or, Don't Believe What You Hear is the Whole Story.

Remember the story, oh so long ago now, of the lady who sued McDonald's for burning herself on hot coffee? Remember how audacious and ridiculous it sounded, and outrageous when she won the case?

Well let me let you in on a (not so)little (not so) secret. The "News" has a vested interest in making things sound outrageous. With a lot of talk about media bias these days, which definitely exists in both directions depending on the channel, let me tell you what I have discovered.

There is media bias. The bias is toward conflict and controversy.

I heard "the full story" on talk radio about a year ago, and have been meaning to post about it for a while now. So with that, I leave you to read the full story of the (not so) audacious McDonald's coffee lawsuit. Pardon the atrocious web page... But it has the facts!

Some people are not only not the brightest crayons in the box. Some people are raw umber. Dull.

Take this fellow, 22 years old, who breaks into a church to steal instruments, takes a bite of their donuts, and then leaves the evidence... (here)

It's kinda funny to me that he wouldn't think of such a thing. When I have to lick an envelope at work, I actually refer to it as DNA evidence. Too bad this guy hadn't watched as much CSI as I have.

On the other hand, I've been the victim of a break-in of my home where irreplaceable things of value were stolen, and although the police did come and take fingerprints from wherever they could think to, I knew (and the cop probably knew but didn't want to tell me) they would never catch whomever did it. There are just too many of those types of crimes. Besides, in California you probably would have to get permission from the suspect and three priests to run the fingerprints, let alone keep a searchable database on hand for such a need. I highly doubt the system is as quick and effective as on CSI.

Maybe next time I go out of town, I'll leave a box of donuts lying around as insurance.

You have to see these photos. Sheeesh!

British gym replaces dumbbells with human weights
Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:27pm GMT

LONDON (Reuters) - A British gym is trying to add human interest to otherwise dreary workouts by replacing traditional dumbbell weights with human ones. [READ MORE...]

I was listening to some talk radio on the topic of MLK's I Have A Dream Speech and President Obama. I'm part of a generation that never thought a black person COULDN'T be president.

But have we acheived Dr. King's Dream? That's the question I keep hearing. Some say yes, some say we're on our way, some say we have yet to begin. Still some say no, but not because of a belief that America is racist, but because many have gone so far in the opposite direction. We're not judging by the content of anyone's character, because they may be labeled a minority, and we'd be labeled racist to judge at all.

Sure, I do believe there ARE racist people out there, I have actually experienced a tiny taste of that even. But I think its a dying trend. It may have its strongholds, but as every person who got any airtime yesterday pointed out, the inauguration of a man of color into the presidency is evidence that a majority of us don't subscribe to such hate.

So, on to the quote, which I found to be succinct and profound:

You may have heard on the news this week that teens who take virginity pledges are just as likely to engage in premarital sex as other teens. As this article from the Wall Street Journal by William McGurn explains how, if you heard that, you were plain, flat-out lied to. (FYI, grownup words are used in the article.)

Like a Virgin: The Press Take On Teenage Sex

Yes, attitudes do make a difference in behavior.

The chain reaction was something out of central casting. A medical journal starts it off by announcing a study comparing teens who take a pledge of virginity until marriage with those who don't. Lo and behold, when they crunch the numbers, they find not much difference between pledgers and nonpledgers: most do not make it to the marriage bed as virgins.

Like a pack of randy 15-year-old boys, the press dives right in.

"Virginity Pledges Don't Stop Teen Sex," screams CBS News. "Virginity pledges don't mean much," adds CNN. "Study questions virginity pledges," says the Chicago Tribune. "Premarital Abstinence Pledges Ineffective, Study Finds," heralds the Washington Post. "Virginity Pledges Fail to Trump Teen Lust in Look at Older Data," reports Bloomberg. And on it goes.

In other words, teens will be teens, and moms or dads who believe that concepts such as restraint or morality have any application today are living in a dream world. Typical was the lead for the CBS News story: "Teenagers who take virginity pledges are no less sexually active than other teens, according to a new study."

Here's the rub: It just isn't true.

