<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: graham</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'graham'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22graham%22&t=%22graham%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:06:58 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>The Senate’s Interventionist Caucus and Libya</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4753670&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FfVlc7wkjMWg%2F</link>
            <description>By Christopher PrebleAn interesting window into the politics of the Obama administration’s war in Libya may open this week, when Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) reintroduce a resolution expressing the sense of the Senate “that it is not in the vital interests of the United States to intervene militarily in Libya,” and calling on NATO member states and the Arab League, two parties who are directly threatened by the violence in Libya, to provide the necessary assets to the mission.
Such resolutions almost never have a direct impact on the conduct of military operations. Hutchison-Manchin isn’t even the first attempt to constrain President Obama’s ability to wage war in Libya. A resolution offered by freshman Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), and cosponsored by S...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4753670</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 16:25:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4753670</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4747599&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fhwji2Oqv4oo%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
&amp;#8220;Sadly, in Egypt’s case, a freely elected civilian government may prove powerless in the face of the deeply entrenched and well-organized military.&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;Washington politicians from both parties, and bureaucrats, have for decades successfully decreased our freedom and liberties as they have regulated more and more of our lives, including our retirement.&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;The Ryan proposal correctly focuses on achieving debt reduction through spending cuts, but this very gradual debt reduction schedule is a weakness that could lead to its downfall.&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;Nearly two years ago Sen. McCain, along with Senators Graham and Lieberman, was supping with Qaddafi in Tripoli, discussing the possibility of Washington providing military aid.&amp;#8221;
Cato media fello...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4747599</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2011 15:03:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4747599</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>George Will on Libya</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4684264&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F3V-WKxgXuaU%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazPresident Obama's incomprehensible &quot;kinetic military action&quot; in Libya has driven George Will to distraction, and to mordant wit:
At about this point in foreign policy misadventures, the usual question is: What is Plan B? Today’s question is: What was Plan A?
Not to mention literary allusion:
Perhaps the CIA operatives should have stayed home and talked to some senators who seem to know what’s what. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) refers to the Libyan rebels as part of a “pro-democracy movement.” Perhaps they are. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) must think so. Serving, as usual, as Sancho Panza to Sen. John McCain’s Don Quixote, Graham said last Sunday (on “Face the Nation”), “We should be taking the fight to Tripoli.”
Read the whole thing.
George Will on Libya is a po...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4684264</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 14:48:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4684264</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tea Party Isn’t Mellowing GOP Militarism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4399513&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUQLK8clRt6Q%2F</link>
            <description>By Benjamin H. FriedmanLindsay Graham isn&amp;#8217;t alone when he imagines an emerging &amp;#8220;isolationist wing&amp;#8221; of the Republican Congress. Pundits have lately both lamented and celebrated the arrival of a Tea Party foreign policy, where deficit fears restrain military adventures and Pentagon spending.
I wish there were such a thing. My op-ed in yesterday&amp;#8217;s Philadelphia Inquirer shows that there isn&amp;#8217;t.  I report there on research that I did (really research that intern Matt Fay did) on support among Republicans in the House and Senate for cutting defense spending and getting out of Afghanistan. I found little.
I also tested the idea that the Tea Party is restraining Republican militarism, by comparing the 101 freshmen that largely claim adherence to that movement to other...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4399513</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:03:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4399513</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tea-Party Isn’t Mellowing GOP Militarism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4394419&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUQLK8clRt6Q%2F</link>
            <description>By Benjamin H. FriedmanLindsay Graham isn&amp;#8217;t alone when he imagines an emerging &amp;#8220;isolationist wing&amp;#8221; of the Republican Congress. Pundits have lately both lamented and celebrated the arrival of a tea-party foreign policy, where deficit fears restrain military adventures and Pentagon spending.
I wish there were such a thing. My op-ed in yesterday&amp;#8217;s Philadelphia Inquirer shows that there isn&amp;#8217;t.  I report there on research that I did (really research that intern Matt Fay did) on support among Republicans in the House and Senate for cutting defense spending and getting out of Afghanistan. I found little.
I also tested the idea that the tea-party is restraining Republican militarism, by comparing the 101 freshmen that largely claim adherence to that movement to other...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4394419</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:03:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4394419</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Media Miss Real News in Latest Trade Report</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4249043&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FgwG4wkc_VpU%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel GriswoldThis morning’s report from the U.S. Department of Commerce that the pesky trade deficit shrank unexpectedly in October is being hailed in the media as “good news” for the economy, while the real news behind the numbers remains buried.
According to the latest monthly trade report, exports of U.S. goods rose in October compared to September, while imports declined slightly. Rising exports are good news in anybody&amp;#8217;s book, but according to the conventional Keynesian and mercantilist logic, falling imports must also be good for the economy because that means consumers are spending more on domestically produced goods, right? Wrong.
