9. februar 2004

Study: Optimism doesn't help cancer patients survive I don't know about you, but I've always heard that being positive and optimistic is extremely important for cancer patients to survive. Now Australian scientists are challenging the popular conception. In a new study of people with lung cancer, those with an optimistic outlook did not live any longer than those who were more pessimistic. "It's not that feeling positive is a bad thing," lead researcher Dr. Penelope Schofield of the Peter MacCallum Cancer Center in Melbourne told Reuters Health. She noted that optimism is associated with better quality of life. "People who feel positive also feel better about themselves and their life," Schofield said. But people diagnosed with cancer often feel obligated to put on a happy face when dealing with their disease, according to Schofield. "What I am concerned about is that we know that many patients may feel a social pressure to be positive because there is a common belief that this will increase their chances of survival," Schofield said. The belief that optimism improves survival often carries an "unintentional implication" that people with cancer are ultimately responsible for the outcome of their disease, said Schofield. "This is a heavy burden when you have just been diagnosed with a very frightening disease," she noted. Obviously, being in a good mood (as opposed to acting it) at least makes the quality of life better. That is easier said than done, admittedly, when facing a disease where only 15% of patients are alive 5 years after receiving the diagnosis. 11:55:51 PM    comment []  trackback []

Buy Al Gore a tin foil hat! ""[President Bush] took America on an ill-conceived foreign adventure, dangerous to our troops, that was preordained and planned before 9-11," Gore told Tennessee Democrats at a party event Sunday." (CNN) 9:44:41 PM    comment []  trackback []

British Muslim rappers praise Bin Laden Some young Muslims in Britain are listening to western style rap songs, but the message is about murder, terrorism and praise for Bin Laden and other Islamofascist terrorists. The rap song is called 'Dirty Kuffar' - Arabic for dirty non-believer - and it praises Osama bin Laden and the attack on the World Trade Centre in New York. The video has recently been posted on the British website run by the Islamic extremist Mohammed al-Massari, the UK-based Saudi Arabian dissident who has lived in Britain since 1994. Al-Massari claims that the video has been selling in large quantities at mosques to the younger generation and is in heavy demand overseas. The rapper fronting the video calls himself Sheikh Terra and the Soul Salah Crew - a take on the rap group So Solid Crew. 'Salah' is Arabic for faith. The video might at first be mistaken for an Ali G spoof, but the violent images quickly reveal it is no joke. The violent message from the images, including the destruction of the World Trade Center to the sound of the rappers laughing, is a powerful propaganda recruitment tool, likely to appeal to confused young Muslims who are otherwise put off by the Taliban's ban on music and dancing. Here, they can hum along to the words while filling in the membership application for al-Qaeda: Peace to Hamas and the Hizbollah OBL [bin-Laden] pulled me like a shiny star Like the way we destroyed them two towers ha-ha The minister Tony Blair, there my dirty KuffarThrow them on the fire The one Mr Bush, there my dirty Kuffar. Well, they got the crappy lyrics down rap style, I'll give them that. Why is Britain tolerating these terrorist recruiters staying in the country anyway? 8:25:45 PM    comment []  trackback []

Bush AWOL revisited CalPundit has done what looks like good detective work on president Bush's Air National Guard service, and come up with some documents and facts that don't exactly make the Commander in Chief look good. Apparently, in 1972 and 73 Bush did duty in something called the ARF. ARF stands for Army Reserve Force, and among other things it's where members of the guard are sent for disciplinary reasons. As we all know, Bush failed to show up for his annual physical in July 1972, he was suspended in August, and the suspension was recorded on September 29. He was apparently transferred to ARF at that time and began accumulating ARF points in October. ARF is a "paper unit" based in Denver that requires no drills and no attendance. For active guard members it is disciplinary because ARF members can theoretically be called up for active duty in the regular military, although this obviously never happened to George Bush. To make a long story short, Bush apparently blew off drills beginning in May 1972, failed to show up for his physical, and was then grounded and transferred to ARF as a disciplinary measure. He didn't return to his original Texas Guard unit and cram in 36 days of active duty in 1973 — as Time magazine and others continue to assert based on a mistaken interpretation of Bush's 1973-74 ARF record — but rather accumulated only ARF points during that period. In fact, it's unclear even what the points on the ARF record are for, but what is clear is that Bush's official records from Texas show no actual duty after May 1972, as his Form 712 Master Personnel Record from the Texas Air National Guard clearly indicates Check out the whole thing, including scans if the actual documents. I don't know much about how military records look like, or are supposed to look like, or even how the system works, so I can't decide either way. 7:15:37 PM    comment []  trackback []

Paper: al-Qaeda has nukes An Arab newspaper says al-Qaeda obtained tactical nuclear weapons from Ukraine in 1998. There was no independent corroboration of the report, which appeared in the newspaper al-Hayat under an Islamabad dateline on Sunday and cited sources close to al Qaeda, which the United States blames for the attacks of September 11, 2001. The newspaper said al Qaeda bought the weapons in suitcases in a deal arranged when Ukrainian scientists visited the Afghan city of Kandahar in 1998. The city was then a stronghold of the Taliban movement, which was allied with al Qaeda. Al Qaeda would use the weapons only inside the United States or if the group faced a "crushing blow" which threatened its existence, such as the use of nuclear or chemical weapons against its fighters, the paper quoted its sources as saying. This story is about as bloody unlikely as can be imagined. Al-Qaeda would have no qualms about using these weapons already if it had them. Besides, storage would carry a high risk of discovery or destruction. If this story is planted by al-Qaeda, it sounds like it is feeling seriously threatened and tries to bluff. If it wanted to prove it had nukes, it could (even without nuking anything). Doesn't prevent us from getting a shudder and "what if" at the mere thought. This is what must be prevented at any cost. 2:53:17 PM    comment []  trackback []

A not-so-honourable mention I don't think most Norwegians are likely to be flattered that we're now famous for our "Satanic" Black Metal (which I have written about exactly once earlier). For a totally different reason, I don't think anyone should be happy that the neocons Richard Perle and David Frum are being compared to them, either. That is one of the most bizarre double book reviews I have seen. The author, Mark Ames, doesn't like Norway very much either: And here is where Norway, the comic straight-man character in this dumb, bloody saga, comes in. Norway is not only a completely humorless society (it banned Monty Python’s The Life of Brian for being too offensive, leading to ads in rival Sweden boasting that the movie was "so funny it was banned in Norway!"), but worse, a deeply oppressive society, in a recognizably bland, caring, pious, Social Democratic way. Which raises an interesting question: Do boredom and blandness "count" as real suffering, and if so, do they justify murder the way other forms of oppression make murder seem a likely, even understandable response? The Black Metalists of Norway think so. I am willing to bet that this author has never spent any notable time in Norway. It is true, and an embarrassing fact, that Life of Brian was banned here for a few years (as well as in Israel. heh). That was due to religious extremists having a stranglehold on the State film board. Some years later, it was shown on state broadcasting. On the other hand, nobody would sue the world over showing a boobie on TV here. In fact, hardly anyone would notice. PS: I have read many of the Norwegian writings of Didrik Søderlind, one of the authors of the black metal book reviewed, and I wonder if he recognize his own ideas in this review. I am pretty sure Perle and Frum didn't. 7:37:09 AM    comment []  trackback []

© Copyright 2004 Jan Haugland. Last update: 01.03.2004; 14:41:45.