LOS ANGELES (AP) — A Southern California woman cited for wearing Internet-connected eyeglasses while driving plans to contest the citation.
Cecilia Abadie was pulled over for speeding Tuesday evening in San Diego, when a California Highway Patrol officer noticed she was wearing Google Glass and tacked on a citation usually given to drivers who may be distracted by a video or TV screen.
The lightweight eyeglasses, which are not yet widely available to the public, feature a hidden computer and a thumbnail-size transparent display screen above the right eye. Users can scan maps for directions — as well as receive web search results, read email and engage in video chats — without reaching for a smartphone.
Abadie, a software developer, said in an interview that she was not using her Google Glass when she was pulled over for allegedly going about 80 mph in a 65 mph zone on the drive home to Temecula after visiting a friend.
"The Glass was on, but I wasn't actively using it" to conserve the battery, she said.
Abadie expressed surprise that wearing the glasses while driving would be illegal and said she's "pretty sure" she will fight the ticket. First, she said, she needs to seek legal counsel. In the flurry of online commentary her traffic stop has generated, several people saying they are attorneys offered their services.
"The law is not clear, the laws are very outdated," Abadie said, suggesting that navigating with the device could be less distracting than with a GPS unit or phone.
"Maybe Glass is more a solution to the cellphone problem than a problem," she said.
It's unclear whether a citation for Google Glass has been issued before. The CHP said it is not sure whether an officer within its own ranks has written one, and an agency spokesman pointed out hundreds of law enforcement agencies in California alone can write traffic tickets.
Legislators in at least two states, Delaware and West Virginia, have introduced bills that would specifically ban driving with Google Glass. Authorities in the United Kingdom are mulling a similar ban.
About 10,000 units have been distributed so far in the United States to "pioneers," and this week Google announced another 30,000 would be available for $1,500 apiece. Abadie said she got hers in May and has become an "evangelist" for the technology.
A spokesman for Google did not reply to a request for comment. On its website, Google says this about using the headgear while driving: "Read up and follow the law. Above all, even when you're following the law, don't hurt yourself or others by failing to pay attention to the road."
___
Associated Press researcher Rhonda Shafner in New York contributed to this report.
___
Follow Justin Pritchard at https://twitter.com/lalanewsman
ATHENS, Greece (AP) — Thousands of protesters clogged the Greek capital's streets Thursday to demonstrate against a new property tax. The anger was registered across society, with retirees, disabled groups, shipyard workers and high school teachers among those taking part in demonstrations.
Parliament is due to vote next week on proposals to replace an emergency property tax included on electricity bills with a permanent levy, breaking a pledge made last year by the conservative-led coalition government to abolish the tax. More than 50 conservative lawmakers are demanding changes to proposals, arguing they unfairly burden their rural constituents.
The government is also planning new cuts to state benefits and the public workforce, triggering another general strike planned by unions for Nov. 6.
Outside the Labor Ministry, more than a thousand disabled demonstrators who traveled from around Greece blocked traffic outside the building, before filing through the city center in wheelchairs, on crutches and using white canes for the blind.
Deaf protesters responded to speeches by shaking both hands in the air, sign language for applause.
Yannis Vardakastanis, a blind Greek who heads the European Disability Forum, said the protest was called after disabled people were denied an exemption from the new property tax.
"We are the poorest of the poor but we must not let them turn us into victims," he said. "The financial crisis is turning into a humanitarian crisis for us."
Michalis Kouklos, a 35-year-old blind and unemployed man, took a six-hour bus ride from the northern city of Thessaloniki to attend the demonstration.
"We're here to defend the obvious things that everyone needs to live in dignity," he told the AP.
"People with serious illnesses are losing their health insurance and have to go from hospital to hospital to try and get treated. I wish there had been more of us here today because things are getting really bad."
The government has promised a six-year recession will end in 2014, but unemployment has continued to rise. By the latest measure, it was near 28 percent, with 31 percent of the country living in poverty or at risk of poverty, according to the EU statistics agency, Eurostat.
Supreme Court's Obamacare decision established new limits on federal authority, IU paper says
PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:
31-Oct-2013
[
| E-mail
]
Share
Contact: George Vlahakis vlahakis@iu.edu 812-855-0846 Indiana University
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- A new paper by an Indiana University professor sheds new light on the U.S. Supreme Court's rejection of legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act, which many critics said threatens state sovereignty and individual liberties.
The paper comes at a time when problems with the act's implementation, particularly the creation of state health care exchanges, highlight the limits of federal capabilities and the importance of state cooperation in the success of domestic government programs.
In an article in Business Horizons, a journal published by IU's Kelley School of Business, Tim Lemper argues that the court's decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius actually established new limits on the power of the federal government.
"The court was heavily criticized for betraying the principles of federalism and limited government in the U.S. Constitution," Lemper said. "In reality, the court's decision placed groundbreaking limits on Congress' power to regulate commerce and use federal funds to pressure states into doing its bidding.
"These aspects of the court's decision received less attention in the popular media but may actually prove to have a more significant impact on the scope of federal power in the future," said Lemper, a clinical professor of business law at Kelley.
In his research, Lemper often takes a more critical approach to overlooked details in legislation and jurisprudence. Earlier research brought to light a drafting error in the federal trademark dilution statute, which led Congress to amend the law last fall.
In his paper, "The Supreme Struggle: 'Obamacare' and the New Limits on Federal Regulation," Lemper bases his arguments on two points raised in the court's opinion: new limits on Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce and to coerce states with the threat of losing federal funding.
In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that the limits on Congress' power in the Constitution, and the reservation of powers to the states, were intended to protect individual liberty.
Details overlooked in media reports about the decision include what Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in dissent, called "a novel constraint" on Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce, a sweeping and seemingly unlimited power that has been used to uphold a broad range of federal regulations on activity far beyond traditional commercial transactions, Lemper said.
"Set in historical context, the court's decision is significant because it establishes a new limit on Congress' expansive power under the Commerce Clause," he wrote. "Five of the nine justices concluded that the Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to regulate existing commercial activity, but does not allow Congress to compel individuals to become active in commerce.
