In the September 21st 2009 online issue of Roll Call, Harry Johns, President and CEO of the Alzheimer’s Association, penned an article entitled, Fundamental Health Reform: Investing in Alzheimer’s Research.
Mr. Johns article brought to light the inadequate level of current funding for Alzheimer’s. In essence, our governmental research funding at present does not come anywhere near to matching the impact that this disease is having upon our society.
The article cites federal statistics that recognize that AD now kills as many people as diabetes. It also kills more people than breast and prostrate cancers combined.
The Alzheimer’s Study Group determined that AD will cost US taxpayers $20 trillion in Medicare and Medicaid costs over the next 40 years. This is just the start of how it will be if we do nothing different than we are doing now and remain complacent.
The 2010 budget provided by the National Institute on Aging (part of the National Institute of Health) for Alzheimer’s research is approximately $428 million. According to Mr. John’s article this amount represents an investment equal to $1.39 per person in America. By comparison, $8.60 on average has been invested over the past 30 years on each American for cancer research.
As a result, in 2006, survivorship from cancer had reached 10 million people, and, for the first time since being recorded, annual cancer deaths had actually fallen.
A new national poll conducted by USAgainstAlzheimer’s revealed that 88% of our registered voters say it’s important to make Alzheimer’s Disease a priority, even with the budget deficit we are facing. An equally amazing number is that 77% of those Americans polled say they have been touched by AD.
Where would we be today in our fight against AD if a sum comparable to that which has been invested in the fight against cancer had also been directed towards understanding AD causation, prevention, and a cure? The imperative before us now is simple. Research expenditures for both the private sector and our government must increase now along with a top down federally coordinated mission-driven organization.
Our 111th Congress is sitting upon two bills dealing with Alzheimer’s Disease. Combined, they address the issues of dramatically improved funding, prioritized research and informational sharing. A summary of the highlights of each bill is being provided here.
Alzheimer’s Disease Breakthrough Act of 2009. (S.1492 and HR 3286)
Sponsored by Senator Edward Markey (Dem - MA) and 136 cosponsors, this bill was introduced on July 22nd 2009. This bill includes the following action items.
1. A doubling of National Institute of Health funding for AD research.
2. Priority given to AD research.
3. An AD disease prevention initiative.
4. Accelerated Clinical research.
5. Enhanced infrastructure for implementing clinical prevention and medication trials.
6. Facilitate the clinical trial enrollment process.
7. Earlier diagnostic research.
8. Research on AD disease services and care giving.
9. Calls for a National Summit on AD 3 years after enactment.
10. A stepped up AD public education campaign.
National Alzheimer’s Project Act, or NAPA. (S.3036 and HR4689)
This bill was sponsored by Senators Evan Bayh (Dem -IN), and Susan Collins (R - ME) on February 24th 2010. This piece of legislation includes the following action items.
1. Establish an Office position for AD within the Health and Human Services administration.
2. Accelerate treatments to prevent, halt, and reverse Alzheimer’s Disease.
3. Responsible for the creation and maintenance of an integrated national plan to overcome AD.
4. Coordinate the health care and treatment of citizens with AD.
5. Ensure the inclusion of higher risk ethnic and racial populations in the receipt of care, research
and the participation in clinical trials.
6. International coordination.
7. Provide information and coordination of AD research and services across all Federal agencies.
With the timely involvement of Maria Shriver and her Shriver Report: A Woman’s Nation Takes On Alzheimer’s, interest and support for the passage of both of these bills in Congress should be ignited along with a nationwide dialog about AD.
Nearly 150 of our nations leading researchers believe Alzheimer’s can be stopped by 2020 provided that both sufficient funding is extended along with a coordinated top down national mission oriented strategy. The passage of both of these pieces of legislation are a step towards the funding and top down national strategy that our researchers set forth as investment requirements for stopping AD by 2020.
The time to act is now!
Jeff Dodson
October 20th 2010
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Where Do We Stand With Alzheimer's?
Where do we stand with respect to this fatal neurodegenerative disease? How much is it costing our society monetarily? How close are we to putting the brakes on to slow its destructive march? These are a few of the questions I have regarding what’s going on with Alzheimer’s Disease.
The very latest investigative report on what AD is costing our society globally is now out.
