text:
Former Vice President Dan Quayle on Obama's Strategy for Afghanistan, Health Care and More
This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," December 2, 2009. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Tonight: Did you hear what former secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld said? Well, he slammed President Obama. Rumsfeld said Obama made a bald misstatement. Would that be a polite way to say "lie"? Former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld has been lying low, but not anymore.
Secretary Rumsfeld released a blunt statement today saying in part, "In his speech to the nation last night, President Obama claimed that commanders in Afghanistan repeatedly asked for support to deal with the reemergence of the Taliban but these reinforcements did not arrive. Such a bald misstatement, at least as it pertains to the period I served as secretary of defense, deserves a response. I'm not aware of a single request of that nature between 2001 and 2006. If any such requests occurred, repeated or not, the White House should promptly make them public."
So what does the White House say?
JAKE TAPPER, ABC NEWS: The president said commanders in Afghanistan repeatedly asked for support to deal with the reemergence of the Taliban, but these reinforcements did not arrive. I assume you're referring to the McKiernan requests throughout 2008.
ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Well, I -- that's I believe what the speech -- the line in the speech -- I will let Secretary Rumsfeld explain to you and to others whether he thinks the effort in Afghanistan was sufficiently resourced during his tenure as secretary of defense.
TAPPER: Well, he says...
GIBBS: I think that that's a -- something that -- you know...
TAPPER: He said he's not aware of a single request of that nature between 2001 and 2006, when he was secretary of defense.
GIBBS: Again, I'll let him explain to the American public whether he believes that the effort in Afghanistan during 2001 to 2006 was appropriately resourced. You -- you know...
TAPPER: Well, what do you...
GIBBS: You go to war with the secretary of defense you have, Jake.
TAPPER: The question, though, is what specifically was President Obama talking about when he said that.
GIBBS: Again, what President Obama was talking about...
TAPPER: The whole war?
GIBBS: ... were additional resource requests that came in during 2008, which we've discussed in here.
TAPPER: OK.
GIBBS: But Jake, again, I'll leave it to the secretary of defense from 2001 to 2006 to discuss the level of resourcing for that, understanding the level of commitment that we already had dedicated in Iraq, and whether or not he feels sufficient that history will judge the resourcing decisions that he made during that time period in the war in Afghanistan were or were not sufficient.
VAN SUSTEREN: Well, I think it's pretty clear Secretary Rumsfeld did not like at least one part of President Obama's speech. What does former vice president Dan Quayle think? He went "On the Record."
VAN SUSTEREN: Mr. Vice President, last night, President Obama addressed the nation about Afghanistan. What did you think of his speech?
DAN QUAYLE, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I thought it was a solid speech. This was a very tough decision for him. Even though he campaigned that this was the right war and the war in Iraq was the war of choice, his constituency in the Democratic Party on the left is very much opposed to this. He took his time, many think probably too much time, and I'm sort of in that camp, but he made a thorough review. He escalated in March and he escalated again last night.
He was talking to a lot of different people in the speech, but the bottom line is, is that he defined Afghanistan within our national security interests, and he's going to do what is necessary to protect our interests and he believes that the deployment of an additional 30,000 troops is in that national security interest.
VAN SUSTEREN: When you say...
QUAYLE: He sounded very much like a president. I was a little surprised that he chose West Point to be the venue of the speech, rather than the Oval Office. But it was a solid speech. The only qualification I would put on it was that timeline. I'm not exactly sure what that meant exactly because there were a lot of qualifications around it. We'll find out as time goes on.
VAN SUSTEREN: You used the word "constituency" and being a tough speech as a result. For the issue of war, isn't that really sort of the one issue where we sort of leave constituents behind and we -- and a president should step back, and you know, constituents be damned, so to speak, is what -- really what the right decision at the right time?
QUAYLE: That's exactly the case and that's the point. But there's been a lot of politics, particularly in this administration. Many people noted -- and I did, too, a little bit -- you know, how comfortable, how committed was he? I'm not going to read the body language. He made the statement. He's given the order to the Pentagon, who will give the order to the generals. The troops will be deployed.
And this is a tough situation. In my view, it's tougher than Iraq. Let's put it in perspective. Iraq at one time was actually a functioning government. It's a real state. Afghanistan is not Iraq. It's tribal. It's got a different -- a number of different sects, never really had a solid government there running the country on any kind of a continuing basis. And he indicated nation-building. Well, to rebuild the nation of Afghanistan is going to be more difficult than rebuilding the nation of Iraq.
And the reason that Afghanistan is so important to us is because of Pakistan, which is right there. And hopefully, he'll be able to take on the Taliban. Hopefully, he'll -- Karzai government will be cooperative, and we can see somewhat -- I don't think you'll ever get a real stable Afghanistan, but a somewhat stable Afghanistan, and then we can begin to extricate ourselves from this conflict.
VAN SUSTEREN: Well, in light of the complexity of it and how it's tribal, it's not like Iraq where they did have a government that was functioning at one time, does he set himself up when he gives a timeline, or a projected or aspirational timeline for withdrawing? Because this is so profoundly more difficult in terms of trying to sort out the corruption and sort out the solution.
QUAYLE: No, you're right. I didn't like the timeline. It was a little bit of a throwaway line to try to appease his constituency on the left. He's trying to have it both ways, which presidents do in all matters. But he did qualify that timeline. The headlines in the -- some of the newspapers was that withdrawal would begin in 2011. I'm not sure that's going to happen. I really don't think that will happen because the full deployment is going to take at least I think 12 months to get them all over there. And then, you know, shortly thereafter, we're going to begin withdrawing?
But it was really a constituency on the left, saying, Hey, guys, I have an exit strategy. My own preference, I don't think he should have put it in, but I'm not overly concerned that he did. I understand why, and I think the world does, too. The world was looking to this speech to see how committed he was. He made the speech on the national security interests of the United States of America, and he wants help from the allies, and I hope NATO, you know, ponies up on this. He wants help from the Karzai government. They've got to help. But he did it primarily for the right reason, and that is it is in our interests to have a stable Afghanistan, and he believes and the generals believe this is the best way to go.
VAN SUSTEREN: In terms of stabilizing Afghanistan, our goal, to the extent that we stabilize it, and we run the risk of pushing the problems south into Pakistan, we desperately need Pakistan's help. How do we get that? They say they're going to help us, but how do we really get the help of Pakistan?
QUAYLE: From Pakistan. That's the -- that's a difficult question. As you well know, they're going through some political maneuvers right now, where the president is shifting some of the military responsibility to the prime minister. There's allegations against the president. You know, Pakistan is -- always seems to have a lot of political complexities and political challenges.
But Pakistan is important, you know, for a number of reasons. Primarily, it is a nuclear power. And if, in fact, al Qaeda and Taliban, which are in Pakistan and causing a lot of tragedies and deaths in Pakistan -- if they would ever somehow have real influence and control of that government, then we really have a problem.
You think Iran is going to be a problem if they get a nuclear weapon, you put the -- Pakistan in the hands of radical Islam Taliban/al Qaeda, you have a huge problem. You know, India's right there, a nuclear power. China's right there, is a nuclear power. This is a very, very difficult situation.
And I think in the back of President Obama's mind, and I know this is in the briefing papers, that that was really a talking point on why we had to be in Afghanistan was because of Pakistan.
VAN SUSTEREN: Well, you know why it's so troubling, though, is because, you know, we've been successful in many parts of the world by giving aid and showing that Americans are generous people, Americans want to help, but we just gave $7.5 billion -- or committed $7.5 billion to Pakistan, and we did have strings attached. We want to know where it goes. And the Pakistanis were insulted. They were -- many of them were outraged. How could you Americans give us money with strings attached? And so it almost backfired. So that didn't help us.
QUAYLE: I'm not -- I'm not sure I believe all of that. The fact is, we've always been giving aid to Pakistan for as long as I can remember because it's a, you know, very important country. It was a very important country when the Soviet Union occupied Afghanistan. It's a very important country in the whole proliferation issue. It's a very important country vis-a-vis the China, India, Pakistan triangle there.
I'm sure some people said it was insulting, but you know, we do give aid. We are generous. We -- almost all the aid that we give, there are certain conditions. And with Pakistan, I can recall when I was in the -- in the Senate, from time to time, aid was actually cut off from Pakistan because of the lack of human rights and the military control of that country. I think we're in a much better position today, and I hope it continues that.
VAN SUSTEREN: Up next, more with Vice President Quayle. What about health care? Would he cross party lines and vote for the health care bill? And does former vice president Dan Quayle miss Washington? Now, we were surprised by his answer. That's next.
VAN SUSTEREN: More with former vice president Dan Quayle.
VAN SUSTEREN: What do you make of what's going on with the health care bill in the U.S. Senate?
QUAYLE: My guess is they'll probably get something, and they're going to have something that maybe they can call it the public option, maybe they can't call it the public option. I don't think anybody really knows.
When it came out of the Senate Finance Committee, as you know, then Reid took a couple of weeks to put together a bill that is now on the floor being debated. I mean, there's a possibility that it never gets out of the Senate. But I think that there's a strong interest, particularly on the Democrats -- particularly with the Democrats in the Senate and Congress to get something through, just move the process on. It's going to be fairly challenging.
I think, looking back on it, the one mistake that they'll -- that they'll recognize is they really never made any attempt to bring Republicans in. They worked with Olympia Snowe on the committee, to Max Baucus's credit. He tried -- he did work there and he got her vote. That was the only attempt, and it was a very small attempt to get bipartisan support. And when you into major pieces of legislation like this, whether it's health care reform or immigration reform or reforming the environment or energy, substantive major changes, you usually have to have bipartisan support.
And this time, they let the Democrats in the Congress basically write the bill. The administration sort of took a hands-off position. And if you let the Congress and the Democrats in the Congress write the bill, there's such a partisan atmosphere up there, it's very difficult for them, unfortunately, to reach across the party lines and do it the way it should be done and the way it's normally done, and that is bipartisanship. You will see bipartisanship on the support for the increasing funding for the war in Afghanistan.
VAN SUSTEREN: Do you see if -- if -- do you see if -- from what we know of the bill -- and I realize it's going to go through some amendments, possibly, and a lot of changes, and it's got to be reconciled -- but is this bill headed in a direction that a Senator Quayle would be inclined to support it or not?
QUAYLE: No. From what I know, you've got the public option, a government-run health care system, at least opening the door to a full- throttled government-run health care situation is the wrong way to go. You're increasing taxes. You're increasing regulation. You're increasing health insurance premiums.
There are -- and the one thing that it doesn't deal with, which is just amazing, is tort reform. I mean, that is -- everyone in the health care industry, whether you're a doctor or other kind of provider, or whatever the situation could be, tort reform has to be part of it if you want to hold down costs. And the two things that I would be focusing on is holding down costs and to increase the amount of people that have health care. Those are the two goals. And you can't hold down costs in any kind of credible, legitimate way without dealing with tort reform.
And the Democrats in the Congress are so beholden to the trial lawyers, they couldn't even try it because if that would have possibly gotten some bipartisan support if they would have gotten serious about that one issue. And I guarantee you -- I don't know what the polls are, but I bet you 75 percent of the American people would support some tort reform to hold down costs in health care.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right, do you miss the vice presidency or the U.S. Senate, or are you glad to be out of here?
QUAYLE: No, I miss it. I'll be -- I'll be very candid with you. It's fulfilling. You know, when you're there, particularly as vice president, helping the president make decisions to run the country and run the world, you miss that. And you miss the Senate. But I enjoy what I'm doing. I have a very good life in the business community, primarily. I do a little bit of politics, but not much. I've been with the service (ph) now for almost 10 years. So I enjoy it a lot. But do I miss it? Of course I do. Who wouldn't?
VAN SUSTEREN: What do you miss about it, though? I mean, because, I mean, it is -- I mean, it's such a hornets' nest here. You know, people at each other's throats and struggling and fighting and -- you know, what part do you miss?
QUAYLE: Well, the atmosphere is more partisan. There's probably more bickering and not a willingness to be collegial and try to get things done. But I miss the debate. I miss the discussion of policies. I miss making decisions and helping the president make the decisions that have a humongous impact.
I mean, when I was vice president, you know, to see that Berlin wall come down and see the Soviet Union begin to disintegrate and Eastern and Central Europe achieve democracy and freedom, and apartheid eliminated in South Africa, and jobs being created in the United States -- I mean, I was right there with George Bush, and it was a great four years. And I wish we would have had another four years, but the American people thought otherwise.
VAN SUSTEREN: Mr. Vice President, it's always nice to see you, sir. I hope you'll come back soon.
QUAYLE: I will. Thank you.
Content and Programming Copyright 2009 FOX News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2009 CQ Transcriptions, LLC, which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon FOX News Network, LLC'S and CQ Transcriptions, LLC's copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.


