Selling Online: Putting The Customer First | Business Computing ...

Online retail sales increased by 14 per cent last year, to more than ?50 billion. This figure is only set to grow year on year. But many brands spend millions on driving their online presence, with little guarantee their offering will result in an online sales boom.

Selling online is a science and with the cutthroat competition between online businesses to reel in customers and secure transactions, it is vital that a business that wants to enhance its online presence does so intelligently, by understanding the customer base and thinking rationally about pricing.

So, how does an online business turn ?interested clicks? into completed transactions?

1. Price

The success of online selling, in essence, comes down to price or originality. With the rise in price comparison websites that offer highly competitive prices for a variety of products, it is important online businesses differentiate in terms of what they offer the customer.

The ?big trusted players? such as Amazon or eBay offer a range of products at attractive prices and customers are drawn to these sites, based on this factor. For new online businesses the aim should not be to out price these online giants, but to steer away from selling branded or readily available products.

New start-ups should also offer customers product groupings. For example, bundling a mobile phone with a phone charger and a phone holder means better management of your margin and proves popular with the customer. This gives the business a greater chance of completing the transaction and it is these strategies that can help an online business differentiate itself.

2. Ease of purchase

Ease of purchase is also an essential component of a successful online business. The ?one click check out? facet, companies such as Amazon use, relieves the customer of any difficulty in the transaction process. Customers have a good memory when it comes to buying online, so online businesses that have complex purchasing options will inadvertently divert customers away from their site.

It should be one of the primary objectives for online businesses to make purchasing easy for the customer. Bombarding customers with additional offers and questionnaires that block the route to the checkout will only frustrate the customer.

3. Trust

The ultimate issue that online businesses should address is trust. This is a more long-term goal for online businesses as the reputation of the site has to be built before customers start intrusting the site with sensitive information such as credit card details, addresses and contact numbers.

Visual impact and usability are the key issues here and to an extent they overlap with the ease of purchase. Customers feel happy with sites that they know they can use and that they have experienced few problems with in the past. The massive barrier to entry for start-ups means that online businesses cannot afford to relax over details. To gain the trust of the customer the website and the business needs to have a trustworthy face to it and this requires precision in both the design and the tools that the website offers.

A lot of the success online businesses achieve comes down to psychology. It will take a user just one twentieth of a second to decide whether they like the website or not and this fraction of a second can be the difference between securing the final transaction or not.

If the customer likes the look of the website in the first instance and, for some reason, the website is difficult to use, the customer is likely to be more forgiving and continue with the purchasing process. The visual impact of an online business is like the shop window of a high street outlet. If it looks attractive and welcoming, the customer will be drawn in by it.

The three points: price, ease of purchase and trust are essential areas to work hard on for online businesses. The price that is offered will inevitably determine whether or not the customer follows through with the transaction but, the ease of purchase and the trustworthiness of an online business complete the experience for the customer. This will not only result in transforming interested clicks into completed transactions, it will also strongly persuade the customer to revisit and reuse the website in future.

Damon Segal

Damon Segal is the CEO of Intenix and the architect behind Telaeo CMS. He is also MD of Emotio Design Group. Damon has been at the forefront of Web design his whole career. Having seen drawing boards replaced with Macs and paint brushes cast aside in favour of the latest design tools such as Wacom Tablets, Damon has classical training in a constantly evolving industry. Damon has held a number of high profile positions, including the chairman of the Executive Association of Great Britain, an Internet partner for Superbrands UK and a practitioner on the Global Market Network?s Advisory Council.

Damon Segal is the CEO of Intenix and the architect behind Telaeo CMS. He is also MD of Emotio Design Group. Damon has been at the forefront of Web design his whole career. Having seen drawing boards replaced with Macs and paint brushes cast aside in favour of the latest design tools such as Wacom Tablets, Damon has classical training in a constantly evolving industry. Damon has held a number of high profile positions, including the chairman of the Executive Association of Great Britain, an Internet partner for Superbrands UK and a practitioner on the Global Market Network?s Advisory Council. ...less info

Source: http://www.businesscomputingworld.co.uk/selling-online-putting-the-customer-first/

davy jones death born this way foundation lytro camera lytro camera andrew brietbart branson mo monkees songs

Giants beat Reds 6-4, win NLDS on Posey's slam

CINCINNATI (AP) ? Not just any comeback would get San Francisco back to playing for a pennant. It would take one of Giant proportions.

