Agile teams have a different structure (collaborative versus hierarchy structures) and organization (coach versus project manager) than those found in the typical hierarchical or matrix organization. Implementing Agile requires flattening the team structure and using mechanisms to manage the day-to-day activities of the team.? Mechanisms include stand-up meetings to plan and control work, and retrospectives to change behavior. At the same time the standard human resource management functions are still required in corporate organizations (annual reviews, training plans and salary management). Managers, who are responsible for these HR functions, are external to the team. Failure to redesign teams structure and management creates conflicting goals and allegiances that make implementing Agile difficult. Picture the impact on an Agile implementation of a department manager visiting a team?s standup meeting and passing out daily assignments. ?This would be the exact opposite of a team self-organizing and self-managing.?Teams are impacted when there is role confusion, dynamic membership and no coaching to help get back on track.
Agile teams have three basic roles: Product Owner, Scrum Master (or coach) and the development team. The Product Owner provides business acumen, makes decisions and maintains the backlog. ?The Scrum Master facilitates the team and ensures that Agile techniques are used effectively. The development team completes the work that the team committed to deliver. ?While the boundaries between these roles may well be blurred on a day-to-day basis, they should not be confused or conflated with roles from other methods. For example, at no point should the Scrum Master act like a project manager. When roles are confused or roles from other frameworks are overlaid on the team, communication and interaction between team members will be impeded, thus reducing productivity.
Every time a team is altered the chemistry of the team is changed. New members will need time to develop rapport and trust. This includes the potential for stable relationships to be disrupted as new communication patterns are generated. Actively changing team composition is reflective of the management styles that were in vogue in the late 20th Century called the dynamic team syndrome. It is reflective of deterministic view of knowledge work. ?Dynamic teams are formed and reformed to meet specific needs.? In some organizations, teams were formed and reformed on a daily basis. ?In these dynamic teams, managers generally assign work on a daily basis as they are they one role that has the big picture.? In many cases, tasks are assigned as new ideas or problems are discovered even if they are not related to the current project, usually without impacting the due date of the tasks that are being interrupted. ?Agile is built on the assumption that teams will be stable and that membership and focus will not be changed during a sprint or iteration.? When the work a team is doing must change significantly, the sprint will be stopped and reset. Violating the basic assumptions about the composition and tenure of team members will disrupt the trust and effectiveness of the team. It will yield a group of vaguely related individuals, rather than an Agile team.
Teams learn by doing, making mistakes and getting feedback. Without the feedback loop portion of the cycle, it is easy for teams to wander off the path.? When poor behavior is repeated habits are developed which makes getting back on track become more difficult. I was exposed to an organization a few years ago that had wandered away from going demonstrations and had begun to assign work to the teams (versus accepting work into the team). ?Everyone involved indicated that there had not been a conscious choice; rather it just happened.? We had to build a feedback mechanism for the organization to get back on track. Without coaching it would have been easy to continue follow poor practices and perhaps wander further away from the Agile principles (and from process effectiveness). Agile Coaches help teams and organizations embrace Agile and help maximize the delivery of business value.
Implementing Agile requires modifying team behaviors and structure. The changes help provide a basis for self-organizing and self-managing teams. At the same time managers need learn not to dynamically change team structure based whomever is yelling the loudest.?Change of this type is not easy. A coach can provide an experienced, outside view to help keep the change on track until it becomes muscle memory.
Google?s Nexus 7 tablet is now available for pre-order on Best Buy?s website. As reported by The Verge, the 7-inch device comes equipped with Android 4.3 Jelly Bean and is available with either 16 GB or 32 GB of storage. ?If rumors are true that Google?s ?Breakfast with Sundar Pinchai? event tomorrow involves the Nexus 7 release, then Best Buy has jumped the gun.
The Nexus 7 is priced from $229.99. The ship date is currently not stated on the device listing, but it could be revealed in a few hours.?Droid-Life is saying that the release date is July 30.
