Friday, August 2, 2013

Salad-tied outbreak widespread, source not pegged

LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) ? Food safety advocates are sounding an alarm at the lack of information being disseminated about an enduring intestinal illness tied to prepackaged salad that has sickened nearly 400 people nationwide.

The outbreak of the rare parasite cyclospora has been reported in at least 15 states, and federal officials warned Wednesday it was too early to say it is over.

But if you're looking to find out exactly where it came from, you may be out of luck.

Health officials in Nebraska and Iowa say they've traced cases there to prepackaged salad. They haven't revealed the company that packaged the salad or where it was sold, explaining only that most if not all of it wasn't grown locally.

The lack of information has fueled concern from consumers and others who argue companies should be held accountable when outbreaks happen and customers need the information about where outbreaks came from to make smart food choices.

"If you want the free market to work properly, then you need to let people have the information they need to make informed decisions," said Bill Marler, a Seattle attorney who specializes in class-action food-safety lawsuits.

Heath authorities in California, which provides much of the nation's leafy green produce, said Wednesday the state had not received any reports of cyclospora cases.

"Based on the most currently available information, the leafy greens being implicated in this outbreak were not grown or processed in California," added spokesman Corey Egel in a statement to the Associated Press.

Mark Hutson, who owns a Save-Mart grocery story in Lincoln, Neb., said the lack of specific brand information threatened to hurt all providers, including the good actors.

"I think there was so little information as to what was causing the problem, that people just weren't sure what to do," he said. "Frankly, we would prefer to have the names out there."

Authorities said they still hadn't determined whether the cases of cyclospora in the different states are connected.

"It's too early to say for sure whether it's over, and thus too early to say there's no risk of still getting sick," said Mar?a-Bel?n Moran, spokeswoman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Only Iowa and Nebraska officials had directly linked the outbreak in their states to a salad mix of iceberg and romaine lettuce, carrots and red cabbage.

Still, grocery shoppers far from known outbreak areas acknowledged it was a factor as they shopped for produce.

"I can't say I really want to go and buy particularly any lettuce right now," said Laura Flanagan, 35, who was shopping at a Whole Foods in Dallas with her two young children. "I'm being pretty cautious about it."

The product was widely distributed in Iowa by wholesalers who could have supplied the bagged salad mix to all types of food establishments, including restaurants and grocery stores, said Iowa Food and Consumer Safety Bureau chief Steven Mandernach.

Mandernach said at least 80 percent of the vegetables were grown and processed outside both Iowa and Nebraska. He said officials haven't confirmed the origins of 20 percent and may never know because victims can't always remember what they ate.

Iowa law allows public health officials to withhold the identities of any person or business affected by an outbreak. However, business names can be released to the public if the state epidemiologist or public health director determines that disclosing the information is needed to protect public safety.

Mandernach said there is no immediate threat, so his office is not required to release information about where the product came from. He said state officials believe the affected salad already has spoiled and is no longer in the supply chain.

Nebraska public health officials said they still hadn't traced the exact origins of the outbreaks.

"I am by no means giving all-clear, green light on the issue," said Dr. Joseph Acierno, the state's chief medical officer and director of public health. "We're encouraging the medical community to stay vigilant."

Food-safety and consumer advocates say the agencies shouldn't withhold the information.

"It's not clear what the policy is, and at the very least they owe it to us to explain why they come down this way," said Sandra Eskin, director of the Pew Charitable Trusts' food safety project. "I think many people wonder if this is all because of possible litigation."

Marler said withholding the information can create general fears that damage the reputation of good actors in food production. He said consumers should be allowed to decide for themselves whether to shop and grocery stores or eat at restaurants where tainted produce was sold.

Some states also are slow to interview infected people, he said, which reduces the chances that they remember where they ate.

The Food and Drug Administration said Wednesday that it didn't have enough information to name a possible source of the outbreak. In the past, the agencies have at times declined to ever name a source of an outbreak, referring to "Restaurant A" or using vague terms.

Caroline Smith DeWaal of the Center for Science in the Public Interest says that the decision to withhold a company's name may not only hurt consumers but the food industry, as well. When an item is generally implicated but officials give few specifics, like with the bagged salad, people may stop buying the product altogether.

"I think consumers need more information to make good buying decisions," she said.

Responsibility for disclosing the names of businesses involved general falls to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration because their authority crosses state lines, said Doug Farquhar, a program director with the National Conference of State Legislatures. Farquhar said most states have laws that prohibit the disclosure of businesses that are affected by a foodborne illness.

