Every four years, athletes from around the world gather to compete for the gold and then go back to the Olympic Village and hook up -- but not American track-and-field star Lori "Lolo" Jones, who has admitted that she is a 29-year-old virgin.
long island serial killer wizard of oz jeff green saturday night live aortic aneurysm minnesota timberwolves jr martinez
United States (HEALTH/Kaiser) ? Amber Cooper and her husband were doing OK. They both had jobs. A healthy 5-year-old son, a house in Riverbank, Calif., and health insurance from her job in the accounting department of a small manufacturing company.
But then one day everything changed.
?We were in a conference room getting the information and I had heard rumors but didn?t know if it was true and started crying in front of everyone and actually had to excuse myself to gather myself together and go back in. It was devastating for me,? said Cooper.
It was devastating because the rumors — her worst fears — had come true. Cooper had a liver transplant when she was 10. So she takes a drug twice a day so her body won?t reject her liver. She was in that conference room for a meeting about her health insurance.
?Every year my company changes the insurance. And instead of giving us three different choices for insurance plans they were changing to one, which was a high-deductible plan with no prescription coverage,? she said.
Cooper was stunned. Her anti-rejection medicine costs way more than she could afford on her own — more than $1,000 a month.
Cooper, 30, started a frantic search for help. Finally, she found the HealthWell Foundation, which was willing to pay for her medication. But she still couldn?t afford the $300 blood test she needs every month to make sure she?s not rejecting her liver.
?It is scary because the only way to tell if you?re going to go into rejection is by the blood work. Your numbers will be a little bit crazy and then the doctors will be like, ?OK, you need to get in and we need to check you out and make sure you?re OK.? So I really took a risk not getting that blood work done. But I couldn?t afford to get it done. I really couldn?t,? she said.
What happened to Cooper is happening more and more these days.
?Beneath the surface what health insurance is in the country has been changing really dramatically. And just in plain language it?s becoming skimpier and skimpier and less and less comprehensive,? said Drew Altman of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a private, non-profit, non-partisan research group. (KHN is a editorially independent program of the foundation).
Paul Fronstin of the Employee Benefits Research Institute says that is the trend nationally.
?Deductibles have gone up. Co-pays have gone up. You see costing-sharing for out-of-network services have gone up,? Fronstin said. ?It seems to have accelerated in the last few years. Health care is just continuing to take a bigger bite out of take-home pay.?
So even people with insurance are paying thousands of dollars out of pocket before their insurance kicks in. And even when it does, insurance picks up less then it used to — often a lot less.
More than 1 in 5 Americans had a problem getting insurance to pay for a hospital, doctor or other health care in the past year, according to a new poll by NPR, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Harvard School of Public Health.
Altman says this comes as many families are struggling to get by.
?This effects not only how people seek health care — they?re more reluctant to get it if they can put it off. But it also affects family budgets in a very real way, especially as we?re still coming out of recession and families are still crunched by a weak economy,? Altman said.
Cooper?s family has stopped taking trips, eating out, fixing up their house, or spending money on anything else they don?t have to. Their son gets by with hand-me-downs, she said.
?He?s five and growing out of everything. I haven?t been able to buy him any clothes and shoes. Those are things I haven?t been able to purchase because of the increase in the health care,? she said.
And Fronstin says the weak economy is driving more and more companies to cut back on coverage because of simple math — it?s the only way they can keep up with rising health care costs.
?Employers are trying to manage those costs. They?re trying to keep those cost increases as close to inflation as possible. And they?re doing everything they can to get their workers so that they think twice about the health care that they are using,? Fronstin said.
Cooper?s just grateful she?s getting her drugs every month. And she started those monthly blood tests again when her company changed insurance again this year. But it?s still not as good as it used to be. So she and her husband don?t go to the doctor when their get sick if they can avoid it. Same goes for their son.
?There were a couple of times where he got sick where I just tried to do the best I could with what I had whether it was children?s Ibuprofen or cooling him down with cool rags and that sort of thing,? she said.
And Cooper can?t help but worry about the next company meeting about her family?s health plan.
?It changes every year so I really have no clue what?s going to happen next year and with them making that change I really don?t know what to expect every year,? she said.
? Kaiser Health News.
