The Top 12 Things That Bother American Drivers The Most -

The Top 12 Things That Bother American Drivers The Most - 



With Memorial Day rapidly approaching and the onset of summer - and the inevitable spike in the number of drivers on the road, Expedia decided to poll American drivers to understand what really pisses them off the most. The 2014 Road Rage Report ranks "The Texter" as the most aggravating driving behavior beating out "The Tailgater". Perhaps most interestingly, 7 in 10 Americans report having been "flipped off" by a fellow motorist (while only 17% admitted to the aggressive act) and the rudest drivers live in the largest cities (71% rank NYC as the rudest).

Via The Expedia 2014 Road Rage Report:

The full list of driving behaviors ranked as "most annoying or offensive" includes (percentage identifies behaviors ranked in the top five):

The Texter (drivers who text, email or talk on a phone while driving): 69%

The Tailgater (drivers who follow others far too closely): 60%

The Multi-tasker (applying makeup, eating, reading, etc.): 54%

The Drifter (either straddling two lanes or weaving between them): 43%

The Crawler (driving well below the speed limit): 39%

The Swerver (failing to signal before changing lanes or turning): 38%

The Left-Lane Hog (drivers who occupy the passing lane without moving): 32%

The Inconsiderate (those who do not let others merge): 30%

The Speeder (driving well past the speed limit at length): 27%

The Honker (drivers who slam the horn at will): 18%

The Unappreciative (drivers who do not give a wave or gesture of thanks): 13%

The Red Light Racer (drivers who inch ever closer to the light when red): 12%


Despite the fact that Americans identify texting as the most offensive driving violator, 55% of Americans do admit to using their mobile phone at least some of the time while driving.

In addition, 70% of Americans also admit to having been guilty of aggressive driving behavior, including speeding (58%), tailgating (28%) and yelling and/or swearing at fellow drivers (28%). Men are only slightly more likely to admit to aggressive driving than women (74% to 67%). 
   
The rudest drivers are found in the largest cities. 33% of Americans name New York City as home to the least courteous/most rage-inducing drivers. 71% of Americans put New York among the top five rudest driving cities. Los Angeles (22%) ranked second, while Atlanta (9%) came in third. Only 5% of Americans believe Boston features the country's rudest drivers, but 27% of Americans place Boston in the top five.

62% of Americans believe 16 is too young to drive

85% of American drivers are "always pleasantly surprised" to receive a wave of thanks from a fellow driver

Classic rock is the preferred road trip music for 40% of Americans, followed by:

Country (28%)
Golden Oldies (25%)
Top Hits (24%)
Pop (23%)
Easy Listening (22%)
Hip Hop (15%)
Heavy Metal (10%)

Read more - 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-16/what-bothers-american-drivers-most

Florida car thief arrested after crashing stolen auto into alligator...

Florida car thief arrested after crashing stolen auto into alligator...



A suspected auto thief was captured after the stolen car he was driving struck an alligator as the animal was crossing a Florida road, police report.

Calvin Rodriguez, 22, was driving a hot Honda Civic Tuesday when he was spotted by Port St. Lucie Police Department officers. Rodriguez sped off with cops on his tail.

According to a police report, the vehicle “began driving at a high rate of speed and was lost sight of.” Rodriguez’s escape, however, was not without complications, cops noted.

“The Honda was later discovered to have crashed into an alligator, causing it to crash into a median,” police reported. A search of the 1999 Honda yielded a set of “shaved keys” that Rodriguez reportedly told police he used to “boost” cars. “This shows that Calvin was in control of the Honda that struck the alligator and the median,” investigators noted.

A police spokesperson told TSG that he was unaware whether the alligator survived the collision.  

One of Rodriguez’s alleged accomplices told officers that he “steals cars, drives them for a few days, and gets rid of them.” After being read his Miranda rights, Rodriguez confessed to the auto theft, saying that he learned to steal cars “by growing up in a tough town in Connecticut.”

