The outbreak is still sweeping the land and has killed, so far, more than 1,000 people in the United States. On April 26, the administration declared swine flu a public health emergency. They immediately accepted the shipment of roughly 12 million doses of flu-fighting medications from a federal stockpile to states across the country. At the time, there were 20 confirmed cases in the U.S. of people recovering quickly and easily. There was no vaccine against swine flu, but the CDC had taken the initial step necessary for producing one.

Obama wrote last Friday in his new declaration:

“As a nation, we have prepared at all levels of government, and as individuals and communities, taking unprecedented steps to counter the emerging pandemic.”

As of last Wednesday only 11 million doses of vaccine had been shipped to health departments, doctor’s offices and other providers, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, however according to new government goals, there should be about 50 million doses of swine flu vaccine out by mid-November and 150 million in December.

Those who think that the Swine Flu has flown are living in a dangerous bubble. It is more rampant now than ever. Almost 100 American children have died from H1N1 and 46 U.S. states have “widespread” flu activity.

The swine influenza, which is grown in chicken eggs, is indeed a worldwide epidemic. Globally more than 5,000 lives have been claimed by the nasty disease so far.

First of all, they just about always contain little to no vitamins or other essential nutrients known in a healthy diet. And the caffeine, carbonation, simple sugars, sugar substitutes and other additives and preservatives which they do contain, can in fact do damage to one’s health.

In fact, tooth decay, heart disease, type-2 diabetes, nutritional depletion and obesity in young children is often caused by an unhealthy diet, consisting of a soft drink overdose.

Also, if you were thinking that diet or sugar-free soda is a better health choice, think again. While the sugar overdose risk is cut in half with diet drinks, the sugar substitutes used in them is equally unhealthy. For instance, saccharin has been found to be a carcinogenic.

Aspartame, or nutrasweet, tricks the brain into thinking that it is sweet. It breaks down into acpartic acid, or phenylalanine and methanol at 86 degrees. This is bad because your tummy is usually about 98 degrees.

Breaking it down:
Sugar: The USDA recommendation for sugar consumption is about 2,000 calories per day. Most soft drinks contain more than this.

Dr Mao says:

“When you drink sodas that are packed with simple sugars, the pancreas is called upon to produce and release insulin, a hormone that empties the sugar in your blood stream into all the tissues and cells for usage. The result of overindulging in simple sugar is raised insulin levels. Raised blood insulin levels beyond the norm can lead to depression of the immune system, which in turn weakens your ability to fight disease.”

Too much sugar also results in weight gain and increases the risk of heart disease and cancer.

Carbonation:
Carbonated beverages contain phosphoric acid, which depletes the blood calcium level. This is bad for the bones and can eventually cause osteoporosis.
As for the risks incurred with overdosing on caffeine, well, you can probably make a nice educated guess.

Given this statistic, perhaps insurance companies have less to worry about than was once expected. Drew Altman, the president of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation last week:

“The public option is a significant issue, but its place in the debate is completely out of proportion to its actual importance to consumers. It has sucked all the oxygen out of the room and diverted attention from bread-and-butter consumer issues, such as affordable coverage and comprehensive benefits.”

In order to prevent the government-run option from piling more onto the federal deficit, most uninsured people will have to wait until 2013 for federal help. And even then, some will have to pay a significant share of their own health care costs.

The Congressional Budget Office the nonpartisan economic analyst for lawmakers, said that the scaled back government plan in the House bill would not actually overtake private health insurance, even conceptually. And in fact it might even help insurance companies.

The 2% of Americans under 65 who would actually sign up for the government option makes up 6 million out of 282 million Americans in the wide age group.

The fact is that the majority of the population would remain in private health insurance plans sponsored by employers; and low-income people, would be covered through an expanded Medicaid program.

Actually most people would not have access to the new public plan. Under the House bill, it the government option would be open only to those who buy coverage on their own or work for small companies. Still, even within that pool of 30 million people, only 1-in-5 would take the public option.

Economist Karen Davis, president of the Commonwealth Fund, said;

“The concern was that the public option would destabilize the bulk of private insurance, but in fact what Congress has fashioned is very targeted. It’s not going to be taking away the insurance industry’s core business.”

Later this week the full House will vote on the bill, whose full cost still goes undisclosed. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Proudly declared on the steps of the Capitol, that the bill “covers 96% of all Americans and it puts affordable coverage in reach for millions of uninsured and under insured families, lowering health care costs for all of us.”

