All posts by medical

Anatomy

Anatomy Of A Panicked Reaction: Financial Advisors’ Daily Digest – Seeking Alpha

The longest running disagreement between me and some of the readers in this forum concerns my persistent warnings that investors are prone to sell low in panic and buy high in euphoria, and the ensuing resentful rebuttals I get from an army of disciplined DIYers. That this type of statement elicits indignation merely reinforces my view that there is an underlying emotion animating the response - that is, a deep-seated fear that panic-selling could happen to the one denying it.

(Some of these commenters dress up their rebuttals in the form of how dare you suggest investors need an advisor? but those reading my posts carefully enough understand that I am agnostic about the form of help people get and recognize that some people dont need any.)

It is with this background that I commend to your attention a must-read article by Erik Conley, who relays with uncommon honesty the story of how his panic on March 3, 2009, as the market plumbed new lows (after cascading downward for over a year) prompted him to call his broker to sell everything.

Most Seeking Alpha readers will recognize the date as being just days before the all-time market low during the last financial crisis. Whats important also to know is that Conley is not just your average working stiff. Hes a professional investor! And, as is evident from his writing, hes highly intelligent as well. This is no surprise to me, since I have repeatedly warned that the most intelligent people are precisely the most vulnerable because their fertile minds can quickly spin a compelling narrative that makes sense of why things are going down, and must continue to do so. Indeed, Conley alludes to this when he interprets a downward trending stock chart on CNBC as follows (with my emphasis added):

I began to imagine scenes of widespread panic like those old newsreels from the Great Depression of the 1930s. I imagined crowds of people lined up in front of banks desperately trying to get their money out before the bank collapsed. I saw bread lines and soup kitchens. And I saw myself, living in a van, down by the river. At that moment, I was in full panic mode."

Conley was fortunate that when he implored his broker to sell, saying I don't care what the price is, just get me out! his long-time associate tried hard to walk him off the ledge. He couldnt convince him not to sell everything but got Conley to agree to sell only half. When Conley came to his senses, he called back and re-bought everything. The cost of this investment roundtrip was 1.75% of his portfolio - not a bad price for such a valuable lesson. How costly it would have been had he missed out on the ensuing eight years of market price appreciation.

If Conley - a market veteran - can fall into the No. 1 investing trap, certainly anyone can. He chalks it up to the inescapability of being human:

I had acted irrationally, but I just couldn't see it at the time. I'm only human, after all, and humans panic sometimes. But I'm also an experienced, professional investor. I should have known better."

Thats true enough. Im less convinced, though, by another point he makes, suggesting that he got caught off guard while on vacation and away from his normal surroundings, computer and investment plan:

Had I taken the time to consult the part of my written plan that spells out how to deal with big market declines, I would have been more rational, and it's very unlikely that I would have made that panic sale.

The problem with this there is always a time of vulnerability. If it wasnt on March 3, it could have been on March 4. Elazar Advisors, LLC has commented that his trading advice service is premised on the knowledge that someone who is sitting alone making investment decisions is bound to crack up at some point from the psychological pressure that is most acute when by oneself. I think this applies to everyone to a greater or lesser extent - we all are prone to heeding inner messages emerging from the wellsprings of our sometimes irrational fears, hopes or desires.

That inner voice can convince you to shred that investment plan. That could have happened perhaps even more easily had Erik Conley seen the same screen on the same day back at home. Having his broker, partner and friend, on the other line kept the cost of his investment lesson to 1.75% of his portfolio rather than 3.50%. People need people - in all areas of life, not just investments. Whether you employ an advisor, enlist a knowledgeable friend or make sure you and your spouse are mutually committed to that investment plan, youre likely to lose less and gain more with a partner.

Postscript

It is with this perspective in mind that I want to notify readers of a new premium service on Seeking Alphas Marketplace called Wealth Watchers, designed for people who want something in between engaging a financial advisor and doing things completely on their own. The new forum will serve as a mutually supportive peer group with knowledge and perspective on the how-tos of earning, saving and investing with the aim of achieving financial independence.

Please share your thoughts in our comments section. Meanwhile, here are a few advisor-related links for today:

Visit link:
Anatomy Of A Panicked Reaction: Financial Advisors' Daily Digest - Seeking Alpha

Anatomy

What happened at the Oscars: Anatomy of a disaster – TODAY.com – Today.com

February 28th, 2017

PricewaterhouseCoopers has been tallying results for the Oscars for the past 83 years. Now the professional services firm says its taking full responsibility for what is being called the biggest Oscars flub in history: La La Land initially being announced as the Best Picture winner rather than the actual winner, Moonlight. NBCs Joe Fryer takes TODAY through the fiasco step by step.