In the real world, that assumption is almost always false, as I did my best to document a few weeks back in an op-ed titled, “Are risi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4249043</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:21:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4249043</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Happiness Is…</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4220466&amp;cid=t_432893_151_f&amp;fid=35818&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Frecoveryissexy.com%2Fhappiness-is%2F</link>
            <description>Happiness Is&amp;#8230;       
A Recovery Book
In this highly entertaining and literate book, Shawn Christopher Shea takes us on a provocative journey into the world of practical philosophy, applied spirituality and everyday psychology. Calling upon more than twenty years of clinical experience, fifty years of navigating life&amp;#8217;s ups and downs, and an array of thinkers and pop icons &amp;#8211; from Alan Watts to Albert Einstein, Billy Graham to Bob Dylan, the Dalai Lama to the English mystic Julian of Norwich &amp;#8211; he weaves a gentle compassion and a tart wit into this compelling look at human nature and our never-ending quest for happiness.
Not content with traditional stereotypes of happiness, Shea is on a search for a tougher happiness that is present and revitalizing even during times o...</description>
            <author>Recovery Is Sexy.com</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4220466</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4220466</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The NNT: Quick Summaries Of Evidence-Based Medicine</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4197071&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fthe-nnt-quick-summaries-of-evidence-based-medicine%2F2010.11.23</link>
            <description>I think I blogged this before, but didn’t describe it much. Allow me to rectify that mistake.
The NNT.com (&amp;#8220;Number Needed To Treat&amp;#8221;) is an ever-expanding website which boils down high-quality reviews of medications and interventions and presents its recommendations in a much more approachable green-yellow-red &amp;#8220;warning triangle&amp;#8221; format rather than some ratio.
While I won’t use this as a single source to change my practice, I’m going to have to do some more research on some of the [questionables] of our age (i.e. Octreotide for variceal bleeding, PPI infusions for upper GI bleeding, etc.) &amp;#8212; just two of the studies that fly in the face of current practice.
An aside: While inhaled corticosteroids for asthma aren’t beneficial in the review, what it doesn...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4197071</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:00:56 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4197071</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>5 Must-Read Life Lessons from Alexander Graham Bell</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4190560&amp;cid=t_432893_180_f&amp;fid=38612&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fpickthebrain%2FLYVv%2F%7E3%2F1YsN-i0H_qA%2F</link>
            <description>Alexander Graham Bell was a prominent scientist, inventor, engineer and innovator who is credited with inventing the first “practical” telephone, although some believe he stole the idea from Elisha Gray.
Bell&amp;#8217;s father, grandfather, and brother were all involved with work on speech and elocution, and both his mother and wife were deaf, profoundly influencing Bell&amp;#8217;s life&amp;#8217;s work.
Bell’s research on hearing and speech further led him to experiment with hearing devices. These experimentations eventually resulted in Bell being awarded the first U.S. patent for the telephone in 1876.  Interestingly enough, Bell considered his invention an interference with his “real” work as a scientist and refused to have a telephone in his study.
Bell is also known for many other la...</description>
            <author>PickTheBrain | Motivation and Self Improvement</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4190560</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 22 Nov 2010 08:30:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4190560</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is Your Doctor a &quot;Return on Investment&quot;?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4133856&amp;cid=t_432893_109_f&amp;fid=38951&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fcarlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F11%2Fis-your-doctor-return-on-investment.html</link>
            <description>Ever since ProPublica published its disturbing database called Dollars for Docs, there have been many local news stories written about hired gun physicians who take money from drug companies to promote drugs to other doctors. A particularly good one was published yesterday in the SentinelSource by the Chicago Tribune's Judith Graham.The Tribune interviewed about a dozen physicians who make thousands per year from drug company talks, and, according to Graham, &quot;all said they believe such ties have no effect on their medical practices.&quot;But Graham also interviewed a former drug rep, who provided the unvarnished and rather ugly truth about how these apparently well-meaning doctors are actually being manipulated by their handlers: &quot;Angie Maher, a former Michigan drug sales representative turned ...</description>
            <author>The Carlat Psychiatry Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4133856</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:41:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4133856</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Earmarkers Work to Penalize Earmark Opponents</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4074044&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FtSnuybvMHAg%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperPolitical gamesmanship has never seen a clearer illustration than in this CQ Politics article, &amp;#8220;Locals Split on DeMint&amp;#8217;s Earmark War.&amp;#8221;
South Carolina Republican senator Jim DeMint opposes earmarks. Fellow South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham supports earmarks and regularly requests them. (See a list of all 136 of his earmark requests for FY 2010 here.) 
Senator Graham&amp;#8217;s request for a $400,000 earmark for the Port of Charleston hasn&amp;#8217;t been awarded&amp;#8212;perhaps because of DeMint&amp;#8217;s opposition to earmarks.