The Worldwide Cost
The World Alzheimer’s Report 2010, published by Alzheimer’s Disease International, and just released on September 21st 2010, reveals the gargantuan size and scope of this disease to all of us. Listed in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of this report are some sobering statistics.
1. If dementia care were a country, it would be the world’s 18th largest economy, ranking between Turkey and Indonesia.
2. If it were a company, it would be the world’s largest by annual revenue exceeding Wal Mart (US $414 billion) and Exxon Mobil (US $311 billion).
3. According to the World Alzheimer’s Repot 2009, 35.6 million older people worldwide (around 1/2% of the world’s total population) live with dementia. By the year 2030, this number will increase to 65.7 million.
4. Alzheimer’s Disease International calls on governments to make dementia a health care priority and develop national plans to deal with the disease.
A Discovery Made Created An Opportunity That Was Lost
It has now been 103 years since German psychiatrist and neuropathologist, Alois Alzheimer, was credited for the diagnosis of what he called pre senile dementia in a middle-aged patient. The patient, Auguste Deter, had been housed in the Frankfurt Asylum for lunatics and epileptics when Alzheimer met her in 1901. From 1901 until 1906, Alzheimer was obsessed with the behavior that she exhibited and studied her until her death in 1906. In November of 1906, he gave a speech in which he presented his findings of pre senile dementia after concluding an autopsy study of the patients’ brain.
In spite of Doctor Alzheimer’s landmark discovery and work, the field of medical science and neurology basically squandered the next 50 years and did virtually nothing to further explore and extrapolate upon Alzheimer’s findings. Our collective ignorance as a society regarding the brain and the difference between a healthy one and a diseased one advanced little during this time period. When some people aged into their 50’s and 60’s, senility was presumed to have set in causing, what was referred to as, “becoming feeble-minded”. Senility, as it came to be viewed, was part and parcel of becoming old for some senior citizens.
As a child and adolescent, I can recall some older people and a few relatives being referred to as “addle-brained”, an old “shut-in”, or one that “lives in his own private world”. Older folks, suffering from as-yet-to-be-defined variations of dementia, were basically just closeted away at home, or packed off to a nursing home and written off.
It really wasn’t until the early 1970’s that Alzheimer’s Disease research developed the equivalent of a vehicle transmission and began to gain traction up to perhaps a walking pace.
Another 20 more years would then pass before AD research, clinical trials, and both government and private sector grant money would all start to pick up the pace.
Gaining Momentum
Between 1990 and the present we have begun to see noteworthy involvement of medical science, a substantial increase in clinical trials, governmental and private sector research funding and greater public awareness. The death of a popular former president, Ronald Reagan, movie actors Charlton Heston and Rita Hayworth, and other public figures have helped raise societal interest and involvement to a higher level of participation.
As of October 2010, we have only 5 FDA approved medications available for the treatment of Alzheimer’s. Those medications are: Aricept, Razadyne, Namenda, Excelon, and Cognex. The newest of the group, Namenda was approved in 2003. The oldest drug, Aricept, was approved 17 years ago in 1993. NONE of these current medications will substantially slow down the progression of this fatal disease. There are NO preventative NOR any curative medications available at this time to fight and counter AD.
On the other hand, there are over 100 clinical trials underway at present with 4 promising medications that have made it to a Phase III clinical trial. Those medications that successfully survive a Phase III trial and the followup study stand a 90% or better chance of making it to market. The 4 drugs are: bapineuzumab (AAB-001), gammagard, resveratrol, and , solanezumab (LY2062430).
Early detection and screening measures have shown promising results with PET scans, blood and cerebrospinal fluid biomarker tests, and retina scans. The biomarker tests and retina scans in particular have generated excitement for their ability to disclose the presence of what scientists call a “pre-Alzheimer’s condition” 10 to 15 years before the AD symptoms start to be noticed.
A substantial amount of research has been done with more on the way at investigating dietary risk factors. Researchers have found compelling evidence of how certain metals such as iron, copper and aluminum and fertilizer derivatives such as nitrates and nitrites may be major environmental contributors in the progression of Alzheimer’s.
