(Photo courtesy of www.simplicity.com)
I am making the bag on the lower right: the one featured in red. (But now is waiting on webbing for the handles) It was recommended to use a heavy-weight fabric but I had this great Japanese fabric from my stash so I decided I didn't need a really heavy-weight bag. After all, it's really for water and tea and not big wine bottles.
Then, I read a Facebook comment from my friend that states she is helping host an auction for a friend who has cancer and insurance isn't covering the cost of the experimental treatment (of course). More on the insurance topic below... So, she has asked that we help with the fundraising. Well, as I'm making this bag and btw, it's going together very quickly, I thought I'd make a smaller one for the auction.
I'm sure it's my error but it didn't turn out right at all. I'm going to see if I needed to use the differential feed or what. Not like I'll ever have 6 wine bottles to buy at one time but this is good for my Honest Tea and Metro Mint water purchases at Whole Foods. That's one way I spoil myself. (Don't ask my husband because he'll say that's not the only thing;))
Any other ideas?
(Disclaimer: I am on my soap-box and if you don't want to hear a strong opinion which may differ from your own, don't read below)
Ok, how do we women feel about the mammogram recommendation? Yes, I agree, most of the time nothing is found but really? If a woman dies due to advanced breast cancer the insurance company comes out ahead. How? Think of how much it costs to diagnose, treat and reconstruct a woman after breast cancer. A LOT! Millions of dollars will be saved each year by less mandated testing, less treatment (biopsies, lumpectomies, mastectomies) and saved hospital costs. How much is a life worth? So, I ask if a woman gets the testing and it is found negative for so many years and she absorbs the cost; and at lets say 15 yrs down the road she gets a positive mammogram, can she be reimbursed by her insurance company for saving them the money? My friend was diagnosed with aggressive Stage III breast cancer in her early 30s- rare, yes but it could have killed her. Without the mammogram, her children would be without a mother today. It could not be detected by a self-exam or physician exam. How many women need to die for this to be a priority. Hey, Viagra is paid for and birth control isn't. Yes, ED is a medical condition but prevention should be the focus. Preventing diabetes, obesity, heart disease, emphysema, pregnancy are all cost savings for insurance companies. Why is it we as a society don't pull together to fight the insurance companies? Are we afraid of losing coverage? Most likely. It's sad to think we have lost our options. Individuals and small businesses must take on the brunt of the cost and leave the money making, multi-billion dollar insurance companies to dictate who lives or dies based on their ability to pay. (I have officially hopped off my soap-box)