How I Felt Watching Clare’s ‘Bachelorette’ Episodes

first_imgLife before Tayshia! Tayshia Adams got candid about watching Clare Crawley’s dates with their mutual Bachelorette contestants before she arrived in Palm Springs to take over as the season 16 lead.“I was watching, but I was trying not to, like, be in my head because our experiences were so different and they didn’t know I was coming. I didn’t know I was coming,” the 30-year-old reality TV personality exclusively told Us Weekly on Monday, November 9. “I’m happy that they, like, dove into it the way that they did, but then also at the same time, I’m like, ‘Oh, really?’ You know what I mean, watching it back. But I didn’t think too much about it.”Tayshia Adams Admits She Had Some Questions for the Men After Watching Clare Crawley’s EpisodesTayshia Adams and Clare Crawley Craig Sjodin/ABC(2)- Advertisement – When asked whether she thought Clare, 39, sent home anyone she thought she could have connected with, Tayshia quipped, “You know what, I didn’t actually think about that!”Us confirmed in August that Clare stopped filming season 16 within the first two weeks of production because she was already in love with one of her suitors. During the Thursday, November 5, episodes fans saw Clare and Dale Moss get engaged — and Tayshia arrive. The phlebotomist will meet the men during the Tuesday, November 10, episode.- Advertisement – “I couldn’t have asked for, like, a better group of men. I’ve always said that I want an older, more mature man that has depth and all of these guys have exactly that. It was, like, perfect,” she told Us, noting that most of the men were over Clare when she arrived. “Every single guy really reassured me that they were so happy and excited. And once I had that confidence, I was like, ‘OK, I got this.’ But there were some guys, yes, that were still having feelings for Clare. And so we talked about that as well.”Tayshia, who teased to Us that she is on “cloud nine” after the experience, added that she’s “excited” to watch her journey play out.“I had the best time. There’s not really anything that I regret,” she concluded. “I mean, is it kind of like mortifying to watch yourself make out on television and know that your dad is also watching? Like, yes, [but] it’s fun. I’m not looking forward to that, but other than that, I can’t wait.”- Advertisement – The Bachelorette airs on ABC Tuesdays at 8 p.m. ET.Listen to Here For the Right Reasons to get inside scoop about the Bachelor franchise and exclusive interviews from contestants – Advertisement –last_img read more


‘Storm Eta ruined my home’

first_imgStorm Eta has brought torrential rain and high winds to Central America and has devastated the home of 22-year-old Honduran Aileen. Luckily her family, which include her 75-year-old grandmother, mother, two brothers, sister and two dogs, were able to escape before the floods hit. – Advertisement – When she returned two days later, her house was still standing but everything inside was ruined. Now she is trying to rebuild her life. – Advertisement –center_img – Advertisement –last_img read more


