24 Captivating Photos of Concrete

Concrete. It's possibly the drabbest material on the planet, but that unto itself makes for a powerful aesthetic all its own. For this week's Shooting Challenge, you shot concrete structures. The results? Cold. Rotting. Geometric. And captivatingly minimal. More »

Source: http://feeds.gawker.com/~r/gizmodo/full/~3/7TgvAyNRw04/24-captivating-photos-of-concrete

Hollister old navy walmart black friday walmart black friday Target Black Friday PacSun apple store

Michigan Republicans Support Changing State's Electoral Vote Allocation

The Michigan GOP backed a measure on Saturday that would allocate the state's electoral college votes by congressional districts, reviving energy for a plan considered by Republicans in several states after the inauguration but one that seemed dead about a month ago.

At the state's party convention in Lansing, members backed a resolution to take away Michigan's winner-take-all system by a 1,370-132 margin. The proposal -- introduced by state Rep. Pete Lund (Shelby Township) -- would allocate 14 of the state's 16 votes by district, and the remaining two to the statewide winner. That system is similar to Maine and Nebraska, the only states to allocate by district.

If the plan had been in effect in 2012, 10 of Michigan's electoral college votes would have gone to President Barack Obama, while six would have gone to Mitt Romney.

Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder (R), however, threw cold water on the idea, saying that it was "not the appropriate time" to discuss the plan, according to the Detroit News. Addressing the initiative before a census and in a bipartisan way would be more fitting, he said.

Following Obama's second inauguration, Republicans in several blue states -- backed by RNC Chairman Reince Priebus -- considered changing their state's electoral college allocation to allocate votes by congressional district. A Huffington Post analysis showed that such allocation in all 50 states would have given us a President Romney in 2012. Republicans retained a majority in the House but lost the House popular vote, thanks largely to gerrymandered districting.

However, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) and gubernatorial candidate and Attorney General Ken Cuccinnelli oppose such a move and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) has since voiced concerns about it after being initially open to the idea. Thirteen Pennsylvania Republican legislators proposed another bill to change the state's allocation earlier this month.

Also on HuffPost:

"; var coords = [-5, -72]; // display fb-bubble FloatingPrompt.embed(this, html, undefined, 'top', {fp_intersects:1, timeout_remove:2000,ignore_arrow: true, width:236, add_xy:coords, class_name: 'clear-overlay'}); });

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/25/michigan-electoral-college_n_2758501.html

dick clark Happy new year fiscal cliff Pitbull Hannah Storm Psy fergie

Barbara Walters returning to 'The View' on Monday

NEW YORK (AP) ? Barbara Walters says she's returning to "The View" on Monday.

She's been sidelined for several weeks. But now she's "had enough rest and it's time to come back," Walters reported by phone during Tuesday's edition of the ABC talk show.

Walters was hospitalized on Jan. 19 after fainting and cutting her head at a party in Washington. The 83-year-old said she had chickenpox and a fever at the time but didn't realize it. She suffered a concussion and got six stitches. She was released 10 days later and since then, has been resting in her New York home.

"No more chickenpox," she told her fellow panelists in the studio during her phone call.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/barbara-walters-returning-view-monday-164021415.html

project x the lorax lorax fisker karma super tuesday states shepard fairey is snooki pregnant

Trial set to open for Gulf oil spill litigation

NEW ORLEANS (AP) ? Nearly three years after a deadly rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico triggered the nation's worst offshore oil spill, a federal judge in New Orleans is set to preside over a high-stakes trial for the raft of litigation spawned by the disaster.

Barring an 11th-hour settlement, U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier will hear several hours of opening statements Monday by lawyers for the companies involved in the 2010 spill and the plaintiffs who sued them. And the judge, not a jury, ultimately could decide how much more money BP PLC and its partners on the ill-fated drilling project owe for their roles in the environmental catastrophe.

BP has said it already has racked up more than $24 billion in spill-related expenses and has estimated it will pay a total of $42 billion to fully resolve its liability for the disaster that killed 11 workers and spewed millions of gallons of oil.

But the trial attorneys for the federal government and Gulf states and private plaintiffs hope to convince the judge that the company is liable for much more.

With billions of dollars on the line, the companies and their courtroom adversaries have spared no expense in preparing for a trial that could last several months. Hundreds of attorneys have worked on the case, generating roughly 90 million pages of documents, logging nearly 9,000 docket entries and taking more than 300 depositions of witnesses who could testify at trial.

"In terms of sheer dollar amounts and public attention, this is one of the most complex and massive disputes ever faced by the courts," said Fordham University law professor Howard Erichson, an expert in complex litigation.

