Archive for bribes

Chris Christie Makes Surprise Appearance -- At A Roast Without The Beef

Share

ChristieFiveHamsw391h224

Gotta love the big guy in New Jersey. He's not hiding in the face of all the troubles he's brought down on the state. His political ambitions are in shambles. As a matter of fact, there are so many state and federal prosecutors in New Jersey now investigating him that it's become a cottage industry -- the number two largest employer in New Jersey. How long until Christie proclaims this was his plan all along to boost employment in the Garden State?

Evidently he was invited to a roast. Boy what a surprise he got when he showed up and they weren't serving a roast but rather holding a comedy roast for football great, Boomer Esiason. Christie took the opportunity, ham that he is, to try to make light of the crises that garnish his plate at the Trenton Governor's mansion. Talk about embarrassing.

So, for some awkward moments and some self-deprecating humor, I proudly present Governor Chris Christie in what may turn out to be a long line of striped suits -- or maybe the the new ones might be orange jumpsuits and have the words "New Jersey State Correctional Institution" on the back. So with no further ado, I give you possible future inmate NJ386574:

Share

The FDA Is Afraid Of Home DNA Tests

Share

pregnancy test

One of the largest selling over the counter items to come along in the past ten years is the home pregnancy test. It's simple, safe and for the most part, accurate. Without doubt, there are false negatives and certainly false positives. Regardless of that fact, women who want the test can drop on down to the drug store and pick up a kit. And for many, when they discover that they are with child, they seek immediate medical attention. They leap right into healthy pre-natal care or address the pregnancy in other ways. But the simple point is that the home test started them on a path toward better care and attention.

USA today reports a startling story about another kind of home testing -- done with a simple swab. It's the home DNA test.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Food and Drug Administration is ordering genetic test maker 23andMe to halt sales of its personalized DNA test kits, saying the company has failed to show that the technology is backed by science.

In a warning letter posted online, FDA regulators say the Silicon Valley company is violating federal law because its products claim to identify health risks for more than 250 diseases and health conditions.

23andme test kit

I can't say that I have ever found need for a DNA test. But I'm sure there are many who do -- it's almost a staple test on Jerry Springer, Dr. Drew, Dr. Phil, and Maury Povich. Yet seemingly there's a large number of people who are using these home tests.

 The proliferation of consumer-marketed genetic tests has troubled many public health officials and doctors who worry that the products are built on flimsy science.

So the FDA is claiming that DNA is flimsy science. Tell that to the people in jail or freed from it because of that flimsy science.

Here's where the wheels of doubt and suspicion start working like the cogs at an old steampunk factory. Who's really against this and why?

The FDA warning takes issue with a number of claims the company makes for its saliva-based test kit, particularly calling it a "first step in prevention" against diseases like diabetes, heart disease and breast cancer. Regulators worry that false results from the test could cause patients to receive inadequate or inappropriate medical care.

Let's look at that for a second. You test positive for a possible disease and you're not going to follow up on it? I would think not knowing you had an illness would contribute more to complications and lack of care than knowing. And now with Obamacare and more  people having health coverage, it's as important as ever to have an idea you may be carrying something that can be cured so you'll seek out medical attention.

23andMe says its test can identify women who carry the BRCA gene mutation that significantly increases the risk of breast and ovarian cancer. But a false result could lead women to undergo unnecessary screening, chemotherapy and surgery.

Isn't no result (not being tested) worse than a false result? Early detection is key in curing. This FDA argument is a bogus one at best. What doctor is going to accept a home test result and operate on someone or give them radiation treatments without doing their own followups? If they do, they don't deserve to have a license.

The FDA's concern with 23andMe appears to center on its commercial approach, which sidesteps doctors and health professionals.

The test also claims to predict how patients will respond to popular drugs, including the ubiquitous blood thinner warfarin, which is used to prevent blood clots. The FDA warns that an inaccurate reading there could "have significant unreasonable risk of illness, injury, or death to the patient," if they don't receive the appropriate drug dose.

Once again, it's time to apply some common sense here. Sometimes one doctor prescribes something and another doctor prescribes something else which in combination could cause a conflict. Don't we as patients want to know that so we can contact our physicians and ask.

Center For Disease Control:

In 2011, drug misuse and abuse caused about 2.5 million emergency department (ED) visits. Of these, more than 1.4 million ED visits were related to pharmaceuticals.

An educated and cautious patient is a good thing. Just accepting meds on face value is the real danger. Doctors should welcome this potential heads up. At the very worst, the patient can call the doctor and tell him/her what their home test revealed. Lives could be saved, not lost.

Why doesn't the FDG have the same problem with home pregnancy tests? It seems perhaps the FDA is showing signs of corruption. If they don't get their bribe, their payoff, they don't give their approval. It might be time for an investigation, a home test, on the FDA and see what kind of maladies they're suffering from.

