Monday, October 31, 2011

80-year-old falls into sinkhole in his front lawn

An 80-year-old man who went to retrieve the morning papers on his lawn sank into an 8-foot hole on New York's Long Island.

  1. Only on msnbc.com

    1. Born in the U.S.A.: Websites target birth tourists
    2. Iowa Poll: Cain, Romney top field ahead of caucuses
    3. Bachmann defends stance on kids of illegal immigrants
    4. One woman's story of surviving 20 years of conflict in Uganda
    5. Do science and politics mix?
    6. Facebook says 600,000 account logins compromised every day
    7. Breast cancer causes foot-in-mouth disease in others

Michael Ciron's screams on Sunday morning soon woke up his daughter, who summoned police and firefighters to the Oceanside home.

According to Newsday, by the time rescuers arrived, Ciron managed to pull himself up so that his head cleared above ground.

The fire department secured webbing around his torso and then pulled him out.

Ciron speculated that the sinkhole may have been the site of an old well or cesspool that opened up after Saturday's wet, snowy weather.

Ciron joked that throughout the ordeal, "I held on to the papers."

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45101955/ns/us_news-life/

9 9 9 plan hell on wheels hell on wheels last house on the left last house on the left hoppin john jack dempsey

Siri might give Apple a serious lead over Google (Appolicious)

The addition of the voice-activated personal assistant software known as Siri to the launch of the iPhone 4S gives Apple a big lead over Google?s Android operating system, according to one venture capitalist.

Mashable has the story, in which Gary Morgenthaler of Morgenthaler Ventures ? a former director of Siri Inc. and something of an expert in artificial intelligence ? says that Apple now has a two-year lead over Android because of Siri. The voice-activated software, which you can use to ask your phone questions and receive responses and data, or activate various functions like calling people or responding to texts, changes the expectation of what people can do with their phones, Morgenthaler said.

He might not be wrong. The iPhone 4S has drummed up a lot of sales so far, and everyone is particularly impressed with Siri. In fact, it?s probably a fair assessment to say that many of the sales?are really about Siri, given that fewer iPhone users might otherwise want to upgrade to the 4S if they already have the iPhone 4. Siri and its possibilities give the iPhone 4S ? an incremental upgrade to the iPhone 4 with a better camera and a faster CPU chip, but not a whole lot else in the way of changes ? a fresh coat of paint, as it were. It?s also an exclusive function that other iPhones (and Android devices) can?t currently carry.

Morgenthaler points to Siri as having ?cracked the code? in allowing users to complete voice-activated functions without having to work extra hard to have the software understand what you?re saying. Siri allows users to speak in plain English, and seems to work a lot better than other voice-activated software, which has always struggled with understanding its users.

Meanwhile, Morgenthaler says, Google has no way of catching up right now. Siri?s so good at what it does that it?ll take years for the company to replicate the technology on its own, and there?s no company that Google can purchase that will help it bridge the gap more quickly. Apparently, Siri is that far ahead of the competition (though Morgenthaler might be a little biased, given that he was on Siri?s board).

It?s possible we?ll be seeing more of Siri as Apple further develops the technology. Before the Siri company was bought by Apple, it had more than 45 APIs for the software, meaning there are a lot of ways it could be used to integrate with other software and make it more functional.

Morgenthaler even thinks Siri has the capability of rendering Google?s massive search businesses obsolete by providing users with one (or very few) correct answer to a question, rather than pages and pages of search results. If Siri can quickly answer a question with only the most relevant data, it could allow Apple to circumvent Google?s searches, and the ads that Google delivers with them to make its money.

That?s some forward-thinking that?s not going to probably happen anytime soon. But in the meantime, it does seem as though Siri is going to help make Apple?s iOS platform a leader among smartphones even with Google?s Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich on the horizon. How Apple uses it in the future will determine whether that remains the case once the novelty of Siri starts to wear off.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/applecomputer/*http%3A//us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/external/appolicious_rss/rss_appolicious_tc/http___www_appolicious_com_articles10070_siri_might_give_apple_a_serious_lead_over_google/43446999/SIG=131bof48s/*http%3A//www.appolicious.com/tech/articles/10070-siri-might-give-apple-a-serious-lead-over-google

the brothers grimm the brothers grimm penn state football weather boston grimm fairy tales grimm fairy tales gold rush

Occupy Wall St. Sanctioned for Public Masturbation (Powerlineblog)

Share With Friends: Share on FacebookTweet ThisPost to Google-BuzzSend on GmailPost to Linked-InSubscribe to This Feed | Rss To Twitter | Politics - Top Stories Stories, News Feeds and News via Feedzilla.

Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/154946553?client_source=feed&format=rss

world series schedule apple earnings tampa weather pat buchanan susan sarandon susan sarandon motorola razr

Former Mr. Jelly Belly looking for sweet comeback (AP)

COVINA, Calif. ? He's the Willie Wonka of this small suburban town east of Los Angeles, the rotund man in the T-shirt and shorts who joyfully takes just about anybody who walks through the door on a tour of his tiny candy factory.

But David Klein was once much more.

The confectioner, who these days makes a comfortable living selling various chewy, crunchy concoctions with funny names like Candy Barf and Zombie Heart (the latter squirts strawberry-flavored "blood" when you bite into it), was once at the center of a sweet-tooth revolution.

He was Mr. Jelly Belly.

In 1976 Klein launched the gourmet jelly bean craze when he improbably envisioned that people would be willing to pay 10 or 20 times more for jelly beans if they simply tasted better, came in scores of natural flavors and had a clever name.

Then, with only $800 in hand, he somehow talked a small, family-run candy company in the San Francisco Bay area into going into business with him.

The result was the Jelly Belly, a precociously flavorful little gob of sugar, syrup and corn starch that quickly became the favored treat of millions, including President Ronald Reagan.

And Klein, a one-time nut distributor who had begun selling his creation in just one candy store, was the gourmet bean's mascot.

Decked out in a Jelly Belly-bejeweled top hat and a matching white cowboy suit, he was everywhere in the late 1970s.

He was photographed for People magazine sitting in a bathtub filled with Jelly Bellys, some stuck to his hairy chest, others lodged between his toes. He dropped by TV programs like "The Mike Douglas Show" to trade quips with the host and cajole the celebrity guests into sampling his new flavors.

Then, for reasons Klein still has trouble coming to terms with, he and his partner sold their interest in the Jelly Belly name in 1980 for $4.8 million. He collected his half of the money in monthly installments over 20 years, and he faded into obscurity.

"I went from hero to zero in about 60 seconds," the usually upbeat candy maker says morosely when the subject is raised. "I was Mr. Jelly Belly for four years. And then ...," his voice trail off.