"In other words, Congress can regulate activity under the Commerce Clause, but it cannot regulate inactivity."
Applying this rationale to the Affordable Care Act, the majority on the court concluded that the individual mandate (requiring individuals to buy health insurance or pay a tax penalty) exceeded Congress' power to regulate commerce because it compelled people to engage in commerce by buying health insurance.
"That the court still upheld the individual mandate as a valid exercise of Congress' more limited power to lay and collect taxes does not diminish the significance of the limit that it placed on Congress' more expansive power to regulate interstate commerce," Lemper said. "Congress' power to lay and collect taxes is more limited and less coercive than its power to regulate interstate commerce, which -- before this decision -- increasingly appeared to have no limit."
"The court's decision precludes Congress from venturing into new regulatory territory under the guise of regulating commerce," he said. "At the very least, it forecloses future governmental regulation that uses a person's inaction as a basis to compel them to act."
Lemper said the court's decision also broke new ground in restricting Congress' power under the Spending Clause. Seven of the justices -- "a majority of rare size for this court" -- held that the Affordable Care Act wrongly coerced states into accepting the Medicare expansion by threatening them with the loss of all Medicare funding (a significant portion of states' budgets) if they refused to do so.
"The court's decision is remarkable because it is the first time that the court has ever struck down a federal law under the Spending Clause on the ground that it runs counter to the system of federalism in the Constitution," he added. "For decades, the court has recognized the possibility that the federalism principles could limit Congress' power under the Spending Clause, but it had never actually done so until its decision on the Affordable Care Act.
"Its landmark holding gives real teeth to limits on Congress' power that had previously only existed in theory."
###
[
| E-mail
Share
]
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Supreme Court's Obamacare decision established new limits on federal authority, IU paper says
PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:
31-Oct-2013
[
| E-mail
]
Share
Contact: George Vlahakis vlahakis@iu.edu 812-855-0846 Indiana University
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- A new paper by an Indiana University professor sheds new light on the U.S. Supreme Court's rejection of legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act, which many critics said threatens state sovereignty and individual liberties.
The paper comes at a time when problems with the act's implementation, particularly the creation of state health care exchanges, highlight the limits of federal capabilities and the importance of state cooperation in the success of domestic government programs.
In an article in Business Horizons, a journal published by IU's Kelley School of Business, Tim Lemper argues that the court's decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius actually established new limits on the power of the federal government.
"The court was heavily criticized for betraying the principles of federalism and limited government in the U.S. Constitution," Lemper said. "In reality, the court's decision placed groundbreaking limits on Congress' power to regulate commerce and use federal funds to pressure states into doing its bidding.
"These aspects of the court's decision received less attention in the popular media but may actually prove to have a more significant impact on the scope of federal power in the future," said Lemper, a clinical professor of business law at Kelley.
In his research, Lemper often takes a more critical approach to overlooked details in legislation and jurisprudence. Earlier research brought to light a drafting error in the federal trademark dilution statute, which led Congress to amend the law last fall.
In his paper, "The Supreme Struggle: 'Obamacare' and the New Limits on Federal Regulation," Lemper bases his arguments on two points raised in the court's opinion: new limits on Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce and to coerce states with the threat of losing federal funding.
In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that the limits on Congress' power in the Constitution, and the reservation of powers to the states, were intended to protect individual liberty.
Details overlooked in media reports about the decision include what Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in dissent, called "a novel constraint" on Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce, a sweeping and seemingly unlimited power that has been used to uphold a broad range of federal regulations on activity far beyond traditional commercial transactions, Lemper said.
"Set in historical context, the court's decision is significant because it establishes a new limit on Congress' expansive power under the Commerce Clause," he wrote. "Five of the nine justices concluded that the Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to regulate existing commercial activity, but does not allow Congress to compel individuals to become active in commerce.
"In other words, Congress can regulate activity under the Commerce Clause, but it cannot regulate inactivity."
Applying this rationale to the Affordable Care Act, the majority on the court concluded that the individual mandate (requiring individuals to buy health insurance or pay a tax penalty) exceeded Congress' power to regulate commerce because it compelled people to engage in commerce by buying health insurance.
"That the court still upheld the individual mandate as a valid exercise of Congress' more limited power to lay and collect taxes does not diminish the significance of the limit that it placed on Congress' more expansive power to regulate interstate commerce," Lemper said. "Congress' power to lay and collect taxes is more limited and less coercive than its power to regulate interstate commerce, which -- before this decision -- increasingly appeared to have no limit."
"The court's decision precludes Congress from venturing into new regulatory territory under the guise of regulating commerce," he said. "At the very least, it forecloses future governmental regulation that uses a person's inaction as a basis to compel them to act."
Lemper said the court's decision also broke new ground in restricting Congress' power under the Spending Clause. Seven of the justices -- "a majority of rare size for this court" -- held that the Affordable Care Act wrongly coerced states into accepting the Medicare expansion by threatening them with the loss of all Medicare funding (a significant portion of states' budgets) if they refused to do so.
"The court's decision is remarkable because it is the first time that the court has ever struck down a federal law under the Spending Clause on the ground that it runs counter to the system of federalism in the Constitution," he added. "For decades, the court has recognized the possibility that the federalism principles could limit Congress' power under the Spending Clause, but it had never actually done so until its decision on the Affordable Care Act.
"Its landmark holding gives real teeth to limits on Congress' power that had previously only existed in theory."
###
[
| E-mail
Share
]
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Women under 60 with diabetes at much greater risk for heart disease
PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:
31-Oct-2013
[
| E-mail
]
Share
Contact: Patrick Smith psmith88@jhmi.edu 410-955-8242 Johns Hopkins Medicine
Results of a Johns Hopkins study published today in the journal Diabetes Care found that young and middle-aged women with type 2 diabetes are at much greater risk of coronary artery disease than previously believed.
Generally, women under 60 are at far less risk for coronary artery disease than men of the same age. But among women of that age who have diabetes, their risk of heart disease increases by up to four times, making it roughly equal to men's risk of this same form of heart disease.