Read more - 

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/alligator-helps-foil-car-theft-487632

Russia Dumps 20% Of Its US Treasury Holdings As Mystery "Belgium" Buyer Adds Another Whopping $40 Billion -

Russia Dumps 20% Of Its US Treasury Holdings As Mystery "Belgium" Buyer Adds Another Whopping $40 Billion - 



Back in mid-March, there was a brief scare after the start of the Ukraine conflict, when Fed custody holdings plunged by a record $104.5 billion (if promptly bouncing back the following week), leading many to believe that Russia may have dumped its Treasurys, or at least change its bond custodian. We noted that we wouldn't have a definitive answer until the May TIC number came out to know for sure how much Russia had sold, or if indeed, anything. Moments ago the May TIC numbers did come out, and as expected, Russia indeed dumped a record $26 billion, or some 20% of all of its holdings, bringing its post-March total to just over $100 billion - the lowest since the Lehman crisis.






But as shocking as this largely pre-telegraphed dump was, it pales in comparison with what Zero Hedge first observed, is the country that has quietly and quite rapidly become the third largest holder of US paper: Belgium. Or rather, "Belgium" because it is quite clear that it is not the country of Begium who is engaging in this unprecedented buying spree of US paper, but some account acting through Belgian custody.

This is how we explained it last month:

... to clarify for our trigger-happy Belgian (non) readers: it is quite clear that Belgium itself is not the buyer. What is not clear is who the mysterious buyer using Belgium as a front is. Because that same "buyer", who to further explain is not China, just bought another whopping $31 billion in Treasurys in February, bringing the "Belgian" total to a record $341.2 billion, cementing "it", or rather whoever the mysterious name behind the Euroclear buying rampage is, as the third largest holder of US Treasurys, well above the hedge fund buying community, also known as Caribbean Banking Centers, which held $300 billion in March.

In summary: someone, unclear who, operating through Belgium and most likely the Euroclear service (possible but unconfirmed), has added a record $141 billion in Treasurys since December, or the month in which Bernanke announced the start of the Taper, bringing the host's total to an unprecedented $341 billion!
Make that an unprecedented $381 billion because as we just learned "Belgium" bought another $40 billion in March!



Curiously, this happened as Japan sold $10 billion in TSYs, and as China remained unchanged.  Further, foreign official accounts actually declined from $4.069 trillion to $4.054 trillion, which means this is what the US Treasury would classify as a "Private" buyer. 

So to summarize, of the total $60 billion increase in foreign Treasury holdings, which rose from $5.89 trillion to $5.95 trillion, "Belgium" accounted for two thirds, most likely doing the purchases under the guise of a "private", unofficial account! 

And once again, it is Belgium in "", because whoever is buying through the tiny European country, whose GDP is just double its reported total TSY holdings, is neither its government nor its people.

The question remains: who? Who has bought a whopping $200 billion in Treasurys using Belgium as a proxy since October?

Read more - 

How Might Food Dye Be Affecting Your Health? -

How Might Food Dye Be Affecting Your Health? - 



Artificial food colouring in packaged food tends to be listed on ingredient labels, but until now, the amount of food dye in brand name food products was a mystery.  

But a new study published in the journal, Clinical Pediatrics, looks at just how much artificial food dye is in those popular products. 

Laura Stevens is a research associate at Purdue University’s Nutrition Science department in West Lafayette, Ind. She said the data collected allows parents to look at what their kids eat and determine how much food dye they're ingesting. 


The research indicates a meal of two cups of Kraft Dinner,237 mL or eight ounces of Orange Crush and a bag of Skittles for dessert adds up to 102 milligrams of artificial food dye in one sitting.
  
Stevens said the data revealed surprises like lemon pudding tinted yellow with artificial dyes, and marshmallows and white icing tinted with multiple shades of food colouring. 

"I thought it was interesting that pickles have yellow and blue dye to make them green, and I’ve looked through the pickles at our grocery store and haven’t found any that don’t contain those dyes," she said.


This issue has been looked at before, but supermarket shelves and buying habits have changed a lot since then.

"There’s been a lot of studies back in the '70s and '80s that used 26-27 milligrams of dyes and found that very few kids seemed to react to that amount," Stevens said.  

"But when they increased it to 50-100 milligrams then a greater proportion of children reacted."

That initial amount of 26 milligrams used in the original studies seems pretty tame now, considering one serving of Kool-Aid’s Burst Cherry drink has twice that amount.

While nothing definitive has been found, artificial food dyes have long been studied for links to behavioural issues in kids.

"There were studies done in the U.K. recently that gave food dyes to a large group of healthy children, including ADHD kids," Stevens explained.  

"And they found that not only did some of the ADHD kids react to the dyes, but also some of the children without ADHD reacted. And they reacted with more hyperactivity and inattention."