While Jelly Bellys were being passed around the table at Reagan administration Cabinet meetings and carried into outer space by astronauts in the 1980s, Klein was trying in vain to come up with another big thing.

He brought out a version of sugar-free salt water taffy. He tried to hit it big with sour licorice until more well-heeled competitors squeezed him out. He pioneered gross-out candy with a chocolate bar shaped to look like ? well ? you get the idea. It never caught on.

Through it all, he moped about his and his late partner's decision to sell their 50-50 interest in Jelly Belly to the Herman Goelitz Candy Company, which renamed itself the Jelly Belly Candy Company.

"It caused a lot of pain in the family," says his son, Bert Klein, who produced the documentary "Candyman: The David Klein Story." So much so that his son, a veteran Hollywood film animator, says that as a child he stopped telling people his father had ever been Mr. Jelly Belly. It was too painful and most people didn't believe him anyway.

Now, with another holiday candy season upon us, Klein is back and hoping, at age 65, to regain the mojo that once made him the talk of the candy world.

His company, Can You Imagine That!, is working with Leaf Brands in developing a new treat called Farts. (Yes, you read that right.)

Leaf, which created Milk Duds, plans to have Farts in stores by Christmas, and when it does Klein predicts they will make people forget all about Nerds, a similar looking but crunchier candy.

Then there is Dave's Signature Beyond Gourmet jelly beans. They will mark Klein's return to the candy bean business with such exotic flavors as ginger, jalapeno and bacon. He's predicting they will also make people wonder what they ever saw in Jelly Belly, a company with which his relations have grown increasingly acrimonious over the years.

Klein has long maintained that Jelly Belly's chairman, Herman G. Rowland Sr., bullied him into selling out at a rock-bottom price so he could have the Jelly Belly empire all to himself. It's an allegation Rowland emphatically denies.

"I loved Dave," Rowland said recently from his office in Fairfield, before quickly adding he wanted to make sure his listener had heard him correctly: He had said "loved," not "love."

Still, Rowland chuckles often when he recalls the heady, early days of Jelly Belly and the promotional schemes Klein would come up with.

He acknowledges it was Klein's idea to call the candy Jelly Belly, a name Rowland didn't think much of at the time. He thought even less of the portly Klein's decision to be photographed naked in a bathtub full of jelly beans.

"When I saw that thing, I went, `Oh my God, this is the end of Jelly Belly. No one will ever want to eat one,'" he recalls with a laugh. "Well, I was wrong."

He only pressed to buy Klein out, he says, after learning he had given his late partner half of his Jelly Belly distribution business and his partner in turn had trademarked the product's name. He realized then, Rowland said, that if he didn't buy Jelly Belly the name could be taken to any other candy maker.

Meanwhile, Jelly Belly had become so popular that the small company Rowland's great-grandfather had founded in 1869 was struggling to keep up with production while spending money to expand so it could make more Jelly Bellys, which it sold only through Klein.

"Now maybe he doesn't know these things or maybe he doesn't remember them," Rowland said. "But I protected his a-- completely."

Klein, for his part, says he does understand.

But then he thinks again of those days when he'd put on his Mr. Jelly Belly costume and go on television. And he becomes wistful and wishes he'd never relinquished the name. If he hadn't he figures he'd still be Mr. Jelly Belly.

"Col. Sanders created a product and when he sold it he was still Col. Sanders," Klein says earnestly. "His picture was still on the buckets and everything."

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/celebrity/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111030/ap_en_ce/us_the_candy_man

cujo weather denver weather denver hpv vaccine hurricane tracking hurricane tracking flat tax

Sunday, October 30, 2011

Texas Gov. Rick Perry commits to 5 more presidential debates (Star Tribune)

Share With Friends: Share on FacebookTweet ThisPost to Google-BuzzSend on GmailPost to Linked-InSubscribe to This Feed | Rss To Twitter | Politics - Top Stories News, RSS and RSS Feed via Feedzilla.

Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/155197963?client_source=feed&format=rss

walking dead weldon weldon danica patrick today show david garrard matt nathanson

Motorola Mobility reports $3.3 billion in revenue and $32 million net loss, offers more details on Google buyout

Just in time for the company to be acquired by Google, Motorola Mobility is beginning to right the ship, as evidenced by today's quarterly earnings report. The company reported total net revenues of $3.3 billion -- precisely the same amount earned last quarter, incidentally, and up 11 percent from this time last year -- and a GAAP net loss of $32 million. While the number may put frowns on a few faces, it's still an improvement from Q2's loss of $56 million, and more than half ($18 million) of the losses were attributed to expenses from the Google acquisition. Mobile device revenues are up 20 percent year-over-year and 11.6 million devices were shipped, including 4.8 million smartphones and 100,000 Xoom tablets.

On the regulatory front, Moto offered a few new details about the progress of the company's acquisition. It announced that it will hold a meeting with stockholders on November 17 to gain approval of the Google merger, and -- pending antitrust clearance by the US Department of Justice, the EU and several other government entities -- expects to close the transaction by the end of this year or early 2012 at the latest. Check out all of the numbers after the break.

Continue reading Motorola Mobility reports $3.3 billion in revenue and $32 million net loss, offers more details on Google buyout

Motorola Mobility reports $3.3 billion in revenue and $32 million net loss, offers more details on Google buyout originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 27 Oct 2011 16:32:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  sourceMotorola  | Email this | Comments


Source: http://feeds.engadget.com/~r/weblogsinc/engadget/~3/CtBYF864NKA/

hes just not that into you hes just not that into you eagle rock music festival eagle rock music festival arbor apple crisp recipe apple crisp recipe

Qantas Airways grounds global fleet due to strikes

FILE - In this April 21, 2010 file photo, Qantas Chief Executive Officer Alan Joyce address the media in Sydney, Australia. Qantas Airways grounded its global fleet indefinitely Saturday in a lockout of workers whose strikes have disrupted airline operations for weeks, and the government said it would seek arbitration. Flights in the air were continuing to their destinations. Booked passengers were being rescheduled at Qantas' expense, chief executive Alan Joyce said. (AP Photo/Rob Griffith, File)

FILE - In this April 21, 2010 file photo, Qantas Chief Executive Officer Alan Joyce address the media in Sydney, Australia. Qantas Airways grounded its global fleet indefinitely Saturday in a lockout of workers whose strikes have disrupted airline operations for weeks, and the government said it would seek arbitration. Flights in the air were continuing to their destinations. Booked passengers were being rescheduled at Qantas' expense, chief executive Alan Joyce said. (AP Photo/Rob Griffith, File)

FILE - In this June 12, 2011 file photo, Qantas jets sit on the tarmac at the international airport in Sydney, Australia. Qantas Airways grounded its global fleet indefinitely Saturday, Oct. 29, 2011, in a lockout of workers whose strikes have disrupted airline operations for weeks, and the government said it would seek arbitration. (AP Photo/Rob Griffith, File)

(AP) ? Qantas Airways grounded its global fleet indefinitely and locked out workers Saturday after weeks of disruptive strikes, and the disappointed Australian government was seeking emergency arbitration.