Barbier has promised he won't let the case drag on for years as has the litigation over the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, which still hasn't been completely resolved. He encouraged settlement talks that already have resolved billions of dollars in spill-related claims.

"Judge Barbier has managed the case actively and moved it along toward trial pretty quickly," Erichson said.

In December, Barbier gave final approval to a settlement between BP and Plaintiffs' Steering Committee lawyers representing Gulf Coast businesses and residents who claim the spill cost them money. BP estimates it will pay roughly $7.8 billion to resolve tens of thousands of these claims, but the deal doesn't have a cap.

BP resolved a Justice Department criminal probe by agreeing to plead guilty to manslaughter and other charges and pay $4 billion in criminal penalties. Deepwater Horizon rig owner Transocean Ltd. reached a separate settlement with the federal government, pleading guilty to a misdemeanor charge and agreeing to pay $1.4 billion in criminal and civil penalties.

But there's plenty left for the lawyers to argue about at trial, given that the federal government and Gulf states haven't resolved civil claims against the company that could be worth more than $20 billion.

The Justice Department and private plaintiffs' attorneys have said they would prove BP acted with gross negligence before the blowout of its Macondo well on April 20, 2010.

BP's civil penalties would soar if Barbier agrees with that claim.

BP, meanwhile, argues the federal government's estimate of how much oil spewed from the well ? more than 200 million gallons ? is inflated by at least 20 percent. Clean Water Act penalties are based on how many barrels of oil spilled.

Barbier plans to hold the trial in at least two phases and may issue partial rulings at the end of each. The first phase, which could last three months, is designed to determine what caused the blowout and assign percentages of blame to the companies involved. The second phase will address efforts to stop the flow of oil from the well and aims to determine how much crude spilled into the Gulf.

The trial originally was scheduled to start a year ago, but Barbier postponed it to allow BP to wrap up its settlement with the Plaintiffs' Steering Committee.

Barbier, 68, was nominated by President Bill Clinton and has served on the court since 1998. He had a private law practice, primarily representing small businesses and other plaintiffs in civil cases, and served as president of the New Orleans Bar Association before he joined the bench.

Dane Ciolino, a Loyola University law professor who has represented criminal defendants in Barbier's court, described him as a "no-nonsense" but even-tempered judge.

"He's very good at getting down to the pertinent issues," Ciolino said. "Some judges could be described as impatient, short or gruff. He is none of that."

Despite the bitter disputes at the root of the case, Barbier has maintained a collegial atmosphere at his monthly status conferences with the lawyers, cracking an occasional joke or good-naturedly ribbing attorneys over their college football allegiances.

Cordial with each other in the courtroom, the competing attorneys have saved their harshest rhetoric for court filings or news releases. Despite its settlement with BP last year, the Plaintiffs' Steering Committee attorneys won't be allies at trial with the London-based oil giant. And they still haven't resolved civil claims against Transocean or cement contractor Halliburton.

"These three companies' reckless, greed-driven conduct killed 11 good men, polluted the Gulf for years and left the region's economy in shambles. Any statement to the contrary is self-serving nonsense," Steve Herman, a lead plaintiffs' attorney, said in a recent statement.

A series of government investigations has exhaustively documented the mistakes that led to the blowout, spreading the blame among the companies. Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange said witnesses scheduled to testify at trial will reveal new information about the cause of the disaster.

"I think you're going to learn a lot, particularly about the culture that existed at BP and their priorities," Strange said.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/trial-set-open-gulf-oil-spill-litigation-092735476.html

jennifer lopez wardrobe malfunction hugo hugo nfl combine 84th annual academy awards beginners 2012 oscars

Research suggests malaria can be defeated without a globally led eradication program

Public release date: 26-Feb-2013
[ | E-mail | Share ]

Contact: Peter Franklin
p.franklin@soton.ac.uk
44-238-059-5457
University of Southampton

A researcher at the University of Southampton, working as part of a team from the UK and USA, believes the global eradication of malaria could be achieved by individual countries eliminating the disease within their own borders and coordinating efforts regionally. The team's findings have been published in the journal Science.

Dr Andrew Tatem explains, "In 1955 a global programme was launched to eradicate Malaria, but funding collapsed in 1969 and ultimately eradication wasn't achieved. We have examined what was learned from this programme and how malaria has since been eliminated in individual countries.

"Our findings suggest it may be possible for malaria elimination to proceed like a ratchet, tightening the grip on the disease region-by-region, country-by-country, until eradication is ultimately achieved but without the need for a globally coordinated campaign."