Original post:
What happened at the Oscars: Anatomy of a disaster - TODAY.com - Today.com

Embryology

What Price Concord? (RJS) – Patheos (blog)

There are two primary fronts in the conflict or apparent conflict between science and Christian faith: (1) Are the scientific claims intrinsically atheistic? and (2) How do we reconcile Scripture with the scientific data? Neither of these are new problems, but they play a significant role in Western society today. In his book Evolution: Scripture and Nature Say Yes Denis Lamoureux seeks to demonstrate that scientific claims are not intrinsically atheistic, rather that it requires faith to move from science to any metaphysical claim about the existence or non-existence of God. Nothing in our scientific understanding of the universe either requires or eliminates God from the picture. We can endeavor to predict the weather based on physics and chemistry and still view it as under Gods control. Our understanding of embryology and fetus development does not require us to dismiss the Psalmists wonder and awe of God who formed my inward parts and knitted me together in my mothers womb.(Ps 139:13)

Although the story of Galileos run-in with the Catholic Church is often cast as a paradigm for the unavoidable conflict between science and Christian faith, it is a story from which we can learn much. We can draw insights concerning the most effective way that scientists can introduce findings to the church, the manner in which the church can productively engage with science, and the approach we should take to apparent scientific claims in Scripture.

Very few today doubt that the earth and other planets orbit the sun, or that the earth is in one of many solar systems in the galaxy, one of many galaxies in the universe. For most of church history, however, there was no belief but that the earth was the center of the universe and that the Holy Scriptures clearly taught this truth. Augustine wasnt even convinced that the earth was spherical, although he was convinced that it was ridiculous to imagine antipodians (individuals with their feet pointing towards his) on the other side of the earth if the earth was spherical. Among other things, God could not be in the heavens above both Rome and the antipodians and this was contrary to Scripture (so Augustine thought).

By the time of the Reformation (Luther nailed his theses to the door in 1517), Copernicus (mid 1500s) and Galileo a bit later in the early 1600s, a spherical earth was not terribly controversial. Columbus sailed west in search of a route to the Far East in 1492. The idea of a sun-centered solar system introduced by Copernicus, accepted and popularized by Galileo, was controversial. Many arguments were raised against the idea, only some of which were grounded in Scripture. It was not at all unreasonable for the church to take an attitude of wait and see. It was unfortunate that the church authorities chose to make definite pronouncements against the ideas advanced by Copernicus, Galileo and others. It wasnt until Newtons theory of gravity made the scene (late 1600s) and more refined astronomical measurements followed (1700s) that Galileo and Copernicus were fully vindicated.

Galileo and the Interpretation of Scripture. Galileo was a devout Christian loyal to the Catholic Church. Because of this he wrestled with the interpretation of Scripture and the implications of the scientific evidence. Lamoureux digs into Galileos views, especially those related in his Letters to the Grand Duchess Christina. Galileo firmly believed that God was revealed both in Scripture and in nature.

Galileo believed that Scripture and nature are divine revelations. He asserts, God reveals himself to us no less excellently in [1] the effects of nature than in [2] the sacred words of Scripture, as Tertullian perhaps meant when he said, We postulate that God ought first to be known [1] by nature, and afterward further known [2] by doctrine [1] by nature through his works, [2] by doctrine through official teaching. (p. 138-139)

Gods self-revelation, recorded for us in the words of Scripture provide knowledge otherwise beyond the reach of human reason. We cannot know, from reason alone, that God is love, that humans were created in his image, that God is both merciful and just, that he pursues his people, that Jesus died for the sins of the world. This revelation, however, is couched in a framework intelligible to the original audience, 2000 to 4000 years ago in the Middle East. It came to humankind though the personal relationship of God with his creation; it did not require any scientific understanding of the big-bang, the magnitude and age of the universe, quantum theory or evolution.

Lamoureux continues:

With regard to matters dealing with science and the physical world Galileo defends the priority of nature over Scripture. He writes, I think that in disputed about natural phenomena one must begin not with the authority of scriptural passages but with sensory experience and necessary demonstrations [i.e. science]. (p. 139-140)

Later:

Galileo argued that the Creator gave us a mind that so that we could practice science. I do not think one has to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, language, and intellect would want us to set aside the use of these. Indeed, who wants the human mind put to death? Galileo affirms that God is not deceptive, but faithful. We can trust our mind and the scientific discoveries we make in nature because the Creator made us that way. An implication of being blessed by the Lord with our senses, language, and intellect is that he wants us to use these gifts. In fact, they assist us in obeying Jesus commandment to love the Lord our God with all our mind (Matt. 22:37). (p. 141)

Because God created the universe (making it a reliable revelation) and us with senses, language, and intellect, as his image bearers, it is entirely proper to use information derived from study of the universe to aid in the proper interpretation of Scripture. Galileo adds that it would be proper to ascertain the [scientific] facts first, so that they could guide us in finding the true meaning of Scripture. (p. 143). Lamoureux points out that we all do this, we interpret the immovability of the earth, the rising and setting of the sun, and the vault above as phenomenological statements not scientific statements. We interpret the pillars of the earth and the storehouses of hail as poetic rather than scientific.

