Tuesday, September 25, 2012

$100 for a rainy day- how many possess it?

$100 dollars..    What can it buy nowadays?

A week or so of food to feed the family?

Perhaps a full tank and a half of gasoline?

Or one night's stay at the local Days Inn or EconoLodge with just enough change left over to get some breakfast at the local Denny's or Waffle House?

So what is $100 anyways?

Well.. for many, many people making $30k or less per year, $100 or less equals the total nest-egg life savings they possess for emergencies and/or the unexpected.

The -loanshark  Quickie Loan company CashNetUSA did a poll of 1000 Americans of different genders, age groups, and economic strata and asked, "If you needed to cover an emergency expense within one day, how much in savings would you have available to you?"
Here's some of the findings based on this representative poll:

Note: The statistical numbers will not add up to a perfect 100%.  It may be less or more because it was not 1000 people polled possessing $100 or less in savings and finding out their categorical breakdown, but rather 'Of 1000 people in Total' then broken down into a particular categories, one being what percentage possessed $100 or less...'

Salary:       Under $30k/yr   ---  50.2%
                    $30k - $49k     ---  25.0%
                    $50k - $74k     ---  16.9%
                          $75k+        ---    7.7%

Age:       Under 30 years old  ---   30.7%
               30-39 years old      ---   27.3%
               40-49 years old      ---   29.6%
               50-59 years old      ---   13.1%
                    60+ up               ---   14.1%

Gender:      Males   ---  22.7%
                Females  ---  22.9%

Children under 18:      Have children under 18   ---  28.3%
                                     No children under 18     ---  20.4%
~ Now the survey didn't solely focus on those possessing less than $100 in available emergency funds. They also asked the 1000 random respondents how many possessed $800 or more to be available immediately?

Here's how they responded:

Salary:       Under $30k/yr   ---   27.0%
                    $30k - $49k     ---   34.7%
                    $50k - $74k     ---   54.1%
                          $75k+        ---   79.3%

Age:       Under 30 years old  ---   35.3%
               30-39 years old      ---   47.5%
               40-49 years old      ---   47.0%
               50-59 years old      ---   68.8%
                    60+ up               ---   69.4%

Gender:      Males   ---  55.3%
                Females  ---  52.2%

Children under 18:      Have children under 18   ---  44.6%
                                     No children under 18     ---  57.8%
So what does one take from that survey?

1)  Its good to see the figures of those with $800 or more available to them at around or over 50% but when one looks at picture of those possessing less than $100, it's more clear than ever that there are two Americas.

2)  The only way most people can survive and maintain any standard of living, even that most basic, is through debt.  Credit card debt in particular.  Wages aren't enough...  Government subsidies i.e. welfare, food stamps, etc is not enough..

3) The more one makes, the more one can save; the more wages become depressed, the harder it is to survive... obvious, yes...  That's what happens in an economy that is not, nor has been in a 'recovery'

4)  Of all the various age demographics surveys, the elderly are overall most prepared for unexpected emergencies; the younger age groups are still spending more $$ on things they don't need to keep up with the 'Joneses'...

Favorites from Spring 2o13 RTW . . .

Hey..dear stylebookers...I wanna share my favorite collections from Spring RTW 2013..There was collections from New-York, London and Milan..Can't wait to watch to fashion shows from Paris..Ok, guys, I choose my favorites from Spring RTW just for you :) Just look and Enjoy..

White shirt is amazing . . .

Antonio Berardi it's my favorite in last years..very feminity and fabulous outfits...

Very light colors...

Love the headbands . . .

Ohh..Ferre..Ferre..awesome collection

Perfect materials  .

Modern Geisha...

Adore..cause butterfly is here )

Gorgeous sandals, and cuting is amazing. . .

Etro..Vintage!

I think that Jason thinks like a woman but cutting like a old man!

As usual...

I love these twins..They are so funny and fashionable guys :) Dean and Dan Catens, and here is t-shirt with their last name . . .

First of all love phyton with lace...
Minimalism. . .

He is New York fashion's éminence grise...!

 Knee-high peep-toe flat croc boots...I love u Giornetti!

I like dresses with embroidery  . . .

Awsome, Stylish!

"I wanted to take my aesthetic and find a new way of working it," she said before the show. And she do that..

Gorgeous !!!