As for the specs, the device will have 2GB DDR3LM memory to handle multitasking, a scratch-resistant glass screen to help minimize damage, an Adreno 320 graphics card, 5.0 megapixel rear-facing and 1.2 megapixel front-facing camera, Bluetooth 4.0, and come preloaded with the suite of Google tools and programs.
Here are some images of the Nexus 7 from Best Buy?s website:
Last week, members of the press were invited to an event where Google?s Android and Chrome chief would be speaking. Immediately after the invites were sent, there was speculation that it would involve the Nexus 7. Involving a hardware release would make sense ? after all, the event is being held at the same place where Pinchai unveiled the Chromebook Pixel computer.
The announcement clearly wasn?t going to be around a new phone. After all, invites to the unveiling of the Moto X smartphone went out soon after.
We?ll find out for sure in a few hours. In the meantime, if you want to get in line for the Nexus 7, you can visit Best Buy?s website now for the 16GB or 32GB tablet.
Trinity Health joins Mayo Clinic Care NetworkPublic release date: 24-Jul-2013 [ | E-mail | Share ]
Contact: Bryan Anderson newsbureau@mayo.edu 507-284-5005 Mayo Clinic
MINOT, N.D. -- In a move designed to strengthen the delivery and quality of health care in northwest North Dakota, Mayo Clinic today welcomes Trinity Health as the newest member of the Mayo Clinic Care Network. As a member of the network, Trinity Health's physicians and other providers will have direct access to Mayo Clinic experts and clinical resources.
MULTIMEDIA ALERT: Video and photography can be retrieved at the Mayo Clinic News Network.
Mayo Clinic established the network in 2011 to extend knowledge and expertise to physicians and providers interested in working together to benefit patients and enhance the delivery of health care at the local level.
"We welcome our colleagues from Trinity Health, who diligently work to provide patient-centered care, to the Mayo Clinic Care Network," says David Hayes, M.D., medical director, Mayo Clinic Care Network. "Trinity Health was founded nearly a century ago to serve a region in need of a quality health care provider, and Trinity continues that mission of service today. By working with such committed organizations, Mayo Clinic hopes to develop new models of care, and increase quality for patients by providing the right care, at the right place, at the right time."
Trinity Health president and CEO John Kutch says entering into a collaborative relationship with Mayo Clinic is a privilege.
"One of our strategic imperatives has been to expand and strengthen relationships with other care systems," Kutch says. "Membership in the Mayo Clinic Care Network may be the ultimate fulfillment of that goal. We're excited about what this means for our patients and communities. Working with Mayo Clinic, we'll be in the strongest position possible to deliver high-quality, best-practice care. I congratulate our staff, physicians and all who have worked so hard to make our patients healthier, safer and more supported."
As a Mayo Clinic Care Network member, Trinity Health physicians will be able to connect with Mayo Clinic specialists on questions of patient care using an electronic consulting technique called eConsults. Trinity providers also will have access to Mayo-vetted medical information through the AskMayoExpert database. Kenneth Keller, M.D., Trinity's physician champion for the new relationship, believes these tools, in addition to health care consulting, will help Trinity Health provide the best care for its patients as well as improve its systems and the health of the community.
"I am particularly excited for Minot and our surrounding communities because patients will now have access to Mayo expertise without necessarily having to travel," says Dr. Keller, who also serves as medical director of the Radiology Department. "This collaboration will give a major boost to the quality and volume of resources available to physicians, hospital staff and, especially, our patients. It will allow more of our patients to get the care they need right here at home."
The Mayo Clinic Care Network represents non-ownership relationships. Network members share a commitment to improve the quality and delivery of health care. The primary goal of the Mayo Clinic Care Network is to help people gain the benefits of Mayo Clinic knowledge and expertise close to home, ensuring that patients need to travel for care only when necessary.
Trinity Health employs more than 2,700 people and is a fully integrated health care system including an acute care, full-service hospital.
Trinity Health extends the presence of the Mayo Clinic Care Network in North Dakota, where Mayo first launched the network in 2011. The network also has member organizations in Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire and Puerto Rico in the United States, and in Mexico.
