Glenn Beck: De-Transitioner Exposes Dark World of 'Gender-Affirming Care'

 

[VIDEO] "Gender-affirming care" does sound a bit nicer than the discussion being have currently with people like Glenn Beck. Transgender, puberty blockers, mastectomy, castration, hormones, to be honest to hear all of those things as far as someone transitioning to another gender makes me a bit uncomfortable.

I've had to conclude that while I might say there isn't much I can do about an adult wanting to do all of these procedures to change their gender. For the most part I would say they know what they're getting themselves into. Still I would say I have far more things going on in my life than to worry about an adult and their own issues as far as their gender identity.

However, for Chloe Cole at the young age of 15 she had no idea what she signed up for when it came to "gender-affirming care". She now knows if she was lucky enough to have a child she can never chest breastfeed. Because she took hormones and puberty blockers she might be concerned about giving birth to children in the future, and it seems this young lady isn't yet 20. She realized on some level she has gone a bit too far, however, time will tell if she's gone past the point of no return. She realizes she should never have gone through this at such a young age.

It seems going through this transition causes more issues, especially mental health issues that it's suppose to solve. Also weak parents seem to be OK with this and sadly if a parent actively opposes their children transition they could lose custody of their children as a result and that means someone else makes that decision for that child. Someone else would "affirm" the child's new gender and approve these irreversible procedures.

The question we should ask is, why is there a push to transition children as young as 6 years old to another gender? If someone that young has no concept of the "transition" all some adult whether a parent or any other authority figure have done is set that person up for a future with a diminished quality of life.

The president has coronavirus

 This is really yesterday's news. The POTUS Joe Biden tests positive for coronavirus and reports are that he has mild symptoms via CNN

Upon the news he shared this video of himself on the Truman Balcony at the White House letting us know what's up.

An update from me: pic.twitter.com/L2oCR0uUTu

— President Biden (@POTUS) July 21, 2022

I think it's great news that his symptoms are mild. He has been vaccinated and boosted, he still got it although it's mitigating some aspects of the infection. I do sincerely hope he will be on the mend.

I see many reactions which are political and even saw some hints of a react from the man he booted out of office President Donald Trump. Trump himself got coronavirus during the presidential campaign in 2020 which prompted the cancellation of one Presidential Debate with then challenger Biden.

I don't intend to make this political, keep in mind that the President is almost 80 years ago. He'll turn 80 in November, and many of us are concerned about his declining mental faculties.

And to throw this in, I'm not concerned about the potential of a President Kamala Harris. I'm more or less convinced that she won't be able to get much done it's just based on her performance as Vice President now. It's very likely she won't win a presidential election - as was likely the case in 2020 had she got elected. Regardless who knows but she'll be nothing more than a placeholder.

Again while Biden isn't my favorite sitting president in my lifetime, I do wish him a speedy recover although I did go political in this post.

Hivemind: Communist talking point didn't age well

 

[VIDEO] Liberal Hivemind talks about the propaganda point about how citizens of the Marxist autocracy of Cuba have access to "free" healthcare. Well think about this, how did Cuba handle the coronavirus pandemic?

Also consider that Cubans right now have been protesting their autocratic gov't as of late and as you see in the above vid Cuban-Americans in Florida are also hitting the streets in support. Its safe to say this pandemic has certainly exposed the limits of the Cuban gov't in handling this pandemic. When you think about it while there have been successes and failures everywhere this pandemic has exposed all the limitations as far as gov't responses.

Even here in America our many gov'ts have been tested by this pandemic.

What about that vaccine? Is there politics involved?

 

[VIDEO] After the election we learned that there is a promising vaccine that is being very well tested and hopefully available in the near future. Of course as you see Bill O'Reilly discuss, the timing of the announcement is suspicious. The timing didn't help the President of course to be fair if one believes the fix was in, perhaps this didn't help or perhaps it wouldn't matter.