Bags and this trench is my favorite!Want it!!! :)

I think this green's tone will be very actually in next summer

Black and White!! so stylish collection!

White dress is my favorite,

Just Cavalli, Just Amazing!!!! awesome blouses

As always..

Love the colors...

No Comments . . .

Headbands and earrings.!! and love the materials too

Awsome shoes, I love these shoes!!

Arabic taste from New York :)

Love materials!! 

Ohhh..Fendi..Fendi!!! awesome..I can't find words to say for this collection! I think this is the best collection of RTW 2013
Thanks for reading....
Bye..
XAVER

"Cool of the Evening" Tenor Sax Giants Al Cohn/Zoot Sims



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR4ZfCh601k&feature=related

Icons From the Age of Anxiety: Max Beckmann "The King"

Max Beckmann, The King, 1934-37, oil on canvas,53.25 x 39.25 in., St. Louis Art Museum


Stephan Lackner writes:

"The crowned king sits in his palace, in Oriental splendor, proudly erect, surrounded by two women. The young, beautiful lady on the left seems utterly trustful and loving as she puts her right arm over his thigh and fondles his left arm. The older, dark woman whispers conspiratorial advice into his ear; her cowl gives her an air of intrigue and secrecy, and her left hand is pushed forward in a gesture of warning or rejection, apparently contradicting the naive, friendly creature on the other side of the monarch. The young blonde has his love, no doubt, but the older woman "has the king's ear." The king weighs the two influences silently. There is a strange, portentous atmosphere in the palace chamber. When will he arise and proclaim his decision?

"The king's features are akin to Beckmann's own, although no formal self-portrait may have been intended. The collar with its triangular flaps has the shape the artist usually assigned to clown and harlequin costumes, so we may suspect that the ominous scene is really just part of a play.

"Beckmann worked on The King for a long time. He must have considered it already finished in 1934, for he had it photographed in Berlin, three years before his emigration. He submitted it to the Carnegie International, where it was exhibited in the European section, in San Francisco, in 1934-35, and illustrated in the Carnegie catalogue. The painting did not win a prize. Disappointed, Beckmann changed the first version considerably and finally signed it in Amsterdam in 1937. This history of the painting is important because some commentators have seen allusions to the "despot" of the day and claim that this was the first painting that Beckmann created in exile. But the resemblance to Beckmann himself precludes any reference to the actual tyrant. No-this is the inner drama of a proud, powerful, benign individual.

"In the first version, the base of the column at the right edge of the painting resembled the bases of the columns of Persepolis. Beckmann at the time was immersed in studies of Tel Halaf, and Assyrian and Babylonian lore. This localization of the scene gave way, in the final version, to a more general, luxurious background. Also, the profile of the warning, plotting confidante is more expressive, and the texture of the final canvas is more varied and decisive. On the whole, we can thank the Carnegie judges of 1934 for awarding the prize to Karl Hofer and not to Beckmann. Their action caused Beckmann to dig even deeper into his subconscious, to explore his own myth."

David K. Randall: Rethinking Sleep


Vincent van Gogh , The Siesta (after Millet), December 1889-January 1890, oil on canvas, H. 73; W. 91 cm, Musée d'Orsay.

Sometime in the dark stretch of the night it happens. Perhaps it’s the chime of an incoming text message. Or your iPhone screen lights up to alert you to a new e-mail. Or you find yourself staring at the ceiling, replaying the day in your head. Next thing you know, you’re out of bed and engaged with the world, once again ignoring the often quoted fact that eight straight hours of sleep is essential.

Sound familiar? You’re not alone. Thanks in part to technology and its constant pinging and chiming, roughly 41 million people in the United States — nearly a third of all working adults — get six hours or fewer of sleep a night, according to a recent report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And sleep deprivation is an affliction that crosses economic lines. About 42 percent of workers in the mining industry are sleep-deprived, while about 27 percent of financial or insurance industry workers share the same complaint.

Typically, mention of our ever increasing sleeplessness is followed by calls for earlier bedtimes and a longer night’s sleep. But this directive may be part of the problem. Rather than helping us to get more rest, the tyranny of the eight-hour block reinforces a narrow conception of sleep and how we should approach it. Some of the time we spend tossing and turning may even result from misconceptions about sleep and our bodily needs: in fact neither our bodies nor our brains are built for the roughly one-third of our lives that we spend in bed.