? AHN
odom vt vt los angeles angels los angeles angels lindsay lohan’s playboy cover leaked online lindsay lohan’s playboy cover leaked online
A simple blood test to check seemingly healthy men for hidden prostate cancer does more harm than good and shouldn?t be part of routine medical care. That?s the long-awaited final recommendation from the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), published today in Annals of Internal Medicine.
About half of men over age 40 get this test as part of a regular checkup. It measures the amount of a protein called prostate-specific antigen, secreted by the walnut-sized prostate. An above-normal PSA level can signal hidden prostate cancer. But it can also be a sign of prostate infection, an enlarged prostate, and other problems. Hunting for hidden disease in the absence of any outward signs or symptoms is called screening.
The task force?s evidence-based rationale for saying ?no? to routine prostate cancer screening using the PSA test goes like this. For every 1,000 men, routine PSA testing would:
Most men and their doctors would agree that the harsh side effects of treating a life-threatening problem, like lung cancer or pancreatic cancer, are worth tolerating. But many men who are treated for prostate cancer picked up by PSA screening have tumors they never would have noticed? otherwise. These men would suffer more from prostate cancer treatment than they would from the cancer itself.
?What most people don?t realize is that most prostate cancers never spread and cause suffering. Under the microscope, they look like a disease. But they don?t act like a disease. With those cancers, the treatment always is worse than the disease. What we desperately need is a test that distinguishes between the occasional prostate cancers that spread and cause suffering, even death, and the much more frequent prostate cancers that will never cause suffering. The PSA is not that test,? says Dr. Anthony Komaroff, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and editor in chief of the Harvard Health Letter.
Although prostate cancer is usually slow growing, it isn?t always. An estimated 28,000 men will die of prostate cancer this year. It?s the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States, behind lung cancer, which will kill nearly 90,000 men this year.
Advocates of routine PSA testing say that the test saves lives. In a commentary that accompanied the USPSTF?s recommendation, nine prostate cancer specialists argue that detecting prostate cancer in younger men (meaning those in their mid-40s or 50s), who can look forward to another 30 years of life, is important. As Northwestern University?s Dr. William Catalona, one of the commentary authors, told NPR, ?If all PSA screening were to stop, there would be thousands of men who would unnecessarily suffer and die from prostate cancer.? They also criticize the across-the-board recommendation, and that PSA testing should be approved for high-risk populations, such as men with a family history of prostate cancer or men of African descent.
Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, thinks the USPSTF got it right. He believes that more than one million American men were needlessly ?cured? of their prostate cancer over the last 20 years. Writing in support of the USPSTF recommendation, he points out that
Americans have been taught for decades to fear all cancer and that the best way to deal with cancer is to find it early and treat it aggressively. As a result, many have a blind faith in early detection of cancer and subsequent aggressive medical intervention whenever cancer is found. There is little appreciation of the harms that screening and medical interventions can cause.
The USPSTF was asked to do some heart-rending calculus: What is one prostate cancer death prevented worth?
To the person whose life it is, and his family, the answer is simple: priceless. The answer will be different for men whose prostate cancer was identified by PSA testing, who were treated unnecessarily for a cancer that never would have threatened their health, and who can no longer get erections, who need diapers or other aids to cope with urinary incontinence, or who have long-lasting bowel problems.
?I explain to my patients that getting a PSA test may lead to a treatment that will remove a cancer from their body but that may cause erectile dysfunction and incontinence,? says Dr. Komaroff, ?They often reply that the side effects are worth eliminating the cancer. Then I tell them that there is only a small chance that their cancer will actually spread and cause suffering, but that I do not have a test that can determine what the chance is. Some say, ?Then take it out.? But others say, ?Then let?s just watch it.? I think the patient needs to participate in the decision about PSA testing.?
The USPSTF recommendation won?t be the last word on PSA testing. Men still have a choice.
I?ve been telling my doctor for years that I don?t want it. If you do, talk with your doctor. But before you get your blood drawn, realize that a high PSA might start you on a path to biopsy and treatment that will likely cause more harm than good.
bobby rush supreme court justices 19 kids and counting danny o brien alicia silverstone park slope food coop anchorman sequel
![[ Back to EurekAlert! ]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vy65pHu79uur0on3QKdMUFzukz2JMSkqYvLJSBA0hlVP9Axezj44OqIaEsWSqSscjArC1KVzBp9MqSEBo80z8iHsWCPqcy3yliT0l5QK8=s0-d){kind=small}
Public release date: 22-May-2012
Share ] Contact: Kara Gavin
kegavin@umich.edu
734-764-2220
University of Michigan Health System
ANN ARBOR, Mich. When thousands of psychiatrists attend their field's largest annual meeting each year, the presentations they hear about research into drug treatments report overwhelmingly on positive results.