As you see in the above clip in a past state of the union address President Trump made it his goal to lower prescription drug prices. With this vaccine which we hope will help to kill off this coronavirus and bring society back to normal he hoped to provide it for free. And considering how cases are increasing to the point where some parts of the nations are considering new lockdowns that makes sense. It should be available to anyone who wants it!

Well, the drug companies want to profit. I mean of course they do, they're in business. Pick a name, any name. It could be Trump or it could be Biden or it could be Obama if any politician dared to to make it a point to lower prescription drug prices, the pharmaceutical industry would likely push back. And perhaps in Trump's case this after the election announcement (better yet was it not announced after Biden declared victory/declared the winner of the 2020 Presidential race) this was Pfizer - who's producing this vaccine - way of pushing back.

Meanwhile anything that means this pandemic is a memory is something I will support. And make this vaccine available to everyone! 

Hydroxychloroquine has become a political drug...

Now wait a second, he's not the only Democrat who is claiming the benefits of using hydroxycholoroquine. That medicine is one used in the treatment of malaria and is being promoted as a treatment to the coronavirus. The bad news is that promoting it's use is proving political in a time where we need treatments to this virus which is burning through the world's population.

A Democratic New York City Councilman says hydroxychloroquine saved his life after a near-fatal run-in with COVID-19 in March.

Paul Vallone, who represents northeast Queens, took the drug along with a standard flu Z-pack, and came back from the brink almost immediately.

“I couldn’t breathe, very weak, couldn’t get out of bed. My doctor prescribed it. My pharmacy had it. Took it that day and within two to three days I was able to breathe,” Vallone told The Post. “Within a week I was back on my feet.”

Though Vallone went public with his coronavirus diagnosis in an April 1 Twitter post, saying he was experiencing “mild symptoms,” his actual condition was considerably more severe. Vallone’s initial prognosis was particularly grim, as he also suffers from sarcoidosis, an auto-immune disease that attacks his lungs.

“We were in panic mode when I went down because I didn’t have a lot of immune response,” he said. “I needed something to stay alive.”

Hydroxychloroquine “worked for me.”

Vallone’s brother Peter, a former City Councilman and a current civil court judge in Queens, also became a convert after his brother’s illness.

“I guess all those doctors who are prescribing it are right. This drug is already on the market and the patent is up so it’s cheap. A new drug won’t be. So big money does not want this drug to be used. Always follow the money,” Peter Vallone said in a May 12 Facebook post, sharing a link to an NYU study touting the drug.

I guess you want to know who was the other Democrat? And it was very early into this pandemic during the time of panic buying and lockdowns. Back when we didn't know as much about this virus:

State Rep. Karen Whitsett, who learned Monday she has tested positive for COVID-19, said she started taking hydroxychloroquine on March 31, prescribed by her doctor, after both she and her husband sought treatment for a range of symptoms on March 18.

"It was less than two hours" before she started to feel relief, said Whitsett, who had experienced shortness of breath, swollen lymph nodes, and what felt like a sinus infection. She is still experiencing headaches, she said.

Rep. Karen Whitsett (Photo: Michigan House of Representatives)

Whitsett said she was familiar with "the wonders" of hydroxychloroquine from an earlier bout with Lyme disease, but does not believe she would have thought to ask for it, or her doctor would have prescribed it, had Trump not been touting it as a possible treatment for COVID-19.

Trump, at his daily coronavirus briefings, has repeatedly touted the drug in combination with the antibiotic azithromycin, despite criticism from health professionals that it is unproven and potentially dangerous. There have also been complaints that Trump's remarks have resulted in a shortage of the drug for those people who normally use it for its recommended purposes.

Why is talking about this drug as a treatment for coronavirus political? Because Trump has been talking about it, but I thought this was a dangerous illness. We need treatments to get back to some semblance of normal right? And yet, someone out there whether a doctor or nurse or politician wants to discount the President's assertion out of hand and anyone else who believes this could be an effective treatment without any study or consideration. I don't understand....

