Warung Bebas

Senin, 25 Juni 2012

What Puts Fat Into Fat Cells, and What Takes it Out?

Body fatness at its most basic level is determined by the rate of fat going into vs. out of fat cells. This in/out cycle occurs regardless of conditions outside the cell, but the balance between in and out is influenced by a variety of external factors.  One of the arguments that has been made in the popular media about obesity goes something like this:  


A number of factors can promote the release of fat from fat cells, including:
Epinephrine, norepinephrine, adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), glucagon, thyroid-stimulating hormone, melanocyte-stimulating hormone, vasopressin, and growth hormone
 But only two promote fat storage:
Insulin, and acylation-stimulating protein (ASP)*
Therefore if we want to understand body fat accumulation, we should focus on the latter category, because that's what puts fat inside fat cells.  Simple, right?

Can you spot the logical error in this argument?

Read more »

FDA: Software Failures Responsible for 24% Of All Medical Device Recalls

At "FDA: Software Failures Responsible for 24% Of All Medical Device Recalls" via Kapersky Labs, a software security company, it is observed (emphases mine):

Software failures were behind 24 percent of all the medical device recalls in 2011, according to data from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which said it is gearing up its labs to spend more time analyzing the quality and security of software-based medical instruments and equipment.

The FDA's Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories (OSEL) released the data in its 2011 Annual Report on June 15, amid reports of a compromise of a Web site used to distribute software updates for hospital respirators. The absence of solid architecture and "principled engineering practices" in software development affects a wide range of medical devices, with potentially life-threatening consequences, the Agency said. In response, FDA told Threatpost that it is developing tools to disassemble and test medical device software and locate security problems and weak design.

... "Manufacturers are responsible for identifying risks and hazards associated with medical device software (or) firmware, including risks related to security, and are responsible for putting appropriate mitigations in place to address patient safety," the agency said in an e-mail statement.

Health IT medical devices are the exception, of course.  A health IT virtual medical device is always of rock-solid architecture, always uses "principled engineering practices" in software development, and never has life-threatening consequences, of course.

Hence its special regulatory accommodations over non-virtual (tangible) medical devices.

-- SS

I hate road races!!

OK, so everyone who has ever been within ear shot of my whining on the trails, knows that I hate road races. So why do I sign up for the Niagara 1/2 Marathon when I know it is 99.99% pavement and the temperatures are always hot and humid. 
Well for those that can be swayed with bull shit its because the course is scenic and relatively flat. But those in the know, will guess correctly that I would do a race anywhere when there is free beer at the end. Because we all know beer tastes best when free, cold and served at 10:00 am.


I also got to witness the Connor boys at work.Steve did the 1/2 Marathon and finished in 1:28.18 taking 8th overall and first in age group.
And I finished just behind Steve. (as did a hundred others that were blocking me all the way)



Pat pictured here, marked this as his 50th marathon, with a finish time of 3:57.50. But I was well ahead of him at the beer table.

Segway

Niles Crane (Frasier TV Series) on a
Segway.  Full original picture link
No that's not a typo ... though I've probably been guilty of spelling it that way.  The correct spelling for the word, is segue.   But no, I'm talking about the invention that was going to revolutionize transportation as we know it.  The Segway.

Recent discussions reminded me of this.

Did you go to a 10 year celebration of the Segway?  Complete with the 10th Anniversary Edition launch?   What?  No?  Was there even a PBS documentary on life before Segways?  

I remember the hype, do you?  For months we were teased by this device that would revolutionize transportation and all that.   It was a hush hush secret.   Nobody would need a car or public transportation in the cities, etc.etc.   Perhaps because the originals cost $5K, or you had to stand, or there was no protection from the elements, or perhaps all three and then some ... but the Segway never did really even catch on as a trendy gadget or status symbol, let alone change transportation in our time.                                                                                                                                                      

By all objective measures, the Segway was a dud.  I don't know a single person (in real life) who owns one -- or at least who will admit they do!   I've never seen any "private" person using one.  By that I mean that nowadays you will see them in use, but not by ordinary people in the course of doing their ordinary personal business.  Who uses these?  Well, I've seen them fairly regularly used by ... mall security guards and parking meter attendants.

There are many more examples of the point I'm getting at.  Solar powered homes and electric cars come to mind.  These are even heavily subsidized and incentivized by government.  And yet relatively nobody still wants them.  The Segway bombed because no amount of hype and pomp and circumstance could convince the public they had to have one.  And yet despite knowing that the latest fill in new phone/computer/gaming-device here will likely cost a mere fraction of the launch price within months, people still flock to buy it ... camping out overnight for even just a chance to do so.

Marketing.  Advertising.  It only works if they give you what you want.

Huge Insurance Company WellPoint Settles Once Again, Providing a Window On the Ethical Questions Its Birth Presented

Another month, another question about the ethical conduct of for-profit insurance giant WellPoint. 

