Dec 3, 2013
Generation Y, or those in their 20s, are more likely than their parents or grandparents to take the “pursuit of happiness” to heart.
The generation is characterized by high expectations and a heightened value on teamwork and family. Work-wise, a Forbes article states that this generation isn’t interested in a big paycheck—they’re more inclined to value friendly co-workers, a fun work environment, and an employer that values their work style.
This new breed of 20-somethings longs for adventure and enrichment, even placing family over their jobs. They tend to long for positive feedback and are more willing than any generation before them to relocate to find their ideal workplace. The modern 20-something professional will likely leave their resume up just in case something more fulfilling may come along.
Although they may be criticized as being unrealistic or uncommitted, this generation has the potential to be the happiest (and most productive) yet.
If refusing to settle is wrong, who wants to be right?
Nov 26, 2013
The beginning of the year 2000 ushered in a new trend in the food and dining business, which is centered on offering food and dishes that are more safe and healthier to the body: food categorized as “Gluten-free.”
The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (FAAN) reports that there are about 12 million Americans experiencing food allergies; more than three million of these are suffering from celiac disease. Celiac disease, which causes damage to the small intestine, is a digestive illness; it obstructs the absorption of food nutrients that result to malabsorption and causes an abnormal reaction to gluten, the protein naturally contained in barley, rye and wheat. Besides the daily food we usually consume, gluten is also used in the manufacture of vitamins, medicines and lip balms.
As more and more Americans are becoming greatly concerned about their health and conscious of the kind of food they eat, restaurants, hospitals, cafeterias, school and office lunchrooms, university dining halls, hotels and even convenience stores, have made it their main concern to offer allergy-friendly and gluten-free food. Besides promoting good health, these establishments also say that it has been good to their business.
Even with the continuous growth of this trend in the food business, the Gluten Intolerance Group (GIG), through organizations, such as the Gluten-Free Restaurant Awareness (GFRAP) and the National Restaurant Association, is consistent in its endeavor in working, especially with dining establishments, to ensure that they offer food and dishes that are safe for all types of clients and customers.
Surprisingly, even those not affected by the celiac disease have also begun to prefer gluten-free food, which they say increases their energy and keeps the bellies from bloating. Thus, besides restaurants, health food stores and groceries are also beginning to offer and stock more gluten-free products.
In Baltimore, University of Maryland Center for Celiac Research medical director Alessio Fasano, M.D., agrees that reversing to gluten-free diet does promote good health. For those with celiac disease, Dr. Fasano states the gluten “is truly evil”; it damages the small intestine that can result to nutritional deficiencies and severe gastrointestinal distress which, in turn, can lead to osteoporosis, infertility and intestinal cancers, if untreated.
With gluten-free food being offered in majority of the restaurants and other food establishments all across the US, dining out or buying food is now more healthy and worry-free. Thus, the next time you go out to eat, consider sampling the foods at a gluten-free restaurant.
Nov 23, 2013
“Save lives, prevent injuries, reduce vehicle-related crashes”: this is the major task of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), a branch of the Department of Transportation and one of the agencies of the U.S. government’s Executive Branch.
On its website, Ravid & Associates, P.C., does not disprove the fact that some car accidents are due to “unavoidable and unpredictable” occasions; more, however, are results of another motorist’s recklessness or carelessness on the road.
True enough, as the usual major causes of car crashes are drunk-driving, over or under-speeding, recklessness and driver error (especially because of the use of hand held phones and other forms of devices that cause driver distraction). And, sad to say, but the numbers of those who sustain severe injuries or those who end up dead, due to these car accidents, still number to millions or thousands, respectively.
For this reason, every state in the US mandate drivers to have sufficient auto liability insurance, and the one kind of this type of insurance that has become quite famous now is the no-fault auto liability insurance.
Through no-fault auto insurance, your insurance provider will pay for the injuries that you, as their policy holder, have sustained, regardless of whose fault the accident was (injury suffered by the other driver will be paid by his/her own insurance provider). The payment, called the personal injury protection (PIP), covers lost wages, due to days of work missed, medical bills and property damage. The desire to still pursue additional payment for damages to property can be done in court.
No-fault car liability insurance renders premiums and legal costs lower than at-fault insurances. This is because the former would no longer necessitate legal or court procedures associated simply with determining whose fault the accident really is – this means no more court fees to pay. This court procedure is what actually requires at-fault drivers to pay higher premiums.