And Buster Posey believed it could happen. Even after the Giants left the West Coast down two games, the National League batting champion insisted his team could pull it off, despite the long odds.

With one swing, he got everyone else believing it, too.

Posey hit the third grand slam in Giants' postseason history on Thursday, and San Francisco pulled off an unprecedented revival, moving into the championship series with a 6-4 victory over the Cincinnati Reds.

"You don't want to be in a lose-and-you're-out scenario," reliever Jeremy Affeldt said, wearing a brace on his left wrist so he didn't hurt it in the champagne-flavored clubhouse celebration. "We've been in that situation for three days. We're probably going to sleep well tonight."

They'll play either Washington or St. Louis for the NL pennant, Sunday, not caring at all who they face.

"We could go up against anybody at any time," shortstop Brandon Crawford said. "Being down 2-0 and coming back and winning three at their place, it's an unbelievable feeling."

Game 1 of the NL championship series will be Sunday, either in Washington against the Nationals or in San Francisco vs. the Cardinals. In the meantime, the Giants will stay in Cincinnati until their next opponent is determined Friday night when the Cards and Nats play Game 5.

The Giants became the first NL team to overcome a 2-0 deficit in the division series, which began in 1995. Major League Baseball's changed playoff format this season allowed them to become the first to take a best-of-five by winning the last three on the road.

Posey's second career grand slam off Mat Latos put the Giants up 6-0 in the fifth and sparked a joyous scrum in the San Francisco dugout. The ball smacked off the front of the upper deck in left field, just above Latos' name on the video board.

For the first time in the series, the Giants could exhale.

"I don't think anybody gave up," Posey said.

Will Clark, in the 1989 NLCS, and Chuck Hiller, in the 1962 World Series, hit the other Giants slams in the postseason.

Matt Cain and the bullpen held on, with more help from Posey. The All-Star catcher threw out Jay Bruce at third base to snuff out a sixth-inning rally that cut it to 6-3. The Giants had a pair of diving catches that preserved the lead in the eighth.

There was more drama in the ninth. Ryan Ludwick singled home a run off Sergio Romo. With two runners aboard, Romo fanned Scott Rolen to end it.

The Giants raised their arms, hugged and huddled by the side of the mound, bouncing in unison.

"It was a spectacular moment," outfielder Hunter Pence said.

In Cincinnati, the home-field meltdown had a sickeningly familiar feeling. The Reds haven't won a home playoff game in 17 years. After taking the first two on the West Coast, all they needed was one more at home, where they hadn't dropped three straight all season.

"You get tired of the disappointments, but then you get over it," manager Dusty Baker said. "It hurts big-time."

Once Posey connected, the Reds were the ones facing a steep comeback. They've never overcome a six-run deficit in the playoffs, according to STATS LLC.

Couldn't do it this time, either.

"Buster Posey's swing was a series-changer," said Reds star Joey Votto, standing on second base when the game ended. "That made it very difficult to come back. You know they're going to throw the kitchen sink at us."

The Giants never trailed in any of their three postseason series when they won it all in 2010. They beat the Braves 3-1 in the division series, knocked out the Phillies 4-2 for the NL title, then took four of five from Texas for their sixth World Series title and their first since they moved from New York to San Francisco in 1958.

They really had to scramble this season to get another shot at it.

The bullpen took a huge hit when closer Brian Wilson blew out his elbow, and that was just the start. All-Star game MVP Melky Cabrera got a 50-game suspension in August after a positive testosterone test, taking a .346 hitter out of their lineup. The Giants have decided not to bring him back, even though he's eligible to return for the NL championship series.

Two-time Cy Young winner Tim Lincecum pitched so poorly ? 15 losses ? that he got relegated to the bullpen for the division series.

And don't forget that Posey was coming off a broken leg that wiped out most of his 2011 season, making a great comeback of his own.

"Unreal," Romo said, with champagne dripping off his scraggly beard. "That guy's definitely the MVP of our team. We believe he's the MVP of the league. We wouldn't be here without him, that's for dang sure. He's the one that's been the face of the team all season long. What a great story with all he's been through last year."