The results of that study were motivation enough for the European Union to start labelling foods with high amounts of food dye, linking them to potential behavioural problems in some kids.

The European Food Safety Agency said that though the effects of food dyes on behaviour were somewhat uncertain, the lack of nutritional benefits from the food colouring meant removing them wouldn't compromise a healthy diet. 

And while no study has statistically proven the potential connection between food dye and behaviour problems, consumer pressure is forcing some companies to make changes.


Kraft has removed some dyes from its macaroni and cheese products, Pepperidge Farm switched to natural dyes for its coloured Goldfish crackers a few years ago and Frito-Lay has removed some artificial food dyes from several of their products.

While future studies are likely to continue looking for links between behaviour and artificial food dyes, Stevens said parents can try an elimination diet protocol with their own kids at home.

"All they have to do is avoid the foods that are coloured for a week or two. Then get the little bottles of red and green and yellow and blue food dye, put a few drops in a glass of water and ask their child to drink it. Then observe the behaviour."

Stevens said to watch for things like hyperactivity, runny nose, muscle aches, inattentiveness or higher levels of frustration. 

Read more - 

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/05/15/food-dye-health_n_5328579.html

How Dirty Are Your Dog’s Kisses? - testing found evidence of Nyceria, bacteria linked to STD’s, pneumonia and plaque -

How Dirty Are Your Dog’s Kisses? - testing found evidence of Nyceria, bacteria linked to STD’s, pneumonia and plaque - 



We’ve all gotten licks of love from our dogs. However, would you let your dog kiss you on the mouth?
Urban legend has it that dog’s mouths are very clean.
“That’s not true,” said Nova Southeastern University Microbiologist Dr. Julie Torruellas-Garcia.
Saliva samples from dogs in Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach were sent to the lab to be tested. Based on the cultures that grew in the lab from the samples, Dr. Torruellas-Garcia said you may want to think twice before you and your dog exchange siliva.
“There was quite a bit of bacteria that grew from the dogs’ mouths,” said Dr. Torruellas-Garcia.
While our testing did not reveal the presence of any e-coli or bacteria that could cause a staph infection, Dr. Torruellas-Garcia and her students found globs of other microboes.
“One plate had so many bacteria mixed together that it was difficult to test,” said Dr. Torruellas-Garcia.
In swabs taken from dogs in the West Palm Beach area, the testing found evidence of Nyceria, bacteria linked to STD’s, pneumonia and plaque.
“Think about where a dog tends to lick, and consider he or she might have just licked before they licked you,” said Dr. Torruellas-Garcia.
After all, it’s not like a dog knows to wash hands or brush teeth. West Palm Beach Veterinarian Ken Simmons said not to worry though, all that bacteria doesn’t stay in a dog’s mouth for long.
“It’s gone so fast, if they lick and groom themselves, whatever organisms they ingest, they’re gone in a matter of minutes,” said Simmons.
If doggie breath bothers you, it may be time to take your dog for a dental cleaning. After all, if you didn’t take care of your teeth, your mouth would have the same problems.
In the end, the testing didn’t reveal anything out of the ordinary. Dr. Simmons said it’s simply a matter of with what you are comfortable.
“I don’t think it’s a great idea to french kiss a dog, but having a normal lick on the face is no more dangerous than a kiss from your spouse,” said Dr. Simmons.

Read more - 

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2014/05/13/how-dirty-are-your-dogs-kisses/

Intensive mobile phone users at higher risk of brain cancer... -

Intensive mobile phone users at higher risk of brain cancer... - 



People who used their phones more than 15 hours each month found to be at two to three times higher risk of developing glioma and meningioma tumours

People who use mobile phones intensively appear to have a higher risk of developing certain types of brain cancer, French scientists have said, reviving questions about phone safety.

Individuals who used their mobiles for more than 15 hours each month over five years on average had between two and three times greater risk of developing glioma and meningioma tumours compared with people who rarely used their phones, they found.

The study, appearing in the latest issue of British journal Occupational and Environmental Medicine, is the latest in a long-running exploration of mobile-phone safety.

Over the past 15 years most investigations have failed to turn up conclusive results either way, although several have suggested a link between gliomas and intensive, long-term use.

"Our study is part of that trend, but the results have to be confirmed," said Isabelle Baldi, of the University of Bordeaux in south-western France, who took part in the study.

