A PRICE on delaying death?

This is a HUGE topic........Can you "put a price on delaying death?" There is a revolutionary drug that may cost $93,000 to add FOUR MONTHS to the life of prostate cancer patients. This drug has very little side effects, by the way...patients are comfortable until the end, apparently. Here's an important snippet (in italics) from the article, though I hope you read the whole thing, it's not long and it's fascinating:

An estimated 200,000 new cases of prostate cancer will be diagnosed in 2010, according to the National Cancer Institute. While only a fraction of these cases will ever become eligible for treatment with Provenge, the potential burden on Medicare funds is sizable.

Currently, Medicare is not allowed to deny a treatment based on cost alone, but in the coming years, "it will be difficult to sustain coverage of these very costly procedures considering the Medicare program is facing a huge long-term deficit," David Howard, assistant professor in the department of Health Policy and Management at Emory's Rollins School of Public Health, says.

"Ten years, 20 years down the road, Congress is going to have to rewrite the law to allow cost to play into coverage decisions."

UHOH. Congress will decide? And, this drug may also be effective for BREAST CANCER.

CAN we put a price on life? Can we pay these huge prices for four months more life?

WHAT DO YOU THINK? It's a HUGE topic and I hope we can get some good input here..thanks.

z

Vicious attacks at FOX? What do you think?

CAROL and MUSTANG are featuring this video about ISLAM....It's so important I applaud them for blogging it and had to blog it here, too.


The following video is one I found yesterday when a friend emailed me about the Muslim Family day at Six Flags......Nothing really troubling here, the muslim spokeswoman reminds us how muslims, too, died at the WTC on 9/11, and she explains why the grouped picked 9/12 for this Family Day (the only minor objection FOX had, by the way), and she proceeds to talk about how much charity muslims do here in America.......but look at her eyes, her demeanor.. "Salaam Aleichem" Keep the video above in mind.......



HERE is where MediaMatters thinks it shows "FOX'S LATEST VICIOUS ATTACK ON ISLAM TARGETS" (I wish they're produced the last "vicious attack on islam targets"...just for FAIRNESS, you know!) When you read the linked piece, you'll see that the counter interview by the muslim in my second video above hardly makes this "vicious" or "Fox's LATEST attack..." on ANYTHING. FOX was extremely respectful in its interview with Kaufman, the man against the Six Flags Day and, and featured the Muslim opinion the very next day. Both sides' information just doesn't count as news anymore, folks. :-) Truth is "vicious"?

This Six Flags Muslim Family Day started in 2000.....it doesn't seem to be too objectionable, except that I'd hate to see the UPROAR should Six Flags host PROTESTANT CHRISTIAN FAMILY DAY, huh? You think there just might be a review of THAT on CNN or MSNBC? :-)
z

This could save a LIFE...

HERE is a VERY important article on CPR which includes the fact that experts are no longer recommending the old "breathe in the mouth and then push on the the chest" procedure.
I am extremely private about details concerning my Mr. Z's passing last October 10th, but suffice it to say I thought he was alive for good reason and 911 talked me through the chest pumping..."no mouth anymore". He didn't make it but someone you love could....or even a stranger.
How many more of us might try to save a stranger in a dire situation if we knew 'just' pushing on his or her chest will suffice, that you do not have to breathe for that person?
Please read the article...............if it saves one life, it's worth the blog space.

this is dedicated to my Mr. Z. But then, everything is.
z

WILL hits it OUT OF THE PARK............and so does my friend

HERE is the transcript of one fantastic speech by the amazing George Will, the author of several books on politics and baseball. I don't always find myself agreeing with him but I sure do agree with every word he said in his speech to the Cato Institute in May. I do hope you read the whole linked article.... here are some terrific quotes (in italics) from it:
It is a principle of liberal social legislation that a program for the poor is a poor program. I believe that today, as has been the case for 100 years, and as will be the case for the foreseeable future, the American political argument is an argument between two Princetonians: James Madison of the class of 1771, and Thomas Woodrow Wilson of the class of 1879. I firmly believe that the most important decision taken anywhere in the 20th century was the decision where to locate the Princeton graduate college. Woodrow Wilson, then Princeton's president, wanted it located on the campus, others wanted it located, where it in fact is, up on the golf course away from campus. When Wilson lost that, he had one of his characteristic tantrums, went into politics, and ruined the 20th century. I'm simplifying a bit. Madison asserted that politics should take its bearings from human nature and from the natural rights with which we are endowed, and which preexist government. Woodrow Wilson, like all people steeped in the 19th century discovery that history is a proper noun - History - with a mind and a life of its own, argued that human nature is as malleable and changeable as history itself, and that it's the job of the state to regulate and guide the evolution of human nature and the changeable nature of the rights we are owed by the government that - in his view - dispenses rights. Madison said rights pre-exist government. Wilson said government exists to dispense whatever agenda of rights suits its fancy, and to annihilate, regulate, attenuate, or dilute others. Madison said the rights we are owed are those necessary for the individual pursuit of happiness. Wilson and the Progressives said the rights you deserve are those that will deliver material happiness to you, and spare you the strain and terror of striving. There are reasons to be downcast at the moment. Certain recent elections have not gone so well. Let me remind you, however, of something, again going back to 1964. In 1964 the liberal candidate got 90 percent of the electoral votes. Eight years later the liberal candidate got 3 percent of the electoral votes. This is a very changeable country.
Z: Please, God.

