PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE SUES DEBATE COMMITTEE TODAY

Last week, as I reported here - but most media ignored - Green Party presidential candidate Dr. Jill Stein, who'll appear on 85 percent of ballots on Election Day, was arrested while attempting to get into the presidential debates. 

Police detained her for hours for simply practicing her First Amendement rights.

Well, she apparently wasn't real happy about being arrested. Today, just hours ago, she filed a lawsuit against the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), claiming that the CPD, Democratic National Committee, Republican National Committee, Federal Election Commission and Lynn University had deprived her of her constitutional rights to due process, equal protection, and free speech.

The lawsuit sought both an emergency court order enjoining tonight's CPD presidential debate from taking place, as well monetary damages. 

"Our constitution is supposed to protect us against manipulations of democracy of the kind scheduled tonight, and I hope the court will act now to stop this farce, but either way, we will keep up the fight, and one of these days American elections and our debates will be reclaimed by the American people," said Stein in the lawsuit.

Meanwhile, Free & Equal, a non-partisan civic organization, is hosting an alternative debate hosted by Larry King tomorrow featuring Stein, Gov. Gary Johnson (libertarian) and others. No major cable networks are carrying it. Americans can only see it on Al Jazeera and Russia Today. 

"It shouldn't be the case that the only TV networks bringing this debate to theAmerican people are based in countries whose political systems are even less democratic than our own," says Ben Manski, Stein's campaign manager. "The failure of CNN, MSNBC, and others to broadcast the debate only adds to the global perception that the United States doesn't live up to the democratic standards it professes."

Several petitions calling for more open debates have also been posted on Change.org, which I wrote about this recently for Newsweek/The Daily Beast. And more than 14,000 people have signed a statement calling on the CPD to change its criteria. 

Obviously it's too late for tonight's debate. But I frankly don't expect anything will change in the long-term, either. Debates should be more open. That's true democracy. More voices should be heard. It seems a no-brainer. 

CAN NEW DRUG COMBINATION PREVENT LYMPHOMA RELAPSE?

More potentially good news for lymphoma patients worldwide. An evidently powerful weapon in the growing arsenal of lymphoma-fighting drugs appears to be on its way toward human clinical trials in Europe.

Scientists in the UK are very optimistic that lymphoma patients could benefit from a chemical called R848, which triggers the body's immune system to fight cancer. Early lab results in mice have been promising, to say the least.

As reported in Science Daily, Medical News Today and other publications, R848, used in combination with radiation therapy, is four times more likely to result in long-term survival for lymphoma patients than radiation therapy alone, according to researchers at the University of Manchester.

Just what is R848? It's a chemical that sends signals to certain molecules known as receptors found on the surface of immune cells, triggering them into action. According to the new study published online in Blood, the Journal of the American Society of Hematology (ASH), researchers found that injections of R848 can generate a rapid expansion of specific anti-lymphoma immune cells known as "killer T cells."

A highly respected lymphoma patient advocate explains to me that R848 is a toll-like receptor agonist - just like CpG, which Pfizer shelved because there wasn't enough money in it. TRL agonists are immune stimulators. So the strategy is to use the radiation to kill most of the lymphoma to deliver a clinical complete response, the advocate says.

But that is not the same as a molecular complete response and some lymphoma cells remain. So this approach (which others are also using) is to follow induction therapy with an immunostimulator - such as R848, CpG or lenalidomide (Revlimid) - to prompt the immune system to continue policing and subduing malignant cells. The goal is to prolong PFS. Such is the hope in the ECOG trial using Revlimid as a maintenance therapy. 

In indolent lymphomas, the immune system plays a big role, hence waxing and waning, the advocate says. The immunomodulators, including the toll-like receptors, turbo charge immune therapies and can even act on their own - but are so much stronger when used with something like Rituxan, another antibody or a vaccine.  

One patient I know received vaccine + CpG and she and others like her responded well. There's a new trial for the BiovadID vaccine teaming it with lenalidomide, another immunostimulator. Studies of Rituxan paired with Revlimid (lenalidomide) have been showing excellent results. 

CpG is a TLR9 agonist and R848 is a TLR7 & 8 agonist. The patient advocate tells me that there is some preliminary evidence out of Ron Levy's lab that suggests TRL 7 & 8 may not as effective as TRL 9 (which CpG targets). However there is not a lot of data on this as of yet.

Dr. Simon Dovedi of the University of Manchester's Institute of Cancer Sciences and the Manchester Cancer Research Centre, said of R848 in a statement: 

"Excitingly, we think that this new approach to treating cancer could be capable of giving patients a better response to conventional therapies through the generation of a lymphoma-specific immune response against tumor cells. This could be the key to ensuring long-term survival in more patients and reducing the number of relapses after initial therapy."

