Fun in the sun yesterday…sniff sniff today
Posted by michellemoquin on September 2nd, 2008
Hey…good morning everyone! I hope that all of you enjoyed Labor Day! I certainly did and I am paying for it today in the form of a slight summer cold. -bummer. It’s really not that bad but I am skipping school and going back to bed so that it doesn’t get worse.
Hello Anon(s): Wow- I couldn’t help but notice the 27 comments from you yesterday!? Well really 25, minus the 2 from ‘Health info” – I think that is the most comments from one single person (?) I have ever had – congrats on breaking the daily record! We’re you bored yesterday? Or just wanting to banter with yourself? :) Hahaha!! However I think, it may be from several different anons…
Anyway, I have yet to read them all – will do so later when I wake up so that I can focus on all that was written. Seems from my quick scan this morning, that much of what was written was about Sarah Palin. Whoa. Yeah, she is getting quite the coverage and even more so now with her pregnant 17 year old daughter.
Readers: Feel free to chat amongst yourselves and I’ll chime in tomorrow. Have a good one.
Gratefully your blog host,
michelle ?
Aka BABE: Your Bad Ass Bitch Editor
For archives dated before January 17, 2008 click on my Blogroll:
or click here: “A Day in the life of…”
All content on this site are property of Michelle Moquin © copyright 2008
" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:36 am
ARE SPECIALTY CARDIAC HOSPITALS BETTER?
There’s a new trend in the delivery of medicine: Specialty hospitals that focus on a single, lucrative area of care such as cardiology or orthopedics. The idea is that a more efficient and focused health care model will enable physicians to deliver a higher standard of care that costs less. After all, it has long been recognized that the higher volume of a particular surgery performed at a medical center — whether it’s removing a gallbladder, opening a blocked artery or replacing a hip — the better outcome, on average. Using this rationale, specialty hospitals make sense, don’t they?
Well, not really. Though the argument might be made for more quality control and cost-effective care, there are other factors that can influence outcome data — for instance, heart hospitals attract patients who are healthier and wealthier. So, it’s hard to know definitively whether they achieve better results than hospitals where a comparable volume of similar procedures are performed. And now a new study demonstrates that when a specialty heart hospital is opened in a neighborhood, suddenly more heart procedures — in one case a 42% higher rate of elective heart procedures — are performed.
AT THE HEART OF THE MATTER: POLITICS AND PROFITS
To learn more about specialty hospitals in general and heart hospitals in particular, I spoke with University of Iowa researcher Peter Cram, MD, who is involved in research on the impact of specialty hospitals on the delivery of care to financially vulnerable populations. He told me that specialty hospitals are usually for-profit facilities owned at least in part by doctors who refer their own patients to them. Most that have opened since 1990 are located in states lacking a “certificate of need” permit for the construction or expansion of health care facilities (such as Texas, Arizona, California, Kansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and South Dakota).
CLEAR CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The conflicts of interest aren’t hard to identify. Critics instantly pointed out that when doctors share in hospital ownership, they’re more likely to refer patients for procedures there since financial incentives add to the medical considerations. This in and of itself could account for the significant rise in the volume of expensive and specialized procedures. Another problem is that these specialty facilities rapidly earned a reputation for “skimming” the healthier, better-insured patients, leaving the burden of caring for the sicker and uninsured on general hospitals.
At the VA Health Services Research and Development Center of Excellence in Ann Arbor, Michigan, researchers examined the provision of heart care for Medicare beneficiaries 65 and older in various regions around the country between 1995 and 2003. Their goal was to determine whether specialty heart hospitals were associated with an increase in volume of heart procedures to unblock clogged arteries — specifically, coronary artery bypass surgery (CABGs) and “percutaneous coronary interventions” (PCIs, which are less invasive artery-opening techniques, such as angioplasty and stenting).
The researchers found that four years after the opening of a new heart hospital in a region, the rate of heart procedures performed in that area doubled when compared with those where no new specialty hospital opened or even where heart programs were opened at a general hospital. The numbers were more dramatic when it came to post-heart attack PCI procedures (emergency) versus non-emergency (elective) PCIs — in the latter, the medical benefits are less clear-cut. When a specialty heart hospital opened in a particular community, the rate of elective PCIs jumped by 42%. This was nearly twice the rate of growth for these procedures in regions where a general hospital had recently added cardiac services (23%), or where no new cardiac care facilities opened (24.8%). These results were published in the March 7, 2007, issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
There is sufficient concern on this topic that the federal government put a ban on opening new specialty hospitals in 2003 (which expired in 2005) and denied Medicare coverage at these facilities as well. Now a host of new specialty hospitals for cardiac care and orthopedic care are scheduled to open around the country, sparking renewed controversy and debate.