"Our findings suggest that we need to work harder to prevent heart disease in women under 60 who have diabetes," says Rita Rastogi Kalyani, M.D., M.H.S., endocrinologist at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and lead study author. "This study tells us that women of any age who have diabetes are at a high risk for coronary artery disease."
While men generally have a higher incidence of heart disease than women, the study found that diabetes had little or no effect on men's heart disease risk.
Kalyani said the new study is believed to be the first to focus specifically on gender differences in coronary artery disease among younger and middle-aged people with diabetes.
For the research, she and her colleagues analyzed data from more than 10,000 participants in three widely regarded studies: the GeneSTAR Research Program, the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III. None of the participants had a history of heart disease. All three studies yielded similar gender differences in rates of diabetes and the risk of developing heart disease.
"Our study adds to growing evidence that gender differences exist in the risk of coronary artery disease brought on by diabetes," Kalyani says.
Interestingly, in both women and men, these findings were unrelated to differences in obesity and other traditional cardiovascular risk factors such as high blood pressure, cholesterol and smoking.
Kalyani and her colleagues offer several possible explanations for the increased risk. There may be distinct genetic and hormonal factors related to the development of heart disease by gender. Differences in adherence to heart-healthy lifestyle behaviors, compliance and treatment of cardiovascular treatments between genders are also possible but need to be further investigated, Kalyani says. Also, the relationship of diabetes duration and glucose control to risk of heart disease remains unclear.
###
In addition to Kalyani, the study's authors are Mario Lazo, M.D.; Pamelo Ouyang, M.B.B.S.; Karinne Chevalier, M.S.; Frederick Brancati, M.D., M.H.S.; Diane Becker, Sc.D., M.P.H.; and Dhananjay Vaidya, Ph.D., M.P.H., of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, as well as Evrim Turkbey, M.D., of Radiology and Imaging Sciences at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center.
About Johns Hopkins Medicine
Johns Hopkins Medicine (JHM), headquartered in Baltimore, Maryland, is a $6.7 billion integrated global health enterprise and one of the leading academic health care systems in the United States. JHM unites physicians and scientists of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine with the organizations, health professionals and facilities of The Johns Hopkins Hospital and Health System. JHM's vision, "Together, we will deliver the promise of medicine," is supported by its mission to improve the health of the community and the world by setting the standard of excellence in medical education, research and clinical care. Diverse and inclusive, JHM educates medical students, scientists, health care professionals and the public; conducts biomedical research; and provides patient-centered medicine to prevent, diagnose and treat human illness. JHM operates six academic and community hospitals, four suburban health care and surgery centers, and more than 35 Johns Hopkins Community Physicians sites. The Johns Hopkins Hospital, opened in 1889, was ranked number one in the nation for 21 years in a row by U.S. News & World Report. For more information about Johns Hopkins Medicine, its research, education and clinical programs, and for the latest health, science and research news, visit http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org.
Media Contacts: Patrick Smith
410-955-8242; psmith88@jhmi.edu or
Helen Jones
410-502-9422; hjones49@jhmi.edu
[
| E-mail
Share
]
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Women under 60 with diabetes at much greater risk for heart disease
PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:
31-Oct-2013
[
| E-mail
]
Share
Contact: Patrick Smith psmith88@jhmi.edu 410-955-8242 Johns Hopkins Medicine
Results of a Johns Hopkins study published today in the journal Diabetes Care found that young and middle-aged women with type 2 diabetes are at much greater risk of coronary artery disease than previously believed.
Generally, women under 60 are at far less risk for coronary artery disease than men of the same age. But among women of that age who have diabetes, their risk of heart disease increases by up to four times, making it roughly equal to men's risk of this same form of heart disease.
"Our findings suggest that we need to work harder to prevent heart disease in women under 60 who have diabetes," says Rita Rastogi Kalyani, M.D., M.H.S., endocrinologist at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and lead study author. "This study tells us that women of any age who have diabetes are at a high risk for coronary artery disease."
While men generally have a higher incidence of heart disease than women, the study found that diabetes had little or no effect on men's heart disease risk.
Kalyani said the new study is believed to be the first to focus specifically on gender differences in coronary artery disease among younger and middle-aged people with diabetes.
For the research, she and her colleagues analyzed data from more than 10,000 participants in three widely regarded studies: the GeneSTAR Research Program, the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III. None of the participants had a history of heart disease. All three studies yielded similar gender differences in rates of diabetes and the risk of developing heart disease.
"Our study adds to growing evidence that gender differences exist in the risk of coronary artery disease brought on by diabetes," Kalyani says.
Interestingly, in both women and men, these findings were unrelated to differences in obesity and other traditional cardiovascular risk factors such as high blood pressure, cholesterol and smoking.
Kalyani and her colleagues offer several possible explanations for the increased risk. There may be distinct genetic and hormonal factors related to the development of heart disease by gender. Differences in adherence to heart-healthy lifestyle behaviors, compliance and treatment of cardiovascular treatments between genders are also possible but need to be further investigated, Kalyani says. Also, the relationship of diabetes duration and glucose control to risk of heart disease remains unclear.
###
In addition to Kalyani, the study's authors are Mario Lazo, M.D.; Pamelo Ouyang, M.B.B.S.; Karinne Chevalier, M.S.; Frederick Brancati, M.D., M.H.S.; Diane Becker, Sc.D., M.P.H.; and Dhananjay Vaidya, Ph.D., M.P.H., of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, as well as Evrim Turkbey, M.D., of Radiology and Imaging Sciences at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center.
About Johns Hopkins Medicine
Johns Hopkins Medicine (JHM), headquartered in Baltimore, Maryland, is a $6.7 billion integrated global health enterprise and one of the leading academic health care systems in the United States. JHM unites physicians and scientists of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine with the organizations, health professionals and facilities of The Johns Hopkins Hospital and Health System. JHM's vision, "Together, we will deliver the promise of medicine," is supported by its mission to improve the health of the community and the world by setting the standard of excellence in medical education, research and clinical care. Diverse and inclusive, JHM educates medical students, scientists, health care professionals and the public; conducts biomedical research; and provides patient-centered medicine to prevent, diagnose and treat human illness. JHM operates six academic and community hospitals, four suburban health care and surgery centers, and more than 35 Johns Hopkins Community Physicians sites. The Johns Hopkins Hospital, opened in 1889, was ranked number one in the nation for 21 years in a row by U.S. News & World Report. For more information about Johns Hopkins Medicine, its research, education and clinical programs, and for the latest health, science and research news, visit http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org.
