How Many Women Have Died part 2

Gees >sigh<


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

December 26, 2006
Hormones and Cancer: Assessing the Risks
By GINA KOLATA
When researchers reported recently that a precipitous drop in breast cancer rates might be explained by a corresponding decrease in the use of hormones for menopause, women reacted with shock, anger and, in some cases, profound relief that they had never taken the drugs.

But many also had questions. How certain were scientists that the hormones were responsible? How could stopping hormones have such an immediate and pronounced effect? And how much did scientists really know about the biology of breast cancer and hormones?

The data seemed clear enough. In 2003, after climbing for almost seven decades, the breast cancer rate fell for the first time in the United States, and it fell sharply. Over all, the incidence of newly diagnosed breast cancer dropped 7 percent, and it dropped 15 percent among women with cancers whose growth is fueled by estrogen.

There also was no question that at the same time, women had begun to abandon hormones as a treatment for menopause. In July 2002, a large study, the Women’s Health Initiative, concluded that a popular hormone therapy for menopause, Prempro, made by Wyeth, slightly increased the risk of breast cancer. Within the next six months, prescriptions for Prempro dropped by half.

A connection between hormone use and breast cancer rates did not surprise scientists like Dr. V. Craig Jordan, vice president and scientific director for the medical science division at Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia. Dr. Jordan is a leader in studying the effects of estrogen-blocking drugs on breast cancer. Among his many awards is this year’s American Cancer Society Award from the American Society for Clinical Oncology for his work on estrogen and the prevention and treatment of breast cancer.

Dr. Jordan’s wife, Dr. Monica Morrow, a breast cancer surgeon, is chairwoman of the surgical oncology department at Fox Chase. Their offices, he says, are across the hall from each other, “so we are together 24 hours a day.”

Q. Prempro, the combination drug that many women took for menopause symptoms, contains both estrogen and progestins. And the findings from the Women’s Health Initiative study suggested that estrogen alone has only a tiny effect, if any, on breast cancer risk. So which is the bad actor, progestins or estrogen? Or is it both hormones combined?

A. We’ve known for 30 years that estrogen can directly cause the growth of breast cells and of endometrial cells. Estrogen is fuel for the fire. But progesterone seems to do different things in different places in a woman’s body. In the uterus, it stops the growth of the endometrium and makes it ready for implanting a fertilized egg. In breast cancer, estrogen causes a doubling of cancer cells every 36 hours. Soon, the growing tumor ball needs to increase its blood supply because cells in the middle are not getting enough food and oxygen. Progesterone seems to cause other cells, stromal cells, to gather around the ball of cancer cells and play a supporting role. Stromal cells are the woman’s own cells that researchers now think may be specifically selected to build an architecture and send out signals for more blood supply, more fuel.

Q. That seems to be an unusual arrangement. Why would progesterone act on stromal cells in the breast?

A. When a woman is pregnant, her breasts are much larger and her estrogen and progesterone levels are huge. Progesterone is sending out signals that provide a skeleton to build the breasts.

Q. Was it a surprise to learn that estrogen and progestins can cause breast cancer?

A. We’ve known there is a cause and effect with hormones and breast cancer since 1896. If a woman is premenopausal and she has breast cancer and you take out her ovaries, the tumors decrease in size. Not all the tumors — if you took 100 women who were premenopausal and took their ovaries out, 35 percent would have a response. And you could get a dramatic response. A tumor that was the size of a walnut could shrink in six months to the size of a pinhead. It turned out that the tumors that responded contained estrogen receptors. This became cause and effect — the estrogen receptor was the mechanism that estrogen used to stimulate tumors to grow. If there was no estrogen receptor, taking away estrogen didn’t do anything at all.

Q. Did taking away estrogen ever make a breast cancer go away completely?

A. This is the basic difficulty. We were dealing with advanced breast cancer, and what we saw was that we could get complete remissions in 4 or 5 percent of the women. In the majority of women, the remission would last for one to two years. Taking away estrogen slowed things down, it reversed the process, but it did not cure.

Q. Do you agree with the latest analysis indicating that breast cancer is declining because so many women stopped taking Prempro and other menopausal hormones?

