Larkin Callaghan recently completed her doctorate in health behavior and public health education at Columbia, focusing on women's health and global health development. With research and program experience in HIV and sexual health, social network building, trauma and violence, drug and alcohol abuse, and how socioeconomic status and history of abuse contribute to health and social mobility, she specializes in women's and adolescent health, population health, communication and social marketing and the health of vulnerable populations - and how they relate to one another. She also works as a UN Correspondent for MediaGlobal, covering issues affecting the least developed countries, with a not-exclusive focus on global health. She posts about public health, sociology and social justice, human rights, research, and gender. She manages the Reproductive Health Daily Tumblr and is a fellow in Health Communication and Epidemiology at Columbia's Mailman School of Public Health, where she writes and uses social and new media to promote research that focuses on health disparities, access and rights. She’s an avid runner and a California loyalist, and also posts longer opinion pieces on I'm Not Tired Yet at https://larkincallaghan.wordpress.com/.
How often are lawmakers trading stocks of companies with a vested interest in the very legislation they over see? Pretty often, a new Washington Post analysis of OpenSecrets.org data and other records finds. Almost one in eight trades made by Congress between 2007 and 2010 intersected with legislation that could impact that company.
One-hundred-thirty members of Congress or their families have traded stocks collectively worth hundreds of millions of dollars in companies lobbying on bills that came before their committees, a practice that is permitted under current ethics rules, a Washington Post analysis has found.
The lawmakers bought and sold a total of between $85 million and $218 million in 323 companies registered to lobby on legislation that appeared before them, according to an examination of all 45,000 individual congressional stock transactions contained in computerized financial disclosure data from 2007 to 2010.
This week marks two major events. One is the second anniversary of something that’s not that popular: the Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare. The second is the return to television of something that’s far more popular: Mad Men. The clear solution is to combine them in one awesome infographic.
There’s some good news. As everyone knows, levels of smoking have fallen precipitously. Cancer is more survivable. More women are doctors. But most of the news is bad. Alcohol consumption, shockingly, is actually higher now than in 1965. Obesity is higher. Diabetes is more prevalent. The most important thing to watch is the top line. It shows dramatically why some sort of health-care reform that controls costs is a pressing need for the nation. The hard part is just figuring out how that works. Frankly, we’d just as soon sit back with a full highball glass and the Mad Men season premiere.
Interesting graph depicting the difference between genders in their interest in running for electoral office. American University researchers did a study that they think explains this divide - thoughts?