Propecia online

Start Preamble propecia online U.S. Small Business Administration. Amendment 1.

This is an amendment to the Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declarations issued for each State and Territory propecia online of the U.S. Incident. hair loss (hair loss treatment).

Incident propecia online Period. 01/31/2020 and continuing. Issued 12/30/2020.

Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline propecia online Date. 12/31/2021. Submit completed loan applications to.

U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. Start Further Info A.

Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734. End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information The notice of the Economic Injury declarations for each State and Territory of the U.S., dated between 03/16/2020 to 03/21/2020, is hereby amended to extend the deadline date for filing applications for economic injury as a result of this disaster to 12/31/2021.

For additional information, please visit SBA.gov/disaster. For questions, please contact the SBA disaster assistance customer service center at 1-800-659-2955 (TTY. 1-800-877-8339) or email disastercustomerservice@sba.gov.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Start Signature Jovita Carranza, Administrator. End Signature End Supplemental Information [FR Doc.

2021-00171 Filed 1-7-21. 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8026-03-PStart Preamble Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Notice of meeting.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention within the Department of Health and Human Services announces the next meeting of the Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) on February 10-11, 2021. The meeting will be held on Wednesday, February 10, 2021, from 8:30 a.m. To 6:00 p.m.

EDT, and Thursday, February 11, 2021, from 8:30 a.m. To 5:00 p.m. EDT.

The meeting will be held via web conference. Start Further Info Onslow Smith, Office of the Associate Director for Policy and Strategy. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS-V-25-5, Atlanta, GA 30329, phone.

(404)498-6778, email. CPSTF@cdc.gov. End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information Meeting accessibility.

The CPSTF meeting will be held virtually via web conference. CDC will send web conference information to registrants upon receipt of their registration. All meeting attendees must register by February 3, 2021 to receive the web conference information for the February meeting.

CDC will email web conference information from the CPSTF@cdc.gov mailbox. To register for the meeting, individuals should send an email to CPSTF@cdc.gov and include the following information. Name, title, organization name, organization address, phone, and email.

Public comment. Individuals who would like to make public comments during the February meeting must state their desire to do so with their registration and provide their name and organizational affiliation and the topic to be addressed (if known). The requestor will receive instructions for the public comment process for this virtual meeting after the request is received.

A public comment period follows the CPSTF's discussion of each systematic review and will be limited, up to three minutes per person. Public Start Printed Page 1502comments will become part of the meeting summary. Background on the CPSTF.

The CPSTF is an independent, nonfederal panel whose members are appointed by the CDC Director. CPSTF members represent a broad range of research, practice, and policy expertise in prevention, wellness, health promotion, and public health. The CPSTF was convened in 1996 by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to identify community preventive programs, services, and policies that increase health, longevity, save lives and dollars, and improve Americans' quality of life.

CDC is mandated to provide ongoing administrative, research, and technical support for the operations of the CPSTF. During its meetings, the CPSTF considers the findings of systematic reviews of existing research and practice-based evidence and issues recommendations. CPSTF recommendations are not mandates for compliance or spending.

Instead, they provide information about evidence-based options that decision makers and stakeholders can consider when they are determining what best meets the specific needs, preferences, available resources, and constraints of their jurisdictions and constituents. The CPSTF's recommendations, along with the systematic reviews of the evidence on which they are based, are compiled in the The Community Guide. Matters proposed for discussion.

The agenda will consist of deliberation on systematic reviews of literature and is open to the public. Topics will include Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity and Health Equity/Social Determinants of Health. Information regarding the start and end times for each day, and any updates to agenda topics, will be available on the Community Guide website (www.thecommunityguide.org) closer to the date of the meeting.

The meeting agenda is subject to change without notice. Start Signature Dated. January 5, 2021.

Sandra Cashman, Executive Secretary, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. End Signature End Supplemental Information [FR Doc. 2021-00112 Filed 1-7-21.

Should i take propecia or not

	Propecia	Proscar	Finast	Finpecia
Average age to take	1mg 10 tablet $14.95	5mg 360 tablet $289.95	$	$
Best price in Great Britain	At walmart	Offline	Canadian Pharmacy	Drugstore on the corner
Daily dosage	Yes	In online pharmacy	Canadian pharmacy only	Register first
Best price for generic	Yes	Yes	Online	No

And out there I saw unexpectedly a beautiful should i take propecia or not young deer near a lake. He focused his eyes on me to verify that I pose no danger. If I had fetched my cell phone to snap a photo, he would have disappeared.

I chose to enjoy the view, savoring the should i take propecia or not moment as if the deer were a transient piece of music. In such instances, rare beauty cannot be documented or else it disappears. This left no way for me to share my rare experience with my family.

Past generations may have witnessed phenomena that were never documented in a scientific should i take propecia or not way. Is it possible that we missed important scientific clues from the past?. Science relies on reproducibility of results, but we might need to wait a long time before rare events will repeat.

Let us consider a should i take propecia or not particular example. Suppose the solar system had been visited by technological equipment from an extraterrestrial civilization a few million years ago—hardly impossible since the age of the Milky Way galaxy is a million times longer than our recorded history. If we found a photo album with high-resolution images from that time, we would have an affirmative answer to Enrico Fermi’s paradox.

€œWhere is should i take propecia or not everybody?. € But the absence of that evidence doesn’t mean the answer is negative. If a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody around to hear it, does it make a sound?.

One remedy is to search for surprising events in the long should i take propecia or not history of Earth. For example, two billion years after the Earth formed, the oxygen level in the atmosphere rose for an unknown reason, enabling the complex life that currently thrives on Earth. Even more surprisingly, intelligent life appeared abruptly in the last one thousandth of the Earth’s history.

Both events should i take propecia or not probably have a natural origin, but other explanations are possible. A better approach is to search the sky for technological relics from distant civilizations. The newly announced Galileo Project aims to image objects near Earth whose nature is unknown, such as unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) or anomalous interstellar objects like ‘Oumuamua.

It makes little sense to should i take propecia or not do otherwise. Choosing not to look through the windows doesn’t mean your neighbors aren’t there. A common mistake is to assume that our environment was choreographed with us in mind.

Instead, we might just be spectators of a play designed for other actors, just as I was in should i take propecia or not the natural environment of the Adirondack deer. Any technological equipment that the Galileo Project finds could have been sent millions of years ago, long before humans existed. The probes could have been sent towards Earth as a habitable destination on its own merit.

The Galileo should i take propecia or not Project will ignore objects that are of most interest to national security, such as drones or airplanes which are human-made. Instead, it will focus on the “other” category in the UAP report that was delivered to Congress on June 25, 2021. To justify my engagement in the Galileo Project as part of my day job at Harvard University, I explained that it will assemble and interpret data from telescopes.

Rather than focusing on distant objects should i take propecia or not as astronomers often do, our research team will track nearby objects that move fast on the sky. There is no minimum distance for an object to be considered astronomical, especially if it originated from outside the solar system before arriving to our vicinity. The thousands of supporting e-mails I received in the days following the announcement of the Galileo Project show unequivocally that the idea of imaging the unknown inspires people.

Bringing the study to the mainstream of astronomy will should i take propecia or not attract new funds and talent to science. There is no downside to seeking evidence. It is a win-win proposition that will teach us something new.