The idea that we should sleep in eight-hour chunks is relatively recent. The world’s population sleeps in various and surprising ways. Millions of Chinese workers continue to put their heads on their desks for a nap of an hour or so after lunch, for example, and daytime napping is common from India to Spain.

One of the first signs that the emphasis on a straight eight-hour sleep had outlived its usefulness arose in the early 1990s, thanks to a history professor at Virginia Tech named A. Roger Ekirch, who spent hours investigating the history of the night and began to notice strange references to sleep. A character in the “Canterbury Tales,” for instance, decides to go back to bed after her “firste sleep.” A doctor in England wrote that the time between the “first sleep” and the “second sleep” was the best time for study and reflection. And one 16th-century French physician concluded that laborers were able to conceive more children because they waited until after their “first sleep” to make love. Professor Ekirch soon learned that he wasn’t the only one who was on to the historical existence of alternate sleep cycles. In a fluke of history, Thomas A. Wehr, a psychiatrist then working at the National Institute of Mental Health in Bethesda, Md., was conducting an experiment in which subjects were deprived of artificial light. Without the illumination and distraction from light bulbs, televisions or computers, the subjects slept through the night, at least at first. But, after a while, Dr. Wehr noticed that subjects began to wake up a little after midnight, lie awake for a couple of hours, and then drift back to sleep again, in the same pattern of segmented sleep that Professor Ekirch saw referenced in historical records and early works of literature.

It seemed that, given a chance to be free of modern life, the body would naturally settle into a split sleep schedule. Subjects grew to like experiencing nighttime in a new way. Once they broke their conception of what form sleep should come in, they looked forward to the time in the middle of the night as a chance for deep thinking of all kinds, whether in the form of self-reflection, getting a jump on the next day or amorous activity. Most of us, however, do not treat middle-of-the-night awakenings as a sign of a normal, functioning brain.

Doctors who peddle sleep aid products and call for more sleep may unintentionally reinforce the idea that there is something wrong or off-kilter about interrupted sleep cycles. Sleep anxiety is a common result: we know we should be getting a good night’s rest but imagine we are doing something wrong if we awaken in the middle of the night. Related worries turn many of us into insomniacs and incite many to reach for sleeping pills or sleep aids, which reinforces a cycle that the Harvard psychologist Daniel M. Wegner has called “the ironic processes of mental control.”

As we lie in our beds thinking about the sleep we’re not getting, we diminish the chances of enjoying a peaceful night’s rest.

This, despite the fact that a number of recent studies suggest that any deep sleep — whether in an eight-hour block or a 30-minute nap — primes our brains to function at a higher level, letting us come up with better ideas, find solutions to puzzles more quickly, identify patterns faster and recall information more accurately. In a NASA-financed study, for example, a team of researchers led by David F. Dinges, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, found that letting subjects nap for as little as 24 minutes improved their cognitive performance.

In another study conducted by Simon Durrant, a professor at the University of Lincoln, in England, the amount of time a subject spent in deep sleep during a nap predicted his or her later performance at recalling a short burst of melodic tones. And researchers at the City University of New York found that short naps helped subjects identify more literal and figurative connections between objects than those who simply stayed awake.

Robert Stickgold, a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, proposes that sleep — including short naps that include deep sleep — offers our brains the chance to decide what new information to keep and what to toss. That could be one reason our dreams are laden with strange plots and characters, a result of the brain’s trying to find connections between what it’s recently learned and what is stored in our long-term memory. Rapid eye movement sleep — so named because researchers who discovered this sleep stage were astonished to see the fluttering eyelids of sleeping subjects — is the only phase of sleep during which the brain is as active as it is when we are fully conscious, and seems to offer our brains the best chance to come up with new ideas and hone recently acquired skills. When we awaken, our minds are often better able to make connections that were hidden in the jumble of information.
Gradual acceptance of the notion that sequential sleep hours are not essential for high-level job performance has led to increased workplace tolerance for napping and other alternate daily schedules.

Employees at Google, for instance, are offered the chance to nap at work because the company believes it may increase productivity. Thomas Balkin, the head of the department of behavioral biology at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, imagines a near future in which military commanders can know how much total sleep an individual soldier has had over a 24-hour time frame thanks to wristwatch-size sleep monitors. After consulting computer models that predict how decision-making abilities decline with fatigue, a soldier could then be ordered to take a nap to prepare for an approaching mission. The cognitive benefit of a nap could last anywhere from one to three hours, depending on what stage of sleep a person reaches before awakening.

