text:
05SACp03
NTP                                        STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF PRIMARY TUMORS                              REPORT: PEIRPT08
LAB: Southern Research Inst                                      EMODIN                                        DATE: 12/02/98
EXPERIMENT: 05211 TEST: 06                                                                                TIME: 10:35:44
TEST TYPE:  CHRONIC                             CAGES FROM 0000 TO LAST CAGE                                   PAGE:       1
CONT: NO1-ES-85216                              ROUTE: DOSED FEED                                              NTP C#: C62408
PATHOLOGIST: FARNELL, D.                                                                                CAS: 518-82-1
CORE STUDY MICE
REASONS FOR REMOVAL:    25022 Accidently Killed
25019 Moribund Sacrifice
25020 Natural Death
25021 Terminal Sacrifice
TEST TYPE:  CHRONIC                             CAGES FROM 0000 TO LAST CAGE
Mice(B6C3F1)
FOR ALL DOSES THE TUMOR RATES IN THE FOLLOWING TISSUES/ORGANS ARE
BASED ON NUMBER OF TISSUES EXAMINED.  IN OTHER TISSUES/ORGANS RATES
ARE BASED ON THE NUMBER OF ANIMALS NECROPSIED.
Adrenal Cortex
Adrenal Medulla
Islets, Pancreatic
SUMMARY OF STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT (P<=.05) RESULTS
IN THE ANALYSIS OF                      EMODIN
Male Mice
Organ                                 Morphology
-----                                 ----------
Adrenal Cortex                         Adenoma
Liver                                  Hepatocellular Carcinoma, Hepatocellular Adenoma, or Hepatoblastoma
Lung                                   Alveolar/Bronchiolar Carcinoma or Alveolar/Bronchiolar Adenoma
Thyroid Gland: Follicular Cell         Carcinoma or Adenoma
All Organs                             Malignant and Benign Tumors
Female Mice
Organ                                  Morphology
-----                                  ----------
Malignant and Benign Tumors
Date:  12/02/98                           EXPERIMENT: 05211 TEST: 06                                            Page 1
Statistical Analysis of Primary Tumors in Mice(B6C3F1)        -                       EMODIN
Terminal Sacrifice at 105 weeks
|=================================================================================================================================|
|                   |                                                        |                                                    |
|                   |                              Males                     |                       Females                      |
|Dose               |     0            160          312          625         |0            312          625          1250         |
|                   |     PPM          PPM          PPM          PPM         |PPM          PPM          PPM          PPM          |
|                                                                                |
|Adrenal Cortex                                                                                |
|     Adenoma                                                                                |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|TUMOR RATES        |                                                        |                                                    |
|-----------        |                                                        |                                                    |
|OVERALL (a)        |     1/50 (2%)    6/50 (12%)   5/50 (10%)   2/50 (4%)   |0/50 (0%)    1/50 (2%)    0/50 (0%)    1/50 (2%)    |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     2.1%         13.1%        10.7%        4.2%        |0.0%         2.2%         0.0%         2.2%         |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     1/41 (2%)    6/37 (16%)   5/40 (13%)   2/43 (5%)   |0/37 (0%)    1/39 (3%)    0/40 (0%)    0/36 (0%)    |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     729 (T)      729 (T)      729 (T)      729 (T)     |---          731 (T)      ---          608          |
|-------------------|                                                        |                                                    |
|STATISTICAL TESTS  |                                                        |                                                    |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.495N     P=0.043 *    P=0.097      P=0.517     |P=0.406      P=0.511      (e)          P=0.509      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.538N     P=0.050      P=0.097      P=0.501     |P=0.412      P=0.502      (e)          P=0.504      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.543N     P=0.052      P=0.099      P=0.499     |P=0.409      P=0.500      (e)          P=0.502      |
|POLY 6             |     P=0.526N     P=0.047 *    P=0.096      P=0.506     |P=0.416      P=0.506      (e)          P=0.506      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.495N     P=0.043 *    P=0.097      P=0.517     |P=0.403      P=0.511      (e)          P=0.516      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.542N     P=0.056      P=0.102      P=0.500     |P=0.405      P=0.500      (e)          P=0.500      |
|Harderian Gland                                                                                |
|TUMOR RATES        |     #            #            #            #           |#            #            #            #            |
|OVERALL (a)        |     4/50 (8%)    2/50 (4%)    3/50 (6%)    4/50 (8%)   |0/50 (0%)    3/50 (6%)    3/50 (6%)    1/50 (2%)    |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     8.4%         4.4%         6.4%         8.4%        |0.0%         6.6%         6.4%         2.2%         |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     3/41 (7%)    2/37 (5%)    3/40 (8%)    4/43 (9%)   |0/37 (0%)    3/39 (8%)    3/40 (8%)    1/36 (3%)    |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     639          729 (T)      729 (T)      729 (T)     |---          731 (T)      731 (T)      731 (T)      |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.524      P=0.383N     P=0.515N     P=0.621N    |P=0.512      P=0.130      P=0.135      P=0.495      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.492      P=0.359N     P=0.515N     P=0.641     |P=0.532      P=0.120      P=0.127      P=0.502      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.486      P=0.351N     P=0.510N     P=0.639     |P=0.529      P=0.119      P=0.122      P=0.501      |
|POLY 6             |     P=0.501      P=0.369N     P=0.520N     P=0.640N    |P=0.536      P=0.124      P=0.134      P=0.503      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.501      P=0.348N     P=0.508N     P=0.643     |(e)          P=0.130      P=0.135      P=0.495      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.483      P=0.339N     P=0.500N     P=0.643N    |P=0.526      P=0.121      P=0.121      P=0.500      |
Statistical Analysis of Primary Tumors in Mice(B6C3F1)       -                       EMODIN
|     Carcinoma                                                                                |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     ---          715          729 (T)      729 (T)     |731 (T)      ---          731 (T)      604          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.067      P=0.480      P=0.495      P=0.130     |P=0.242      P=0.489N     P=0.744N     P=0.499      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.055      P=0.492      P=0.496      P=0.120     |P=0.252      P=0.498N     P=0.751N     P=0.507      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.054      P=0.495      P=0.497      P=0.119     |P=0.251      P=0.500N     P=0.757N     P=0.503      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.062      P=0.494      P=0.495      P=0.130     |P=0.247      (e)          P=0.744N     P=0.498      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.054      P=0.500      P=0.500      P=0.121     |P=0.247      P=0.500N     P=0.753N     P=0.500      |
|     Carcinoma or Adenoma                                                                                |
|OVERALL (a)        |     4/50 (8%)    3/50 (6%)    4/50 (8%)    7/50 (14%)  |1/50 (2%)    3/50 (6%)    4/50 (8%)    3/50 (6%)    |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     8.4%         6.6%         8.6%         14.7%       |2.2%         6.6%         8.5%         6.5%         |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     3/41 (7%)    2/37 (5%)    4/40 (10%)   7/43 (16%)  |1/37 (3%)    3/39 (8%)    4/40 (10%)   2/36 (6%)    |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     639          715          729 (T)      729 (T)     |731 (T)      731 (T)      731 (T)      604          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.176      P=0.552N     P=0.628      P=0.287     |P=0.267      P=0.324      P=0.203      P=0.303      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.144      P=0.525N     P=0.628      P=0.260     |P=0.293      P=0.308      P=0.192      P=0.312      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.141      P=0.515N     P=0.633      P=0.258     |P=0.289      P=0.306      P=0.184      P=0.309      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.156      P=0.514N     P=0.634      P=0.263     |P=0.286      P=0.324      P=0.203      P=0.304      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.140      P=0.500N     P=0.643N     P=0.262     |P=0.282      P=0.309      P=0.181      P=0.309      |
|Intestine Small: Jejunum                                                                                |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     0/41 (0%)    0/37 (0%)    4/40 (10%)   0/43 (0%)   |0/37 (0%)    0/39 (0%)    0/40 (0%)    0/36 (0%)    |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     ---          ---          729 (T)      ---         |---          ---          ---          ---          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.529      (e)          P=0.060      (e)         |(e)          (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.518      (e)          P=0.058      (e)         |(e)          (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.509      (e)          P=0.059      (e)         |(e)          (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     (e)          (e)          P=0.060      (e)         |(e)          (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.505      (e)          P=0.059      (e)         |(e)          (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|Intestine Small: Site Unspecified                                                                                |
|Kidney: Renal Tubule                                                                                |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     ---          729 (T)      729 (T)      729 (T)     |---          ---          ---          ---          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.392      P=0.480      P=0.233      P=0.510     |(e)          (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.377      P=0.496      P=0.237      P=0.504     |(e)          (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.372      P=0.499      P=0.239      P=0.503     |(e)          (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     (e)          P=0.480      P=0.233      P=0.510     |(e)          (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.371      P=0.505      P=0.253      P=0.505     |(e)          (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|Liver                                                                                |
|     Hemangiosarcoma                                                                                |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     556          ---          729 (T)      604         |---          ---          ---          731 (T)      |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.284N     P=0.139N     P=0.317N     P=0.301N    |P=0.191      (e)          (e)          P=0.495      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.284N     P=0.128N     P=0.317N     P=0.305N    |P=0.200      (e)          (e)          P=0.502      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.288N     P=0.125N     P=0.313N     P=0.307N    |P=0.200      (e)          (e)          P=0.501      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.259N     P=0.076N     P=0.257N     P=0.233N    |(e)          (e)          (e)          P=0.495      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.293N     P=0.121N     P=0.309N     P=0.309N    |P=0.198      (e)          (e)          P=0.500      |
|     Hepatocellular Adenoma                                                                                |
|OVERALL (a)        |     9/50 (18%)   10/50 (20%)  12/50 (24%)  11/50 (22%) |9/50 (18%)   7/50 (14%)   12/50 (24%)  7/50 (14%)   |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     18.9%        21.9%        25.4%        23.1%       |19.9%        15.3%        25.4%        15.3%        |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     9/41 (22%)   10/37 (27%)  11/40 (28%)  11/43 (26%) |9/37 (24%)   5/39 (13%)   12/40 (30%)  5/36 (14%)   |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     729 (T)      729 (T)      497          729 (T)     |731 (T)      720          731 (T)      681          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.422      P=0.399      P=0.289      P=0.447     |P=0.469N     P=0.347N     P=0.382      P=0.412N     |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.357      P=0.461      P=0.305      P=0.405     |P=0.421N     P=0.383N     P=0.351      P=0.379N     |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.346      P=0.476      P=0.307      P=0.399     |P=0.428N     P=0.391N     P=0.327      P=0.386N     |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.381      P=0.399      P=0.295      P=0.447     |P=0.431N     P=0.331N     P=0.382      P=0.379N     |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.341      P=0.500      P=0.312      P=0.402     |P=0.438N     P=0.393N     P=0.312      P=0.393N     |
|     Hepatocellular Carcinoma                                                                                |
|OVERALL (a)        |     20/50 (40%)  25/50 (50%)  22/50 (44%)  16/50 (32%) |4/50 (8%)    7/50 (14%)   9/50 (18%)   4/50 (8%)    |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     41.1%        50.5%        44.0%        32.9%       |8.8%         15.4%        19.1%        8.7%         |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     15/41 (37%)  15/37 (41%)  12/40 (30%)  13/43 (30%) |3/37 (8%)    7/39 (18%)   9/40 (23%)   3/36 (8%)    |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     636          446          497          632         |684          731 (T)      731 (T)      646          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.124N     P=0.150      P=0.393      P=0.242N    |P=0.523N     P=0.292      P=0.150      P=0.637      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.141N     P=0.231      P=0.465      P=0.267N    |P=0.487N     P=0.263      P=0.131      P=0.637N     |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.145N     P=0.223      P=0.446      P=0.272N    |P=0.493N     P=0.260      P=0.121      P=0.640N     |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.156N     P=0.291      P=0.485      P=0.266N    |P=0.489N     P=0.287      P=0.161      P=0.639N     |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.139N     P=0.211      P=0.420      P=0.266N    |P=0.500N     P=0.262      P=0.117      P=0.643N     |
|     Hepatocellular Carcinoma or Hepatoblastoma                                                                                |
|     Hepatocellular Carcinoma or Hepatocellular Adenoma                                                                          |
|OVERALL (a)        |     28/50 (56%)  32/50 (64%)  31/50 (62%)  22/50 (44%) |13/50 (26%)  14/50 (28%)  21/50 (42%)  11/50 (22%)  |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     23/41 (56%)  22/37 (60%)  21/40 (53%)  19/43 (44%) |12/37 (32%)  12/39 (31%)  21/40 (53%)  8/36 (22%)   |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     636          446          497          632         |684          720          731 (T)      646          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.065N     P=0.162      P=0.320      P=0.135N    |P=0.448N     P=0.566      P=0.103      P=0.428N     |
|     Hepatocellular Carcinoma, Hepatocellular Adenoma,                                                                           |
|     or Hepatoblastoma                                                                                |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.049N*    P=0.204      P=0.382      P=0.098N    |P=0.448N     P=0.566      P=0.103      P=0.428N     |
|POLY 6             |     P=0.048N*    P=0.399      P=0.527      P=0.100N    |P=0.358N     P=0.529      P=0.102      P=0.371N     |
|Lung                                                                                |
|     Alveolar/Bronchiolar Adenoma                                                                                |
|OVERALL (a)        |     9/50 (18%)   9/50 (18%)   6/50 (12%)   7/50 (14%)  |4/50 (8%)    1/50 (2%)    2/50 (4%)    1/50 (2%)    |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     18.9%        19.5%        12.7%        14.7%       |8.7%         2.2%         4.2%         2.2%         |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     8/41 (20%)   7/37 (19%)   5/40 (13%)   7/43 (16%)  |2/37 (5%)    1/39 (3%)    2/40 (5%)    0/36 (0%)    |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     699          636          572          729 (T)     |592          731 (T)      731 (T)      681          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.239N     P=0.510      P=0.307N     P=0.353N    |P=0.167N     P=0.174N     P=0.307N     P=0.183N     |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.281N     P=0.571      P=0.296N     P=0.392N    |P=0.163N     P=0.182N     P=0.326N     P=0.180N     |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.288N     P=0.582      P=0.294N     P=0.396N    |P=0.164N     P=0.182N     P=0.335N     P=0.180N     |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.274N     P=0.551      P=0.298N     P=0.357N    |P=0.166N     P=0.172N     P=0.335N     P=0.178N     |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.289N     P=0.602N     P=0.288N     P=0.393N    |P=0.165N     P=0.181N     P=0.339N     P=0.181N     |
|     Alveolar/Bronchiolar Carcinoma                                                                                |
