December 25, 2010
December 24, 2010
December 23, 2010
December 22, 2010
Pssssst! Psssst! Don't tell anyone but ...
Diamond Jim felt he needed one last junket at our expense, so when the opportunity to have another "free trip" before leaving office presented itself he just couldn't refuse.
Now, before all you Doyle Defenders try to deflect this as a trip to drum up "Green Jobs" business for Wisconsin let's check what took place against logic.
Doyle and his assistant's travel expenses and maybe some hotel and meals were paid by someone other than the state tax payers. But we paid the tab for the two body guards and another person. Over all not likely to be a huge budget busting expense, but still paid by the tax payer.
On ALL of Diamond Jim's previous junkets to get business for Wisconsin he took along a much larger group of people including those from our Commerce department and often a good number of business leaders who were there to assist in looking for ways to gain business for Wisconsin. Why not this time? Was he really seriously looking for more jobs for Wisconsin or was this just as I suggested - one last fling before leaving the governors job? After all the weather in Can-Cun is great this time of year. Did he even attend any of the sessions? Where are the agreements and a report about all the new "Green Job" opportunities he brought back with him?
On ALL previous trips the Governor's office made a HUGE splash in the media ahead of time about the great significance of the trip to wherever - looking to boost Wisconsin jobs and business. On this trip he tried to completely hide the fact that it even happened. Why? It couldn't be because this was just a free trip with no intention of bringing back anything to help out our state, or could it.
In the great scheme of things surrounding our states fiscal mess this is not by itself going to create a lot more ruin, but it is just another confirmation of the TOTAL LACK OF CHARACTER and ETHICAL PRINCIPLES that our soon to be X-Governor has had for the 8 looonnnggg years we have had him in the Governor's mansion doing everything possible to screw up our state!! Good ridance to an absolute failure as our Governor.
Now, before all you Doyle Defenders try to deflect this as a trip to drum up "Green Jobs" business for Wisconsin let's check what took place against logic.
Doyle and his assistant's travel expenses and maybe some hotel and meals were paid by someone other than the state tax payers. But we paid the tab for the two body guards and another person. Over all not likely to be a huge budget busting expense, but still paid by the tax payer.
On ALL of Diamond Jim's previous junkets to get business for Wisconsin he took along a much larger group of people including those from our Commerce department and often a good number of business leaders who were there to assist in looking for ways to gain business for Wisconsin. Why not this time? Was he really seriously looking for more jobs for Wisconsin or was this just as I suggested - one last fling before leaving the governors job? After all the weather in Can-Cun is great this time of year. Did he even attend any of the sessions? Where are the agreements and a report about all the new "Green Job" opportunities he brought back with him?
On ALL previous trips the Governor's office made a HUGE splash in the media ahead of time about the great significance of the trip to wherever - looking to boost Wisconsin jobs and business. On this trip he tried to completely hide the fact that it even happened. Why? It couldn't be because this was just a free trip with no intention of bringing back anything to help out our state, or could it.
In the great scheme of things surrounding our states fiscal mess this is not by itself going to create a lot more ruin, but it is just another confirmation of the TOTAL LACK OF CHARACTER and ETHICAL PRINCIPLES that our soon to be X-Governor has had for the 8 looonnnggg years we have had him in the Governor's mansion doing everything possible to screw up our state!! Good ridance to an absolute failure as our Governor.
December 21, 2010
What a disgusting worm.
Barney Frank: Double-Dip Estate Tax Not Punishment Because Heirs Didn’t do Anything to Deserve It...
Oh yeah? What exactly did you do to deserve it Barney? Not a damn thing.
Work hard, pay taxes your whole life and then Barney the worm Frank thinks he should get a cut of whatever is left over?
The death tax is immoral and should be abolished FOREVER.
Oh yeah? What exactly did you do to deserve it Barney? Not a damn thing.
Work hard, pay taxes your whole life and then Barney the worm Frank thinks he should get a cut of whatever is left over?
The death tax is immoral and should be abolished FOREVER.
Guess the number game.
0.
I'm going to give this one to you. 0, the number of hearings, amount of testimony and number of amendments offered to the "Dream" act.
That's right folks, for all the scrutiny and for all the sanctimonious headlines written about this bill it skipped absolutely every normal process a bill going through our governmental system usually has to traverse.
Remember this with every headline you read that does not mention this. The Dream Act was nothing but a political stunt. I wish the left was willing to have an honest debate about this instead of just posturing for political purposes.
This should start with sealing our borders.
I'm going to give this one to you. 0, the number of hearings, amount of testimony and number of amendments offered to the "Dream" act.
That's right folks, for all the scrutiny and for all the sanctimonious headlines written about this bill it skipped absolutely every normal process a bill going through our governmental system usually has to traverse.
Remember this with every headline you read that does not mention this. The Dream Act was nothing but a political stunt. I wish the left was willing to have an honest debate about this instead of just posturing for political purposes.
This should start with sealing our borders.
While you sleep...
Your freedoms are slowly eroded and stolen from you by people you didn't vote for.
Just another Christmas surprise?
December 20, 2010
MRQ how not to play
|
December 19, 2010
Should Xcel Energy Clean Up Its Act in Owen?
I interviewed Dr. Pamela Jaffke, a veterinarian in Owen, Wisconsin, who is suffering because of the bullheadedness of her utility company, Xcel Energy. They, along with the other state power companies and the Public Service Commission, refuse to take action to improve the safety of their product in spite of the continuous stream of health complaints like Dr. Jaffke's over the years.
It is time for the Wisconsin utilities to stop releasing their voltage trash - known as transients and harmonics - into the ground, and upgrade the system statewide to protect people, and not just cows, from exposure to biologically harmful ground currents. Rather than repost the whole shebang here, here is the link.
