n2doc

n2doc's Journal

October 27, 2015

Fungi Found in Brains of Alzheimer's Patients

Despite years of intense medical research, the cause of Alzheimer's remains enigmatic. The ultimate molecular manifestation of the disease consists of the accumulation of a small toxic protein called amyloid beta that causes inflammation and destroys neurons. Why this occurs in some individuals but not others is unknown. Genetic, immunological, and environmental risk factors have been investigated, but no smoking gun has emerged.

A relatively new hypothesis is that fungal infection can trigger the disease. Back in 2014, a group of Spanish researchers found fungal DNA and proteins in the brains of Alzheimer's patients. Now, the same team has performed a new analysis using fungus-specific antibodies. They show that several different fungi are present, both inside and outside cells, throughout the brains of Alzheimer's patients. (See figure.)

In the figure above, the authors stained (in green) various regions of an Alzheimer's brain with antibodies against four fungi: Candida famata, Candida albicans, Phoma betae, and Syncephalastrum racemosum. All samples were positive. The authors then performed PCR, a test that detects DNA, on ten additional brains with Alzheimer's. All contained fungi, while control (disease-free) brains did not.

So, does this constitute "slam dunk" evidence for a fungal cause of Alzheimer's disease? Unfortunately, no. There are still many questions that need to be answered. For instance:

1. Is fungal infection a cause or consequence of Alzheimer's? It is possible, if not likely, that people with Alzheimer's disease are so sick that their brains become susceptible to fungal infection. Under this scenario, fungus would be a consequence, not a cause, of Alzheimer's.
more

http://www.realclearscience.com/journal_club/2015/10/27/fungi_found_in_brains_of_alzheimers_patients_109425.html

October 27, 2015

Woman charged with McChicken assault

A woman is jailed in Clinton County after police responded to a domestic violence incident at about 2 p.m. Sunday in Renovo.

The woman, 31, was reported to have struck a male victim multiple times with her fists, a metal crutch and a McChicken sandwich. The victim, 32, sustained multiple scratches.

The woman was placed in the Clinton County Correctional Facility on charges of simple assault and harassment, police said. No names were released

http://www.centredaily.com/2015/10/26/4985555_woman-charged-with-mcchicken-assault.html?rh=1

Should be charged with assault with a deadly sandwich….

October 27, 2015

Why an Iowa Poll Is Unfair to Bernie Sanders

There are very good reasons to question a new Monmouth poll that shows Hillary Rodham Clinton leading by 41 percentage points in Iowa.

Most other polls have tended to show a tight race, but Monmouth shows a blowout. Why?

One possibility is that Mrs. Clinton has made gains over the last few weeks, thanks to Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the race or her performance in the Benghazi hearing. But another possibility is the sampling frame of the survey. There are good reasons to believe that the Monmouth poll excludes many voters who are supporting Mr. Sanders.

What’s a sampling frame? Basically, it’s the people who could be selected to participate in the survey. According to the Monmouth poll’s methodology description, the poll’s sample was drawn “from a list of registered Democratic voters who voted in at least one of the last two state primary elections.”

These two conditions — being a registered Democrat and recent primary participation — exclude many of Mr. Sanders’s supporters.

He fares best among unaffiliated voters in most polls, and thousands of them will participate in the Iowa caucuses. To participate in the caucuses, you have to be a registered Democrat — but you can change your voter registration at the event, so people who are currently unaffiliated or even Republican could ultimately participate.

more
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/upshot/why-an-iowa-poll-is-unfair-to-bernie-sanders.html

October 27, 2015

WI Republicans Fast-tracking Bill that Effectively Kills Workers' Comp

Wisconsin has the distinction of being the birthplace of the Worker's Compensation system.

Approximately 100 years ago, labor and management struck a "grand bargain" where if a worker gets injured at work, the worker cannot sue their employer for damages—even if the injury is clearly the employer's fault.

…

Next week, Wisconsin Republicans plan to throw all that out the window. According to memo sent to all legislators late Wednesday afternoon, Rep. John Spiros in the Wisconsin Assembly and Sen. Duey Stroebel in the Senate, plan on jointly introducing the legislation on October 29. (The Legislative Reference Bureau's review of the legislation is below.)

Under the new system, worker's still will not be allowed to sue their employers for workplace injuries, but will be required to prove that the workplace injury wasn't their fault to receive their full compensation-- which is still codified at the meager rate.

Wisconsin Republicans have actually figured out a way to make things worse for workers than before Worker's Compensation came along-- because at least in the bad old days of the Gilded Age, a worker might get justice in court.

- See more at: http://progressive.org/news/2015/10/188374/wi-republicans-fast-tracking-bill-effectively-kills-workers-comp

October 27, 2015

Charles Pierce- Why Does America Need a 'Deal' to Not Blow Itself Up?

It appears that our elected officials have managed to agree that it is a good thing if the government keeps functioning and that it would be a bad thing if the entire world economy were to melt down. You have to give them credit.

"We successfully secured equal increases in funding defense and non-defense priorities," said House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi. "We have extended the solvency of Social Security Disability Insurance and protected millions of seniors from a significant increase in their Medicare Part B premiums and deductibles next year. Most importantly, we have affirmed that the full faith and credit of the United States is non-negotiable and inviolable."

