I was assuming she meant journals that doctors frequently read, which means they have easier access. I've found several studies and articles online that I couldn't read without paying 30+ dollars for, and I was never THAT interested. Also, if they're involved in an ongoing study, couldn't that doctor have access to the work before its published? Not sure, just a theory.

A prepaid debit/credit card with X amount of dollars on it might work for your son.

I'm watching it right now. It's making me feel guilty for wanting to take the kids trick or treating for candy Saturday :glare:

Hmmm. We stretch meat out a lot in our house. I take 1 chicken breast and cube it up. From there I either put it in a casserole or just cook it up with some seasoning and put it in a bowl. 1 breast goes for 4 of us (granted the younger 2 are both under 3, so they should count as 1 together). I also do soups and stews a lot, and cut the meat in most recipes by half. It helps it go further and it's a bit healthier. Lunches will sometimes have meat/fish in the form of sandwiches or leftovers, so I'm guessing it's 1 breast or a little less overall.

I wouldn't compare the 1918 pandemic to today. http://1918.pandemicflu.gov/ Sanitation, the state of medicine, standard of living were all MUCH different.

If a hospital doesn't have beds, they don't have beds. They would have to turn people away at that point. Hopefully they could refer or transport them to another hospital, or give them really good drugs to go home with and hope for the best. Also if a hospital is extremely short staffed, maybe out with the flu, it could impact readiness and how many patients they can treat. I'm curious now if the passing of the national emergency will impact how many patients a doctor or nurse is legally allowed to care for at one time? You know, it's probably really selfish, but I'm glad right now that I'm no longer a practicing nurse. But, back to the topic of triage, the wikipedia article explains triage really well. The worst patients don't always get seen first. At its most primitive, those responsible for the removal of the wounded from a battlefield or their care afterwards have always divided victims into three basic categories: 1) Those who are likely to live, regardless of what care they receive; 2) Those who are likely to die, regardless of what care they receive; 3) Those for whom immediate care might make a positive difference in outcome. And while a person on the battlefield wouldn't be 'left to die' in the sense that they're left in a field somewhere they are 'left to die' in CSH area. The expectant patients would all be put in one area and given palliative care when possible (pain medication if supplies are available) but that's about it. Referring back to the wikipedia article again, In advanced triage, doctors may decide that some seriously injured people should not receive advanced care because they are unlikely to survive. Advanced care will be used on patients with less severe injuries. Because treatment is intentionally withheld from patients with certain injuries, advanced triage has ethical implications. It is used to divert scarce resources away from patients with little chance of survival in order to increase the chances of survival of others who are more likely to survive.

Medical people have to do triage all the time. When EMT's show up to the scene of a huge accident they have to prioritize who to treat first. When you have limited resources that's what you have to do. If one person is likely to die, but you can save 2 others in the time it takes to TRY to save the 1, than you save the 2. If beds are at capacity in a hospital and you have to choose between a person you can treat, and a person you're merely providing palliative care for, you treat the person you can save and send the other person home or to an alternate facility with some really good drugs. Granted my training was with the military so we focused a lot on MASCAL events and the first thing we had to do in any MASCAL training was run around to all the 'injured' and decide who was the priority. We labeled them with tags for those coming in behind us to round up the guys. Black tag meant 'expectant', that the person was likely so they are last on the list to be treated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triage Triage is a necessary part of the medical field and as long as there are adequate resources no one should be left to die.

While it does bother me that the national emergency was declared and it could impact our rights, I don't really buy into most of what that article says either. The theory about the FEMA camps has been debunked before. http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4312850.html

http://www.gummybearvitamins.com/products.php L'il Critters Omega-3 Gummy Fish We also use the gummy multi-vitamin and the gummy vit. D. I might switch over to liquid supplements at some point, but the girls love getting their vitamins right now :)

I believe the 411 is probably very close, just not 100% accurate. Even the 411 is a far cry from the 2400 deaths they are attributing when they count in those diagnosed with symptoms rather than tests. I personally believe the numbers are inflated, and that the larger numbers go further in terms of scaring people. The media these days seems like it is more in the entertainment business rather than the news business, and fear sells more than facts.

For us I think it was only 4-5 days, though it may have been up to 7. We were visiting my BIL and the last day we were there he started getting sick. We all started getting sick about 4 days after we got home. I guess we could have been exposed to the germs a few days before that in his house. Anyway, he got tested and tested positive for H1N1 around the same time we all started getting sick. No one was sick enough for me to feel we needed to go to the doctor. My 2 year old was vomiting, hubby and I had diarrhea, and we all had low grade fevers (101-102) and were really tired. The infant was still breastfeeding and never got sick. We all recovered in a few days though without it ever being too terrible. Of course we had been to the beach while we were in SC, and it was early summer, so we probably had pretty high vit. D levels. That combined with a good diet may have made our immune systems pretty well able to fight it off.

If you go to the link I gave to the CDC it gives this explanation for the large numbers. "Reports can be based on syndromic, admission or discharge data, or a combination of data elements that could include laboratory-confirmed and influenza-like illness hospitalizations." What I get from that is if someone dies with influenza like symptoms they are being lumped in with H1N1. I don't even trust the smaller number though, because what they count as 'testing positive' is "Laboratory confirmation includes any positive influenza test (rapid influenza tests, RT-PCR, DFA, IFA, or culture), whether or not typing was done." So if someone tests positive for influenza type A but isn't typed to figure out if it's the H1N1 strain, it still counts as a death with a positive test result.