###
About Mayo Clinic
Mayo Clinic is a nonprofit worldwide leader in medical care, research and education for people from all walks of life. For more information, visit http://www.mayoclinic.org/about/and http://www.mayoclinic.org/news/.
About Trinity Health
Trinity Health is a nonprofit, integrated health care system providing a full complement of health care services to the people of western North Dakota and eastern Montana. Accredited by The Joint Commission, Trinity has been recognized as one of America's "50 Top Cardiovascular Hospitals" for 2013 by Truven Health Analytics and among the nation's "Most Wired" health systems. In 2010 Trinity earned a "Best in Value" Award from the Hospital Value Index. For more information, visit http://www.trinityhealth.org.
Mayo Clinic:
Bryan Anderson (Minnesota)
507-284-5005 (days)
507-284-2511 (evenings)
newsbureau@mayo.edu
Trinity Health:
Mary Muhlbradt
701-857-5116
701-857-5683
mary.muhlbradt@trinityhealth.org
[ | E-mail | Share ]
?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Trinity Health joins Mayo Clinic Care NetworkPublic release date: 24-Jul-2013 [ | E-mail | Share ]
Contact: Bryan Anderson newsbureau@mayo.edu 507-284-5005 Mayo Clinic
MINOT, N.D. -- In a move designed to strengthen the delivery and quality of health care in northwest North Dakota, Mayo Clinic today welcomes Trinity Health as the newest member of the Mayo Clinic Care Network. As a member of the network, Trinity Health's physicians and other providers will have direct access to Mayo Clinic experts and clinical resources.
MULTIMEDIA ALERT: Video and photography can be retrieved at the Mayo Clinic News Network.
Mayo Clinic established the network in 2011 to extend knowledge and expertise to physicians and providers interested in working together to benefit patients and enhance the delivery of health care at the local level.
"We welcome our colleagues from Trinity Health, who diligently work to provide patient-centered care, to the Mayo Clinic Care Network," says David Hayes, M.D., medical director, Mayo Clinic Care Network. "Trinity Health was founded nearly a century ago to serve a region in need of a quality health care provider, and Trinity continues that mission of service today. By working with such committed organizations, Mayo Clinic hopes to develop new models of care, and increase quality for patients by providing the right care, at the right place, at the right time."
Trinity Health president and CEO John Kutch says entering into a collaborative relationship with Mayo Clinic is a privilege.
"One of our strategic imperatives has been to expand and strengthen relationships with other care systems," Kutch says. "Membership in the Mayo Clinic Care Network may be the ultimate fulfillment of that goal. We're excited about what this means for our patients and communities. Working with Mayo Clinic, we'll be in the strongest position possible to deliver high-quality, best-practice care. I congratulate our staff, physicians and all who have worked so hard to make our patients healthier, safer and more supported."
As a Mayo Clinic Care Network member, Trinity Health physicians will be able to connect with Mayo Clinic specialists on questions of patient care using an electronic consulting technique called eConsults. Trinity providers also will have access to Mayo-vetted medical information through the AskMayoExpert database. Kenneth Keller, M.D., Trinity's physician champion for the new relationship, believes these tools, in addition to health care consulting, will help Trinity Health provide the best care for its patients as well as improve its systems and the health of the community.
"I am particularly excited for Minot and our surrounding communities because patients will now have access to Mayo expertise without necessarily having to travel," says Dr. Keller, who also serves as medical director of the Radiology Department. "This collaboration will give a major boost to the quality and volume of resources available to physicians, hospital staff and, especially, our patients. It will allow more of our patients to get the care they need right here at home."
The Mayo Clinic Care Network represents non-ownership relationships. Network members share a commitment to improve the quality and delivery of health care. The primary goal of the Mayo Clinic Care Network is to help people gain the benefits of Mayo Clinic knowledge and expertise close to home, ensuring that patients need to travel for care only when necessary.
Trinity Health employs more than 2,700 people and is a fully integrated health care system including an acute care, full-service hospital.
Trinity Health extends the presence of the Mayo Clinic Care Network in North Dakota, where Mayo first launched the network in 2011. The network also has member organizations in Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire and Puerto Rico in the United States, and in Mexico.