Why do [we] do this? Its because scientists have shown us the structure of the solar system and explained how gravity works. After the Galileo affair, Christians realized that astronomers had proven geocentricism to be false. The earth is not the center of the universe with the sun circling it. Consequently, Christians could no longer read biblical verses about the earths immovability and the suns movement as factual scientific statements. (p. 143)

Ive had this conversation many times following various blogs and in discussion groups. Most Christians simply accept without questions that the demonstrably false statements in Scripture are not intended to be interpreted literally. The mind is not located in the gut. The stars are not inscribed on a vault. Many translations go so far as to hide the original referent from the modern audience without giving it a second thought. It isnt usually dishonest, but grounded in the realization that other language will convey the truth more clearly to a modern audience. Every translation requires interpretation.

One approach to dealing with the presence of ancient science in Scripture is to invoke the idea of accommodation. This is not a new idea. Among others, both Augustine and the Reformers used the concept in their approach to Scripture. God didnt introduce seventeenth century or twenty-first century science into his self-revelation in Scripture because this would have introduced an unnecessary stumbling block for the original audience, obscuring the intended message.

What lessons should we as Christians take from the Galileo affair?

(1) Withhold judgment on scientific matters until there is a clear consensus. It isnt necessary or desirable to shoehorn every new idea into theology. Nor is it wise to reject ideas early, before all the evidence is in. We can afford to be generous and exercise intellectual humility. Science doesnt impact key claims of the Christian faith the nature of God or his relationship with his creatures, the incarnation, crucifixion and resurrections.

(2) Recognize that Scripture does contain ancient science and this does not detract from the message that is conveyed.

(3) Avoid proof-texting that rips passages from their biblical and cultural context and uses them to shore up a desired interpretation of Scripture. Someday I am going to write a post entitled Lord save us from a proof-text faith. The reliance on proof-texts is one of the biggest failings of western evangelicalism. We need to be immersed in Scripture not shored up by resting on favored tidbits.

(4) Avoid authoritative proclamations in areas outside of your expertise. Lamoureux argues Only let those with proper training in biology, especially evolutionary biology, be given the privilege of teaching about the origins of life in our churches and Sunday schools. (p. 150) I think this goes too far. Taken seriously it would mean that I should not teach on either Scripture or the question of origins as I am an authority on neither evolutionary biology nor ancient Hebrew and Near Eastern Culture. I would take a somewhat looser position. We should be skeptical of anyone without expertise who teaches an idea far outside of the mainstream, and of one who does not rely openly on trusted experts in the area. This isnt a cure-all but it would go a long way toward a cure for what ails the church on issues of science and Christian faith. Do not allow non-Christians to pronounce on the essence of Christian faith (proclamations that science demands atheism are ridiculous). Allow Christians with expertise in astronomy, geology, genetics, and biology the primacy of place in discussions of these fields in the Church. Allow those with expertise in ancient Near Eastern Culture and language the primacy of place in interpretation of the Old Testament.

(5) Understand the reasons given for variant positions on the questions of age and origins. Some Christian biologists and geologists hold views outside of the scientific mainstream, not because of the scientific evidence, but because of their view of Scripture. This doesnt mean they should be silenced but that their views should be evaluated on the appropriate grounds. Is the interpretation of Scripture reasonable and is it a sufficient reason to deviate from mainstream scientific views?

(6) Respect expertise whether you ultimately agree or disagree. This is important for our witness as Christians.

(7) Arguing that the church has always believed this as in the church has always believed in a earth-centered universe (true in 1600) or the church has always believed in de novo creation of species or kinds (true enough) doesnt really help with resolution of science and Christian faith. The church, and before that Judaism, have adapted to our growing understanding of Gods creation. (Kyle Greenwoods book Scripture and Cosmology is a great read here.)

We need to hold firm to truths about God and his relationship with his people, created in his image. That Scripture records ancient understandings of science incidental to the message should cause us little concern and no angst.