In other words—we've managed to keep the crazies at bay for a couple of years, and none of this will come up again to make the presidential candidates uncomfortable, and please don't stab us all, Dr. Bennie (The Blade) Carson. All American politicians now exist under the threat that Dr. Bennie The Blade will show up and slaughter them all. This is such a great election.

(A brief aside: so Doctor Ben used to maybe think about stabbing people. He grew up to be an acclaimed neurosurgeon. He's good with a blade. Hey, for me, this sounds like somebody making a constructive living out of what might only have been a childhood hobby.)

Naturally, the biggest threat to the deal comes from the flying monkey caucus.

Louisiana Republican Rep. John Fleming told reporters Boehner essentially "threw committee chairmen under the bus" and suggested this big deal was being dropped on members now because the committees failed to do their work. But, in Fleming's telling, House Budget Committee Chairman Tom Price, R-Georgia, pushed back, saying that he was in fact working on fiscal reforms but was told by leadership to stand down. Roughly 10 House conservatives got up and complained in the meeting about the process of cutting a major deal and rushing it to the floor without going through regular order, lawmakers said. Rep. Walter Jones, a conservative from North Carolina, said he still was waiting on the details -- but added that he "would not be blackmailed" into voting for a debt limit increase. Across the Capitol, the complaints were just as sharp. Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina said, "It's too early to tell (but) I'm leaning no" on the budget deal. "I'm not necessarily in a position where I think it's in the best interest of our country," he said. Senate GOP Whip John Cornyn, the No. 2 in his conference, added: "It's a mixed bag, there is no question about it. I don't think you'll hear anybody popping any champagne corks."

If there were a substantial Democratic equivalent to this, there might be an equal amount of hell raised over the deal's finagling with the Social Security disability trust fund, which has been a target for conservative mendacity and vandalism for almost 30 years. (See, again, the story of Marcus Stephens.) I get a little nervous when I hear Nancy Pelosi talk about "extending the solvency" of the trust fund, because that's exactly the phrase Republicans use when they're talking about privatizing Social Security as a whole. And, while I understand the urgency of getting this deal done, it's hard for me to see the "reforms" of this aspect of Social Security as anything more than a sign that the whole program might be open for business at some later date, particularly if the flying monkeys in the House push new Speaker Paul Ryan in the direction in which Ryan has been dying to go for his entire public career. This is worth keeping an eye on.

more
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a39193/budget-deal-celebrations/

October 27, 2015

Mike Tyson endorses Trump for president

Former professional boxer Mike Tyson thinks America should be run like a business and is thus throwing his support behind real estate mogul Donald Trump for president.

"He should be president of the United States," Tyson told HuffPost Live of the Republican presidential candidate.

Tyson said it's time for something new after President Obama's eight years in the White House.
"Let's run America like a business, where no colors matter," Tyson said. "Whoever can do the job, gets the job."

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news-campaigns-presidential-campaigns/258162-mike-tyson-endorses-trump-for

Don't let mike near your ears, Donald!

October 27, 2015

As Pot Prohibition Crumbles, Marijuana Consumers Are Less Likely To Abuse It

It stands to reason that legalizing marijuana, by making it easier, cheaper, and less risky to obtain, would encourage consumption. That is mostly a positive development, since it implies greater consumer satisfaction as more people enjoy a product that prohibition made harder to get. But it also stands to reason that as marijuana consumption rises, so will marijuana-related problems. The extent of those problems is a big part of the current debate about the wisdom of emulating Colorado, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska by treating marijuana suppliers as legitimate businesses instead of criminal organizations.

Contrary to what prohibitionists tend to assume, the increase in marijuana-related problems following legalization may not be proportional to the increase in consumption. It’s plausible that people prone to excess are less likely to be deterred by prohibition than people of more moderate habits. If so, problem users may represent a smaller share of cannabis consumers after legalization than they did before, which means marijuana’s benefit-to-cost ratio would improve. A study published yesterday by JAMA Psychiatry provides some evidence that as the number of cannabis consumers increases, the percentage who experience serious cannabis-related problems will decline.

That is not the way most news outlets presented the study’s results. “Marijuana use has more than doubled in the U.S. since the beginning of the century,” NBC News reported, “but so have problems for users.” Reuters’ gloss was similar: “As attitudes and laws in the US have become more tolerant of marijuana, the proportion of adults using and abusing the substance at least doubled between 2001 and 2013.” Under the headline “Marijuana Use—and Abuse—in the U.S. Has Doubled in the Last Decade,” Newsweek declared that “marijuana use disorders are now a bigger problem than ever.” These alarming reports not only exaggerate the bad news in the study; they overlook the good news.

Examining data from two large surveys of adults conducted in 2001-02 and 2012-13, Columbia University psychiatrist Deborah Hasin and her colleagues found that the share of respondents who reported using marijuana in the previous year rose from 4.1% to 9.5%. Hasin et al. argue that “more permissive” marijuana “laws and attitudes” are largely responsible for this increase in cannabis consumption. But the same factors may also have made survey respondents more willing to admit marijuana use, in which case some of the increase would be illusory.

more
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2015/10/22/as-pot-prohibition-crumbles-marijuana-consumers-are-less-likely-to-abuse-it/

October 27, 2015