###
About Mayo Clinic
Mayo Clinic is a nonprofit worldwide leader in medical care, research and education for people from all walks of life. For more information, visit http://www.mayoclinic.org/about/and http://www.mayoclinic.org/news/.
About Trinity Health
Trinity Health is a nonprofit, integrated health care system providing a full complement of health care services to the people of western North Dakota and eastern Montana. Accredited by The Joint Commission, Trinity has been recognized as one of America's "50 Top Cardiovascular Hospitals" for 2013 by Truven Health Analytics and among the nation's "Most Wired" health systems. In 2010 Trinity earned a "Best in Value" Award from the Hospital Value Index. For more information, visit http://www.trinityhealth.org.
Mayo Clinic:
Bryan Anderson (Minnesota)
507-284-5005 (days)
507-284-2511 (evenings)
newsbureau@mayo.edu
Trinity Health:
Mary Muhlbradt
701-857-5116
701-857-5683
mary.muhlbradt@trinityhealth.org
[ | E-mail | Share ]
?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
The Irish?Office of the Data Protection Commissioner (ODPC) has responded to two of the complaints filed?last month?by?the European data protection activists behind the?Europe v Facebook?(evf) campaign group?against several U.S. technology companies for alleged collaboration with the?NSA?s Prism data collection program. Responding specifically to complaints against Apple and Facebook, the ODPC basically takes the view that there?s no complaint to answer, owing to a prior ?Safe Harbor? agreement between the E.U. and the U.S. which it says governs the transfer of personal data in this instance.
evf had been aiming to gain clarity on what it argued were potentially conflicting legal requirements, whereby ? owing to their corporate structure ? the companies in question may have been unable to comply with both European privacy laws and?U.S. surveillance laws. However, in a letter (reproduced here) responding to evf?s complaints, the ODPC takes the view that so long as ?the U.S. based entity is ?Safe?Harbor? registered? (which Apple and Facebook apparently are) there is no cause for Prism-based complaints, noting:
We consider that an Irish-based data controller has met their data protection obligations in relation to the transfer of personal data 10 the U.S. if the U.S. based entity is ?Safe Harbor?registered. We further consider that the agreed ?Safe Harbor? Progamme envisages and addresses the access to personal data for law enforcement purposes held by a U.S. based data processor.
While the U.S.-E.U. Safe Harbor agreement, which dates back to 2000, generally requires US companies to adhere to a set of E.U. personal data protection principles ? such as informing citizens that their data is being collected and how it will be used (which has clearly not been going on in the case of the NSA?s Prism program) ? the ODPC?s letter notes that adherence to the principles ?may be limited? ?
(a) to the extent necessary to meet national security, public interest, or law enforcement requirements; Cb) by statute, government regulation, or case law that create conflicting obligations or explicit authorizations, provided that, in exercising any such authorization, an organization can demonstrate that its non?compliance with the Principles is limited to the extent necessary to meet the oveniding legitimate interests furthered by such authorization?.
As you?d expect, evf is unimpressed with the ODPC?s response ? dubbing it ?unbelievable?. The group argues that while the Safe Harbor agreement generally allows the transfer of data to the U.S. ?as a rule of thumb?, it does also include exceptions where Europeans? data ?is not adequately protected? ? which evf says the?ODPC?s response ignores.
Commenting on the letter in a statement, evf spokesman?Max Schrems said: ?The Irish authority seriously says that the EU has envisioned and accepted the PRISM program 13 years?ago, when making the ?Safe Harbor? decision. They say that the EU has agreed to PRISM, effectively blaming Brussels?instead of taking action. This also means that the DPC is of the opinion that the PRISM program is in line with an??adequate protection? of privacy under EU law. I doubt that the European Commission thinks so too, but at least we got?the Irish DPC to publicly declare for which team they are playing.?
?This means that you can forward Europeans? data to the NSA as?much as you wish, if you only put your parent company on a list,? he added.