I also get the feeling any news from this NYC councilman will get suppressed. This is not something that's going to get spread because it goes against the grain of anyone who wants to discount President Trump.

It sort of happened to Michigan State Representative Whitsett.  She got censured by her caucus when she talked about this drug.

h/t Newsalert

Blue Collar Logic: Is narrative falling apart?

[VIDEO] I apologize for not writing more about the coronavirus pandemic here. I've used space at The Sixth Ward - at least back when it really was very serious - to discuss some of its local effects. Not so much here and it's just as much a crisis as this unrest we're still seeing around the country after the untimely demise of George Floyd by a callous police officer in Minneapolis.

What I have shared on this blog, I found among other places the Blue Collar Logic YouTube channel. I shared a video of two doctors out of California who tried to dispel the danger of the coronavirus citing high levels of infections, but very low counts of deaths. You will have a hard time finding that video as YouTube - owned by Google suppressed it - Blue Collar Logic even did a video about their version of that video being deleted.

This time Jason Siler talks about the narrative of how dangerous coronavirus is. What's been said a lot about this bug is that it mainly attacks those with comorbidities or pre-existing conditions. Perhaps said person had cancer or diabetes or asthma or hypertension and that makes them more likely to die of this very nasty illness and I do believe it is nasty.

Herman Cain is one example as he already had cancer, and it's noted he went to a Trump rally in Oklahoma City, OK and unfortunately he died from it. People are going to bring up that he chose not to wear a face covering to protect himself. I'm sure he's not the only one who didn't take their precautions knowing the risks of contracting the coronavirus.

Either way I'm not relishing the prospect of another lockdown as coronavirus infections continue to go up around the nation in a variety of states. I'm not relishing the disruption that these lockdowns have caused. Worse still I'm definitely not relishing the politics of it all, especially over the usage of an anti-malaria drug that seems to be proving controversial as a treatment.

It seems we know more about this virus than we did once the President declared his initial national emergency this past spring. And it seems we could have a vaccine soon and not only that I'm sure were developing necessary treatments to insure more people survive. And I look forward to getting back to some form of normal once we do. 

ABL: Are Black People MORE Affected By The Virus? Why?

[VIDEO] This has become a controversial topic lately. Van Jones a former Obama administration official got himself in trouble talking about this very issue. However, is Van Jones wrong? Anthony Brian Logan discusses in the video above.

During the last few days I've been sharing videos that illustrated mostly that the threat of this virus is overblown. I recognize that its highly infectious and definitely dangerous for those with these pre-existing conditions or elderly. I recognize that you shouldn't be at a crowded party as some in Chicago were recently and risk possibly an infection or even worse without an infection simply spreading the virus to someone it was adversly affect.

Van Jones isn't wrong to talk about lifestyle changes. It's documented that Blacks seem to have issues with asthma, high-blood pressure, diabetes, and perhaps other health issues. We often hear about health disparities as far as Black America. The coronavirus may put a spotlight on this, however, it also should out the spotlight on us as individuals and the choices as far as our health.

We see the measures put in place out there in the world especially if you go to the store for example. Social distancing is one way we can beat the virus, we don't have to be too close to anyone especially someone we don't know. We could always wash our hands more frequently that we've ever have in our lives.

Either way, why not have this discussion on health. This is the time! What can I do as a Black male to assure that I can avoid prevent at least some of these pre-existing conditions? What can I do to stay healthy? In what ways can Black Americans insure that they can be healthier once this pandemic has subsided?

Possible pandemic treatment suppressed???

[VIDEO] It's interesting what real information you can find out there. For roughly the past week I've seen nothing but memes making reference to the President thinking out loud about giving ill people I.V. with disinfectant. While he says it was him being sarcastic a lot of people who aren't happy with him are making jokes about it online showing people injecting themselves with disinfectants.

