Tips to stay healthy in the water

Oxford County Public Health and Emergency Services is asking local residents as part of its yearly prevention campaign on recreational water illness to stay healthy in the water by not swimming when they are ill with diarrhea.

According to public health, it takes only trace amounts of fecal matter to make others sick and some of the germs can survive for days, even in swimming pools with good filtration and disinfection systems.
One of the most common parasites Cryptosporidium can survive up to eleven days in a chlorinated swimming pool.

According to public health swallowing water contaminated with feces is still a leading cause of recreational water illness because germs from stool can easily contaminate the water in a large pool or water park.
“Children love visiting the beach, pools and water parks in the summer, but children are also one of the groups most vulnerable to recreational water illness because their immune systems are maturing and they are more likely to swallow water,” said Peter Heywood, Oxford public health program supervisor.

Public health’s campaign features “Swimming and diarrhea don’t mix” and “Wash your baby” posters at public pools to remind people to stay out of the pool if they have diarrhea and to wash babies thoroughly before swimming.

“Even if you think you’re well enough to swim, to help protect everyone’s health, we’re asking people to wait until they know their diarrhea has completely subsided before stepping foot in a public swimming area,” Heywood said.

Swimmers can also protect themselves by using the showers at public pools to rinse off before swimming, washing their hands after using the bathroom or changing a diaper, taking children on bathroom breaks and changing swimming diapers often and avoid swallowing pool or beach water.

Recreational water illnesses can cause skin, ear, respiratory, eye and wound infections, and are responsible for more serious health complications in children, pregnant women and people with weakened immune systems.

Public health’s said their role in helping to prevent recreational water illness includes inspecting pools and splash pads in the community to ensure health procedures are followed.

Public Health also samples beach water weekly from mid-May to Labour Day to check bacteria levels. Area beaches with high levels of bacteria are posted on site as not safe for swimming. Beach water updates are available online at www.oxfordcounty.ca/health or by phone by dialing 2-1-1.

Source  http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/2012/06/26/tips-to-stay-healthy-in-the-water

The Best Golfers Never to Win the U.S. Open: A Fan's Take

Many great golfers have claimed the United States Open title. On Father's Day a new champion will be crowned at the 112th U.S. Open at the Olympic Club in San Francisco, California. Yet there are many great golfers throughout history that have never had their name engraved on the trophy. As always lists are quite subjective by their very nature. That being said here is my list of the greatest players (in alphabetical order) never to claim the United States Open Championship. 

Seve Ballesteros

Spanish golfing legend Seve Ballesteros won five major championships in his career. Arguably one of the greatest players that continental Europe has yet produced, Ballesteros claimed three British Open titles and two green jackets. In addition to his success in the United States Ballesteros won 50 titles, including his major wins, on the European Tour. This remains the European Tour record. Ballesteros' best U.S. Open finish came in 1987 when he placed third. 

Nick Faldo

Englishman Sir Nick Faldo claimed six major championships in his career but never the United States Open championship. Faldo also enjoyed substantial success of the European tour claiming 30 victories. Faldo's best U.S. Open finish was second place in 1988. 

Bobby Locke

Bobby Locke was one of the great golfers in history and yet many American fans likely know little about him. Locke is most well-known for winning four British Open titles and for being one the greatest if not the greatest putter that ever lived. Locke's famous quote, "drive for show, putt for dough" is known by most every golfer. A native of South Africa, Locke was also the first great golfer that was neither British nor American. In only six U.S. Open appearances, Locke recorded five Top Five finishes. 

Phil Mickelson

It is difficult to place Phil Mickelson on this list because his career is not complete. Yet I think his career to this point warrants his inclusion. Phil Mickelson has won four career major championships; three Masters titles and a victory at the 2005 PGA Championship. In total Mickelson has 40 career PGA Tour titles which places him in the Top 10 all-time. While he cannot lay claim to being the greatest player of his generation, he is certainly no worse than number two. He has had many chances to hoist the U.S. Open trophy yet he is been relegated to runner-up status five times. Unfortunately for Phil his time to claim the U.S. Open title is running short. 

