Posts made by leatherbear

Wikipedia

Rough trade

Often, the terms "trade" and "rough trade" are treated as synonymous. Often the attraction for the gay male partner is finding a dangerous, even thuggish, partner who may turn violent. That is not to say that people necessarily desire to be physically hurt, but the danger of seeking a partner in a public park, restroom, or alleyway may be exciting.

Another variation is in comparison to regular trade, rough trade is more likely to be working-class laborers with less education and more physical demands of their work, therefore with a body developed naturally rather than in a gym. They will have a less polished or Cleancut style than an office worker or professional businessman.

Gender roles

Usually, it is very important to the bi or straight identified partner that he maintain his stereotypical masculine identity and not be particularly emotionally available, nor cuddlesome, nor as the bottom. Often, with rough trade it is his stereotypical masculinity (i.e. bottom vs top, top vs bottom) being questioned that pushes him over the edge into physical violence.

Members of ACT UP demonstrate against the Defense Department's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy in front of a recruitment center in Times Square, New York City

The Pentagon took a giant step toward integrating openly gay men and women into the U.S. military on Thursday. No, it didn't repeal 1993's "Don't ask, don't tell" law — only Congress can do that. But it did something that could be almost as important: it eased the enforcement of that law by loosening the regulations that have been used to snare 13,500 gays — and boot them out of uniform — since 1994. "These changes will allow us to execute the law in a fair and more appropriate manner," Defense Secretary Robert Gates said. The revised regs "provide a greater measure of common sense and common decency to a process for handling what are difficult and complex issues for all involved."

The new rules require a senior officer — a general or admiral — to approve the ouster of a serviceman or -woman for being gay. That's at least one rank higher than earlier mandated, and is likely to cut down on the number of such cases. Hearsay will no longer be allowed, and statements about a military member's sexual orientation will have to be given under oath. Furthermore, information given to lawyers, clergy or medical professionals — or in connection with domestic violence — can't be used to oust someone. (See a brief history of gays in the military.)

It's Act 2 in the Obama Administration's three-act drama to keep the President's campaign pledge to lift the ban. The first act came last month when Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, told Congress he had no problem with gays in uniform. With Mullen's backing, Gates on Thursday took the next step by relaxing enforcement of the ban. The final act — getting Congress to repeal the law — is months, if not years, away.

Elaine Donnelly, head of the nonprofit Center for Military Readiness, a conservative group, predicted Congress will stick with the ban. "I remain confident that members of Congress ultimately will retain current law," she said, "which is important to protect recruiting, retention and readiness in the all-volunteer force." (From TIME's Archive: The dawn of "Don't ask, don't tell.")

But it may not matter all that much. Thursday's changes are likely to lead to far fewer soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines being drummed out of the service for being gay or lesbian. Gates sent a clear signal that such cases should only be brought "in exceptional or extraordinary circumstances," says Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, a nonprofit group trying to end the anti-gay policy. "The White House and Pentagon have gone a long ways toward reducing discharges."

Supporters of the ban fear an exodus from the ranks if it is lifted, but anti-gay ardor has cooled since May 1993 when Senators ventured to Norfolk Navy Base to explore the cramped sleeping quarters aboard a nuclear attack submarine and assess the impact of gays serving openly. Fifteen of 17 military personnel who testified at a hearing on the base that day strongly opposed lifting the ban. While opposition today isn't as high — and the public supports doing away with the ban — it remains a sensitive political issue, as Bill Clinton painfully discovered. He simply wanted to let gays serve by changing the regulation barring them from doing so. But Congress got so upset at that prospect that it passed the compromise "Don't ask, don't tell" law, which has allowed gays to serve secretly — that's the "don't tell" part of the law. The "don't ask" portion bars the military from asking recruits if they are gay.

Feelings still run deep. Last week, a retired Marine general told the Senate Armed Services Committee that one reason the Dutch military was unable to defend 7,000 innocent Bosnian Muslims from a Serb massacre in Srebrenica in 1995 was that the Netherlands' openly gay troops weakened their military's combat resolve. Senator Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who chairs the panel, declared John Sheehan's claim "totally wrong." And, on Thursday, Gates and Mullen scolded Army Lieut. General Benjamin Mixon for publicly opposing the potential lifting of the ban in a recent letter to the independent Stars and Stripes military newspaper. "If those of us who are in favor of retaining the current policy do not speak up, there is no chance to retain the current policy," said Mixon, who commands Army troops in the Pacific. Mullen suggested that if Mixon doesn't agree with the possible change, he should "vote with his feet" and retire.