In his earlier book, Evolutionary Creation, Lamoureux notes that we should expect agreement between historical events and Scripture when the text records witnessed history this starts at some point in or after Genesis 12. This agreement will be consistent with the accepted forms of writing in ancient Israel up through the first century Roman world. We expect spiritual concord from beginning to end. Scripture faithful records the message of Gods work in the world. We expect scientific concord when phenomenological observations (common in the ancient Near East) are re-enforced by scientific study, not when they are revised or replaced.

Scientific concordism simply doesnt seem to be supported by a careful reading of Scripture or our growing understanding of Gods creation. The Holy Spirit did not correct errant understandings of science whether in biology, geology, medicine or cosmology. The price of insisting on scientific concordism is large both in driving some from the faith and in preventing others from even considering the faith.

What is the price of scientific concordism?

What can we learn from the story of Galileo?

If you wish to contact me directly you may do so at rjs4mail[at]att.net

If interested you can subscribe to a full text feed of my posts at Musings on Science and Theology.

Read more here:
What Price Concord? (RJS) - Patheos (blog)

Cell Biology

Shedding light on the star of cell biology – Cherwell Online

In the twilight depths off the west coast of North America lives a small and graceful jellyfish floating apparently aimlessly through the void. Who would have known that this humble jellyAequorea victoriawas set to revolutionise cellular biology in the latter half of the twentieth century. Along the rim of the jellyfishs bell (the propulsive body) lies a ring of light-emitting organs which, in the blackness, produce an electric green glow that wouldnt be out place in a Ghostbusters film. This luminescence can be attributed to a chemical mechanism based around the molecule known as the Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP), synthesised by the jellyfish. Earning those involved in its discovery the Nobel Prize in 2008, GFP has been the key to unlocking the potential of biological imaging over the last 25 years.

The light organ houses two molecules essential for the light reaction: aequorin and GFP, working in conjunction. By catalyzing the degradation of the protein luciferin, aequorin causes blue light to be released. Rather than emitting this blue light, the photons are instead used an as energy source to activate the fluorescence of GFP. GFP has an excitation peak at the wavelengths of 395 nm and 475 nmcorresponding to blue and UV light. This means that it will most efficiency absorb light in this range of the spectrum. Absorbing this light leaves GFP in an unstable state with too much energy, being described as excited. Emission of green light at the wavelength of 508 nm, energetically lower than that it absorbed, returns it to its stable state.

Green light is rare in the ocean depths, meaning that an organism that can luminesce in such a way will be more obvious in its surroundings, allowing it to attract prey and confuse predators. But how is this relevant to cell biology in the laboratory? In 1992, American scientist Douglas Prasher sequenced and cloned the wild-type GFP gene. Over the following few years GFP became the darling of molecular genetics, a result of our ability to fuse the gene onto the beginning or the end of any other gene in any organism.

Related Do not go gentle into that good night

If inserted into an embryo, every cell in the body can inherit the GFP tagged protein. When the resulting organism is exposed to UV light it then glows green. This allows scientists to track both the distribution and the concentration of the protein throughout individual cells or through the organism as a whole, depending on which protein is tagged with GFP. We can see the trafficking of the proteins through the cell in real time, highlighting a host of cellular processes from protein packaging to the structure of the nuclear membrane.

Over the course of its history GFP has been constantly engineered and modified, transforming it into an increasingly more effective and versatile tool. A whole spectrum of different colours of fluorescent proteins have now been engineered. By using a red-producing variant of GFP, scientists have found success in diagnosing cancer since, due to its longer wavelength, red light can travel further through intervening tissue.

On a grander scale, one couldnt discuss GFP without bringing up the glow-in the dark rats, cats, rabbits, pigs, monkeysyou name it. Due to its obvious but relatively benign nature, GFP serves as one of the earliest genes used when trialling an organism with genetic modification, as a proof of the technology before more complex manipulation is attempted, with wide implications especially within medicine. We will soon reach the point where we can easily extract vaccines from cows milk, and produce disease resistant pigs.

The story of a simple jellyfish that has gone onto transform the very nature of molecular biology and medicine is a testament to the resourcefulness of science and humanity as a whole. It proves that the most useful of tools can have the most unlikely of origins, and should serve as a needed reality check. With every extinction, we say goodbye to another jewel in the biological crown, the vast wealth of unique genetic information that the organism possessed vanishing often forever. Who knows how many GFPs weve already lost.

Follow this link:
Shedding light on the star of cell biology - Cherwell Online

Anatomy

Scoop: GREY’S ANATOMY on ABC – Thursday, March 16, 2017 – Broadway World

Who Is He (And What Is He To You)? Jackson and April travel to Montana in order to perform a complicated surgery on a young patient, but Jacksons mind is elsewhere, and April is forced to step up and get him back on track, on Greys Anatomy, THURSDAY, MARCH 16 (8:00-9:01 p.m. EST), on the ABC Television Network.

