Monday, April 7, 2014


News Clips For The Day



How to Fix Rehab: Expert Who Lost Son to Addiction Has a Plan – NBC
By Tony Dokoupil

The call came on a Saturday, a day after Thomas McLellan told an auditorium of graduate students to rethink the science of addiction. As a research psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania, no one knew more about the subject. But despite his expertise, both McLellan’s sons had become addicts. His oldest was in rehab for alcohol abuse.

But the call—from a sobbing relative—was about Bo, the younger son, who had begun to mix drinking with pills. He finished college the day of his dad’s lecture, and died of an overdose the very same night.

“It seemed like a sign from God,” McLellan later confided to a friend. He was an expert in addiction, surrounded by experts in addiction, and he had no idea what to do when the disease wormed its way into his own family. He knew what the science said, but he struggled to find the science reflected in the real world, where “treatment” still meant 28-days of moralizing and a referral to a grim local circle of metal chairs. “If I don’t know, nobody else knows,” McLellan says today, almost six years after burying his son. “Where does a schoolteacher turn? How about a truck driver? How about a cop?

What to do for the addicted—how to stop their slide from use to abuse to oblivion—is a question confronting a record number of Americans. Heroin gets all the headlines, with the official tally of opioid addicts doubling in a decade, and overdoses tripling among the young. But no one starts with a needle in their arm. Drug and alcohol abuse in general has exploded nationwide, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which has tracked a two-fold rise in drug-related deaths in a generation.

Most American addicts are not in treatment, however, not even a free 12-step program. Of those who are in treatment, the vast majority will quit or start using again within a year, studies show. The result is an endless loop of denial, decline, recovery and relapse.

“I’ve been a connoisseur of every big name rehab facility out there,” says former congressman Patrick Kennedy, a recovering addict and one of McLellan’s strongest allies in the push for better care. “None of them got me sober.”

But the 64-year-old McLellan is feeling downright sunny about the future of treatment. In fact, he thinks we’re about to fix it for good, drawing lessons from a program now in use for addicted physicians and airline pilots. “You’ll be happy to know,” he says, understandably happy to know himself, eight out of 10 of those treated produced clean urine for a full five years. And of those who relapsed? Most relapsed only once.

“We’re finally getting it right,” McLellan says. “The world is going to get better treatment.”

The new push for better treatment began shortly after his son’s death, when McLellan got call from President Barack Obama, followed by another call from Vice President Joe Biden. Would he join the administration, they wondered, serving as the Senior Scientist for the Office of National Drug Control Policy? McLellan disdains government work, which he says makes people “stupid most of the day.” He agreed because he felt it was a chance to help keep someone else from losing a child to addiction, and he was right.

In the second half of 2009 and early 2010, McLellan helped lobby substance abuse treatment into the Affordable Care Act. As of January 1, addiction and mental health care is considered one of 10 essential pillars of national health. For more than ten million people with drug or alcohol problems, it means new insurance eligibility or the expansion of existing coverage. For tens of millions of other Americans, it means a guaranteed safety net if they fall into the bottle or worse. For McLellan, it means something more profound: a victory for science-based treatment.

Historically, addiction has been viewed as a moral weakness, not a genuine disease. As a result the treatment system was shaped by amateurs, most notably an alcoholic named Bill Wilson. In 1935, while locked in a Manhattan detox room, the failed stockbroker experienced “a wind not of air but of spirit,” as he later put it, and he said it cured him of his desire to drink. A few years later he codified that experience in his famous 12-steps, settling on a number that matched the 12 apostles of the Bible.

Today almost every drug and alcohol program is based on Wilson’s model, despite a success rate below 10 percent and research suggesting that at least a fifth of programs make people worse. “They take patients, and they harm them,” McLellan says. That’s in large part because 12-step programs are based on an outdated theory of addiction, or what McLellan calls “the washing machine model”: Dirty old addicts go in, clean new citizens come out.