PUT YOUR HEART IN THE RIGHT HANDS: CHOOSING YOUR HOSPITAL
Whenever you go to the hospital, whether it’s for a major or minor problem, you need to ensure you are in the best hands possible. In Dr. Cram’s opinion, that means the most experienced hands. Facilities that perform the highest volume of the particular procedure you require — whether general or specialty hospitals — remain the safest and most effective choice. Also, it’s best to get a second opinion prior to undergoing such a procedure.
Additionally, hospitals are required to be ever more transparent about reporting on quality — including medical errors, outcomes and more. Asking a physician you trust for advice always makes sense, but now you can also do your own research by going on-line to compare and contrast all types of hospitals in your area on various Web sites.Are Specialty Cardiac Hospitals Better? — More Money Is Made, But It Doesn’t Appear that More Lives Are Saved…
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:45 am
Oh bummer, feel better, Mischa.
I had an ugly something myself this weekend, chills/fever, blah blah, no fun until 3 hours yesterday and then uh-oh back to bed, dumb move getting out in the first place : ) live and learn, all good today though.
anon, yeah, have to do a reread before I say anything but I did click through on http://baptistsforbrown2008.wordpress.com/ and I understand even better why serious Christians (baptist, evangelical) scare the s**t out of me, they’re not right in the head, I read a few of the entries (and the comments), they are downright scary, or they are completely spoofing, but methinks not.
All weekend there were reports about how ‘bad’ Dems were for chasing down poor Sarah about her down’s baby (possibly being her daughter’s) and causing her the distress of announcing her daughter’s pregnancy now, blah blah, it was on the site listed above and the Christians were anything but kind and loving about it. They threw around names and judgments like they were, oh I don’t know, God??! what a bunch of hypocrits, so glad I’m the fallen angel that I am, at least I tell the truth (as I see it, that’s my disclaimer).
Btw, am I the only one who doesn’t know that Michael Phelps is gay? I thought he made headlines for mashing with the Aussie female world champ swimmer? maybe I’m out of it. Or you know, I also read this info on that rad Christian site so, uh, could be made up BS…
Ok, I’m out so http://www.lilliandevin.com/ ‘US could give the Chinese a nod on this: revere the aging’
Peace, Zen Lill
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:46 am
It seems to me that the issue is about Sarah Palin’s stand that sex education shouldn’t be taught in schools.
Since that is her stand then, the fact that her daughter was having sex at least since she was 16 says a lot about the repubs inference that if you don’t talk about sex in school that teens won’t do it.
That brings us to another point. That it seems that repubs want to insist that everybody have babies but once they are brought into the world the repubs don’t have or don’t care to have a plan to help them become mentally and physically healthy society contributing adults.
It borders on child abuse to keep sex education away from children in schools and then as parents refuse to educate your children about unwanted pregnancies and even worse sexually transmitted diseases.
I’ll venture to guess that Sarah Palin’s child did not have a clue about the consequences of unprotected sex. It is a good thing that Palin is a member of the NRA. It should help with the shot-gun wedding for her child.
Linda
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:06 am
The question should be did Palin’s child want to get pregnant and if not why did she not have the knowledge to prevent an unwanted pregnancy? If she did and it was an accident, did she want to have the baby or was she forced to have it by Palin’s beliefs? Are we looking at child abuse here?
JoAnn
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:09 am
Sarah Palin’s No sex education, no condoms, and no abortions for any reason is definitely child abuse. To force a child to have a baby when the parent(s) did not educate the child about sex and the sanctity of their bodies is not just cruel but it should be a crime.
What if Palin’s daughter had gotten AIDS? Would the media be as thrilled with the fact that Palin would be supporting her daughter? Or would they be screaming that it was partially her fault for not educating her daughter about the dangers of unprotected sex?
“No sex” should be spelt “Know sex” and applied like that in all schools. Why should the state depend on a parent to sexually educate their child. It is a compelling state interest to keep its population from sexually transmitted diseases.
The main stream media seems to be missing the true issue which is if the schools don’t educate the child who will. The fact that Palin is “supporting” the child is not the issue. Many families don’t have the means to support another unwanted child whether it is by the mother or the child.
Caroline
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:19 am
Perhaps we should look at the rumors that the Palin girl is having her “second” child. There is word that it is the older son’s offspring, which is why he was sent away. A simple DNA test will show the deserving public’s right to have these answers as to the severity of this situation and the office in question. It is not very often that a politician’s son or daughter signs up for active duty…
If this child is Sarah Palin’s, this means that she was in planes during her final phase of pregnancy. With some of the speeches and public appearances she was giving at that timeframe this shows a complete lack of responsibility as a parent – flying in her third term. If this is the case, and she is so adamant about abortion yet she will put the unborn child’s safety in such question by getting on a plane?