In 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) said radiofrequency fields used by mobile phones were possibly carcinogenic.

However, researchers have faced several challenges, including getting an accurate picture of phone use in real life, filtering out lifestyle factors such as smoking which amplify cancer risk and taking into account changing phone technology.

The new study looked at 253 cases of glioma and 194 cases of meningioma reported in four French departments between 2004 and 2006.

These patients were matched against 892 "controls" or healthy individuals drawn from the general population, in a bid to spot any differences between the two groups.

The comparison found a higher risk among those who used their phone intensively, especially among those who used it for their work, such as in sales. The duration of use in this category ranged from between two and 10 years, averaging at five years.

But the study also found several inconsistencies with other investigations that have suggested a link between heavy phone use and brain cancer.

For instance, in contrast with previous work, it found that cancer occurred on the opposite side of the brain – rather than on the same side – of where the phone was customarily used.

"It is difficult to define a level of risk, if any, especially as mobile phone technology is constantly evolving," the study acknowledged.

"The rapid evolution of technology has led to a considerable increase in the use of mobile phones and a parallel decrease of [radiowave intensity] emitted by the phones.

"Studies taking account of these recent developments and allowing the observation of potential long-term effects will be needed."

Read more - 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/may/13/intensive-mobile-phone-users-higher-risk-brain-cancer-study

How "Hyperpalatable" Foods Could Turn You Into A Food Addict -

How "Hyperpalatable" Foods Could Turn You Into A Food Addict - 



Over a third of the global population is now overweight, and the percentages are increasing. Some neuroscientists have suggested that the rise of so-called "hyperpalatable foods" may partially explain the unprecedented rates of obesity.

Our food environment has changed dramatically over the years, most notably through the introduction of so-called "hyperpalatable" foods. These foods are deliberately engineered in such a way that they surpass the reward properties of traditional foods, such as vegetables, fruits, and nuts. Food chemists achieve this by suffusing products with increased levels of fat, sugar, flavors, and food additives.



Conditioned hypereating

David A. Kessler, author of The End of Overeating: Taking Control of the Insatiable American Appetite and former head of the FDA, claims that the food industry has combined and created foods in a way that taps into our brain circuitry, thus stimulating our desire for more. On their own, these ingredients aren't particularly potent, but when combined in specific ways, they tap into the brain's reward system, creating a feedback loop that stimulates our desire to eat and leaves us wanting more — even when we're full.

As Kessler told the New York Times, restaurant chains like Chili's cook up "hyper-palatable food that requires little chewing and goes down easily," while a Snickers bar is "extraordinarily well engineered." As we chew it, he says, the sugar dissolves, the fat melts and the caramel traps the peanuts so the entire combination of flavors is blissfully experienced in the mouth at the same time.

Eventually, the experience of eating impossibly delicious foods results in what Kessler describes as "conditioned hypereating." When we consume enjoyable sugary and fatty foods, it stimulates endorphins in our brains — chemicals that signal a pleasurable experience. In turn, and in Pavlovian fashion, these chemicals stimulate us to eat more of that type of food, while also calming us down and making us feel good.

But is it really addiction?

Conditioned hypereating sounds suspiciously similar to what we might call food addiction. And indeed, studies have shown that hyperpalatable foods may be capable of triggering an addictive process — one that's been postulated as a possible cause of the obesity epidemic.

But is it fair or reasonable to categorize food — something we need to keep us alive — alongside such things as illicit drugs, alcohol, and gambling? Some scientists say yes.

Last year, for example, neuroscientists from Connecticut College claimed that Oreo cookies are more addictive than cocaine. The researchers came to this conclusion after measuring a protein called c-Fos in the brains of rats. They found that the cookies activated more neurons in the accumbens — a region of the brain associated with pleasure, and studied for its role in addiction and reward-processing — than addictive substances like cocaine. Not surprisingly, the researchers were harshly criticized for suggesting that something as apparently benign as an Oreo cookie could be compared to a notorious party drug.

These concerns aside, evidence is mounting in support of the idea that food addiction is actually a thing.

It's known, for example, that food cues and consumption activates neurocircuitry, such as the meso-cortico-limbic pathways, implicated in drug addition.

