Visit site:
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Illustration by Andrew Rae
Last May, the Supreme Court decided in favor of Christians asserting their right to open town meetings with prayers. An unintended consequence of this and other recent court rulings knocking holes in the wall between church and state is that Satanists, pagans, and pranksters have eagerly embraced their newfound right to express their spiritual beliefs on public time and property:
Two days after the Supreme Court’s decision, a newly converted Satanist started asking towns in Florida if he could open town meetings with a prayer to his “Dude in Charge.” (So far, without luck.)
In September, an “agnostic pagan pantheist” opened a county commission meeting in Escambia County, Florida, with a two-and-a-half-minute chant invoking the elements and four directions. (“Powers of Air! We invoke and call you/Golden Eagle of the Dawn, Star-seeker, Whirlwind.”)
After a judge ruled in September that religious pamphlets could be handed out in public schools in Orange County, Florida, the Satanic Temple published The Satanic Children’s Big Book of Activities, a coloring book that includes a connect-the-dots pentagram.
In December, a chapter of the Satanic Temple was allowed to display a fallen angel in the Capitol of (where else?) Florida, alongside a holiday display by Flying Spaghetti Monster-worshipping Pastafarians and a Festivus pole made of beer cans.
Also at Christmastime, Satanists in Detroit set up a “Snaketivity Scene” on the lawn of the Michigan Capitol. A Republican lawmaker who set up a competing nativity scene insisted, “I’m not afraid of the snake people. I’m sure that Jesus Christ is not afraid.”
The Satanic Temple has commissioned a nearly nine-foot-tall bronzed statue of a Baphomet, a goat-headed idol seated on a throne before two children, which it plans to erect in the Oklahoma Capitol. The building already has an enormous copy of the Ten Commandments that’s being challenged by the ACLU.
Illustrations from The Satanic Children’s Big Book of Activities
Source –
Satanic Reverses: Religious Exceptions Are A Real Win For Devil Worshippers
Originally posted here:
View post:
Mother Jones
The Brennan Center has released a lengthy report examining the reasons for the big crime decline of the 90s and aughts, and one section highlights the work of Jessica Reyes and others linking crime levels to gasoline lead emissions:
Reyes, and other researchers, have found that lead is connected to aggressive behavior and behavioral problems because it affects brain development of children….Reyes found that the decrease in lead caused a remarkable 56 percent of the decrease in violent crime in the 1990s….This theory had been previously suggested by another economist, Rick Nevin, in 1999. He illustrated a similarity in the trends between violent crime and gasoline lead 23 years prior.
….In December 2013, an NAS roundtable discussed the lead theory. There was an extended discussion in which most participants seemed to concur that the 56 percent drop in crime attributed to lead by Reyes was likely too large. Most experts seem to believe that lead played some role, but maybe not as high as the finding presented by Reyes. More research is needed to establish lead’s precise role in the crime decline.
….The authors do not draw a conclusion on this theory because they could not secure complete state-by-state data on this variable level for 1980 to 2013, as needed for the regression….Based on current research and expert reactions, it is possible that lead played some role in the 1990s drop in violent crime but perhaps not as large as that found by Reyes. Further, lead’s effect on the crime drop likely waned in the 2000s.
Now, you might think I’d be annoyed that lead was the 13th out of 13 theories they looked at, and that they downplayed the likelihood of a significant role for lead. In fact, I’m thrilled. This is one of the first reports I’ve seen that gives lead a substantial section of its own, and the authors clearly take the idea seriously. The fact that they want more research before committing themselves further is perfectly reasonable. It’s a new theory that needs more research from people not already committed to it one way or the other.
A couple of notes, though. First, if the authors are only willing to draw conclusions if they can get complete state-by-state data on lead emissions, then they’re stacking the deck. That data simply isn’t available, just as it’s not available for most things in a reliable way. Additionally, since people move in and out of states, even perfect data would be incomplete. This shouldn’t be an excuse for not analyzing the data that does exist, especially since it exists at local, state, national, and international levels.
