hgh dhea metformin

Calendar

January 2011
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

Pages

Archives

Recent Posts

Blogroll





Archive for January, 2011

 

By Nick Collins
Published: 8:26AM BST 03 Aug 2010

Jeremy Clarkson, the Top Gear presenter, has become embroiled in a row with disability campaigners after using the term “special needs” to describe a car.

His comments came during an episode of the BBC Two show broadcast on Sunday when he compared two Ferraris to each other, arguing that the new model made its forerunner look like a “simpleton”.

The older car, the 430 Speciale, ought to be rebranded the “430 Speciale Needs”, he concluded, to the horror of some viewers.

Last year the presenter was forced to apologise for offending the Scottish and the disabled after referring to Gordon Brown, then the prime minister, as a “one-eyed Scottish idiot”.

Clarkson said at the time: “I have nothing against the Scottish and of course I regret making any remark that might have upset the disabled.

“But the idiot bit – there is no chance I’ll apologise for that.”

Read in Full:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/7923681/Jeremy-Clarkson-in-special-needs-row.html



 

August 3, 2010

The way the brain reacts differently to the sense of touch in people with Autism will be examined as part of an innovative Cardiff University study designed to create better understanding of the condition.

Dr David McGonigle from Cardiff University’s Schools of Psychology and Biosciences will use the latest brain imaging techniques to create a clearer picture of how touch is processed differently.

Sensory dysfunction is known to affect the quality of life of people with . Certain qualities of touch, sound or movement are known to be distracting and unpleasant in some sufferers, while others may not even notice a particular sound or colour, which can make everyday activities difficult.

Dr McGonigle, who leads the two-year study, said: “It’s common for work on (ASD) to focus on the communicative or social aspects of the disorder.

“However, there are also high incidences of sensory symptoms in people with ASD. With an estimated 80 percent of those diagnosed suffering from some aspect of sensory dysfunction this is something that we need to understand better to provide a fuller picture of the disorder.”

The study will, for the first time, combine traditional experimental tests of touch, such as the ability to feel and distinguish between different sorts of vibrations delivered to the fingers, with images of the brain from the latest state-of-the-art neuroimaging equipment.

Read in Full:  http://www.physorg.com/news200060724.html



 

August 3, 2010

The way the brain reacts differently to the sense of touch in people with Autism will be examined as part of an innovative Cardiff University study designed to create better understanding of the condition.

Dr David McGonigle from Cardiff University’s Schools of Psychology and Biosciences will use the latest brain imaging techniques to create a clearer picture of how touch is processed differently.

Sensory dysfunction is known to affect the quality of life of people with . Certain qualities of touch, sound or movement are known to be distracting and unpleasant in some sufferers, while others may not even notice a particular sound or colour, which can make everyday activities difficult.

Dr McGonigle, who leads the two-year study, said: “It’s common for work on (ASD) to focus on the communicative or social aspects of the disorder.

“However, there are also high incidences of sensory symptoms in people with ASD. With an estimated 80 percent of those diagnosed suffering from some aspect of sensory dysfunction this is something that we need to understand better to provide a fuller picture of the disorder.”

The study will, for the first time, combine traditional experimental tests of touch, such as the ability to feel and distinguish between different sorts of vibrations delivered to the fingers, with images of the brain from the latest state-of-the-art neuroimaging equipment.

Read in Full:  http://www.physorg.com/news200060724.html



 

Marina Edelman, MA Updated: Aug 4th 2010

True happiness is not attained through self-gratification, but through fidelity to a worthy purpose –
Helen Keller

What’s the use of happiness? It can’t buy you money – Henny Youngman

This is an age old question that has been debated over dinner tables for centuries. First we need to define happiness. Miriam Webster got it right when they declared that the definition of happiness as good fortune is becoming obsolete. The modern definition includes both positive feelings (such as ecstasy and comfort) and positive activities that are absorbing and engaging. Thanks in part to modern technology; happiness is no longer an abstract concept. Guillaume Duchenne, an early happiness researcher, looked at the quality of people’s smiles and found that truly happy people had a smile that not only turned up the corners of their mouths, but also crinkled the skin around their eyes. Happiness can also be defined by our physiology. Researchers can identify happy people by their brain waves, their predominant hormones, and by the chemical make up of their cells.