Evolution of a National Brand.
A Brand Born Into Digital.
We are a disruptive creative agency capable of propelling you into next-generation growth. Thinkers. Does. We are agents of change. Learn more about us here.
Is Brand Consistency Actually Important?


To get the lowdown on finest furreal associates toy, we've consulted prime specialists who has in-and-out data concerning the furreal associates toy.
An more and more fashionable possibility is a Little Live Pets Snuggles My Dream Puppy, which comes with wonderful options you've by no means heard earlier than. More than 844 verified patrons have rated this product 3.6 star on Amazon. It is undoubtedly the very best furreal associates toy accessible available in the market right this moment. However, in the event you don't need to spend huge on furreal associates toy, then it is best to completely go for furReal StarLily, My Magical Unicorn Interactive Plush Pet Toy, Light-up Horn, Ages 4 and Up(Amazon Exclusive) which comes with all the essential options one might anticipate in a furreal associates toy.
Best furreal associates toy 2018 – The Winners!
While you'll discover furreal associates toy which are lower than $20, you're far likelier to have issues with these fashions than considerably dearer furreal associates toy. Generally, a very good furreal associates toy with fascinating further options will value between $20 to $160.
If you might be prepared to decide on a brand new furreal associates toy, take a look at our suggestions for the very best furreal associates toy. But in the event you'd wish to study extra concerning the varied varieties of furreal associates toy accessible and the way to decide on the appropriate one for you, learn on.
Hi! I'm Snuggles, your Dream Puppy! I transfer and really feel identical to an actual pet. Hold me in your arms and provides me a hug.
Meet Snuggles your Dream Puppy. Snuggles is the no mess pup who likes to be cherished.
With a pat of the top or a rub of the stomach Snuggles behaves in several methods. Realistic and absolutely interactive, all Snuggles wants is a finest good friend such as you.
Snuggles eyes open and shut. Watch them shut as he lays down for a sleep.
Snuggles is so reasonable and strikes like an actual pet. Watch as his head gently strikes backward and forward.
Snuggles tummy additionally strikes out and in as he breathes.
You've by no means met one other pet like this one! The furReal StarLily, My Magical Unicorn Interactive Plush Pet Toy responds to your voice and contact with greater than 100 sound-and-motion combos. When you work together together with her, she strikes her head and hoof, makes particular sounds, and lights up her horn.
Hasbro is dedicated to being an moral and accountable firm and is a acknowledged toy trade chief within the areas of product security, environmental sustainability, moral sourcing and philanthropy.
We endeavor to offer correct data, however the merchandise, names, colours and supplies are topic to alter with out discover. Many of our merchandise, together with the designs and options contained therein, are protected by logos, patents and/or copyrights.
FurReal Friends pets are right here for you! They're finest pet associates who play all day, make you snicker, and love you again. These cuddly friends are right here to present you unconditional love, laughter, and even slightly contact of magic everytime you want it.
The pet of your desires is right here: the StarLily, My Magical Unicorn toy! StarLily is a stupendous younger unicorn who's come from her residence in an enchanted forest to develop into your perfect good friend. You've by no means met one other pet like her! She responds to your voice and contact with greater than 100 sound and movement combos! When you work together together with her, she strikes her head and hoof, makes particular sounds, and lights up her horn so you may inform she's listening.
Get prepared for every kind of magical adventures with StarLily! Pet, hug, and maintain her, and watch as she flutters her lovely, delicate wings and her horn flashes in several colours to match her temper! This poseable unicorn determine has strikes and magnificence to maintain you entertained for hours! Her entrance leg strikes; she sits, stands, and lies down; and she will be able to even transfer when she hears music! StarLily additionally has a stupendous mane and tail — and she or he loves it while you braid them so they appear further fancy.
FurReal Friends plush pets are all about wealthy pet experiences. Their thrilling and fascinating play helps to create unforgettable recollections.
The loveable Bootsie pet is a furry feline with a number of persona. How is she feeling proper now – joyful, unhappy, excited or perhaps a little mad? It's typically a shock.
She has a light-weight sensor that permits her to reply when somebody merely waves at her. Tap her mouth twice to make her cranky (uh oh!), or pet her on the brow to find her newest temper.
No doubt about it, this feline cutie has a number of attraction!
FurReal Friends and all associated characters are logos of Hasbro.
The Roarin' Tyler, the Playful Tiger pet is able to play. And his favourite strategy to play is to ROAR! Make noise and he roars again.
Welcome to the furReal model's household of pets – partaking and infrequently shocking associates that may develop into a toddler's favourite companion. Unlike different plush toys, furReal pets aren't meant to be merely watched or collected; they're designed to be performed with, lived with, and cherished.
Imagine a jungle pet that's additionally playful. Meet Roarin' Tyler, the Playful Tiger pet! This younger tiger is at all times prepared for enjoyable and play.
Roarin' Tyler, the Playful Tiger pet responds to sounds and contact with 100+ sound-and-motion combos! Make noise (and even roar!) and he roars again. Pet his brow, muzzle, or again and he'll reply with sounds and actions.
When he's not attempting to behave like a full-grown tiger, this good-looking cub enjoys playtime together with his little play toy that appears like a rooster. With poseable again legs and mushy fur, he's simple to hug and cuddle.
FurReal Friends pets are right here for you! These cuddly friends are right here to present you unconditional love and many laughs wherever and everytime you want them. Come on a journey that fulfills all of your pet-lovin' desires, from proudly owning a pet who's all yours to creating a brand new finest good friend who loves you simply the way in which you might be.
Meet the furReal Flurry, My Baby Snow Leopard Interactive Plush Toy! This candy, plush pet is so excited to play with you. She wants tender loving care (hearken to the joyful sounds she makes while you feed her together with her bottle) and many playtime (she coos, kicks, and walks to you while you shake her rattle).
This candy, mushy snow leopard plush pet is so excited to play with you! She wants playtime and tender loving care, and while you give her her bottle she'll make joyful sounds. Then she's prepared so that you can shake her rattle and watch her stroll to you whereas she makes extra sounds! Your Flurry, My Baby Snow Leopard toy will at all times be prepared for enjoyable or cuddle time, and she or he'll at all times be excited as may be while you come round!
Includes pet, rattle, bottle and directions.
Meet Pax, My Poopin' Pup toy! It's a lot enjoyable to maintain him like an actual pet. Push ahead on his leash to take him for a stroll.
Pax, My Poopin' Pup pet loves his treats. Make him joyful by feeding him his favourite pet treats, one after the other.
Sweet little Pax, My Poopin' Pup pet is huggable, loveable, and makes enjoyable pet noises. And when he's having fun with his deal with, he makes joyful feeding sounds.
This is probably the most lovely penguin ever and she or he's so excited to bop and play with you! When you press her tummy, she dances and sings, and she or he strikes her wings and waddles like an actual penguin. Your Piper, My Dancing Penguin toy is prepared for enjoyable, and she or he'll at all times be excited as may be while you come round! FurReal Friends and all associated characters are logos of Hasbro.
FurReal Friends plush pets are all about wealthy, pet experiences. Their thrilling, partaking, and interactive play helps to create unforgettable recollections.
Piper, My Dancing Penguin pet loves to bop when you play together with her! Gently press her stomach and she or he'll present you ways joyful she is as she waddles backward and forward, doing her personal little penguin dance. She additionally gently strikes her cute wings up and down as she waddles.
With Piper, My Dancing Penguin plush toy, you may have the very best day ever! She seems like she's doing slightly dance when she waddles backward and forward. She additionally likes to make joyful penguin sounds for you.
Welcome to the world of Butterscotch and her associates. This candy little pony pet is a mushy and cuddly pal that walks and performs with you.
The furReal Roarin' Ivory, the Playful Tiger Interactive Plush Toy is able to play, and her favourite strategy to have enjoyable is to ROAR! Roar at her or make a noise, she responds by roaring again! Incredibly reasonable pet responds to sounds and contact with 100+ sound-&-motion combos. Talk to her (or roar!) and she or he roars again.
Hope this listing of the very best furreal associates toy will likely be useful for you. Feel free to contact us when you've got any questions on our web site or our evaluations, and we will likely be joyful that will help you together with your buying choices in any method we will.


