A New Test to Predict Alzheimer’s

At Stanford University, there has been continuous research on a new way to diagnose people with the progressive brain-wasting disease, Alzheimer’s. Just from a simple blood test, doctors are able to tell whether someone is at risk for Alzheimer’s. The test is quite simple. In the beginning of the disease, the brain sends signals to the immune system, and this triggers the immune system to fight off the disease. In the new test, doctors look for these chemical signals. If these chemical signals are found, it means the person is at risk for Alzheimer’s. So far, the test has been 90% accurate in predicting it. But of course, like all other new medical discoveries, there still has to be more testing done.

With each discovery in medicine and science, there are lives that will be changed, but it also triggers many ethical questions. This new blood test brings up several moral questions: would you want to know you’ll have a brain-wasting disease? There are, of course, arguments for each side. Firstly, it would be good to know ahead of time because this will allow for more family planning and earlier treatment for the progression of the disease. But, on the other hand, would you want to know you’ll be turning into a brain-wasting away person?

Another side to BlackWater

This article really helps explain the whole controvery over Blackwater. The Blackwater company, led by Prince, is a "mercenary" service - basically a company which employs retired Navy Seals and militray men and women and then rents them for use to countries - currently, American employs over 1000 Blackwater personel in Iraq.
There was recently a congressional hearing about Blackwater, becuase they are said to be trigger-happy, having just killed 17 unarmed Iraqis. The diplomots they protect say that Blackwater's men push anyone who's in their way, run other cars off the road, and shoot carelessly. Also, there are accusations that Prince runs the business off of Christian ideals, and has his own religious crusade army.
However, Prince defended his business, bringing up some really interesting points. It's been American tradition for Americans to train themselves for militray service - for instance, under the a famous statue of Washington, there is an inscription which ways says "He gave military training and discipline to the citizen soldiers who achieved the independence of the United States." Prince feels his company does just that. Also, they have been amazing successful - none of the diplomats they have protected have ever been hurt.
So what to do? Stop using Blackwater to help our reputation and help the Iraq people? As a protected diplomat put it, after he has a conference, they make one step forward, but when driving back and Blackwater's men forces others off the road, they take two steps back. Or do should we keep employing Blackwater? You can't argue they don't do an amazing job - they havn't lost a single person they've been protecting. That is a better percentage than the percent of diplomats who whould survive if the new Iraq soldiers would be protectign them - in fact, it would be much, much higher.

Armenian Genocide

This is actually a pretty interesting one.
First, a litte history lesson.
The Armenian Genocide, also labeled the Armenian Holocaust, was when the Ottomon Turks forcibly deported and killed over 1.5 million Armenians during WW1.
So, now the news.
Nancy Pelosi wants to pass a resolution which would declare this act a Genocide. However, Bush is ademently against it.
The reasons for passing the resolution are pretty straight forward. It was a genocide, without a doubt, and many feel that it must be recognized. It hasn't been recognized before because its never been "the right time" - first the Soviet Union, then the Gulf War, etc... Pelosi feels America must stop procrastinating. Also, the survivors of the genocide are getting old, and she feels as if they deserve this resolution.
However, Bush doesn't want to becuase he claims it will bring instability to the region, and that it will have negative impacts on the War in Iraq - and in both cases he is actually right. Turkey has been in upheavel over this possible resolution, and the Turkish Government says that American-Turkey relationships will be deeply hurt. Now what does that mean? It means uh-oh for the War in Iraq. Being a NATO ally, Turkey has helped immensly with the War in Iraq. 70% of US cargo goes through Turkey, and it's the main re-fueling hub. If this resolution is passed, it is almost certain that Turkey will not allow Americans use of its military bases.
So what to do? What policy do you think America should follow?
Follow our morals and do the "right thing" no matter what? Sticking up for the little guy? Give peace to the victims and their families?
Or should we listen to our other side - we need Turkey - our War effort needs Turkey, and our hundreds of thousands of troops in Iraq need Turkey.
It's a tough one. any suggests? If you've got a good one, I'm sure Bush and Pelosi would love to hear it.