 New research conducted by Gallup World Poll, published in the July 2010 issue of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, analyzed findings from a study of 136,000 people in 132 countries. Their findings concluded that life satisfaction rises with income, but income has small correlation with positive feelings and enjoying yourself. The pollsters asked people questions on a wide range of topics, and found that positive feelings are much more associated with factors such as whether they feel respected, have autonomy, and if their jobs are fulfilling.

Among the poll findings:

  • The United States had the highest income but ranked 16th in life satisfaction and 26th on positive feelings.
  • Denmark ranks high across categories. The country ranked No. 1 on life satisfaction, seventh on positive feelings, and fifth in income. Danes are happier mainly for two reasons — social trust is very high, and corruption is considered low. Also, people in Denmark are more satisfied with “their economic safety net” than people in the U.S., Ed Diener, PhD, professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Illinois and a senior scientist with the Gallup Organization.
  • Extremely impoverished countries in Africa generally scored low on various categories, but no nation came in lowest in all types of happiness.
  • Israel ranks high on life satisfaction (11th) but much lower in positive feelings.
  • Some nations such as Costa Rica and New Zealand are happier than their income levels would suggest. Costa Rica ranks 41st in income but fourth in positive feelings, while New Zealand ranks 22nd in incomes but first in positive feelings.
  • Self-esteem is more important to happiness in the U.S. than in “traditional” cultures.
  • In studies of poor people, researchers find that some are happy, in part because their needs are met.
  • Money makes a bigger difference to happiness among poor people, but it takes a lot more additional money to change the happiness of a person who is well-off, Diener says.

Read in Full: http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=39118&cn=110



 

Marina Edelman, MA Updated: Aug 4th 2010

True happiness is not attained through self-gratification, but through fidelity to a worthy purpose –
Helen Keller

What’s the use of happiness? It can’t buy you money – Henny Youngman

This is an age old question that has been debated over dinner tables for centuries. First we need to define happiness. Miriam Webster got it right when they declared that the definition of happiness as good fortune is becoming obsolete. The modern definition includes both positive feelings (such as ecstasy and comfort) and positive activities that are absorbing and engaging. Thanks in part to modern technology; happiness is no longer an abstract concept. Guillaume Duchenne, an early happiness researcher, looked at the quality of people’s smiles and found that truly happy people had a smile that not only turned up the corners of their mouths, but also crinkled the skin around their eyes. Happiness can also be defined by our physiology. Researchers can identify happy people by their brain waves, their predominant hormones, and by the chemical make up of their cells.

 New research conducted by Gallup World Poll, published in the July 2010 issue of Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, analyzed findings from a study of 136,000 people in 132 countries. Their findings concluded that life satisfaction rises with income, but income has small correlation with positive feelings and enjoying yourself. The pollsters asked people questions on a wide range of topics, and found that positive feelings are much more associated with factors such as whether they feel respected, have autonomy, and if their jobs are fulfilling.

Among the poll findings:

  • The United States had the highest income but ranked 16th in life satisfaction and 26th on positive feelings.
  • Denmark ranks high across categories. The country ranked No. 1 on life satisfaction, seventh on positive feelings, and fifth in income. Danes are happier mainly for two reasons — social trust is very high, and corruption is considered low. Also, people in Denmark are more satisfied with “their economic safety net” than people in the U.S., Ed Diener, PhD, professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Illinois and a senior scientist with the Gallup Organization.
  • Extremely impoverished countries in Africa generally scored low on various categories, but no nation came in lowest in all types of happiness.
  • Israel ranks high on life satisfaction (11th) but much lower in positive feelings.
  • Some nations such as Costa Rica and New Zealand are happier than their income levels would suggest. Costa Rica ranks 41st in income but fourth in positive feelings, while New Zealand ranks 22nd in incomes but first in positive feelings.
  • Self-esteem is more important to happiness in the U.S. than in “traditional” cultures.
  • In studies of poor people, researchers find that some are happy, in part because their needs are met.
  • Money makes a bigger difference to happiness among poor people, but it takes a lot more additional money to change the happiness of a person who is well-off, Diener says.

