Limerick Ladies National Football League opener to be streamed live TAGSDirectly Elected MayorFine GaellimerickSenator Maria Byrne Advertisement Previous articleMural and new priory walkway unveiled in KilmallockNext articleFour Limerick players named on Official GAA team of the Week Alan Jacqueshttp://www.limerickpost.ie Senator Maria ByrneLIMERICK’S directly elected mayor must have real powers to drive transport strategy for the city and county, a Fine Gael Senator has said.Maria Byrne, who led the campaign in the city on behalf of Fine Gael, said: “I will be working to ensure that as well as budgetary oversight and other powers, that Government transfers significant powers to lead on transport strategy to the incoming mayor.“The transport infrastructure in the city and county needs strong local leadership to ensure that as a growing city Limerick can hold its own when it comes to sustainable public transport.Sign up for the weekly Limerick Post newsletter Sign Up “There is a real push at the moment, both locally and at Government level, to make Limerick an even better place to work and live and transport is an integral part of making that a reality.“Limerick must not be left behind Dublin and other cities in the development of a state-of-the-art transport system. We need Limerick to be a well-connected city where people can rely on public transport that is plentiful, punctual and makes sense.“Becoming the first place in Ireland to have a directly elected mayor is an opportunity to transform not only Limerick but also the entire region. I am determined to ensure that the incoming mayor will have true powers to achieve this transformation.“It was exciting to see people from all walks of life come forward in support of our campaign to have an elected mayor and to lay out their vision for Limerick.“I will work to ensure that this enthusiasm is matched in Government buildings as we map out what the mayor’s role will look like.” WhatsApp Predictions on the future of learning discussed at Limerick Lifelong Learning Festival Linkedin Email Billy Lee names strong Limerick side to take on Wicklow in crucial Division 3 clash Limerick’s National Camogie League double header to be streamed live Facebook Donal Ryan names Limerick Ladies Football team for League opener RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Print Twitter WATCH: “Everyone is fighting so hard to get on” – Pat Ryan on competitive camogie squads NewsLocal NewsLimerick mayor must have real powers to drive transport strategyBy Alan Jacques – June 4, 2019 188
Tri-State Food Bank has been named a recipient of the 2019 “Living Our Values Award” by Feeding America’s new CEO, Claire Babineaux-Fontenot. The 2019 “Living Our Values Award” was presented to 19 Feeding America food banks across the nation “For Honorable and Generous Demonstration of Network Partnership and Collaboration During the 2019 Government Shutdown.”“Food insecurity is indiscriminate and affects too many families, children, and seniors in the Tri-State. To address the growing need, Tri-State Food Bank provides food where it’s needed most. We are happy to be recognized by Feeding America for helping address the increased need for food during the government shutdown. It was another challenge we faced in our fight against hunger,” stated Glenn Roberts, Executive Director of Tri-State Food Bank. Established in 1982, Tri-State Food Bank distributes over 8 million pounds of food (over 7 million meals) annually to over 250 feeding programs in 33 counties throughout the Tri-State.FacebookTwitterCopy LinkEmail
Individuals with major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder who receive low-field magnetic stimulation (LFMS) show immediate and substantial mood improvement, McLean Hospital researchers report in the Aug. 1 issue of Biological Psychiatry.“LFMS is unlike any current treatment. It uses magnetic fields that are a fraction of the strength but at a higher frequency than the electromagnetic fields used in TMS [transcranial magnetic stimulation] and ECT [electroconvulsive therapy],” explained first author Michael Rohan, a physicist at McLean Hospital’s Brain Imaging Center and a lecturer at Harvard Medical School.According to Rohan, although other brain stimulation treatments like ECT and TMS are often effective for the treatment of depression, they typically take longer to impact mood, and ECT is associated with side effects such as memory loss.Similarly, while antidepressant medications can be highly effective for treating depression, it can take between four to six weeks before mood changes are detected.“Importantly, LFMS appears to have an immediate effect on mood and thus has the potential to provide relief in emergency situations,” explained Rohan, who first reported the potential use of LFMS to treat depression in a groundbreaking study in 2004. “In addition to providing quick relief from symptoms, the other exciting piece about LFMS is that no side effects have been observed.”Using a portable tabletop LFMS device that Rohan designed, the researchers studied 63 volunteers between the ages of 18 and 65. All participants had been diagnosed with either major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder and had been on a regimen of antidepressants or mood-stabilizing medications for at least six weeks. Of the study participants, 34 actively received LFMS, while the other 29 went through the process but did not actually receive any brain stimulation. Since neither the patients nor the researchers knew which participants had actually received the treatment, the true effect of the LFMS could be measured.Each participant rated his or her mood before and after the single 20-minute treatment using two common self-assessment tools: a visual analog scale and the positive and negative affect schedule. Participants who received the LFMS treatment indicated a marked improvement in their mood, while those whose brains were not stimulated reported no change in mood.“We observed immediate improvement in mood following relatively brief exposure to LFMS,” noted Rohan. “Although larger research studies are needed, we think LFMS could be a powerful tool as a rapidly acting treatment for depression, either alone or in combination with medication.”Biological Psychiatry also published commentary from experts on brain stimulation who said Rohan’s work on LFMS is exciting and shows great promise.“If the results described in this study are replicated in larger studies and the effects are shown to be durable, LFMS would be a welcome addition to the clinical armamentarium in the treatment of depression, may find application in other psychiatric and neurologic diseases, and may help to inform and guide us toward future directions in neuromodulation,” wrote Mouhsin Shafi, Philip Stern, and Alvaro Pascual-Leone.According to Rohan, additional research is already underway to find the best parameters for LFMS use in the clinical treatment of depression. He has also started a research study to evaluate the effects of multiple rather than to single treatments, and measure how long the antidepressant effects last following treatment.McLean Hospital is an affiliate of Harvard Medical School.