As predicted, Republicans were quick with their negative reactions. Republican House Representative John Boehner of Ohio said, “It will raise the cost of Americans’ health insurance premiums; it will kill jobs with tax hikes and new mandates, and it will cut seniors’ Medicare benefits.”
The question remains, will the Republicans be able to block the bill’s approval in a House which is made up of 256 Democratic seats, where 218 makes a majority?

The bill will provide an expansion of Medicaid, which is a state/federal run health program for the poor. Individuals making up to $16,245 and a family of four making up to $33,075 would be covered. This would add 15 million to Medicaid.

As far as private insurers, one of the bill’s features is a new national insurance market. Therein private companies may sell policies that meet federally mandated benefit levels. The government would offer competing coverage and therefore individuals may shop around for their best option.

Also, doctors, hospitals and other private providers would be able to negotiate rates with the Department of Health and Human Services (for services provided under the government insurance option).

Here’s a way to squeeze a few extra bucks out of Uncle Sam, while being a true blue green machine:

The economic stimulus package passed by Congress last February included a full federal tax credit – that is not just a deduction – on 30% of the cost on all energy saving items. This includes a cap of $1,500 per house, if installed before the end of 2010. Within this new stimulus package consumers have the double benefit of slashing their utility bills while increasing their house’s long-term value. Now keeping it green is a double entendre – haha!

If you don’t really need to upgrade the whole entire house, you may at least benefit from one to two new changes. Qualified products must meet standards established in 2009 by the International Energy Conservation Code.

Here are a few ideas:

-Formaldehyde-free fiberglass batts and cellulose-based spray foam, which fills various nooks and crannies are a couple of ideas.
-Insulation jobs paired with sealing air leaks is a major bang-for-the-buck efficiency measure.
-In Australia, which is suffering a major drought, a company called Caroma has created a Profile toilet with special water conserving features. You can recognize it as the toilet with the faucet on top of the tank. After you flush, water pours out of the faucet and into a recessed drain until it refills the tank.
-A new product from Velux, The Skylight Turn-Key Collector Kit, is also a hot item. It enables you to get hot water for free, from anywhere which you can mount a skylight. The kit comes equipped with an electronically controlled pump, two water collectors encased in the Weather Tight frames and a 60-gallon hot-water storage tank.

In a Memorandum of Understanding the DOE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) who jointly manage Energy Star, agreed to increased product testing and quicker updates.

Still according to Consumer Reports, consumers are better off buying Energy Product stars than any other similar company. Their track record does include years of energy-saving products.

Starting this year, the EPA will take the lead on all Energy Star specifications. Currently there are more than 60 product categories which may earn Energy Star. So it goes without saying that there is a lot of work that needs to be done.

The Yahoo Daily Green News Blog reports:

If Energy Star has 90% market share, then the maximum level of efficiency that is “technically feasible and economically justified” (where federal standards must be set by DOE) is at least this high. If the market share is low, then incentives or education might be needed to encourage folks to invest in more efficient equipment.

Here’s a list of product categories which will most likely need revision in order to meet redefined Energy Star standards:

- Audio/DVD has 35% market share. 44% of these products meet with Energy Star.
- Residential Boilers have market shares over 50%. They must be 85% efficient to meet with Energy Star standards.
- 49% of all laptops meet with Energy Star.
- Copiers and scanners with Energy Star have market shares of around 90%.
- 80% of televisions meet with Energy Service.

Which is it dudes? Is the planet cooling? Heating? Both? Neither? A little clarity, me thinks, will go a long way in getting global citizens to be hip to the cause.

Who is hungry for the truth?
The Associated Press held a blind test, in order to get some straight facts to filter into the media. They conducted a blind test, in which temperature data was given to four independent statisticians. Strangely, the expert statisticians found no trends having to do with temperatures declining over time.

So who started the rumor?
Opinion columns, a BBC news story posted on the Drudge Report, and especially a fun new book by the best-selling authors of “Freakonomics”, all claim that there is evidence for the cause and hence cause for worry.

In a poll by the Pew Research Center, conducted last week, it was discovered that only 57% of Americans, today, believe that there is substantial scientific evidence for the reality of global warming. In 2006 there were 77%. What changed people’s minds? Al Gore? Indian summers? No and no. Get this: global warming skeptics are basing their claims on an unusually hot year in 1998. They say that since then, temperatures have dropped. But does this a global cooling trend make? Apparently we should think not – according to the Associated Press, anyway.

