New Mad Cow Case in US

Back to previous page


New case of mad cow disease discovered in Calif.; officials say food, dairy supplies safe

By Associated Press, Updated: Tuesday, April 24, 10:09 PM

WASHINGTON — The first new case of mad cow disease in the U.S. since 2006 has been discovered in a dairy cow in California, but health authorities said Tuesday the animal never was a threat to the nation’s food supply.

The infected cow, the fourth ever discovered in the U.S., was found as part of an Agriculture Department surveillance program that tests about 40,000 cows a year for the fatal brain disease.

No meat from the cow was bound for the food supply, said John Clifford, the department’s chief veterinary officer.

“There is really no cause for alarm here with regard to this animal,” Clifford told reporters at a hastily convened news conference.

Mad cow disease, or bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), is fatal to cows and can cause a fatal human brain disease in people who eat tainted beef. The World Health Organization has said that tests show that humans cannot be infected by drinking milk from BSE-infected animals.

In the wake of a massive outbreak in Britain that peaked in 1993, the U.S. intensified precautions to keep BSE out of U.S. cattle and the food supply. In other countries, the infection’s spread was blamed on farmers adding recycled meat and bone meal from infected cows into cattle feed, so a key U.S. step has been to ban feed containing such material.

Clifford said the California cow is what scientists call an atypical case of BSE, meaning that it didn’t get the disease from eating infected cattle feed, which is important.

That means it’s “just a random mutation that can happen every once in a great while in an animal,” said Bruce Akey, director of the New York State Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory at Cornell University. “Random mutations go on in nature all the time.”

The atypical form of BSE that is caused by protein mutation also occurs in humans. Called classic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, it is found at a rate of one case per 1 million people worldwide, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“It’s not unreasonable to think that something similar could occur in cattle,” said Terry Lehenbauer, director of the School of Veterinary Medicine Research Centers at the University of California, Davis. “We just don’t know all the science about how this disease develops and is transmitted.”

Questions remain about whether the incident will prompt the USDA to change how it tests for the disease. But Mike Doyle, director of the University of Georgia’s Center for Food Safety, said the testing system worked because it caught what is a really rare event.

“It’s good news because they caught it,” Doyle said.

Clifford did not say when the disease was discovered or exactly where the cow was raised. He said the cow was at a rendering plant in central California when the case was discovered through regular USDA sample testing.

Rendering plants process animal parts for products not going into the human food chain, such as animal food, soap, chemicals or other household products.

Dennis Luckey, executive vice president of Baker Commodities, told The Associated Press that the disease was discovered at its Hanford, Calif., transfer station when the company selected the cow for random sampling.

Luckey said the cow died at a dairy and was randomly tagged for the surveillance program.

Michael Marsh, chief executive of Western United Dairymen, said it was an adult cow over 30 months old, not a downed or sick animal, and it appeared normal when it was last observed. He said the cow was first tested April 18.

The disease is not transmitted through casual contact like a virus, but Marsh said government investigators are testing other members of the dead cow’s feeding herd, as well as cows born at the same time as the dead cow.

It wasn’t known how the cow died, and the name of the dairy where the cow died has not been released. Officials also haven’t said where it was born.

“It’s appropriate to be cautious, it’s appropriate to pay attention and it’s appropriate to ask questions, but now let’s watch and see what the researchers find out in the next couple of days,” said James Culler, director of the UC Davis Dairy food Safety Laboratory.

Culler, an authority on BSE, said the California cow’s form of the disease so rarely occurs that consumers should not be alarmed.

“Are you worried about all of the meteors that passed the earth last night while you were sleeping? Of course not,” Culler said. “Would you pay 90 percent of your salaries to set up all of the observatories on earth to watch for them? Of course not. It’s the same thing.”

There have been three confirmed cases of BSE in cows in the United States — in a Canadian-born cow in 2003 in Washington state, in 2005 in Texas and in 2006 in Alabama.

Both the 2005 and 2006 cases were also atypical varieties of the disease, USDA officials said.

The Agriculture Department is sharing its lab results with international animal health officials in Canada and England who will review the test results, Clifford said. Federal and California officials will further investigate the case. He said he did not expect the latest discovery to affect beef exports.