Flu vaccine mostly went to priority groups, CDC says

first_imgMar 31, 2005 (CIDRAP News) – Influenza vaccination coverage among people in high-risk groups this season was similar to levels in past years, signaling that the government’s effort to make the most of the limited vaccine supply paid off, federal health officials reported today.Two-thirds of the vaccine doses administered from the beginning of the flu season through January went to people in priority groups, whereas about half of all doses went to those groups in the previous year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says. The information appears in the Apr 1 issue of Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.In addition, the altruism of healthy adults who skipped their flu shots, “saving vaccine for people who need it more,” according to a phone survey, led to about 17.5 million doses being freed for people in priority groups, the CDC reports.”Despite an unexpected and substantial vaccine shortfall, coverage levels among adults in the original influenza vaccine priority groups were similar to historical demand . . . thereby suggesting the effectiveness of prioritization,” the article says.The nation lost about half of its anticipated flu vaccine supply last October because of contamination at a Chiron Corp. plant in the United Kingdom. The CDC responded by recommending that available doses go to people at increased risk for flu complications, including the elderly, healthcare workers with patient contact, pregnant women, people with chronic medical conditions, children aged 6 to 23 months, people caring for babies younger than 6 months, and children on chronic aspirin therapy. (In late December, healthy people aged 50 to 64 and household contacts of people at high risk were added to the priority list, because of declining demand among other groups.)The findings come from the CDC’s nationwide Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) telephone survey. Because it was the first year certain questions about vaccination were used, the results had to be measured against findings in two other surveys, the 2003 National Immunization Survey (NIS) and the 2003 National Health Interview Survey (NIHIS). The CDC cautioned that only limited comparisons can be made among those surveys.Here’s how the 2004-05 BRFSS and 2003 NHIS findings on vaccination rates compared:Those aged 65 and older: 62.7% and 65.5%Healthcare workers with patient contact: 35.7% and 40.1%Pregnant women and people with chronic conditions: 25.5% and 34.2%Healthy people aged 18 to 64: 8.8% and 17.8%About 48.4% of children aged 6 to 23 months received flu shots this season, the first time the CDC formally recommended flu shots for that age-group. In addition, 34.8% of children aged 2 through 17 with high-risk conditions were vaccinated, which was much higher than the 12% coverage among children in that age-group who were not in a priority group.The Chiron vaccine woes didn’t affect vaccines for children younger than 2 years. But the outcome remains significant because it “suggests how quickly physicians and parents can adopt a new disease-prevention guideline,” the CDC says.”Despite the shortfall of inactivated influenza vaccine, the level of coverage achieved among those groups prioritized in 2004-2005 appears to be similar to historical coverage,” the report states. “Additional guidelines for prioritization of influenza vaccination in the event of a future influenza vaccine shortfall are in development and should assist with efforts to maximize the use of available vaccine.”Limitations of the BRFSS data include potential self-reporting error, exclusion of people without land-line telephones, exclusion of certain vaccine priority groups (i.e., institutionalized adults and adult caretakers of babies younger than 6 months outside the home), and exclusion of vaccinations that took place after the Feb 1-27 survey.CDC: Estimated influenza vaccination coverage among adults and children—United States, September 1, 2004–January 31, 2005. MMWR 2005 Apr 1;54(12):304-7 [Full text]last_img read more