"In some cases, states go 'rogue' and release the names without FDA approval, in the name of public safety," Farquhar said. "But for the most part, states prefer to let the FDA release the names and take the heat.

___

Associated Press writers Uriel Garcia in Dallas and Gosia Wozniacka in Fresno, Calif., contributed to this report.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/salad-tied-outbreak-widespread-source-not-pegged-070835989.html

ll cool j Presidents Day 2013 jack white wiz khalifa 2013 Grammys kelly clarkson Lumineers

Thursday, August 1, 2013

5 big challenges for Google Glass

Google Glass, for all its promise, has some scary implications. Here is my list of 5 potential challenges we face with Glass:

  • User Experience
  • Social Awkwardness
  • Privacy (or lack thereof)
  • Obsession
  • Humanity

1. User Experience

It?s early days right now, so I don?t want to harp on too much about UX challenges, but there are a few worth mentioning, not least how I can walk up to someone and start controlling their device by simply uttering: ?OK Glass.? Yikes.

Some other notable growing pains:

  • It?s really hard to see the screen in daylight
  • Looking up and to the right (where the screen is located) can hurt your eyes after a while
  • Don?t try to drive with Glass on.? Trust me on this one
  • The voice commands are limited and you have to say things exactly how Glass expects them
  • The volume is quite low ? rather than using an ear bud, Glass uses bone conduction
  • Short battery life

Survival tip: Hang tight. These are all things that Google has some or full control over, so we can expect improvements consistently over time as the engineers learn and the components become more advanced.?

There?s nothing really damaging or fearful about the user experience of Glass; in fact, for an alpha release of a product category that didn?t exist 12 months ago, it?s extremely impressive.

2. Social Awkwardness

Have you ever tried having a conversation with someone who is wearing Glass? It's really unpleasant. Is the thing on? Are they recording me? Are they checking their email? It's just...obnoxious.

Hilarious, but not far from reality.

The ungainliness will likely subside as Glass gets smaller and more obscure - eventually fitting inconspicuously in the frames of your Ray-Ban?s - but that will just amplify the angst of not knowing whether you're being recorded or completely ignored.? At least with iPhones, it's completely obvious when someone isn?t paying attention.

Survival tip: Just as we?re learning that sometimes we need to turn our phones off when we want to be fully present, we?re going to need to take off or turn off Glass. ?OK Glass, don?t interrupt me or even let me know you?re here unless it?s the zombie apocalypse.?

3. Privacy (or lack thereof)

Have you ever done or said something stupid at a party or other social setting?? No?? Well, everyone else in the world has. And, for most of us, those moments are gone forever. As they should be. Maybe they're committed to our own memory, but they're not lurking on a hard drive waiting to go viral.

Inevitably the battery life of Glass will enable 24/7 recording with data streamed instantly into the cloud for storage and replication. Combine this with the rapid advancements in facial recognition and privacy and anonymity are out the door.

So how do we hide from Glass?

Survival tip: Accept that you cannot hide. We can barely hide now from the gadgets we have, especially in public places. If you think about it, any time a number of people in a contained area get together, the chances that someone will record some part of the proceedings is pretty high. We are adapting. Hopefully the positive outcomes (identifying miscreants or missing children) will outweigh the negative ones (privacy violations and extortion).

4. Obsession

Will we ever turn Google Glass off, or will we become one with our devices, science fiction-style?

At Varonis, we?re fascinated with digital collaboration, work habits, and human-computer interaction, because our software helps make those things safer by protecting sensitive information from those who shouldn?t have access to it. We?ve done a number of research reports on these topics and they all support the hypothesis that many of us are becoming obsessed:

  • 86% of people surveyed consider themselves device obsessed or ?always on?
  • 44% use their devices during meals
  • 20% consider themselves borderline workaholics
  • 15% bring their work devices on vacation

Survival tip: Again, turn it off! Glass is the ultimate multi-tasking device. While we might feel like we?re being more productive by doing many things at once, there are rapidly diminishing returns. Studies show that the human brain is terrible at multi-tasking.? So we will have to be disciplined about turning Google Glass off, not only for the sake of our own personal productivity, but for the sanity of the people we interact with.

5. Humanity

We shouldn?t let technology be a substitute for acting human. Wearable technology like Glass, which is omnipresent and entangled with our consciousness, has a strong potential for distancing us from human interaction.?

A quick personal story.

