TestRX Review

test rxDo you need your sex drive back? One way to get it back is very clear. You need to use a natural health supplement to help you achieve it. What is this all natural health supplement that can get the job done? It is no other than Testrx. What is it that makes Test Rx great for this purpose? The answer lies in all of the amazing ingredients that do make up this totally natural and safe health supplement to boost testosterone.

Testrx is all about boosting up strength, vitality, and mainly sex drive. A lot of men have trouble with their sex drive and being able to maintain it in the bedroom. All they need to do is tone thing, and that is this, to take Test Rx regularly until it starts to kick their sex lives back into high gear.

Testrx is there for every man who needs it for a much better sex drive overall. This is because this amazing health supplement product does contain not only wonderful ingredients to make it possible. It also does have Tongkat Ali, which is no other than a natural aphrodisiac, compliments of Mother Nature herself. Testrx gives you back your youthful mojo and makes you feel beyond being an average Joe. This is especially true in the bedroom where you need to be the very best man you can be.

testrx review

Test Rx increases your energy levels, stimulates your sex drive, delivers much better erections, protects one’s bone health, and makes you feel totally alive and vital. Testrx is truly the finest of all natural products when it comes to lifting up testosterone naturally and giving you back your sex drive for the long term. If you would like to know more about TestRx, please go to the link of http://www.test-rx.net, you will be happy you did.

Social media is playing a huge role in business growth and what better way to grow your company than to have people following you? You must buy real instagram followers from igramlikes.com because we deliver only real, active and fast followers on instagram at affordable prices.

Salitair™ – Best Salt Air Inhaler

 

salitair salt air inhalwer

Salitair is a unique tool for inhaling all-natural rock salt vapors for relief from symptoms of COPD, asthma, hay fever, bronchitis, and allergies, and it alleviates snoring. Saltaire is 100% drug-free and has been clinically proven to reduce the negative effects of respiratory issues, reducing the need for inhalers, breathing treatments, and the like.

For decades, doctors have advised patients with respiratory ailments to spend time near the sea, to “take in the ocean air”. This is because the benefits of the salt in the breezes off of the ocean waters have been known for many years. For some time this was considered to be nothing more than a “folk remedy” – until studies began to prove that the results were very real.

how does salitair work?How Does Salitair Work?

The Salitair Salt Pipe works by delivering microscopic particles of natural salt into the respiratory system where they work to clean the air passages by dissolving excess phlegm and destroying any harmful microorganisms present in the airways. The salt particles also boost the body’s natural cleansing abilities in order to continuously sooth irritation and prevent infection.

For those with concerns about salt intake due to blood pressure issues, Salitair does not increase sodium levels in the body that are affected by actual salt intake. Salitair is completely safe.

PROS OF USING SALITAIR:
– All-natural, drug-free relief
– Easy to use with fast results
– Since Salitair uses all-natural rock salt, there is no danger of drug interactions with your other medications
– The device is easy to clean and handy for travel

CONS OF USING SALITAIR:
– Salitair has not yet been approved by the Food and Drug Administration

salitair salt air inhaler

Salitair has received rave reviews and 5-star ratings from hundreds of satisfied users.

Salitair comes with a full 30 day money-back guarantee. If you don’t get fast relief from the symptoms of respiratory issues, your money will be fully refunded.

Airsnore™ – Anti-Snoring System That Actually Works

airsnore

Snoring is estimated to affect over 90 million Americans and nearly half of those experience symptoms and side effects on a regular basis. Research is beginning to show a connection between routine snoring and health issues such as sleep deprivation, depression, and even increased risk of heart attack or stroke. Regular snoring can also cause health problems in the people sharing your bed by interrupting their sleep cycles as well.

Snoring is caused by the relaxing of airways while you sleep. This can often lead to a narrowing of the air passages causing the airflow in and out to get faster and stronger. The increased airflow causes the soft tissues in our airways to vibrate creating the sound we recognize as snoring. Even a light snore can cause you, or your partner, to awaken briefly. These small, restless moments can happen many times during the night, depriving your body of the deep REM cycles it desperately needs.

Given the seriousness of this issue it is no surprise there are lots of options for correcting the problem or managing the symptoms. Many promise relief but few actually deliver a good night’s sleep, free of snoring. The Airsnore mouthpiece is one product that delivers what it promises; an anti-snoring system that actually works.

The Airsnore is an easy-to-use, low cost device that will deliver you a refreshing rest starting night one. Simply mould the rubber mouthpiece to fit the inside of your mouth, put it in just before bedtime, and then let Airsnore do the rest!

airsnore device
Airsnore moves your jaw ever so slightly, to open up that upper airway, thus allowing air to flow in and out more freely. Breathing becomes easier, snoring disappears, and sleep becomes deeper. Just like that!

