Thursday, October 30, 2014

The Bushes are Back

Heaven help us all. The Bush family dynasty is rearing its ugly head again in the form of Jeb Bush ranting against President Obama’s handling of the Ebola situation, an obvious first salvo in a run for the presidency. Hasn’t this family killed enough Americans (more than five thousand at last count) in trumped-up unnecessary wars to sufficiently tarnish whatever grand proclamations any member of that silver spoon-clan has to say about anything?  Hasn’t this family killed enough foreign citizens (more than 200,000 in Iraq alone) to lose any credibility about how to handle a potential crisis?  Wait, you might say. Is it fair to extrapolate the demagoguery and shortcomings of Georgie Junior to the younger and more intelligent Jeb who can actually speak in full sentences, unlike his older brother?  We have daily reminders of Junior’s handiwork in the holdings of the Supreme Court’s far-right activist justices who have equated money with speech in deciding that elections will go to the highest bidder.  The theme "Money Talks, Everyone Else Walks" is the current electoral trend compliments of Junior-appointed justices Roberts and Alioto. The Bush family message (and its legacy) has been received. The government of the United States is for sale to the highest unnamed bidders.  I predict we will have the opportunity to witness a first-class pandering of Tea Party types by Jeb-Boy as he systematically moves far enough to the right by demonstrating his hatred of all things Obama, the only way that he can possibly be considered a serious candidate.

The Bushes have done enough damage to our country already. Let’s not go there again. Enough is enough.


Just saying . . .

Monday, October 6, 2014

Marijuana Kills Brain Cells in Teenagers

A carefully done peer-reviewed study has demonstrated unequivocally that pot smoking in teenagers can result in a significant decline in IQ that appears to be permanent. The neurotoxic effect of cannabis on the adolescent brain highlights the importance of prevention and policy efforts targeting adolescents. The authors of this study say "Prevention and policy efforts should focus on delivering to the public the message that cannabis use during adolescence can have harmful effects on neuropsychological functioning, delaying the onset of cannabis use at least until adulthood, and encouraging cessation of cannabis use particularly for those who began using cannabis in adolescence."

Their findings suggest that regular cannabis use before age 18 years of age  predicts impairment. In the  study, the most persistent adolescent-onset cannabis users evidenced an average 8-point IQ decline from childhood to adulthood. Cannabis use in adolescence causes brain changes that result in neuropsychological impairment. "Several lines of evidence support this possibility (24⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓31, 33, 34). First, puberty is a period of critical brain development, characterized by neuronal maturation and rearrangement processes (e.g., myelination, synaptic pruning, dendritic plasticity) and the maturation of neurotransmitter systems (e.g., the endogenous cannabinoid system), making the pubertal brain vulnerable to toxic insult (33). Second, cannabis administration in animals is associated with structural and functional brain differences, particularly in hippocampal regions, with structural differences dependent on age and duration of exposure to cannabinoids (33). Third, studies of human adolescents have shown structural and functional brain differences associated with cannabis use (26, 29, 35). The association between persistent cannabis use and neuropsychological decline was still apparent after controlling for years of education. However, the toxic effects of cannabis on the brain may result in impaired neuropsychological functioning, poor academic performance, and subsequent school dropout, which then results in further neuropsychological decline.
"Our finding of neuropsychological difficulties among adolescent-onset former persistent cannabis users who quit or reduced their use for 1 year or more suggests that neuropsychological functioning is not fully restored in this time.
"Increasing efforts should be directed toward delaying the onset of cannabis use by young people, particularly given the recent trend of younger ages of cannabis-use initiation in the United States and evidence that fewer adolescents believe that cannabis use is associated with serious health risk (42). Quitting, however, may have beneficial effects, preventing additional impairment for adolescent-onset users."

         Madeline H. Meier, Avshalom Caspi, Antony Ambler, HonaLee Harrington, Renate Houts, Richard S. E. Keefe, Kay McDonald, Aimee Ward, Richie Poulton, and Terrie E. Moffitt
Persistent cannabis users show neuropsychological decline from childhood to midlife

PNAS 2012 109 (40) E2657–E2664; published ahead of print August 27, 2012.

Just saying . . .

Saturday, September 27, 2014

Big Deal! So What?