|OVERALL (a)        |     10/50 (20%)  9/50 (18%)   6/50 (12%)   5/50 (10%)  |2/50 (4%)    1/50 (2%)    1/50 (2%)    4/50 (8%)    |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     680          632          688          729 (T)     |548          727          731 (T)      709          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.064N     P=0.588N     P=0.224N     P=0.115N    |P=0.155      P=0.490N     P=0.482N     P=0.330      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.078N     P=0.532N     P=0.221N     P=0.131N    |P=0.166      P=0.501N     P=0.489N     P=0.336      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.080N     P=0.520N     P=0.216N     P=0.133N    |P=0.165      P=0.502N     P=0.497N     P=0.337      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.075N     P=0.531N     P=0.220N     P=0.123N    |P=0.165      P=0.486N     P=0.490N     P=0.335      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.080N     P=0.500N     P=0.207N     P=0.131N    |P=0.164      P=0.500N     P=0.500N     P=0.339      |
|     Alveolar/Bronchiolar Carcinoma or Alveolar/Bronchiolar                                                                      |
|OVERALL (a)        |     18/50 (36%)  17/50 (34%)  12/50 (24%)  10/50 (20%) |6/50 (12%)   2/50 (4%)    3/50 (6%)    5/50 (10%)   |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     37.6%        36.4%        25.4%        21.0%       |12.9%        4.4%         6.4%         10.9%        |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     16/41 (39%)  13/37 (35%)  10/40 (25%)  10/43 (23%) |3/37 (8%)    1/39 (3%)    3/40 (8%)    3/36 (8%)    |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.020N*    P=0.524      P=0.159N     P=0.044N*   |P=0.557      P=0.132N     P=0.217N     P=0.506N     |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.027N*    P=0.536N     P=0.143N     P=0.057N    |P=0.569N     P=0.140N     P=0.237N     P=0.512N     |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.029N*    P=0.524N     P=0.142N     P=0.059N    |P=0.570N     P=0.139N     P=0.243N     P=0.507N     |
|POLY 6             |     P=0.025N*    P=0.544N     P=0.142N     P=0.053N    |P=0.567      P=0.139N     P=0.227N     P=0.517N     |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.026N*    P=0.567N     P=0.152N     P=0.045N*   |P=0.568      P=0.124N     P=0.238N     P=0.505N     |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.030N*    P=0.500N     P=0.138N     P=0.059N    |P=0.570      P=0.134N     P=0.243N     P=0.500N     |
|Ovary                                                                                |
|     Cystadenoma                                                                                |
|OVERALL (a)        |                                                        |1/45 (2%)    2/44 (5%)    2/48 (4%)    1/48 (2%)    |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|                                                        |2.4%         5.0%         4.4%         2.3%         |
|TERMINAL (d)       |                                                        |1/35 (3%)    1/34 (3%)    2/39 (5%)    1/35 (3%)    |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |                                                        |731 (T)      681          731 (T)      731 (T)      |
|LIFE TABLE         |                                                        |P=0.547N     P=0.502      P=0.538      P=0.762      |
|POLY 3             |                                                        |P=0.518N     P=0.489      P=0.539      P=0.744N     |
|POLY 1.5           |                                                        |P=0.521N     P=0.489      P=0.529      P=0.744N     |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|                                                        |P=0.518N     P=0.488      P=0.538      P=0.762      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |                                                        |P=0.526N     P=0.491      P=0.524      P=0.736N     |
|Pituitary Gland: Pars Distalis or Unspecified Site                                                                               |
|OVERALL (a)        |     0/40 (0%)    0/38 (0%)    0/42 (0%)    0/46 (0%)   |4/46 (9%)    4/45 (9%)    9/46 (20%)   8/44 (18%)   |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     0.0%         0.0%         0.0%         0.0%        |9.7%         9.6%         20.7%        20.1%        |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     0/34 (0%)    0/28 (0%)    0/34 (0%)    0/41 (0%)   |4/34 (12%)   4/37 (11%)   9/39 (23%)   7/32 (22%)   |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     ---          ---          ---          ---         |731 (T)      731 (T)      731 (T)      709          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     (e)          (e)          (e)          (e)         |P=0.060      P=0.598N     P=0.172      P=0.149      |
|POLY 3             |     (e)          (e)          (e)          (e)         |P=0.075      P=0.640N     P=0.133      P=0.156      |
|POLY 1.5           |     (e)          (e)          (e)          (e)         |P=0.075      P=0.638      P=0.121      P=0.156      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     (e)          (e)          (e)          (e)         |P=0.060      P=0.598N     P=0.172      P=0.148      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     (e)          (e)          (e)          (e)         |P=0.076      P=0.631      P=0.115      P=0.156      |
Date:  12/02/98                           EXPERIMENT: 05211 TEST: 06                                            Page 10
|Skin                                                                                |
|     Fibrosarcoma                                                                                |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     729 (T)      ---          ---          ---         |587          ---          658          ---          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.298N     P=0.520N     P=0.505N     P=0.490N    |P=0.185N     P=0.239N     P=0.473N     P=0.243N     |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.302N     P=0.508N     P=0.504N     P=0.499N    |P=0.187N     P=0.238N     P=0.486N     P=0.237N     |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.303N     P=0.505N     P=0.503N     P=0.501N    |P=0.187N     P=0.238N     P=0.495N     P=0.238N     |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.298N     (e)          (e)          (e)         |P=0.185N     P=0.221N     P=0.483N     P=0.235N     |
|Stomach, Forestomach                                                                                |
|     Squamous Cell Carcinoma or Papilloma Squamous                                                                               |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     ---          729 (T)      ---          729 (T)     |731 (T)      ---          ---          ---          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.421      P=0.480      (e)          P=0.510     |P=0.115N     P=0.227N     P=0.221N     P=0.244N     |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.403      P=0.492      (e)          P=0.501     |P=0.113N     P=0.235N     P=0.228N     P=0.235N     |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.402      P=0.495      (e)          P=0.499     |P=0.113N     P=0.237N     P=0.234N     P=0.236N     |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     (e)          P=0.480      (e)          P=0.510     |P=0.115N     (e)          (e)          (e)          |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.403      P=0.500      (e)          P=0.500     |P=0.115N     P=0.247N     P=0.247N     P=0.247N     |
|Thyroid Gland: Follicular Cell                                                                                |
|OVERALL (a)        |     1/50 (2%)    5/50 (10%)   0/50 (0%)    0/50 (0%)   |2/50 (4%)    5/50 (10%)   2/50 (4%)    3/48 (6%)    |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     2.1%         11.0%        0.0%         0.0%        |4.4%         11.0%        4.2%         6.7%         |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     1/41 (2%)    5/37 (14%)   0/40 (0%)    0/43 (0%)   |2/37 (5%)    5/39 (13%)   2/40 (5%)    3/36 (8%)    |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     729 (T)      729 (T)      ---          ---         |731 (T)      731 (T)      731 (T)      731 (T)      |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.099N     P=0.081      P=0.505N     P=0.490N    |P=0.563      P=0.237      P=0.667N     P=0.487      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.106N     P=0.092      P=0.504N     P=0.499N    |P=0.577      P=0.220      P=0.678N     P=0.494      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.105N     P=0.096      P=0.503N     P=0.501N    |P=0.569      P=0.217      P=0.688N     P=0.489      |
|POLY 6             |     P=0.104N     P=0.089      P=0.505N     P=0.496N    |P=0.577N     P=0.227      P=0.665N     P=0.499      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.099N     P=0.081      (e)          (e)         |P=0.563      P=0.237      P=0.667N     P=0.487      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.108N     P=0.102      P=0.500N     P=0.500N    |P=0.559      P=0.218      P=0.691N     P=0.480      |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.049N*    P=0.176      P=0.244N     P=0.228N    |P=0.563      P=0.237      P=0.667N     P=0.487      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.049N*    P=0.176      (e)          (e)         |P=0.563      P=0.237      P=0.667N     P=0.487      |
|Uterus                                                                                |
|     Polyp Stromal                                                                                |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |                                                        |606          633          673          681          |
|LIFE TABLE         |                                                        |P=0.596      P=0.679N     P=0.662N     P=0.691      |
|POLY 3             |                                                        |P=0.593N     P=0.691N     P=0.680N     P=0.692N     |
|POLY 1.5           |                                                        |P=0.594N     P=0.693      P=0.689N     P=0.693N     |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|                                                        |P=0.595      P=0.686N     P=0.693N     P=0.693      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |                                                        |P=0.596      P=0.691N     P=0.691N     P=0.691N     |
|All Organs                                                                                |
|     Hemangioma                                                                                |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     729 (T)      ---          497          ---         |---          ---          731 (T)      ---          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.445N     P=0.520N     P=0.494      P=0.490N    |P=0.693      (e)          P=0.516      (e)          |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.449N     P=0.508N     P=0.498      P=0.499N    |P=0.694      (e)          P=0.509      (e)          |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.454N     P=0.505N     P=0.498      P=0.501N    |P=0.695      (e)          P=0.503      (e)          |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.405N     (e)          P=0.625      (e)         |(e)          (e)          P=0.516      (e)          |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.458N     P=0.500N     P=0.500      P=0.500N    |P=0.694      (e)          P=0.500      (e)          |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     556          729 (T)      729 (T)      604         |731 (T)      731 (T)      625          646          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.471N     P=0.340N     P=0.513N     P=0.487N    |P=0.071      P=0.750N     P=0.535      P=0.180      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.488N     P=0.324N     P=0.515N     P=0.499N    |P=0.074      P=0.759N     P=0.520      P=0.183      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.494N     P=0.317N     P=0.509N     P=0.502N    |P=0.073      P=0.760N     P=0.508      P=0.181      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.487N     P=0.255N     P=0.465N     P=0.440N    |P=0.071      P=0.750N     P=0.506      P=0.182      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.498N     P=0.309N     P=0.500N     P=0.500N    |P=0.072      P=0.753N     P=0.500      P=0.181      |
|     Hemangiosarcoma or Hemangioma                                                                                |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     556          729 (T)      497          604         |731 (T)      731 (T)      625          646          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.367N     P=0.211N     P=0.629      P=0.326N    |P=0.073      P=0.750N     P=0.342      P=0.180      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.379N     P=0.195N     P=0.633      P=0.337N    |P=0.078      P=0.759N     P=0.326      P=0.183      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.387N     P=0.189N     P=0.636      P=0.340N    |P=0.077      P=0.760N     P=0.314      P=0.181      |
|     Histiocytic Sarcoma                                                                                |
|OVERALL (a)        |     0/50 (0%)    1/50 (2%)    0/50 (0%)    0/50 (0%)   |1/50 (2%)    2/50 (4%)    5/50 (10%)   3/50 (6%)    |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     0.0%         2.2%         0.0%         0.0%        |2.2%         4.3%         10.4%        6.4%         |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     ---          729 (T)      ---          ---         |608          490          461          445          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.560N     P=0.480      (e)          (e)         |P=0.218      P=0.505      P=0.129      P=0.314      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.578N     P=0.492      (e)          (e)         |P=0.224      P=0.508      P=0.114      P=0.313      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.576N     P=0.495      (e)          (e)         |P=0.221      P=0.503      P=0.107      P=0.310      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     (e)          P=0.480      (e)          (e)         |P=0.205      P=0.627      P=0.108      P=0.307      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.573N     P=0.500      (e)          (e)         |P=0.216      P=0.500      P=0.102      P=0.309      |
|     Malignant Lymphoma: Histiocytic, Lymphocytic, Mixed,                                                                        |
|     NOS, or Undifferentiated Cell Type                                                                                |
|OVERALL (a)        |     5/50 (10%)   3/50 (6%)    3/50 (6%)    1/50 (2%)   |9/50 (18%)   10/50 (20%)  8/50 (16%)   10/50 (20%)  |
|POLY-3 ADJUSTED (b)|     10.5%        6.6%         6.4%         2.1%        |19.4%        21.7%        16.9%        21.6%        |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     5/41 (12%)   3/37 (8%)    2/40 (5%)    1/43 (2%)   |5/37 (14%)   7/39 (18%)   6/40 (15%)   8/36 (22%)   |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     729 (T)      729 (T)      727          729 (T)     |606          659          698          608          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.069N     P=0.413N     P=0.371N     P=0.093N    |P=0.470      P=0.545      P=0.425N     P=0.496      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.076N     P=0.379N     P=0.368N     P=0.101N    |P=0.489      P=0.493      P=0.483N     P=0.496      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.078N     P=0.371N     P=0.364N     P=0.103N    |P=0.489      P=0.492      P=0.497N     P=0.498      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.065N     P=0.413N     P=0.359N     P=0.093N    |P=0.493      P=0.500      P=0.496N     P=0.500      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.079N     P=0.357N     P=0.357N     P=0.102N    |P=0.488      P=0.500      P=0.500N     P=0.500      |
|     Benign Tumors                                                                                |
|TERMINAL (d)       |     21/41 (51%)  24/37 (65%)  21/40 (53%)  22/43 (51%) |17/37 (46%)  19/39 (49%)  24/40 (60%)  15/36 (42%)  |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     636          636          497          729 (T)     |587          633          673          608          |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.293N     P=0.345      P=0.579N     P=0.421N    |P=0.350N     P=0.420      P=0.274      P=0.419N     |
|     Malignant Tumors                                                                                |
|FIRST INCIDENCE    |     556          446          497          281         |484          490          461          445          |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.112N     P=0.263      P=0.448      P=0.198N    |P=0.276      P=0.510N     P=0.491      P=0.365      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.119N     P=0.410      P=0.517      P=0.200N    |P=0.244      P=0.515      P=0.324      P=0.303      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.124N     P=0.414      P=0.509      P=0.204N    |P=0.253      P=0.536      P=0.320      P=0.320      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.184N     P=0.509      P=0.527      P=0.252N    |P=0.257      P=0.576      P=0.298      P=0.308      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.130N     P=0.418      P=0.500      P=0.210N    |P=0.267      P=0.580N     P=0.344      P=0.344      |
|     Malignant and Benign Tumors                                                                                |
|LIFE TABLE         |     P=0.036N*    P=0.129      P=0.492      P=0.115N    |P=0.192      P=0.409N     P=0.204      P=0.352      |
|POLY 3             |     P=0.023N*    P=0.225      P=0.612      P=0.106N    |P=0.123      P=0.539      P=0.015 *    P=0.248      |
|POLY 1.5           |     P=0.024N*    P=0.242      P=0.612      P=0.106N    |P=0.139      P=0.584      P=0.015 *    P=0.279      |
|LOGISTIC REGRESSION|     P=0.035N*    P=0.291      (e)          P=0.129N    |P=0.174      P=0.500N     P=0.029 *    P=0.317      |
|COCH-ARM / FISHERS |     P=0.026N*    P=0.262      P=0.613N     P=0.105N    |P=0.171      P=0.500N     P=0.028 *    P=0.330      |
(a)  Number of tumor-bearing animals /  number of animals examined at site.
(b)  Poly-3 adjusted lifetime tumor incidence.
(d)  Observed incidence at terminal kill.
(f)  Beneath the control incidence are the P-values associated with the trend
test.  Beneath the dosed group incidence are the P-values corresponding to
pairwise comparisons between the controls and that dosed group.  The life
table analysis regards tumors in animals dying prior to  terminal kill as
being (directly or indirectly) the cause of death.
Logistic regression is an alternative
method for analyzing the incidence of non-fatal tumors. The Cochran-Armitage
and Fishers exact tests compare directly the overall incidence rates
For all tests a negative trend is indicated by N
(e)  Value of Statistic cannot be computed.
(I)  Interim sacrifice
(T)  Terminal sacrifice
#   Tumor rates based on number of animals necropsied.
*   To the right of any statistical result, indicates significance at (P<=0.05).
**  To the right of any statistical result, indicates significance at (P<=0.01).


