CARACAS (Reuters) –
Unfazed by a recession and rampant inflation, image-conscious Venezuelans show no signs of cutting back on the facelifts, liposuction, and breast augmentation that have become de rigueur beauty treatments.

"There is never a question of not doing it, but of how you can do it. We all want to get everything done," said Helen Patino, a 37-year-old former model who had her first breast augmentation when she was 21 and her third about three months ago.

Venezuela's inflation is the highest in Latin America, up more than 20 percent in the first 10 months of this year and the South American nation is in recession after a five year boom.

Hard times may even encourage cosmetic procedures as people look for ways to lift their spirits, with many dipping into savings or taking on debt to get operations, surgeons say.

"The financial crisis has spurred people to spend more on themselves ... to console themselves in this crisis. I have not seen demand diminishing," said Peter Romer, a plastic surgeon in Caracas.

For Iris Delgado, a 57-year-old dental technician, a lack of funds was not an obstacle to getting a recent eyelid tuck.

"With the economy, one has to make sacrifices, because you don't have the money. So, you get it from credit cards, from family and you pay for it," said Delgado, who borrowed 7,000 bolivares -- about $3,250 -- for the procedure, a move she saw as a hedge against inflation in plastic surgery prices.

Like Delgado, many go into debt to finance cosmetic surgery, according to those in the industry.

"It's an investment that people make and they look for money everywhere," said Romer, adding that one of his patients moved into a smaller apartment to get a makeover and another traded her car for a facelift.

Leoncio Barrios, a social psychologist at the Central University of Venezuela, said such stories are the exception. "The majority of middle and lower-income women do not have property to sell or the capacity to save," he said.

"What is clear is that in the subway you can see ads for clinics that offer credit for this type of surgery, and that women who work use their vacation bonuses and borrow from their work savings accounts," he added.

The industry will make sure that cosmetic work remains within reach to ensure a steady flow of income, Barrios said.

"NEED TO BE BEAUTIFUL"

Despite the hefty price tag, the choice to get cosmetic surgery is not considered a luxury for some Venezuelans.

"We need to be beautiful," said Patino.

Competition among women, by far the biggest consumers of plastic surgery in Venezuela, to look their best is fierce, and social pressure to get work done is high.

"Socially, there is a lot of demand, especially from men, to have a good body," said Prem Pratita, a 27-year-old who had a breast augmentation a few weeks ago.

In this image-conscious country, famous for beauty queens who win record numbers of international pageant titles, the idea of getting cosmetic surgery is instilled at a young age.

Patino recalls how, as a child, her mother and aunt dreamt of surgery to get rid of wrinkles. Now, with a child of her own, the subject is already on the table.

"I told my husband, 'Look honey, if she has your nose, she's going to get surgery,'" said Patino.

Some young women even describe moving up a few cup sizes as a rite of passage.

"It's a transformation from being a girl to being a woman," said Pratita, who said she was one of the last in her circle of friends to have the procedure.

"Everybody has a breast augmentation. Three or four of every seven women have one," said plastic surgeon Angel Pena, who likens his surgery to body decoration practiced for centuries.

"By nature, human beings have the desire to look better ... this desire is timeless and it's a desire that doesn't depend on your economic situation ... it's not that frivolous."

(Editing by Frank Jack Daniel and Sandra Maler)