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association said in a statement that “U.S. regulatory controls are effective, and that U.S fresh beef and beef products from cattle of all ages are safe and can be safely traded due to our interlocking safeguards.”

Clifford said the finding shows that safeguards the U.S. government and other nations have put into place in recent years are working. In 2011 there were only 29 worldwide cases of BSE, a dramatic decline since the peak of 37,311 cases in 1992. He credited the decline to effect of feed bans as a primary means of controlling the disease.

Past scares about mad cow disease have affected beef exports to Japan and other countries. Japan banned all U.S. beef imports in 2003 after the first case of mad cow disease was discovered in the United States. Japan resumed buying American beef in 2006 after the bilateral trade agreement setting new safety standards.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency said Tuesday that the latest finding would not affect trade between the US and Canada.

___

Associated Press writers Gosia Wozniacka and Traci Cone contributed to this report from Fresno, Calif.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

© The Washington Post Company

Raising your Fork

Do you think about where your food comes from? When you raise your fork and put food inside your self, do you think about the source of that food? How about food in a fast food joint? Do you just indulge the flavors or do you take a moment to think about the factories your food comes from, the feedlots where cows stand in their dung and eat a soup of chemicals and corn before they are whisked off to a place where they are caught by the leg, raised in the air and have their throats cut while they wide eyed experience a wash of total terror.

How about that bacon that resteraunts put on everything any more. Fat and salt and such a flavor that reminds us of our mothers. The pigs that have their bodies sliced thin are among the more intelligent and sensitive animals who used to wander the family farm but now are raised in warehouses, packed together and fed a mix of chemical garbage including hormones, anti biotics and pesticides that go right into your blood when you eat that tasty bac0n on the cheeseburger. Your body reacts immediately, filling your blood with saturated fats, the kind that cling to the walls of your arteries and portend a trip to the hospital in an ambulance, siren wailing with paramedics frantic to stabilize you after your heart siezes up.

Meat and cheese didn’t used to be so toxic. Before the 1970s the animals that were killed for us came from small farms and they were fed simple feed that made sense like grass and corn stems. Today big corporations have taken over and the family farm is gone except for little farms that feed the local farmer’s market. Any meat you buy in a conventional grocery store or at a corporate resteraunt is full of all sorts of things you would never eat willingly if they told you it was there. If you could see the factories where they raise the animals, you would probably never eat these substances again.

When you raise your fork, do you think about your self? Do you like yourself, care about yourself? If so why would you eat toxic fat laden material that comes from the suffering of animals and which is only there to make some corporation rich?

TR

Keystone XL Pipeline Disaster Spawns Political Disasters

It looks like the republicans on Capitol Hill have forced President Obama into a corner on the Keystone XL pipeline that would deliver and oily sludge from the Boreal forests of Alberta to the virtually unregulated oil refineries of the Texas coast. The right in America wants very much to continue our oil addiction and this project fits right in. Republican efforts to derail green energy and pump new subsidies into Exxon and Haliburton move ahead faced by only tepid opposition from Democrats.

Getting oil from tar sands barely breaks even in terms of energy in and energy out. Huge lakes of toxin laden water are created near the mines which destroy tens of thousands of acres of critically important forest and force native people off their land. Rivers are heavily polluted and thousands of birds get killed in the toxic lakes. But Americans are addicted to oil and the oil industry dominates Capitol Hill with its campaign contributions (bribes). The GOP is now totally opposed to environmental protections of any kind except in rare cases as they’ve demonstrated again with their open pandering to multinational corporations.

Note that the GOP has attacked both the Endangered Species Act (with help from President Obama and some democrats) and with it’s Keystone pipeline forcing amendment to the short term payroll tax cut. It has issued one of the largest blows in history to the critical National Environmental Policy Act. Anything to appease its corporate masters. Ethics anyone? Morals?

The good news is there is a huge international effort to fight the Keystone pipeline by citizens. Given the power of corporations in Washington, it has its work cut out for it.

Note that Canada exited from the Kyoto Protocol this month because its emissions from its huge oil sands mines are among the largest sources of pollution on earth. Canada has very weak environmental laws and it is only too happy to ruin the environment in Alberta to appease Americans insatiable thirst for oil.

