Obat herbal untuk amandel

health care obama care

<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="health care obama care" height="500" src="http://obamacarefacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/healthcare-costs.jpg" title="health care obama care" width="500" />
</div>
<div align="justify">hey, everybody. it's me, ben. and today's question isspecific to the united states. how does the affordable careact work, and what does it do? although its full nameis the patient protection and affordable careact, you've probably heard it just calledthe affordable care act, or obamacare, or the aca. it's called obamacare becausepresident barack obama signed 
it into law on march 23, 2010. but what does it actually do? let's look at the basics. health care in the united stateshas some serious long term issues. first, there are millionsof uninsured people. second, people whodo have insurance tend to pay morefor it than they would in othercomparable countries. 
the aca aims to fix these issuesby making affordable health care available tomore americans. i mean, that's agood idea, right? to do this, the act makessome pretty big changes. but although the act makesome big changes to insurance, these changes phasein over time instead of happening all at once. a lot of things willalso stay the same. for example, if you already havehealth insurance that you're 
happy with, you cankeep it under this law. and children under the age of 26can stay on their parents plan. if you already havemedicaid coverage, then you're goingto stay on that too. or you can if you wish. in fact, manystates are expanding medicaid to cover more people. so now, let's talkabout what's changing. there are several things. 
first there's this thingcalled the individual mandate. most americans willbe required to have some form of health insurance. this is a sweeping change fora country with an estimated 30 million uninsured residents. but how do you enforcesomething like that? by 2014, everyonewithout health insurance will need to pay a small fee. during that year, for instance,the fee is going to be $95 per 
adult, $47.50 per child. the maximum a familywill pay in 2014 is $285. now, those numbers are over thewhole year, not month by month. to make sure that people canfind affordable insurance, the aca creates what are calledhealth insurance marketplaces. these are virtual spaces runby the federal government, or by your state,where customers can see different plansand prices offered by insurance providers. 
so ultimately, thismight allow you to qualify for lowerpremiums, depending on your income andyour family size. and regardless of whatkind of insurance you have, insurers will no longerbe able to deny or revoke coverage forpreexisting conditions. and women won't have to pay morethan men for insurance either. finally, right? insurance will alsocover preventative care. 
so this would bestuff like mammograms, and checkups, andscreenings, and so on. then there's the 80/20 rule. insurers will generally berequired to spend at least 80% of the money theyget from premiums on-- wait for it--actual health care. if your insurer spendstoo much on overhead, then you're goingto receive a rebate. finally, the laws also requirecompanies to publicly justify 
rate increases of over 10%. and they are banned fromimposing lifetime dollar limits on benefits. this act also affectsyour employer, whether you work for a largecompany or a smaller company. a smaller business, onewith less than 50 employees, can visit the small businesshealth options program, or-- get this-- shop. right? 
a government loves an acronym--to compare and purchase affordable health plans. additionally, someof these businesses might be eligiblefor tax credits if they get coveragethrough shop. the rules are a littlebit different for bigger businesses. in 2015, they haveto make what's called an employer sharedresponsibility payment if they 
don't provide insurance meetinga minimum value standard, or if one of theiremployees gets a better deal in the individualmarketplace. since states are implementingthe act in different ways, it's very importantfor you to check on the specific plansof your home state. so that's it. if you'd like to learn morespecifics about the affordable care act, check outwww.healthcare.gov 
for more information. and hey, while you're online? you can always like this videoif you're into liking stuff. if you want to learn more abouteverything from light sabers to the speed of light, youcan subscribe to our videos. and if you want to see somemore videos like right now, and you're just thinking, iwant to see some more videos. then, we've got threeon the side over here. and we'll see you next time. 
</div>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hyMJYhe3GCc?rel=0" frameborder="0"
allowfullscreen></iframe>

health care obama care

hey, everybody. it's me, ben. and today's question isspecific to the united states. how does the affordable careact work, and wha...

health care law repeal

<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="health care law repeal" height="500" src="http://media.salon.com/2016/09/congress-coal-miners.jpeg-1280x960.jpg" title="health care law repeal" width="500" />
</div>
<div align="justify">so far this week there's been lot of discussionabout obamacare. the democrats have met, and they're tryingto come up with ways to protect their signature achievement during the obama years. meanwhile, republicans are meeting tryingto figure out exactly how they're going to repeal this entire law. well, there are some things that republicanscan and cannot do in order to kill obamacare. there's a few things democrats can do to saveit. let's start with the easiest. a full repeal of obamacare. 
is it possible? yes. is it probable? no. because democrats in the senate, though theyare the minority, they can absolutely filibusterer a full repeal. therefore, a full repeal will not happen. the republicans are going a little bit sneakierroute right now. they're trying to tie-in anything in obamacarerelated to budgetary issues, which include 
the tax subsidies for people who cannot affordhealth insurance, they're tying those to budget bills through a process known as reconciliationwhere the budget bills cannot be filibustered. they're simple up and down, yes or no, vote. goes to the president, he signs it, thosecan be repealed. typically, those pieces of legislation shouldnot and cannot be included in a budget bill. it has to go through something known as thebyrd law, b-y-r-d, and then that has to be decided by a senate parliamentarian. if the parliamentarian actually says, "no. you can't include those," the republicansthen have the option to fire the senate parliamentarian, 
hire a new guy who's going to give them approval,so then they'll be able to do that. here's the thing, the best part of the affordablecare act is the condition, or the preexisting conditions, stipulation that says you cannotbe denied health insurance if you have a preexisting medical condition. republicans can't touch that because a democraticfilibuster will keep it in place. they can, however, make health insurance unaffordablefor millions of people by repealing all of those tax subsidies, and in effect, thosetax subsidies are paid for increased taxes on the wealthy which is going to give thewealthy a tax break of $346 billion over the next 10 years. 
that's what this is all of about. this has nothing to do with health insuranceor wanting a better plan. republicans are simply trying to give thewealthy another tax break. that's what the whole repeal of obamacareis about. that's why they're only wanting to touch thesesubsidies issues and the tax issues, because that's all they care about. what's going to happen is that's going tomake people unable to afford this health insurance. here's another side product of what couldhappen if they repeal the subsidies but leave in the preexisting condition requirement,healthy people will simply not buy insurance. 
they won't need it. if they get sick, they then can buy healthinsurance. they can't be denied. then the insurance company has to pay. it's going to result in higher premiums foreverybody else. huge financial losses for the insurance industrywhich is going to result in ever higher premiums. bottom line is that there's no way to do thisguys. we have a law in place. is it perfect? 
god no. why not just improve it? the answer is because republicans don't wantto. again, it's for two reasons. one, they want to give the wealthy that massivetax break. two, this was created by democrats, so itneeds to go away. it's spite and loyalty to the 1%. that is 100% what is behind the republicanspush to repeal obamacare. they do have a couple tools to do this with. 
unfortunately, when 20 million people areno longer able to afford health insurance, the republicans are going to have to own that. they're going to have to answer for that inthe midterm elections. that's not going to end well for them. even worse, it's not going to end well forthe 20 million americans who find themselves without health insurance because the republicanswanted to give a tax break to their wealthy donors. </div>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FYaZeQohuhg?rel=0" frameborder="0"
allowfullscreen></iframe>

health care law repeal

so far this week there's been lot of discussionabout obamacare. the democrats have met, and they're tryingto come up with ways to...

health care alternatives

<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="health care alternatives" height="500" src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Y_j7RycjGYY/maxresdefault.jpg" title="health care alternatives" width="500" />
</div>
<div align="justify">dr janet beilby: how do you prepare health students to work in demanding, complex and often emotional situations? the best way is to place them in real-life clinical situations, or at least simulatethese as closely as possible. voice over: unfortunately, clinical placements are limited and very costly. alternatively, such as using trained actors to role-play are also expensive and limited to training small numbers of students. student: â€œhello jim, what brings you here today?â€ jim: â€œmy memory isnâ€™t what it used to be.â€ 
student: "okay well we can help with some..." voice over: the solution is the empathy simulator; a world-first avatar-based patient simulator designed to train students in clinical empathy. itâ€™s the result of decades of collaborative research by curtin and george washington universities,now brought to life by citrine technologies in america, a world leader in computer simulation. meet jim, a digital avatar, looking very much like an elderly retired farmer. student: "...your communication or your memory." the avatar has around 50 verbal and non-verbal 
responses that are currently, controlledby a trainer. the traineeâ€™s interaction can be recordedfor self-reflection and feedback. the empathy simulator is a cost-effective way of providing comparable standards from trainee to trainee. application of this compelling marriage of scientific rigour and cutting edge technology, has applications beyond the health care sector. jim: "goodbye now." student: "seeya." voice over: future developmentswill include voice recognition software, and a range of avatars, so the practice is portable and tailored to a variety of contexts for real life learning. 
currently there are few commercial competitors in this software space which has an estimated market value of morethan $400 million in the next few years. dr janet beilby: every year, there are more students and yet less resources to train them to the standard the community expects and deserves. our avatar may be â€˜virtual' but the learning is very real. </div>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FF-hMWrpmfw?rel=0" frameborder="0"
allowfullscreen></iframe>

health care alternatives

dr janet beilby: how do you prepare health students to work in demanding, complex and often emotional situations? the best way is to pla...

