is enumerated after that of one Charles Chambers age 58 and Joseph is still born circa 1834. Finally a check of the 1850 census has him enumerated with his father and brother and birth year is still circa 1834.
I don't need any more proof to conclude that the death certificates are for the same person, but am glad that I found two conflicting death certificates. It is a prime example that even "official records" can be wrong. I will admit that if I had found the Ohio record first, I would have dismissed it. But having seen the Kentucky one, I now see the errors on the Ohio record. And I found this because I have obsessive-compulsive family research disorder!
* Clicking on the images will display a full scale photo.
2 comments:
When he got married, Jim's Great-grandfather, Isaac Craven, told the judge he was born in 1875, making him one year older than his bride, Edith Langley, who was born in 1876. According to census data, he was 11 in Feb. of 1892, which means he was born in 1880. Of course, the reason he lied was that he was married in 1897, and would only have been 17 years old, and his bride was 21!ReplyDelete
Another fun fact: His brother, Ernest, married Edith's sister, Emma!
I fear you have passed this on to me. Crap.
Ok. Two comments here - first if Jim's great grandfather was born in 1880, he was only 8 years older than our grandfather. Which census are you looking at for 1892? New York State? Second - grandpa's marriage record to grandma Ruth has his mother's maiden name as Gleasant. The information was only as good as who gave it. Grandpa gave what he heard, not what he knew. His mother's family has been hard to research because of that name.ReplyDelete


text:
Curmudgeonly comments documenting an unsuccessful attempt to remain in the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Communion at the same time---with some leavening for good measure.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Now I Understand . . .
A Primer: Understanding Derivatives
Heidi is the proprietor of a bar.
She realizes that a good deal of her customers are unemployed alcoholics and, as such, cannot afford to have all the drinks they would like to have at her bar.
To solve this problem, she comes up with a new marketing plan that allows her customers to drink now, but pay later. She requires them to pay on each visit only for their first drink, but not for any drinks thereafter.
Heidi keeps track of the drinks consumed on a ledger (thereby granting the customers loans).
Word gets around about Heidi's "drink now, pay later" marketing strategy and, as a result, increasing numbers of customers flood into Heidi's bar. Soon she has the largest sales volume for any bar in town.
By providing her customers the freedom to have as many as they can consume after paying for just one drink, Heidi gets no resistance when, at regular intervals, she substantially increases her prices for wine and beer, the most consumed beverages.
Consequently, Heidi's gross sales volume increases massively, as does her book of customer loans.
A young and dynamic vice-president at the local bank recognizes that these customer debts constitute valuable future assets, and increases Heidi's borrowing limit.
He sees no reason for any undue concern because he has had Heidi sign over the debts of the unemployed alcoholics as collateral for the bank's loans to her.
But at the bank's corporate headquarters, expert traders figure a way to make huge commissions on top of the value of Heidi's ever-increasing loans, and transform these "collateralized debt obligations" into securitized packages called DRINKBONDS.
With Heidi's help, they are divided into "tranches", or "layers", according to the time when Heidi knows the customer in question first comes into her bar.
Those who come in the evening are figured to furnish the best collateral, because they are presumed to be able to earn money during the day. (In fact, they are mostly sleeping off their hangovers until three o'clock, and then standing in line to get their welfare checks, but never mind.) The debts secured by their obligations receive an AAA grade.
Those who start their binges early in the morning are graded the lowest, but because of the higher risk, they pay a higher return. (They drink more, and so borrow more, and so Heidi charges them a higher book rate of interest.) And the others fall in between.
(The third-party firms who are paid to provide the ratings have no idea of the quality or value of the collateral securing each tranche, because the packages are too complex for them to say just which loans secure which bundle of securities. But the brokers tell them that if they will just give the top tranche an AAA rating, and grade the rest accordingly, they will be given lots and lots more securities to rate, and make lots and lots more fees for doing so.)
These "securities", as rated by independent and trusted rating agencies, then are bundled and traded on international securities markets.
Naive investors don't really understand that the securities being sold to them as "AAA Secured Bonds" really are secured largely by the obligations of unemployed alcoholics who sleep during most of the day. Nevertheless, because of their novelty, they are pitched as the newest type of investment vehicle with a great potential for appreciation, and demand is created.
As a result, the bond prices continuously climb, justifying the sales pitch for them - and the securities soon become the hottest-selling items for some of the nation's leading brokerage houses.
The smart folk at the brokerage houses realize that they can sell even more DRINKBONDS to more cautious investors, and make even more commissions, by arranging for insurance on them in case they drop in value. A giant international insurance company agrees to underwrite the value of each new series of bonds, in exchange for annual premiums.
The premiums are included in the price of the repackaged securities. With this added layer of protection, now international banks and investment houses feel secure in acquiring DRINKBONDS backed by the giant insurance company. Other insurers soon get in on the act, and rake in the premiums. (Heidi's prices for her drinks are continually rising, so what can go wrong?)
One evening, one of Heidi's customers, driving home intoxicated from her bar, crosses over the center line and collides with another vehicle. Luckily, the driver of that vehicle is not injured. But he works as a risk manager at the local bank that is managing Heidi's loans.
When he finds out that the other driver had just come from drinking at Heidi's bar, and carried no insurance because "he couldn't afford it, being out of work", he begins to look more closely into Heidi's debtors.
Even though the DRINKBOND prices still are climbing, he decides that the time has come to call in the collateral on Heidi's loans, to provide the bank with more cushion against default. He so informs Heidi, tells her to collect her customers' debts, and put the cash into CD's at the bank.
Heidi then demands payment from her patrons. But most of them, being unemployed alcoholics, cannot pay back their drinking debts. The bank then calls all of Heidi's loans.
Since Heidi cannot repay her loan obligations, she is forced into bankruptcy. The bar closes and Heidi's 32 employees lose their jobs.
The income stream from DRINKBONDS dries up. Overnight, DRINKBOND prices drop by 90%.
The now worthless asset value of its loans to Heidi destroys the bank's liquidity and prevents it from issuing new loans, thus freezing most credit and economic activity in the community.
The suppliers of Heidi's bar had granted her generous payment extensions and had invested their firms' pension funds in DRINKBOND securities.
They find they are now faced with having to write off her bad debt and with losing over 90% of the presumed value of the bonds in their pension funds.
Her wine supplier cannot make up the loss and claims bankruptcy, closing the doors on a family business that had endured for three generations. Her beer supplier is taken over by a competitor, who immediately closes the local plant and lays off 150 workers.
The giant insurance company is suddenly on the hook for more losses than it has reserves, because it had reinsured its risks with other insurers who had sold their own policies on the DRINKBONDS to make more money, and who now face losses themselves.
Moreover, rather than use the premium payments they received to increase reserves, the insurers instead paid them out as big bonuses for their oh-so-clever executives, who had boosted their companies' earnings by arranging for insurance which they told each other would never be called upon, since DRINKBONDS simply could not go down in value. (H/T: NW Bob, below.)
Fortunately, though, the bank, the insurance companies, the brokerage houses and their respective executives are saved and bailed out by a multibillion-dollar, no-strings-attached cash infusion from the government -- to whose politicians they had prudently made large campaign contributions, lest the former forget where lay their true loyalty.
The politicians rush the bailout through Congress as an emergency measure, to prevent what they tell the voters and the compliant media will otherwise be "a system-wide collapse." They also claim that the banks, brokerage houses and insurance companies (their loyal contributors, remember) are all "too big to fail."
The funds required for this bailout are obtained by new taxes levied on employed, middle-class, nondrinkers who have never been in Heidi's bar.
Even those new taxes, however, are not enough to fund the complete bailout. So the government borrows the rest of the money required from China, and reckons that the taxpayers' grandchildren can take care of figuring out later how to pay all the money back.
With the bailout moneys, the banks, brokerage houses and insurance companies pay large bonuses to their clever executives who got them out of their mess, and begin looking for the next scheme by which they can make money.
(H/T: A serendipitous email)
7 comments:
AHHH! Thanks. Now I get it took....ReplyDelete
Thinking of our Congress, this puts a whole new perspective on the shout, "The drinks are on the House!"ReplyDelete
Excellent explanation! You forgot to mention that the giant insurance company used their credit default premiums to pay big executive bonuses instead of setting them aside as reserves against possible claims. They viewed the chance of default as negligible. When the default claims were filed, they were shocked, I say, shocked that there was gambling going on.ReplyDelete
NW Bob
Of course, given that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (not to mention FDIC and and FSLIC) are both creatures of government, we really should not be surprised. What is most commonly referred to as "the free market" only ever truly exists when government (by which I refer to all of its entities and their employees, including the elected ones) restricts itself to the rigorous enforcement of property rights and the Rule of Law. That describes a set of conditions which have not applied in the United States for a century, at the very least (government interference with the market is easily traced back to the Theodore Roosevelt administration.)ReplyDelete
Pax et bonum,
Keith Töpfer
Keith, your paean to the very forces that helped create this mess is one of the more conspicuous cases of denialism I've seen in, well, OK, the last few hours. A little historical perspective on TR is that we got regulation in the first place to try to suppress the "free" market from cooking up this kind of con job a century ago. It is apparently the tendency for the market to evolve so as to prevent the game from being played fairly, and securitization of mortgages certainly played out that way. That Fannie and Freddie were governmental figured into the fraud aspect by giving the false impression of governmental security and supervision; they can be faulted for not bothering to do the latter, but the more fundamental fault (that risk was being obscured) had little to do with their attachment to the federal government. I would tend to assume that the legislation that created them also took away old regulation that prevented securitization.ReplyDelete
The bottom line, at any rate, is that the government created this market at the behest of the market. If the government has simply allowed the market to come into being, things may have progressed somewhat differently, but I believe the outcome would have been about the same.
Well put, C. Wingate. I would also add, having worked in the "welfare" dept. (aka CalWorks) of Santa Clara Co., the description of the alcoholics as being on welfare is inaccurate- "welfare" was substantially changed in 1996 by the Clinton Administration. No more staying at home indefinitely and having more babies. Nowadays you are either in job training or job hunting all day - in four years, soon to become two years, end of welfare whether you are trained and employed or not. And you have to have kids under 19 to qualify.ReplyDelete
Also it would have been more accurate analogy to say that bartender lied to people at the bar about the true cost of their drinks and led them to believe that it was an affordable health drink, not alcohol.
Love reading Michael Lewis!
The analogy is based on the subprime program as it was encouraged by enactment of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, signed by President Bush. It was James Johnson of Fannie Mae who shortly thereafter began pushing loans for low-income people who could show any kind of income at all -- including welfare income, as it then existed.ReplyDelete