Why risk you or your partner’s health when an inexpensive and painless solution is so readily available? Order Airsnore today so you can get a good night’s sleep tonight. Learn more visiting Airsnore Official Site here.

airsnore-device

VigRX Ingredients

vigrx ingredientsSince it’s invention in 2000, VigRX Plus has been able to satisfy the sexual urges and egos of various males.  This natural enhancement supplement is the best for treating erectile dysfunction. Although, there are several male enhancement products available on the market this days, but this natural pills is the most popular one.

If a person wants to collect information about Vigrx, they can read the testimonials published on our blog. People who have consumed VigRX Plus are happy with their intense orgasms, proper ejaculation and improved sexual stamina. One of the best things about VigRX Plus is as they are made of natural ingredients one does not have to worry about any kind of side effects. Some of the natural Vigrx ingredients are discussed below:

  1. Epimedium: This ingredient is also known as Horny Goat Weed. It was originally extracted from China. This natural herb enhances sexual libido, as its main ingredient, known as icariin improves erection. Epimedium also enhances the blood flow to the penis, which in turn increases the sexual sensation. This natural ingredient works by directly affecting the level of testosterone which in turn enhances the sexual vigor and urge.
  2. Cuscuta seed: The extract of cuscuta seed decreases the amount of sperm and also treats ejaculation. The fertility functions of this extract works in both female and male bodies.
  3. Gingko Biloba: This natural ingredient enhances the surge of blood, which improves erections. As the components of this ingredient improve the circulation, Gingko Biloba also treats other possible issues in the human body like impotence in males.
  4. Red Ginseng: This natural ingredient has been in use since historic times. This ingredient rejuvenates weak bodies and also increases the energy level. When the energy level starts increasing, the Red Ginseng modifies the blood flow to the brain as well as penis, thus reducing the possibilities of ejaculation and impotence.
  5. Saw Palmetto: Saw Palmetto plays the role of an effective aphrodisiac. This ingredient produces several effects in the sexual performance as well as health of the men. This ingredient also cures urinary infections and enlarged glands.
  6. Muira Pauma: The extract of Muira Pauma treats erectile dysfunction and also enhances one’s sexual desire.

Also you can learn more about VigRX Plus ingredients, how it works and results just watching Vigrx Plus review on Youtube.

VigRX Plus not only arouses sexuality of every man, but has a distinctive component which takes care of the heart. So, if you are also among those males who suffer from any of these issues, start consuming VigRX Plus from today.

Lobbying in the Age of Analytics

One person’s “education” is another person’s “lobbying.” It has always been thus. But despite a certain definitional elasticity that’s intrinsic to politics, it’s widely recognized that a strong backbone to any effective education/lobbying effort is good information — pertinent data, compelling facts, knowledge of the political landscape over which the battle is waged.

The informational weapons that educators/lobbyists use to arm themselves is eliciting heat amid reports of growing reliance on “insider” knowledge. According to this telling, “operatives” in a “political intelligence industry” are milking non-public tips from Hill contacts, then using the information to alert investors to changes afoot (or not afoot) in regulatorily sensitive economic sectors, like health care.

6a00d8341c084c53ef0168e966a461970c-320wi
“Insider” information doesn’t exactly have a nice ring to it, and folks like the SEC have long had more than a passing interest. But traditional “insider” information pertained to corporate facts and plans, the disclosure of which could affect stock prices. The “insider” information in which political intelligence “operatives” are said to traffic refers to what some view as mere Congressional semi-secrets that clients have long paid lobbyists to verify/rebut. The subject is predictably complex and controversial, sufficiently so that registration requirements for the political intelligence industry were omitted from the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act that Congress, over the objections of Iowa Republican Charles Grassley and two other Senators, recently adopted.

Despite Congressional reluctance to regulate political intelligence “operatives” under the STOCK Act, and whatever one’s views on the underlying issues, larger forces seem poised to shape lobbying’s knowledge base at least as much as any new legislated requirements ever could.

We’ve noted in a previous post that the emerging field of open-source intelligence aims to bring to heel the Internet’s tsunami-like wash of digital content. This new field includes use of technology to size up an informational jetstream too large to be comprehended at normal speed, converting it to freeze frames that isolate the facts and developments needed to understand an issue or make a case. In a word, technology-powered analytics can help tame “big data” by slowing its blur, giving it definition, and teeing up priorities and decision points.

There’ll always be a role for shoe leather in Hill lobbying. But lobbyists, no less than others, can also benefit from “big data” tools, and we expect that increasingly they will.