text:
Can You Make a New Building as Cool as a Warehouse?
Author: Robert Benson
Yes. Yes, we certainly can. Seriously. We cannot find any more old warehouse buildings to renovate, and selling space in the central business district is difficult as corporate buildings are becoming less and less attractive. We need a new building that is attractive to companies that cut their teeth in co-working incubators before seeking their own digs.
Enter the Taxonomy of Cool
We are a society obsessed with the new. We want to look eternally young, drive the latest car, wear runway fresh clothes and have up-to-the minute technology at our fingertips. We do not care the battery in our phones cannot be changed, because we are happy to simply get a newer phone. The American pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness is a glittering glare of polish and gloss, all sparkling and new.
That is, unless we're talking architecture. Even a well-designed new building can have the appearance of a fresh haircut when the barber cut a little too much. A little weathering can improve the appearance. But with architecture, it's often about much more than just that. The preference is not limited to such subtle nuance. Consider the image below:
Which brick style do you prefer?
Old, weathered and pitted brick style
New, clean and uniform brick style
We performed an admittedly un-scientific survey, asking for a preference between the images. Results were 9:1 in favor of the old wall desperately in need of tuck-pointing. There are many other examples of course, but intuitively we understand this fascination. We wondered if we could identify attributes and codify strategies to take advantage of the preferences.
Related Content: The 3 dimensions of improving workplace well-being
On paper, the warehouse office that features such common masonry is often preferred by tech companies, creative agencies and start-ups — even though they shouldn't be all that desirable. Deeper floor plates put people further from smaller windows. It's often more challenging to regulate temperature. The neighborhoods in which they are located can be remote and further from public transportation. The list goes on, but it doesn't matter because they have that same je ne sais quoi appeal as the crumbling brick wall. The stock of these properties is finite. Can a new or existing office building have the same appeal? What makes these warehouse office buildings so cool?
Authentic Disorder
The brick images begin to answer that question. On the right — weathered bricks, with aged mortar oozing out — the wall carries with it a sense of character, a sense of time. It feels authentic, where the wall on the left is so perfect it feels machined and sterile. The degree of disorder or uncertainty in a system (entropy) influences how we respond to it. On the left, there is no disorder, nothing suggested other than what it is on the surface. The wall on the right is expressive, a poem in clay and mortar filled with the beauty of inflections and innuendos. This is true of the other materials found in lofts — battered heavy timbers, cracked concrete, corroded metal covered in a century's worth of enamel. They give us something to respond to, something with which to make an emotional connection.
So, problem solved. Use old looking materials.
A Human Core
Warehouse Office Community Space
Finishes are certainly important, but they alone do not make an experience. There is a spatial experience the drives the soul of the workplace. The prototypical office building places a solid core at the center of the floor plate. It's a perfect model for companies looking to build out offices along the perimeter. It's a model that's becoming increasingly rarified as organizations recast their workplaces as a landscape of different work typologies instead of the black and white way they'd been defined for decades: open vs. closed, cubicles vs. private offices.
We need to start looking at our traditional office space differently. Just as we looked at that boarded up warehouse and thought it could be something other, office towers can be reborn.
The repurposed warehouse or factory was designed for its first life to have big central spaces for work or goods. The freight elevators were pushed to the perimeter. Repurposed as office, the big spaces allow for people to be at the center of the space. Rather than a solid building core, the center is a café, huddle rooms, soft seating areas and quiet nooks. These are big spaces vertically as well, trading the standard 9' ceiling in most office towers for soaring rafters.
Co-working Culture
The "people core" possesses properties rarely found in a downtown high-rise. Coming out of incubator spaces, or being accustomed to working collaboratively throughout school, people who prefer these buildings tend to want to feel connected with the people working around them, even if they don't ever directly work with them. Shared spaces, relaxed rules, bring your dog to work days—all build a spirit of connection to something more than another day at the office. Compare that to a traditional commercial office building filled with security gates, security guards, rules and restrictions and companies stacked anonymously one upon another into the sky.
Creating Cool
So what does this mean for us? Once the city's last defunct machine shop is used, that's it, right? No, it means we need to start looking at our traditional office space differently. Just as we looked at that boarded up warehouse and thought it could be something other, office towers can be reborn. This could mean investments in making changes to the structures themselves to create larger volume spaces. Or, it could be a modification to how they're leased — thinking of space vertically rather than hugging the core. It could be the creation of a shared co-working space within the building that is paid for through each tenant's rent. Likewise, as we develop new buildings, we don't need to adhere to the old model. We can design new buildings that capture those things people find so desirable in loft buildings, from the volumes to the spirit of kinship between the tenants.
Finally, as we develop new buildings, we can use these lessons not to try and create copies of loft buildings, but to create something new that builds on what we've learned. To try and replicate would betray the authenticity cardinal to their appeal. We recently completed a study for a speculative building that's at once iconoclastic and iconic. Within its sculptural form, chipped away to reveal the life within, the design affords remarkable planning efficiency and gives tenants those spaces they might have thought could only be found in a formerly derelict building—high ceilings, big spaces to congregate and shared space for everyone in the building to use, regardless of company. As we study old warehouses as new office typologies, and investigate the entropy of materials, we've discovered the real cool is community.
Corporate / Commercial Design + Innovation Insights in your Inbox
Corporate Values as Workplace Drivers
Co-Working Spaces – Three Things to Know
Fast Company: Designing Workspaces to Empower People
retooling PRACTICE
Workplace Wednesday: IFMA World Workplace Trends
Corporate/Commercial Expertise
View here >