Refusing to go along has a price. And in the article it&amp;#8217;s a Republican operative who sinks the first shiv, suggesting that DeMint&amp;#8217;s failure to earmark hurts South Carolina.
&amp;#8220;What you&amp;#8217;re hearing [in the state...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4074044</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 14 Oct 2010 14:09:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4074044</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Avandiagate: Glaxo And A Controversial Memo</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3896091&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FZvLxhdlArQ8%2F</link>
            <description>Avandiagate, as some have called it, appears to be never ending. In the latest twist, a letter and accompanying memo that GlaxoSmithKline wrote and distributed at the behest of the FDA is now itself the subject of a flap because some experts say the contents are misleading. And this occurs just as the agency gets set to decide the fate of the controversial Avandia diabetes pill, The New York Times writes.
The letter was supposed to bring doctors up to date on two things - the outcome of a recent FDA advisory committee meeting about Avandia, which the panel decided should remain on the market but with restrictions, and a decision by the FDA to halt Glaxo&amp;#8217;s TIDE clinical trial designed to assess cardiovascular risk when compared with the rival Actos drug (background here and here). The...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3896091</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 18:41:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3896091</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Should Americans Use Meds Approved In Europe First?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3802585&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FxRiG_6Xlj5o%2F</link>
            <description>Here&amp;#8217;s a radical idea: Congress should amend the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to allow Americans to use new meds once these are approved by the European Medicines Authority. Why? &amp;#8220;Congress’s grant of a regulatory monopoly to the FDA is creating a significant obstacle to Americans’ timely access to new medicines,&amp;#8221; according to a new report from the Pacific Research Institute, a conservative think tank. By amending the law, the contention is that regulatory competition would increase, patient choice would be expanded and lives could be saved for those suffering life-threatening illnesses without any options.
What about safeguard? John Graham, who authored the report, writes that the FDA would retain the power to compel drugmakers to label their meds with a warning that ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3802585</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:34:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3802585</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Could the FMAP Extension be the Latest Victim of the Cooties</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3750053&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FDisruptiveWomenInHealthCare%2F%7E3%2FXMYZ5MjPBt8%2F</link>
            <description>By Rozalynn Goodwin. Yes, I said “cooties.”  You remember that childhood imaginary disease believed to spread through contact with those infected or worse, those of the opposite sex.  The cooties epidemic has spread to Washington, DC, and has politicians frightened to work across the aisles for the greater good.  I heard that the lesson: “They Have the Cooties” takes up most of the first day of orientation for newly elected congressmen and senators.  This class perfects neophytes’ skills in murdering any attempts for bipartisanship.
Cooties can be deadly for a politician.  Just look at SC&amp;#8217;s latest casualty, outgoing Congressman Bob Inglis.  His independent thinking and willingness to sometimes side with the other party were clear symptoms that he had been infected, an...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3750053</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 14:18:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3750053</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FDA, Avandia &amp; High Stakes: Dan Carpenter Explains</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3746986&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F-CbIiY0mVwQ%2F</link>
            <description>This report could change the Avandia game entirely. For one, if Marciniak’s view is widely held at the FDA (or it’s widely shared among its advisory committee), then we no longer have a case in which the clinical trials point one way and the observational evidence points the other way. More important, because Marciniak is a CDER reviewer, we no longer have a case in which the FDA’s ‘trialists’ are entirely at odds with its ‘observationalists.’ In other words, Marciniak’s memo may create doubt among many CDER medical reviewers who favor randomized clinical trials but who may come to doubt GSK’s credibility in running them. That kind of loss of trust can be severely destructive for a company. As far as I can tell, Marciniak’s voice is a new one in this debate, and combine...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3746986</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:09:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3746986</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Diabetes Drug Avandia Reported to Have Increased Heart Risks</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3706599&amp;cid=t_432893_83_f&amp;fid=34856&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Finsidesurgery.com%2F2010%2F06%2Fdiabetes-drug-avandia-reported-increased-heart-risks%2F</link>
            <description>Two large studies published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) detail the increased cardiovascular risks including stroke and heart attack associated with taking the diabetes drug Avandia (rosiglitazone). One of the studies was led by Dr. David Graham of the FDA. (Source: Inside Surgery)</description>
            <author>Inside Surgery</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3706599</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 04:53:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3706599</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Avandia, Heart Attacks &amp; An Upcoming FDA Meeting</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3706994&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FennOAQ5bM08%2F</link>
            <description>Just three weeks before what is certain to be a tense FDA advisory committee meeting, the study showing the Avandia diabetes pill increases the the risk of stroke, heart failure and death compared with Takeda Pharmaceutical&amp;#8217;s Actos has been peer-reviewed and published (see this). This is the same paper that was leaked to us earlier this month (see here) and now appears online at the Journal of the American Medical Association web site. 