The Manchester researchers tested injections of R848 in combination with radiation therapy in lab mice with lymphoma. It was found to have few side effects, with 100 percent of mice achieving long-term survival compared to just 28 percent of those mice that were treated with radiation therapy alone. 

In those mice that achieved long-term survival, any reintroduction of cancer was completely rejected by the immune system in 75 percent of cases. That's pretty impressive.

Early phase clinical trials of R848 for human patients with lymphoma are expected to happen soon. How long it takes for this med to make its way to North America, though, is still anyone's guess.

Professor Chris Bunce, Research Director of Leukaemia & Lymphoma Research in the UK, said in a statement: 

"While it is still early and this treatment has not yet been tested in humans, these results are hugely promising. One of the major obstacles to long-term successful treatment for many types of lymphoma has been relapse after initial successful treatment. Treatment with R848 can prime T cells to recognize various tumour-associated antigens, protecting patients from the return of the cancer."

BREAKING NEWS: GREEN PARTY CANDIDATES ARRESTED AT DEBATE

Not a banner day for our beloved democracy when a legitimate candidate for President of the United States is arrested simply for practicing her right to free speech. 

But so it goes...

Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala, the Green Party presidential and vice-presidential nominees, were just forcibly prevented from entering the grounds of tonight's presidential debate and arrested by local police. 

You can watch the video here. 

Stein and Honkala, who'll appear on 85 percent of ballots nationwide in the upcoming election, were detained by the cops when they tried to enter the grounds of Hofstra University where the debate is scheduled to take place in a couple of hours. 

They're currently still in police custody.

Stein and Honkala walked toward the campus with supporters earlier today, then held an impromptu press conference in which Stein said, "We are here to bring the courage of those excluded from our politics to this mock debate, this mockery of democracy." 

When they turned and began walking onto the debate grounds, police physically stopped them and pushed them back. The two women sat down and the police arrested them, saying that Stein and Honkala would be charged with "obstructing traffic," a charge Jill Stein for President staffer and lawyer Alex Howard calls "bogus." 

There was no through-traffic visible at any time during the incident, he says. 

In an interview this afternoon, Ben Manski, the Green Party ticket's campaign manager, told me he thinks the arrest is "outrageous. The reality is that Jill and Cheri pose a threat to no one except for the political establishment. The Commission on Presidential Debates (organizers of tonight's debate) is an illegitimate institution established to prevent the American people from having access to all a qualified candidates. It is intended to limit our politics to pre-selected options."

Manski adds that "the positive thing about this election is that the movement for more open and fair debates is gaining momentum, we're seeing a growing section of the population not only becoming more aware of this but speaking out against controlled debates, which do not serve the American people."

Several petitions calling for more open debates have also been posted on Change.org, which I wrote about recently for Newsweek/The Daily Beast.

And more than 14,000 people have signed a statement calling on the Commission on Presidential Debates to change its criteria. 

The statement reads, "The debates must include every candidate who is on enough ballots to win the White House and who has demonstrated a minimal level of support -- meaning either 1% of the vote in a credible national poll, or qualification for federal matching funds, or both. In 2012, the Green and Libertarian party candidates both meet all of these criteria and are both contenders for the presidency. These debates belong to the people, not the politicians or Wall Street."

There've been protests all over the country about making these debates more inclusive. They've taken place in Boston, home of Mitt Romney's headquarters, and in Denver and Kentucky, the sites of the two recent presidential and vice presidential debates.

Assuming she gets out of jail, Stein will be participating in several upcoming debates, including the following:

Thursday, October 18 -- The Independent Voter Network debate between Stein and Gary Johnson of the Libertarian party can be viewed live on October 18, 2012 beginning at 7:00 PM EST on http://ivn.us/, or on IVN.us' Google+ and YouTube page. 

Monday, October 22 -- Time TBA: Democracy Now continues its "Expanding the Debate" series with a live broadcast during the third presidential debate with real-time responses from Stein and Justice Party nominee Rocky Anderson from the Justice Party. 

Thursday, October 23 & Tuesday October 30 -- Free and Equal Election's Alternative Debate will be available live online, streaming from http://freeandequal.org/live on Oct. 23 and Oct 30 at 9:00 PM EST. This debate will include Stein, Johnson, Anderson, and Virgil Goode from the Constitution Party.

PRESCRIPTION PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS ARE KILLLING OUR TROOPS AND VETERANS

In a woefully misleading story posted on the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) website, the department touts its allegedly successful monitoring of prescription medications given to veterans. 