Even if ‘Oumuamua is a natural should i take propecia or not object, like a never-seen-before hydrogen iceberg, we will learn that there must be nurseries of interstellar objects that are very different from the solar system. In leading the Galileo Project, I act as former farm boy who has preserved his childhood curiosity. I understand the pushback from those who do not share my perspective, but cherish the company of like-minded explorers and donors.

The Galileo Project is a should i take propecia or not fishing expedition. We use hooks in the form of telescopes without assuming what they might catch. The fundamental innovation is that we chose to look through telescopes for answers.

This is the biggest lesson we learned from Galileo Galilei’s debate with the philosophers who refused to look should i take propecia or not through his telescope. Recently, a philosopher published an article that uses philosophical reasoning to argue that ‘Oumuamua could not have been technological in origin. This suggests that looking through telescopes for answers is not as trivial as it may seem four centuries after Galileo.

This is an opinion and analysis should i take propecia or not article. The views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.Some gestures can be understood almost anywhere. Pointing to direct someone’s attention, for instance.

New research shows that certain should i take propecia or not vocalizations can also be iconic and recognizable to people around the world—even when a speaker is not simply imitating a well-known sound. These findings, published in Scientific Reports, may help explain the rise of modern spoken language. In 2015 language researchers challenged some English speakers to make up sounds representing various basic concepts (“sleep,” “child,” “meat,” “rock,” and more).

When other English should i take propecia or not speakers listened to these sounds and tried matching them to concepts, they were largely successful. But “we wanted to be able to show that these vocalizations are understandable across cultures,” says study co-author and University of Birmingham cognitive scientist Marcus Perlman. Credit.

Amanda Montañez should i take propecia or not. Source. €œNovel Vocalizations Are Understood across Cultures,” by Aleksandra Cwiek et al., in Scientific Reports, Vol.

11. May 12, 2021 So Perlman and his colleagues conducted online and in-person experiments in seven countries, from Morocco to Brazil. They recruited more than 900 participants, who spoke a total of 28 languages, to listen to the best-understood vocalizations from the 2015 investigation and select matching concepts from a set of words or images.

Vocalizations that evoked well-known sounds—for example, dripping water—performed best. But many others were also understood at rates significantly above chance across all languages tested, the team found. €œThere is a notable degree of success outside of just onomatopoeia,” Perlman says.

This is likely because certain acoustic patterns are universal, the team suggests. For example, short and basic sounds often convey the concept of “one,” and repeated sounds are typically associated with “many.” Likewise, low-pitched sounds accompany something big, and high-pitched sounds convey small size. These findings of “iconic” sounds could help scientists understand how human ancestors started using rich acoustic communication, says co-author Aleksandra Ćwiek, a linguist at the Leibniz-Center General Linguistics in Berlin.

The human voice, she says, might “afford enough iconicity to get language off the ground.” University of Tübingen linguist Matthias Urban, who was not involved in the research, agrees. €œIt’s unclear how words came into being in the first place,” he says. Iconic vocalizations are “potentially one pathway that could have been involved.”The famous opening words, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times,” of Charles Dickens' 1859 novel A Tale of Two Cities referred to the period of French Revolution.

But he could equally well have been describing his contemporary Charles Darwin’s experience with his theory of evolution by natural selection. Darwin was born at the best of times in 1809 when conditions were highly conducive for his theory to flourish, but he died in 1882 at the worst of times because there was a real danger that it might soon be killed off. Darwin's nemesis was the eminent physicist Lord Kelvin, and the weapon used against him was the age of the Earth.

Various theories of evolution predated Darwin, but whatever version one favored, one thing was clear. It needed a very long time for its consequences to work itself out. Precisely how long was hard to pin down, but it was believed to require tens or hundreds of millions of years.

From 1650 on, the dominant theory about the age of the Earth, based on the work of Bishop Ussher, Isaac Newton and many other scholars who used various textual sources, was that it was about 6,000 years. Theories of geology and biology had to accommodate themselves to this short timeframe. The geological theory known as catastrophism postulated that major features such as the Grand Canyon, Himalayas, etc.

Had emerged as a result of sudden and violent upheavals. When it came to biological diversity, the idea of special creation, that organisms were immutable and had been specially designed to fit the biological niches in which they found themselves, was the prevailing view. Such a short window of time would have made it impossible for anyone to credibly propose the emergence of new species by a process of slow evolution.

But around 1785, ideas of the age of the Earth began to undergo a radical change as geologists and paleontologists started using the features of the Earth itself, such as erosion, sedimentation and the layers of strata and the fossils embedded in them, to estimate its age. The theory of uniformitarianism, that major geological features were caused by the very slow accumulation of tiny changes, gained ground, culminating in Charles Lyell’s epic three-volume work Principles of Geology in 1830 that cemented the idea that the Earth had been around for hundreds of millions of years and possibly much longer, so long that it seemed impossible to fix an actual age. Darwin was also a keen student of geology and was familiar with Lyell's work (they later became close friends) and had the first two volumes of his book with him as he made his five-year voyage around the globe on the HMS Beagle during 1831–1836, where the ideas for his theory of evolution germinated as he observed the patterns of species in the various locations that he visited.

Darwin knew from his work with pigeons that even deliberately breeding for specific characteristics took a long time to produce them. But how much time was necessary?. He felt that it required at least hundreds of millions of years.

The work of Lyell and other geologists gave him the luxury of assuming that sufficient time existed for natural selection to do its work. Darwin also came of age at a time when the idea that species were immutable had begun to crumble. While Darwin was taught and accepted the still dominant special creation theory, he was also familiar with the general idea of evolution.

His own grandfather Erasmus Darwin had in 1794 published a book Zoonomia that explored protoevolutionary ideas. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck had published his own model of how evolution worked in 1802. The various models proposed for the mechanism of evolution, such as Lamarckian evolution, orthogenesis and use-disuse, all implied some level of teleology.

That there was a directionality inherent in the process. The extremely long window of time opened up by the new geology allowed Darwin and his co-creator Alfred Russell Wallace, working independently, to develop the central new insight of natural selection that differed from other models of evolution by showing how diversity could arise naturally by a process of Malthusian population selection pressures, without any kind of mystical agency directing the process towards any specific ends. Their theory held that evolution was contingency-driven in that how organisms evolved depended on chance factors and a changing environment, which suggested that if we ran the clock again, we could get very different outcomes in which human beings might never appear.

Their work was first presented in a joint paper in 1858. Darwin's major work On the Origin of Species, published a year later, was a closely argued compilation of a massive amount of evidence that helped establish evolution as a fact. The radical change in the status of human beings implied by their model, from being specially created in the image of God to just another accidental byproduct of the evolutionary process just like all other species, was an immediate source of controversy because it challenged a key religious tenet that human beings were special.

This was why natural selection aroused such opposition even while evolution was accepted. Many scientists of that time were religious and believed in theistic evolution that said that a supernatural agency was guiding the process to produce the desired ends. While all models of evolution required long times, natural selection required much longer times than any guided selection process.

Hence the younger the age of the Earth, the more likely it was that natural selection could not be the mechanism. Physicists, led by the eminent Kelvin, himself a theistic evolutionist, were leaders of the charge for a young Earth, though it must be emphasized that “young” at that time meant around 100 million years or less. Even religious scientists had abandoned the idea of the Earth being just 6,000 years old.

Beginning around 1860, Kelvin and other physicists started estimating the ages of the Earth and sun using the nebular hypothesis proposed around 1750 by Immanuel Kant and Pierre-Simon Laplace. This model treated the Earth and the sun as starting as rotating clouds of particles that coalesced under gravity to form molten balls, with the Earth subsequently solidifying and cooling. Kelvin used the laws of thermodynamics and other physics principles to arrive at estimates of 20–400 million years.