If Clinton and Edwards are in question on their promiscuity, perhaps we should delve substantially deeper into this situation since Sarah’s entire platform is on family values. I would not want her values to become a national example of what is our nation’s desire for family values if any of these allocations are deemed correct.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:45 am
Who opened the flood gates? This woman is incompetent on so many levels. If she was a man with this level of incompetence would we even be tolerating it? This is reverse sexism.
Mccan’t-help-f**k-up is way passed having a senior moment. But the really scary thing is how the repubs rally around an obvious stupid choice. What does it say about this party and its followers?
This is the kind of group that encourages dictatorships. Nuts who will always support their party line are usually natural xenophobes. Hence they are easily manipulated into a “strong” military man who will protect them from other countries and peoples.
The repubs have practically handed the country over to the dictates of the executive branch of government. Their part in the framers checks and balances of our federal government has been lost on them. We can not count on the Supreme Court to do their part because 4 of them sold out for the job.
When you hear some women say they see this unwanted pregnancy as an even more reason to vote for Palin it makes me sick. I know why the repub men are supporting the choice. But for a woman to say that this opens up dialogue between their children and them about sex is ludicrous.
If they needed an unwanted pregnancy by the repub vice presidential candidate to begin talking about sex with their children, how incompetent as a parent and a how stupid are they?
I am waiting to hear one woman say “this is stupid on so many levels.” This sets a poor example for all families. It is not a good thing. Where are these “wise” women we hear so much from on this blog?
Who are these inept anchor women that do not have the guts to ask the real question. Palin since you advocated no sex, and no condom and no abortions why didn’t you institute sex education in your own home. And if you say you don’t believe in sex education even in the home. Then can you not admit that this is the result of that foolish stand?
It seems that women refuse to ask the tough questions on the air and they want to prevent the men from asking them. Women are all action when it comes to jumping on men’s bad behavior. Yet, when it comes to their own, they are just all talk and no substance. I don’t want to hear your bullshit anymore. Clean your own house before you give me any advice.
Somebody needs to tell the dumb bitch that forcing her teenager to have a baby is terrible mothering.
Thomas
September 2nd, 2008 at 12:49 pm
You left wing lunatics lost the elections in 2000 and 2004 because you put up crummy candidates with no real solutions for America’s problems.
AND you over-educated, elitist a-holes continure to make fun of “real” Americans (you know,, us stupid rednecks living in the Midwest and South who keep tipping the national elections to the Republican candidates), the ones who saturate the population base throughout the heartland (WHAT,,,You mean there REALLY ARE huge blocks of voters living outside NYC, SF and LA????? How uncivilized!!)
PULLLLLEASE,,,,Keep making degrading remarks about honest, hard-working Sarah Palin and her family, WE CONSERVATIVES LUVVVV WHEN YOU DO THIS,,, because you’re just pissing off more people in the heartland who will vote to keep your two EMPTY SUITS out of the oval office,,,,,,,,,,thanks for your help!!!!!!!!!
September 2nd, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Hoo boy, um, yes, I’ll open my mouth, Thomas, who cares what anon thinks, I certainly do not. I think she’s a bad choice on many levels, and nothing to do with being a woman, #1 her beliefs and mine do not jive, look at the fiasco that’ll become her daughter’s life esp if the kid is her older son’s?! Thanks for that info, ick…I just heard about that, that’s friggin’ disturbing on many levels…none relating to the veep job but clearly something is awry in that household if it’s true.
I don’t have a damn clue what she did/did not tell her kids about sex (obviously not all that much, but you can’t blame every mother for these things either, where’s dad, he’s her parent also, oh yeah, we’ll rail him later, he’s not running for veep)…
My kid is 9 and knows the basic birds and bees dealio, all age appropriate info, all spoken within the context of the two parties being in a loving, committed relationship. When it is appropriate she’ll have all the knowledge she needs, I think some people (women and MEN)have trouble discussing sex, sexual health, female/male parts and their possible slang terms, all of it…and yet, we leave basicically clueless kids to sort this s**T for themselves or rely on sex education in schools, (health class which they do twice a year and everyone giggles through? That’s ok with you?) to me, it’s a nice addition to the home talking and it is on-going here (just as it should be between a couple btw) you don’t just do the basic rap to your kid and send them on their way, BUT, you must have established an open casual chatty type sitch in your home long before they’re teens…or fugget about it.