The Reds won't forget the first inning of the series, when everything changed. Ace Johnny Cueto pulled muscles in his right side and had to leave the game. He wound up getting dropped from the playoff roster because of the injury.

Latos pulled them through that opening game, pitching in relief on short rest for a 5-2 win. Latos came to Cincinnati from the Padres at a high price ? pitcher Edinson Volquez and three former high draft picks ? and with a clear purpose in the offseason. He was expected to take them to the next level.

The right-hander allowed three hits through the first four innings, then fell apart in the fifth. Crawford had an RBI triple and scored on rookie shortstop Zack Cozart's error. A four-pitch walk and a single loaded the bases for Posey.

As soon as he connected, Reds catcher Ryan Hanigan stood and turned away, unable to watch the ball head for the seats.

Cincinnati's 17-year history of playoff futility was about to go on.

NOTES: Posey's other career grand slam came on July 7, 2010 at Milwaukee. ... The Reds are 3-3 in winner-take-all playoff games, including 1-2 in best-of-five series and 2-1 in best-of-seven series. .. Teams that lose the first two games in a best-of-five series are 7-59 all-time. ... Cain gave up six hits and three runs in 6 2-3 innings, the longest appearance by a Giants starter during the series.

___

Follow Joe Kay on Twitter: http://twitter.com/apjoekay

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/giants-beat-reds-6-4-win-nlds-poseys-210543095--mlb.html

east of eden weather radio indiana autoimmune disease westboro baptist church news channel 9 insanity workout

St. Charles Parish crime report | NOLA.com

St. Charles Parish Sheriff Greg Champagne has released the following information. The following incidents were reported on Oct. 11.

ARRESTS

Kerwin Riley, 30, 323 Meadows Drive, Destrehan, was arrested Oct. 10 and booked with unauthorized entry of an inhabited dwelling and simple battery.

INCIDENTS

1 Marine Center Lane, Taft, a 2001 GMC truck was reported stolen on Oct. 9.

154 Dianne Drive, St. Rose, a 40-inch television, an Xbox gaming system, an iPad2, a Wii gaming system and a laptop were reported stolen on Oct. 10.

Source: http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/10/st_charles_parish_crime_report_33.html

jesse james pearl harbor day discovery channel lea michele michael buble michael buble teddy roosevelt

Obama on debate with Romney: 'I had a bad night'

SIDNEY, Ohio (AP) ? President Barack Obama conceded Wednesday he did poorly in a debate last week that fueled a comeback by his rival in the race for the White House. Mitt Romney barnstormed battleground Ohio and pledged "I'm not going to raise taxes on anyone" in a new commercial.

A perennial campaign issue flared unexpectedly as Romney reaffirmed he is running as a "pro-life candidate and I'll be a pro-life president." He spoke one day after saying in an interview he was not aware of any abortion-related legislation that would become part of his agenda if he wins the White House.

Romney and Obama maneuvered in a race with 27 days to run as Vice President Joe Biden and Republican running mate Paul Ryan looked ahead to their only debate, set for Thursday night in Danville, Ky.

Whatever the impact of the Biden-Ryan encounter, last week's presidential debate boosted Romney in the polls nationally and in Ohio and other battleground states, to the point that Obama was still struggling to explain a performance even his aides and supporters say was subpar.

"Gov. Romney had a good night. I had a bad night. It's not the first time I've had a bad night," Obama said in an ABC interview.

Asked if it was possible he had handed the election to Romney, the president replied: "No."

"What's important is the fundamentals of what this race is about haven't changed," he said. "You know, Gov. Romney went to a lot of trouble to try to hide what his positions are," he said, referring to abortion as an example.

Despite the presidential display of confidence, public opinion polls suggested the impact of last week's debate was to wipe out most, if not all, of the gains Obama made following both parties' national conventions and the emergence in late summer of a videotape in which Romney spoke dismissively of 47 percent of Americans whom he said pay no income taxes. They feel as if they are victims, he said, adding they don't take personal responsibilities for their lives.

Eager to capitalize on his newfound momentum, Romney told more than 7,000 packed into a western Ohio rally: "We can't afford four more years of Barack Obama."