NEW YORK – For many women, getting a mammogram is already one of life's more stressful experiences.
Now, women in their 40s have the added anxiety of trying to figure out if they should even be getting one at all.
A government task force said Monday that most women don't need mammograms in their 40s and should get one every two years starting at 50 — a stunning reversal and a break with the American Cancer Society's long-standing position. What's more, the panel said breast self-exams do no good, and women shouldn't be taught to do them.
The news seemed destined to leave many deeply confused about whose advice to follow.
"I've never had a scare, but isn't it better to be safe than sorry?" asked Beth Rosenthal, 41, sitting in a San Francisco cafe on Monday afternoon with her friend and their small children. "I've heard of a lot of women in their 40s, and even 30s, who've gotten breast cancer. It just doesn't seem right to wait until 50."
Her friend agreed. "I don't think I'll wait," said Leslie David-Jones, also 41, shaking her head.
For most of the past two decades, the American Cancer Society has been recommending annual mammograms beginning at 40, and it reiterated that position on Monday. "This is one screening test I recommend unequivocally, and would recommend to any woman 40 and over," the society's chief medical officer, Dr. Otis Brawley, said in a statement.
But the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a government panel of doctors and scientists, concluded that such early and frequent screenings often lead to false alarms and unneeded biopsies, without substantially improving women's odds of survival.
"The benefits are less and the harms are greater when screening starts in the 40s," said Dr. Diana Petitti, vice chair of the panel.
Breast cancer survivors who were diagnosed at a young age were among the more vocal critics of the new guidelines.
"This sure seems like a big step backwards to me," said Debbie Hayes, who was diagnosed with Stage 2 breast cancer at age 33 after finding a lump during a self-exam. A mammogram, ultrasound, biopsy and finally a mastectomy and chemotherapy followed.
"People are being diagnosed even in their early 20s," said Hayes, now 53 and a volunteer coordinator for the Chicago-based Breast Cancer Network of Strength. "Mammograms are a key element of that."
But another breast cancer survivor thought the new guidelines sounded about right — even though she was diagnosed at age 37, two years ago.
"They seem pretty sensible to me," said Claire Mayne, of San Francisco. "The death rate is not going down because of the earlier mammograms. I'd feel comfortable telling a friend to wait until she was 50."
Mayne was more doubtful, though, about the advice on self-exams; that's how she found her own cancer.
Most women in their 40s interviewed for this article said they planned to stick with the old mammography recommendations, at least for now.
"I have two young children," said Amber Smart, a 47-year-old mother in Agoura Hills, Calif. "There's a lot of years left that they need me." She's been having mammograms every six months, since she was 44, to make sure that certain dense areas of her breasts aren't cancer.
"I think it's kind of sad that they're basically saying, 'We can't afford to pay for the few people who may have it in their 40s, so a few people are going to die,'" Smart said.

Judy Finley, a flight attendant from Dallas, called the new recommendations "a terrible idea," and said she was especially worried that insurance companies might "pick up on this and quit paying for mammograms from 40 to 50."

"I think it would be really sad," said Finley, who was walking through the Crown Center mall in Kansas City, Mo. "And I don't know how the U.S. government or a panel of government officials can think they know better than the American Cancer Society."

But there were those who saw the new guidelines as potentially a relief, a development that could save women from endless stress, false positives and perhaps needless procedures.

"I can't tell you how many friends I have who've gone through severe worries from false scares," said Maren Waxenberg, a Manhattan mother. "At least three of them have had biopsies. And it turned out to be nothing."

Waxenberg herself, 46, has not yet had a mammogram. "I'm not concerned at this age," she said. "I plan to do it, but there's no sense of urgency."

The new guidelines are for the general population, not those at high risk of breast cancer because of family history or gene mutations.

They say:

_Most women in their 40s should not routinely get mammograms.

_Women 50 to 74 should get a mammogram every other year until they turn 75, after which the risks and benefits are unknown. (The task force's previous guidelines had no upper limit and called for exams every year or two.)

_The value of breast exams by doctors is unknown. And breast self-exams are of no value.

Medical groups such as the cancer society have been backing off promoting breast self-exams in recent years. Decades ago, the practice was so heavily promoted that organizations distributed cards to be hung in the shower demonstrating the circular motion women should use to feel for lumps.

As for mammography, the panel's new recommendations are more in line with international guidelines, which call for screening to start at age 50; the World Health Organization recommends the test every two years, and Britain says every three years.

They were sharply challenged by the cancer society on Monday.

"The task force advice is based on its conclusion that screening 1,300 women in their 50s to save one life is worth it, but that screening 1,900 women in their 40s to save a life is not, Brawley wrote.

That stance "is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives, just not enough of them," he added.

But Dr. Amy Abernethy of the Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center agreed with the task force's changes.

"Overall, I think it really took courage for them to do this," she said. "It does ask us as doctors to change what we do and how we communicate with patients. That's no small undertaking."

__

Associated Press writers Marilynn Marchione in Milwaukee, Stephanie Nano in New York, Evelyn Nieves in San Francisco and Heather Hollingsworth in Kansas City, Mo., contributed to this story.

___

On the Net:

Government advice: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstf/uspsbrca.htm

WASHINGTON (Reuters) –
Republicans seeking a comeback from recent losses may pick up the governor's seats in Virginia and New Jersey on Tuesday in campaigns that tested the limits of President Barack Obama's influence.