Here is an email I got this morning from my friend who sent me the article above. I had asked her last night via email "what do YOU think of it?" My friend is a black American woman and she responds:

I liked and agreed with the article. I disagree with the direction that the country is headed under the Obama administration, but I am not foolish enough to think that all this madness began with him. For the past 30 or so years the country has been headed downhill, while at the same time technology has exploded. I can't tell if the two are connected -- I'm not that smart. But, what I do see is that the lack of concern for the sovereignty of our nation did not start in 2008 or 07, or 06 ... there has been a steady decline for decades. Furthermore, I believe that at the bottom of it there are those that will benefit greatly from the dismantling of America and you can rest assured, it won't be the American people. It is a sad state of affairs that the American people find themselves and, as long as "they" can keep us at each other's throats ... we won't know what hit us. It is still my firm and abiding belief that the ONLY solution for the American people is for us to stop and look at our neighbor with fresh eyes, not with the eyes that the media/Senate/Congress, etc. would like us to ... I think we will see that we are all struggling and that we all want a good life for our families. I think that the sharing of ideas will set this country ablaze with renewed energy for saving what is ours, AMERICA. Someone needs recognize that it is unfair that our children aren't allowed to learn about ALL ideologies, both conservative and liberal alike. It is so insane to me that liberals believe that their ideas are the ONLY ideas that count. This is crazy. Anyway ... I could go on and on ...but I won't bore you further.

Didn't bore ME, did it bore YOU, geeeZ readers? :-)
z

Help Sharron Angle DEFEAT Harry Reid

Please click HERE...ANY amount will help! It's against Harry Reid, and he must be stopped.

Oprah and you Southern RACISTS!!?

Whether one watches Oprah or not (and millions do) she's very effective and she said something Tuesday that really needs to be heard.

Dr. Henry Louis Gates was on her show discussing people who he found through DNA testing are related, like Eva Longoria/Yo Yo Ma, and Mike Nichols/Meryl Streep. Gates was apparently advertising his FACES OF AMERICA special for PBS, which was aired in February, so this Oprah show I happened upon must be a summer rerun. While talking about DNA, etc., Gates started talking about how it's a scientific fact that "If there was a Garden of Eden, it was in East Africa...scientific FACT!"

Oprah looked into the camera and said "...which, of course, lots of Southerners won't be too happy to know!" with such a cute little smile on her face. That's for all you RACIST Southerners who'd be SO upset to find that your earliest ancestors came from (gasp!) AFRICA. Aren't you? :-)

Speaking of TV shows, as you know, Obama will be the first president to visit THE VIEW on Thursday. Should the tax payers foot that bill for his travel, etc., or should the DNC? What do you think? I sure wish he'd given those thousands of Boy Scouts celebrating their Jamboree a visit instead of a video, don't you?

geeeeeZ
z

First-hand information from HAITI

THIS article reminded me of something a friend said to me a few weeks ago, something I'd wanted to blog on because it's just more information we're not hearing.

This friend's 26 yr old grandson (I'll call him John) went to Africa with the Peace Corps...he was so disillusioned with the way nothing was really getting done in Kenya, where he was, that, after almost 2 years, he left and went to work for a French relief company with which he is working in Haiti right now.

John was visiting his grandparents last month and told him that the biggest problem in Haiti is that the money that's been sent there is not getting to the people nearly as quickly and effectively as it could. In fact, he says it's not reaching them at ALL. He said that he personally is held back by Aristide's grandson, with whom he's always bickering because he blocks all progress the French relief group is trying to accomplish in every way he can. The Haitian government is doing nothing but create roadblocks to progress, the United Nations is doing nothing but throw up walls instead of making things easier, too, and none of the relief workers can quite figure it out but it is doing nothing for their morale or the morale of the Haitian people. His father is going to see him there in a few weeks and I'm hoping he makes an attempt at getting the story to America.