Media Contacts: Patrick Smith
410-955-8242; psmith88@jhmi.edu or
Helen Jones
410-502-9422; hjones49@jhmi.edu
[
| E-mail
Share
]
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Google showed off its new Android version 4.4 (or KitKat) operating system, running on a new flagship phone, the Nexus 5. Google uses its Nexus line to show off its new operating systems, and the device and OS are reflections ...
Researchers discover how retinal neurons claim the best brain connections
PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:
31-Oct-2013
[
| E-mail
]
Share
Contact: Paula Byron pbyron@vt.edu 540-526-2027 Virginia Tech
Discovery may shed light on brain disease, development of regenerative therapies
Real estate agents emphasize location, location, and once more for good measure location. It's the same in a developing brain, where billions of neurons vie for premium property to make connections. Neurons that stake out early claims often land the best value, even if they don't develop the property until later.
Scientists at the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute and the University of Louisville have discovered that during neurodevelopment, neurons from the brain's cerebral cortex extend axons to the edge of the part of the brain dedicated to processing visual signals but then stop. Instead of immediately making connections, the cortical neurons wait for two weeks while neurons from the retina connect to the brain.
Now, in a study to be published in the Nov. 14 issue of the journal Cell Reports, the scientists have discovered how. The retinal neurons stop their cortical cousins from grabbing prime real estate by controlling the abundance of a protein called aggrecan.
Understanding how aggrecan controls the formation of brain circuits could help scientists understand how to repair the injured brain or spinal cord after injury or disease.
"Usually when neuroscientists talk about repairing injured brains, they're thinking about putting neurons, axons, and synapses back in the right place," said Michael Fox, an associate professor at the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute and lead author of the study. "It may be that the most important synapses the ones that drive excitation need to get there first. By stalling out the other neurons, they can get the best spots. This study shows that when we think about repairing damaged neural networks, we need to consider more than just where connections need to be made. We also need to think about the timing of reinnervation."
The researchers genetically removed the retinal neurons, which allowed the cortical axons to move into the brain earlier than they normally would.
"We were interested in what environmental molecular cues allow the retinal neurons to control the growth of cortical neurons," said Fox, who is also an associate professor of biological sciences in Virginia Tech's College of Science. "After years of screening potential mechanisms, we found aggrecan."
Aggrecan is a protein that has been well studied in cartilage, bones, and the spinal cord, where it is abundant after injuries. According to Fox, aggrecan may be able to isolate damaged areas of the spinal cord to stop inflammation and prevent further destruction. The downside, however, is that aggrecan inhibits axonal growth, which prevents further repair from taking place.
"Axons see this environment and either stop growing or turn around and grow in the opposite direction," said Fox.
Although it is less studied in the developing brain, aggrecan appears in abundance there. In the new study, the researchers found that retinal neurons control aggrecan in a region that receives ascending signals from retinal cells as well as descending signals from the cerebral cortex.
Once the retinal neurons have made connections, they cause the release of enzymes that break down the aggrecan, allowing cortical neurons to move in.
Fox said it is interesting that the retinal axons can grow in this region of the developing brain, despite the high levels of aggrecan. He suspects that it may be because retinal neurons express a receptor integrin that cortical axons do not express.
###
The study, "A molecular mechanism regulating the timing of corticogeniculate innervation," is by Fox, Jianmin Su, a research assistant professor, and Carl Levy, an undergraduate from Suffolk, Va., all with the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute; graduate student Justin Brooks and undergraduate Jessica Wang from Virginia Commonwealth University; and Tania Seabrook, a postdoctoral associate, and William Guido, a professor and the chair of the Department of Anatomical Sciences and Neurobiology, both with the University of Louisville School of Medicine.
Written by Ken Kingery
[
| E-mail
Share
]
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Researchers discover how retinal neurons claim the best brain connections
PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:
31-Oct-2013
[
| E-mail
]
Share
Contact: Paula Byron pbyron@vt.edu 540-526-2027 Virginia Tech
Discovery may shed light on brain disease, development of regenerative therapies
Real estate agents emphasize location, location, and once more for good measure location. It's the same in a developing brain, where billions of neurons vie for premium property to make connections. Neurons that stake out early claims often land the best value, even if they don't develop the property until later.
Scientists at the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute and the University of Louisville have discovered that during neurodevelopment, neurons from the brain's cerebral cortex extend axons to the edge of the part of the brain dedicated to processing visual signals but then stop. Instead of immediately making connections, the cortical neurons wait for two weeks while neurons from the retina connect to the brain.
Now, in a study to be published in the Nov. 14 issue of the journal Cell Reports, the scientists have discovered how. The retinal neurons stop their cortical cousins from grabbing prime real estate by controlling the abundance of a protein called aggrecan.
Understanding how aggrecan controls the formation of brain circuits could help scientists understand how to repair the injured brain or spinal cord after injury or disease.
"Usually when neuroscientists talk about repairing injured brains, they're thinking about putting neurons, axons, and synapses back in the right place," said Michael Fox, an associate professor at the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute and lead author of the study. "It may be that the most important synapses the ones that drive excitation need to get there first. By stalling out the other neurons, they can get the best spots. This study shows that when we think about repairing damaged neural networks, we need to consider more than just where connections need to be made. We also need to think about the timing of reinnervation."
The researchers genetically removed the retinal neurons, which allowed the cortical axons to move into the brain earlier than they normally would.
"We were interested in what environmental molecular cues allow the retinal neurons to control the growth of cortical neurons," said Fox, who is also an associate professor of biological sciences in Virginia Tech's College of Science. "After years of screening potential mechanisms, we found aggrecan."