Ignorance and Misinformation
Yet ignorance, myths and misinformation remain entrenched worldwide about AD. The same World Alzheimer’s Report 2010 found that several common misunderstandings about Alzheimer’s Disease and dementia still exist globally that include these beliefs:
1. It is not a very common problem.
2. AD is a normal part of aging.
3. Nothing can be done, families will provide care - it is not an issue for health care systems or for governments.
These misguided notions are reminiscent of the beliefs that existed between 1905 and the early 1970’s. Where education is absent and ignorance prevails, either no action or the wrong actions will be taken towards combating AD. Clearly, education about AD needs to be ramped up immediately.
Driving Change
The Alzheimer’s Association has been a primary driving force in lobbying congress and the the National Institute of Health for increased research funding. It works with the private sector and the general public in an effort to keep donations coming for additional research project grants.
On October 15th 2010, Maria Shriver is joining with the Alzheimer’s Association to release the Shriver Report, A Woman’s Nation Takes On Alzheimer’s. This report will be the first multidisciplinary approach at the impact of AD, the costs, the burden upon family and cargivers, and current medical research and breakthroughs. The Shriver Report will also feature a wide variety of professional entertainers, political leaders, and news correspondents. The Shriver Report is intended to ignite a national dialogue on the epidemic disease of AD.
An Action Plan From Out Of The Past
A multidisciplinary, mission driven approach to the challenge was the kind of force employed in the phenomenal World War II “Manhattan Project” which led to the creation and detonation of the world’s first atomic bomb. This remarkable achievement was executed on a timeline between 1942 and 1946 with an approximate budget of 2 billion dollars (22 billion dollars at present day rate).
The World Alzheimer’s Report 2010 has brought to light the severity of the costs and growth of this disease. A new case of AD is diagnosed every 70 seconds. The time for a dramatic increase in public and global education, funding for public and private research, and caregiving relief with insurance reform and change is now.
Perhaps now is the right moment to shake off the dust of time and revisit the top down organizational methods of the “Manhattan Project.” Utilize the how-it-was-done template as a present day vehicle for first bringing AD to a screeching halt, then a follow up knockout punch of finding a cure.
Jeff Dodson
October 12th 2010
The very latest investigative report on what AD is costing our society globally is now out.
The Worldwide Cost
The World Alzheimer’s Report 2010, published by Alzheimer’s Disease International, and just released on September 21st 2010, reveals the gargantuan size and scope of this disease to all of us. Listed in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of this report are some sobering statistics.
1. If dementia care were a country, it would be the world’s 18th largest economy, ranking between Turkey and Indonesia.
2. If it were a company, it would be the world’s largest by annual revenue exceeding Wal Mart (US $414 billion) and Exxon Mobil (US $311 billion).
3. According to the World Alzheimer’s Repot 2009, 35.6 million older people worldwide (around 1/2% of the world’s total population) live with dementia. By the year 2030, this number will increase to 65.7 million.
4. Alzheimer’s Disease International calls on governments to make dementia a health care priority and develop national plans to deal with the disease.
A Discovery Made Created An Opportunity That Was Lost
It has now been 103 years since German psychiatrist and neuropathologist, Alois Alzheimer, was credited for the diagnosis of what he called pre senile dementia in a middle-aged patient. The patient, Auguste Deter, had been housed in the Frankfurt Asylum for lunatics and epileptics when Alzheimer met her in 1901. From 1901 until 1906, Alzheimer was obsessed with the behavior that she exhibited and studied her until her death in 1906. In November of 1906, he gave a speech in which he presented his findings of pre senile dementia after concluding an autopsy study of the patients’ brain.
In spite of Doctor Alzheimer’s landmark discovery and work, the field of medical science and neurology basically squandered the next 50 years and did virtually nothing to further explore and extrapolate upon Alzheimer’s findings. Our collective ignorance as a society regarding the brain and the difference between a healthy one and a diseased one advanced little during this time period. When some people aged into their 50’s and 60’s, senility was presumed to have set in causing, what was referred to as, “becoming feeble-minded”. Senility, as it came to be viewed, was part and parcel of becoming old for some senior citizens.
As a child and adolescent, I can recall some older people and a few relatives being referred to as “addle-brained”, an old “shut-in”, or one that “lives in his own private world”. Older folks, suffering from as-yet-to-be-defined variations of dementia, were basically just closeted away at home, or packed off to a nursing home and written off.
It really wasn’t until the early 1970’s that Alzheimer’s Disease research developed the equivalent of a vehicle transmission and began to gain traction up to perhaps a walking pace.