The self-congratulatory piece describes VA pharmacists as people who “know medications, how they work, and their effects on veteran patients," and suggests that VA has “adapted to the increased role medications play" and that its pharmacists work "closely with physicians, nurses, and other health care providers to prescribe, monitor, and optimize veteran patients’ drug therapy while reducing medication risks."

Really? Reducing risks? In light of the overwhelming evidence that the increase in prescription drug use among our troops and young veterans has been nothing short of catastrophic, this "feel-good" story about the way in which VA handles prescription medicine is absurd. 

The "increased role medications play" in the lives of our troops and veterans is an understatement. Psychiatric drugs, specifically (antidepressants, anti-anxiety medications, etc), are now being given out like candy by both military and VA doctors. And largely as a result, many reports have shown, suicides have skyrocketed.

VA seems to want to ignore this problem, which has been going on now for nearly a decade. I've been writing about the potential dangers of prescribing psyche meds to our troops and veterans since the early days of the war in Iraq.

In 2006, longtime military writer Rick Rogers wrote a piece for the San Diego Union-Tribune (now U-T San Diego) that raised the issue of psychiatric drugs in the military. In the story, Rogers reported that troops with serious mental health issues were being sent back into combat.

The Hartford Courant subsequently reported that the U.S. military was sending troops with serious psychological problems into Iraq and keeping soldiers in combat "even after superiors have been alerted to suicide warnings and other signs of mental illness. Once at war, some unstable troops are kept on the front lines while on potent antidepressants and anti-anxiety drugs, with little or no counseling or medical monitoring. And some troops who developed post-traumatic stress disorder after serving in Iraq are being sent back to the war zone, increasing the risk to their mental health."

The Courant story noted that service members who committed suicide in 2004 and 2005 were kept on duty "despite clear signs of mental distress, sometimes after being prescribed antidepressants with little or no mental health counseling or monitoring." 

In 2009, Time reported that "for the first time in history, a sizable and growing number of U.S. combat troops are taking daily doses of antidepressants to calm nerves strained by repeated and lengthy tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. The medicines are intended not only to help troops keep their cool but also to enable the already strapped Army to preserve its most precious resource: soldiers on the front lines."
 
The Army Times reported in 2010 that the use of psychiatric medications among 18 to 34-year-olds (both troops and their spouses) soared by 42 percent between 2005 and 2009. 

And The New York Times reported in 2011 that "after a decade of treating thousands of wounded troops, the military’s medical system is awash in prescription drugs - and the results have sometimes been deadly."

In a PBS Frontline documentary The Wounded Platoon, Army psychiatrist Col. George Brandt said, "What I use medications for is to treat very specific side effects. I don’t want somebody in a helpless mode in a combat environment. I want to make sure I don’t have someone with suicidal thoughts where everyone is armed."

Unbelievable. Did the clueless Col. Brandt realize he was throwing throwing gasoline on a fire? Does Brandt know or care that prescribing these dangerous and sometimes addicting drugs has caused a tragic increase in suicide among our troops and veterans?

The Austin American Statesman just ran a remarkable investigative series, "Uncounted Casualties,"which shows a strong correlation between the mixing of these drugs prescribed by VA and early death among veterans in Texas. 

The Statesman obtained autopsy results, toxicology reports, inquests and accident reports from more than 50 agencies throughout the state to analyze the causes of death for 266 Texas veterans who served in operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom and were receiving VA care when they died. 

The series reveals that a disturbingly high percentage of these men and women died from prescription drug overdoses, toxic drug combinations, suicide and single-vehicle crashes. 

Granted, in some cases these drugs provide relief. But they're clearly causing more harm than good.

In the wake of so many devastating reports about the real toll prescription psychiatric drugs are taking on veterans, VA's cheery report that its pharmacists really know how drugs work and that veterans are getting "the most benefit from their medications" is just unconscionable.

SEASONED NFL REFS CAN STINK, TOO

After the blown call made a couple weeks ago by the replacement officials in the now-infamous game between the Green Bay Packers and the Seattle Seahawks, football fans couldn't wait for the regular officials to return to the field.

Soon after that bad call was heard 'round the world, the National Football League gave in to overwhelming public pressure and, on Sept. 27, the league and the NFL Referees Association (NFLRA) agreed on a new eight-year collective bargaining agreement.

And just like that the replacement refs were, well, replaced. But be careful what you wish for my fellow football fans. Having the regulars back has not meant a reduction in bad calls. If anything, it's inexplicably gotten worse.

