Rock and roll legends conferred on the KeyArena in Seattle, WA last night, as Bruce Springsteen brought his The River tour to the Northwest and welcomed Pearl Jam singer Eddie Vedder during the performance. Springsteen has been on fire throughout the tour, playing his 1980 album The River in its entirety before busting out other big hits from his career.Known for his marathon performances, Springsteen played a full 29 song set, complete with a number of requests from signs in the audience. After a brief intermission, the band announced that Vedder would be joining them on stage. Vedder, a Seattle native, certainly has fun joining the band for “Bobby Jean,” a hit tune from Springsteen’s Born In The USA album.Watch the cover below, thanks to YouTube user TES0864:The full setlist can be seen via setlist.fm:Edit this setlist | More Bruce Springsteen setlists
The purple jacket.My husband gave me a purple running jacket for Christmas. I love it – and not just because it’s lightweight, wind and water resistant, and breathable. I love it because of what it represents. For the past ten years, I’ve been a sponsored athlete. Now, before you jump to conclusions, let me assure you that this does not mean that I’m a professional runner. I don’t get paid to run. I have a day job just like everyone else. However, it does mean that I have been supplied with free shoes and gear from my awesome sponsor, inov-8, and for this I am eternally grateful. However, with sponsorship sometimes come limitations.Part of being a sponsored athlete means running in the team uniform, which, for some reason is often black or red. Maybe team managers believe that these colors are flashy and good for intimidating the competition. I agree – I always feel like a bad*** when I’m decked out in black. Black makes me feel like I’m a serious competitor – mean and ready to take on the world. Don’t mess with me when I’ve got on my team kit and my game face.Recently, however, this persona hasn’t really reflected who I feel I am as a runner. After thirty-one years of being competitive in the sport, I’m feeling the need to take my running – and myself – a little less seriously. Hence, the purple jacket. Not only is purple my favorite color, it’s also a fun color. A color that says, “Don’t take me too seriously.” A color that for me, promises lightness, spontaneity, and adventure. A color that mirrors the delicate wild irises that grace the trail in the early spring and the vivid sunrises that greet me on quiet winter mornings.You may still occasionally see me sporting the eye-catching uniform of my team sponsor, and when that happens, look out – I mean business. But for the coming year, my goal is to have more purple jacket days. Days when I will run the trail just because it’s there, enjoying the journey and forgetting about mileage, splits, competition and PRs. Days when I will run from the heart and not the ego. What will your purple jacket days bring?
Leaders from U.S. Army South engaged with Colombian army counterparts during bilateral staff talks at the U.S. command’s headquarters in Texas, from March 18-21. The Colombian army fought in Korea; the US commander of the 24th division army 8 said the following concept about the performance of the Colombian battalion.” I HAVE FOUGHT IN THREE WARS, I HAVE COMMANDED AND SEEN THE BEST SOLDIERS OF THE WORLD FIGHT. I THOUGHT I HAD SEEN IT ALL IN THE FIELD OF HEROICS AND HUMAN BRAVERY, BUT WATCHING THE COLOMBIAN BATTALION FIGHT I WITNESSED THE GREATEST AND MOST SUPERB THING OF MY LIFE – MAYOR GENERAL BLACKSBEAR BRYAN” Commander of the 24th division KOREA> October 1st, 1951 By Dialogo April 04, 2013 The U.S. Army Staff Talks Program serves as a bilateral forum for strategic-level discussions between respective armies. The program seeks to promote bilateral efforts in order to develop professional partnerships and increase interaction between partner nation armies. “The staff talks are a continuous process where we are able to coordinate and plan engagements to strengthen capabilities and build capacity,” said Maj. Gen. Frederick S. Rudesheim, the Army South commanding general. “We discuss ways in which we can enhance our security cooperation, as well as contribute to regional stability and constructive relations.” The army-to-army relationship between Colombia and the United States is strong. In this past year, the two armies worked together during humanitarian exercises in Guatemala and Honduras and during the PANAMAX 2012 multinational exercise.