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Berry Bros. & Rudd is Britain's oldest wine & Spirits merchants, they have been supplying the British Royal Family since 1760.
Each individual Single cask whisky from the Berry Bros range has a unique story to tell, whether it is a closed distillery, an unusual flavor characteristic or an interesting provenance. Being from one single cask, each bottle of whisky from Berrys Own Selection is limited … when it is gone, it is gone forever making this whisky a truly rare find and a collectors favourite.
All of the Berry Bros. & Rudd whiskies are natural in colour and wherever possible they avoid chill-filtering to preserve as much of the authentic character of the original spirit as possible.


text:
Spinning Round the Periphery
Road to Wellness
By William Brashear
Ninety-nine percent of the time, 99 percent of us live our lives in the periphery rather than from the center of our being. This has its purpose and has established the comfortable material existence we have today, but this is a universe away from a fully conscious existence. Only rare unconscious visits are made to our center, that place where it's possible to "know thyself" and the implications thereof.
With the periphery constantly calling our attention and being made so shiny and pretty, why we'd want to move inward is ultimately an experiential wisdom. For now, suffice it to say that our individual being is described in many spiritual traditions as a microcosm of the universe. Our center is as the sun. Nothing can touch it, much less harm it. It sheds light on all things. It's the self-sustaining, life-giving, ultimate observer of the universe. Yet as great as the sun is, the planets and most life forms upon them are completely oblivious of its glory.
Similarly, most people are oblivious to their center of being. They are too caught up in archetypal dramas. They have scripts they feel they must play out, scripts that all revolve around worldly and peripheral desires. Each desire brings with it a drama or quest, and each quest follows a certain universal storyline. You can recognize them everywhere in life, from history to television, but most readily in mythology.
To move to our center we can simply jump out of our script at any time — an opportunity that's rarely recognized. We're usually too busy trying to fulfill our role or quest first. And if it doesn't take our whole life to do so, sometimes even before completion of one drama we're readying ourself for yet another. We jump back into the spinning wheel again and again, allowing its inertia to throw us back out to the periphery.
The best place to see the world in perspective is from the sun, the center of the universe; from there you see the entire universe. And the best place to see oneself is from one's center, and consequently from there you can see the same consciousness that animates all beings.
When we have awareness of the scripts we cycle into, we can consciously observe them. Observation, which is symbolically a power of the sun, is a phase of liberation. The more equanimity (evenness of being) we can bring into our script the more we interrupt age-old and miserably dramatic patterns. This creates a gap in our dramatrix (dramatic matrix) through which we can differentiate the outer world of acting from the inner world of true being.
We're then free to live consciously in either space and to connect at will to that central consciousness that enables us not only freedom from our own scripts but also the ability to see the scripts that others are unconsciously caught in. We therefore escape our own dramas and can keep from falling into the dramatrix of others. We go beyond the fears, miseries and limits of an unconscious peripheral existence into the fearless joys and unlimited potentialities of living consciously in the center of our being.
WILLIAM BRASHEAR is a Yoga Psychologist and owner of Cincinnati Yoga School in Blue Ash. He's been practicing progressive meditation since 1988 and gives lectures and instruction locally and internationally. Contact him at [email protected].


