MIAMI -- Four minutes into the
Heat preseason, he was joined on
the floor by Mike Miller, Joel
Anthony, Carlos Arroyo and Chris
Bosh, and at that point, surely you
wondered: Didn't LeBron James
leave a better team in Cleveland?
Dwyane Wade by then was
already in the locker room, icing a
strained right hamstring, which
completely changed the tenor of
the special, much-anticipated night.
This was no longer qualified as a
sneak peak. This was a sneak
tweak.
"LeBron told me he didn't come
here to see me sit on the side,"
Wade said.
American Airlines Arena was still
foggy with resin tossed by LeBron
from his pregame ritual when
Wade pulled up and limped off
against the Pistons. And just like
that, instead of getting a first feel
for how powerful the Heat might
be this season, we discovered how
vulnerable they can be.
They can't afford an injury to
LeBron or Wade or Bosh. This team
is top heavy. There is no "picking
up the slack" or having someone
"step up" should any of the Big
Three be confined to a tailored suit
and a seat at the end of the bench.
You suppose the Celtics or Magic or
Lakers would shiver in their hi-tops
at the sight of a Big-Two-And-A-
Third? No.
"We don't want to be in a situation
a lot where one of our guys go
down," conceded LeBron.
There's relief in Miami today
because Wade's injury isn't serious,
and besides, he has three weeks to
heal. Plus, even though tender
hamstrings can be tricky and tend
to linger, Wade sent a reassuring
message to Miami fans and a
warning to the league.
"They'll have a lot of time to see
the Big Three," he said.
Until then, they'll see plenty of
LeBron taking control and making
the Heat his team; essentially,
doing what he did in Cleveland for
the last seven years. Any notion of
LeBron, flanked by a pair of All-
Stars, suddenly turning into a
facilitator was erased from the
opening tip, when he drove hard to
the basket the first time he
touched the ball. That was a
constant sight against the Pistons,
and LeBron said get used to it,
even when Wade returns.
"I'm never in a defer mentality,"
he said. "I'm in attack mode. No
matter how many weapons we
have on the court, I'm still going to
play my game."
LeBron and Bosh have so far
avoided any kind of sustained
injury in their careers but the same
can't be said about Wade. Three
times in his seven seasons he's
dealt with some serious injury; a
shoulder, a knee, a calf and a wrist
among the brittle body parts. That
doesn't mean Wade is injury-prone.
It does mean he's hardly invincible,
no matter how much more swollen
his biceps are this season.
"I'm not stranger to minor
setbacks," joked Wade. "I'm a
professional in that regard."
Stuck in the trainer's room for all
but three minutes of the game,
Wade had a flat-screen view of
what took place without him. And
although he wasn't too thrilled with
how he felt, he was encouraged by
what he saw.
"You saw what LeBron can do with
his playmaking ability and his
ability to attack the basket," Wade
said. "And Chris' ability to make
one-on-one plays, and he can be a
force on the glass as well."
Given the summer he just went
through, marked by a big decision
and a swarm of criticism for the
way he did it, LeBron wanted the
emotional release that only a
basketball game can provide. He
tore through the Pistons for layups,
hit jumpers, and at times was a blur
during an 18-point, 26-minute
effort. In the words of Heat
assistant coach Bob McAdoo, "he'll
be a one-man fast break if you
don't run with him."
Just the same, Bosh weaved his
way inside for 20 points, a good
bit of them on feeds from
LeBron.
"It feels good to have guys who
have the capabilities they have,"
Wade said.
Until Wade felt a twinge, the night
was a coming-out of sorts. Minutes
before tipoff, the Heat were shown
on the overhead scoreboard
gathering in the hallway leading to
the entrance to the floor, and that
drew a big crowd response. The Big
Three heard, felt and saw a
standing O in the introductions.
LeBron tossed his powder in the air.
Wade raised both arms and
pointed, his traditional pregame
greeting. The announced crowd was
a sellout at 19,600, although the
actual crowd was smaller than that.
Then the game began. Bosh stole a
pass. Wade hit a jumper. LeBron hit
a jumper. And then, Wade to the
locker room.
Is this minor injury destined to
precede something else, something
bigger down the road? Meaning: Is
this an omen? If Year One becomes
known more for surgery than
champagne, then we'll all revisit
the bitter words of Dan Gilbert, the
Cavaliers' owner who predicted as
much last July.
"The good news is that this
heartless and callous action can
only serve as the antidote to the
so-called Curse on Cleveland, Ohio,"
wrote Gilbert, moments after the
Cavs drew the short straw in The
Decision. "The self-declared former
King will be taking the `curse' with
him down south. And until he does
right by Cleveland and Ohio, James
[and the town where he plays] will
unfortunately own this dreaded
spell and bad karma. Just watch."
Oh, we'll watch. Count on that,
considering how much interest
followed a meaningless preseason
game, which fizzled faster than
expected.
"When I told fans at the Dolphins
game to get here early," said
Wade, "I didn't think they had to
be here this early, to see me three
minutes.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Miami is basketball central
MIAMI — Put aside, for a
second, the whole idea
of LeBron James,
Dwyane Wade and
Chris Bosh suiting up
tonight for the first time,
the tipoff for what will
be an adventure, one
way or another.
The real surprise is that
this is happening in
Miami, a place nobody
ever confused with
hoops heaven.
The Heat’s preseason
opener with the Pistons
will be a sellout, and in
normal times, maybe
half of American Airlines
Arena would be filled.
But everyone wants to
witness the start of
history, and so 18,000-
plus will shoehorn inside
the building, not for pure
basketball reasons, but
because tonight is an
event. And Miami is an
event town. Not a sports
town. Definitely not a
basketball town. It ’s a
see-and-be-seen town.
Nobody’s hating on
Miami here. This is just
reality. In a perfect
basketball world, these
three players would ’ve
gathered in Indiana,
birthplace of John
Wooden. Or New York,
home of Rucker Park
and the 4th Street cages.
Or Boston or Chicago or a
number of other places
that historically have
embraced basketball on
all levels.
Miami loves the
Dolphins. Always has,
always will.
I speak from some
authority. I was the beat
writer for the Miami
Herald when the Heat
was born in 1988. And
after a curiosity stage,
fans drifted away to
their first love, football.
Even the Marlins rarely
draw well, and while the
blame for that is largely
heaped on playing in a
football stadium, we’ll
see what happens when
the team moves to the
new stadium on the
former site of the
Orange Bowl in two
years and asks people in
Broward County to drive
south during rush hour.
I ’m not optimistic.
Miami is about big
events: Super Bowl,
Orange Bowl, All-Star
Games, those types.
That ’s why you’ve got to
give it up to Pat Riley.
Ever since he arrived,
he ’s tried to turn the
Heat into an 82-game
event. His player haul is
impressive: Alonzo
Mourning, Tim
Hardaway, Dwyane
Wade, Shaquille O’Neal
and now, James and
Bosh. Without big names,
there is no event, and
there ’s no interest in
Miami.
In that sense, Riley is the
basketball equal of
legendary Dolphins
coach Don Shula. All he
needs is a steakhouse
and a highway named
after him. The event
begins tonight. And it
may last a while.
second, the whole idea
of LeBron James,
Dwyane Wade and
Chris Bosh suiting up
tonight for the first time,
the tipoff for what will
be an adventure, one
way or another.
The real surprise is that
this is happening in
Miami, a place nobody
ever confused with
hoops heaven.
The Heat’s preseason
opener with the Pistons
will be a sellout, and in
normal times, maybe
half of American Airlines
Arena would be filled.
But everyone wants to
witness the start of
history, and so 18,000-
plus will shoehorn inside
the building, not for pure
basketball reasons, but
because tonight is an
event. And Miami is an
event town. Not a sports
town. Definitely not a
basketball town. It ’s a
see-and-be-seen town.
Nobody’s hating on
Miami here. This is just
reality. In a perfect
basketball world, these
three players would ’ve
gathered in Indiana,
birthplace of John
Wooden. Or New York,
home of Rucker Park
and the 4th Street cages.
Or Boston or Chicago or a
number of other places
that historically have
embraced basketball on
all levels.
Miami loves the
Dolphins. Always has,
always will.
I speak from some
authority. I was the beat
writer for the Miami
Herald when the Heat
was born in 1988. And
after a curiosity stage,
fans drifted away to
their first love, football.
Even the Marlins rarely
draw well, and while the
blame for that is largely
heaped on playing in a
football stadium, we’ll
see what happens when
the team moves to the
new stadium on the
former site of the
Orange Bowl in two
years and asks people in
Broward County to drive
south during rush hour.
I ’m not optimistic.
Miami is about big
events: Super Bowl,
Orange Bowl, All-Star
Games, those types.
That ’s why you’ve got to
give it up to Pat Riley.
Ever since he arrived,
he ’s tried to turn the
Heat into an 82-game
event. His player haul is
impressive: Alonzo
Mourning, Tim
Hardaway, Dwyane
Wade, Shaquille O’Neal
and now, James and
Bosh. Without big names,
there is no event, and
there ’s no interest in
Miami.
In that sense, Riley is the
basketball equal of
legendary Dolphins
coach Don Shula. All he
needs is a steakhouse
and a highway named
after him. The event
begins tonight. And it
may last a while.