McLellan likes to invite people to imagine that the same model existed for diabetes. It would mean blaming people for their diets, then denying them care until they’d gone blind or needed a limb amputated. After stabilizing them at rock bottom, they’d be scolded into better choices at a residential facility, and discharged to a church basement. Two months later, they’d be sick again. “That would be stupid,” says McLellan. “It would be malpractice.”

The national office of Alcoholics Anonymous declined to respond to McLellan's comments, but a spokesperson—himself in AA and therefore anonymous—sought to distance the group from the wider treatment industry that uses its model. "It grew up in a separate effort," the spokesperson says. "AA didn't set this in motion."

Either way, in the era of the Affordable Care Act, the industry should find a new direction, McLellan says. That’s because the ACA adopts the view of most researchers, who consider addiction to be an incurable chronic disease, something that has to be managed for life. It should force insurance companies to fund a diabetes-level continuum of care, and pressure treatment programs to provide the most effective possible care, or lose millions of new customers. Or so goes the economic theory.
Money is essential, of course, but McLellan knows that money alone isn’t enough. When his own kids began to come home sparkly-eyed and smelling of cinnamon gum, experimenting as kids do, he had the money to help them if they got in trouble. What he lacked, he realized, as the trouble piled up, was the practical knowledge to spend his money well. What treatment programs are providing proven methods of care? And which of those would be best for his kids? He simply didn’t know.

Throughout the 1990s, McLellan was a rising star at the University of Pennsylvania, where he was a senior member of the Center for Studies of Addiction. But he had long been surrounded by his field. His father and brother died of alcohol-related causes. When his kids entered rehab, he became the only person in his immediate family who was not in recovery, and something heavy settled in his mind: his research was getting him promoted, but it wasn’t making a difference in the real world.
To fix that he founded the Treatment Research Institute, a nonprofit aimed at developing science-based solutions to addiction, and plowing them into the marketplace. One of his first ideas was for a guide to rehab, a ranking of what works, and why. By the night Bo died, more than a decade later, the guide was still just an idea.

But this spring, through donations made in Bo’s honor and a grant from the National Institutes of Health, TRI will finally debut the Consumer Guide to Adolescent Treatment, a sleek web-based review, akin to an interactive college guide, except based on sharper science. It’s the guide McLellan wishes he had when it counted, the guide he hopes other parents will use for a rational foothold in an emotional moment. “It’s something tangible,” he says.

To put it together McLellan turned to Consumer Reports, the premier guide to chaotic capitalism. The magazine agreed to coach the eager Ph.D., teaching him the art of comparative reviews. McLellan and his colleagues then frisked the literature of addiction, developing a list of 10 features of “quality programs.” They broke those features into dozens of components, each backed by at least two peer-reviewed studies. So what are the features and components of quality programs?

They are almost too obvious to list. Quality programs begin with quality employees, including mental health specialists, family therapists, and medical professionals. They tailor treatment based on the patient’s needs, not rigid program dictates. They prescribe medicine, attend to physical health and educational hurdles, and they prepare the patient for a long-term recovery, including monitoring and support.
“It’s not rocket science,” says McLellan, and yet as he discovered most facilities don’t come close to offering even half of it.

McLellan and his team spent years rigorously reviewing real-world programs. In this pilot stage the Consumer Guide to Adolescent Rehab is limited to programs in the Philadelphia area. But the result—which NBC News previewed exclusively—is already powerful and unprecedented, a merciless blend of science and consumer empowerment.
“Quality Counts,” reads a headline on the homepage. “Find the Best Treatment.”
Visitors can answer a few questions, and be shown only programs with the qualities they’re likely to need. Or they can enter their zip code, and scroll through programs by area, scanning their rating. A red circle means “needs improvement.” Yellow means “adequate.” Green means “good.”

While the prototype shows all three colors, the real data will reveal a lot of red. Not a single rehab reviewed by TRI got more than two green lights, and the average rating out of a perfect score of 64 points was just 13 points.

That’s even worse than what another nonprofit found a decade ago, when it conducted a national study of 144 “highly regarded” teen treatment programs. Each program in that study came recommended by a major authority in the field, and yet out of a possible 45 points, the average score was a 23.