text:
Futurex Crypto Chat with Encryption Consulting: Quantum, Cloud, and "Wow" Technology
By FuturexOctober 15, 2021August 16th, 2022No Comments
HomeBlogFuturex Crypto Chat with Encryption Consulting: Quantum, Cloud, and "Wow" Technology
Adam Cason, vice president, global and strategic alliances, Futurex, chats with Puneet Singh, founder of Encryption Consulting
Adam: How do you see encryption evolving over the next 5-10 years?
Puneet: Quantum computers are evolving swiftly with time. The encryption process, specifically asymmetric encryption, and encryption with keys of a small length, will be at high risk of a breach in the next 5-10 years.
Quantum computers high-speed computations can be very advantageous for many tasks that cannot be done now, even by supercomputers. At the same time, their super performance can be a significant threat to popular public-key cryptography — which we are using nowadays — as quantum computers can quickly solve many problems like NP-complete problems, non-deterministic problems, etc.
In other words, we can say that in the next 5-10 years, when there is a large-scale universal usage of quantum computers, we cannot trust public-key cryptography algorithms. However, we can use symmetric key cryptography securely. The NIST also recommends that AES-256 be used until 2030 and beyond.
Adam: Tell us a little about Encryption Consulting.
Puneet: Encryption Consulting is a customer-focused cyber-consulting firm providing an array of services in all aspects of encryption. Our knowledge and experience put experts on your team to deploy the industry's best, proven encryption technologies. Our people and services enable organizations to successfully achieve their data security goals in Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability. Our services will secure your sensitive data throughout its entire lifecycle. Our specialty is delivering Assessments, Strategies, and Implementations for organizations that either lack specialized resources or value having a trusted advisor to upgrade their data security posture.
At Encryption Consulting, we have created a custom Cryptographic Data Protection framework based on NIST 800-57, NIST 800-53 standards, FIPS, and industry best practices to accelerate our client's data protection projects.
We provide services in the following area:
Sensitive Data Identification and Classification
Enforcement of data protection controls – Encryption, Tokenization, or Masking
Expert advice on implementation strategy and services
How to comply with encryption standards and follow industry best practices
Insights on encryption compliance & regulation
Operationalizing Encryption key lifecycle management
Delivering on reporting and integration
PKI and HSM training for cloud and on-premises environments
Encryption technology supplier evaluations
In summary, we enable organizations to identify areas in their current encryption environment needing improvement by conducting an assessment, creating a roadmap, and implementing an encryption plan end-to-end.
We are also in the process of enhancing our code signing solution, Codesign Secure, to provide a secure and flexible solution to our customers' code signing needs for all operating systems, including Windows, Linux, Macintosh, Docker, and Android/iOS apps.
Join us for our Encryption Consulting Virtual Conference 2021 on November 3 and November 4 to hear the latest about encryption and cryptography.
Adam: Based on the past year of assessments your organization has worked on, what takeaways or data security best practices can you share?
Puneet: Based on the past year assessments, the best data security practices are as follows:
An organization should encrypt its data at every level.
Data should be encrypted at the Storage level.
File/Folder Layer encryption, Database Layer encryption, and Application Layer encryption should be present.
All keys must be stored in a hardware security module (HSM), and there must be access control and monitoring of data in place.
When a user wants to access the resources, there must be a strong verification process. The user can only access resources applicable for their job.
Users should not be able to access the resources of another department.
Documentation of processes, standards, architecture designs, policies, etc., plays a significant role in an organization for existing and new team members. Defining appropriate documents for the necessary services is a must.
Adam: What tips do you have for organizations when approaching key management in the cloud?
Puneet: Compliance standards and regulations ask a lot of key management practices. Standards created by NIST, and regulations, like PCI DSS, FIPS, and HIPAA, expect users to follow certain best practices to maintain cryptographic keys used to protect sensitive data. The following are important practices to ensure compliance with government regulations and standards:
Avoid hard-coding keys: The most important practice with cryptographic keys is never hard-coding key values anywhere. Hard-coding a key into open-source code — or code of any kind — instantly compromises the key. Anyone with access to that code now has access to the key value of one of your encryption keys, resulting in an insecure key.
Least privilege: The principle of least privilege is the idea that users should only have access to keys that are absolutely necessary for their work. This assures only authorized users can access important cryptographic keys while providing better tracking of key usage. If a key is misused or compromised, only a handful of people have access to the key, so the suspect pool is narrowed down if the breach was within the organization.
HSMs: An HSM is a physical device that stores cryptographic keys and performs cryptographic operations on-premises. For an attacker to steal the keys from an HSM, they would need to physically remove the device from the premises, steal a quorum of access cards required to access the HSM, and bypass the encryption algorithm used to keep the keys secure. HSMs on the Cloud are also a viable key management storage method.
Automation: Automation is a widely practiced method of ensuring keys do not go past their validity period and become overused. Other key lifecycle tasks can be automated, like creating new keys, backing up keys regularly, distributing keys, revoking keys, and destroying keys.
Create and Enforce Policies: Creating and enforcing security policies relating to encryption keys is another way many organizations ensure the safety and compliance of their key management system. Security policies provide the methods everyone within an organization follows and creates another tracking method to access specific keys.
Separate Duties: Separating duties related to key management is another important practice for any organization. An example of separation of duties is that one person is assigned to authorize a new user's access to keys, while another distributes the keys, and a third person creates the keys. With this method, the first person cannot steal the key during the distribution phase or learn the value of the key during the generation phase of the key lifecycle.
Split Keys: One final practice to ensure the strength of any key management system is by splitting the keys into multiple portions. In this way, no one person knows the full key. Rather multiple people must come together to use the key. This assures that others can be held responsible by their peers if their portion of the key is compromised.
Adam: What "wow" technology is on the horizon, in your opinion?
Puneet: As I previously mentioned, quantum computing is an up-and-coming system being developed in the world of computers. I believe this will be a product to keep an eye on in the future, as it will change everything about the encryption world. With quantum computers, public-key cryptography will be a thing of the past. Quantum computers have the potential to make public-key cryptography obsolete, since they will be able to solve encryption with public-key cryptography in an extremely short amount of time.
Although public-key cryptography will not be able to be used, symmetric encryption will still be usable. Additionally, new protection methods will have to be developed to protect against quantum computing, likely using quantum computing. These new quantum computing protections will be another future product to keep an eye out for, as they will be a new addition to the world of cybersecurity.
Note: Encryption Consulting is hosting its Encryption Consulting Virtual Conference 2021 on November 3 and November 4. Register now: https://www.encryptionconsulting.com/ecconf
Contact a Solutions Architect today.
Interested In? * Interested In?SalesTechnical SupportCareers
Author Futurex
For over 40 years, Futurex has been a trusted provider of hardened, enterprise-class data security solutions. More than 15,000 organizations worldwide have used Futurex's innovative hardware security modules, key management servers, and cloud HSM solutions to address mission-critical data encryption and key management needs.


An emergency can range from all-out devastation to a surprise event that calls for extraordinary response, or an unusual surge in weather conditions.
When you need cooling for an emergency, it's usually for a temporary time period, and usually needed right away.
Rental cooling systems are the answer to most needs. You want rapid delivery and setup by skilled personnel, and if electricity is a problem, you need a portable generator too.
Our portable air conditioning units range from spot coolers that blast cold air to hot spots, to stackable or trailer-mounted external A/C units that duct into a building or tent, and everything in between, including next-generation evaporative units and systems that cool outdoor spaces.
We will rush emergency cooling to your location anywhere in Texas, day or night. First, let's talk – let our experts advise the best solution for your needs over the phone.
When we've established what's required, we'll hang up the phone, and get moving!
Rental units are built for portability and ease of deployment. Often designed for military performance, units are rugged, dependable and built for adverse conditions.
Rental units for emergency cooling are a scalable solution, allowing you to decrease or increase the number or size of the units as the situation either improves or calls for more intense response.
Spot Cooler solutions are made to cool down spaces from 200 sq. ft to more than 2,000 sq. ft. These units are self-contained and can easily be moved around on sturdy casters. They blow cool air where it's needed most, without having to cool an entire building or enclosure.
Spot coolers are powerful and can work to keep people and machinery cool in intense activity, outdoors, in temporary structures, or anywhere there's no existing, or not enough, cooling.
They plug into regular electricity, and vent their heat exhaust through a flexible hose that fits through a window assembly, tent flap, into a drop ceiling – anywhere separated from the cool zone.
Portable Swamp Coolers are low cost and high efficiency evaporative coolers that use proprietary filtration materials to deliver large volumes of cool, filtered air, with no misting or sprays. They run on household electricity and use ordinary tap water.
Our portable swamp coolers are fairly quiet and bring immediate relief to areas from 1,000 to 5,000 square feet – at little more than $1 per day in power consumption. They're exceptionally good for the outdoors – patios, barns and stables, temporary staging areas, even places where people are standing in line or in a makeshift staging area.
Event Air Conditioning is usually deployed for large structures such as buildings, open-sided shelters, marquee tents, and the like. These are stackable and trailer-mounted units, self-contained A/C units that duct cold air inside through 20-inch wide ducting. They're controlled by thermostat from the inside, and offer a more uniform cooling for the entire space.
The units have internal electrical controls that won't surge your power supply, but if power is in short supply during your emergency response, we have generators to make up the difference. These cooling units are extremely rugged and durable enough to stay in place and in use indefinitely.