After college, I scraped together enough money to backpack through Europe for a bit. It was my first time outside of my native US. My first time on a plane, even. Buckingham Palace, the Louvre, St. Peter?s cathedral, the Colosseum - I was gulping down experiences one by one, with my own eyes and ears.? I took my fair share of photos, but I recall seeing droves of tourists walking through St. Peter?s glued to the glowing screens of their video cameras. They were capturing everything, but experiencing nothing.

As much as I adore technology, I?m grateful that I didn?t have an iPhone on that trip.? And imagining my trip, or my daughter?s graduation, through Google Glass honestly makes me a bit queasy.?

Blogger Jason Calacanis has an extreme viewpoint: ?The space between you and me is sacred. It?s the last sacred place we have left, and Google Glass destroys it. There?s no social norm that will solve it.?

I think that?s taking it too far. I think many of us are capable of balance.

Survival tip: Be balanced.? There will be times where Google Glass will greatly enhance life. But there will be plenty of times when you and your friends and family would be far better served if you?d just shut the thing off. Follow Google?s own motto here: Don?t Be Evil. And don?t be rude. Be present for your loved ones.

OK, Glass: save and close blog post.

Rob Sobers is Director at security firm Varonis

Top image: Flickr (infocux Technologies)

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/itproportal/rss/~3/IXPVh1VZlgg/

pennsylvania primary jerome simpson hand sanitizer obama on jimmy fallon pilar sanders andrew young real life barbie

Edwin Moses running for WADA president

LONDON (AP) ? Former Olympic hurdles great Edwin Moses is a candidate to become the next president of the World Anti-Doping Agency.

The IOC says the two-time Olympic gold medalist in the 400-meter hurdles submitted his candidacy last week.

Moses is the third candidate to enter the race, joining IOC vice president Craig Reedie of Britain and former IOC medical director Patrick Schamasch of France.

Moses, who won gold medals in 1976 and 1984, has been active in the anti-doping movement since retiring from competition. He is currently chairman of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency.

The IOC executive board will put forward one candidate for the WADA presidency at its meeting in Moscow on Aug. 9.

It's up to the Olympic movement to nominate a successor to former Australian minister John Fahey, who steps down in November after six years in the job.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/edwin-moses-running-wada-president-103918074.html

mickelson how to tie a tie sweet potato recipes the sound of music celebration church new york auto show 2012 tulsa

A glass of milk after eating sugary cereals may prevent cavities

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Sugary cereals eaten dry could cause tooth decay, but when washed down with milk after eating, plaque acid levels are reduced, reducing damage to tooth enamel that leads to cavities, according to new research.

Source: http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sciencedaily/most_popular/~3/Mvkp68FcMzA/130731164718.htm

Where To Vote james harden breeders cup Mitch Lucker Red Cross CMA Awards 2012 election day

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

St. Louis Community College votes not to extend Dorsey's contract

Staff St. Louis Business Journal

The St. Louis Community College board of trustees has voted not to extend Chancellor Myrtle Dorsey's contract, which ends in June 2014.

The motion to extend Dorsey's contract to 2015 failed on a vote of 3-3, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.

The vote follows controversy over how the college handled an attack on a female student in a restroom on the college's Meramec campus in the spring. Former president of the Meramec campus, George Wasson, resigned following criticism about the incident.

Source: http://feeds.bizjournals.com/~r/bizj_stlouis/~3/vgiZoQmhcUQ/st-louis-community-college-votes-not.html

selection sunday NIT Tournament clay matthews Ncaa Tournament 2013 2013 NCAA Bracket leprechaun ides of march

Yoohoo! Another investigation turns up taxpayer waste in Afghanistan.

The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction released the latest in a string of reports today on fraud, mismanagement, and wasted US spending in the troubled country.

By Dan Murphy,?Staff writer / July 29, 2013

A US Marine sweeps for land mines in the Helmand Province of southern Afghanistan, Sept. 7, 2011. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) reports today on fraud, mismanagement, and wasted US spending in the troubled country.

Rafiq Maqbool/AP/File

Enlarge

Today, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) reports that a $47 million US government stability program failed to bring any stability.

Skip to next paragraph Dan Murphy

Staff writer

Dan Murphy is a staff writer for the Monitor's international desk, focused on the Middle East.?Murphy, who has reported from Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, and more than a dozen other countries, writes and edits Backchannels. The focus? War and international relations, leaning toward things Middle East.