The Louis Vuitton Monogram Canvas Estrela MM NM Bag is an elegant and sophisticated everyday Louis Vuitton bag to carry all of your daily essentials. This bag features a classic tote style with round detail rivets and a detachable shoulder strap to be worn over your shoulder or across your body. This new model version features a wider shape and pebbled cowhide leather trimmings which make this bag even more durable. Current retail price is $2110.
The exterior coated canvas is clean and beautiful throughout. The leather trim remains clean as well. The hardware is bright and shiny with hairline surface scratches mainly on the bottom feet. The handles are clean and in excellent condition, with some natural creasing on the shoulder strap from the buckle. The interior lining is clean and overall in like new condition.


AUD/USD today broke through the key resistance level 0.8100 (previous buy target, which reversed the earlier corrective waves (A) and (ii), as can be seen from the daily AUD/USD chart below). The breakout of the resistance level 0.8100 accelerated the active minor impulse wave 3 of the intermediate impulse wave (C) from December. AUD/USD is expected to rise further toward the next buy target at the next resistance level 0.8200 (target price for the completion of the active impulse 3).


Paul Weller might like to say otherwise – "I always take great care with melody and if you think the tunes are better on this album it's only because of the lack of augmentation" – but the bucolic songs on his new record, True Meanings, have taken him to another career peak. Largely acoustic, there is a level of sophistication, maturity and intricacy here that moves him to yet another plateau.
Yes, True Meanings really is that good. He might have spent the past ten years making some of the most inventive records of his career – OK, OK, we admit it: we at GQ are big fans of Weller – but with this album he's returned to a lyrical, rootsy vibe that many will remember from Wild Wood. Basing most of the choices around a similar chord grouping, Weller has produced a collection of songs on this album that have a real cohesion to them. We wouldn't dare call it a concept album – prog rock being one of the few musical genres that Weller still hates – but all the songs are of a piece. The thing that really shines through on True Meanings is Weller's songwriting, which, far from tailing off, is just as strong as it ever was and actually maybe even -stronger. Three of the songs – including the rather extraordinary "Bowie" – were written with Erland Cooper from the Orcadian folk rock band Erland & The Carnival, while there are also contributions from Noel Gallagher, Lucy Rose and Martin Carthy. Weller himself calls the album grandiose yet delicate and he's not wrong. "The Soul Searchers", "Mayfly", "Old Castles", "Aspects" – every one of the 14 tracks is worthy of your attention.
Ah, yes, 60. It's sometimes difficult to imagine that Weller was the chin-strutting leader of The Jam all those years ago, because he is now one of rock's genuine elder statesmen.
This record is as pure as you're ever going to get with Weller. Stylistically, it may follow a traditional form, but it is not a genre record. Some have said the record is very John Martyn, very Nick Drake, but to him it's just his voice, his guitar and, of course, his songs. Paul Weller, unplugged.
Is True Meanings Weller's best record for a decade? Only completely. And if there is a better record than this before Christmas, we'll be very surprised.


Mumbai are currently placed at the third spot on the IPL points table while Rajasthan are languishing at the seventh position with a solitary win.
Mumbai Indians (MI) will look to extend their three-match unbeaten run when they welcome the Rajasthan Royals (RR) to the Wankhede Stadium for match 27 of the 2019 Indian Premier League (IPL) on April 13. MI find themselves sitting pretty in the top-four while the Royals who have just one win out of six are second from bottom on the points table.
MI come into this game after a thrilling last-ball victory against Kings XI Punjab at home. Riding on the back of KL Rahul's maiden IPL ton (100* off 64) and yet another 'Gaylestorm' (63 off 36), KXIP posted 197/4 on the board. In reply, Mumbai were reduced to 140/6 in the 16th over but an incredible innings by stand-in captain Kieron Pollard (83 off 31) helped them seal a pulsating victory.
Rajasthan looked set to seal only their second victory of the IPL when they had Chennai Super Kings (CSK) on the mat reducing them to 24/4 in the 6th over. Rajasthan had earlier posted 151/7 and a brilliant start from their pacers made that look like a daunting target. However, MS Dhoni (58) and Ambati Rayudu (57) stuck in to script another last-ball victory which Mitchell Santner sealed with a six.
Three men from the Caribbean will be in focus when these two sides clash at the Wankhede. Pollard and Alzarri Joseph have been lighting up the field for Mumbai while Jofra Archer has been in scintillating form for the Royals. Their form will be crucial in deciding which side comes out on top in this humdinger of a contest.
The hosts also have death overs specialist Jasprit Bumrah along with Australian pacer Jason Behrendorff both of whom apart from Joseph, can rip through any good batting line up.
Rajasthan would be wary of MI's attack after they were reduced to a 53 for three by CSK last night. None of the batsmen could score a big innings with Ben Stokes emerging as the top-scorer with 28 run. RR's batting line-up, including skipper Ajinkya Rahane, Sanju Samson, Steve Smith and Jos Buttler will need to pull up their socks to confront the Mumbai bowlers at the Wankhede Stadium.
English all-rounders Ben Strokes, who was hit for a six by New Zealand's Mitchell Santner to seal the four-wicket win for Chennai, will have to come up with something special with both bat and ball.
Venue – Wankhede Stadium, Mumbai.
Where to watch – Star Sports 1/1HD/1 Hindi/1HD Hindi/1 Tamil/1 Telugu/1 Kannada/1 Bangla/Select 1/Select 1HD. Online viewers can catch the action live on Hotstar.
Head to head: Both teams have played each other on 21 occasions in the past with Mumbai holding the edge with 11 wins as compared to Rajasthan's nine. One match ended with no result.
A leg spasm had forced Rohit to miss an IPL game for the first time in 11 seasons when he sat out against Punjab. Rohit's inclusion will not only put to rest any doubts about his fitness but also boost the Mumbai's batting line-up. Siddhesh Lad will made way if the skipper is deemed fit.
Rajasthan will be expected to field an unchanged playing XI.
Prediction: Mumbai have been in great form so far and it looks unlikely that Rajasthan will be able to put a halt to their dominant run. The home side will most likely emerge on top unless RR can pull off something special.
Other popular bets can be viewed on Oddschecker.com.
Wankhede Stadium Pitch Report: The Wankhede track has always been a batter's paradise with the ball coming onto the ball nicely. The conditions will favour the side batting second as the dew also sets in.
Moneycontrol Dream XI: Quinton de Kock (WK), Jos Buttler, Rohit Sharma (C), Kieron Pollard, Suryakumar Yadav, Hardik Pandya, Krunal Pandya, Jofra Archer, Shreyas Gopal, Jasprit Bumrah and Dhawal Kulkarni.
Pollard promoted himself up to no. 4 in the previous game and his performance fully justified his decision as he finished with a stunning 83 off 31 with 3 fours and 10 sixes. It will be interesting to watch which position he comes out to bat with skipper Rohit back in the side.
Last season Jos Buttler finished with an unbeaten 94 off just 63 balls at the Wankhede helping Rajasthan chase down Mumbai's 168 with two overs to spare. The Englishman has been in good form so far but has failed to capitalize on his quick starts and will be eager to register a big knock.
IPL points table: Mumbai are currently placed at the third spot with four wins from six matches, while Rajasthan are languishing at the seventh position with a solitary win from six matches. Check out the updated points table here.