That's the finding of a new study published in the Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology by two young psychiatrists from the University of Michigan and Yale University, who analyzed the presentations given at two recent meetings of the American Psychiatric Association.
Of 278 studies presented at the 2009 and 2010 APA meetings that compared at least two medicines against each other for any psychiatric illness, they found that 195 had been supported by industry, and 83 funded by other means. The authors then evaluated the studies without knowing which kind of support each one had.
Of the industry-supported studies, 97.4 percent reported results that were positive toward the medicine that the study was designed to test, and 2.6 percent reported mixed results. No industry-sponsored studies with negative results were found.
In contrast, when industry was not the source of funding, 68.7 percent of the presentations were positive, and 24.1 percent contained mixed results, while 7.2 percent contained negative results.
This 'presentation bias', in which mostly good news about medicines gets reported at meetings, echoes the 'publication bias' that has been seen in research published in major journals, says Srijan Sen, M.D., Ph.D., an assistant professor of psychiatry at the U-M Medical School who led the study while in his residency at Yale.
While attending the APA's massive annual meeting, he noted the large industry presence and emphasis on research involving medicines that were still "on patent" and being actively marketed to both psychiatrists attending the conference. He teamed with Yale psychiatry resident Maya Prabhu, M.D., M.Sc., now a consulting forensic psychiatrist at Yale, to do a formal review.
"This analysis suggests that the APA meeting might be being used as an opportunity to make drugs seem more effective than they are," he says.
Meanwhile, research on "talk therapy" treatments such as cognitive behavioral therapy which doesn't have industry backing gets less attention, even though there is growing evidence that such non-drug therapies can have as much effect as medicines in illnesses such as depression.
Since the APA meeting is a major source of continuing medical education credit for psychiatrists, and a hub for psychiatry residents just starting out in the field, the bias has the potential to affect their clinical care when they return home.
Sen notes that the research journals and funding agencies have tried to confront research bias in journal articles by requiring pharmaceutical companies to register the clinical trials they are conducting and include the registration number when publishing the study. This allows interested individuals to see which trials are being reported in the medical literature, and whether the trial results are interpreted according to the original study design.
For instance, if a drug trial is designed to test long-term results from a particular treatment, but a paper is published showing positive results over a much shorter term, that could be an indication of bias. Research meetings could require a similar practice, Sen says. And, APA could be more selective in accepting poster presentation submissions.
If nothing else, Sen says, attendees at the APA's meeting and perhaps other large gatherings of psychiatrists should be aware of the positive bias of the research they will hear about at the meeting.
And, non-industry funding for research especially research to compare older "off patent" drugs that aren't being marketed by industry is also important, he says. The federal government has funded large comparison studies in depression, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, he notes and these mostly showed that the generic medications that have lost their patent protection are just as effective as newer, patent-protected ones. But even still, psychiatrists prescribe the generic ones far less often than the brand-name patent-protected ones.
###
The study was supported by grants MH095109 and UL1RR024986 from the National Institutes of Health. In 2009, Sen was a trainee member of an APA committee involved in soliciting the scientific reports to be presented at the annual meeting.
Reference: Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology & Volume 32, Number 3, June 2012
[ | E-mail | Share ] ?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Public release date: 22-May-2012 Share ] Contact: Kara Gavin
kegavin@umich.edu
734-764-2220
University of Michigan Health System
ANN ARBOR, Mich. When thousands of psychiatrists attend their field's largest annual meeting each year, the presentations they hear about research into drug treatments report overwhelmingly on positive results.
That's the finding of a new study published in the Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology by two young psychiatrists from the University of Michigan and Yale University, who analyzed the presentations given at two recent meetings of the American Psychiatric Association.
Of 278 studies presented at the 2009 and 2010 APA meetings that compared at least two medicines against each other for any psychiatric illness, they found that 195 had been supported by industry, and 83 funded by other means. The authors then evaluated the studies without knowing which kind of support each one had.
Of the industry-supported studies, 97.4 percent reported results that were positive toward the medicine that the study was designed to test, and 2.6 percent reported mixed results. No industry-sponsored studies with negative results were found.