Another thing asserted in that press conference is the many ways that the coronavirus can be rendered ineffective. Isopropyl alcohol can kill this virus within seconds while bleach (presumably with chlorine) can kill it within minutes. Air can kill the virus within hours if not mere minutes, however, with UV light and especially light from the sun definitely kills the virus quickly.

So her we see Mark Dice looks at media coverage of Trump's response and especially his pronouncements of how to defeat this virus. Dice shows us the efforts by the media to suppress possible treatments including as the President puts it getting UV light directly into the body to kill the virus. There is a company out there working on this and shared their information online.

The video showing their concept of this treatment was taken off YouTube and the companies twitter account was suspended due to the efforts of a NY Times reporter. This virus is so bad and could kill millions - depending upon who you might listen to - why are there efforts to suppress this?

We see a doctor dismissing this idea, and it's OK to dismiss and of course he should have his reasons why this treatment is unfeasible. However, any efforts to really keep this virus handled should be looked at.

Dice's thoughts on this activity is that any attempt to back up the President should be suppressed. Strange times we're living in...

Stossel: Coronavirus overreach #Pandemic

[VIDEO] Earlier this morning I shared a video from the Blue Collar Logic YouTube channel showing a pair of urgent care physicians talking about their analysis of all data concerning the current pandemic. What I didn't emphasize that they talked about the overreach of authorities as far as these lockdowns enacted around the country in an attempt to flatten the curve. Agree or disagree with their conclusions they gave us a good lesson on the science of this virus and it's affects on people.

So now I share this video from John Stossel who further emphasizes the effects of the measures enacted around the county on individual rights. Granted this is a virus one shouldn't fool with, even if it is survivable. However, how many of us want to continue to sit at home especially as the weather is beginning to get much warmer.

I've always been OK with a slow rollout as far as easing these restrictions. I hope that time comes here in Chicago, Illinois.

Doctors question the lockdowns #Pandemic

[VIDEO] From the YouTube channel Blue Collar Logic. We see two California doctors who own a chain of urgent care clinics talking about the data they see from the coronavirus pandemic. They're ready to lift the various restrictions (lockdowns, stay-at-home, shelter-in-place, etc.) around the nation that is designed to help slow the spread of this virus. The above video is over an hour duration.

You'll hear this often especially in the beginning with these restrictions a large number of infections with very small amount of deaths. Also when it comes to quarantines we don't normally quarantine the healthy, we're supposed to quarantine the sick.

I think I heard this Sweden is going about their business they may have some restrictions (such as social distancing) but not as much in most of the U.S. No lockdowns there and it seems the Swedes are banking on "herd immunity". Then we look at their neighbor next door in Norway that has enacted restrictions and yet both nations have many cases but very little death. These two urgent care physicians have determined based on the data they've collected, why do we have these restrictions?

What's the deal with these restrictions here in America?

Dan Mace on his #COVID19 experience

[VIDEO] Usually I avoid posting on Sundays on any of my blogs, however, in this case I will make a exception. Besides, I don't really post a lot anywhere these days.

Dan Mace was mentioned in yesterday's video by big time YouTuber Casey Neistat as Mace himself  - as the 67th case of corona in his native South Africa - stated that he was positive for the coronavirus. Listen to Mace talk about his symptoms as he states that others experienced the loss of his sense of smell & taste. He also noted that this symptom was experience reportedly by others who had been infection with this contagion.

He talks about difficulty breathing, fatigue which are symptoms of this virus. However, its often been noted how these are also symptoms of the flu. He was treated accordingly, however, he was actually tested for the coronavirus and he was positive.

Mace has opted not to monetize this video and wants to educate the public on this. I hope someone see this 10 minute video. Instead of panicking I hope they go to the doctor not only to get tested, but to get treated. If you don't have any major medical conditions, especially the illness will be unpleasant however it will still pass.