Greys Anatomy stars Ellen Pompeo as Meredith Grey, Justin Chambers as Alex Karev, Chandra Wilson as Miranda Bailey, James Pickens Jr. as Richard Webber, Kevin McKidd as Owen Hunt, Jessica Capshaw as Arizona Robbins, Jesse Williams as Jackson Avery, Sarah Drew as April Kepner, Caterina Scorsone as Amelia Shepherd, Camilla Luddington as Jo Wilson, Jerrika Hinton as Stephanie Edwards, Kelly McCreary as Maggie Pierce, Jason George as Ben Warren, Martin Henderson as Nathan Riggs and Giacomo Gianniotti as Andrew DeLuca.

Greys Anatomy was created and is executive produced by Shonda Rhimes (Scandal, How to Get Away with Murder), Betsy Beers (Scandal, How to Get Away with Murder), Mark Gordon (Saving Private Ryan) and Rob Corn (Chicago Hope). William Harper, Stacy McKee, Zoanne Clack and Debbie Allen are executive producers. Greys Anatomy is produced by ABC Studios.

Who Is He (And What Is He To You)? was written by Elisabeth R. Finch and directed by Kevin McKidd.

Greys Anatomy is broadcasted in 720 Progressive (720P), ABCs selected HTV format, with 5.1-channel surround sound.

Read this article:
Scoop: GREY'S ANATOMY on ABC - Thursday, March 16, 2017 - Broadway World

Anatomy

Anatomy of a NIMBY – CityLab

Restricting housing construction does not just hurt developersit makes housing less affordable for everyone. But to overcome neighborhood resistance, you need to understand what drives it.

Birds sit on a telephone line near Skid Row Housing Trust's 102 pre-fabricated modular apartments under construction in Los Angeles.

Next week, Los Angeles will vote on Measure S, a ballot initiative that proposes a two-year moratorium on developments that required changes to land use.

The law could potentially limit both new developments and affordable housing. Even with an exception for affordable housing developments written into the law, critics say it could still further restrict affordability in the region.

For a growing chorus of urbanists, NIMBYism and land use restrictions are the culprit behind everything from growing income inequality to shrinking affordable housing, productivity, and innovation. A 2015 study estimated that land use restrictions costs the United States upwards of $1.5 trillion in lost productivity. The 2016 Economic Report of the President called for sweeping reform of zoning and land use restrictions to overcome these costly economic rents, build more housing, and stimulate the U.S. economy.

A recent white paper by Paavo Monkkonen sheds interesting new light on the connection between NIMBYism and housing affordability. It takes a deep dive into, on the one hand, neighborhood opposition and land use restrictions, as well as housing supply and housing costs in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Californias other expensive housing markets. (The research was partially supported by an unrestricted grant from the Center for California Real Estate to the University of California Center Sacramento Center Housing, Land Use, and Development Public Leadership and White Paper Award.)

California offers an ideal case study in the effects of NIMBYism on housing prices. Its major metrosLos Angeles, San Francisco, Silicon Valley, San Diego, Santa Barbaraare some of the most expensive in the nation. They combine high levels of productivity and high levels of amenitytwo factors which create the high demand which puts pressure on housing prices, and have fallen victim to harsh land use restrictions.

San Francisco Is So Expensive Even Renters Can Be NIMBYs

My own research finds that knowledge and professional workers are able to pay Californias higher housing costs. The burden falls largely on less advantaged blue-collar and service workers who have very little money left over after paying for housing. San Francisco has the highest housing costs in the country, while L.A. has the highest share of rent-burdened households. Across the state as a whole, renters need to make almost four times the state minimum wage to afford an average rent.

The crux of the California problem, the Monkkonen paper argues, is not the states restrictions on uber-high density building in and around urban centers, but the broader dependence on lower-density zoning across the board. Los Angeles may be a relatively dense city and metro (indeed, according to some basic measures, it is the densest metro in the country), but three-quarters of its residential land is devoted to relatively low-density single-family housing that only shelters half the citys population.

But adding new supply in the form of high-rise towers in and around the core will do little to solve the overall housing affordability problem. For one, those towers are usually built for the wealthy, and luxury buildings often boost the price of housing in neighborhoods in and around where theyre built (prompting calls like this one for a luxury housing tax to fund affordable units). They can also displace people from their neighborhoods and change the character of those neighborhoodsthings residents very much care about and will understandably seek to block.

Understanding NIMBYs

To get beyond NIMBYism, we first must understand it. Neighborhood resistance isnt just triggered by residents trying to prop up their home values or protect their neighborhoods from things they dont likeits the product of policies that provide incentives toward homeownership and a regulatory system that encourages and prompts opposition.