As 2019 winds down, many are already looking ahead to next year including the key federal regulators that issue rules impacting credit unions. Two times a year, the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs issues a unified agenda from various federal regulators. The most recent versions were published in November 2019 and give us a look ahead to what agencies like NCUA and the CFPB will be working on in the coming months.NCUANCUA has several proposed and final rules on its agenda. Some address issues stemming from the agency’s regulatory reform agenda like compensation in connection with loans. Other agenda items tackle challenging capital issues like transitioning to the Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL) methodology and subordinated debt/regulatory capital.Here is a snapshot of the agenda: ShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr continue reading »
SHARE Email Facebook Twitter Press Release, Restore Pennsylvania Harrisburg, PA – Community leaders throughout Pennsylvania’s Anthracite Coal Region are urging the General Assembly to support Gov. Tom Wolf’s aggressive infrastructure plan, Restore Pennsylvania.“Many of municipalities that comprise Northeast Pennsylvania’s Anthracite Coal Region are facing a backlog of infrastructure projects that have been accumulating since the mining industry began to decline,” said Gov. Wolf. “By using Restore Pennsylvania to tackle critical infrastructure issues like blight, flooding and brownfields, we can help communities turn the corner and position them for economic success.”Supporters of Restore Pennsylvania include the Wilkes-Barre city council and mayor; Scranton city council and mayor; and Carbondale city council and mayor. Leaders of these communities say Restore Pennsylvania will play a critical role in improving not only the economy, but the daily lives of residents.“Pennsylvania’s aging infrastructure hurts our state’s competitiveness, risks public safety, and impacts our citizens’ quality of life,” Wilkes-Barre Mayor Tony George said in a letter to the General Assembly. “The time is right for Pennsylvania to position itself as a leader in the 21st century by investing in critical infrastructure needs that for too long have been neglected.”“On behalf of the City of Carbondale and the entire Upper Valley region of Northeastern Pennsylvania, I commend Governor Wolf on his “Restore PA” proposal,” said Carbondale Mayor Justin Taylor after city council voted to pass a resolution supporting Restore Pennsylvania. “The governor ‘gets it’ when it comes to cities and municipalities needing assistance to revitalize neighborhoods and downtowns. And to make such a comprehensive proposal using potential revenue from natural gas drilling — not taxes collected directly from the citizens of the Commonwealth — this should become a model for all regions and states.”“Stormwater management, flood control, blighted neighborhoods and overall infrastructure investment top the list of challenges we must begin to address to position the City of Scranton to be competitive and successful in the 21st century,” Scranton City Councilmembers Bill Gaughan and Kyle Donahue said in a joint statement regarding city council’s approval of a resolution supporting Restore Pennsylvania. “We can’t face those challenges alone. We are proud to stand with Governor Wolf in support of his vision outlined in Restore Pennsylvania to finally begin to address the urgent need for infrastructure investments across Pennsylvania.”Restore Pennsylvania is a statewide plan to aggressively address the commonwealth’s vital infrastructure needs. Funded through a commonsense severance tax that the Independent Fiscal Office has determined will be primarily paid for by out-of-state residents, Restore Pennsylvania is the only plan that will help make Pennsylvania a leader in the 21st century.View the full Restore Pennsylvania plan. Anthracite Coal Region Communities Urge Passage of Gov. Wolf’s Restore Pennsylvania Infrastructure Plan May 02, 2019
Speaking at the Innovation Second Pillar conference in Lucerne earlier this week, the question was raised whether funds should be forced to rewrite their lending agreements so their securities are with them during the AGM season.When a security is with the borrower, the lender cannot use it to vote.Barbara Heller, managing director of proxy advisory SWIPRA, said she believed those funds that wanted to ensure they could vote should not lend.“If you want to be sure you can vote at AGMs, then you mustn’t be involved in securities lending – but the law does not forbid it,” she told delegates.Speaking in a personal capacity, Zihler added that he did not view large-scale securities lending as compatible with VegüV, saying it was important to avoid a situation where pension funds were seen as “systematically” trying to circumvent voting requirements by lending their holdings.“You can’t say that if you have leant some or a part of the shares, potentially over a longer horizon, that you won’t be forced to recall the shares ahead of an AGM,” he said.However, Dominique Biedermann, chief executive of Swiss proxy voting foundation Ethos, stressed that pension funds should not be lulled into a sense of false security over engagement, believing that their only role was to cast votes.“The most important thing is not to attend the AGMs, but in advance to engage in a dialogue with the companies and, potentially – it is not impossible – to organise a campaign ahead of the AGM to communicate one’s concerns.” Large-scale securities lending by Switzerland’s pension funds will probably be impossible under legislation requiring the schemes to exercise their shareholder rights, the industry has been warned.Florian Zihler, a lawyer working at the Ministry of Justice (BJ), said he acknowledged that pension funds were financially compensated for lending out parts of their portfolio and therefore benefitted from it, but added that the activity could not be used as a reason for domestic funds to fail to vote at the AGMs of domestic firms.His comments come after the Swiss public last year overwhelmingly voted in favour of the Minder Initiative, requiring a change to the country’s constitution.The resulting law on excessive executive pay (VegüV) also requires the country’s pension funds to vote at the AGMs of companies either headquartered or listed in the country.