About her abilities, I can only say that I do not want a bible-thumping evangelical christian woman, period. She’s anti-abortion, and pro-lifer’s talk a good game but where are they when 17 year old’s do keep their babies, are they there to help, oh F**K no. & that’s just more nonsensical BS. I’m pro-mind my biz, just give women good health care no matter their choice (that’s always what this is about to me, women not having to fly out of the country to get a hanger job, c’mon it’s 2008 not 1960) that decision is between her and her man and her doc, ’nuff said, and men (and women either) I do not care if you agree with that or not. She’s anti-gay, again it is 2008, to each his own. To go up agianst her experience would just bring up more backlash about Obama having no experience either, but Mccant brought this on, I just wish Obama had done what I thought he’d do and bring Hill back out at the last second, and ya nevah know ; ) Biden could ‘back out’ ‘unexpectedly’ hahaha…
Doug, it’s true you should not fly last trimester, I did fly 12 days before Lily was born, had to bury my father, just couldn’t go with the docs on that one, I’m stubborn, they conceded based on her going breech 2 weeks ealier, she was happily practicing her yoga namaste move in there. I had to get up and walk around every 15 minutes, a total hassle on a red eye. I have never ever heard of flying after water breaking though…that’s not normal, at all.
Ok, someone is urgently texting me, better go see what’s up!
Ciao Ciao, Zen Lill
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:26 pm
LIFE’S NOT FAIR FOR PEOPLE WITH PSORIASIS
Earlier this year, I wrote about a study demonstrating that people with psoriasis are at higher risk for heart attack. Now another study has linked psoriasis to diabetes and atherosclerosis, the hardening and narrowing of the arteries that can lead to heart disease. According to Daily Health News contributing medical editor Andrew L. Rubman, ND, this has been seen anecdotically for years — but now there’s research to back it up.
RESEARCH FINDINGS
Researchers in Israel conducted a case-controlled study that compared 46,095 patients with psoriasis with 1,579,037 patients without psoriasis. They found a significantly higher proportion of diabetes and atherosclerosis in psoriasis patients compared with the control group, even after adjusting for their age since that can be a factor. The study supports previous research that demonstrated an association between psoriasis and these medical conditions.
Does this study mean that people who have psoriasis should worry about diabetes and heart disease? Does psoriasis actually cause diabetes and heart disease, or vice versa? I asked Joel M. Gelfand, MD, MSCE, assistant professor of dermatology and medical director of the Clinical Studies Unit at the University of Pennsylvania Health System — and he said the cause/effect relationship isn’t yet clear. “Psoriasis is a classic model of an immune-mediated disease,” he said, adding that “the type of inflammation that leads to psoriasis is the same type that occurs in blood vessels leading to clogged arteries and heart attack, and also the type that leads to insulin resistance and diabetes.”
In other words, psoriasis is a visible manifestation of the same process — it’s on the skin, where you can see it, rather than in the blood vessels, where you can’t.
SELF-DEFENSE
Even though it isn’t shown that psoriasis causes diabetes or heart disease, those with psoriasis, particularly if it is severe, should be aware of their potential increased risk for diabetes and heart disease and alert to the symptoms of these diseases. Since psoriasis is usually treated as a skin problem and many dermatologists do not screen for these medical conditions, it is important to see your primary care physician to evaluate your risk and monitor cardiovascular health.
Psoriasis is a complicated illness. And, like so many diseases, lifestyle is a factor. “Psoriasis sufferers ought to take a look at their risk factors that are modifiable,” said Dr. Gelfand. “Smoking and obesity are important risk factors for heart disease and diabetes. Many people who have psoriasis also smoke and become overweight over time, due to the burden of coping with the disease.”
A healthful lifestyle is the best way to reduce your risk for heart disease and diabetes, and it can also combat inflammation, notes Dr. Rubman. His advice on natural strategies: Get regular exercise and eat a nutritious diet that includes lots of fruits and vegetables and foods high in omega-3 fatty acids such as fish, borage or flaxseed oil, and avoid all foods that contain trans fats.
You may also benefit from relaxation techniques that reduce stress, such as meditation, yoga, deep breathing or listening to soothing music. “There is some data that shows that stress exacerbates psoriasis, but this may be a chicken and egg situation because having psoriasis can be very stressful,” said Dr. Gelfand. “Some studies show that relaxation techniques such as meditation not only help patients feel better, but also improve patients’ response to psoriasis treatments.”
Source(s): ?
Joel M. Gelfand, MD, is assistant professor of dermatology and associate scholar at the Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and medical director of the Clinical Studies Unit at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Dr. Gelfand’s epidemiologic research focuses on the natural history of psoriasis and the risk of diseases associated with psoriasis. He has published extensively on the risk of obesity, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, lymphoma and myocardial infarction associated with psoriasis.
Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, April 2007.