In Rare Move, China Court to Hear H.I.V. Case
BEIJING — In what appears to be a
first for China’s legal system, a
court in Anhui Province has agreed
to hear a complaint by a
prospective schoolteacher that he
was illegally denied a job because
he is H.I.V. positive, the man ’s
lawyer said Tuesday.
The unidentified man, said to be in
his early 20s, brought the case
under a 2006 national regulation
that prohibits job discrimination
against people with H.I.V., his
lawyer, Zheng Jineng, said in a
telephone interview from Hefei, the
provincial capital.
Mr. Zheng said the case would be
heard by a district court in Anqing.
The plaintiff contends that he
passed a written test and
interviews for a teaching job there,
but that the city education bureau
rejected him after a physical
examination showed he was
infected with H.I.V., the virus that
causes AIDS.
“In the past on sensitive cases like
this, the court would be very
reluctant to accept the case, ” Mr.
Zheng said. “But this time they
accepted it smoothly and quickly.
That means the legal system in
China is making progress. ”
H.I.V.-positive Chinese suffered
official and public discrimination for
years after the disease first
surfaced in the country in 1986.
Infected students were often
forced to leave school and workers
were shunted from their jobs.
More recently, the national
government has taken a tolerant
approach, offering free
antiretroviral drugs and prenatal
care to many people who are H.I.V.
positive, as well as screening for
those who suspect that they might
be. Many migrants remain unable
to receive the services, however,
because they lack the appropriate
residence papers.
The National People’s Congress,
China’s legislature, has approved a
law that bans employers from
discriminating against job applicants
with certain kinds of communicable
diseases, as chosen by state
regulators. But the basis for the
Anhui lawsuit is a regulation issued
in March 2006 by the State Council,
the government ’s senior
management body, which states
that “no institution or individual
shall discriminate against people
living with H.I.V., AIDS patients and
their relatives. ”
More than four years later, no court
had placed an H.I.V. discrimination
case on its docket until Monday ’s
decision, said Yu Fangqiang, the
chief coordinator for Yirenping, a
Beijing-based civil-rights advocacy
group involved in the Anhui case.
The group paid the court fee to file
the lawsuit, and Mr. Zheng waived
his legal fees for the case.
Mr. Yu said he agreed with Mr.
Zheng that the court ’s acceptance
of the discrimination lawsuit was a
sign of changing legal standards.
But he added that news media
coverage had probably played a
crucial role in the court ’s decision,
which had been delayed until the
Chinese journal Legal Daily ran an
article about the case.
The newspaper, he said, “is a must-
read for a lot of people in the legal
system. I think the media played a
role in the court accepting this
case. ”
Yirenping, the rights group, had
filed as many as 15 other lawsuits
similar to the Anhui complaint in
the past, Mr. Yu said, but courts
uniformly rejected them. Many
other H.I.V.-positive citizens
approached the organization for
advice on suing, but later dropped
the idea for fear that their
confidentiality would be
compromised, he said.
But the Anhui plaintiff, he said, was
determined to pursue a lawsuit.
“He was born to a poor family in
the countryside,” Mr. Yu said, “and
a job as a teacher means a lot to
him — stable pay and a decent
job.
first for China’s legal system, a
court in Anhui Province has agreed
to hear a complaint by a
prospective schoolteacher that he
was illegally denied a job because
he is H.I.V. positive, the man ’s
lawyer said Tuesday.
The unidentified man, said to be in
his early 20s, brought the case
under a 2006 national regulation
that prohibits job discrimination
against people with H.I.V., his
lawyer, Zheng Jineng, said in a
telephone interview from Hefei, the
provincial capital.
Mr. Zheng said the case would be
heard by a district court in Anqing.
The plaintiff contends that he
passed a written test and
interviews for a teaching job there,
but that the city education bureau
rejected him after a physical
examination showed he was
infected with H.I.V., the virus that
causes AIDS.
“In the past on sensitive cases like
this, the court would be very
reluctant to accept the case, ” Mr.
Zheng said. “But this time they
accepted it smoothly and quickly.
That means the legal system in
China is making progress. ”
H.I.V.-positive Chinese suffered
official and public discrimination for
years after the disease first
surfaced in the country in 1986.
Infected students were often
forced to leave school and workers
were shunted from their jobs.
More recently, the national
government has taken a tolerant
approach, offering free
antiretroviral drugs and prenatal
care to many people who are H.I.V.
positive, as well as screening for
those who suspect that they might
be. Many migrants remain unable
to receive the services, however,
because they lack the appropriate
residence papers.
The National People’s Congress,
China’s legislature, has approved a
law that bans employers from
discriminating against job applicants
with certain kinds of communicable
diseases, as chosen by state
regulators. But the basis for the
Anhui lawsuit is a regulation issued
in March 2006 by the State Council,
the government ’s senior
management body, which states
that “no institution or individual
shall discriminate against people
living with H.I.V., AIDS patients and
their relatives. ”
More than four years later, no court
had placed an H.I.V. discrimination
case on its docket until Monday ’s
decision, said Yu Fangqiang, the
chief coordinator for Yirenping, a
Beijing-based civil-rights advocacy
group involved in the Anhui case.
The group paid the court fee to file
the lawsuit, and Mr. Zheng waived
his legal fees for the case.
Mr. Yu said he agreed with Mr.
Zheng that the court ’s acceptance
of the discrimination lawsuit was a
sign of changing legal standards.
But he added that news media
coverage had probably played a
crucial role in the court ’s decision,
which had been delayed until the
Chinese journal Legal Daily ran an
article about the case.
The newspaper, he said, “is a must-
read for a lot of people in the legal
system. I think the media played a
role in the court accepting this
case. ”
Yirenping, the rights group, had
filed as many as 15 other lawsuits
similar to the Anhui complaint in
the past, Mr. Yu said, but courts
uniformly rejected them. Many
other H.I.V.-positive citizens
approached the organization for
advice on suing, but later dropped
the idea for fear that their
confidentiality would be
compromised, he said.
But the Anhui plaintiff, he said, was
determined to pursue a lawsuit.
“He was born to a poor family in
the countryside,” Mr. Yu said, “and
a job as a teacher means a lot to
him — stable pay and a decent
job.
H.I.V.: National Institutes of Health Licenses Its Patent on a New Drug for AIDS
The rights to the N.I.H. patent on
the drug, darunavir, do not mean
that generic-drug makers will
instantly be able to make it
cheaply for poor countries, since
other darunavir patents are held
by private companies, including
Tibotec, a Johnson & Johnson
subsidiary.
But it increases pressure on drug
makers to follow suit. They have
been reluctant because they fear
losing the profits they could make
as once-poor countries become
richer, as India and Brazil have.
Also, they fear losing control over
quality, since a bad batch of a
generic could hurt the reputations
of their patented drugs. Instead,
they have tended to cut private
deals with generic makers.
The pool is run by Unitaid, an
independent agency founded at
the United Nations in 2006. Its
original mission was to accept the
receipts from several taxes
dedicated to global health —
mostly from a fee on European
airline tickets. The money has been
spent on AIDS drugs for children
and second-line drugs.
“We ask that companies step up
and collaborate so we can quickly
see more affordable, easy-to-use
pills getting into people ’s mouths,”
said Nelson Otwoma, head of
Kenya ’s Network of People Living
with H.I.V./AIDS and a Unitaid
board member.
the drug, darunavir, do not mean
that generic-drug makers will
instantly be able to make it
cheaply for poor countries, since
other darunavir patents are held
by private companies, including
Tibotec, a Johnson & Johnson
subsidiary.
But it increases pressure on drug
makers to follow suit. They have
been reluctant because they fear
losing the profits they could make
as once-poor countries become
richer, as India and Brazil have.
Also, they fear losing control over
quality, since a bad batch of a
generic could hurt the reputations
of their patented drugs. Instead,
they have tended to cut private
deals with generic makers.
The pool is run by Unitaid, an
independent agency founded at
the United Nations in 2006. Its
original mission was to accept the
receipts from several taxes
dedicated to global health —
mostly from a fee on European
airline tickets. The money has been
spent on AIDS drugs for children
and second-line drugs.
“We ask that companies step up
and collaborate so we can quickly
see more affordable, easy-to-use
pills getting into people ’s mouths,”
said Nelson Otwoma, head of
Kenya ’s Network of People Living
with H.I.V./AIDS and a Unitaid
board member.
RECIPES FOR HEALTH Berry-Rose Crumble
The perfume of rose water, which
you can find in Middle Eastern
markets, is irresistible here. Served
with yogurt, this is one of my
favorite breakfasts.
The berries are quite juicy. If you
want a thicker syrup, use corn
starch or arrowroot.
2 quarts mixed strawberries,
blackberries and blueberries (about
2 pounds fruit)
2 tablespoons sugar, preferably
organic
1 tablespoon rose water
2 teaspoons cornstarch or
arrowroot (optional)
1 batch quinoa-oat crumble topping
1. Hull the strawberries. If they’re
large, cut them in half. In a large
bowl, toss the fruit with the sugar,
rose water and (optional)
cornstarch or arrowroot. Cover and
let stand for 15 to 30 minutes.
Meanwhile, preheat the oven to
350 degrees, and butter a two-
quart baking dish.
2. Transfer the fruit to the baking
dish, making sure to scrape all of
the liquid into the bowl. Set the
baking dish on a baking sheet for
easier handling, and place in the
oven for 15 minutes. Remove from
the oven, and spread the crumble
topping over the fruit in an even
layer. Return to the oven for 15 to
20 minutes until the crumble is
bubbling and nicely browned. Allow
to stand for at least 15 minutes
before serving.
