
(973)724-3271
Remixxing the mainstream news one blog post at a time from the shores of Venice Beach. News, politics & conspiracy theories about world issues. All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the "fair use doctrine" in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of Blogger.com and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Remixx World!


1 Feb 2011
Among those 4-19 years of age who received Pandemrix®-vaccine had a manifold increased risk of falling ill with narcolepsy during the 8 months following vaccination in comparison to those unvaccinated in the same age group. Based on the evaluation done so far, the National Narcolepsy Task Force finds it probable that Pandemrix®-vaccination contributed to the observed increase in incidence of narcolepsy among those 4 -19 years of age. Currently, the most likely explanation is that the increase in narcolepsy is by joint effect of the vaccine and some other factor(s). At the moment, there is no evidence that the increase in narcolepsy observed in Finland could be attributed to the vaccine lots used. The results can be read in the Interim Report of the Task Force which is published on February 1st, 2011.
The association of Pandemrix-vaccination and narcolepsy was studied using extensive registry based data. Data gathered from hospital discharge registries on patients fallen ill with narcolepsy during years 2009-10 was linked with data from primary care records on pandemic vaccination. The observed association is so evident that it is unlikely that other so-called confounding factors could fully explain the phenomenon.
In Finland during years 2009–10, 60 children and adolescents aged 4-19 years fell ill with narcolepsy. These figures base on data from hospitals and primary care, and the review of individual patient records by a panel of neurologists and sleep researchers. Of those fallen ill, 52 (almost 90 percent) had received Pandemrix® vaccine, while the vaccine coverage in the entire age group was 70 percent. Based on the preliminary analyses, the risk of falling ill with narcolepsy among those vaccinated in the 4-19 years age group was 9-fold in comparison to those unvaccinated in the same age group. This increase was most pronounced among those 5–15 years of age. No cases were observed among those under 4 years of age. Also, no increase in cases of narcolepsy or signs of vaccination impacting risk of falling ill with narcolepsy was observed among those above 19 years of age.
In 2009, among countries using similar pandemic vaccine as was used in Finland, an increase in cases of narcolepsy has been observed only in Finland, Sweden and Iceland. Contrary to the observations in Finland, narcolepsy has occurred in greater numbers than expected also among unvaccinated children and teenagers in Iceland.
During the coming months, these preliminary register based results will be confirmed in Finland. In further investigations, special attention will be given to infections and other stimuli in close time association with the pandemic vaccination. The significance of the possible joint effects will be explored.
In addition, other significant co-factors contributing to the onset of narcolepsy will be evaluated in epidemiologic, immunologic and genetic studies planned. The main aim of the immunologic studies is to clarify, whether the immunological responses to the different components of the Pandemrix® vaccine and to the A(H1N1) virus among those children and teenagers with genetic disposition to narcolepsy and those fallen ill with narcolepsy differ from the immunological responses of other children and teenagers not belonging to these risk groups.
It is also of utmost importance to find out whether the association is observed also elsewhere than in Finland. At present, Finland is participating in the ECDC contracted, VAESO led narcolepsy background incidence and case control studies which are being conducted in 9 European Union countries by pharmacovigilance researchers from Public Health Institutes, Regulatory Agencies and Universities. These studies will evaluate the contribution of the pandemic vaccines and other risk factors in the onset of narcolepsy, and confirm whether increase in incidence in narcolepsy is seen in other countries. The outcomes of these studies will be reported during early summer 2011.
By January 24, 2011, 56 notifications of narcolepsy in association with Pandemrix® vaccination have been received by the National Vaccine Adverse Events Register maintained at the National Institute of Health and Welfare in Finland. Of these, 54 cases belonged to the age group of 4–19 years. Among most of the notified cases, the onset of symptoms of narcolepsy had started approximately two months following Pandemrix® vaccination.
The final report from the National Narcolepsy Task Force will be released by 31st August 2011.