Democrats were bracing for the unhappy possibility they could go down to defeat not just in those two states but in a congressional district in upstate New York where a conservative candidate was leading.

The election outcome could give some clues as to the national mood a year after Obama was elected president and a year before 2010 congressional elections that will represent the first clear referendum on Obama's time in office.

While local factors influenced all three races, the weak state of the U.S. economy was an overarching issue that played a role in each state.

In Virginia, Republican Bob McDonnell was leading Democrat Creigh Deeds by double digits in opinion polls as Virginians went to the polls -- an opportunity for Republicans a year after Obama became the first Democratic presidential nominee to win the state since 1964.

Two appearances on Deeds' behalf by Obama appeared to have little impact on the race, as Democrats suffered a lack of enthusiasm without Obama on the ticket and Republicans were energized by the chance to take back the governor's seat, held by Democrats the past eight years. Voting ends at 7 p.m. EST (0000 GMT) and the winner could be known a few hours later.

OBAMA CAMPAIGNS FOR CORZINE

In New Jersey, Republican Chris Christie has been running neck and neck with Democratic Governor Jon Corzine, the former Wall Street executive who has pumped $23 million of his own money into his campaign. A poll released on Monday gave the Republican a slight lead.

Independent candidate Chris Daggett trailed, and a key question concerned how many of Daggett's supporters would abandon him for Christie or Corzine and sway the race.

Obama campaigned with Corzine on Sunday and made a last-ditch appeal for the Democrat, trying to generate more enthusiasm for him.

"We will not lose this election if all of you are as committed as you were last year," he said. "So I want everybody in this auditorium to make a pledge that in these next 48 hours, you will work just as hard for Jon as you worked for me."

New Jersey polls close at 8 p.m. EST (0100 GMT Wednesday) but it could be some hours before the outcome is clear.

While a Virginia loss for the Democrats could be considered fairly predictable in a state long considered a Republican stronghold, a defeat in New Jersey would be seen as a bigger blow to the party because the state is heavily Democratic. Obama won it by 16 points last year.

"If the Democrats win New Jersey and lose Virginia, I would basically say, no harm, no foul," said Democratic strategist Doug Schoen. "The only real adverse impact is if the administration loses two campaigns, especially one they're heavily invested in New Jersey."

In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg appeared headed to victory over Democrat Bill Thompson after engineering a rules change to allow him to run for a third term and spending millions of his own money on his campaign. As of last month, the billionaire mayor had spent $85 million to Thompson's $6 million.

WILD RACE IN NEW YORK

A wild race was taking place in New York's 23rd congressional district for a House of Representatives seat left vacant when Obama picked Republican John McHugh as his Army secretary.

Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman was leading Democrat Bill Owens slightly in the traditionally Republican district. The race took a bizarre twist over the weekend when Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava withdrew because of flagging support and endorsed the Democrat.

Democrats charged the race was an example of how divided the Republican Party has become between conservatives and moderates as it tries to rebound from losing control of Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008.

Hoffman had been endorsed by conservative Republicans such as Sarah Palin, last year's Republican vice presidential nominee.

"If you look at what I think is likely to happen next year, you already have some Republicans who are more aligned with the very conservative element of what's happening in New York saying, 'This is a model for what you'll see throughout the country,'" said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs.

(Additional reporting by Ellen Wulfhorst in New York; Editing by Peter Cooney)

Folding bicycles often separate or fold in the middle of the frame, which, depending on the design, can weaken the frame and cause more energy-absorbing flexing. Many have elongated seatposts and stems. These longer components, which project above the frame like masts, experience greater bending stresses where they meet the frame, compared to the shorter components of regular bikes. There have been sporadic reports of failure in these components in online message forums[citation needed], and at least one recall due the failure of the steering mechanism.[citation needed] Folding bicycles necessarily have more parts, to allow folding and to lock the frame when unfolded. This results in a more complicated design, with more parts that can potentially fail.

The A-bike is similar to the Strida but has tiny wheels and compacts a bit smaller. Bikes smaller than a Brompton are often called portable bicycles. They forgo the performance and easy ride benefits of their larger counterparts, acquiring characteristics similar to those of an adult folding kick scooter. Regardless of how each folds, the result is easier to transport and store than a traditional bicycle.

http://www.greenzonebikes.com/foldingtandem-bicycles.html