health care act

<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="health care act" height="500" src="https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/image/acacbonumbers_1.jpg" title="health care act" width="500" />
</div>
<div align="justify">good morning hank, it's tuesday- what is thisweird, non-airport background? anyway, yesterday was the five year anniversary of the signingof the affordable care act, widely known as obamacare, which made me wonder if it's, ya'know,like, uh... worked. so here's the summary of what i found. inthe united states in 2009 more of my tax dollars went to healthcare than would if i lived injapan, or the united kingdom, or australia, and in exchange for all of that money we didnot get the universal health care that people in all of those countries enjoy. five years later, in 2014, we spent aboutthe same percentage of our gdp on health care, and we still don't have universal health carebut we do have less un-universal health care. 
by the way, i'm going to oversimplify herea lot. for better information, you should check out "healthcare triage". so here's how it worked in the halcyon, pre-obamacaredays of 2009: the government provided insurance to elderly people, through medicare, and alsoto some poor people, through medicaid. many other people got insurance through their jobsor paid for it themselves, but this still left a lot of people out: like there were44 million people without insurance. this was obviously a problem for those 44million people, but it was also a problem for the rest of us because we did have a kindof universal healthcare in the united states: like when uninsured people got sick and wentto the hospital, they did receive care and, 
if later, they couldn't pay for that care,those costs would be absorbed, either by the rest of us paying higher prices for healthcare,or else by taxes, because the government had to subsidize public hospitals. but it wasn't really universal healthcare,because you can't, like, go into an emergency department and get your week's supply of insulinif you're diabetic. so in the us we didn't, and still don't, have real universal healthcare,we have, like, if-you-get-shot,-we-will-try-to-patch-that-up-for-you universal healthcare. and this system was astonishingly inefficient.like, we spent more than 17% of our total gross domestic product on healthcare. in countrieslike canada and france and australia and the 
netherlands, they spend less than 10% of theirgdp on healthcare, and they get similar, or in many cases better, health outcomes. also, back in 2009, insurers could deny youaccess to healthcare insurance if you had a "pre-existing condition": a phrase intentionallyso broad that it encompassed, like, everything. for instance, henry reich of "minute physics"was once denied insurance because he had the pre-existing condition of tinnitus, or ringingin his ear. the only way to get around the pre-existingcondition clause was if you worked for a big company, you could get insurance through them.and that, of course, incentivized people to work for big companies when they might otherwisebe doing different kinds of work, like...i 
don't know, making "minute physics" videos. so, the affordable care act sought to makethe labor market less bananas; decrease health related bankruptcies, the number one causeof bankruptcy in the united states; and, ultimately, to insure those 44 million people withoutinsurance, while, at the same time, over time decreasing the amount of money we spend onhealthcare. it was going to solve the access problem bycreating these healthcare exchanges where private companies could compete for people'sbusiness, but they couldn't discriminate based on gender or pre-existing conditions. the law also would expand medicaid, whichwould get insurance to more poor people, and 
it required companies with more than 50 employeesto provide affordable insurance to their employees, or else pay a gigantic penalty. this would all be paid for, more than paidfor, hopefully, by cost control measures. these range from getting tougher on medicarefraud, to incentivizing hospitals to keep elderly patients healthy so they don't getreadmitted to the hospital. there's also a new tax on, like, tanning salons,and an increase in the medicare payroll tax for income over $250,000 a year. but has it worked? yes - insofar as things are better than before.and also...no - insofar as we are nowhere 
close to a path to sustainable healthcarespending. so the aca was phased in slowly, and the realmeat of it didn't get going until 2014. you'll recall the roll-out of the healthcare exchangesin late 2013 was...a complete disaster. the website, healthcare.gov, was plagued withglitches and really just...didn't work. admittedly, buying private insurance in theus before the obamacare exchanges was arguably even worse than healthcare.gov. but it wasjust terrible. i remember trying to sign up in those early months and it was truly awful.what has not been widely reported is that, now, it's really easy. in general, the exchanges now work very welland more than 12 million americans, including 
me, have signed up for insurance through them.insurance premiums are going up, on average, more slowly than they did before the exchanges,and more insurers are participating, which means there will be more competition in themarket. plus, the law is costing less than expectedbecause fewer employers than expected have dropped fewer people than expected off theirinsurance. and, it doesn't seem to be negatively affecting the job market. it certainly led to more freedom in the labormarket. for instance, sarah green could leave her insurance-providing museum job to startan art show with pbs digital. and certainly for people who can get insurancenow who couldn't before, either because of 
pre-existing conditions or because they couldn'tafford without the government subsidies, the aca is a really big deal. and none of thecollapse of the healthcare system or "death panel" predictions have come to pass. instead, uninsurance rates in the u.s. havedropped dramatically, and early signs indicate that at least in some sectors the law is improvinghealth. by the way, sources for all this stuff in the doobly-doo. on the other hand, many millions of peoplestill don't have insurance and under-insurance, where people technically have insurance butstill end up with medical bills they can't afford is a huge problem. 
and while the growth of our healthcare costshas slowed, we still spend over 17 percent of our gdp on healthcare. most other developedcountries spend far less than that and still have citizens who live longer and healthierlives than americans. and before you say that's because americanseat or drink or smoke or whatever more than british people: no, that's simply not true!have you ever met an actual british person? i don't mean like jack or finn or charlie,i mean a real one. so yeah, if nothing changes, healthcare costsare still going to crush us in the long run, because the thing about the aca is that it'snot particularly radical. like, the 12 million people who got insurance through the exchanges,that's less than 4% of americans. 
for the vast majority of people, very littlehas changed, and that means that the underlying problems haven't really changed. we spendway too much on healthcare, and we get too little in return. to take that seriously would require radicalchange: government interventions like price controls, for instance. or a single-payerhealthcare system, or a truly free market system where if you show up to the hospitalwith a gunshot wound and you can't pay for treatment, you don't get treatment. so hank, the old system definitely wasn'tworking, and the aca is working, in so far as its job is to get health insurance to peoplewho don't have it without disturbing the health 
insurance ecosystem for most people. but the aca didn't really replace an existingsystem so much as it grew on top of it. now the fact that so many insurers are bringingmore plans to the exchanges indicates that probably the aca will continue to work, unlessthe supreme court eviscerates it in a few months. but the aca has not and will not solve thelong-term healthcare spending challenge that we face. neither, of course, would repealingthe law, if anything the the healthcare spending problem was worse before obamacare. ratherthan the endless discussions of repeal or defend we should be frank about the choicesbefore us. 
as healthcare economist and healthcare triagehost aaron carroll told me, trade-offs are messy. you can get reform more easily andmore cleanly, but not necessarily while preserving the private market. you can make healthcarecheaper, but not without imposing even more regulation. you can insure more people and make it costless for everyone, but not without spending more tax dollars. hank, healthcare policyexperts across the political spectrum seem to acknowledge this complex reality. it'sour job now to make our politicians acknowledge it too. again, for more information and lots of othervideos about healthcare, please check out 
healthcare triage. hank, thanks for reminding me last week aboutthe many pleasures of being in a crowd, i will see you on friday. </div>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JZkk6ueZt-U?rel=0" frameborder="0"
allowfullscreen></iframe>

health care act

good morning hank, it's tuesday- what is thisweird, non-airport background? anyway, yesterday was the five year anniversary of the si...