A Pentagon study panel is examining how the military would deal with gays if the ban is repealed, and is slated to deliver its findings to Gates by Dec. 1. The Defense chief said he would await that report before deciding if the ban should go. "There is a great deal we don't know about this [possible repeal] in terms of the views of our service members, in terms of the views of their families and influencers," Gates said. Congress, in turn, is likely to delay any action on a repeal until that report is finished. That means the next eight months — and how those in uniform react to Gates' changes, which take effect immediately — are likely to play a key role in the ultimate fate of "Don't ask, don't tell."

Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway says, "I would not ask our Marines to live with someone that's homosexual."

CNN)  – The Marine Corps' top officer says he would want to avoid housing gay and heterosexual Marines in the same rooms on base if the ban on gays openly serving in the military is lifted.

"I would not ask our Marines to live with someone that's homosexual if we can possibly avoid it," Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway told a Web site in an interview posted Friday. "And to me that means we've got to build [barracks] that have single rooms."

Asked about the possibility of gay and straight Marines living together, Conway told the site Military.com that he would "want to preserve the right of a Marine that thinks he or she wouldn't want to do that – and that's the overwhelming number of people that say they wouldn't like to do so."

Conway said the Marine Corps is the only branch of the armed services that houses two to a room.

On Thursday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced that the Pentagon will start to ease its enforcement of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy prohibiting homosexuals from serving openly in the military.

Among other things, Gates said the Pentagon is raising the threshold for what constitutes an appropriate level of information necessary to launch a "credible inquiry" into allegations of homosexual behavior.

The change, which will take effect in 30 days and apply to all current cases, is a reflection of "common sense" and "common decency," Gates said.

"These changes reflect some of the insights we have gained over 17 years of implementing the current law, including the need for consistency, oversight and clear standards," Gates said.

President Obama and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, support a legislative repeal of "don't ask, don't tell," which was first enacted in 1993. Some senior members of the military, however, have expressed concern over the impact of the ban's repeal on unit cohesion and morale, among other things.

:thankyou:

WASHINGTON (March 25) – The U.S. military's internal struggles over homosexuality in the ranks were on full display today, as top officials announced new and relaxed policies for enforcing restrictions on service by gays while rebuking a three-star Army general for publicly defending the old policies.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, charged that Lt. Gen. Benjamin Mixon ignored written directions that senior uniformed leaders should keep their opinions of the longstanding "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gay service within the military's chain of command.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, left, takes questions during Thursday's press briefing. Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is at right.

In a March 8 letter to Stars and Stripes, the armed forces daily newspaper, Mixon said President Barack Obama's call for repeal of the law is "ill-advised." He urged troops, military families and veterans who share his sentiments to "write your elected officials and chain of command and express your views."

That advocacy crossed a line, Mullen told reporters. He said senior officers are obligated to follow policies enunciated by the president; those who feel they can't have the option to "vote with your feet" and retire from service.

Mixon's future in uniform is "up to him," Mullen added.

The lieutenant general had no immediate response.

Mixon is not the only high-ranking officer to question Obama's call for repeal of "don't ask." But others who've spoken up, including Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway, have done so in response to questions from members of Congress.

Federal law and longstanding military customs give Conway and other members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff leeway to differ publicly with the president on policy questions when lawmakers ask for their personal views.

Mullen announced in February that he supports Obama's plan to repeal "don't ask" but also backs an ongoing Pentagon study of how best to integrate openly gay troops into the force. Repealing the law "with haste could easily generate a very bad outcome," he cautioned today.

While the administration presses for repeal, Republican congressional leaders, along with some conservative Democrats, have indicated they'll fight to preserve "don't ask," in part because they believe repeal now would disrupt a force already strained by ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Gates said that while Congress considers Obama's call for repeal, the Pentagon will enforce the law using "a greater measure of common sense and common decency." He disputed suggestions that the new enforcement guidelines constitute a moratorium on enforcement.

Among other things, those policies limit the use of hearsay testimony in proceedings against allegedly gay troops and bar investigations of alleged gays based on anonymous complaints. The new rules also require that a general or admiral authorize all formal investigations of homosexual conduct and that investigations be led by officers at the rank of colonel or above.