Fresh doubts, new support for flu shots for seniors

first_imgOct 9, 2007 (CIDRAP News) – In quick succession, the view that influenza shots yield life-saving benefits for elderly people has come under serious attack and received fresh support in recent weeks.One group of experts, writing in the October issue of Lancet Infectious Diseases, argued that the mortality benefits of flu shots for the elderly have been greatly exaggerated because of a subtle bias and other methodologic problems in many of the relevant studies.”The remaining evidence base is currently insufficient to indicate the magnitude of the mortality benefit, if any, that elderly people derive from the vaccination programme,” says the analysis by Lone Simonsen, PhD, of George Washington University in Washington, DC, and colleagues.But in the Oct 4 New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), another team of experts presented a study showing that in the course of up to 10 flu seasons, flu shots reduced the risk of hospitalization for pneumonia and flu by 27% and shrank the risk of death by 48% for elderly members of three health maintenance organizations (HMOs). The study addresses several of the methodologic problems raised by the Lancet authors.”Vaccine delivery to this high-priority group should be improved,” states the report by Kristin Nichol, MD, of the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of Minnesota, and four coauthors.The controversy has major policy implications, since the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other medical groups heavily promote flu shots for elderly people, given their risk for serious complications if they contract the flu. This policy is reinforced by Medicare coverage of flu shots for this age-group.A sharp critique of the evidenceThe Lancet Infectious Diseases authors offer several reasons for questioning the notion that flu immunization saves lives in the elderly population:Vaccination coverage among the elderly has increased from 15% to 65% since 1980, but instead of declining, overall mortality due to pneumonia and influenza in elderly people has increased in that period.Few randomized, placebo-controlled trials have examined flu vaccine effectiveness in elderly people. The largest and best study, done in the Netherlands, showed a 50% reduction in confirmed flu cases among all the volunteers, but the reduction for those older than 70 was only 23%. There was no significant reduction in influenza-like illness.A number of investigators have reported finding evidence of flu vaccination benefits in the elderly by analyzing the records of large healthcare organizations. But these studies typically are flawed in that investigators looked for an effect on all-cause mortality, a nonspecific outcome, rather than on lab-confirmed flu. Further, many such studies may be marred by a subtle selection bias, wherein relatively healthy older people were more likely to be vaccinated than frail seniors were, thereby making vaccination look more beneficial than it really was. A further problem is that cohort studies typically have defined the flu season arbitrarily as December through March, rather than on the basis of flu surveillance.Simonsen and colleagues also write that since 1968, flu has accounted for an average of about 5% of all winter deaths in older people. Yet the results of cohort studies have prompted claims that flu vaccination reduces the risk of winter death from any cause by about 50% for community-dwelling people older than 65. “That influenza vaccination can prevent ten times as many deaths as the disease itself causes is not plausible,” say Simonsen et al.They argue that in view of the “slim” evidence that flu immunization prolongs elderly people’s lives, it may be time to consider doing more randomized, placebo-controlled trials—even though using a placebo would be “ethically unappealing.” In addition, they suggest, other options for protecting the elderly should be pursued, such as developing vaccines that are more immunogenic, using larger vaccine doses, and employing antiviral drugs more aggressively.Meanwhile, the researchers say elderly people should continue to be vaccinated, because “even a partly effective vaccine would be better than no vaccine at all.”Critiquing the critiqueThe review by Simonsen and colleagues drew praise in an editorial in The Lancet, written by two other vaccine experts who have reviewed the case for flu immunization in the elderly. Tom Jefferson and Carlo Di Pietrantonj of the Cochrane Vaccine Fields in Alessandria, Italy, write that Smonsen et al “prove that statistical methods for adjustment for residual bias used in the observational studies of influenza vaccines did not work, largely because of the difficulty of adjusting for frailty with data available in electronic records.”Jefferson and Di Pietrantonj endorse the idea of doing new randomized, placebo-controlled trials of flu vaccination in older people, arguing that such studies are “the only ethical and scientific way” to settle conclusively whether the vaccines are protective. The trials must cover more than one flu season and be large enough to detect rare outcomes, such as deaths due to flu, the pair assert.In an interview, a flu expert with the CDC asserted that the evidence of effectiveness remains strong enough to justify the US policy of promoting flu shots for the elderly. David K. Shay, MD, MPH, a medical officer in the CDC’s influenza division, agreed that better vaccines are needed, but he rejected the idea of doing placebo-controlled trials in the elderly as unethical.Shay said the randomized, controlled trial from the Netherlands that showed a 50% reduction in confirmed flu cases among the elderly provided “gold standard evidence” for a protective effect. The risk was reduced 57% in 60- to 69-year-olds versus 23% in those 70 and older, but because of wide confidence intervals, the difference between the two groups was not significant, he said.The Dutch findings and the high risk of flu-related hospitalization and death in the elderly provide the major underpinnings of the US policy of promoting flu vaccination in the elderly, Shay said, adding, “We’re left with the fact that this study [by Simonsen et al] isn’t going to change policy in the US for the use of these vaccines.”He said it is very difficult to demonstrate a reduction in mortality as a result of vaccination: “No vaccine trial ever done in the developed world has been [statistically] powered to look at a mortality benefit. So we’re going to have to rely on observational data.”As for the suggestion that unmeasured confounding variables have inflated the effectiveness of flu vaccines