Sam Snead

Sam Snead was a legendary figure in the world of golf. He won seven major championships in his illustrious career. In all Snead won 82 career PGA Tour titles. That is still a record that stands to this day. It's not that Sam Snead did not have some success at the U.S. Open because he certainly did. Snead finished as the runner-up to the U.S. Open champion four times in his career. 

Source  http://sports.yahoo.com/news/best-golfers-never-win-u-open-fans-001800381--golf.html

No. 1 again! Luke Donald wins Transitons playoff, reclaims top ranking

Luke Donald is thinking about what might be, Ernie Els can only think about what might have been Sunday in a dramatic finish that saw Donald walk away with the Transitions Championship and reclaim his No. 1 ranking in the world of golf.

Els had the tournament firmly in his grasp, he was 14-under par through 15 holes at Innisbrook’s Copperhead course and had just hit his second shot within five feet for birdie at the difficult 16th. He missed that short putt then suffered bogeys on each of the final two holes.

He hit a poor tee shot at the 218-yard 17th that left him short right and he had no shot at saving par. Then Els shot himself in the foot on the 18th green when he missed a three-foot par putt that would have put him at 13-under par and in a playoff with Donald, Jim Furyk, Robert Garrigus and Sang Moon Bae.

Instead, it was Donald who went back to the 18th to take on those three. Donald was first to hit his approach to the 425-yard par four and he stuck it within six feet. Garrigus matched him, landing just outside Donald’s ball from 116-yards out after a monster drive.

Disappointing second shots left both Furyk and Bae with lengthy birdie putts they both failed to convert.

Garrigus missed his bid for birde and Donald calmly found the inside left of the cup and walked away with his fifth PGA Tour win and returned to the top of the World Golf Rankings, jumping over idle Rory McIlroy, who moved into the spot two weeks ago at the Honda Classic.

Donald shot 66 for his final round and had to wait for about an hour while Els, Furyk and Bae finished. Garrigus shot 64 and had a four-hour wait to learn that he was in the playoff.

Another trio besides Els finished one out of the playoff. Scott Piercy posted a spectacular 62 and was done four hours before the leaders teed off. Overton shot 66 and Ken Duke a 68 to finish 12-under.

The win had Donald looking forward to his next appearance and that will come at the Masters in three weeks.

“It’s another step in the right direction,” Donald said of his victory. “It’s a perfect preparation for Augusta.”

Was Donald contemplating regaining the No. 1 ranking? “No, I was focused on trying to win this tournament,” he said. Donald played steady early. “I had my eye on the leaders,” he recounted. “I birdied 11 to get to 13-under. I had a good chance for another birdie at 14 but didn’t make it.”

His run of seven straight pars to close out his day was good enough for him to post 13-under, 271. He then watched and waited and saw the misfortunes that cost Els the tournament and an invitation to the Masters.

Els was in the left center of the fairway at the final hole, 165 yards out. He pulled his approach but he was just off the green on the fringe and putted three feet past the hole. “I pulled my putt,” Els said as he stood near the 18th green, head down.

Source http://gantdaily.com/2012/03/18/no-1-again-luke-donald-wins-transitons-playoff-reclaims-top-ranking/

Are you a gym rat or gym brat? Workout tips for staying healthy and not offending others

This is the time of year when the rolls of health clubs swell with new members. Getting in shape is a good thing. Healthy people are happy people. That the general populace understands the benefits of regular exercise is part of why we as a species are living longer.

In a perfect world, the fitness center should be a place of joy and harmony. After all, it's a place where every day, in every way, the people in attendance are getting better and better.

So can someone please explain to me why when people get in a gym, they lose all basic sense of manners? People who normally wouldn't hiccup without a torrent of apologies and "excuse me's" suddenly feel free to gawk and stalk and spit on the floor in front of 100 complete strangers. Why is it that otherwise normal, decent people lose their ding-dong minds when they change into sweat clothes?