The military discharged 428 officers and enlisted members last year for violating "don't ask." Officials could not supply figures for the number of troops currently under investigation, but Gates said all pending cases will be "reinitiated and re-evaluated" under the new enforcement guidelines.

The changes are "a solid first step to help rein in many of the abuses" in enforcement since "don't ask" was adopted in 1993, said Alexander Nicholson, a former U.S. Army interrogator who was discharged under the policy.

Nicholson, who heads Servicemembers United, an organization of gay and lesbian troops, urged Congress to repeal the law immediately, without waiting for results of the Pentagon's review of the possible effects of that move.

But Elaine Donnelly, a conservative activist who runs the Michigan-based Center for Military Readiness and has been an outspoken opponent of service by gays, said the new Pentagon enforcement guidelines "will undermine respect for the law."

Donnelly also blasted Mullen's rebuke of Mixon, calling it "ironic that Adm. Mullen has criticized a three-star general for expressing a personal view in support of the 1993 law, even after Mullen himself expressed a personal opinion favoring repeal. … This appears to be a double-standard that is not helpful."

Arthur Budzinski was a student at St. John's School for the Deaf outside Milwaukee in the 1960s when he alleges that he was molested by the Rev. Lawrence C. Murphy. The late priest, who ran the school, is accused of molesting some 200 deaf boys.

MILWAUKEE (March 25) – Arthur Budzinski sits at a coffee shop, using sign language to talk about a new report that top Vatican officials knew about the priest who abused him and hundreds of other boys at a Catholic school for the deaf -- but failed to act out of fear of embarrassing the church.

"This is nothing new for him," his daughter, Gigi Budzinski, said, interpreting her father's signs. "He's known for many, many years that people at the Vatican knew this and ignored it. His innocence was stolen from him when he was just a boy. Now he's 61 years old and he's still fighting this same fight."

As reported in The New York Times on Thursday, newly released documents show that bishops in Wisconsin reported the allegations against the Rev. Lawrence C. Murphy directly to then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who is now pope, The news comes as Pope Benedict XVI faces accusations about failing to respond to other sexual abuse allegations as an archbishop in his native Germany.

Minnesota lawyer Jeff Anderson, who represents victims of church sexual abuse in Wisconsin and shared the documents, told AOL News that the correspondence shows "a direct line from the victims through the bishops and directly to the man who is now pope."

"What this clearly demonstrates is that the world's top Catholic officials, as a matter of protocol and practice, when a serial predator was reported to them by U.S. bishops, looked at it and chose to do nothing because they were afraid of the publicity and to avoid scandal," he said. "The obvious result is that more kids were abused."

According to the documents, in 1996 then-Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert Weakland wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger, then prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith at the Vatican, and explained that sexual abuse charges against Murphy dating to the 1950s included accusations that he solicited sexual activity from boys in the confessional.

"My concern now is not simply for necessary justice, I am even more interested in a healing response from the church to the deaf community within the archdiocese so that their anger may be defused and their trust in ecclesiastical ministers be restored," Weakland wrote.

However, according to the documents, a canonical trial that could have led to Murphy's dismissal was halted after the priest wrote to Ratzinger, saying he had repented.

"I simply want to live out the time that I have left in the dignity of my priesthood," wrote Murphy, who died in 1998 at age 72. "I ask your kind assistance in this matter."

The files contain no response from Cardinal Ratzinger.

Budzinski said he heard similar claims of repentance from Murphy when he confronted the priest about the abuse after graduating from St. John's School for the Deaf in St. Francis, near Milwaukee.

An undated photo shows Budzinski at left with his hands folded and Murphy at far right during a church service. Budzinski said he was 12 years old when he went to Murphy for confession and instead was molested by the priest in a secluded stairway.

"He said, 'Please be quiet. Forgive me, please. I have stopped,' " Budzinski said, through his daughter. "But he kept molesting boys."

Budzinski began attending the school, near Lake Michigan in a quiet Milwaukee suburb, in 1953, when he was 5 years old. Although he cried every Sunday night when his father dropped him off at the school, clinging to his leg and begging to go home, Budzinski said he enjoyed going there and connecting with other deaf children.

The young boys particularly enjoyed exploring the sprawling building and its grounds, he said, pointing to pictures in a battered pamphlet from the 1950s. Budzinski's face lit up as he used his hands to describe the stately school grounds, wide stairways, huge parlor and hidden walkways. As an older child, he enjoyed walking to Lake Michigan during breaks from classes.

