Model Airplanes

By chance last week I tuned in to a TV newscast as the announcer said, “A study has concluded 30 per cent of MRIs contribute nothing to the treatment of a patient.” I was stunned.

An MRI (or magnetic resonance imaging) is a technique that uses a magnetic field and radio waves to create detailed three-dimensional images of the organs and tissues within your body. The patient lies on a table which then moves forward into an enclosed cavern resembling an oversized laundry dryer. A computer reveals the images to a radiologist who interprets them for the attending physician as a guide to the patient’s treatment.

Besides the substantial cost of the MRI machine itself, each exam involves the time of highly qualified medical staff. Then to learn 30 per cent of the time the “work” this machine and staff are doing is of no benefit to the patient is somewhat startling.

The reasons for ordering an MRI (or other tests) that may contribute little if anything to a patient’s care are many, including to do a complete workup while the patient is in the hospital anyway, to fish

Article source: http://www.terracestandard.com/opinion/375146141.html

By chance last week I tuned in to a TV newscast as the announcer said, “A study has concluded 30 per cent of MRIs contribute nothing to the treatment of a patient.” I was stunned.

An MRI (or magnetic resonance imaging) is a technique that uses a magnetic field and radio waves to create detailed three-dimensional images of the organs and tissues within your body. The patient lies on a table which then moves forward into an enclosed cavern resembling an oversized laundry dryer. A computer reveals the images to a radiologist who interprets them for the attending physician as a guide to the patient’s treatment.

Besides the substantial cost of the MRI machine itself, each exam involves the time of highly qualified medical staff. Then to learn 30 per cent of the time the “work” this machine and staff are doing is of no benefit to the patient is somewhat startling.

The reasons for ordering an MRI (or other tests) that may contribute little if anything to a patient’s care are many, including to do a complete workup while the patient is in the hospital anyway, to fish

Article source: http://www.terracestandard.com/opinion/375146141.html

Alcoa (AA – Analyst Report) is gearing up to release its first-quarter 2016 results after the close on Apr 11. In the last quarter, the New York-based aluminum giant swung to a loss on a reported basis, hurt by charges related to restructuring and lower metals pricing. However, its adjusted earnings beat expectations (a positive surprise of 33.33%).  

Alcoa’s primary metals business posted a loss in the quarter, hammered by lower aluminum prices and a decline in regional premiums. Headwinds from lower prices more than offset gains from productivity actions in the quarter.

Alcoa, in its fourth-quarter 2015 call, said that it sees 6% global aluminum demand growth in 2016 (to a record 60.5 million tons). The company’s outlook also indicated sustained strong momentum in aerospace, a key end-use market.

Alcoa’s results are closely watched by investors as they put a spotlight on demand trends for aluminum (a major industrial metal) across a vast spectrum of industries, which is closely linked to levels of economic activity. Investors will look particularly for management’s commentary on demand and pricing trends and the company’s planned separation into two independent companies.
 
Let’s see how things are shaping up for this announcement.
 
Factors to Watch For

Alcoa is witnessing strong momentum across aerospace and automotive markets. Healthy demand from these key end-markets coupled with the company’s aggressive cost-cutting and productivity improvement actions is expected to lend support to its earnings in the March quarter. The company achieved around $1.2 billion in productivity gains

Article source: http://www.zacks.com/stock/news/212727/alcoa-aa-buckles-up-for-q1-another-earnings-beat-coming

Australopithecus sediba did not have the jaw and tooth structure required for a diet of hard foods. Most of australopiths were having adaptations in their jaws, teeth and faces that allowed them to process foods that were difficult to chew.

A. sediba was not predisposed to chewing hard foods, even if it did consume them, and may have eaten softer foods that weren’t as hard to chew than tree bark or nuts

The researchers believe A. sediba didn’t share the same nutcracker jaw feature as its ancestors, due to its natural inability to crack hard foods. This also suggests that the species was a transitional one in between human ancestors, coming after A. africanus and most likely before Homo habilis or H. erectus.

“Most australopiths had amazing adaptations in their jaws, teeth and faces that allowed them to process foods that were difficult to chew or crack open,” said study lead David Strait of WUSTL in a press statement. “Among other things, they were able to efficiently bite down on foods with very high forces.”

Strait’s team used an A. sediba skull discovered in South Africa in 2008 and put it to an extensive series of tests and modeling simulations, similar to the tests car and airplane parts go through during their manufacture. According to the test results, A. sediba was not predisposed to chewing hard foods, even if it did consume them, and may have eaten softer foods that weren’t as hard to chew than tree bark or nuts.

The

Article source: http://www.albanydailystar.com/health/dietary-changes-shaped-the-evolutionary-paths-of-pro-humans-stamford-daily-science-16246.html