Posted on 09/17/2011 7:29:48 AM PDT by Askwhy5times
It's not an internal cross subsidization sort of thing like the special rates for Periodicals, or Books.
Any money that flows into the coffers of a Texas university or college helps defray the costs of the administrators.
It may even be sufficient to make it possible to hire a couple of more administrators ~ like you.
However, it's not likely the extra administrator will spend all his time devoted to exactly whatever it was precipitated his own hiring.
This is called INSTITUTIONAL COSTS or what most folks know as OVERHEAD.
Even if you got a grant for building an atomic power plant on campus, part of that grant is an allocation for INSTITUTIONAL COSTS, or OVERHEAD, or your job ~ and if you spent 1 second per day dwelling on the care and feeding of illegal aliens, that is clearly an assignable cost ~ and the fact you did that means you diverted part of the grant for the atomic power plant to the question of illegal aliens.
It is not possible to avoid this.
Money is fungible.
Step up to the stupid plate, muawiyah, we’re all friends here.
“Okie dokie, when you get those buses gassed up and full of illegals headed south, let me know.”
Be nice to get a little cooperation from Uncle Sam, but a bunch of them moved back on their own a while back. I’m thinking all the states need laws like the one in Arizona. Our version started working before it even passed, and has still had some effect even though it’s been challenged in court. I’ve not been back to the school in several years due to health problems, so don’t know if any of my students who were illegals are still there or not.
OS
“The role of government is not to prevent any conceivable bad outcome.”
We agree on this.
“Vaccines are not risk-free, and the medical research is neither exact nor complete. Based on what we know today it is outrageous to be jabbing every 12 year old girl with a new vaccine for this. This is not polio or smallpox, and if we react this way to every rare disease then we will be pumping everyone full of biomedical stew ‘just in case’.”
First sentance is correct. Except that for some reason, vaccine makers seem to think that mercury-based compounds that are known to be harmful in other instances are commonly used to preserve vaccines. Thimerosal, for instance. Is it the vaccine, or the thimerosal that is the problem? The published research says, for example, that my son’s autistic-spectrum disorder was not caused by a thimerosal-preserved vaccine. The guy who published the study that said such vaccines WERE notably harmful got his license pulled. However, my son developed the first symptoms (which we didn’t recognize at the time) within weeks of getting his DTP vaccine. Autism has been recognized since the late 40’s. In the past decade or two, the incidence has either risen sharply, or we’re just getting much better at diagnosing it. I was working on a Master’s Degree in Special Education a few years ago, and have been following the vaccine controversy, now supposedly settled, for some time. In so far as I’m concerned, the issue is not yet properly closed.
“Now that I’ve done the math on this particular one, I can see that it’s ten times worse the decision to force this vaccine on girls than I’d imagined it to be earlier. It’s not even a good medical decision for any given individual to take on the vaccine risk if the manufacturer gave the vaccine away for free.”
And again, I disagree, though that may have (in fact, DOES have) to do with my family history. If your family has no incidence of any kind of cancer, it just might be valid for YOUR family. My daughters got the HPV vaccine. I exercised my parental right to get it for them because I know that they are very likely to be at risk due to their family history. YMMV. Not to mention your math error... ;)
After they do studies on guys, I may insist my son gets it, too. Especially since sensitivity to vaccines, tendencies to get cancer, and the potential to develop autism, along with many other things, may be heredetary. Besides,considering how recently they linked cervical cancer to HPV, what else might it be linked to? Prostate cancer? Testicular cancer? Any other type(s) of cancer?
One of these days, maybe we’ll all know. In the mean time, never say “never.”
Old Student.
Between the 40’s and 70’s pregnant women with complications were given a synthetic estrogen. Turns out that hormone treatment did not make a difference in the outcome of the pregnancy. But the female offspring were then at risk for clear cell adenocarcinoma (cervical cancer), cancer of the vagina, and an increased risk for breast cancer. Sometimes doctors catch that connection, most often they don't because records for those treatments no longer exist and the patients are unaware of it.