Recent posts

' + google_ads[0].line2 + '
' + google_ads[0].line3 + '

'; } else if (google_ads.length > 1) { ad_unit += ''; } } document.getElementById("ad_unit").innerHTML += ad_unit; google_adnum += google_ads.length; return; } var google_adnum = 0; google_ad_client = "pub-6743622525202572"; google_ad_output = 'js'; google_max_num_ads = '1'; google_feedback = "on"; google_ad_type = "text"; // google_adtest = "on"; google_image_size = '230x105'; google_skip = '0'; // -->

Last week, SIGAR reported that millions of dollars given to Afghan contractors to place grates over culverts to prevent explosives being hidden inside of them were misspent, likely leading to the deaths of US and other forces when grates were either not installed or installed improperly. At the end of June, SIGAR reported that the Pentagon was moving forward with a $772 million purchase of aircraft for the Afghan military "even though the Afghans lack the capacity to operate and maintain them."

Last year, SIGAR found that despite a US government program to help Afghanistan end money laundering, billions in drug proceeds and stolen aid money continued to flow out of Kabul International Airport.

And those are just the recent findings from SIGAR that have caught my eye. The government's inspector general, created to monitor the billions of dollars flowing to the Afghan war effort, has been churning out high quality reports for years, and if you read enough of them, the picture that emerges is one of weak monitoring, duplicitous contractors, hundreds of millions spent on facilities the US military won't use, or the Afghans don't want, or can't feasibly use.

The long-term impact of all this?

So far, very little, as far as I can tell. SIGAR issues reports and press releases and make itself available to answer questions from the press. Journalists cover the latest release and then it seems like the story vanishes down the Afghan spending black hole. The amount of money being wasted or directed toward the Taliban and other enemies of the US project rarely comes up in the debates over whether the US should consider a full withdrawal from the country at the end of 2014.

What's the latest?

According to the [Stability in Key Areas Program] contracts, contractors would award grants to communities for projects that address sources of instability identified by the community. In September 2012, USAID and the Afghan government agreed that each of the SIKA programs would be a ?quick delivery program,? in which projects identified by the community were initiated quickly but would achieve long-term results. Such projects could include road gravelling, culvert construction, or canal lining. The contracts also state that grants are the ?essential? component to the program and shall be provided to communities. Although USAID had disbursed approximately $47 million for the four SIKA contracts as of March 31, 2013, none of the funds had gone to grants that fund community projects, such as those that are ?labor-intensive or productive infrastructure projects,? as called for in the SIKA contracts to address sources of instability?[emphasis added].

SIGAR places the blame for this on the nine-month delay in an agreement between the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Afghan government to work together.?And while money hasn't been set, SIGAR reports that potential Afghan grantees are experiencing "fatigue" from endless rounds of planning workshops that lead nowhere. The program is, in effect, undermining crediblity and support for the US and the Afghan government, so far. "Such disappointment may actually result in further destabilization and disaffection toward the Afghan government," according to the report.

What happened with the $47 million?

SIGAR says that it has been disbursed to two for-profit contractors working with USAID - DAI of Bethesda, Maryland and Los Angeles-based AECOM. SIGAR says that USAID commented on a draft of the report and updated their figures, showing that $285,000 in disbursements had been made to Afghan grantees as of July 1, "only 0.6 percent of the $46.5 million designated for grants," SIGAR writes.

Most of the money spent so far has been on operational expenses for the contractors, research, and about 150 community workshops and training sessions. All of this for what was meant to be a "quick delivery" program designed to get Afghans to work and improve local infrastructure.

Conducting programs in far-off lands with limited infrastructure and with language and cultural barriers at every turn are hard, particularly when there's a war on. There are plenty of understandable reasons for why these sorts of programs don't pan out as advertised. Yet the spending train continues to steam along.

Money is often pointed to as an important weapon for the US war effort in Afghanistan, much as it was in Iraq.

The Commanders Emergency Response Fund (CERP), cash that senior officers were allowed to dole out without prolonged contracting procedures, was used widely in Iraq, and still is in Afghanistan. In the case of CERP in Iraq, SIGAR's counterpart for Iraq spending said in its final report in July that $370 million was supposed to spent equipping and paying the so-called Sons of Iraq, Sunni militias ? many former insurgents ?who switched sides in 2007 and were a major reason that fighting there cooled.

Did the money go where it was intended? Impossible to say, the Special Inspector for Iraq Reconstruction found.

The chance that a large amount of that money was skimmed off the top by Iraqi and other intermediaries in an environment where "monitoring was weak" is probably close to 100 percent. And if money didn't get to its intended recipients ? former Sunni insurgents who switched sides at great personal risk ? there's a chance that disillusionment among these men partially explains the reinvigorated Sunni insurgency in Iraq.