The research team[1] examined data from 1980 onwards for 30 countries which successfully eliminated malaria and also took part in the 1955 Global Malaria Eradication Programme (GMEP). In these countries, elimination[2] has become highly stable, transmission (or infection) has declined and resurgence has occurred far less frequently than traditional theory would predict.

Three potential reasons for this decline and stability of malaria have been suggested:

• declines in transmission rates resulting from urbanization and economic development
• a high-degree of transmission control from treating malaria cases combined with outbreak control
• low-connectivity among places that are highly receptive to transmission

Dr Tatem comments, "Evidence from the data we have examined suggests that a concerted effort to bring an individual country to the point of elimination will likely result in that country maintaining a stable, low malaria transmission rate. If this is the case, malaria elimination could proceed at an individual country level, until global eradication[3] is achieved.

"The possibility that the complete absence of ongoing malaria transmission can become highly-stable is relevant for policy because it suggests that before achieving global eradication, some countries that eliminate could scale back control measures and rely on their health systems. Projected economic costs of elimination are dominated by the management of imported malaria, but if elimination is stable, then it could save costs before achieving eradication."

The researchers observed that after elimination in a region, malaria importation poses a constant threat, because humans and mosquitoes carry the disease from endemic areas across international boundaries and within countries. This means it is important to maintain measures to monitor and contain outbreaks and avoid endemic transmission from restarting. Of the countries examined, causes of resurgence were poorly documented, but it was most frequently blamed on a failure to intervene at a high-level when outbreaks were identified. This demonstrates long-term investment is needed to ensure elimination in a country is maintained.

###

The paper The Stability of Malaria Elimination can be found in the journal Science: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/339/6122/909.summary?sid=dff77906-3f0d-458b-b229-b6ea00cbfb09

The research was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Bloomberg Family Foundation.

1 The research team is from the Emerging Pathogens Institute, University of Florida; Department of Geography and Environment, University of Southampton; Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA; Clinton Health Access Initiative, Boston; Spatial Ecology and Epidemiology Group, Department of Zoology, Oxford University; Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore; Malaria Research Institute, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore; Malaria Elimination Initiative, Global Health Group, University of California; Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics and Policy, Washington.

2 Elimination refers to the stopping of transmission in a defined region until no parasites remain through implementation of vector control, treatment of infected individuals and other available interventions.

3 Eradication is elimination at a global scale.

Notes for editors:

1) For more information about Geography and Environment at the University of Southampton visit: http://www.southampton.ac.uk/geography/

2) The University of Southampton is a leading UK teaching and research institution with a global reputation for leading-edge research and scholarship across a wide range of subjects in engineering, science, social sciences, health and humanities.

With over 23,000 students, around 5000 staff, and an annual turnover well in excess of 435 million, the University of Southampton is acknowledged as one of the country's top institutions for engineering, computer science and medicine. We combine academic excellence with an innovative and entrepreneurial approach to research, supporting a culture that engages and challenges students and staff in their pursuit of learning.

The University is also home to a number of world-leading research centres including the Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, the Optoelectronics Research Centre, the Institute for Life Sciences, the Web Science Trust and Doctoral training Centre, the Centre for the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease, the Southampton Statistical Sciences Research Institute and is a partner of the National Oceanography Centre at the Southampton waterfront campus. www.soton.ac.uk

3) For information on partner organisations visit:

http://www.epi.ufl.edu/ University of Florida

http://www.fic.nih.gov/Pages/Default.aspx National Institutes of Health

http://www.clintonhealthaccess.org/ Clinton Health Access Initiative

http://www.zoo.ox.ac.uk/ University of Oxford

http://www.jhsph.edu/departments/epidemiology/ Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

http://globalhealthsciences.ucsf.edu/global-health-group/malaria-elimination-initiative University of California

http://www.cddep.org/ Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics and Policy

For further information contact:

Peter Franklin, Media Relations, University of Southampton, Tel: 023 8059 5457, email: p.franklin@soton.ac.uk

www.soton.ac.uk/mediacentre/

Follow us on twitter: http://twitter.com/unisouthampton

Like us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/unisouthampton

---

[ | E-mail | Share ]

?

AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.

Public release date: 26-Feb-2013
[ | E-mail | Share ]

Contact: Peter Franklin
p.franklin@soton.ac.uk
44-238-059-5457
University of Southampton

A researcher at the University of Southampton, working as part of a team from the UK and USA, believes the global eradication of malaria could be achieved by individual countries eliminating the disease within their own borders and coordinating efforts regionally. The team's findings have been published in the journal Science.