Most of us are not fortunate enough to work in office environments that permit, much less smile upon, on-the-job napping. But there are increasing suggestions that greater tolerance for altered sleep schedules might be in our collective interest. Researchers have observed, for example, that long-haul pilots who sleep during flights perform better when maneuvering aircraft through the critical stages of descent and landing.

Several Major League Baseball teams have adapted to the demands of a long season by changing their sleep patterns. Fernando Montes, the former strength and conditioning coach for the Texas Rangers, counseled his players to fall asleep with the curtains in their hotel rooms open so that they would naturally wake up at sunrise no matter what time zone they were in — even if it meant cutting into an eight-hour sleeping block. Once they arrived at the ballpark, Montes would set up a quiet area where they could sleep before the game. Players said that, thanks to this schedule, they felt great both physically and mentally over the long haul.

Strategic napping in the Rangers style could benefit us all. No one argues that sleep is not essential. But freeing ourselves from needlessly rigid and quite possibly outdated ideas about what constitutes a good night’s sleep might help put many of us to rest, in a healthy and productive, if not eight-hour long, block.

David K. Randall is a senior reporter at Reuters and the author of “Dreamland: Adventures in the Strange Science of Sleep.”

The Epigenetics Revolution

This epigentics book looks interesting. I'll order a copy today.




The Epigenetics Revolution: How Modern Biology Is Rewriting Our Understanding of Genetics, Disease, and Inheritance by Nessa Carey

Epigenetics can potentially revolutionize our understanding of the structure and behavior of biological life on Earth. It explains why mapping an organism's genetic code is not enough to determine how it develops or acts and shows how nurture combines with nature to engineer biological diversity. Surveying the twenty-year history of the field while also highlighting its latest findings and innovations, this volume provides a readily understandable introduction to the foundations of epigenetics.

Nessa Carey, a leading epigenetics researcher, connects the field's arguments to such diverse phenomena as how ants and queen bees control their colonies; why tortoiseshell cats are always female; why some plants need cold weather before they can flower; and how our bodies age and develop disease. Reaching beyond biology, epigenetics now informs work on drug addiction, the long-term effects of famine, and the physical and psychological consequences of childhood trauma. Carey concludes with a discussion of the future directions for this research and its ability to improve human health and well-being.

 Biography
Here's the official version...
Nessa Carey has a virology PhD from the University of Edinburgh and is a former Senior Lecturer in Molecular Biology at Imperial College, London. She has worked in the biotech and pharmaceutical industry for ten years. She lives in Bedfordshire and this is her first book.
And what else?
After leaving school I went to the University of Edinburgh to become a vet. This didn't last because I was allergic to fur, unable to think in 3D (not good for anatomy), quite bored and really rubbish at the course. So I dropped out and at Catford Job Centre, in amongst the ads for short order chefs (I couldn't cook) and van drivers (I couldn't drive), was one for a forensic scientist. And oddly enough I had always wanted to work at this end of crime - I must have been the only kid in the UK who had read a biography of Bernard Spilsbury by the age of 11.
So for five years I worked at the Metropolitan Police Forensic Science Lab in London and studied part-time. I then realised that I loved academic science and went off to do a PhD. At the University of Edinburgh. In the veterinary faculty.
After that, it was the academic route of post-doc, Lecturer and Senior Lecturer. But I had a tendency to wander off on routes that intrigued me - degree in Immunology, PhD in Virology, post-doc in Human Genetics, academic position in Molecular Biology. Such wandering isn't necessarily the best idea in academia but the breadth of experience is really valued in industry. I've spent 10 years in biotech and have recently moved to the pharmaceutical sector.
And outside of work? I love birdwatching (no, I don't have a life-list), cycling, scavenging stuff from skips, and growing vegetables. I have a fantasy about one day having a smallholding (where I will starve to death if I really have to be self-sufficient) and I can't wait to write my next book. And I can now cook. And drive.