Unfortunately, health clubs are full of people who have some ways about them that just aren't right. They seem to be missing the self-awareness gene. Don't become one of these people.

Are you the guy at the gym who wears street clothes while working out? You're wearing slacks and wingtip shoes on the treadmill. You can afford a health club but not sweat pants? Really?

Just because working out is your life, that's no reason to look down your nose or roll your eyes at people who are new to the experience. Fat people go to health clubs because they don't want to be fat anymore. Show some compassion, Mr. And Mrs. Hotbody. Being in shape is not as easy for some people as it has become for you. And you might try reading a book once in a while.

Are you the woman who is at the club every day with a different sparkly spandex outfit, wearing full makeup and sporting daggerlike, decorated nails? Lady, this is a gym, not a fashion runway. Try some aerobics. Your brain is in obvious need of oxygen.

Does the idea of other people's germs make you insane? Do you feel the compulsion to sanitize everything you touch or breathe on? Maybe it's time to invest in some home exercise equipment.

Are you the big galoot who feels the need to draw attention to yourself by dropping your weights with a huge crash after your last repetition to show everyone how much you're lifting? Everyone hates you.

When you finish your drill on the weight machine or treadmill, reset it to neutral. Chances are the next person to use it won't be exactly like you. Just a guess.

Are you the inconsiderate pig who does not wipe your sweaty residue off the weight machine you've just been spritzing on for 10 minutes? The spray bottle of disinfectant and paper towels are there for a reason. Use them.

Do you sing along to the songs on your iPod at the top of your lungs while on the treadmill? Please don't. You're annoying everyone in the room. This isn't an audition for "American Idol." Save it for the shower -- the one at your home.

The hair dryer in the locker room is for the hair on your head. Enough said.

Do you hog the weight machine between sets by texting and pretending you don't notice the person standing right there waiting to use it? People like you should save the texting for when you are driving during rush hour.

Are you the strange guy in the locker room who enjoys a period of prolonged nudity a little too much? There are gay bathhouses for that. Join one.

Do you give the big, long, gawky eyeball to whoever catches your attention? That's rude. Go back to staring at yourself in the mirror.

Are you the person who spends an hour and a half at the gym but only 10 minutes working out? You're not the social director on the Love Boat, pal. Heard of pull-ups?

Are you the chatty type? Do you love to meet new people? Can't help but comment on people's hair, clothes, demeanor? Are you dying to discuss the movie you saw last night, the book you just finished? The gym is for working out. Join Facebook.

Ladies, gents, easy on the cologne and perfume. People are trying to get oxygen here.

The mirrors are there so you can see that you are doing your exercises properly for maximum physical benefit, not so you can make out with yourself for an hour. Get a room.

For most people, the gym is a place where they want to get in, work out and get on with their lives. Therefore, don't hog the equipment, drinking fountain or shower. Work on your flabbiest muscle. The one that strengthens your consideration for others.

Source http://www.cleveland.com/pdq/index.ssf/2012/02/gym_rat_and_gym_brats_health_c.html

UK secretly helping Canada push its oil sands project

The UK government has been giving secret support at the very highest levels to Canada's campaign against European penalties on its highly polluting tar sands fuel, the Guardian can reveal.

At the same time, the UK government was being lobbied by Shell and BP, which both have major tar sands projects in Alberta, and opened a new consulate in the province to "support British commercial interests".

At least 15 high-level meetings and frequent communications have taken place since September, with David Cameron discussing the issue with his counterpart Stephen Harper during his visit to Canada, and stating privately that the UK wanted "to work with Canada on finding a way forward", according to documents released under freedom of information laws.

Charles Hendry, the energy minister, later told the Canadian high commissioner: "We would value continued discussion with you on how we can progress discussions in Brussels," with Hendry's official asking the Canadians if they had "any suggestions as to what we might do, given the politics in Brussels".