He first saw Murphy when the priest visited a class where the students used headphones to try to learn speech. Budzinski said it wasn't until he was 10 that he began "hearing whispers" from the older boys about the priest's late-night visits to their dormitories.

When Budzinski was 12, he said, he went to Murphy for confession and instead was molested by the priest in a secluded stairway between two buildings. Budzinski says he was molested by Murphy two more times, once at age 12 and again at 14.

"You're real handsome," Budzinski recalled the priest telling him. "You are a real handsome boy."

When Budzinski graduated eighth grade and began attending a high school for the deaf, he heard other boys talking openly about Murphy, compelling him to confront the priest in the encounter he described, when he saw Murphy at a high school football game. But he didn't go to civil authorities until 1974, with two boyhood friends who also said they had been molested, and by that point they were told the statute of limitations had expired.

His daughter said Budzinski was given $80,000 in 2006 from a fund established to compensate clergy abuse victims.

The Archdiocese of Milwaukee, in a statement issued Thursday in response to the Times' article, noted: "Murphy's actions were criminal and we sincerely apologize to those who have been harmed. … Most importantly, today, no priest with any substantiated allegation of sexual abuse of a minor serves in public ministry in any way in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee."

Archdiocesan spokeswoman Julie Wolf added in an interview with AOL News: "I think it's important for people to look at these news stories of 2010 not only through the lens of 2010 but then through the lens of 1950 and '60 and '70 -- how as a society things were different and how as a church things were different. We as a church today are really setting the standard for sexual abuse prevention."

However, Budzinski said he hasn't trusted the church for decades. "My only faith," he said, "is right here in my heart."

Budzinski, who became a journeyman printer, married and had two daughters, had this advice to other victims: "You need to tell. Never give up. ... Never give up."

(March 25) – Just days after Pope Benedict XVI chastised Irish bishops for covering up clerical sexual abuse in Ireland, new documents suggest he did nothing to discipline a Wisconsin priest he knew had molested scores of deaf boys -- and may have blocked a church trial in the case.

In 1996, when then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was serving in one of the Vatican's most important positions, he received written warnings from several bishops about the Rev. Lawrence Murphy, a priest at St. John's School for the Deaf in St. Francis, Wis., The New York Times reported. The Times obtained the internal church documents from lawyers of five victims of Murphy, who are suing the Archdiocese of Milwaukee.

"This shows a direct line from the victims through the bishops and directly to the man who is now pope," Jeff Anderson, one of the lawyers, told AOL News reporter Lisa Holewa in Milwaukee. "The only difference [from the 1950s] is now we have the documents that are open to secular eyes."

The abuse of what may have been up to 200 deaf boys, many who reported cowering in their beds weeping while Murphy, the school's powerful priest, molested others, was first reported in 2006 in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Murphy worked at the school from 1950 to 1974.

Milwaukee's then-archbishop, Rembert G. Weakland, wrote Ratzinger two letters about Murphy's behavior and got no response, the Times reported. However, thousands of cases were forwarded to Ratzinger from 1981 to 2005, when he headed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which decides whether priests will be defrocked.

Finally, eight months later, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, now the Vatican's secretary of state, told Wisconsin bishops to start a secret canonical trial that might have ended with Murphy's dismissal.

However, Bertone called off the trial after Murphy appealed to Ratzinger directly. He claimed poor health and said the abuse was no longer within the church's statute of limitations.

"I simply want to live out the time that I have left in the dignity of my priesthood," Murphy wrote. "I ask your kind assistance in this matter." The Times reported that there are no responses from Ratzinger in the files.

The recently unearthed correspondence and church files come from attorneys for five men suing the Archdiocese of Milwaukee over the abuse.

As reported in the Journal Sentinel, the men reported similar experiences.

They said Murphy would either call them to his bedroom in the school, or come to them in their dorm beds late at night. He would fondle them and then leave, often going to other boys during the same visit. Sometimes he would molest them while taking their confession.

The boys were often so confused and upset that they would cover their heads with blankets, hold themselves close and cry.

"Murphy was so powerful and it was so hard," said one of the plaintiffs, who said he was molested when he was in seventh grade and said he saw more than a dozen other boys molested. "You couldn't get out. It was like a prison. I felt so confused. Here I had Father Murphy touching me. I would be like, 'God, what's right?' "

This latest black eye for the Vatican comes one day after the pope accepted the resignation of Irish Bishop John Magee for his part in covering up clerical sexual abuse in Ireland. Just days before, the pope wrote a pastoral letter to Irish Catholics, blaming clergy there for the massive scandals.