Energy Squandered to put Meat on our Table

How far would you go to help fight climate change? How about eating less meat? Or none at all? Anyone can do it, says Mike Tidwell, author, climate change activist, recovering carnivore. His stomach still growls at the thought of sumptuous BBQ pork on a bun, but Tidwell quit meat cold turkey—excuse me, carrot—because he says the human hunger for burgers, chicken wings, and ham has turned our stomachs into a bigger driver of climate change than our cars.

In his article “Low Carbon Diet” (Audubon, January-February 2009), Tidwell points to all the energy resources squandered to put meat on our tables: huge volumes of petroleum products used to grow mass quantities of grains, which are harvested by thousands of gas-guzzling tractors, and fed to the millions of cows, pigs, chickens, and sheep that eventually become supper.

Then there are the gas byproducts: No matter which end of the cow they come from, methane and nitrous oxide are much more potent greenhouse gases than regular old carbon dioxide. Tidwell writes:

“Accounting for all factors, livestock production worldwide is responsible for a whopping 18 percent of the world’s total greenhouse gases. That’s more than the emissions of all the world’s cars, buses, planes, and trains combined.”

If we don’t voluntarily pull in our belts and make some changes to our diets, Tidwell says climate change might do it for us:

If we allow extreme global warming to become reality, an impact on the U.S. diet could very well be a great reduction in the amount of meat on our tables—a reduction imposed on us by nature instead of achieved by us through enlightened lifestyle changes. The wide and guaranteed availability of agriculturally productive land may simply cease. The crop yields we see now could shrink significantly, thanks to everything from weird weather to pest invasions.”

As we embark on the New Year, Tidwell certainly offers some interesting food (vegetarian, of course) for thought. If you’re ready to start cutting the carbon out of your diet, check out some of Tidwell’s favorite cookbooks and recipes, as well as a historical view of vegetarianism, in this Audubon web exclusive.

Copyright Audubon Magazine

President Clinton

President Bill Clinton told CNN this week that he has become a vegan. Vegans eat only plant based foods. Mr. Clinton had quadruple bypass surgery a few years ago and discovered that removing dairy and meat from his diet would drop his cholesterol levels below 150 and vastly reduce the chance of another heart attack.

Thank you Bill Clinton. He is setting an excellent example for Americans, not only for their personal health but in terms of lowering the huge environmental impacts of livestock production including high greenhouse gas emissions caused by the whole cycle of cattle production. The polar bears would thank Mr. Clinton if they could, I’m sure.

Films to See

Two good films have hit the screens this summer. First we mention Food Inc. even though it is not a new film.  This documentary talks about the corporate takeover of the American food production system with a big emphasis on technology and centralized production. Though the film focuses on meat production and doesn’t discuss the need to get away from meat eating to save the environment and our personal health, the points made need to be understood by all Americans. People need to understand what is happening to our food production system and Food Inc. is a great place so start.

Knives over Forks is out this summer in theaters and discusses directly the need to move away from animal proteins and toward plants based diets. Be sure to see this film either at your local theater or from NetFlixs. This is a must see.

 

Letter From 255 Climate Scientists on Political Interference In Climate Science

Science 7 May 2010:
Vol. 328 no. 5979 pp. 689-690
DOI: 10.1126/science.328.5979.689
  • Letters

Climate Change and the Integrity of Science

We are deeply disturbed by the recent escalation of political assaults on scientists in general and on climate scientists in particular. All citizens should understand some basic scientific facts. There is always some uncertainty associated with scientific conclusions; science never absolutely proves anything. When someone says that society should wait until scientists are absolutely certain before taking any action, it is the same as saying society should never take action. For a problem as potentially catastrophic as climate change, taking no action poses a dangerous risk for our planet.

Scientific conclusions derive from an understanding of basic laws supported by laboratory experiments, observations of nature, and mathematical and computer modeling. Like all human beings, scientists make mistakes, but the scientific process is designed to find and correct them. This process is inherently adversarial—scientists build reputations and gain recognition not only for supporting conventional wisdom, but even more so for demonstrating that the scientific consensus is wrong and that there is a better explanation. That’s what Galileo, Pasteur, Darwin, and Einstein did. But when some conclusions have been thoroughly and deeply tested, questioned, and examined, they gain the status of “well-established theories” and are often spoken of as “facts.”