A. Throughout the 1990s, physicians were recommending that menopausal women take hormone replacement therapy. What happens is that you increased the rate of breast cancer in the whole country. And it shifted the epidemiology. We have seen an increase in the percentage of estrogen-receptor-positive tumors in the 1990s and in the beginning of the 2000s, so that now 70 percent of tumors are estrogen-receptor positive.

This was, if you like, consistent. Everything was ticking in. The Women’s Health Initiative and the Million Women Study in Britain really said: “Here’s a controlled series of studies comparing taking nothing with taking hormone replacement therapy. How many cancers were there at the end of the day?”

The Women’s Health Initiative found a 23 percent increase in breast cancer; the Million Women Study found a 100 percent increase. Those studies were highly publicized and women stopped taking hormones. Now the breast cancer rates are going down. Now tumors you would have detected are not being detected. There is no proof the tumors will ever go away, but you can’t detect them. And it is possible that many subclinical cancer cells may never grow inside a woman’s breast if she has no estrogen around to fuel that fire.

Q. If a woman has a tumor that is undetectable because she did not take menopausal hormones, will it eventually grow anyway and turn into a cancer that can be seen on a mammogram?

A. We don’t know. What we have learned from the tamoxifen clinical trial is that tamoxifen, which blocks estrogen, did a fantastic job. The cancer rate in the group taking tamoxifen dropped by 50 percent. Tamoxifen prevented the development of breast cancers that were early stage, and it also stopped cells from progressing to breast cancer.

Q. Some people suggest that the real problem was that the hormones women were taking were artificial or were given in artificial ways. Prempro, for example, gets its estrogen from pregnant mares. Some say other hormone preparations, for example, so-called bioidentical hormones, would be safe. Do you agree?

A. We’ve been talking about women’s ovaries producing estrogen and progesterone. When a woman enters menopause, hormone levels drop dramatically. The longer you bathe a woman’s breasts in these hormones, the more likely she will have cancer. If you start menstruating early, if you have two extra years of estrogen in your body, bathing your breasts in that fuel is a risk factor for breast cancer. If you start menopause late, if your periods go on for an extra four or five years, that is a risk. The longer you have menstrual cycles, the higher your probability of breast cancer. And that is with natural hormones, the ones in your body.

Q. What about birth control pills? Do they increase the risk of breast cancer?

A. We have had testing of birth control pills in huge groups of women since the 1950s, and there really is no evidence of a significant rise in breast cancer risk. What we do know is that oral contraceptives reproduce the messages in the brain to stop a woman from ovulating. You are bathing a woman’s body with artificial hormones, but normally she would be bathing her own body with estrogen and progesterone. You don’t have women getting endometrial cancer, and oral contraceptives reduce the risk of getting ovarian cancer by 50 percent. It is one of the few things we know of that reduces the risk of ovarian cancer.

Q. What about chemicals in the environment, like DDT or chemicals in plastics, that can mimic estrogen. Could they be causing breast cancer?

A. There are a group of compounds like DDT that are byproducts of industry and are in our environment. They can affect cells in the laboratory and can affect the reproduction of animals, but in really huge doses. There is an effect, but does it cause an increase in cancer? I personally don’t believe that is the case. I don’t think there is enough around to do that. A pinch of estrogen in the environment is very small compared to the gallons in a woman’s body.

Q. What should women do now? Should they ever take menopausal hormones?

A. The value of hormone therapy for women with extremely severe menopausal symptoms is well established, and women, in consultation with their doctors, should consider using it for only a few months to alleviate severe symptoms. The main concern is using the drugs for many years to prevent osteoporosis. They can reduce the risk of hip fractures, but there are now many different alternatives for women to maintain bone density, such as bisphosphonates or raloxifene. Hormone replacement therapy should only be considered after all other options have failed.

How Many Women Were Lost?

Yesterday my Mother called asking me to pick up some medicine her doctor called into the pharmacy. Knowing she had been ill I glady went and got it. Moms 76 years old so I don't mind doing things for her when she calls.