Pope Benedict has not yet commented on reports that he went easy on a priest in Germany who he knew had sexually abused children.

The Vactican has accepted the resignation of Irish Bishop John Magee, who was accused of mishandling complaints against priests.

(March 24) – The Vatican today accepted the resignation of a prominent Irish bishop who for years failed to report to police sexual abuse allegations involving two priests in his diocese.

Bishop John Magee, who served as a personal assistant to three popes, has been under fire for more than a year for apparently caring more about the welfare of the accused priests than of their alleged victims. Neither of the two priests have faced criminal charges.

"To those whom I have failed in any way, or through any omission of mine have made suffer, I beg forgiveness and pardon," Magee said in a statement. The 73-year-old bishop had handed over day-to-day responsibilities for his diocese in the south of Ireland a year ago.

Magee's resignation came just days after Pope Benedict XVI issued a pastoral letter to Irish Catholics squarely blaming Irish bishops for "serious mistakes" in confronting sexual abuse charges.

The church is facing similar allegations in Germany, Netherlands and Austria, where investigations suggest a pattern of clergymen shuffling pedophile priests around rather than responding promptly to warnings they were dangerous to children. Cases have even emerged from the current pope's old archdiocese in Germany, which failed to keep at least one known pedophile away from children in the early 1980s when the future pope was in charge there.

As the church's crisis continues in Europe, however, there's new evidence that the sexual abuse scandal that has dogged it in the U.S. for more than a decade may be tapering off. A new survey shows U.S. bishops received fewer complaints of sexual abuse by clergy in 2009 than in any other year since 2004, when the church first began collecting such data.

The church's costs for settling U.S. abuse cases in court have also declined. Dioceses and their insurers paid $104 million in settlements, legal fees and other abuse-related costs in 2009 -- down from $376 million the year before.

Those figures are from an annual audit funded by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops but conducted by independent researchers. It's based on self-reporting from Catholic dioceses.

American bishops say reforms they made at the height of their own church abuse scandal in 2002 are working. Their annual report identified 398 "credible allegations of sexual abuse" involving clergy from Catholic dioceses in 2009 -- a 36 percent drop from the year before. The figure has declined each year since 2004, when bishops reported 889 complaints.

The report said that about one-eighth of the allegations made in 2009 were unsubstantiated or determined to be false by the end of the year.

Most cases involved victims who were preteen or teen males at the time of the abuse, which largely happened decades ago. Of all the allegations reported in 2009, six involved children who were still under the age of 18 last year.

The number of offenders -- priests and deacons -- dropped 32 percent over the same period, to 286. Forty-five percent of those were new names that hadn't been accused of abuse before. Most of the offenders are dead, have left the priesthood, were removed from clergy jobs or are missing, the report said.

Some advocates for victims of clergy abuse dismissed the bishops' annual survey as inaccurate because it relies on data provided by the church. Participation in the audit was voluntary, and 15 percent of dioceses and religious orders didn't complete the survey.

"Can anyone really think that the Catholic hierarchy's deeply rooted, centuries-old patterns of self-serving secrecy and deceit have suddenly been reversed and that heinous crimes once routinely hidden are now routinely revealed?" David Clohessy, executive director of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, asked in The Washington Post.

But others have defended the church and applauded its efforts to rid its ranks of abusers and investigate allegations against them. Since 2002, the Catholic church has appointed abuse point-people in American dioceses, for the first time creating channels through which victims may report abuse. It has also increased screening at seminaries and conducted criminal background checks of people who work with church youth groups.

"The church's efforts to come to grips with these problems within the household of faith -- which have been more far-reaching than in any other institution or sector of society -- have led others to look to the Catholic church for guidance on how to address what is, in fact, a global plague," George Weigel, a Catholic commentator and biographer of popes wrote earlier this week.

James Randi

How To Say It?
Swift
Written by James Randi  
Sunday, 21 March 2010

Well, here goes. I really resent the term, but I use it because it’s recognized and accepted.

I’m gay.

From some seventy years of personal experience, I can tell you that there’s not much “gay” about being homosexual. For the first twenty years of my life, I had to live in the shadows, in a culture that was — at least outwardly — totally hostile to any hint of that variation of life-style. At no time did I choose to adopt any protective coloration, though; my cultivation of an abundant beard was not at all a deception, but part of my costume as a conjuror.