Dr Andrew Tatem explains, "In 1955 a global programme was launched to eradicate Malaria, but funding collapsed in 1969 and ultimately eradication wasn't achieved. We have examined what was learned from this programme and how malaria has since been eliminated in individual countries.

"Our findings suggest it may be possible for malaria elimination to proceed like a ratchet, tightening the grip on the disease region-by-region, country-by-country, until eradication is ultimately achieved but without the need for a globally coordinated campaign."

The research team[1] examined data from 1980 onwards for 30 countries which successfully eliminated malaria and also took part in the 1955 Global Malaria Eradication Programme (GMEP). In these countries, elimination[2] has become highly stable, transmission (or infection) has declined and resurgence has occurred far less frequently than traditional theory would predict.

Three potential reasons for this decline and stability of malaria have been suggested:

• declines in transmission rates resulting from urbanization and economic development
• a high-degree of transmission control from treating malaria cases combined with outbreak control
• low-connectivity among places that are highly receptive to transmission

Dr Tatem comments, "Evidence from the data we have examined suggests that a concerted effort to bring an individual country to the point of elimination will likely result in that country maintaining a stable, low malaria transmission rate. If this is the case, malaria elimination could proceed at an individual country level, until global eradication[3] is achieved.

"The possibility that the complete absence of ongoing malaria transmission can become highly-stable is relevant for policy because it suggests that before achieving global eradication, some countries that eliminate could scale back control measures and rely on their health systems. Projected economic costs of elimination are dominated by the management of imported malaria, but if elimination is stable, then it could save costs before achieving eradication."

The researchers observed that after elimination in a region, malaria importation poses a constant threat, because humans and mosquitoes carry the disease from endemic areas across international boundaries and within countries. This means it is important to maintain measures to monitor and contain outbreaks and avoid endemic transmission from restarting. Of the countries examined, causes of resurgence were poorly documented, but it was most frequently blamed on a failure to intervene at a high-level when outbreaks were identified. This demonstrates long-term investment is needed to ensure elimination in a country is maintained.

###

The paper The Stability of Malaria Elimination can be found in the journal Science: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/339/6122/909.summary?sid=dff77906-3f0d-458b-b229-b6ea00cbfb09

The research was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Bloomberg Family Foundation.

1 The research team is from the Emerging Pathogens Institute, University of Florida; Department of Geography and Environment, University of Southampton; Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA; Clinton Health Access Initiative, Boston; Spatial Ecology and Epidemiology Group, Department of Zoology, Oxford University; Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore; Malaria Research Institute, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore; Malaria Elimination Initiative, Global Health Group, University of California; Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics and Policy, Washington.

2 Elimination refers to the stopping of transmission in a defined region until no parasites remain through implementation of vector control, treatment of infected individuals and other available interventions.

3 Eradication is elimination at a global scale.

Notes for editors:

1) For more information about Geography and Environment at the University of Southampton visit: http://www.southampton.ac.uk/geography/

2) The University of Southampton is a leading UK teaching and research institution with a global reputation for leading-edge research and scholarship across a wide range of subjects in engineering, science, social sciences, health and humanities.

With over 23,000 students, around 5000 staff, and an annual turnover well in excess of 435 million, the University of Southampton is acknowledged as one of the country's top institutions for engineering, computer science and medicine. We combine academic excellence with an innovative and entrepreneurial approach to research, supporting a culture that engages and challenges students and staff in their pursuit of learning.

The University is also home to a number of world-leading research centres including the Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, the Optoelectronics Research Centre, the Institute for Life Sciences, the Web Science Trust and Doctoral training Centre, the Centre for the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease, the Southampton Statistical Sciences Research Institute and is a partner of the National Oceanography Centre at the Southampton waterfront campus. www.soton.ac.uk

3) For information on partner organisations visit:

http://www.epi.ufl.edu/ University of Florida

http://www.fic.nih.gov/Pages/Default.aspx National Institutes of Health

http://www.clintonhealthaccess.org/ Clinton Health Access Initiative

http://www.zoo.ox.ac.uk/ University of Oxford

http://www.jhsph.edu/departments/epidemiology/ Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

http://globalhealthsciences.ucsf.edu/global-health-group/malaria-elimination-initiative University of California

http://www.cddep.org/ Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics and Policy

For further information contact:

Peter Franklin, Media Relations, University of Southampton, Tel: 023 8059 5457, email: p.franklin@soton.ac.uk

www.soton.ac.uk/mediacentre/

Follow us on twitter: http://twitter.com/unisouthampton

Like us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/unisouthampton

---

[ | E-mail | Share ]

?

AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.