By 1879 the upper limit had been lowered to about 100 million years for the Earth and an even shorter upper limit of 20 million years for the Sun, much less than the 200 million years or so believed to be required for natural selection to work. Since physics was considered to be the most rigorous of the sciences, things looked bad for natural selection. When Darwin died in 1882, he was mourned as a great scientist who had radically changed our understanding of how the vast diversity of organisms we see around us came about, dethroning the idea that they were immutable.

But because of the shrinking age of the Earth, he died with a major cloud hanging over his mechanism of natural selection. Darwin's final words on the topic, written in 1880 just two years before his death, expressed a plaintive hope that future developments might reconcile the needs of natural selection with physics calculations. €œWith respect to the lapse of time not having been sufficient since our planet was consolidated for the assumed amount of organic change, and this objection, as urged by [Lord Kelvin], is probably one of the gravest as yet advanced, I can only say, firstly that we do not know at what rate species change as measured in years, and secondly that many philosophers are not yet willing to admit that we know enough of the constitution of the universe and of the interior of our globe to speculate with safety on its past duration.” It turned out Darwin was prescient that improved knowledge of the interior of the Earth might change the calculations in his favor, but at the time he seemed to be grasping at straws.

In fact, in the near term the problem got even worse because Kelvin and others produced new calculations that resulted in the age of the Earth being reduced even more, so that by 1895 the consensus physics view was that the age of the planet lay in the range 20–40 million years. Natural selection appeared to be doomed. But physicists were now encountering stiffer opposition from other disciplines.

Geologists were adamant that their models based on the accumulating evidence on sedimentation and erosion, while not as rigorous as the physics models, were well enough established that they were confident of their lower limit of 100 million years. Paleontologists were also arguing that the fossil record was not consistent with the physicists’ shorter ages. Both groups argued that the physicists must have gone awry somewhere, even if they could not point out the specific flaws.

Beginning in 1895, this impasse began to be broken when physicist John Perry, a former assistant of Kelvin's, challenged the latter's assumption that the Earth was a rigid and homogeneous body, saying there was little evidence to support it. By introducing inhomogeneity and convective flow in the Earth’s interior, he found that Kelvin’s estimates for the age of the Earth could change by as much as a factor as 100, shifting the upper limit into the billions of years. Other physicists also chimed in with similar upward shifts, and this encouraged geologists, paleontologists and biologists to ignore the physicists' arguments for a young Earth.

It was the discovery of radioactivity that decisively changed the picture. It led to an entirely new way of measuring the age of the Earth, by allowing scientists to calculate the ages of rocks. Since the oldest rock that could be found set a lower limit for the age of the Earth, the race was on to find older and older rocks using this method.

Records fell rapidly, leading to ages of 141 million years by 1905, 1.64 billion years by 1911, 1.9 billion years by 1935, 3.35 billion years by 1947, and to 4.5 billion years by 1953, which is where the current consensus lies. When Kelvin died in 1907 at the age of 83, it was not clear if he had accepted that his estimates were no longer valid. But Darwin's hope that Kelvin would be proven wrong, and that eventually it would be shown that sufficient time existed for natural selection to work, was realized, 30 years after Darwin’s death.

His theory now has all the time it needs. This is an opinion and analysis article. The views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.Edited by Dava Sobel First it fell just fell at my feet no wind no squirrel or bird to give it a push a green green pine cone with brown accents heavy with sealed overlapping rounded rhomboid structures in spirals I have to restrain myself from seeing here the condensed aromatic hydrocarbons I leave it on a plate and look on the web for the names of cone parts names are important even if my last name changed three times what I learn is that I have a female cone that the plates are scales and that each comes in two types bract or seed I think I am seeing seed scales in formation tightly fitting each scale at its center begins to ooze ever-so-slowly a tiny pitch droplet a spiral of spherical diamonds now I know it's pitch and not sap because it is damn sticky I can't get it off my fingers we enter the world of science dealing with the world of words and the world of things being farmed and manufactured and sold sap is not pitch which is not resin-resin and rosin and turpentine and pine tar what's in it for plants is not what's in it for us see water-based sap gets molecule A from site B to C in the inner tree while pitch is an organic soup moving in its own pipelines near the bark ready to flow out if bark or wood is damaged to push out with some force an insect to seal in time forming a solid resin odoriferous to repel insects that might enter the damage or attract some others and we thought we humans made things complicated damned chemist in me can't stop wondering what smells what makes things sticky it's terpenes oligomers of isoprene with appropriate names monoterpenes like pinene and diterpenoid resin acids like abietic acid I could tell you how they're made in pine or the lab and before long we have the whole lovable interconnected and thoroughly messy world meanwhile the cone rests oozing gently maybe the small globules of pitch are a survival strategy to be pollinated by any pollen from male cones that might be left over vain hope wrong season no males and the premature cone begins to darken to brown waiting for dispersal.

Don't let me get started on acorns.Toward the end of my senior year at Dartmouth, I watched my peers line up in front of the Career Services building. Waiting for their interviews for corporate jobs, all seemed to be dressed the same—the men wearing navy jackets, the women dark dresses. I thought back to my first day on campus four years earlier when we all wore different colors and dreamed of different futures.

It was as if our education, instead of enhancing our individualities and imaginations, had reduced them to sameness. It was not a unique scene. All over the world, formal education supplies the economy with workers who will increase productivity.

Its purpose is to fuel the economic machine rather than to alter its inner workings. But this machine now threatens our very survival. If the entire world reaches the levels of consumption seen in high-income countries today, we’ll need multiple planet Earths to supply the resources.

The absurd idea of infinite growth within a finite territory is at the heart of our economic system. To keep this machine running, formal education generates ever more efficient “human capital.” Increasing productivity metrics—such as revenue per employee or return on investment—rather than the individuality of students, drive our civilization’s approach to schooling our young people. Whereas the Sustainable Development Goals call for turning education into a force for sustainability, the opposite is often true.

The ways Western societies have come to think about education undermine our ability to deal with the environmental crisis. To get through this crisis, we need to cultivate our imagination, not undermine it. Growing up, none of my schooling fostered my ability to imagine a world different from what I saw around me.

As a child in 1990s Slovakia, I had to memorize textbooks word by word. Decades later, as an education researcher, I see children elsewhere going through the same—a chorus of Indian pupils repeating the sentences written by their teacher on the blackboard, a South African child yelled at by the teacher for failing to reproduce exactly the content of the textbook. Rote learning, discouraging individuality and instilling docility in children are still at the root of what it means to be educated across much of the world.

Many experts agree that we need to move away from such approaches to education. But the suppression of children’s imagination doesn’t take place only in underresourced communities or outmoded education systems. The issue is obscured but even more pernicious in “elite” institutions that tout “critical thinking.” Save for a few wise mentors, hardly anyone encouraged me to imagine an alternative future for the world throughout my Ivy League undergraduate years and my Oxbridge graduate years.

These institutions want to see their graduates succeed, and success is too often about maintaining current structures—not about reimagining their foundations. In recent years, we have witnessed efforts towards standardizing curricula across the globe. Such reforms bring Western notions of educational success to the rest of the world.

