Found 7293 related files. Current in page 1
Reprinted with permission from the IFFGD. Originally printed in Participate -- Vol 7 No 1, Spring 1998. Go to the IFFGD website for Information on subscribing to Participate (and becoming an IFFGD member). People with functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorders can have a variety of symptoms that range from painless diarrhea or constipation, to pain associated with diarrhea and/or constipation (usually called irritable bowel syndrome). There is another, less common condition of abdominal pain that is chronic or frequently recurring; it is not associated with changes in bowel pattern. This condition is called chronic functional abdominal pain (CFAP). CFAP is a functional GI disorder. There are no abnormal x-rays or laboratory findings to explain the pain. It occurs because of altered sensitivity to nerve impulses in the gut and brain, and it is not associated with altered motility in the intestines. For people with CFAP, the pain can be so all-consuming that it becomes the main focus of their lives. Not only does it impact on quality of life, but it has a major economic impact as well. The US Householders Survey of Functional GI Disorders published in 1993 found that people with CFAP missed an average of 12 days of work annually due to illness compared to 4 missed days for people without gastrointestinal symptoms. Also, the number of doctor visits in a year averaged 11 for those with CFAP compared with only 2 for those without CFAP.
A 4-year-old boy was brought to the emergency department with a long history of constipation and recent onset of abdominal pain. His mother stated that he did not have diarrhea, vomiting, or fever, but noted that “his belly is getting hard.” He had a small bowel movement 2 days previously. On the day of presentation, he woke up with abdominal pain. The patient previously had been in good health and had regularly seen his pediatric primary care physician. He had never had surgery or an illness requiring hospitalization. Physical Examination On examination, the following vital signs were obtained: oral temperature, 98.5°F; heart rate, 145 bpm; respiratory rate, 30 breaths/min; blood pressure, 108/59 mm Hg. He was pale and appeared to be uncomfortable due to the abdominal pain. The abdominal examination revealed a large mass in the right side of his abdomen. The mass was firm and slightly tender. He also had guarding. He had bilaterally descended testicles and no evidence of inguinal hernias. His musculoskeletal and neurologic examinations showed normal results, and skin examination revealed decreased turgor and coolness of peripheral extremities, with no rashes, bruising, or petechiae.
“We will drive year on year improvements to deliver sustainable packaging with the smallest environmental footprint by 2015.” Andy Fennell, Chief Marketing Officer, and David Gosnell, President Global Supply and Procurement. P ackaging plays an essential role in protecting, delivering and presenting our products and brands to our consumers around the world. It adds value by creating consumer convenience, providing product information, safeguarding public health and protecting the products throughout the supply chain to ensure the consumer receives the optimum quality. However, in an era of increasing energy costs, heightened social and environmental consciousness, strict regulation on pollutants and disposal of solid waste, packaging design should aim to not only add value to our products and brands but also reduce our impact on the environment Diageo defines sustainable packaging as the packaging design with the lowest possible environmental footprint while ensuring the required functionality to protect, deliver and present our products and brands. Our Sustainability & Responsibility Strategy lies at the heart of our commitment to sustainable packaging. This is entirely consistent with and rooted in our core values of being proud of what we do, being the best and value each other.
As companies deal with ever larger amounts of data and increasingly demanding workloads, a new class of databases has taken hold. Dubbed “NoSQL”, these databases trade some of the features used by traditional relational databases in exchange for increased performance and/or partition tolerance. But as NoSQL solutions have proliferated and differentiated themselves (into key-value stores, document databases, graph databases, and “NewSQL”), trying to evaluate the database landscape for a particular class of problem becomes more and more difficult. In this paper we attempt to answer this question for one specific, but critical, class of functionality – applications that need the highest possible raw performance for a reliable storage engine. There have been a few attempts to provide standardized tools to measure performance or other characteristics, but these have been hobbled by the lack of a clear mandate on exactly what they’re testing, plus an inability to measure load at the highest volumes. In addition, there is an implicit tradeoff between the consistency and durability requirements of an application and the maximum throughput that can be processed. What is needed is not an attempt to quantify every NoSQL solution into one artificial bucket, but a more systemic analysis of how some of these databases can achieve under assumptions that mirror real-world application needs. We attempted to provide a comprehensive answer to one specific set of use cases for NoSQL databases -- consumer-facing applications which require extremely high throughput and low latency, and whose information can be represented using a key-value schema. In particular, we look at two common scenarios.
Rise in the population, increasing consumer awareness, and the growth in availability of vitamins at extremely low prices, to drive the global vitamin market. The North American vitamins (Nutraceuticals) market constituted 25.4% of the global Nutraceutical market in the year 2013, and its share is estimated to be 25.3% by the end of year 2018. http://www.micromarketmonitor.com/market/north-america-vitamins-nutraceuticals-3919030976.html
Counteroffer Acceptance: Road to Career Ruin by Paul Hawkinson Matthew Henry, the 17th century writer said, “Many a dangerous temptation comes to us in fine gay colors that are but skin deep.” The same can be said for counteroffers, those magnetic enticements designed to lure you back into the nest after you've decided it's time to fly away. The litany of horror stories I've come across in my years as an executive recruiter, consultant and publisher, provides a litmus test that clearly indicates counteroffers should never be accepted . . . EVER! I define a counteroffer simply as an inducement from your current employer to get you to stay after you've announced your intention to take another job. We're not talking about those instances when you receive an offer but don't tell your boss. Nor are we discussing offers that you never intended to take, yet tell your employer about anyway as a “”they-want-me-but-I'mwith-you” ploy. These are merely astute positioning tactics you may choose to use to reinforce your worth by letting your boss know you have other options. Mention of a true offer, however, carries an actual threat to quit. Interviews with employers who make counteroffers, and employees who accept them, have shown that as tempting as they may be, acceptance may cause career suicide. During the past 20 years, I've seen only isolated incidents in which an accepted counteroffer has benefited the employee. Consider the problem in its proper perspective. What really goes through a boss's mind when someone quits?
