Louisa Enright's Blog

Mainely Tipping Points

Archive for March 16th, 2016

Turkey Tracks: Happy Birthday Miss Reynolds Georgia

with 2 comments

Turkey Tracks:  March 15, 2016

Happy Birthday Miss Reynolds Georgia

Fourteen years ago, I brought home Miss Reynolds Georgia, aka “The Beauty Queen.”

(She’s always “the queen” with regard to usurper No No Penny, who steals her beds, her place at my side, and tries to steal her food from time to time.”)

She’s a rat terrier, but one who is the product of being bred back to Chihuahuas to make them smaller.  It has also made them “trickier” in terms of health and temperament.

Rey Rey was so so tiny.  She could fit into my two palms.

She came home in my lap, under a towel, on the long ride from the Virginia countryside to Falls Church.

For the past fourteen years, she has followed my every step, my every move from room to room, my sleeping and waking, my car trips.  (She rides shot gun on the front seat and loves to drive.)

She grieves when I leave her and settles down to wait out the separation.

It’s hard to get a picture of her as she does not like the camera and looks away.

But, here she is today.

She has a huge place in my heart.

IMG_0977

IMG_0978

She looks great for fourteen, doesn’t she?

(That quilt was made by Gail Galloway Nicholson and quilted by Joan Herrick and gets used every night while we watch television.)

Written by louisaenright

March 16, 2016 at 4:34 pm

Interesting Information: ‘Cancer Screening Has Never Saved Lives’ – BMJ Study Concludes

with one comment

Interesting Information:  March 16, 2016

“Cancer Screening Has Never Saved Lives”

Here’s how the article begins:

Millions have marched for “cancer causes.” Millions more have been diagnosed “early” and now believe screening saved their lives. But a new study confirms something we have been reporting on since our inception: In most cases, screening not only has not “saved lives,” but actually increases your risk of dying.

First, what is The BMJ?

The BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal) is an international peer reviewed medical journal and a fully online first publication. The website is updated daily with original articles, podcasts, videos, and blogs and organised into four main content streams—research, education, news and views, and campaigns. In addition, the site is fully searchable, with an archive back to 1840 and numerous topic collections on clinical and non-clinical subjects. Articles of relevance to specific countries and regions are grouped together on country portals.

My understanding is that medical claims of screening efficacy are based on yet another “medical math” con job.  Success is being measured by claimed reductions in a specific disease due to early discovery, not by overall mortality figures.  So, if I am understanding correctly, if someone is diagnosed and treated for disease X and dies from anything but that disease, that disease is not credited with the death.  Nor is the screening.  Nor are the treatments.  By looking at OVERALL death, a truer picture emerges.  Think about it, lots of folks die from conditions caused by screening methods, like cancer from too many x-rays.  When screenings are followed by cut, poison, burn treatments, many of which cause other diseases, other cancers, more death occurs.  But under the current system, the real death picture is not being captured.  Instead, something like pneumonia might be on the death certificate.  But, what caused the pneumonia?  What caused the eruption of other cancers?

Further, the major medical committees that review, say, mammographies and prostrate screenings, are saying these screenings are not reducing survival at all.  Rather, for much of the time, these screenings are leading to unnecessary and ineffective treatments.  Yet, up here in Maine, our newspapers are full of ads urging people to come and be screened.  Why?  Screenings make money not only in and of themselves, but in the treatments that follow.  Science is not involved here.  Or your health.  Money is.

Further still, the cancer industry has Americans by the throat–in that people all over the world are experiencing genuine cancer cures.  But that information, those cures, are not being recognized or utilized by the American cancer industry.  They are making far too much money to shift gears.  So, we are living with a rigged system.  And it’s killing us.

Here’s an abstract:

The claim that cancer screening saves lives is based on fewer deaths due to the target cancer. Vinay Prasad and colleagues argue that reductions in overall mortality should be the benchmark and call for higher standards of evidence for cancer screening

Despite growing appreciation of the harms of cancer screening,1 2 3 advocates still claim that it “saves lives.”4 This assertion rests, however, on reductions in disease specific mortality rather than overall mortality.

Using disease specific mortality as a proxy for overall mortality deprives people of information about their chief concern: reducing their risk of dying.5 6 Although some people may have personal reasons for wanting to avoid a specific diagnosis, the burden falls on providers to provide clear information about both disease specific and overall mortality and to ensure that the overall goal of healthcare—to improve quantity and quality of life—is not undermined.7

In this article we argue that overall mortality should be the benchmark against which screening is judged and discuss how to improve the evidence upon which screening rests.

Source: ‘Cancer Screening Has Never Saved Lives’ – BMJ Study Concludes

Written by louisaenright

March 16, 2016 at 2:55 pm

Turkey Tracks: “Crayon Crumbs Box” Quilt

with one comment

Turkey Tracks:  March 16, 2016

Crayon Crumbs Box Quilt

I have been obsessed for much of the winter with making use of the small leftover pieces from my quilt projects.  These pieces are too small, for the most part, to cut into a 1 1/2-inch strip or a 2-inch block.  so, I started making 2 1/2 inch wide strips with the “crumbs” (as Bonnie Hunter calls them).  I use a flip and sew method–and trim from the back when I am done.

I used these strips as sashing for the cheddar version of Bonnie Hunter’s 2015 American Patchwork and Quilting Magazine‘s four-patch challenge.

My four-patch blocks came from my “parts department”–so named by Freddy Moran and Gwen Marston in their excellent book COLLABORATIVE QUILTING.  Remember that I spent a lot of time last summer making four-patches from my two-inch bin of squares–cut from leftovers from finished quilts.  I love this idea of having a “parts department.”  Bonnie Hunter also amasses and uses blocks from her quilt projects–like the small triangles one can salvage from making half-square triangles by laying a square over the corner of a rectangle or larger square (as with a snowball block), sewing from corner to corner, and trimming.  Bonnie Hunter uses a template to also mark a sewing line for this smaller triangle.  For more info, see her quiltville.com web site and click on tips/etc. at the top of the page.  Right now I’m getting about 400 2-inch half-square triangles from a snowball block project–using Bonnie’s method.  (They’re going into a border on that quilt.)

So, here is the finished quilt:

IMG_0844

Red-orange (or cheddar in quilting terms), teal blue/green, and violet magenta form a triad on the color wheel.

The backing and binding bring in the violet purple/magenta:

IMG_0850

You can see the quilting–an soft rose colored thread from Signature–on the border:

IMG_0848

The rose color “knocked back” the brightness just a bit.  I like it.

The pantograph is “Whirlwind” by Patricia Ritter.

Here are some pics of the quilt top–so you can see the way this block and the sashings work together.

IMG_0847

IMG_0846

And one showing a secondary pattern:

IMG_0852

I have loved every minute of this project!!!