text:
Financial Literacy Summit
Register to Attend or Watch the 2017 Financial Literacy Summit in Chicago.
Register to Attend or Watch the 2017 Financial Literacy Summit in Chicago.
Financial education lesson plans, brochures, guides and more are available for download.
Visa's Director of Financial Education, Hugh Norton, delivers expert personal finance tips to people of all ages in this series.
Visa and Marvel Entertainment have teamed up to release two exciting educational comic books to teach young people about personal finance.
Knowing the screen of choice for many today is their mobile phone, Practical Money Skills has launched an array of educational apps to promote
Visa's annual nationwide surveys and corresponding infographics highlight American spending patterns during holidays and special events.
Whether you want a crash course on tax credits or a briefing on federal financial law, these lessons make it easy to understand the economy.
Receive the latest financial literacy articles and news from Practical Money Skills directly to your inbox.
Watch the latest financial education events and news featuring educators, students, government officials and professional athletes.
Explore your financial information in greater detail by using these powerful tools for assessing your financial choices.


text:
Items where Author is "Gupta, Rakesh"
|Up a level
Guidi, Francesco and Gupta, Rakesh (2012) Market efficiency in the ASEAN region: Evidence from multivariate and cointegration tests. Applied Financial Economics, 23 (4). pp. 265-274. ISSN 0960-3107 (Print), 1466-4305 (Online) (doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09603107.2012.718064)
Guidi, Francesco, Gupta, Rakesh and Maheshwari, Suneel (2011) Weak-form market efficiency and calendar anomalies for Eastern Europe equity markets. Journal of Emerging Market Finance, 10 (3). pp. 337-389. ISSN 0972-6527 (Print), 0973-0710 (Online) (doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/097265271101000304)
Gupta, Rakesh and Guidi, Francesco (2011) Cointegration relationship and time varying co-movements among Indian and Asian developed stock markets. International Review of Financial Analysis, 21. pp. 10-22. ISSN 1057-5219 (doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2011.09.001)
Guidi, Francesco and Gupta, Rakesh (2012) Forecasting volatility of the ASEAN-5 stock markets: a nonlinear approach with non-normal errors. Discussion Paper. Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. (doi:2012-14)
Guidi, Francesco and Gupta, Rakesh (2011) Are ASEAN stock markets efficients? Evidence from univariate and multivariate variance ratio tests. Discussion Paper. Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.


text:
Wheat futures are currently 1 1/2 lower to as much as 3/4 cents higher, with MPLS spring wheat the firmest class this morning. They were steady to 4 cents higher in most contracts on Wednesday. KC saw fractional losses in the back months. Taiwan bought 111,650 MT of US wheat in their recent tender on Wednesday. Egypt's GASC purchased 415,000 MT of Russian wheat on Wednesday, with 295,000 MT for Feb 20-28 delivery and 120,000 MT for March 1-10 delivery. Algeria purchased 550,000 MT of optional origin wheat in a tender that closed on Tuesday. French 18/19 exports outside of the EU are now projected at 8.7 MMT by FranceAgriMer, down 0.1 MMT from last month.
--provided by Brugler Marketing & Management


text:
Boards & Commissions
Urban Design Committee Agenda
Urban Design Committee
Notice is hereby given that the Urban Design Committee will hold a meeting on Wednesday, September 11, 2013 at 3:00 p.m. in the County-City Building, 555 S. 10th Street, Lincoln, Nebraska, in Room 214 on the 2nd Floor. For more information, please contact the Lincoln City/Lancaster County Planning Department at 402-441-7491.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
- Adoption of meeting records from the UDC meeting of August 14, 2013.
- Appeal of Neighborhood Design Standards relative to single family house proposal, 3313 S. 40th Street.
- Update and review of Cornhusker Highway and I-180 Entryway streetscape project (Parks & Rec.).
- Sidewalk cafe for Miller Time Pub & Grill at Cornhusker Hotel, 13th & L Streets.
- Fence replacement/upgrade, 11th & N St. bus stop (StarTran).
- Staff report/miscellaneous.