Driven by the OECD’s standardized tests, which rank education systems, countries focus on improving quantifiable outcomes such as literacy and numeracy. Winning the competition for the most efficient educational system today means having the most efficient workforce and growing the national economy faster tomorrow. Our standardized, metric-driven, “efficient” education systems essentially shape children in the image of artificial intelligence (AI).

The perfect “worker,” AI continually improves its own productivity but doesn’t challenge the larger structures within which it operates. It is one of the great paradoxes of our time that we invest so much into building supercomputers while marginalizing the imaginative potential of millions of human brains. Our focus on technological solutions to our civilization’s challenges is driving our approach to education.

More students at British universities are studying science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) than ever before, including a 400 percent increase in enrollment in AI courses over the last 10 years. Compared to STEM, social sciences and humanities are often underfunded and seen as inferior by policy makers and the public alike. But this approach is counterproductive because non-STEM subjects are crucial to fostering our ability to reimagine the world.

We even put our hope in solving the environmental crisis on AI. We use machine learning to optimize energy networks, track land use through satellite imagery and predict extreme weather. But AI, like our other technologies, can only treat the symptoms of the environmental crisis, not the causes.

These lie in our arrogance and lack of sensitivity to our impact on the planet. We can’t outsource to computers the solutions to the flaws in our politics and culture that underpin the environmental crisis. Throughout history, achievers of great change have relied on their imaginations to address fundamental flaws in society.

In my country of birth, Czechoslovakia, dissidents against Communism kept their dreams of democracy alive for decades by imagining different futures. In South Africa under apartheid, Nelson Mandela’s followers had to be radical in their imagination to create a vision of a fairer society. Imagining democracy when living under a totalitarian regime isn’t that different from imagining degrowth when living in a world of infinite growth.

The kind of intelligence Nelson Mandela and Václav Havel possessed was not artificial. The ability to reimagine the future and disrupt the status quo remains a distinctly human quality. Unlike AI, children are naturally imaginative and question the premises of society.

In my research, I have observed that younger children are often the most radical in imagining different futures. As they get older, their imagination tends to become more generic, mimicking mainstream narratives of technological progress. As long as our imagination is curtailed, ideas like degrowth or intergenerational justice remain fringe and sound utopian to many.

Cultivating imagination means learning from history’s disrupters who made the allegedly impossible palatable. It means moving away from our standardized curricula, quantifiable metrics and authoritarian pedagogies. Instead of dismissing “childish” ideas about the world’s future, it means seeing inspiration in children’s imaginations.

In an education system that celebrates imagination, arts and creativity are as important as math and science. Teachers develop and act on their own pedagogical philosophies. Children define success for themselves.

Idealism coexists with pragmatism. Expressing opinions and taking political action are goals of education, not distractions from it. Some of these ideas have already inspired educational projects around the world—such as forest schools in Europe, jeevanshalas (schools of life) in India or Schumacher College in the U.K.—but these are the exceptions.

The environmental crisis is not a crisis of technology or science, it is a crisis of imagination. If we let children be our guides, we might just be able to imagine our way to survival.

And out https://www.cabriotravel.nl/rp4wp_link/ there I propecia online saw unexpectedly a beautiful young deer near a lake. He focused his eyes on me to verify that I pose no danger. If I had fetched my cell phone to snap a photo, he would have disappeared. I chose propecia online to enjoy the view, savoring the moment as if the deer were a transient piece of music. In such instances, rare beauty cannot be documented or else it disappears.

This left no way for me to share my rare experience with my family. Past generations may have witnessed phenomena that were propecia online never documented in a scientific way. Is it possible that we missed important scientific clues from the past?. Science relies on reproducibility of results, but we might need to wait a long time before rare events will repeat. Let propecia online us consider a particular example.

Suppose the solar system had been visited by technological equipment from an extraterrestrial civilization a few million years ago—hardly impossible since the age of the Milky Way galaxy is a million times longer than our recorded history. If we found a photo album with high-resolution images from that time, we would have an affirmative answer to Enrico Fermi’s paradox. €œWhere is propecia online everybody?. € But the absence of that evidence doesn’t mean the answer is negative. If a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody around to hear it, does it make a sound?.

One remedy is to search for propecia online surprising events in the long history of Earth. For example, two billion years after the Earth formed, the oxygen level in the atmosphere rose for an unknown reason, enabling the complex life that currently thrives on Earth. Even more surprisingly, intelligent life appeared abruptly in the last one thousandth of the Earth’s history. Both events probably have propecia online a natural origin, but other explanations are possible. A better approach is to search the sky for technological relics from distant civilizations.

The newly announced Galileo Project aims to image objects near Earth whose nature is unknown, such as unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) or anomalous interstellar objects like ‘Oumuamua. It makes propecia online little sense to do otherwise. Choosing not to look through the windows doesn’t mean your neighbors aren’t there. A common mistake is to assume that our environment was choreographed with us in mind. Instead, we propecia online might just be spectators of a play designed for other actors, just as I was in the natural environment of the Adirondack deer.

Any technological equipment that the Galileo Project finds could have been sent millions of years ago, long before humans existed. The probes could have been sent towards Earth as a habitable destination on its own merit. The Galileo Project will ignore objects that are of most interest propecia online to national security, such as drones or airplanes which are human-made. Instead, it will focus on the “other” category in the UAP report that was delivered to Congress on June 25, 2021. To justify my engagement in the Galileo Project as part of my day job at Harvard University, I explained that it will assemble and interpret data from telescopes.

Rather than focusing on distant objects as astronomers often do, our research team will track nearby objects propecia online that move fast on the sky. There is no minimum distance for an object to be considered astronomical, especially if it originated from outside the solar system before arriving to our vicinity. The thousands of supporting e-mails I received in the days following the announcement of the Galileo Project show unequivocally that the idea of imaging the unknown inspires people. Bringing the study propecia online to the mainstream of astronomy will attract new funds and talent to science. There is no downside to seeking evidence.

It is a win-win proposition that will teach us something new. Even if ‘Oumuamua is a natural object, like a never-seen-before hydrogen iceberg, propecia online we will learn that there must be nurseries of interstellar objects that are very different from the solar system. In leading the Galileo Project, I act as former farm boy who has preserved his childhood curiosity. I understand the pushback from those who do not share my perspective, but cherish the company of like-minded explorers and donors. The Galileo Project is a fishing propecia online expedition.

We use hooks in the form of telescopes without assuming what they might catch. The fundamental innovation is that we chose to look through telescopes for answers. This is the biggest lesson we learned from Galileo Galilei’s debate with the propecia online philosophers who refused to look through his telescope. Recently, a philosopher published an article that uses philosophical reasoning to argue that ‘Oumuamua could not have been technological in origin. This suggests that looking through telescopes for answers is not as trivial as it may seem four centuries after Galileo.

This is propecia online an opinion and analysis article. The views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.Some gestures can be understood almost anywhere. Pointing to direct someone’s attention, for instance. New research shows that certain vocalizations can also be iconic and recognizable to people around propecia online the world—even when a speaker is not simply imitating a well-known sound. These findings, published in Scientific Reports, may help explain the rise of modern spoken language.

In 2015 language researchers challenged some English speakers to make up sounds representing various basic concepts (“sleep,” “child,” “meat,” “rock,” and more). When other propecia online English speakers listened to these sounds and tried matching them to concepts, they were largely successful. But “we wanted to be able to show that these vocalizations are understandable across cultures,” says study co-author and University of Birmingham cognitive scientist Marcus Perlman. Credit. Amanda Montañez propecia online.