In contrast, when industry was not the source of funding, 68.7 percent of the presentations were positive, and 24.1 percent contained mixed results, while 7.2 percent contained negative results.
This 'presentation bias', in which mostly good news about medicines gets reported at meetings, echoes the 'publication bias' that has been seen in research published in major journals, says Srijan Sen, M.D., Ph.D., an assistant professor of psychiatry at the U-M Medical School who led the study while in his residency at Yale.
While attending the APA's massive annual meeting, he noted the large industry presence and emphasis on research involving medicines that were still "on patent" and being actively marketed to both psychiatrists attending the conference. He teamed with Yale psychiatry resident Maya Prabhu, M.D., M.Sc., now a consulting forensic psychiatrist at Yale, to do a formal review.
"This analysis suggests that the APA meeting might be being used as an opportunity to make drugs seem more effective than they are," he says.
Meanwhile, research on "talk therapy" treatments such as cognitive behavioral therapy which doesn't have industry backing gets less attention, even though there is growing evidence that such non-drug therapies can have as much effect as medicines in illnesses such as depression.
Since the APA meeting is a major source of continuing medical education credit for psychiatrists, and a hub for psychiatry residents just starting out in the field, the bias has the potential to affect their clinical care when they return home.
Sen notes that the research journals and funding agencies have tried to confront research bias in journal articles by requiring pharmaceutical companies to register the clinical trials they are conducting and include the registration number when publishing the study. This allows interested individuals to see which trials are being reported in the medical literature, and whether the trial results are interpreted according to the original study design.
For instance, if a drug trial is designed to test long-term results from a particular treatment, but a paper is published showing positive results over a much shorter term, that could be an indication of bias. Research meetings could require a similar practice, Sen says. And, APA could be more selective in accepting poster presentation submissions.
If nothing else, Sen says, attendees at the APA's meeting and perhaps other large gatherings of psychiatrists should be aware of the positive bias of the research they will hear about at the meeting.
And, non-industry funding for research especially research to compare older "off patent" drugs that aren't being marketed by industry is also important, he says. The federal government has funded large comparison studies in depression, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, he notes and these mostly showed that the generic medications that have lost their patent protection are just as effective as newer, patent-protected ones. But even still, psychiatrists prescribe the generic ones far less often than the brand-name patent-protected ones.
###
The study was supported by grants MH095109 and UL1RR024986 from the National Institutes of Health. In 2009, Sen was a trainee member of an APA committee involved in soliciting the scientific reports to be presented at the annual meeting.
Reference: Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology & Volume 32, Number 3, June 2012
[ | E-mail | Share ] ?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
big ten acc challenge scott disick kourtney kardashian kourtney kardashian lipitor lipitor kourtney kardashian pregnant again
TRIPOLI (Reuters) - The Libyan convicted of the 1988 bombing of a PanAm flight over Lockerbie will be buried on Monday in a quiet ceremony that Libyans hope will allow them to leave behind the controversy that surrounded him in life.
Abdel Basset al-Megrahi, who always said he was not responsible for bringing down the jumbo jet on the Scottish town and killing 270 people, died in his bed in Tripoli on Sunday surrounded by family.
His release from jail in 2009 caused huge controversy in Britain and the United States, where most of the victims were from. But his death at 60 from cancer barely made the television news in Libya, where people are focused on reconstruction after overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi in a NATO-backed war last year.
Outside the Megrahi home in Tripoli, less than a dozen men sat in plastic chairs sipping tea and offering condolences. Little fanfare was expected for a man seen by many as an embarrassing reminder of Gaddafi's rule, which saw Libya become a pariah state that suffered international sanctions for years.
For his family, courted by Gaddafi before last year's revolt and by foreign journalists since, the death offered closure.
"I myself heard Abdul Basset always saying that if God gives me life and health I will appeal my case and prove my innocence," his cousin Rashed Megrahi said. "We see his death as a mercy - he has rested and so have we."
CONTROVERSY
Megrahi was found guilty of the Lockerbie bombing in 2001 but was freed in 2009 and returned to Libya because he had terminal cancer and was not expected to live long.
The decision by officials in Scotland to repatriate Megrahi angered relatives of many victims, 189 of whom were American, and was criticized by Washington as he received a hero's welcome from Gaddafi, who was killed by rebels last year.