Casey Neistat on #COVID19

[VIDEO] One of my favorite YouTubers Casey Neistat has his own experience with the coronavirus. His friend and fellow filmmaker Dan Mace had been diagnosed with this very contagious pathogen. He's going to be fine, however, he experience issues with his breathing for example and trying to get tested. That seems to be a recurring thing once this became a real issue in American society, you don't get tested unless your condition is grave.

COVID-19 could cancel or delay #WrestleMania

[VIDEO] I haven't done many posts about the coronavirus aka COVID-19 aka beerflu aka "Steve Corino" thanks WrestleTalk. Right now its the latest epidemic and I'm not stating this lightly. Here in Chicago our St. Patrick's Day parade downtown has been cancelled and in Illinois there are 19 reported cases in this state so far. Also CPS is affected by this beerflu as there are a few cases amongst CPS personnel.

According to Wrestlelamia this outbreak is affecting the current top two pro-wrestling promotions in the world WWE and AEW. AEW released a statement about the beerflu while there are some concerned that WWE might be forced to cancel the WrestleMania in Tampa Bay over this outbreak.

Just to add some context to this authorities concerned about this outbreak has to make decisions to really try to prevent the spread of this virus. There is some context with the flu epidemic of 100 years ago one public health official allowed a parade to take place while the other didn't and one city experienced more deaths from the flu than the other city. It's good that the organizers of Chicago St. Pat's parade have elected to cancel this parade with not a whole lot of prodding by the city or even the state. It's understood that the state of Illinois could step in if the city of Chicago wouldn't.

I've always wanted to go to WrestleMania though in light of this epidemic I'm glad I was a tad behind the curve on getting tickets. It would be a shame to cancel the "grandest stage of them all", however, those in the WWE universe certainly are in no rush to risk catching this virus. Perhaps by April 6, 2020 the beerflu will be nothing more than a memory.

Charlie Gard

I'm going to ache for Charlie's parents. I don't yet have any children but it's shame what happened during the course of at least the past month of so. They wanted their baby who isn't yet a year old to have a chance at life, and unfortunately were thwarted by health and legal authorities in Britain and Europe.

The authorities didn't want them to attempt to sent their baby who is suffering from a rare genetic condition. This story even elicitied a tweet from the President indicating that he would like to help facilitate a visit for the parents and child to visit this nation so that they could seek further treatment for their boy.

Sadly we learned that it's too late. His life is over and he's not even one-full year! Unfortunately parents and doctors disagree over the appropriate course of action, however, in Great Britain doctors can seemingly overrule parents. Seeking an experimental treatment for this child in his condition they believed would cause the child more pain. So the doctors got backed up by the courts who and the course of action the doctors intended was to take this 11-month-old off of life support.

The parents of Charlie has found out after an examination that this experiment treatment isn't like to help him. Whatever damage from this genetic condition has been too far advance for this experiment treatment to do any good.

So, these death panels we hear about especially during the debate over Obamacare? Well we see one example if we look into created a socialized single-payer health care system in America. You as a parent want to help your child, but the resources to treat your child they may decide needs to go elsewhere because medicine did all they could and the condition isn't changing. I just got to say that's cold! Perhaps there's a virtue to a consumer based system Charlie's parents should be able to get second or third opinions.

So with the opinion of an American doctor - as far as this experimental treatment is over - and that means his parents have ended all appeals. And Charlie's life will end soon and it hadn't even gotten off the ground.

Finally I shared this video over at E.M. during the past month and in relation to Charlie's case. I will share it here - although it's a 10-year-old vid. An example of how a public health care system many not always work in favor of someone who absolutely needs treatment. [VIDEO]

The Hill: Is Supreme Court's chief justice ready to take down ObamaCare?

This article caught my eye because a few years ago when the SCOTUS was considering the constitutionality of Obamacare the ruling was shocking to a certain segment of the electorate. Conservatives wanted to see it thrown out and under the bus instead it got a new life. Now that it's firmly in place what would SCOTUS do this time? Would it be any different?

