Friday, September 23, 2011
Worms World Party Mophun Engine Download Mobile Game
Worms World Party Mophun Engine Download Mobile Game
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Scary Maze v.1.0.0 Download Mobile Game
REAL FOOTBALL 2012 v1.0 1 Download Mobile Game
Alice In Wonderland Syndrome
So sang Jefferson Airplane in their psychedelic classic White Rabbit. While this song seems sure to have been inspired by the use of certain unapproved medications, don't have to be dropping acid to feel ten feet tall.One pill makes you larger
And one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you
Don't do anything at all
Go ask Alice
When she's ten feet tall
A new paper from Germany reports on a case of "Alice In Wonderland Syndrome" associated with topiramate, an anti-epileptic drug also used to prevent migraines:
Alice In Wonderland Syndrome - the feeling that parts of the body have changed in size or shape - is a symptom known to be associated with various brain disorders, although it's not clear why it happens. It can occur in migraines. However in this case, the patient had never experienced such symptoms before she started on an anti-migraine drug.A 17-year-old girl presented with a 7-year history of migraine... she was put on 50 mg topiramate at night... after 4 months the dose was further increased to 75 mg/day, as she was still having three to four headache days/month.She then reported previously unknown intermittent nocturnal distortions of her body image only on those occasions when she did not directly fall asleep after taking topiramate. She described that either her head would grow bigger and the rest of the body would shrink, or that her hand resting comfortably on her chest would increase in size and become heavier, while the remaining arm would become smaller. The patient denied any hallucinatory character of these perceptions and insisted on their unpleasant but unreal nature...After reduction of topiramate to 50 mg/day, the nocturnal phenomena ceased within 2 weeks. The neurological and psychiatric examination was normal... We agreed with the patient to a rechallenge and increased the daily dose to 75 mg/day. Two weeks later the distortions reappeared again and the patient decided to discontinue the drug.
The authors conclude that while topiramate is an "excellent" drug, it can cause unusual side effects and they say that "The prescribing physician should be aware that it has the ability to induce various adverse effects and should encourage patients to report them - even if they initially appear awkward to them."
Jürgens TP, Ihle K, Stork JH, & May A (2011). "Alice in Wonderland syndrome" associated with topiramate for migraine prevention. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 82 (2), 228-9 PMID: 20571045
Alice In Wonderland Syndrome
So sang Jefferson Airplane in their psychedelic classic White Rabbit. While this song seems sure to have been inspired by the use of certain unapproved medications, don't have to be dropping acid to feel ten feet tall.One pill makes you larger
And one pill makes you small
And the ones that mother gives you
Don't do anything at all
Go ask Alice
When she's ten feet tall
A new paper from Germany reports on a case of "Alice In Wonderland Syndrome" associated with topiramate, an anti-epileptic drug also used to prevent migraines:
Alice In Wonderland Syndrome - the feeling that parts of the body have changed in size or shape - is a symptom known to be associated with various brain disorders, although it's not clear why it happens. It can occur in migraines. However in this case, the patient had never experienced such symptoms before she started on an anti-migraine drug.A 17-year-old girl presented with a 7-year history of migraine... she was put on 50 mg topiramate at night... after 4 months the dose was further increased to 75 mg/day, as she was still having three to four headache days/month.She then reported previously unknown intermittent nocturnal distortions of her body image only on those occasions when she did not directly fall asleep after taking topiramate. She described that either her head would grow bigger and the rest of the body would shrink, or that her hand resting comfortably on her chest would increase in size and become heavier, while the remaining arm would become smaller. The patient denied any hallucinatory character of these perceptions and insisted on their unpleasant but unreal nature...After reduction of topiramate to 50 mg/day, the nocturnal phenomena ceased within 2 weeks. The neurological and psychiatric examination was normal... We agreed with the patient to a rechallenge and increased the daily dose to 75 mg/day. Two weeks later the distortions reappeared again and the patient decided to discontinue the drug.