Medicare Fraud

While listening to NPR, I heard this news story, and it really caught my attention. There is a wide variety of ways for people to make money illegally: drugs, gambling, and fraud. But, has anybody ever heard about Medicare fraud? Has anybody ever heard of people selling durable medical equipment illegally? Well, yes, it is possible. It probably sounds really lame to sell medical equipment to make tons of money, but it is in fact a huge business, and an even greater problem. Believe it or not, this year there were fraudulent Medicare claims between $300 and $400 million in only two – TWO! – Florida counties. According to an interview on NPR, there are four major reason why former drug dealers turn to selling fraudulent Medicare equipment: “‘There’s more money, there’s much less chance of being caught, and if I do get caught, I’ll be treated like a white-collar criminal, not like a drug dealer,’” and my favorite reason of all: “They’re less likely to be killed in a drive-by shooting.”

Although this sounds so strange, it is true. I feel that the Medicare system is almost inviting to fraud problems. There were several reasons given in the news story. First, that it is a “trusting system” where most claims are paid automatically – an obvious mistake. Second, that “the companies Medicare hires to handle its claims say they are working to improve fraud detection. But their main mission is not to root out fraud; it is to pay claims quickly and smoothly.” I agree with the other people interviewed in this segment: that there should be a reform of the Medicare system and how money is delegated to the system. But of course, with all reforms, it’ll be hard to do. Any suggestions?

I guess, whether you’re a drug dealer, or a wheelchair and cane dealer, there’s always going to be an easy way to get money. But, hopefully in the future, more people will act honestly and with compassion, not greedily.

Al Gore wins Nobel Peace Prize

Last week, the Nobel committee awarded Al Gore with the Nobel Peace Prize. This has received much publicity because of his popular movie, books, and popularity. He, as well as 2,500 scientists from around the world, who are part of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, will share the prize.
I think that it is great that Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize because it will definitely bring more attention and importance to the growing climate issues we have been and will be experiencing. Hopefully, this will help to start the increased funding for more alternate energy projects and research.

Ever since Gore won the prize, there has been much speculation about whether or not he will use this new popularity to announce a run for the presidency in 2008. He has said no, but some are still hoping that he will. But, personally, I think he’s more compassionate about the climate change and not politics. He tried politics and the run for the presidency, and lost. However, if he did decide to run, Clinton is so far ahead in the poles that Gore would probably lose, which would lessen his influence.

Overall, I am personally happy that he won the prize because I think he has deserved it. But it's not just a prize for Gore; it is a prize for the issue that he represents. Also, I hope that a lot of good will come from this prize and more action will be taken against global warming, which is a huge topic in the world and in politics right now. But, if he does happen to run for president – however unlikely it may be – we will all know the second it happens.

In the article about this from The Sacramento Bee newspaper, there are still people who think that Gore is exaggerating the truth and should not have received the award – what do you think?

Clinton urges diplomacy with Iran

Hillary Clinton recently said that the Bush administration is making a mistake by cutting off diplomatic contact with the Iran government. She believes that such actions would give the American credibility in the Iran government, and help prevent a possible future blockade of oil to the United States. She also insists that the "the resolution gives an opening to future penalties and 'leverage when we negotiate with them.'"

I think that Clinton is right in this issue. We should try to end the conflicts in the Middle East as soon as possible. We need to bring the troops home and decrease the costly prices for oil. By ending the conflict, the economy would not be in danger of a oil blockade and needless bloodshed would be avoided.

Schwarzeneggar vetoes gay marriage

As the debate over gay marriage rages on throughout the country, the California governor, once again, vetoed a bill for gay marriage. His reasons were that voters and the California Supreme Court should decide the issue, instead of lawmakers. The bill would have defined marriage as a union between two people, not just a man and a woman. Arnold says that he will continue to veto bills involving the issue of gay marriage. Meanwhile, the California Supreme Court will rule on whether the state's voter-approved ban on gay marriage violates the Constitution.



I think that Arnold is right in vetoing this bill because gay marriage is such a hot-button issue to so many people. For him to please gay marriage advocates would also be to upset opponents of gay marriage. So, the issue should be left to the voters of California. What irritates me about what our governor did is that he says Californians "should not be discriminated against based upon their sexual orientation," even though he just vetoed a bill that would have approved gay marriage. I don't know about you, but I hate hypocritical politicians.

P.S.: VOTE FOR RYAN LANDIS!