It?s worth noting that the ODPC?s letter does also note that ?the proportionality and oversight?arrangements for programmes such as PRISM are to be the subject of high-level?discussions between the EU and the USA? ? so the overriding impression conveyed by the letter is of a regional DP authority with close links to the U.S. tech giants which have sited headquarters on its soil doing everything it can to avoid sticking its own neck over the parapet on Prism. And passing the buck up the chain to EU data protection regulators instead. (Contrast the Irish response to this regional German DP agency?s concern about a ?massive risk? associated with Prism data collection, for instance, and the tonal variation is striking).
?We have the impression that the ODPC is trying to simply ignore the complaints and the whole PRISM scandal. It seems like they have little interest in the rights they are paid to protect. If there is a way to appeal this in Ireland we clearly appeal it. Right now it seems like the ODPC is ruining Ireland?s reputation in this matter,? added?Schrems.
Ireland?s economy continues to benefit from attracting tech giants to set up international headquarters there ? with favourable corporate tax rates as one lure, and ? as evf would doubtless argue ? a ?friendly? data protection authority as another. As an example of the latter, the ODPC has previously ruled in Facebook?s favour:?last September, after a lengthy investigation into?user data and privacy issues ? triggered once again by evf complaints ? the body declared itself happy that Facebook had listened to ?the great majority? of its recommendations.
We?ve reached out to the European Commission for comment on the ODPC?s stance and will update this story with any response. The EC?s Neelie Kroes has been critical of Prism, warning earlier this month that the programme risks undermining trust in U.S. cloud companies.
A fantastic fence ought not only provide privacy and security. It should also serve to increase the beauty and charm of a house. Nowadays, folks are needs to give more importance around the aesthetic worth of a fence. Ahead of the appearance of a fence wasn?t considered, today the style of a fence could make or break the overall impact of a home. That is probably why increasing numbers of people are seeking out the expert opinion of designers and architects with regards to the kind of their fencing contractor .
Fences come in different designs to suit every type of home. It could be manufactured from wood, steel, stone, brick, vinyl or a combination of these. You can customize your fence so as harmonize it along with the rest of the home or make it stick out. It?s all regulated dependent on choice. Fence design is normally classified under two categories- classic and modern.
Exactly what is a modern fence? There isn?t any standard definition of such a modern fence is. The concept of modern fences has resulted through the evolution of fences, design, and art. Developing a fence is not really solely entrusted to carpenters, inspire the joint effort of designers, architects, and fence contractors. Modern fences are a mixture of design and functionality. It is usually made out of numerous materials like wood, steel, or even glass; along with unique patterns, lines, and color. Modern fences are usually up-to-date with technology boasting features like automated gates in case you can afford the luxurious.
Classic fences, alternatively, are more traditional with regards to design. A common illustration of a well used fence will be the traditional white picket fence. Unlike modern fences, classic fences are usually simpler with regards to design and color, automated gates aren?t commonly incorporated. Many people prefer classic fences due to the comfort and stability it represents. Even though it could possibly be simpler than its modern counterparts, classic fences put in a certain allure and feeling of romanticism with a home. There are tons of fencing companies which give you the setting up fences with classic designs this sort of interested. Classic fences can be seen on older plus more traditional varieties of houses, whereas modern fences are more popular for newer varieties of residences.
No matter which design that suits you which is dependent on personal taste. Attempt to know what you need along with what you would like before having one installed.
In November 2002, a small group of scientists gathered at the University of Kansas with one clear mission.?The topic at hand: an industrial chemical called n-propyl bromide, or nPB. Their goal, according to the conference agenda and meeting notes, was to design a ?research program needed to establish nPB as a safe product.?
?It was clear almost from the beginning that the meeting was not about science,? said Kim Boekelheide, an attendee of the conference and a pathology professor from Brown University. Three days after the conference, Boekelheide wrote a letter to the Kansas researchers asking that his name ?not be used in any documents prepared or submitted regarding this activity.?