Researchers published the results topped by the word “disturbing.” McLellan uses the word “dismal.” But in fact the results are more than just dispiriting. While the prototype is flush with hundreds of fictional programs, two out three real rehabs approached by TRI declined to be evaluated—perhaps hoping to avoid the clear-eyed review their peers got.

“It’s a dirty little secret,” says Patrick Kennedy, “but none of these places want to be evaluated.”

McLellan is hoping to make such close-door policies impossible to sustain. He’ll start by listing the uncooperative programs in the guide anyhow, next to a red-stamp that says: Refused. At the same time, if his guide is successful, he’ll be funneling more and more people to the higher quality programs, and that alone will pressure everyone else to improve their services—and open their doors to independent review.
McLellan’s plan is to move from Philadelphia on to the state, and then the nation, where officials in four states have already expressed interest. At the same time, the American Society of Addiction Medicine has signed on to work on an adult version of the guide. But the key for McLellan is still users—and lots of them. He wants people pounding desks, demanding that their insurers cover the best treatments, not just the cheapest options that comply with the ACA.

It won’t happen quickly, but McLellan believes it will happen all the same. His oldest son is now in recovery, and McLellan returns to the addiction treatment currently enjoyed only by pilots and doctors. It’s simple: five years of care, beginning with rehab, progressing through stages of monitoring, and ending up in an out-patient setting. That’s it: acute care, monitoring, and consequences. It works so well, McLellan says, that pilots keep their jobs while they’re in it.

“They are flying planes,” he says, and they taking drugs tests, “so it gives the public the kind of assurance that they should expect.”

It’s too late for such a program to benefit Bo, of course, but McLellan’s worries have passed to a new generation. He is the grandfather of two little boys, and when he thinks of the future he thinks of them. “I couldn’t be more optimistic,” he says. “The United States has now, finally, seen the light.”




There is a lot of verbiage here, but this is what I think is different about McClellan's plan. (1) “tailor treatment based on the patient’s needs, not rigid program dictates” – note, the article doesn't explore what those variables might be – (2) five years of monitoring and support and (3) finally, “outpatient status.” Since all psychiatric treatment after the 28 days is “outpatient” I don't know what McLellan means by this. He probably means that there is no more contact with the treatment center unless there is a relapse. The website of Promises is found below, which is a similar if not identical plan to McLellan's. The tailor-made treatment plan is its central tool.

His plan is similar to AA and other 12 step programs, as he said, but is held in a treatment center instead of a “church basement,” it is not the strictly voluntary and group-based experience that AA provides. AA creates a lifetime – not just five years – out of an endless succession of days without a drink. McLellan's program is hospital based and under the management of psychiatrists. If the psychiatrist can develop a good relationship with the addict, this therapy-based program might work better for some people who do not relate well enough to groups for AA to be effective or who are outrightly hostile to religions. There are many people, also, whose lack of insight into themselves or serious mental illness prevents their getting sober at the time they first come to meetings, but considerable growth and maturation happens through the group discussions, often leading to success later. McLellan's plan may also work better for adolescents, who are sometimes too immature to take the situation seriously or participate in their own behalf.

The following website is from a treatment plan advertised as being for “professionals”: http://www.promises.com/professionals-treatment-at-promises/ and at one point it mentions the term “high functioning professionals,” so it may not be available to people with other mental health issues, a lack of education, or those who simply can't pay the fees. The costs for going into a treatment center can be astronomical. If the “professions”plan is elitist in any or all ways, it will be, as McLellan says of AA, “harmful” to many people – very harmful. If this plan is successful to any degree whatsoever, however, it should be financed by a good health insurance plan, so under Affordable Healthcare the matter of the fee should not be a great problem.


From the Promises website is the following description of their plan:

Professionals Treatment at Promises provides individualized, client-oriented treatment (as opposed to “program-oriented”). No other illness is managed in a “one size fits all” manner and addiction should not be an exception. Specific recovery performance behaviors are identified and clear treatment goals are set and monitored. We also recognize that for high-functioning professionals, especially those in safety-sensitive positions, it is necessary and wise to achieve considerable stability prior to returning to work.