Aggrecan is a protein that has been well studied in cartilage, bones, and the spinal cord, where it is abundant after injuries. According to Fox, aggrecan may be able to isolate damaged areas of the spinal cord to stop inflammation and prevent further destruction. The downside, however, is that aggrecan inhibits axonal growth, which prevents further repair from taking place.
"Axons see this environment and either stop growing or turn around and grow in the opposite direction," said Fox.
Although it is less studied in the developing brain, aggrecan appears in abundance there. In the new study, the researchers found that retinal neurons control aggrecan in a region that receives ascending signals from retinal cells as well as descending signals from the cerebral cortex.
Once the retinal neurons have made connections, they cause the release of enzymes that break down the aggrecan, allowing cortical neurons to move in.
Fox said it is interesting that the retinal axons can grow in this region of the developing brain, despite the high levels of aggrecan. He suspects that it may be because retinal neurons express a receptor integrin that cortical axons do not express.
###
The study, "A molecular mechanism regulating the timing of corticogeniculate innervation," is by Fox, Jianmin Su, a research assistant professor, and Carl Levy, an undergraduate from Suffolk, Va., all with the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute; graduate student Justin Brooks and undergraduate Jessica Wang from Virginia Commonwealth University; and Tania Seabrook, a postdoctoral associate, and William Guido, a professor and the chair of the Department of Anatomical Sciences and Neurobiology, both with the University of Louisville School of Medicine.
Written by Ken Kingery
[
| E-mail
Share
]
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Forgiving parents are strict with their first born because they hope to establish a perception that will influence the behavior of their younger children as well.
Photo by Thinkstock
Time and again, research has shown that first-born children are better at a lot of things than their younger siblings. First-borns do better on IQ tests and are more likely to become president of the United States than their kid brothers or sisters. And, at the other end of the spectrum, first-borns are less likely to do drugs and get pregnant as teenagers.
So it probably won’t surprise anyone that first-borns do better in school than their younger siblings, a finding documented in a recent study I wrote with Juan Pantano, an assistant professor of economics at Washington University in St. Louis.
But why birth order appears to matter so much for school achievement level is much less clear.
Many theories have been posited, ranging from genetics to the stability of family life to the teaching dynamics among siblings. Pantano and I offer a different explanation: It comes down to parents’ reputations for maintaining discipline with their kids. Reputations matter for politicians, teachers, and even used car salesmen. Less obvious, but still important, is a parent’s reputation in their children’s eyes.
The basic idea is this: There are two types of parents—those who in our study we call “unforgiving” in that they will punish poor school performance, regardless of the child’s birth order, and those who are “forgiving,” meaning they don’t like to punish any of their children, regardless of birth. The latter type of parent faces a dilemma. If they don’t punish their oldest child’s poor behavior, all of their children will know that mom and dad are pushovers who don’t punish for poor grades. As a result, all the children of forgiving parents will tend to not work hard in school. To avoid this situation, forgiving parents are strict with their first born, hoping to establish a perception that will influence the behavior of their younger children as well. The younger children, seeing their big brother or sister punished, will be less likely to slack off in school because they can’t be sure that mom and dad aren’t really unforgiving types. Call it “trickle down” discipline—you put the most energy into the first-born, trying to set the tone for all. (As Slate’s Matthew Yglesias put it, it’s a cost/benefit calculation. The cost is the disciplining, which most parents don’t enjoy doling out.)
Call it “trickle down” discipline—you put the most energy into the first-born, trying to set the tone for all.
It is only later that these forgiving parents, who really don’t like to punish any of their children, start slacking off in their parenting. So the outcome of this strategic parenting is that while all children benefit from the first born’s punishments, the impact is greatest on the eldest child.
In our study, Pantano and I looked at data from the children of female respondents who themselves were members in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth begun in 1979. We focused on families with more than one child. The survey included detailed information on parenting, and we were able to look at parenting rules as reported by mothers and by their children.
While the data does not contain complete information on grades, it does include information on mothers’ perceptions of their children. In some cases we were able to link mothers’ perceptions to actual performance, and found their perceptions to be accurate. For the purposes of this study, however, the mothers' perceptions still gave us a clear picture of birth-order trends.
Mothers were asked, “Is your child one of the best students in class, above the middle, in the middle, below the middle, or near the bottom of the class?” Based on these mothers’ responses, we found a clear association exists between birth-order and school performance. While 34 percent of first-born children were considered “one of the best in the class,” only 27 percent of those who were fourth in the birth order received such recognition. On the other end of the spectrum, only 7.3 percent of first-borns were considered “below the middle or at the bottom of the class,” while mothers classified 11.7 percent of fourth-borns this way.
After establishing the existence of birth-order effects, we then used the data to explore whether differing parental treatment based on birth order affected how children performed at school. We found that first-borns were more likely to face daily homework monitoring than younger siblings. Again, the reputation model is at play here. The eldest children get the most monitoring in the hopes that younger siblings will observe that poor school performance leads to closer monitoring or loss of privileges, and will then have additional incentives to do well in school.
Perhaps the most interesting feature of the data we use is that mothers were asked hypothetical questions about their children’s performance in school and how they would react.
For each of their children, mothers were asked, “If [your child] brought home a report card with grades lower than expected, how likely would you be to keep a closer eye on [his/her] activities?”
This question lets us look directly at parenting strategy. We found that the more younger siblings a child has, the greater the likelihood that parents will closely supervise the oldest child after that child performs lower than expected on a report card. In fact, with each additional younger sibling, the chances of increased supervision rose by 2.2 percentage points.
So what’s the takeaway? While it is often thought that different levels of attainment across birth order are determined at birth and thus unavoidable, our results suggest otherwise. Rather, our findings show that it matters how parents establish discipline and priorities for their children when they are young. Our evidence strongly suggests that the better performance in school by first-borns and the poorer performance by later-borns is the result of differential parenting.
So, the next time you first-borns complain that mom and dad never let you get away with what your younger siblings did, you can be assured that you’re right. And you’re better off because of it.
