Randy Pausch, Carnegie Mellon University professor and author of The Last Lecture passed away this morning. My prayers today go to his family and friends who in him have lost a great man, friend, son, brother, husband, father and most of all a great inspiration to us all.

I wrote a blog entry a few months back when I learned about the professor's story who moved millions to listen to his message. You can read it here: On Facing Death.

I listened to his Last Lecture and it confirmed what I have believed for so long, life is more than material possesions, it is about making our dreams come true and holding on to what really matters in life; love, health, values, faith, hope.

Unlike Randy, many of us don't have the minor idea of when our time will come but we know one day it will. I would really hate for that day to come and not have accomplished my goals and dreams. I realize that not all of them are meant to be but many of them are. We need to push harder, to work a little bit more, to tune in to our inner self more in order to find out how to do this.

The Last Lecture came about when at Carnegie Mellon University professors were asked to think about what matters to them most and give a hypothetical final talk. I believe it is a brilliant idea to do something like this at any stage of our life, it will force us to stop and think where our life has been and where is going.

If you were asked to write your Last Lecture what would it say? I'm sure I will be thinking of composing mine very soon.

Thank you Randy Pausch, your life mattered and your memory, great teaching and example will inspire many for generations to come.

####
Clary Lopez, author of Simplicity, Richness of Life

Isa lang ang kumpanyang inaplayan ko. Hindi ko babanggit kung ano ang pangalang ng kumpanya, for security and personal purposes. 5/Five pages yung application form nila, kung wala kang dalang resumé.

Tapos, may job fair sa TriNoma, kahapon at ngayon. Hindi na ako pumunta kasi, napansin ko na alas-kuwatro na ng hapon, umaambot sa Megamall, at maaring siksikan sa pag-sakay sa Annex building ng SM North Edsa. Tapos, itim yung usok ng bus na sinakyan/nasakyan ko. Nalaman ko na may job fair sa TriNoma, sa tatay ko. Hindi ko alam, kung papano niya nalaman.

Isa lang ang kumpanyang inaplayan ko. Hindi ko babanggit kung ano ang pangalang ng kumpanya, for security and personal purposes. 5/Five pages yung application form nila, kung wala kang dalang resumé.

Tapos, may job fair sa TriNoma, kahapon at ngayon. Hindi na ako pumunta kasi, napansin ko na alas-kuwatro na ng hapon, umaambot sa Megamall, at maaring siksikan sa pag-sakay sa Annex building ng SM North Edsa. Tapos, itim yung usok bus na sinakyan/nasakyan ko. Nalaman ko na may job fair sa TriNoma, sa tatay ko. Hindi ko alam, kung papano niya nalaman.

This is London | Jul 24, 2008

The European Food Safety Authority found that animals involved in cloning suffer pain and ill-health linked to miscarriages, organ defects and gigantism. It also flagged up the possibility that clones and their offspring could pass animal diseases to humans through meat and milk.

The inquiry was launched in January 2007 after the Daily Mail highlighted the fact that Dundee Paradise – the offspring of a clone – had been born on a British farm.

Last month, the Mail reported that a total of eight 'clone farm' calves have now been born on British farms.

Frozen embryos taken from the clones of prize-winning Holstein cows in the U.S. were flown to the UK and implanted into farm animals.

Advocates claim it will allow prize-winning animals to be copied to create a new generation of animals, able to produce vast quantities of milk or lean meat.

But the report by the EFSA, set up in 2002 to improve EU food safety, said: 'The health and welfare of a significant proportion of clones have been found to be adversely affected, often severely and with a fatal outcome.'

Professor Vittorio Silano, of the EFSA, said: 'It is clear there are significant animal health and welfare issues for surrogate mothers and clones that can be more frequent and severe than for conventionally-bred animals.'

The cloning process involves taking the nucleus of cells from the ear of an animal and implanting them in an egg from a female. The fertilisation process is kick-started with an electric charge.

There are large number of miscarriages of embryos. Organ defects lead to death in pregnancy or soon after birth.

EFSA said clones are also more likely to show 'gigantism'. They are so large the only way they can be born is through caesarean section.