Source. €œNovel Vocalizations Are Understood across Cultures,” by Aleksandra Cwiek et al., in Scientific Reports, Vol. 11. May 12, 2021 So Perlman and his colleagues conducted online and in-person experiments in seven countries, from Morocco to Brazil. They recruited more than 900 participants, who spoke a total of 28 languages, to listen to the best-understood vocalizations from the 2015 investigation and select matching concepts from a set of words or images.

Vocalizations that evoked well-known sounds—for example, dripping water—performed best. But many others were also understood at rates significantly above chance across all languages tested, the team found. €œThere is a notable degree of success outside of just onomatopoeia,” Perlman says. This is likely because certain acoustic patterns are universal, the team suggests. For example, short and basic sounds often convey the concept of “one,” and repeated sounds are typically associated with “many.” Likewise, low-pitched sounds accompany something big, and high-pitched sounds convey small size.

These findings of “iconic” sounds could help scientists understand how human ancestors started using rich acoustic communication, says co-author Aleksandra Ćwiek, a linguist at the Leibniz-Center General Linguistics in Berlin. The human voice, she says, might “afford enough iconicity to get language off the ground.” University of Tübingen linguist Matthias Urban, who was not involved in the research, agrees. €œIt’s unclear how words came into being in the first place,” he says. Iconic vocalizations are “potentially one pathway that could have been involved.”The famous opening words, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times,” of Charles Dickens' 1859 novel A Tale of Two Cities referred to the period of French Revolution. But he could equally well have been describing his contemporary Charles Darwin’s experience with his theory of evolution by natural selection.

Darwin was born at the best of times in 1809 when conditions were highly conducive for his theory to flourish, but he died in 1882 at the worst of times because there was a real danger that it might soon be killed off. Darwin's nemesis was the eminent physicist Lord Kelvin, and the weapon used against him was the age of the Earth. Various theories of evolution predated Darwin, but whatever version one favored, one thing was clear. It needed a very long time for its consequences to work itself out. Precisely how long was hard to pin down, but it was believed to require tens or hundreds of millions of years.

From 1650 on, the dominant theory about the age of the Earth, based on the work of Bishop Ussher, Isaac Newton and many other scholars who used various textual sources, was that it was about 6,000 years. Theories of geology and biology had to accommodate themselves to this short timeframe. The geological theory known as catastrophism postulated that major features such as the Grand Canyon, Himalayas, etc. Had emerged as a result of sudden and violent upheavals. When it came to biological diversity, the idea of special creation, that organisms were immutable and had been specially designed to fit the biological niches in which they found themselves, was the prevailing view.

Such a short window of time would have made it impossible for anyone to credibly propose the emergence of new species by a process of slow evolution. But around 1785, ideas of the age of the Earth began to undergo a radical change as geologists and paleontologists started using the features of the Earth itself, such as erosion, sedimentation and the layers of strata and the fossils embedded in them, to estimate its age. The theory of uniformitarianism, that major geological features were caused by the very slow accumulation of tiny changes, gained ground, culminating in Charles Lyell’s epic three-volume work Principles of Geology in 1830 that cemented the idea that the Earth had been around for hundreds of millions of years and possibly much longer, so long that it seemed impossible to fix an actual age. Darwin was also a keen student of geology and was familiar with Lyell's work (they later became close friends) and had the first two volumes of his book with him as he made his five-year voyage around the globe on the HMS Beagle during 1831–1836, where the ideas for his theory of evolution germinated as he observed the patterns of species in the various locations that he visited. Darwin knew from his work with pigeons that even deliberately breeding for specific characteristics took a long time to produce them.

But how much time was necessary?. He felt that it required at least hundreds of millions of years. The work of Lyell and other geologists gave him the luxury of assuming that sufficient time existed for natural selection to do its work. Darwin also came of age at a time when the idea that species were immutable had begun to crumble. While Darwin was taught and accepted the still dominant special creation theory, he was also familiar with the general idea of evolution.

His own grandfather Erasmus Darwin had in 1794 published a book Zoonomia that explored protoevolutionary ideas. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck had published his own model of how evolution worked in 1802. The various models proposed for the mechanism of evolution, such as Lamarckian evolution, orthogenesis and use-disuse, all implied some level of teleology. That there was a directionality inherent in the process. The extremely long window of time opened up by the new geology allowed Darwin and his co-creator Alfred Russell Wallace, working independently, to develop the central new insight of natural selection that differed from other models of evolution by showing how diversity could arise naturally by a process of Malthusian population selection pressures, without any kind of mystical agency directing the process towards any specific ends.

Their theory held that evolution where to buy propecia was contingency-driven in that how organisms evolved depended on chance factors and a changing environment, which suggested that if we ran the clock again, we could get very different outcomes in which human beings might never appear. Their work was first presented in a joint paper in 1858. Darwin's major work On the Origin of Species, published a year later, was a closely argued compilation of a massive amount of evidence that helped establish evolution as a fact. The radical change in the status of human beings implied by their model, from being specially created in the image of God to just another accidental byproduct of the evolutionary process just like all other species, was an immediate source of controversy because it challenged a key religious tenet that human beings were special. This was why natural selection aroused such opposition even while evolution was accepted.

Many scientists of that time were religious and believed in theistic evolution that said that a supernatural agency was guiding the process to produce the desired ends. While all models of evolution required long times, natural selection required much longer times than any guided selection process. Hence the younger the age of the Earth, the more likely it was that natural selection could not be the mechanism. Physicists, led by the eminent Kelvin, himself a theistic evolutionist, were leaders of the charge for a young Earth, though it must be emphasized that “young” at that time meant around 100 million years or less. Even religious scientists had abandoned the idea of the Earth being just 6,000 years old.

Beginning around 1860, Kelvin and other physicists started estimating the ages of the Earth and sun using the nebular hypothesis proposed around 1750 by Immanuel Kant and Pierre-Simon Laplace. This model treated the Earth and the sun as starting as rotating clouds of particles that coalesced under gravity to form molten balls, with the Earth subsequently solidifying and cooling. Kelvin used the laws of thermodynamics and other physics principles to arrive at estimates of 20–400 million years. By 1879 the upper limit had been lowered to about 100 million years for the Earth and an even shorter upper limit of 20 million years for the Sun, much less than the 200 million years or so believed to be required for natural selection to work. Since physics was considered to be the most rigorous of the sciences, things looked bad for natural selection.

When Darwin died in 1882, he was mourned as a great scientist who had radically changed our understanding of how the vast diversity of organisms we see around us came about, dethroning the idea that they were immutable. But because of the shrinking age of the Earth, he died with a major cloud hanging over his mechanism of natural selection. Darwin's final words on the topic, written in 1880 just two years before his death, expressed a plaintive hope that future developments might reconcile the needs of natural selection with physics calculations. €œWith respect to the lapse of time not having been sufficient since our planet was consolidated for the assumed amount of organic change, and this objection, as urged by [Lord Kelvin], is probably one of the gravest as yet advanced, I can only say, firstly that we do not know at what rate species change as measured in years, and secondly that many philosophers are not yet willing to admit that we know enough of the constitution of the universe and of the interior of our globe to speculate with safety on its past duration.” It turned out Darwin was prescient that improved knowledge of the interior of the Earth might change the calculations in his favor, but at the time he seemed to be grasping at straws. In fact, in the near term the problem got even worse because Kelvin and others produced new calculations that resulted in the age of the Earth being reduced even more, so that by 1895 the consensus physics view was that the age of the planet lay in the range 20–40 million years.