in observational studies, Shay said, “We also think that’s possible. The CDC is interested in working with HMOs to get a better handle on how to do vaccine effectiveness studies and mortality outcome studies.”But given the existing evidence that flu shots do help protect seniors, he rejected the suggestion of doing placebo-controlled trials. “If you can’t honestly answer, ‘I have no idea’ to the question whether the vaccine is effective, then you have no basis for doing a placebo-controlled trial,” he said.On the other hand, Shay commented, “Everybody would agree that we need a vaccine with greater effectiveness and greater immunogenicity in the elderly. Manufacturers are working on adjuvanted vaccines that hopefully will be more effective.”HMO study addresses methodologic issuesIn the NEJM study, Nichol and associates sought specifically to address the kinds of methodologic problems cited by Simonsen et al. They retrospectively gathered data on flu vaccination, hospitalization for pneumonia and flu, and death from any cause among community-dwelling elderly members of three HMOs. The study covered the flu seasons from 1990-91 through 1999-2000 for one HMO and those from 1996-97 through 1999-2000 for the other two. The HMOs were in Minnesota and Wisconsin, Washington state, and the New York City area.The study included 713,872 person-seasons of observation. Vaccinated subjects were slightly older and had slightly higher rates of most of the underlying medical conditions that were recorded. There were 4,599 hospitalizations for pneumonia or flu and 8,796 deaths.The per-season hospitalization rates for unvaccinated and vaccinated people were 0.7% and 0.6%, and the corresponding death rates were 1.6% and 1.0%. The figures translated into a 27% reduction in hospitalization rate for pneumonia and flu among the vaccinated (adjusted odds ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 0.77) and a 48% reduction in mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.55).The vaccine was somewhat less effective in preventing death—a 37% compared with 48% reduction—in the two seasons when the vaccine was a poor match for the circulating viral strains. For the seasons in which there was a good match, the vaccine yielded a 52% reduction in mortality risk.In an effort to detect any “healthy-vaccinee bias” (better underlying health among the vaccinated than the unvaccinated), the authors compared the risk of hospitalization among vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects during the summers (noninfluenza seasons) of 1999 and 2000. They found that the risks were similar for the two groups.The researchers went a step further by hypothesizing that an unmeasured confounding variable was influencing their findings and then estimating what that influence would be under various assumptions. They picked functional status as the unmeasured variable most likely to affect their subjects’ risk of hospitalization or death.On the basis of studies of functional status, the authors estimated that subjects with poor functional status would be half as likely to get a flu shot and two to three times as likely to be hospitalized or die, compared with those with better functional status. When they plugged these estimates into their data, along with estimates of the prevalence of the confounding variable, they found that the effectiveness of vaccination was reduced but still significant.For example, assuming that the confounder was present in 60% of subjects and that it doubled the risk of hospitalization or death, vaccination still reduced the risk of hospitalization by 14% and the risk of death by 39%. In the most extreme scenario—the confounder was prevalent in 60% and tripled the risk of hospitalization or death—vaccination still lowered the risk of hospitalization 7% and the risk of death 33%.The researchers write that their study “showed multiple benefits across multiple subgroups, a result suggesting that vaccination benefits probably extend to a broad spectrum of elderly persons.” However, they acknowledge that elderly HMO members may differ from elderly nonmembers, and the study did not include the frailest elderly, such as those living in nursing homes, who are likely to have weaker immune responses.A confidence boosterIn an accompanying NEJM editorial, John D. Treanor, MD, writes that the study by Nichol et al addresses many of the concerns raised about other observational studies “and increases our confidence in the benefits of influenza vaccination in older adults.”Because the evidence of vaccine effectiveness held up well through 10 seasons, the findings “convincingly dispel concerns that the previous studies were artifacts of a specific influenza season or a specific population,” states Treanor, who is a vaccine researcher; professor of medicine, microbiology, and immunology at the University of Rochester; and member of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.He also comments favorably on the authors’ efforts to address the concerns about unmeasured confounding variables, including the examination of summer hospitalization rates and the estimate of the effect of a hypothetical difference in functional status.”Overall, this study provides additional support for the current strategy to vaccinate elderly adults,” Treanor asserts. The methodologic issues are important, and the precise magnitude of the benefits of vaccination is not yet clear, but it is clear that vaccination is beneficial and should be used widely, he adds.However, he agrees with Shay that the development of more immunogenic and effective vaccines for the elderly is an important goal.Shay said the CDC is contemplating a special initiative to help resolve the controversy over the value of flu immunization for seniors. “Sometime in 2008 the CDC hopes to get together a panel of consultants to bring about ways to move forward and find ways to resolve this controversy,” he said. By assembling experts from the different camps, the agency hopes to come up with recommendations to guide the next series of studies, he said.Simonsen L, Taylor RJ, Viboud C, et al. Mortality benefits of influenza vaccination in elderly people: an ongoing controversy. Lancet Infect Dis 2007 Oct;7:658-66 [Abstract]Jefferson T, Di Pietrantonj C. Inactivated influenza vaccines in the elderly—are you sure? (Editorial) Lancet 2007 Oct 6;370(9594):1199-1200Nichol KL, Nordin JD, Nelson DB, et al. Effectiveness of influenza vaccine in the community-dwelling elderly. N Engl J Med 2007 Oct 4;357(14):1373-81 [Full text]Treanor JD. Influenza—the goal of control. (Editorial) N Engl J Med 2007 Oct 4;357(14):1439-41 [Full text]last_img read more