Flights in the air were continuing to their destinations, but others were stopped even taxiing on the runway, according to one flier. Booked passengers were being rescheduled at Qantas' expense, chief executive Alan Joyce said.

Bookings already had collapsed after unions warned travelers to book with other airlines through the busy Christmas-New Year period, and Joyce told a news conference in Sydney the unions' actions have caused a crisis for Qantas.

"They are trashing our strategy and our brand," Joyce said. "They are deliberately destabilizing the company and there is no end in sight."

The grounding of the largest of Australia's four national domestic airlines will take a major economic toll and could disrupt the national Parliament, due to resume in Canberra on Tuesday after a two-week recess. Qantas' budget subsidiary Jetstar continues to fly.

British tourist Chris Crulley, 25, said the pilot on his Qantas flight informed passengers while taxiing down a Sydney runway that he had to return to the terminal "to take an important phone call." The flight was then grounded.

"We're all set for the flight and settled in and the next thing ? I'm stunned. We're getting back off the plane," the firefighter told The Associated Press from Sydney Airport by phone.

Crulley was happy to be heading home to Newcastle after a five-week vacation when his flight was interrupted. "I've got to get back to the other side of the world by Wednesday for work. It's a nightmare," he added.

Qantas offered him up to 350 Australian dollars ($375) a day for food and accommodation, but Crulley expected to struggle to find a hotel at short notice in Sydney on a Saturday night.

The government has called an emergency arbitration court hearing on Saturday night to rule on the strike action and the airline's response.

Transport Minister Anthony Albanese described the grounding as "disappointing" and "extraordinary." Albanese was angry that Qantas gave him only three hours' notice.

"It is certainly a breach of faith with the government," Albanese told reporters.

All 108 aircraft in as many as 22 countries will be grounded until unions representing pilots, mechanics, baggage handlers and caterers reach agreements with Qantas over pay and conditions, Joyce said.

"We are locking out until the unions withdraw their extreme claim and reach agreement with us," Joyce said, referring shutting staff out of their work stations.

"This is a crisis for Qantas. If the action continues as the unions have promised, we will have no choice but to close down Qantas part by part," he added.

Staff will not be paid starting Monday, and Joyce estimated the grounding will cost the airline $20 million a day. It already had reduced and rescheduled flights for weeks because of strikes and overtime bans as workers worry their jobs will move overseas.

Richard Woodward, vice president of the pilot's union, the Australian and International Pilots Association, accused Qantas of "holding a knife to the nation's throat" and said Joyce had "gone mad."

Steve Purvinas, federal secretary of the mechanics' union, Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association, described the grounding as "an extreme measure."

The recent strike action has most severely affected Qantas domestic flights.

In mid-October, Qantas grounded five jets and reduced domestic flights by almost 100 flights a week because aircraft mechanics had reduced the hours they were prepared to work.

Qantas infuriated unions in August when it said it would improve its loss-making overseas business by creating an Asia-based airline with its own name and brand.

The five-year restructure plan will cost 1,000 of Qantas' 35,000 jobs.

Qantas is the world's 10th largest airline and among the most profitable.

Qantas announced in August that it had more than doubled annual profit to AU$250 million, but warned the business environment was too challenging to forecast earnings for the current fiscal year.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/cae69a7523db45408eeb2b3a98c0c9c5/Article_2011-10-29-AS-Australia-Qantas/id-f1f6a41bb53a4a6b874014146c804457

ted kennedy warren zevon caroline kennedy caroline kennedy day of rage sportscenter pay per view

Saturday, October 29, 2011

Deficit-cutting panel looking at benefits, taxes (AP)

WASHINGTON ? Rival deficit-cutting plans advanced by Republicans and Democrats on Congress' secretive supercommittee would both mean smaller-than-expected cost of living benefit increases for veterans and federal retirees as well as Social Security recipients and bump up taxes for some individuals and families, according to officials familiar with the recommendations.

In all, the changes would reduce deficits by an estimated $200 billion over a decade, a fraction of the committee's minimum goal of $1.2 trillion in savings.

A final decision by the panel on legislation to reduce deficits is still a few weeks off, and given the political difficulties involved, there is no certainty that the six Republicans and six Democrats will be able to agree.

The two sides exchanged initial offers earlier this week, and each side swiftly found fault with the others' proposal in the privacy of the committee's rooms as well as in public.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, noting published reports that Democrats are seeking $3 trillion in higher taxes, said, "This is the same number that was in the president's budget, the same number that ? that they ? I don't know that they found any Democrats in the House and Senate to vote for."

"I don't think it's a reasonable number," he said. Boehner also chided Democrats for recommending $50 billion in savings from Medicaid over the next decade, well below what Republicans are seeking.

"Let's understand over the next 10 years, we're going to spend $10 trillion on Medicaid. I just think there's a lot more room there to help find common ground," he said.

At the same time, Boehner emphasized, "I am committed to getting to an outcome" that clears the committee and Congress. The speaker negotiated privately with President Barack Obama over the summer in deficit-reduction talks that failed to produce an agreement.

At a news conference of her own, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California said she wanted a compromise that was "big, bold and balanced," a phrase that Democrats use to convey an insistence on higher tax revenue.

She pointedly declined to embrace what Democrats had presented to the supercommittee. She called it "Sen. Baucus' package," a reference to the Montana Democrat and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. That ran directly counter to his aides' statements earlier in the week that he was speaking for a majority of Democrats on the panel ? and tacit confirmation that at least two of the party's members had not signed on as supporters.

Ironically, while the Republican and Democratic panel members remain far apart, one of the relatively few items in common was a potentially controversial recommendation to change the calculation for annual cost-of-living increases in federal programs as well as the yearly adjustments in income tax brackets.

According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the recommended change "produces lower estimates of inflation than the traditional" measurement of the Consumer Price Index. Since December 2000 the difference on average has amounted to 0.3 percentage points, according to the agency.

A decision to base annual cost of living increases on the new calculation would lower Social Security costs by $108 billion over a decade, and the impact on benefits for federal civilian and military pension programs and veterans' benefits would save an additional $23 billion, according to calculations made in February 2010.

Congressional experts said the list of federal programs that would be affected is extensive, and included Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps and more, but the absence of a written description by either side in the deficit negotiations makes a complete listing impossible.