PTP’s “client-focused” treatment approach means each individual will receive a customized treatment plan which will include strategic activities, clearly defined recovery goals and an integrated continuing care plan. A client’s treatment goals must be met prior to a recommendation for discharge from the PTP treatment team.




Nancy Pelosi blames CIA's "enhanced interrogation" on Dick Cheney
By Jake Miller CBS News April 6, 2014

In advance of a report from the Senate Intelligence Committee that will cast a harshly critical eye on the CIA's post-9/11 "enhanced interrogation" program, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi sought to absolve the spy agency of some of the blame for using interrogation methods critics have dubbed tortuous.

Pelosi told CNN on Sunday that the "patriotic" officials at the CIA were only following marching orders from former Vice President Dick Cheney.

"I do believe that during the Bush-Cheney administration, that Vice President Cheney set a tone and an attitude for the CIA," she said. "Many people in the CIA are so patriotic, they protect our country in a way to avoid conflict and violence."
"But the attitude that was there...I think it came from Dick Cheney," she said. "I think he's proud of it."

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted this week to declassify the report. It won't be available to the public until a security review conducted largely by the CIA itself is completed. Some of the report's conclusions have been leaked, though, including the key accusation that the CIA misled Congress about the effectiveness and the severity of enhanced interrogation methods.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, said shortly after the vote to declassify on Thursday that the report's conclusions were "shocking."

"The report exposes brutality that stands in sharp contrast to our values as a nation," she said. "It chronicles a stain on our history that must never be allowed to happen again. This is not what Americans do."

But some in Congress and the intelligence community took issue with the report's findings and Feinstein's characterization, saying they offer a negatively biased view of a program that did have some redeeming value.

"I have a tremendous amount of respect for Dianne Feinstein. We work very closely together on a lot of national security issues," Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, told CNN. "This report, I just have some differences of opinion."

"This is not the Holy Grail. It doesn't answer all the questions," Rogers said. "There is another counterargument out there on these facts. So you'll only get one side of the facts to argue from, and I think that's unfortunate."

Rogers also said Pelosi's invocation of Cheney is "politicizing" the issue in a way that could "lead people to the wrong conclusion."

"To say this is all about Dick Cheney. I think...clearly when you say things like that it becomes highly charged politically," he said.

And former CIA Director Michael Hayden, who took the reins of the spy agency in 2006 after the methods under scrutiny had largely been curtailed, said Feinstein's take on the issue may be too "emotional" to produce an unbiased report.

Citing Feinstein's stated desire to author a report damning enough to prevent such a program from ever being permitted again, Hayden told "Fox News Sunday," "That motivation for the report...may show deep emotional feeling on part of the senator. But I don't think it leads you to an objective report."

Hayden said he still believes "the totality of information, including information from this program" helped the U.S. eventually find Osama bin Laden.

He also disputed the idea that the CIA labored to hide the efficacy and severity of the program from Congress, noting that as CIA director, "I was the one who decided to inform all the members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committee to move the prisoners out of the black sites to Guantanamo and actually go public with a significant portion of this program."



Senator Dianne Feinstein stated, “The report exposes brutality that stands in sharp contrast to our values as a nation," and "It chronicles a stain on our history that must never be allowed to happen again. This is not what Americans do."

“Some” voices defend the program saying it “did have some redeeming value.” “former CIA Director Michael Hayden characterizes Feinstein's comments as being “too emotional” – a standard macho statement about a woman, I must say. The article claims that Feinstein herself said she wanted to create a report “damning enough to prevent such a program from ever being permitted again.” Hayden denied that the CIA tried to hide the basic aspects of the program from Congress, stating that he as CIA director ordered the removal of prisoners from the “black sites” around the world to Guantanamo Bay, and that the program was partly responsible for the targeting and assassination of bin Laden.

Whatever, I still don't want the US government to be administering electric shocks, tying prisoners up by their arms naked and bringing in female soldiers to taunt them, exposing them while wet to cold temperatures, waterboarding them, or any other such methods. What ever happened to “truth serum?” Is it not considered effective enough? I personally don't think it puts my “patriotism” in a bad light because I feel this way. It's just that I'm patriotic about a virtuous national government that administers justice with “due process of law.” That is a truly defensible position which doesn't need to be “classified” so the public won't find out about it.