The Australian 20 August 2016Family First Comment: This is a fascinating read – and watch: “At the recent hearings of Victoria’s Royal Commission into Family Violence, experts in alcohol abuse and mental illness spoke out about this blatant disregard of the 40 years of research that addresses these complexities. “It is simplistic and misleading to say that domestic violence is caused by patriarchal attitudes,” said James Ogloff, a world-renowned mental health expert. “A sole focus on the gendered nature of family violence, which labels men as the perpetrators and women as the victims and which identifies gender inequity as the principal cause of family violence, is problematic on a number of levels,” said Peter Miller, principal research fellow and co-director of the violence prevention group at Deakin University. “The gendered view of domestic violence has held sway, dissenters are silenced and evidence about the true issues underlying this complex issue is ignored. And the huge cash cow supporting our blinkered domestic violence industry becomes ever more bloated. – Bettina ArndtIt has been shocking to watch this morph into a worldwide domestic violence industry determined to ignore evidence showing the complexities of violence in the home and avoid prevention strategies that would tackle the real risk factors underpinning this vital social issue.Here, too, we are witnessing Solberg’s “huge social betrayal” by denying the reality of the violence being witnessed by many Australian children.Just look at the bizarre $30 million television campaign the federal government ran a few months ago, which started with a little boy slamming a door in a little girl’s face. A series of vignettes followed, all about innocent females cowering from nasty males.The whole thing is based on the erroneous notion that domestic violence is caused by disrespect for women, precisely the type of “tired gender analysis” that Solberg has so thoroughly discredited.Yet our government spent at least $700,000 in funding for research and production of this campaign — just one example of the shocking misuse of the hundreds of millions of dollars that Malcolm Turnbull boasts our government is spending on domestic violence.Our key organisations all sing from the same songbook, regularly distorting statistics to present only one part of this complex story.There is a history of this in Australia. “Up to one quarter of young people in Australia have witnessed an incident of physical or domestic violence against their mother or stepmother,” Adam Graycar, a former director of the Australian Institute of Criminology, wrote in an introduction to a 2001 paper, Young Australians and Domestic Violence, a brief overview of the much larger Young People and Domestic Violence study.Somehow Graycar failed to mention that while 23 per cent of young people were aware of domestic violence against their mothers or stepmothers, an almost identical proportion (22 per cent) of young people were aware of domestic violence against their fathers or stepfathers by their mothers or stepmothers — as shown in the same study.This type of omission is everywhere today, with most of our bureaucracies downplaying statistics that demonstrate the role of women in family violence and beating up evidence of male aggression.How often have we been told we face an epidemic of domestic violence? It’s simply not true. Most Australian women are lucky enough to live in a peaceful society where the men in their lives treat them well.The official data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows violence against women has decreased across the 20-year period it has been studied, with the proportion of adult women experiencing physical violence from their male partner in the preceding year down from 2.6 per cent in 1996 to 0.8 per cent in 2012. (Violence from ex-partners dropped from 3.3 per cent to 0.7 per cent.)“There’s no evidence that we’re in the middle of an epidemic of domestic violence,” says Don Weatherburn, the respected director of the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, confirming that these figures from national surveys carried out by the ABS provide the best data on domestic violence in the country.He adds that in NSW “serious forms of domestic assault, such as assault inflicting grievous bodily harm, have actually come down by 11 per cent over the last 10 years”.The most recent statistics from the ABS Personal Safety Survey show 1.06 per cent of women are physically assaulted by their partner or ex-partner each year in Australia. This figure is derived from the 2012 PSS and published in its Horizons report by Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, available at http://bit.ly/1ZYSyEj. The rate is obtained by dividing cell B9 in Table 19 (93,400) by the total female residential population aged 18 and older (8,735,400).One in 100 women experiencing this physical violence from their partners is obviously a matter of great concern. But this percentage is very different from the usual figures being trotted out. You’ll never