Officials in both parties said their plans would affect income tax brackets, which currently are adjusted annually to make sure that inflation alone does not expose more earnings to taxation.

By slowing the rate of the adjustment, more income would be taxed than is currently forecast, a change that Congress' Joint Tax Committee recently estimated would produce $59.6 billion in revenue to the Treasury over a decade.

Just as changes to Social Security and benefit programs are politically problematic for Democrats, tax increases are difficult for Republicans.

Americans for Tax Reform, an organization led by anti-tax advocate Grover Norquist, earlier this year said slowing the pace at which tax brackets are adjusted for inflation "would most certainly be a tax hike."

There was one caveat, though.

"This idea can of course be part of a discussion of comprehensive and revenue-neutral tax reform, but stand-alone it is a tax hike."

Both Republicans and Democrats included tax reform in their presentations inside the supercommittee, and the issue has great political appeal.

But the two sides differ dramatically on the details. Democrats called for tax reform that would generate an additional $1 trillion in revenue over a decade, while Republicans said they envisioned no increase.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/uscongress/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111027/ap_on_go_co/us_supercommittee_debt

sean avery east river east river harry shum jr workaholics workaholics new iphone 5 release

What gives scientists – and writers – credibility?

Kat Austen, CultureLab editor

festivalideas1.jpg(Image: Sir Cam)

You know those random conversations you strike up with strangers? I remember one from years ago, with a guy on a train from London to Cambridge, where we started talking about life-logging. It turned out he was a psychologist, working in the research department at Microsoft on the precursor to the SenseCam.

The technology was in its early days, and he was telling me about how being shown photos of the previous day?s activities can help people recollect in different ways. It?s intuitive, but being told it by a chap at Microsoft Research added the gravitas needed to move it from ?common sense? to ?information?. His position there gave him credibility.

festivalideas2.jpg(Image: Sir Cam)

Employment at a recognised institution can do that for a scientist. In fact, these days, it?s almost requisite. And, as I learned this week at the Festival of Ideas, hosted by the University of Cambridge, it is increasingly important for people who write about science too.

The session, INcredible: Stories in Science, explored not only how scientists gain, maintain and lose credibility, but also how that kind of credibility translates over into writing about science and scientists.

The Royal Observatory?s public astronomer, Marek Kukula, explained that he got his job because of his 15 years of research experience in supermassive black holes - because of the ?plausibility that experience lends?, as Wellcome Trust public engagement fellow Richard Barnett interjected. But in the intervening years, this credibility, and his job title, seems to have transferred away from his area of astronomical expertise, he noted, positioning him to speak with authority about anything related to physics or satellite collisions or faster-than-light neutrinos.

For writers about science, the institution is no less important. Novelist and poet Sue Guiney told us how her position as writer-in-residence at the at the University of London has opened far more doors than did the fact she has written four books.

In fact, as fellow novelist Laura Dietz pointed out, the institution is such a strong factor in science that citizen scientists who prove their worth outside of the traditional research environment tend to get scooped up into a university as soon as they rise to prominence. Like research papers, it seems that people require peer review in order to gain credibility, too.

As an ex-scientist and current science journalist, I am confronted with questions over credibility on a daily basis, be it my own or that of others. This aspect was touched upon only lightly - how the media?s predilection for a good narrative arc in stories compares to that of fiction writers - but given the impassioned views and breadth of the topic, that debate could have raged for hours. After much discussion, though, the panel decided that plausibility - be it of fictional characters, imagined research ideas, or even real-life stories of scientists - is the overarching measure for credibility. This was most succinctly summarised in an interjection from the audience, when esteemed science historian Simon Schaffer piped up with, ?I couldn?t put a cigarette paper between plausibility and credibility?.

The importance of credibility came sharply into focus for me later on in the week when I attended a debate entitled "Energy policy: should scientists be in charge?" The panel was stacked to the gunnels with intellectual heavyweights, but was in fact more of a face-off between engineering and economics than a question of whether scientists should be in charge. Electrical engineers Mike Kelly and Richard McMahon argued the pragmatism and overarching vision of their profession meant they should be in charge. Economists David Newbery and Michael Pollitt countered by arguing strongly for the effect of the free market in directing energy policy. They also pointed out that one country?s energy policy alone won?t mitigate climate change, that other countries must be ?persuaded? to meet targets too.

The audience?s opinion was as divided on leaving the discussion as on entering it. On a topic as important and complex as energy policy, who to trust becomes even more important. But confronted with a panel of experts giving conflicting advice, individual credibility won?t be able to sway the decision. In the end, you are left to hope that the credibility of their arguments will win out.

Source: http://feeds.newscientist.com/c/749/f/10897/s/19a48a54/l/0L0Snewscientist0N0Cblogs0Cculturelab0C20A110C10A0Cwhat0Egives0Escientists0E0E0Eand0Ewriters0E0E0Ecredibility0Bhtml0DDCMP0FOTC0Erss0Gnsref0Fonline0Enews/story01.htm

republican debate republican presidential candidates republican presidential candidates bet hip hop awards 2011 bet hip hop awards 2011 kraken kraken

Livestream Refreshes Video Service: ?Viewers Can Rewind While Its Live?

livestream closeupLivestream is unveiling a major upgrade to its live video service today. It won't be fully rolled out until December, but you can see a preview of it here or watch the video below. The new player brings a few firsts to live video: an adaptive bitrate which can adjust dynamically based on the viewers bandwidth up to HD quality (720p); an instant playback DVR feature; a live blogging platform to add text, photos, and video clips underneath the main video; and social networking features. One of the most noticeable changes is the DVR functionality. "Viewers can rewind while it is live," says CEO Max Haot. One of the big issues with live video online is that it takes a while for an archive to be viewable. At the very least, you have to wait for the live event to be finished before an archive can be produced. But Livestream's new platform allows for viewers to jump back to earlier parts of the live video while it is still being streamed. This feature will also allow producers to cut clips and embed them in the feed below the video stream.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/txZZzSl9Fsw/

michael jackson autopsy michael jackson autopsy liberace liberace repudiate avengers joost

Video: Dramatic rescues in earthquake rubble

Sorry, Readability was unable to parse this page for content.

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/45044030#45044030

mixology sarah shourd sensa sister wives season 2 kerry collins kerry collins jermichael finley

Friday, October 28, 2011

Study: Rich get a lot richer, outpace middle class

WASHINGTON (AP) ? The richest 1 percent of Americans have been getting far richer over the last three decades while the middle class and poor have seen their after-tax household income only crawl up in comparison, according to a government study.

Average after-tax income for the top 1 percent of U.S. households almost quadrupled, up 275 percent, from 1979 to 2007, the Congressional Budget Office found. For people in the middle of the economic scale, after-tax income grew by just 40 percent. Those at the bottom experienced an 18 percent increase.