Even if the economic arguments about the costs and negative consequences of NIMBYism reflect sound economic logic, they amount to little if they fail to address the very real concerns of neighborhood groups. Most regular citizens and neighborhood residents dont think like dispassionate economists. According to a 2016 Building Industry Association poll, some two-thirds of San Franciscans surveyed do not think increasing housing supply improves affordability. Rather, they believe that land use regulations help to protect their neighborhoods.

Monkkonen goes on to parse four different strains of NIMBYism and their underlying motivations:

To fend off the four flavors of NIMBYism, the paper suggests several strategies:

There are other ways to combat NIMBYism. Yale Law School professor David Schleicher suggests using local tax policy to essentially co-opt NIMBY opposition to new development. The basic idea, referred to as tax increment local transfers, is to allow the residents of neighborhoods to share in the tax revenues that come from new developmentfor example, by rebating and reducing their own property taxes over a period of time. Others suggest that shifting from the current property tax to a land-value tax, which taxes property owners on the underlying value of the land itself, will create better incentives for more intensive land use.

But regardless of the precise mechanism employed, finding better ways to understand and counteract NIMBYism and create more vibrant and affordable cities is one of the most pressing policy issues facing urban America. The need to build more housing without removing community input is, as Monkkonen puts it, "a challenge we can no longer ignore."

See the original post:
Anatomy of a NIMBY - CityLab

Anatomy

Play anatomy: Corey Peters – Scout

In this week's edition of "Play Anatomy," CardinalsSource examines the impact nose tackle Corey Peters made stopping the run during the 2016 season.

Editor's note: Each week, CardinalsSource looks at a particular play or a particular skill demonstrated by a Cardinals' player from the 2016 season in great detail. This week's CardinalsSource is examining the run-stopping capabilities of nose tackle Corey Peters by looking at a week 16 play against Seattle.

After missing the 2015 season with a serious Achilles' injury, nose tackleCorey Petersreturned to the Arizona Cardinals in 2016 to play out the second year of a three-year contract.

Peters played the first five seasons of his career with the Atlanta Falcons before signing with Arizona to bolster the team's run-stopping capabilities in the interior of its defense.

During his first healthy season with Arizona, Peters proved to be a valuable asset, racking up 21 tackles and commanding enough attention on the line to allow players like Chandler Jones, Markus Golden and Calais Campbell to work in more favorable one-on-one situations.

Peters performed well against the run throughout the season, thanks in large part to a quick first step and a great initial burst that made him a challenging blocking assignment on zone run plays. To put that in perspective, CardinalsSource is looking at a week 16 run play the Seattle Seahawks ran against the Cardinals that Peters stopped in its tracks.

Prior to the snap, Arizona lined up with a 4-2-5 defensive front, allowing Jones to put his hand in the dirt and defensive endJosh Mauroto anchor the opposite side of the line of scrimmage.

In this alignment, Peters is set up in a four-shade on the outside shoulder of the right guard. If Seattle plans on running right, Peters knows he's responsible for shutting down the B-gap and pushing the offensive guard back off the line of scrimmage. if the Seahawks run left, Peters is responsible for tracking down the play from the back side of the line and beating the block of the right tackle.

At the snap, Seattle's linemen immediatelyrush left with zone blocking footwork that pits Peters against the Seattle right tackle. With the right guard attempting to reach the linebacker level and the right tackle responsible for Peters, the Seahawks leave Mauro unaccounted for and expect quarterback Russell Wilson to hold him with a play-action fake. By holding Mauro in his spot and reaching Peters with the right tackle, Seattle's goal is to set up a cutback lane for its running back if the play side becomes muddled.

Peters, however, foils the Seahawks plans almost immediately after the snap. Once he realizes the guard lined up in front of him wants to get to the linebacker level, he slides through the B-gap and begins scraping his way down the line of scrimmage, preventing the right tackle from securing a clean angle to block him from.

As a result, the cutback lane can't develop for the Seahawks' back, who must either follow his fullback into the hole, or attempt to bounce the play to the outside, where Jones has clearly established contain. Essentially, the back is out of options, and Peters makes his decision far more challenging because he's racing down the line of scrimmage to make a tackle in the backfield.

Eventually, when Seattle's fullback cuts up the field, so too does its running back, but Peters is already there to make the play. Peters secures a tackle and brings the back down for a two-yard loss, all because he started the play off with an excellent first step and reaction at the line of scrimmage that prevented the Seahawks' right tackle from having a clean angle to block from.

