Rolling Stone polled other players, and this is what they came up with. Can’t think of too many people they missed, except Bruce Cockburn (called the world’s best by Eddie Van Halen).
One of my favorite moments last year: The Opera Company of Philadelphia’s Hallelujah Chorus flash mob at the downtown Macy’s:
My relationship with food is becoming very complicated. There’s a very limited overlap between the gall bladder diet and the diverticulitis diet (you can’t eat any fiber during a flareup). Now, after a week eating canned soup, I read this:
Is it safe to eat canned foods?
That’s a question worth asking after a new study found a huge spike in urinary levels of the chemical bisphenol A – commonly known as BPA – in a group of volunteers who ate canned vegetable soup for several days. BPA, which has been linked to a variety of health disorders, is used in the lining of many food and beverage cans.
The results suggest BPA is being absorbed by the canned food and then ingested by consumers.
“We were very surprised by the numbers,” said the senior author of the study, Karin Michels of Harvard Medical School in Boston. “It makes you feel a little uneasy about cans.”
The experiment involved 75 participants. Half of them were asked to eat a 12-ounce bowl of canned vegetable soup at lunch for five consecutive days. After a two-day break, they consumed the same-sized serving of fresh vegetable soup for five lunches in a row. The other volunteers did the experiment in the reverse order – starting with five days of fresh soup, followed by five lunches of canned soup.
Urine samples were collected on several occasions, usually a few hours after the noon-time meal.
The analysis revealed that when participants ate the canned soup they experienced more than a 1,000 per cent increase in their urinary concentrations of BPA, compared to when they dined on fresh soup.
Oh, and Americans had twice as much BPA in their systems as Canadians.
Let’s make the best government program we have into an inefficient cash cow for the insurance industry! Dean Baker:
The NYT claims that plans that could raise the cost of Medicare equivalent policies for seniors by $34 trillion are gaining increasing support in Congress. These plans involve replacing Medicare with a voucher. This leads to higher costs both because the administrative costs of private plans are far higher than Medicare and they are likely to be less effective in controlling costs.
The Congressional Budget Official projected that a Republican plan along these lines, that was approved by House earlier in this year, would raise the cost of Medicare equivalent polices by $34 trillion over the program’s 75-year planning horizon. While this plan would save the government money by reducing its payments for Medicare, it would mean that future generations of workers would pay far more for health care in their retirement. The cost of Medicare equivalent policies would far exceed the typical retiree’s income by 2050.
It would have been helpful if this article had pointed out that these proposals imply both a huge increase in health care costs to beneficiaries and an increase in costs to the country as whole. Virtually all research shows that these sorts of plans will make the country’s health care system considerably less efficient.