The study, which evaluated data from 227,571 Medicare patients between 2006 and 2009 with an average of 74.4 years, found there 1,746 heart attacks, of which 21.7 percent fatal; 1,052 strokes and 7.3 percent fatal; 3,307 hospitalizations for heart failure, including 2.6 percent that were fatal; and 2,562 deaths for all causes. Although the analysis sh...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3706994</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:18:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3706994</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Blink Of An Eye: Genentech &amp; Medicare Spending</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3672034&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F7CpBD1Qpr10%2F</link>
            <description>Once again, a battle looms over the cost of treating wet age-related macular degeneration. An unpublished study shows Medicare can save more than $500 million annually by using Avastin, instead of Lucentis to treat the illness, The Wall Street Journal reports. The disclosure underscores a heated debate that has embroiled federal officials and Genentech, which sells both drugs, for years.
Why? Avastin is not approved to treat the eye disease, which is a leading cause of blindness among the elderly. Lucentis is approved, but Avastin is much cheaper. For instance, the study found Avastin, which is used in 65 percent of Medicare patients but only 40 percent are treated with Lucentis. But Medicare paid $537 million for Lucentis in 2008 and only $20 million for Avastin, the Journal writes. Put a...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3672034</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:13:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3672034</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is The FDA Suppressing An Avandia Study?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3648798&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FIMny61PkBdU%2F</link>
            <description>A new observational study comparing the controversial Avandia diabetes pill found an increased risk of various cardiovascular problems compared with Actos, a similar drug but one that hasn&amp;#8217;t raised as many concerns. Yet one co-author, FDA reviewer David Graham, recently wrote top FDA officials over concerns that agency supervisors hadn&amp;#8217;t given clearance for the study to be submitted for publication. (You can see Graham&amp;#8217;s email to FDA commish Margaret Hamburg further down).
The May 28 draft manuscript indicates the authors reviewed records of 227,571 Medicare patients with an average age of 74.4 years who were followed for up to three years after starting either of the two pills. The results - GlaxoSmithKline&amp;#8217;s Avandia increased the risk of stroke by 27 percent; hear...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3648798</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:07:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3648798</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The FDA Denies Suppressing An Avandia Study</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3652693&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FIMny61PkBdU%2F</link>
            <description>A new observational study comparing the controversial Avandia diabetes pill found an increased risk of various cardiovascular problems compared with Actos, a similar drug but one that hasn&amp;#8217;t raised as many concerns. Yet one co-author, FDA reviewer David Graham, recently wrote top FDA officials over concerns that agency supervisors hadn&amp;#8217;t given clearance for the study to be submitted for publication. (You can see Graham&amp;#8217;s email to FDA commish Margaret Hamburg further down).
The May 28 manuscript indicates the authors reviewed records of 227,571 Medicare patients with an average age of 74.4 years who were followed for up to three years after starting either of the two pills. The results - GlaxoSmithKline&amp;#8217;s Avandia increased the risk of stroke by 27 percent; heart fail...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3652693</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 15:33:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3652693</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Justice Kennedy Discusses Cato’s View on Use of Foreign Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3585594&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F0XOHW5lFkQY%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroOne quick addendum to my previous commentary on this week&amp;#8217;s decision in Graham v. Florida the use of foreign law by U.S. courts: Toward the very end of Justice Kennedy&amp;#8217;s majority opinion, in part D where he gratuitously nods to world opinion about juvenile life-without-parole (LWOP) sentences, he takes issue with one of the lesser arguments we make in our brief, that no international treaty prohibits such sentences.  (See page 31 of the Graham opinion &amp;#8212; note that Cato itself is not mentioned because we were one of 13 groups signing the brief &amp;#8212; and pages 14-16 of our brief.)  Kennedy says that the issue of whether international law prohibits the United States from imposing the juvenile LWOP sentences is beside the point, that the proper questio...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3585594</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 19:40:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3585594</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>First, They Came for the Sex Offenders</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3585595&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FD5TjCpBSZ9Y%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersFirst, they came for the sex offenders. I am not a sex offender, but I opposed the civil commitment of sex offenders by the federal government because it is not an activity within the enumerated powers of Congress. The Supreme Court decided otherwise in Comstock, with the exception of Justices Thomas and Scalia.
Next, they will come for suspected terrorists. As Dahlia Lithwick (who I rarely agree with – here is her commentary on the Heller case) points out, the Supreme Court’s decision in Comstock may have some frightening implications for domestic preventive detention of terrorism suspects in lieu of criminal prosecution.
