Not exact matches
We do not get at (or «interfere with») the underlying behavior driving the epidemic; we simply reduce the
risk or harm
by providing condoms, clean
needles, treating the curable sexually transmitted diseases, etc..
Doctors do great disservice
by telling women they will likely not be able to handle the pain, and quickly offer a «way out» (that carries the
risk of a
needle hitting a nerve and causing more long term pain than fully feeling a one or two day labor).
One common cause of false positives are so - called «high -
risk» lesions that appear suspicious on mammograms and have abnormal cells when tested
by needle biopsy.
This brings us to the second
risk, which is that Lancaster's growing scale means that finding new
needle - moving acquisitions that fit its disciplined approach and business model could be harder to come
by.
To avoid the
risk of tumor seeding (spillage of tumor cell clusters and their subsequent growth at a site adjacent to the original tumor) through cystosyntesis (a procedure in which
needle is inserted into the urinary bladder of an animal through the abdomen and a sample of urine is removed), urine may be collected
by free catch or catheterization.
In light of these matters, why would we want to expend the energy and resources to treat a symptom of planetary CO2 poisoning and take all the
risks that LG describes when it pretty clear that the best approach is a wildly ambitious conversion to very low emission energy / transportation / agriculture systems followed
by a wildly ambitious global program of CO2 sequestration / removal from the oceans and / or atmosphere to push the
needle back down under 400 ppm in a decade or two at most?
Double CO2 climate scenarios increase wildfire events
by 40 - 50 % in California (Fried et al., 2004), and double fire
risk in Cape Fynbos (Midgley et al., 2005), favouring re-sprouting plants in Fynbos (Bond and Midgley, 2003), fire - tolerant shrub dominance in the Mediterranean Basin (Mouillot et al., 2002), and vegetation structural change in California (
needle - leaved to broad - leaved trees, trees to grasses) and reducing productivity and carbon sequestration (Lenihan et al., 2003).
Those who contract the virus through sexual contact or
by an accidental
needle stick are regarded as lower
risk groups than intravenous drug users, for instance.