text:
Category: LGCT
Peder "The Great" Fredricson Claims the Crown of 2021 Longines Global Champions Tour Champion!
Samorin, Slovakia – October 23, 2021 – It wasn't game, set and match last Saturday after Peder Fredricson (SWE) wrote hins mane in history, claiming his firt Longines Global Champions Tour title just hours after helping to secure the GCL team series crown for the Valkenswaard United. The […]
Live Streaming & Order-of-go in the 2021 LGCT Championship Decider in Samorin!
Šamorín, Slovakia – October 23, 2021 – It's showtime for showjumping at the X-Bionic Sphere and the last chase for the coveted individual championship is on today. The battle has never been this close before after Peder Fredricson could have taken the overall season title last week if he […]
Two Riders at the Top of the Leaderboard as LGCT Heads to Season Finale at Samorin
Valkenswaard, The Netherlands – October 04, 2021 – For the first time in Longines Global Champions Tour history with just two stages of the 2021 season to go Ben Maher (GBR) and Olivier Robert (FRA) are joint leaders on 228 points, dramatically knocking Edwina Tops-Alexander (AUS) off top […]
Sergio Álvarez Moya to the Lead of the Longines Global Champions Tour Standings
Berlin, Germany – July 30, 2021 – Sergio Álvarez Moya (ESP) has "climbed the ladder" to the top of the 2021 Longines Global Champions Tour standings after winning the €300,000 Longines Global Champions Tour Grand Prix of Berlin CSI 5* last week.The Spaniard has a six-point lead over […]
Pieter Devos Leaps to the Lead of the Longines Global Champions Tour Standings
Pieter Devos (BEL) has retaken the lead in the overall standings of the 2019 Longines Global Champions Tour. The Belgian was the runner-up in the €303,000 Longines Global Champions Tour Grand Prix of Saint-Tropez CSI 5* last Sunday and now leads the championship race with just 1 point […]
Ben Maher Leads the Chase for the 2019 Longines Global Champions Tour Season Title
St. Tropez, France – September 12, 2019 – Ben Maher (GBR) is in the driver's seat at the top of the leaderboard of the 2019 Longines Global Champions Tour standings. The Brit claimed first position after winning the €300,000 Longines Global Champions Tour Grand Prix of Rome CSI 5* […]
Pieter Devos Leads the Chase for Title as Longines Global Champions Tour Gets Ready for Rome
Pieter Devos (BEL) leads the 2019 Longines Global Champions Tour standings as the championship series takes a summer break. Season titles will be on the line during the 16th leg of the tour in the city of Rome. Pieter Devos (BEL) has extended his lead in the 2019 LGCT […]
Championship Dreams on the Line as Ben Maher Leads Standings Heading into Longines Global Champions Tour of Rome CSI 5*
By Jumper News on 6 06America/Sao_Paulo September 06America/Sao_Paulo 2018
The window of the 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour (LGCT) is being closed as the championship series makes it curtain-call stops in Rome this week and Doha later on. The chase for the title has separated pretenders from contender and Ben Maher (GBR) is still sitting on top […]
Cédric Angot & Talent des Moitiers Win €25,400 French Tour Generali Prize CSI 5* at LGCT of Chantilly
By Jumper News on 14 14America/Sao_Paulo July 14America/Sao_Paulo 2018
Cédric Angot (FRA) and Talent des Moitiers took a stunning opening win of the Longines Global Champions Tour of Chantilly, flying the French flag to kick start three days of spectacular show jumping. A smiling Cédric said: "I'm very happy, my horse jumped very well. I think for […]
Edwina Tops-Alexander at the Top of the 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour Season Standings
By Jumper News on 27 27America/Sao_Paulo June 27America/Sao_Paulo 2018
Edwina Tops-Alexander (AUS) is at the top of the leaderboard of the 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour (LGCT) standings heading into the ninth leg of the championship series in Monaco starting tomorrow. The Aussie has a total of 172 points while Ben Maher (GBR) has tallied 143 points. […]
Edwina Tops-Alexander at the Top of the Leaderboard of 2018 LGCT Season Standings
Edwina Tops-Alexander (AUS) leads the field of international superstars in pursuit of the 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour Title this week during the Longines Global Champions Tour of Cascais in Estoril, Cascais, Portugal. After the first seven legs of the championship series, the Australian has accumulated a total […]
Edwina Tops-Alexander Supreme in Longines Global Champions Tour Standings
By Jumper News on 5 05America/Sao_Paulo June 05America/Sao_Paulo 2018
Edwina Tops-Alexander (AUS) has taken over the lead of the 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour overall standings after scoring 35 additional points due to the third-place finish in the €300,000 Longines Global Champions Tour Grand Prix of Saint Tropez CSI 5* last Saturday at the Longines Athina Onassis […]
Scott Brash on Top Again of the 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour Standings
By Jumper News on 8 08America/Sao_Paulo May 08America/Sao_Paulo 2018
Scott Brash (GBR) has maintained the lead for the 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour Championship after another consistent finish last week in Madrid. Brash finished in fifth place for the second consecutive event, adding 32 more points to his previous total, accumulating a total of 131 after the […]
Scott Brash Maintains Lead in 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour Standings
By Jumper News on 24 24America/Sao_Paulo April 24America/Sao_Paulo 2018
Scott Brash maintained his overall lead in the 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour standings after the third leg of the tour last weekend in Shanghai, China. Brash was bold again and despite riding a "green" Hello Shelby, a 9-year-old bay Hannoverian gelding (Stolzenberg x For Pleasure), the Brit […]
Scott Brash on Top of Standings Heading to Longines Global Champions Tour of Shanghai CSI 5*
Scott Brash (GBR) has retained his overall lead in the 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour standings after a tenth-place finish in the €300,000 Longines Grand Prix of Miami Beach CSI 5* two weeks ago. As a result, the Brit added 27 points to his previous score of 40 […]
Scott Brash Leads Field of All-Stars in Pursuit of 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour Title
By Jumper News on 6 06America/Sao_Paulo April 06America/Sao_Paulo 2018
The 2018 Longines Global Champions Tour is just beginning but the competition for a huge jackpot, fame, glory and to be called The Champion of Champions promises to be exciting throughout the season. Everything has been set for the showdown tomorrow in Miami Beach as the […]


text:
Meet Lewis, Help Kids & get a tax deduction
⚠MEET LEWIS, HELP A CHILD & GET A TAX DEDUCTION
"Your past and continued support of the Children of the Forest College Fund has been so successful that we are extending the campaign. Your donations will now provide life changing education and ultimately citizenship to younger, stateless children through kindergarten, elementary and high school.
Lets keep this going! This means a great deal to me but much more to these kids. Potentially hundreds of children will be now given an opportunity through education that has previously never been in their grasp. It's something minimal we can do to change lives... to give back, and that's what makes it worthwhile. YOU can make a world of difference." ~ Lewis Black
⚠MEET LEWIS, HELP A CHILD AND GET A TAX DEDUCTION
In 2015, Lewis Black was proud to help sponsor the first Children of the Forest College Fund, with a goal of $25,000 per year to cover the entire cost of helping 12 kids through four years of college. Thanks to YOUR generous donations, we met that goal in 2015-19. There were 7 University graduates and 5 vocational school graduates, with all returning to work in their communities and giving back.
For the 2022 Tour, we are setting the goal of $26,000 to cover the annual cost to operate the COF Young Children's House (ages 3-12) and the COF Middle Age Boys house (ages 6-14). Both houses provide safe residences, health care, education, care workers, clothes, and legal assistance to start their path to legal status in Thailand, for these stateless children who have been abandoned, abused or orphaned on the Thai-Myanmar border.
⚠UPDATE: Please note that after-show meet & greets have been suspended until 2022.
THREE WAYS TO DONATE
100% of your donation goes to help these kids!
⚠Donate $750: *Receive 2 complimentary tickets in the first 10 rows plus you + your guest will MEET Lewis!
⚠Donate $500: You + your guest will MEET Lewis at a show you already have tickets for. Tickets are NOT included in this level.
⚠Donate $100: If you purchase fan club tickets and donate $100, you are entered into a random drawing for 2 Meet & Greets!! If randomly selected, you + your guest will MEET Lewis at a show on his 2021-22 tour. One winner will be selected every month of the tour and contacted by email around the middle of the previous month..
*If you have already purchased fan club tickets, MAKE A NOTE of that in the comments field when you donate, and we will give you a SEAT UPGRADE to the front row of the fan club seats (in lieu of 2 complimentary tickets). VIEW TOUR DATES (more dates TBA).
All donations are tax-deductible
*Tickets and meet & greets are subject to availability and some black-out dates may apply.
If you wish to write a check, please make payable to:
Children of the Forest
(Please write "Lewis Black College Fund" in the memo)