The authors conclude that while topiramate is an "excellent" drug, it can cause unusual side effects and they say that "The prescribing physician should be aware that it has the ability to induce various adverse effects and should encourage patients to report them - even if they initially appear awkward to them."
Jürgens TP, Ihle K, Stork JH, & May A (2011). "Alice in Wonderland syndrome" associated with topiramate for migraine prevention. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 82 (2), 228-9 PMID: 20571045
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Gaoranger Mods Pack in Gta SA
GaoRanger Mods in GTA SA
GaoRed
GaoBlue
GaoBlack
GaoWhite
GaoYellow
Gaoranger Mods in Gta
Author : 100nadzmi
Samurai Sentai Shinkenger Pack v2 in Gta SA
ShinkenRed i already release at another post for v2.
Shinkenblue v2
Author :100nadzmi
Model name : ch02_bl
Shinkengreen v2
Author :100nadzmi
Model name : ch02_gr
Shinkenpink v2
Author :100nadzmi
Model name : ch02_pi
Shinkenyellow v2
Author :100nadzmi
Model name : ch02_ye
Shinkenger v2 Link Download
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?duyvz164b6ldaml
Shinkenblue v2
Author :100nadzmi
Model name : ch02_bl
Shinkengreen v2
Author :100nadzmi
Model name : ch02_gr
Shinkenpink v2
Author :100nadzmi
Model name : ch02_pi
Shinkenyellow v2
Author :100nadzmi
Model name : ch02_ye
Shinkenger v2 Link Download
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?duyvz164b6ldaml
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Antidepressants In The UK
Antidepressant sales have been rising for many years in Western countries, as regular Neuroskeptic readers will remember.
Most of the studies on antidepressant use come from the USA and the UK, although the pattern also seems to hold for other European countries. The rapid rise of antidepressants from niche drugs to mega-sellers is perhaps the single biggest change in the way medicine treats mental illness since the invention of psychiatric drugs.
But while a rise in sales has been observed in many countries, that doesn't mean the same causes were at work in every case. For example, in the USA, there is good evidence that more people have started taking antidepressants over the past 15 years.
In the UK, however, it's a bit more tricky. Antidepressant prescriptions have certainly risen. However, a large 2009 study revealed that, between 1993 and 2005, there was not any significant rise in people starting on antidepressants for depression. Rather, the rise in prescriptions was caused by patients getting more prescriptions each. The same number of users were using more antidepressants.
Now a new paper has looked at antidepressant use over much the same period (1995-2007), but using a different set of data. Pauline Lockhart and Bruce Guthrie looked at pharmacy records of drugs actually dispensed, not just prescribed, and their data only covers a specific region, Tayside in Scotland. The 2009 study was nationwide.
So what happened?
The new paper confirmed the 2009 survey's finding of a strong increase in the number of antidepressant prescriptions per patient.
However, unlike the old study, this one found an increase in the number of people who used antidepressants each year. It went up from 8% of the population in 1995, to 13% in 2007 - an extremely high figure, higher even than the USA.
In other words, more people took them, and they took more of them on average - adding up to a threefold increase in antidepressants actually sold. The increase was seen across men and women of all ages and social classes.
There's no good evidence of an increase in mental illness in Britain in this period, by the way.
But why did the 2009 paper report no change in antidepressant users, while this one did? It could be that the increase was localized to the Tayside area. Another possibility is that there was an increase nationwide, but it wasn't about people with depression.
The 2009 study only looked at people with a diagnosis of depression. Yet modern antidepressants are widely used for other things as well - like anxiety, insomnia, pain, premature ejaculation. Maybe this non-depression-based use of antidepressants is what's on the rise.
Lockhart, P. and Guthrie, B. (2011). Trends in primary care antidepressantprescribing 1995–2007 British Journal of General Practice
Most of the studies on antidepressant use come from the USA and the UK, although the pattern also seems to hold for other European countries. The rapid rise of antidepressants from niche drugs to mega-sellers is perhaps the single biggest change in the way medicine treats mental illness since the invention of psychiatric drugs.