health and care

<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="health and care" height="500" src="https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/health-care-tags-cloud-26761643.jpg" title="health and care" width="500" />
</div>
<div align="justify">hi, i'm katrina szish for howdini. today we're going to find outhow to get a healthy mouth in just three steps. to do that, i'm joined by dr. briankantor, cosmetic dentist. nice to see you, brian. nice to see you. how are you? i'm great. now, i want to dive right in, though. 
what are some of the keys to maintaininga healthy mouth? you know, today, having a healthy mouthis more important than ever. actually having a healthy mouth canlead to having a healthier body. it's more important than ever totake good care of your mouth. so what i tell all of my patientsis to have three easy steps-- a good diet, see your dentist twicea year regularly for cleanings and checkups, and to havegood oral hygiene. ok, now let's focus a littlebit on good oral hygiene-- brushing, flossing, mouthwash. 
is there an order? well, the most important thing, yes,is brushing twice a day, flossing twice a day, and rinsingwith mouthwash. i say brushing and flossing, you canpick whichever one you want to do. and then you should end with rinsingwith mouthwash because it washes it away and actually leaves youwith fresh minty breath. i love fresh minty breath. ok, toothbrushes. some people swear by their electrictoothbrush, and they say it does a 
better job than a manual toothbrush. is that true? well, actually, whateverworks for you. i say to the patient, whateverworks for you, you can use, manual or electric. the beauty of the electric toothbrushis it does some of the work for you. there's a timer. it makes sure you brush each quadrant--there are four quadrants-- for 30 seconds each. 
so it times you, and at two minutes, itbeeps, so it knows you've actually done a thorough job. the manual toothbrush you actually haveto do manually with no timer. oh no! it requires a little more effort, butif you feel comfortable with it, that's great. but the most important thing, no matterif it's manual, electric, battery powered, is the bristles. it has to have soft bristles. 
there's soft, medium, and hard. so when you're shopping,you should look for-- i guess it says soft bristles? soft, yes, absolutely. it's imperative. speaking of shopping for tooth-brushingproducts, toothpaste. there are so many out there. does it really matterwhich one i choose? yes. 
the most important ingredient intoothpaste is it has fluoride. fluoride will actually-- it helpsremineralize the enamel, so it makes the teeth healthier. so the most important ingredientin the toothpaste is fluoride. most toothpastes have fluoride,but make sure it has it. there are a lot of other ingredientsthat some toothpastes have, and you have to pick and choose whatworks best for you. there are some that a minty fresh. for people with bad breath, theyget more of a minty taste. 
there are some that hasantisensitivity. for people with sensitive teeth or gumsthat have receded, they want a toothpaste that actually helpsdecrease the sensitivity. there's also whitening toothpastes,which help remove surface stain a little better than theother toothpastes. so you really have to seewhat works best for you. so shop around a little bit. try them out. i would say buy a few. 
see what works best for you, what tastesbest, what you like to use, and go with that toothpaste. ok, now when it comes to taste, i thinkof mouthwash, and we love the residual effect, thatfresh minty breath. but sometimes, mouthwashes burn. now, why do they burn, anddo they need to burn? does that mean they'redoing a good job? no, the burning does not meanit's doing a good job. the burning is the alcoholin the mouthwash. 
it's not an active ingredient. all it does is it's a bindingagent for the mouthwash. ok, fantastic. now, flossing, of course, isone of those key things. and it goes way beyond just removingthose food particles from between the teeth. flossing is imperative. the teeth have a lot of surface area, alot of hard-to-get places, and food gets trapped all over. 
and you have to really get all the foodout, because the food accumulates bacteria, and the bacteria causebad breath and decay. so flossing actually gets in between theteeth and gets the food particles out, and it also getsunderneath the gums. now, there's different types of floss,and you can use what's best for you. there's a waxed floss. people with very tight contacts, so inthe back of your mouth, the posterior, some of those molars are really tighttogether, and it's hard to get regular floss in there. 
so that person should use waxedfalse because the wax actually gets in there easier. it slips in there, and it'seasier to get through. so again, you should try differenttypes of floss and see what works best for you. ok, now flossing, though, of course,some people think, eh, i can do it once a week. but you say twice a day for flossing. the three most important parts ofyour oral hygiene is having-- 
brushing twice a day-- minimum-- flossing twice a day, and rinsing withmouth rinse twice a day as well. ok, now, of course, one of the mostimportant parts is coming to see the dentist. how often shouldwe come see you? twice a year. if you have the best oral hygiene in theworld, you still have to come see a dentist. it's important to have aprofessional cleaning and to get examined by a dentist. there are a lotof infections and diseases that actually show signs in the oral cavitybefore it spreads elsewhere-- 
oral cancer, leukemia, hiv. these allshows signs and symptoms in the mouth. so the dentist is almost like adetective and can detect some of these symptoms before it becomes a problem. ok, well, thanks so much forjoining us, dr. kantor. i think i'm ready to go floss. how about you? thanks. thank you. to recap, you need to get a goodtoothbrush, an electric, like this 
one, or there's lower-cost options, likethis battery powered or manual one, and change them outevery three months. toothpaste. the must-haves are cavityfighting with fluoride. but today you can also get toothpaste towhiten, to fight gingivitis, or for sensitive teeth. so talk to your dentist about yourneeds and spend a little time in-store or online. try a few out and see whatworks best for you. 
the floss. remember to floss below the gumline where the bacteria live. mouthwash. it can do more than justfreshen your breath. it can help kill germs that causeplaque, gingivitis, and bad breath. use it twice a day, morning and night. on behalf of crest, i'm katrinaszish for howdini. for more information, checkout the website. </div>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aOmd00dE6mI?rel=0" frameborder="0"
allowfullscreen></iframe>

health and care

hi, i'm katrina szish for howdini. today we're going to find outhow to get a healthy mouth in just three steps. to do that, i...

health & care

<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="health & care" height="500" src="http://manicapost.co.zw/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/health-at-work.jpg" title="health & care" width="500" />
</div>
<div align="justify">10 health myths people still believe 10) myth: microwaves kill the nutrients infoods cooking food in the microwave can actuallybe one of the best ways to retain the vitamins and minerals in food. this is because microwaving exposes fruitand vegetables to heat for a small amount of time. it also requires very little water,which allows the food to gently steam from the inside, preventing overcooking. microwaving can even enhance the nutritionof some foods. it makes the antioxidants in tomatoes and carrots more available to ourbodies, for example, while making the biotin 
in eggs more digestible. source: cnn 9) myth: the five second rule the five second rule states that food droppedon the floor is safe from harmful germs if picked up within 5 seconds. in a scientific study by jillian clarke, gummybears were dropped on surfaces that were covered with bacterium e. coli. the study found thatthe e. coli contaminated the gummy bears within five seconds. it has also been discoveredthat just 10 cells or less of some strains of e. coli are enough to cause severe illness- or even death - in people with low immune 
systems. source: discover magazine, the guardian 8) myth: carrots help you see in the dark the vitamin a present in carrots is good foreye health, but the myth that eating carrots can improve vision gained popularity duringww2. during the war, the british government developedsecret radar technology, which allowed royal air force planes to pinpoint and thereforeshoot down german planes before they reached england. to keep the radar technology under wraps,propaganda was released stating that eating 
carrots enabled pilots and civilians to seein the dark. source: smithsonian mag 7) myth: orange juice is healthy nutritionally, store bought orange juice isnâ€™tmuch better than soda. despite orange juice being advertised as fresh,healthy, and packed with vitamins, it is in fact heavily processed, in order to maintainits shelf life. orange juice brands such as tropicana preservetheir juice by removing all of the oxygen from the freshly squeezed juice. however,this process also removes all of the natural flavor of the juice, which is then replacedwith flavor packs engineered by perfumers. 
to further enhance this flavor, many popularfruit juice brands add more sugar than a serving of coca-cola, and studies have found thatfruit juice is associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. source: the atlantic, the guardian 6) myth: muscles turn into fat when you donâ€™texercise the idea that unused muscles turn into fatis impossible, as muscle and fat are two distinct tissues that never convert into each other. when people stop exercising, muscles beginto shrink, creating more space for the bodyâ€™s fat to grow into. 
usually when people stop exercising, theycontinue to consume the same amount of calories as when they were training. this means thatrather than using up the excess stored energy, the body transforms energy into fat, givingthe illusion that a six-pack has literally turned into a flabby belly. source: ny times 5) myth: sugar makes children hyperactive after eating sugary foods, children are thoughtto experience a â€˜sugar rushâ€™, which makes them hyperactive. however, psychologists believe that the â€˜sugarrushâ€™ is in fact just the natural high spirits 
of children when they get together. it ismerely a coincidence that many events in which children are hyperactive happen to includecakes and sweets. because of the â€˜sugar rushâ€™ myth, manyparents interpret their childrenâ€™s behavior as being hyperactive after eating sugar, becausethey believe the myth to be fact. source: new scientist 4) myth: we should eat like cavemen the palaeolithic [pay-lee-oh-lith-ick] dietis based on the idea that the human digestive system is unable to cope with a modern diet,and therefore we should only eat the meat, fish, nuts, and berries that were availableto our hunter-gatherer ancestors. 
however, biologists argue that humans areconstantly evolving. one such relatively recent genetic change found in humans is the developmentof lactase persistence, which has enabled modern adults to tolerate milk. meanwhile, studies have found that those whofollow the palaeolithic diet struggle to reach the recommended daily amounts of calcium,iron and fiber. source: bbc 3) myth: carbs make you fat when people cut out carbs from their dietand lose weight, this can be attributed to the high-calorie ingredients that are oftenmixed in or eaten with the carbs that have 
also been cut out, such as butter, cheese,cream, sugar, and oil. gram for gram, carbohydrates contain fewerthan half the calories of fat. weight gain is determined not by having a diet high infat or carbs, but by consuming too many calories. in reality, eating carbs can actually helppeople lose weight, as the high fiber found in carb foods help to bulk out a meal andmake you feel full. source: nhs 2) myth: fasting rids the body of toxins there is no medical basis to support the ideathat prolonged fasting and detoxing diets can cleanse our bodies of environmental toxins. 
our liver, kidneys, skin, and lungs are constantlyworking to eliminate environmental toxins from our body on their own. there is currentlyno known way to improve these bodily functions in an already healthy body. studies have shown that prolonged fastingis actually damaging to the body, leading to vitamin deficiency and weight loss. source: huffington post, the guardian 1) myth: multivitamins help you live longer almost half of the us population take vitaminsupplements, with multivitamins being the most popular. 
however, research has shown that if you arehealthy, taking multivitamins and high dose antioxidants may actually be killing you. taking vitamins and minerals as supplementscan essentially cause our cells to overdose and prevent them from absorbing the mineralsthey actually need. for example, an excess amount of vitamin ais linked to increasing lung cancer in smokers, while excess zinc is linked to reduced immunesystem function. source: bbc, forbes </div>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/F8dvQxFSiUY?rel=0" frameborder="0"
allowfullscreen></iframe>