In fact, the only way the study's author, Janet Elise Rosenbaum of Johns Hopkins University, could reach such results was by comparing teens who take a virginity pledge with a very small subset of other teens: those who are just as religious and conservative as the pledge-takers. The study is called "Patient Teenagers? A Comparison of the Sexual Behavior of Virginity Pledgers and Matched Nonpledgers," and it was published in the Jan. 1 edition of Pediatrics.

The first to notice something lost in the translation was Dr. Bernadine Healy, the former head of both the Red Cross and the National Institutes of Health. Today she serves as health editor for U.S. News & World Report. And in her dispatch on this study, Dr. Healy pointed out that "virginity pledging teens were considerably more conservative in their overall sexual behaviors than teens in general -- a fact that many media reports have missed cold."

What Dr. Healy was getting at is that the pledge itself is not what distinguishes these kids from most other teenagers. The real difference is their more conservative and religious home and social environment. As she notes, when you compare both groups in this study with teens at large, the behavioral differences are striking. Here are just a few:

- These teens generally have less risky sex, i.e., fewer sexual partners.

- These teens are less likely to have a teenage pregnancy, or to have friends who use drugs.

- These teens have less premarital vaginal sex.

- When these teens lose their virginity they tend to do so at age 21 -- compared to 17 for the typical American teen.

- And very much overlooked, one out of four of these teens do in fact keep the pledge to remain chaste -- amid much cheap ridicule and just about zero support outside their homes or churches.

Let's put this another way. The real headline from this study is this: "Religious Teens Differ Little in Sexual Behavior Whether or Not They Take a Pledge."

Now, whatever the shock that might occasion at CBS or the Washington Post, it comes as no surprise to parents. Most parents appreciate that a pledge of virginity -- a one-time event that might be made at an emotional moment in a teen's life -- is not some talisman that will magically shield their sons and daughters from the strong and normal desires that grow as they discover their sexuality. What these parents hope to do is direct these desires in a way that recognizes sex as a great gift, which in the right circumstances fosters genuine intimacy between a man and a woman and at its freest offers the possibility of new life.

This is not the prevailing view, of course. And these parents know it. Far from conformists living in a comfortable world where their beliefs are never challenged, these families live in an environment where most everything that is popular -- television, the movies, the Internet -- encourages children to grow up as quickly as possible while adults remain locked in perpetual adolescence.

Nor do these families believe their children are better than other kids. Unlike the majority of health experts and their supporters in the press, however, they don't believe that the proper use of the condom is the be all and end all. For these parents, the good news here is that the striking behavioral differences between the average American teen and the two teen groups in this study show that homes and families still exert a powerful influence.

That, alas, is not something you're likely to read in the headlines. For when it comes to challenging the conventional wisdom on issues of sexuality, the American media suddenly become as coy as a cloistered virgin.

Write to MainStreet@wsj.com

Barring a reprieve, regulations set to take effect next month could force thousands of clothing retailers and thrift stores to throw away trunkloads of children's clothing.

The law, aimed at keeping lead-filled merchandise away from children, mandates that all products sold for those age 12 and younger -- including clothing -- be tested for lead and phthalates, which are chemicals used to make plastics more pliable. Those that haven't been tested will be considered hazardous, regardless of whether they actually contain lead. (read more here...)

Bailout Provides More Mental Health Coverage

Firefighters criticize Giuliani about a bad idea for a fund raising event (his people say they aren't the ones who came up with it). Father and infant die in gang-related shooting. Barry Bonds record ball gets an asterisk. Some more people shot. City bans smoking in private dwellings. A crook of a city councilman gets replaced. We're wrecking the oceans with our trash. Memorial is vandalized. Wildfire, wildfire, wildfire. Ninjas rob gas station (now there's at least an interesting one). Some more people died.


Tell me how this is supposed to make me a "better informed" person?

This is why I hate the news.

Here is a snippet from one of my favorite latest news stories...

Seagull becomes crisp shoplifter

The seagull, nicknamed Sam, has now become so popular that locals have started paying for his crisps.

Shop assistant Sriaram Nagarajan said: "Everyone is amazed by the seagull. For some reason he only takes that one particular kind of crisps."