The FBI has released a study which clearly documents the rise in sporadic mass killins in the United States since the turn of the century. The NYTimes notes “The bureau’s new survey across the past 13 years concludes that horrific shootings like those in 2012 at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., and the movie theater in Aurora, Colo., are occurring with greater frequency.  The average annual number of shooting sprees with multiple casualties was 6.4 from 2000 to 2006. That jumped to 16.4 a year from 2007 to 2013, according to the study of 160 incidents of gun mayhem since 2000. (In 2000, The Times examined 100 spree killings, all those that the paper’s staff could find going back 50 years.) The F.B.I. report makes the shooters’ terrible effectiveness clear: 486 people were killed — 366 of them in the past seven years — and 557 others were wounded, many of them gravely incapacitated for years afterward.”
My reaction to all of this is ‘big deal.’ Only 486 people dead? So what?  I’ll tell you the number of dead that really gets my attention; 16,651.  This is the number of people that died in 2010 from physician-prescribed opioid analgesics, pain-relieving drugs containing narcotics (Percocet, Oxycontin, etc.). Let me do the simple math for comparison. 486 dead over seven years is an average of 69.42 people for year killed in mass shooting sprees. I will be generous and round the number off to 70. Now let’s look at the other example by way of comparison. If the annual rate of deaths over the past seven years from narcotic prescription drugs stayed the same, 116,657 people have died, a number that really gets my attention.

Now that I, perhaps, have your attention as well, the number of gun deaths each year is in excess of 31,000. This number is the total of annual deaths from all guns including those guns that are carried legally throughout the United States, some into churches and bars and college classes and Starbucks and wherever else a gun–toter may fancy. Let me do some quick math again about that number, a number that really does get my attention; 31,000 times 7 equals 217,000 people dead over the last seven years. 486 is only 0.02% of those 217,000 people.

Big deal? So what? The ‘big deal and so what’ to me is that the NRA and its gullible-as-hell minions scream (and spend millions of dollars lobbying and buying off our hapless politicians) to protect the specious right to bear arms. The ‘big deal and so what’ to me is that doctors and Big Pharma scream about unfair lawsuits and restrictions on their right to kill people for profit.


Just saying . . .

Saturday, September 20, 2014

Another of Tom’s Stupid Jokes?

I started out thinking that this blog was going to be a parody of sorts of the dark humor beyond the circumstances of the various antics of Jamie Winston, the Florida State star quarterback and last year’s Heisman Trophy winner. I found it particularly humorous that two years after Mr. Winston was accused of rape by another FSU student followed by a botched criminal investigation, his arrest for shoplifting at a local Publix grocery store, and the recent uttering of a swear word on campus, the only punishment meted out for any misconduct was, until yesterday, suspension for the first half of today’s football game because he said a bad word. Perhaps, it was more drastic than simply washing his mouth out with soap, but not much. When the public outrage clamored for more, the suspension was increased yesterday to a full game! This is a Tom-like joke. It’s not funny and no one is laughing, (not even me).
In the alleged rape case, as reported by the New York Times, the police did not follow the leads that would have quickly identified Mr. Winston as the suspect and witnesses, one of whom videotaped part of the sexual encounter. After the accuser identified Mr. Winston as her assailant, the police made no attempt to interview him for nearly two weeks and never obtained his DNA. The detective handling the case waited two months to write his first report and then suspended his inquiry without informing the accuser. By the time the prosecutor got the case, important evidence had disappeared, including the video of the sexual act.  The detective also told the complainant's attorney that because Tallahassee was a big football town, her client would be “raked over the coals” if she pursued the case.
In the shoplifting case, Mr. Winston was first arrested and it was reported as such, then the police department claimed that it was not an arrest, and he was given a ticket and sentenced to three or four hours of community service. Publix’s usual policy is to prosecute all shoplifters as a deterrent, but for some strange reason, it refused to do so in this case.
This Winston scenario occurred as professional football, colleges and universities across the country face rising criticism over how they deal with physical and sexual assaults as well as questions about whether athletes sometimes receive preferential treatment.
The upshot is that prominence of football (collegiate and professional) and the celebrity of its star players are so all-encompassing they tend to overwhelm all other considerations. It’s been disgusting to see the ways in which the focus on episodes that started with assaults on young children and women has been turned from these victims to the impact on powerful men who have hurt them. A lot of time and energy is spent on what we should do or feel most recently about Jamie Winston, Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson and even Roger Goodell, the hapless NFL commissioner. Perhaps the best example of this has been the nearly forgotten Penn State episode. Penn State was just restored to active status in collegiate football after what is referred to as the “Sandusky” thing. To briefly reiterate, Sandusky, a vital part of the Penn State football program, abused innocent young boys sexually for more than a decade while others, including the legendary Joe Paterno, silently ignored the situation because of the damage it might do to the football program. When it all came out, the student body at Penn State conducted a candlelight vigil outside the Paterno home in sympathy for his plight, the NFL equivalent of that public reaction being the women wearing Rice football jerseys in moral support of Rice’s conduct. 
The thing that emerges from all this is that we now have a clear understanding of the football power brokers’ priorities. NFL officials reacted, as did Paterno, with little more than a shrug when the video of Rice battering his fiancĂ©e or the reports of Peterson bloodying his little boy first surfaced and only went into action when sponsors threatened boycotts if the league didn’t act. The public bears responsibility here as well. The word on the street, I have heard it often, is that blacks do beat their children and wives and Rice’s and Peterson’s behaviors must be considered within that broader context.
To date, the message has been loud and clear.  To paraphrase the current response "Inaction does speak louder than words." In the eyes of college and NFL’s decision-makers and football fans, it’s no great crime to rape little kids or susceptible college girls, beat up a woman or a child.  But if a player damages the brand, that’s another matter altogether. Particularly if a player tells the world he is gay. Just ask Michael Sam. At last report, an anti-gay group is planning to protest the Dallas Cowboys after the team signed the openly gay football star onto its practice squad.
Just saying . . .