health & care

10 health myths people still believe 10) myth: microwaves kill the nutrients infoods cooking food in the microwave can actuallybe one of ...

government healthcare plans

<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="government healthcare plans" height="500" src="http://naplesherald.com/wp-content/uploads/Health-Overhaul-Insur-NH.jpg" title="government healthcare plans" width="500" />
</div>
<div align="justify">mr. carney: so much -- so much to talk about.hello, everyone. welcome back from a holiday weekend. i hope you had a great three daysoff. before i take your questions, let me begin with a couple of items. first, we are pleased to announce that thepresident will address this year's annual aipac policy conference in washington, d.c.,on sunday, march 4. the president welcomes this opportunity to speak to the strengthof the special bonds between israel and the united states. as you know and has been previouslyannounced, the president has a bilateral meeting with prime minister netanyahu on march 5th,the day after. and then also, if i could give you a readoutof the president's call this morning with 
chancellor merkel of germany. the presidentand german chancellor angela merkel spoke by phone this morning to discuss the latestdevelopments concerning the financial situation in the eurozone. the president thanked thechancellor for her leadership, and welcomed last night's agreement in europe on a newrescue program for greece to help reduce its debt to sustainable levels. the presidentand the chancellor agreed that the planned eu fiscal pact, recent actions by the europeancentral bank, and reforms by spain and italy have also been positive steps in addressingthe eurozone crisis. the president and the chancellor also discussed preparations forthe upcoming g8 summit, and agreed that the emphasis there should be on growth and jobs. 
those are my top-of-the-briefing announcements.i'd be happy to take a few questions. ben. q thanks, jay. two topics please. can youtell us, did the president have any personal reaction to the news of the korans being burnedat the u.s. military base in afghanistan? mr. carney: i have not discussed that withhim. i'm confident that he is aware of it and been briefed on it. i know that this isan issue we're following closely. general allen and secretary panetta have both madestatements this morning, and i can only echo what they say, which is that we apologizeto the afghan people and disapprove of such conduct in the strongest possible terms. thiswas a deeply unfortunate incident that does 
not reflect the great respect our militaryhas for the religious practices of the afghan people. our military leaders have apologized,as i mentioned, for these unintentional actions, and isaf is undertaking an investigation tounderstand what happened and to ensure that steps are taken so that incidents like thisdo not happen again. q do you know if president obama plans tocall president karzai on this? mr. carney: i don't have any calls to announce.the president did speak with president karzai yesterday on issues of reconciliation. q we're reporting that the koran were removedfrom a library in a jail there because detainees were using them to exchange extremely secretmessages. do you have any comment on that? 
mr. carney: i would refer you to isaf or tothe defense department for specifics about that matter. q and just kind of more broadly on this, fromthe white house perspective, is this stunning that this event, this kind of incident stillhappens at all? mr. carney: i donâ€™t have -- i donâ€™t knowenough about it to provide that kind of context. i would simply say that itâ€™s regrettable.it does not represent the views of our military, and it certainly does not represent the conductof our men and women in uniform, or our general respect for the religious practices and beliefsof the afghan people. q thanks for that. i just wanted to ask youalso about something the president said today. 
in the payroll tax cut extension context,he was pressing congress to take action on other matters and said that congress needsto make the buffett rule a reality. and the way he framed it seemed to suggest that thisis something before congress right now like the small business tax cuts and so forth.but the white house isnâ€™t actually asking for the buffett rule to be put into law rightnow, is it? i mean, thatâ€™s a principle for tax reform. are you asking them to act now? mr. carney: well, it is a principle for overallindividual tax reform. he is calling on congress to make it a reality within the context oftax reform. the overall principle should be adhered to as we look at issues of the balancewe have in our tax code going forward. we 
have a -- as you know, the bush tax cuts expireat the end of the year. this president believes that, short of overall tax reform, that themiddle-income tax cuts need to be extended, made permanent. thatâ€™s long been his position. heâ€™s opposed to the extension again of thehigher-income tax cuts, which we simply cannot afford. and the presidentâ€™ overall approachto this is informed in part by the buffett principle, by the buffett rule, that millionairesand billionaires should not be paying a lower effective tax rate than hardworking, averagefolks out there. q but heâ€™s not asking congress to turn thatinto a law right now, is he? mr. carney: well, i think if you -- it dependson how -- what congressâ€™ approach is to 
issues of the tax code this year. if theyaddress income tax, individual income tax, then they ought to ensure that the buffettrule is made law, if you will, through that practice -- through that legislation. yes. q jay, on the greek debt crisis, does theadministration believe that the europeans have done enough to solve that crisis anddo you believe that thatâ€™s reduced the risk of spillover from the european debt crisisfrom hindering the recovery here? mr. carney: alister, i would say that theeuropeans have taken important steps to deal with the crisis. that was reflected in thepresidentâ€™s telephone conversation with 
the german chancellor. it also remains the case that additional stepsshould be taken, and we encourage our european friends and allies to take those steps tostrengthen the firewall, to ensure that the reforms that have been taking place in countrieswithin the eurozone are furthered and carried out in a way that helps ease the situation.so progress still needs to be made, and we will continue to work with our european friendsand allies to do that, and to offer advice and counsel based on our own experience withthese kinds of issues. as you know, certainly, secretary geithnerhas spent a lot of time in recent months interacting with his counterparts in europe, discussingthese various issues and offering his perspective 
based on his experience here in the unitedstates. q on one other topic, mr. donilon visitedjerusalem over the weekend. can you talk about the message that he took there? was he thereto try and persuade the israelis to give sanctions more time and talk them out of taking militaryaction against iran? and did his -- was he persuasive on that issue? mr. carney: mr. donilon, the national securityadvisor, was in israel, discussing security matters and our important relationship withisrael, and specifically iran; discussing the fact that israel and the united statesshare the same objective, which is to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon; anddiscussing the fact that the approach that 
this administration has taken has led to asituation where iran is isolated as never before, where it is under pressure economicallyas never before, where there is an international consensus around the idea that it is -- theproblem here is iranian bad behavior, their refusal to live up to their internationalobligations. now, we feel as iâ€™ve said and others havesaid, as, most importantly, the president has said, that there is time and space fordiplomacy to work, for the effective sanctions to result in a change in iranian behavior,an agreement by iran to live up to its obligations, to engage in negotiations and resolve thismatter peacefully. we do not, of course, as weâ€™ve said manytimes take any option off the table. and that 
was the context of the discussions that mr.donilon had with his counterparts in israel. jake, then iâ€™ll move back. yes. q i was wondering if you have any reaction-- republicans are -- i know you havenâ€™t said that youâ€™ll be tapping the strategicpetroleum reserve, but you have said itâ€™s on the table. the president did it last summer.republicans have legislation that would tie the presidentâ€™s hands, would make him haveto okay the keystone pipeline in order for him to be able to tap the strategic petroleumreserve. and iâ€™m wondering if you have a reaction to that. mr. carney: well, i'll make a couple of pointson that. in terms of keystone, as you all 
know, the history here is pretty clear. andthe fact is, is that because republicans decided to play politics with keystone, their actionessentially forced the administration to deny the permit process because they insisted ona timeframe within which it was impossible to appropriately approve the pipeline. therewasn't even an alternate route proposed yet through nebraska, an alternate that was deemednecessary based on the request of many in nebraska, including the republican governor. so the fact that the process ended the wayit did in terms of that permit request is wholly the responsibility of the republicanswho insisted on playing politics with the payroll tax cut extension back at the endof last year. 
going forward, let's just talk a little bitabout oil prices. there are no magic solutions to rising oil prices and the pain that americansfeel at the pump. this is a -- the fact is, is that the president is very aware of theimpact that the global price of oil has on families. and this is not something that thisadministration discovered or rediscovers every spring, as some politicians do. as you'reaware, jake, oil production in the united states has increased every year that thispresident has been in office. and right now -- q is that all because of his actions? isn'tthat -- some of that because of the previous administration? 
mr. carney: well, it is now a combinationof both. and the fact is, is that american oil production is at its highest now thanit has been in eight years. moreover -- and this goes to our actions -- over the pastthree years we've opened millions of new acres for oil and gas exploration. as part of ourfocus on continuing to expand responsible domestic production, last month the presidentdirected his administration to open more than 75 percent of our potential offshore oil andgas reserves -- resources, including a 38-million-acre lease sale in the gulf of mexico scheduledfor this summer, which could produce up to 1 billion barrels of oil and 4 trillion cubicfeet of natural gas. and then, also, let's step back. when youlook at this as a long-term issue and not 