You really have to see it to believe it! It's the best news story of the week, possibly of the year. :)

Maybe it's because I don't watch a lot of TV, but it seems the compulsory grief session that has accompanied previous anniversaries of the terrible attacks of 9/11 are waning. A Gallup poll released today shows that only 6% of Americans will recognize the anniversay in a formal way, while 23% will not depart from their regular routine. But for those that experienced the events of the day, lost loved ones, or been casualties in the military effort thereafter; for those who truly grieve, my prayers are with you.




On an unfortunately relatednote, I'd like to point out that we'd be better served as Americans if our political leadership would quit the bickering, backstabbing, and general disservice they do to us. Everybody knows how much some people dislike President Bush. (Bush Job Approval Rating Holds Steady at 32%) Well congress is worse! (Historical Low: Just 18% approve of job Congress is doing)

Those who read my blog might remember I talked about this before... Melissa, a friend from high school, was just a baby when her father was murdered... This, from the Skagit Valley Herald:

Everett pleads guilty in 22-year-old murder

MOUNT VERNON — Around 22 years after Randy Soderberg disappeared, someone has officially taken responsibility for slaying the Sedro-Woolley resident.

Against his attorney’s advice, Marcus Everett pleaded guilty to first-degree murder Friday afternoon in Skagit County Superior Court for bludgeoning Soderberg to death in 1984. Everett’s trial was due to start Monday.

Everett, 43, will likely be sentenced to more than 20 years in prison.

Study shows older men may be at risk of fathering children with autism

The Associated Press

Published: September 4, 2006

CHICAGO Men who become fathers in their 40s or older are much more likely to have autistic children than younger dads, a new study released Monday shows, bolstering evidence that genetics contributes to the mental disorder.

The research involved about 130,000 Israeli Jews born in the 1980s. Those fathered by older men were almost six times more likely to have autism or related disorders than those fathered by men younger than 30, and more than one-and-a-half times more likely than children fathered by men ages 30-39.
The mothers' age at childbirth appeared to have little impact on autism, although the researchers said they could not rule out "a possible small effect" from the oldest mothers. Autism experts called the study intriguing but not definitive, and the authors said the results need to be tested in a broader population to see if similar findings would occur in other ethnic groups.
It's not the first time fathers' age has been implicated in autism, but the new research stands out because "it's a strong effect in a carefully designed study," said Dr. Edwin Cook, an autism researcher at University of Illinois-Chicago who was not involved in the study.
The study was released Monday in September's Archives of General Psychiatry.
It is based on biographical information on Israeli boys and girls who at age 17 were being assessed for eligibility to serve in the Israeli military. Among them, 110 had been diagnosed earlier with autism or related disorders which include a less severe condition called Asperger's syndrome. However, most of the affected children in the study had autism and the researchers said their results may not apply to Asperger's or other autism-like disorders.
Lead author Abraham Reichenberg, a researcher at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, called it the first rigorous population-based study to investigate whether a father's age affects the risk of a child developing autism. Researchers from Columbia University and Israeli institutions including Chaim Sheba Medical Center and Hebrew University participated in the research.
Previous research by some of the same authors linked advanced paternal age with lower intelligence scores and with schizophrenia.
Other studies have shown that sperm mutate more often in older men, potentially leading to increased risk for brain abnormalities in their children.
"It's a very interesting, strong study," said Dr. Fred Volkmar, an autism researcher at Yale University who was not involved in the research.
Volkmar said the study is consistent with a prevailing theory that genes are a cause of autism, but he said the results need to be tested to prove the fathers' age was a culprit. For example, the study lacked information on whether the fathers themselves had autism.
Autism is a developmental disorder that involves an impaired ability to socialize and communicate. Symptoms can include repetitive behaviors such as head-banging; avoidance of physical or eye contact with others, and communicating with gestures rather than words. It is more common in boys than in girls and typically is diagnosed in the first few years of life.
Many researchers believe impaired genes are a cause or trigger of autism. Most studies have failed to find evidence to support a persistent belief among some parents that mercury-containing childhood vaccines are to blame.


the original URL for this article is http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/09/04/america/NA_MED_US_Autism_Dads_Age.php