Natural selection appeared to be doomed. But physicists were now encountering stiffer opposition from other disciplines. Geologists were adamant that their models based on the accumulating evidence on sedimentation and erosion, while not as rigorous as the physics models, were well enough established that they were confident of their lower limit of 100 million years. Paleontologists were also arguing that the fossil record was not consistent with the physicists’ shorter ages. Both groups argued that the physicists must have gone awry somewhere, even if they could not point out the specific flaws.

Beginning in 1895, this impasse began to be broken when physicist John Perry, a former assistant of Kelvin's, challenged the latter's assumption that the Earth was a rigid and homogeneous body, saying there was little evidence to support it. By introducing inhomogeneity and convective flow in the Earth’s interior, he found that Kelvin’s estimates for the age of the Earth could change by as much as a factor as 100, shifting the upper limit into the billions of years. Other physicists also chimed in with similar upward shifts, and this encouraged geologists, paleontologists and biologists to ignore the physicists' arguments for a young Earth. It was the discovery of radioactivity that decisively changed the picture. It led to an entirely new way of measuring the age of the Earth, by allowing scientists to calculate the ages of rocks.

Since the oldest rock that could be found set a lower limit for the age of the Earth, the race was on to find older and older rocks using this method. Records fell rapidly, leading to ages of 141 million years by 1905, 1.64 billion years by 1911, 1.9 billion years by 1935, 3.35 billion years by 1947, and to 4.5 billion years by 1953, which is where the current consensus lies. When Kelvin died in 1907 at the age of 83, it was not clear if he had accepted that his estimates were no longer valid. But Darwin's hope that Kelvin would be proven wrong, and that eventually it would be shown that sufficient time existed for natural selection to work, was realized, 30 years after Darwin’s death. His theory now has all the time it needs.

This is an opinion and analysis article. The views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.Edited by Dava Sobel First it fell just fell at my feet no wind no squirrel or bird to give it a push a green green pine cone with brown accents heavy with sealed overlapping rounded rhomboid structures in spirals I have to restrain myself from seeing here the condensed aromatic hydrocarbons I leave it on a plate and look on the web for the names of cone parts names are important even if my last name changed three times what I learn is that I have a female cone that the plates are scales and that each comes in two types bract or seed I think I am seeing seed scales in formation tightly fitting each scale at its center begins to ooze ever-so-slowly a tiny pitch droplet a spiral of spherical diamonds now I know it's pitch and not sap because it is damn sticky I can't get it off my fingers we enter the world of science dealing with the world of words and the world of things being farmed and manufactured and sold sap is not pitch which is not resin-resin and rosin and turpentine and pine tar what's in it for plants is not what's in it for us see water-based sap gets molecule A from site B to C in the inner tree while pitch is an organic soup moving in its own pipelines near the bark ready to flow out if bark or wood is damaged to push out with some force an insect to seal in time forming a solid resin odoriferous to repel insects that might enter the damage or attract some others and we thought we humans made things complicated damned chemist in me can't stop wondering what smells what makes things sticky it's terpenes oligomers of isoprene with appropriate names monoterpenes like pinene and diterpenoid resin acids like abietic acid I could tell you how they're made in pine or the lab and before long we have the whole lovable interconnected and thoroughly messy world meanwhile the cone rests oozing gently maybe the small globules of pitch are a survival strategy to be pollinated by any pollen from male cones that might be left over vain hope wrong season no males and the premature cone begins to darken to brown waiting for dispersal. Don't let me get started on acorns.Toward the end of my senior year at Dartmouth, I watched my peers line up in front of the Career Services building. Waiting for their interviews for corporate jobs, all seemed to be dressed the same—the men wearing navy jackets, the women dark dresses. I thought back to my first day on campus four years earlier when we all wore different colors and dreamed of different futures.

It was as if our education, instead of enhancing our individualities and imaginations, had reduced them to sameness. It was not a unique scene. All over the world, formal education supplies the economy with workers who will increase productivity. Its purpose is to fuel the economic machine rather than to alter its inner workings. But this machine now threatens our very survival.

If the entire world reaches the levels of consumption seen in high-income countries today, we’ll need multiple planet Earths to supply the resources. The absurd idea of infinite growth within a finite territory is at the heart of our economic system. To keep this machine running, formal education generates ever more efficient “human capital.” Increasing productivity metrics—such as revenue per employee or return on investment—rather than the individuality of students, drive our civilization’s approach to schooling our young people. Whereas the Sustainable Development Goals call for turning education into a force for sustainability, the opposite is often true. The ways Western societies have come to think about education undermine our ability to deal with the environmental crisis.

To get through this crisis, we need to cultivate our imagination, not undermine it. Growing up, none of my schooling fostered my ability to imagine a world different from what I saw around me. As a child in 1990s Slovakia, I had to memorize textbooks word by word. Decades later, as an education researcher, I see children elsewhere going through the same—a chorus of Indian pupils repeating the sentences written by their teacher on the blackboard, a South African child yelled at by the teacher for failing to reproduce exactly the content of the textbook. Rote learning, discouraging individuality and instilling docility in children are still at the root of what it means to be educated across much of the world.

Many experts agree that we need to move away from such approaches to education. But the suppression of children’s imagination doesn’t take place only in underresourced communities or outmoded education systems. The issue is obscured but even more pernicious in “elite” institutions that tout “critical thinking.” Save for a few wise mentors, hardly anyone encouraged me to imagine an alternative future for the world throughout my Ivy League undergraduate years and my Oxbridge graduate years. These institutions want to see their graduates succeed, and success is too often about maintaining current structures—not about reimagining their foundations. In recent years, we have witnessed efforts towards standardizing curricula across the globe.

Such reforms bring Western notions of educational success to the rest of the world. Driven by the OECD’s standardized tests, which rank education systems, countries focus on improving quantifiable outcomes such as literacy and numeracy. Winning the competition for the most efficient educational system today means having the most efficient workforce and growing the national economy faster tomorrow. Our standardized, metric-driven, “efficient” education systems essentially shape children in the image of artificial intelligence (AI). The perfect “worker,” AI continually improves its own productivity but doesn’t challenge the larger structures within which it operates.

It is one of the great paradoxes of our time that we invest so much into building supercomputers while marginalizing the imaginative potential of millions of human brains. Our focus on technological solutions to our civilization’s challenges is driving our approach to education. More students at British universities are studying science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) than ever before, including a 400 percent increase in enrollment in AI courses over the last 10 years. Compared to STEM, social sciences and humanities are often underfunded and seen as inferior by policy makers and the public alike. But this approach is counterproductive because non-STEM subjects are crucial to fostering our ability to reimagine the world.

We even put our hope in solving the environmental crisis on AI. We use machine learning to optimize energy networks, track land use through satellite imagery and predict extreme weather. But AI, like our other technologies, can only treat the symptoms of the environmental crisis, not the causes. These lie in our arrogance and lack of sensitivity to our impact on the planet. We can’t outsource to computers the solutions to the flaws in our politics and culture that underpin the environmental crisis.

Throughout history, achievers of great change have relied on their imaginations to address fundamental flaws in society. In my country of birth, Czechoslovakia, dissidents against Communism kept their dreams of democracy alive for decades by imagining different futures. In South Africa under apartheid, Nelson Mandela’s followers had to be radical in their imagination to create a vision of a fairer society. Imagining democracy when living under a totalitarian regime isn’t that different from imagining degrowth when living in a world of infinite growth. The kind of intelligence Nelson Mandela and Václav Havel possessed was not artificial.