After standing in line for about 30 minutes (mom uses Wal Mart) finally my turn came. The young man says 28 bucks. Excuse me Mom has insurance it shouldn't be more than 5 dollars for both perscriptions. Her doctor was going on vaction till after the first of the year so he had called in her syntheriod along with the antibiotic. Turns out it was 5 days too soon. Medicare part D does not allow a person to pick up an on going prescription until 5 days before your last one runs out. We were 5 days to soon. Thats right folks they limit people to when they can pick up their medication. Doesn't matter if their going to out of town or picking up early because the weather may turn bad. So I told the phamacist to keep it and we would pick it up later when the insurance would pay for it, but give me the antibiotic.

This is where I begin thinking. Getting to Moms house I told her what happened. And indeed early pick up is prohibited. I asked her about the syntheriod she had been taking, it is a hormone replacement she takes since doctors removed half her thyriod several years ago. I asked her if the doctor had told her about any side effects. Yes he had and she explained to me it was safe. I said good because I had read a recent article in the New York Times that hormone replacement had caused breast cancer, heart attackes, strokes and blood clots.

Oh I know all about that Mom says. I was given premerin in 1978 or 79. Remember when I was in the hospital? The blood clot that went though my heart and caused a stroke? Yes I did remember. Premerin had caused the blood clot. I was STUNED! Premerin had almost killed my Mother 28 years ago! How could that be? Women were only warned about premerin in 2002.

How could it take 24 years for the warnings to come out. How can big pharma and doctors claim they didn't know till 2002 when they did a study and saw that a combination of hormone replacement drugs caused breast cancer, heart attackes, stroke and blood clots.

In my Mothers case she only took premerin not a combination of hormone replacements.
How many women have died? And how many years before Mom had her blood clot were women prescribed premerin and died? For that matter how many women have died from breast cancer, heart attackes, strokes and blood clots over the decades from these drugs. How many other families like mine stood vigil over a loved one lying the intensive care unit because they had been prescribed premerin?

I've lost several friends to breast cancer over the last 10 years and have several who beat it. I wonder how many of them had taken hormone replacement? I want answers. I want to see the 2002 study and I want to see the original studies done decades ago on these drugs that allowed the FDA to ok them for women to take.

I WANT ANSWERS! HOW MANY WOMEN ARE DEAD BECAUSE SOMEONE AT THE FDA LET THE DRUG COMPANIES MARKET A DRUG THAT COULD KILL! Not just a few deaths like vioxx which was pulled just a few years after it's release but THOUSANDS killed over DECADES!

But hey it's just women, it's just our Mothers and sisters, wives and daughters. Who cares. Not even the media cares, the New York Times article was ignored while three men on a mountain became the media sensation of the weekend.
-------------------------------------------



Editorial in the New York Times
December 16, 2006

A Big Drop in Breast Cancer
The sharp drop in breast cancer rates reported this week is astonishingly good news. It is the first major reduction in the incidence of a malignancy that strikes more than 200,000 American women every year — and kills some 40,000 annually.

Researchers from the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston and other institutions reported that the incidence of all types of breast cancer fell a stunning 7 percent in 2003 — the latest year for which statistics are available — from the year before. This was the first such decline after persistent rises for several decades and a leveling off from 1998 to 2002. The researchers estimate that 14,000 fewer women were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2003 than in the year before.

The most plausible explanation is that women by the millions abandoned or sharply cut back their use of hormone therapy. For many years hormones — which have been widely used to treat the symptoms of menopause — had also been hyped by the pharmaceutical industry as an elixir to ward off the ravages of aging. Overly enthusiastic doctors also championed hormone therapy as a way to prevent or mitigate heart disease, Alzheimer’s, severe depression and urinary incontinence — none of which turned out to be true.

But in mid-2002, a study of the effects of hormones on thousands of women had to be halted after it became clear that prolonged use of a popular hormone combination caused an increase in breast cancer, heart attacks, strokes and blood clots.

Women abandoned the hormone pills in droves, and almost immediately, the incidence of breast cancer began to fall. As Gina Kolata reported in yesterday’s Times, rates of the most common form of breast cancer — tumors that are fueled by estrogen — dropped a startling 15 percent from August 2002 to December 2003.