I saw this firsthand last summer when I attended a scholars meeting with the Obama administration’s Detention Policy Task Force (the same one that...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3585595</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2010 19:30:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3585595</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Use and Misuse of Foreign Law in U.S. Courts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3577382&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F9UpjEwYNT-A%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroOn Tuesday I discussed the Supreme Court&amp;#8217;s decision to strike down laws that allow juveniles to be sentenced to life without parole (LWOP) for non-homicide crimes.  What concerns me here isn&amp;#8217;t so much the morality or policy wisdom in applying such sentences &amp;#8212; though Chief Justice makes some good policy points in his concurrence &amp;#8212; or even the interpretation of what constitutes a &amp;#8220;cruel and unusual punishment&amp;#8221; &amp;#8212; which I think Justice Kennedy mishandles in a confusing discussion of national consensuses. 
No, the most troubling part of that case was the unfortunate reference to foreign authorities to support the Court&amp;#8217;s interpretation of the Eighth Amendment.  Justice Kennedy notes that juvenile LWOP has been &amp;#8220;rejecte...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3577382</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 12:51:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3577382</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Today’s Other Big Bad Supreme Court Opinion</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3573669&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FtLAseO5-J04%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroAs Wally points out in his Supreme Court/Kagan roundup, the Court did further damage to principled constitutional interpretation in citing foreign law as support for its holding that life-without-parole (LWOP) sentences are unconstitutional as applied to juveniles committing non-homicide crimes.  As I blogged when we filed a brief in the case, Graham v. Florida, &amp;#8220;Cato takes no position on the wisdom of these types of sentences, but when evaluating their constitutionality the Court should only consider American law.&amp;#8221;
That is, regardless of the criminological or moral merits of juvenile LWOP sentences, the Court ought not consider non-binding provisions of international human rights treaties, other countries&amp;#8217; laws, or customary international law in its a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3573669</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 20:31:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3573669</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Kerry and Lieberman Unveil Their Climate Bill: Such a Deal!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3560214&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Ftbj9Cdviku0%2F</link>
            <description>By Patrick J. MichaelsI see that my colleague Sallie James has already blogged on the inherent protectionism in the Senate’s long-awaited cap-and-tax bill.  A summary was leaked last night by The Hill.
Well, we now have the real “discussion draft” of  “The American Power Act” [APA], sponsored by John Kerry (D-NH) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT).  Lindsay Graham (R-SC) used to be on the earlier drafts, but excused himself to have a temper tantrum.
So, while Sallie talked about the trade aspects of the bill, I’d like to blather about the mechanics, costs, and climate effects. If you don’t want to read the excruciating details, stop here and note that it mandates the impossible, will not produce any meaningful reduction of planetary warming, and it will subsidize just about every fo...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3560214</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2010 19:42:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3560214</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Ten Protectionist Senators Pay Lip-Service to International Trade Rules</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3479664&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F4O2lz_1MOAw%2F</link>
            <description>By Sallie JamesSen. Sherrod Brown (D, OH), along with eight other &amp;#8220;usual suspects,&amp;#8221; yesterday sent a letter to Senators John Kerry (D, MA), Joe Lieberman (I, CT) and Lindsey Graham (R, SC), outlining what&amp;#8217;s necessary for their support of the latter&amp;#8217;s climate green jobs bill (there seems to be some confusion about the precise purpose). The math, assuming that Republicans vote as a block to defeat the bill, requires that these senators&amp;#8217; demands be met if the Democrats are to overcome a filibuster and pass the bill.
So what exactly do they want? The main thrust of their demands seems to be for U.S. manufacturing&amp;#8217;s competitiveness to be &amp;#8220;addressed,&amp;#8221; including by asking for the bill to &amp;#8220;invest&amp;#8221; (don&amp;#8217;t you just love the way th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3479664</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 19:10:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3479664</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Schumer and Graham on Immigration Reform: Why Not Do it Without the Biometric National ID?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3382797&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Ffoj0uy-ak_M%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperThere is much to commend in the op-ed on immigration reform that Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) published in this morning&amp;#8217;s Washington Post. Unfortunately, they lead with their worst idea: a biometric national ID card, mandatory for all American workers.
Here&amp;#8217;s the good: &amp;#8220;Americans overwhelmingly oppose illegal immigration and support legal immigration,&amp;#8221; they say. &amp;#8220;Throughout our history, immigrants have contributed to making this country more vibrant and economically dynamic.&amp;#8221;
Their plan includes problem-solving proposals: &amp;#8220;creating a process for admitting temporary workers&amp;#8221; and &amp;#8220;implementing a tough but fair path to legalization.&amp;#8221; The latter would reduce the population of illegal aliens in ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3382797</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:45:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3382797</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Playing Chicken Again</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3366181&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqzETmFTvV34%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersAs I wrote in this post, Senators McCain and Lieberman proposed a broad piece of anti-terrorism legislation. The Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010 would use military detention to incapacitate suspected domestic terrorists, including American citizens. This is a sea change in counterterrorism policy and a break from American principles that mandate a day in court.