For instance, there is compelling scientific evidence that our planet is about 4.5 billion years old (the theory of the origin of Earth), that our universe was born from a single event about 14 billion years ago (the Big Bang theory), and that today’s organisms evolved from ones living in the past (the theory of evolution). Even as these are overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, fame still awaits anyone who could show these theories to be wrong. Climate change now falls into this category: There is compelling, comprehensive, and consistent objective evidence that humans are changing the climate in ways that threaten our societies and the ecosystems on which we depend.

FigureCREDIT: Paul Nicklen/National Geographic/Getty Images

Many recent assaults on climate science and, more disturbingly, on climate scientists by climate change deniers are typically driven by special interests or dogma, not by an honest effort to provide an alternative theory that credibly satisfies the evidence. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other scientific assessments of climate change, which involve thousands of scientists producing massive and comprehensive reports, have, quite expectedly and normally, made some mistakes. When errors are pointed out, they are corrected. But there is nothing remotely identified in the recent events that changes the fundamental conclusions about climate change:

(i) The planet is warming due to increased concentrations of heat-trapping gases in our atmosphere. A snowy winter in Washington does not alter this fact.

(ii) Most of the increase in the concentration of these gases over the last century is due to human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.

(iii) Natural causes always play a role in changing Earth’s climate, but are now being overwhelmed by human-induced changes.

(iv) Warming the planet will cause many other climatic patterns to change at speeds unprecedented in modern times, including increasing rates of sea-level rise and alterations in the hydrologic cycle. Rising concentrations of carbon dioxide are making the oceans more acidic.

(v) The combination of these complex climate changes threatens coastal communities and cities, our food and water supplies, marine and freshwater ecosystems, forests, high mountain environments, and far more.

Much more can be, and has been, said by the world’s scientific societies, national academies, and individuals, but these conclusions should be enough to indicate why scientists are concerned about what future generations will face from business-as-usual practices. We urge our policy-makers and the public to move forward immediately to address the causes of climate change, including the unrestrained burning of fossil fuels.

We also call for an end to McCarthy-like threats of criminal prosecution against our colleagues based on innuendo and guilt by association, the harassment of scientists by politicians seeking distractions to avoid taking action, and the outright lies being spread about them. Society has two choices: We can ignore the science and hide our heads in the sand and hope we are lucky, or we can act in the public interest to reduce the threat of global climate change quickly and substantively. The good news is that smart and effective actions are possible. But delay must not be an option.