The ability to reimagine the future and disrupt the status quo remains a distinctly human quality. Unlike AI, children are naturally imaginative and question the premises of society. In my research, I have observed that younger children are often the most radical in imagining different futures. As they get older, their imagination tends to become more generic, mimicking mainstream narratives of technological progress. As long as our imagination is curtailed, ideas like degrowth or intergenerational justice remain fringe and sound utopian to many.

Cultivating imagination means learning from history’s disrupters who made the allegedly impossible palatable. It means moving away from our standardized curricula, quantifiable metrics and authoritarian pedagogies. Instead of dismissing “childish” ideas about the world’s future, it means seeing inspiration in children’s imaginations. In an education system that celebrates imagination, arts and creativity are as important as math and science. Teachers develop and act on their own pedagogical philosophies.

Children define success for themselves. Idealism coexists with pragmatism. Expressing opinions and taking political action are goals of education, not distractions from it. Some of these ideas have already inspired educational projects around the world—such as forest schools in Europe, jeevanshalas (schools of life) in India or Schumacher College in the U.K.—but these are the exceptions. The environmental crisis is not a crisis of technology or science, it is a crisis of imagination.

If we let children be our guides, we might just be able to imagine our way to survival.

How should I take Propecia?

Take finasteride tablets by mouth. Swallow the tablets with a drink of water. You can take Propecia with or without food. Take your doses at regular intervals. Do not take your medicine more often than directed.

Contact your pediatrician or health care professional regarding the use of Propecia in children. Special care may be needed.

Overdosage: If you think you have taken too much of Propecia contact a poison control center or emergency room at once.

NOTE: Propecia is only for you. Do not share Propecia with others.

Propecia nz buy

More than 1,000 interns will begin working in the NSW Health system today - a record number of new starters and the most of any propecia nz buy state or territory in Australia.“These junior medical officers join NSW Health at a remarkable time in our history,” Richard Griffiths, Acting Deputy Secretary, NSW Health said. €œThey come to us in the middle of an unprecedented, world-wide propecia and have the unique opportunity to play a vital role in in our extraordinary health system.” This year, NSW has a record number of 1,041 intern positions, an increase of 35 per cent since 2011. Of these positions, 150 belong to the Rural Preferential Recruitment scheme, in which interns propecia nz buy undertake the majority of their training in rural hospitals. This has doubled in number since 2012.

This innovative scheme was designed to encourage interns to work in rural hospitals once they finished their medical school training. The new doctors starting their internship today will be entering a training program with networked propecia nz buy hospitals throughout the state, providing formal and on the job training. They receive two-year contracts to rotate between metropolitan, regional and rural hospitals to ensure the diversity of their experience. They also join different units in each hospital, including surgery and emergency propecia nz buy medicine.

Interns are medical graduates who have completed their medical degree and are required to complete a supervised year of practice in order to become independent practitioners. For more information about the recruitment of Junior Medical Officers, visit Junior Medical Officer recruitment..

More than propecia generic 1,000 interns will begin working in the NSW Health system today - a record number of new starters and the most of any state or territory in Australia.“These junior medical officers join NSW Health at a remarkable time in our history,” Richard Griffiths, propecia online Acting Deputy Secretary, NSW Health said. €œThey come to us in the middle of an unprecedented, world-wide propecia and have the unique opportunity to play a vital role in in our extraordinary health system.” This year, NSW has a record number of 1,041 intern positions, an increase of 35 per cent since 2011. Of these positions, 150 belong to the Rural Preferential Recruitment propecia online scheme, in which interns undertake the majority of their training in rural hospitals.

This has doubled in number since 2012. This innovative scheme was designed to encourage interns to work in rural hospitals once they finished their medical school training. The new doctors starting their propecia online internship today will be entering a training program with networked hospitals throughout the state, providing formal and on the job training.

They receive two-year contracts to rotate between metropolitan, regional and rural hospitals to ensure the diversity of their experience. They also join different units in propecia online each hospital, including surgery and emergency medicine. Interns are medical graduates who have completed their medical degree and are required to complete a supervised year of practice in order to become independent practitioners.

For more information about the recruitment of Junior Medical Officers, visit Junior Medical Officer recruitment..

Propecia medication

Anyone in the local community who is feeling rising distress or experiencing suicidal thoughts can now seek support at the new 'Safe Haven' located in Wagga, one of 20 new drop in centres being trialled buy propecia discount across NSW.Minister for Mental Health Bronnie Taylor said the Safe Haven is a place of refuge for anyone experiencing distress, and offers an alternative to going to a busy, stressful propecia medication emergency department."We want people to know that they don't have to struggle alone on a bad day, they can go into the Safe Haven and get immediate help," Mrs Taylor said."This is all about creating a welcoming environment where people learn about their own response to crises and develop skills to help maintain their mental health. It can also be a place for people to just sit and have a cup of tea with a peer worker, join in an activity or sit in a propecia medication quiet spot and listen to music.""This Safe Haven is for everyone, there is no referral required and anyone can drop in during opening hours.""It is another important community-based support for the Murrumbidgee region and complements existing supports such as the team of Community Gatekeepers, Wellbeing School Nurses, Suicide Prevention Outreach Team and the Safeguards child and adolescent mental health response team announced earlier this year."Wagga's Safe Haven is located at 7 Yathong Street and open on Friday, Saturday and Sunday between 2pm and 9pm. The Griffith Safe Haven has also recently launched, temporarily located at 5 Wiradjuri propecia medication Place, Griffith.

A more permanent home will be secured in the city later in the year. Murrumbidgee Local Health District's Towards Zero Suicides Coordinator, Richard Parks, said the Safe Haven service is a warm, welcoming space staffed by propecia medication people who can empathise with people who require support. "The Safe Haven provides compassionate, respectful care by peer workers with a lived experience of suicidality," Mr Parks said propecia medication.

"Peer support workers are uniquely placed to offer understanding and support because they have been propecia medication in their shoes."Local people with lived experience of suicidal crisis have been involved in co-designing this new suicide prevention service. The district also consulted widely with local health and welfare agencies to tailor the delivery of care to the Wagga community."The Safe Haven initiative is based on a model operating in the UK, which has achieved a 33 per cent reduction in admissions to mental health inpatient units," said propecia medication Mr Parks. Anyone can drop in to a Safe Haven during opening hours.

There are no age limitations, however if the person is under 16 years of age, consent to participate will need to be sought from a parent or guardian.The NSW Government has propecia medication invested $25.1 million in the Safe Haven initiative, which contributes to the Towards Zero Suicides Premier's Priority.If you, or someone you know, is thinking about suicide or experiencing a personal crisis or distress, please seek help immediately by calling 000 (Triple Zero) or one of these services. Lifeline 13 11 14 Suicide Call Back Service 1300 659 467To connect with specialist mental health services in the Murrumbidgee, call Accessline 1800 800 944.​Councils and staff across the state came together in a webinar yesterday afternoon to discuss the impacts of hair loss treatment on the mental health of the NSW local government workforce and the communities they serve.Minister for Local Government Shelley Hancock said more than 200 propecia medication council workers, councillors, mayors and general managers joined the webinar with Minister for Mental Health Bronnie Taylor and NSW Chief Psychiatrist Dr Murray Wright. "The last 18 months has been a very difficult time for everybody, with prolonged restrictions on our daily lives and mounting social and economic impacts, so this webinar was designed to address the many stressful and isolating issues we've been encountering," Mrs Hancock said."The webinar provided an opportunity for council staff and councillors to take stock of their own mental health, obtain information on support services, and ask questions and receive advice from the experts.

