<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: hasan</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 'hasan'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22hasan%22&t=%22hasan%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 03:01:52 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Report on Fort Hood, Hasan</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3178814&amp;cid=t_308219_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2010%2F01%2F15%2Freport-on-fort-hood-hasan%2F</link>
            <description>The AP reported this morning that the Army report to be released today will implicate Army Maj. Nidal Hasan&amp;#8217;s supervisors and those who knew of his troubled behavior, but failed to detail it in his records or further followup on it. 
Hasan&amp;#8217;s disturbing behaviors were detailed as far back as during his medical residency and were apparently known to anyone who worked closely with him in a supervisory capacity. And when they became aware of his behavior, did they detail it and pass it along to Hasan&amp;#8217;s future bosses? Apparently not:

Hasan got passing grades and a promotion in part because disturbing information about his behavior and performance was not recorded by superiors or properly passed to others who might have stepped in, the report found.
As Hasan&amp;#8217;s training p...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3178814</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:45:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3178814</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Fort Hood: Reaction, Response, and Rejoinder</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2984777&amp;cid=t_308219_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FODpp6kuKYzg%2F</link>
            <description>Commentary on the Fort Hood incident can be categorized three ways: reaction, response, and rejoinder (commentary on the commentary).
Reactions generally consist of pundits pouring their preconceptions over what is known of the facts. These are the least worthy of our time, and rejoinders like this one from Stephen M. Walt of Harvard University in the Fort Hood section of The Politico&amp;#8217;s Arena blog dispense with them well:
Of course [Fort Hood] is being politicized; there is no issue that is immune to exploitation by politicians and media commentators. The problem is that there are an infinite number of &amp;#8220;lessons&amp;#8221; one can draw from a tragic event like this &amp;#8212; the strain on our troops from a foolish war, the impact of hateful ideas from the fringe of a great religion...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2984777</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:39:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2984777</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Preemptive Word on “Lone Wolves”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2977272&amp;cid=t_308219_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Frhu-1uSAIRs%2F</link>
            <description>As Marcy Wheeler notes, the press seem to have settled on the term &amp;#8220;lone wolf&amp;#8221; to describe Fort Hood gunman Nidal Malik Hasan, which means it&amp;#8217;s probably only a matter of time before we encounter a pundit or legislator who is cynical or befuddled enough (or both) to invoke the tragedy in defense of the PATRIOT Act&amp;#8217;s constitutionally dubious Lone Wolf provision. (A &amp;#8220;matter of time&amp;#8221; apparently meaning the time it took me to write that sentence: We have a winner!) Though the Senate Judiciary Committee has approved a bill that would renew the measure, their counterparts in the House wisely—though narrowly—voted to permit it to expire last week.
To spare anyone tempted by this argument some embarrassment: The Lone Wolf provision is totally irrelevant to th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2977272</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:37:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2977272</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Model? Fred Hassan &amp; Vytorin Forecasts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1393899&amp;cid=t_308219_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F276280429%2F</link>
            <description>At the very end of this morning&amp;#8217;s hour-long teleconference with Wall Street analysts, Fred Hassan was asked a question by Jami Rubin of Morgan Stanley about Vytorin net income this year. She noted that even her 11-year-old is aware Vytorin sales will drop this year, but she asked Fred if he and his team could be more specific about the amount of income to be received from its joint venture with Merck.
You may recall that, earlier this week, Merck week disclosed it expects equity income from the venture to fall by $700 million this year due to the hoopla over Vytorin. Unlike Merck, Schering-Plough has been unwilling to provide any numbers, probably because Schering-Plough is more vulnerable than Merck to a big drop. So Fred blew her off by insisting there is no way to estimate such a ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1393899</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 16:49:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1393899</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