Congress resumes work today, and NAFCU is ready for action as the House prepares to take up the Financial CHOICE Act. Meanwhile, NAFCU witness Steve Grooms, president and CEO of 1st Liberty Federal Credit Union, is preparing to advocate regulatory relief during a Senate Banking Committee hearing Thursday.NAFCU lobbyists will be on the Hill as work commences on CHOICE, which has several NAFCU-sought measures that would provide regulatory relief to the nation’s credit unions. A review of appropriate levels of risk-based capital is called for in the bill, along with a reining in of CFPB’s rules and a requirement that regulators improve cost-benefit analyses and better tailor regulations to the size of regulated institutions.The association’s advocacy team will also be present during Thursday’s hearing, “Fostering Economic Growth: The Role of Financial Institutions in Local Communities.” Grooms, whose credit union is headquartered in Great Falls, Mont., is one of three credit union industry representatives on the witness list, which also includes banking trades. continue reading » 13SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr
bbc.comArsenal’s Alex Iwobi scored as Nigeria beat a stubborn Zambia 1-0 to become the first African side to seal a place at next year’s World Cup in Russia.The win put them on an unassailable 13 points at the top of Group B. Chances were missed at both ends by the time Shehu Abdullahi provided the cut-back for Iwobi to finish from inside the box in the 73rd minute.Odion Ighalo, John Mikel Obi, Victor Moses and Moses Simon went close for the Super Eagles but failed to score.Zambia goalkeeper Kennedy Mwenne produced an acrobatic save to deny Wilfred Ndidi in the second half in a pulsating end-to-end encounter.Share this:FacebookRedditTwitterPrintPinterestEmailWhatsAppSkypeLinkedInTumblrPocketTelegram
Vanessa Diaz was scribbling notes for her “African Diaspora” class last semester when her professor stopped and made an informal announcement to the room.“If it’s too much,” he said, “you don’t have to look at it.”The lecture that day was to be centered on the historical lynchings of African Americans in the United States, coupled with graphic images and detailed narratives of the individuals killed. The professor made it clear that if any students wanted to excuse themselves, they had the right to.The professor’s precaution, though small, is indicative of a growing trend in the college classroom of implementing trigger warnings: verbal or written disclaimers meant to warn students of potentially distressing material preceding its dissemination.While originating as a means to predominantly protect students who have previously experienced trauma, the practice’s effects are now causing a tug-of-war between the needs of a professor’s academic freedom and those of students’ well-being.“Students have the right not to be traumatized in the classroom,” said Diaz, a junior majoring in American studies and executive co-director of USC’s Women’s Student Assembly. “The trigger warning in the syllabus from class that day had me prepared. I walked in knowing what I was getting into and knowing beforehand that I could deal with it.”Diaz and other student advocates of trigger warnings encourage their utility at universities as a safe way to prevent mental health relapses in the classroom, and some members of the faculty agree.Leslie Berntsen, a teaching assistant for introductory psychology classes and chair of the TA Fellows program at the Center for Excellence in Teaching, uses trigger warnings in her discussions. She said reaction is overwhelmingly positive, and that students have emailed her after class, thanking her for the “heads up” before particularly sensitive topics.“I don’t think there’s anything particularly radical about [trigger warnings],” Berntsen said. “It’s not a huge deal, my academic freedom has never been threatened, my classroom has not combusted.”Nevertheless, the fear among faculty is there, and not all share Bernsten’s enthusiasm. Anthony Sparks, now a professor at California State University, Fullerton, was Diaz’s African Diaspora professor. He said that his decision in class that day was more an exception to the rule than a common practice, and in general, he finds the idea of trigger warnings debilitating to the classroom.“For me, a trigger warning is more wrapped up in comforting a student — making them comfortable at all times — versus providing context and giving the student a framework in order to view, encounter or discuss the material,” he said. “There’s a difference between the two.”Similarly, Alison Trope, clinical professor of communication and director of undergraduate studies in the Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, thinks that students should have the right to excuse themselves if they are especially affected by course material, but doesn’t believe trigger warnings should be required on teacher’s syllabi. For her, the practice is treating a symptom of a larger problem: a need for greater cultural competency and sensitivity among faculty and students.