In the decade after that fateful meeting, nPB grew vastly more popular. In furniture factories throughout the South, this chemical is the glue that bonds foam cushions in most office chairs and home couches. At local dry cleaners, it removes spots from delicate fabrics without getting them wet. Car mechanics use it for degreasing engine parts. The army uses it to waterproof bullets. Spray cans are sold online for household use.
Indeed, the scientists, convened in Kansas by EnviroTech, an Illinois-based company that markets products made from nPB, helped drive the 15-fold increase in nPB?s use from 1998 to 2012, primarily by pushing?back against tighter oversight by regulators. The two scientists who played the biggest role in organizing the conference, Karl Rozman and John Doull,?had already managed to get an EnviroTech advertising pamphlet published in a peer-reviewed journal, without disclosing who had funded the research. Rozman and Doull were outfitted with a $50,000 budget for the one-day event, and were also paid over $100,000 by EnviroTech to produce research suggesting that concerns about nPB?s health impacts were overblown.
But as nPB found its way into more and more American workplaces, it became clear that something was truly wrong. Across the U.S., factory workers began showing up in local hospitals and emergency rooms, unable to walk and with no feeling in their arms or legs except for sporadic shooting pain or a pins-and-needles sensation. Over the past 15 years, hundreds of people exposed to nPB have been sickened?[PDF], many of them left permanently disabled after breathing in the chemical?s fumes, federal records show.
The chemical, it turns out, is a potent neurotoxin that eats away at nerve endings. Some workers who handle it may never be able to have children, researchers warn. Even at low levels of exposure it may cause cancer, according to researchers at the National Institute of Health.
The story of nPB?s proliferation offers a cautionary lesson on how chemicals are regulated in the United States. Even when experts discover that a chemical is harming people, federal regulators are ill equipped to do anything?about it, thanks in part to an?obscure federal law called the Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA, that allows chemical makers to sell products without first proving they are safe. That 37-year-old statute is the only major federal environmental law that?s never been substantially updated since it was first written.
?It would be hard to design a law more stacked against the regulators than the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, which is supposed to ensure the safety of thousands of chemicals used in household products and manufacturing,? the New York Times editorial board wrote in an April call for reform.
But even when federal regulators have tried to intervene to control hazardous chemicals ? like they did with nPB ? their efforts have been largely toothless. Though the Occupational Safety and Health Administration presciently flagged the hazards of this chemical in 1999, the agency has never set a mandatory exposure?limit for it, leaving employers and workers in the dark.?And although EPA recommended limits on fumes in workplaces to protect people?s health, the agency has little authority to enforce those standards.
?American workers serve as unwitting guinea pigs to test the toxicity of these new compounds,? said Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a whistle-blower advocacy network. ?Not surprisingly, more than 40,000 U.S. workers die each year from occupational exposure while another 200,000 are disabled annually.?
Meanwhile, federal records obtained by Grist through open records requests show workers using the chemical pleading with the EPA to provide reliable information about whether and how nPB should be used. ?We are an industry without guidance,? one dry cleaner wrote. A 28-year old working at the Corpus Christi Army Depot cushion makers wrote to EPA in 2009 to complain that ?we are constantly being evacuated and nobody tells us anything,? adding that breathing the chemical left her feeling ?like a zombie? and her coworkers were visiting neurologists because their arms and legs had gone entirely numb.
Prospects for a fix look dim. A bill presently before Congress could update the way that toxic substances are regulated. But the bill, a compromise between the chemical industry and safety advocates, could end up so watered down as to be useless. Besides, the legislation has little chance of winning White House backing or getting enough bipartisan support to make it through a deeply divided Congress.
The burden remains on regulators to prove that a new chemical is unsafe, even though they have virtually no legal authority to compel manufacturers to do testing. That?s why even though roughly 85,000 chemicals are registered for use in the U.S, only about 200 have been subjected to safety testing under the law, and only five have faced restrictions because they pose an ?unreasonable risk.?
In the case of nPB, the evidence of harm has mounted for years. An extensive expose by The New York Times chronicled these hazards in painful detail earlier this year. But the untold story about nPB is the role that chemical sellers like EnviroTech have played, with help from paid?researchers, in muddying the waters about the?dangers of this chemical.