text:
It that time again – when everyone wants to get their two-pennyworth in and tell the Chancellor of the Exchequer what to do with his budget! Now far be it from me to suggest what he does with his red box but here are a few thoughts from the Moneyagonyaunt experts!
David Jones our employment lawyer says: What we really need are measures to get the under 25s, who account for 40% of the total unemployed, into work. If the government doesn't act we face losing several years worth of well educated, talented graduates and school leavers - future tax payers - from the UK workforce.
IFA Simon Hodges says: I doubt there will be anything of major significance in the budget considering the current climate! But I would certainly like to see an increase in the Cash ISA allowance from £3,600 to help counteract the poor interest rates available at the moment and hopefully prompt savers confidence. This would also help pensioners holding cash on deposit (which a number of them are relying on to supplement their income!). The government seem to have let up slightly on the payment of corporation tax and income tax by allowing businesses more time to pay but I would like to see a major change within VAT. There is no concession for the actual running of the business (i.e. Council tax, lease payments, staff costs etc) and I firmly believe that this will claim the life of a number of small businesses over the next 12 months. I would also like to see new measures being introduced to regulate the banks more stringently. They have been getting away with murder for far too long and are now benefiting on the retail side through their own mistakes! By this I mean that when customers go to a branch to complain about their poor interest rates, they are being referred on to the 'Financial Adviser' to have a chat. By the time they have left, they have a shiny new policy (generally the same as everyone else's regardless of age, objective and attitude to risk!) and the bank gets a commission for all their hard work!
Benefits consultant Marion Morse says: The Chancellor needs to give people something to look forward to, so an incentive to save for small savers, perhaps a government bond that pays interest and a bonus for long term saving. That might encourage banks and Building Societies follow suitI'd like to see the removal of interest on present savings, up to a reasonable level thatwould benefit small savers rather than become another manoeuvre for biginvestors, and the removal of tax for all who only pay tax at 20 %. Keep the lower rate of VAT and exemption of stamp duty on houses or bring in a nil band of stamp duty for first time buyers. Prpoerty expert Luke Doonan wants even bigger changes to stamp duty: I would like to see Stamp Duty cancelled for 2 years! This will make a massive difference to the market, in particular first time buyers. Then reclassify it to –a) Exemption up to 250k b) 1% from 250k to 500k c) 2% from 500k to 1 Milliond) 3% over 1 Million. On top of that I'd like to see Council Tax scrapped for over 60's and an end to inheritance tax!
Andrew Wilkins our pension experts says: Frankly I don't think Alastair Darling has much room for manoeuvre but needs to do what he can. I don't envy him at all.But there's a rumour that he might take away high rate tax relief on pension contributions. Over my dead body! This would be disastrous because it would stunt many people's savings for retirement and store-up trouble for the years still to come.For small savers, we need an increase in the tax thresholds, especially for older people, so as to take many more out of tax completely, and a kick start for banks and building societies to offer better savings rates, especially for pensioners. For taxpayers and small business owners: a reduction in red-tape and a lowering of personal taxation by raising the thresholds and allowances. For people in debt we need a scheme whereby the mortgage lenders "roll-over" negative equity and so enable people to move as normal and/or downsize to reduce debts.What must be avoided though is piling more taxation on to any one sector, simply because those people affected would no longer be able to afford the big expensive items (such as pricey cars) on which our economy so depends. And Senior Financial Partner John Eaton has written a letter to Santa: Dear Spring Santa Darling, I've been a very good boy this year so I would really like: An extension of exemption from Income Tax on the first £5,000 of investment income, preferably for everybody, but at the very least for Pensioners - to help offset the virtually total disappearance of any investment income on Pensioners' savings thanks to the negligible interest rates the Bank of England has been compelled to introduce (Do you realise that most pensioners have suffered an 80% drop in their income, as a result of your favouring borrowers at the expense of savers?)An end to the totally unrealistic assumption that Pensioners with savings over £6,000 are earning over 10% on their capital, and the introduction of a fair rate of assumed interest - like 0%.The abolition of means-testing for Pension Credits, and restoration of the principle that every £1 saved towards a Pension ought to produce at least £1 worth of benefit The issuing of a lot more Index-linked Gilts, so that Pension Fund Managers - and individual savers - could be guaranteed to have an investment which keeps pace with inflation, and doesn't expose them to unnecessary risk. The abolition of the rule requiring people to buy an annuity at age 75. At the very least, give people the right to postpone the purchase of an annuity indefinitely, instead of forcing them to buy something which is currently appalling value for money. And an increase in the annual limit of tax-free income from Lodgers in your own home, which has been stuck at £4,250 p.a for ages.
Love, John.
Let's see what our experts think of the budget when it's delivered tomorrow. Me? I want all of the above and measures to keep people in jobs. If we're not earning we can't spend or save for retirement so the next generation of pensioners will face an even bleaker future.


text:
|The North Market, Front Street, Toronto. Photograph 2011, BDM.
12 February 2012
Silent Sundays
It's time for a little colour on a cold day.
Labels: Silent Sundays
2 comments:
- CallieK said...
OOoh I love that dress! A trip to the market may be in order.
- Monday, 13 February, 2012
- BDM said...
... and a cup of coffee with me!
- Tuesday, 14 February, 2012
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text:
As always, Last Friday ArtWalk is bursting with the talented work of new and veteran artists. And per usual, rain (hail) or shine, there is more than enough reason to brave the elements, but in case you are in need of specifics, here are a few.
Ninkasi Brewery will be hosting the work of Steven Lopez, a celebrated muralist and painter, perhaps best known for his After Midnight Soul series. His aesthetic often walks a tightrope between the futuristic and the prehistoric, portraying vibrant images that look as if they are straight out of a Harlan Ellison short story or some lucid fever dream. Lopez, a UO graduate and overachiever who has worked with and painted the likes of musicians Jill Scott, Erykah Badu and Akon, displays both urban and otherworldly content at the brewery — add the standard Ninkasi experience of strong, tasty beer, and you can't go wrong.
If you are more into wine than beer, cruise over to Territorial Vineyards and check out the acrylic paintings of Heather Marie Michaud. Or if you are a food-before-booze person, the Pizza Research Institite could be a good first stop, where you can experience the oil paintings of Jean Denis and her "Local Faces and Places" exhibit.
The Museum of Unfine Art, now in its tenth year, will be showing the paintings of Anj Marth, Dennis Greeley and Lisa Hill. And for you turntable junkies, The Old Whiteaker Firehouse will be hosting a vinyl record-themed art show entitled Beats and Brushstrokes.
Lastly, the work of EW photographer Trask Bedortha will be hanging at Sam Bond's. Bedortha is an avid outdoorsman and expert photographer obsessed with images that represent both beauty and savagery in the natural world. His photos will likely provide a rugged and rarely captured glimpse into the backwoods of Oregon.
Remember, ArtWalk is always FREE.