text:
Bon Jovi: The Heart of Camden
It's been two years since the rocker with a soul came to Camden – not to perform, but to make a difference. And what a difference he's made. Corner lots are greener. Families have homes. College kids have a safe place to stay. And homeless men can rest a bit easier.
Next month, Jon Bon Jovi will attend the Heart of Camden gala to accept the "Small Things with Great Love" award for his foundation. The people of Camden have seen firsthand what can happen when a rock star picks you from the crowd – it can change everything. In Camden, it already has.
It started in 2009, when Jon Bon Jovi directed the efforts of his Philadelphia foundation – now called theJon Bon Jovi Soul Foundation – across the river to a city he recognized desperately needed his help. "We did express an interest in helping Camden back then," he says, "and our Soul Foundation has been working with our community partners there ever since."
Jon Bon Jovi appears in the movie "New Year's Eve" alongside Lea Michelle and many other stars
That work has been so successful that Heart of Camden, a nonprofit known for its work rehabbing homes in Camden, is honoring the Soul Foundation at its annual gala in December. Bon Jovi has agreed to attend and accept the award.
The world-famous musician is quick to note that his attendance is in honor of all the volunteers who are working to improve the impoverished city. He even requested to event organizers that representatives of the foundation's community partners in Camden also attend the gala.
"It takes more than any one person to make a difference," Bon Jovi says.
"But it also takes a willing community who believes in a better tomorrow for all. We are big believers in the power of we. And we on behalf of all of us graciously accept this accolade."
Two years ago, the singer first surprised Camden officials by coming to town to get an up-close look at how the community was trying to help itself. "I had my eye across the bridge and into Camden for a long time," says Bon Jovi. "I was just waiting to see a foundation there." He met with community leaders, visited nonprofits and talked with residents to see how he could spark change. He initially settled his attention on one project: GreenUp.
"Our goal was to clean, green and stabilize 81 vacant lots. A number of areas in the city were filled with trash and weeds. You might find a tire buried in the ground or even an abandoned car in the middle of the lot," says Jake Gordon, executive director of the Camden Special Services District, which manages GreenUp. The Jon Bon Jovi Soul Foundation gave a $50,000 matching donation to the project.
"We met our goal," says Gordon. "And two years later, every one of those lots looks like it did when it was first cleaned."
Gordon credits the sustainability of the lots to Camden residents and the work of his organization, which is funded by about 30 Camden businesses, including Campbell Soup and Cooper University Hospital. "But one of the biggest reasons – and this is something you see in other cities that have had similar projects, like in North Philly – is that once the lot looks like it is cared for, there is a respect from the residents. Everyone who walks by is passively showing support for the project. None of these lots were trashed after they were cleaned up, and some people predicted they would be."
Since the completion of the 81 lots, the city of Camden and the Camden Redevelopment Agency applied for a federal grant and included additional funding for GreenUp. "That was approved," adds Gordon, "so we are continuing to improve our neighborhoods. We have another 100-200 lots that will be cleaned and greened. And that's a direct result of the original investment and initiative of the Soul Foundation. It was a great initial project, and now it's ongoing."
The widespread affects of Bon Jovi's efforts can be seen throughout the impoverished city. Many of the supported projects provide affordable housing, which the singer chose as the primary area of interest soon after starting the JBJ Soul Foundation.
"One day, I focused my attention out the window of a hotel in Philadelphia, and I saw a man sleeping on the steps of City Hall. I thought 'this is not what our founding fathers were thinking about when they wrote that stuff on paper,'" he says. "I thought we could focus our efforts on something that didn't discriminate – it doesn't care if you're black, white, Democrat, Republican, Eagles fan or Giants fan. It can affect anyone at any given moment in time."
So Heart of Camden, which has rehabbed over 220 dilapidated homes in the city since 1984, was an obvious beneficiary for the foundation. The renovated homes – complete with new plumbing, heating and electric – are eventually sold to Camden residents at a reasonable price.
The Jon Bon Jovi Soul Foundation gave Heart of Camden a $262,000 grant to build nine homes.
"It came at just the perfect time," says Helene Pierson, executive director of Heart of Camden. "In community development, you never know where that next dollar will come from or how you will survive another year. It used to be that something from the government always came through, but that's not the case any more. So when the foundation showed up, it couldn't have been at a better time. Without them, we wouldn't have had enough money to do our next housing project.
"And what was really great," she adds, "they didn't just give us the grant, they advanced us the money, as opposed to having us spend the money and then get reimbursed. That was critical for us. It allowed us to move forward."
A Lanning Square corner lot looks today as it did after its 2009 rehab
So a year later, Pierson was planning the nonprofit's annual fundraiser and getting ready to select the winner of the "Small Things with Great Love" award. The choice, she says, was obvious.
"Jon Bon Jovi's work, his spirit and the mission of his foundation is sincerely to help the homeless and the families of Camden, and to rebuild neighborhoods," says Pierson. "He's trying to give people better lives. That fits the mission of the award. There couldn't have been a better fit."
Once Pierson and her planning committee invited Bon Jovi and the Soul Foundation to the event, "we were excited, but we had to wait to see if he would come," she says.
"Obviously, he's very busy. It's not a quick ask and a quick commit. You put the concept out there well in advance, but he can't commit to his schedule until four months in advance. We had to wait until we knew he was coming. And, he has a movie coming out right on the heels of this gala. We almost lost him because press in L.A. starts on the day of the gala, but it turned out he wasn't scheduled for anything on that first day."
Bon Jovi will be at the gala for the dinner and the award presentation. "And he will make a speech, which I'm sure will touch everyone's heart," says Pierson.
"He's really passionate about his work. It isn't about throwing money at something and never being a part of it," she says. "For him, it's about being a part of something."
Other projects funded by the JBJ Soul Foundation since Bon Jovi's initial 2009 visit include a $75,000 grant to the Saint Joseph's Carpenter Society for the renovation of five homes in Camden. The nonprofit has built or rehabbed over 800 homes since its opening in 1985. St. Joseph's also teams with Campbell Soup to provide the Homeowner Academy, a 12-week program that teaches first-time homeowners skills to transition from renter to homeowner. Anyone who purchases a St. Joseph's home is required to take the class.
In additional support for St. Joseph's, Bon Jovi posted a birthday wish on his website asking for donations for the homeless shelter the nonprofit runs, Joseph's House. Normally, the shelter would close in the spring, but because of the harsh weather this year, organizers wanted to keep the shelter open for the month of April. Bon Jovi got his birthday wish – and the house was funded for another month.
Jon Bon Jovi visited Hopeworks after his foundation donated to the nonprofit's housing project for employed youth
Over at Hopeworks 'N Camden, an organization which teaches Camden youth web design and video production skills, the JBJ Soul Foundation awarded a $58,000 grant to help with its construction of a community home for ten young adults.
"The program is called C.R.I.B. – community responding in belief. It's a residential community for youth who have earned a job with us or are in college," says Sean Dougherty, director of grants and video production at Hopeworks. "We found many of our youth have unsafe or unstable living arrangements and that can jeopardize their success in college. The Camden diocese sold us an old convent for one dollar, and we were able to turn it into a place where ten people can live."
Jon Bon Jovi and his wife visited Hopeworks in July and met with the young people who live at C.R.I.B. "It's great that he would take the time to come and see what he invested in and meet the people his foundation invested in," says Dougherty. "He spent about an hour talking with our youth. They asked him questions about how he overcomes obstacles in his life, and what advice he had for them as they began their college careers. They also asked how they should give back, because they see him as someone who gives back to the community.
"Jon Bon Jovi told them how he came to be involved in focusing on housing issues. He said it's a big problem but you do what you can do. He said their generation was the army that would take it to the next level.
"As far as college, he said you have to work hard and stay focused. He's a member of a top touring band, but he said he practices playing guitar every day. He encouraged them not to lose their focus but to work hard to achieve their dreams. He made an impression on their lives."
In all of his philanthropic work, Jon Bon Jovi speaks of the "power of we" and how each person can make a difference. If you would like to help the people of Camden, contact any of the following nonprofits:
Heart of Camden
Hopeworks 'N Camden
Joseph's House
St. Joseph's Carpenter Society
Bon Jovi's Back in Camden
Unbelievable Photos from Bon Jovi's Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Induction
Jon Bon Jovi Visits Camden High School to Shoot Music Videos


The thyroid is a remarkably tough organ. Bodybuilders routinely subject it to a great deal of harsh treatment with the use of various drugs to lose fat, and it always seems to bounce back better than ever, and fairly quickly to boot. T3, T4, and Cytomel are all drugs which are commonly used to manipulate the function of the thyroid. This is very useful for getting into shape for a show. Synthroid has emerged as a viable option for thyroid management in the pre-contest phase in recent years. It is similar to Cytomel, the only difference being that as a synthetic version of T4, it doesn't positively affect T3 levels (leading to weight loss) in the same way that T3 does.
It's still a very useful drug for weight loss – it just doesn't work as efficiently on thyroid management.
Synthroid should not be used by bodybuilders who are currently using extremely low-carbohydrate, high protein Ketogenic diets. In cases like these, stick with Cytomel or the more traditional Clenbuterol or ECA (ephedrine, caffeine, aspirin) stack. Ketogenic diets are very popular these days, and the interactions with some drugs have yet to be studied to a large degree.
Bodybuilders should use up to 300 mcgs per day of Synthroid. This is much higher than the 100 mcgs daily they would run with Cytomel, but that is because Cytomel is just that much stronger of a compound. There isn't a great deal of studies that have been done on dosing variances with Synthroid. The 300 mcgs number is the result of numerous discussions with athletes – not clinical tests. It's still a very "de facto", not "de jure" drug.
Synthroid is more expensive than Cytomel. For this reason, most bodybuilders opt for Synthroid only when they discover Cytomel isn't available. Additionally, since Cytomel has popular medical uses, it may be much more available, and may be more easily obtained without setting off any alarm bells at Customs. Additionally, there is a great deal of research on the effects of Cytomel on bodybuilders and fitness athletes leading up to a show. Most bodybuilding nutritionists (drug gurus) worth their salt can easily discuss the interactions and implications of using Cytomel. However the use of Synthroid is much less discussed and familiar.
All users should be aware that there is the potential for damage to the thyroid from use that is too heavy. Small use can take place for a long period of time with minimal chance of damage. The thyroid usually returns to full function in just a few weeks. However, very heavy use/abuse of these compounds can cause irreversible damage in a very short period of time. Take it easy when you use thyroid altering compounds. Check your BBT (basal body temperature) or have your thyroid function checked every 8 weeks as a part of a standard blood panel. It's not an enjoyable part of the bodybuilding experience (having blood drawn), but it's a very good way to get in front of small problems with body function early before they become larger issues.


At a Culver City fundraiser for underserved youths, more than 400 swimmers try to break a world record for distance swum in a single pool in a single day. The other goal: raising awareness about the importance of knowing how to swim.
Professional triathlete Jim Lubinski's workout routine often begins with a two-hour swim, a three- to five-hour bike ride and, later in the day, a run.


text:
$(function() {

    $("#newbie-path-link").click(function() {toggle_paths($(this))});
    $("#adv-beginner-path-link").click(function() {toggle_paths($(this))});
    $("#engineer-path-link").click(function() {toggle_paths($(this))});
    $("#nontechnical-path-link").click(function() {toggle_paths($(this))});

    var toggle_paths = function(pathLink) {
        $.scrollTo(pathLink.offset().top - 50, 400); //50px is navbar ht. Use CSS property from devise instead? BW
        pathLink.text(pathLink.text() == "More" ? "Less" : "More" )
    };

});

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Every piece of jewellery tells a story.
Let the world discover yours.
Rose gold-plated Round Earrings are refined and easy to wear, they will quickly become one of your everyday essentials. Add a bohemian and minimal touch to your look. On-trend and innovative, they are easily adaptable to any of your outfit. The earrings come as a pair.
Begna is a London based sterling silver jewellery store that combines both elegance and functionality with its impeccable designs. Ready to start? Check our collection now.


Serves 6 Preparation: 10 min. Cooking: 0 min. Total: 10 min.
2 Cup fresh cilantro leaves, roughly chopped.
1 Cup chopped. fresh mint leaves.
2 hot. green chilies stemmed.
2 medium. cloves garlic, minced.
Place cilantro, mint, onion, coconut, lemon juice, chilies, garlic, and ginger in the work-bowl of a food processor. Pulse until all ingredients are finely chopped, stopping to scrape down sides of bowl as needed. Add additional water as needed, 1 Tbsp at a time, to form a thick, but pourable sauce. Use immediately or transfer to an airtight container and store in the refrigerator for up to a week.