Yield: Serves eight generously.
Advance preparation: The
crumble topping keeps for several
months in the freezer. Bake the
fruit without the crumble topping as
instructed in Step 2, then allow it to
sit for a few hours before you finish
it with the crumble topping. This
makes a great leftover; I did not
tire of it for the five days that it
lasted in my refrigerator.
Nutritional information per
serving: 268 calories; 11 grams
fat; 6 grams saturated fat; 23
milligrams cholesterol; 42 grams
carbohydrates; 6 grams dietary
fiber; 103 milligrams sodium; 4
grams protein
Martha Rose Shulman can be
reached at martha-rose-
shulman.com. Her latest book, "The
Very Best of Recipes for Health,
you can find in Middle Eastern
markets, is irresistible here. Served
with yogurt, this is one of my
favorite breakfasts.
The berries are quite juicy. If you
want a thicker syrup, use corn
starch or arrowroot.
2 quarts mixed strawberries,
blackberries and blueberries (about
2 pounds fruit)
2 tablespoons sugar, preferably
organic
1 tablespoon rose water
2 teaspoons cornstarch or
arrowroot (optional)
1 batch quinoa-oat crumble topping
1. Hull the strawberries. If they’re
large, cut them in half. In a large
bowl, toss the fruit with the sugar,
rose water and (optional)
cornstarch or arrowroot. Cover and
let stand for 15 to 30 minutes.
Meanwhile, preheat the oven to
350 degrees, and butter a two-
quart baking dish.
2. Transfer the fruit to the baking
dish, making sure to scrape all of
the liquid into the bowl. Set the
baking dish on a baking sheet for
easier handling, and place in the
oven for 15 minutes. Remove from
the oven, and spread the crumble
topping over the fruit in an even
layer. Return to the oven for 15 to
20 minutes until the crumble is
bubbling and nicely browned. Allow
to stand for at least 15 minutes
before serving.
Yield: Serves eight generously.
Advance preparation: The
crumble topping keeps for several
months in the freezer. Bake the
fruit without the crumble topping as
instructed in Step 2, then allow it to
sit for a few hours before you finish
it with the crumble topping. This
makes a great leftover; I did not
tire of it for the five days that it
lasted in my refrigerator.
Nutritional information per
serving: 268 calories; 11 grams
fat; 6 grams saturated fat; 23
milligrams cholesterol; 42 grams
carbohydrates; 6 grams dietary
fiber; 103 milligrams sodium; 4
grams protein
Martha Rose Shulman can be
reached at martha-rose-
shulman.com. Her latest book, "The
Very Best of Recipes for Health,
Neurofeedback Gains Popularity and Lab Attention
You sit in a chair, facing a computer
screen, while a clinician sticks
electrodes to your scalp with a
viscous goop that takes days to
wash out of your hair. Wires from
the sensors connect to a computer
programmed to respond to your
brain ’s activity.
Try to relax and focus. If your brain
behaves as desired, you ’ll be
encouraged with soothing sounds
and visual treats, like images of
exploding stars or a flowering field.
If not, you ’ll get silence, a
darkening screen and wilting flora.
This is neurofeedback, a kind of
biofeedback for the brain, which
practitioners say can address a host
of neurological ills — among them
attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder , autism, depression and
anxiety — by allowing patients to
alter their own brain waves
through practice and repetition.
The procedure is controversial,
expensive and time-consuming. An
average course of treatment, with
at least 30 sessions, can cost $3,000
or more, and few health insurers
will pay for it. Still, it appears to be
growing in popularity.
Cynthia Kerson, executive director
of the International Society for
Neurofeedback and Research, an
advocacy group for practitioners,
estimates that 7,500 mental health
professionals in the United States
now offer neurofeedback and that
more than 100,000 Americans
have tried it over the past decade.
The treatment is also gaining
attention from mainstream
researchers, including some former
skeptics. The National Institute of
Mental Health recently sponsored
its first study of neurofeedback for
A.D.H.D.: a randomized, controlled
trial of 36 subjects.
The results are to be announced
Oct. 26 at the annual meeting of
the American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry. In an
interview in the summer, the
study ’s director, Dr. L. Eugene
Arnold, an emeritus professor of
psychiatry at Ohio State, noted that
there had been “quite a bit of
improvement” in many of the
children’s behavior, as reported by
parents and teachers.
Dr. Arnold said that if the results
bore out that neurofeedback was
making the difference, he would
seek financing for a broader study,
with as many as 100 subjects.
John Kounios, a professor of
psychology at Drexel University,
published a small study in 2007
suggesting that the treatment
speeded cognitive processing in
elderly people. “There’s no question
that neurofeedback works, that
people can change brain activity,”
he said. “The big questions we still
haven’t answered are precisely
how it works and how it can be
harnessed to treat disorders. ”
Russell A. Barkley, a professor of
psychiatry at the Medical
University of South Carolina and a
leading authority on attention
problems, has long dismissed claims
that neurofeedback can help. But
Dr. Barkley says he was persuaded
to take another look after Dutch
scientists published an analysis of
recent international studies finding
significant reductions in
impulsiveness and inattention.
Still, Dr. Barkley cautioned that he
had yet to see credible evidence
confirming claims that such benefits
can be long lasting, much less
permanent.
And another mainstream expert is
much more disapproving. William E.
Pelham Jr., director of the Center
for Children and Families at Florida
International University, called
neurofeedback “crackpot
charlatanism.” He warned that
exaggerated claims for it might
lead parents to favor it over
proven options like behavioral
therapy and medication.
Neurofeedback was developed in
the 1960s and ’70s, with American
researchers leading the way. In
1968, M. Barry Sterman, a
neuroscientist at the University of
California, Los Angeles, reported
that the training helped cats resist
epileptic seizures. Dr. Sterman and
others later claimed to have
achieved similar benefits with
humans .
The findings prompted a boomlet
of interest in which clinicians of
varying degrees of respectability
jumped into the field, making
many unsupported claims about
seeming miracle cures and tainting
the treatment’s reputation among
academic experts. Meanwhile,
researchers in Germany and the
Netherlands continued to explore
neurofeedback ’s potential benefits.
A major attraction of the technique
is the hope that it can help patients
avoid drugs, which often have side
effects. Instead, patients practice
routines that seem more like
exercising a muscle.
Brain cells communicate with one
another, in part, through a constant
storm of electrical impulses. Their
patterns show up on an
electroencephalogram, or EEG, as
brain waves with different
frequencies.
Neurofeedback practitioners say
people have problems when their
brain wave frequencies aren ’t
suited for the task at hand, or when
parts of the brain aren ’t
communicating adequately with
other parts. These issues, they say,
can be represented on a “brain
map,” the initial EEG readings that
serve as a guide for treatment.
Subsequently, a clinician will help a
patient learn to slow down or speed
up those brain waves, through a
process known as operant
conditioning. The brain begins by
generating fairly random patterns,
while the computer software
responds with encouragement
whenever the activity meets the
target.
screen, while a clinician sticks
electrodes to your scalp with a
viscous goop that takes days to
wash out of your hair. Wires from
the sensors connect to a computer
programmed to respond to your
brain ’s activity.
Try to relax and focus. If your brain
behaves as desired, you ’ll be
encouraged with soothing sounds
and visual treats, like images of
exploding stars or a flowering field.
If not, you ’ll get silence, a
darkening screen and wilting flora.
This is neurofeedback, a kind of
biofeedback for the brain, which
practitioners say can address a host
of neurological ills — among them
attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder , autism, depression and
anxiety — by allowing patients to
alter their own brain waves
through practice and repetition.
The procedure is controversial,
expensive and time-consuming. An
average course of treatment, with
at least 30 sessions, can cost $3,000
or more, and few health insurers
will pay for it. Still, it appears to be
growing in popularity.
Cynthia Kerson, executive director
of the International Society for
Neurofeedback and Research, an
advocacy group for practitioners,
estimates that 7,500 mental health
professionals in the United States
now offer neurofeedback and that
more than 100,000 Americans
have tried it over the past decade.
The treatment is also gaining
attention from mainstream
researchers, including some former
skeptics. The National Institute of
Mental Health recently sponsored
its first study of neurofeedback for
A.D.H.D.: a randomized, controlled
trial of 36 subjects.
The results are to be announced
Oct. 26 at the annual meeting of
the American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry. In an
interview in the summer, the
study ’s director, Dr. L. Eugene
Arnold, an emeritus professor of
psychiatry at Ohio State, noted that
there had been “quite a bit of
improvement” in many of the
children’s behavior, as reported by
parents and teachers.
Dr. Arnold said that if the results
bore out that neurofeedback was
making the difference, he would
seek financing for a broader study,
with as many as 100 subjects.
John Kounios, a professor of
psychology at Drexel University,
published a small study in 2007
suggesting that the treatment
speeded cognitive processing in
elderly people. “There’s no question
that neurofeedback works, that
people can change brain activity,”
he said. “The big questions we still
haven’t answered are precisely
how it works and how it can be
harnessed to treat disorders. ”
Russell A. Barkley, a professor of
psychiatry at the Medical
University of South Carolina and a
leading authority on attention
problems, has long dismissed claims
that neurofeedback can help. But
Dr. Barkley says he was persuaded
to take another look after Dutch
scientists published an analysis of
recent international studies finding
significant reductions in
impulsiveness and inattention.