  1. P. H. Gleick*,
  2. R. M. Adams,
  3. R. M. Amasino,
  4. E. Anders,
  5. D. J. Anderson,
  6. W. W. Anderson,
  7. L. E. Anselin,
  8. M. K. Arroyo,
  9. B. Asfaw,
  10. F. J. Ayala,
  11. A. Bax,
  12. A. J. Bebbington,
  13. G. Bell,
  14. M. V. L. Bennett,
  15. J. L. Bennetzen,
  16. M. R. Berenbaum,
  17. O. B. Berlin,
  18. P. J. Bjorkman,
  19. E. Blackburn,
  20. J. E. Blamont,
  21. M. R. Botchan,
  22. J. S. Boyer,
  23. E. A. Boyle,
  24. D. Branton,
  25. S. P. Briggs,
  26. W. R. Briggs,
  27. W. J. Brill,
  28. R. J. Britten,
  29. W. S. Broecker,
  30. J. H. Brown,
  31. P. O. Brown,
  32. A. T. Brunger,
  33. J. Cairns Jr.,
  34. D. E. Canfield,
  35. S. R. Carpenter,
  36. J. C. Carrington,
  37. A. R. Cashmore,
  38. J. C. Castilla,
  39. A. Cazenave,
  40. F. S. Chapin III,
  41. A. J. Ciechanover,
  42. D. E. Clapham,
  43. W. C. Clark,
  44. R. N. Clayton,
  45. M. D. Coe,
  46. E. M. Conwell,
  47. E. B. Cowling,
  48. R. M Cowling,
  49. C. S. Cox,
  50. R. B. Croteau,
  51. D. M. Crothers,
  52. P. J. Crutzen,
  53. G. C. Daily,
  54. G. B. Dalrymple,
  55. J. L. Dangl,
  56. S. A. Darst,
  57. D. R. Davies,
  58. M. B. Davis,
  59. P. V. de Camilli,
  60. C. Dean,
  61. R. S. Defries,
  62. J. Deisenhofer,
  63. D. P. Delmer,
  64. E. F. Delong,
  65. D. J. Derosier,
  66. T. O. Diener,
  67. R. Dirzo,
  68. J. E. Dixon,
  69. M. J. Donoghue,
  70. R. F. Doolittle,
  71. T. Dunne,
  72. P. R. Ehrlich,
  73. S. N. Eisenstadt,
  74. T. Eisner,
  75. K. A. Emanuel,
  76. S. W. Englander,
  77. W. G. Ernst,
  78. P. G. Falkowski,
  79. G. Feher,
  80. J. A. Ferejohn,
  81. A. Fersht,
  82. E. H. Fischer,
  83. R. Fischer,
  84. K. V. Flannery,
  85. J. Frank,
  86. P. A. Frey,
  87. I. Fridovich,
  88. C. Frieden,
  89. D. J. Futuyma,
  90. W. R. Gardner,
  91. C. J. R. Garrett,
  92. W. Gilbert,
  93. R. B. Goldberg,
  94. W. H. Goodenough,
  95. C. S. Goodman,
  96. M. Goodman,
  97. P. Greengard,
  98. S. Hake,
  99. G. Hammel,
  100. S. Hanson,
  101. S. C. Harrison,
  102. S. R. Hart,
  103. D. L. Hartl,
  104. R. Haselkorn,
  105. K. Hawkes,
  106. J. M. Hayes,
  107. B. Hille,
  108. T. Hökfelt,
  109. J. S. House,
  110. M. Hout,
  111. D. M. Hunten,
  112. I. A. Izquierdo,
  113. A. T. Jagendorf,
  114. D. H. Janzen,
  115. R. Jeanloz,
  116. C. S. Jencks,
  117. W. A. Jury,
  118. H. R. Kaback,
  119. T. Kailath,
  120. P. Kay,
  121. S. A. Kay,
  122. D. Kennedy,
  123. A. Kerr,
  124. R. C. Kessler,
  125. G. S. Khush,
  126. S. W. Kieffer,
  127. P. V. Kirch,
  128. K. Kirk,
  129. M. G. Kivelson,
  130. J. P. Klinman,
  131. A. Klug,
  132. L. Knopoff,
  133. H. Kornberg,
  134. J. E. Kutzbach,
  135. J. C. Lagarias,
  136. K. Lambeck,
  137. A. Landy,
  138. C. H. Langmuir,
  139. B. A. Larkins,
  140. X. T. Le Pichon,
  141. R. E. Lenski,
  142. E. B. Leopold,
  143. S. A. Levin,
  144. M. Levitt,
  145. G. E. Likens,
  146. J. Lippincott-Schwartz,
  147. L. Lorand,
  148. C. O. Lovejoy,
  149. M. Lynch,
  150. A. L. Mabogunje,
  151. T. F. Malone,
  152. S. Manabe,
  153. J. Marcus,
  154. D. S. Massey,
  155. J. C. McWilliams,
  156. E. Medina,
  157. H. J. Melosh,
  158. D. J. Meltzer,
  159. C. D. Michener,
  160. E. L. Miles,
  161. H. A. Mooney,
  162. P. B. Moore,
  163. F. M. M. Morel,
  164. E. S. Mosley-Thompson,
  165. B. Moss,
  166. W. H. Munk,
  167. N. Myers,
  168. G. B. Nair,
  169. J. Nathans,
  170. E. W. Nester,
  171. R. A. Nicoll,
  172. R. P. Novick,
  173. J. F. O’Connell,
  174. P. E. Olsen,
  175. N. D. Opdyke,
  176. G. F. Oster,
  177. E. Ostrom,
  178. N. R. Pace,
  179. R. T. Paine,
  180. R. D. Palmiter,
  181. J. Pedlosky,
  182. G. A. Petsko,
  183. G. H. Pettengill,
  184. S. G. Philander,
  185. D. R. Piperno,
  186. T. D. Pollard,
  187. P. B. Price Jr.,
  188. P. A. Reichard,
  189. B. F. Reskin,
  190. R. E. Ricklefs,
  191. R. L. Rivest,
  192. J. D. Roberts,
  193. A. K. Romney,
  194. M. G. Rossmann,
  195. D. W. Russell,
  196. W. J. Rutter,
  197. J. A. Sabloff,
  198. R. Z. Sagdeev,
  199. M. D. Sahlins,
  200. A. Salmond,
  201. J. R. Sanes,
  202. R. Schekman,
  203. J. Schellnhuber,
  204. D. W. Schindler,
  205. J. Schmitt,
  206. S. H. Schneider,
  207. V. L. Schramm,
  208. R. R. Sederoff,
  209. C. J. Shatz,
  210. F. Sherman,
  211. R. L. Sidman,
  212. K. Sieh,
  213. E. L. Simons,
  214. B. H. Singer,
  215. M. F. Singer,
  216. B. Skyrms,
  217. N. H. Sleep,
  218. B. D. Smith,
  219. S. H. Snyder,
  220. R. R. Sokal,
  221. C. S. Spencer,
  222. T. A. Steitz,
  223. K. B. Strier,
  224. T. C. Südhof,
  225. S. S. Taylor,
  226. J. Terborgh,
  227. D. H. Thomas,
  228. L. G. Thompson,
  229. R. T. Tjian,
  230. M. G. Turner,
  231. S. Uyeda,
  232. J. W. Valentine,
  233. J. S. Valentine,
  234. J. L. van Etten,
  235. K. E. van Holde,
  236. M. Vaughan,
  237. S. Verba,
  238. P. H. von Hippel,
  239. D. B. Wake,
  240. A. Walker,
  241. J. E. Walker,
  242. E. B. Watson,
  243. P. J. Watson,
  244. D. Weigel,
  245. S. R. Wessler,
  246. M. J. West-Eberhard,
  247. T. D. White,
  248. W. J. Wilson,
  249. R. V. Wolfenden,
  250. J. A. Wood,
  251. G. M. Woodwell,
  252. H. E. Wright Jr.,
  253. C. Wu,
  254. C. Wunsch and
  255. M. L. Zoback

