Thursday, July 31, 2014

Teens Fight Back Against Ronald And The Burger King With Catchy Rap Song

There are a number of reasons not to say "I'm lovin' it" to fast food in America, but these Oakland, California-based kids say it in a powerful, catchy way: With a rap song.



In this film from Muse Video, a collaborative project between Bay Area youth organizations aiming to mix music and news, a group of teens take on the problems with the fast food system using very clever lyrics and equally scary costumes.



"Are you feelin' it, or are you feelin' sick?," the main rapper asks.



One thing is for sure: we're definitely lovin' this video.







from Healthy Living - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1AEkJf7

via IFTTT

Misty Copeland's Under Armour Ad Is Like Nothing You've Seen

We've been anxiously awaiting Misty Copeland's first commercial for Under Armour ever since we learned that the American Ballet Theatre soloist signed with the athletic company back in January. And from the looks of this 60-second spot, it was well worth the wait.



The ad begins with Copeland balancing on pointe while a young woman's voice is heard reading a rejection letter. As the camera pans over her physique, the letter lists all of the reasons why the applicant didn't make the cut, including the sentence, "You have the wrong body for ballet."



But Copeland spends the second half of the spot disproving that sentiment, powerfully and gracefully dancing her way across a stage.



The video is significant for a number of reasons, namely for marking a major marketing shift for a brand whose image has been traditionally masculine. The ad was released in conjunction with the brand's new website, I Will What I Want, which "celebrates the will to find inner strength and to follow no one."



Check out the inspiring video above.







from Healthy Living - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1s7GTBC

via IFTTT

Amazing 'See-Through' Mice Seen As Aid To Study Of Anatomy

NEW YORK (AP) — Researchers have found a way to make see-through mice, but you won't find these critters scampering in your kitchen.



The transparent rodents aren't alive and they're for research only, to help scientists study fine details of anatomy. Before they are treated with chemicals, the animals are euthanized and their skin removed. Researchers made their inner organs transparent, but not their bones.



The results look like a rodent-shaped block of gelatin with the organs held in place by connective tissue and a gel used in the procedure.



Mice are mainstays of biomedical research because much of their basic biology is similar to ours and they can be altered in ways that simulate human diseases.



Scientists have been able to make tissues transparent to some degree for a century, and in recent years several new methods have been developed. Last year, for example, a technique that produced see-through mouse brains made headlines. Such treatments reveal far more detail than X-rays or MRI exams could deliver.



The new work is the first to make an entire transparent mouse, experts said.



It should be useful for projects like mapping the details of the nervous system or the spread of cancer within lab animals, said Vivian Gradinaru of the California Institute of Technology, senior author of a paper describing the work. It was released Thursday by the journal Cell.



It might also help doctors analyze biopsy samples from people someday, she said.



The see-through technique involves pumping a series of chemicals through blood vessels, as well as other passages in the brain and spinal cord. Some chemicals form a mesh to hold tissue in place. Others wash out the fats that make tissue block light. It takes about a week to create a transparent mouse, Gradinaru said. The researchers have also made transparent rats, which take about two weeks, she said.



Scientists can use stains to highlight anatomical details like the locations of active genes.



___



Online:



Cell: http://www.cell.com



___



Malcolm Ritter can be followed at http://ift.tt/PnQkWY



from Healthy Living - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1m2mGbe

via IFTTT

FX “Partners” with Kelsey Grammer and Martin Lawrence

In the new FX comedy series Partners, Kelsey Grammer and Martin Lawrence play two Chicago lawyers from vastly different backgrounds who unexpectedly meet on their worst day. Marcus Jackson (Lawrence) is going through a heartbreaking divorce, while Allen Braddock (Grammer) just got fired from his father’s firm. After fate brings them together, they form a friendship and start their own storefront law firm. Two comic heavyweights team up in the new FX comedy Partners, with Kelsey Grammer and Martin Lawrence playing down-on-their-luck lawyers who are brought together by fate and become cohorts. If the law firm of Grammer & Lawrence … Continue reading →


The post FX “Partners” with Kelsey Grammer and Martin Lawrence appeared first on Channel Guide Magazine.






from Channel Guide Magazine http://ift.tt/1oRYnSf

via IFTTT

Shopping for Your Health Care: Can You Tell if the Price Is Right?