WHO: Pandemrix® vaccine and increased risk of narcolepsy
Terhi Kilpi
Director of Department of Vaccines and Immune Protection, Chairman of the Task Force
National Institute of Health and Welfare, THL
tel +358 20 610 8678
Hanna Nohynek
Vaccine Safety Officer, Secretary of the Task Force
National Institute of Health and Welfare,THL
Tel +358 20 610 8246
Short address: http://www.thl.fi/doc/en/24103
Gerry Pennell, CIO of the London 2012 Olympics told CBR that, "We will be the target of a cyber attack. It'll happen for sure."
D.C.'s homeland security department is pressing for access to more security cameras, including ones owned by private businesses and Metro.
The D.C. Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency submitted a plan to tap into private cameras, such as those found at banks or outside office buildings...
If you grew up during the days I did and lived near the New Madrid fault, the date of December 3, 1990 probably brought fear to your heart. That was the day that a major earthquake was supposed to strike along the New Madrid Fault between St. Louis and Memphis. A major earthquake did not occur on the New Madrid that day, but the threat still looms over the region.
Click the actual link to the press release about DARPA's new $100 million headquarters if you don't trust my cut and paste abilities.| |
|
The Veterinary Department of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) announced about huge losses in cattle caused by the long cold spell in recent days.
The department stated the costly deaths occurred despite the best efforts of local authorities and people to save their livestock.
Following statistics at 4pm on January 16, total of 9,248 heads of cattle died in provinces including Lang Son, Yen Bai, Cao Bang, Bac Can, Ha Giang, Tuyen Quang, Son La, Quang Ninh, Hoa Binh, Lao Cai, Bac Giang, Lai Chau, Ha Tinh and Quang Binh.
EMERGENCY lending from the ECB to banks in Ireland fell in December, the first decline since January 2010, but only because the Irish Central Bank stepped up its help to banks.
The Irish Independent learnt last night that the Central Bank of Ireland is financing €51bn of an emergency loan programme by printing its own money.
Unfortunately, most of the data was never backed up, a mistake Shin said could be a major setback in the fight against cancer.
Some of that data can never be replicated. Other parts of that research could take up to two years to do over. That's earth shattering considering 30,000 men die in the U.S. every year from prostate cancer, meaning people could lose their lives all because of a crime.
"We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy, and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities," Locke continued.
To help meet these challenges, the Obama administration recently released a comprehensive cyberspace policy review outlining a series of necessary actions by the public and private sector including improving identity solutions, identity management services, and privacy enhancing technologies. This review has helped to lay the groundwork for the administrations forthcoming national strategy for trusted I'dties in cyberspace, or NSTIC. The final version of this strategy will be signed by the president in the coming mods and Howard Schmidt will be from the White House will be talking more about this in just a few minutes. And many of you are familiar with the public draft release this past summer, and many of you participated in the open public process with comments on the strategy and we very much want to thank you for your thoughts and your recommendations. The end game of course, is to create an identity ecosystem where individuals and organizations can complete on-line transactions with greater confidence. Putting greater trust in the on-line identities of each other, and greater trust in the infrastructure that the transactions run over. Let's be clear, we're not talking about a national ID card. We're [not] talking about a government controlled system. But what we are talking about is enhancing on-line security and privacy and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorizing a dozen password through the creation and use of more trusted digital I'dties. To accomplish this, we're going to need your help. And we need the private sector's expertise and involvement in designing, building and implementing this identity ecosystem. To succeed we'll also need a national program office at the Department of Commerce focused on implementing our trusted I'dties strategy. The commerce department already has an expensive experience in this realm. Last April for instance we launched an inter net policy task force to address the most pressing Internet issues of the day. The task force was made up of experts from a contrast the department, experts in trade policy, intellectual property, information policy, Cybersecurity, and standards. And the task force is working on develop Cybersecurity policy recommendations for the commercial sector, as well as policy recommendations on other Internet issues like privacy, copy right protection, and international eCommerce. We've reached out expensively for public comments on all these topics and the task force just last month released initial recommendation for strengthening on-line