But while a rise in sales has been observed in many countries, that doesn't mean the same causes were at work in every case. For example, in the USA, there is good evidence that more people have started taking antidepressants over the past 15 years.
In the UK, however, it's a bit more tricky. Antidepressant prescriptions have certainly risen. However, a large 2009 study revealed that, between 1993 and 2005, there was not any significant rise in people starting on antidepressants for depression. Rather, the rise in prescriptions was caused by patients getting more prescriptions each. The same number of users were using more antidepressants.
Now a new paper has looked at antidepressant use over much the same period (1995-2007), but using a different set of data. Pauline Lockhart and Bruce Guthrie looked at pharmacy records of drugs actually dispensed, not just prescribed, and their data only covers a specific region, Tayside in Scotland. The 2009 study was nationwide.
So what happened?
The new paper confirmed the 2009 survey's finding of a strong increase in the number of antidepressant prescriptions per patient.
However, unlike the old study, this one found an increase in the number of people who used antidepressants each year. It went up from 8% of the population in 1995, to 13% in 2007 - an extremely high figure, higher even than the USA.
In other words, more people took them, and they took more of them on average - adding up to a threefold increase in antidepressants actually sold. The increase was seen across men and women of all ages and social classes.
There's no good evidence of an increase in mental illness in Britain in this period, by the way.
But why did the 2009 paper report no change in antidepressant users, while this one did? It could be that the increase was localized to the Tayside area. Another possibility is that there was an increase nationwide, but it wasn't about people with depression.
The 2009 study only looked at people with a diagnosis of depression. Yet modern antidepressants are widely used for other things as well - like anxiety, insomnia, pain, premature ejaculation. Maybe this non-depression-based use of antidepressants is what's on the rise.
Lockhart, P. and Guthrie, B. (2011). Trends in primary care antidepressantprescribing 1995–2007 British Journal of General Practice
Antidepressants In The UK
Antidepressant sales have been rising for many years in Western countries, as regular Neuroskeptic readers will remember.
Most of the studies on antidepressant use come from the USA and the UK, although the pattern also seems to hold for other European countries. The rapid rise of antidepressants from niche drugs to mega-sellers is perhaps the single biggest change in the way medicine treats mental illness since the invention of psychiatric drugs.
But while a rise in sales has been observed in many countries, that doesn't mean the same causes were at work in every case. For example, in the USA, there is good evidence that more people have started taking antidepressants over the past 15 years.
In the UK, however, it's a bit more tricky. Antidepressant prescriptions have certainly risen. However, a large 2009 study revealed that, between 1993 and 2005, there was not any significant rise in people starting on antidepressants for depression. Rather, the rise in prescriptions was caused by patients getting more prescriptions each. The same number of users were using more antidepressants.
Now a new paper has looked at antidepressant use over much the same period (1995-2007), but using a different set of data. Pauline Lockhart and Bruce Guthrie looked at pharmacy records of drugs actually dispensed, not just prescribed, and their data only covers a specific region, Tayside in Scotland. The 2009 study was nationwide.
So what happened?
The new paper confirmed the 2009 survey's finding of a strong increase in the number of antidepressant prescriptions per patient.
However, unlike the old study, this one found an increase in the number of people who used antidepressants each year. It went up from 8% of the population in 1995, to 13% in 2007 - an extremely high figure, higher even than the USA.
In other words, more people took them, and they took more of them on average - adding up to a threefold increase in antidepressants actually sold. The increase was seen across men and women of all ages and social classes.
There's no good evidence of an increase in mental illness in Britain in this period, by the way.
But why did the 2009 paper report no change in antidepressant users, while this one did? It could be that the increase was localized to the Tayside area. Another possibility is that there was an increase nationwide, but it wasn't about people with depression.
The 2009 study only looked at people with a diagnosis of depression. Yet modern antidepressants are widely used for other things as well - like anxiety, insomnia, pain, premature ejaculation. Maybe this non-depression-based use of antidepressants is what's on the rise.
