Sandoval I PG - History

Sandoval I PG - History


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Sandoval I

(PG: dp. 106; 1. 116'10"; b. 15'6", dr. 6'3", s. 19 k.
cpl. 21; a. 2 3-pdrs., 2 Colts, cl. Alvarado)

The first Sandoval, a steel gunboat, was launched on 20 September 1895 at Clydebank Engine and Shipbuilding Co., Clydebank, Scotland, for the Spanish Navy. She was captured on 17 July 1898 upon the surrender of Spanish forces at Santiago de Cuba. Taken in tow by the tug, Potomac, Sandoval was berthed alongside Vulcan on 2 September 1898 and commissioned the same day, Lt. Edwin C. Anderson in command.

Upon completing preliminary repairs, Sandoval was taken in tow by the tug, Manati, and beached near Fisherman's Point, Cuba. There she was careened and her hull cleaned in preparation for the voyage to the United States. Towed off the beach on 1 October Sandoval ran steam trials on 27 October and departed Santiago Bay on 3 November 1898. Calling at Key West on 9 November, Sandoval sailed on 13 November in company with her sister gunboat, Alvarado, for Jacksonville, Fla.; Port Royal and Charleston, S.C.

Wilmington, N.C., Hampton Roads, Va. and arrived at Norfolk on 24 December 1898. After cailing at Annapolis on 29 December, Sandoval reached the Washington Navy Yard on 3 January 1899 for repairs. Standing down the Potomac on 3 April 1899 after overhaul Sandoval and Alvarado continued northward to New York; Providence, R.I.; Boston and Marblehead, Mass. Then proceeding to the Portsmouth (N.H.) Navy Yard, Sandoval WaS decommissioned on 10 May 1899 and was placed in reserve.

Recommissioned on 14 October 1900, Sandoval was assigned to the United States Naval Academy as a practice ship. Sandoval and her sister, Alvarado, remained at Annapolis until 1906 returning to the Norfolk Navy Yard to decommission on 22 March 1906. Loaned to the New York Naval Militia on 16 November, she arrived in Lake Ontario in September 1907. Commissioning each summer for training duty on the Great Lakes, she was based at Charlotte Harbor, N.Y., and frequently cruised to Ogdensburg and Sackets Harbor, N.Y. During World War I, Sandoval continued her training duties on the Great Lakes, calling at ports such as Erie, Pa., and Chicago, Ill., into 1918.

Declared surplus to Navy requirements, Sandoval was ordered sold on 10 July 1919 and accordingly struck from the Navy list on 23 July 1919. She was sold on 30 September 1919 to Charles S. Neff of Milwaukee, Wis. She was registered until 1924 as a private yacht.


1598 New Mexico

• He appeared on the census in 1816 in Bosque, New Mexico.[3] Cayetano Pacheco, 64 Ygnacia Sandoval, 57 children: Jose Concepcion, 23 Bicenta Montolla, 14.

Cayetano married Maria Luisa Mestas. Maria was born in New Mexico and died on 18 September 1789 in San Juan de Los Caballeros, New Mexico. [4]

Children from this marriage were:

2 i. Juan Jose Pacheco was born circa 1763. Juan married Mariana Lopez, daughter of Silvestre Lopez and Barbara Tafoya, on 30 October 1794 in Santa Cruz de la Cañada, New Mexico.[5]

3 ii. Felipe Santiago Pacheco was born on 27 April 1774 in Chama, New Mexico and was baptized on 1 May 1774 in Santa Clara, New Mexico. [6]

• He appeared on the census in 1816 in Bosque, New Mexico.[7] Phelipe Pacheco, 40 Maria Gertrudis Cordova, 35 children: Gabriela, 14 Ysidro, 12 Maria Manuela, 9 Maria Soledad, 7 Juan 5 Josefa, 2 Josef Mariano, 1.

Felipe married Maria Gertrudes Cordova circa 1800. Maria was born circa 1781.