That Megrahi survived for nearly three years after his release from jail caused discomfort in Britain. Prime Minister David Cameron, visiting the United States on Sunday, said Megrahi should never have been freed.
The White House said it would not end the quest for justice and Scottish leader Alex Salmond said Scottish lawyers were still seeking other suspects.
Libya's National Transitional Council (NTC), keen to distance themselves from the bombing and Megrahi, has said it would work with the Scottish government over the possible involvement of others in the 1988 attack.
Megrahi, the only person convicted for the bombing, was found guilty under Scottish law of secretly loading a suitcase bomb onto a plane at Malta's Luqa Airport, where he was head of operations for Libyan Arab Airlines in December 1988.
The suitcase was transferred at Frankfurt to another flight and then onto New York-bound PanAm Flight 103 at London's Heathrow airport, concluded Scottish judges sitting at a converted Dutch military base selected as a neutral trial venue.
Megrahi, handed over by Gaddafi under a U.N.-brokered deal, always insisted he was merely an airline executive, not a Libyan intelligence agent as prosecutors charged.
His trial was part of a process of rapprochement by which Gaddafi distanced himself from association with groups regarded as terrorists in the West and secured renewed cooperation with Western firms keen to exploit Libya's oil and gas reserves.
Many people in Britain say they believe Megrahi was a scapegoat and families of the victims fear they will never know the truth.
Megrahi told Reuters in October the West had exaggerated his role and the truth about what happened would emerge soon. But his brother Abdulhakim said he was too sick to utter anything on his deathbed and anything he may have known died with him.
"He was smiling before he died," another brother, Mohammed, said. "He died in his home and country, an innocent man."
(Additional reporting by Olesya Dmitracova in London and Lily Kuo in New York, Adrian Croft in Chicago and Bill Trott in Washington; Writing by Lin Noueihed; Editing by Mark Heinrich)
michael pineda charles taylor calvin johnson calvin johnson carl crawford mad cow disease powerball
You don't have to look any further than the 4,000 lumen brightness rating for the Casio XJ-H1750 Pro Series ($2,200 street) to know that its natural home is in a mid-size to large conference room or classroom. What makes it interesting, however, and worth a close look, is that it coaxes that 4,000 lumens out of Casio's hybrid light source, consisting of LEDs and a laser. It doesn't hurt either that it offers excellent data image quality.
Casio was the first company to offer projectors with a hybrid light source, starting in 2010, and I've reviewed earlier models, including, for example, the Casio Green Slim XJ-A250 ($1399.99 direct, 4 stars). The XJ-H1750 has the distinction of being a third-generation model, with the implied improvements from lessons learned in earlier generations.
Basics, Setup, and Connections
Aside from the light source, the XJ-H1750 offers a fairly mundane set of specifications, built around a DLP chip with a native XGA (1,024 by 768) resolution. That puts it in the same class as the Editors' Choice Epson PowerLite 1880 MultiMedia Projector ($1399 direct, 4 stars). At 15.7 pounds, however, it weighs more than twice as much. So although both projectors are most likely to wind up permanently installed or on a cart, the XJ-H1750 is far less appropriate to carry elsewhere, even occasionally.
Set up is standard fare, with a manual focus and manual 1.2x zoom, which is just enough to give you a little flexibility in how far you can put the projector from the screen. The back panel offers a reasonably full set of connectors, including an HDMI port for a computer or video source, two VGA ports for computers or component video, a pass-through VGA port, and both S-video and composite video inputs.
Three other connectors worth mention are for a LAN port and for both USB A and USB B ports. The LAN port lets you both send data images and control the projector over a network. The USB A port lets you plug in a USB memory key to read JPG files directly or plug in a supplied WiFi adaptor that can accept data images from a computer or from most Android, iOS, and Windows smartphones and tablets.
The USB B port lets you connect to a computer to use the projector's interactive option ($250 street for the software and interactive pen). The interactive option is best ignored, however, given that with the projector's standard throw, it would be hard to avoid shadows if you're close enough to the screen to interact with it.
Brightness and Eco Modes
The XJ-H1750 scores well on both brightness and image quality. In its brightest mode it was easily bright enough for the 78-inch wide (98-inch diagonal) image I tested with to stand up to the typical level of ambient light in a mid- to large-size conference room or classroom. In fact, it was too bright for comfortable viewing with the lights off.