Can I take the trailer on a beach or dirt roads?
No, our trailers are not designed to be towed on any kind of unsealed areas, dirt roads or on the beach as sand, salt water and dust can potentially damage the trailers paint, bearings & brakes.
All of our hire trailers come with spare tyres but do not come with wheel braces or jacks. Please ensure you carry a wheel brace that will fit the trailers wheel nuts as well as a jack suitable for jacking up a trailer.
How much overhang is allowed from the trailer?
For information regarding legal trailer load overhang, Google Trailer Load Projection Rules & Regulations.
How do I convert feet to meters?
There are approximately 3.3 feet in 1 metre.
Do the trailers have flat or round plugs?
All trailers come standard with 7 pin round trailer plugs. We have a large range of adapters to suit your needs free of charge.
Do I need to use a rope if I have a cage?
Yes, it is law to secure loads even if you are using a trailer cage.
How much weight can I put into the trailer?
Every trailer has a different capacity and rating. For specific details on a trailer, please visit our trailer info pages.
Do the trailers have brakes?
We stock a large range of braked and un-braked trailers.
How do I know how much my car can tow?
Smaller cars can generally tow less weight. Check your towbars rating or your cars instruction manual for vehicle specifications.
Where can I get a tow bar fitted to my car?
Do car trailers include tie downs?
No, hirer's are required to provide their own rated tie downs.
Are d shackles supplied with the hire?
Yes, all hire trailers come with rated d shackles.
What size tow ball do I require?
50mm tow balls are standard for all hire trailers in South Australia.
Can I return the trailer to a different location?
No, all trailers must be returned to the same location.
Our current opening hours can be found in the footer section at the bottom of this page.
Can I have the trailer delivered?
No, currently we do not offer a delivery service.
Where do I collect the trailer from?
Can I hire a trailer if I have never towed a trailer before?
Some prior knowledge will be required to ensure you fully understand all aspects of trailer safety. It is recommended that if in doubt, do not use a trailer.
Do you need a special license to hire a trailer?
No special licenses are required to hire any trailers from Adelaide Trailer Hire.
Can a learner driver hire a trailer?
No, learners are not permitted to hire from Adelaide Trailer Hire.
Can I hire a trailer on my P plates?
What is the minimum age to hire a trailer?
What ID do I require to hire a trailer?
Can I hire with an interstate or international drivers license?
Can I take a trailer outside of the Adelaide metro area?
Can I return a trailer outside of business hours?


We provide management, technology, and policy consulting and implementation services to government and commercial clients. We help our clients conceive, develop, implement, and improve solutions that address complex healthcare, diplomatic, transportation, and technological issues. These services help clients address and respond to the challenges they face and increase the effectiveness and transparency of their programs.
Our specialties include needs and market assessments, policy analysis, strategy and concept development, process re-engineering, program design, program management, enterprise architecture, Agile transitioning, business transformation, strategic communications, training, continuous improvement initiatives, performance management, benchmarking and return-on-investment analysis.


Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) settled a lawsuit on the first day of a trial over claims its antipsychotic drug Risperdal caused a male plaintiff to grow breast tissue, one of his lawyers told a state judge in Philadelphia.
The lawsuit by Aron Banks, 21, was the first to go to trial on claims that Risperdal caused boys to grow breasts. Another trial on the same claim is set to begin Sept. 20 in Philadelphia. The terms of the settlement are confidential, Steve Sheller, another of Banks's attorneys said following the announcement in court today.
"The case resolved and the client is satisfied," Sheller said in an interview.
The lawsuit is one of about 420 against J&J and its Janssen unit that allege personal injuries caused by Risperdal, the company said in a regulatory filing last month. About 130 of the suits involve claims that the drug caused young males to grow breasts, Sheller said.
Banks claimed he sustained psychological trauma from breast growth he experienced while taking the drug as a child from 2000 to 2004 when it wasn't approved for children.
The Food and Drug Administration gave its approval to Risperdal for psychotic disorders including schizophrenia in 1993. It was later approved for other uses.
Teresa Mueller, a spokeswoman New Brunswick, New Jersey- based Johnson & Johnson, didn't immediately return a phone call for comment on the settlement.
J&J and Janssen's marketing of Risperdal has also been the subject of government investigations and lawsuits.
The U.S. has been investigating Risperdal sales practices since 2004, including allegations that the company marketed the drug for unapproved uses, J&J executives said in a regulatory filing.
J&J officials reached an agreement with the U.S. Justice Department to pay as much as $2.2 billion to resolve probes of its sales of drugs, including Risperdal, according to people familiar with the matter, Bloomberg News reported earlier this year.
The company last month agreed to pay $181 million to resolve claims by 36 states that it improperly marketed and advertised Risperdal and Invega, another antipsychotic.
In April, a judge in Arkansas ordered the drugmaker to pay $1.2 billion in fines over Risperdal marketing. That verdict came three months after J&J decided to end a trial in Texas over the drug's sales with a $158 million settlement. The Texas case included claims that the company marketed the drug for children while lacking approval by regulators for such use.
In June 2011, a judge in South Carolina ordered J&J to pay $327 million in penalties for deceptively marketing the medicine. The company on Aug. 31 lost a bid to have a Louisiana appeals court throw out an award of almost $258 million that a jury ordered it to pay over Risperdal marketing in that state.
The drug's global sales peaked at $4.5 billion in 2007 and declined after the company lost patent protection. It generated $3.4 billion in sales in 2008, or 5.4 percent of J&J's revenue, according to company filings. Sales of the drug fell to $527 million in 2010, according to earnings reports.
Lawyers for Banks intended to call J&J Chief Executive Officer Alex Gorsky as the second witness in the trial, Sheller said. Gorsky had been vice president of sales and later president of J&J's Janssen unit.
The case is Banks v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas, January Term 2010, No. 00618.