Source: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-02/uos-rsm022613.php

belize adele lyrics best new artist 2012 grammys foo fighters nikki minaj album of the year

How Long Can I Wait to Bring a Personal Injury Lawsuit in California ...

---

Have you or a loved one been injured in an automobile or other type of accident in California? If you answered yes, and are considering taking legal action to recover financial damages against the person or persons who injured you, the time to act is NOW. You may be familiar with the term ?statute of limitations,? which is the legal deadline for filing a lawsuit. In California, there is a statute of limitations for bringing personal injury claims; such as a car accident or slip and fall accident. Discuss the statute of limitations in detail with your Los Angeles personal injury lawyer, but know that according to the California law, most lawsuits ?MUST be filed within a certain amount of time. In general, once the statute of limitations on a case ?runs out,? the legal claim is not valid any longer.?

If you were injured in an accident Los Angeles and are considering bringing a personal injury claim against the person who you believe injured you, the lawsuit must be filed in a Los Angeles court two years from the injury. However, if you and/or your doctors did not discover the injury right away, you must bring the lawsuit 1 year from the date the injury was discovered. Unsure about the date of your injury?s discovery? An experienced Los Angeles personal injury lawyer can talk with you and your doctor to determine when the statute of limitations began to run and make sure you file your lawsuit in time.

Be aware that the law regarding the statute of limitations also changes when a public entity (like a city bus driver) is at fault. If you or a loved one were injured by a government employee in Los Angeles, the statute of limitations to bring the lawsuit against the city or county is one year. There are also special rules regarding minors, the details of which a knowledgeable Los Angeles trial lawyer can discuss with you.

In almost every case, the sooner you speak to a skilled injury lawyer for help, the more effective we can be and the more likely you are to recover financial damages for lost wages, hospital bills, and other damages. You do not have to do this alone. BIKLAW is one your side.

If you have suffered?an injury in the Greater Los Angeles area?contact the experienced lawyers at the Trial Law Offices of Bradley I. Kramer today.

Categories: Blog, Personal Injury

User1

Disclaimer: The information contained in this Weblog (Blog) is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. No recipients of content from this site, clients or otherwise, should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in the site without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue from an attorney licensed in the recipient's state. The content of this Weblog (Blog) contains general information and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. The Trial Law Offices Of Bradley I. Kramer expressly disclaim all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all the contents of this Weblog (Blog).

Source: http://www.biklaw.com/how-long-can-i-wait-to-bring-a-personal-injury-lawsuit-in-california/

Jessica Ridgeway ipad mini Kevin Krim Autumn Pasquale ann coulter minecraft Ben Wilson

Why Pain Can Feel Good

Pain isn't always a pain. Sometimes it can actually feel good.

People experience pleasure during a painful stimulus if the stimulus turns out to be less bad than they were expecting, new research suggests.

"It is not hard to understand that pain can be interpreted as less severe when an individual is aware that it could have been much more painful," said study co-author Siri Leknes, a psychologist at the University of Oslo in Norway, in a statement. "Less expected, however, is the discovery that pain may be experienced as pleasant if something worse has been avoided."

The findings were published in the March issue of the journal Pain.

Too hot

To see how people perceived pain, Leknes and her colleagues hooked 16 participants up to a device that applied a variable level of painful heat to their arms. At the same time, the researchers measured their brain activity using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans.

In the first setting, participants experienced a series of either a slightly painful stimulus ? about as painful as grasping a slightly too hot cup of coffee ? or no pain.

In a second setup, the participants experienced a series of either moderate or intense pain. On a screen, the participants could see what type of pain was coming up next in the series.

In the first scenario, the participants rated the moderate pain as unpleasant.

What a relief

But interestingly, participants rated the moderate pain as actually pleasurable in the second setup, when the alternative was the intense pain. During the moderate stimulus in the second setup, participants' brain activity also showed less activation in the pain region of the brain (the brain stem) and more activation in a region in the middle of the frontal lobes that's associated with pain relief and pleasure than during the same stimulus in the first setup.

"The likely explanation is that the subjects were prepared for the worst and thus felt relieved when they realized the pain was not going to be as bad as they had feared," Leknes said in a statement. "In other words, a sense of relief can be powerful enough to turn such an obviously negative experience as pain into a sensation that is comforting or even enjoyable."

The finding could shed light on why some people experience the burn of hot chili peppers or?painful sex?as pleasurable.

Follow Tia Ghose on Twitter @tiaghose or LiveScience @livescience. We're also on Facebook?& Google+.?

Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/why-pain-feel-good-200855984.html

black panthers mauritania obama open mic jefferson county colorado extenze tenacious d steve smith