BlackHoleNews.net
Space, UFO and Science Digest

Astronaut Edgar Mitchell Claims Alien Cover-up

Dr. Edgar Mitchell is a veteran of the Apollo 14 mission and he was the sixth man to walk on the Moon. Dr. Mitchell also insists that aliens have visited Earth and that governments are actively covering it up. "I happen to have been privileged enough to be in on the fact that we've been visited on this planet and the UFO phenomena is real," Dr Mitchell said. "It's been well covered up by all our governments for the last 60 years or so, but slowly it's leaked out and some of us have been privileged to have been briefed on some of it. "I've been in military and intelligence circles, who know that beneath the surface of what has been public knowledge, yes - we have been visited. Reading the papers recently, it's been happening quite a bit." Dr Mitchell, who has a Bachelor of Science degree in aeronautical engineering and a Doctor of Science degree in Aeronautics and Astronautics claimed Roswell was real and similar alien visits continue to be investigated. He told the astonished Kerrang! radio host Nick Margerrison: "This is really starting to open up. I think we're headed for real disclosure and some serious organisations are moving in that direction." NASA issued a quick denial. In a statement, a spokesman said: "NASA does not track UFOs. NASA is not involved in any sort of cover up about alien life on this planet or anywhere in the universe. "Dr Mitchell is a great American, but we do not share his opinions on this issue." If Dr. Mitchell is correct about a cover-up than this is exactly the type of denial one would expect NASA to make. You can listen to the interview with Dr. Mitchell where he discusses the UFO phenomena here. Permalink | Recent Headlines | News Feeds Read more…

New Technologies For Heart Disease: Are Drug-eluting Stents Worth The Cost?

20.12.2006 04:17 Science - Source: ScienceDaily Headlines

Over the past 3 decades, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI, or balloon angioplasty) has significantly changed the treatment of coronary artery disease (narrowing of the arteries supplying the heart muscle).

Unlike the more invasive coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, angioplasty is a nonsurgical procedure in which a tiny catheter with a balloon is inserted into the coronary artery. The balloon is then inflated to push aside the plaque causing the narrowing. Often a stent (wire mesh tube) is left in place to help keep the treated artery open; however, restenosis, or repeat narrowing, of the artery can occur over time.

Drug-eluting stents were recently introduced to lower this risk of restenosis and have become an attractive alternative to bare-metal stents. However, they are much more expensive than bare-metal stents, and studies have shown no significant differences in rates of death or heart attack between patient groups receiving either type of stent.

Two articles that will appear in the Jan. 16, 2007, issue of CMAJ provide new insights into the use of drug-eluting stents.

The first is a research article by Grilli and colleagues in which they compare the use of drug-eluting stents for PCI in public versus private sectors of the Italian medical community. They also evaluate the effect PCI with drug-eluting stents has had on the volume of cardiac surgery, including traditional CABG surgery. They found that drug-eluting stents were used more frequently in private hospitals, with public hospitals using them more sparingly and selectively in patients with high-risk coronary artery disease. Overall cardiac surgery volumes decreased significantly in the public hospitals but remained stable in the private hospitals.

The authors note that future assessments of the impact of drug-eluting stents need to consider the influence of system-wide financial and organizational incentives for adoption of their use.

In the second article, Ligthart and colleagues systematically review all published cost-effectiveness analyses comparing drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents for PCI. They comment on how the conclusions of these analyses have differed despite using a relatively constant measure of the efficacy of drug-eluting stents. The factors they found to be associated with these different conclusions were study quality, funding source and country of origin.

In a related commentary, Knudtson examines the ongoing debates that surround the cost-effectiveness of drug-eluting stents and the clinical indications for their use. Knudtson notes that even the clinical indications for PCI have been questioned by the findings of a recent trial that has successfully challenged the long-held belief that an open artery is always worth striving for, even late in a heart attack.

Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by Canadian Medical Association Journal.