President Barack Obama gestures while speaking in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, Monday, Oct. 21, 2013, on the initial rollout of the health care overhaul. Obama acknowledged that the widespread problems with his health care law's rollout are unacceptable, as the administration scrambles to fix the cascade of computer issues. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
President Barack Obama gestures while speaking in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, Monday, Oct. 21, 2013, on the initial rollout of the health care overhaul. Obama acknowledged that the widespread problems with his health care law's rollout are unacceptable, as the administration scrambles to fix the cascade of computer issues. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)
WASHINGTON (AP) — Just two weeks after President Barack Obama saw his Democratic Party put up an unyielding front against Republicans, his coalition is showing signs of stress.
From health care to spying to pending budget deals, many congressional Democrats are challenging the administration and pushing for measures that the White House has not embraced.
Some Democrats are seeking to extend the enrollment period for new health care exchanges. Others want to place restraints on National Security Administration surveillance capabilities. Still others are standing tough against any budget deal that uses long-term reductions in major benefit programs to offset immediate cuts in defense.
Though focused on disparate issues, the Democrats' anxieties are connected by timing and stand out all the more when contrasted with the remarkable unity the party displayed during the recent showdown over the partial government shutdown and the confrontation over raising the nation's borrowing limit.
"That moment was always going to be fleeting," said Matt Bennett, who worked in the Clinton White House and who regularly consults with Obama aides. "The White House, every White House, understands that these folks, driven either by principle or the demands of the politics of their state, have to put daylight between themselves and the president on occasion."
Obama and the Democrats emerged from the debt and shutdown clash with what they wanted: a reopened government, a higher debt ceiling and a Republican Party reeling in the depths of public opinion polls.
But within days, attention turned to the problem-riddled launch of the 3-year-old health care law's enrollment stage and revelations that the U.S. had been secretly monitoring the communications of as many as 35 allied leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel. And with new budget talks underway, Democratic Party liberals reiterated demands that Obama not agree to changes that reduce Social Security or Medicare benefits even in the improbable event Republicans agree to increase budget revenues.
The fraying on the Democratic Party edges is hardly unraveling Obama's support and it pales when compared to the upheaval within the Republican Party as it distances itself from the tactics of tea party conservatives. But the pushback from Democrats comes as Obama is trying to draw renewed attention to his agenda, including passage of an immigration overhaul, his jobs initiatives and the benefits of his health care law.
The computer troubles that befell the start of health insurance sign-ups have caused the greatest anxiety. Republicans pounced on the difficulties as evidence of deeper flaws in the law. But Democrats, even as they defended the policy, also demanded answers in the face of questions from their constituents.
"The fact is that the administration really failed these Americans," Rep. Allyson Schwartz, D-Pa., told Medicare chief Marilyn Tavenner at a hearing this week. "So going forward, there can be just no more excuses."
In the Senate, 10 Democrats signed on to a letter seeking an unspecified extension of the enrollment period, which ends March 31. "As you continue to fix problems with the website and the enrollment process, it is critical that the administration be open to modifications that provide greater flexibility for the American people seeking to access health insurance," Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., wrote.
Another Democratic senator, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, has called for a one-year delay in the requirement that virtually all Americans have health insurance or pay a fine.
On Thursday, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough, Tavenner and the White House's designated troubleshooter for the health care web site, Jeffrey Zients, were meeting privately with Senate Democrats to offer reassurances.
Democrats who have talked to White House officials in recent days describe them as rattled by the health care blunders. But they say they are confident that the troubled website used for enrollment will be corrected and fully operational by the end of November.
The spying revelations also have created some tensions between the administration and Democrats. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and until now a staunch supporter of the NSA's surveillance, called for a "total review of all intelligence programs" following the Merkel reports.
She said that when it came to the NSA collecting intelligence on the leaders of allies such as France, Spain, Mexico and Germany, "Let me state unequivocally: I am totally opposed."
In the House, Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, a Democratic member of the House intelligence committee, complained that the intelligence committees had been kept out of the loop about the collection of data on foreign leaders.
"Why did we not know that heads of state were being eavesdropped on, spied on?" she asked Obama administration intelligence officials on Tuesday. "We are the Intelligence Committee. And we did not -- we didn't know that. And now all of us, all of us, are dealing with a problem in our international relations. There will be changes."
With Congress renewing budget talks Wednesday, liberals have been outspoken in their insistence that Democrats vigorously resist efforts to reduce long-term deficits with savings in Social Security or Medicare. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who usually votes with Democrats, has been the most outspoken, saying he fears a budget deal will contain a proposal in Obama's budget to reduce cost-of-living adjustments for Social Security and other benefit programs.
Obama, however, has proposed that remedy only if Republicans agree to raise tax revenue, a bargain that GOP lawmakers involved in the discussions made clear they would reject. Moreover, leaders from both parties as well as White House officials have signaled that in budget talks, they are looking for a small budget deal, not the type of "grand bargain" that would embrace such a revenue-for-benefit-cuts deal.
Still, many liberals warn that such cuts aren't palatable even if coupled with additional revenues.
"The idea, the notion that we're going to solve this problem or it's going to be OK if we were able to raise revenue and cut this thing back at the same time, it just isn't going to fly outside of Washington," said Jim Dean, chairman of the liberal advocacy group Democracy for America.
Follow Jim Kuhnhenn at http://twitter.com/jkuhnhenn
DAVIE, Fla. (AP) — Miami Dolphins tackle Jonathan Martin left the team this week to receive professional assistance for emotional issues, a person familiar with the situation said, and was ruled out of Thursday night's game against Cincinnati.
Martin was with relatives, and his issues didn't involve any problems with the coaching staff, the person said. The person spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the Dolphins have said not released any details of the illness.
Martin, 24, played in Sunday's loss at New England, then missed practice this week. He was replaced by Tyson Clabo, who started Miami's first six games before being benched.
A second-round draft pick from Stanford, Martin started every game at right tackle as a rookie last year. He switched to left tackle this season, then moved back to the right side last week in a reshuffling of the Dolphins' struggling offensive line.
"You can approach this two different ways," Martin said last week regarding his latest position switch. "You can go in the tank and be one of those guys that moans and is a cancer in the locker room, or you can be a professional and play as hard as you can. My mindset is I'm going to go out there and do whatever I can to help the team win."