magic solutions that politicians propose inthe spring and forget about come summer and fall, this president put into place historicfuel efficiency standards, that will more than nearly double the efficiency of the vehicleswe drive over the next decade. and that alone will save american families $1.7 trillionat the pump, and cut oil consumption by 12 million billion barrels. ** the president is also committed to -- i mean,he takes an all-of-the-above approach. we've approved new nuclear reactor development -- firsttime i believe in 30 years. we are focused on increasing domestic oil and gas production.but we're also focused on developing alternative sources of fuel; whether they're biofuelsor wind and solar, alternative energy is another 
means by which we can reduce our relianceon foreign oil, reduce our vulnerability because of global oil -- changes in the global priceof oil. that's the kind of approach we have to take to ensure our economic future. q give your reaction to republicans tying-- trying to tie -- mr. carney: i don't have reaction to a specificproposed piece of legislation, or even any legislation that's been submitted now. i wouldsimply point you to the actions that this president is taking to increase domestic oilproduction, increase domestic gas production, reduce our reliance on foreign sources ofenergy, and suggest to you that that's the right approach, and that this record -- therecord the president has here is -- speaks 
for itself. q how can you say you have an all-of-the-aboveapproach if the president turned down the keystone pipeline? and you blame the republicansfor making a political -- mr. carney: but the president didn't turndown the keystone pipeline. there was a process in place with long precedent, run out of thestate department because of the issue of a pipeline crossing an international boundary,that required an amount of time for proper view after an alternate route was deemed necessarythrough nebraska, at the request of the republican governor of nebraska and other stakeholdersin nebraska and the region, that needed to take its -- that needed to play out to bedone appropriately. you can't review and approve 
a pipeline, the route for which doesn't evenexist. the republicans were the ones, unfortunately,who decided, because they were looking for scalps, i guess, or looking for wins in asituation where somehow they found themselves on the wrong side of cutting taxes for 160million americans last december -- they decided to play politics with this decision and attachit to the payroll tax cut extension. that essentially -- even though it had been madeclear by the state department that doing so would make it impossible for them to conducta review responsibly, they did it anyway, knowing what the result would be. q i don't want to relitigate the whole thing.the republicans say that the president was 
playing politics first, by delaying a decisionuntil after the election. mr. carney: well, i appreciate that and wehave been through this. but i would note that the delay was the result of a decision madeto honor the concerns of those in nebraska, including the republican governor, who feltthat the proposed pipeline associated with the permit request ran through a portion ofnebraska that would threaten the aquifer -- threaten the water supply in nebraska. the decisionwas then made to delay approval, delay the process to allow for examination of alternateroutes. \ that's the way the process should work. itis unfortunate that the process was artificially halted because of the decision to play politicswith the payroll tax cut extension. 
kristen. q jay, thanks. as you know, this weekend therewere fresh calls from senators mccain, graham, and some others to arm the opposition movementin syria. i know the white house has said consistently that this is not something thatthey are currently considering seriously, but given these fresh calls, might you startto reconsider? mr. carney: well, kristen, i appreciate thequestion. we still believe that a political solution is what's needed in syria. we don'twant to take actions that would contribute to the further militarization of syria becausethat could take the country down a dangerous path. but we don't rule out additional measuresthat -- working with our international partners 
-- that the international community mighttake if the international community should wait too long and not take the kind of actionthat needs to be taken to ensure that assad steps aside, to ensure that a peaceful democratictransition can take place in syria. so iâ€™m not ruling out potential future actions,but there is an opportunity that still exists we believe for a peaceful transition to occurin syria. and we don't want to contribute to the further militarization there. q also on the issue of syria, the internationalcommittee of the red cross is calling for a daily, two-hour cease-fire so that it candeliver humanitarian aid. whatâ€™s the latest information that you have about that situation?and how concerned is the white house that 
aid is not getting to the people who needit most there? mr. carney: well, we remain -- we are veryconcerned about the humanitarian situation in syria. we support calls for cease-firesto allow for the provision of humanitarian supplies to syrians who desperately need it. the fact is the reprehensible actions takenby the assad regime, the brutal violence perpetrated by the syrian leader against his own peoplehas led us to this situation where basic supplies, humanitarian supplies are in -- are very scarce,and therefore action needs to be taken. so we would certainly support the calls for thosekinds of cease-fires. q some reporters on the ground have lookedat the situation and said that it seems to 
be moving toward a civil war. in fact, onereporter said that itâ€™s careening toward an all-out civil war. is that how the whitehouse sees the situation? mr. carney: well, thereâ€™s no question thatthere is an intense level of violence, largely one-sided, because of the brutal attacks bythe syrian forces against the syrian people in certain parts of the country. the fact is, as weâ€™ve seen, the assad regimedoes not control the entire country, is gradually losing control of parts of the country. webelieve that we are in a situation where the international community needs to act in orderto allow for the transition from assad to a more democratic future for syria to takeplace before the situation becomes too chaotic. 
so that's why we were so disappointed in thefailure of the united nations security council to pass that resolution that was vetoed bytwo members. i would point you to the general assemblyresolution and the enormous support for that resolution. the opposition to it was minimaland included countries that certainly can't claim to be friends of the syrian people. q would you use the term "civil war"? mr. carney: i wouldnâ€™t characterize it thatway at this time, but thereâ€™s no question that the situation continues to get worse.and as long as assad shows no regard for the very people he purports to govern, the situationwill continue to get more dire. 
yes, sir. q two quick topics. one, the white house hasspoken out about congressional earmarks and how theyâ€™ve been abused. the heritage foundation,which is obviously a conservative think tank, has a report out saying they looked at federalgrants that the administration had put out on the eves of -- on the eve of big voteson the presidentâ€™s agenda -- health care plan, cap and trade, dodd-frank -- and theyclaim that the money mostly goes to lawmakers who are in districts that -- that theyâ€™refolks who are on the fence over a number of these issues. theyâ€™re charging youâ€™rebeing hypocritical because you go after congressional earmarks but essentially youâ€™re doing thesame thing. what do you say to that? 
mr. carney: this is the heritage foundation? q yes. mr. carney: where the individual responsibilityprovision was born before it was adopted by massachusetts and then taken up by the affordablecare act? i would simply say that the presidentâ€™s opposition to earmarks is well known. thefact of the matter is iâ€™m confident that the issuance of grants through agencies, thatprocess is done on a merit-based -- in a merit-based way. and i would simply suggest that the reportitself, given some of the authors, is not particularly credible. q i want to talk about the issue of faithbecause robert gibbs on abc was talking to 
jake on sunday and basically said that ricksantorum crossed the line in questioning the presidentâ€™s faith. but then santorum wenton fox last night and brought up reverend wright, which is now a four-year-old story.not to relive all of those details and repeat them, but this man might be the republicannominee. what does the white house make of the fact that he appears to not be backingdown from questioning the presidentâ€™s faith? mr. carney: well, ed, i would simply pointyou and others to the statements the president made at the national prayer breakfast notlong ago where he spoke very explicitly about his own christian faith. and then i wouldsay that this president is focused on doing the things that he believes the american peopleelected him to do, which is work with congress 
or independently to take every measure andevery action he can to grow the economy and create jobs, to protect the middle class,to help this country recover from the worst recession since the great depression. you guys can decide, and your editors andyour bookers, whatâ€™s a story and whatâ€™s not. this presidentâ€™s focused on his jobas president, getting this country moving in the right direction, ensuring that therecovery -- which is underway -- continues forward; that we continue the positive economicgrowth that weâ€™ve had; that we continue the 23 straight months of private sector jobgrowth that weâ€™ve had -- over 3.7 million jobs created -- private sector jobs createdin the last 23 months. 
those are the issues that the president isfocused on. those are the issues that the president believes the america people arefocused on, and want their representatives in washington and those who would representthem in the white house to focus on. q last thing, you mentioned the prayer breakfast.in that speech, the president also went after his critics a little bit and said -- he usedthe phrase, he said, â€œwe should listen to our creator and avoid phony religiosity.â€how does the white house think "phony religiosity" in talking about your critics is differentthan what rick santorum said when he was talking about â€œphony theologyâ€? mr. carney: look, i would again point youto what the president said in his remarks 
at the national prayer service, the expressionof his own faith, itâ€™s importance to his life. and i think what the president was describingis in some ways what youâ€™re asking me about. and these are decisions that, in the end,those of you who decide what the american people are most interested in, what they wantto see on your air or what they want to read about in your paper, you decide whatâ€™s news.and weâ€™ll leave those judgments to you and your editors. q can i follow on that? mr. carney: let me get back to you. cheryl. 