The researchers hypothesize that tiny tumors in the breast, when deprived of the hormones that fueled them, stopped growing or at least grew more slowly, leaving them too small to be detected on mammograms. It is also possible that, with their hormones cut off, some tumors shrank or even disappeared. Other factors, like a slight dip in mammography screening to detect tumors and use of drugs that are known or thought to slow breast cancer, might have played a small role in reducing the numbers, but they were deemed too inconsequential to explain the results.

The great unknown is what will happen in the future. If tumor growth was simply slowed, not stopped, the tumors may become detectable as time goes on. But hormone therapy has continued to decline, so the drop in breast cancer is apt to continue. A study in California found that a sharp decrease in breast cancer incidence in 2003 was followed by a slower but continued drop in 2004, a harbinger, perhaps. of what national statistics will show next year.

Further analyses will be needed to identify all possible reasons for the decline of breast cancer incidences. If the hypothesis holds up that the drop in hormone use is the main cause, as seems likely, it should persuade even more women to curb their use except when absolutely necessary. Meanwhile, breast cancer incidence will remain high, underscoring the need for more ways to prevent this dreaded disease.


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/16/opinion/16sat1.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

No Amnesty Not Again!

Lately I have been thinking about my life. I really don’t want to but the resent talk of giving illegal immigrants amnesty forces me to remember some horrific times. No one should have to live though what my two sons and I survived, at least not in America the land of milk and honey.

The year is 1986 twenty long, long years ago. Ronald Reagan has just announced amnesty for millions of illegal aliens. At the time I didn’t think much about it until I saw hoards of people streaming though my yard 24/7. I had lived in Tucson, AZ for nine years and had seen an occasional person with a backpack, suitcase or garbage bag carrying jugs of water but this, was surreal. Month after month it continued and every day on the news more and more dead people would be found in the Sonoran Desert. If I knew then what I know now I would have packed up my children and moved back to Illinois.

So this is where my story begins and I have no doubt it was the same for many others. I was an uneducated divorced single mother, who worked to put her ex-husband though college. But after he got his degree I was deserted and left to make my own way. Life in Tucson wasn’t to bad but the cost of living was astronomical because of the Snowbirds, Northerners who would make Arizona and Tucson their home during the cold winter months, then go home in the spring. Life revolved around our Snowbirds and it was feast when they were there and famine when they left, so you saved as best you could but eventually I would apply for food stamps and AFDC, welfare. Back then welfare amounted to about $265.00 a month for a woman and 2 kids and 120 dollars in food stamps. Not near enough to live on so I would baby sit, do yard work whatever I could find. I even learned how to skin palm trees and climb as high as 125 feet to make a buck.

But then Amnesty came and our lives were turned upside down. The next four years were horrific. If you weren’t bilingual or educated there was no work for you. Welfare became a way to survive a vicious circle that surrounded and strangled you. When I went to the welfare office I sat there with mostly white undereducated single mothers who also had become the victims of Reagan and the Republicans Amnesty for the illegal aliens. We were Americans and illegal’s had taken our jobs. Companies who once paid us four or five dollars an hour were now paying $1.25. Even welfare was getting harder to hang onto. If you did work a few hours a month they would take it all away even the food stamps.


What about child support , fat chance in the state of Arizona. Recently I learned that my ex-husband did pay but $14,000 went missing between California and Arizona. I tried to find a lawyer to help me retrieve the money I’m owed but that amount is just petty cash and no one wanted to take on both states. Yes, I am accusing both the state of California and Arizona of EMBEZZLEMENT. So someone either in California or Arizona fed their kids with our money while mine starved. Yes we starved. I suffered from gout and my oldest suffered with a scalp ailment that made his hair fall out in clumps. Just a foot note but my social worker Trudy killed herself. I heard they found her hanged in her home. When I think back poor Trudy had to listen to my story from every woman she was trying to help. Her job working with woman who had no education and barely any hope of ever getting off welfare must have been overwhelming. She had to look into the crying faces of the women and take away the meager welfare they received because for whatever reason they no longer qualified. I liked Trudy and many times thought about taking the easy way out myself.

My children and I became homeless (more than once) and slept in our car because the shelter in Tucson would be full of the mentally ill patients other states would give a one way ticket to Tucson. Finally I had to swallow my pride and go ask my mother and step father for money. I’d a rather slit my wrists then ask my step father for money, but that’s another story.