It’s also worth noting something that I feel like I have to say again and again: state-level regressions aren’t the only evidence in favor of the lead-crime theory. In fact, regressions in general aren’t the only evidence available. There are also prospective studies and brain imaging studies that point in the same direction. Nobody should make the mistake of thinking that if only we had better data and could run cleaner regressions we’d get closer to the truth. What we really need at this point are tests of very specific hypotheses of the lead-crime theory. If, for example, a detailed cohort-level study failed to show age-specific effects of lead on crime, that would be a big blow to the overall theory. That would be a useful study—though, as usual, it would probably be very difficult to carry out properly because the raw data is unlikely to exist in detailed and reliable form.
I’d also note that although the authors are correct that the role of lead waned in the 2000s, it probably wasn’t until the late 2000s. Lead likely played a significant role in crime declines up to about 2008 or so, when the last cohort of children born in 1986 turned 22. Changes in crime rates since then are most likely due to other factors.
(Changes in incarceration rates, however, lag crime rates, and will probably be affected by the end of leaded gasoline for another decade or two. And in other countries, which banned lead in the 90s or the early aughts, the effect on crime rates will probably continue to be felt for another decade at least.)
Outfits like the Brennan Center are fundamentally interested in things like incarceration, poverty, and policing, and it’s only natural that these are the things they spend the most time discussing. Thus, the mere fact that they gave lead any attention at all is good news. It means people are taking the idea seriously, and eventually that might lead to the further research they’d like to see.
As always, if you want to read the complete argument in favor of the lead-crime hypothesis, it’s right here at Mother Jones in my 2013 piece, “America’s Real Criminal Element.” Just click for the whole story.
Jump to original –
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
In 2000, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared that measles had been eliminated in the United States. Now it’s making a comeback, in large part due to parents who refuse to vaccinate their children.
This year’s outbreak—more than 100 cases reported across 14 states—follows a dramatic rise in measles cases in 2014—644 cases across 27 states. In light of the the potentially deadly disease’s return, public health officials are expressing concern about rising vaccine exemption rates. Citing the risks of not vaccinating, Anne Schuchat, an assistant surgeon general and the director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, stressed that measles could get “a foothold in the United States and become endemic again.”
More stories on vaccines and outbreaks:
Vaccines Work. These 8 Charts Prove It.
Map: The High Cost of Vaccine Hysteria
How Many People Aren’t Vaccinating Their Kids in Your State?
Measles Cases in the US Are at a 20-Year High. Thanks, Anti-Vaxxers.
This PBS Special Makes the Most Powerful Argument for Vaccines Yet
Mickey Mouse Still Stricken With Measles, Thanks to the Anti-Vaxxers
If You Distrust Vaccines, You’re More Likely to Think NASA Faked the Moon Landings
Every state requires children to get the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine before they enter kindergarten. (The vaccine is usually administered in two doses after a child’s first birthday.) All states offer medical exemptions for kids with allergies, cancer, or compromised immune systems. Most offer religious exemptions as well. And now a growing number of states—20 as of this year—permit personal belief exemptions (PBEs) that allow parents to not to vaccinate for reasons of philosophy or conscience.
Nonmedical vaccine exemptions—the rules that allow parents to opt their kids out of required vaccines based on beliefs—are on the rise. Over the past four school years, there’s been a 37 percent increase in exemptions filed. Between the the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 school years, the rate of of exemptions for incoming kindergartners jumped 30 percent. The CDC reports that 85 percent of people who go unvaccinated do so for personal or religious beliefs.
According to a 2012 study led by Saad Omer, a professor of global health and epidemiology at Emory University, allowing PBEs leads to fewer kids getting vaccinated. Opt-out rates in states with PBEs are more than double those in states with religious exemptions alone. These vaccination gaps result in higher rates of diseases like measles and whooping cough, especially in states where PBEs are easily obtained.
“We do know that states that have philosophical exemptions tend to have not only high rates of exemption but also high rates of disease,” Omer says. But some states grant exemptions more readily than others. In states such as Colorado, a parent’s signature is all that is required. But in states like Arkansas, parents must first establish why they are seeking an exemption or receive counseling from a health care provider. “We have found that the more difficult the requirements are, the lower the rate of exemption and the lower the rate of disease,” Omer says.