WellPoint Settles Allegations its Predecessor Anthem Cheated its Former Policy-Holders

This time the issue was how the company treated people insured by its now Anthem subsidiary a long time ago.  Here is the Reuters version:
Health insurer WellPoint Inc has agreed to pay $90 million to settle a class-action lawsuit against its Anthem unit over accusations the company did not fairly compensate former members when Anthem was converted from a mutual company into a stock company.

The Indianapolis Star noted:
WellPoint had fought the lawsuit for seven years in court.

The lawsuit alleged that WellPoint's Anthem subsidiary underpaid policyholders who opted to receive cash instead of stock when the Blue Cross-Blue Shield franchisee converted in 2001 into a stock company.

Of course, a WellPoint spokesman denied the company had done anything wrong, per Reuters,
Anthem spokeswoman Kristin Binns said in an e-mailed statement.

'We continue to believe that in all ways the company acted appropriately and in the best interests of its former members,...'
The Historic Context: the Conversion of Non-Profit Health Insurers into For-Profit Corporations

This may seem very dry and only of historical interest, but consider the historical context. Per Wendell Potter's Deadly Spin, after the Clinton administration's failed attempt at health reform, leaders of previously non-profit Blue Cross and Blue Shield insurance plans saw a new opportunity. In the mid-1990s,
the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association took a little-noticed but monumental step. The trade group, a bastion of non-profit health insurers that included the founders of the modern health insurance system, modified its bylaws to permit members to convert into public-stock companies.

Potter opined about the executives' main motivation for conversion to for-profit status, and then consolidation of the resulting companies,
They would earn bigger pay packages for managing larger businesses, and if they could convert them to for-profit companies, they would earn even more.

So,
Fourteen Blue Cross plans, most of which dominated their state-wide markets, converted from nonprofits to for-profits, and by 2004 all fourteen wound up as wholly owned subsidiaries of WellPoint....
The Anthem Demutualization as a Step to WellPoint Executives' Enrichment

Anthem began as a non-profit insurance company, Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Indiana. Its hired managers first converted it into a mutual insurance company, a company that was owned by its policy-holders, and hence somewhat a non-profit in spirit. Then the executives started to acquire other formerly non-profit Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans. Then they converted the mutual insurance company into a pure for-profit. The for-profit Anthem eventually acquired WellPoint, taking that company's name. The resulting company then had become the biggest for-profit US health care insurer. In 2003, as the acquisition of WellPoint was pending, the Indianapolis Star reported:
The top executive at Anthem Inc. will receive a $42.5 million stock-and-cash award for guiding the company as it became the state's largest firm and now stands to become the nation's largest health benefits company.

Larry C. Glasscock will receive the merit-based performance award over the next three years on top of his salary, bonus and other compensation of $3.73 million last year. It's the most compensation Glasscock has received since he became the company's chief executive in 1999 and helped convert it to a publicly traded concern in 2001

Furthermore,
Award amounts of $16 million each went to Glasscock's two highest-ranking associates: executive vice presidents David R. Frick, an attorney and former Indianapolis deputy mayor, and Michael L. Smith, a former chief executive of moving company Mayflower Group.

In addition, the president of Anthem Midwest, Keith R. Faller, will get a stock-and-cash award of $11.9 million, while Anthem Southeast President Thomas G. Snead Jr. got $4.36 million.

The allegation that the company's hired managers failed to adequately reimburse policy-holders for the policy-owners' ownership interests in the mutual version of Anthem was the basis of the law-suit that was just settled. The Anthem demutualization was a key step in the formation of the WellPoint behemoth. Its creation was the rationale to make the executives listed above rich. The allegations made in the lawsuit just settled suggest that they earned these huge windfalls on the backs of the policy-holders who at one point thought it was their company, and formerly thought that their insurer was a benign non-profit organization.

A Continuing Record of Ethical Misadventures

Thus, the lawsuit just settled suggests that WellPoint was born in ethically questionable circumstances, and that its creation served more to enrich its hired executives, who may have started as hired leaders of mission-oriented non-profit organizations. So in retrospect maybe it is not so surprising that WellPoint's leadership has continued to generate a series of ethical questions.