text:
First Time User? Sign Up Now
First Time User? Enroll now.
Home > Health Library > Lung Cancer Screening (PDQ®): Screening - Health Professional Information [NCI]
This information is produced and provided by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The information in this topic may have changed since it was written. For the most current information, contact the National Cancer Institute via the Internet web site at http://cancer.gov or call 1-800-4-CANCER.
Separate PDQ summaries on Lung Cancer Prevention, Small Cell Lung Cancer Treatment, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treatment, and Levels of Evidence for Cancer Screening and Prevention Studies are also available.
Evidence of Benefit Associated With Screening
Screening by low-dose helical computed tomography: benefit
One large randomized trial reported that screening persons aged 55 to 74 years who have cigarette smoking histories of 30 or more pack-years and who, if they are former smokers, have quit within the last 15 years reduces lung cancer mortality by 20% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.8–26.7; P = .004) and all-cause mortality by 6.7% (95% CI, 1.2–13.6; P = .02).[1] An updated analysis showed that the estimated reduction in lung cancer mortality was 16% (95% CI, 5–25).[2]
Magnitude of Effect: 16% relative reduction in lung cancer–specific mortality.
Screening by low-dose helical computed tomography: harms
Based on solid evidence, approximately 96% of all positive, low-dose helical computed tomography screening exams do not result in a lung cancer diagnosis.[1] False-positive exams may result in unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures.
Magnitude of Effect: Based on the findings from a large randomized trial , the average false-positive rate per screening round was 23.3%. A total of 0.06% of all false-positive screening resultsled to a major complication after an invasive procedure performed as diagnostic follow-up to the positive screening result. Over three screening rounds, 1.8% of participants who did not have lung cancer had an invasive procedure following a positive screening result.
Based on fair evidence, some lung cancers detected by low-dose helical computed tomography screening appear to represent overdiagnosed cancer. The magnitude of overdiagnosis was 18% in one randomized trial and 67% in another randomized trial. These cancers result in unnecessary diagnostic procedures and also lead to unnecessary treatment. Harms of diagnostic procedures and treatment occur most frequently among long-term and/or heavy smokers because of smoking-associated comorbidities that increase risk propagation.
Magnitude of Effect: 18% to 67%, depending on characteristics of screened population and screening regimen.
Evidence of No Benefit Associated With Screening
Screening by chest x-ray and/or sputum cytology: benefits
Based on solid evidence, screening with chest x-ray and/or sputum cytology does not reduce mortality from lung cancer in the general population or in ever-smokers.
Magnitude of Effect: N/A.
Screening by chest x-ray and/or sputum cytology: harms
False-positive exams
Based on solid evidence, at least 95% of all positive chest x-ray screening exams do not result in a lung cancer diagnosis. False-positive exams result in unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures.
Based on solid evidence, a modest but non-negligible percentage of lung cancers detected by screening chest x-ray and/or sputum cytology appear to represent overdiagnosed cancer; the magnitude of overdiagnosis appears to be between 5% and 25%. These cancers result in unnecessary diagnostic procedures and also lead to unnecessary treatment. Harms of diagnostic procedures and treatment occur most frequently among long-term and/or heavy smokers because of smoking-associated comorbidities that increase risk propagation.
Magnitude of Effect: Between 5% and 25%, depending on characteristics of screened population and screening regimen.
Incidence and Mortality
Lung cancer is the third most common form of noncutaneous cancer in the United States and is the leading cause of cancer death in men and in women. In 2020 alone, it is estimated that 116,300 men and 112,520 women will be diagnosed with lung cancer, and 72,500 men and 63,220 women will die of this disease. The lung cancer death rate rose rapidly over several decades in both sexes, with a persistent decline for men commencing in 1991. From 2008 to 2017, death rates decreased by about 4% per year in men and by 3% per year in women.[1]
Risk Factors
The most important risk factor for lung cancer (as for many other cancers) is tobacco use.[2,3] Cigarette smoking has been definitively established by epidemiologic and preclinical animal experimental data as the primary cause of lung cancer. This causative link has been widely recognized since the 1960s, when national reports in Great Britain and the United States brought the cancer risk of smoking prominently to the public's attention.[3] The percentages of lung cancers estimated to be caused by tobacco smoking in males and females are 90% and 78%, respectively.
For a complete description of factors associated with an increased or decreased risk of lung cancer, refer to the PDQ summary on Lung Cancer Prevention for more information.
Screening by low-dose helical computed tomography
There have been intensive efforts to improve lung cancer screening with newer technologies, including low-dose helical computed tomography (LDCT).[4,5] LDCT was shown to be more sensitive than chest radiography. In the Early Lung Cancer Action Project (ELCAP),[5] LDCT detected almost six times as many stage I lung cancers as chest radiography, and most of these tumors were no larger than 1 cm in diameter.
A systematic analysis [6] summarized 13 observational studies of LDCT undertaken between 1993 and 2004 and that included 60 to 5,201 participants. Some Japanese studies included nonsmokers, but the others were limited to current and former smokers. Variability in detection of nodules—between 3% and 51%—may be attributed to several factors:
Overall, lung cancer was diagnosed in 1.1% to 4.7% of screened participants; most of these diagnoses were early-stage disease.[6]
With completion of the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), there is now evidence that screening with LDCT can reduce lung cancer mortality risk in ever-smokers who have smoked 30 pack-years or more and in former smokers who have quit within the past 15 years. The NLST included 33 centers across the United States. Eligible participants were between the ages of 55 years and 74 years at randomization, had a history of at least 30 pack-years of cigarette smoking, and, if former smokers, had quit within the past 15 years. A total of 53,454 persons were enrolled; 26,722 persons were randomly assigned to receive screening with LDCT, and 26,732 persons were randomly assigned to receive screening with chest x-ray. Any noncalcified nodule found on LDCT that measured at least 4 mm in any diameter and any noncalcified nodule or mass identified on x-ray images were classified as positive. Radiologists, however, had the option of calling a final screen negative if a noncalcified nodule had been stable on the three screening exams. The LDCT group had a substantially higher rate of positive screening tests than did the radiography group (round 1, 27.3% vs. 9.2%; round 2, 27.9% vs. 6.2%; and round 3, 16.8% vs. 5.0%). Overall, 39.1% of participants in the LDCT group and 16.0% in the radiography group had at least one positive screening result. Of those who screened positive, the false-positive rate was 96.4% in the LDCT group and 94.5% in the chest radiography group. This was consistent across all three rounds.[7] A review of two surrogate markers of benefit from the LDCT for lung cancer screening determined that there is no discernible relationship between the proportion of stage I lung cancers or lung cancer-specific survival for stage I disease and lung cancer mortality benefit at 4 years.[8]
In the LDCT group, 649 cancers were diagnosed after a positive screening test, 44 after a negative screening test, and 367 among participants who either missed the screening or received the diagnosis after the completion of the screening phase. In the radiography group, 279 cancers were diagnosed after a positive screening test, 137 after a negative screening test, and 525 among participants who either missed the screening or received the diagnosis after the completion of the screening phase. Three hundred fifty-six deaths from lung cancer occurred in the LDCT group, and 443 deaths from lung cancer occurred in the chest x-ray group, with a relative reduction in the rate of death from lung cancer of 20% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.8%–26.7%) with LDCT screening.[7] An updated analysis showed that the estimated reduction in lung cancer mortality was 16% (95% CI, 5%–25%).[9] Overall, mortality was reduced by 6.7% (95% CI, 1.2%–13.6%). The number needed to screen with LDCT to prevent one death from lung cancer was 320.[7]
Since the publication of the results of the NLST, more has been learned about who may benefit the most from screening for lung cancer using LDCT.[10,11,12] One group of investigators developed an individual risk model to assess who might benefit from screening. The model used additional factors not used as inclusion criteria in the NLST, such as a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, personal or family history of lung cancer and a more detailed smoking history. More persons would have been eligible to be screened using the trial's criteria as opposed to the inclusion criteria of the NLST without missing patients with cancer.[11] A second group performed a reanalysis of the NLST data and calculated each patient's risk of developing lung cancer and estimated each patient's lung cancer mortality.[12] The investigators then divided the NLST participants into five groups on the basis of risk. The number needed to screen to avoid a lung cancer death in the low-risk group was 5,276; 161 screens were needed in the high-risk group to avoid a lung cancer death. Further, the number of false-positive screens decreased from 1,648 in the lowest quintile of risk to 65 in the highest risk group. The three highest quintiles of risk accounted for 88% of the mortality reduction from screening, whereas the lowest quintile accounted for only a 1% reduction in mortality. These studies illustrate possible improvements for determining the population of patients who may benefit the most from screening, potentially reducing the number of false positives, and reducing the potential harm related to the adverse events associated with their evaluation. One other benefit of calculating individual risk is the ability to incorporate the findings into a shared decision-making process so that patients can decide whether to undergo screening.[12] However, a recent comparison of ten models used for predicting lung cancer or lung cancer mortality risk found that four of the models were well calibrated with reasonable discrimination, but none of these models were considered superior to the others for the use of identifying lung cancer risk among individuals who had ever smoked. Additional work is needed to address modeling weaknesses.[13]
Other randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of LDCT are under way or are already completed in a number of countries.[14] The largest is the Dutch-Belgian Randomized Lung Cancer Screening Trial (or NELSON trial).[15] This study differs from the NLST in that the control group does not have chest radiographic screening. Other smaller trials in Europe also compare a nonscreening arm with LDCT.[16,17,18,19,20] These smaller trials are largely not powered to assess mortality as an endpoint, but there is an effort under way to combine the findings from these studies with the NELSON data, once the data are fully mature. These studies may also be able to assess consistency with the NLST findings. In addition to the data gleaned from ongoing trials, the NLST data are being analyzed to examine other important issues in lung cancer screening, including cost-effectiveness, quality of life, and whether screening would benefit individuals younger than those enrolled in the NLST and those with fewer than 30 pack-years of smoking exposure. Data from the U.S. Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial suggest that, in the absence of screening, the risk of lung cancer death for current smokers who have a smoking history of 20 to 29 pack-years is no different than that of former smokers who have quit within 15 years and have a smoking history of more than 30 pack-years (hazard ratio, 1.07; CI, 0.75–1.5). Although the risk for the former-smokers group is no different than that of the current-smokers group (for whom LDCT screening is recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force), the efficacy of screening is unknown in the former-smokers group.[21]
A Guide has been developed to help patients and physicians assess the benefits and harms of LDCT screening for lung cancer.[22]
Screening and smoking cessation
The target population for lung cancer screening has a high prevalence of current smokers compared with the general population. A lung cancer screening program could potentially impact the likelihood of smoking cessation, theoretically promoting cessation among those screened who have lung abnormalities detected on their screen. Conversely, screening could also be a deterrent to cessation among those with no evidence of lung abnormalities on their screen. The Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial is a randomized trial that compared LDCT with no intervention among participants aged 50 to 70 years who had at least a 20 pack-year smoking history.[23] The proportion of participants who had quit smoking was monitored every year for 5 years of follow-up and remained virtually identical in the two groups from baseline (CT group and control group each had 23% ex-smokers) until the 5-year follow-up (43% ex-smokers in both groups). The comparison of these two randomized groups indicates that the CT screening program had zero net effect on the likelihood of smoking cessation.
Another report used data from the NLST to address the question of whether the screening result influenced the likelihood of smoking cessation.[24] The NLST compared CT with chest x-ray, and data from both arms were pooled to examine the impact of abnormal findings on the likelihood of smoking cessation. Compared with those who did not have abnormal findings, current smokers who had a screening examination that was suspicious for lung cancer (but was not lung cancer) were significantly more likely to have stopped smoking 1 year later. The associations with quitting smoking among those who had a major lung abnormality, which was not suspicious for lung cancer, or a minor abnormality were weaker and not uniformly statistically significant.
A third study from the U.K. Lung Cancer Screening pilot trial of a LDCT scan found that screening was associated with a statistically significant increase in short- and long-term cessation, and this effect was greatest among those whose initial screening test was positive, warranting additional clinical investigation.[25]
The results of these studies suggest that the net impact of a CT program on smoking cessation varied,[23] but there appears to be a higher likelihood of smoking cessation among current smokers who have findings suspicious for lung cancer.[24] This is an important research area that needs to be clarified.
Screening by chest x-ray and/or sputum cytology
The question of lung cancer screening dates back to the 1950s, when rising lung cancer incidence and mortality rates indicated a need for intervention. In response to the emerging lung cancer problem, five studies of chest imaging, two of which were controlled, were undertaken during the 1950s and 1960s.[26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33] Two studies also included sputum cytology.[26,27,28,29,30] The results of these studies suggested no overall benefit of screening, although design limitations prevented the studies from providing definitive evidence.
In the early 1970s, the National Cancer Institute funded the Cooperative Early Lung Cancer Detection Program,[34] which was designed to assess the ability of screening with radiologic chest imaging and sputum cytology to reduce lung cancer mortality in male smokers. The program comprised three separate RCTs, each enrolling about 10,000 male participants aged 45 years and older who smoked at least one pack of cigarettes a day in the previous year. One study was conducted at the Mayo Clinic,[35,36,37] one at Johns Hopkins University,[38,39,40] and one at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center.[40,41,42,43] The Hopkins and Sloan-Kettering studies employed the same design: persons randomly assigned to the intervention arm received sputum cytology every 4 months and annual chest imaging, while persons randomly assigned to the control arm received annual chest imaging. Neither study observed a reduction in lung cancer mortality with screening.[40] The two studies were interpreted as showing no benefit of frequent sputum cytology when added to an annual regimen of chest x-ray.
The design of the Mayo Clinic study (known as the Mayo Lung Project, or MLP), was different. All potential participants were screened with chest imaging and sputum cytology, and those known or suspected to have lung cancer, as well as those in poor health, were excluded. Remaining persons were randomly assigned to either an intervention arm that received chest imaging and sputum cytology every 4 months for 6 years, or to a control arm that received a one-time recommendation at trial entry to receive the same tests on an annual basis. No reduction in lung cancer mortality was observed. The MLP was interpreted in the 1970s as showing no benefit of an intense screening regimen with chest x-ray and sputum cytology.
One RCT of lung cancer screening with chest imaging was conducted in Europe in the 1970s. The Czechoslovakian study began with a prevalence screen (chest imaging and sputum cytology) of 6,364 males aged 40 to 64 years who were current smokers with a lifetime consumption of at least 150,000 cigarettes.[44,45] All participants except the 18 diagnosed with lung cancer as a result of the prevalence screen were randomly assigned to one of two arms: an intervention arm, which received semi-annual screening for 3 years, or a control arm, which received screening during the third year only. The investigators reported 19 lung cancer deaths in the intervention arm and 13 in the control arm, and concluded that frequent screening was not necessary.