Deke Arndt, the climate monitoring chief of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) says to the contrary of global cooling theorists, “The last 10 years are the warmest 10-year period of the modern record. Even if you analyze the trend during that 10 years, the trend is actually positive, which means warming.”

In an excerpt from the new book by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, “Super Freakonomics: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance”, we read:

“Then there’s this little-discussed fact about global warming: While the drumbeat of doom has grown louder over the past several years, the average global temperature during that time has in fact decreased.”

But this line sent false messages to readers apparently. The University of Chicago economist, Levitt says that he does not actually believe that there is a cooling trend. Instead the line from the new book was just “an attempt to note the irony of a cool couple of years at a time of intense discussion of global warming.”

By 2011, roughly 100 charging stations will be found on the streets of Jerusalem. In the same year Israel plans to have electric cars available for mass consumption. Twenty of the stations are already in place.
Better Place, CEO, Shai Agassi calls Israel, “a leader in the road to sustainable mobility.”

In a recent statement, a Better Place spokesperson said that:

Electric car batteries used in Israel will have a range of 160-200 km (100-125 miles), sufficient to cover the distances among most of the small country’s main urban centers. They would take 3-4 hours to charge.

Better Place, is a brand new $200-million venture-backed company. They plan to add electric car charging stations in Denmark after the project in Israel; and is working with Renault and Nissan, to develop electric car infrastructure.

According to Reuters:

The firm has also announced partnerships with Australia, California and Hawaii, worth about $2 billion in total, to expand its network in the coming years as markets search for alternatives to cut carbon emissions and pricey fuel imports.

The icky pond scum known as algae grows remarkably fast and is full of fat; for these reasons scientists have cause to believe that it has a huge potential as a renewable energy source. The objective will be to find a COST-EFFECTIVE way to convert the lipids found in algae ponds into fuel. Then the fuel may be pumped into cars, trucks and jets. Pretty cool!

Algae is remarkable for its ability to quickly devour carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas caused by the burning of fossil-fuels. Also it grows in places that are not used for growing food crops, for example, dirty pools and waste water.

Taking Action

Last summer ExxonMobil declared that it would invest 600 million dollars into algae research, in a partnership with a California biotechnology company. A chemical engineer named George Philippidis, director of applied research at Florida International University in Miami said:

“I think it’s very realistic. I don’t think it’s going to take 20 years. It’s going to take a few years…we could hook up to the exhaust of polluting industries…we could capture it and feed it to algae and prevent that CO2 from contributing to further climate change.”

Sapphire Energy, a smart California company, fueled a cross-country road trip with, get this, algae-tinged gasoline. So while still in its formative stages, we at least know that the idea will work. Sapphire Energy’s cross country journey was meant to raise awareness, and it prompted the headline, “Coast to Coast on Slime.” A different California company is looking for a way to fatten fish on algae and then process the fish for oil. Poor fish, lucky Earth.

The Hurdle
Of course the process of converting algae into usable fuel will not be simple. There is a small stumbling-block which is not unique, and that would be the $$$ factor. Although the stuff grows incredibly fast, currently it costs $100 to make a gallon of algae fuel. This is by no means a savings.

Roy Swiger, a molecular geneticist and director of the Florida division of the non-profit Midwest Research Institute said,

“It would not make sense to spend five dollars of electricity to run a centrifuge to dry out algae, that in turn would only produce one dollar of fuel.”

However, I always put my health first. So I did some research to see what health benefits there may be to responsible and moderate drinking; and what health issues, to be wary of. I found that there have been lots of studies done on this recently. Here’s what I came up with:

There is a myth that different red wine grapes possess different health benefits. I found that this is not true. They all have the same benefits. It is true that one glass of wine is good for the heart. Resveratrol is a chemical found in the skin of grapes which provides antioxidants which lower blood sugar levels and improve insulin, making it beneficial for diabetes. However, red wine, which does not eat away at your tooth enamel as fast as white wine does, does have a tendency to stain teeth.

Beer, as once thought, does not raise cholesterol. In fact it increases HTL’s, which are somewhat beneficial for your cholesterol count. Though, if you think that beer is good for preventing and curing heart disease, you are unfortunately mistaken.

Also, for you college kids…

WARNING: Beer Not Good For Hangovers. This is because when you are ‘hung-over’, your body is dehydrated. Beer will only make you more dehydrated.
Bottoms Up …..