find the figure of 1.06 per cent mentioned by any of the domestic violence organisations in this country. Their goal is to fuel the flames, to promote an alarmist reaction with the hope of attracting ever greater funding for the cause.What we hear from them is that one in three women are victims of violence. But that’s utterly misleading because it doesn’t just refer to domestic violence. These statistics are also taken from the Personal Safety Survey but refer to the proportion of adult women who have experienced any type of physical violence at all (or threat of violence.) So we’re not just talking about violence by a partner or violence in the home but any aggressive incident, even involving a perfect stranger — such as an altercation with an aggressive shopping trolley driver or an incident of road rage.That’s partly how the figure inflates to one in three, but it also doesn’t even refer to what’s happening now because these figures include lifetime incidents for adult women — so with our 70-year-olds the violence could have taken place more than 50 years ago. And the equivalent figure for men is worse — one in two.As for the most horrific crimes, where domestic violence ends in homicide, we are constantly told that domestic violence kills one woman every week. That’s roughly true.According to AIC figures, one woman is killed by an intimate partner or ex-partner every nine days. One man is killed by his partner about every 30 days. So it is important to acknowledge that male violence is likelier to result in injury or death than female violence towards a partner.The fact remains that almost a quarter (23.1 per cent) of victims of intimate partner homicide are male — and we hardly ever hear about these deaths.It is not serving our society well to downplay the fact female violence can also be lethal, towards men and towards children: women account for more than half of all murders of children (52 per cent).The explosion in police records is due in part to recent expansions in the definition of family violence to include not just physical abuse but also threats of violence, psychological, emotional, economic and social abuse. Look at Western Australia, where this changed definition was introduced in 2004. That year West Australian police recorded 17,000 incidents of violence, but by 2012 this had almost tripled to 45,000.Other states report similar trends because of these expanded definitions.“If a woman turns up to a police station claiming her man has yelled at her, the chances are that she’ll end up with a police report and well on her way to obtaining an apprehended violence order, which puts her in a very powerful position,” says Augusto Zimmermann, a commissioner with the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia, who explains that AVOs can be used to force men to leave their homes and deny them contact with their children.Often men are caught in police proceedings and evicted from their homes by orders that are issued without any evidence of legal wrongdoing. “It is a frightening reality that here in Australia a perfectly innocent citizen stands to lose his home, his family, his reputation, as a result of unfounded allegations. This is happening to men every day (as a consequence) of domestic violence laws which fail to require the normal standards of proof and presumptions of innocence,” Zimmermann says, adding that he’s not talking about genuine cases of violent men who seriously abuse their wives and children but “law-abiding people who have lost their parental and property rights without the most basic requirements of the rule of law”.The growing trend for AVOs to be used for tactical purposes in family law disputes is also pushing up police records of domestic violence. “Rather than being motivated by legitimate concerns about feeling safe, a woman can make an application to AVO simply because she was advised by lawyers to look for any reason to apply for such an order when facing a family law dispute,” says Zimmermann, who served on a recent government inquiry into legal issues and domestic violence.A survey of NSW magistrates found 90 per cent agreed that AVOs were being used as a divorce tactic. Research by family law professor Patrick Parkinson and colleagues from the University of Sydney revealed that lawyers were suggesting that clients obtain AVOs, explaining to them that verbal and emotional abuse were enough to do the trickThe bottom line is that police reports tell us little and the ABS Personal Safety Survey remains our best source of data, showing the true picture of domestic violence. But there’s one more vital fact revealed by that survey that rarely surfaces: men account for one in three victims of partner violence.You’ll never find this figure mentioned on Our Watch, one of our leading domestic violence organisations, annually attracting government grants of up to $2 million. In May, when Lucy Turnbull became an ambassador for Our Watch, she was welcomed by its chief executive, Mary Barry, who thanked the ambassadors for “engaging Australians to call out