What a surprise! George Bush doing something t jeoparde the health and sanity of the American people! Register the shock!!!!
I hope a big old slab of mad cow makes it to the filet mignon in Bohemian Grove this year. I think it would serve those boys right to get the disease themselves. They only thing is that if they all went mad and lost their marbles, how could we tell the difference???????
I am more disappointed with her every time I read something new. She has lost my vote in the primaries. Unless Satan himself is the republican nominee I won't even vote for her in the general election. I'll vote either green or libetarian!!! If you happen to be an ad person checking out this site, here was my ultimate deal breaker. Her health care plan. I resent the way she scapegoated obesity as being responsible for 30% of rising health care costs. That is an OPINION, not a fact. They never even count the cost of side effects from all those dangerous diet pills. Speaking of which, I didn't hear her mention how BigPharmas profits rose considerably. Perhaps because she takes so much in contributions from them. Reducing obesity in elderly women is a priority???? What drug did you slip her? 1) Weight loss INCREASES the chance of death in the elderly. Fat is protective in old people 2) Leave the damn old women alone! If they make it to old age that shouldn't have to worry about dieting, it is inhumane. Let they have their pleasures in peace. Off all the problems we are facing today, who worries about obesity in the elderly???? And I don't want a big brother work place prevention program either. Because who gets targeted tends to be people these bogus prevention specialists can make $ off of. Other employees can do just as much to raise collective premiums : speeding, risky hobbies, etc but there is no money in "managing" them for their own good. No health based witch hunts in the office, no witches in the white house!!!!! (Make that no MORE witches in the white house, after all the Bush women have lived there!!!))
Well, I give Unilever credit for Dove's real beauty campaign. I applaud both their size and age diversity. I think it took courage
and most of my college aged females loved it. The truth is for better or worse ads do influence people. Lots of young women were given an alternate definition of beauty. And lots of us older women are redefining beauty as well. The world would be better off without mega corporations. But until the coming social collapse (and it IS coming!!!!!) at least that was one corporation that did a bit of good. (I say this holding my nose because I can not stand ultra slim fast. But even their new commercials are more reasonable than say Jenny Craig who had the nerve to exploit 911 - how low can you go, or Subway and the obnoxious and offensive ads they have running right now. Boycotting them for life!!!!!)
"Weight obsession is a social disease. If we cared more about CO2 than BMI there would still be time."
Richard Garfield was critical of the 2006 Lancet study in a letter to the Lancet journal (see below). He was also quoted as being critical of it in a London Times article (see link and quote below). Simply because he denies (in your quote) that it's "discredited" doesn't mean he wasn't critical of it. He was critical of it.
The Lancet 2007; 369:101
DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60058-0
Correspondence
Mortality in Iraq
Johan von Schreeb (a), Hans Rosling (a) and Richard Garfield (b)
The uncertainty of estimates from retrospective mortality surveys in humanitarian emergencies is composed of both sampling and reporting errors. Gilbert Burnham and colleagues, in their mortality study in Iraq (Oct 21, p 1421),1 quantify the sampling error, but the security situation did not allow for the supervision and repeat interviews needed to estimate reporting errors.
Over-reporting of deaths was regarded as limited because 92% of reported deaths were supported by death certificates, but Burnham and colleagues do not report who issued these certificates. Neither do they discuss why the availability of death certificates increased from 81% in 2004.2
The existence of a substantial reporting error is supported by the finding of low child mortality. The study population only reported 54 non-violent deaths in those younger than 15 years, and 1474 births—ie, an under-15 mortality of 36 per 1000 births. This is a third of the estimated preinvasion under-5 mortality.3 Since nothing indicates that child mortality has decreased,4 the results suggest that fewer than half of child deaths were reported.
Without an explanation for the high availability of death certificates, one could assume that the reporting error is of the same size as the sampling error (±30%). This assumption still yields at least a five-fold higher number of violent deaths than the passive surveillance mortality numbers.5 If the death certificates are valid and the availability above 90%, it seems better to monitor mortality by compiling data from the local agencies that issue these certificates than by doing further dangerous household surveys.