Still, Dr. Barkley cautioned that he
had yet to see credible evidence
confirming claims that such benefits
can be long lasting, much less
permanent.
And another mainstream expert is
much more disapproving. William E.
Pelham Jr., director of the Center
for Children and Families at Florida
International University, called
neurofeedback “crackpot
charlatanism.” He warned that
exaggerated claims for it might
lead parents to favor it over
proven options like behavioral
therapy and medication.
Neurofeedback was developed in
the 1960s and ’70s, with American
researchers leading the way. In
1968, M. Barry Sterman, a
neuroscientist at the University of
California, Los Angeles, reported
that the training helped cats resist
epileptic seizures. Dr. Sterman and
others later claimed to have
achieved similar benefits with
humans .
The findings prompted a boomlet
of interest in which clinicians of
varying degrees of respectability
jumped into the field, making
many unsupported claims about
seeming miracle cures and tainting
the treatment’s reputation among
academic experts. Meanwhile,
researchers in Germany and the
Netherlands continued to explore
neurofeedback ’s potential benefits.
A major attraction of the technique
is the hope that it can help patients
avoid drugs, which often have side
effects. Instead, patients practice
routines that seem more like
exercising a muscle.
Brain cells communicate with one
another, in part, through a constant
storm of electrical impulses. Their
patterns show up on an
electroencephalogram, or EEG, as
brain waves with different
frequencies.
Neurofeedback practitioners say
people have problems when their
brain wave frequencies aren ’t
suited for the task at hand, or when
parts of the brain aren ’t
communicating adequately with
other parts. These issues, they say,
can be represented on a “brain
map,” the initial EEG readings that
serve as a guide for treatment.
Subsequently, a clinician will help a
patient learn to slow down or speed
up those brain waves, through a
process known as operant
conditioning. The brain begins by
generating fairly random patterns,
while the computer software
responds with encouragement
whenever the activity meets the
target.
Health Care’s Uneven Road to a New Era
Consider what it would be like to
have a health insurance plan that
capped annual benefits at $2,000.
For any medical care costing more
than that, you would have to pay
out of pocket.
Examples of care that costs more
than $2,000 — and often a lot
more — include virtually any
cancer treatment, any heart
surgery, a year’s worth of diabetes
treatment and care for many
broken bones. Even a single M.R.I.
exam can cost more than $2,000. A
typical hospital stay runs thousands
of dollars more.
So does this insurance plan sound
like part of the solution for the
country ’s health care system — or
part of the problem?
A $2,000 plan happens to be one of
the main plans that McDonald’s
offers its employees. It became big
news last week, when The Wall
Street Journal reported that the
company was worried the plan
would run afoul of a provision in
the new health care law. In
response to the provision,
McDonald ’s threatened to drop the
coverage altogether, until the
Obama administration signaled it
would grant some exemptions.
This episode was only the latest
disruption that the health law
seems to be causing. Also last
week, the Principal Financial Group
said it was getting out of the health
insurance business, while other
insurers have said they might stop
offering certain types of coverage.
With each new disruption come
loud claims — some from insurance
executives — that the health
overhaul is damaging American
health care.
On the surface, these claims can
sound credible. But when you dig a
little deeper, you often discover the
same lesson that the McDonald ’s
case provides: the real problem
was the status quo.
American families spend almost
twice as much on health care —
through premiums, paycheck
deductions and out-of-pocket
expenses — as families in any
other country. In exchange, we
receive top-notch specialty care in
many areas. Yet on the whole, we
do not get much better care than
countries that spend far less.
We don’t live as long as people in
Canada, Japan, most of Western
Europe or even relatively poor
Jordan. Misdiagnosis is common.
Medical errors occur more often
than in some other countries.
Unique to the developed world,
millions of people have no health
insurance, and millions more, like
many fast-food workers, are
underinsured.
In choosing their health reform
plan, President Obama and the
Democrats eschewed radical
changes, for better or worse, and
instead tried to minimize the
disruptions to the current system.
Sometimes, Mr. Obama went so far
as to suggest there would be no
disruptions, saying that people
could keep their current plan if they
liked it. But that’s not quite right. It
is not possible to change a system
as huge, and as hugely flawed, as
ours without some disruptions.
•
McDonald’s offers its hourly
workers two different health care
plans, which are known as “mini-
med” plans. In one, workers can
pay about $730 a year for benefits
of up to $2,000. In the other, they
can pay about $1,660 a year for
benefits of up to $10,000, The
Journal reported.
In a memo to federal regulators,
McDonald ’s executives argued that
their version of health insurance
“ positively impacts” the almost
30,000 workers who are covered.
And that ’s true. A plan with a
$2,000 or $10,000 cap can cover
some modest health problems and
is better than being uninsured.
But should the litmus test for
American health care really be
better than nothing?
Mini-med plans force people to
drain their savings accounts for
dozens of common medical
problems. They also force hospitals
to let some bills go unpaid, which
drives up costs for everyone else.
Senator Charles Grassley,
Republican of Iowa, has previously
criticized AARP for marketing
similarly limited plans to its
members. “It’s not better than
nothing,” Mr. Grassley argued, “to
encourage people to buy
something described as ‘health
security’ when there’s no basic
protection against high medical
costs. ”
Dr. Aaron Carroll, an Indiana
University pediatrics professor who
studies health policy, says of mini-
med plans: “They’re great if you’re
healthy, because you feel like
you ’re covered. But if you ever
need them, they’re so skimpy,
they provide very little.” Gary
Claxton of the Kaiser Family
Foundation adds, “They really just
shouldn’t be considered health
insurance.”
The plans’ skimpiness is the main
reason they ran into legal jeopardy.
Under the new law, most plans
must spend at least 85 percent of
their revenue on medical care,
rather than administrative
overhead. The McDonald ’s plans
aren’t generous enough to clear the
hurdle.
At the same time, it’s probably
unrealistic to expect McDonald’s to
give workers decent health
insurance. Many of those workers
make less than $20,000 a year. A
typical family insurance plan would
raise their total compensation by
more than half, destroying the
McDonald ’s business model.
The workers, for their part, cannot
afford to buy insurance in the so-
called individual market. Plans are
even more expensive in that
market, because it is dominated by
people who desperately need
insurance — which is to say, sick
people.
This is where health reform comes
in. It tried to solve the problem by
creating what policy experts call a
three-legged stool.
First, people will be required to buy
insurance, to spread costs among
the sick and the healthy. Second,
insurers will be prohibited from
cherry-picking only the healthiest
customers, again to spread costs.
Finally, the government will give
subsidies to people, like McDonald’s
workers, who can’t afford insurance
on their own.
Germany, the Netherlands and
Switzerland all use a system along
these lines to cover everyone,
largely through the private sector,
for less money per person than this
country spends.
The recent disruptions in our health
insurance market are partly a
result of the fact that the stool ’s
three legs were not built on the
same timetable. Some of the
insurance regulations, like the one
on overhead costs, are starting to
take effect. But the new markets
for health insurance, known as
exchanges, won’t be up and
running until 2014. This timetable
has its problems, and the Obama
administration will probably need
to grant some more temporary
exemptions.
In 2014, however, the choice for
McDonald ’s workers will no longer
be between a bad policy and no
policy. Through the exchanges,
they will be able to buy a real
health insurance plan — one that
covers cancer, heart attacks,
surgeries, M.R.I. ’s and hospital stays.
Dr. Carroll notes that many families
will end up paying less than they
are now paying out of pocket and
will get more access to care, too.
For insurance companies, these
changes won ’t be quite so positive.
They will no longer be able to sell
plans that devote 30 percent of
revenue to salaries for their
workers. They will not be allowed
to compete over which company
can come up with the most
ingenious ways to say no to the
sick. Their benefits and prices will
become more public, thanks to the
exchanges.
The health care overhaul that
passed Congress is far from ideal,
as I have written many times in
this space. But it does represent
progress.
The fact that it is beginning to
disrupt the status quo — that some
insurance policies will eventually be
eliminated and some inefficient
insurers will have to leave the
market altogether — is all the
proof we need.
have a health insurance plan that
capped annual benefits at $2,000.
For any medical care costing more
than that, you would have to pay
out of pocket.
Examples of care that costs more
than $2,000 — and often a lot
more — include virtually any
cancer treatment, any heart
surgery, a year’s worth of diabetes
treatment and care for many
broken bones. Even a single M.R.I.
exam can cost more than $2,000. A
typical hospital stay runs thousands
of dollars more.
So does this insurance plan sound
like part of the solution for the
country ’s health care system — or
part of the problem?
A $2,000 plan happens to be one of
the main plans that McDonald’s
offers its employees. It became big
news last week, when The Wall
Street Journal reported that the
company was worried the plan
would run afoul of a provision in
the new health care law. In
response to the provision,
McDonald ’s threatened to drop the
coverage altogether, until the
Obama administration signaled it
would grant some exemptions.
This episode was only the latest
disruption that the health law
seems to be causing. Also last
week, the Principal Financial Group
said it was getting out of the health
insurance business, while other
insurers have said they might stop
offering certain types of coverage.
With each new disruption come
loud claims — some from insurance
executives — that the health
overhaul is damaging American
health care.