disrespect and violence towards women and advocating for gender equality”, which was “exactly what the evidence says is needed to end the epidemic”.Our Watch staff spend their time writing policy documents and running conferences all firmly locked into the gender equity framework. The site’s facts-and-figures pages include lists of cherry-picked statistics about violence against women but male victims are dismissed by simply stating that the “overwhelming majority of acts of domestic violence are perpetrated by men against women”.There’s an interesting parallel here. As it happens, this one-in-three ratio is similar to the proportions of suicides among men and women. Among males, 2.8 per cent of all deaths in 2014 were attributed to suicide, while the rate for females was 0.9 per cent. Imagine the public outcry if the smaller number of female suicides were used to justify committing the entire suicide prevention budget to men. So why is it that all our government organisations are getting away with doing just that with the hundreds of millions being spent on domestic violence?According to one of Australia’s leading experts on couple relationships, Kim Halford, a professor of clinical psychology at the University of Queensland, most family violence does not fit the picture most of us have when we imagine domestic violence — a violent man severely beating up his partner to control her. Such violence makes up less than 1 per cent of family violence.Most family violence is two-way aggression, with international research showing about a third of couples have a go at each other — pushing, slapping, shoving or worse. Given the shame and stigma associated with being a male victim of family violence it is not surprising that men downplay these experiences in victim surveys such as Australia’s Personal Safety Survey. It’s only when men and women are asked about perpetrating violence that the two-way violence emerges, with women readily admitting to researchers that they are very actively involved and often instigate this type of “couple violence”.“Thirty years of international research consistently shows that women and men are violent towards each other at about the same rate,” Halford tells Inquirer.As one example, two major meta-analysis studies conducted by psychology professor John Archer from Britain’s University of Central Lancashire in 2000 and 2002 found that women were likelier than men to report acts such as pushing, slapping or throwing something at their partner. Archer pointed out that women were likelier to be injured as a result of the couple violence, although there was still a substantial minority of injured male victims.This two-way violence wasn’t what most researchers expected to find, admits a leading researcher in this area, Terrie Moffitt from Duke University in the US. “We asked the girls questions like, ‘Have you hit your partner?’ ‘Have you thrown your partner across the room?’ ‘Have you used a knife on your partner?’ I thought we were wasting our time asking these questions but they said yes, and they said yes in just the same numbers as the boys did.” Moffitt’s work with young people was part of the world-renowned Dunedin longitudinal study back in the 1990s that recently featured on the SBS series Predict My Future (http://bit.ly/29NEDwQ).The 2001 Young People and Domestic Violence study mentioned earlier was based on national research involving 5000 young Australians aged 12 to 20. This found ample evidence that children were witnessing this two-way parental couple violence, with 14.4 per cent witnessing “couple violence”, 9 per cent witnessing male to female violence only and 7.8 per cent witnessing female to male violence only — which means about one in four young Australians have this detrimental start to their lives. The report found the most damage to children occurred when they witnessed both parents involved in violence.It is often claimed that women hit only in self-defence, but Halford points out the evidence shows this is not true. “In fact, one of the strongest risk factors for a woman being hit by a male partner is her hitting that male partner. It’s absolutely critical that we tackle couple violence if we really want to stop this escalation into levels of violence which cause women serious injury,” he says. Of course, the impact on children is the other important reason to make couple violence a significant focus.Naturally, none of this rates a mention in the section on “what drives violence against women” in the official government framework (http://bit.ly/2a3sVOQ) promoted by all our key domestic violence bodies. Nor is there any proper attention paid to other proven, evidence-based risk factors such as alcohol and drug abuse, poverty and mental illness.The only officially sanctioned risk factor for domestic violence in this country is gender inequality. “Other factors interact with or reinforce gender inequality to contribute to increased frequency and severity of violence against women, but do not drive violence in and of themselves” is the only grudging acknowledgment in the framework that other factors may be at play.At the recent hearings of Victoria’s Royal Commission into Family Violence, experts in alcohol abuse and mental illness spoke out about this blatant disregard of the 40 years of research that addresses these complexities. “It is simplistic and misleading to say that domestic violence is caused by patriarchal attitudes,” said James Ogloff, a world-renowned mental health expert.