text:
WHO Radiofrequency EMF Health Risk Assessment Monograph (EHC series)
September 1, 2021 (Updated January 17, 2022)
The World Health Organization (WHO) is undertaking a health risk assessment of radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (EMF) which will be published as a monograph in the Environmental Health Criteria (EHC) series. This monograph will update the 1993 monograph on radiofrequency fields (EHC #197).
According to Microwave News, WHO originally began work on this monograph in January 2012 (WHO, 2016*) and released 11 chapters of a draft report in 2014 for public comment. Comments on the draft report from other scientists were highly critical. "After that the process stalled, and the RF EHC was stuck in limbo." In October 2019, WHO issued a call for ten systematic reviews of the RF effects research (see list below). This call had a short timeline to apply. "The lack of advance notice and the fast deadline have led some to question whether the WHO engineered the schedule to help ICNIRP stay in control." In 2020, WHO reissued the call for three of these reviews (SR2, SR4, SR10).
Although WHO refused to state publicly whom they selected to conduct these reviews, some of their identities became known when papers describing research protocols for seven (SR1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9) of the forthcoming ten reviews were recently published. See abstracts below.
All of the research protocols will be published online for a special issue of Environment International (see https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/environment-international/special-issue/109J1SL7CXT).
To conduct the research reviews, the scientists will use a "tailored version" of the National Toxicology Program's OHAT risk of bias rating tool "for evaluating individual study risk of bias or internal validity – the assessment of whether the design and conduct of a study compromised the credibility of the link between exposure and outcome" (1-3). This tool has been recommended for assessing risk of bias in human environmental epidemiology studies (Eick et al., 2021; see abstract below).
For the EHC monograph, "Confidence in evidence will be assessed in line with the GRADE approach."
A tool is only as good as the persons using it. Will the scientists that the WHO chose to conduct these reviews apply these tools in an unbiased manner? Or will they employ them to manufacture doubt about the validity of the thousands of peer-reviewed studies that assessed biologic and health effects from exposure to radio frequency fields?
Lagorio et al. (2021) while describing their research protocols forecast the conclusion of their review paper: "As systematic reviews cannot remedy limitations of the original studies, those (and our) syntheses are unlikely to produce conclusive evidence." So this review will likely call for more definitive research.
We should not forget there has never been a perfect study--every study has either limited internal or construct validity and/or limited generalizability (external validity).
According to the National Research Council (2007):
"The extent to which particular scientific results constitute progress in knowledge or contribute to societal well-being is often contested. This is especially the case when scientific findings are uncertain or controversial and when they can be interpreted to support controversial policy choices....Assessing science, no matter how rigorous the methods that may be used, is ultimately a matter of interpretation. The possibility of competing interpretations of evidence is ever-present when using science indicators or applying any other analytic method for measuring the progress and impact of science." (4)
(1) National Toxicology Program. Handbook for Conducting Systematic Reviews for Health Effects Evaluations. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/assessments/noncancer/handbook/index.html
(2) National Toxicology Program. Handbook for Conducting a Literature-Based Health Assessment Using OHAT Approach for Systematic Review and Evidence Integration (March 4, 2019): https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/ohat/pubs/handbookmarch2019_508.pdf
(3) National Toxicology Program. 2019 OHAT Handbook Update and Clarification Summary Document (March 4, 2019). https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/ohat/pubs/handbookclarificationmarch2019_508.pdf
(4) National Research Council. 2007. A Strategy for Assessing Science: Behavioral and Social Research on Aging. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11788.
Research Protocols for Radiofrequency EHC Reviews
SR1: The effect of exposure to radiofrequency fields on cancer risk in the general and working population: A protocol for a systematic review of human observational studies
Susanna Lagorio, Maria Blettner, Dan Baaken, Maria Feychting, Ken Karipidis, Tom Loney, Nicola Orsini, Martin Röösli, Marilia Silva Paulo, Mark Elwood. The effect of exposure to radiofrequency fields on cancer risk in the general and working population: A protocol for a systematic review of human observational studies. Environ Int. 2021 Aug 22;157:106828. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106828.
• RF-EMF was classified by IARC as possibly carcinogenic to humans (2B) in May 2011
• A systematic review of all subject-relevant epidemiological studies is now needed.
• A detailed protocol ensures the review's transparency, utility and credibility.
• Original study validity will be evaluated with a customized OHAT risk of bias tool.
• Internal coherence and external plausibility will inform conclusions.
Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) has an ongoing project to assess potential health effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) in the general and working population. Here we present the protocol for a systematic review of the scientific literature on cancer hazards from exposure to RF-EMF in humans, commissioned by the WHO as part of that project.
Objective: To assess the quality and strength of the evidence provided by human observational studies for a causal association between exposure to RF-EMF and risk of neoplastic diseases.
Eligibility criteria: We will include cohort and case-control studies investigating neoplasia risks in relation to three types of exposure to RF-EMF: near-field, head-localized, exposure from wireless phone use (SR-A); far-field, whole body, environmental exposure from fixed-site transmitters (SR-B); near/far-field occupational exposures from use of handheld transceivers or RF-emitting equipment in the workplace (SR-C). While no restriction on tumour type will be applied, we will focus on selected neoplasms of the central nervous system (brain, meninges, pituitary gland, acoustic nerve) and salivary gland tumours (SR-A); brain tumours and leukaemias (SR-B, SR-C).
Information sources: Eligible studies will be identified through Medline, Embase, and EMF-Portal.
Risk-of-bias assessment: We will use a tailored version of the OHAT's tool to evaluate the study's internal validity.
Data synthesis: We will consider separately studies on different tumours, neoplasm-specific risks from different exposure sources, and a given exposure-outcome pair in adults and children. When a quantitative synthesis of findings can be envisaged, the main aims of the meta-analysis will be to assess the strength of association and the shape of the exposure-response relationship; to quantify the degree of heterogeneity across studies; and explore the sources of inconsistency (if any). When a meta-analysis is judged inappropriate, we will perform a narrative synthesis, complemented by a structured tabulation of results and appropriate visual displays.
Evidence assessment: Confidence in evidence will be assessed in line with the GRADE approach.
Funding: This project is supported by the World Health Organization. Co-financing was provided by the New Zealand Ministry of Health; the Istituto Superiore di Sanità in its capacity as a WHO Collaborating Centre for Radiation and Health; ARPANSA as a WHO Collaborating Centre for Radiation Protection.
Registration: PROSPERO CRD42021236798.
This project is supported by the World Health Organization (grant numbers: RAD 2020/1031788–0; RAD 2020/994756–0). Co-financing was provided by the New Zealand Ministry of Health; the Istituto Superiore di Sanit`a in its capacity as a WHO Collaborating Centre for Radiation and Health; ARPANSA as a WHO Collaborating Centre for Radiation Protection.
Role of funders
A strict oversight was exercised by the WHO Secretariat to ensure that all commissioned systematic reviews were planned according to a harmonized and good practice standard. The other sponsors had no role in developing the protocol.
Open access paper:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412021004530?via%3Dihub
SR3: The effects of radiofrequency exposure on male fertility and adverse reproductive outcomes: A protocol for two systematic reviews of human observational studies with meta-analysis
Ryan P.W. Kenny, Evelyn Barron Millar, Adenike Adesanya, Catherine Richmond, Fiona Beyer, Carolina Calderon, Judith Rankin, Mireille Toledano, Maria Feychting, Mark S Pearce, Dawn Craig, Fiona Pearson. The effects of radiofrequency exposure on male fertility and adverse reproductive outcomes: A protocol for two systematic reviews of human observational studies with meta-analysis. Environ Int. 158, 2022, 106968. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106968.
Background The World Health Organization (WHO) is bringing together evidence on radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure in relation to health outcomes, previously identified as priorities for evaluation by experts in the field, to inform exposure guidelines. A suite of systematic reviews are being undertaken by a network of topic experts and methodologists in order to collect, assess and synthesise data relevant to these guidelines. Here, we present the protocol for the systematic review on the effect of exposure to RF on adverse reproductive outcomes (human observational studies), also referred to as Systematic Review (SR) 3 within the series of systematic reviews currently being commissioned.
Objectives Following the WHO handbook for guideline development and the COSTER conduct guidelines, we will systematically review the effect of RF-EMF exposure on both male fertility (SR3A) and adverse pregnancy outcomes (SR3B) in human observational studies. Herein we adhere to the PRISMA-P reporting guidelines.
Data sources We will conduct a broad search for potentially relevant records relevant for both reviews within the following bibliographic databases: MEDLINE; Embase; and EMF Portal. We will also conduct searches of grey literature through relevant databases and organisational websites. RF-EMF experts will also be consulted. We will hand search citation and reference lists of included study records.
Study eligibility criteria We will include quantitative human observational studies on the effect of RF-EMF exposure: (in SR3A) in adult male participants on infertility, sperm morphology, concentration or total sperm count or motility; and (in SR3B) in preconception adults or pregnant women on preterm birth, small for gestational age (associated with intrauterine growth restriction), miscarriage, stillbirth and congenital anomalies.
Study appraisal and synthesis methods Titles, abstracts and then full texts will be screened in blinded duplicate against eligibility criteria with input from a third reviewer as required. Data extraction from included studies will be completed by two reviewers as will risk of bias assessment using the Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) tool. If appropriate we will undertake meta-analysis to pool effect measures and explore heterogeneity using sub-group analyses or meta-regression as feasible. We will conduct sensitivity analysis to assess the impact of any assumptions made throughout the review process. The OHAT methodology, based on the GRADE guidelines for evidence assessment, will be used to evaluate the certainty of evidence per outcome and to conclude the level of evidence of a health effect.
Conclusion This manuscript details the protocols for two systematic reviews. The aims of publishing details of both protocols are to: pre-specify their scope and methods; reduce the impact of reviewer bias; promote transparency and replicability; and improve the review process.
Prospero registration CRD42021265401 (SR3A), CRD42021266268 (SR3B).
Open access paper:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412021005936
SR4: Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field (RF-EMF) exposure on male fertility and pregnancy and birth outcomes: Protocols for a systematic review of experimental studies in non-human mammals and in human sperm exposed in vitro
Francesca Pacchierotti, Lucia Ardoino, Barbara Benassi, Claudia Consales, Eugenia Cordelli, Patrizia Eleuteri, Carmela Marino, Maurizio Sciortino, Martin H.Brinkworth, Guangdi Chen, James P. McNamee, Andrew William Wood, Carlijn R. Hooijmans. Rob B.M. de Vries. Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field (RF-EMF) exposure on male fertility and pregnancy and birth outcomes: Protocols for a systematic review of experimental studies in non-human mammals and in human sperm exposed in vitro. Environment Int. Volume 157, December 2021, 106806.
• Male infertility and adverse pregnancy outcomes are relevant human health problems.
• Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields are widespread in the human environment.
• A link between radiofrequency and adverse reproductive outcomes is controversial.
• This is the protocol of WHO-funded systematic review and meta-analysis on this issue.
Background Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields (RF-EMF) at environmental level have been reported to induce adverse effects on the male reproductive system and developing embryos. However, despite the number of experiments conducted since the 1970s, the diversity of testing approaches and exposure conditions, inconsistencies among results, and dosimetric flaws have not yet permitted a solid assessment of the relationship between RF-EMF exposure and such effects, warranting a more systematic and methodologically rigorous approach to the evaluation of available data.