Woodwork Effect Comes Out of the Woodwork

A familiar pillar of health economics debates, the woodwork effect, holds that mere availability of a new service can induce patients to come out of the woodwork to get it, thus increasing service volume, which in turn generates aggregate expenses that swamp any per-service cost savings. In other words, a new service can be so good in the singular that it’s considered bad in the plural. Of course, some observers refer to this phenomenon as expanding patient access to higher-quality care.

Whatever one’s health economics views, it’s notable that the singular v. plural conundrum is finding expression in other areas . . . practically coming out of the woodwork, so to speak.

Take this article, on energy and the environment, which argues that significant fuel-efficiency improvements in jets will do little to reduce our collective carbon footprint. “The main effect of additional engineering improvements,” says the article, “will be the same as for all such improvements in the past: to make travel easier, cheaper, more convenient and more attractive—thus encouraging us to do more of it.”

And so the world turns: In the way availability of a new health intervention is said to ramp up patient demand for care, so the availability of cheap air fares is understood to stimulate interest in travel.

None of which should be astounding. If something new offers value, consumers are likely to try to scoop it up. To argue that the result could be otherwise is to strike a blow for such artifacts of the past as interminable propeller-racked journeys and terrifying anesthesia-free surgeries.

New Report Probes “Transparency”

Technology assessment is a topic that’s been lighting up ContentHealth’s research platform of late, and we pass along an interesting new report out of Washington State on how stakeholders perceive and participate in assessment processes and related coverage decisions.

The report finds general stakeholder support for the mechanics of the state’s assessment/coverage regimes.  But the report also makes clear that there’s more to the oft-cited ideal of “transparency” than simply slapping some information on a Web site.

In suggesting ways for translating mere information into genuine understanding, the report provides a useful framework for any assessment/coverage program that seeks to be “transparent.”

Politics: Harder Than it Looks

Now that we’re deep in a fractious electoral season, it’s tempting to descend into rank political speculation about health care issues. So let’s get started.

Actually, let’s add a modicum of caution about rushing to precise health policy judgments in the heat of political campaigns. For there’s a tendency to report breathlessly on perceived policy nuance that escapes the mouths of candidates on political stumps that stretch from Sarasota to 1600 Pennsylvania. To be clear, it’s not that what candidates say about health care is somehow irrelevant; what they say informs the electorate, and, for that reason, deserves a careful hearing. But for the media and other listeners to hang on every word is to ascribe literal concreteness to a political process that increasingly muddies the waters between what is said and what is done.

In this, the frenzied season leading up to Supreme Court review of the health reform law, it’s hard to remember 2008, when Barack Obama was the Democratic candidate against the individual mandate. In providing this reminder, we mean no knock on the President, for the tide against which he swims knows no party, engulfing Republicans like former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, whose own journey on the mandate tacks exactly opposite the President’s. But if experienced leaders like these can overrule themselves on so fundamental a question as the individual mandate, what possible credence can be given this or that candidate’s assurances on less overarching issues like IPAB, value-based purchasing, or the Part D coverage gap?

One is tempted toward cynicism, toward writing this off as simply politics as usual. But deeper forces are at work, and they conspire to make it difficult for any elected official to do anything beyond a minuscule number of broad policy strokes for which there is inarguable public consensus.

What are these deeper forces?

On the “input” side — that is, what happens in campaigns — a new law of nature seems to hold that if capacity exists in a communications channel, volume of information must increase until the channel’s full capacity is utilized. This imperative to fill television, newspapers, Web posts, Twitter feeds, and all manner of conventional and social media induces demand for content, which, in turn, requires candidates to state positions more often and in more detail.

Once a candidate is elected, these positions face a grueling process of being transformed into “outputs” — into the actual policies of government. The political tenor for this policymaking was set in motion in 1962, in Baker v. Carr, when the Supreme Court established the “one person/one vote” doctrine, which requires that legislative districts be composed of (virtually) equal numbers of voters. As such, a downstate Illinois farmer’s vote, say, can’t carry more weight than that of a suburban Chicago office worker. As immortalized in a later Supreme Court decision, the key principle is that legislators “represent people, not trees . . .”

While making sense Constitutionally, the “one person/one vote” doctrine operates to enforce a mathematical precision that, over time, has legitimized a new kind of gerrymandering — one in which analytically savvy political operatives, restrained only by numerical equality, draw legislative lines that veer hither and yon to create large numbers of districts colored the deepest blue or the deepest red. These ideologically pure districts produce ideologically pure politicians, who, amplified by interest group echo chambers, often see it as their mission to fuel controversy rather than to seek compromise.

And so it’s not so much that the candidates on the campaign trail don’t mean what they say; it’s more the system being stacked against anyone trying to do what they say, whatever that may be.

So, yes, listen to the candidates and evaluate them on the fundamentals of their health care approaches. But discount the particulars, however mesmerizing they may be, for they will likely fall victim to the greater truth that everything is harder than it looks.