The report, based on IRS and Census Bureau data, comes as the Occupy Wall Street movement protests corporate bailouts and the gap between the haves and have-nots. Demonstrators call themselves "the 99 percent."

"The distribution of after-tax income in the United States was substantially more unequal in 2007 than in 1979," CBO Director Doug Elmendorf said in a blog post. "The share of income accruing to higher-income households increased, whereas the share accruing to other households declined."

The top 1 percent made $165,000 or more in 1979; that jumped to $347,000 or more in 2007, the study said. The income for the top fifth started at $51,289 in 1979 and rose to $70,578 in 2007. On the other end of the spectrum, those in the 20th percentile went from $12,823 in 1979 to $14,851 in 2007.

The report also found:

?The top 20 percent of the population earned 53 percent of after-tax income in 2007, as opposed to 43 percent in 1979.

?The top 1 percent reaped a 17 percent share of all income, up from 8 percent in 1979.

?The bottom 20 percent reaped just 5 percent of after-tax income, versus 7 percent in 1979.

Lawmakers and presidential candidates are mulling overhauling the tax code ? some propose a flat tax that critics say could magnify the income gap ? and a congressional "supercommittee" is weighing options to cut the deficit.

President Barack Obama has toured the country promising to raise taxes on the wealthy in order to finance his jobs agenda, which includes continuing a payroll tax cut, boosting infrastructure spending and helping local governments avoid layoffs of teachers, police officers and firefighters.

In a speech Wednesday, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the chairman of the House Budget Committee, decried Obama's moves as "class warfare" and said GOP policies would preserve "equality of opportunity."

"Telling people they are stuck in their current station in life, that they are victims of circumstances beyond their control, and that the government's role is to help them cope with it ? well, that's not who we are," Ryan said at the conservative Heritage Foundation.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/386c25518f464186bf7a2ac026580ce7/Article_2011-10-26-Income%20Gap/id-4f2184324cc249df8ea7cd1ec4b1f24d

home depot center the replacements fleet week scarecrow festival scarecrow festival texas longhorns texas longhorns

Attention, Protestors: You're Probably Part of the 1% (The Motley Fool)

About a year ago, The Wall Street Journal ran an article describing the plight of Americans struggling to rebuild after bankruptcy. The article highlighted Linda Frakes, who filed for bankruptcy after accumulating over $300,000 in credit card debt.

"Ms. Frakes is now unemployed, living on $330 a week of unemployment benefits and odd jobs," the Journal wrote. Frakes "struggled to rent a home and buy a car after bankruptcy. A used-car dealer ultimately gave her financing on a Jaguar."

No one's hardship should be belittled. Becoming unemployed or losing a home aren't just financial problems. They're social and emotional problems that strike at people's sense of being.

But things always need to be kept in perspective. Only in America, I thought to myself after reading the article, can someone be driving a Jaguar and portrayed as living in an impoverished underclass. Context is crucial with these issues.

The recent Occupy Wall Street protests have aimed their message at the income disparity between the 1% richest Americans and the rest of the country. But what happens when you expand that and look at the 1% richest of the entire world? Some really interesting numbers emerge. If there were a global Occupy Wall Street protest, people as well off as Linda Frakes might actually be the target.

In America, the top 1% earn more than $380,000 per year. We are, however, among the richest nations on Earth. How much do you need to earn to be among the top 1% of the world?

$34,000.

That was the finding World Bank economist Branko Milanovic presented in his 2010 book The Haves and the Have-Nots. Going down the distribution ladder may be just as surprising. To be in the top half of the globe, you need to earn just $1,225 a year. For the top 20%, it's $5,000 per year. Enter the top 10% with $12,000 a year. To be included in the top 0.1% requires an annual income of $70,000.

Of course, goods and services cost different amounts in different countries. These numbers only apply to those living in the U.S. To adjust for purchasing power parity, those living in Western Europe should discount their dollar-denominated incomes by 10%-20%, Milanovic says. Those in China and Africa should increase their incomes by 2.5-fold. India, by threefold.

The global distribution figures may seem incomprehensibly low, but consider a couple of statistics you're likely familiar with: According to the U.N., "Nearly half the world's population, 2.8 billion people, earn less than $2 a day." According to the World Bank, 95% of those living in the developing world earn less than $10 a day.

Those numbers are so shocking that you might only think about them in the abstract. But when you consider them in the context of the entire globe, including yourself, the skewing effects they have on the distribution of income is simply massive. It means that Americans we consider poor are among some of the world's most well-off. As Milanovic notes, "the poorest [5%] of Americans are better off than more than two-thirds of the world population." Furthermore, "only about 3 percent of the Indian population have incomes higher than the bottom (the very poorest) U.S. percentile."

In short, most of those protesting in the Occupy Wall Street movement would be considered wealthy -- perhaps extraordinarily wealthy -- by much of the world. Many of those protesting the 1% are, ironically, the 1%.

This isn't to disparage the Occupiers' message. Protestors are, I think, upset because so many of America's top 1% are perceived to have earned their income unjustifiably -- think bankers and bailouts. Most are not against inequality of wealth; they're against inequality of opportunity. As they should be.

But take a step back and put things in perspective. As Milanovic notes, "One's income ... crucially depends on citizenship, which in turn ... means place of birth. All people born in rich countries thus receive a location premium ... all those born in poor countries get a location penalty. It is easy to see that in such a world, most of one's lifetime income will be determined at birth." He continues, "it turns out that place of birth explains more than 60 percent of variability in global incomes." And there are few better places to be born than America -- even if you end up poor by American standards. If there is inequality in opportunity, those born in America are the ones with the unfair advantage.

As author Matt Ridley put it, "Today, of Americans officially designated as 'poor,' 99 percent have electricity, running water, flush toilets, and a refrigerator; 95 percent have a television, 88 percent a telephone, 71 percent a car and 70 percent air conditioning. Cornelius Vanderbilt had none of these." Nor does much of the world.

Food for thought.

Check back every Tuesday and Friday for Morgan Housel's columns on finance and economics.

Fool contributor TMFHousel. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/personalfinance/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/fool/20111028/bs_fool_fool/rx158440

nfl picks 911 conspiracy notre dame michigan anniversary god bless america flight 93 flight 93

New and updated iPhone and iPad apps for Tuesday, October 25

Every day, TiPb gets flooded with announcements for new and updated iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad apps and games. So every day we pick just a few of the most interesting, the most notable, and simply the most awesome to share with you! Ray Marching: You are...