“A sole focus on the gendered nature of family violence, which labels men as the perpetrators and women as the victims and which identifies gender inequity as the principal cause of family violence, is problematic on a number of levels,” said Peter Miller, principal research fellow and co-director of the violence prevention group at Deakin University.Miller was involved in a comprehensive recent review of longitudinal studies involving predictors of family violence that identified childhood experiences with abuse and violence, particularly in families with problem alcohol use, as key predictors of adult involvement in domestic violence. He has encountered obstruction in conducting and publishing research into the role of drugs and alcohol in family violence.The evidence is there about the complexities of domestic violence, but on an official level no one is listening. The reason is simple. The deliberate distortion of this important social issue is all about feminists refusing to give up hard-won turf. Ogloff spelled this out to the royal commission when he explained that the Victorian family violence sector feared that “recognising other potential causes of violence could cause a shift in funding away from programs directed at gender inequity”.Forty years ago an important feminist figure was invited to Australia to visit our newly established women’s refuges. Erin Pizzey was the founder of Britain’s first refuge, a woman praised around the world for her pioneering work helping women escape from violence. On the way to Australia Pizzey travelled to New Zealand, where she spoke out about her changing views. She had learned through dealing with violent women in her refuge that violence was not a gender issue and that it was important to tackle the complexities of violence to properly address the issue.Pizzey quickly attracted the wrath of the women’s movement in Britain, attracting death threats that forced her for a time to leave the country. She tells Inquirer from London: “The feminists seized upon domestic violence as the cause they needed to attract more money and supporters at a time when the first flush of enthusiasm for their movement was starting to wane. Domestic violence was perfect for them — the just cause that no one dared challenge. It led to a worldwide million-dollar industry, a huge cash cow supporting legions of bureaucrats and policymakers.”In Pizzey’s New Zealand press interviews she challenged the gender inequality view of violence, suggesting tackling violence in the home required dealing with the real roots of violence, such as intergenerational exposure to male and female aggression.News travelled fast. By the time Pizzey was set to leave for the Australian leg of the trip she was persona non grata with the feminists running our refuges. Her visit to this country was cancelled.That was 1976. Since then the gendered view of domestic violence has held sway, dissenters are silenced and evidence about the true issues underlying this complex issue is ignored. And the huge cash cow supporting our blinkered domestic violence industry becomes ever more bloated.READ MORE: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/domestic-violence-data-shows-women-are-not-the-only-victims/news-story/2749c4517a57c33aca8bc2da9a40e2f9
Sharing is caring! Share Share HealthLifestyle Contraceptive Injection by: – February 22, 2011 Tweet Share 110 Views no discussions BBC HealthFPAYou can prevent pregnancy with an injection every two or three months. Discover how this method works and whether it could be suitable for you.What is it?The contraceptive injection contains the hormone progestogen. There are two types of injection:Depo-Provera provides contraception for three months (12 weeks)Noristerat provides contraception for two months (eight weeks)Depo-Provera is the most used injectable method in the UK. Injectable contraception is a long-acting method of contraception.How does it work?The main way it works is by stopping the ovaries releasing an egg (ovulation) each month. It also:Thickens the mucus in the cervix, making it difficult for sperm to reach an eggMakes the lining of the womb thinner so it’s less likely to accept a fertilised eggMyths about the contraceptive injection:It makes you infertile. Not true – but normal fertility can take some time to return after using Depo-ProveraYou can only use it for two years. Not true – it can be used for longer providing you do not have any risk factors for osteoporosis (being over 45, poor diet, low exercise or family history of osteoporosis)How reliable is it?It’s more than 99 per cent effective. This means that using