The Republican challenger made three public appearances in Ohio on Wednesday and will spend two of the next three days in the state.

"Ohio could well be the place that elects the next president of the United States," he said. "I need you to do that job. We're going to win together."

Romney's new television commercial was an appeal to voters' pocketbooks ? and also a rebuttal to Obama's claim that Romney had a plan to cut taxes by $5 trillion on the wealthy that would mean higher taxes for the middle class.

"The president would prefer raising taxes," Romney is shown saying in an exchange from last week's debate. "I'm not going to raise taxes on anyone. ... My priority is putting people back to work in America."

Unemployment and the economy have been the dominant issues in the race for the presidency, and while Romney gained from the debate, last week's drop in the jobless rate to 7.8 percent gave Obama a new talking point for the Democratic claim that his policies are helping the country recover, however slowly, from the worst recession in decades.

Romney also sought to lay any abortion-related controversy to rest as he campaigned across Ohio, a battleground with 18 electoral votes and one of the places where he has gained ground since last week's debate.

"I think I've said time and again that I'm a pro-life candidate and I'll be a pro-life president," he said, renewing his promise to cut off federal aid for Planned Parenthood and implement a ban on the use of foreign aid for abortions overseas.

But by the time he spoke, Obama's aides had already jumped on comments from an interview with The Des Moines Register in which Romney said "there's no legislation with regards to abortion that I'm familiar with that would become part of my agenda."

Stephanie Cutter, Obama's deputy campaign manager, told reporters on a conference call that Romney was "cynically and dishonestly" hiding his positions on women's issues. "We're not saying he's changed his mind on these issues. We're saying he's trying to cover up his beliefs," she said.

For entirely different reasons, one prominent anti-abortion group agreed that he shouldn't.

As if to remind Romney of his previous statements on the issue, the head of the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List distributed an article he wrote last summer vowing to prohibit federal funding for Planned Parenthood and to support legislation that would "protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion."

"We have full confidence that as president, Gov. Romney will stand by the pro-life commitments," said Marjorie Dannenfelser, the group's president.

Vice presidential encounters rarely make a significant difference in a White House campaign, although aides engage in the same sort of attempt to shape public expectations as when the men at the top of the ticket are ready to face off.

For Ryan's camp, that meant whispering that the 42-year-old Wisconsin congressman and House Budget Committee chairman was comfortable discussing spending issues and domestic policy, but might not be able to hold his own on foreign policy, a Biden strong suit.

The vice president's side let it be known that Ryan is smart and wonky, a man who knows the budget better than anyone ? but it's a version that omits mention of Biden's nearly four decades of experience in government and his role as Obama's point man in budget negotiations with Republicans on an elusive deficit-reduction deal.

Romney's wife, Ann, took a turn as guest host on ABC's "Good Morning America" and spoke candidly about experiencing depression after she was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis 14 years ago. She said horses helped her recover her mental health.

"I was very, very weak and very much worried about my life, thinking I was going to be in a wheelchair as well. Turned to horses, my life has been dramatically different," she said. "They gave me the energy, the passion to get out of bed when I was so sick that I didn't think I'd ever want to get out of bed."

Mrs. Romney is part-owner of a horse that competed this summer in the Olympic sport of dressage, the equine equivalent of ballet.

___

Espo reported from Washington. Associated Press writers Nedra Pickler, Julie Pace, Philip Elliott and Matthew Daly in Washington contributed to this report.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/obama-debate-romney-had-bad-night-222703143--election.html

ron paul maine safe house jay z and beyonce baby cpac powell the last lecture kim jong un

The McGill Daily ? Locked In

Warning: This article contains potentially triggering descriptions of suicide and medical experiences.

By the end of it, Tony Nicklinson could only blink. Having experienced a severe stroke seven years ago, Nicklinson suffered from locked-in syndrome, a condition in which the patient is cognitively aware but suffers from paralysis of the body except for the eyes. Relying on a sophisticated computer that tracked his eye movements so that he could tell a British high court why he deserved the right to die, Nicklinson said his life had become ?dull, miserable, demeaning, undignified, and intolerable.? And when Lord Justice Toulson rejected his appeal, Nicklinson?s anguish was so visible that, despite being paralyzed from the neck down, his entire body shook from crying. Emotionally devastated, Nicklinson ?went downhill quickly,? according to his family. He would refuse food for six days, contract pneumonia, and then ? finally ?? pass away at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, August 22, 2012. He was 58 years old.