The study highlighted the need to find out why clones and their offspring are more vulnerable to some diseases and if these could be a food safety threat.

The report said: 'It should be investigated whether consumption of meat and milk derived from clones or their offspring may lead to increased exposure to transmissable agents.'

The developments in clone farming have outpaced moves by the British Government and EU to put in place a policing mechanism.

There is no system to monitor the existence and welfare of clones and their offspring. Nor is there any system to ensure that meat and milk from these animals is labelled to inform shoppers.

The final decision on whether to allow clone farming and food rests with the European Commission.

Peter Stevenson of Compassion in World Farming, said: 'Britain and the EU should ban cloning, not just farming but also food from cloned animals and their offspring because of the very serious health and welfare issues.'

RSPCA senior scientist, Dr Nikki Osborne, said: 'The RSPCA believes cloning of animals for food production should be banned on animal welfare and ethical grounds.'

Sue Davies, Chief Policy Adviser at consumer group Which?, said: 'This EFSA opinion highlights why it is far too premature to think about using cloned animals for food production.'

Director of Eurogroup for Animals, Sonja Van Tichelen, said: 'The EU is now obligated to follow its own rules. Under the general farm directive a breeding technique that causes suffering should not be allowed.'

Last night Defra said it would expect food companies or farmers to seek advice from the Government before attempting to put meat and milk from clones or their offspring on the market.

By MICHAEL KUNZELMAN

NEW ORLEANS - The Federal Emergency Management Agency asked a federal judge Wednesday for immunity from lawsuits over potentially dangerous fumes in government-issued trailers that have housed tens of thousands of Gulf Coast hurricane victims.

Lawyers for victims of hurricanes Katrina and Rita accuse FEMA of negligence for sheltering them in trailers with elevated levels of formaldehyde, a preservative used in construction materials that can cause health problems.

But a government attorney told U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt that the FEMA's decisions in responding to a disaster, including its use of travel trailers after Katrina, are legally protected from "judicial second-guessing."

"It is what the legislative branch is supposed to second guess, and they are doing that," Department of Justice attorney Henry Miller said, referring to a series of congressional hearings on formaldehyde concerns.

Plaintiffs attorney Gerald Meunier said FEMA can be held liable for providing hurricane victims with trailers that didn't meet federal safety standards and weren't designed to be long-term housing.

"Some of these people are still living in these trailers almost three years later," Meunier said.

Engelhardt took FEMA's request for immunity under advisement and didn't indicate how soon he will rule.

The judge is presiding over several consolidated cases filed against the federal government and the companies that supplied FEMA with tens of thousands of trailers after Katrina made landfall on Aug. 29, 2005, and Rita struck about a month later.

FEMA spent more than $2.5 billion to purchase more than 140,000 new trailers from recreational vehicle dealers and trailer manufacturers after the storms.

The lawsuits accuse trailer makers of providing FEMA with shoddily built units in a rush to meet the agency's unprecedented demand for emergency housing. Plaintiffs lawyers also claim FEMA ignored concerns about formaldehyde levels in trailers for months after Katrina.

"At what point do you say, 'We know there's a crisis here, but there is a minimal standard where people have got to be protected against danger,'" Meunier said.

Earlier this year, federal officials announced that tests on hundreds of occupied FEMA trailers and mobile homes detected formaldehyde levels that were, on average, about five times higher than what people are exposed to in most modern homes.

Miller said FEMA fielded its first formaldehyde complaint from a trailer occupant in March 2006 and only had seven or eight complaints by June 2006.

"What was the alternative (to using trailers)?" Miller asked. "To move them to Baton Rouge, to move them to Arkansas, to move them to Texas?"

Lawyers for the plaintiffs want the cases certified as a class action on behalf of tens of thousands of current and former trailer occupants in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. Engelhardt hasn't ruled on that request yet.

A University of Washington study of top-selling laundry products and air fresheners found the products emitted dozens of different chemicals. All six products tested gave off at least one chemical regulated as toxic or hazardous under federal laws, but none of those chemicals was listed on the product labels.