this method, fewer than one woman in 100 will get pregnant in a year. All long-acting reversible methods are very effective because while they’re being used you don’t have to remember to take or use contraception.How to the contraceptive injectionThe hormone is injected into a muscle, usually in your bottom. Depo-Provera can also sometimes be given in the leg or arm. The injection can be started up to and including the fifth day of your period. If started at any other time, additional contraception has to be used for seven days.Advantages and disadvantagesThe advantages of the contraceptive injection include:It’s very effectiveIt doesn’t interrupt sexYou can use it if you can’t use oestrogens or are breastfeedingIt may reduce heavy painful periods and help with premenstrual symptoms for some womenIt may give you some protection against cancer of the wombIt may give you some protection against pelvic inflammatory diseaseIt isn’t affected by other medicinesThe disadvantages include:Your periods may change in a way that is not acceptable to you, or they may stopIrregular bleeding may continue for some months after you stop the injectionYou may put on weight when you use Depo-ProveraSome women report having headaches, acne, mood changes and breast tendernessThe injection lasts for eight or 12 weeks, so if you have side effects they will continue during this time and for some time afterwardsYour periods and normal fertility may take some time to return – more than a year for some womenOther things you may want to consider include:Once you’ve had the injection you don’t need to think about it until it needs replacingYou don’t need a cervical screening test or internal examination to have the injectionIt doesn’t protect you against sexually transmitted infectionsDepo-Provera affects your normal oestrogen level, which may cause thinning of the bones, but once you stop any risk is reversed – women aged under 18 and over 45 will be carefully counselled about thisCan anyone use it?Most women can have the contraception injection, but it may be unsuitable if you:Think you might already be pregnantWant a baby within the next yearDon’t want your periods to changeHave thrombosis, heart or circulatory diseaseHave active liver diseaseHave breast cancer now or within the past five yearsHave migraines with auraHave diabetes with complications or have had diabetes for more than 20 yearsHave risk factors for osteoporosisWhere can I get it?Injectable contraception is free on the NHS from contraception clinics, sexual health clinics and general practice.
A nationwide lockdown was lifted last week, and Nepal is now open “for tourism activities, including mountaineering and trekking,” Mira Acharya of the tourism department told AFP. The decision comes despite over 1,000 new coronavirus infections reported this week, with a total of 19,547 cases. KATHMANDU – Nepal has reopened its mountains – including Everest – for the autumn trekking and climbing season in a bid to boost the struggling tourism sector, officials said yesterday, despite coronavirus uncertainty. The Himalayan country shut its borders in March just ahead of the busy spring season when hundreds of mountaineers usually flock to the country, costing jobs and millions of dollars in revenue. The government will permit international flights to land in the country from August 17. Officials were “working on” safety protocols Acharya added, including for how long visitors would have to quarantine on arrival. (AFP) Despite coronavirus uncertainty, Nepal has reopened Everest for the autumn trekking and climbing season.
David Ivan Bean, 78, of Greensburg passed away on August 21, 2017. He was born on June 16, 1939 in Osgood, the son of Ivan and Emily (Corson) Bean. He was a 1957 graduate of Osgood High School. On April 14, 1962 he married Carolyn June Weber and she preceded him in death on September 19, 2011. David was the owner of Napa of Greensburg. He had worked at KB Foods and most recently drove cars for Acra Automotive. He was a member of the Greensburg United Methodist Church, Masonic Lodge of Greensburg, Order of the Eastern Star, employed by the Indianapolis Motor Speedway and was a Greensburg volunteer fireman. David was best known for spreading holiday cheer both locally and in the surrounding communities during the Christmas season. Survivors include: Daughters- Deborah (John) Sellers and Melissa (David) Fischer; Grandchildren- Olivia (Shane) Fischer-Smith, Sean Sellers, and Kyle Sellers; and Sister- Emily D. Lewis. He was preceded in death by his parents, his wife Carolyn and his brother Donald Bean.A visitation for family and friends will be held on Thursday, August 24, 2017 from 3PM 7PM at the Greensburg United Methodist Church. Funeral services will begin at 10AM on Friday, August 25 also at the church with Pastor Dan Richwine officiating. Burial will follow at the South Park Cemetery. Memorial contributions can be made to the Greensburg United Methodist Church or the Cheer Fund. Online condolences can be made to the family at www.gilliland-howe .com.