By 1990, the medical community was still unsure about the relationship between screening with chest imaging (using traditional chest x-ray) and lung cancer mortality. Although previous studies showed no benefit, findings were not definitive because of a lack of statistical power. A multiphasic trial with ample statistical power, the PLCO Cancer Screening Trial,[46] began in 1992. PLCO enrolled 154,901 participants aged 55 to 74 years, including women (50%) and never smokers (45%). Half were randomly assigned to screening, and the other half were advised to receive their usual medical care. PLCO had 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality.
The lung component of PLCO addressed the question of whether annual single-view (posterior-anterior) chest x-ray was capable of reducing lung cancer mortality as compared with usual medical care. When the study began, all participants randomly assigned to screening were invited to receive a baseline and three annual chest x-ray screens, although the protocol ultimately was changed to screen never-smokers only three times. At 13 years of follow-up, 1,213 lung cancer deaths were observed in the intervention group, compared with 1,230 lung cancer deaths in the usual-care group (mortality relative risk, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.87–1.22). Sub-analyses suggested no differential effect by sex or smoking status.[46]
Given the abundance and consistency of evidence, as well as the lack of benefit observed in the PLCO trial, it is appropriate to conclude that lung cancer screening with chest x-ray and/or sputum cytology, regardless of sex or smoking status, does not reduce lung cancer mortality.
Screening by Low-Dose Helical Computed Tomography
False-positive exams are particularly problematic in the context of lung cancer screening. Persons most likely to be screened for lung cancer, i.e., heavy smokers, have comorbidities (such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and heart disease) that make them poor candidates for certain diagnostic procedures.
False-positive test results must be considered when lung cancer screening with low-dose helical computed tomography (LDCT) is being evaluated. A false-positive test may lead to anxiety and invasive diagnostic procedures, such as percutaneous needle biopsy or thoracotomy. The percentage of false-positive findings varies substantially among studies and is primarily attributable to differences in how a positive scan is defined (the size criteria), the thickness of the slice used between cuts (smaller slice thicknesses lead to detection of more nodules) and whether the subject resides in a geographic location where granulomatous disease is highly prevalent. A systematic review of the benefits and harms of computed tomography (CT) screening for lung cancer reported that the follow-up of a screen-detected nodule most often included further imaging, which varied among 21 screening trials between 1% and nearly 45%. Positron emission tomography scanning was performed in 2.5% to 5% of patients.[1] The frequency of nonsurgical biopsies or procedures in screening trials ranges from 0.7% to 4.4%. Of those biopsied, there was marked variation in the finding of a benign result (6%–79%). The rate of surgical resection for screen detected nodules in screening trials is between 0.9% and 5.6%. Of patients who underwent surgery, between 6% and 45% had a benign nodule discovered during surgery,[2] a potential harm of lung cancer screening. In the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST), most major complications related to invasive procedures and surgeries occurred in patients diagnosed with lung cancer, with a major complication rate of 14%. Additionally, a complication rate of 4.1 deaths and 4.5 complications per 10,000 diagnostic events can be expected in patients determined to have a benign nodule. The rates of complications from the NLST may not be generalizable to a community setting; participants in the NLST were younger, better educated, and less likely to be current smokers (therefore healthier) than the population of smokers and former smokers in the general U.S. population who would be eligible for screening. Of note, 82% of the participants were enrolled at large academic medical centers, and 76% of the enrollees were seen at National Cancer Institute–designated cancer centers. This may account for the extremely low complication rate and surgical mortality (1%) found in the NLST that led the multisociety position paper to strongly recommend that screening be carried out at centers with the same patient-management resources as those in the NLST.[1]
The rates of potential screening harms can vary as lung cancer screening is implemented in a real-world setting. In one study, the authors examined the effects of introducing a LDCT lung cancer screening program into selected Veterans Health Administration (VA) hospitals across the United States.[3] In another study, 93,000 patients were assessed for eligibility to receive one round of LDCT screening: 4,246 patients met the criteria (as per the 2013 U.S. Preventive Service Task Force recommendations);[4] of those eligible, 58% of patients agreed to be screened, and 50% of patients (n = 2,106) actually underwent screening. Sixty percent of patients had a false-positive test, 56% of patients had a suspicious nodule that required ongoing monitoring, and 3.5% of patients underwent diagnostic evaluation for a positive screen. The high rate of false-positive tests (compared with 27.3% of patients in the NLST for a first screen) may be attributed to the VA program's definition of a positive screen, which used Fleischer Society guidelines for management of CT-detected nodules,[5] whereas the NLST had an absolute cut-off value of 4 mm to define a positive nodule.[2] Most nodules detected in the VA pilot program were 4 mm or less (55%). However, there is currently no uniformly accepted protocol for nodule management in LDCT lung cancer screening, so wide rates of variability in false-positive results could be likely with broad implementation.Additionally, 41% of participants in the VA program had incidental findings of unclear significance that were reported by the reading radiologist to likely require follow-up or further evaluation.[3] The new Lung-RADs criteria for assessing LDCT findings, which are in wide use in the United States, are even stricter than the NLST criteria for defining a positive screen, and have the potential to lower the false-positive rate from that seen in NLST.[6]
A less familiar harm is overdiagnosis, which means the diagnosis of a condition that would not have become clinically significant had it not been detected by screening.[7] Had the patient not been diagnosed with cancer, the patient would have died of other competing comorbidities. In the case of screening with LDCT, overdiagnosis could lead to unnecessary diagnosis of lung cancer requiring some combination of therapy (e.g., lobectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy). Autopsy studies suggest that a significant number of individuals die with lung cancer rather than from it. In one study, about one-sixth of all lung cancers found at autopsy had not been clinically recognized before death.[8] This may be an underestimate; depending on the extent of the autopsy, many small lung cancers that are detectable by CT may go unrecorded in an autopsy record.[9] Studies in Japan provide additional evidence that screening with LDCT could lead to a substantial amount of overdiagnosis.[10] Studies are needed to establish the level of overdiagnosis that might be associated with CT screening for lung cancer. However, in one study, the volume-doubling times of 61 lung cancers were estimated using an exponential model and successive CT images. Lesions were classified into three of the following types:
The mean-doubling times were 813 days, 457 days, and 149 days for types G, GS, and S, respectively. In this study, annual CT screening identified a large number of slowly growing adenocarcinomas that were not visible on chest x-ray, suggesting overdiagnosis.[11]
In a screening trial with more than 5,000 participants, the proportion of cancers that would be considered overdiagnoses was evaluated. Volume-doubling time was used as a surrogate for overdiagnosis. Patients with a calculated volume-doubling time of more than 400 days before surgical resection were considered to have an overdiagnosed cancer.[12] The investigators discovered that 25% of those ultimately diagnosed with lung cancer met the criteria of an indolent screen-detected nodule, suggesting that one in four cancers in that trial were overdiagnosed.[12] Similar rates of overdiagnosis have been documented in breast cancer. This rate is consistent with previous chest radiograph screening studies and for other solid tumors. Data from the NLST showed a persistent gap of about 120 excess lung cancer cases in the LDCT group compared with the chest radiograph group. This suggests that 18% of screen-detected lung cancers were overdiagnosed, although long-term follow-up is needed.[13] Additional evidence of overdiagnosis with LDCT screening was observed in the randomized Danish Lung Cancer Screening Trial. At 10 years of follow-up (5 years after the last screening exam), almost twice as many lung cancers had been diagnosed in the screening group than in the control group (5.1 vs. 2.7 cases per 1,000 person-years or 100 vs. 53 lung cancer cases in 4,104 total participants, respectively); most of the lung cancers were early stage adenocarcinomas, with no statistically significant difference in the number of stage III and IV cancers between the two groups.[14] Overdiagnosis was estimated at 67%.[15]
About 20 years of follow-up of the Mayo Lung Project (MLP) cohort indicates that 17% of lung cancers diagnosed as the result of an intense regimen of chest x-ray and sputum cytology are overdiagnosed;[16] 585 lung cancers had been diagnosed in the intervention arm as compared with 500 in the usual-care arm. After 13 years of follow-up of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) cohort, 1,696 lung cancers had been diagnosed in the intervention arm as compared with 1,620 lung cancers in the usual-care arm.[17] This suggests that about 25% of the 307 cancers diagnosed as the result of annual chest x-ray were overdiagnosed.
Complications of diagnostic evaluation
In the PLCO,[17] 0.4% of participants with at least one positive screen who had a diagnostic evaluation had a complication associated with a diagnostic procedure. The most common of the 69 complications were pneumothorax (29%), atelectasis (15%), and infection (10%).
A retrospective cohort study of community practices indirectly estimated the complication rates and downstream medical costs of invasive diagnostic procedures performed for lung abnormalities that were identified through lung cancer screening. The complications rates of 23% (aged 55–64 years) and 23.8% (aged 65–77 years) were more than twice that reported in the NLST (8.5%–9.8%). The mean costs ranged from $6,320 to $56,845 , suggesting that the NLST, which was conducted in the context of a controlled clinical trial, may have underestimated the potential for adverse events and high downstream costs in the community setting. Despite study limitations, including the lack of information about patient eligibility for lung cancer screening and the extent to which complications were affected by poorer patient health and lower quality of care, these results reinforce the need for discussion of risks, benefits, and shared decision making.[18]
Increase in lung cancer mortality
Findings from the MLP hinted at the possibility of an increase in lung cancer mortality for persons screened with an intense regimen of chest x-ray and sputum cytology.[19] At the end of 20 years of follow-up, the lung cancer mortality rate was 4.4 cases per 1,000 deaths in the intervention arm and 3.9 cases per 1,000 deaths in the usual-care arm. The two rates were not statistically different from one another (P = .09). No increase in risk was seen in the intervention arms of the John Hopkins University and Memorial Sloan-Kettering studies (relative risk [RR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74–1.05), and the PLCO (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.87–1.22).
Radiation exposure
Another potential risk from screening with LDCT is radiation exposure. The average exposure is very lowforan LDCTat 1.5 mSv. It is estimated that over a 3-year period of screening, NLST participants have been exposed to an average of 8 mSv of radiation (which accounts for radiation from screens and additional imaging for screen-detected nodules). Modeling from previous work on radiation exposure and the development of cancer suggests that there could be one death per 2,500 screens in those participating in a screening program such as the NLST, although the benefit of screening (1 death avoided per 320 screens) far outweighs the risk. Younger persons and those without a significant risk of lung cancer may be more likely to suffer a radiation-induced lung cancer from screening than to be spared a lung cancer death.[1]
Screening by Chest X-ray and/or Sputum Cytology
Unless reported above, data on harms associated with sputum cytology or a combined regimen of sputum cytology and chest x-ray have not been published.
In the PLCO Cancer Screening Trial, the percentage of false positive screens (among all positive lung cancer screens) was 98%.[20] When smoking status was considered, the percentage of false-positive screens (among all positive screens) was highest in never-smokers (>99%) and lowest in current smokers (95%). After adjustment for smoking, the percentage of false-positive screens did not differ by sex.
Informed medical decision making is increasingly recommended for individuals who are considering cancer screening. Many different types and formats of decision aids have been studied. (Refer to the PDQ summary on Cancer Screening Overview for more information.)
The PDQ cancer information summaries are reviewed regularly and updated as new information becomes available. This section describes the latest changes made to this summary as of the date above.
Description of the Evidence
Updated statistics with estimated new cases and deaths for 2020. Also revised text to state that from 2008 to 2017, death rates decreased by about 4% per year in men and by 3% per year in women (cited American Cancer Society as reference 1).
This summary is written and maintained by the PDQ Screening and Prevention Editorial Board, which is editorially independent of NCI. The summary reflects an independent review of the literature and does not represent a policy statement of NCI or NIH. More information about summary policies and the role of the PDQ Editorial Boards in maintaining the PDQ summaries can be found on the About This PDQ Summary and PDQ® - NCI's Comprehensive Cancer Database pages.
Purpose of This Summary
This PDQ cancer information summary for health professionals provides comprehensive, peer-reviewed, evidence-based information about lung cancer screening. It is intended as a resource to inform and assist clinicians who care for cancer patients. It does not provide formal guidelines or recommendations for making health care decisions.
Reviewers and Updates
This summary is reviewed regularly and updated as necessary by the PDQ Screening and Prevention Editorial Board, which is editorially independent of the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The summary reflects an independent review of the literature and does not represent a policy statement of NCI or the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Board members review recently published articles each month to determine whether an article should:
Changes to the summaries are made through a consensus process in which Board members evaluate the strength of the evidence in the published articles and determine how the article should be included in the summary.
Any comments or questions about the summary content should be submitted to Cancer.gov through the NCI website's Email Us. Do not contact the individual Board Members with questions or comments about the summaries. Board members will not respond to individual inquiries.
Levels of Evidence
Some of the reference citations in this summary are accompanied by a level-of-evidence designation. These designations are intended to help readers assess the strength of the evidence supporting the use of specific interventions or approaches. The PDQ Screening and Prevention Editorial Board uses a formal evidence ranking system in developing its level-of-evidence designations.
Permission to Use This Summary
PDQ is a registered trademark. Although the content of PDQ documents can be used freely as text, it cannot be identified as an NCI PDQ cancer information summary unless it is presented in its entirety and is regularly updated. However, an author would be permitted to write a sentence such as "NCI's PDQ cancer information summary about breast cancer prevention states the risks succinctly: [include excerpt from the summary]."
The preferred citation for this PDQ summary is:
PDQ® Screening and Prevention Editorial Board. PDQ Lung Cancer Screening. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Updated <MM/DD/YYYY>. Available at: https://www.cancer.gov/types/lung/hp/lung-screening-pdq. Accessed <MM/DD/YYYY>. [PMID: 26389268]
Images in this summary are used with permission of the author(s), artist, and/or publisher for use within the PDQ summaries only. Permission to use images outside the context of PDQ information must be obtained from the owner(s) and cannot be granted by the National Cancer Institute. Information about using the illustrations in this summary, along with many other cancer-related images, is available in Visuals Online, a collection of over 2,000 scientific images.
The information in these summaries should not be used as a basis for insurance reimbursement determinations. More information on insurance coverage is available on Cancer.gov on the Managing Cancer Care page.
Contact Us
More information about contacting us or receiving help with the Cancer.gov website can be found on our Contact Us for Help page. Questions can also be submitted to Cancer.gov through the website's Email Us.
Last Revised: 2020-04-01
This information does not replace the advice of a doctor. Healthwise, Incorporated disclaims any warranty or liability for your use of this information. Your use of this information means that you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Learn how we develop our content.
Healthwise, Healthwise for every health decision, and the Healthwise logo are trademarks of Healthwise, Incorporated.
2615 Lake Drive
Suite 201
Raleigh, NC 27607
901 Ridgefield Drive
Raleigh, NC 27609
4420 Lake Boone Trail
Raleigh, NC 27607
934 Vandora Springs Road
Garner, NC 27529
1505 SW Cary Parkway
Suite 200
Cary, NC 27511
View More