Another 20 more years would then pass before AD research, clinical trials, and both government and private sector grant money would all start to pick up the pace.
Gaining Momentum
Between 1990 and the present we have begun to see noteworthy involvement of medical science, a substantial increase in clinical trials, governmental and private sector research funding and greater public awareness. The death of a popular former president, Ronald Reagan, movie actors Charlton Heston and Rita Hayworth, and other public figures have helped raise societal interest and involvement to a higher level of participation.
As of October 2010, we have only 5 FDA approved medications available for the treatment of Alzheimer’s. Those medications are: Aricept, Razadyne, Namenda, Excelon, and Cognex. The newest of the group, Namenda was approved in 2003. The oldest drug, Aricept, was approved 17 years ago in 1993. NONE of these current medications will substantially slow down the progression of this fatal disease. There are NO preventative NOR any curative medications available at this time to fight and counter AD.
On the other hand, there are over 100 clinical trials underway at present with 4 promising medications that have made it to a Phase III clinical trial. Those medications that successfully survive a Phase III trial and the followup study stand a 90% or better chance of making it to market. The 4 drugs are: bapineuzumab (AAB-001), gammagard, resveratrol, and , solanezumab (LY2062430).
Early detection and screening measures have shown promising results with PET scans, blood and cerebrospinal fluid biomarker tests, and retina scans. The biomarker tests and retina scans in particular have generated excitement for their ability to disclose the presence of what scientists call a “pre-Alzheimer’s condition” 10 to 15 years before the AD symptoms start to be noticed.
A substantial amount of research has been done with more on the way at investigating dietary risk factors. Researchers have found compelling evidence of how certain metals such as iron, copper and aluminum and fertilizer derivatives such as nitrates and nitrites may be major environmental contributors in the progression of Alzheimer’s.
Ignorance and Misinformation
Yet ignorance, myths and misinformation remain entrenched worldwide about AD. The same World Alzheimer’s Report 2010 found that several common misunderstandings about Alzheimer’s Disease and dementia still exist globally that include these beliefs:
1. It is not a very common problem.
2. AD is a normal part of aging.
3. Nothing can be done, families will provide care - it is not an issue for health care systems or for governments.
These misguided notions are reminiscent of the beliefs that existed between 1905 and the early 1970’s. Where education is absent and ignorance prevails, either no action or the wrong actions will be taken towards combating AD. Clearly, education about AD needs to be ramped up immediately.
Driving Change
The Alzheimer’s Association has been a primary driving force in lobbying congress and the the National Institute of Health for increased research funding. It works with the private sector and the general public in an effort to keep donations coming for additional research project grants.
On October 15th 2010, Maria Shriver is joining with the Alzheimer’s Association to release the Shriver Report, A Woman’s Nation Takes On Alzheimer’s. This report will be the first multidisciplinary approach at the impact of AD, the costs, the burden upon family and cargivers, and current medical research and breakthroughs. The Shriver Report will also feature a wide variety of professional entertainers, political leaders, and news correspondents. The Shriver Report is intended to ignite a national dialogue on the epidemic disease of AD.
An Action Plan From Out Of The Past
A multidisciplinary, mission driven approach to the challenge was the kind of force employed in the phenomenal World War II “Manhattan Project” which led to the creation and detonation of the world’s first atomic bomb. This remarkable achievement was executed on a timeline between 1942 and 1946 with an approximate budget of 2 billion dollars (22 billion dollars at present day rate).
The World Alzheimer’s Report 2010 has brought to light the severity of the costs and growth of this disease. A new case of AD is diagnosed every 70 seconds. The time for a dramatic increase in public and global education, funding for public and private research, and caregiving relief with insurance reform and change is now.
Perhaps now is the right moment to shake off the dust of time and revisit the top down organizational methods of the “Manhattan Project.” Utilize the how-it-was-done template as a present day vehicle for first bringing AD to a screeching halt, then a follow up knockout punch of finding a cure.
Jeff Dodson
October 12th 2010
Thursday, October 7, 2010
To Forgive: The Right Choice To Make
To forgive. This is what every religion in our society teaches its followers. Two current dictionaries provide the following definitions.
The Oxford Online English Dictionary defines forgive as follows.
“To stop feeling angry or resentful towards someone for an offense, flaw or mistake, or to cancel a debt.”