Since we began Health Care Renewal, we have noted that the company:

  • settled a RICO (racketeer influenced corrupt organization) law-suit in California over its alleged systematic attempts to withhold payments from physicians (see 2005 post here).
  • subsidiary New York Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield misplaced a computer disc containing confidential information on 75,000 policy-holders (see 2007 story here).
  • California Anthem Blue Cross subsidiary cancelled individual insurance policies after their owners made large claims (a practices sometimes called rescission).  The company was ordered to pay a million dollar fine in early 2007 for this (see post here).  A state agency charged that some of these cancellations by another WellPoint subsidiary were improper (see post here).  WellPoint was alleged to have pushed physicians to look for patients' medical problems that would allow rescission (see post here).  It turned out that California never collected the 2007 fine noted above, allegedly because the state agency feared that WellPoint had become too powerful to take on (see post here). But in 2008, WellPoint agreed to pay more fines for its rescission practices (see post here).  In 2009, WellPoint executives were defiant about their continued intention to make rescission in hearings before the US congress (see post here).
  • California Blue Cross subsidiary allegedly attempted to get physicians to sign contracts whose confidentiality provisions would have prevented them from consulting lawyers about the contracts (see 2007 post here).
  • formerly acclaimed CFO was fired for unclear reasons, and then allegations from numerous women of what now might be called Tiger Woods-like activities surfaced (see post here).
  • announced that its investment portfolio was hardly immune from the losses prevalent in late 2008 (see post here).
  • was sanctioned by the US government in early 2009 for erroneously denying coverage to senior patients who subscribed to its Medicare drug plans (see 2009 post here).
  • settled charges that it had used a questionable data-base (built by Ingenix, a subsidiary of ostensible WellPoint competitor UnitedHealth) to determine fees paid to physicians for out-of-network care (see 2009 post here). 
  • violated state law more than 700 times over a three-year period by failing to pay medical claims on time and misrepresenting policy provisions to customers, according to the California health insurance commissioner (see 2010 post here).
  • exposed confidential data from about 470,000 patients (see 2010 post here) and settled the resulting lawsuit in 2011 (see post here).
  • fired a top executive who publicly apologized for the company's excessively high charges (see 2010 post here).
  • California Anthem subsidiary was fined for systematically failing to make fair and timely payments to doctors and hospitals (see 2010 post here).
  • management was accused of hiding the company's political contributions from the company's own stock-holders (see 2012 posts here and here).
Meanwhile, top hired managers have continued to draw bloated compensation from the company.  For example, as we noted here, current WellPoint CEO Angela Braly got $13.2 million compensation, and received an additional $6.9 million from newly vested restricted stock units in 2011, despite falling company earnings.

Summary: A Company Too Big to Manage Except to Enrich Its Executives

Thus, we have seen an amazing string of incidents suggesting that company leadership has consistently put short-term revenues, and the resulting exaggerated management compensation, before stock-holders' interests, and before patients' interests.  Yet this pattern, so plain above, has largely not been assembled from its component pieces in public other than on Health Care Renewal.  Lack of perception of this pattern may explain why this incredible compilation of ethical missteps has failed to generate any calls for massive revisions in how this company is lead and governed, or perhaps calls to dismantle such a large for-profit company as unmanageable except as a source of nearly unlimited dollars for the enrichment of its top insiders.

True health care reform would require the leaders of health care organizations to uphold the health care mission ahead of their own self-interest, and to be accountable to the organizations' owners, when they exist, and to patients and the public at large.




 well, hello there monday....go easy on us okay....after all, it's summer :)

*images courtesy of style casterwith love from kat, open housecultivate, amber interiors

Mendeley Desktop ~ Attention PubMed Etc. Geeks & Addicts

Are you like me?  Do you have a terabyte sized pile of PDF files on your hard drive?  A zillion studies on a bazillion topics?  Don't remember where you got it from?  Forgot to rename the file when you downloaded it, and now you've got a file named ABCXYZ123whatever.pdf and no clue what it's about?  Sure, you can preview the PDF in Windows.  Sure you can search on the title and find the link quickly enough.  Sure you can be more fastidious about renaming files and organizing them in subfolders.  Oh ... but what if you use more than one computer?  File not there?  Again, sure there are other syncing apps and online drives/services out there.   

But a couple of days ago I found a paper on Mendeley.com and they were touting Mendeley desktop.  I downloaded it and I'm in heaven!!  I've only just begun to explore this, so I haven't put much into mine yet, but below are some screenshots of my current Glyceroneogenesis folder.  Yes, I really am just getting started  with this :-)





In this case, at least I had renamed this PDF something descriptive.  But, for example, that Hanson paper in there was sent to me entitled ForEvelyn.pdf.  So by just dragging and dropping the file into MD, it extracted all this information, including a link to the url.  There are tools for highlighting, notes, etc.  I haven't even begun to explore the syncing and collaborative features of this program ... but this is super exciting for me.  See how it just extracted the real title of the study?  But now I don't even need to bother changing file names, this does it for me and tells me what the file is actually named.  How kewl is that?!   And having the link?  Priceless!!  It's not perfect.  The mark-up tools have some quirks -- hopefully that gets ironed out.  Sometimes it doesn't extract all information.  It's not particularly useful for scanned image PDF's (common for older papers).  But all in all I'm so glad I found this!

Maybe everybody already knew about this or some similar tool,  and I've been living in a cave or something, but thought I'd share this.


 

ZOOM UNIK::UNIK DAN UNIK Copyright © 2012 Fast Loading -- Powered by Blogger