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheIphoneBlog/~3/w5xg8fBtAIg/

us supreme court cameron todd willingham death row naacp cheryl cole x factor forgetting sarah marshall freetown

Thursday, October 27, 2011

Jackson doctor's defense case drawing to a close (AP)

LOS ANGELES ? The defense of the doctor charged in Michael Jackson's death will shift away Thursday from personality to the science that his attorneys hope will prevent the physician from being convicted.

The final witnesses testifying for Dr. Conrad Murray will be fellow doctors, one an expert in addiction and the other in the powerful anesthetic that the Houston-based cardiologist was giving Jackson as a sleep aid.

Their testimony could make the difference in whether Murray is convicted or acquitted of involuntary manslaughter in connection with Jackson's June 2009 death. Authorities contend Murray gave Jackson a fatal dose of propofol and botched resuscitation efforts.

Murray's attorneys contend Jackson gave himself the fatal dose of propofol when his doctor left the room, but have not yet shown evidence about how that theory is even possible. Several prosecution experts have said the self-administration defense was improbable and a key expert said he ruled it out completely, arguing the more likely scenario is that Murray gave Jackson a much higher dose than he has admitted.

The scientific testimony of Dr. Robert Waldman and Dr. Paul White comes a day after jurors heard from five of Murray's one-time patients, who described the cardiologist as a caring physician who performed procedures for free and spent hours getting to know them. When Ruby Mosley described Murray's work at a clinic he founded in a poor neighborhood in Houston in memory of his father, tears welled up in the eyes of the normally stoic doctor-turned-defendant.

Waldman is an addiction expert who may try to bolster the defense theory that Jackson had become dependent on propofol to sleep and was driven to self-administer it when Murray left his bedside.

It will be up to White to explain whether that was possible. He sat in court throughout the testimony of prosecution propofol expert Dr. Steven Shafer, at times shaking his head and furiously passing notes to defense attorneys. In the courthouse, he has been seen conferring with Murray in the hallway outside the courtroom where the case is being heard.

White and Waldman do not necessarily have to convince jurors that Jackson gave himself the fatal dose, but merely provide them with enough reasonable doubt about the prosecution case against Murray.

While prosecutors have portrayed Murray, 58, as a reckless physician who repeatedly broke the rules by giving Jackson propofol as a sleep aid, jurors heard a different portrait of the doctor on Wednesday.

Several of the character witnesses called described Murray as the best doctor they had ever seen and highlighted his skills at repairing their hearts with stents and other procedures.

"I'm alive today because of that man," said Andrew Guest of Las Vegas, who looked Murray. "That man sitting there is the best doctor I've ever seen."

Another former patient, Gerry Causey, stopped to shake Murray's hand in the courtroom and said the physician was his best friend.

A prosecutor noted that none of them were being treated for sleep issues, although Causey and others said they didn't believe the allegations against Murray.

Defense attorneys have told Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor they expect their case to conclude on Thursday. Pastor has said if that happens, closing arguments would occur next week.

___

AP Special Correspondent Linda Deutsch contributed to this report.

___

McCartney can be reached at http://twitter.com/mccartneyAP

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/celebrity/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111027/ap_en_mu/us_michael_jackson_doctor

blue angels weather miami ohio state angus t. jones belgian malinois honey badger girl fight

Director, Communications and Social Media Job, FOX Sports South ...

FOX SPORTS SOUTH / SPORTSOUTH (FSS)
Director, Communications and Social Media
Atlanta, GA 30361

RESPONSIBILITIES
The Director of Communications and Social Media is responsible for strengthening and maintaining FOX Sports South's position as a leading influencer among local sports fans and a conduit to their hometown teams. Reporting directly to the general manager, this candidate is charged with evangelizing FSS's ability to serve the local sports community by directly engaging fans through a variety platforms, with an emphasis on social media. He/she will coordinate efforts with FOX Sports' corporate offices as necessary in order to maximize the effectiveness and reach of the company's social media platforms.

The overall goal is to develop and drive communications strategies that leverage FSS's abundant content to connect better with local fans and drive or contribute to the local sports conversation. Additional goals include fostering communities and influencing conversations around the teams and encouraging fans to interact, while generally bolstering the overall local sports community through FOX Sports South.

Key tasks
Create strategic communications plans to better connect with fans and build brand affinity for FOX Sports South. Goal is to evangelize and excite local fans and position FSS as the primary conduit for the local sports community.

Distribute FSS's abundant content to the local sports community more efficiently and effectively to better influence the local sports conversation.

Utilize FSS's social media platforms more strategically to better communicate with fans, create more compelling content, and build their fan bases / followers.

Develop strategies to tap into popular blogs, fan forums, and message boards to use them as vehicles to reach fans.

Utilize FSS's assets to market directly to fans, increase brand affinity, and position FSS as a hub / conduit for the local sports community.

Drive FSS's social TV integration and serve as the local liaison between departments working in this area.

Interact with FSS executives #local and corporate# to ensure strategy and positioning is appropriate, timely, and consistent with the company's overall strategy.

Qualifications:
Minimum 5-7 years in public relations / marketing with established track record of managing campaigns and utilizing social media to reach consumers.

This person must have a deep knowledge of the local sports community and the ability to foster strong relationships with the fans that drive it.

Should display a dynamic personality and be a savvy networker and relationship builder to recruit support within the organization and with team partners.

Must be a strategic, creative thinker that can drive results with resources that are primarily managed by others.

The candidate should have a keen sense of the power of social media and digital media and be comfortable evangelizing FOX Sports South to a wide range of constituents, including fans, media, bloggers, and team partners.

Fluent understanding of new media platforms and the ability to foresee trends and utilize digital assets to reach consumers.

Strong interpersonal communications skills a must.

Fox Sports South is an Equal Opportunity Employer.

Source: http://jobs.mashable.com/a/jbb/redirect/589619

stacy keibler stacy keibler dancing with the stars season 13 cast tay sachs tay sachs watch the walking dead giuliana and bill

US setting up online embassy to reach Iranians (AP)

WASHINGTON ? The Obama administration is setting up an Internet-based embassy to reach out to Iranians hoping to broaden their understanding of the United States.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says the "virtual embassy in Tehran" will be online by the end of the year.

She told the BBC's Persian-language service Wednesday the site will aim to answer questions on traveling and studying in the U.S.

Clinton said she wants to increase student visas for Iranians hoping to study at American schools.

The U.S. hasn't had an embassy in Iran since breaking off diplomatic relations shortly after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Iran, likewise, has no embassy in Washington.

Clinton said reaching out to Iranians made sense because U.S. efforts to reach out to the government haven't been successful.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/obama/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111026/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_us_iran

9 11 conspiracy theories zeitgeist bush ellie goulding ginger aron ralston aron ralston

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Obama tells students: 'I need your voices'

(AP) ? President Barack Obama urged thousands of enthusiastic college students Wednesday to make their voices heard, telling a boisterous crowd in Denver, "Young people, I need you guys involved."