This bill is a bad idea for several reasons. First, for the points that I made in my previous post, the civilian criminal justice system successfully incapacitates domestic terrorists. Our laws are built to do that &amp;#8212; it’s the international nature of al Qaeda and the necessity of military force in the expeditionary conflicts we are fighting that make things different. ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3366181</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:00:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3366181</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senator Graham’s Inexplicable National ID Support</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3354299&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F6TxM0YyU3qg%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperCompromise is catnip in Washington, D.C. That&amp;#8217;s my best guess at why Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) would endorse New York Senator Chuck Schumer&amp;#8217;s (D) widely reviled plan to create a mandatory biometric national ID system.
Schumer&amp;#8217;s national ID plans have no more definition today than when he wrote about them in his 2007 campaign manifesto Postitively American. Among the thin gruel of that book is a two-page lump displaying more ignorance than understanding of how identity systems work and fail. Schumer doesn&amp;#8217;t know the difference between an identifier&amp;#8212;a characteristic used to distinguish or group people&amp;#8212;and an identification card or system, which does the entire task of proving a person&amp;#8217;s previously fixed identity. (My thin gruel ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3354299</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:03:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3354299</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>&quot;Parenthood&quot;: Sex, Drugs, &amp; Asperger's</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3354287&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36050&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fblisstree.com%2Flive%2Fparenthood-premie%2F</link>
            <description>Reviews of NBC’s new primetime series “Parenthood” have been mixed, but whether you loved or hated the latest iteration of Lauren Graham’s messed-up Mommy character, the show’s pilot took on some hefty parenting issues. (Spoiler Alert)
Parenthood follows the “very large, very colorful, and imperfect Braverman family”, and kicks off when single mother Sarah (played by Lauren Graham) moves back home with her kids. Dramas quickly unfold: Sarah finds condoms in her Dad’s office, her sister Julia struggles to balance career and motherhood, the kids get caught with drugs, and her brother Crosby discovers that his girlfriend is pursuing artificial insemination in response to his inability to commit.
But one of the most fascinating and sensitive topics to riddle the Braverman famil...</description>
            <author>Breastfeeding 1-2-3</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3354287</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:33:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3354287</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Avandia, Heart Attacks &amp; An Internal FDA Battle</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3290991&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FzmPNNoYg-CQ%2F</link>
            <description>Avandia is needlessly causing hundreds of cases of heart attacks and heart failure each month, according to confidential government reports, The New York Times writes. Moreover, if every diabetic taking Avandia were given Actos instead, about 500 heart attacks and 300 cases of heart failure would be avoided each month. The pill was linked to 304 deaths during the third quarter of 2009, and a report by the FDA&amp;#8217;s David Graham and Kate Gelperin concludes the pill should be yanked (Graham said this in 2007 - look).
Some FDA officials want Avandia withdrawn because they believe a safer alternative exists, the Times adds, noting others insist studies offer contradictory info and Avandia should remain an option. GlaxoSmithKline, which makes the pill, says it studied Avandia extensively and ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3290991</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 15:29:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3290991</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>GSK - Avandia: “Rosiglitazone should be removed from the market,”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3290989&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=34768&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpharmagossip.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F02%2Fgsk-avandia-rosiglitazone-should-be.html</link>
            <description>Hundreds of people taking Avandia, a controversial diabetes medicine, needlessly suffer heart attacks and heart failure each month, according to confidential government reports that recommend the drug be removed from the market.The reports, obtained by The New York Times, say that if every diabetic now taking Avandia were instead given a similar pill named Actos, about 500 heart attacks and 300 cases of heart failure would be averted every month because Avandia can hurt the heart. Avandia, intended to treat Type 2 diabetes, is known as rosiglitazone and was linked to 304 deaths during the third quarter of 2009.More from Gardiner Harris at the NYT (Source: PharmaGossip)</description>
            <author>PharmaGossip</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3290989</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 04:55:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3290989</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Vox Populi:*  How Do Your Define “Tragedy?”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3200631&amp;cid=t_432893_136_f&amp;fid=37846&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthinfoispower.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F01%2F22%2Fvox-populi-how-do-your-define-tragedy%2F</link>
            <description>How do you define tragedy? &amp;#8230; The loss of Archibald &amp;#8220;Moonlight&amp;#8221; Graham and Sue-Louise Newmann is certainly tragic, however, their lives exemplify hope and inspiration.