The Wikipedia Online Dictionary offers the following definition. “The process of concluding resentment, indignation or anger as a result of a perceived offense, difference or mistake and/or ceasing to demand punishment or restitution.”
Here is what a few notable individuals in our society have had to say about forgiveness or the steps they took to extend it.
In his book , The Seat of the Soul, author Gary Zukav had this to say about forgiveness:
“Forgiveness means that you do not carry the baggage of an experience. Forgiveness means that you do not hold others responsible for your experiences. When you forgive you release critical judgment of yourself as well as of others. You lighten up.”
Mahatma Ghandi offered this opinion about forgiveness:
“Forgiveness is a quality of the soul, and therefore, a positive quality”.
June Hunt, who hosts the long-running radio broadcast, Hope In The Night, wrote a book about the positive and liberating effects of forgiveness entitled, “How To Forgive...When You Don’t Feel Like It.”
The globally known song, Amazing Grace, was adapted from a hymn authored by English poet and clergyman, John Newton in 1779. The hymn, penned by Newton, contains a message that forgiveness and redemption are possible for all those who have wronged or harmed others. In his early adult years, Newton participated in the maritime slave trade. In the midst of a harrowing storm upon the high seas, with his ship in danger of capsizing and sinking, Newton prayed for forgiveness and redemption for all of his sins and transgressions. Thereafter, Newton felt as if a great burden had been lifted from his shoulders. God, in Newton’s eyes, had forgiven him for his sins and mistreatment of others.
To forgive but not forget?
Many folks take a stab at forgiving in this fashion. Call it forgiving with a booby trap. They convey that they are no longer sore or angry over the offense, and they accept your apology, but, they want you to know that you are still not off the hook because they will never, ever forget the incident.
One example here might sound like this.
“We’ll, I sat down with Uncle Harry and told him to his face that I have forgiven him for breaking my heirloom porcelain serving tray; the one that belonged to my great grandmother. Told him that I accepted his apology from 3 years back, but that forgetting it was out of the question.”
Another example might be this one.
“My husband went out shopping at the mall in my new BMW. He wrecked it on the way home after running a stop sign. It took me 10 years of saving up for the down payment on that car. That was my dream car. I have told him that I forgave him, but I damn well won’t forget it!”
Finally, one more example might sound like this one.
“Joey stole my new bicycle when we were both just 10 years old. 3 days later, his mother made him bring the bike back to me and apologize to me and my parents. Dad made me accept his apology and forgive him, but I never really did. For the next 10 years, anytime I saw Joey, I made it a point of telling whomever was nearby, there goes Joey, the bike stealer.”
In the examples here, true forgiveness is not being offered. What is being extended is another attempt to manipulate the feelings of the alleged wrongdoer. The one who is forgiving , by not forgetting the situation, is telling the other party, they are still interested in obtaining their pound of flesh; that an indeterminate grudge is still being held. The bonfire of pain, anger and resentment continues to be stoked and maintained.
Why should I choose to forgive those who have wronged me?, you say.
I suggest three reasons for committing to this particular choice.
First, it has a restorative effect upon my sense of well being. I have made the willful decision to stop letting a circumstance of the past dictate how I conduct myself in the present moment as well as the future. I liken it to removing a blacksmith’s anvil out of my hiker’s backpack. Imagine how much easier my climbing pace and posture will be!
Second, it ends the feeling of pain; very much like the removal of a pesky and painful deep wood sliver. The site of the wound always feels so much better a couple of days after draining away the toxin from infection along with the offending foreign object. A transition from a disease state to a state of being at ease.
Third, it empowers and strengthens me. The element of control in my life is restored to me. I made the choice to stop defining how I was living based upon an accident, a crime, or misdeed visited upon me by another. Control over me by some past event, person or circumstance would now be extinguished.
What Forgiveness is not.
Forgiving does not mean that you eagerly choose to renew or strike up a relationship with the person that originally trounced upon your feelings or otherwise victimized you. To forgive does not include sitting down with former offender “to break bread over a meal with them.” You do not have to involve yourself any further, nor in any manner.
To forgive means to let go, put it to rest, and put it behind you. Retake responsibility of your own reactions to circumstance.
Jeff Dodson
October 5th 2010
The Oxford Online English Dictionary defines forgive as follows.