It is time for the Wisconsin utilities to stop releasing their voltage trash - known as transients and harmonics - into the ground, and upgrade the system statewide to protect people, and not just cows, from exposure to biologically harmful ground currents. Rather than repost the whole shebang here, here is the link.
Who owns human genes?
For my first Real Debate Wisconsin science article, I have decided to focus on human gene patents. The issue involves the patent protection of thousands of human genes and the elimination of drug development, diagnostics or any type of discovery based on these genes without approval of the patent holders.
Genes, the DNA sequences found in cells, “code” for RNA which in turn codes for proteins, often contain non-coding sequences called introns. Think of a blind person “coding” Braille into words. Cells have to skip over the non-coding introns when turning DNA into RNA. The RNA made by cells therefore only contains the sequence that leads to production of a protein. When a gene is cloned in a laboratory, scientists fish around and create a synthetic gene called a cDNA (c for “complementary”) which excludes the introns and stitches only the coding sequences together. This construct does not exist in nature and can be used for further study. For example, diseases are often caused by mutations in genes that in turn lead to faulty RNA and ultimately proteins, so studying these genes can lead to diagnostics and drugs. It is important to note that the cDNAs contain no information not already found in genes, they are simply versions that have edited out the non-coding parts.
Beginning over twenty years ago, pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as universities and foundations, tested the waters at the U.S. Patent and Trade office. They argued that these cDNA sequences were patentable, even though they only contained information already found in nature, because the cDNAs were synthetic products of scientists in laboratories. The PTO agreed. One of the early patent submitters, Myriad, applied for patent protection for two mutated genes responsible for some inherited forms of breast cancer, and these mutations were named BRCA1 and BRCA2. The patents were granted, and from that point on only Myriad could screen for those mutations in clinical tests.
The ACLU and a number of scientists have been challenging these patents for some time, and this past spring the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York invalidated Myriad’s BRCA patents. The U.S. government recently filed an amicus brief which argued for reversal of the original position of the U.S. PTO. I encourage anyone interested in this issue to read this brief (although it is not brief in length) because it provides a wonderful review of the science and explains their arguments extraordinarily well:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/business/genepatents-USamicusbrief.pdf
I am a strong advocate of the patentability of drugs and diagnostics – without patent protection there would be no drugs or diagnostics available – because they are based upon new chemicals, new processes, and often both. However, I have always found the concept of patenting the information found inside human cells to be an abomination of patent law. One of Myriad’s many arguments is that production of a cDNA is non-obvious and in fact difficult, and does not exist in nature. No it doesn’t – but the sequence information does! As for it being difficult, I cannot patent a rock I find in my backyard, but if I spend lots of money to take an expedition to the Amazon, should I be able to patent a rock I find there?
A series of articles are now being offered by the Journal Sentinel that talk about a little boy who had all of his genes sequenced (no introns, just the coding information). This led to the discovery of a unique mutation in one of his genes and a subsequent treatment:
http://www.jsonline.com/features/health/111641209.html
Imagine if a company (or WARF) “owned” the mutated gene these physicians discovered. That little boy’s doctors would have been unable to do anything without permission of the patent holder.
What do you think?
Genes, the DNA sequences found in cells, “code” for RNA which in turn codes for proteins, often contain non-coding sequences called introns. Think of a blind person “coding” Braille into words. Cells have to skip over the non-coding introns when turning DNA into RNA. The RNA made by cells therefore only contains the sequence that leads to production of a protein. When a gene is cloned in a laboratory, scientists fish around and create a synthetic gene called a cDNA (c for “complementary”) which excludes the introns and stitches only the coding sequences together. This construct does not exist in nature and can be used for further study. For example, diseases are often caused by mutations in genes that in turn lead to faulty RNA and ultimately proteins, so studying these genes can lead to diagnostics and drugs. It is important to note that the cDNAs contain no information not already found in genes, they are simply versions that have edited out the non-coding parts.
Beginning over twenty years ago, pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as universities and foundations, tested the waters at the U.S. Patent and Trade office. They argued that these cDNA sequences were patentable, even though they only contained information already found in nature, because the cDNAs were synthetic products of scientists in laboratories. The PTO agreed. One of the early patent submitters, Myriad, applied for patent protection for two mutated genes responsible for some inherited forms of breast cancer, and these mutations were named BRCA1 and BRCA2. The patents were granted, and from that point on only Myriad could screen for those mutations in clinical tests.
The ACLU and a number of scientists have been challenging these patents for some time, and this past spring the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York invalidated Myriad’s BRCA patents. The U.S. government recently filed an amicus brief which argued for reversal of the original position of the U.S. PTO. I encourage anyone interested in this issue to read this brief (although it is not brief in length) because it provides a wonderful review of the science and explains their arguments extraordinarily well:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/business/genepatents-USamicusbrief.pdf
I am a strong advocate of the patentability of drugs and diagnostics – without patent protection there would be no drugs or diagnostics available – because they are based upon new chemicals, new processes, and often both. However, I have always found the concept of patenting the information found inside human cells to be an abomination of patent law. One of Myriad’s many arguments is that production of a cDNA is non-obvious and in fact difficult, and does not exist in nature. No it doesn’t – but the sequence information does! As for it being difficult, I cannot patent a rock I find in my backyard, but if I spend lots of money to take an expedition to the Amazon, should I be able to patent a rock I find there?
A series of articles are now being offered by the Journal Sentinel that talk about a little boy who had all of his genes sequenced (no introns, just the coding information). This led to the discovery of a unique mutation in one of his genes and a subsequent treatment:
http://www.jsonline.com/features/health/111641209.html
Imagine if a company (or WARF) “owned” the mutated gene these physicians discovered. That little boy’s doctors would have been unable to do anything without permission of the patent holder.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)