By now, many people know that our country's health care costs are unsustainably high, and rising. But the component details -- the prices for testing, medications, procedures and hospital stays -- have remained arbitrary and opaque even to most health care leaders and physicians, not to mention patients.



Of the many drivers behind our high health care costs, low transparency and consumer awareness are particularly intriguing ones. The idea is straightforward: Without accurate, usable knowledge about how much health care services cost, patients can't make choices that satisfy both their health needs and their pocketbooks, like they could if they were purchasing cars or refrigerators. For decades, patients have received care without really knowing what it costs.



Access to more information, on the other hand, could allow people to make the economically sensible decisions that drive prices down to more competitive, market-dictated levels. For example, patients needing knee surgery could compare prices from multiple hospitals and choose the highest value option, while providers would have to increase quality and reduce cost to compete for business. The movement towards added transparency and awareness create the potential for patients to shop for their care in ways that have never before been possible.



Some believe that we have made strides over the last few years. Medicare released nationwide information about what prices hospitals and clinics charge, and actually get paid, for everything from joint replacement surgeries to hospitalizations for pneumonia or heart attacks. It then upped the ante by publishing information about what individual doctors charge medicare for their services. With these two releases, anyone can now go to the Medicare website, pull information for a number of doctors or hospitals, and compare their charges against each other.



At least for now, however, shopping thoughtfully for your health care will remain far more difficult than the click of a few buttons. The first issue is that most bills are negotiated and therefore don't equal what insurance companies or patients pay out of pocket. The other is that additional costs are frequently baked into bills, including those around "case mix adjustment" (added costs for hospitals caring for sicker patients) and education (added costs for hospitals that sponsor new, young doctors in residency training). The medical community are split on how helpful all this new data really is.



Also, there's no simple answer for whether a hospital is better because it cares for sicker patients or employees young, resident physicians. Issues of costs and physician experience certainly exist. However, the benefits -- added expertise of doctors who care for sicker, more complex patients; more minds thinking about a diagnosis and accessing new data -- are not captured in pricing data. It's probably no surprise, but amid all of this uncertainty, hospitals are charging wildly different prices for the same thing.



So what's a value conscious person to do with all of this new information? For now, unfortunately, the answer appears to be "not much." Data is good, but using what we have now to shop for health care is still premature for a few reasons.



First, pricing information needs to be adjusted to represent out of pocket costs and presented in a user-friendly way. With the complexities of negotiated prices, multiple payers, and emerging reform, this will continue to be challenging. But if the vision is ultimately to deliver helpful information to end-users, we will need simple ways to compare true consumer prices. It's a stretch to some, but formats like those used for travel/hotel websites (think Kayak for hospitals) come to mind.



Second, prices have to reflect bundled services when possible. Knowing how much your knee surgery will cost is good. Knowing how much the knee surgery, post-operation hospital stay, and subsequent rehab fees will be is better. We aren't at the point of providing this level of cost information, but it's where we should be headed.



Third, information should eventually include more than prices. As with almost every other service or good, there's more to value than just price. Using the car analogy, many of us buy vehicles only partially based on price, often also taking brand and dependability (which are tangible but sometimes less concrete than price) into account. Likewise, we will need information about hospital and clinic "brand." It already exists somewhat in the form of national news rankings, word-of-mouth, and marketing. But we could do a much better job strengthening that information by adding aspects like satisfaction scores, patient-reported outcomes, and other physician and hospital quality measures.



