E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe nonprofit investigative group, FairWarning, has a report on lung cancer, which receives far less federal funding for research than other common cancers.
Reporter Bridget Huber finds:
The stigma of smoking is largely to blame. Anti-tobacco campaigns have, in a way, done their job too well, leading many to see lung cancer as self-inflicted. That stigma keeps some families and patients from speaking out, while corporate donors stay away from the disease, and some scientists and policymakers question whether scarce research dollars should be devoted to a smokers’ illness.
Read the full story here: Stigma of 'Smokers' Disease' Stifles Fight Against No. 1 Killer, Lung Cancer
Leave a Comment:
If they are going to come entirely clean on the Sandusky matter, they need to investigate and charge Tom Corbett as well who knew all about the Sandusky matter and did nothing in his capacities as PA AG and as a lackey for the PSU Board of Trustees - but, of course, it will never happen!
The Bible says the soul is forever,so wars can't kill an evil person's soul,so wars can't kill evil-that's why the Cross and Gospel of Jesus Christ is so necessary.And Christians can't use a separation of Church and State to fight wars,the Bible teaches that the Church is the Bride of Jesus,so the Church can't be separated from the State,it's not of God.
then where's my money bichhh ....
becouse the tobacko co's. were sued and paid out that cash long ago .. and the states were paid to do exackly that (reserch based on cancers "possibly" caused by tobacko and or thier produckts) yet what did the states do with the cash ?? you need not ask as the answers are inalienably clear im sure unless your stupid as a pile of rocks...... damm sure wer'nt spend on no reserch nore paying for cancer (based on tobacko) or thier produckts for the pacients of that as specified by law and the judgment there of based on a case which was seen and heard long ago was it ...... what about the $4.00 a pack tax on the produckt where does it go damm sure ain't to reserch nore to the care of those whom were effeckted by the produckt.. which by the way was the only thing this co@!$%#ry had to make it a viable colony for the east ... (england and them) with out which this country would not exist in it's curent form .. tobacco that is >>>>
I hate to break it to you, and it is very sad, but this is what happens when you have non-union workers. Many pensions are destroyed for the non-union sectors and the company fulfills or makes a compromise with it's union members. This has nothing to do with the President, but is a company decision. That's why we keep paying those dues each month. I know a guy who worked for our company for 22 yrs. in the union sector, decided to switch to management and 3 yrs. later, lost his job due to a co-workers jealousy in management. No union protection. You do have a choice, it's your decision to work in any given sector. Look what happened to the Enron people, etc., etc. many examples out there. Pensions are much more vulnerable to loss as well. It is better to have a 401K or retirement fund, (I have both) and guard it with your life. I'm just an average airline worker for past 30 yrs, belong to two unions, and through careful planning and hard work, have managed to build a nearly $500,000.00 portfolio. I only lost $303.13 in 2008, because I moved my 100% stock invested portfolio to $1 a share mutual funds for almost an entire yr. Three weeks ago, I also moved my funds to a safer area, in anticipation of a Wall street reaction to the President's re-election. By the way, I am a big supporter of the President and a lifelong Democrat.