One wonders if the same problems are plaguing CERP spending in Afghanistan now.

Source: http://rss.csmonitor.com/~r/feeds/csm/~3/Ypik3iPr8nY/Yoohoo!-Another-investigation-turns-up-taxpayer-waste-in-Afghanistan

bells palsy channel 5 news uc berkeley harrison barnes brett ratner stevie nicks anchorman

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

CBS defends handling of 'Big Brother' controversy

This July 18, 2013 photo released by CBS shows houseguest, Aaryn, in a scene from "Big Brother." "Big Brother" has included appalling behavior this season but the network said Monday, July 29, that it has responded appropriately. (AP Photo/CBS, Sonja Flemming)

This July 18, 2013 photo released by CBS shows houseguest, Aaryn, in a scene from "Big Brother." "Big Brother" has included appalling behavior this season but the network said Monday, July 29, that it has responded appropriately. (AP Photo/CBS, Sonja Flemming)

This publicity image released by CBS shows Leslie Moonves, President and Chief Executive Officer for CBS Corporation during the TCA Summer Press Tour 2013, on July 29, 2013 in Beverly Hills, Calif. (AP Photo/CBS, Monty Brinton)

(AP) ? The "social experiment" that is CBS' "Big Brother" included appalling behavior this season but the network has responded appropriately, CBS Corp. CEO Les Moonves said Monday.

Contestants have been caught on the reality show's 24-hour-a-day Internet feed making boorish and racially insensitive remarks, and some were aired on one of the show's TV episodes.

"What you see there ... unfortunately is reflective of how certain people feel in America. It's what our show is. I think we've handled it properly," Moonves told the Television Critics Association.

The executive has a unique connection to the series: His wife, Julie Chen, is the host, and Moonves said he makes a point of watching each episode. The network responded when racially oriented comments became an issue with the contestants, he said.

In the online feed, contestant GinaMarie Zimmerman, 32, of Staten Island, N.Y., used the N-word to describe welfare as "insurance" for black people.

Another incident involving Zimmerman was part of the TV show. In an exchange with contestant Aaryn Gries of San Angelo, Texas, Zimmerman said a black house member is "on the dark side, but she's already dark." Gries responded, "Be careful what you say in the dark because you might not be able to see the bitch."

A network disclaimer that was shown on screen read, in part, "At times, the Houseguests may reveal prejudices and other beliefs that CBS does not condone" and which do not represent the network's views or opinions.

The remarks clearly disturbed other contestants on the show. Howard Overby, a youth counselor who is black, said he resisted expressing anger for fear it could hurt his chances in the game.

Broadcast's infatuation with the reality genre, which is both popular and can be cheaper to produce than scripted series, has made it an entrenched part of network schedules. But its pitfalls can include the contestants and their on- or off-screen behavior.

At the dawn of the reality cycle, Fox's "Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire" drew scrutiny in 2000 over the financial and personal credentials of its centerpiece, Rick Rockwell. "American Idol" has jettisoned contestants who failed to disclose arrest records or have other issues.

Some critics have questioned how real much of reality TV is, given factors including casting and editing that are part of the quest for ratings.

"Big Brother," which gathers contestants in a house to live under the gaze of cameras as they compete to be the last one left, was established as a social experiment when it began airing, and "clearly that's what's happening this year," Moonves said. The series, which debuted in 2000, is based on a Dutch show.

While he finds some of the behavior "absolutely appalling," Moonves said, "it's what our show is."

He was asked if what happened might be the result of the network trying too hard to find outgoing, eccentric contestants for shows like "Big Brother" and "Survivor."

"Obviously, you don't want wallflowers on reality shows. You're going to take people that are interesting. ... Sometimes that leads to controversy," he said.

Referring to the original season of "Survivor," he recalled the casting of Richard Hatch, who is gay, and Rudy Boesch, an older man who "wasn't used to dealing with homosexuals at all."

"Now, these two guys became good friends on the island, and so they are social experiments. Trying too hard? I don't think there's any such thing," Moonves said.

He made an unexpected appearance at the Television Critics Association's summer meeting in place of CBS entertainment chief Nina Tassler, who was unable to attend because she was attending a friend's funeral.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/4e67281c3f754d0696fbfdee0f3f1469/Article_2013-07-29-US-TV-Big-Brother/id-a50e1a29476f4a61aa5074b49f1d8115

gold price defiance Ny Post Boston Bombing 2013 Regions Bank ny times Boston Marathon Results