On the surface, these claims can
sound credible. But when you dig a
little deeper, you often discover the
same lesson that the McDonald ’s
case provides: the real problem
was the status quo.
American families spend almost
twice as much on health care —
through premiums, paycheck
deductions and out-of-pocket
expenses — as families in any
other country. In exchange, we
receive top-notch specialty care in
many areas. Yet on the whole, we
do not get much better care than
countries that spend far less.
We don’t live as long as people in
Canada, Japan, most of Western
Europe or even relatively poor
Jordan. Misdiagnosis is common.
Medical errors occur more often
than in some other countries.
Unique to the developed world,
millions of people have no health
insurance, and millions more, like
many fast-food workers, are
underinsured.
In choosing their health reform
plan, President Obama and the
Democrats eschewed radical
changes, for better or worse, and
instead tried to minimize the
disruptions to the current system.
Sometimes, Mr. Obama went so far
as to suggest there would be no
disruptions, saying that people
could keep their current plan if they
liked it. But that’s not quite right. It
is not possible to change a system
as huge, and as hugely flawed, as
ours without some disruptions.
•
McDonald’s offers its hourly
workers two different health care
plans, which are known as “mini-
med” plans. In one, workers can
pay about $730 a year for benefits
of up to $2,000. In the other, they
can pay about $1,660 a year for
benefits of up to $10,000, The
Journal reported.
In a memo to federal regulators,
McDonald ’s executives argued that
their version of health insurance
“ positively impacts” the almost
30,000 workers who are covered.
And that ’s true. A plan with a
$2,000 or $10,000 cap can cover
some modest health problems and
is better than being uninsured.
But should the litmus test for
American health care really be
better than nothing?
Mini-med plans force people to
drain their savings accounts for
dozens of common medical
problems. They also force hospitals
to let some bills go unpaid, which
drives up costs for everyone else.
Senator Charles Grassley,
Republican of Iowa, has previously
criticized AARP for marketing
similarly limited plans to its
members. “It’s not better than
nothing,” Mr. Grassley argued, “to
encourage people to buy
something described as ‘health
security’ when there’s no basic
protection against high medical
costs. ”
Dr. Aaron Carroll, an Indiana
University pediatrics professor who
studies health policy, says of mini-
med plans: “They’re great if you’re
healthy, because you feel like
you ’re covered. But if you ever
need them, they’re so skimpy,
they provide very little.” Gary
Claxton of the Kaiser Family
Foundation adds, “They really just
shouldn’t be considered health
insurance.”
The plans’ skimpiness is the main
reason they ran into legal jeopardy.
Under the new law, most plans
must spend at least 85 percent of
their revenue on medical care,
rather than administrative
overhead. The McDonald ’s plans
aren’t generous enough to clear the
hurdle.
At the same time, it’s probably
unrealistic to expect McDonald’s to
give workers decent health
insurance. Many of those workers
make less than $20,000 a year. A
typical family insurance plan would
raise their total compensation by
more than half, destroying the
McDonald ’s business model.
The workers, for their part, cannot
afford to buy insurance in the so-
called individual market. Plans are
even more expensive in that
market, because it is dominated by
people who desperately need
insurance — which is to say, sick
people.
This is where health reform comes
in. It tried to solve the problem by
creating what policy experts call a
three-legged stool.
First, people will be required to buy
insurance, to spread costs among
the sick and the healthy. Second,
insurers will be prohibited from
cherry-picking only the healthiest
customers, again to spread costs.
Finally, the government will give
subsidies to people, like McDonald’s
workers, who can’t afford insurance
on their own.
Germany, the Netherlands and
Switzerland all use a system along
these lines to cover everyone,
largely through the private sector,
for less money per person than this
country spends.
The recent disruptions in our health
insurance market are partly a
result of the fact that the stool ’s
three legs were not built on the
same timetable. Some of the
insurance regulations, like the one
on overhead costs, are starting to
take effect. But the new markets
for health insurance, known as
exchanges, won’t be up and
running until 2014. This timetable
has its problems, and the Obama
administration will probably need
to grant some more temporary
exemptions.
In 2014, however, the choice for
McDonald ’s workers will no longer
be between a bad policy and no
policy. Through the exchanges,
they will be able to buy a real
health insurance plan — one that
covers cancer, heart attacks,
surgeries, M.R.I. ’s and hospital stays.
Dr. Carroll notes that many families
will end up paying less than they
are now paying out of pocket and
will get more access to care, too.
For insurance companies, these
changes won ’t be quite so positive.
They will no longer be able to sell
plans that devote 30 percent of
revenue to salaries for their
workers. They will not be allowed
to compete over which company
can come up with the most
ingenious ways to say no to the
sick. Their benefits and prices will
become more public, thanks to the
exchanges.
The health care overhaul that
passed Congress is far from ideal,
as I have written many times in
this space. But it does represent
progress.
The fact that it is beginning to
disrupt the status quo — that some
insurance policies will eventually be
eliminated and some inefficient
insurers will have to leave the
market altogether — is all the
proof we need.
Global Fight Against AIDS Falters as Pledges Fail to Reach Goal of $13 Billion
In another signal that the global
battle against AIDS is falling apart
for lack of money, the Global Fund
to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and
Malaria failed on Tuesday to reach
even its lowest “austerity level”
fund-raising target of $13 billion —
the amount it had said it needed
just to keep putting patients on
treatment at current rates.
Three-year pledges from 40
countries attending a two-day
conference held in Manhattan
amounted to $11.7 billion. The
pledges were announced at the
United Nations. The fund had hoped
to raise $20 billion to catch up with
the growing epidemic.
No one now on treatment will be
cut off, said Dr. Michel Kazatchkine,
the fund ’s executive director, but
the targets for the next few years
must be lowered.
He said that he “deeply
appreciates” the amount raised, but
that “we need to recognize that it’s
not enough to meet expected
demand and will lead to difficult
decisions in the next three years.”
He could not, he said, estimate
exactly how many deaths would
result.
The fund pays for AIDS drugs for
almost three million patients now,
and still might be able to reach four
million by 2013. It had hoped to
reach five million or more.
It supports about half of the world’s
poor who are getting treatment.
The President ’s Emergency Plan for
AIDS Relief, or Pepfar, started under
the administration of President
George W. Bush, pays for the other
half.
An estimated 33 million people are
infected worldwide, a number that
grows by a million people a year
after adding new infections and
subtracting deaths.
Of that number, about 14 million
are already so sick that, under
World Health Organization
guidelines, they should be on drugs.
It looks increasingly likely that that
number will outpace the number
getting drugs.
The United States pledged $4 billion,
which is a nearly 40 percent
increase over its previous
contribution. It is by far the most
generous donor, and most countries
raised their contributions by less.
France, Canada and Norway went
up by 20 percent, Japan by 28
percent. Britain, Sweden and the
Netherlands could not commit
because of budget cycles, but were
expected to be in that ballpark;
Italy and Spain gave nothing. South
Africa, which has the world ’s worst
AIDS epidemic, made a token
contribution of $2 million. Russia
and China gave $60 million and $14
million respectively, far less than
fund officials had hoped. To reach
the fund ’s $20 billion goal, all
countries would have had to
roughly double their giving.
AIDS activists vented open
frustration, both with the overall
result and the American
contribution.
“This is a modest course correction,
not what we were hoping for in
terms of U.S. leadership, ” said Dr.
Paul Zeitz, executive director of the
Global AIDS Alliance, an advocacy
group that had lobbied the
administration for a $6 billion
contribution. “This took the other
donors off the hook. Everyone
could aim low. ”
By not reaching a decision earlier,
he complained, the United States
dithered away its leverage over
other countries.
Under American law, the United
States can contribute only one-third
of the fund. If it had told other
donors privately weeks ago that it
intended a 40 percent increase,
they would have been under
pressure to match that, both to
avoid sounding cheap, and because
the United States cannot pay unless
its donation is matched 2 to 1.
Dr. Eric Goosby, the global AIDS
coordinator, said the intra-
administration debate about how
much to pledge was “robust” and
went on right up until Tuesday
morning.
“We’re proud of the pledge,” Dr.
Goosby said in a telephone
interview. Getting the United States,
which has a one-year budget cycle,
to commit to a three-year pledge
was “swimming upstream,”
especially in such a weak economy.
The battles against malaria and
tuberculosis will also suffer, but the
effect on AIDS is easier to measure.
Malaria waxes and wanes with hot
weather and local spraying. The TB
epidemic echoes the AIDS epidemic
because so many people have
both, but TB can be cured in six
months, which shrinks case counts
rapidly.
battle against AIDS is falling apart
for lack of money, the Global Fund
to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and
Malaria failed on Tuesday to reach
even its lowest “austerity level”
fund-raising target of $13 billion —
the amount it had said it needed
just to keep putting patients on
treatment at current rates.
Three-year pledges from 40
countries attending a two-day
conference held in Manhattan
amounted to $11.7 billion. The
pledges were announced at the
United Nations. The fund had hoped
to raise $20 billion to catch up with
the growing epidemic.
No one now on treatment will be
cut off, said Dr. Michel Kazatchkine,
the fund ’s executive director, but
the targets for the next few years
must be lowered.
He said that he “deeply
appreciates” the amount raised, but
that “we need to recognize that it’s
not enough to meet expected
demand and will lead to difficult
decisions in the next three years.”