text:
Tag: Lee Einer
Michael Moore Speaks at Plays & Players
by Jeffrey Stanley on Jun.29, 2012, under Politics, The Sixth Boro
Michael Moore Speaks at Plays & Players
1714 Delancey Place
Philadelphia, PA
Michael Moore's documentary SiCKO was released in 2007 to widespread acclaim. A straight-from-the-heart portrait of the crazy and sometimes cruel U.S. healthcare system, SiCKO is told from the vantage of everyday people faced with extraordinary and bizarre challenges in their quest for basic health coverage.<
Join Filmmaker Michael Moore, Health insurance industry whistleblower and Deadly Spin author Wendell Potter, and SiCKO's Donna and Larry Smith, Reggie Cervantes, Billy Maher, Julie Pierce, Lee Einer, Dawnelle Keys, Adrian Campbell Montgomery, and more for a Q&A about the film's impact on their lives five years after its release.
Tickets available here: https://secure.qgiv.com/for/paievent/event/10984/
Questions? 802-223-6677 or email@example.com


text:
Avocado Egg Salad Recipe
Whether you serve this as a wrap, on whole-grain toast or in a lettuce cup, you will love this egg salad that uses half the yolks and lots of healthy fats from the avocado.
I tried a Flat-Out for the first time after hearing your positive reviews about it and loved how easy it was to create a wrap. It tasted great too! If you're on a gluten free diet or looking to use less calories this is also wonderful in a lettuce wrap or why not a hollowed out tomato!
Avocado Egg Salad
Servings: 6 • Size: 1/2 cup • Points +:4 • Smart Points: 4
Calories: 155 • Fat: 12 g • Protein: 9 g • Carb: 4.6 g • Fiber: 3 g • Sugar: 0.5 g
Sodium: 132 mg (without salt)
4 large hard-boiled eggs, chopped
4 hard boiled egg whites, chopped (discard the rest)
1 medium hass avocado, cut into 1/2-inch pieces
1 tbsp light mayonnaise
1 tbsp fat free plain yogurt
1/2 tablespoon finely chopped chives
2 teaspoons red wine vinegar
1/2 tsp Kosher salt
pinch freshly ground pepper
Combine the egg yolks with the avocado, light mayo, yogurt, chives, vinegar, salt and pepper. Mash with a fork. Combine with egg whites and adjust salt as needed.
Keywords: Avocado Egg Salad