"I first got interested in this topic because people were telling me that the air fresheners in public restrooms and the scent from laundry products vented outdoors were making them sick," said Anne Steinemann, a UW professor of civil and environmental engineering and of public affairs. "And I wanted to know, 'What's in these products that is causing these effects?'"

She analyzed the products to discover the chemicals' identity.

"I was surprised by both the number and the potential toxicity of the chemicals that were found," Steinemann said. Chemicals included acetone, the active ingredient in paint thinner and nail-polish remover; limonene, a molecule with a citrus scent; and acetaldehyde, chloromethane and 1,4-dioxane.

"Nearly 100 volatile organic compounds were emitted from these six products, and none were listed on any product label. Plus, five of the six products emitted one or more carcinogenic 'hazardous air pollutants,' which are considered by the Environmental Protection Agency to have no safe exposure level," Steinemann said.

Her study was published online today by the journal Environmental Impact Assessment Review. Steinemann chose not to disclose the brand names of the six products she tested. In a larger study of 25 cleaners, personal care products, air fresheners and laundry products, now submitted for publication, she found that many other brands contained similar chemicals.

Because manufacturers of consumer products are not required to disclose the ingredients, Steinemann analyzed the products to discover their contents. She studied three common air fresheners (a solid deodorizer disk, a liquid spray and a plug-in oil) and three laundry products (a dryer sheet, fabric softener and a detergent), selecting a top seller in each category. She bought household items at a grocery store and asked companies for samples of industrial products.

In the laboratory, each product was placed in an isolated space at room temperature and the surrounding air was analyzed for volatile organic compounds, small molecules that evaporate from the product's surface into the air.

Results showed 58 different volatile organic compounds above a concentration of 300 micrograms per cubic meter, many of which were present in more than one of the six products. For instance, a plug-in air freshener contained more than 20 different volatile organic compounds. Of these, seven are regulated as toxic or hazardous under federal laws. The product label lists no ingredients, and information on the Material Safety Data Sheet, required for workplace handling of chemicals, lists the contents as "mixture of perfume oils."

This study does not address links between exposure to chemicals and health effects. However, two national surveys published by Steinemann and a colleague in 2004 and 2005 found that about 20 percent of the population reported adverse health effects from air fresheners, and about 10 percent complained of adverse effects from laundry products vented to the outdoors. Among asthmatics such complaints were roughly twice as common.

Manufacturers are not required to list the ingredients used in laundry products and air fresheners. Personal-care products and cleaners often contain similar fragrance chemicals, Steinemann said. And although cosmetics are required by the Food and Drug Administration to list ingredients, no law requires products of any kind to list chemicals used in fragrances.

"Fragrance chemicals are of particular interest because of the potential for involuntary exposure, or second-hand scents," Steinemann said.

"Be careful if you buy products with fragrance, because you really don't know what's in them," she added. "I'd like to see better labeling. In the meantime, I'd recommend that instead of air fresheners people use ventilation, and with laundry products, choose fragrance-free versions."

The European Union recently enacted legislation requiring products to list 26 fragrance chemicals when they are present above a certain concentration in cosmetic products and detergents. No similar laws exist in the United States.

"I hope this study will raise public awareness, and reduce exposures to potentially hazardous chemicals," said Steinemann.

PPHN or Persistent Pulmonary Hypertension of the Newborn is a life-threatening disorder in which the newborn’s arteries to the lungs remain constricted after delivery, limiting the amount of blood flow to the lungs and therefore the amount of oxygen into the bloodstream. It is very similar to Pulmonary Hypertension in adults.

Some possible causes for PPHN are Stress while the baby is in the uterus which can be caused by lots of things, other conditions like meconium aspiration syndrome, anemia, severe pneumonia, infection, hypoglycemia, and birth asphyxia (when the baby is deprived of oxygen during a complicated delivery) have all been associated with PPHN and lastly SSRI exposure during the second and third trimester of the pregnancy poses a six fold increase in the fetus developing PPHN. SSRIs include Celexa, Lexapro, Paxil, Prozac, Symbyax and Zoloft. These are, as you may know, antidepressant drugs.