Presently, there are 12 states that require drivers to carry no-fault car liability insurance; these include Utah, Pennsylvania, North Dakota, New York, New Jersey, Minnesota, Michigan, Massachusetts, Kentucky, Kansas, Hawaii and Florida.
Nov 22, 2013
The many different work-related accidents in the past have all contributed to the US government’s decision to enact a law that would ensure and enforce health and safety in the workplace for the benefit of all employees in the US.
This led to the creation of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 which, in turn, gave rise to the creation of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the task of which is to ensure that all work sites are compliant with the government’s safety standard and are medically safe.
Among all work places, construction sites are acknowledged as the most dangerous due to the dangers and risks constructions workers are exposed to. These dangers, according to the website of Hach & Rose, LLP, which are also the usual causes of construction accidents, included scaffolding problems, falling tools and/or equipment, crane collapse, construction vehicle (such as cranes and forklifts) accidents.
Much earlier than the OSHA, the Workers’ Compensation Benefit was passed into law in 1908. The primary intention of this law was to give immediate financial benefit to workers injured during the performance of their job; those who developed job-related illnesses were also covered by the law. Workers’ comp was intended to financially assist the injured worker in his/her medical needs and to provide temporary monetary assistance due to loss of capacity to work and earn a wage.
Construction site and other job-related injuries number to more than two million every year, while the number of deaths total to about 14,000. Many other laws have also been created to significantly reduce these numbers. Government standards were also set regarding the quality of the tools and equipment to be used, provision of health stations where workers can avail of immediate treatment in the event of an accident and education of workers regarding proper use and maintenance of everything in the workplace.
OSHA believes that many workplace accidents can be prevented; all it takes is the business’ strict compliance with the agency’s policies. Failure to still maintain safety in the workplace, despite all the communications issued by OSHA regarding job safety and health, would already be a clear indication of an employer’s negligence in performing his/her duty for the benefit of the employees.
Nov 19, 2013
A year after hurricane Sandy hit and devastated the United States, many are still homeless and battling with their insurance provider about the claim they believe they deserve, which will enable them to rebuild either their ruined of torn down houses.
The superstorm, according to the US National Hurricane Center, was 2012 Atlantic hurricane season’s deadliest and the second costliest storm to ever hit the United States. This October 29, 2012, Category 2 storm, affected as many as 24 states, most especially New Jersey and New York, wreaking damages estimated between $50 and $68 billion and claimed more than 150 lives; 72 deaths happened during the storm itself, while 87 more lives were lost after the storm, due to accidents during the cleanup phase, carbon monoxide poisoning and hypothermia or extremely low body temperature because of power outages.
New York City, specifically, which the superstorm severely affected, suffered the destruction of thousands of vehicles and homes, flooding of the majority of its road tunnels, suburban communities and subway system, destruction of many business establishments and homes due to fire, power outages for several days, closure of businesses, such as the New York Stock Exchange, for days, and closure and evacuation of hospitals.
Almost everyone was in need of urgent care which many did not even know where and what the source would be, for almost all the residents of the city and neighboring states were just like them – victims of the natural disaster.
Equally worse, though, is the fact that even after a year, so many of those whose homes the storm destroyed are still homeless. Their hope to rebuild their destroyed properties cannot be started or finished as these individuals are still fighting against their insurance provider on the issue of hurricane insurance claim. With regard to dealing with Insurance companies for the financial benefit that ought to enable them to have a brand new start, it would seem that the storm has also washed away all their hopes.
Many legal experts believe that many Insurance firms employ a delaying strategy in releasing the claims of policy holders. This is besides assessing damage to properties inaccurately to give them the reason to award a benefit that is far below what the policy holder expects.
Sad to say, but, sometimes, dealing with Insurance providers is worse than dealing with a destructive storm. Insurance policies and the laws governing the Insurance business are long and complicated that for the policy holder to deal with his/her provider alone would be a hopeless endeavor. Having a legal expert to help you fight for your rights would be much advisable; this way, no Insurance firm would be able to mislead you about any stipulations indicated in your contract.