He could not, he said, estimate
exactly how many deaths would
result.
The fund pays for AIDS drugs for
almost three million patients now,
and still might be able to reach four
million by 2013. It had hoped to
reach five million or more.
It supports about half of the world’s
poor who are getting treatment.
The President ’s Emergency Plan for
AIDS Relief, or Pepfar, started under
the administration of President
George W. Bush, pays for the other
half.
An estimated 33 million people are
infected worldwide, a number that
grows by a million people a year
after adding new infections and
subtracting deaths.
Of that number, about 14 million
are already so sick that, under
World Health Organization
guidelines, they should be on drugs.
It looks increasingly likely that that
number will outpace the number
getting drugs.
The United States pledged $4 billion,
which is a nearly 40 percent
increase over its previous
contribution. It is by far the most
generous donor, and most countries
raised their contributions by less.
France, Canada and Norway went
up by 20 percent, Japan by 28
percent. Britain, Sweden and the
Netherlands could not commit
because of budget cycles, but were
expected to be in that ballpark;
Italy and Spain gave nothing. South
Africa, which has the world ’s worst
AIDS epidemic, made a token
contribution of $2 million. Russia
and China gave $60 million and $14
million respectively, far less than
fund officials had hoped. To reach
the fund ’s $20 billion goal, all
countries would have had to
roughly double their giving.
AIDS activists vented open
frustration, both with the overall
result and the American
contribution.
“This is a modest course correction,
not what we were hoping for in
terms of U.S. leadership, ” said Dr.
Paul Zeitz, executive director of the
Global AIDS Alliance, an advocacy
group that had lobbied the
administration for a $6 billion
contribution. “This took the other
donors off the hook. Everyone
could aim low. ”
By not reaching a decision earlier,
he complained, the United States
dithered away its leverage over
other countries.
Under American law, the United
States can contribute only one-third
of the fund. If it had told other
donors privately weeks ago that it
intended a 40 percent increase,
they would have been under
pressure to match that, both to
avoid sounding cheap, and because
the United States cannot pay unless
its donation is matched 2 to 1.
Dr. Eric Goosby, the global AIDS
coordinator, said the intra-
administration debate about how
much to pledge was “robust” and
went on right up until Tuesday
morning.
“We’re proud of the pledge,” Dr.
Goosby said in a telephone
interview. Getting the United States,
which has a one-year budget cycle,
to commit to a three-year pledge
was “swimming upstream,”
especially in such a weak economy.
The battles against malaria and
tuberculosis will also suffer, but the
effect on AIDS is easier to measure.
Malaria waxes and wanes with hot
weather and local spraying. The TB
epidemic echoes the AIDS epidemic
because so many people have
both, but TB can be cured in six
months, which shrinks case counts
rapidly.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Diego: I really want to play at brazil 2014
Much to the delight of German
football followers, and Wolfsburg
fans in particular, Diego is back in
the Bundesliga and doing what he
does best: creating and scoring
goals. Forming a lethal attacking
trident with Bosnian striker Edin
Dzeko and fellow Brazilian Grafite,
whose two headed goals in last
weekend's 2-1 win over Freiburg
were both supplied by the former
Werder Bremen playmaker, the
diminutive 25-year-old has helped
spark a run of three consecutive
wins to revive the fortunes of a
team that began the campaign
with three straight defeats.
In an exclusive interview with
FIFA.com, Diego discussed a range
of issues including why he left Serie
A giants Juventus to return to
Germany, a new era for the
Brazilian national team and
Wolfsburg ’s chances of claiming a
second ever Bundesliga crown.
FIFA.com: Diego, what’s it been
like to come back to German
football? Would it be too much
to say it ’s almost like returning
home, given just how well your
first spell in Germany went?
Diego: Yes, to a degree you could
say that. I was very happy during
my first spell here, at Werder
Bremen, and I ’ve always had a lot
of affection for this country. I’m
hoping things work out equally well
with Wolfsburg. I ’m finding it
interesting getting to know the club
and, while the country is the same,
the way things are happening
seems different. It ’s like I’m
discovering it for the first time
again.
What was the biggest factor
behind your return to Germany?
Juventus didn’t have a good
season last term, the team
performed well below expectations.
I ’ve got history here in Germany
and Wolfsburg made me a great
offer. I was happy to be able to
come back.
You’ve said that you always
enjoyed a good relationship
with the Juve supporters, so did
you have any regrets at all
when you left the club?
Juventus went through a series of
problems. We had a good team
that didn ’t live up to expectations.
Yes, the fans were great to me and
they were always asking me to
stay at the club, but I didn ’t leave
Italy with any regrets. I’d have
liked to have won some silverware,
but it was a worthwhile experience.
Given that Wolfsburg have a
new coach in Steve McClaren and
new players such as yourself,
could the fact that the club are
not involved in European
competition this season be
beneficial for you and the team?
Whenever a team misses out on
Europe and changes coach, it
always goes through a process of
transition. And I think that yes, that
will help me settle. That said, I ’d still
prefer to see Wolfsburg taking part
in the biggest competitions, and
we ’re going to battle to make sure
that’s the case next season.
How do you see Wolfsburg’s
chances of winning a second
Bundesliga title in 2010/11?
We’ve got just as good a chance as
any other big club. We’ve had a
difficult start but we know that we’ll
bounce back. It’s just a question of
time before Wolfsburg are battling
it out at the top of the table again.
And with Grafite and Dzeko, we ’ll
be more dangerous going forward.
Two factors that set the German
Bundesliga apart from other
major European leagues are the
fact it is so well-balanced and its
high average attendance
figures. In a nutshell, how
would you define German
football fans?
Local derbies are really important
here. Every city has a team and
the fans stay faithful to their side
and turn up in huge numbers, even
during the bad times. The
impression you get is that matches
are a compulsory part of the
calendar here.
Changing tack a little, one of the
trends at the recent FIFA World
Cup ™ was the success of
technically gifted teams like
Germany and eventual winners
Spain. Do you think this will be
reflected at club level?
I hope so. Nowadays there’s a
tendency for teams to either put
their faith in a skilful approach,
which we saw at the World Cup, or
in a defensive one like Jose
Mourinho used to win the
Champions League and beat Barça
(his then Inter Milan side beat the
Catalans in the semi-finals). It just
remains to be seen whether the
two schools can coexist.
Turning to the Brazilian national
team, since taking the job Mano
Menezes has promised to
reintroduce a more creative
brand of football to A Seleção.
After what you saw at South
Africa 2010, do you think that’s
the right approach?
Brazil are undergoing a process of
transition. The national team should
put faith in technical ability, but
without neglecting tactical strength.
I think that Mano Menezes is going
to do a good job and I ’ll do
everything I can to be part of this
new era.
Menezes has moved quickly to
bring in younger players and,
while you ’re by no means a
veteran, you’re certainly an
experienced performer. Given
this generational transition, do
you worry about being
overlooked? By which I mean
you ’re much younger than the
likes of Gilberto Silva, but much
older than Neymar for
example...
I think I’ve got everything it takes
to get back into the national team.
I ’ll be a good age when the World
Cup in Brazil comes around. Aside
from which I ’ve got plenty of
experience, which really counts. But
more than anything else, it ’s all
going to depend on my form. By
playing well I can ensure I get back
in the squad. I really want to play
in the World Cup on home soil.
football followers, and Wolfsburg
fans in particular, Diego is back in
the Bundesliga and doing what he
does best: creating and scoring
goals. Forming a lethal attacking
trident with Bosnian striker Edin
Dzeko and fellow Brazilian Grafite,
whose two headed goals in last
weekend's 2-1 win over Freiburg
were both supplied by the former
Werder Bremen playmaker, the
diminutive 25-year-old has helped
spark a run of three consecutive
wins to revive the fortunes of a
team that began the campaign
with three straight defeats.
In an exclusive interview with
FIFA.com, Diego discussed a range
of issues including why he left Serie
A giants Juventus to return to
Germany, a new era for the
Brazilian national team and
Wolfsburg ’s chances of claiming a
second ever Bundesliga crown.
FIFA.com: Diego, what’s it been
like to come back to German
football? Would it be too much
to say it ’s almost like returning
home, given just how well your
first spell in Germany went?
Diego: Yes, to a degree you could
say that. I was very happy during
my first spell here, at Werder
Bremen, and I ’ve always had a lot
of affection for this country. I’m
hoping things work out equally well
with Wolfsburg. I ’m finding it
interesting getting to know the club
and, while the country is the same,
the way things are happening
seems different. It ’s like I’m
discovering it for the first time
again.
What was the biggest factor
behind your return to Germany?
Juventus didn’t have a good
season last term, the team
performed well below expectations.
I ’ve got history here in Germany
and Wolfsburg made me a great
offer. I was happy to be able to
come back.
You’ve said that you always
enjoyed a good relationship
with the Juve supporters, so did
you have any regrets at all
when you left the club?
Juventus went through a series of
problems. We had a good team
that didn ’t live up to expectations.
Yes, the fans were great to me and
they were always asking me to
stay at the club, but I didn ’t leave
Italy with any regrets. I’d have
liked to have won some silverware,
but it was a worthwhile experience.
Given that Wolfsburg have a
new coach in Steve McClaren and
new players such as yourself,
could the fact that the club are
not involved in European
competition this season be
beneficial for you and the team?