The article about the Haitian orphans, linked above, says that "Yankoski urges those concerned about the (orphaned) children to be patient, and suggests they are far better off at Holy Family — with nutritious meals, schooling and counseling — than if they'd stayed in Haiti." John can vouch for that.
z

LUCKY HAYWARD "pays a PRICE!?"

HERE is the article. From it : "Hayward, who paid the price for a series of gaffes, including the comment "I'd like my life back," will receive a year's salary of 1.045 million pounds ($1.6 million) as part of his severance package. He will also be entitled to draw an annual pension of 600,000 pounds from a pension pot valued at around 11 million pounds and retains his rights to shares under a long-term performance program which could eventually be worth several million pounds if BP's share price recovers."
Poor Tony. HE paid the price? :-) He's banished from the huge problems in America, he gets to leave all that behind, and will be handsomely paid for the rest of his life. "Hayward said it was right that BP embark on its next phase under new leadership...." DUH!
Imagine the guy who's taking over? There isn't enough money in the WORLD to get ME to........although, wait a minute..................if you do a REALLY lousy job and have to go.........hmmm. Where do we SIGN UP?
z

Gilbert and Sully-Man?

Remember the TV show ROSEANNE and the younger daughter character called Darlene? Here's a tidbit about what she's been up to (keep reading, I don't give a darn, either, but you will by the end of this).....
From Wikipedia: In her teens, Sara Gilbert became a vegetarian. Today, she supports numerous organizations such as PETA, Meals on Wheels, Freedom of Speech, Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the AIDS Project Los Angeles. She stated on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson in November 2008 that she has now adopted a vegan lifestyle.

She has been in a relationship with Allison Adler since 2002. They have a son, Levi Hank, born in October 2004 and a daughter, Sawyer, born on August 2, 2007. Adler is the birth mother of Levi and Gilbert is the birth mother of Sawyer.

Isn't all of that just precious? Sara is now producing and will be the main host(ess) of a show aiming to 'dethrone' The View, as the linked article puts it. She and "the co-hosts -- moms with children ranging in age from infant to adult -- will swap stories, challenge each other on issues and engage the studio audience and viewers at home about events in the headlines and their own homes through the lens of motherhood," CBS said in a news release Wednesday. "

I dare say it'll be through a whole other 'lens', too, having read her bio. Maybe they'll cover the benefits of childhood veganism and celebrate how "Mommy will have the experience of having one child THIS time and the OTHER Mommy will have the experience NEXT time!" or "You can say the F word, little Betsy, that's FREEDOM OF SPEECH!" Perhaps they'll discuss the VITAL importance of a strong father in a child's life, actually not sullying males for a change (just threw that in for comic relief through sarcasm! Wishful thinking, I guess). Or do you think they really might have a conservative celebrity mother/host with traditional values on to represent that side of America, at least 50% of our moms today? And, if they do, will they include another usually embarrassing woman like The View's Elisabeth Hasselbeck as their token conservative?

This is yet another reason the Hollywood types who are conservative need to step up to the bat, NOW (not when they 'think they're ready', as I've been told), and produce shows American women and America itself could actually benefit from.

Yes, yes, they're 'entitled'.............but SO ARE WE.
z

CNN's "WHO IS SHIRLEY SHERROD?"

I was channel surfing tonight when I came upon CNN's special "WHO IS SHIRLEY SHERROD?"
I didn't get to see all of it, but did see the part about how her Dad, the father of five girls of whom she was the eldest, was allegedly gunned down by a white farmer during a dispute. They told how she was called into the principal's office and informed that her father'd been killed and a sister of hers was interviewed, in tears, about how terrible the family felt. I can only imagine how awful that would be.
Ms Sherrod then went on to relate how the jury hearing the murder case was all white and acquitted the alleged killer. She was asked by CNN's Don Lemon (who I really rather like sometimes) "Did it make you hate white people?" The show went on to say how her sisters integrated a white high school and how a cross was then burned in the front yard of her home. Sherrod apparently went on to a career of organizing black farmers to 'take on the white establishment.'
I post this because I don't really know what to think of off this Special on CNN. One thing I found odd is that Sherrod, in the interviews we all saw, admits that it's the White House who finally said "pull over NOW and resign your job." But, I saw on the news today that the Obama said, on Thursday, that "the USDA 'jumped the gun' in letting Sherrod go." How's that? Sherrod clearly said the White House did it.
Even THIS article from AP, as unbelievably biased as it is, admits that the White House had her let go.

What do you think of CNN doing a whole special telling us that, essentially, Sherrod seems to have been a racist for good reasons? My feeling is that the whole special was a little over the top....just plain ODD. It's such partisanship, such bias. Don't you think so? I even wonder if CNN was asked to do it. What do you think?

z