privacy protection. The commerce department has the National Institute of Standards and Technology, one of the preeminent laboratories within the Federal Government that's part of the commerce department. It also has significant long standing investments in Cybersecurity R&D and in standard dags programs. And all of this experience can help a new program office be effective facilitators for both government and private sector engagement and indeed private sector leadership. In the end, we want to build consensus on legal and policy frame works necessary to make the trusted I'dties strategy successful, including ways to enhance privacy, free expression and open markets. We want to work with industry to identify where new standards or collaborative efforts may be needed and we want to support inner governmental collaboration and we want to support important pilot projects. These are important undertakings. And today's symposium and today's announcement is just an early step in a much longer journey. Of course, we all know that these pilot projects, any follow-on commercial deployments and the immersed ens of an identity ecosystem itself will not be a pan see a. There is no magic bullet to solve all the Cybersecurity issued out there. ( However we do know that robust identity solutions can substantially enhance the trustworthiness of on-line transactions. And they not only can improve security, but if done properly, can enhance privacy as well. Such an I'd identity ecosystem must be led by people that made Internet the Internet what it is today. That's why Howard and and Pat Gallagher our. Have come to Silicon Valley, which remains an epi center of American in in ovation and entrepreneur and Pat's going to be here for the rest of the day to talk more about our efforts but also to gather input from all of you.
Insolvency means that an entity cannot pay its debts owed. Is the United States currently insolvent or soon to be insolvent? Secretary Geithner seems to believe so and says so in a letter to Congress regarding raising the statutory debt limit. Specifically, Geithner says, "Failure to raise the limit would precipitate a default by the United States." A default by the United States means that the country would not be able to pay its debts when the debts came due. Therefore, the country would be insolvent.###
Secretary Geithner Sends Debt Limit Letter to Congress
By: Erika Gudmundson
Dear Mr. Leader:
I am writing in response to your request for an estimate by the Treasury Department of when the statutory debt limit will be reached, and for a description of the consequences of default by the United States.
Never in our history has Congress failed to increase the debt limit when necessary. Failure to raise the limit would precipitate a default by the United States. Default would effectively impose a significant and long-lasting tax on all Americans and all American businesses and could lead to the loss of millions of American jobs. Even a very short-term or limited default would have catastrophic economic consequences that would last for decades. Failure to increase the limit would be deeply irresponsible. For these reasons, I am requesting that Congress act to increase the limit early this year, well before the threat of default becomes imminent.
As you know, in February of 2010 Congress passed legislation to increase the debt limit to $14.29 trillion. As of this writing, the outstanding debt that is subject to the limit stands at $13.95 trillion, leaving approximately $335 billion of “headroom” beneath the current limit. Because of the inherent uncertainty associated with tax receipts and refunds during the spring tax filing season, as well as other variable factors, it is not possible at this point to predict with precision the date by which the debt limit will be reached. However, the Treasury Department now estimates that the debt limit will be reached as early as March 31, 2011, and most likely sometime between that date and May 16, 2011. This estimate is subject to change depending on the performance of the economy, government receipts, and other factors. This means it is necessary for Congress to act by the end of the first quarter of 2011.
At several points in past years, Treasury has taken exceptional actions to delay the date by which the limit was reached in order to give Congress additional time to raise the limit. These extraordinary actions include: suspending sales of State and Local Government Series (SLGS) Treasury securities[1]; suspending reinvestment of the Government Securities Investment Fund (G-Fund)[2]; suspending reinvestment of the Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF)[3]; and determining that a “debt issuance suspension period” exists, permitting redemption of existing, and suspension of new, investments of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund (CSRDF)[4]. Treasury would prefer not to have to engage again in any of these extraordinary measures. If we are forced to do so again, these measures could delay the date by which the limit is reached by several weeks. Once these steps have been taken, no remaining legal and prudent measures would be available to create additional headroom under the debt limit, and the United States would begin to default on its obligations.