“A trigger warning should not be necessary if, as members of an academic community, we can be sensitive and empathetic partners in an ongoing dialogue,” she wrote in an email to the Daily Trojan.Trope and Sparks aren’t alone on campus in their hesitations. Trope, who is also co-chair of the newly formed Academic Senate Committee on Campus Climate, said the topic has not been discussed explicitly within the committee but notes there are strong sentiments among faculty — both at USC and nationwide — concerning the cost of trigger warnings.“The main hesitation faculty have (important caveat … this is not ALL faculty, nor is this limited to USC) is twofold,” Trope wrote. “Trigger warnings are seen as a potential threat to academic freedom. And, related, they are characterized (or mischaracterized in some cases) as ‘coddling’ students.”These two points are the most frequently cited reasons against trigger warnings, most notably in the idea of the practice sheltering students from harmful discourse. An Atlantic cover story last September dubbed “The Coddling of the American Mind,” was an 8,000-word piece deriding the practice as counterintuitive to treating mental health and indicative of an increasingly sensitive generation, and the most notable example of public backlash.For some students at USC, national outcry from older generations has them both frustrated and on the defensive.“I was really disappointed [by it],” said Sophia Li, a junior majoring in law, history and culture and sociology, regarding media coverage maligning trigger warnings. “I usually love The Atlantic, [but] I think it completely missed the point and mischaracterized the point of trigger warnings and the people advocating for them.”Diaz, too, was thrown off by what she sees as a blatant lack of empathy among critics, and an inability to view those in the classroom in a multidimensional fashion.“People try to separate the student and the person,” she said. “Logic and emotion don’t exist in binary ways. The idea that we should remove our own experiences is impossible.”This trend of confusion is common. Those advocating trigger warnings see them as beneficial for those who need them and inconsequential for those who don’t. Questions of academic freedom and student “coddling,” they say, are misinformed and misguided.“I wish [critics] would take a step back and reflect why they think they’re qualified to determine what people are allowed to be offended by,” Berntsen said. “This entire debate about trigger warnings comes down to basic human empathy. These aren’t radical concepts, but somehow the entire discourse has evolved into something that I don’t understand.”Here at USC, some of the practice’s most vocal critics have reached campus. At a speaking event hosted by the USC College Republicans in October, journalist Milo Yiannopoulos maligned trigger warnings as an egregious and intolerable offense against the academic culture of a university. Students requesting them, he said, shouldn’t be at college.“My basic response to this is anyone who wants a trigger warning should be immediately expelled,” Yiannopoulos said. “They’ve demonstrated that they are incapable of completing requirements of their course. They’ve chosen to use slippery and unnecessary tactics based on dodgy cognitive science to suggest that people can’t be exposed to certain ideas because they’re so hurtful or traumatic. All of this is nonsense.”While not nearly as hyperbolic in tone, there are some students who agree that trigger warnings don’t necessarily belong in an academic setting.The leading campus student organization on mental health, the USC National Alliance on Mental Illness, or USC NAMI, came out with an official response against trigger warnings in response to this article. The organization cited the practice as harming students’ mental health rather than helping it and allowing for censorship in the classroom. While they said that professors should allow an alternative assignment or excused absence from class if a student specifically asks in advance, they stressed it is the student’s responsibility, not the professor’s, to address the issue.“NAMI does not support trigger warnings,” the statement read. “Despite the good intentions behind trigger warnings, we believe they would be detrimental to the student population in more ways than one.”In an interview, USC NAMI co-presidents Steve Navarrete and Rosemarie Wilson expanded that the diversity of mental health illnesses coupled with the professor’s necessity to teach freely makes trigger warnings both burdensome and predominantly unnecessary.“You can’t possibly warn everyone for something,” Navarrete said. “Where do you draw that line? Where does it become appropriate? It really limits what you can do as a professor, and as a professor you don’t want to be limited. You want to be able to discuss what the world is. That’s exactly what we’re trying to do here as a university, which is to learn, not be censored. Otherwise, what’s the point?”As of now, there is nothing in existence nor immediately planned at USC to mandate or even encourage professors to issue trigger warnings. But as the dialogue surrounding mental health increases on campuses nationwide, more eyes are shifting to the responsibility of campus educators.“We’re clearly showing a shift toward mental health at USC, but there’s still more the University could do,” Wilson said. “Professors and faculty members need to be trained better on mental health because a lot don’t know how to respond to crisis.”