Canada's vast tar sands – also known as oil sands – are the second largest reserve of carbon in the world after Saudi Arabia, although the energy needed to extract oil from the ground means the process results in far more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil drilling, as well as causing the destruction of forests and air and water pollution.

Nasa scientist James Hansen says if the oil sands were exploited as projected it would be "game over for the climate".

The European proposal is to designate transport fuel from tar sands as resulting in 22% more greenhouse gas emissions than that from conventional fuels. This would make suppliers, who have to reduce the emissions from their fuels by 10% by 2020, very reluctant to include it in their fuel mix. It would also set an unwelcome precedent for Canada by officially labelling fuel from tar sands as dirtier.

The UK and Canada's shared opposition to the European plan puts the UK in a minority among EU countries and will be deeply embarrassing as a new round of global negotiations on tackling climate change begins in Durban, South Africa on Monday. Chris Huhne, the energy and climate change secretary, claimed on Thursday that the UK was showing "leadership" in the UN negotiations, while Canada's prime minister has blocked climate laws. The revelations are also the latest blow to Cameron's claim to be the "greenest government ever".

The vote to approve the European fuel quality regulations takes place on Friday. In advance of that, William Hague, the foreign secretary, has also given support to Canada, sending an "immediate action" cable in September to the UK's embassies there asking "to communicate our position and seek Canadian views on what might be acceptable".

However, the Department for Transport, in which the Liberal Democrat minister Norman Baker has responsibility for tar sands issues, has released only two presentations made to it by Shell, both heavily redacted. The DfT rejected requests to release at least six other relevant documents on the grounds of commercial confidentiality and adverse effect on international relations, as did the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), where Shell also met ministers.

BP has lobbied ministers, too. Its vice president in Europe, Peter Mather, has been, in his own words, "bending the ear" of Baker. Mather also sent a letter in which he wrote: "The regulatory burden would be considerable at a time when the industry is already creaking under the weight of a heavy regulatory regime."

John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK, said: "The scale of oil industry lobbying exposed in these documents is quite extraordinary. It's especially worrying that Baker held a secret meeting with Shell about this key European vote on tar sands. But worse still, he's now covering up what was discussed."

Colin Baines, toxic fuels campaign manager at the Co-operative, the UK mutual business group which targets tar sands as part of its climate change campaigning, said: "It is very disappointing that the UK government is supporting Canada's efforts and we hope it has a rethink and puts tackling climate change ahead of Canada's trade interests when it comes to vote on the European commission's commonsense proposal."

The documents were obtained by the Co-operative under environmental information regulations, a type of freedom of information law. They include letters to and from ministers, diplomatic correspondence and notes of meetings.

Baker said: "The government is staying true to its aspiration to be the greenest ever by seeking to secure the best deal it can for the environment from the discussions ongoing in the EU about the fuel quality directive.

"We believe that means tackling all highly polluting crudes equally, not simply oil sands from one particular country. These certainly represent a problem, but so do other crudes, and it makes no environmental sense to ignore these.

"This is not about protecting one particular country – we want to deal with all crudes, not just one type, and in a way that is based on robust and objective data, related to their carbon emissions."

Like Baker, Canada also argues in the newly revealed documents that it is unfair to single out one nation and that other types of oil can be as dirty as tar sands.

But Baines says these arguments are "myths", as the European proposal does not name any nation and on average fuel from tar sands is a greater source of carbon by a clear margin, according to a Stanford University study for the European commission.

Furthermore, the European commission proposal allows for changes in the emissions designated for fuel types.

Canadian ministers and diplomats state they support an "overarching ambition" to reduce carbon emissions. But Canada has admitted it will fail to meet its Kyoto protocol target of a 6% cut compared with 1990 levels: in 2009 its emissions were 34% higher.

In September, Lord Sassoon, the UK Treasury minister for commerce, spent two days in the Albertan capital Calgary, a few hundred miles from the vast oil sand pits excavated by 1,500-tonne diggers. The International Energy Agency expects production to treble in the next 20 years. Sassoon met politicians and oil executives to discuss boosting trade with the UK and told reporters that Alberta is "one of the main focuses of British business". Alberta's energy minister, Ron Liepert, told Sassoon privately he "was grateful for UK efforts" on the tar sands issue in Europe.