Nessa Carey: The Value of ENCODE


The C. elegans connectome.


by Nessa Carey, author, The Epigenetics Revolution

Aren't we humans marvellous, with our trillions of cells, our long life spans, complex organs and higher cognitive functions? How lovely to look down on the lower creatures, like a humble microscopic worm called C.elegans. Poor old C.elegans, with its measly 1024 cells, pitiful little organs and limited brain power. You might as well compare a single Enid Blyton story with the complete works of Shakespeare. You'll never find a worm doing the fantastic things we can do, from creating the rules of ping-pong to sequencing the entire three billion letter alphabet of the human genome. Yet it was that very achievement, just over a decade ago, that made scientists feel a little less smug about our status as superior organisms.

It had long been assumed that we humans are top of the evolutionary tree in complexity because we possess the most complicated DNA blueprint (our genome). And it's certainly true that each of our cells contains a lot more DNA than that of poor old C.elegans. But the unexpected finding from the 2001 sequence release was that we and the little worm have almost exactly the same number, and same types of genes (a gene being defined as a stretch of DNA that codes for a protein, the business molecules in cells). We and the worm each possess around 21,000 genes. The only reason our genome is so much bigger is because we have loads of DNA that doesn't code for proteins. In fact, a whopping 98 percent of our genome is this non-coding DNA, more cruelly referred to as "junk."

But as the old Victorian expression about finding value in rubbish has it, there's brass in muck. A huge consortium of scientists has spent the last six years sifting through this supposed garbage tip of DNA and now the ENCODE (Encyclopedia of DNA Elements) project is starting to find the vast number of tiny flecks of gold and gemstone fragments that account for the overwhelming richness of the human organism.

Imagine you are standing on the top of one of the Himalayan peaks, of about 25,000 feet, on a day with cloud cover up to 20,000 feet. All you would see would be the other mountain peaks. That's the situation we were in when we first decoded the human genome and saw only the genes. Now, with ENCODE, the cloud has partially cleared and we can see not just how the mountains are linked together, but details of the valleys, the bridges, the forests, the villages and much more besides.

The junk DNA is actually crammed full of information. It's as if Shakespeare wrote fifty lines of stage direction for every line of dialogue. And what stage directions. Forget about "Exit, pursued by a bear." These would be more along the lines of "If performing Hamlet in Vancouver and The Tempest in Perth, then put the stress on the forth syllable of this line of Macbeth. Unless there's an amateur production of Richard III in Mombasa and it's raining in Quito."

Similarly, the various bits of junk DNA are saturated with such instructions. These act like volume controllers, governing how strongly individual genes are expressed in specific cells at different times, and how they respond if the environment changes. The human genome employs a huge variety of molecules and mechanisms to make the greatest use of this additional level of information. By contrast, there is very little of this extra complexity in the C.elegans genome and the tiny worm is stuck with a relatively rigid pattern of gene expression and is far more hard-wired than us. In visual terms, both we and the worm have a a palette of primary colours but the lower organisms aren't able to mix them to create hundreds of different shades.

The differences extend all the way through the kingdom of life. Humans and chimps share in the region of 99 percent of the genetic instruction book, but yet again we humans are able to use our information in a greater and more sophisticated variety of ways. This is particularly the case in the brain, and may be the explanation for why we are the smartest of all the apes.

Of course no system is perfect, and especially one that is designed to confer a lot of flexibility. Ever since the human genome was sequenced, scientists have been puzzled by really odd research findings. When they have searched the genome to find regions that are associated with risks of diseases in humans, from multiple sclerosis to type two diabetes, they were bemused to discover that the suspect regions weren't in genes. The findings from ENCODE are starting to show that many of these candidates for disease susceptibility are in parts of the junk DNA that control expression of key genes in relevant cell types.

It's not clear yet if the new data will help us treat human disease. Each individual component of the vast regulatory networks may in isolation only have a relatively minor effect. Creating a drug to target just one regulator may have as little impact as removing one small brick from a large well-designed house. But the more we understand the regulatory networks involved in health and disease, the more chance we have of identifying the key vulnerable pinch points in our organ systems, and this may drive new treatment approaches.

ENCODE has cost nearly $200 million and involved hundreds of scientists so far, and is by no means finished. Some scientists are concerned it could start to consume a disproportionate amount of funding. After all, there will always be more cell types to analyse, more details to explore and new questions to ask. To go back to the mountains analogy, do we need to see the houses in the village or the rice in the pots in the houses? But after such a spectacularly successful start, it's unlikely that the foot will come off the gas pedal just yet.