Fourth, pricing data must accommodate challenges that arise from different types of care. Asking people to be economic about colonoscopies and knee surgeries, relatively straightforward procedures with low mortality risks, is appropriate. Asking the same of them in intensive-care settings -- where patients are extremely sick, clear data is often limited, and the lives of loved ones often hang in the balance -- is probably not. Our models for consumer awareness will need to recognize and accommodate these challenges.



Ultimately, I believe in a tomorrow with more transparency and greater consumer awareness; one with troves of information at our fingertips; one where we can make health decisions with our eyes open. So for all of their limitations, the most recent Medicare releases are steps in the right direction.



But the price just isn't right yet for using that data in any meaningful way. Because in the future I envision, new challenges await all of us, tough choices that we've never had to face head on, choices about what we value, and we're really willing to pay for it.



from Healthy Living - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1tz8gqV

via IFTTT

Never Second Guess a Second Opinion

The day Jackson was diagnosed with cancer, it was like being hit by a bus.



"Your 1-year-old has cancer." (Bus.)



"He's going to need a year or so of grueling treatment." (Being dragged behind bus.)



"He has a 30-40 percent chance of survival." (Hit by second bus.)



I remember walking with our nurse to the registration department to admit my baby for his first round of chemo. It was after the full diagnosis conference, and I felt like I wanted to kick someone. I was mad that kids could actually get cancer. I was mad about the lack of options to cure pediatric cancer, especially Neuroblastoma. I was spitting, hissing, Momma mad.



In my memory, there is literally a light that shines down on this nurse's head as she listened. She comforted and reassured me that we were doing the best we could based on the research available. That she hated it as much as I did. She spoke in detail about what was going to be the most important part of the plan to beat his cancer, based on her years as an oncology nurse. She gently, but firmly, yanked me out from under the bus.



From our conversation, I knew I had to stop sitting still. Stop accepting that we got the best, without checking it out myself. I chose to not accept statistics. I couldn't take my son's cancer away, but there were other things I could do.



Everett and I got busy researching. When it comes to cancer treatment, comfort zone be damned. Go where the best is. Fight with the best medicine. Based on our late nights and private referrals from other cancer parents, we discovered one of the best Neuroblastoma surgeons was at Sloan Kettering in New York City.



Actually getting a second opinion seemed daunting at first. Traveling from Virginia to New York for surgery scared me. Would our insurance cover it? Would we like the surgeon? Where would we stay? Could we afford it?



But that's the big thing about questions -- if you never get the answers, you'll always wonder if you did the right thing.



It only took a few minutes once we met him to know this was the surgeon who would operate on Jackson. He performed more than 10 times the amount of solid tumor surgeries a year than our home hospital. He had published reports we could read and ongoing clinical trials. In addition to great hands and surgical results, he was a kind man. I found that parents were traveling from all over the world to have him do their child's surgery.



A month later, we were back at MSKCC, but this time to stay for surgery. It was all worth it in that moment when the surgeon came out, still in his scrubs, to tell us he'd removed all of Jackson's cancer.



2014-07-30-335643_4573805393991_1472956397_o.jpg



It's been over five years since his surgery and I know we made the right decision by getting a second opinion. The combination of chemotherapy, radiation, stem cell transplant and immunotherapy at our local children's hospital, with the surgery in New York, just seemed to work on Jackson. He's still cancer free. Even if it hadn't, I know we did everything we could possibly do. That means something.



One of the biggest things I've learned as a parent is to never second guess getting a second opinion. How else will you know what else is out there or if you're already where you should be? My advice is to quiet the questions and start the process.



This is how:




  • Get to know your illness. I cannot stress this point enough. For us, it was Neuroblastoma. Know it inside and out. Find the hospitals that specialize in your particular illness. Know it so well that you stump your doctors and they have to learn more. Your Google M.D. will help you narrow down locations and doctors.