In addition, work done in Bart Hoebel's lab at Princeton University have shown that rats overeating a sugar solution develop many behaviors and changes in the brain that are consistent with the effects of drug abuse, including withdrawal symptoms. Other studies support these findings, suggesting a reward dysfunction linked to addiction in rats who overeat hyperpalatable foods. Importantly, much of this compares reasonably well to humans, including cravings, continued use despite negative consequences, and diminished control of consumption. On the face of it, food addiction certainly exhibits all the hallmarks of conventional forms of addiction.



If it looks like a duck...

As noted by Nicole Avena and Mark Gold in a short-paper on the effects of sugars and fats on hedonic overeating, many of these "studies are supported by clinical research showing similarities in the effects of increased body weight or obesity and abused drugs on brain dopamine systems, as well as the manifestation of behaviors indicative of addiction."

Importantly, a relationship has been found to exist between binge eating-related disorders and addiction-like eating habits facilitated by the consumption of hyperpalatable foods. As summarized by addiction expert Adrian Meule:

In humans, increasing evidence suggests that individuals with binge eating-related disorders, i.e., bulimia nervosa (BN), binge eating disorder (BED), and obesity, experience behavioral symptoms and neurochemical changes that are highly comparable to other addictive behaviors. Moreover, increased prevalence of drug use can be found in BN and BED, but not in anorexia nervosa. In recent years, neuroendocrine pathways have been identified that are involved in both drug- and food-seeking behaviors. Specifically, appetite-regulating peptides like ghrelin, neuropeptide Y, orexin, or leptin have also been associated with craving for alcohol or tobacco. On a neurochemical level, reduced striatal D2 receptor availability has been found in obese patients similar to patients with substance use.
In light of this evidence, some researchers are suggesting that "food addiction' join other non-drug addictions, such as sexual compulsivity and gambling.

Tackling the Problem

Though the addictive potential of foods continues to be debated, a number of strategies have been proposed to address the situation. Back in 2011, Ashley Gearhardt and colleagues reviewed some policy and public health strategies that have proven effective in reducing the impact of addictive substances. They concluded that:

Corporate responsibility, public health approaches, environmental change, and global efforts all seem essential in reducing food- and substance-related problems. Such approaches could be enacted in conjunction with individual-focused behavioral and pharmacological efforts that could also benefit from considering similarities between food-related conditions like obesity and drug addiction. Ignoring the analogous neural and behavioral effects of foods and drugs of abuse may result in a substantial loss of time, resources, and lives, as we rediscover lessons learned in reducing the impact of addictive substances.
Amongst their many recommendations, the researchers proposed that hyperpalatable foods be taxed like cigarettes, have their accessibility reduced (e.g. removal of vending machines from specific locations), and that manufacturers be limited in terms of marketing and sales (e.g. by not allowing certain products to alter the food environments of developing nations). It has been shown, for example, that obesity rates in countries such as France and the United Kingdom have been rising in parallel with increases in the availability of highly processed foods and fast-food chains.

Lastly, by recognizing and appreciating the neurological underpinnings of overeating, researchers will be encouraged to find new ways of improving treatments, while policy makers will have added support for implementing broader and more impactful health policies.

Read more - 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-13/guest-post-how-hyperpalatable-foods-could-turn-you-food-addict

SEC Official Claims Over 50% Of Private Equity Audits Reveal Criminal Behavior -

SEC Official Claims Over 50% Of Private Equity Audits Reveal Criminal Behavior - 



Last week, Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism penned a fantastic piece leveraging a talk by SEC official Drew Bowden. Mr. Bowden heads the SEC’s examinations unit, and at a private equity conference he explained that “more than 50 percent of private equity firms it has audited have engaged in serious infractions of securities laws.” What is so incredible about the talk, is that while Bowden goes into details of shady practice after shady practice, he ultimately admits that the SEC isn’t being particularly aggressive with the private equity industry because “we believe that most people in the industry are trying to do the right thing, to help their clients, to grow their business, and to provide for their owners and employees.”

Yes, go ahead and read that again. The industry regulator is assuming that private equity firms are trying to do the right thing, despite the fact that audits demonstrated to a tune of greater than 50% the opposite to be true.

Private equity managers are some of the savviest people in finance and they know exactly what they are doing. What the SEC is basically admitting, is that private equity firms are also “too big to regulate” and, of course, “too big to jail.” After all, every single person at the SEC is likely angling for a big payday at a PE firm via the revolving door. Of course they aren’t going to regulate.