Alabama Crimson Tide 37 &amp;#8212; Texas Longhorns 21.  That was the final score of the Citi BCS National Championship football game, which was played in the Rose Bowl on January 7, [...] (Source: Libby's H*O*P*E*)</description>
            <author>Libby's H*O*P*E*</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3200631</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 23:58:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3200631</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>On What Planet Is Lindsey Graham a Free-Trader?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3023095&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F35PMRhE5m3I%2F</link>
            <description>I&amp;#8217;ve just started reading a new article by economists at the World Bank and the Peterson Insititute. The gist of the paper is that greenhouse gas emission targets will have little effect on &amp;#8220;carbon leakage&amp;#8221;, the apparently-largely-theoretical phenomenon whereby carbon-intensive industries move to less regulated jurisdictions in response to stringent emissions regulations in their original home.  So we can strike that off our list of worries.
The authors do reach the conclusion, though, that output of energy-intensive products will decline in response to emissions cuts and the political temptation for &amp;#8220;carbon tariffs&amp;#8221; will be strong (see here why that is a bad idea). Basing the carbon tariffs on the carbon content of imports&amp;#8211;as opposed to, say, the carb...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3023095</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:10:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3023095</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Senate Panel Endorses Sotomayor</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2648965&amp;cid=t_432893_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FboOpO8ZP3vY%2F</link>
            <description>The judiciary committee’s vote to endorse Sonia Sotomayor is not surprising. None of the Democrats are from red states and so have little to fear from voters, while the quixotic Lindsey Graham—in what can only be described as a triumph of hope over experience—was the only Republican to have set aside legitimate qualms and voted for the “wise Latina.” But voting on a Supreme Court nomination is more than a matter of deciding whether a nominee is “qualified”—even if Sonia Sotomayor had been a leading light of the judiciary rather than just the best available Hispanic woman—or deferring to the president. Instead, Senator Dick Durbin had it right when he said during John Roberts’s confirmation hearings that “no one has a right to sit on the Supreme Court” and that the ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2648965</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:06:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2648965</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The General Chiropractic Council (GCC) wants to waive the rules</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2523002&amp;cid=t_432893_97_f&amp;fid=36415&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dcscience.net%2F%3Fp%3D1764</link>
            <description>A flood of complaints against chiropractors has arrived at the General Chiropractic Council (GCC) in the wake of the British Chiropractic Association (BCA) v Singh affair. It is really rather beautiful that people have put some such enormous effort into writing complaints for no gain to themselves. 
My own paltry two complaints to the GCC produced an interesting reaction. Yesterday I was told by the GCC
&amp;#8220;Under the provisions of the General Chiropractic Council (Investigating Committee) Rules

2000 (&amp;#8221;the Rules&amp;#8221;), the Committee is required to invite you to make a statement of evidence in relation to your complaint by way of statutory declaration or affidavit. If you wish to, you can discuss your complaint with a solicitor who acts on behalf of the Committee who could help y...</description>
            <author>DC's Improbable Science</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2523002</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:20:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2523002</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cognition, Law, Stories - Abstract</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1467110&amp;cid=t_432893_109_f&amp;fid=36089&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fthesituationist.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F05%2F24%2Fcognition-law-stories-abstract%2F</link>
            <description>Lorie Graham and Stephen McJohn, have posted their essay, &amp;#8220;Cognition, Law, Stories&amp;#8221; 				(forthcoming Minnesota Journal of Law (2009)) on SSRN. Here is the abstract. 
* * *
This essay reviews Steven Pinker, The Stuff of Thought (Penguin 2007), which offers insights from cognitive science just where it overlaps the most with law - how we use basic cognitive categories like intent, space, time, events and causation. The Stuff of Thought might offer insights into a broad range of issues in legal theory. Legal theory could make more use of such cognitive science concepts as chunking, recursion, and the primary qualities of an object. Other topics likewise resonate in thinking about the law: The book suggests that metaphor is an important cognitive tool, but less constraining than mi...</description>
            <author>The Situationist</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1467110</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 15:46:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1467110</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>John McCain Watch: VP Sweepstakes - Crist, Jindal and Romney?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1460901&amp;cid=t_432893_125_f&amp;fid=34819&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fflapsblog.com%2F%3Fp%3D7022</link>
            <description>Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., waves after arriving in Burbank, Calif., Wednesday, May 21, 2008.
Are the McCain VP Sweepstakes on for this weekend in Arizona?
Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, on Friday is scheduled to meet with two Republican governors who have been prominently mentioned as potential running mates, according to Republicans familiar with McCain&amp;#8217;s plan.
The two governors, Charlie Crist, of Florida, and Bobby Jindal, of Louisiana, have both accepted invitations to meet with McCain at his home in Arizona, according to Republican familiars with the decision. One Republican said that Mitt Romney, a former rival of McCain for the presidential nomination wasalso expected to visit him this weekend. Romney&amp;#82...</description>
            <author>FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1460901</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 23:14:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1460901</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Around the web - May 4, 2008</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1419672&amp;cid=t_432893_132_f&amp;fid=35011&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2Fmndoci%2F%7E3%2F283684780%2F</link>
            <description>Discussion forum for next gen sequencing (was down when I was writing this)
In perpetual pursuit of context
Open Metabolomics Data
EquityEdit is an interesting organization. They edit and translate biomedical manuscripts and the compensation funds small, innovating, global health organizations (with a focus on the developing world, e.g. Nyaya Health). Don&amp;#8217;t know too much about them, but the financial model is definitely interesting. 