  • Find a place to start. You're dealing with a lot of information being thrown at you at one time and you're seriously overwhelmed. Schedule a care conference with your medical team. Bring notes and ask key questions, like: "What's the most important to get right? "What are other institutions doing? And, "How have things changed in regards to treatment over the past five years?"





  • Know second opinions are normal. All offices will be able to assist in this process. If you're worried about hurting feelings, don't. If your doctor's ego gets a little bruised, it's really okay, he or she will get over it. And if they don't, that's why you're getting a second opinion, right?





  • Make a second opinion ally. Our nurse was integral in pulling Jackson's medical files and putting scan results on a CD and shipping to New York. Jackson's oncologist emailed as well. If you have an ally in your home doctor's office, you can ask their opinion for facilities to get a second opinion. But be sure to bring an extra copy yourself; Jackson's scans never reached the surgeon by appointment time, and we luckily brought an extra.





  • Proceed with a second opinion, even if you like your current doctor. There are brilliant doctors with terrible bedside manner and bottom-of-their-class doctors who you'll absolutely love. Personally, I like brilliant and kind. (Those doctors do exist, by the way.) Find the right fit for you based on what's important to your illness and course of treatment.





  • Talk with your insurance company before going to your appointment. Call the number on the back for your card to know whether the appointment will be considered in or out of network, and what your co-pays will be. I don't like expensive surprises. Does anyone?





  • Keep an open mind. You might go through all of this research, paperwork and travel to meet the doctor and not like him or her at all. It's disappointing, but you have to follow your gut. It's what I called a "spirit check." If something doesn't sit well, it usually means it's not a good idea. I mean, hello, there's such a thing as a third opinion.






from Healthy Living - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1kp3qKf

via IFTTT

Around The World, Schizophrenia Isn't Always Seen As Debilitating

In the course of her most recent research project, Stanford professor Tanya Luhrmann came across a Hindu woman who claimed to hear messages from God. She told Luhrmann that she wasn't only hearing words, but also feeling vibrations.



Had the woman been born in the West, Luhrmann said, she likely would have been diagnosed with schizophrenia. But instead, she was born in the Indian city of Chennai, where she was never questioned by her husband or father about the sounds that she alone could hear.



This difference in the perception of schizophrenia is the focus of Luhrmann's most recent study, published in the British Journal of Psychiatry. Luhrmann analyzed how the cultural perception of the mental condition affects patient outcomes in three different communities around the world: Accra, Ghana; Chennai, India; and San Mateo, California. She studied 12 women and eight men in Accra, nine women and 11 men in Chennai, and 10 women and 10 men in San Mateo.



Luhrmann, who has been studying schizophrenia since the early '90s, concluded that the West treats schizophrenia as a debilitating disorder and dismisses people's hallucinations as "symptoms." However, in places like India and Ghana, the hallucinations and voices are not so easily discounted, she said. More than half of her research subjects in India, for example, described the voices they heard as those of family members or ancestors. As a result, Luhrmann said, the voices were perceived as guides instead of threats.



The major difference was that “the Chennai (India) and Accra (Ghana) participants were more comfortable interpreting their voices as relationships and not as the sign of a violated mind," she wrote in the study. "Participants in the USA were more likely to use diagnostic labels and to report violent commands than those in India and Ghana.”



Luhrmann hypothesized that if patients diagnosed with schizophrenia can change the way they perceive the voices in their head, they might be able to better control the disorder.



"In my experience, those who are taught to interpret their voices as guides tend to have the most success in handling the disease," she told The Huffington Post. "It’s a new, radical way of thinking about how to handle psychiatric voices that suggests if you identify them, interact with them, name them and come to know them, they may behave better, they may be more generous and less harsh."



Luhrmann acknowledged that this approach would not work for everyone, but said it has important implications for treatment.



"Harsh, violent voices so common in the West may not be an inevitable feature of schizophrenia," she said.



from Healthy Living - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1n6WXht

via IFTTT