If Peters gets reached, perhaps a back side cutback lane develops and the Seahawks are able to make something out of nothing. However, because it does not, a simple zone play goes for a two-yard loss, and Peters forces Seattle to rethink the way it's going to block this play moving forward.

Read more here:
Play anatomy: Corey Peters - Scout

Human Behavior

Shri Narayanan named inaugural Nikias Chair in Engineering – Daily Trojan Online

Professor Shri Narayanan of USCs Viterbi School of Engineering received the Niki and C. L. Max Nikias Chair in Engineering. This honor is the first formal recognition in Nikias name.

Narayanan is a professor of electrical engineering, computer science, linguistics, psychology, neuroscience and pediatrics. He has served as director of the Ming Hsieh Institute of Electrical Engineering since 2010, and director of the Signal Analysis and Interpretation Lab since 2005.

Nikias recruited Narayanan nearly two decades ago, when Nikias was a Viterbi professor.

One of my most enduring and heartfelt achievements while at USC Viterbi was to help recruit Shri, Nikias said to USC News. Seventeen years ago, one could not overestimate his towering intellect and creativity.

Narayanans lab focuses on human-centered technologies. By using data scientific approaches to understand human cognition, aspects of human behavior are explored further. In the context of this, Narayanan wants to bring greater understanding to mental health.

We are trying to find more objective ways of diagnosing autism, as well as understanding changes in behavior in response to the treatment, he said.

Additionally, Narayanans work spreads to media studies, particularly focusing on unconscious biases and their representation in media and the effect this has on society.

Narayanans work is unique in that it brings mathematics and computer science into the equation.

These subjects traditionally have been dealt with very qualitatively, Narayanan said. We try to combine multiple perspectives from different fields like engineering, psychology and linguistics.

By bringing objective quantitative analysis to psychotherapy, Narayanan hopes to better understand the mental condition of patients in addiction therapy and counseling.

Nikias presented the award to Narayanan on Feb. 15 at Tutor Hall.

I feel very honored and excited, because [Nikias] is a leader in the field Ive worked in, Narayanan said. Hes also one of my mentors. Its very meaningful for me on both a personal and a professional level.

Go here to read the rest:
Shri Narayanan named inaugural Nikias Chair in Engineering - Daily Trojan Online

Human Behavior

Business & Professional – NUjournal

Eric Warmka is the new general manager at Minnesota Valley Funeral Homes, and the Willkommen Committee of the New Ulm Area Chamber of Commerce stopped by to congratulate him, and to welcome new funeral director Dan Baltramonas.

Eric, originally from Wells, has worked in the funeral industry for 12 years. He moved to New Ulm almost three years ago from the St. Cloud area with his wife, Sarah, and their son Jackson. He says he loves that MVFH is a community-owned cooperative, so that they are able to focus on service and not sales.

Dan is originally from south-east Wisconsin, and earned his mortuary science degree in Arizona. He has 15 years of experience working at funeral homes in Eau Claire and Platteville, Wisconsin.

MVFH has two locations in New Ulm as well as Nicollet and Gibbon.

Holmquist receives APMA designation

NEW ULM John Holmquist, a financial advisor with Ameriprise Financial in New Ulm, recently received the Accredited Portfolio Management AdvisorSM (APMA) designation from the College of Financial Planning.

Individuals who hold the APMA designation have completed a course of study encompassing client assessment and suitability, risk/return, investment objectives, bond and equity portfolios, modern portfolio theory and investor psychology.

Holmquist is part of Wealth Management Solutions, a financial advisory practice of Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc.

As a financial advisor, Holmquist provides financial advice that is anchored in a solid understanding of client needs and expectations, and provided in one-on-one relationships with his clients. For more information, please contact John Holmquist at 507-354-7177. His office is located at 510 2nd St N New Ulm, MN 56073.

Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. Member FINRA and SIPC.

Bloedow to speak to regional HR

professionals about cybersecurity

NEW ULM The responsibility for cybersecurity cant lie with IT alone when so many breaches occur as a result of human behavior.

On March 30, Sam Bloedow address HR professionals in Mankato, providing practical tactics that they can use to develop cybersecurity awareness and employee habits that will lessen the risk of cyber attack and its serious impacts.

In this presentation for the Southern Minnesota Area Human Resource Association (SMAHRA), Sam will help participants understand how the cybercriminal ecosystem has evolved, making small and medium-sized businesses rich targets for cybercrime. Hell guide the audience into a new understanding about cybersecurity awareness as a company priority, by discussing some of the threats that employees could encounter during their work day, including social engineering, phishing, and web-based exploits.

HR professionals can play an important role in how companies protect their business information and employees from cybercrime. Participants in this event will take away practical information on cybersecurity habits that can be implemented immediately and learn guildelines for effective cybersecurity training. Register and learn more about SMAHRA on their website http://www.smahra.org/.