Objectives This study aims at evaluating the effects of RF-EMF exposure on male fertility and pregnancy outcomes by a systematic review (SR) of experimental studies, conducted in compliance with international guidelines. The evidence will be organized into three streams: 1) Studies evaluating the impact of RF-EMF on the male reproductive system of experimental mammals; 2) studies evaluating the impact of RF-EMF on human sperm exposed in vitro; 3) studies evaluating the impact of RF-EMF on adverse pregnancy, birth outcomes and delayed effects in experimental mammals exposed in utero.
Study eligibility and criteria Eligible studies will include peer-reviewed articles reporting of original results about effects of controlled exposures to RF-EMF in the frequency range 100 kHz–300 GHz on the selected outcomes without any language or year-of-publication restrictions. Eligible studies will be retrieved by calibrated search strings applied to three electronic databases, PubMed, Scopus and EMF Portal and by manual search of the list of references of included papers and published reviews.
Study appraisal and synthesis method The internal validity of the studies will be evaluated using the Risk of Bias (RoB) Rating Tool developed by National Toxicology Program/Office of Health Assessment and Translation (NTP/OHAT) integrated with input from the SYRCLE RoB tool. Given sufficient commensurate data, meta-analyses will be performed, otherwise narrative syntheses will be produced. Finally, the certainty of the effects of RF-EMF exposure on male fertility and pregnancy and birth outcomes will be established following GRADE.
Funding The study is financially supported by the World Health Organization.
Registration OSF Registration DOI https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/7MUS3; PROSPERO CRD42021227729, CRD42021227746.
This project is partially funded by the World Health Organization (contract 2020/1026306-0). Additional in-kind funds are provided by ENEA, Health Canada and Swinburne University of Technology.
AWW directs a research group, which includes three technical associates who are telecommunications company employees. The group is also providing advice for a local government authority and a utility on electric and magnetic field exposure issues on a fee-for-service basis. AWW has been member of the ICNIRP Scientific Expert Group (SEG) from 2013 until 2021 and collaborates with the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency. JPM was a member for IARC Monograph 102 Working Group assessing the carcinogenicity of RF-EMF (Mechanistic Studies sub-group), a co-author of Canada's Safety Code 6 (which are the de facto national human exposure limits applied in Canada) and a member of the WHO EMF Project International Advisory Committee (Canadian representative). Health Canada financially contributed to the WHO EMF Project to support the completion of the systematic reviews on RF-EMF. CM has been member of Technical Consultation on the WHO RF Research Agenda (2010), member of ICNIRP main commission since May 2012, confirmed in 2016 and 2020, Italian delegate for the European Cost Actions BM0704 and BM1309 "EMF-MED". All other authors declare that they have no known conflicts of interest.
SR5: The effect of long-term radiofrequency exposure on cognition in human observational studies: A protocol for a systematic review
Geza Benke, Michael J Abramson, B M Zeleke, Jordy Kaufman, Ken Karipidis, Helen Kelsall, Steve McDonald, Chris Brzozek, Maria Feychting, Sue Brennan. The effect of long-term radiofrequency exposure on cognition in human observational studies: A protocol for a systematic review. Environ Int. 158, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106972.
• This protocol outlines the steps required for a systematic review of the effect of long-term radiofrequency exposure on cognition in human observational studies.
• The protocol allows for an assessment of possible cognitive effects due to RF-EMFs from personal, environmental and occupational exposure.
• The protocol follows the best methodology for synthesis and risk of bias assessment for RF-EMF exposure and cognition in human observational studies.
Background: The long term effects of exposure to radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (EMF) for frequencies from 100 kHz to 300 GHz on cognitive performance are best assessed using observational studies. In recent years, the use of mobile (cell) phones has been the main source of RF EMF exposure to the brain, although other sources of exposure may be significant. Cognitive function includes various mental and psychological abilities, which can be measured in a range of domains, such as learning, memory, reasoning, problem solving, decision making and attention. Although effects on cognitive function may be most evident later in life, in the experimental setting acute and immediate effects can only be studied. Observational studies are needed when effects are observed after months or years following short or long-term exposure. The importance of the effects of exposure on children has also been recently identified.
Objectives: To assess the long-term effects of RF EMF local and whole-body exposure compared to no or a lower level of exposure on indicators of cognition, including complex attention, executive function, learning and memory, perceptual motor ability and social cognition, but excluding cognitive effects caused by neurodegenerative diseases or neurodevelopmental disorders, and to assess if there is evidence of a dose response relationship.
Study eligibility and criteria: We will include observational studies that have evaluated cognitive effects of RF energy including a comparator group with a different level of exposure. Studies must report at least one validated measure of cognitive function, including global or domain specific measures, or cognitive impairment, with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. Cohort or case-control studies published in the peer review literature in any language are eligible. We will exclude cross-sectional studies and any that only report brain structure or biomarkers.
Study appraisal and synthesis method: We will conduct searches of PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO and the EMF-Portal. At least two authors will independently screen the titles/abstracts of all records, with any conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Full-text screening will also be conducted independently by two authors with conflicts resolved by consensus. Data will be extracted from the studies included, such as identifiers and characteristics of the study design, exposure and comparator groups, participants, outcomes assessed and results. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) tool. We will conduct a meta-analysis of similar studies with a random effects model in STATA or similar software, if two or more studies are available for a given exposure-outcome combination. Confidence in the body evidence will be judged using GRADE methods as adapted by OHAT for reviews of environmental exposures.
This project is funded by the World Health Organization. Co-financing was provided by ARPANSA in its capacity as a WHO Collaborating Centre for Radiation Protection.
SR6: The effect of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on cognitive performance in human experimental studies: A protocol for a systematic review
Blanka Pophof, Jacob Burns, Heidi Danker-Hopfe, Hans Dorn, Cornelia Egblomassé-Roidl, Torsten Eggert, Kateryna Fuks, Bernd Henschenmacher, Jens Kuhne, Cornelia Sauter, Gernot Schmid. The effect of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on cognitive performance in human experimental studies: A protocol for a systematic review. Environ Int. 2021 Jul 29;157:106783. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106783.
Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) is currently assessing the potential health effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) in the general and working population. Related to one such health effect, there is a concern that RF-EMFs may affect cognitive performance in humans. The systematic review (SR) aims to identify, summarize and synthesize the evidence base related to this question. Here, we present the protocol for the planned SR.
Objectives: The main objective is to present a protocol for a SR which will evaluate the associations between short-term exposure to RF-EMFs and cognitive performance in human experimental studies.
Data sources: We will search the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the EMF-Portal. The reference lists of included studies and retrieved review articles will be manually searched.
Study eligibility and criteria: We will include randomized human experimental studies that assess the effects of RF-EMFs on cognitive performance compared to no exposure or lower exposure. We will include peer-reviewed articles of any publication date in any language that report primary data.
Data extraction and analysis: Data will be extracted according to a pre-defined set of forms developed and piloted by the review author team. To assess the risk of bias, we will apply the Rating Tool for Human and Animal Studies developed by NTP/OHAT, supplemented with additional questions relevant for cross-over studies. Where sufficiently similar studies are identified (e.g. the heterogeneity concerning population, exposure and outcome is low and the studies can be combined), we will conduct random-effects meta-analysis; otherwise, we will conduct a narrative synthesis.
Assessment of certainty of evidence: The certainty of evidence for each identified outcome will be assessed according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Performing the review according to this protocol will allow the identification of possible effects of RF-EMFs on cognitive performance in humans. The protocol has been registered in PROSPERO, an open-source protocol registration system, to foster transparency.
This project is funded by the World Health Organization.
PROSPERO CRD42021236168.
Open access paper
SR7: The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on tinnitus, migraine and non-specific symptoms in the general and working population: A protocol for a systematic review on human observational studies
Martin Röösli, Stefan Dongus, Hamed Jalilian, Maria Feychting, John Eyers, Ekpereonne Esu, Chioma Moses Oringanje, Martin Meremikwu, Xavier Bosch-Capblanch. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on tinnitus, migraine and non-specific symptoms in the general and working population: A protocol for a systematic review on human observational studies. Environ Int, Volume 157, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106852.
• There is public concern to develop non-specific symptoms from EMF.
• No up to date comprehensive systematic review is available.
• Priority outcomes for head exposure are tinnitus, migraine, and headaches.
• Further priority outcomes are sleep disturbances and composite symptom scores.
Background Applications emitting radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF; 100 kHz to 300 GHz) are widely used for communication (e.g. mobile phones), in medicine (diathermy) and in industry (RF heaters). Concern has been raised that RF-EMF exposure affects health related quality of life, because a part of the population reports to experience a variety of symptoms related to low exposure levels below regulatory limits.
Objectives To systematically review the effects of longer-term or repeated local and whole human body RF-EMF exposure on the occurrence of symptoms evaluating migraine, tinnitus, headaches, sleep disturbances and composite symptom scores as primary outcomes.
Methods We will follow the WHO handbook for guideline development. For the development of the systematic review protocol we considered handbook for conducting systematic reviews for health effects evaluations from the National Toxicology Program-Office of Health Assessment and Translation (NTP-OHAT) and COSTER (Recommendations for the conduct of systematic reviews in toxicology and environmental health research).
Eligibility criteria Peer-reviewed epidemiological studies in the general population or workers aiming to investigate the association between local or whole-body RF-EMF exposure for at least one week and symptoms are eligible for inclusion. Only cohort, case-control and panel studies will be included.
Information sources We will search the scientific literature databases Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos and Embase, using a predefined search strategy. This search will be supplemented by a search in the EMF-Portal and checks of reference lists of relevant papers and reviews.
Study appraisal and synthesis method Data from included papers will be extracted according to predefined forms. Findings will be summarized in tables, graphical displays and in a narrative synthesis of the available evidence, complemented with meta-analyses. We will separately review effects of local, far field and occupational exposure.
Risk of bias The internal validity of included studies will be assessed using the NTP-OHAT Risk of Bias Rating Tool for Human and Animal Studies, elaborated to observational RF-EMF studies.
Evidence appraisal To rate certainty of the evidence, we will use the OHAT GRADE-based approach for epidemiological studies.
Framework and funding This protocol concerns one of the ten different systematic reviews considered in a larger systematic review of the World Health Organization to assess potential health effects of exposure to RF-EMF in the general and working population.
Registration PROSPERO CRD42021239432.
SR8: The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on human self-reported symptoms: A protocol for a systematic review of human experimental studies
Xavier Bosch-Capblanch, Ekpereonne Esu, Stefan Dongus, Chioma Moses Oringanje, Hamed Jalilian, John Eyers, Gunnhild Oftedal, Martin Meremikwu, Martin Röösli. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on human self-reported symptoms: A protocol for a systematic review of human experimental studies. Environ Int. 158, 2022, 106953. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106953.
Background The technological applications of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) have been steadily increasing since the 1950s across multiple sectors exposing large proportions of the population. This fact has raised concerns related to the potential consequences to people's health. The World Health Organization (WHO) is assessing the potential health effects of exposure to RF-EMF and has carried out an international survey amongst experts, who have identified six priority topics to be further addressed through systematic reviews, whereof the effects on symptoms is one of them. We report here the systematic review protocol of experimental studies in humans assessing the effects of RF-EMF on symptoms.