Lockhart, P. and Guthrie, B. (2011). Trends in primary care antidepressantprescribing 1995–2007 British Journal of General Practice
Most of the studies on antidepressant use come from the USA and the UK, although the pattern also seems to hold for other European countries. The rapid rise of antidepressants from niche drugs to mega-sellers is perhaps the single biggest change in the way medicine treats mental illness since the invention of psychiatric drugs.
But while a rise in sales has been observed in many countries, that doesn't mean the same causes were at work in every case. For example, in the USA, there is good evidence that more people have started taking antidepressants over the past 15 years.
In the UK, however, it's a bit more tricky. Antidepressant prescriptions have certainly risen. However, a large 2009 study revealed that, between 1993 and 2005, there was not any significant rise in people starting on antidepressants for depression. Rather, the rise in prescriptions was caused by patients getting more prescriptions each. The same number of users were using more antidepressants.
Now a new paper has looked at antidepressant use over much the same period (1995-2007), but using a different set of data. Pauline Lockhart and Bruce Guthrie looked at pharmacy records of drugs actually dispensed, not just prescribed, and their data only covers a specific region, Tayside in Scotland. The 2009 study was nationwide.
So what happened?
The new paper confirmed the 2009 survey's finding of a strong increase in the number of antidepressant prescriptions per patient.
However, unlike the old study, this one found an increase in the number of people who used antidepressants each year. It went up from 8% of the population in 1995, to 13% in 2007 - an extremely high figure, higher even than the USA.
In other words, more people took them, and they took more of them on average - adding up to a threefold increase in antidepressants actually sold. The increase was seen across men and women of all ages and social classes.
There's no good evidence of an increase in mental illness in Britain in this period, by the way.
But why did the 2009 paper report no change in antidepressant users, while this one did? It could be that the increase was localized to the Tayside area. Another possibility is that there was an increase nationwide, but it wasn't about people with depression.
The 2009 study only looked at people with a diagnosis of depression. Yet modern antidepressants are widely used for other things as well - like anxiety, insomnia, pain, premature ejaculation. Maybe this non-depression-based use of antidepressants is what's on the rise.
Lockhart, P. and Guthrie, B. (2011). Trends in primary care antidepressantprescribing 1995–2007 British Journal of General Practice
Samurai Sentai Shinken Gold
Shinkengold
Name : ShinkenGold
Author : 100nadzmi
Label : Super Sentai
Extract from : Super Sentai Battle Ranger Cross(wii)
Model file name : ch02_gl0
Release : 21/9/2011
Link : http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?jmadqekze1x8nl4(Mediafire)
Link 2 : http://100nadzmi.opendrive.com/files/45945951_T6l5U_839a/Shinkengold.rar(Direct Download)
Name : ShinkenGold
Author : 100nadzmi
Label : Super Sentai
Extract from : Super Sentai Battle Ranger Cross(wii)
Model file name : ch02_gl0
Release : 21/9/2011
Link : http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?jmadqekze1x8nl4(Mediafire)
Link 2 : http://100nadzmi.opendrive.com/files/45945951_T6l5U_839a/Shinkengold.rar(Direct Download)
Monday, September 19, 2011
The Ancients
I just got back from a holiday in Greece - hence the lack of posts these past two weeks. Normal service will now resume.
Greece, of course, is rich in history (if not money, at the moment) and the National Archaeological Museum is predictably impressive. One of the most striking artefacts I remember was a kind of miniature suit made out of pure gold leaf, complete with a little face mask with tiny eye holes. It was the death mask of an infant from Mycenae, buried about 3000 years ago and dug up in the 19th century.
That's fascinating of course. When you think about it, it's also tragic. This was someone's baby son or daughter. However, it's hard to feel sad over it. If that baby died in front of you, or even if it happened yesterday and you read about it on the news, it would be sad.
You'd even feel sad if it were an entirely fictional baby that "died" in a movie. But being so old, it's not sad, it's just interesting, which is why these things have ended up in museums.