Share

Proof That Chris Christie Has Been Bought By The NRA

Share

.50 caliber rifle

Gov. Chris Christie is a hypocrite. He speaks about about the need for gun safety, then he vetoes a bill that would have put some sane, common sense into his states laws. Paige Lavendar on HuffPo, reports on the veto.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) vetoed legislation on Friday that would have banned .50-caliber rifles from the state, despite backing the same proposal just months ago.

This sounds like another case of 'I was for it before I was against it.' But this time,you need to look at the governor's rationale. If it's sound, then why criticize? But if it's faulty, he's got to be called on it. So try this whopper Christie fashioned in his defense of his veto:

"Tellingly, the legislature points to no instance of this class of firearms being used by even a single criminal in New Jersey," he said. "The wide scope of this total ban, therefore, will not further public safety, but only interfere with lawful recreational pastimes."

Really Governor Mushmouth, no instance of this class of firearm being used by even a single criminal in New Jersey?" What part of your ass did you pull that out from?  I Googled "uses for .50 caliber rifles" and look what came up first:  VPC - the Violence Policy Center's article on criminal activity with the .50 caliber sniper rifle.

The first line of the article is a quote:

"The simple fact is that .50-calibers have not been used in crimes,"
NRA spokesman Andrew Arulandam, Associated Press, August 18, 2004

Sound familiar? Now we know where you're getting your talking points. The NRA. Are you in their hip pocket?

The article on .50 caliber sniper crimes goes on to list many crimes and murders committed using this very classification of weapon. Read it. You'll learn something, Governor Head-Up-Your-A**.

And as for your defense of your veto, you refer to lawful recreational pastimes. How interesting that few of the articles talk or indicate a recreational use. They all describe the weapon's in terms military or sniper purposes. So what kind of lawful uses are you thinking this weapon has?

Why did you this spring, recommend the banning of this killing machine? Again, from Lavendar's article:

In April 2013, Christie recommended banning the sale of Barrett .50-caliber semi-automatic sniper rifles as part of a group of proposals to curb gun violence. On Friday, Christie said the ban wouldn't make the Garden State any more safe, according to Reuters.

So what happened between April and now? How much money did the NRA promise you? What did you promise them in return -- this veto? This is mighty suspicious because you're not just vetoing a bill, you're vetoing a bill you recommended on your own. There was no .50 caliber sniper's rifle pointed at your head when you went public with your thoughts.

You, like Rickie Ricardo, have some 'splainin' to do.

Take a look at the size of these bullets. In case you didn't know, the largest one here is the .50 caliber. On the other end is the .22.

.50 caliber bullets

You're either a idiot which I don't believe, or you're on the take. And I do believe that. Whether it's cash or the NRA's backing you're getting, you're hurting New Jersey and everyone nationwide who believes in you. Your credibility is going down the toilet.

The only part of Sandy Hook that touches you is the 'Sandy' part -- Hurricane Sandy. Money. I'm calling you out: Betrayer!

Share

Reality TV and Reality Law Creation. Fact vs. Fiction.

Share

Congressional bill

Okay, we all understand how a bill becomes law. A bill is proposed  either by the president or a congressperson. If it makes it through congressional committee, it goes to the floor for a vote. From there assuming it passes, it goes to  the President for signature. If he signs it, we have a new law -- unless the Judicial branch finds it unconstitutional. If the president vetoes it, the house and senate get another shot at it -- needing 2/3 majority to override the veto. Boom. You have it. Reality of bill passage.

That's how it's drawn up, anyway, according to the Constitution. But how does it really work?

Real Housewifes

Like with reality TV, you're told something's real, you see it, and you're expected to buy it as reality. Horsepuckey. The truth is the subjects involved are put in scripted/planned situations and these featured characters are told how to react and what to react to. Sorry to burst your bubble but those Housewives of Beverly Hills aren't really housewives. And those Jersey Shore kids aren't just happening on the outrageous drunken adventures on their own. And Househunters shows start with a couple already buying a house and after they close escrow,  they're shown two others houses and they fake interest. I'm not trying to dispel truths you may wish to believe, but thats how these shows are done. They're plotted, scripted and produced. I know because I've worked on them.

So now that we understand reality, let's put a bill under the same eye of scrutiny. Let's take this creating a law as described above, and get down to brass tacks. Examine the real nitty-gritty. And what better way to do it than with animation?  What follows below is how a bill is really passed today, the hoops and rings of fire that must be jumped through. When the framers of the Constitution drew up our guidelines, they didn't know about lobbyists -- though undoubtedly they must have existed. Maybe even agreement on the Constitution itself came down to some backroom horse and slave trading. So with a h/t to Lucian Dixon, here's something to chew on:

Share