Objective Our objectives are to assess the effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (compared to no or lower exposure levels) on symptoms in human subjects. We will also assess the accuracy of perception of presence of exposure in volunteers with and without idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF).
Eligibility criteria We will search relevant literature sources (e.g. the Web of Science, Medline, Embase, Epistemonikos) for randomized trials (comparing at least two arms) and randomised crossover trials of RF-EMF exposure that have assessed the effects on symptoms. We will also include studies that have measured the accuracy of the perception of the presence or absence of exposure. We will include studies in any language.
Study appraisal and synthesis Studies will be assessed against inclusion criteria by two independent reviewers. Data on study characteristics, participants, exposure, comparators and effects will be extracted using a specific template for this review, by two independent reviewers. Discrepancies will be solved by consensus. Risk of bias (ROB) will be assessed using the ROB Rating Tool for Human and Animal Studies and the level of confidence in the evidence of the exposure-outcome relations will be assessed using the GRADE approach. For the perception studies, we will use adapted versions of the ROB tool and GRADE assessment. Where appropriate, data will be combined using meta-analytical techniques.
Open access paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016041202100578X
SR9: The effect of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on biomarkers of oxidative stress in vivo and in vitro: A protocol for a systematic review
Bernd Henschenmacher, Annette Bitsch, Tonia de las Heras Gala, Henry Jay Forman, Athanassios Fragoulis, Pietro Ghezzi, Rupert Kellner, Wolfgang Koch, Jens Kuhne, Dmitrij Sachno, Gernot Schmid, Katya Tsaioun, Jos Verbeek, Robert Wright. The effect of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on biomarkers of oxidative stress in vivo and in vitro: A protocol for a systematic review. Environ Int. 158, 2022, 106932. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106932.
Background Oxidative stress is conjectured to be related to many diseases. Furthermore, it is hypothesized that radiofrequency fields may induce oxidative stress in various cell types and thereby compromise human and animal health. This systematic review (SR) aims to summarize and evaluate the literature related to this hypothesis.
Objectives The main objective of this SR is to evaluate the associations between the exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and oxidative stress in experimental models (in vivo and in vitro).
Methods The SR framework has been developed following the guidelines established in the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development and the Handbook for Conducting a Literature-Based Health Assessment). We will include controlled in vivo and in vitro laboratory studies that assess the effects of an exposure to RF-EMF on valid markers for oxidative stress compared to no or sham exposure. The protocol is registered in PROSPERO.
We will search the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, and the EMF-Portal. The reference lists of included studies and retrieved review articles will also be manually searched.
Study appraisal and synthesis method Data will be extracted according to a pre-defined set of forms developed in the DistillerSR online software and synthesized in a meta-analysis when studies are judged sufficiently similar to be combined. If a meta-analysis is not possible, we will describe the effects of the exposure in a narrative way.
Risk of bias The risk of bias will be assessed with the NTP/OHAT risk of bias rating tool for human and animal studies.
We will use GRADE to assess the certainty of the conclusions (high, moderate, low, or inadequate) regarding the association between radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and oxidative stress.
Funding This work was funded by the World Health Organization (WHO).
Registration The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO webpage on July 8, 2021.
Open access paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412021005572
Prioritizing health outcomes when assessing the effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields: A survey among experts
Jos Verbeek, Gunnhild Oftedal, Maria Feychting, Eric van Rongen, Maria Rosaria Scarfì, Simon Mann, Rachel Wong, Emilie van Deventer. Prioritizing health outcomes when assessing the effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields: A survey among experts. Environ Int. 146, 2021. 106300. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2020.106300.
• RF EMF may lead to other than heat-related health effects by yet unknown mechanisms
• Prioritizing health effects is needed for review utility and resource efficiency.
• RF EMF experts prioritized all peer-reviewed published biological and health outcomes.
• Cancer, heat-related effects, and adverse birth outcomes were rated most critical.
• WHO commissioned ten systematic reviews of the most critical health outcomes.
Exposure to radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (EMF) (frequencies of 100 kHz to 300 GHz) has been steadily increasing. In addition to heat-related effects of RF EMF, other yet-unspecified biological effects, might exist which could possibly lead to health effects. Given the large number of health endpoints that have been studied, we wanted to prioritize those that would merit systematic reviews.
We developed a survey listing of all health endpoints reported in the literature and we asked 300 RF EMF experts and researchers to prioritize these health effects for systematic review as critical, important or unimportant. We also asked the experts to provide the rationale for their prioritization.
Of the 300 RF EMF experts queried, 164 (54%) responded. They rated cancer, heat-related effects, adverse birth outcomes, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, cognitive impairment, adverse pregnancy outcomes and oxidative stress as outcomes most critical regarding RF EMF exposure. For these outcomes, systematic reviews are needed. For heat-related outcomes, the experts based their ranking of the critical outcomes on what is known from human or animal studies, and for cancer and other outcomes, they based their rating also on public concern.
To assess health risks of an exposure in a robust manner, it is important to prioritize the health outcomes that should be systematically reviewed. Here we have shown that it feasible to do so in an inclusive and transparent way.
Given the limited resources available for systematic reviews, it was decided to include male fertility but not brain electrical function. The ratings of these two outcomes as critical were similar, but more experts rated male fertility as important....
MF was vice chairman (May 2016 – May 2020) of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, an independent body setting guidelines for non-ionizing radiation protection. She has served as advisor to several national and international public advisory and research steering groups concerning the potential health effects of exposure to non-ionizing radiation.
MRS is in the Scientific Council of the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority for preparing reports on the evaluation of the scientific literature related to electromagnetic fields and health.
GO is member of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. She has been member of groups appointed by Norwegian authorities to evaluate potential health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields.
EvR was chairman (May 2016 – May 2020) of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection and is currently vice-chairman. He is also member of the Scientific Council of the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority.
SM is a member of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection's Scientific Expert Group. Within the UK, he is Secretary to the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment and he was Secretary (until 2017) to the Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation.
All other authors have declared no conflict of interest.
Assessing risk of bias in human environmental epidemiology studies using three tools: different conclusions from different tools
Stephanie M. Eick, Dana E. Goin, Nicholas Chartres, Juleen Lam, Tracey J. Woodruff. Assessing risk of bias in human environmental epidemiology studies using three tools: different conclusions from different tools. Syst Rev 9, 249 (2020). doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01490-8.
Background Systematic reviews are increasingly prevalent in environmental health due to their ability to synthesize evidence while reducing bias. Different systematic review methods have been developed by the US National Toxicology Program's Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT), the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), and by the US EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), including the approach to assess risk of bias (ROB), one of the most vital steps which is used to evaluate internal validity of the studies. Our objective was to compare the performance of three tools (OHAT, IRIS, TSCA) in assessing ROB.
Methods We selected a systematic review on polybrominated diphenyl ethers and intelligence quotient and/or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder because it had been endorsed by the National Academy of Sciences. Two reviewers followed verbatim instructions from the tools and independently applied each tool to assess ROB in 15 studies previously identified. We documented the time to apply each tool and the impact the ROB ratings for each tool had on the final rating of the quality of the overall body of evidence.
Results The time to complete the ROB assessments varied widely (mean = 20, 32, and 40 min per study for the OHAT, IRIS, and TSCA tools, respectively). All studies were rated overall "low" or "uninformative" using IRIS, due to "deficient" or "critically deficient" ratings in one or two domains. Similarly, all studies were rated "unacceptable" using the TSCA tool because of one "unacceptable" rating in a metric related to statistical power. Approximately half of the studies had "low" or "probably low ROB" ratings across all domains with the OHAT and Navigation Guide tools.
Conclusions Tools that use overall ROB or study quality ratings, such as IRIS and TSCA, may reduce the available evidence to assess the harms of environmental exposures by erroneously excluding studies, which leads to inaccurate conclusions about the quality of the body of evidence. We recommend using ROB tools that circumvent these issues, such as OHAT and Navigation Guide.
Open access paper: https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13643-020-01490-8
EHC on Radiofrequency fields* (WHO, 2016)
World Health Organization. The International EMF Project Progress Report. June 2015-2016. page 10. https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/radiation-international-emf-project-reports/emf-iac-2016-progress-report.pdf?sfvrsn=7b2836c0_2. Accessed 01/17/2022.
"Following on the publication of the INTERPHONE study (May 2010) and the IARC classification of RF fields (May 2011), the health risk assessment of radiofrequency fields by WHO was started with a kick-off meeting in January 2012. A core group of 6 experts has been gathered to help with the development of the monograph. They, in turn, have enlisted the help of close to 30 experts to develop different sections of the first draft. Monthly conference calls have been held over the past year. A face-to-face meeting was convened in Istanbul in May 2015.
A number of systematic reviews have been performed based on published peer-reviewed data. Search strategies, inclusion/exclusion criteria and quality criteria have been developed for the different types of studies. A first draft was uploaded on the WHO website in the Fall of 2014. Over 90 entries were filed electronically through the consultation providing around 700 comments to different chapters and section of the draft. Over 300 missing papers were identified through this useful step. Each submission has been carefully considered by the Core Group and the draft has been revised to take account of relevant comments and of papers published since December 2012. As a result of the consultation, a new chapter on biochemical and biological effects was added.
The drawing of conclusions from the literature and the drafting of these chapters is the remit of a formal Task Group that will be convened by WHO following due process. The meeting of the Task Group is currently slated to be held in the Fall of 2016."
In March 1993, almost 30 years ago, the WHO published the last EHC monograph on radiofrequency radiation:
Electromagnetic fields (300 Hz to 300 GHz)
Environmental Health Criteria Monograph No.137
13 March 1993 | Technical document
Download table of contents for this report (360.6 kB)
"WHO's assessment of any health risks produced by EMF emitting technologies falls within the responsibilities of the International EMF Project. One of the goals of the International EMF Project is therefore to carry out health risk assessments of RF, ELF and static fields, published in the Environmental Health Criteria.
The health risk assessments are the result of in-depth critical reviews conducted through independent, scientific peer-review groups. The are usually undertaken if new data are available that would substantially change the evaluation, if there is public concern for health or environmental effects of the agent because of greater exposure, or if an appreciable time period has elapsed since the last evaluation."
https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9241571373
Labels: EHC, Environmental Health Criteria, monograph, radiofrequency, research reviews, RF, WHO, world health organization
Why did JAMA Oncology publish a paper written by a...
WHO Radiofrequency EMF Health Risk Assessment Mono...
Effect of Mobile Phones on Sperm Quality
5G Wireless Technology: Is 5G Harmful to Our Health?
5G Wireless Technology: Cutting Through the Hype
Recent Research on Wireless Radiation and Electrom...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Espresso launchFragmentInContainer<> binding issue I have a simple test function like this:
@Test
fun testfunc() {
    val fragScenario = launchFragmentInContainer<MyFragment>()
}