So "Obamacare" will reduce working people's income...

You know sometimes I wonder how much analysis of "Obamacare" I should believe. It's certainly a laudable goal to make healthcare more accessible financially by many people. The only question is a matter of how.

The President got dinged for his statement on if you like your coverage you can keep it. And then he got dinged on the awful roll-out last year. It's probably on many fronts that he got dinged for how this was managed.

This article by Byron York via Instapundit shows another was "Obamacare" was dinged:

Brookings scholars Henry Aaron and Gary Burtless sought to determine the law's impact on income in 2016, when almost all of Obamacare will be in effect. To do so, they adopted a broad definition of income -- not just a person's wages, but also pension income, employer health coverage, government cash transfers, food stamps, other benefits, and now, subsidies from Obamacare.

They found quite an impact. "The ACA may do more to change the income distribution than any other recently enacted law," Aaron and Burtless wrote. Obamacare provides billions in subsidies to those who qualify, expands Medicaid benefits, cuts Medicare, fines those who don't purchase government-approved coverage and levies new taxes -- all of which will change how much income millions of Americans bring in each year.

Aaron and Burtless' first finding is no surprise: Obamacare will mean more for the lowest-income Americans. It will increase income by 9.2 percent for the lowest bracket — households making below about $21,000 a year — for those in their working years, age 25 to 64.

Then the surprise. Obamacare will reduce, by an estimated 0.9 percent, the incomes of working-age Americans in the next-lowest income bracket, households making between about $21,000 and $40,000 a year. And in the next income group, households making between about $40,000 and $65,000 a year — Obamacare will reduce their income, too, also by 0.9 percent.

A 1 percent reduction in income is relatively small. But it is still a reduction -- and not at all what President Obama and Democrats in Congress promised. When the president pledged that Obamacare would make the health care system "better for everybody," it's doubtful Americans interpreted that as meaning it would reduce their income.
...
Why? There could be a number of factors, but the authors suggest that because the Affordable Care Act will make health care more expensive, a significant number of people who receive health coverage through their job will be affected. "Incomes fall ... primarily because the expansion in employer-sponsored insurance is predicted to cause a modest drop in money wages as employers devote a larger share of their compensation payments to health benefits," the researchers wrote.

Like I said, I'm not entirely certain how much of this to take to heart or not. What's acceptable to me is that the Affordable Care Act is a significant change that unfortunately isn't going away so easily. Unfortunately we will have to continue to deal with the fallout of the significant provisions of this significant piece of legislation.

Another piece of analysis, "Obamacare" discourages able-bodied people from working. This almost feels like piling on!

Obamacare provision delayed...

There's a lot to that has been written about a recent announcement that a provision of the Obamacare law passed in 2010 will be delayed one more year from January 2014 to January 2015. Basically what's being pushed back is the provision where employers who have at least 50+ employees who work over 30+ hours per week would be forced to provide health insurance.

Having to quickly scan any articles about this shows that many of the talking heads out there are looking at this with political eyes. Think about it next year is not only state elections but congressional elections. Not that I've been paying attention to any forecast on how either of our major parties look in both houses of Congress.

Think about this however. When Obamacare was passed in 2010 who could've anticipated the trouncing the President's party would take at least in the Congressional elections with the Democrats losing control of the US House of Representatives. Would maintaining this provision prove precarious for Congressional Democrats heading into 2014?

Also another aspect which interests me is the lens through businesses will look at this announcement. Without a doubt this legislation is well meaning intended to help many Americans gain access to health care that was beyond their reach. It's already expensive to go see a doctor or to get care for any ailment and of course many employers aren't exactly able - if not willing - to provide any sort of health care coverage for their employees.

As a matter of fact an article that I have read on this subject suggest that this delay will prove beneficial to those who would in the food service, retail, and hotel industries. Hopefully responsible employers who value their employees will be able to do what they can to provide health insurance for their workers. Because of this law and its well meaning implications we may have heard where some employers were already talking about cutting worker's hours in advance.