New director at Woodstone

Maggie Gostonczik is the new executive director at Woodstone Senior Living, and the Willkommen Committee stopped by to welcome her.

Maggie is originally from the Judson area and has lived in Hutchinson for the past 12 years. She married her high school sweetheart, and they have three children together. Woodstone has three locations: Hutchinson, New Ulm, and Rice Lake. The New Ulm location has 10 memory care units and 20 care suites (assisted living), three with vacancies. Contact her at 507-359-3355 to set up a tour or to learn more about Woodstone of New Ulm.

New offices for New Ulm Real Estate

New Ulm Real Estate has moved, and the Willkommen Committee recently stopped their new offices at 1227 N. Broadway to see them.

The New Ulm Real Estate team consists of Mary Henle (broker and agent), Lisa Besemer, Stephanie Meyer, and Kim Hanson.

Mary has been in the business for 25 years, Lisa and Stephanie joined her 6 years ago and Kim began 1.5 years ago. The ladies agree that their old space was too small. They love the easy access and corner location of the new building, which used to be Terrys Auto Service. In the remodeling/building of their new offices, they kept the original building, which can still be seen in the exposed ceiling and interior walls. Stop by to see the new space, or visit them online at newulmrealestate.net.

New partner at Gislason & Hunter

The WIllkommen Committee of the New Ulm Area Chamber of Commerce recently stopped by Gislason & Hunter Law Firm in New Ulm to congratulate Kaitlin Pals on becoming a new partner.

Kaitlin is originally from northern Iowa (near Mason City) and attended law school at the University of Iowa. She was an English major in college and was thinking about becoming a professor before deciding to go to law school. She has been an attorney in New Ulm for about 5 years. She specializes in estate planning and corporate ag business. Her recent partnership makes her the only woman out of the eight partners at the New Ulm location.

Gislason & Hunter has three other locations, Mankato, Minneapolis, and Des Moines.

New Edward Jones financial advisor

The Willkommen Committee recently visited with Jill Berdan, new Edward Jones financial advisor at 108 N. State.

Steve Schreiber is retiring, and Jill is one of three agents who are helping with this transition.

This is a new career for Jill, who was previously branch president of SouthPoint Financial in Sleepy Eye. Jill wasnt looking for new employment; she was previously an Edward Jones client and was approached about the opportunity. She says she is setting an example for her sons that you can be in a career you love but continue to challenge yourself. She likes that Edward Jones places importance on personal connections and one-on-one meetings and she is looking forward to building relationships with her clients.

She is not going to be working alone. Kris Sandmann, who worked with Steve Schreiber for 16 years, will be staying on as senior branch office administrator.

MADELIA First Responders with the Madelia Fire Department are now some of the best-equipped in the nation to ...

See the original post here:
Business & Professional - NUjournal

Anatomy

The Anatomy of Awareness: Emotional Trauma and Health – The Good Men Project (blog)

On the latest Real Men Feel, Andy Grant and Appio Hunter are joined by their friend, Emotional Strength Trainer Amanda Foy, to explore emotions, awareness, and how emotional trauma affects our cells and health.

Video:

. .

Audio alone:

.

The Anatomy of Awareness with Amanda Foy, Episode 48, February 21, 2017

Amanda says that guilt and shame are the only useless emotions. They have no purpose but to make you feel horrible. Guilt is acceptance without positive action. Shame is a lack of acceptance or acknowledgment of having a human experience. While trauma is defined by each person. What one person finds traumatic another person may not. It can depend on what we were taught and how we are expected to be.

When you get sick, it is your bodys way of taking you out of a situation you dont know how to handle. Illness comes when you are too stubborn to do the work you need to do, so it is a good thing. ~ Amanda Foy

Do you want to talk about how to have richer, more mindful, and enduring relationships?

Photo credit: Pixabay

The Real Men Feel Show is a weekly podcasthosted by RMF founder, Andy Grant and his friend and fellow coach, Appio Hunter. Each episodeis recorded live with Zoom, a video meeting service that allows up to fifty people to be part of a live video conversation. Viewers can watch, make comments and ask questions in a chat room, or even request to join the live program on video and audio, and really be part of the show. Real Men Feel Show is live each (most) Tuesdays at 8pm Eastern at RealMenFeel.org/show Some weeks feature Andy and Appio discussing what is going on with them, while other shows feature invited guests. Live participants are always welcome and can share comments in a chat room or even ask to be seen and heard as part of the show.

See a directory of past shows here.

Here is the original post:
The Anatomy of Awareness: Emotional Trauma and Health - The Good Men Project (blog)