Trees Falling in a Digital Forest

Hombre readers know health policy is nothing if not unrelenting substance, each day a new encounter with deep thinking on ACOs, risk corridors, annual update factors, and similar weighty matters. It’s also an accepted fact that modes of communication have undergone dramatic change. But how, if at all, do the two relate? That is, might the way we communicate be affecting the way we comprehend and address health policy?

In the pre-digital era of 20 years ago, health policy moved lethargically across a relatively barren and uneventful plain. You might pluck a health newsletter from the mail once a week or slip a reimbursement update into a three-ring-binder, or somebody might zap you a fax now and then. But it was nothing like today, when health policy arrives in a blur of always-on coverage that saturates the Web and carpet bombs your in-box, phone, Twitter account, etc.

Paradoxically, we may well know less today than we knew then. That’s because the very plethora of content makes it harder to see — and, if seen, to muster the focus to understand — any one substantive nugget. Indeed, there’s emerged a whole field of open-source intelligence, the basic premise of which is that the best way to hide something is to put it out in public, where it can be effectively masked by the tsunami-like wash of everything else that’s streaming by in “plain sight.”

And so one wonders: If a tree falls in this new digital forest, and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

Sounds were more clearly audible a generation ago, when health care innovators were traumatized by HHS plans to publish an “emerging technology” list (a paean to the idea is here). The innovators’ dilemma, circa 1981, was that the list would help technology assessors draw a bead on new products before they had the chance to make reasonable progress along the diffusion curve. In the context of the times, the concern was understandable because such a list would have stood out and focused attention, and it might well have galvanized unproductive actions against new ideas before they could get a fair evaluation.

It’s only slightly facetious to wonder whether a similar list moving through today’s digital jetstream would even get noticed. For example, dipping into that jetstream over just the last couple of weeks turns up such innovation-centric actions, events, and issuances as these:

That’s just a quick sample; the digital jetstream harbors more that can’t be “seen” because we’re trying to see so much already. It’s as if in the course of 20-some-odd years the Rorschach Test has flipped its fields, rendering invisible the very inkblot images the human mind once perceived as visible.

Oh, and about that emerging technology list? Actually, CMS is receiving comments on the list now — more precisely, on a new list of potential topics for Medicare national coverage decisions (perhaps most fully appreciated in the context of another recent agency move: to rewrite the guidance on coverage with evidence development).

So past may indeed be prologue, even if seeing the connection between the two is getting harder all the time.

Health Care’s Economic Footprint . . . It’s Complicated

It’s now more than obvious that the key U.S. issue for the immediate indefinite future is the economy, and it’s no surprise that an industry as sizable as health care would find itself in the thick of the debate on job creation. But as seems the case with all things health care . . . well, it’s complicated.

From one vantage point, the health care sector can be seen as that rare economic safe harbor that racks up jobs gains month after month. For example, BLS reported 44,000 new health care jobs for September, more than 40 percent of the month’s total employment gains and a continuing moderating force against unemployment’s upward tick, as shown in the chart below. But there are questions about the “quality” of at least some of these new health care jobs.


A recent study by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, while generally extolling health care’s employment track record in the southeastern U.S., also took note that the future may hold a strong dose of lower-wage positions requiring relatively modest levels of education. A key challenge, according to the report, is to train workers to take on the more sophisticated tasks required to bring to completion such key health care transitions as those to electronic health records and ICD-10 coding.

In this same vein, a proposal by the American Health Information Management Association urges policy incentives to help workers acquire “the core job skills demanded by an integrated electronic health information system” as a means for creating “sustainable, middle class jobs that pay well and offer employment security.”

Everything said thus far assumes the basic desirability of a growing, thriving health care industry. But health care is nothing if not a flashpoint for double-edged swords, and there’s at least one we find ourselves flirting with here: the view that at some level robustness in the health care sector becomes a net negative for the economy as a whole.

This view finds resonance in another Fed report, this one out of the St. Louis district and titled “Why Health Care Matters and the Current Debt Does Not.” Probing the notion that health care is a “superior” good, this analysis finds that the sector has an “unambiguously unsustainable” spending trajectory that is “the overwhelming obstacle” to the nation’s fiscal stability. (Other than that, no problem.)

Similarly, an Alliance for Healthcare Competitiveness proposal to export the U.S. medical “ecosystem” to other nations drew a rebuke from former U.S. Senator and MedPAC member David Durenberger, who, likening the effort to “a parasite eating its host,” sees the health industry’s enviable economic record as directly traceable to heavy government subsidies.

And so the beat goes on as the back-and-forth of competing worldviews long familiar inside health care finds new expression in the broader search for jobs and economic growth.