Only days after the federal Preventive Services Task Force revised mammography standards, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) is recommending women of all ages undergo Pap smears less frequently, and not begin until age 21. ACOG staunchly opposed the revision of mammography guidelines Tuesday, but says the argument for changing Pap screening is far more compelling; there is far more unnecessary Pap screening and more potential for harmful treatments, especially in young women, who are especially prone to develop abnormalities in the cervix that appear to be precancerous, but will go away if left untreated. Treating these growths can risk injury to the cervix and lead to premature birth and an increased risk of needing a Caesarean if a woman becomes pregnant.
Politics and health care is a messy combination, as already evidenced by months of debate over health care reform in Washington; but events of the past week have further muddied the reform waters as recommended changes in screening for breast cancer and cervical cancer in women have led to political recriminations. How would a hypothetical “public option” handle the changes in mammograms; are the recommended limitations on pap smears the first sign of feared government rationing of healthcare? We apply these real world examples to the proposed reform legislation in front of Congress.
Carbon offsets, a growing multi-billion dollar global industry, is a simple premise with an altruistic motivation: purchasing a carbon offset to cancel out the emissions generated by activities like flying or driving, and direct that money to programs that reduce emissions elsewhere. The developing problem is that carbon offsets are discouraging pollution but rather assuaging the guilt of the polluters. Travel company Responsible Travel just cancelled its carbon offset program because while it might help customers feel virtuous it wasn’t doing anything to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Is this a fundamental problem with cap-and-trade, carbon offset strategy?
A federal court judge rules that the Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for the levee breaches which left much of the city of New Orleans underwater after Hurricane Katrina. The decision has the potential to leave the government venerable to billions of dollars in claims from victims. The judge gave the corps a lambasting claiming they had a “myriad” of ways to protect the Bernard Parish and the Lower 9th Ward but showed “insouciance, myopia and shortsightedness” along with “gross negligence” in opting not to do so. The lead plaintiff’s attorney says Katrina was not a natural disaster but a disaster caused by the Army Corps of Engineers—and apparently, the judge agreed.
Was Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson's ally in the White House a leading factor in the decision by federal attorneys not to pursue charges against him for alleged financial misdeeds and inappropriate behavior with female students? Former federal inspector general Gerald Walpin, who protested the prosecutors' handling of the case, thinks so; he was fired by the Obama White House in June. LA Times Washington correspondent Tom Hamburger tells the story.
Hendrik Hertzberg’s byline in the New Yorker guarantees a wise, edgy and compelling exposition of the body politic and political bodies. His new book Obamanos! is all about the year of living presidentially, offering context to key elements that defined the 2008 general election while telling the story of a reinvigoration of the Democratic Party alongside a Republican tailspin.
Patt Morrison is known for its innovative discussions of local politics and culture, as well as its presentation of the effects of national and world news on Southern California.