Pass protection has been a problem for Miami all season. Ryan Tannehill went into the Bengals game with an NFL-high 32 sacks, and the Dolphins (3-4) were saddled with a four-game losing streak.
Martin's agent didn't respond to requests for comment.
In an unrelated move, the Dolphins promoted receiver Ryan Spadola from the practice squad to the active roster.
___
AP NFL website: www.pro32.ap.org and http://twitter.com/AP_NFL
___
Follow Steven Wine on Twitter: http://twitter.com/Steve_Wine
Recently Apple released its second update to the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display. These Late 2013 MacBook Pros keep the same 2880 by 1800 resolution Retina display as its predecessor, but use the latest quad-core Haswell processors, Iris Pro graphics and PCIe connected flash.
Image: Michael Homnick
Externally identical to the 4.46 pound, 15-inch models released in February 2013 and June 2012, the changes to this edition of the MacBook Pro are all beneath the aluminum surface. You’ll find Intel’s fourth generation Core processors (Haswell)—specifcally, a quad-core 2.0GHz Core i7 in the $1999 laptop and a quad-core 2.3GHz Core i7 in the $2599 model. They replace the 2.4GHz and 2.7GHz quad-core Ivy Bridge processors, repsectively, that powered the systems that launched earlier this year. The low-end model ships with 8GB of RAM and 256GB of fast PCIe-connected flash storage. The high-end model doubles both the RAM and storage capacity.
Two Thunderbolt 2 ports replace the Thunderbolt ports on the previous Retina models. Thunderbolt 2 is backwards compatible with Thunderbolt, but you need Thunderbolt 2 devices to see the increased bandwidth.
The rest of the connections remain from previous models: two USB 3.0 ports, HDMI port, SDXC card slot, headphone jack and MagSafe 2 power connector. Wireless connections have been updated to the latest specs: 802.11ac WiFi, which as we’ve seen in the MacBook Airs, offers much faster wireless transfer rates; and Bluetooth 4.0.
Image: Michael HomnickWhile the 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro models got thinner and lighter, the 15-inch models remain the same size and weight.
Graphical differences
In a first for Apple, the $1999 15-inch MacBook Pro has no discrete graphics. It relies solely on Intel’s Iris Pro (equipped with Crystalwell) integrated graphics. The $2599 model has two graphic cards, the aforementioned integrated Iris Pro as well as Nvidia GeForce GT 750m discreet graphics with 2GB of dedicated video memory.
As our tests of the 13-inch MacBook Pro show, the Iris graphics are considerably faster than the Intel Integrated Graphics 4000 used in the Ivy Bridge MacBook Pros. Unfortunately, the new integrated graphics still have a ways to go before they can match the performance of discrete graphics. In our tests, the Iris Pro graphics in the $1999 MacBook Pro were 33 percent faster than the Iris graphics in the 13-inch MacBook Pro. The discrete graphics in the high-end 15-inch MacBook Pro posted frame rates as much as twice that of the new low-end’s Iris Pro.
With the new MacBook Pro, Apple brings the PCIe connected flash storage the company introduced with the mid-2013 MacBook Air. And it’s fast. The new low and high-end MacBook Pros were 34 and 41 percent faster, respectively, in our 6GB folder copy test than the high-end early 2013 MacBook Pro and its 512GB SATA-connected flash storage.
Image: Michael HomnickSDXC slot, HDMI port, and USB 3.
Macworld Lab is close to finishing up our new Speedmark 9 overall system performance benchmark, but for now, we’re running a dozen application tests to compare performance between Macs. In those tests, the new high-end 15-inch MacBook Pro was faster in eight of our 12 tests and tied in three of the tests. Highlights include a 19 percent higher MathematicaMark 9 scores and 9 percent improvements in Photoshop Creative Cloud and Cinebench R15 OpenGL tests. The previous high-end was 2 percent faster in our 6GB file compression test.
The new low-end 15-inch Retina couldn’t keep up with the early-2013 high-end, trailing in 7 of the twelve tests and tying in one. Comparing the new 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro and the new low-end 15-inch model, the 15-inch was considerably faster across the board. The 15-inch’s quad-core i7 was about twice as fast in CPU intensive tests like Handbrake, MathematicaMark 9 and Cinebench r15’s CPU test, but there were improvements in graphics, storage and productivity applications.
One place where both of the new MacBook Pros shined was in our battery life tests. The new low-end lasted 9 hours and 36 minutes on a single charge. The new high-end lasted 9 hours and 26 minutes, about two hours longer than the early 2013’s 7 hour and 30 minute result. The new 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro lasted a little longer: 10 hours and 11 minutes.
Image: Michael Homnick
Bottom line
Much improved battery life and fast internal storage are both welcome improvements to this latest iteration of the 15-inch Retina MacBook Pro. The $1999 2.0GHz MacBook Pro’s lack of discrete graphics took a toll on its Cinebench and 3D game performance, but it’s a much faster system than the high-end 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro. The $2599 2.3GHz Retina MacBook Pro was faster in just about every way than the system it replaces and would be a great fit for owners of older Mac portables looking for a high-performance laptop.
Next page: Complete benchmark results
James Galbraith , Macworld
James is the director of Macworld Lab. More by James Galbraith
WASHINGTON (AP) — When President Barack Obama visited Berlin in June, German Chancellor Angela Merkel made a point of showing him a balcony in her office overlooking train tracks that crossed the border of her once-divided country — a symbol of her upbringing on the east side of the divide, where eavesdropping by secret police was rampant during the Cold War.
The private moment between the two leaders underscores the degree to which Merkel's personal history has influenced her outrage over revelations that the National Security Agency was monitoring her communications. The secret spying threatens to damage the close relationship between Obama and Merkel, which, until now, has been defined by candor and trust.
"We are very sensitive to the fact that she comes from the East, and that brings with it a historical perspective on surveillance that is quite powerful," said Ben Rhodes, Obama's deputy national security adviser. He said while the White House hopes the strength of Obama's relationship with Merkel will allow them to weather the current controversy, "it also clearly makes it more difficult when she is surprised by these types of revelations."
