BACTERIA RESISTANT TO ANTIBIOTICS

EIN News says, "A Looming Drug Crisis: The Dearth of New Antibiotics. In recent years, efforts to combat drug-resistant bacteria have focused on the immediate goal of reducing rates of hospital-acquired infections. But now global health officials face an approaching crisis: the number of different antibiotics available to treat such infections when they do occur is dwindling because pharmaceutical companies have neglected to invest in the development of new types of drugs. (time.com)".

This is baloney! The reporter appears to be castigating pharmaceutical companies, for whatever agenda he may have in mind, perhaps related to government health care. Pharmaceutical company management is not stupid. When they see an obvious market, such as control of antibiotic resistant bacteria, they make every attempt to fill it. They do so for the profit motive, which is the basis of their business.

We have known about the developing resistance of pathogenic bacteria to antibiotics for at least 10 years, and the pharmaceutical industry has been doing a good job in introducing new antibiotics, which are effective against the new resistant bacteria. However, this is an ongoing problem, because bacteria are able to modify their metabolism to again develop resistance to the new antibiotics. This is similar to the ability of influenza viruses to modify their genetic program to avoid being inhibited by flu vaccines. This is why the Center of Disease Control has a continuing problem of trying to predict what form of flu virus to protect against each year.

Recent research on the basic chemistry of antibiotic resistance has shown that nitric oxide is an integral part in the resistance development. This work is being continued in an effort to determine how nitric oxide in that particular genomic system can be removed, while also not affecting necessary nitric oxide for other genomic operations.

Water on the Moon

E-mail to Congress:

EIN News says, "India's Lunar Mission Finds Evidence of Water on the Moon. Dreams of establishing a manned Moon base could become reality within two decades after India's first lunar mission found evidence of large quantities of water on its surface. Data from Chandrayaan-1 also suggests that water is still being formed on the Moon. Scientists said the breakthrough — to be announced by Nasa at a press conference today — would change the face of lunar exploration. (timesonline.co.uk)".

Please don't be misled by this "pie-in-the-sky" report. The questions to ask are how much water is there? And, how available is it? It is obviously not available in the same manner as it is on earth; i.e. rivers, lakes, ponds, and oceans. Even if you have a lot of damp sand, how do you separate the water from the sand? It can theoretically be done, but that would take energy. What's the energy source? It might be the sun, but that energy is too widespread for practical use. We see that in our attempts to use solar energy here on earth, wherein we need acres and acres of solar panels, in order to harvest solar energy.

In essence, this is an interesting scientific observation which has no practical use at this time, but which should be filed for later reconsideration, depending upon other technological developments.

The idea that "water is still being formed on the Moon" seems like super pie-in-the-sky. It will be interesting to hear on what basis that claim has been made.

Iran on Nuclear Weapons

E-mail to Congress:

EIN News says, "Obama Issues Ultimatum to Iran to Open Secret Uranium Plant to UN Inspection. Barack Obama has issued a strongly worded ultimatum to Iran after it admitted having a secret uranium plant that was revealed earlier today by US officials. Obama demanded UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) be allowed access to the secret site, which according to US officials is built inside a mountain near the ancient city of Qom, one of the holiest Shia cities in the Middle East. (guardian.co.uk)" area
An ultimatum means, "You must do this, or I will----. I don't see any of the "or I will----" in the above statement. Therefore, it is a hollow remark.
I have no particular suggestion on how to handle Iran, but I have a comment on what Pres. Obama said to the United Nations. In essence, he said we are going to ban atomic weapons from use in the world. This is in the same category as banning sin, fraud, prostitution, drug use, etc.. It can't be done. When will this president confront reality?
My only hope is that Congress has more common sense.

It has been said that one should always speak favorably about the dead. We can say the following about recently departed Sen. Edward Kennedy:
He had extreme perseverance in following a project or point of contention. He defended his position on Chappaquiddick to the very end.
He was extremely capable in relating himself to the "poor and impoverished. A memorial service was even arranged in a church in one of the poorest sections of Boston.
He was able to speak forcefully and with conviction on subjects about which he had no knowledge.
He had a strong influence in promoting worldwide egalitarianism (division of wealth so that all persons are equally endowed.) This helps bring up the living standards of Mexicans and other impoverished through justifiable sacrifice on your part.
By his great charm and wit, he was able to obtain the support of a majority of Massachusetts voters, so that they continually reelected him to office.
He was able to do all of the above while maintaining his multimillion dollar family fortune.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