Whenever a team misses out on
Europe and changes coach, it
always goes through a process of
transition. And I think that yes, that
will help me settle. That said, I ’d still
prefer to see Wolfsburg taking part
in the biggest competitions, and
we ’re going to battle to make sure
that’s the case next season.
How do you see Wolfsburg’s
chances of winning a second
Bundesliga title in 2010/11?
We’ve got just as good a chance as
any other big club. We’ve had a
difficult start but we know that we’ll
bounce back. It’s just a question of
time before Wolfsburg are battling
it out at the top of the table again.
And with Grafite and Dzeko, we ’ll
be more dangerous going forward.
Two factors that set the German
Bundesliga apart from other
major European leagues are the
fact it is so well-balanced and its
high average attendance
figures. In a nutshell, how
would you define German
football fans?
Local derbies are really important
here. Every city has a team and
the fans stay faithful to their side
and turn up in huge numbers, even
during the bad times. The
impression you get is that matches
are a compulsory part of the
calendar here.
Changing tack a little, one of the
trends at the recent FIFA World
Cup ™ was the success of
technically gifted teams like
Germany and eventual winners
Spain. Do you think this will be
reflected at club level?
I hope so. Nowadays there’s a
tendency for teams to either put
their faith in a skilful approach,
which we saw at the World Cup, or
in a defensive one like Jose
Mourinho used to win the
Champions League and beat Barça
(his then Inter Milan side beat the
Catalans in the semi-finals). It just
remains to be seen whether the
two schools can coexist.
Turning to the Brazilian national
team, since taking the job Mano
Menezes has promised to
reintroduce a more creative
brand of football to A Seleção.
After what you saw at South
Africa 2010, do you think that’s
the right approach?
Brazil are undergoing a process of
transition. The national team should
put faith in technical ability, but
without neglecting tactical strength.
I think that Mano Menezes is going
to do a good job and I ’ll do
everything I can to be part of this
new era.
Menezes has moved quickly to
bring in younger players and,
while you ’re by no means a
veteran, you’re certainly an
experienced performer. Given
this generational transition, do
you worry about being
overlooked? By which I mean
you ’re much younger than the
likes of Gilberto Silva, but much
older than Neymar for
example...
I think I’ve got everything it takes
to get back into the national team.
I ’ll be a good age when the World
Cup in Brazil comes around. Aside
from which I ’ve got plenty of
experience, which really counts. But
more than anything else, it ’s all
going to depend on my form. By
playing well I can ensure I get back
in the squad. I really want to play
in the World Cup on home soil.
liverpool on the brink of sale as two credible bids tabled
ESPNsoccernet can reveal that
Liverpool are on the brink of being
sold after two new credible buyers,
tabled offers for the stricken
Premier League giants, though that
news is tempered by the fact that
current owners George Gillett and
Tom Hicks are refusing to walk
away from the club with nothing.
• "High valuation" derailed Kirdi
bid
• Zamora: Hodgson's Reds will
improve
• Adams: Where do Liverpool
turn?
• Torres to miss derby
The Liverpool board met on
Tuesday to discuss which bid to
accept - one of them from New
England Sports Ventures, owners of
US baseball team the Boston Red
Sox - but while three board
members favoured a sale, the
proposals are still being blocked by
Hicks and Gillett. .
The American duo attempted to
oust managing director Christian
Purslow and commercial director
Ian Ayre before the meeting took
place, an apparent sign of just how
fervently they oppose the offers
on the table.
A statement on Liverpool's official
website read: "The board of
directors have received two
excellent financial offers to buy the
club that would repay all its long-
term debt. A board meeting was
called today to review these bids
and approve a sale.
"Shortly prior to the meeting, the
owners - Tom Hicks and George
Gillett - sought to remove
managing director Christian Purslow
and commercial director Ian Ayre
from the board, seeking to replace
them with Mack Hicks and Lori Kay
McCutcheon. This matter is now
subject to legal review and a
further announcement will be
made in due course.
"Meanwhile Martin Broughton,
Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre
continue to explore every possible
route to achieving a sale of the
Club at the earliest opportunity."
Months of abortive bids from across
the globe - including offers from
India, Canada and the Middle East,
as well as speculation that the
Chinese Government were even
tabling a bid - all fell by the
wayside as the buyers were unable
to offer up proof of funds.
And it had looked as though the
deadline set by the Royal Bank of
Scotland (RBS) on October 15 - to
call in their £237 million loans to
Hicks and Gillett - could have seen
the bank take control of the club or
consider placing the company into
administration, likely invoking a
subsequent nine-point Premier
League deduction.
With Liverpool having slipped into
the relegation zone, lost to
Northampton Town in the Carling
Cup, and with manager Roy
Hodgson under intense pressure
after the poor results on the pitch,
worries about no takeover being in
sight had led to despair setting in at
Anfield.
But potential new owners have
finally emerged from the United
States and Asia, with the bidders
possessing the necessary credibility
to convince chairman Martin
Broughton to sell and save one of
football's biggest institutions right in
the nick of time.
Yet the fight is far from over, as
ESPNsoccernet can also disclose that
the outgoing American owners are
desperately trying to block the bids
because both Hicks and Gillett will
be frozen out of receiving any
money for their shares.
Chairman Martin Broughton,
brought in to find a buyer by RBS,
has insisted that prospective new
owners of Liverpool would need
the funds to bring in new players,
and also to eventually build a new
£400 million stadium.
Hicks and Gillett initially valued the
club at £800 million, when they first
revealed their intention to search
for a buyer earlier this year, but it
quickly became clear that such a
sum was way beyond any true
value.
The American duo claim that they
are owed at least £150 million but
will be shocked that the offers that
Broughton, chief executive Christian
Purslow and commercial director
Ian Ayre are ready to accept do
not include any money to pay off
Hicks and Gillett.
It is a scenario that will delight
Liverpool fans, who will want funds
channelled into the club for players
and the new stadium, and not back
into the pockets of the detested
Hicks and Gillett, who have been
the target of widespread
demonstrations at recent home
matches at Anfield. However, on
the evidence of recent
machinations from the pair,
including an attempted refinancing
of the debt with American
investment company Blackstone
by Hicks, it seems highly unlikely
that will go down without a fight
Liverpool are on the brink of being
sold after two new credible buyers,
tabled offers for the stricken
Premier League giants, though that
news is tempered by the fact that
current owners George Gillett and
Tom Hicks are refusing to walk
away from the club with nothing.
• "High valuation" derailed Kirdi
bid
• Zamora: Hodgson's Reds will
improve
• Adams: Where do Liverpool
turn?
• Torres to miss derby
The Liverpool board met on
Tuesday to discuss which bid to
accept - one of them from New
England Sports Ventures, owners of
US baseball team the Boston Red
Sox - but while three board
members favoured a sale, the
proposals are still being blocked by
Hicks and Gillett. .
The American duo attempted to
oust managing director Christian
Purslow and commercial director
Ian Ayre before the meeting took
place, an apparent sign of just how
fervently they oppose the offers
on the table.
A statement on Liverpool's official
website read: "The board of
directors have received two
excellent financial offers to buy the
club that would repay all its long-
term debt. A board meeting was
called today to review these bids
and approve a sale.
"Shortly prior to the meeting, the
owners - Tom Hicks and George
Gillett - sought to remove
managing director Christian Purslow
and commercial director Ian Ayre
from the board, seeking to replace
them with Mack Hicks and Lori Kay
McCutcheon. This matter is now
subject to legal review and a
further announcement will be
made in due course.
"Meanwhile Martin Broughton,
Christian Purslow and Ian Ayre
continue to explore every possible
route to achieving a sale of the
Club at the earliest opportunity."
Months of abortive bids from across
the globe - including offers from
India, Canada and the Middle East,
as well as speculation that the
Chinese Government were even
tabling a bid - all fell by the
wayside as the buyers were unable
to offer up proof of funds.
And it had looked as though the
deadline set by the Royal Bank of
Scotland (RBS) on October 15 - to
call in their £237 million loans to
Hicks and Gillett - could have seen
the bank take control of the club or
consider placing the company into
administration, likely invoking a
subsequent nine-point Premier
League deduction.
With Liverpool having slipped into
the relegation zone, lost to
Northampton Town in the Carling
Cup, and with manager Roy
Hodgson under intense pressure
after the poor results on the pitch,
worries about no takeover being in
sight had led to despair setting in at
Anfield.
But potential new owners have
finally emerged from the United
States and Asia, with the bidders
possessing the necessary credibility
to convince chairman Martin
Broughton to sell and save one of
football's biggest institutions right in
the nick of time.
Yet the fight is far from over, as
ESPNsoccernet can also disclose that
the outgoing American owners are
desperately trying to block the bids
because both Hicks and Gillett will
be frozen out of receiving any
money for their shares.
Chairman Martin Broughton,
brought in to find a buyer by RBS,
has insisted that prospective new
owners of Liverpool would need
the funds to bring in new players,
and also to eventually build a new
£400 million stadium.
Hicks and Gillett initially valued the
club at £800 million, when they first
revealed their intention to search
for a buyer earlier this year, but it
quickly became clear that such a
sum was way beyond any true
value.
The American duo claim that they
are owed at least £150 million but
will be shocked that the offers that
Broughton, chief executive Christian
Purslow and commercial director
Ian Ayre are ready to accept do
not include any money to pay off
Hicks and Gillett.