?The animals got cancer and have been dead for five years, but EnviroTech is still saying the science is not finished yet,? said Adam Finkel, executive director of the University of Pennsylvania Program on Regulation, referring to research showing?[PDF] that nPB is likely a potent carcinogen. While he was a top official at OSHA in the late ?90s, Mr. Finkel was the first to sound the alarm about dangers of nPB, but it can take decades for OSHA to craft binding rules for chemical exposures.
In this?vacuum?created by federal inaction, EnviroTech has waged an effective marketing campaign promoting nPB as non-hazardous and ?green.? The?company based many of its claims on a peer-reviewed study, published just before the Kansas conference, by the two prestigious toxicologists who organized it: Karl Rozman, an internationally known chemist, and John Doull, who is most famous for having written a preeminent textbook on toxicology.
Doull was also useful to EnviroTech because from 1992 to 1999, he was the chairman of the committee at the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists that recommends safety standards for workplace chemicals. Since OSHA can take so long to set federal standards, the public and most businesses rely on those set by the hygienists? conference.
A review of court documents and meeting notes shows how these researchers, at times joined by Tibor Rozman, a medical doctor and Karl?s brother, worked hard to help EnviroTech assuage concern about nPB?s safety and to ward off regulators in the U.S. and Europe.
?Some, perhaps big, trouble is coming up for n-propyl bromide,? Karl Rozman warned EnviroTech in an August 2002 email. European officials were focusing on nPB, he wrote, because EnviroTech and other companies had downplayed potential risks in their marketing materials. Tibor Rozman added: ?Once decided in a negative way for nPB it will be very difficult to reverse the verdict.?
Already, some producers of the chemical were starting to take a more cautious posture toward nPB. Three major manufacturers issued stern warnings to customers not to use the chemical as a solvent, or stopped selling it all together. Some manufacturers began switching away from using nPB. ?There is a weight of evidence that should sound warning bells to any thinking person,? Protonique SA, a circuit-board manufacturer in Switzerland that used nPB, said as it described the chemical?s health hazards to customers.
Concerned by this shift, EnviroTech decided to fund research that suggested nPB was safer than others believed. Throughout the process, the company played a subtle hands-on role in guiding the researchers? findings. At one point, EnviroTech pressed the professors to push the EPA for weaker limits and to raise specific objections to the agency?s methodology. ?After discussions with Dr. Doull, I have changed a few sentences to clarify our opinion,? Karl Rozman told EnviroTech.
In October 2002, Rozman and Doull?s study on nPB was published in the journal Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene. In violation of the journal?s financial disclosure rules, the article made no mention of EnviroTech?s role in funding the research.
At least one reader of the journal wrote to complain.
?In publishing a paper that has been ? literally ? a sales tool of a nPB solvent supplier for years, APPLIED effectively endorsed EnviroTech International!? Jimmy Witcher, the president of Techspray, a chemical company, wrote in a November 2002 email to the journal editor.
EnviroTech representatives and Rozman failed to respond to requests by Grist for comment on nPB?s safety or the validity of their conclusions.
In the meantime, reports of the harm done by this ?green? chemical have increased. They started when a dozen workers at a chemical manufacturer making nPB first told researchers that their fingers and toes had gone numb. Things escalated quickly, and in recent years,?dozens of furniture makers and upholsterers using the chemical have been turning up in emergency rooms across the U.S., complaining of weakness and an inability to walk, impaired cognitive function and memory loss.
Researchers then found that nPB had caused a dry cleaning shop worker in New Jersey to have problems seeing, muscle spasms, and numbness ? worrisome because nPB-based products like EnviroTech?s DrySolv have been marketed as an eco-friendly alternative to the nation?s roughly 40,000 dry cleaning shops. For decades, dry cleaners relied heavily on another chemical called perchlorethylene, or perc, untested when it hit the market, which has contaminated drinking water supplies across the U.S. and was finally banned under an international treaty because it destroyed the ozone layer.