"While much of the focus for councils has been on propecia medication providing infrastructure, facilities and services to their communities during the hair loss treatment outbreak, it's important to reflect on the mental health of council staff and councillors in addition to residents. "Our 128 local councils across NSW comprise nearly 1,300 councillors and more than 48,000 staff, propecia medication and they too are enduring incredible stress in serving their local communities in the face of unprecedented challenges. "The Office of Local Government has so far held nine webinars during this current hair loss treatment outbreak with key ministers and senior government officials to keep them up to date with the latest developments and restrictions."The NSW Government will continue to support our councils and their local communities to respond and recover from the hair loss treatment propecia."Mrs Taylor said the NSW Government is working on a propecia recovery roadmap, under which councils and local communities will play an integral part."Councils have a big role to play as we navigate our path out of this propecia, with the community right at the centre of the recovery," Mrs Taylor said."The NSW Government has invested in community-led suicide prevention activity including local drop-in centres, response groups and community based services."Local staff are doing an incredible job confronting challenges head-on every day, so it is really important that they are equipped with the tools to, not only support the community but also to be able to recognise when they might need to put their hand up for help themselves."This is all about challenging the stigma around with mental illness, encouraging help seeking behaviour and creating connected communities full of healthy, resilient individuals."The NSW propecia medication Government has relaunched its Mentally Healthy Workplaces Strategy in response to the significant shift in the way we work due to hair loss treatment.

It aims to help employers move from a model of only prioritising mental health at work following an incident, to offering targeted and proactive support to their employees throughout the year.Extensive mental health resources including self-help and online counselling support can be accessed on the Commonwealth Government's Head to Health website If you or somebody you know needs help, call Lifeline on 13 11 14, Beyond Blue on 1800 512 348 or the NSW Mental Health Line on 1800 011 511..

Anyone in the local community who is feeling rising distress or experiencing suicidal thoughts can now seek support at the new 'Safe Haven' located in Wagga, one of 20 new drop in centres being trialled across NSW.Minister for Mental Health Bronnie Taylor said the Safe Haven is a place of refuge for anyone experiencing distress, and offers an alternative to going to a busy, stressful emergency department."We want people to know that they http://www.ec-cath-pfettisheim.ac-strasbourg.fr/?page_id=226 don't have to propecia online struggle alone on a bad day, they can go into the Safe Haven and get immediate help," Mrs Taylor said."This is all about creating a welcoming environment where people learn about their own response to crises and develop skills to help maintain their mental health. It can also be a place for people to just sit and have a cup of tea with a peer worker, join in an activity or sit in a quiet spot and listen to music.""This Safe Haven is for everyone, there is no referral required and anyone can drop in during opening hours.""It is another important community-based support for the Murrumbidgee region and complements existing supports such as the team of Community Gatekeepers, Wellbeing School Nurses, Suicide Prevention Outreach Team and the Safeguards child and propecia online adolescent mental health response team announced earlier this year."Wagga's Safe Haven is located at 7 Yathong Street and open on Friday, Saturday and Sunday between 2pm and 9pm. The Griffith Safe Haven has also recently launched, temporarily located at 5 Wiradjuri Place, propecia online Griffith. A more permanent home will be secured in the city later in the year.

Murrumbidgee Local Health District's Towards Zero Suicides Coordinator, Richard Parks, said the Safe Haven service is a warm, welcoming space staffed by people propecia online who can empathise with people who require support. "The Safe propecia online Haven provides compassionate, respectful care by peer workers with a lived experience of suicidality," Mr Parks said. "Peer support workers are uniquely propecia online placed to offer understanding and support because they have been in their shoes."Local people with lived experience of suicidal crisis have been involved in co-designing this new suicide prevention service. The district also propecia online consulted widely with local health and welfare agencies to tailor the delivery of care to the Wagga community."The Safe Haven initiative is based on a model operating in the UK, which has achieved a 33 per cent reduction in admissions to mental health inpatient units," said Mr Parks.

Anyone can drop in to a Safe Haven during opening hours. There are no age limitations, however if the person is under 16 years of age, consent to participate will need to be sought from a parent or guardian.The NSW Government has invested $25.1 million in the Safe Haven initiative, which contributes to the Towards Zero Suicides propecia online Premier's Priority.If you, or someone you know, is thinking about suicide or experiencing a personal crisis or distress, please seek help immediately by calling 000 (Triple Zero) or one of these services. Lifeline 13 11 14 Suicide Call Back Service 1300 659 467To connect with specialist mental health services in the Murrumbidgee, call Accessline 1800 800 944.​Councils and staff across the state came together in a webinar yesterday afternoon to discuss the impacts of hair loss treatment on the mental health of the NSW local government workforce and the communities they serve.Minister for Local Government Shelley Hancock said more than 200 propecia online council workers, councillors, mayors and general managers joined the webinar with Minister for Mental Health Bronnie Taylor and NSW Chief Psychiatrist Dr Murray Wright. "The last 18 months has been a very difficult time for everybody, with prolonged restrictions on our daily lives and mounting social and economic impacts, so this webinar was designed to address the many stressful and isolating issues we've been encountering," Mrs Hancock said."The webinar provided an opportunity for council staff and councillors to take stock of their own mental health, obtain information on support services, and ask questions and receive advice from the experts.

"While much of the focus for councils has been on providing infrastructure, facilities and services to their communities during the hair loss treatment outbreak, it's important to reflect on the mental health of council staff and councillors propecia online in addition to residents. "Our 128 local councils across NSW comprise nearly 1,300 councillors and more than 48,000 staff, and they too are propecia online enduring incredible stress in serving their local communities in the face of unprecedented challenges. "The Office of Local Government has so far held nine webinars during this current hair loss treatment outbreak with key ministers and senior government officials to keep them up to date with the latest developments and restrictions."The NSW Government will continue to support our councils and their local communities to respond and recover from the hair loss treatment propecia."Mrs Taylor said the NSW Government is working on a propecia recovery roadmap, under which councils and local communities will play an integral part."Councils have a big role to play as we navigate our path out of this propecia, with the community right at the centre of the recovery," Mrs Taylor said."The NSW Government has invested in community-led suicide prevention activity including local drop-in centres, response groups and community based services."Local staff are doing an incredible job confronting challenges head-on every day, so it is really important that they are equipped with the tools to, not only support the community but also to be able to recognise when they might need to put their hand up for help themselves."This propecia online is all about challenging the stigma around with mental illness, encouraging help seeking behaviour and creating connected communities full of healthy, resilient individuals."The NSW Government has relaunched its Mentally Healthy Workplaces Strategy in response to the significant shift in the way we work due to hair loss treatment. It aims to help employers move from a model of only prioritising mental health at work following an incident, to offering targeted and proactive support to their employees throughout the year.Extensive mental health resources including self-help and online counselling support can be accessed on the Commonwealth Government's Head to Health website If you or somebody you know needs help, call Lifeline on 13 11 14, Beyond Blue on 1800 512 348 or the NSW Mental Health Line on 1800 011 511..