q thanks, jay. back to taxes, will the whitehouse this week release the presidentâ€™s corporate tax reform plan? and will that includethe buffett rule, or is that separate? mr. carney: i do not have specifics for you,but we will release the corporate reform -- corporate tax reform proposal before the end of themonth. i think that takes us potentially into next week, if today is the 21st. so i don'thave a specific date for you, and no specifics on what will be included and what wonâ€™t.i don't want to steal anybodyâ€™s thunder. jessica. q the reverend billy graham -- sorry -- thereverend franklin graham made some astonishing comments this morning on â€œmorning joe,â€including that he can't say categorically 
that the president is not a muslim, islamhas had a pass under this president, and the muslims of the world -- the president seemsmore concerned about them than the christians that are being murdered in muslim countries.i wonder if the president -- because he took this man seriously enough to meet with himpersonally -- has a reaction to this, is astonished by this. and what the white houseâ€™s positionis in response to these comments? mr. carney: well, strangely enough, goingto my response to edâ€™s question, i did meet with the president this morning for about45 minutes, and amazingly he didn't bring this up because he was actually talking aboutpolicy issues that he believes are the most important things he can do and he can focuson as president, and that they are the most 
important things to the vast majority of theamerican people who are concerned about paying the rent or the mortgage, sending their kidsto school, making ends meet. i mean, you heard him speak earlier todayat the payroll tax cut extension event where he firmly believes that getting an extra $40in every paycheck is of vastly greater significance to most americans than someoneâ€™s opinionexpressed on cable television about his personal faith, which, again, he has spoken about explicitlyas recently as a few weeks ago at the national prayer service. thanks. norah. 
q on gas prices, you talked about meetingwith the president today. are there some things that the president and the white house isconsidering, though, to deal with the rising gas prices? mr. carney: well, we don't rule anything out.i think that was mentioned by jake -- or perhaps q that was me. mr. carney: it was you. it was jake. i justwant to give credit where credit is due. we are doing -- the president is doing a varietyof things, and has been, since he took office to increase domestic oil and gas production;to reduce our reliance on foreign sources of energy; to increase our generation of alternativeenergy, which, again, helps reduce our reliance 
on foreign sources of energy, which is importantnot just for national security reasons but also for -- because of the fact that you have-- in a global oil market, you have spikes in prices, and the more we -- the more actionwe take to create domestic energy, the most insulated we are from those kinds of changesin the market. but iâ€™ll also say that this is a broaderissue because we have to do everything we can. and i remember talking about this whenwe werenâ€™t in a period of a price surge in oil prices, but we had seen them in thepast and were likely to see them again in the future. it just underscores why this presidentâ€™sapproach is that we have to do everything we can that we can control to grow the economyand create jobs. 
that's why we have to extend the payroll taxcut. that's why we have to extend unemployment insurance. that's why congress should actimmediately to pass the elements of the american jobs act that they have not yet passed -- becausethose are the things we can absolutely control. because the surest hedge, if you will, thesurest insurance against the effects on the economy from the global marketplace are theactions that we take to make the american economy stronger and to put money in peopleâ€™spockets. that means extending the payroll tax cut,which the president looks forward to signing. that means congress acting on his refinancingproposal, which for responsible homeowners would result in an extra $3,000. and thatmoney obviously would help ease the pain at 
the pump that higher oil prices and gas pricesare causing. q can i ask you, secretary vilsack had a conferencecall this morning with reporters, talking about the increased use of bio-based products.and he said about gas prices, â€œour hope is that oil companies will work with us andwith the country to ensure that the recovery that weâ€™re now seeing is not jeopardizedby energy costs that get out of control.â€ our hope is that oil companies will work withus -- is the white house speaking with oil companies about something new? mr. carney: well, i didnâ€™t see those remarksby the agriculture secretary. i mean, he was talking about our efforts to promote a bio-economy,to the fact that the president will issue 
a presidential memorandum directing the federalgovernment to take decisive steps to dramatically increase the purchase of bio-based productsover the next two years. and that's part of his all-of-the-above approach to america'senergy needs, that we can ensure -- we can reduce our reliance on foreign sources ofenergy if we expand in every direction -- if we increase oil production, increase gas production,increase our investments in alternative energy, and take dramatic action, like he did withthe fuel efficiency standards, the dramatically reduce our consumption of oil and save americans$1.7 trillion in costs. so, again, i don't have the transcript anddidnâ€™t see what the secretary's remarks were, so i'll have to take that and get backto you. 
q and can i ask you about newt gingrich? hewas on cbs this morning, and he said the president has had a policy that's been "outrageouslyanti-american." he said the president does want more expensive gas, and he cited thatsecretary chu in 2008 said he wanted gasoline prices to get to the european level, whichis $9 or $10 a gallon, and last year he said people shouldnâ€™t complain about high gasprices, that they ought to buy more efficient cars. the president said he wants to get there-- mr. carney: he said "outrageously"? q yes. he said the policy has been "outrageouslyand anti-american policy." mr. carney: he loves his adverbs, there'sno question about that. (laughter.) i would 
-- i enjoyed them a lot when i covered him.i would simply say that -- i would point you to the fact -- and it is an extensive listof facts -- all of the actions the president has taken since being sworn into office toincrease domestic oil production, to increase domestic gas production, the lease sales thati just talked about, the efforts to increase our fuel efficiency to reduce our dependenceon foreign energy. again, as i mentioned in response to anotherquestion earlier, there are -- this kind of situation that comes periodically becauseof a rise in the price of oil globally often results in magic solutions being put forwardby politicians who may or may not know what they're talking about. but the fact is youhave to have an approach that's comprehensive, 
that takes a long-term look at reducing ourdependence on foreign sources of energy, increasing domestic production, and developing alternativesources of fuel. and that's the approach the president is taking. q is the rise in gas prices the president'sfault? mr. carney: look, the rise in gas prices isclearly the effect of a variety of factors on the global price of oil. they include unrestin certain regions of the world. they include growth in areas like china and india. youknow this well, you've covered it. the fact that this is happening only underscores theneed, as it did last year when prices went up, and as it did two years before that -- underscoresthe need to have a comprehensive energy policy, 
which this president has and has been puttinginto place. and that has causes -- that has resulted in more domestic oil production thanwe've had in the past eight years, greater sales of leases in the gulf and elsewhereto increase our production, the reduction in our reliance on foreign energy sources. i mean, these are the kind of policies thathave long-term, positive impact on the american economy and on our national security. andthat's why the president has taken the actions he has. q the president just today had this eventon the payroll tax cut. why wasnâ€™t it -- why werenâ€™t republicans included? did they notwant to come because it was their supposed 
surrender on this issue? or did you not invitethem, or was it not a priority to hold a signing ceremony? mr. carney: well, first of all, we don't havea bill to sign yet. congress works in mysterious and often slow ways to pass paper from onebuilding to another. but we expect that to arrive soon and the president will sign itas soon as it does. the event today was meant to highlight theimpact that regular folks had by raising their voices on congress to get them to act in theway that resulted in the extension of the payroll tax cut. as the president said, thiswas -- it happened late last year and it happened again, where congress, after exploring otheralternatives, decided to act in a rational 
way, to compromise, where everybody didnâ€™tget everything they wanted, but the result was what was necessary for the american peopleand what was necessary for the american economy. and that's a positive thing. so his event today was meant to say, thisis how the system can work and should work if the focus is on helping americans and helpingthe economy grow and helping it create jobs. and if congress keeps that as its focus, itshould then move on to other important things, like the president's refinance proposal tohelp americans, help the economy -- and help the economy create jobs.that was the purpose of the event. it wasnâ€™t a celebration; it was an exhortation. 
q i was curious about how -- when you decideto hold a signing ceremony and when you don't decide, because there is that issue of (inaudible.)and i understand -- i did talk to members on the hill, and they said that it could havegotten here by today. mr. carney: we don't control when the billarrives. we just don't. that's a congressional prerogative. q it could have gotten here by today, fromwhat i understand, so it wasnâ€™t like taking advantage of a time -- mr. carney: again, the point was, whetherit was here this morning or gets here this afternoon or tomorrow, or whenever it arrives,the point of the event wasnâ€™t to have a 
signing ceremony. the point of the event -- orto celebrate action that was simply congress doing the right thing and acting rationallyon behalf of the american people, and being willing to compromise on behalf of the americanpeople. it was meant to say, that's not enough, let's do more -- and to note, as the presidentdid, that we do not accept the conventional wisdom oft expressed by the various outletsrepresented here, that congress can't do anything this year because it's an election year. they've already proven otherwise. and we believethat they have an excellent opportunity in the weeks and months ahead to do so again-- to show that the fact that it's an election year does not mean that important things can'tget done. 