Paxil Attorneys California-based are working hard to get this information out to the public. They filed a lawsuit because of their concern with the relation between certain SSRI-antidepressants and PPHN.

I am trying to help get this information out because I am a mom, I have lots of friends that are pregnant right now and I also want to get pregnant again. It is important to know all there is to know about being safe and healthy during all the 9 months of pregnancy not only during the 1st trimester.

For more information and in some case, seek legal rights check out www.Pphlawyers.com and be aware!

{Spoilers up ahead, stop reading if you don't want me to ruin it for you}

It's a book about loving yourself and having the courage to step out of your comfort zone and try new things.

Jemima J is what you call a full figured woman. I hate to use the word fat because its derogatory. Jemima, a writer had a pretty face & awesome personality but people around her never got to know her more because they never saw past her weight. She was always known as Jemima, the fat girl.

When JJ lost all her weight and started looking gorgeous; her life started to change but JJ quickly learned that being skinny does not necessarily mean being happier.

In the end though, after realizing that weight/looks is not everything, our protagonist got the man, and lived a healthy life, I won't spill though if she remained thin or she gained back all the weight! Teehee it's for you to find out.

All  can say is that the story - which is totally 'relate-able' - to all women in all sizes, shape and color, is a good read. It's fun, light and the author, Jane Green is very creative in the way she narrates the story for the readers.

Right now, I am searching for other ebooks by Jane Green, anyone out there who has, care to share? ^_^

I figured I could get some folks together and we could help motivate each other. So post your results here and we will see how we do.  A video of progress once in a while would be motivational as well.

I did 48 but I won't count them all because they were sloppy and I noticed my arms weren't going far enough up to a lockout. Watching myself on video made me realize this, but I am too tired to do another video so I will have to work to improve that in future trials.

I am starting this Monday July 21st. 2008. Lets not talk the talk but walk the walk while talking the talk..

Of course the good thing about this is that we're dealing with a renewable resource that's free to grow. It's much worse when one tries inexpert DIY on expensive materials; I've made this mistake too and now will think twice about painting a door on my own.

So when my Zhan Zhuang teacher reminds the class not to practice too long on our own, I listen. Well kind of. Assuming that he expects us not to listen, and has already given us a low figure, I compensate a little to the upside. But within these adjusted guidelines I'm very disciplined.

Copyright Nigel Davies, 2008. All rights reserved.

*** 1/2

Build's impressive, but YET again, the face just doesn't do it for me.

Presenting this week's bonus pictures!

I think National bowler Lee Yu-Wen's mug should be pretty popular with quite a fair bit of the gay population, no?

Click to read more.

Barack Obama's plan for health care in America places a large emphasis on "prevention and public health." The candidate argues that the nation is on the brink of an obesity epidemic, and that a "radical shift toward prevention" is required to solve the problem.

Covering the uninsured and modernizing America’s health care system are urgent priorities, but they are not enough. Simply put, in the absence of a radical shift towards prevention and public health, we will not be successful in containing medical costs or improving the health of the American people.

A relatively new display of that "radical shift" has come in the form of government telling people what they may and may not eat. And it appears the Democratic party has decided that the 2008 DNCC is the perfect event to showcase this portion of their new prevention platform. The New York Times recently reported:

A 28-page contract requested by Denver organizers that caterers provide food in “at least three of the following five colors: red, green, yellow, blue/purple and white.” Garnishes could not be counted toward the colors. No fried foods would be allowed. Organic and locally grown foods were mandated, and each plate had to be 50 percent fruits and vegetables. As a result, caterers are shying away.

Of course, convention organizers say the claim is completely false, as in this alleged letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal:

The idea that fried foods would be banned from this year’s Democratic National Convention left a bad taste in many mouths-ours included.