Reports based on leaks from former NSA systems analyst Edward Snowden suggest the U.S. has monitored the telephone communications of 35 foreign leaders. The fact that Merkel was among them has been particularly troubling to many in Europe and on Capitol Hill, given her status as a senior stateswoman, the leader of Europe's strongest economy, and a key American ally on global economics, Iranian nuclear negotiations and the Afghanistan war.
Obama, in a phone call to Merkel last week, said the U.S. was not currently monitoring her communications and had no plans to do so in the future. But those assurances appeared to do little to placate the German leader, who said trust with the U.S. "has to be built anew" and there must be no "spying among friends."
A U.S. official said Obama was only made aware that the NSA was monitoring Merkel in recent weeks, after the White House launched a broader review of surveillance programs following Snowden's revelations. The official was not authorized to discuss the matter by name and insisted on anonymity.
In Merkel, Obama has found a leader who shares his businesslike, cut-to-the-chase approach to leader-level diplomacy. Both eschew the staged formality of international summits and sometimes can be seen as cold and brusque by some of their counterparts.
"She's got a style and mannerism that feels familiar to him," said Tommy Vietor, who until March was Obama's National Security Council spokesman. "She's no-nonsense, but she's also really effective and gets things done."
First elected chancellor in 2005, Merkel was already a formidable player on the world stage when much of Europe became enthralled by an upstart American politician named Barack Obama. He was particularly popular in Germany and scheduled a stop there during an overseas trip ahead of the 2008 election. He hoped to speak at Berlin's Brandenburg Gate, the site of famous speeches by past American presidents.
But Merkel made it clear that she disapproved of plans for a politician to hold a campaign rally at the site, a landmark symbol of the Cold War. For Obama, it was an early lesson in Merkel's firmness. His campaign reversed course and another site was selected for the speech.
Obama finally got his chance to speak at the Brandenburg Gate this summer, and Merkel was there to introduce him. She ended her remarks by referring to Obama with a German word for "you" that is typically reserved for friendly visitors, sparking surprised laughter from the crowd.
In the years between Obama's trips to Berlin, he and Merkel have attempted to inject some warmth into their business relationship. During Merkel's 2011 visit to Washington, the two leaders hit the town for dinner at a high-end restaurant, an unusual overture by Obama. A few days later, he hosted Merkel at the White House for a formal state dinner, where he awarded the chancellor the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest U.S. honor bestowed upon civilians.
Despite their strong working relationship, Obama and Merkel have had deep policy differences, particularly over the response to the European debt crisis. During the depths of the crisis in 2011 and 2012, Merkel pushed for fiscal austerity on the continent, while Obama and many European leaders backed American-style stimulus.
Both leaders were driven by domestic concerns: for Obama, his looming re-election campaign, and for Merkel, the German public's unease with bailing out its fiscally irresponsible neighbors.
"During the debt crisis, Merkel just felt like Barack Obama never fully understood what was at stake — which was Europe," said Heather Conley, director of the Europe program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "And I think the president felt like Angela Merkel didn't quite understand the impact the European economy could have on his re-election efforts."
The NSA surveillance disclosures already had revealed another policy split between Obama and Merkel even before the revelations that the U.S. was monitoring the German leader's phone.
When Obama visited Germany earlier this year, Merkel was under election-year pressure from her privacy-protective constituents to condemn NSA programs that swept up phone and email records, including those of Europeans. She raised the issue with Obama both publicly and privately, casting a shadow over what had been expected to be a tension-free visit.
It's unclear whether the NSA spying disclosures will still cast a pall over Obama and Merkel's relationship when they next meet, likely next year during the international summits both regularly attend. But what is known is that the two leaders are stuck with each other for a while. Last month, Merkel convincingly won a third term as chancellor, meaning she'll still be office after Obama leaves the White House in 2016.
___
Associated Press writers Robert Reid and Geir Moulson in Berlin contributed to this report.
___
Follow Julie Pace on Twitter at http://twitter.com/jpaceDC
TMI! Peter Facinelli and girlfriend Jaimie Alexander put their love on display at the 2013 GQ Gentlemen's Ball in New York City on Wednesday, Oct. 23. The couple of nearly one year showed lots of PDA on the red carpet, and may have shared a bit too much while chatting with reporters about their love life.
An eyewitness tells Us Weekly that the 39-year-old Twilight actor and 29-year-old actress were "super lovey-dovey" while posing for photographers and stole a few kisses. Alexander, who costarred with Facinelli on Showtime's Nurse Jackie and in the 2012 film Loosies, patiently waited off to the side for her boyfriend to finish red carpet interviews. But when one reporter asked Facinelli to share the most romantic thing he's done for his girlfriend recently, he asked her to weigh in.
After playfully sticking out her tongue, Alexander quipped, "I think that's too graphic, baby." Thinking of a more acceptable response, she shared, "You're always holding the door for me."
Facinelli began dating Alexander about eight months after he filed for divorce from Jennie Garth, his wife of 11 years. He and his ex-wife, 41, share three daughters: Luca, 16, Lola, 10, and Fiona, 7.
During the GQ Gentlemen's Ball event at the IAC Building, the proud father also shared his girls' latest milestones with Us. "My oldest just turned 16, so she's getting her driver's license soon. She doesn't have it yet," he shared. "My middle one is turning 11, so that's pretty big. And the youngest one just turned 7. She's doing her first musical play at school. She's got the lead part playing Jasmine in Aladdin."
Garth is now dating businessman Michael Shimbo, the CEO for a San Francisco-based company called Planes, Trains and Automobiles. During an Oct. 21 interview with Bethenny Frankel on her talk show Bethenny, Garth opened up about her difficult road back to romance after divorce. "It's fun, and it's awful all at the same time," she said of dating. "It's like a weird type of torture. But it can be fun."
![[ Back to EurekAlert! ]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_v2ZiilwcVZOoOO-rXg1PA49XH1nS8vWpwYnpMgIRb50wFwIRTlPHZQlLlqZPgu74KdHHAcvxcAzW2GLF6_5oSQUxYODTmcrYaTEW1lkWI=s0-d){kind=small}
Share
Source: 