so we look forward to working with congressand disproving the experts on this, because it's the right thing to do for the americanpeople. all the way in the back. q back to oil prices. do you think the agreementthat was signed yesterday with mexico will help the president -- and what is he goingto do to convince the u.s. congress to ratify that agreement? mr. carney: well, i don't have a legislativestrategy for you. but absolutely, the agreement reached with mexico represents, again, thepresident's all-of-the-above approach to safely and responsibly develop domestic sources ofoil and gas, and in partnership with other 
countries, develop oil and gas. because hebelieves that the right thing to do. it's the only way, because there's not a singlesolution to the problem of our reliance on foreign sources of energy, or the problemof spikes in oil prices. you have to take a holistic, broad, all-of-the-above approach.and that's what he's doing. q do you think he will have the support ofcongress on the agreement? mr. carney: well, we certainly would hopethat in the interest of production of oil and gas, and in the interest of our energysecurity, that we would have that support, yes. fox radio. 
q thanks, jay. there's a group of 2,500 pastorsand evangelical leaders that sent a letter to the white house yesterday expressing theirconcern about the contraception policy. i know you haven't received that yet. but inlight of that, i wanted to ask you what the status was of the administration's dialoguewith faith leaders on that issue, who's been contacted and that sort of thing. mr. carney: i don't have a list of contactsfor you. i know that there have been contacts, especially as we work with stakeholders onthe issue of a the self-insured, the element that we will resolve in this same contextthat we resolved, we believe -- or found the right balance, we believe, in terms of ensuringthat religious institutions like universities 
and hospitals that have an objection do nothave to pay for or directly provide contraceptive services, but the women who work for thoseinstitutions will get the same coverage and preventive services coverage that women acrossamerica will get. and we are continuing to have those conversationsto work out a solution as it relates to self-insured institutions. q and just to follow up, what is the whitehouse perspective on this controversy? do you feel that it's being -- that the concernsare being addressed and contained? or in light of this letter and some of the suits thathave popped up -- lawsuits that have popped up recently, do you feel that it's widening? 
mr. carney: well, the president's focus wason finding the right balance. you heard him say so from this very podium that he was absolutelycommitted to ensuring that these important services were provided to women, regardlessof where they work. but he was also very committed to ensuring that it was done in a way thatrespected religious beliefs and religious concerns. he knows from his own experience that theseissues matter and they need to be respected. and that is the balance he sought and thesolution that was put forward. and we are continuing to work with stakeholders to implementthat solution in a way that we believe satisfies the concerns -- or should satisfy the concernsof those in terms of their religious beliefs. 
the approach was to find that balance, toensure that the coverage was provided, and to respect religious beliefs. it was not toensure that everybody said that they were okay with it -- because you often cannot finda solution to difficult issues if thatâ€™s the approach you take. you guys can decide whether the issue is -- asa political issue or even a policy issue -- is expanding or contracting. it is sometimesamusing to read how one week, what is viewed as a colossal error by the white house, thenext week is viewed as some brilliant political move -- when, in fact, the approach all alonghas just been an effort to find the right policy. 
mr. carney: mr. landler, how are you? q iâ€™m fine. thanks jay. back to iran fora moment. thereâ€™s been this series of strong statement about iran from israeli leaders.thereâ€™s been obviously a long series of retaliatory statements by the iranians. iranhas become a very big topic on the campaign trail, with republicans arguing that the presidentmay not be doing enough to back up israel, and some media critics have likened this periodto sort of the period leading up to the iraq war. iâ€™m wondering whether the president,the white house feels that thereâ€™s been too much emphasis on military options andwhether thereâ€™s a bit too much of a drumbeat of war that perhaps gets in the way of seeingwhether the sanctions strategy will work out? 
mr. carney: well, i guess one part of yourquestion has to do with media coverage, and that is what it is. but we take very seriously-- we, a, share the concerns strongly that israel has about the potential developmentby iran of a nuclear weapon. we share those concerns. and we certainly understand theheightened concern that israel has, given its geographic location and other circumstancesthat are involved here for israel. having said that, we believe that the approachthis administration has taken has resulted in a level of consensus within the internationalcommunity regarding iranian behavior that has never been attained before. it has resultedin a level of punitive sanctions that have never been attained before, that in turn,have resulted in a level of disruption to 
the iranian economy and the iranian leadershipthat have never been achieved before, and that that is having an impact. we believe that there is time and space toattempt to resolve this peacefully. and we are endeavoring to do that with our internationalpartners and allies. having said that, as the president never fails to make clear, heis not removing any option off the table. we are very -- we are committed to tryingto prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. we share that goal with israel. q is there any danger that the issue couldbecome overly politicized in this country? do you think it's time, as some other senior-- former senior officials have suggested, 
that people on the campaign trail think carefullyabout the things they say on this subject? mr. carney: well, look, i think that any issuecould become over politicized. and again, we'll have to let reporters in many ways decidewhether that is what's happening in this case, or with regards to any other issue. our focusis on -- an important matter like this is on american national security and the securityof israel and other allies, and that's the approach we've taken. and, again, just to review some of the historyhere -- that when the president came into office we had a situation where iran had pursuedits nuclear ambitions, and yet, broadly viewed, there was division about whether iran wasresponsible or the united states, and whether 
the united states had taken the right approachto this. and what this president did was unify, through his actions and his policy, unifythe international community to focus the world's attention on iranian behavior and the factthat the iranian regime had refused to live up to its international obligations, and thatit was iran that was causing the problem here and not the united states. that has resulted in punitive sanctions thathave been ratcheted up continuously, and continue to this day to be ratcheted up. and that hasput immense pressure on the economy and on the leadership. and i think sometimes, whenyou hear from iran provocative statements or other things -- actions taken -- it's oftendriven by a desire to distract attention from 
the very significant impact that this policyhas had on their economy and on their politics. ann. q the supreme court has agreed to take upanother affirmative action case. what does the president think about colleges and universitiesusing race as one of the factors for admission? mr. carney: well, ann, i'll say a couple ofthings. first of all, i'm not going to comment on the supreme court's decision to take upa case or not take up a case. i think as the supreme court has recognized in the past,diversity in the classroom has learning benefits for students, campuses and schools. presidentobama has said that while he opposes quotas and thinks an emphasis on universal and notrace-specific programs is good policy, considering 
race along with other factors can be appropriatein certain circumstances. but again, i want to make sure that's viewedas a broad statement of where he has been and what his position is broadly, not a referenceto this specific case. q and on gas prices, what does he think theimpact of $5-a-gallon gasoline? has he asked mr. carney: well, i think that -- youâ€™respeculating about where markets may go, and iâ€™m not able to engage in that. q some gas stations are charging that now. mr. carney: well, that may be true, but thefact of the matter is this president is keenly aware of the effect that, and the impact,that high gas prices have on average americans 
as they're trying to make ends meet. one ofthe reasons why passing the payroll tax cut last year was so important is that it helpedaverage american families, hardworking americans, deal with the spike in oil prices in 2011. there is no question that the fact that thispresident has led, and this congress has acted, on extending the payroll tax cut for the fullcalendar year in 2012 will help insulate americans from higher gas prices this year as it didlast year. itâ€™s just another reason why we need totake every step we can. we need to work with congress where congress will work with us,and then the president will take every action he can independently to grow the economy andcreate jobs, to put more money in peopleâ€™s 
pockets and to give middle-class americansgreater economic security. we have to act on the things we can controlto protect ourselves from the things that we can't. and i think that that is an approachthat dictates the need for congress to act on the presidentâ€™s refinance proposal, forcongress to pass infrastructure investments that would put construction workers back towork while our infrastructure is being rebuilt in a way that solidified our economic foundation.there are a host of things that congress can do, and that this president will do to keepthe economy recovering and to keep it creating jobs. mr. knoller. 
q jay, when you were speaking a minute agoabout the slow and mysterious ways of congress were you saying that congress or congressionalleaders were delaying -- mr. carney: no, not at all. q okay. mr. carney: i was simply commenting on thefact that it sometimes -- it takes a certain amount of time -- hours, days, whatever -- forbills to be enrolled and processed and -- q delivered. mr. carney: -- delivered. and that was all.but my point was that this event was never meant to be a bill-signing event. this wasan event designed to highlight the impact 
that americans had by raising their voicesand pushing congress to pass a payroll tax cut extension, and the impact that passingit has on average americans, and to -- in making that point, to show -- and to callon congress to do more, to take action, continued action to help american families as we recoverthe from recession. q thanks, jay. mr. carney: all right, thanks, all. appreciateit. </div>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Z8QpucgN_Sc?rel=0" frameborder="0"
allowfullscreen></iframe>