Too many posters here assume cervical cancer is a sexually transmitted disease or that a history of cervical cancer is a heredity issue. Now you know that is not always true.
If I were the parent of a pre-teen I would not risk this vaccine for my daughters. Yearly pap tests once a female becomes sexually active is important and safer. Now they are advising pre-teen males also get this vaccine. I'd opt for giving this vaccine some history.
Governor Perry said he went about it the wrong way. Let's move on. The media would love for conservatives to be bogged down with this stuff.
Between the 40’s and 70’s pregnant women with complications were given a synthetic estrogen. Turns out that hormone treatment did not make a difference in the outcome of the pregnancy. But the female offspring were then at risk for clear cell adenocarcinoma (cervical cancer), cancer of the vagina, and an increased risk for breast cancer. Sometimes doctors catch that connection, most often they don't because records for those treatments no longer exist and the patients are unaware of it.
Too many posters here assume cervical cancer is a sexually transmitted disease or that a history of cervical cancer is a heredity issue. Now you know that is not always true.
If I were the parent of a pre-teen I would not risk this vaccine for my daughters. Yearly pap tests once a female becomes sexually active is important and safer. Now they are advising pre-teen males also get this vaccine. I'd opt for giving this vaccine some history.
Governor Perry said he went about it the wrong way. Let's move on. The media would love for conservatives to be bogged down with this stuff.
Certain HPV types are classified as "high-risk" because they lead to abnormal cell changes and can cause genital cancers: cervical cancer as well as cancer of the vulva, anus, and penis. In fact, researchers say that virtually all cervical cancers -- more than 99% -- are caused by these high-risk HPV viruses.
- - - - - - - -
Persistent HPV infections are now recognized as the cause of essentially all cervical cancers, as well as most cases of anal cancer. In 2011, more than 12,000 women in the United States are expected to be diagnosed with cervical cancer and more than 4,000 are expected to die from it (2). Cervical cancer is diagnosed in nearly half a million women each year worldwide, claiming a quarter of a million lives annually.
Although anal cancer is uncommon, more than 5,000 men and women in the United States are expected to be diagnosed with the disease in 2011, and 770 people are expected die from it.
Genital HPV infection also causes some cancers of the vulva, vagina, and penis. In addition, oral HPV infection causes some cancers of the oropharynx (the middle part of the throat, including the soft palate, the base of the tongue, and the tonsils).
It has been estimated that HPV infection accounts for approximately 5 percent of all cancers worldwide.
From the National Cancer Institute:
Women whose mothers were treated with hormone therapy during their pregnancies with complications have already been HIT with a CA diagnosis. Therefore, today's stats have changed. Doctors abandoned that treatment in the early 70’s.
Not ALL cervical cancer is caused by sexual transmission, however, and that was my point along with the fact that women who were put at risk and received a CA diagnosis are mostly unaware they were put at risk the minute their mothers were treated. These women did not contract CA by sexual activity.
I'm glad you are doing your research. And I agree with your posts in the main.
I have not read the whole thread. What Governor Perry did was totally and completely, (NO matter how good intentioned) against TEA PARTY principles. HE in his executive order required insurance companies to TAX consumers of health insurance to PAY for a few to receive this vaccine.
Higher risk is not cause. It is possible that the hormone therapy reduced their ability to fight off HPV infections.
Smoking is well documented to raise the risk factor for cervical and other cancers. It does not mean that smoking causes cervical cancer.
Nearly every cancer organcization that will state a cause for cervical cancer, ties it to HPV.
From the American Cancer Society:
http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/OtherCarcinogens/InfectiousAgents/HPV/what-women-should-know-about-cervix-cancer-and-hpv
Q: Do we know what causes cervix cancer?
A: Cervix cancer is caused by a virus called HPV.
- - - - - - - -
Over 1/2 of the sexually active men and women will catch HPV. Most fight off the infection without any significant effect.
Persistent infection with high risk types of HPV is associated with almost all cervical cancers and many cancers of the vulva, vagina, and anal regions.
http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/common-clinicians/ClinicianBro-fp.pdf
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.