The Denver Host Committee’s effort to make the catered food at Convention-related events healthier is a notable cause-we could probably all benefit from adopting healthier eating habits. But to be clear, Democrats at the Pepsi Center can have all the fried goodies they’re used to finding at any American ballpark or sports arena-fish and chips, chicken tenders, French fries. No one will face a plate of beets and asparagus unless they’ve ordered it. And by the way, at the Democratic National Convention, we also enjoy apple pie, weekend barbecues and catching a Colorado Rockies game-where we can’t keep away from the fried mini-donuts.

Jenni R. Engebretsen
Deputy CEO for Public Affairs
Democratic National Convention Committee
Denver
Monday, July 7, 2008

A couple key issues stand out in this statement. First, there is the claim that convention-goers "can have all the fried goodies they’re used to...." However, the rule against fried foods is not acting against the people who will be eating the food, it's against the people who will be providing the food. So telling people what they "can have" means little if something they want is not available. Next is the claim, "No one will face a plate of beets and asparagus unless they’ve ordered it." Again, this goes back to what food is actually being made available. Sure, people will only eat that dish if they have ordered it. But what if that is the only dish on the menu? It's a bit like Henry Ford's famous promise about his Model-T, "The customer can have any color he wants so long as it's black." That is not much of a choice, is it? Ultimately, the statement never actually says that DNCC caterers will be providing any of the fried foods that it says people are allowed to eat.

The war against food freedom began gaining steam in 2006 when the New York City Board of Health voted in "the nation’s first major municipal ban on the use of all but tiny amounts of artificial trans fats in restaurant cooking...."

The city’s prohibition on trans fats, which would be phased in starting in July, was a victory for Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, an outspoken health advocate, and his activist health commissioner, Dr. Thomas R. Frieden.

After the city’s aggressive campaign to ban smoking in restaurants and in public places that goes back more than a decade, the regulation governing trans fats has again thrust New York to the forefront of a significant public health issue.

Fast forward to 2008, and the law is now fully implimented across the entire city.

June 30, 2008 – Tomorrow, New York City restaurants will be safer for the hearts of New Yorkers. The final phase of the City’s trans fat regulation takes effect tomorrow, July 1, requiring restaurants to clear artificial trans fat from all their menu items. The first phase, implemented last year, applied to fry oils and spreads. It will now cover previously excluded items such as baked goods, frozen foods, cannoli, and doughnuts as well. As of tomorrow, all foods served, including baked goods, oils, shortenings and margarines used for baking, and pre-prepared items that contain artificial trans fat, must have less that 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving. Foods served in the manufacturer’s original, sealed packaging, such as candy and crackers, are still exempt.

Yes, you read that correctly. Even New York's cannolis are not safe from the "politically-correct nanny-state nightmare."

Not to be outdone by New York City, the entire state of California is now launching its own campaign against people's food freedoms. The state's legislature recently sent an anti-trans-fat bill to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has yet to take an official position on the matter.

The measure, passed with a bare majority, comes two weeks after a similar ban in New York City became fully effective. California doctor and consumer groups support the law, while restaurant groups have offered a lukewarm response. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not taken a position, a spokesman said.

Assemblyman Tony Mendoza, D-Artesia (Los Angeles County), who wrote AB97, said the measure is intended to promote the health of Californians.

"When it comes to heart disease and diabetes, communities of color are leading the way," Mendoza said. "I figured that the use of trans fats in our restaurants is a leading contributor to that."
...
The bill also allows local governments to create trans fat ordinances, such as San Francisco's voluntary plan under which restaurants that pass a $250 inspection will be awarded a decal indicating that they are trans fat free. The city's law takes effect this month.

Laws against the types of drugs people put into their bodies affect everyone. Drug users have the potential to negatively interrupt the lives of others, and it is the government's responsibility to protect its citizens from those who might do them harm. But is it the government's responsibility to protect its citizens from themselves and dictate the types of food they eat and the way that it is prepared for the sake of prevention and good health?

And perhaps an even more fundamental question would be, how many people preaching prevention will actually practice what they preach?

UPDATE: South Central Los Angeles is also in danger of losing some of its eating options. (H/T: Pajamas Media)

In a proposal that is stunning in both its ignorance and arrogance, a South Central Los Angeles politician wants to place a moratorium on the construction of new fast food restaurants in her area.