Also I associate this with the minimum wage workers. I believe in the idea of moving up in the work world getting promoted or gaining skills to be able to get better jobs in the labor market. Alas a well meaning health care mandate and a potential rise in the minimum wage seems like a good idea. Unfortunately it seems that this may have adverse effects on the workers in the short term at least as business seek a way to cope.

In any event it would be interesting to continue to read all analysis of the decision of Obama's administration to delay implementation of their landmark achievement so far. What would be the implications for those affected businesses and would this help the political prospects for either party?

Reason: How Medicaid & Obamacare Hurt the Poor - and How to Fix Them

[VIDEO] Reason argues why Medicaid & "Obamacare" in fact hurts the poor. Here's a brief description:

"Most physicians can't afford to accept Medicaid" patients, says Dr. Alieta Eck, a primary-care physician based in Piscataway, New Jersey. "If you're getting paid about $17 per visit, it won't be long before you can't pay your staff or pay your rent."

Medicaid is the nation's health care system for the poor. It's funded jointly by the federal government and the states. Medicaid is either the first- or second-largest budget item in all 50 states and the program is slated for a massive expansion under President Obama's health-care reform law. Despite the program's huge and growing overall cost, reimbursements to medical providers are so low that many practices refuse to accept Medicaid patients, causing long waiting periods for treatment.

Is it better to come up with something that's expected to keep health care affordable than to just work on why health care costs are high? Or should we ask why Medicaid reimbursements are so low for doctors who serve low income patients?

The former Williams Clinic

Crossposted at The Sixth Ward

View Larger Map

What you see above is a Google Streetview of the former Williams Clinic located at 408 E. Marquette Road. It was operated by a family of Black doctors and it seemed they offered a number of services at this clinic including a dentist and a pharmacy. In fact here's an obituary for one of the Williams brothers who originally founded the clinic.

Recently I drove by and it hits me that the clinic is close the motel near Marquette Road & King Drive that had been recently demolished thanks to the activism of a local minster Corey Brooks - who incidentally was interested in succeeding Jesse Jackson Jr. for the 2nd congressional district seat. In driving by, on that motel property was a rendition of how the new community center Brooks hope to build would look.

Then it also hit me, I wonder if Brooks might find a way to thrown in some health care services at his future community center. Indeed perhaps he could find a way to take over the Williams Clinic property which is currently a church.

I do wish to know what happened to Williams Clinic. My dad used to patronize their practice back in the day and continued to do so until it appears that the Williams family were no longer involved in that business. I'm not entirely certain when they closed but surely someone could fill in some details.

BTW, this post is going into some unfamiliar territory as far as a particular issue such as health care. Medical services are necessary no matter your income level and this area around the former clinic is considered a low-income area. The question to ask here is whether or not it's possible for an independent clinic such as this could exist today. Would the economics of health care today keep independent medical professionals from operating?

Slate: Boys Hitting Puberty Sooner, Just Like Girls

Oh dear, what is going on? Is there something in the food or is this just plain evolution? I hope the study includes causes:

Boys in the United States are beginning to see the first signs of puberty from six months to two years earlier than previously observed, according to a new study published Saturday in Pediatrics. The study is the first to look at the onset of puberty for U.S. boys in 25 years and seems to mirror similar findings that have already been well documented in girls, points out the Wall Street Journal. The difference appears most pronounced in African-American boys, who are starting to see the first signs of puberty at 9.1 years. The average for Hispanic boys is 10 and 10.1 years for white boys, compared with the average age of 11.5 in previous studies.

The study has been a long time coming and is widely considered to be the most comprehensive attempt to measure puberty in U.S. boys. Still, experts cautioned that since previous studies were smaller or approached the issue through a different light, it might not be so easy to pinpoint how much earlier boys are developing, points out the New York Times.

Hat-tip Instapundit!