For as long as we?ve been willing to discuss it, the debate surrounding euthanasia and medically-assisted suicide has driven right to the ethical heart of our society. On the one hand are the supporters, who argue that prolonging someone?s suffering and refusing to grant them authority over their own bodies is inhumane. On the other hand are the opponents, who insist that institutionalized assisted suicide will lead to elder abuse and that, instead, palliative care units should be improved. Now, twenty years after Canadians were first confronted with the issue, the two sides have been given an opportunity to pitch their arguments to the public and resolve the right-to-die debate in Canada.

We should first hash out the terms ?assisted suicide? and ?euthanasia.? ?Assisted suicide? ? or less grimly, ?medical-aid-in-dying? ? occurs when a patient intentionally ends their life with the assistance of another individual. For example, a patient is unable to inject a toxin into their system or lift their arms to put a pill into their mouths and they require another person?s aid. Or, assisted dying could also take place when a perfectly mobile patient simply wants a physician to oversee the process. Euthanasia occurs in the event that someone other than the patient ends the patient?s life. Here, an example would be if a patient wishes to never live in a vegetative state, and requests a doctor to euthanize them should they become incognizant.

By way of historical background, we see that the right-to-die debate in Canada has ebbed and flowed. In 1972, attempted suicide became no longer punishable under the Criminal Code of Canada. Over the next decade, a handful of court cases determined that a mentally competent patient had the right to refuse treatment. Citing section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states that individuals cannot be discriminated against based on physical disability, ALS patient Sue Rodriguez claimed that her rights were being violated by being refused access to assisted dying.? If she were an able-bodied person, she reasoned, she wouldn?t face persecution for wanting to end her life. While the Supreme Court ultimately agreed with Rodriguez, twice, that her rights were being infringed, they insisted it was necessary to do so to protect against widespread abuse. After years of exhaustive legal battles, Rodriguez committed suicide illegally in 1994 with the assistance of an anonymous medical practitioner.

After the Rodriguez case, aside from a handful of ?compassionate homicides? where the victim was often terminally ill and euthanized by a family member, Canadians had to look south in order to see the right-to-die debate played out in any meaningful way. Between 1990 and 1998, Dr. Jack Kevorkian would help an estimated 130 ill Americans end their lives and, subsequently, draw substantial public interest with his vitriolic critiques of the medical community. ?My ultimate aim is to make euthanasia a positive experience,? Kevorkian would tell the media after his first patient, Janet Adkins, took her own life. ?I?m trying to knock the medical profession into accepting its responsibilities, and those responsibilities include assisting their patients with death.? For his actions, Kevorkian would have his medical license revoked in 1991, be labeled ?Dr. Death? by a divided American public, and found guilty of second-degree homicide in 1999 for assisting in ALS sufferer Thomas Youk?s death. Usually, the patient would use Kevorkian?s own machine to inject chemicals into their bloodstream under his supervision. However, in footage provided to 60 Minutes, Kevorkian administered the lethal injection to Youk. That injection, despite being fully consensual, was enough to sentence Kevorkian to 10 to 25 years in prison. He was released in 2007.

While Kevorkian was in prison, the world was given its first international euthanasia and assisted-suicide celebrity. On March 18, 2005, 15 years after having entered a vegetative state following a full cardiac arrest, a legal tug-of-war between Terri Schiavo?s estranged husband and her family ended with a court injunction that her feeding tube be removed. With no written statement about what she would have wanted to happen ? which was, really, the true essence of the case ? both sides of the right-to-die debate would lay claims to her voice. However, instead of delving into either side of the discussion, most news sources relied on tabloid spectacle to keep the story alive. Talking heads babbled over her (possible) eating disorder, protesters covered their mouths with red tape inscribed with the word LIFE, and a ten-year old boy was arrested for trying to bring her water. All the while, we allowed ourselves to forget that Schiavo was crawling toward, as the court insisted, a ?natural? death. It would take 14 days without food and water until, finally, she died of severe dehydration. And when a television banner announced a few weeks later that Schiavo?s condition was irreversible and that large portions of her brain had been liquefied by the seven minutes it had been deprived of oxygen during her cardiac arrest, it was hardly talked about.