We declare that we have no conflict of interest.
References
1. Burnham G, Lafta R, Doocy D, Roberts L. Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: across-sectional cluster sample survey. Lancet 2006; 368: 1421-1428. Abstract | Full Text | Full-Text PDF (110 KB) | CrossRef
2. Roberts L, Lafta R, Garfield R, Khudhairi J, Burnham G. Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample survey. Lancet 2004; 364: 1857-1864. Abstract | Full Text | Full-Text PDF (252 KB) | CrossRef
3. Ali MM, Blacker J, Jones G. Annual mortality rates and excess deaths of children under five in Iraq, 1991-98. Popul Stud 2003; 57: 217-226. MEDLINE | CrossRef
4. UNICEF. The State of the world's children 2007. New York: United Nations Children's Fund, 2006:.
5. Iraq Body Count
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
(accessed Dec 18, 2006)..
Link: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673607600580/
From the London Times, March 05, 2007:
Dr Richard Garfield, an American academic who had collaborated with the authors on an earlier study, declined to join this one because he did not think that the risk to the interviewers was justifiable. Together with Professor Hans Rosling and Dr Johan Von Schreeb at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Dr Garfield wrote to The Lancet to insist there must be a “substantial reporting error” because Burnham et al suggest that child deaths had dropped by two thirds since the invasion. The idea that war prevents children dying, Dr Garfield implies, points to something amiss.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1469636.ece
What a surprise! George Bush doing something t jeoparde the health and sanity of the American people! Register the shock!!!!
I hope a big old slab of mad cow makes it to the filet mignon in Bohemian Grove this year. I think it would serve those boys right to get the disease themselves. They only thing is that if they all went mad and lost their marbles, how could we tell the difference???????
I am more disappointed with her every time I read something new. She has lost my vote in the primaries. Unless Satan himself is the republican nominee I won't even vote for her in the general election. I'll vote either green or libetarian!!! If you happen to be an ad person checking out this site, here was my ultimate deal breaker. Her health care plan. I resent the way she scapegoated obesity as being responsible for 30% of rising health care costs. That is an OPINION, not a fact. They never even count the cost of side effects from all those dangerous diet pills. Speaking of which, I didn't hear her mention how BigPharmas profits rose considerably. Perhaps because she takes so much in contributions from them. Reducing obesity in elderly women is a priority???? What drug did you slip her? 1) Weight loss INCREASES the chance of death in the elderly. Fat is protective in old people 2) Leave the damn old women alone! If they make it to old age that shouldn't have to worry about dieting, it is inhumane. Let they have their pleasures in peace. Off all the problems we are facing today, who worries about obesity in the elderly???? And I don't want a big brother work place prevention program either. Because who gets targeted tends to be people these bogus prevention specialists can make $ off of. Other employees can do just as much to raise collective premiums : speeding, risky hobbies, etc but there is no money in "managing" them for their own good. No health based witch hunts in the office, no witches in the white house!!!!! (Make that no MORE witches in the white house, after all the Bush women have lived there!!!))
Go Obama!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, I give Unilever credit for Dove's real beauty campaign. I applaud both their size and age diversity. I think it took courage
and most of my college aged females loved it. The truth is for better or worse ads do influence people. Lots of young women were given an alternate definition of beauty. And lots of us older women are redefining beauty as well. The world would be better off without mega corporations. But until the coming social collapse (and it IS coming!!!!!) at least that was one corporation that did a bit of good. (I say this holding my nose because I can not stand ultra slim fast. But even their new commercials are more reasonable than say Jenny Craig who had the nerve to exploit 911 - how low can you go, or Subway and the obnoxious and offensive ads they have running right now. Boycotting them for life!!!!!)
"Weight obsession is a social disease. If we cared more about CO2 than BMI there would still be time."
Pages