CIA used "Dr. Zhivago" to subvert Soviet Union during Cold War, newly declassified documents show
CBS News April 7, 2014

For more than 50 years, the CIA kept a literary secret. The agency used a classic novel to subvert the Soviet Union in the Cold War.

The Cold War was a clash of ideology as much as empire, and according to 130 newly declassified CIA documents, the agency adopted some unusual tactics to infiltrate the Soviet Union, including covertly publishing copies of banned literary works like "Dr. Zhivago" by Boris Pasternak.

The novel -- and its later 1965 film adaptation -- tells the story of Yuri Zhivago, a poet whose faith and creativity is squashed during the Russian Revolution of 1917, which helped bring the communists to power.

During the real-life Cold War, the Kremlin banned it. That's when the CIA quietly published and distributed it as anti-Soviet propaganda.

A recently declassified CIA memo from April 1958, excerpted in the soon-to-be-published book "The Zhivago Affair," explains their intent: "...We have the opportunity to make Soviet citizens wonder what is wrong with their government, when a fine literary work by the man acknowledged to be the greatest living Russian writer is not even available in his own country."

CBS News contributor Douglas Brinkley, presidential historian, said, "There's nothing that the Kremlin hated more than this particular book."

In order to avoid detection, the CIA asked the Vatican to secretly hand out copies to thousands of Soviet citizens at the 1958 World's Fair.

"It was an extremely effective CIA campaign," Brinkley said. "I mean, the propaganda value was immense. All over Russia, word of Pasternak's work starting being talked about, and was being smuggled in."

The so-called "Zhivago Affair" was only one example of how the U.S. government used art or culture to undermine the Soviet Union. In the early '50s, a young Ronald Reagan promoted Radio Free Europe. He said at the time, "The crusade for freedom is your chance and mine to fight communism."

Paid for by the U.S. government, it broadcast American culture and music to people inside the Soviet bloc.

Another program paid jazz musicians to tour and perform to showcase the creativity and glamour of American artists.

Brinkley says that the impact of art -- even novels like "Dr. Zhivago" -- is powerful. He said, "Pasternak's voice continues to live through the ages because it's a humanitarian voice. It's not a voice of totalitarianism. And many people in the world believe that great art will outlive dictators."

For years, CBS News' Margaret Brennan reported, there have been rumors about the CIA's role in publishing Pasternak's novel. The author himself wasn't sure how his book ended up printed in Russian since no publishing house had ever agreed to do so.




Douglas Brinkley said, "Pasternak's voice continues to live through the ages because it's a humanitarian voice. It's not a voice of totalitarianism. And many people in the world believe that great art will outlive dictators." The book to read is this one – “The Zhivago Affair: The Kremlin, the CIA, and the Battle Over a Forbidden Book” written by Peter Finn and Petra Couvee, for $19.86 hardcover and $11.84 Kindle. This should have intrigue, excitement, and even better, it's true.




Students Support Teacher Accused of Pinning Their Classmate – ABC
April 7, 2014
By BAZI KANANI
Bazi Kanani

People are lining up to defend a teacher at a California high school who was placed on leave after being accused of fighting a student, with video of the fight uploaded online and viewed more than a million times.

Mark Black, who is also the wrestling coach at Santa Monica High School, pinned the student to the ground in the fight.

Video appears to show Black using wrestling moves to subdue the student. That video was captured on a student’s phone and later uploaded to the website World Star Hip Hop, where it has been viewed more than a million times.

Students who witnessed the fight are supporting Black, saying the teacher was trying to confiscate something drug-related from the student.

While the teacher has been put on leave, students and parents have started a campaign to save his job, getting thousands to show support on Facebook and sign a petition.
Kylan Townsend, a student at the school, blames the student -- not Black.
“He was trying to be a teacher and help, and I don’t think it was his fault,” Townsend said.