"I need you active, I need you communicating to Congress, I need you to get the word out," Obama said at the University of Colorado, Denver. "Tweet 'em. They're all tweeting all over the place, you tweet 'em back."

The president took off his jacket and rolled up his sleeves to address the crowd of about 4,000 at a gymnasium at the university, the last stop in a three-day swing through the West that mixed high-dollar fundraising with new announcements of modest executive actions to circumvent Congress. To the university crowd, Obama rolled out plans to help students with loan debt.

"We can't wait for Congress to do its job, so where they won't act, I will," Obama said.

"I am going to keep doing everything in my power to make a difference for the American people, but Denver I need your help," the president said.

The crowd was friendly and loud, but partway through, protesters started shouting about a planned oil pipeline from western Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast that's drawn demonstrations around the country and outside the White House. "Say no to the pipeline!" one shouted, and they held aloft a banner reading: "Stop the Keystone Pipeline Project."

Obama paused to respond. "We're looking at it right now. No decision's been made and I know your deep concern about it so we will address it," he said. The protesters were escorted out.

Young people and first-time voters were key to Obama's victory in 2008 but the president has work to do to get them motivated this time around, with the economy sagging and job opportunities scarce.

Obama's Western swing took him through Las Vegas, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Obama held six fundraisers in all, three of them in donor-rich California, which ranks at the top of states contributing to Obama's campaign.

Obama also used the trip to launch a new phase of his campaign to jump-start the economy. Declaring "we can't wait," he announced executive actions to assist struggling homeowners and veterans, as well as graduates weighed down with student loans. He kept up his call for congressional Republicans to support pieces of his $447 billion jobs bill.

The visits to Nevada and Colorado took the president into volatile political battlegrounds where he fine-tuned his re-election message, contrasting himself with Republicans and tying the GOP presidential field to the congressional Republicans blocking the jobs bill.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/386c25518f464186bf7a2ac026580ce7/Article_2011-10-26-Obama/id-212a34e4649d4fe6842fe377715b57f1

osu 9 11 conspiracy theories 9 11 conspiracy theories zeitgeist bush ellie goulding ginger

Well: The Limits of Breast Cancer Screening

Has the power of the mammogram been oversold?

At a time when medical experts are rethinking screening guidelines for prostate and cervical cancer, many doctors say it?s also time to set the record straight about mammography screening for breast cancer. While most agree that mammograms have a place in women?s health care, many doctors say widespread ?Pink Ribbon? campaigns and patient testimonials have imbued the mammogram with a kind of magic it doesn?t have. Some patients are so committed to annual screenings they even begin to believe that regular mammograms actually prevent breast cancer, said Dr. Susan Love, a prominent women?s health advocate. And women who skip a mammogram often beat themselves up for it.

?You can?t expect from mammography what it cannot do,? said Dr. Laura Esserman, director of the breast care center at the University of California, San Francisco. ?Screening is not prevention. We?re not going to screen our way to a cure.?

A new analysis published Monday in Archives of Internal Medicine offers a stark reality check about the value of mammography screening. Despite numerous testimonials from women who believe ?a mammogram saved my life,? the truth is that most women who find breast cancer as a result of regular screening have not had their lives saved by the test, conclude two Dartmouth researchers, Dr. H. Gilbert Welch and Brittney A. Frankel.

Dr. Welch notes that clearly some women are helped by mammography screening, but the numbers are lower than most people think. The Dartmouth researchers conducted a series of calculations estimating a woman?s 10-year risk of developing breast cancer and her 20-year risk of death, factoring in the added value of early detection based on data from various mammography screening trials as well as the benefits of improvements in treatment. Among the 60 percent of women with breast cancer who detected the disease by screening, only about 3 percent to 13 percent of them were actually helped by the test, the analysis concluded.

Translated into real numbers, that means screening mammography helps 4,000 to 18,000 women each year. Although those numbers are not inconsequential, they represent just a small portion of the 230,000 women given a breast cancer diagnosis each year, and a fraction of the 39 million women who undergo mammograms each year in the United States.

Dr. Welch says it?s important to remember that of the 138,000 women found to have breast cancer each year as a result of mammography screening, 120,000 to 134,000 are not helped by the test.

?The presumption often is that anyone who has had cancer detected has survived because of the test, but that?s not true,? Dr. Welch said. ?In fact, and I hate to have to say this, in screen-detected breast and prostate cancer, survivors are more likely to have been overdiagnosed than actually helped by the test.?

How is it possible that finding cancer early isn?t always better? One way to look at it is to think of four different categories of breast cancer found during screening tests. First, there are slow-growing cancers that would be found and successfully treated with or without screening. Then there are aggressive cancers, so-called bad cancers, that are deadly whether they are found early by screening, or late because of a lump or other symptoms. Women with cancers in either of these groups are not helped by screening.

Then there are innocuous cancers that would never have amounted to anything, but they still are treated once they show up as dots on a mammogram. Women with these cancers are subject to overdiagnosis ? meaning they are treated unnecessarily and harmed by screening.

Finally, there is a fraction of cancers that are deadly but, when found at just the right moment, can have their courses changed by treatment. Women with these cancers are helped by mammograms. Clinical trial data suggests that 1 woman per 1,000 healthy women screened over 10 years falls into this category, although experts say that number is probably even smaller today because of advances in breast cancer treatments.

Colin Begg, head of the department of epidemiology and biostatistics at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, said that he supports mammography screening and believes that it does save lives. But he agrees that many women wrongly attribute their survival after cancer to early detection as a result of mammography.

?Of all the women who have a screening test who have breast cancer detected, and eventually survive the cancer, the vast majority would have survived anyway,? Dr. Begg said. ?It only saved the lives of a very small fraction of them.?

The notion that screening mammograms aren?t helping large numbers of women can be hard for many women and breast cancer advocates to accept. It also raises questions about whether there are better uses for the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on awareness campaigns and the $5 billion spent annually on mammography screening.

One of the reasons screening doesn?t make much difference is that advances in breast cancer treatment make it possible to save even many women with more advanced cancers.

?Screening is but one of the tools that we have to reduce the chance of dying of breast cancer,? Dr. Esserman said. ?The treatments that we have actually make up for a good deal of the benefits of screening.?

The Dartmouth analysis comes two years after a government advisory panel?s recommendations to scale back mammography screening angered many women and advocacy groups. The panel, the United States Preventive Services Task Force, advised women to delay regular screening until age 50, instead of 40, and to be tested every other year, instead of annually, until age 74. The recommendations mean a woman would undergo just 13 mammograms in her lifetime, rather than the 35 she would experience if she began annual testing at age 40.