Looking at data from 1991 to 2005, Omer’s team found that states with easy exemption procedures had whooping cough rates up to 90 percent higher than states that made it more difficult to get exemptions.
Last year, nationwide vaccination coverage was at about 95 percent, and the median national rate of children with PBEs was 1.7 percent. That might not seem so bad. Yet because unvaccinated kids are often clustered together, one transmission of a highly contagious disease like measles can put many people at risk and set off a series of outbreaks like those happening now.
These “clusters of vaccine refusal” put two groups at risk, Omer explains. First are people who are not vaccinated, which may include infants and children with compromised immune systems. The other is people who have gotten their shots but did not get immunity—something that affects about 1 in 10 vaccine recipients, even with the most effective vaccines. “Even when it is a good vaccine and someone has done the right thing and gotten their kid vaccinated there is still a chance that they will be unprotected. So, their risk not only depends on their own vaccination status—but also what is happening around them.”
As Schuchat noted earlier this week, “The national estimates hide what’s going on state to state. The state estimates hide what’s going on community to community. And within communities there may be pockets. It’s one thing if you have a year where a number of people are not vaccinating, but year after year in terms of the kids that are exempting, you do start to accumulate.”
Read this article:
More States Are Letting Parents Refuse to Vaccinate Their Kids
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Update, February 2, 2015, 12:20 p.m.: In 2009, Christie wrote a letter in which he appeared to support the theory that autism may be linked to vaccinations. An excerpt from the letter, provided to MSNBC, below:
“I have met with families affected by autism from across the state and have been struck by their incredible grace and courage. Many of these families have expressed their concern over New Jersey’s highest-in-the nation vaccine mandates. I stand with them now, and will stand with them as their governor in their fight for greater parental involvement in vaccination decisions that affect their children.”
Update, February 2, 2015, 10:30 a.m.: Gov. Christie’s office released a statement amending his previous comments to reporters, saying there is “no question kids should be vaccinated.”
.@GovChristie‘s office offers clarification on vaccine interview responses in press release pic.twitter.com/L3PpjrJrkB
— BuzzFeed News (@BuzzFeedNews)
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie called for a “balanced” approach to childhood vaccinations, telling reporters on Monday that it’s important to provide parents a “measure of choice” in their decisions.
“Mary Pat and I have had our children vaccinated and we think that it’s an important part of being sure we protect their health and the public health,” Christie said during a press conference in Cambridge, England, where he is traveling on a trade mission. “I also understand that parents need to have some measure of choice in things as well, so that’s the balance that the government has to decide.”
I asked Gov. Christie if Americans should vaccinate their kids. He says his kids are — but says approach should be “balanced”
— Kasie Hunt (@kasie)
“Not every vaccine is created equal and not every type of disease is as great a public health threat as others,” he added.
Christie’s comments come a day after President Obama urged parents to vaccinate their children in the midst of a widening measles outbreak that started in Disneyland. The highly contagious disease has since spread to 14 states with at least 102 cases reported, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
“I understand that there are families that, in some cases, are concerned about the effect of vaccinations,” Obama said in an interview with NBC Sunday. “The science is, you know, pretty indisputable. We’ve looked at this again and again. There is every reason to get vaccinated, but there aren’t reasons to not.”
The rise in parents who choose not to have their children fully immunized has been cited as one reason for a growing number of vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks in recent years.
Credit:
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Everyone is freaking out about Nationwide’s super depressing Super Bowl commercial about preventable child death.
Did Nationwide Insurance Just Air The Darkest Super Bowl Ad Ever? http://t.co/9H79pLtsl5
— BuzzFeed (@BuzzFeed)
See?
Nationwide, that was a very mean and upsetting commercial.
— roxane gay (@rgay)
Freaking out hard:
That PREVENTABLE accidents ad from Nationwide was awful. Way to ruin my day insurance jackasses. How do we prevent them shitheads??!!
— Judd Apatow (@JuddApatow)
Here’s the commercial:
I don’t have a child so take my opinion for what it’s worth, but I rise in defense of this commercial.