As discussed in greater detail below, raising the debt limit is necessary to allow the Treasury to meet obligations of the United States that have been established, authorized, and appropriated by the Congress. It is important to emphasize that changing the debt limit does not alter or increase the obligations we have as a nation; it simply permits the Treasury to fund those obligations Congress has already established.
In fact, even if Congress were immediately to adopt the deep cuts in discretionary spending of the magnitude suggested by some Members of Congress, such as reverting to Fiscal Year 2008 spending levels, the need to increase the debt limit would be delayed by no more than two weeks. The limit would still need to be raised to make it possible for the government to avoid default and to meet the other obligations established by Congress.
The national debt is the total amount of money borrowed in order to fulfill the requirements imposed by past Congresses and under past presidencies, during periods when both Republicans and Democrats were in control of different branches of government. These are legal obligations, incurred under the laws of the United States. Responsibility for creating the debt is bipartisan, and responsibility for meeting the Nation’s obligations must be shared by both parties.
As the 112th Congress turns to this issue, I want to stress that President Obama believes strongly in the need to restore balance to our fiscal position, and he is committed to working with both parties to put the Nation on a fiscally responsible path. This will require difficult choices and a comprehensive approach to reduce the gap between our commitments and our resources. It will require that the government spend less and spend more wisely. The President has already taken important steps, including enacting the savings in the Affordable Care Act; restoring Pay-As-You-Go budgeting; and undertaking a three-year freeze on non-security discretionary spending. The President’s proposals would put us on a path to cut the deficit by more than half in the medium term, and substantially reduce the rate of growth in federal health care costs in the long term. The President looks forward to working with Members of the 112th Congress on additional measures to address our medium- and long-term fiscal challenges.
Because Congress has always acted to increase the debt limit when necessary, and because failure to do so would be harmful to the interests of every American, I am confident that Congress will act in a timely manner to increase the limit this year. However, for the benefit of Members of Congress and the public, I want to make clear, for the record, what the implications of a default would be so there can be no misunderstanding when the issue is debated in the House and Senate.
Reaching the debt limit would mean the Treasury would be prevented by law from borrowing in order to pay obligations the Nation is legally required to pay, an event that has no precedent in American history. Such a default should be understood as distinct from a temporary government shutdown resulting from failure to enact appropriations bills, which occurred in late 1995 and early 1996. Those government shutdowns, which were unwise and highly disruptive, did not have the same long-term negative impact on U.S. creditworthiness as a default would, because there was headroom available under the debt limit at that time.
I am certain you will agree that it is strongly in our national interest for Congress to act well before the debt limit is reached. However, if Congress were to fail to act, the specific consequences would be as follows:
For these reasons, any default on the legal debt obligations of the United States is unthinkable and must be avoided. It is critically important that Congress act before the debt limit is reached so that the full faith and credit of the United States is not called into question. The confidence of citizens and investors here and around the world that the United States stands fully behind its legal obligations is a unique national asset. Throughout our history, that confidence has made U.S. government bonds among the best and safest investments available and has allowed us to borrow at very low rates.
Failure to increase the debt limit in a timely manner would threaten this position and compromise America’s creditworthiness in the eyes of the world. Every Secretary of the Treasury in the modern era, regardless of party, has strongly held this view. Given the gravity of the challenges facing the U.S. and world economies, the world’s confidence in our creditworthiness is even more critical today.
I hope this information is responsive to your request and will be helpful as Congress considers this important legislation.
The trans-Alaska oil pipeline all but shut down Saturday after workers found a leak in a station pipe at Pump Station 1, said Alyeska Pipeline Service Co., which operates the line.
The company said workers just before 9 a.m. found oil leaking into a booster pump building. It activated a Fairbanks-based incident management team and a separate Anchorage-based crisis team to respond.