It is a scenario that will delight
Liverpool fans, who will want funds
channelled into the club for players
and the new stadium, and not back
into the pockets of the detested
Hicks and Gillett, who have been
the target of widespread
demonstrations at recent home
matches at Anfield. However, on
the evidence of recent
machinations from the pair,
including an attempted refinancing
of the debt with American
investment company Blackstone
by Hicks, it seems highly unlikely
that will go down without a fight
vicente del Bosque: we don't copy anyone
Vicente del Bosque is well versed in
the ways of winning. Earlier in his
coaching career, the 59-year-old
collected two Spanish league titles
and two UEFA Champions Leagues
with Real Madrid, a glittering
prelude to his crowning
achievement with Spain at the
2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa™.
Now engaged in the task of
defending the European title La
Roja seized in 2008, Del Bosque
spoke exclusively to FIFA.com
about his coaching philosophy and
the things that make his side tick.
FIFA.com: Vicente, what’s your
take on the tactics we saw at
South Africa 2010?
Vicente del Bosque: Most teams
chose to play the same way
though there were some sides that
went out with different set-ups. I ’m
not a great believer in formations.
It ’s part of the game now but it’s
not the be all and end all. The most
important thing is that the team
plays as a unit in defence and
attack. Formations give you an
initial picture of things but that ’s all.
You say that, but the way Spain
played is very difficult to copy.
Some of the teams we played
knew exactly what they had to do
to stop us from playing. Chile and
Paraguay counteracted us
extremely well and we found it
really hard to adapt to their
gameplans. You have to
congratulate them on their
defensive play in particular. They
didn ’t cause us too many problems
up front but in terms of
organisation they did very well
against us.
What is the key to Spain’s way
of playing the game?
First and foremost, the fact that we
don ’t copy anyone, and secondly
the type of players we have. With
the midfielders we ’ve got it’s
impossible to play anything other
than a possession game and mix
long balls up with short ones. We
have our strong points and we
can ’t go against them, but no team
is complete without having some
defensive strengths too. In our case
that ’s our ability to close the
opposition down and win the ball
back.
Do you work on that in training
or is it something Spanish
players have in their DNA?
It’s a little bit of both if you ask me.
The clubs do some great work in
that respect and we have to give
them full credit for that. We ’re
setting an example for others to
follow here and it ’s something we
drum into players when we coach
them. Technique is innate but you
have to nurture it too.
How much tactical freedom can
you give to players?
Even in professional football I think
players have to have a certain
amount of freedom. That ’s where
the coach comes in. It’s his job to
combine organisational aspects
with the talent of the players, to
draw the two together. He
shouldn ’t set limits on inspiration,
though. Coaches aren’t just there to
organise but to bring on players
with excellent individual skills and
allow them to express themselves.
Spain have struggled in their
first few games since the FIFA
World Cup finals. Did you expect
that?
When you consider how the game
panned out, the journey we ’d had
and the fact we hadn’t trained, I
thought everything went perfectly
against Mexico. No one got injured
and we acquitted ourselves well. It
was one of the games I ’ve been
most pleased with really. Against
Argentina we started badly and
couldn ’t get back into the game.
We were up against a great side
but still I think we put in a decent
performance. In any case,
sometimes it ’s not so bad to lose. It
can be helpful at times.
You brought in some new faces
for those games. Are you
planning some kind of
generational change?
I can see virtually all of the world
champions making 2012 and most
of them getting to 2014, but we
need to be on our guard if they
don ’t. There were quite a few
differences between the squads we
had in Vienna and in Johannesburg.
We had seven or eight new players
in South Africa, so it ’s something
that’s ongoing.
The Spain players seem to get
on well with each other. What’s
the secret to keeping a dressing
room happy?
It’s not the most important thing
but if the spirit’s good then it’s
easier to win things. Every coach
handles it differently, depending on
their character and the training
they ’ve had. I have to say I’ve
been lucky with the squad I’ve got.
They’re good sportsmen, good
people and we haven’t had any
problems up to now. I don’t think
there’s any single approach that
works. I just feel you have to adapt
to the group. Coaching this Spain
team is not the same as when I
was in charge at Real Madrid, for
example. There ’s no magic formula.
In fact you could also say it
depends on the player, who has to
be able to adapt as well.
People say national coaches
have a more relaxing job than
their counterparts at club level.
Would you agree with that?
You still have a lot of things to do.
To start with you have to represent
the national association, keep an
eye on your upcoming opponents,
talk to the players and look at any
changes you might have to make
at youth level. There’s not enough
time, to be honest. In terms of
pressure, the big difference is that it
tends to be concentrated into very
short periods of time, but I don ’t
think there’s any less of it than at
club football. Whether they’re
supporting their national team or a
club, fans have just as many
expectations.
One last question. Are you a
football addict or do you have
time for other things in your
life?
We all have our lives outside
football. Some coaches are more
obsessed than others, but when
you ’re born into this world and
brought up in it then you’re always
thinking about it to some extent or
other
the ways of winning. Earlier in his
coaching career, the 59-year-old
collected two Spanish league titles
and two UEFA Champions Leagues
with Real Madrid, a glittering
prelude to his crowning
achievement with Spain at the
2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa™.
Now engaged in the task of
defending the European title La
Roja seized in 2008, Del Bosque
spoke exclusively to FIFA.com
about his coaching philosophy and
the things that make his side tick.
FIFA.com: Vicente, what’s your
take on the tactics we saw at
South Africa 2010?
Vicente del Bosque: Most teams
chose to play the same way
though there were some sides that
went out with different set-ups. I ’m
not a great believer in formations.
It ’s part of the game now but it’s
not the be all and end all. The most
important thing is that the team
plays as a unit in defence and
attack. Formations give you an
initial picture of things but that ’s all.
You say that, but the way Spain
played is very difficult to copy.
Some of the teams we played
knew exactly what they had to do
to stop us from playing. Chile and
Paraguay counteracted us
extremely well and we found it
really hard to adapt to their
gameplans. You have to
congratulate them on their
defensive play in particular. They
didn ’t cause us too many problems
up front but in terms of
organisation they did very well
against us.
What is the key to Spain’s way
of playing the game?
First and foremost, the fact that we
don ’t copy anyone, and secondly
the type of players we have. With
the midfielders we ’ve got it’s
impossible to play anything other
than a possession game and mix
long balls up with short ones. We
have our strong points and we
can ’t go against them, but no team
is complete without having some
defensive strengths too. In our case
that ’s our ability to close the
opposition down and win the ball
back.
Do you work on that in training
or is it something Spanish
players have in their DNA?
It’s a little bit of both if you ask me.
The clubs do some great work in
that respect and we have to give
them full credit for that. We ’re
setting an example for others to
follow here and it ’s something we
drum into players when we coach
them. Technique is innate but you
have to nurture it too.
How much tactical freedom can
you give to players?
Even in professional football I think
players have to have a certain
amount of freedom. That ’s where
the coach comes in. It’s his job to
combine organisational aspects
with the talent of the players, to
draw the two together. He
shouldn ’t set limits on inspiration,
though. Coaches aren’t just there to
organise but to bring on players
with excellent individual skills and
allow them to express themselves.
Spain have struggled in their
first few games since the FIFA
World Cup finals. Did you expect
that?
When you consider how the game
panned out, the journey we ’d had
and the fact we hadn’t trained, I
thought everything went perfectly
against Mexico. No one got injured
and we acquitted ourselves well. It
was one of the games I ’ve been
most pleased with really. Against
Argentina we started badly and
couldn ’t get back into the game.
We were up against a great side
but still I think we put in a decent
performance. In any case,
sometimes it ’s not so bad to lose. It
can be helpful at times.
You brought in some new faces
for those games. Are you
planning some kind of
generational change?
I can see virtually all of the world
champions making 2012 and most
of them getting to 2014, but we
need to be on our guard if they
don ’t. There were quite a few
differences between the squads we
had in Vienna and in Johannesburg.
We had seven or eight new players
in South Africa, so it ’s something
that’s ongoing.
The Spain players seem to get
on well with each other. What’s
the secret to keeping a dressing
room happy?
It’s not the most important thing
but if the spirit’s good then it’s
easier to win things. Every coach
handles it differently, depending on
their character and the training
they ’ve had. I have to say I’ve
been lucky with the squad I’ve got.
They’re good sportsmen, good
people and we haven’t had any
problems up to now. I don’t think
there’s any single approach that
works. I just feel you have to adapt
to the group. Coaching this Spain
team is not the same as when I
was in charge at Real Madrid, for
example. There ’s no magic formula.
In fact you could also say it
depends on the player, who has to
be able to adapt as well.
People say national coaches
have a more relaxing job than
their counterparts at club level.
Would you agree with that?
You still have a lot of things to do.
To start with you have to represent
the national association, keep an
eye on your upcoming opponents,
talk to the players and look at any
changes you might have to make
at youth level. There’s not enough
time, to be honest. In terms of
pressure, the big difference is that it
tends to be concentrated into very
short periods of time, but I don ’t
think there’s any less of it than at
club football. Whether they’re
supporting their national team or a
club, fans have just as many
expectations.
One last question. Are you a
football addict or do you have
time for other things in your
life?
We all have our lives outside
football. Some coaches are more
obsessed than others, but when
you ’re born into this world and
brought up in it then you’re always
thinking about it to some extent or
other
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)