Gradually, the general attitude that I’d perceived around me began to change, and presently I find that there has emerged a distinctly healthy acceptance of different social styles of living — except, of course, in cultures that live in constant and abject fear of divine retribution for infractions found in the various Holy Books… In another two decades, I’m confident that young people will find themselves in a vastly improved atmosphere of acceptance.

Before publishing this statement, I chose to privately notify a number of my closest friends and colleagues — none of whom, I’m sure, have been at all surprised at this “coming out.” I’m prepared to receive the inevitable barrage of jeers and insults from the “grubbies” out there who will jump to their keyboards in glee to notify others of their kind about this statement, which to them will be yet further proof of the perfidy of the rationalist mode of life that I have chosen. Those titters of joy will be unheard over the murmur of acceptance that I confidently expect from my friends.

This declaration of mine was prompted just last week by seeing an excellent film — starring Sean Penn — that told the story of politician Harvey Milk, the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in California. I’m in excellent company: Barney Frank, Oscar Wilde, Stephen Fry, Ellen DeGeneres, Rachel Maddow, are just a few of those who were in my thoughts as I pressed the key that placed this on Swift and before the whole world…

I should apologize for having used Swift as the venue to publish this note, an item that is hardly the focus of what we promote and publish here, but I chose the single most public asset I have to make this statement. It’s from here that I have attacked irrationality, stupidity, and irresponsibility, and it is my broadest platform. Here is where I have chosen to stand and fight.

And I think that I have already won this battle by simply publishing this statement.

About James Randi

James Randi has an international reputation as a magician and escape artist, but today he is best known as the world's most tireless investigator and demystifier of paranormal and pseudoscientific claims.

Randi has pursued "psychic" spoonbenders, exposed the dirty tricks of faith healers, investigated homeopathic water "with a memory," and generally been a thorn in the sides of those who try to pull the wool over the public's eyes in the name of the supernatural.

He has received numerous awards and recognitions, including a Fellowship from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation in 1986.

On October 19, 1993, the PBS-TV "NOVA" program broadcast a one-hour special dealing with Randi's life work, particularly with his investigations of Uri Geller and various occult and healing claims being made by scientists in Russia.

He is the author of numerous books, including The Truth About Uri Geller, The Faith Healers, Flim-Flam!, and An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural. His lectures and television appearances have delighted — and vexed — audiences around the world.

In 1996, the James Randi Education Foundation was established to further Randi's work. Randi's long-standing challenge to psychics now stands as a $1,000,000 prize administered by the Foundation. It remains unclaimed.


I have missed you much jagged


This is Janice E. Clements, Ph.D., Mary Wallace Stanton Professor of Faculty Affairs, Vice Dean for Faculty, and Professor of Molecular and Comparative Pathobiology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

Johns Hopkins scientists have found that a safe and inexpensive antibiotic in use since the 1970s for treating acne effectively targets infected immune cells in which HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, lies dormant and prevents them from reactivating and replicating.

The drug, minocycline, likely will improve on the current treatment regimens of HIV-infected patients if used in combination with a standard drug cocktail known as HAART (Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy), according to research published now online and appearing in print April 15 in The Journal of Infectious Diseases. "The powerful advantage to using minocycline is that the virus appears less able to develop drug resistance because minocycline targets cellular pathways not viral proteins," says Janice Clements, Ph.D., Mary Wallace Stanton Professor of Faculty Affairs, vice dean for faculty, and professor of molecular and comparative pathobiology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

"The big challenge clinicians deal with now in this country when treating HIV patients is keeping the virus locked in a dormant state," Clements adds. "While HAART is really effective in keeping down active replication, minocycline is another arm of defense against the virus."

Unlike the drugs used in HAART which target the virus, minocycline homes in on, and adjusts T cells, major immune system agents and targets of HIV infection. According to Clements, minocycline reduces the ability of T cells to activate and proliferate, both steps crucial to HIV production and progression toward full blown AIDS.

If taken daily for life, HAART usually can protect people from becoming ill, but it's not a cure. The HIV virus is kept at a low level but isn't ever entirely purged; it stays quietly hidden in some immune cells. If a person stops HAART or misses a dose, the virus can reactivate out of those immune cells and begin to spread.