Life was up and down, on and off welfare. Endless cold and hot hours spent standing in line outside for government commodities of cheese, butter, beans and rice. Many nights I would go hungry so my children could eat and sometimes even they cried because they went to bed hungry. I thank God for free school lunches but summer would come and so would the desperate hunger. Pay the rent and lights or eat and become homeless. And forget about paying for school clothes, shoes, little league, soccer and all the things that make for a happy childhood for your children. I thank God for the generosity of the Salvation Army and once even the Red Cross. I thank God for my Mother slipping a few dollars she would skim off the mean step father and I thank God for my big sister who gave us shelter when we needed it most but was murdered by her boyfriend. I miss her.

Life goes on, the world keeps turning and time moves on. The boys are grown and both have turned out well. My oldest works in a music store warehouse and DJ’s and wants to be a paramedic. My youngest will soon receive his 1st LT bars in the Alabama National Guard and will graduate from the University of Alabama with a degree in Political Science. He wants to help people, American people first he says, so no children will have to be hungry and homeless in the land of milk and honey. Who knows maybe someday he will become a Senator or God forbid the President of the good ol U.S.of A. Then again wouldn’t that be something.

So my message to all you Senators, Representatives and greedy Corporations when you grant amnesty and hire illegal aliens you will sentence another generation of American single mothers and their children to poverty and suffering. By your hands you will take the bread from their mouths and the roof from their heads and give it to people who broke the law when they illegally came into the United States of America. I’m truly sorry the illegal’s must leave their home countries, but like my own country their government just doesn’t give a shit about their own people.

Oil Corporations Need Welfare?

I received the following email this morning and I didn't know that the poor oil corporation were in such need. Poor things, I had no idea. They must be hungry or homeless or sick but have no health insurance. We must all do our part to help lift them out of poverty. Come on people we can provide the boot straps they need to lift themselves to better life. The oil corporations must really be angry at the American people for putting them is such dire straights, while they pay taxes millions of people have been stripping them of their future success. So my friends I say buy more gas and oil products to help these poor indigent corporations so they can get off the welfare tit.

Actual E-Mail

To reduce our dependence on oil and protect the environment, we can't
afford to squander billions in taxpayer handouts to Big Oil.

Unfortunately, for years Big Oil has gotten the lion's share of
taxpayer subsidies while clean energy has gotten scraps. In fact, a recent
analysis by Friends of the Earth shows that oil companies like ExxonMobil
are slated to receive more than $31.6 billion on taxpayer handouts over
the next five years.

The good news is that new Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has stated
that one of her top agenda items in the first few days after she takes
control in January will be to cut the most outrageous of these taxpayer
giveaways to Big Oil.

Tell your representative that you don't want your tax money lining the
pockets of Big Oil by signing our Stop Handouts to Big Oil petition.
To sign, click on the link below or copy and paste it into your browser:

https://www.uspirg.org/action/new-energy-future/oil-handouts?id4=ES

Then ask your friends and family to help by forwarding this email on to
them.


Oil Company Profits Continue to Skyrocket

Big oil companies are swimming in a sea of record-breaking profits
while American consumers and taxpayers pay the price. In 2005, the world's
biggest oil companies reported a combined $111 billion in profits. In
the first three quarters of 2006 they reported more than $94 billion.

Some of the biggest oil company profits in 2005 were:
* ExxonMobil: $36.1 billion
* Royal Dutch Shell: $25.3 billion
* BP: $22.3 billion
* ConocoPhillips: $13.5 billion
* Chevron Texaco $14.1 billion

Federal Handouts Lavish Billions on Oil and Gas Companies

Despite earning record profits, oil and gas companies continue to
benefit from billions in handouts courtesy of American taxpayers. Between
tax incentives, below-market fees for drilling on public lands, research
and development subsidies and accounting gimmicks, these companies will
receive more than $31.6 billion from the federal government over the
next five years.

Specifically, these handouts break down as follows:
* Tax breaks: $16 billion
* Research and development subsidies: $1.8 billion
* Below-market fees for drilling on public lands: $9.5 billion
* Accounting gimmicks: $4.3 billion
* Total: $31.6 billion

Some of most outrageous handouts to Big Oil include a deduction
allowing oil and gas companies to write off taxes and fees paid to foreign
governments. This giveaway is not only a boon for Big Oil, but also for
the governments of the world's major oil-producing nations, many of
which are openly hostile to American interests. According to estimates
from the Joint Committee on Taxation, modifying the deduction would save
taxpayers $325 million over the next five years.