Senator Cornyn,
My program is:
1. Have a registration day for illegal immigrants. Each registrant pays a minimal fine and receives a guest worker card valid for 90 days. Renewal is based on enrollment in a certified English langauage course, application having been made for U.S. Citizenship, and having proof of employment.
2. Failure to adhere to any of the above, eliminates guest worker status and establishes illegality, for voluntary return to the country of origin.
3. Any illegal immigrant apprehended after registration day, is automatically sentenced to a U.S illegal immigrant detention camp for 6 - 12 months, under condition equivalent to jail in the home country. After serving time, he is returned to his home country.
4. Persons assisting in group immigration practices, preparing and supplying forged documents and or offerinfg employmet to illiegal immigrants are tried as felons.
5. Transfer of U.S funds to a foreign county must be supported by documents certifying U.S. citizenship or guest worker status. U.S. citizens and guest workers assisting illegal immigrants in the transfer of funds will be tried as felons.
While the law will be much more detailed, the above fundamental elements must be included. In addition, proper funding and attitude with respect to enforcing the law will be paramount.

Illegal Immigration - An Open Letter to the U.S. Senate
Dear Senate,
As a U.S. Citizen, I would like to continue living in a country, which operates on the "Rule of Law". Talk about amnesty for illegal immigrants flaunts that principle, since amnesty means to not apply penalties associated with law breaking. It is also a sociological fact that if one can ignore a law and not be penalized, it is then much easier to break the next law.
I have previously suggested a registration day for all illegal immigrants. Those who register are recorded as illegal immigrants with penalties associated with a misdemeanor. However, the penalties associate with the registration are minimal and include paying a fine, attending English class and registering as an applicant for citizenship. Those who do not register and are later apprehended are given jail terms of 6 months to a year in a facility equivalent in quality to that existing in their home country.
My votes for Senators Cornyn and Hutchison in the forthcoming elections will be based on how closely they adhere to the described immigrant registration program. Anything that can be considered amnesty will automatically eliminate my vote for reelection.

Gasoline prices! Is it price gouging? Your answer depends on whether you are a socialistic thinker or a free enterprise thinker.
Socialistic thinkers would claim that property should be distributed equally among the inhabitants of a society, maybe even among the inhabitants of the world. Therefore, those who control the oil supply, refining operations, and distribution are acting immorally, when they withhold supplies of a product or increase prices beyond what socialistic thinkers believe is reasonable.
Free enterprise thinkers would claim that opportunities should exist for individuals to discover, claim, and develop real and intellectual property for their own benefit. Therefore, they have the right to withhold supply of a product or increase price.
Socialistic thinking is part of human compassion. Free enterprise thinking is part of human greed. A quick consideration of the fate of the Soviet Union and human rights in Cuba and China, show that extreme socialistic thinking has its pitfalls. Early development of our country showed some significant disadvantages in unbridled free enterprise thinking. We now travel the middle road, with coop schools, roads, savings & loans, etc., but we also maintain a society based on private property ownership.
The fact is that if a person has an oil well in the U.S., it is considered his property, and he has the legal right to do with it what he wishes, at least within the limitations of what the EPA says. A socialistic thinker might also say that since that is the case in the U.S., an Arab owning an oil well in an Arabic country also has a similar right.
We can proceed with this argument through the refinery stage. Refineries cost a lot of money to build, and therefore, they usually become the property of a company, which is another form of coop. Since this is private property, should not the owner have the right to say how the refinery is operated? That is, run at full capacity to satisfy the public's desire for production at the risk of damaging its equipment and the health of the employees? Maybe the public thought is that the management of the refinery is doing a poor job, and the operation should be turned over to the government. Before we travel this road, look again at what happened to the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and what is now happening in Cuba and North Korea.
The qustion might then be raised as to whether the public has any rights in a free enterprise society. The answer is an obvious yes. In the short term, the people can choose an alternative product or process and gain release from the control of the free enterpriser. That may require some suffering but can be considered delayed payment for not having the forsight to previously obtain economic independence. For gasoline, it means don't buy it. Walk or use a bicycle. car pool as much as possible. Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, most people find it easier to vocally complain, and hope someone can wave a magic wand to get them out of their difficulty.
Am I being preyed upon through gasoline price gouging?
As a socialistic thinker, the answer is "yes". As a free enterprise thinker, the answer is "no". Maybe we should talk about the present high price of gasoline, why it is that way, and what we can do about. But before we attack that problem, we need clear thinking. Are we bunch of "pie in the sky" socialists or are we a bunch of greedy capitalists out to fleece the poor? Maybe somewhere in between?