Finally synergy. Cres and Lošinj together in the development of a tourism development strategy

first_imgCres and Lošinj together in the development of a tourism development strategy until 2030, and will be done by Horwath Consulting.Namely, at the last session of the Tourist Board of the Cres Tourist Board, a decision was made on the development of the Tourism Development Strategy of the Cres-Lošinj archipelago until 2030. “Our two environments, Cres and Lošinj, have a lot of similarities, and guests see us as a unique destination. Therefore, we decided to develop a joint development strategy, and a company with an international reputation, Horwath Consulting, was chosen to prepare this strategic document in the coming years.”Pointed out the mayor of Cres, Kristijan Jurjako, who is also the president of the Tourist Board, Novi list writes.In the first nine months, almost 900.000 overnight stays were realized on Cres, 2,5% more than last year. After an excellent pre-season, there is no post-season behind, so, thanks to the nice weather, Cres welcomes mid-October with about 500 guests, 40% more than last year at the same timeAt the same session, the Tourist Council made a decision to relocate the offices of the Cres Tourist BoardPhoto: Bokanews.comSince the tourist office operates in a cramped and inadequate space, it was decided to move to a new office building that is currently being built on Peškera. It is expected that the building will be finished in the spring, and the Cres tourist board could welcome the next season in new, more appropriate premises.Together, Cres and Lošinj are certainly stronger, and as they are connected or connected by a bridge, they will now join forces with the “tourist” bridge and thus certainly contribute to a better, more diverse and higher quality tourist product.Source: NoviListlast_img read more


Schedule of holidays on emitting markets in 2019

first_imgThe calendar is made in the form of Excel “workbook” – the initial “work folder” brings a summary graphic display of holidays and celebrations in all processed markets, the next “work folder” brings a legend, ie an explanation of the summary graphic view, detailed elaboration for each of the markets. Attachment: Schedule of holidays on emitting markets in 2019 A good season always starts with good preparation, and in order to prepare as well as possible, we bring you a list of holidays and celebrations in the emitting markets in 2019. 21. 4. Sunday – Easter22. 4. Monday – Easter Monday1. 5. Wednesday – Labor Day20. 6. Thursday – Corpus Christi22. 6. Saturday – Day of anti-fascist struggle25. 6. Tuesday – Statehood Day5. 8. Monday – Victory and Homeland Thanksgiving Day and Croatian Veterans Day15. 8. Thursday – Assumption8. 10. Tuesday – Independence Day1. 11. Friday – All Saints25. 12. Wednesday – Christmas26. 12. Thursday – St. Stephen And as we know that domestic tourists, ie domestic consumption, are extremely important, especially when we talk about continental tourism, certainly how extended weekends are ideal for short trips and getting to know Croatia. Croats are known for combining holidays with extended weekends, the only question is where they will spend their extended weekend. Tell them a story to spend with you. List of holidays and celebrations in 2019 in Croatia “In order to help tourism businesses plan such special offers, which can be offered to market partners (tour operators and agents), but also to individual clients, a calendar of public holidays / holidays / school holidays has been developed for 24 major markets for which it is possible prepare programs adapted to the period in which there is potential for travel abroad”They point out from the CNTB and add that the practice of tying holidays and weekends is common in most European countries, while the target group of families with children is particularly motivated to travel during school holidays.last_img read more