I stand with @Nationwide. You people live in a fantasy. Your children could die. When they do, their blood will be on your ignorant hands.
— Ben Dreyfuss (@bendreyfuss)
The world is a dangerous place. If you freak out every time someone reminds you of that simple truth, then you don’t live in the world that exists. You live in a world of pure imagination.
Link to original:
Mother Jones
Some political functionaries creep sheepishly through the revolving door that separates government from the industries it regulates—you know, maybe wait a few years between switches.
Not Joel Leftwich. Since 2010, he’s held the following posts, in order: legislative assistant to longtime Senate agriculture committee stalwart and agribusiness-cash magnet Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kansas); program manager in the federal lobbying department for agrichemical giant DuPont; deputy staff director for the Senate Agriculture Committee; and director of lobbying for PepsiCo. Now, after the Republican takeover of the Senate and Robert’s ascension to the chair of the Agriculture Committee, Leftwich is switching sides again: He’s going to be the ag committee’s chief of staff.
And all just in time for the Congress to perform its once-every-five-years overhaul of federal nutrition programs, including school lunches and the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) food-aid initiative. Back in 2010, President Obama signed a school lunch bill, generated by a Democratic-controlled Congress, that banished junk-food snacks from schools and stipulated more fruits and vegetables in lunches. Leftwich’s once-and-current boss, Sen. Roberts, has been a persistent and virulent critic of those reforms.
As for Leftwich’s most recent ex-employer, Pepsi—whose junk-food empire spans from its namesake soda to Lays and Doritos snacks—its take on the issue of school food is embodied in this flyer, uncovered by my colleague Alex Park. It touts Cheetos as a wholesome snack for school kids. PepsiCo showers Washington in lobbying cash—note how its expenditures jumped in 2009 and 2010, when the last school lunch reauthorization was being negotiated in Congress.
In other revolving-door news: Mike Johanns of Nebraska recently retired from the Senate, where, from his perch on the ag committee, he joined Sen. Roberts in pushing the agribusiness agenda and sopping up industry campaign donations. Before that, he served as USDA chief for President George W. Bush. Now? Days after his retirement comes news he will serve on the board of directors of agribusiness giant John Deere—a position that pays at least $240,000 per year in compensation and stock, Omaha.Com reports. But don’t worry: “Johanns stressed that he won’t be doing any direct lobbying of his former Capitol Hill colleagues or their aides on behalf of the company.”
Originally posted here –
Former Pepsi Lobbyist Will Help Overhaul School Lunch Program
Mother Jones
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Via the LA Times from a few months ago, here’s the rise in “personal belief” exemptions from state-mandated vaccinations among kindergartners in California:
And here’s where it’s happening:
In Los Angeles County, the rise in personal belief exemptions is most prominent in wealthy coastal and mountain communities, The Times analysis shows. The more than 150 schools with exemption rates of 8% or higher for at least one vaccine were located in census tracts where the incomes averaged $94,500 — nearly 60% higher than the county median.
….At Santa Cruz Montessori in the small coastal community of Aptos, about 7% of kindergartners in 2007 got belief exemptions. Last fall, that rate was 22.6%. Principal Kathy Rideout said the school has tried different approaches to encourage parents to immunize children. They asked a doctor to talk with fellow parents. They produced handouts emphasizing the importance of immunizations and asked parents seeking belief exemptions to get counseling from a healthcare practitioner. A state law that went into effect this year makes this a requirement. But none of it made much difference, Rideout said.
….“We have schools in California where the percent of children who exercise the personal belief exemption is well above 50%,” said Dr. Gil Chavez, deputy director of the California Department of Public Health’s Center for Infectious Diseases. “That’s going to be a challenge for any disease that is vaccine preventable.”
There are times when it’s appropriate to be skeptical of authority. This really isn’t one of them. “Big Vaccine” is not an issue in American life. Childhood vaccination is just a matter of public health that no one has any real motivation to lie about. Please don’t get sucked into this maelstrom. Get your kids vaccinated.
This article is from:
Libros