Most of the best exhibits are grave goods, placed in tombs with the dead, in the belief that the deceased would be able to use them in the next world. One Mycenaean warrior was buried with his sword, the blade specially bent so as to "kill" it, and ensure that it would travel to the afterlife with him.
That's fascinating, and also rather weird. Killing a sword so its dead owner could use the ghost of it in heaven? Those crazy ancients!
When you think about it, that's a horrible thing to think. That guy was probably a war hero and that grave was the most solemn memorial his culture could erect to his memory. That was the Arlington, the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, of his day. We could have let it rest in peace. But we put it in a museum.
My point here is not that we ought to stop doing archaeology because it's offending the memory of the dead. What's interesting is the fact that no-one would even consider that. We just don't care about the dead of 3000 years ago, except as historical data. Yet there'd be outrage if someone went into a churchyard and starting digging up the dead of 300 years ago. You wouldn't even stuck some chewing gum to a gravestone or use it as a seat.
So there are two categories of the dead. There's the alive dead, who are felt to be with us, in the sense that they have a right to respect. Then there are the dead dead, the ancients, who are of purely historical interest. The alive dead still have power - wars are fought over their memories, honour, property rights.
Eventually, though, even the dead die, and that's generally a good thing. The Hungarians, so far as I know, don't dislike the Mongolians because of the Mongol Invasion of 1237, although the Hungarians who died then would probably have wanted them to.
Fortunately for modern international relations, they're dead.
Greece, of course, is rich in history (if not money, at the moment) and the National Archaeological Museum is predictably impressive. One of the most striking artefacts I remember was a kind of miniature suit made out of pure gold leaf, complete with a little face mask with tiny eye holes. It was the death mask of an infant from Mycenae, buried about 3000 years ago and dug up in the 19th century.
That's fascinating of course. When you think about it, it's also tragic. This was someone's baby son or daughter. However, it's hard to feel sad over it. If that baby died in front of you, or even if it happened yesterday and you read about it on the news, it would be sad.
You'd even feel sad if it were an entirely fictional baby that "died" in a movie. But being so old, it's not sad, it's just interesting, which is why these things have ended up in museums.
Most of the best exhibits are grave goods, placed in tombs with the dead, in the belief that the deceased would be able to use them in the next world. One Mycenaean warrior was buried with his sword, the blade specially bent so as to "kill" it, and ensure that it would travel to the afterlife with him.
That's fascinating, and also rather weird. Killing a sword so its dead owner could use the ghost of it in heaven? Those crazy ancients!
When you think about it, that's a horrible thing to think. That guy was probably a war hero and that grave was the most solemn memorial his culture could erect to his memory. That was the Arlington, the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, of his day. We could have let it rest in peace. But we put it in a museum.
My point here is not that we ought to stop doing archaeology because it's offending the memory of the dead. What's interesting is the fact that no-one would even consider that. We just don't care about the dead of 3000 years ago, except as historical data. Yet there'd be outrage if someone went into a churchyard and starting digging up the dead of 300 years ago. You wouldn't even stuck some chewing gum to a gravestone or use it as a seat.
So there are two categories of the dead. There's the alive dead, who are felt to be with us, in the sense that they have a right to respect. Then there are the dead dead, the ancients, who are of purely historical interest. The alive dead still have power - wars are fought over their memories, honour, property rights.
Eventually, though, even the dead die, and that's generally a good thing. The Hungarians, so far as I know, don't dislike the Mongolians because of the Mongol Invasion of 1237, although the Hungarians who died then would probably have wanted them to.
Fortunately for modern international relations, they're dead.
The Ancients
I just got back from a holiday in Greece - hence the lack of posts these past two weeks. Normal service will now resume.
Greece, of course, is rich in history (if not money, at the moment) and the National Archaeological Museum is predictably impressive. One of the most striking artefacts I remember was a kind of miniature suit made out of pure gold leaf, complete with a little face mask with tiny eye holes. It was the death mask of an infant from Mycenae, buried about 3000 years ago and dug up in the 19th century.