Ok, I did a little more digging on the CDC website, and most of the deaths that are being attributed to H1N1 are based on the person having 'influenza or pneumonia like symptoms' rather than an actual positive test. http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/updates/us/ Diagnosis based on: Influenza and Pneumonia Syndrome* (Hospitalizations- 21,823) (Deaths- 2,416) Influenza Laboratory-Tests** (Hospitalizations- 8,204) (Deaths- 411) When H1N1 first hit EVERYONE who had a slight sniffle was being tested. It overwhelmed the system so they decided to stop testing in the majority of cases. The result now is they ASSUME who has H1N1. According to the numbers I posted above they only have positive tests for about 38% of the cases they are labeling as H1N1, the rest they are labeling based on the diagnosis of symptoms which are almost identical to traditional flu. So I'm guessing seasonal flu deaths are getting lumped in with H1N1. Declaring a national emergency is extremely premature. Its not like getting things ready before a hurricane hit's landfall. It's like getting things ready when the storm is barely a tropical storm way, way out at sea. ETA: I will add that I am really glad my kids aren't in school right now though. Nasty germ breeding grounds....

Mostly personal interest as well as what might help me most while homeschooling. I'm leaning towards self educating (reading a lot of books) for myself as far as History goes, because it seems like that would be easier to self educate in than Science. I just know that with the 4 year history rotation in the classical curriculum I'd be a bit lost. I don't remember learning much other than American history in school, and even that is a bit shaky in my mind. I don't plan on having a career at any point. I'll probably pick up a paralegal certificate as a 'just in case' when I'm done with my bachelors. It's only 5 or 6 additional classes at my college and it will cover me in the case I need to work for my family. My current plan is to volunteer in a variety of places when I have more free time rather than have a 9-5 career for money.

Can you tell me more about this one?

Ok, right now I'm in college. I've got basically all my Gen Eds as transfer from my military transcripts. I'm only taking 1-2 classes a semester because right now my kids are small, and even as they get older I'll still be using much of my own time for their education and entertainment. I'll be starting on classes for my major in the next semester or two, so I'm evaluating where I want to go. So, right now my declared major is English with a Natural Science minor. I picked that because I felt it would help me when I'm educating my own kids as well as because those two subjects are very interesting to me. Now I'm starting to question that. I'm wondering if I shouldn't have more History classes in there. I'm wondering if I should change to a History major with a English minor, change my minor from Natural Science to History, or if I should just try to self educate History and leave my declared major/minor as is. I started thinking about this because I only have 1 History class I'm required to take and I can't decide which one I should choose. I have a choice between World History I, World History II, American History through 1865, or American History 1865-present. I want to take them all, but I don't even have any Gen Ed spaces left I can fill up. I only get money from my GI bill for courses that are fulfill degree requirements, so I'm limiting myself to those courses at the moment. I love English and Science, but I also like History and feel it would help when I go to teach my kids if I had a stronger base myself in that subject. So, what would you do?

Same here, cold and raining. Very unusually cold. Usually we're in the 60's or so in October, but it's in the 40's. It was in the 40's and raining yesterday as well and will be for the next 2 days. Yuck. I would much rather have snow.....

This just came out this year, so it's a long shot, but has anyone used or even looked at this book yet? It sounds really great and I'm wondering how good it is. http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/language-lessons-through-literature-levels-1-2/7523697 Language Lessons through Literature, Levels 1 & 2 Intended for first and second grades, Language Lessons through Literature, Levels 1 & 2, is a beginning grammar program that focuses on teaching language arts gently and thoroughly through literature. Each level of this program has three lessons per week for thirty-six weeks, for a total of 108 lessons per year. Each lesson includes copywork, a literature selection to be read aloud, a poem, and an Aesop’s fable. Copywork selections are from the literature, the Bible, poems, and maxims. Each week includes a narration or a picture study. Literature selections include beloved children's classics such as The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, Peter Pan, and The Wind in the Willows. All literature selections are in the public domain in the United States. Optional workbooks are available for each level.

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind :001_smile: I'm thinking about buying the combo packs form TWTM. I want to read through the book at my library first, but it's always checked out :glare:

I'm not sure if this question is dead or not yet, but I'm getting my degree through University of Maryland University College. I'm an English major with a Natural Science minor. I figure that combination would help me the most as I am homeschooling, though I have considered changing my minor to history instead. Anyway, http://www.umuc.edu , is fully regionally accredited with a wide variety of majors available completely online. You will have to take your final exam proctored, but most community colleges have a testing center that qualifies.

I probably wouldn't push the issue too much. I think it's Finland doesn't formally begin teaching reading before the age of 7, and they have what's considered the best educational system in the world. If he likes listening I'd probably just read to him right now.

My oldest is about to turn three, so I'm still planning. :lol: I was looking at using SOTW for grammar stage as well, and I don't think I've thought to much past that. I just know I like the 4 year cycle much better than the 6 year outlined on SCM. Basically, the plan I'm trying to come up with is a classical charlotte mason education with a heavy literature emphasis, if such a thing is possible or makes any sense :001_smile:

Sorry about this, I'm can't post more than a few characters at once. I'm looking for history help. Does anyone have experience with the 6 year history cycle used at Simply Charlotte Mason? http://simplycharlottemason.com/plan...ules-overview/ How about the 4 year history cycle? Any experiences with that? Does anyone use SCM as a base, but change the history to a 4 year cycle? It seems like a pretty easy guide to play around with. This is what I was contemplating, but I was curious to get feedback. I guess I'm mostly looking for history idea's in general :)

see below.

Yada Yada Yada