The new British consulate-general in Calgary was announced by Hague on 18 October, the same day as Canadian energy minister Joe Oliver said: "[The British] have been very, very helpful and we're pleased about that. Many European companies are heavily invested in the oil sands and they also would be concerned." The new documents and diplomatic sources suggest the Netherlands, Spain and Poland are among those backing the British-Canadian position.

In London, a senior Canadian diplomat, Sushma Gera, told BIS: "Canada will not hesitate to defend her interests," perhaps via a World Trade Organisation dispute, a possibility also raised by Shell in its presentation to DfT.

Bill McKibben, a leading US environmentalist, who was arrested in August protesting against a major oil sands pipeline called Keystone XL said: "The UK seems to have emerged as Canada's partner in crime, leaning on Brussels to let this crud across the borders. This will be among the biggest single environmental decisions the Cameron government makes."

Greenpeace's Sauven, along with the head of Friends of the Earth, Andy Atkins, and David Nussbaum, leader of WWF-UK, have written to Nick Clegg, deputy prime minister and Lib Dem leader.

The letter says: "We ask you to intervene personally on this, to ensure that your party's green ambitions are more effectively upheld across Whitehall."

Source http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/27/canada-oil-sands-uk-backing?newsfeed=true

Can the left stage a Tea Party?

Why hasn’t there been a Tea Party on the left? And can President Obama and the American left develop a functional relationship?

That those two questions are not asked very often is a sign of how much of the nation’s political energy has been monopolized by the right from the beginning of Obama’s term. This has skewed media coverage of almost every issue, created the impression that the president is far more liberal than he is, and turned the nation’s agenda away from progressive reform.

A quiet left has also been very bad for political moderates. The entire political agenda has shifted far to the right because the Tea Party and extremely conservative ideas have earned so much attention. The political center doesn’t stand a chance unless there is a fair fight between the right and the left.

It’s not surprising that Obama’s election unleashed a conservative backlash. Ironically, disillusionment with George W. Bush’s presidency had pushed Republican politics right, not left. Given the public’s negative verdict on Bush, conservatives shrewdly argued that his failures were caused by his lack of fealty to conservative doctrine. He was cast as a big spender (even if a large chunk of the largess went to Iraq). He was called too liberal on immigration and a big-government guy for bailing out the banks, using federal power to reform the schools and championing a Medicare prescription drug benefit.

Conservative funders realized that pumping up the Tea Party movement was the most efficient way to build opposition to Obama’s initiatives. And the media became infatuated with the Tea Party in the summer of 2009, covering its disruptions of congressional town halls with an enthusiasm not visible this summer when many Republicans faced tough questions from their more progressive constituents.

Obama’s victory, in the meantime, partly demobilized the left. With Democrats in control of the White House and both houses of Congress, stepped-up organizing didn’t seem quite so urgent.

The administration was complicit in this, viewing the left’s primary role as supporting whatever the president believed needed to be done. Dissent was discouraged as counterproductive.

This was not entirely foolish. Facing ferocious resistance from the right, Obama needed all the friends he could get. He feared that left-wing criticism would meld in the public mind with right-wing criticism and weaken him overall.

But the absence of a strong, organized left made it easier for conservatives to label Obama as a left-winger. His health-care reform is remarkably conservative — yes, it did build on the ideas implemented in Massachusetts that Mitt Romney once bragged about. It was nothing close to the single-payer plan the left always preferred. His stimulus proposal was too small, not too large. His new Wall Street regulations were a long way from a complete overhaul of American capitalism. Yet Republicans swept the 2010 elections because they painted Obama and the Democrats as being far to the left of their actual achievements.