San Diego Charger fans like me know this. In the game Sunday night against the New Orleans Saints, the officiating was horrible. I admit my bias, but even some Saints fans admit that officials gave the game to New Orleans.

From start to finish, Chargers future Hall-of-Fame tight end Antonio Gates was held. The refs ignored it. Then in the crucial final drive, the striped crusaders called a preposterous offensive pass interference penalty against Gates. It was incidental contact with the defender - the same one who'd been holding Gates the entire night.

Then the refs called holding on Chargers center Nick Hardwick. The replays showed clearly that Nick didn't hold. These calls arguably cost the Chargers the game. Arrgghh!

But that's not all. In the Packers game against the Saints last week, the "real" refs also blew several calls, including a Saints’ fumble that was wrongly ruled down by contact, and a Saints’ touchdown catch that should’ve been negated for offensive pass interference. Maybe they were paying the Saints back in the Charger game.

Thing is, Charger fans already know all too well that NFL officials, even the alleged best of the bunch, can tear your football-loving heart out with stupid calls. Can you say Ed Hochuli? Back in 2008, Hochuli (pictured above), a former president of the NFLRA, blew a call that helped the Denver Broncos beat the Chargers. I was there. And it's still a painful memory.

The call came in the game's final minute with the Broncos at the Chargers' one-yard-line. Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler, arguably the most unpleasant athlete in professional sports (he's now a Chicago Bear), dropped back to pass, and the football slipped out of his hands and was retrieved by Chargers linebacker Tim Dobbins.

Hochuli called it an incomplete pass. What!? Replay ruled it a fumble, but it was spotted at the 10-yard-line, where the ball hit the ground. And the ball was given to Denver because the rules didn't permit possession to be awarded to San Diego because the whistle had blown. Denver went on to win 39-38. Unbelievable. I'd never been so angry at a sporting event in my life. Like 65,000 other screaming Charger fans, I wanted to ring Hochuli's neck.

To his credit, Hochuli did the right thing and admitted his mistake. He was contrite. He was probably scared for his life.

"I'm getting hundreds of e-mails - hate mail - but I'm responding to it all," Hochuli wrote to several Chargers fans, according to The San Diego Union-Tribune (now called the U-T San Diego). "People deserve a response. You can rest assured that nothing anyone can say can make me feel worse than I already feel about my mistake on the fumble play. You have no idea … Affecting the outcome of a game is a devastating feeling. Officials strive for perfection - I failed miserably. Although it does no good to say it, I am very, very sorry."

I wish the refs who called the Chargers-Saints game Sunday would man up and issue a similar apology. I know that officials are human, and that it's a tough job, but one would think, with this lucrative new contract, these guys would have stepped up their game, and that they would admit their mistakes.

Never thought I'd miss the replacement officials, but right now, the seasoned NFL refs stink!

MONEY FOR NOTHING: MARK KNOPFLER FANS ARE IN 'DIRE STRAITS'

Despite these tough economic times, music fans are still evidently willing to fork over the big bucks to see their favorite artists perform. A confession: I attended four concerts this summer whose ticket prices exceeded $100. 

But when you dig this deeply into your wallet, you expect to get what you paid for. You expect to hear at least some of the songs for which the performer you are seeing is best known.  

Right? 

Apparently Mark Knopfler didn’t get that memo. 

Knopfler (above), the brilliant former lead singer, lead guitarist and songwriter for Dire Straits, is touring with Bob Dylan this fall. And I see from a set list posted online that in a concert this past weekend in Regina, Saskatchewan, Knopfler didn't play a single Dire Straits song.

Really, Mark? Not one?

I think it's safe to say that the majority of people who pay to see Knopfler in concert hope and expect to hear at least some of the songs that made him famous. Dire Straits, one of my very favorite bands, was deservedly one of the most popular bands in the world in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s. 

One of the finest guitarists and songwriters we have, Knopfler is an enduring and prolific artist who continues to write amazing songs. He’s released eight solo records. But can you name one song from Knopfler's solo career without resorting to Google? 

Chances are you can't. But I'll bet you can probably name plenty of Dire Straits songs. Just a few that come immediately to my mind are Sultans of Swing, Romeo and Juliet, Tunnel of Love, Making Movies, Private Investigation, Walk of Life, Lady Writer, Industrial Disease, Solid Rock, So Far Away, Down to the Waterline, Twisting by the Pool, and of course Money for Nothing.

I'm sure you’re getting my drift. As a singer-songwriter, I know it's an eternal quandary for a music artist, finding that delicate balance in concert between your newer material that keeps you feeling vital as an artist, and the older, more familiar songs most of your fans pay to hear but of which you may have grown somewhat weary.