One of the more unusual, and more eco-friendly, touches for the projector is its wide range of brightness level adjustments. Most projectors offer a bright mode and one eco mode that lowers brightness and power consumption. In addition, they typically offer color mode presets that are primarily meant for adjusting color, but affect brightness as well.
The XJ-H1750 offers two non-eco modes plus five eco modes, with the least power-hungry mode using only about 35 percent as much electricity as the most power hungry according to my measurements, or 40 percent as much according to Casio's ratings for peak power usage for each mode. More precisely, I measured the range at 122 to 340 watts, depending on the mode. You can, in short, choose the least bright mode that offers the brightness you need, and use the color presets as they were intended, to pick the best color setting, rather than using them to adjust brightness as well.
Image Quality
The XJ-H1750 offers excellent data image quality, sailing through our standard suite of DisplayMate tests. Colors were fully saturated, and color balance looked good, particularly in the eco modes, with suitably neutral grays across the entire range from black to white. Text was crisp and highly readable down to the smallest sizes we test with.
Video image quality was also good for a data projector. Although the quality is limited by the XGA (1,024 by 768) resolution, the projector did a good job maintaining shadow detail (details in dark areas based on shading) and it showed only a touch of posterization (shading changing suddenly where it should change gradually) on scenes where many data projectors do far worse.
Also very much worth mention is that the XJ-H1750 shows fewer rainbow artifacts (with light areas on screen breaking up into little red-green-blue rainbows) than most DLP projectors. These are caused by the way DLP chips create colors, and they are always a potential issue for single-chip DLP projectors.
With the XJ-H1750, the artifacts show up so infrequently with data images that few, if any, people should find them annoying. With video, I saw them a little more often, though not as often as with many other DLP models. Those who see the artifacts easily may find them bothersome for watching video, but most people shouldn't have a problem with them.
Other Issues
The projector's audio system counts as another small plus, with a 10-watt mono speaker that delivers reasonably high audio quality at reasonably high volume. Less convincingly in the plus column is the 3D support, which is even more limited than the 3D in most data projectors, because it works only with input over the VGA port. That means you can't use it with a video converter to play 3D Blu-ray discs, and you can't even use it with an HDMI-connected computer.
The XJ-H1750 doesn't qualify for the PCMag Greentech Approved seal, but it offers enough eco-friendly features to make them worth highlighting, starting with the five levels of power-saving eco modes and the solid-state light source. Also, in addition to being mercury-free, the light source offers a 20,000-hour lifetime. That means it should last the life of the projector and lower its carbon footprint, since no additional shipping is needed for replacement lamps.
The long lamp life lowers running costs, so the total cost of ownership can easily wind up being less than for a projector with a lower initial cost but a 2,000 hour lamp life and replacements at $200 or more per lamp. Ultimately, the overall balance of brightness, high-quality data images, eco-friendly features, and low running cost make the Casio XJ-H1750 Pro Series both an impressive projector and a potentially attractive choice for a mid- to large-size setting.
More Projector Reviews:
??? Casio XJ-H1750 Pro Series
??? InFocus IN1124
??? Severtson GP4360
??? Volfoni SmartCrystal Pro
??? Severtson GP169923D
?? more
cate blanchett drew brees drew brees tim tebow jets katy perry part of me video photoshop cs6 beta nfl news
Question by Hanna A: Candidate for Medical marijuana?
Im 13 years old and I have been stressed out for a very long time. It started I think three years ago and kept getting worse. If I went into detail It would take me hours to finish writing. But I have been prescribed anti depressants because I have suffered through lots of stress and panic attacks. The anti depressants didn?t work so I stopped using them. Nothing seems to lessen my stress and I was wondering if I would be a candidate for medical marijuana. I?m just asking I don?t know if I would actually do it. I was just wondering if they would let me at this age. I think people that smoke pot are stupid but if it would help me then maybe it would be worth it.
Stupid was a bad word to use. But my opinion is that it?s not right to use it for non medical reasons. I?ve seen people get really messed up for abusing it.
Best answer:
Answer by Adam
No, you must be 18.
Also F*CK you, for Judging the MILLIONS of people who consume cannabis, and labeling them as STUPID.
Your 13, and don?t know shit.
Give your answer to this question below!
uekman music awards music awards giants eagles bcs rankings week 13 bcs rankings week 13 philadelphia marathon
battlestar galactica blood and chrome my morning jacket roger goodell psychosis dianna agron million hoodie march tebow trade