Presbyterians Join the Anti-Israel Choir Divesting from companies like Motorola Solutions to show solidarity with the Palestinians. By Jonathan Marks June 22, 2014 6:34 p.m. ET The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is bleeding members. Between 2000 and 2013, almost 765,000 members left the organization, a loss of nearly 30%. Last week the church's leadership met in Detroit for crisis talks. No, not about the emptying-pews crisis. The Israel-Palestinian crisis. On Friday, in a close vote (310-303), the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)— the largest of several Presbyterian denominations in America—resolved to divest the organization's stock in Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions. The church's Committee on Mission Responsibility Through Investment said the companies have continued to "profit from their involvement in the occupation and the violation of human rights in the region," and have even "deepened their involvement in roadblocks to a just peace." Israel's counterterrorism and defense measures have included razing Palestinian houses (with Caterpillar equipment), operating Gaza and West Bank checkpoints (with Hewlett-Packard technology), and utilizing military communications and surveillance (with Motorola Solutions technology). The church signaled its antipathy for Israel earlier this year by hawking a study guide called "Zionism Unsettled" in its online church store. In the 76-page pamphlet, Zionism—the movement to establish a Jewish homeland and nation-state in the historic land of Israel—is characterized as a "a struggle for colonial and racist supremacist privilege." In a postscript to "Zionism Unsettled," Naim Ateek, a Palestinian priest and member of the Anglican Church, explains the meaning of the charges in the pamphlet.
Today the Wall Street Journal published a letter to the editor from Commission chair Judge Patti B. Saris regarding Mortimer Zuckerman’s op-ed “Harsh Sentencing, Overstuffed Prisons—It’s Time for Reform” (May 3, 2014): Sentencing Guidelines Are Being Intelligently Adjusted The amendment originated with the U.S. Sentencing Commission and is something we carefully considered over several years. Regarding Mortimer Zuckerman’s “Harsh Sentencing, Overstuffed Prisons—It’s Time for Reform” (op-ed, May 3): Mr. Zuckerman mentions a Justice Department sentencing panel proposing an amendment to federal guidelines. In fact, it was the U.S. Sentencing Commission, an independent, bipartisan agency that is part of the judicial branch, which voted unanimously on April 10 to amend the federal sentencing guidelines to modestly reduce sentences for the majority of federal drug offenders. We appreciated the support for this change from the Justice Department and others ranging from bipartisan members of Congress to the Federal Public and Community Defenders to Right on Crime, but the amendment originated with the commission and is something we carefully considered over several years. This amendment has been transmitted to Congress and unless Congress acts to disapprove, it will go into effect Nov. 1, 2014. The federal sentencing guidelines are advisory but carry substantial weight in determining federal sentences. The amendment reduces the guideline levels assigned to most drug-trafficking offenders based on the quantity of drugs involved in the offense. The commission determined that the guideline levels for drug quantity no longer needed to be so high. We estimate that our amendment will affect the sentences of almost 70% of federal drugtrafficking offenders and reduce their sentences by 11 months on average. These sentence reductions will correspond to a reduction in the federal prison population of approximately 6,500 inmates within five years and many more over time. The commission carefully weighed public safety concerns, and based on past experience, existing laws and guidelines and expert testimony it concluded that the amendment should not jeopardize public safety. Our amendment is modest in scope; only Congress can change statutory mandatory minimum penalties. But we believe it is an important start.
In 2007, the Al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) emerged after the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) aligned itself with Al-Qaeda. This development captured the world’s attention and led several scholars and policymakers to ask the question: Why did this merger take place and what does it say about the motivations of GSPC? This research investigates three hypotheses: (1) This merger is merely an ideological one without operational implications; (2) this merger is ideological, operational, and logistical; or (3) this merger is merely a rebranding of a failing organization that needed to survive and, therefore, is not a genuine threat to the United States and its European allies. Exploring the evolution of Algerian Islamism, from the rise of the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) and the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) to the GSPC and AQIM, this study concludes that hypothesis 3 is the best explanation of the merger between GSPC and Al-Qaeda. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503.
Both Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who founded Jamaat al-Tawhid wa-l-Jihad ( JTWJ) in 1999 (see Table 1 for the history of ISIS names), and al-Qaeda head Usama bin Laden came of age during the Afghan jihad against the Soviet Union in the 1980s, but their respective organizations have distinct genetic material, attributable in part to their different backgrounds, leadership styles, and aims. This is the case even though the two groups formed a marriage of convenience beginning in 2004. One key difference involves the socioeconomic background of the groups’ founders. Whereas bin Laden and his cadre grew up in at least the upper middle class and had a university education, Zarqawi and those closest to him came from poorer, less educated backgrounds. Zarqawi’s criminal past and extreme views on takf ir (accusing another Muslim of heresy and thereby justifying his killing) created major friction3 and distrust with bin Laden when the two first met in Afghanistan in 1999.