Now, after a relative lull in explicit discussion on the issue, there are two cases going through the judicial circuit that could produce the right to die in Canada. The first case involves Gloria Taylor who, in June, won a constitutional exemption so that she could be the first person in Canada to legally access assisted suicide. While Taylor?s victory was twice challenged by the federal government ? indicating an interest on the part of the Conservatives to keep things the way they are ? the British Columbia resident died on October 5 from a sudden infection, thereby unable to exercise her exemption. Though Taylor is gone, a larger case dubbed the ?Carter Challenge? has been launched on the heels of her victory in order to revise the current legislation.

For expediency?s sake, it?s probably best to measure the inadequacy of the anti-right-to-die movement by simply examining its claims. The hardest part in acknowledging the opponents of assisted dying is realizing that they are not evangelical half-wits, bunkered away in bomb shelters and donning tin-foil hats. Instead, Canadians have heard from people like Margaret Somerville ? founder of the McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law ? who, for the past thirty years, has been one of the most visible and outspoken opponents in the country of the right to die. In opposing euthanasia and assisted suicide, she often cites the need to improve the Canadian health care system to be better equipped with treating long-term patients.

?We know that if you give people access to good palliative care, the vast majority no longer wants euthanasia or assisted suicide,? claims Somerville. ?And yet in Canada, at the moment, where we?re thinking of instituting this intentional killing of Canadians, we?ve got access to palliative care [for] around 14 per cent of the population ? So, [this means we?re going to have] 86 per cent of the population who are going to be offered euthanasia and not palliative care.?

If nothing else, Somerville?s math reflects the main concern of right-to-die opponents who believe that minor legislative reform will lead to widespread euthanasia of non-consensual participants. As she explains in one correspondence, ?I often ask people to ask themselves the question, ?If we legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide now, how do you think your great-great-grandchildren will die??? For Somerville, the right to die represents a ?slippery slope.? She points to Belgium, where euthanasia has been broadened to include those who were not admitted when the legislation allowing for medical-aid-in-dying was first enacted. She mentions the Netherlands, where parents have recently been given the ability to euthanize disabled children within a month of the birth. Examples like the latter do add a certain complexity to a citizen trying to grasp the ramifications of legislating the right to die.

However, as Wanda Morris (the spokesperson for the right-to-die group Dying With Dignity) points out, the slippery slope theory is inherently flawed. ?A parallel example,? explains Morris, ?is to say, ?oh, my son has been caught shoplifting, so he?s going to [have] a life of crime, and he?s going to go to prison and he?s going to be killed there, and he?ll be dead before he?s 25.? Furthermore, when we recognize that there would have to be deliberate legislative revision for any definitions to change, we can see that the argument that just about anyone will be allowed to kill themselves does not hold water. The slippery slope argument is more revelatory of an opponent reacting to the expansion of euthanasia than any immediate danger posed by allowing the right-to-die. Because, as Morris argues, the legalization of assisted dying ?clearly isn?t about [anyone] being assisted to die on demand, [it?s about] somebody who is facing the prospect of death being less harmful to them than life.?

Probably the strongest argument against the right to die is that it will lead to elder and patient abuse. To this effect, critics like Somerville claim that coercion on the part of family members will lead to unwanted euthanasia and patient death. She insists that there are ?at least 500, or upwards to 2,000? unwanted cases of euthanasia in Canada each year, though I have had trouble locating this statistic elsewhere. Against this argument, the Carter Challenge sets up specific and rigid parameters for when and how assisted dying could occur. Only when the patient has signed a form, demonstrated consent to two physicians, and is accompanied by a witness, can the death be carried out. Elsewhere, such as in Oregon, at least one of the patient?s witnesses cannot be related by blood, marriage, or adoption, nor be entitled to any financial benefit from the passing. Even in the Netherlands, 50 per cent of all assisted dying requests are rejected out of extreme measures to safeguard against possible abuses or lack of conscientiousness on the part of the patient. Moreover, if we follow the argument against euthanasia?s potential abuses to its logical conclusion, we see that it is inherently hypocritical. If the current system of refusing a conscious patient the right to die and thereby forcing them to die a far more arduous and painful death isn?t understood as patient abuse, then what is?