When it comes to health impacts, regulators say nPB could be even worse than perc. And these crippling neurological injuries may only be the tip of the iceberg, as workers exposed today develop cancers years later.
?The one thing that?s common in all of these cases is that the workers get the short end of the bargain,? said Finkel, who plans to testify as an expert witness in a lawsuit against EnviroTech brought by the dry cleaner who was sickened after using nPB. ?If there?s no rule, there?s no guidance, there?s no recommendation, then it?s the wild west.?
For now, the push to overhaul the Toxic Substances Control Act is stalled in committee, and some environmentalists say that may not be such a bad thing: They?re?concerned that the federal law could preempt California?s state laws on chemical control, and say that federal rules must be more rigorous than state standards or the law will represent a step backwards.
But for EnviroTech, that means business as usual. The company, which declined repeated requests for comment, continues in its sales brochures and videos to dismiss worries about nPB?s safety. In a December advertisement, it called fears about nPB?s health impacts ?more rumors and innuendo.? Even at levels many times higher than EPA or other experts in fact recommend, nPB, the?advertisement claims, ?offers complete safety.?
Source: www.calculatedriskblog.com --- Tuesday, July 23, 2013 From DataQuick: California Foreclosure Starts Up From First Quarter While up from the first quarter, the number of California homeowners entering the foreclosure process was at its second-lowest level in seven years last quarter, largely the result of a steep rise in home values, a real estate information service reported. Lenders filed 25,747 Notices of Default (NoDs) during the April-to-June period. That was up 38.7 percent from 18,568 for the previous quarter, and down 52.9 percent from 54,615 for second-quarter 2012, according to San Diego-based DataQuick. The 18,568 NoDs filed in the first quarter of this year marked the lowest quarterly total since fourth-quarter 2005, when 15,337 NoDs were recorded. In addition to less distress in the housing market pipeline, this year's remarkably low first-quarter number mainly reflected policy and regulatory changes. NoD filings plummeted early this year as a package of new state foreclosure laws - the "Homeowner Bill of Rights" - took effect on January 1. In California and other states in recent years foreclosure activity has sometimes plunged temporarily after a new law kicks in and the industry takes time to adjust. Setting aside this year's first quarter, last quarter's NoD tally was the lowest since second-quarter 2006, when 20,909 NoDs were recorded. California NoDs peaked in first-quarter 2009 at 135,431. DataQuick's NoD statistics go back to 1992. "At this point in the cycle, it ...
![[ Back to EurekAlert! ]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_uI60WbQy9L2D6NhqO5EEfD7dqVaOiHyDUq8VJgfqEvsDNprUormi9fq0m6-3kYkZXfHWSkDhm08Nxd5HKl_LoBpFTkMyNTMDoW2BYd3Wc=s0-d){kind=small}
Public release date: 24-Jul-2013
Share ] 
From DataQuick: California Foreclosure Starts Up From First Quarter While up from the first quarter, the number of California homeowners entering the foreclosure process was at its second-lowest level in seven years last quarter, largely the result of a steep rise in home values, a real estate information service reported. Lenders filed 25,747 Notices of Default (NoDs) during the April-to-June period. That was up 38.7 percent from 18,568 for the previous quarter, and down 52.9 percent from 54,615 for second-quarter 2012, according to San Diego-based DataQuick. The 18,568 NoDs filed in the first quarter of this year marked the lowest quarterly total since fourth-quarter 2005, when 15,337 NoDs were recorded. In addition to less distress in the housing market pipeline, this year's remarkably low first-quarter number mainly reflected policy and regulatory changes. NoD filings plummeted early this year as a package of new state foreclosure laws - the "Homeowner Bill of Rights" - took effect on January 1. In California and other states in recent years foreclosure activity has sometimes plunged temporarily after a new law kicks in and the industry takes time to adjust. Setting aside this year's first quarter, last quarter's NoD tally was the lowest since second-quarter 2006, when 20,909 NoDs were recorded. California NoDs peaked in first-quarter 2009 at 135,431. DataQuick's NoD statistics go back to 1992. "At this point in the cycle, it ...