WIkiPatents
Interview with Paul Graham
Subversion &amp; Git
Stagerat - a site for live music fans
Data stores and BI

Multimedia &amp; Presentations


Bio2RDF do SPARQL
Nodalities becomes a magazine
Twitlive.tv - Watch out for what Leo is up to
The stackoverflow podcast. This is a must listen. Can&amp;#8217;t wait to see what the site turns out to be

Blogsp...</description>
            <author>business|bytes|genes|molecules</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1419672</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 04:31:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1419672</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FDA’s David Graham: Nothing Has Changed</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1046801&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F189324560%2F</link>
            <description>Congress last month passed the FDA Amendsment Act, which among other things, promotes tracking of adverse reactions after a drug is approved and in wide use, a move that pharma fought for years. But questions remain about whether that is a substantive fix or a public-relations move by the FDA and industry designed to fend off stronger government demands, The Seattle Times writes.
Graham, an FDA medical reviewer who sought whistleblower protection in early 2004 after the agency investigated leaks about links between antidepressants and teenage suicides, tells the Times that the bureaucratic leopard shows the same spots. He also created a furor by linking Vioxx to a huge number of heart attacks and then testified before a Senate committee that the agency wasn&amp;#8217;t protecting Americans. Mo...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1046801</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 23 Nov 2007 13:12:04 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1046801</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FDA’s Graham Says Avandia Should Go</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=765960&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F138829358%2F</link>
            <description>David Graham, the controversial FDA medical reviewer who criticized the agency&amp;#8217;s handling of Vioxx, believes an FDA advisory panel should urge that Glaxo&amp;#8217;s Avandia get pulled off the market, Reuters reports. The meeting gets under way momentarily.
In slides prepared for his remarks, Graham states that Avandia increases the risk of cardiovascular problems such as heart attacks, while a rival drug, Takeda&amp;#8217;s Actos, doesn&amp;#8217;t. There is &amp;#8220;no evidence of major clinical health benefits&amp;#8221; from Avandia and leaving it on the market may &amp;#8220;cost thousands of lives,&amp;#8221; according to slides for a presentation to be given today by David Graham, a Food and Drug Administration safety scientist.
In briefing documents, senior FDA officials say they don&amp;#8217;t know if A...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=765960</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:55:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">765960</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>New Brain Scanner Could Change How We Work</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=749742&amp;cid=t_432893_109_f&amp;fid=35677&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FBrainBasedBusiness%2F%7E3%2F136267193%2Fnew_brain_scanner_could_change.html</link>
            <description>ABC News recently featured a new and better brain scanner that could change the way we work. How so? If the new brain scanners are what they claim to be they will possibly deliver higher resolution images of some of the fears and joys we take to work daily. According to Graham Wiggins and Lawrence Wald at Massachusetts General Hospital&amp;rsquo;s Dept. of Radiology the new scanner uses multiple sensors. This new technology leaps brain imaging forward in giant steps - through more precise views to create an anatomical picture. How does it differ from the brain imaging we have currently? The best scanners out there tend to hold up to 12 coils &amp;ndash; while the new scanner uses up to 96 coils &amp;ndash; spread in denser fields across the scalp. Each coil detects highly accurate signals from the bra...</description>
            <author>BrainBasedBusiness</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=749742</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 22 Jul 2007 20:42:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">749742</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Merck - Arcoxia: &quot;clearly killing people&quot; in Europe says Graham</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=545814&amp;cid=t_432893_150_f&amp;fid=34768&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpharmagossip.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F04%2Fmerck-arcoxia-clearly-killing-people-in.html</link>
            <description>Food and Drug Administration whistle-blower David Graham isn't giving up.He's not content with helping to keep Merck's drug Arcoxia (the son or daughter Vioxx, depending upon who you read) off just the U.S. market, because that still leaves 63 countries in which the arthritis medication is sold.Graham, of the agency's Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology, warned an FDA advisory panel Thursday that Arcoxia would be &quot;a potential public-health disaster&quot; because it raises heart attack and stroke risk. The panel voted 20 to 1 against recommending approval of Arcoxia, which critics have likened to Vioxx, the arthritis drug Merck withdrew in September 2004 because of cardiovascular safety concerns.The FDA typically follows the advice of its advisory panels.Graham said Friday that he wants to f...</description>
            <author>PharmaGossip</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=545814</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2007 06:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">545814</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