launchFragmentInContainer provides me with this error:
Binary XML file line #10: Failed to resolve attribute at index 1:         TypedValue{t=0x2/d=0x7f040004 a=-1}
Caused by: java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException
which takes me to something wrong with the binding inflater.
override fun onCreateView(inflater: LayoutInflater, container: ViewGroup?, savedInstanceState: Bundle?): View? {
    _binding = MyFragmentBinding.inflate(inflater, container, false)
    return binding.root
}

I assume view binding doesn't work with isolated fragments like this? Do I need to create an entire new fragment without view binding just for testing?

A: In the fragment testing documentation there is a note:

Note: Your fragment might require a theme that the test activity doesn't use by default. You can provide your own theme as an additional argument to launch() and launchInContainer().

This error normally occurs when there are style values that the activity isn't aware of. Be sure to pass your app or fragment style via the themeResId parameter.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Did not follow basic rules for Medicare patients. Patient rights violations everywhere.. little regards for patient. Minimal contact with patients. Signed self out after 3 days. Never spoke to a Doctor at all. Woulf not recommend this place.
Need more linen, especially blankets! Need to be cleaned, smell bad. Need to actually feed the patients that can't feed themselves, not just hide out in their rooms!!
What a great place for long term care. The the staff is very professional and friendly.I would highly recommend it.
from the top down they are all 5stars. My Mom loves it there and would never move.
Edgewood Nursing Center was reviewed by Medicare to have a rating of 5 out of 5 stars.
Edgewood Nursing Center has not received any fines, complaints, or inspection problems in the last 3 years.
Medicare determines the expected staffing time per resident per day depending on level of care the residents of Edgewood Nursing Center require. It is important to compare the reported time to expected time for a single facility instead of comparing the amount of time per resident of two facilities. Learn why.


Black: Who gets to say what agriculture really is?
"I call to order the meeting of the Committee of the Department of Commerce. The purpose of the agenda today is to assess the importance of agriculture in the state. Our job is to determine which businesses should be included as part of agriculture. Let's start," said the chairman.
"It is sure complicated, Mr. Chairman. We'd have to consider imports and exports, a cheap food policy, the smell of the air at the edge of town, muddy tracks on a farm to market road, or the number of implement dealers in the local yellow pages.


Think about how rich you'd be if you knew how to get rid of dust inside the house. Now let's be realistic, that sounds impossible.
The truth is that you can get rid of dust inside the house to a certain extent, but you're unlikely to remove 100% of dust.
As someone with severe allergies, I've gone from having a lot of dust inside my house, to having very little. I'll share my tips for minimizing dust inside the house and let you know what didn't work.
I'd like to share how I grew up because there was dust, lots of it. My family worked hard and came home on weekdays looking to spend time together and enjoy a meal. During the week there certainly wasn't time to clean up.
On the weekends my family was busy with outdoor activities and although we cleaned every weekend it wasn't enough.
We had carpeting thorough our house and as I've learned carpets are notorious for catching and holding onto dust (they are a real pain to keep clean). My weekly chores including cleaning my room and dusting but I wasn't very good at cleaning.
I remember looking at my head board coated in dust and wondering why there was so much. What was dust coming from?
As I grew older I began having health problems. It was allergies and I was allergic to dust. I received advice from my allergist to get rid of carpets, fabric couches, and extra pillows and stuffed animals. I look around the house and realized that the house was set up for dust – lots of it!
In the years that followed, I learned how to effectively get rid of dust in the house. I used strong allergy filters, changed to hardwood floors, and began keeping my dog outside (yes it was sad but pets produce a lot of dust inside). In the sections below I'll share what worked for me!
First things first: It's impossible to remove all dust from your home. One of the main components of indoor dust is human skin, and your skin is being shed continually 24 hours a day. With this in mind, regular cleaning should be done. Regular cleaning should be weekly, not every 2 weeks or every month.
If your household has the luxury of having a cleaner, then you're lucky. For the rest of us, we'll have to put in some hard work to reduce dust.
However, it doesn't have to be hard work. Making a few changes in the products we use can help use keep your homes clean and more hygienic.
I understand, getting rid of carpeting and installing another type of floor is a big commitment. It might even cost you a lot of money.
But I've removed multiple carpets from floors and what I always see disgusts me. Even in the cleanest homes carpets are filthy. Most people keep the same carpet for at least 10 years. The dirt and dust builds up.
To make matters worse, every time we walk on carpets we create little clouds of dust. The dust can stay suspended in the air for hours before it settles again.
When I made the change to hard floors (linoleum, wood, or tile) I felt better immediately. I could also feel a difference in my breathing (I have bad allergies).
Most people don't think twice about their HVAC filter. HVAC stands for "heating, ventilation, and air conditioning" and they require filters every 3-6 months depending on their use.
Did you know there are super strong allergy filters that can be used to reduce dust in the house? When an HVAC is turned on it creates air flow in the house. Air from the house is sucked into the "intake" where it passes a filter then heated or cooled.
If you're using a standard HVAC filter you won't be catching dust. If you're using a high-quality HVAC filter then you'll be cleaning your house and reduce the amount of dust in the air!
The best HVAC filters have the ability to capture pollen, dust mites, bacteria, odors, and smoke.
They are a little more expensive but do wonders to reduce dust around the house. Try using a filter during the summer or winter and witness a reduction in dust around your house.
Dust in homes comes primarily from our own dead skin, not from dirt outside. However, that doesn't mean that dust can enter our homes.
Keeping the windows and doors closed allows us to use the HVAC (with good filters) and clean the air in our homes.
If you live in a city or near a busy road you'll have much more dust floating in your air than if you're in a rural area. If you leave your doors and windows open in the city you'll have more "pollution-type dust" that could be hazardous to health.
The last thing I wanted to do was to kick my dog out of the house. After learning how much pets add to dust in the house I had no choice (of course I cheated sometimes).
Pets like dogs and cats produce a lot of dander. Dander is the combination of hair and skin flakes that add to dust throughout our homes (air purifiers can help collect dust and dander).
We only notice the hair, but their shed skin can create much more dust than the hair we see.
If dust is your priority you'll need to figure out a way to reduce your pet's presence indoors. Or be prepared to clean 2-3 times per week to keep dust levels low.
Everyone vacuums. It's part of being a responsible homeowner or tenant. Did you know that most vacuums don't stop dust? Some vacuums even create more dust by blowing it around the house.
If you purchase a vacuum to reduce dust levels in your home, make sure it uses a HEPA filter (HEPA stands for high-efficiency particulate arrestance). HEPA filters get the smallest of dust particles like pet dander and dust mites.
If you have allergies a HEPA filter is essential!
Our beds are a major source of dust. Did you know that a 2 year old pillow can be made up of 15% weight of dust mites and feces?
Keep your bed dust-free and you'll help get rid of dust in your house.
Using dust mite covers on pillows, blankets, and mattresses can keep dust, pet dander, and dust from working its way into your pillows and mattresses. Dust proof covers can significantly improve bed hygiene and health.
For dust allergy sufferers, this is probably the single most important thing you can do to improve your sleep!
This investment could pay off quickly by reducing dust in your house and reducing the chance of allergy.
Dust is almost possible to get rid of in the house. If I knew how to get rid of dust 100% I'd be a wealthy man.
Even if you can't get rid of all dust, you can still take action to minimize dust. I was blown away after removing my carpets and rugs and opting for hard flooring.
HVAC allergy filters also worked well for me and I could feel the difference in the air. After using good filters in my HVAC I had to change them more often because they caught so much dust.
Pets are hard to keep outside but depending your dust levels it may be another option. Dustproof covers can protect your pillows, mattresses, and blankets by preventing dust from entering (or exiting your bedding).
Lastly, keep your doors and windows closed and always use a vacuum with a HEPA filter. The special filter will collect the smallest dust particles.
I hope this article helps you get rid of dust in your house. Due to my allergies, I had to make a number of changes to my home and the dust levels dropped immediately!
Feel better inside your home knowing that you've done everything possible to reduce dust!


Need a new bathing suit this year? These popular Striped Tankinis are only $22.99 right now at Jane! These are regularly $48 and come in sizes small (0-4) through XL (12-14) in three color combinations: Aqua Stripe, Grey Stripe or Royal Blue Stripe. Shipping adds $3.99 for the first item and is FREE for each additional!


Subject: Re: Any news from Stalker on CalDAV?
Ever open to new solution... but I sincerly can not put Kerio as a CGP competitor.
On the paper it runs everywhere and also has a MAPI solution but in real environment no competition at all.
server helps tackle the problems of scheduling meetings between user..."
Hope that to enforce the enterprise solution market CGS will hear from the list.