text:
The majority of the Longboat Key Town Commission is willing to fight the city of Sarasota's proposed five roundabouts along U.S. 41 near the bayfront, even if it has to dispute its consultant's findings dollar for dollar.
At the Thursday, June 18 regular workshop, four of the six commissioners in attendance gave Town Manager Bruce St. Denis permission to spend up to $25,000 in commission contingency funds to hire a traffic consultant.
The commission hopes that a study done by its own consultant could dispute claims by Trans Associates, the Tampa-based consulting firm hired by the city, that roundabouts will work well in that area.
The commission gave St. Denis the direction after discovering that the city agreed to design and build a test roundabout at U.S. 41 and 10th Street to see how drivers react to it.
Sarasota City Commissioner Kelly Kirschner suggested the test roundabout after hearing that Phase A of the project would take up to three years and would consist mainly of design work, while Phase B (the design and construction of all of the roundabouts) would take up to 20 years.
But the Town Commission is worried about the review and approval timeline of the Florida Department of Transportation, which has already received the city's modeling computer program for its review of the proposed roundabouts.
"Now that they are moving ahead, timing is of the essence," said Commissioner George Spoll. "The clock is running on timely input."
Mayor Lee Rothenberg agreed.
"Of course, the city's consultant has a study that shows traffic flow is just peachy dandy," Rothenberg said. "But that's the charge and goal of the consultants."
Commissioner Hal Lenobel, though, worried that the decision could come back to haunt the town.
"What if the traffic consultant we hire agrees with the city's consultant?" Lenobel asked. "I am reticent to gamble taxpayer money on a decision I may not have any influence over."
Commissioner Gene Jaleski, who is trying to get town staff to reduce the amount of money spent on consultant fees, was upset with the commission's direction.
"I don't approve of this at all," Jaleski said.
Town Attorney David Persson, however, told the commission that hiring a traffic consultant to make an evaluation and place comments in the public record regarding the proposal could make a positive impact on the town's roundabout defense.
Town Manager Bruce St. Denis, who originally estimated the consultant would cost $50,000, reduced his dollar amount to $25,000.
"In order to be credible, you have to evaluate what's in the record," St. Denis said. "All those things will be costly if we dispute their proposal."
The Sarasota City Commission will discuss the test roundabout at a future connectivity public hearing that is yet to be scheduled. And the design and construction of the test roundabout could take months to prepare before an official submittal is made to the Florida Department of Transportation.
Rothenberg also expressed his opinion that the state agency will hold firm on its past opinion that roundabouts will not work better than a signalized traffic intersection in that area.
"But we would still be wise to let our opinions known about this," Rothenberg said.
Vice Mayor Robert Siekmann agreed.
"Any test circle will be judged successful by the city," Siekmann said. "I think we have to fight the good fight if it's a bad thing for this island."
The Town Commission can approve the money transfer at a special meeting Tuesday, June 30 or at its Monday, July 6 regular meeting.


