H1N1 for Gitmo Detainees.

Washington, D.C. – Southwest Missouri Congressman Roy Blunt today continued his criticism of the Obama Administration’s approach to distribution of the vaccine for H1N1 in the wake of news reports that accused terrorists at Guantanamo Bay will receive vaccinations ahead of many vulnerable Americans.

"It’s outrageous that in Missouri, expectant mothers, children and others vulnerable to the H1N1 virus do not have access to the vaccine, and our tax dollars are funding vaccines for accused terrorists detained at Gitmo," Blunt said. "President Obama called this pandemic a ‘national emergency,’ but the federal government continues to fail at one of its most basic responsibilities. And now the Administration tells us ‘no longer women and children first;’ instead accused terrorists will be first in line for H1N1 vaccines."

"If the Obama Administration has enough vaccines for terrorists, then I suggest they send these doses to Missouri, where many vulnerable people are still at risk," Blunt continued.

In Factory Towns, Waiting for the Stimulus to Arrive

by Christopher Flavelle, ProPublica

We start today, as we often do, with the latest must-read stimulus story from the Associated Press. The AP’s Matt Apuzzo and Justin Juozapavicius examine the Obama administration’s difficulty in using the stimulus to revive American factory towns. The two focus on the city of Lamar, Mo., where the closing of a local furniture maker in mid-2007 marked an early start to the recession, and where even the mayor had to file for unemployment when his store went out of business. "What work? Where?" says the mayor, when asked about the 640,000 jobs reported to have been created or saved by the stimulus.

The AP reports that just 2,500 of those jobs were in the manufacturing industry, and while towns like Lamar would likely have been worse off without the increased unemployment and Medicaid benefits included in the stimulus, those benefits "are harder to see than a job and a paycheck."

Over at The New York Times, the (weirdly anonymous) editors of the "Room for Debate" blog assembled a team of economists to discuss that old chestnut, "Did the stimulus work?" But don’t hold your breath for a hard answer: the editors managed to find a "Yes," a "No" and two varieties of "Sort of." We’re looking forward to the day when the Times launches a blog titled "Straight Answers from Economists."

Meanwhile, Paul Krugman writes that the so-far weak recovery argues for more stimulus, not less. This is a familiar argument, but Krugman adds an interesting twist: the claim that stimulus spending will lead to higher taxes down the road is "mostly wrong," he argues, since "spending more on recovery will lead to a stronger economy, both now and in the future—and a stronger economy means more government revenue." The Reagan-era supply-siders made similar arguments about the benefits of lower taxes. We’ll see whether Democrats buy Krugman’s argument.

Computerworld is not a news source that often makes its way into our roundup, but today’s story by Julia King merits a mention. King looks at the efforts of state governments to make their stimulus spending transparent. Just as the size of the stimulus is unprecedented, King writes, so are the reporting demands on state governments. For example, Iowa’s chief information officer estimates that his organization spent 800 employee hours making the state’s stimulus data available to the public. Given ongoing questions about the accuracy of the stimulus data released by the federal government, transparency efforts at the state level are worth watching.

I’ve always heard the old sayin’ that opinions are like belly buttons, ever’body’s got one. The other slant on that I tend ta like better is that opinions are like armpits, ever’body’s got a couple.

Now a lotta folks don’t think their opinions are any more worthwhile than the next. That seems ta be a pretty healthy attitude. Throw them ideas out there and kick ‘em around. Someone might pick up on a mediocre idea and run with it, turnin’ it into somethin’ no one else would a thought of.

The real problems arise when someone seems ta think there can be only one opinion, and they’ve got it.

There’s always more than one way ta look at any particular situation. It’s the arguments that sometimes don’t always make sense. Either way it’s an interestin’ proposition. A lot more interestin’ than armpits.

This is some fact, but mostly,

Just Jake Talkin’.

---

To Your Good Health

By Paul G. Donohue, M.D.

Strength Training OK for Young Children

DEAR DR. DONOHUE: I would like to give my 10-year-old grandson some conditioning advice. He loves basketball. It has occurred to me that upper-body strength is helpful in shooting long shots and in positioning for rebounds. In high school, I had a well-developed lower body but a poorly developed upper body. This handicapped me when shooting long shots. I have added pushups to my daily exercises, and this has helped me in shooting three-pointers.

My questions are: When is a good time for a boy to start building muscle? Are there any exercises you would recommend for upper-body strength building for a 10-year-old? -- J.M.

ANSWER: The sports community, until recently, frowned on strength training (weightlifting, muscle building, resistance exercise) for children who had not reached puberty. They thought that children, before the male hormone surge that takes place at puberty, would not benefit from it. It’s been shown that they do, and that children as young as 7 show improvement in strength.

The sports community also feared that weightlifting posed a health threat to young children whose bones are not completely calcified. Young bones have growth plates, sections of bone that have yet to become real bone. Growth plates permit bone elongation. These areas are areas of weakness. A well-supervised, well-designed weightlifting program doesn’t injure growth plates. In fact, such a program protects children from common sports injuries. All this applies to girls as well as boys.

Your grandson can do the same exercises you do -- with less weight. Your pushups are a good example. Body weight is the weight being hoisted. Chin-ups are another strength-building exercise in which body weight is the stimulus for muscle growth. He also can lift barbells and dumbbells. He should start with a weight that he can lift 12 consecutive times without straining. When he can perform two sets of 15 consecutive lifts, you can increase the weight by one to 3 pounds and go back to the 12 lifts. Barbell and dumbbell curls and bench presses are good upper-body strength-building exercises.