Opponents like Somerville are right to point out the need to improve palliative care facilities, just as they are right to point out the need to improve psychological health for patients enduring the distresses of treatment. However, a failure of their stance is their insistence that assisted dying must be banned for all patients, rather than merely restricted.? As Morris explains, ?the essence of the Carter Challenge is that you can never make anything foolproof, but you have to find a balance between [protecting] the weak and the vulnerable, and the rights of those who are egregiously ill and suffer terribly at the end of life. And the balance is way too far now at one end and we need to move it toward the middle.?

It is, at best, na?ve to believe that because euthanasia and assisted suicide is illegal in Canada, terminally ill people will not kill themselves if they want to. Ideally, organizations like Dying With Dignity exist to provide information on ensuring a peaceful death. However, there are cases like the one Morris told me of a terminally ill woman who recently threw herself in front of a subway. What is being decided in the Carter Challenge is not whether assisted suicide or euthanasia will ever occur in Canada. Instead, it will decide to what extent we want to acknowledge that assisted suicide occurs, and whether Canada will set up specific parameters to make it more peaceful, legal, and medically sound.

Yet, there is another crucial issue that hardly gets mentioned in the right-to-die debate. For while the patient is often the central focus in the argument in favour of legalizing assisted dying, the importance of the death for their surviving family and friends cannot be understated. And, in order to hammer home that part more fully, I should probably tell you about how my father died.

On the evening of March 12, 2005, my father passed away after a nine-month battle with esophageal cancer. Three weeks earlier, his cancer spread toward his liver and, as if unraveling, my father was slowly drawn closer and closer toward his end. Understanding this, my mother fought against hospital administration in order to allow him to return home to die. And when each member of my family was given some time to talk with him and then finally comfort him as he took his last breath, he looked up and then retreated into himself. It was easier to accept this because my father had been given, all things considered, the most comfortable death possible.

My dad was not euthanized, nor did he commit suicide with the assistance of anyone. Someone who opposes the right to die might tell me that my story is actually a celebration of what medicine is doing right, and how it can deliver a dignified death. But my father also didn?t suffer for months or years in constant, extended pain like the agony he endured for the last few weeks of his life. Three days after he died, Terri Schiavo?s feeding tube was removed. By coincidence, I ended up spending lots of time watching the Schiavo drama unfold and saw, for the first time, the difference between a comfortable death and an arduous one. One of the biggest insecurities for extremely ill patients is that their family and friends might be left solely with memories of them in treatment; that the illness might suffocate any understanding of the person who existed before the diagnosis. And if we are terminally ill, and can see our death coming around the bend, do we not deserve the right to establish some parameters around the very thing ? sickness ? that could potentially change our conception of ourselves? Because, if Christopher Hitchens described having a life-threatening illness as being ?shackled to your own corpse,? then being egregiously ill and deprived of the right to die cannot be unlike being buried alive.

Source: http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2012/10/locked-in/

mennonite smokey robinson smokey robinson pulmonary embolism packages camila alves albrecht durer

Tomasz Beer, M.D., to join Dream Team for prostate cancer research ...

Tomasz Beer, M.D.

Tomasz Beer, M.D.

OHSU researcher and Knight Cancer Institute Deputy Director Tomasz Beer, M.D., has been selected to participate in a prestigious, six-person Dream Team to fight advanced-stage prostate cancer. Funding for this collaborative initiative is provided by Stand Up to Cancer, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, and the American Association for Cancer Research.

Dr. Beer will be working with researchers from four University of California campuses?San Francisco, Los Angeles, Santa Crus, and Davis?as well as the University of British Columbia. During the three-year grant period, the group will focus on two aims: finding new ways to target treatment-resistant tumors and utilizing a specially designed social networking tool to store data and match potential treatment options with patients.

Check out the OHSU News release for more information.

Source: http://www.ohsu.edu/blogs/researchnews/2012/10/10/tomasz-beer-m-d-to-join-dream-team-for-prostate-cancer-research/

university of texas UT Austin Lizzie Velasquez NFL Network att libya engadget

Kim Kardashian & Kanye West Shop Til They Drop!