Meanwhile, if you are just an average citizen, you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law if you commit even the most minor infraction. This sort of behavior led to the death of prodigy Aaron Swartz, the incarceration of political prisoner Barrett Brown, a swat team raid on a young kid in Peroia, Illinois for a parody Twitter account, the firing of a constriction worker for not paying for a $0.89 soda refill. This list goes on and on. Yet private equity crimes, which likely run into the billions collectively, are treated with kid gloves. As I have maintained many times before, this is how the social fabric of a society dies.

From Naked Capitalism:

At a private equity conference this week, Drew Bowden, a senior SEC official, told private equity fund managers and their investors in considerable detail about how the agency had found widespread stealing and other serious infractions in its audits of private equity firms.

In the years that I’ve been reading speeches from regulators, I’ve never seen anything remotely like Bowden’s talk. I’ve embedded it at the end of this post and strongly encourage you to read it in full.

Despite the at times disconcertingly polite tone, the SEC has now announced that more than 50 percent of private equity firms it has audited have engaged in serious infractions of securities laws. These abuses were detected thanks to to Dodd Frank. Private equity general partners had been unregulated until early 2012, when they were required to SEC regulation as investment advisers.

Bowden heads the SEC’s examinations unit, and his rap sheet was based on his two years of experience in auditing private equity firms. As bad as embezzlement and other sharp practices are, at least as troubling is the revelation that the limited partners have been derelict in their duties. They’ve agreed to terms in their relationship with the general partners to make it easy for the general partners to abuse the investors. The general partners can steal from their limited partners because the limited partners are asleep. The LPs have failed to negotiate for contractual protections when they have the most leverage, prior to investing, and they’ve been unwilling or unable to monitor their investments effectively once they’ve handed over their money. Note that the industry was warned about this possible outcome; it corresponds to the worst scenario, ” A Broken Industry,” in a 2011 paper by Harvard Business School professor Josh Lerner.

Bowden pointed out that private equity is unique among the investment advisers the SEC supervises. The general partners’ control of portfolio companies gives them access to their cash flows, which the GPs can divert into their own pockets in numerous ways.

He went on to describe some of the common fee skimming models. For example:

Some of the most common deficiencies we see in private equity in the area of fees and expenses occur in firm’s use of consultants, also known as “Operating Partners,” whom advisers promote as providing their portfolio companies with consulting services or other assistance that the portfolio companies could not independently afford.
Here’s how this scam works. PE firms raise funds by showing prospective investors a strong team of professionals who are going to find attractive companies to buy and manage them. The limited partnership agreement, which is the contract between the private equity firm and the investors, typically says that the private equity firm has to pay for the wages of people working on the fund’s behalf. However, unbeknownst to the investors because it was never disclosed, part of the PE firm “team”, usually the members that work with portfolio companies, are actually being paid as independent contractors. The private equity firm then bills most or all of these sham independent consultants to the portfolio companies with whom they interact.

Most troubling of all is that we have reports from industry insiders that Bowden failed to mention the most egregious forms of stealing, which may cost investors billions of dollars annually. As we understand it, the SEC is on to a couple of large-scale scams perpetrated by some of the biggest firms.

The SEC may be pulling its punches because it may be uncertain about what to do with the rot it has found. Side by side with the the unprecedented, detailed litany of numerous forms of lawbreaking and bad conduct, Bowden was also peculiarly deferential, which gave his speech a schizophrenic feel. For instance:

Some questioned why we would show our hand in this way, to which there’s a simple and sensible answer. We believe that most people in the industry are trying to do the right thing, to help their clients, to grow their business, and to provide for their owners and employees. We therefore believe that we can most effectively fulfill our mission to promote compliance by sharing as much information as we can with the industry, knowing that people will use it to measure their firms and to self-correct where necessary. Put another way, we are not engaged in a game of “gotcha.”
So you see, an average citizen gets locked up for life, yet a private equity partner is given the benefit of the doubt and, at worst, asked politely to change behavior by the SEC.

State legislators need to understand what is going on here. They have granted public pension funds and public endowments across the U.S. the exorbitant privilege of secrecy in private equity investing, even to the point of making these contracts virtually the only ones that are exempt from state-level Freedom of Information Act laws.

State legislators need to understand what is going on here. They have granted public pension funds and public endowments across the U.S. the exorbitant privilege of secrecy in private equity investing, even to the point of making these contracts virtually the only ones that are exempt from state-level Freedom of Information Act laws.