Sandra Lyon, the superintendent at Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, wrote an email to parents calling the teacher’s actions “utterly alarming.” She later released another statement, writing, “Teachers are at times confronted with difficult, even threatening, situations, and they must make judgment calls to protect safety.”

No decision on potential punishments will be made until an independent investigation is complete.

Black did not respond to a request for comment.




Mark Black's pinning of a student in a wrestling move was justified, according to other students, because the student had “something drug related,” and another student filmed it on his cell phone. Unfortunately he then uploaded it to a popular website called World Star Hip Hop and it has been screened over a million times since. School boards don't like things like that. The superintendent at first blamed Black and placed him on leave, but later decided that he had been justified in his action. She is quoted as saying “Teachers are at times confronted with difficult, even threatening, situations, and they must make judgment calls to protect safety.” That is so very true. The classroom hasn't been a totally safe place to be in years now. I have always been glad that I didn't try to teach school, at least in high school or middle school.




Mystery Surrounds Death of Tenn. Twins in Home – ABC
April 7, 2014 (AP)
By ADRIAN SAINZ Associated Press

Strange, sad and macabre, the discovery of the skeletal remains of twin brothers Andrew and Anthony Johnson has mystified neighbors and others in Chattanooga and beyond. Each man was found seated in an easy chair inside the modest home they shared for decades, and where they apparently died together about three years ago, with no obvious signs of foul play.

Even while they were alive, though, the 63-year-old twins were something of a mystery to their neighbors, who occasionally saw them wearing surgical masks while gardening but never saw them with visitors.

"I didn't even know their names," said retiree Linda Maffett, who lived across the street.

In an interview about the Johnsons she added, "It's a strange story, it's a sad story. I think it's sad that they were sitting there that long with nobody checking on them."

Police went to the home March 29 after being asked to check on the brothers by a relative who had a key. Officers found the twins' decomposing bodies sitting in recliners in the living room. Their conditions suggested that both men had been dead since 2011.

An autopsy helped confirm their identities, but preliminary results revealed no obvious signs of trauma or foul play, Chattanooga police spokesman Tim McFarland said. He said there was some flesh on the brothers' skeletal remains. The Hamilton County medical examiner is working on toxicology tests. In the meantime, McFarland said police are not speculating on a cause of death.

But Chattanooga residents are formulating their own theories. Was there a gas leak that killed them? Was it a double suicide? Were they poisoned? Or did they just sit down one day and die together?

Neighbors said they had not seen the brothers in at least a couple of years.
They said the Johnsons kept to themselves and didn't associate with others in Chattanooga's Hixson community. They might be seen working on their lawn or going for groceries together. But blinds blocked any view into the white house on Acorn Court in the quiet, hilly neighborhood of one- and two-story homes. The Johnsons' house remained dark, with no exterior lighting, even at night, neighbors said.

Police made a welfare check on them in 2011 at the request of a relative, but found nothing untoward to lead them to break into the house. They said a relative told them that it would be unsurprising if the twins moved without telling anyone in the family.
Some just assumed the house was vacant.

Although the Johnson brothers had stopped cutting their own grass, neighbors said it kept getting cut. No one has been able to say who maintained it, whether a neighborhood volunteer, relative or someone else.

A note inside the mailbox indicated that mail delivery had stopped because the postal service thought the Johnson brothers had moved.

Maffet, one of their nearest neighbors, said that years ago the short, stocky brothers could be seen at times working on their lawn while wearing surgical masks. It is not clear if they had health problems, though one day Maffett went to help one of the men whom she found lying on his front porch after he had fallen down. Maffett offered to get his brother but he said his sibling was deaf.

Maffett called 911 for assistance but never entered the house, and it was the only time she over spoke with either of them, she said.

"I never heard them say anything to each other," she said.
A Census worker even approached Maffett one day to ask about the whereabouts of the Johnsons.




The story begins in 2011 with the police who were requested to make a welfare check on them by a relative. The police, however, “found nothing untoward to lead them to break into the house.” In other words, they did not do a thorough investigation in the matter, because they should have entered the home if they couldn't get any answer when they knocked – the relative was concerned when he couldn't reach them or he wouldn't have asked the police to investigate. The police said, however, that “a relative” – another relative? – had told them if the twins had moved without telling anybody he “wouldn't be surprised.”

