Annuity

Nasal polyposis is seen in many disease states, including allergic and non-allergic rhinitis. Since the quality of life for patients afflicted with this condition decreases, such patients frequently seek medical help. Further, the relationship between the upper and lower respiratory tract makes the treatment of nasal polyposis of critical importance. New research findings, as well as new technical developments, have changed the conventional medical and surgical approaches to treating nasal polyposis, the result of which has been significant advances in the management of the disease. This book, written by authors internationally recognized for their laboratory research and clinical practice, is lavishly illustrated and reader-friendly. It includes the latest information on nasal polyposis, and aims to help the reader improve the daily management of patients affected by this condition.

The Family Research Council (FRC) ran a full-page open letter advertisement in print editions of Politico and of the Washington Examiner on Wednesday calling for a “civil debate” with the Southern Poverty Law Center, the liberal group that labeled the FRC and other social conservative organizations as “hate groups” in early December.

Among the 150 influential conservative leaders who signed on to the FRC’s open letter are Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, soon-to-be House Speaker John Boehner, soon-to-be House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty and Indiana Congressman Mike Pence. The open letter calls for the SPLC to “start debating” and “stop hating.” FRC President Tony Perkins told The Daily Caller he had to cut names from the list to fit them all on the advertisement.

In the open letter, the FRC said, “The surest sign one is losing a debate is to resort to character assassination. The Southern Poverty Law Center, a liberal fundraising machine whose tactics have been condemned by observers across the political spectrum, is doing just that.”

Perkins told TheDC that his group has “just begun getting signatures,” and plans to launch a nationwide tour getting people all around the country to sign onto FRC’s call for halting labeling.

“We’re not afraid to debate the issues,” Perkins said in a phone interview. “We are not running from the debate. We are confident on the issues we advocate for based on empirical, peer-reviewed research.”

The FRC commended the SPLC for what is “was once known for,” which was “combating racial bigotry,” but said the SPLC “is now attacking several groups that uphold Judeo-Christian moral views, including marriage as the union of a man and a woman.”

“Number one, it basically sent the message that the SPLC is off their rocker, and, if they think we’re going to run in the other direction, they’re wrong,” Perkins said. “We’re going to full-speed but not in the direction they want us to. The left wants to say these issues are beyond debate. If we, as a country, decide there is no debate, it becomes a totalitarian state.”

The letter also says the SPLC’s “hate group” designation is similar to tactics used against other conservative groups and movements.

“These types of slanderous tactics have been used against voters who signed petitions and voted for marriage amendments in all thirty states that have considered them, as well as against the millions of Americans who identify with the Tea Party movement,” the letter says. “Some on the Left have even impugned the Manhattan Declaration – which upholds the sanctity of life, the value of traditional marriage and the fundamental right of religious freedom – as an anti-gay document and have forced its removal from general communications networks.”

The SPLC failed to return TheDC’s request for comment.

Reference research: business research and health research and travel research and recent update




finance promote

Ever wondered how the government decided to split up the country? I wouldn’t be at all surprised if you said no and to be honest unless it’s a job you probably have better things to think about, but an interesting survey recently released has some interesting results regarding how the UK’s love for technology is dividing up the country.

Originally created for the BBC’s ‘Britain from Above’ series data was collected from over 12 million anonymised landline British telephone calls which was then used to model a map of Great Britain split into 13 regions which theoretically make the least cuts between ‘connections’./> id="more-19493">/> Based on frequency and time the ‘connections’ were created every time a phone call was made, and then using some clever computer trickery researchers headed by Carlo Ratti of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) divided Great Britain up by creating regions that split through the least number of connections.

The results of these are pretty interesting (and also look kind of exciting on the image) as they give a far more accurate view of how the country is socially divided rather than how it is divided through boundaries that have merely survived the test of time.

Some of the regions are very unexciting: London for example remains a singular region, as does East Anglia, the South West and South East, but it is Scotland and Wales that are the most interesting; despite being unified with England in terms of sovereignty at least there is still a clear social divide between Scotland and North England and the line dividing the two ‘social’ regions mimics the international one incredibly accurately!

However whilst Wales seems to have the south nicely divided up Central Wales is, as far as landline phone calls are concerned, becoming very much a part of the West Midlands whilst North Wales is essentially part of the North West of England.

Ok it is fair to say that this isn’t going to change anything, and is in reality little more than a nice graph, but does it say something about how we communicate in modern times? Although as Mr Ratti said “…you’d need to analyse further data sets, such as emails, instant messages to build a fuller picture of how people communicate” (which would be even more interesting) it is fair to say that even in an age where we can communicate with people anywhere in the country at the touch of a button there is still very much a sense that people communicate mostly within the area that they live.

Admittedly of all the forms of communication landline calls are mostly likely to reflect any residual regionalisation, but nevertheless the idea of regional divides are still very much there – research like this just shows how those regions have evolved to fit people’s everyday needs.

So although this isn’t anything new it can then prompt your technological theory musings of the day: how has the technology boom over the last few decades changed the boundaries of our country?

If this study is anything to go by then it has in the sense that the boundaries have changed, but they are still very much there and perhaps surveys like this should be taken into account by people like the Government and BBC when they consider their regionalisation policies, especially when it comes to issues such as rural broadband!

Via – BBC

Reference research: beauty research and home research and sport research and my social page




Promote Website Free