government healthcare plans

mr. carney: so much -- so much to talk about.hello, everyone. welcome back from a holiday weekend. i hope you had a great three daysoff. ...

gop ryan

<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="gop ryan" height="500" src="http://cdn.redalertpolitics.com/files/2015/10/APTOPIX-House-Republi_Keen.jpg" title="gop ryan" width="500" />
</div>
<div align="justify">let's talk about ideological nor star for paul right the person who is guided in in hiscareer and his ideology loads fine rant and it's not me saying thatit's far right-wing and he said quote the reason i got involved inpublic service by a large if i decry one thinker one person you'd be are in rent paul ryan also said 
rant makes the best case for the morerally be of democratic capitalism argued about morality in a second and twothousand five he also said by a group all on iron rant so who is i'm well she's written that was tried andfound had been tanaka cerveza republicans uh... idolized her well as she thought that uh... all thedon't arrest medicare so security et cetera were for the week and that 
being selfish was the best thing if you do beataltruistic in helping others she thought was by the way vichy take so security laterin life all harris to get another the name of her that presidents so if you wouldn't getcaught she smoked two packs a day thought itwas a conspiracy theory the you'd get cancer from smokingtobacco 
she got lung cancer nukes and then she needed the money so shetook social security like the fraud this year's but let me tell you more but i am she said that uh... idea of having awoman president you know she herself of course isobviously a woman should i be running a woman president is unspeakable 
she said that the arabs are port asalmost poli credited savages she said the handicap or quote sub normal children and thereby helping a handicap never want to bring quote break everybody to a level of thehandicap what to record strong the albert stopbein renders being that's that 
wait to get a load of her admiration for william edward pic well who's away mcmann he was a serial killer now first this is pretty tough stuff but let me describe to you would picktended to a twelve-year-old girl and i will tell you what i am ran for here's michael press pass the scriptionof how it went down at the time at the end of the street 
merion who's a twelve-year-old girl various corpse was dont onto the pavement that's why mywilliam hickman she was dead carlos had been chopped offin our clients have been wired opened a appear as if she was still alive hurt internalorgans have been cut out in p suburb body were leader found strewn all overlos angeles carrier here's what william hickman apparently set 
about back crime and others what is good for me is right now what about a man say about williamhickman and that philosophy it was the best and strongest expression of a real man psychology i have her now the reason she says that his becauseaccording to remind you logical principles she thinks 
growth basically that what's called thesupermassive it doesn't matter if you can do it you take it there's takers and there are makers now ironically paulryan presence in my was renovate triggers a makers they consider some themselves the makerto be a category not from taking from the government he came from othersthat's probably fine but take their twelve yr old daughterand chopper legs up totally blind head 
actually u r not bound by society'srules picked you got altruistic you care about helping other people you work in avisual this was a highly individualism so i ran for rock-and-roll and plot act as a superman echoes a cure his own real man that support so paul ryan tell me what you think myenright in iran more than anywhere else the fantastic job 
the morality of capitalism the moralityof individualism industry has worked his management theyare really the best job of anybody to build a moral case for capitalism invent morality of capitalism is underassault does that sound like morality to you now look even say hateful poor i'm probably didn't know abouthigher her support for the serial killer and i said i feel what that's probablyfair enough 
i did know about it until recently but it is that same coulter ofindividualism where no one alz matters only person that matters isyourself the highest moral good is selfishness vaccine definitely knows about that's why he admires her and that is sick indian army that is so still pathak 
to say i don't even dan about anybodyelse all i care about is meeting me and that is exactly the republicanideology that is the paul ryan ideology vesselwhy deal although i am ran if you're not sure about where she comesfrom the white shoes and a day in a murder back when she was alivethink progress but this together along with a couple quotes check i would sharethe same you why aren't just throw away almost every edifice in the contemporaryamerican way of life 
our judeo-christian religion a modified government regulatedcapitalism are ruled by the majority will by the reviews that said that youscore in churches and the concept of god abuse accurate criticism uh... yes christ every important marley demandshistory has taught us that we should love one another widebandis this kind of love in your mind immoral it is immoral if it is a lab 
place about oneself and ended the man is weak or a woman isweak then she is beyond his beyond love he said he does not deserve it if it means beyond there are very few ofus that in this world by your standards so are worthy of law uh... unfortunately stage because it's that kind of thinking thatkind of writing this story </div>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1JAj440MLrU?rel=0" frameborder="0"
allowfullscreen></iframe>

gop ryan

let's talk about ideological nor star for paul right the person who is guided in in hiscareer and his ideology loads fine rant and it...

Jumlah	Disscount	Harga
1 Botol	-	240.000
4 Botol	40.000	920.000
6 Botol	160.000	1.280.000

Jumlah	Disscount	Harga
1 Box	-	730.000
2 Box	100.000	1.360.000
4 Box	200.000	2.720.000

Jumlah	Disscount	Harga
2 Botol	50.000	310.000
4 Botol	120.000	600.000
6 Botol	240.000	840.000