So then on March 29th the police finally did enter the house, because yet another unnamed relative asked them to check on the men and gave the police a key. Usually in a case like this the neighbors will begin to detect a foul odor coming from the house. This was a very uninvolved set of householders, it seems to me, though many people in modern cities purposely do keep a distance from their neighbors if the area is not considered to be very safe especially. There's no report in this new article of crime scene work being done to look for evidence of what may have happened. I'd like to see another report on this case to see what is happening with it.

The article mentions that “Although the Johnson brothers had stopped cutting their own grass, neighbors said it kept getting cut.” Now that is mysterious, and makes it look as though this may be a case of double murder rather than suicide. Somebody knew they were dead, wanting to cover up the fact so the killer could escape the attention of the authorities. I wonder if the toxicology report won't show that they were poisoned.

Above all, though, this is sad. Elderly people are sometimes completely isolated. I heard a report of an eighty year old woman who was still living by herself and apparently died in her kitchen of natural causes, and was again not found for a long time. I am glad I live in an apartment building where I trust the people and I see someone every day. If I get ill there is a cord I can pull that will notify the guard desk that I have an emergency, and they will send in the medics to find me.




Mob In Ukraine Seizes Provincial Building, Declares Independence – NPR
by Scott Neuman
April 07, 2014

Pro-Russian separatists who seized a provincial building in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk have reportedly declared an independent "people's republic" in a move that echoes events leading to last month's secession of Crimea.

You can see video of the scuffle between police and protesters that led up to the storming of the building here.

After the takeover of the building, one Russian speaker appeared at a podium, proclaiming "the creation of the sovereign state of the People's Republic of Donetsk," according to Al-Jazeera. The Associated Press reports that afterward "a barricade of car tires and razor wire" was erected outside the building to keep police from retaking it.

Ukrainian police responded by closing all roads leading into the city.
"Unknown people who are in the building have broken into the building's arsenal and have seized weapons," police said in a statement on Monday.

The BBC reports:
"The rebels have called for a referendum on secession from Ukraine by 11 May.
"Ukrainian security officials are being sent to the eastern cities of Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkiv after pro-Russia groups occupied government buildings.
"Interim President Oleksandr Turchynov called the unrest an attempt by Russia to 'dismember' Ukraine.

"In an address on national TV, he said it was 'the second wave' of a Russian operation to destabilise Ukraine, overthrow the government and disrupt planned elections."

On Sunday, pro-Russian mobs also stormed buildings in Luhansk and Kharkiv, two other cities in the country's east that have large numbers of Russian speakers and strong pro-Moscow sentiment.

NPR's Ari Shapiro, reporting from Kiev, says Ukraine's acting Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk has accused Russia of instigating protests as a pretext to invade eastern Ukraine.

"It is a plan to destabilize the situation, a plan to let the foreign military forces cross the border and occupy the country, which we are not going to tolerate," Yatsenyuk said.

Russia has argued that Ukraine's regions should have more autonomy. The ominous developments also come as the Kremlin has reportedly massed thousands of troops on the border with Ukraine.




"Interim President Oleksandr Turchynov called the unrest an attempt by Russia to 'dismember' Ukraine. He says it is 'the second wave' of a Russian operation to destabilise Ukraine, overthrow the government and disrupt planned elections."

In NPR's April 1 report NATO's chief said that though Putin promised to remove “some of” the troops at the border, there is no sign that this has happened. The article also states that Russia has been “warning” Ukraine not to make a move toward joining NATO, as it would result in “a freezing of Russian-Ukrainian political contacts, a headache between NATO and Russia and ... to a division in Ukrainian society."

I wonder what has been happening with the US – Russia peace talks with Ukraine as a participant. I could find no reports dated later than March 29. I also wonder what Turchynov is going to do about the mob violence in Eastern Ukraine. Can Ukrainian troops make an effort to dislodge them from the government buildings? I wonder what armaments Kiev has at its disposal. Hopefully Turchynov will try to do something concrete soon.