Read in Full: http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=39118&cn=110



 

Close relatives of people with autism often have subtle differences in the way they move their eyes, researchers said in a finding that might help doctors better diagnose and treat the condition.

The differences would not be noticeable in everyday life but they strongly suggest that many components of autism are inherited, the University of Illinois at Chicago team said. “What we hope these tests do is to identify subgroups of individuals or subgroups of families that have some sort of risk for autism,” Matthew Mosconi, who worked on the study, said in a telephone interview.

“The eye movement differences are the same as the ones that we saw previously in the kids with autism. It is a way to get at the functioning of these specific brain systems that we think are part of the development of autism.”

Read in Full:  http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/health-fitness/health/Eye-movement-tests-show-family-autism-link/articleshow/6251020.cms



 

Close relatives of people with autism often have subtle differences in the way they move their eyes, researchers said in a finding that might help doctors better diagnose and treat the condition.

The differences would not be noticeable in everyday life but they strongly suggest that many components of autism are inherited, the University of Illinois at Chicago team said. “What we hope these tests do is to identify subgroups of individuals or subgroups of families that have some sort of risk for autism,” Matthew Mosconi, who worked on the study, said in a telephone interview.

“The eye movement differences are the same as the ones that we saw previously in the kids with autism. It is a way to get at the functioning of these specific brain systems that we think are part of the development of autism.”

Read in Full:  http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/health-fitness/health/Eye-movement-tests-show-family-autism-link/articleshow/6251020.cms



 

Monday, August 2, 2010 – Autism Unexpected by Jean Winegardner

SILVER SPRING, Md.  — When I write here, I use the words “person with autism” and “autistic person” pretty interchangeably. Every once in a while, this column gets a comment telling me I should use “person first” language, meaning I shouldn’t use the word “autistic” to describe a person.

Because I’ve heard this criticism more than once, I feel it necessary to tell you that I not only use the word “autistic” intentionally, but thoughtfully and with purpose.

The theory behind person-first language (“person with autism”) is that it recognizes the person before the disability and stresses that there is more to a person than just autism. I asked my blog readers and my Twitter followers which they preferred, and the majority, mostly parents of children with autism, reported that they prefer the person-first terminology.

Person-first language is an easy philosophy to accept. It makes complete sense, and I find it to be a perfectly reasonable way of thought. However, I tend not to prefer it. The reasons for rejecting person-first are more complicated, but, I believe, equally valid.

I use the adjective “autistic” for several reasons. I have taken my cues from many autistic adults who self-identify as autistic. For these individuals, autism is simply a part of them that cannot be separated from who they are. Autism is, in a way, a description of how their brains work, not something that has been added to their being. Without autism, they would not be the same person; therefore it is not something they have, but rather something they are.

Autistic adult and autism activist Jim Sinclair wrote a very clear, articulate essay about why he dislikes person-first language. This essay lays out why he identifies as an autistic person, and his reasons are very similar to mine.

I use “autistic” because I don’t see autism as an affliction but rather as a character or physical trait (such as blond, nice, intelligent or short) or as a major life characteristic (such as religion or race). Often, person-first language refers to a disease: “living with cancer,” “a person with lupus,” or “has AIDS.” I think this type of language, while not necessarily wrong, doesn’t work with autism in that it tends to pathologize the condition, which I do not see as a disease but rather a way of being.

My entire goal with my son is to raise him as a proud autistic person. He is what he is, and that is wonderful. I want to teach him that his autism is a part of him that gives him the gift of being able to think differently. It also gives him challenges, and he needs to learn how to compensate for those shortcomings. But, I don’t want him to think he has this extra thing that makes him less.