But the new recommendations have scared many women who believe skipping an annual mammogram puts them at risk of finding breast cancer too late. But Donald Berry, a biostatistician at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, said adding more screening is not going to help more women.

?Most breast cancers are not lethal, however found,? Dr. Berry said. ?Screening mammograms preferentially find cancers that are slowly growing, and those are the ones that are seldom deadly. Getting something noxious out of the body as soon as possible leads women to think screening saved their lives. That is most unlikely.?

Dr. Love, a clinical professor of surgery at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, says the scientific understanding of cancer has changed in the years since mammography screening was adopted. As a result, she would like to see less emphasis on screening and more focus on cancer prevention and treatment for the most aggressive cancers, particularly those that affect younger women. Roughly 15 percent to 20 percent of breast cancers are deadly.

?There are still 40,000 women dying every year,? Dr. Love said. ?Even with screening, the bad cancers are still bad.?

Source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=9ec4b8a21709e970f917671646466805

jason wu jason wu the fall the fall kellen winslow ben folds apple announcement

High fluid intake appears to reduce bladder cancer risk

ScienceDaily (Oct. 24, 2011) ? Drinking plenty of fluids may provide men with some protection against bladder cancer, according to a study presented at the 10th AACR International Conference on Frontiers in Cancer Prevention Research, held Oct. 22-25, 2011.

Although the study did not determine why increased fluid intake might be protective, Jiachen Zhou, M.B.B.S., M.P.H., a doctoral candidate in epidemiology at Brown University, hypothesized that the fluids may flush out potential carcinogens before they have the opportunity to cause tissue damage that could lead to bladder cancer.

Researchers evaluated the association between fluid intake and bladder cancer among 47,909 male participants in the prospective Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (HPFS) during a 22-year period. HPFS is a long-term study of male health professionals who were aged between 40 and 75 years at enrollment in 1986.

Participants answered a questionnaire about fluid intake every four years. Researchers found that high total fluid intake (more than 2,531 milliliters per day) was associated with a 24 percent reduced risk for bladder cancer among men.

Researchers first found an association between fluid intake and bladder cancer risk in this cohort 10 years ago. The association was present but weaker in the most recent study. Detailed analyses revealed the association was stronger among younger men, and this may explain the weakened association over time. The researchers also observed that the men drank fewer liquids, particularly water, as they aged.

Although he warned against generalizing these findings to the wider population, Zhou said that physicians should feel comfortable recommending that patients drink plenty of fluids.

The study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health.

Recommend this story on Facebook, Twitter,
and Google +1:

Other bookmarking and sharing tools:


Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materials provided by American Association for Cancer Research.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.


Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.

Source: http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sciencedaily/~3/iFNTVegmocQ/111024172654.htm

eli manning new york giants cbs richard pryor richard pryor don t ask don t tell don t ask don t tell

Running games back on track in NFL (AP)

NEW YORK ? Run, baby, run.

All those runners who seemed to be ignored while passing numbers flew off the charts earlier this season are resurfacing ? in a big way. Joining the always reliable Adrian Peterson and the resurgent Arian Foster this weekend were the likes of DeMarco Murray, Matt Forte, and Shonn Greene. With injuries hitting a bunch of starters, some new names could join them as the ground game has even more impact in the NFL.

The emergence of Murray was the most notable and spectacular development. His first touch was for a 91-yard touchdown, and he built on it through the Cowboys' rout of the Rams, finishing with a team record 253 yards rushing. Yes, Murray outdid even the best production for one game by Emmitt Smith and Tony Dorsett.

"I never thought in a million years that I'd ever have a day like this," Murray said. "This is what I've been working hard for since my Pop Warner days."

Pop Warner-style offenses, where teams run, run and then run some more, never will resurface in the NFL. Pro football is a passing game, and the record-setting stats early in the 2011 schedule prove that.

But running backs are undergoing a revival and Sunday underscored it.

We've come to expect big showings from Peterson, who despite playing behind a rookie quarterback making his first start, Christian Ponder, and facing the defending Super Bowl champs, had 175 yards and a touchdown in a 33-27 loss to Green Bay. Foster led the league in rushing in his breakout 2010 season and, after battling injuries this year had a huge game in a 41-7 romp past Houston: 115 yards rushing and two scores, 119 receiving and another TD.

Supporting Foster was Ben Tate with 104 yards on the ground. Like Foster the previous year, Tate is making up for a lost season. A second-round draft pick in 2010, he broke his right ankle in the preseason and didn't play again. Foster wasn't used much in his rookie season of 2009, appearing in only six games and gaining 257 yards rushing.

With the re-emphasis on running, three players who surpassed 100 yards on the ground Sunday will take on added importance for their teams: Atlanta's Michael Turner, Chicago's Forte and the Jets' Greene.

Turner has rushed down this road before and is an established star. Forte, in a bitter contract impasse with the Bears, needs to be special because the quarterbacking and receiving are unpredictable. And, of course, they play in Chicago, where Soldier Field is anything but a passer's paradise late in the season.

Greene, who went for 112 yards in New York's 27-21 win over San Diego and was particularly effective in the second half when the Jets rallied, is a key to the team's "ground and pound" philosophy. If the offensive line gets its act together, it is one of the more formidable blocking units around. Greene needs to capitalize on their work.

"Now this, it came together for the most part," Jets guard Brandon Moore said of the running game. "We're just kind of streaming along, staying with that physical attack and style on offense, getting downhill runs . and moving people off the ball."

Some of the guys who will be toting the ball came into the season as backups or backups to the backups. Tim Hightower's left knee buckled in Washington's loss to Carolina and rookie Roy Helu takes over with Hightower gone for the season. Darren McFadden, the league's leading rusher, went down against Kansas City and his sub in Oakland, Michael Bush, isn't an every-down back, meaning speedy rookie Taiwan Jones could see some time.

Seattle's Marshawn Lynch is having back issues and Justin Forsett is one of his replacements. Tampa Bay's Earnest Graham, a solid and versatile back who was filling in for LeGarrette Blount (left knee) left the loss to Chicago in London with a right ankle problem. Next up for Tampa: Kregg Lumpkin.

At least Denver has a former starter to take over for Willis McGahee if his broken right hand sidelines him. Then again, Knowshon Moreno has been a disappointment, which could lead to Lance Ball getting the ball.

Regardless, considering the weather hasn't even gotten bad anywhere in the NFL, running backs will be prominent the rest of the way, especially when the elements become a factor.

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/sports/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20111024/ap_on_sp_fo_ne/fbn_on_football_revived_runners

bethenny frankel morgan freeman orlando brown orlando brown benjamin netanyahu prospect park no child left behind