The idea for using minocycline as an adjunct to HAART resulted when the Hopkins team learned of research by others on rheumatoid arthritis patients showing the anti-inflammatory effects of minocycline on T cells. The Hopkins group connected the dots between that study with previous research of their own showing that minocycline treatment had multiple beneficial effects in monkeys infected with SIV, the primate version of HIV. In monkeys treated with minocycline, the virus load in the cerebrospinal fluid, the viral RNA in the brain and the severity of central nervous system disease were significantly decreased. The drug was also shown to affect T cell activation and proliferation.

"Since minocycline reduced T cell activation, you might think it would have impaired the immune systems in the macaques, which are very similar to humans, but we didn't see any deleterious effect," says Gregory Szeto, a graduate student in the Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine working in the Retrovirus Laboratory at Hopkins.

"This drug strikes a good balance and is ideal for HIV because it targets very specific aspects of immune activation."

The success with the animal model prompted the team to study in test tubes whether minocycline treatment affected latency in human T cells infected with HIV. Using cells from HIV-infected humans on HAART, the team isolated the "resting" immune cells and treated half of them with minocycline. Then they counted how many virus particles were reactivated, finding completely undetectable levels in the treated cells versus detectable levels in the untreated cells.
"Minocycline reduces the capability of the virus to emerge from resting infected T cells," Szeto explains. "It prevents the virus from escaping in the one in a million cells in which it lays dormant in a person on HAART, and since it prevents virus activation it should maintain the level of viral latency or even lower it. That's the goal: Sustaining a latent non-infectious state."

The team used molecular markers to discover that minocycline very selectively interrupts certain specific signaling pathways critical for T cell activation. However, the antibiotic doesn't completely obliterate T cells or diminish their ability to respond to other infections or diseases, which is crucial for individuals with HIV.

"HIV requires T cell activation for efficient replication and reactivation of latent virus," Clement says, "so our new understanding about minocyline's effects on a T cell could help us to find even more drugs that target its signaling pathways."

Provided by Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions

Leatherbear ~ This torrent is awaiting approval.

Le Whif ~ If $3 for a coffee inhaler hits you where you breathe, don't worry. David Edwards, the inventor of Le Whif, told WalletPop  that the price will go down eventually.

In the meantime, Le Whif intends to capitalize on its novelty as the first Joe you drag like a cigarette – followed by a calorie-free, caffeine buzz. It also sells a chocolate inhaler.

Le Whif reps wandering the launch party Thursday at Dylan's Candy Bar in Manhattan said that they expect the product to flourish as an impulse buy, perhaps displayed near the cash register. Edwards called it the perfect on-the-go alternative to a cup of coffee, and better-tasting than a caffeine pill.

Only two stores carry Le Whif: Dylan's and Cardullo's Gourmet Shop in Cambridge, Mass. More will follow, the company says. You can also order from the Le Whif web site. A pack of three runs $7.99.

One lipstick-size dosage delivers about 20 milligrams of caffeine, about half the kick of one espresso, according to Edwards. You're supposed to get about 10 gentle sucks per Le Whif, Sam Mazzarelli of Marlo Marketing told me. But I'm thinking more like five.

I pulled apart the mini-canister, put it to my lips, and inhaled. Dissolving coffee grains hurtled at the roof of my mouth. Then a dusty after-tickle of sugar settled on my tongue. Not bad. I gagged slightly the first time because I apparently bogarted Le Whif, but it got easier as I took smaller puffs. I did feel a tiny rush, man.

Le Whif is the brainchild of the brainy and ascot-wearing Edwards, a Harvard professor of biomedical engineering who has worked with inhalable vaccines. He laughed when I suggested that he's not exactly saving the world with this pursuit. He said he got the idea while in conversation with Michelin-endowed French chef Thierry Marx, and then blurted out, "Wouldn't it be interesting to breathe food?"

Edwards introduced his concept in the keynote address at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Le Whif released an inhalable chocolate first (1 calorie) through Edwards' ArtScience Labs Network, selling it online. But it's the coffee (0 calories, by the way) that is getting the full advertising blitz.

A French laboratory is cranking out 100,000 hits of the stuff a week, so if it takes a while for interest in Le Whif to percolate, that's fine, he said.

You want science? Well, Le Whif's particle engineering renders the grounds into ingestible particles that are small enough to become airborne yet too big to enter the lungs. The taste buds can enjoy the tasting while the tummy doesn't have to worry about the digesting, Edwards explained to WalletPop.

"I was interested in creating a new way of eating," he said.

Whatever you say, Professor. Now give me another hit of that coffee.