Categories
Cardiovascular
Diagnostics
Endocrinology
Health Insurance
Medical Devices
Mental Health
Nutrition
Oncology
Public Health
Sexual Health
Popular Articles
Stretch Mark Remedies

Owners Of A Brechin Rendering Plant Fined ÷£12,000 After Workers Overcome By Toxic Fumes
The owners of a Brechin rendering plant have been convicted of failing to ensure proper health and safety standards were in place, after two workers were overcome by fumes produced by rotting animal waste.
generic viagra online
What Is Croup? What Causes Croup?
Croup is a common respiratory condition characterized by inflammation of the upper airways that often occurs in infants and children. The result is a swelling and narrowing of the larynx (voice box) and trachea (wind pipe) that results in a harsh, barking cough.
News of the day
Lambda Legal Files Suit Against Assisted-Living Facility For Allegedly Discriminating Against HIV-Positive Resident
Lambda Legal, a group that represents HIV-positive people, on Tuesday filed a law suit against the Fox Ridge assisted-living facility in North Little Rock, Ark., for allegedly evicting a resident because he is HIV-positive, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reports.The Rev. Robert Franke, a retired biology and religion professor who was diagnosed with HIV in 1987, moved into Fox Ridge, which is operated by Parkstone Living Center, in February. The day after he moved into the facility, an unidentified administrator told his daughter, Sara Franke Bowling, that her "superiors" said Franke needed to be discharged from the facility "because of his HIV." Franke disclosed his HIV status on application materials before moving into the facility. The suit alleges that Parkstone violated the Fair Housing Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Arkansas Civil Rights Act and requests a permanent injunction to prevent the facility from denying apartments or services to people living with HIV/AIDS. The suit also seeks compensatory and punitive damages and attorneys" fees and costs. The case was assigned to U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Eisele. The facility declined to comment on the suit. Julie Munsell, a spokesperson for the state Department of Human Services, said Arkansas law allows for people who have been discharged for assisted-living facilities to remain in the facility pending a hearing if the discharge is appealed. Munsell said the department"s Long-Term Care Division received notice that Franke was appealing the discharge but that the appeal was later dismissed without a hearing. According to Munsell, facilities are not permitted to discharge residents based on medical diagnoses but that some facilities have said they do not have the capacity to provide care for certain conditions. Munsell also said that Fox Ridge is "claiming that they did not admit this client so there is no need for a hearing." Scott Schoettes, staff attorney for Lambda"s HIV Project, said that Franke was not seeking medical care from Fox Ridge, although the facility does provide medical services. "He didn"t require any services beyond which they were licensed to provide," Schoettes said. Franke"s eviction is "particularly blatant and egregious, but unfortunately, not all that uncommon," Schoettes said, adding, "This happens all across the country. We want to send a message that this kind of discrimination is not going to be tolerated" (Satter, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 5/13).
Cardiovascular

'New Fault Line' Opened In Abortion-Rights Debate Between 'Militants,' 'Pragmatists,' Opinion Piece States

"A new fault line has opened in the abortion debate," and the "fight is no longer between pro-lifers and pro-choicers" but between "militants and pragmatists," Slate national correspondent William Saletan writes in an opinion piece. He continues, "While some extremists have been raising hell and shooting doctors, pragmatists have been hashing out common ground legislation" in the form of the Preventing Unintended Pregnancies, Reducing the Need for Abortion and Supporting Parents Act (HR 3212), which was introduced last week.Saletan writes that "a lot of bargaining" went into the legislation. He explains that abortion-rights advocates "got money for contraception and sex education," while abortion-rights opponents "got abstinence-friendly curriculum, a bigger adoption tax credit and financial support for women who continue their pregnancies." According to Saletan, each side of the abortion debate "faced the other"s truths." He provides comments from bill sponsor Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), who said that ""we all want to see fewer unintended pregnancies and abortions"" and that ""we must also foster an environment that encourages pregnancies to be carried to term."" According to Saletan, "Such statements are forbidden among pro-choice groups," who support "reducing the "need" for abortion, not abortion itself." He adds, "But DeLauro blurted it out. That"s what happens when you open your mind."Saletan continues that the "militant old guard of the pro-life movement" -- led by the National Right to Life Committee -- does not support the legislation, calling it a "scam." He writes that it is difficult to take seriously NRLC"s argument that the bill"s real goal is to achieve financial gains for the abortion industry. According to Saletan, the "militants extend their objection to abortion "advocacy"" because "none of the bill"s money can legally be used for abortions." By these standards, "the government can"t fund contraception programs run by anyone who thinks abortion should be legal. Which rules out nearly every contraception program in the world," Saletan writes. These opponents also condemn the bill for providing funding for ""sex education without a major abstinence component,"" despite that the bill requires grantees to ""encourage teens to delay sexual activity,"" Saletan writes. He adds, "Abstinence has become a code word for blocking any discussion of birth control."According to Saletan, "Ultimately, the militants don"t care what"s in the bill. The mere fact that some pro-choicers support it is, by their reckoning, grounds to oppose it." He continues, "Pro-life pragmatists take a different view" because they "sought, won and commend the bill"s emphasis on abstinence and parental involvement in sex education," and they "welcome its voluntary approach to abortion reduction even as they seek the procedure"s abolition." He adds, "And while some of them oppose contraception or doubt it will help, they think the bill is still worth supporting because, on balance, it will lead to fewer abortions." Saletan concludes, "I prefer the pragmatists. How about you?" (Saletan, Slate, 7/27). Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women"s Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women"s Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company. © 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.


Add your comment:
Name:
Site address: http://
Your message:
Enter today\\\\'s date, 2 digits
(spam protection):

© Copyright 2009