Friday, August 1, 2014

Big Brother is Probably Watching You


The revelation of the CIA spying on Congress is not an isolated incident. In trying to explain the damage inflicted by the wrongdoing, the editors of the New York Times in today's paper state "It is all of Congress and, by extension, the American public, which is paying for an intelligence agency that does not seem to understand the most fundamental concept of separation of powers." I submit that it is not just the concept of separation of powers the agency ignores, but the constitution of our United States and its regard for such individual liberties as freedom of speech. The Times editorial discusses the "lawless culture that has festered within the C.I.A. since the moment it was encouraged by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to torture suspects and then lie about it." The current situation is best epitomized by the prosecution and imprisonment of the only one in the entire government who told the truth to an unsuspecting public. His crime? Revealing that the CIA employed torture in interrogating subjects post-9-11. A great number of individuals, including our former president and veep and the CIA sheep that acted under their direction went unpunished for their crimes, while a CIA agent (John Kiriakou) exposed the illegal (and immoral) actions and in now sitting in prison for his heroic efforts. The recently released film,"Silenced," is a must-see for all American citizens to understand that CIA wrongdoing goes well beyond spying on Congress. The Snowden revelation that the NSA's routine screening of everything we do or say or write means that we are all at risk of being charged with serious crimes for the simple exercise of our basic rights. The next question; Will I be paid a visit or put on some secret 'traitor' list simply for writing these words? Wake up America. This is not some delusional, paranoid rant, but a realistic question based on fact, not fantasy.

Just saying . . .

Friday, June 20, 2014

Shocking News!!

Only 28% of Americans view Walmart unfavorably. I was shocked when I read this statistic. Holy Kattootie, I thought to myself. Why would anyone not be critical of the largest employer in America when the low wages it pays costs taxpayers $900,000 each year in subsidies for the employees at each Walmart superstore? The average “associate” at Walmart makes $8.81 an hour — poverty wage — according to the market-research firm IBISWorld, as of 2011. These poverty-level wages force thousands of employees to look to food stamps, Medicaid and other forms of welfare. The various subsidies cost taxpayers more than five thousand dollars ($5000) per employee. The huge total cost to taxpayers is staggering as the 1.4 million hard-working employees of Walmart look for help from the government just to get by. Walmart made $17 billion in profits last year. Executive compensation for one man at the top of the food chain was more than $20 million a year, and the six heirs of the founding Walton family are now worth at least $150 billion.

The up-shot; Working at Walmart may not make one poor, but it certainly keeps one poor — at the expense of the rest of us. Unless your last name is Walton! 

Just saying . . .

Saturday, June 7, 2014

One Step Forward, Two Steps Back

There is a common thread that runs through various national tragedies such as the massacre of innocent six year olds at Newtown (Yes, it was a tragedy and not the expression of a demented citizen simply exercising his second amendment right to carry assault weapons into an elementary school that the N.R.A.’s lobbying wing, the Institute for Legislative Action, would have us think). This common thread is that most sane, intelligent, sensitive, and rational people think that certain limits should be in place to protect innocent people (defined as men, women and children attempting to go about the day-to-day of living life free from the fear that some a—hole is going walk into a church, school, hospital to shoot them because the shooter is mad at his mother, father, former girl friend, ex-employer, or even worse, no one at all) from being shot to death.

In a perfect example of the inmates running the institution, the Institute did have a lucid moment recently of demonstrating and supporting the rational thinking that must be brought to bear on dealing with these increasingly frequent incidents. Recent insane open-carry demonstrations in Texas, led by the organization Open Carry Texas, provoked a statement on the Institute's website calling the taking of assault weapons to lunch at public venues “downright weird” and “downright scary.” That is to say, we (nearly all of us) took one giant step forward.  Think ‘moon landing’ in the realm of public safety.
But, after the “downright scary and weird” crowd screamed and frothed at the mouth, the Institute removed the offending statement. Chris W. Cox, the N.R.A.’s chief lobbyist, explained that the organization “unequivocally” supports open carry and insisting that it’s “been the leader of open carry efforts across the country.” The state of Michigan is a good example of these “efforts” which includes attempts to allow open carry in churches and bars, havens where it is obviously necessary to demonstrate the size of one’s penis, oops, I mean gun.

Two steps back.   Just saying . . .