Open competition for the award of public recognitions of the Zagreb County

first_imgZagreb County will once again award public recognitions to individuals and legal entities, institutions, associations responsible for the economic, social and cultural development of Zagreb County and its promotion in the country and the world. The competition for the award of public recognitions is open until May 31, 2019. You can see more information about the competition and the application form HERE. The proposal for the awarding of public recognitions of the Zagreb County may be submitted by members of the County Assembly, working bodies, the Zagreb County Prefect, citizens, citizens’ associations, companies, religious communities, cultural, sports and other institutions. Source / photo: Zagrebačka županijacenter_img Potential candidates can be individuals or legal entities who, through their continuous and extremely important scientific, professional, artistic, pedagogical or other public work, have made a lasting contribution and achieved exceptional results in improving the situation and development of certain activities and its international promotion. Also, the future winner of the public award should enjoy the reputation of exemplary employees and experts in his environment. One of the criteria is the achieved result in the overall economic or social development of Zagreb County. The proposal for awarding public recognitions must contain the CV of the proposed candidate for awarding public recognition, the exact name of the company, institution, association or other legal entity proposed for awarding public recognitions with a thorough explanation of the reasons, appropriate documentation and information about the applicant.last_img read more


If workers fail to reach an agreement with more than one employer, they should be deleted from the CES records.

first_imgThe goal of the profession and the Government is to activate and employ the domestic labor force. A more appropriate solution for employers in tourism is a domestic worker for whom there is no need for demanding administration, providing accommodation if it is someone from the local area, and which completes the authentic experience in Croatia for the end guest. “We certainly welcome measures such as dual education, the promotion of vocational occupations in tourism and a possible future reduction in the wage burden as well as tax relief in tourism that would ensure more competitive wages for those in the EU, but we need help now., “Said Žgomba and added that an urgent solution is needed by approving an additional quota of foreign workers for tourism because we are questioning the viability of the branch that carries over 20 percent of GDP. RESPONSE OF THE MINISTRY OF LABOR AND PENSION SYSTEM TO THE EMPLOYER’S APPEAL IN TOURISM: EMPLOYERS CONTACT CES  RELATED NEWS: The appeal for the workers was joined by travel agencies, which emphasize if workers fail to reach an agreement with several employers, that they should be deleted from the CES records because they represent a brake on the employment of those who really want to work – UHPA and UPA HGK point them out. “We ask the CES to send those 4.000 unemployed, of which 1.600 on the coast, who are available for work in the season and have expressed a desire to work in the season, immediately and within three days to employers in tourism who lack labor, and if not manage to reach an agreement with several employers, please delete them from the CES records because they are a brake on the employment of those who really want to work”Said Boris Žgomba, president of the Association of Travel Agencies of the Croatian Chamber of Commerce. HUT AND HUP APPEAL: URGENTLY MAKE A DECISION TO INCREASE QUOTAS BECAUSE THERE ARE NO WORKERS AND THE SEASON IS IN DANGER  UPA HGK and UHPA are leading professional associations in tourism that represent the interests of over 1800 registered companies for the activities of travel agencies and tour operators, employ over 6 thousand people and contribute to the realization of approximately 15 million overnight stays.  Travel agencies also joined the appeal for workers, and due to the burning problem of labor shortage, Croatian tourism is threatened by the impossibility of opening part of the facilities, as well as the deterioration of the quality of service. center_img “Tourism is still an industry of experiencing and transmitting local experience, and man is the key to success in tourism,Fain emphasizes. However, we have been facing for a long time that there are no such workers, and the structural solutions that are being implemented or announced are solutions that will give results in a longer period of time. WILL WE FINALLY INTRODUCE THE SLOVENIAN MODEL FOR IMPORTING FOREIGN WORKERS FROM NEXT YEAR? Insane technical problems with the registration of foreign workers The lack of quality and qualified workforce and the consequent decline in the quality of service in the hotel and catering industry will also be felt by travel agencies, whose quality of offer largely depends on that of other actors in tourism.  They have the same attitude in the Association of Travel Agencies of the Croatian Chamber of Commerce (UPA of the Croatian Chamber of Commerce). Both professional associations welcome electronic applications, but administration remains a problem. The processing of applications for the employment of a foreign worker takes several weeks, which is too long, especially for facilities where the season lasts only 12 weeks. “Professional associations support the efforts of the Government and the Ministry of Labor and Pension System, as well as activities such as Tourism Job Day, providing retirees with part-time work and increasing quotas in 2019, but as these measures do not solve the problem because over 5 workers are missing“Points out Tomislav Fain, President of the Association of Croatian Travel Agencies (UHPA)last_img read more