The very latest playing surface.
ProTurf® is next generation synthetic playing turf and is exclusive to Goals.
It's custom made for 5-a-side with a higher density stitch rate meaning you get a natural flow and movement of the ball. With an added shock absorbing layer you can avoid injury and play the game longer.
We have been busy at work upgrading your local pitches! If you haven't seen on social already, then check out your local clubs Facebook, Twitter & Instagram pages for all the latest updates and news.
Read more about rubber crumbs on our pitches from the FA.
We've played in lots of places with 3g and 4g pitches, but to be honest I love it here. Since the new ProTurf pitches went in...it's a completely different game.


text:
Senate holds closed session in potential violation of ASSU Constitution, also discusses General Use Permit and student group funding
The Senate. (ERIN WOO/The Stanford Daily)
by Erin Woo — May 16, 2018 No Comments
In its third meeting, the 20th Undergraduate Senate discussed the General Use Permit and funding for student groups. Before that, however, the Senate held a closed session that lasted approximately 40 minutes.
Secretary David Jaffe '21 was the only Senate affiliate excluded from the closed meeting, and Senate Chair Leya Elias '21 asked The Daily to leave the room.
The closed session appears to have been in violation of a clause in the ASSU Constitution which states that "information regarding the general content of a closed meeting and the reason for its closure shall be made available to the public 24 hours in advance of the meeting."
According to Elias, public information on the closed session was released in a meeting agenda sent out to the ASSU Senate mailing list on Monday, May 14.
"Anyone can subscribe to that list," Elias said.
However, no information regarding the session's "general content" nor the "reason for its closure" were posted as part of the agenda, which merely states that ASSU Financial Manager Jelani Munroe '16 would be delivering an unspecified presentation.
Immediately before the closed session commenced, Elias informed The Daily that the content of the session was centered on the upcoming year's Senate budget.
At her first official meeting as a senator, upon being sworn in as Chair, Elias stated a desire "to increase transparency and honesty" in the body.
According to ASSU Executive Shanta Katipamula '19, "there was no malicious intent" behind the closed meeting.
"I think it's important to recognize that this is a new Senate," Katipamula said. "This is the first closed meeting Leya has sent out an agenda for. It was a budget presentation, which has always been closed. It will always continue to be closed."
Katipamula disputed the claim that the meeting was in violation of any constitutional clause.
"There was no violation of the Constitution that occured," she said. "I think it was just that [Elias] forgot to note the reasoning."
Elias also disputed that the Constitution had been violated.
"[The ASSU Constitution] says that the Senate can close meetings to discuss proprietary business practices," she said. "It doesn't say anything about me having to disclose exactly what that is."
Senate Parliamentarian Faa Diallo '21 further stated that "there is no provision in the Constitution detailing the content of the notice nor the level of detail required in the notice."
However, the phrasing of the constitutional clause, which requires that the Senate disclose "information regarding the general content of a closed meeting" as well as "the reason for its closure" beforehand, seems to suggest otherwise.
This isn't the first time the 20th Senate has been found in potential violation of ASSU constitutional clauses regarding transparency in student governance. Earlier this month, the Senate held a secret 8 a.m. meeting intended to help incoming Senators prepare for their new roles and determine which Senators would run for which Senate leadership positions. Although former treasurer Katie Hufker '18 emphasized the informality of the meeting, it was held behind a locked door, and was not publicly advertised ahead of time.
As with Tuesday's meeting, the Senate also attempted to remove The Daily from that one, before eventually relenting after the reporter covering the event cited the open information clauses of the ASSU Constitution.
Senate Deputy Chair Jianna So '21, Secretary David Jaffe '21 and Appropriations Chair Gabe Rosen '19 did not respond to The Daily's request for comment on Tuesday's closed session.
Following the closed session, the Senate funded quick grant requests for all student groups who applied except for the Stanford NAACP. The NAACP had requested a reserves transfer in order to put on an event about intersectionality with members of the LGBT+ community. However, the speakers at the event required a contract that had not been signed by Student Activities and Leadership, which left the Senate constitutionally unable to fund the event at this time. The NAACP's request was tabled for next week's meeting.
During the ASSU Executive report, Katipamula noted that while applications for Cabinet and Constitutional Council positions were closed, some Cabinet positions "didn't get as strong of a pool of applicants as we were looking for." She encouraged Senators to reach out to their friends who might be interested in applying.
"We want to make sure that we're choosing from the absolute best candidates out there," said Katipamula, adding that she hopes the Cabinet will be finalized by the end of next week.
The Senate also discussed a proposed joint resolution on Stanford's General Use Permit (GUP). The GUP is the proposal for Stanford's land use development through 2035, which will involve the construction of several million square feet of academic space and thousands of new housing units.
The bill, authored by Stanford Coalition for Planning an Equitable 2035 and co-sponsored by Graduate Student Council member Caleb Smith '17 MA '18 and Undergraduate Undergraduate Senator Melissa Loupeda '21, states that "the current General Use Permit proposal resoundingly fails to offset the impacts of the proposed development on the low-income residents of Santa Clara County and the wider Bay Area region."
During an open forum, Rosen — the only returning Senator for the second year in a row — stressed the need for electoral reform.
"We have to figure out some way to make institutional memory transfer much more sustainable," Rosen said.
Senator Michal Skreta '21 closed the meeting by urging Senators to "always read the bills."
"The last thing that we want to see is if we voted on something and accept something, and we then cannot defend our vote," said Skreta.
Contact Erin Woo at erinkwoo 'at' stanford.edu and Claire Wang at clwang32 'at' stanford.edu.
Tags:203520th Undergraduate Senateagendaappropriations chairbay areabudgetbusinessCabinetCaleb Smithclosed sessionclosureconstitutionConstitutional CouncilcontentDavid JaffeDeputy ChairDevelopmentExecutiveFaa DialloFinancial ManagerFundingGabe RosenGeneral Use Permitgraduate student councilGSCGUPhonestyInformationJelani MunroeJianna Sojoint resolutionKatie Hufkerland useleya eliasLGBTmailing listmelissa loupedamichal skretaNAACPopenproprietaryQuick GrantSALSanta Clara Countysecret meetingsecretarySenatesenate chairShanta KatipamulaStanford Coalition for Planning an Equitable 2035Student Activities and LeadershipStudent Groupstransparencyviolation
Erin Woo
Erin Woo '21 is a senior staff writer. A native of Atlanta, GA, she is currently working her way through Berlin's coffeeshops, museums and bookstores. She served as a Managing Editor of News during The Daily's 254th and 255th volumes, and is excited to return this summer as co-editor in chief of Volume 256a. Contact her at erinkwoo 'at' stanford.edu.


This inviting two bedroom unit is a short stroll from the Yarraville Village, Completely updated with all the comforts. Comprising of two large bedrooms with built in robes, near new sparkling kitchen with Stainless Steel appliances including dishwasher, generous sized lounge room, near new bright bathroom with bath and separate shower, separate laundry and lovely courtyard. Features air conditioner and electric heating, lock up garage and visitors car park.


This Wise Bird brand produce label would have been attached on the shipping boxes of oranges which were produced in Winter Haven, FL. These labels were common on boxes of produce and were used for advertising and for shipping purposes. This label is mounted on board in a thin "frame".


The Potted Plant is an interior landscape company operating in Arizona since 1968.
Our company offers a full range of services including purchase only, two types of maintenance, and short term rental. View our Client List.
We are considered a leader in our industry. The Potted Plant has designed and installed interiorscapes with values in excess of half a million dollars, and have developed and marketed tools worldwide for use in our industry. We are known for the excellent quality of our indoor plant materials and interior plant services.
Our staff uncludes a horticulturist with a B.S. in Ornamental Horticulture and our indoor plant maintenance services are performed by experienced and certified plant technicians with regular inspection of accounts by supervisory personnel.
We carry liability insurance in excess of two million dollars and our employees are uniformed and bonded for your protection.


text:
Population is the basic building block of an empire. The very much countable millions of hearts working as one towards your goal, whatever it is.
Overview[edit | edit source]
Your population is represented in units, each abstracted as a single worker who can be assigned to one of three jobs on the planet (food, research points, and production).
Population generates income through taxation on top of the resources generated above. A larger population means more income across the board.
The motivation of your population to continue working for you is represented by morale. The lower the morale, the bigger percentage of the population will go on strike and reduce your income (a striking population unit does not generate anything).
Each population unit requires one unit of food per turn to survive. Otherwise, starvation sets in and you lose one unit of population per turn of negative food income.
Population icons[edit | edit source]
These little icons represent one unit of population in a simplified manner, aiming to make the race and occupation immediately recognizable. Scientists wear a white lab coat with a vertical blue stripe, and hold a beaker. Farmers wear blue overalls and hold a pitchfork. Workers wear a hard hat and an orange vest and hold a jackhammer. If they are non-productive due to low morale, they sit on the floor and hold a sign with a red X on it. The neutral population icon is used to represent civilian populations in planetary combat.
Retrieved from "https://masteroforion.fandom.com/wiki/Population?oldid=9425"


text:
Root Down Farm
2601 Cloverdale Road
Pescadero, CA 94060
Fall/Winter CSA Boxes are now available! Click here.
Our mission is to humanely raise the healthiest animals possible, while working within our ecosystem to responsibly steward the land and improve soil health. We focus on the strong genetics of heritage breed livestock to ensure our animals thrive in their natural outdoor setting.
Find us at these Farmer's Markets:
Mission Community Market, 4-8 pm, began April 5
SF Ferry Building - 8am to 2pm, year round
Half Moon Bay - 9am to 1 pm, begins May 12th
Palo Alto - 8am to 2pm, begins May 12th
Milpitas - 8am to 1pm, year round
Dede Boies grew up in the suburbs of New Jersey and didn't like even watering the house plants; let alone working in the garden. Yet, after graduating from college and moving west to San Francisco, she discovered her love for being outside, getting dirty and growing food through WWOOFing in Hawaii and New Zealand.
In 2008, she moved to Pescadero to apprentice with Pie Ranch for two years. While at Pie, she was able to soak up knowledge from Jered and Nancy (and Lucas and Rosa) and learned a lot about vegetables, livestock, teaching and juggling through experiential learning. From there she worked at Harley Farms, overseeing their kidding operation, and caring for and raising the newborn goats.
After leaving Harley Farms for a season in Maine at Seal Cove Farm goat dairy, she was pulled back to California and introduced to Kate and Jeff and Echo Valley Farm in neighboring Loma Mar, CA. There she helped develop and manage their 7-acre mixed vegetable and animal farmstead, and gained a wealth of knowledge through their openness and willingness to try almost anything. She stayed at Echo Valley for three years before joining forces with P.O.S.T. and landing in this beautiful valley to start Root Down Farm.
Dede is passionate about humanely raising healthy, happy animals and her passion grows deeper when educating and connecting folks to the meat they chose to eat. Other than coaching high school basketball in the winter, running a farm, and snuggling the zoo inside the house, Dede also spends her time running the nearby trails, drinking cups of creamy black tea, talking about what's for dinner, and convincing folks she isn't Ellen Degeneres.