“To stop feeling angry or resentful towards someone for an offense, flaw or mistake, or to cancel a debt.”
The Wikipedia Online Dictionary offers the following definition. “The process of concluding resentment, indignation or anger as a result of a perceived offense, difference or mistake and/or ceasing to demand punishment or restitution.”
Here is what a few notable individuals in our society have had to say about forgiveness or the steps they took to extend it.
In his book , The Seat of the Soul, author Gary Zukav had this to say about forgiveness:
“Forgiveness means that you do not carry the baggage of an experience. Forgiveness means that you do not hold others responsible for your experiences. When you forgive you release critical judgment of yourself as well as of others. You lighten up.”
Mahatma Ghandi offered this opinion about forgiveness:
“Forgiveness is a quality of the soul, and therefore, a positive quality”.
June Hunt, who hosts the long-running radio broadcast, Hope In The Night, wrote a book about the positive and liberating effects of forgiveness entitled, “How To Forgive...When You Don’t Feel Like It.”
The globally known song, Amazing Grace, was adapted from a hymn authored by English poet and clergyman, John Newton in 1779. The hymn, penned by Newton, contains a message that forgiveness and redemption are possible for all those who have wronged or harmed others. In his early adult years, Newton participated in the maritime slave trade. In the midst of a harrowing storm upon the high seas, with his ship in danger of capsizing and sinking, Newton prayed for forgiveness and redemption for all of his sins and transgressions. Thereafter, Newton felt as if a great burden had been lifted from his shoulders. God, in Newton’s eyes, had forgiven him for his sins and mistreatment of others.
To forgive but not forget?
Many folks take a stab at forgiving in this fashion. Call it forgiving with a booby trap. They convey that they are no longer sore or angry over the offense, and they accept your apology, but, they want you to know that you are still not off the hook because they will never, ever forget the incident.
One example here might sound like this.
“We’ll, I sat down with Uncle Harry and told him to his face that I have forgiven him for breaking my heirloom porcelain serving tray; the one that belonged to my great grandmother. Told him that I accepted his apology from 3 years back, but that forgetting it was out of the question.”
Another example might be this one.
“My husband went out shopping at the mall in my new BMW. He wrecked it on the way home after running a stop sign. It took me 10 years of saving up for the down payment on that car. That was my dream car. I have told him that I forgave him, but I damn well won’t forget it!”
Finally, one more example might sound like this one.
“Joey stole my new bicycle when we were both just 10 years old. 3 days later, his mother made him bring the bike back to me and apologize to me and my parents. Dad made me accept his apology and forgive him, but I never really did. For the next 10 years, anytime I saw Joey, I made it a point of telling whomever was nearby, there goes Joey, the bike stealer.”
In the examples here, true forgiveness is not being offered. What is being extended is another attempt to manipulate the feelings of the alleged wrongdoer. The one who is forgiving , by not forgetting the situation, is telling the other party, they are still interested in obtaining their pound of flesh; that an indeterminate grudge is still being held. The bonfire of pain, anger and resentment continues to be stoked and maintained.
Why should I choose to forgive those who have wronged me?, you say.
I suggest three reasons for committing to this particular choice.
First, it has a restorative effect upon my sense of well being. I have made the willful decision to stop letting a circumstance of the past dictate how I conduct myself in the present moment as well as the future. I liken it to removing a blacksmith’s anvil out of my hiker’s backpack. Imagine how much easier my climbing pace and posture will be!
Second, it ends the feeling of pain; very much like the removal of a pesky and painful deep wood sliver. The site of the wound always feels so much better a couple of days after draining away the toxin from infection along with the offending foreign object. A transition from a disease state to a state of being at ease.
Third, it empowers and strengthens me. The element of control in my life is restored to me. I made the choice to stop defining how I was living based upon an accident, a crime, or misdeed visited upon me by another. Control over me by some past event, person or circumstance would now be extinguished.
What Forgiveness is not.
Forgiving does not mean that you eagerly choose to renew or strike up a relationship with the person that originally trounced upon your feelings or otherwise victimized you. To forgive does not include sitting down with former offender “to break bread over a meal with them.” You do not have to involve yourself any further, nor in any manner.
To forgive means to let go, put it to rest, and put it behind you. Retake responsibility of your own reactions to circumstance.
Jeff Dodson
October 5th 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)