Another costly and unfair handout allows companies drilling for oil and
natural gas in publicly-owned waters and on publicly-owned lands to pay
below-market fees, or royalties, for the resources they extract. These
royalty payments provide needed resources to the Land and Water
Conservation Fund, Historic Preservation Trust Fund, the oil-producing states
and the federal treasury. Schemes that let oil companies off the hook
for their royalty obligations will cost taxpayers at least $9.5 billion
over the next five years.

And despite the substantial investments made by Big Oil into research
and development, Congress is pumping more than $1.8 billion into federal
research and development, including one provision in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 to give $1.5 billion to an oil consortium in Representative
Tom DeLay's home district of Sugarland, TX.

The good news is that new Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has stated
that one of her top agenda items in the first few days after she takes
control in January will be to cut the most outrageous of these taxpayer
giveaways to Big Oil.

Tell your representative that you don't want your tax money lining the
pockets of Big Oil by signing our Stop Handouts to Big Oil petition.
To sign, click on the link below or copy and paste it into your browser:

https://www.uspirg.org/action/new-energy-future/oil-handouts?id4=ES

Sincerely,

Meshawn Ayala
MoPIRG Citizen Outreach Director
MeshawnA@mopirg.org
http://www.MoPIRG.org

Whatever Happened to Innocent Until Proven Guilty?

Recenty the New York Times printed a story about Jose Padilla. If you don't know who he is, what planet have you been living on is all I got to say about that.
Here's the link to the original NYT article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/04/us/04detain.html?th&emc=th
You will have to register to read it but it's free.

Jose is a born American citizen who is also a muslim. He's accused of planning to build and explode a dirty bomb. Held in Gitmo, Cuba for several years, his lawyers accuse the Bush Administration of torturing him and is now unable to assist in his defense.

The NYT's article made me cry. I cried for Jose, I cried for our lost Bill of Rights, I cried for the stupid Americans that think the Patriot Act keeps them safe from the terrorists. I cried for Habeus Corpus too, Habeus was the one thing we Americans had that protected us from EVIL DOERS.

What happened to Jose could happen to anyone now in America. Our Justice system can now be compared to that of Egypt, Sryia, Iraq or Afghanistan.
Each and every American can be arrested by our government, held without the right to a phone call or an attorney. They can even rendition you to another country and not tell anyone. You my friend can just DISAPPEAR. HOW can they do that you ask? Well first we can thank those beautiful people we elected up there in Washington, they voted and killed Habeus Corpus.

What I find appauling is that the people I talk to here in S.W. Missouri are clueless. Clueless about Jose, Clueless about what the Patriot Act really is and Clueless about Habeus Corpus. How the hell do you talk to people who are ignorant about their own DEMOCRACY? I'm sick of people saying "Well I'm not doing anything wrong". Gees people thats just it! You don't need to do something wrong! If a cop thinks you looked at him sideways he can arrest you without cause. They can kick your door in without knocking. Ask the 92 year old woman the police killed what she did wrong? http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/462/woman_92_shot_by_atlanta_police_in_drug_raid

Or the single father who recieved the death penalty after police invade his home but again had the wrong address. He shot and killed a policeman in the middle of the night, after they crashed thru his door. What did he do wrong? In the dark he killed a person in his mind was either going to kill him and hid little girl. I would have done the same thing.

In both of these cases the people thought they were being invaded by someone wanting to harm them and look what they got? One dead and one in prison. The Supreme Court now allows for no knock warrants.

If you think you are Innocent until proven guilty think again.

United States Bill of Rights
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights

Patriot Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act

Habeus Corpus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeus_corpus

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America (Paperback)
http://www.buzzflash.com/store/items/423
People this is a forty page book.



We The People
Constitutional Activism Website
For Liberty in our Lifetime!
"if we are not part of the solution, then most assuredly,
we are part of the problem. Live free or die!"
http://www.stanley2002.org/where_is_the_police_state.html