I recently wrote that private equity will deservedly emerge as the financial industry’s major villain in the next crisis. I detailed why in my post, Leaked Documents Show How Blackstone Fleeces Taxpayers via Public Pension Funds, which is a must read in the context of the article above.

Full article from Naked Capitalism can and should be read - here - http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/05/sec-official-describes-widespread-lawbreaking-material-weakness-controls-private-equity-industry.html

Nagging can be a health hazard, study says - and Men may be more significantly affected -

Nagging can be a health hazard, study says - and Men may be more significantly affected - 



Keep nagging your man and you'll send him to an early grave, a new study claims.

Carried out by scientists at the University of Copenhagen and published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, the study says men may be more significantly affected because they tend to keep problems bottled up and have weaker support networks than women.

According to The Independent, scientists studied data from 9,875 men and women between the ages of 36 and 52. All were asked questions about their everyday social relationships.

Researchers analyzed the connection between recurrent arguments and general worry in relationships and mortality, and discovered that people who had reported frequent demands from a partner had a 50-100% increased mortality risk. Those who experienced regular conflicts within any type of relationship had a two to three times increased mortality risk, they claim.

“Having an argument every now and then is fine, but having it all the time seems dangerous," study researcher Rikke Lund, an associate professor of medical sociology at University of Copenhagen, said. “Worrying about people is a character of us loving them. It's just when it takes up all of your time that it's unhealthy."

About one in 10 participants in the study said their partners or children were a frequent source of worry or placed excess demands on them.

Read more - 

http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/2014/05/12/nagging-can-be-a-health-hazard-study-says

SHOCK CLAIM: Chemicals in soap, toothpaste can cause male infertility... -

SHOCK CLAIM: Chemicals in soap, toothpaste can cause male infertility... - 



Chemicals in common household products such as toothpaste, soap and plastic toys have a direct impact on human sperm which could help explain rising levels of male infertility, scientists have found.

One in three “non-toxic” chemicals used in the manufacture of everyday items significantly affected the potency of sperm cells, which may account for the high incidence of unexplained infertility in the human population, the researchers said.

It is the first time that a study has found a direct effect of the many ubiquitous man‑made chemicals in the environment on a vital function of human sperm. The findings will raise further concerns about the hidden toxicity of chemicals deemed safe by toxicology tests.

But the researchers believe they have developed a new way of testing the impact of household chemicals on human sperm which will allow regulatory authorities in Europe to decide whether to ban or impose restrictions on their use in certain products.

The study was part of wider research into so-called “endocrine‑disrupting” chemicals that for several years have been linked with declining sperm counts and widespread male infertility.

In some cases, these chemicals are thought to mimic female sex hormones – oestrogens – and in other cases act as anti-androgens, the male sex hormones, thereby interfering with the male reproductive system.

However, the scientists found that one in three common household chemicals found in products such as sun screens, detergents and plastics directly sabotaged the human sperm’s swimming behaviour and caused them to prematurely release the critical enzymes needed to penetrate and fertilise the egg cell – which would render the sperm infertile.

They also found that the concentrations needed to trigger these adverse reactions were similar to the very low levels commonly found within the human body. In addition, they showed for the first time that there was a “cocktail effect”, when a number of chemicals worked together to amplify their individual effects.

“For the first time, we have shown a direct link between exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals from industrial products and adverse effects on human sperm function,” Professor Niels Skakkebaek, of Copenhagen University Hospital in Denmark, said.

“In my opinion, our findings are clearly of concern as some endocrine-disrupting chemicals are possibly more dangerous than previously thought. However, it remains to be seen from forthcoming clinical studies whether our findings may explain reduced couple fertility which is very common in modern societies,” Professor Skakkebaek told The Independent.

Professor Skakkebaek has pioneered the scientific investigation of rising male infertility. In 1991, he produced the first evidence showing that human sperm counts had fallen by nearly 50 per cent in less than 50 years – low sperm counts are a major cause of male infertility.

Some years later, scientists found that some common chemicals have an “oestrogenic” or “antiandrogenic” effect on the male reproductive system, which could be particularly important in the development of male foetuses in the womb during the critical first six months when the reproductive tissues form.

Read more - 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/chemicals-in-soap-can-cause-male-infertility-claim-scientists-9353159.html