Nov 17, 2013
The early part of the 20th century and onwards was a turnaround in the business sector as this was the time when the US government started enacting and implementing laws that would protect the rights and interests of employees all across the United States. Laws against workplace discrimination that would ensure equal opportunity to all employees, as well as laws that would assure just wages and provision of financial assistance in the event of injuries or illnesses that are work-related are the targets of these laws.
The website of Cary Kane LLP, is right in saying that no employee can be unjustly terminated from work or unjustly treated, whether by his/her employer, manager or co-workers; anyone who believes that he/she is a victim of unfair and unlawful workplace practices can seek protection from the law to bring the perpetrator to justice and seek compensation for whatever damage and/or harm such injustice may have caused him/her.
Laws that prohibit workplace discrimination due to a person’s nationality, color, race, religion, age, genetic information, disability and sex, are enforced by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). This agency of the federal government that is tasked to enforce anti-workplace discrimination laws also prohibits an employer or co-employee from resorting to retaliatory acts due to an individual’s decision to report, participate in, and/or oppose discriminatory practices in the workplace.
One illegal practice in the workplace that has earned the attention of the EEOC is sexual harassment. There are different Acts/laws that specifically address this concern; one of these is the Equal Pay Act (EPA), which says that male or female employees who perform equal work, so long as this work requires the same skills, responsibilities and efforts, and is done in the same workplace, ought to receive the same compensation. This law was enacted in 1963.
Another is Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which was enacted in 1964, the law that strictly illegalizes any discriminatory and retaliatory acts against any employee; this includes discrimination based on an employee’s gender. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act has had a few amendments; two of these are worth mentioning due to their connection to sexual harassment. One amendment, made in 2011, included sex discrimination as being committed through acts of “sex-stereotyping” made against gays, lesbians and bisexuals. The other, which was made in 2012, extended the law’s protection to cover gender identity and transgender status. Even pregnant women are protected against workplace and sexual discrimination. This protection is provided by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978.
These laws, with the others, are meant to establish good relationship, order, fairness and equality in all workplaces. Employees who feel that they have been discriminated in any way can file a complaint against the guilty individual who, by the way, may also be one of their company’s clients.
Nov 16, 2013
A pharmaceutical drug, otherwise called medicinal product, medicine or medication, is manufactured for purposes of medical diagnoses, prevention, treatment or cure of diseases. Three well-known FDA-approved medicines, under the class known as Bisphosphonate, are Fosamax, Actonel and Boniva – all for prevention and treatment of (post-menopausal) osteoporosis, a medical condition wherein bones turn fragile and brittle due to loss of tissue, an occurrence that usually results from deficiency in vitamin D, calcium or hormonal changes.
Women suffering from post-menopausal osteoporosis are prescribed with one of the three medicines mentioned to help decrease the fracture of bones in their body. In a test conducted, called the Fosamax Actonel Comparison Trial (FACT) trial, Fosamax edged Actonel in the manifestation of decrease in bone loss, seen through a substantial decrease in bone turnover and increases in mineralization.
Another study was conducted, though, which compared the performance and effectivity of the three drugs. The study showed that, while Boniva and Fosamax manifested desired results (that is, decrease of bone fractures) after two years of use, Actonel proved effective only after a year of intake, enabling researchers to confidently say that Actonel works much faster.
The result of this last study has only reassured University of Cincinnati Bone Health and Osteoporosis Center director Nelson B. Watts, MD and Women’s Health Center at The Cleveland Clinic director Holly Thacker, MD, in their decision of to prescribe Actonel over any other drug for treatment of osteoporosis.
In January of 2008, the US Food and Drug Administration issued a health alert, stating the possible risk associated with the use of bisphosphonates. These risks included serious bone, muscle and/or joint pains which may incapacitate a patient. Thus, use of any of the bisphosphonate drugs necessitated both physician and patient to fully understand the benefits and possible side-effects of the drugs.
Actonel, in particular, despite its benefits, is known to cause certain serious side-effects, such as femur fractures, rashes, skin reactions, hypersensitivity and osteonecrosis of the jaw. Actonel (with the generic name Risedronate sodium) was approved for distribution on March 27, 1998; it is manufactured by Procter & Gamble.
One side-effect caused by Actonel, which has resulted to lawsuits is Femur Fracture. On its website, the National Injury Law Center states that Actonel, indeed, is “linked to spontaneous femur fractures” and is, therefore, considered a harmful drug.