I personally like hearing a few new and/or more obscure tunes by artists when I see them live. But like most fans, I also come to hear the tunes I know and love. Most artists honor that trust. Knopfler doesn't, and it kind of ticks me off. 

And it seems to go beyond his desire to focus on the new. He seems hell-bent on erasing his past. If you go to http://www.direstraits.com, for example, guess where it takes you? To markknopfler.com, where, unbelievably, on Knopfler's bio page, Dire Straits isn't even mentioned by name. That's just bizarre.

Even if Knopfler only devoted, say, half his show to his solo stuff and half to Dire Straits songs, I'd be fine with it. Even if he only sang four or five Dire Straits songs, I could still live with it. But that he plays only one Dire Straits song some nights and no Dire Straits songs on other nights is ridiculous. 

It's is an insult to his longtime fans, especially since he's never had major commercial success with any of his solo work. While critics love almost everything he does - and so do I, for the record - none of the songs from his solo career have been big hits. 

Here's Knopfler's set list from that concert over the weekend:

1. What It Is

2. Cleaning My Gun

3. Sailing to Philadelphia

4. Privateering

5. Redbud Tree

6. I Used to Could

7. Song for Sonny Liston

8. Done with Bonaparte

9. I'm The Fool

10. Haul Away

11. Miss You Blues

12. Marbletown

Terrific songs, all. But would you be happy with this set, no matter how well they were performed? I know I wouldn't.

A contemporary of Knopfler’s who does a better job of combining his familiar classics with his newer work is Colin Hay, lead singer and songwriter of another seminal 80s band, Men at Work. Hay is still making great music on his own, and he plays a lot of it in concert. But he doesn’t turn his back on his past.

Hay understands what made him famous. He knows what many of his fans want to hear. He still plays It’s a Mistake, Who Can it Be Now, Be Good Johnny, Overkill and other Men at Work classics. He still embraces his past while looking forward. In fact, this summer Hay released a newly recorded version of the the Men at Work classic Down Under in celebration of the song’s 30th year anniversary.

Dire Straits formed in England in 1977. It would be great if, on this 35-year anniversary of the formation of his band, Knopfler would follow Hay's lead and honor his own past, and his fans, by playing a few Dire Straits songs. 

CANCERCARE AND CARIBOU COFFEE: A PERFECT BLEND FOR CANCER PATIENTS

As a 16-year cancer survivor and longtime patient advocate, I was excited to learn that Caribou Coffee, one of the leading branded coffee companies in the country, has formed a new partnership with CancerCare, a non-profit organization that for nearly 70 years has provided a variety of free support services for cancer patients and their loved ones.

Each year, Caribou pays tribute its original roastmaster, Amy Erickson, who lost her battle with breast cancer in 1995 at age 33, by donating a portion of its Amy's Blend special collection of coffee, tea and merchandise to a cancer organization.

This year the worthy beneficiary is CancerCare.

Until Wednesday, Nov. 7, Caribou will donate 10 percent of all proceeds from sales of the Amy's Blend collection (left) to CancerCare.

The esteemed cancer organization, which helps more than 100,000 individuals and families each year, offers counseling and support groups, educational publications and workshops, financial assistance and more. All of these services are provided by professional oncology social workers and are completely free of charge. 

"Caribou Coffee's generous commitment will help support CancerCare's free nationwide services for people affected by breast cancer," says Helen H. Miller, LCSW, the CEO of CancerCare. "The partnership between Caribou and CancerCare is a natural fit, as both organizations care passionately about what they deliver."

Caribou, which has 585 coffeehouses, including 174 franchised locations, in 21 states, the District of Columbia and nine international markets, is encouraging everyone to access CancerCare's resources by going to the CancerCare.org website.

Another easy way to support CancerCare is to visit Caribou's Facebook page dedicated to Amy, who's described by those who knew her as someone who was deeply compassionate and lived life to the fullest. 

For every new "Like" on this page, the company will donate an additional $1 to CancerCare. For the benefit of cancer patients across the nation, I ask that everyone who reads this story please click on this page and "Like" it.

Mike Tattersfield, president and CEO of Caribou Coffee, says, "Giving back to the community is at the core of our company, and we were moved by CancerCare's approach to providing support services, including financial assistance, on a very local and individual level. We are very excited to work with an organization that will help those impacted by breast cancer in Caribou's communities to provide support for co-payments, home care, transportation to and from treatment, and other miscellaneous costs and needs, all while paying tribute to our dear friend, Amy Erickson."

To speak with a CancerCare social worker, call 800-813-HOPE (4673), or visit www.cancercare.org.