text:
This numbered edition Canvas Print, designed by Roland Banrevi, comes with a numbered and signed certificate of authenticity. Ready to hang, this image is printed onto a 450gsm white finish, 100% cotton canvas and stretched over 1.5" deep wood stretcher bars (3/4" for XS). Each print comes with wall hanging hardware.
Miskolc, Hungary


text:
The Wildcats hit more 3-pointers than any team in Final Four history.
Villanova shattered the record for 3-pointers made in a Final Four game as seven players scored from beyond the arc, and the Wildcats ran away from Kansas, 95-79, during the second national seminal game Saturday night at the Alamodome in San Antonio.
Villanova now will play Michigan on Monday for the national championship.
The Wildcats poured in a total of 18 3-pointers in the game. They had 13 in the first half alone, enough to tie the previous record for made 3s in a Final Four (UNLV in 1987 and Duke in 2010) game. They also tied the record for 3-pointers attempted in a Final Four game (North Carolina in 2005).
Villanova came out fast, jumping out to a 16-4 lead in the game's first six minutes. Kansas had more turnovers (5) than points in that timeframe.
"We tried to come out aggressive and do the same thing on defense," Villanova redshirt freshman Omari Spellman said. "We just tried to buckle down defensively and our shots happened to fall, so we got off to a big lead."
As the Jayhawks found their footing, Villanova kept shooting from deep. Every 2-pointer Kansas made was answered by a 3 from the Wildcats. Kansas trailed by at least 10 point for the games final 36 minutes, 4 seconds.
The Wildcats lived on the perimeter and didn't attempt their first free throw until Jalen Brunson attempted a pair from the charity stripe with 8:48 left in the game.
Eric Paschall led all scorers with 24 points. Jalen Brunson (18), Donte DiVincenzo (15), Omari Spellman (15), Phil Booth (10) and Mikal Bridges (10) also reached double digits for Villanova.
"It just feels good," Paschall said. "My teammates found me some good shots. They trust me, and my coaches trust me, and that gives me confidence. It just feels good to keep playing."
Devonte' Graham led the way for Kansas with 23 points. Malik Newman added 21, and Sviatoslav Mykhailiuk had 10.
"You know, it's going to end sad for 67 other teams in the tournament," Kansas coach Bill Self said. "Whether or not it's a game we were really never in or a game that you lose on the last possession, it still ends abruptly. For our kids to put themselves in a situation to be here and to win the league and the league tournament and get to the Final Four is really a great accomplishment. I hate it for them them that, obviously, we didn't perform better today, but, hey, give Villanova credit. They were unbelievable."
As impressive as the shooting performance was from the Wildcats, it wasn't totally out of character for the team. It's the third time this season Villanova has at least 18 3s in a game. They done better twice, making 19 against Saint Joseph's on Dec. 2 and against Creighton on Feb. 1.
The teams combined for 25 total made 3-pointers, an NCAA Tournament record (Arkansas and North Carolina had 22 total in a 1995 national semifinal).
Villanova will be looking for its second national title in three seasons when they tip against Michigan at 8:20 p.m. Central on Monday. The game will be televised on TBS.


text:
Westlake Village, CA
Contact Us
Dental implants and All-on-4® Treatment Concept has literally transformed millions of lives. Why not see what they can do for you or someone you love? Want to know more?
Call us at (805) 328-2180 to schedule a consultation, to see if dental implants are right for you.
Request an Appointment


text:
- Contactpersoon: Mr. Allen Wang
- Bekijk Contactgegevens
Warmgewalste Stalen Plaat En Plaat - fabrikant, fabriek, leverancier uit China
The price trend of steel rebar
Steel prices continued to rise this week, and it is expected that the market will maintain a volatile pattern. This week, the Myspic steel price index was 186.5, which was a 3.5% increase on a...
Price trend of steel bar
On January 4, the domestic steel market was weak, and the price of building materials fell by a large margin. Among the 25 major cities, the prices of rebar in 23 cities such as Shanghai, Guangzhou,...
Reinforced bar theory weight table big steel bar weight calculation formula
It is believed that many people should have seen steel reinforcement. Steel reinforcement refers to steel for reinforced concrete and prestressed reinforced concrete. Its cross section is round and...
Difference of rebar HRB335, HRB400, round steel
First, rebar In the construction industry, grade II rebar and grade III rebar are known in the past. In the new standard, grade II rebar is called HRB335, and grade III rebar is called HRB400. The...
- Product List( 0 )


text:
The goal of MSYEP is to serve as a young person's first job experience and exposure to the world of work. The program serves Cambridge youth from age 14 up to the summer after graduating high school.
Teens are placed in public sector and non-profit jobs throughout the city for six weeks during the summer. They work twenty hours a week, earning minimum wage ($12.00 per hour), with the wage paid by the City. One third of the youth are placed in Summer Work and Learning sites, which offer participants a valuable educational and employment experience using the community's resources to expose youth to potential educational or career paths.
All work sites must complete an application in order to participate in the program. Both Summer Work and Learning sites and traditional work sites can apply by downloading and submitting the appropriate section of the work site application available here. Please note that youth applications are different from work site applications, and information for youth is listed below.
All youth participate in skill-building workshops for one hour each week and have the opportunity to attend college tours, financial literacy training, and a variety of program-sponsored social events during the summer.