This week, progressives will highlight a new effort to pursue the road not taken at a conference convened by the Campaign for America’s Future that opens Monday. It is a cooperative venture with a large number of other organizations, notably the American Dream Movement led by Van Jones, a former Obama administration official who wants to show the country what a truly progressive agenda around jobs, health care and equality would look like. Jones freely acknowledges that “we can learn many important lessons from the recent achievements of the libertarian, populist right” and says of the progressive left: “This is our ‘Tea Party’ moment — in a positive sense.” The anti-Wall Street demonstators seem to have that sense, too.

What’s been missing in the Obama presidency is the productive interaction with outside groups that Franklin Roosevelt enjoyed with the labor movement and Lyndon B. Johnson with the civil rights movement. Both pushed FDR and LBJ in more progressive directions while also lending them support against their conservative adversaries.

The question for the left now, says Robert Borosage of the Campaign for America’s Future, is whether progressives can “establish independence and momentum” while also being able “to make a strategic voting choice.” The idea is not to pretend that Obama is as progressive as his core supporters want him to be, but to rally support for him nonetheless as the man standing between the country and the right wing.

A real left could usefully instruct Americans as to just how moderate the president they elected in 2008 is — and how far to the right conservatives have strayed.

Source http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/can-the-left-stage-a-tea-party/2011/09/30/gIQA35GMGL_story.html

Obama again presses for a 'grand bargain' on debt ceiling

Buoyed by a new bipartisan proposal to raise the debt ceiling, President Obama continued to press congressional leaders Wednesday for a "grand bargain" that would reduce the federal deficit by nearly $4 trillion over 10 years.

Obama met separately at the White House with Democratic and Republican congressional leaders in an effort to break the impasse before Aug. 2, when the government is expected to run out of money to pay its bills if the ceiling remains at $14.3 trillion. It was not clear if the meetings produced any developments.

Hopes for a sweeping deal on the debt and federal deficits were revived by a proposal offered this week by the so-called Gang of Six senators who have been working all year on budget changes.

The plan would achieve nearly $4 trillion in deficit reduction in the next decade through spending cuts, entitlement reform and an overhaul of the tax code, which includes generating $1.2 trillion in new revenue.

Republican senators' interest in the plan appeared to crack part of the logjam over taxes that has stymied a broader deal. Before now, the GOP had refused to consider more tax revenue as a way of reducing deficits, preferring to rely on steep spending cuts alone — an approach Democrats reject.

But time is limited to achieve such a deal. The Treasury Department has said the government risks default next month, which would cause an economic upheaval and raise U.S. borrowing costs. The proposal from the six senators represents a framework that could take weeks to move through committees and Congress.

Obama has repeatedly said he would reject a debt ceiling increase that falls short of the $2.4 trillion the Treasury needs to pay the government's bills through 2012, arguing that the political environment would grow only more challenging with the coming election cycle.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday that the president still adhered to that position. But for the first time, Carney seemed to leave the door open to a short-term deal to raise the debt ceiling if it would help achieve "something significant" in the way of a larger agreement.

Obama met late Wednesday with GOP leaders — House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), the majority leader — and separately with congressional Democratic leaders.

During the meeting with Boehner and Cantor, the president reiterated his opposition to a short-term deal that Cantor and some Republicans have pursued. Obama also spelled out the terms under which he would consider a short-term arrangement, according to a Democratic official familiar with the talks who would describe them only on condition of anonymity.

Democratic leaders voiced support for a larger package, as long as it did not "balance the budget on the backs of seniors through cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries," according to a House aide, who also spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly.

Liberals in the House have complained that the Gang of Six's outline would alter the federal safety net and entitlement programs.

Also on Wednesday, the Senate announced it was taking up the House-passed debt ceiling bill that Obama has said he would veto. That measure would substantially cut spending and cap future outlays.

It would allow the debt ceiling to be increased only after Congress also sends to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment that would require balanced budgets. A Senate vote is expected by Saturday, but the measure is not expected to pass.

Source http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-debt-white-house-20110721,0,6044288.story