Welcome to the Polar Bear Diet

Welcome. The Polar Bear Diet is a new project focusing on the largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions and environmental damage world wide. Meat and dairy production is BY FAR the most damaging thing humans do to the earth. Methane emitted by cattle and other livestock is the most potent greenhouse gas known, far more damaging to the earth than CO2 which gets so much attention.

The polar bears are in trouble as human caused climate change is destroying the sea ice on which they depend for survival. We focus on them. They eat high fat meats but to save them, humans must eat a low fat plant based diet. Polar bears need to be fat to endure the arctic cold but humans get fat from eating meat and dairy. A plant based diet not only saves the planet, it will also save your life as meat based diets cause a range of diseases from heart disease to diabetes to hypertension and cancer. See the link below for more information.

Meat production creates more greenhouse gas emissions than all the transportation worldwide combined! You can have far more impact on reducing global warming by reducing or eliminating meat and dairy from your diet than you can by driving a hybrid car!

The Polar Bear Diet project will begin by raising awareness among environmentalists about this problem. No person who is serious about climate change or habitat protection can in good conscious eat meat. Next we’ll move on to everyone else. You can help.

Stay tuned as we populate this website with great information, links and tools for you as we begin our effort to drastically cut meat and dairy consumption worldwide.

By the way, meat production not only destroys the atmosphere, it is the single largest source of water pollution worldwide and cattle raising in particular is the largest single cause of tropical deforestation and desertification in places like Africa and the American Southwest.

Meat production is a huge monster with arms that reach into every area of the economy and every area of the environment.  We hope you will think about it. Eating is personal and habitual. We are all addicted to fats and salts to some extent and meat and cheese make up comfort food for many people. Plus we’ve all been propagandized by the meat industry to believe we need meat protein for health and that milk is a good source of calcium. In fact neither are true. We can get better calcium from leafy greens and better quality protein without the deadly saturated fats from plant sources rather than from meat.

For more information on these topics visit: http://www.greathealthconnection.com.

So let’s get started. Please visit often. We’ll make your next visit worthwhile as we get our content up and running!