That's fascinating of course. When you think about it, it's also tragic. This was someone's baby son or daughter. However, it's hard to feel sad over it. If that baby died in front of you, or even if it happened yesterday and you read about it on the news, it would be sad.
You'd even feel sad if it were an entirely fictional baby that "died" in a movie. But being so old, it's not sad, it's just interesting, which is why these things have ended up in museums.
Most of the best exhibits are grave goods, placed in tombs with the dead, in the belief that the deceased would be able to use them in the next world. One Mycenaean warrior was buried with his sword, the blade specially bent so as to "kill" it, and ensure that it would travel to the afterlife with him.
That's fascinating, and also rather weird. Killing a sword so its dead owner could use the ghost of it in heaven? Those crazy ancients!
When you think about it, that's a horrible thing to think. That guy was probably a war hero and that grave was the most solemn memorial his culture could erect to his memory. That was the Arlington, the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, of his day. We could have let it rest in peace. But we put it in a museum.
My point here is not that we ought to stop doing archaeology because it's offending the memory of the dead. What's interesting is the fact that no-one would even consider that. We just don't care about the dead of 3000 years ago, except as historical data. Yet there'd be outrage if someone went into a churchyard and starting digging up the dead of 300 years ago. You wouldn't even stuck some chewing gum to a gravestone or use it as a seat.
So there are two categories of the dead. There's the alive dead, who are felt to be with us, in the sense that they have a right to respect. Then there are the dead dead, the ancients, who are of purely historical interest. The alive dead still have power - wars are fought over their memories, honour, property rights.
Eventually, though, even the dead die, and that's generally a good thing. The Hungarians, so far as I know, don't dislike the Mongolians because of the Mongol Invasion of 1237, although the Hungarians who died then would probably have wanted them to.
Fortunately for modern international relations, they're dead.
Greece, of course, is rich in history (if not money, at the moment) and the National Archaeological Museum is predictably impressive. One of the most striking artefacts I remember was a kind of miniature suit made out of pure gold leaf, complete with a little face mask with tiny eye holes. It was the death mask of an infant from Mycenae, buried about 3000 years ago and dug up in the 19th century.
That's fascinating of course. When you think about it, it's also tragic. This was someone's baby son or daughter. However, it's hard to feel sad over it. If that baby died in front of you, or even if it happened yesterday and you read about it on the news, it would be sad.
You'd even feel sad if it were an entirely fictional baby that "died" in a movie. But being so old, it's not sad, it's just interesting, which is why these things have ended up in museums.
Most of the best exhibits are grave goods, placed in tombs with the dead, in the belief that the deceased would be able to use them in the next world. One Mycenaean warrior was buried with his sword, the blade specially bent so as to "kill" it, and ensure that it would travel to the afterlife with him.
That's fascinating, and also rather weird. Killing a sword so its dead owner could use the ghost of it in heaven? Those crazy ancients!
When you think about it, that's a horrible thing to think. That guy was probably a war hero and that grave was the most solemn memorial his culture could erect to his memory. That was the Arlington, the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, of his day. We could have let it rest in peace. But we put it in a museum.
My point here is not that we ought to stop doing archaeology because it's offending the memory of the dead. What's interesting is the fact that no-one would even consider that. We just don't care about the dead of 3000 years ago, except as historical data. Yet there'd be outrage if someone went into a churchyard and starting digging up the dead of 300 years ago. You wouldn't even stuck some chewing gum to a gravestone or use it as a seat.
So there are two categories of the dead. There's the alive dead, who are felt to be with us, in the sense that they have a right to respect. Then there are the dead dead, the ancients, who are of purely historical interest. The alive dead still have power - wars are fought over their memories, honour, property rights.
Eventually, though, even the dead die, and that's generally a good thing. The Hungarians, so far as I know, don't dislike the Mongolians because of the Mongol Invasion of 1237, although the Hungarians who died then would probably have wanted them to.
Fortunately for modern international relations, they're dead.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)