Read in Full:  http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/autism-unexpected/2010/aug/2/autistic-or-person-autism/



 

Monday, August 2, 2010 – Autism Unexpected by Jean Winegardner

SILVER SPRING, Md.  — When I write here, I use the words “person with autism” and “autistic person” pretty interchangeably. Every once in a while, this column gets a comment telling me I should use “person first” language, meaning I shouldn’t use the word “autistic” to describe a person.

Because I’ve heard this criticism more than once, I feel it necessary to tell you that I not only use the word “autistic” intentionally, but thoughtfully and with purpose.

The theory behind person-first language (“person with autism”) is that it recognizes the person before the disability and stresses that there is more to a person than just autism. I asked my blog readers and my Twitter followers which they preferred, and the majority, mostly parents of children with autism, reported that they prefer the person-first terminology.

Person-first language is an easy philosophy to accept. It makes complete sense, and I find it to be a perfectly reasonable way of thought. However, I tend not to prefer it. The reasons for rejecting person-first are more complicated, but, I believe, equally valid.

I use the adjective “autistic” for several reasons. I have taken my cues from many autistic adults who self-identify as autistic. For these individuals, autism is simply a part of them that cannot be separated from who they are. Autism is, in a way, a description of how their brains work, not something that has been added to their being. Without autism, they would not be the same person; therefore it is not something they have, but rather something they are.

Autistic adult and autism activist Jim Sinclair wrote a very clear, articulate essay about why he dislikes person-first language. This essay lays out why he identifies as an autistic person, and his reasons are very similar to mine.

I use “autistic” because I don’t see autism as an affliction but rather as a character or physical trait (such as blond, nice, intelligent or short) or as a major life characteristic (such as religion or race). Often, person-first language refers to a disease: “living with cancer,” “a person with lupus,” or “has AIDS.” I think this type of language, while not necessarily wrong, doesn’t work with autism in that it tends to pathologize the condition, which I do not see as a disease but rather a way of being.

My entire goal with my son is to raise him as a proud autistic person. He is what he is, and that is wonderful. I want to teach him that his autism is a part of him that gives him the gift of being able to think differently. It also gives him challenges, and he needs to learn how to compensate for those shortcomings. But, I don’t want him to think he has this extra thing that makes him less.

Read in Full:  http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/autism-unexpected/2010/aug/2/autistic-or-person-autism/



 

 

ScienceDaily (Aug. 2, 2010) — Effective reading requires recognizing words and also understanding what they mean. Between 7-10 percent of children have specific reading-comprehension difficulties. These children can read text aloud accurately but do not understand what they have just read. A new study in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, identifies a training program which may help children overcome reading-comprehension difficulties.

 

Psychological scientists Paula J. Clarke, Margaret J. Snowling, Emma Truelove, and Charles Hulme from the University of York in the United Kingdom conducted a study to see which of three intervention programs is most effective in improving children’s reading comprehension. Children (8- and 9-year olds) with reading-comprehension difficulties participated in one of three intervention programs: Text Comprehension training (TC), which emphasized metacognitive strategies (for example, re-reading and visualization) and involved working with written texts; Oral Language training (OL), which emphasized vocabulary and exclusively involved spoken language; and TC and OL training combined (COM) that integrated components from both training programs. Children’s performance was assessed before they started the training program, during the program, and 11 months after they completed their program.

 

The results showed that while all three of the training programs helped to improve reading comprehension, the largest long-term gains occurred for children who were in the OL training group. According to the authors, “The OL and COM groups also showed improvements in knowledge of the meanings of words that they had been taught and these improvements, in turn, helped to account for these children’s improved reading comprehension skills.” That children in the OL training group showed more improvement than did children in the COM training group indicates that the total amount of time devoted to oral-language training (the COM training program relied on half as much oral-language training than did the OL intervention) may be crucial for overcoming reading-comprehension difficulties. The authors note their findings suggest that “deficits in oral vocabulary may be one important underlying cause of children’s reading-comprehension problems.”

 

The results of this study have important implications for education and may help guide teachers in helping children overcome problems in reading comprehension.

 

Source: 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100802125846.htm