4 iii. Antonio Jose Pacheco was born on 19 September 1776 in San Juan de Los Caballeros, New Mexico [8] and was baptized on 21 September 1776.

5 iv. Maria Agustina Pacheco was born on 28 August 1777 in San Juan de Los Caballeros, New Mexico and was baptized on 1 September 1777. [9]

6 v. Juan Bautista Rafael Pacheco was born on 23 July 1780 in San Juan de Los Caballeros, New Mexico and was baptized on 24 July 1780. [10]

7 vi. Juan Antonio Pacheco was born circa 1782.

• He appeared on the census in 1816 in Bosque, New Mexico. [3] Juan Antonio Pacheco, 34 Maria Encarnacion Bernal, 26 Juana Micaela, 6 Jose Miguel, 3 Jose Maria, 1.

Juan married Maria Encarnacion Bernal. Maria was born circa 1790.

8 vii. Juana Rafaela Pacheco was born on 20 October 1782 in San Juan de Los Caballeros, New Mexico and was baptized on 23 October 1782. [11]

9 viii. Jose Rafael Pacheco was born on 24 October 1786 in San Juan de Los Caballeros, New Mexico and was baptized on 25 October 1786. [12]

• He appeared on the census in 1816 in Bosque, New Mexico. [7]
Jose Rafael Pacheco, 31 Reyes Cordova, 23 Jose Guadalupe 2.

Jose married Maria de los Reyes Cordova. Maria was born circa 1793.

Cayetano next married Maria Ygnacia Sandoval on 5 May 1790 in Santa Cruz de la Cañada, New Mexico.13 Maria was born circa 1758 in New Mexico.

Children from this marriage were:

10 i. Juan Pacheco was born on 21 May 1792 in Bosque, New Mexico and was baptized on 27 May 1792. [14]

11 ii. Jose Concepcion de Los Dolores Pacheco was born on 8 December 1793 in Bosque, New Mexico and was baptized on 14 December 1793. [9]

1. AASF, LDS Film # 9, 10, 16976, San Juan de Los Caballeros Church Baptisms, Frame 510, entry 3. Bap Feb 18 1732, gp/ Antonio Salazar and Maria Torres.

2. New Mexico Genealogical Society Members, New Mexico Baptisms, San Juan de los Caballeros, NM 1726-1799 (NMGS 2016), Pg. 10.

3. Virginia Langham Olmsted, Spanish and Mexican Census 1750-1830 (NMGS. Albuquerque, NM. 1981), Pg. 157.

4. Archdiocese of Santa Fe, NM - San Juan, NM Burials, San Juan de los Caballeros Death Records (AASF Reel #37), 887:8. Maria Luisa Mestas wife of Cayetano Pacheco, she died 'anterior' received all the sacraments.

5. Fray Chavez, New Mexico Roots, Ltd.: A Demographic Perspective from Genealogical, Historical and Geographic Data Found in the Diligencias Matrimoniales, Pg. 1429.

6. NMGS Members, New Mexico Baptisms, Santa Clara, NM 1726-1805 (NMGS 2016), Pg. 84.

7. Virginia Langham Olmsted, Spanish and Mexican Census 1750-1830 (NMGS. Albuquerque, NM. 1981), Pg. 157 Bosque.

8. New Mexico Genealogical Society Members, New Mexico Baptisms, San Juan de los Caballeros, NM 1726-1799 (NMGS 2016), Pg. 129.

13. Family History Library, Salt Lake City, Utah, Santa Cruz de la Cañada Marriages (Film # 16972, 16969, Santa Cruz, New Mexico), No Pg. #, entry 2. Cayetano Pacheco, wid/ Maria Luisa Mestas from San Juan with Maria Ygnacia Sandoval wid/ Julian Hernandez from Quemado.

14. New Mexico Genealogical Society Members, New Mexico Baptisms, San Juan de los Caballeros, NM 1726-1799 (NMGS 2016), Pg. 227.


Sandoval was born Esther María González in Ponce where she received her primary and secondary education. After graduating from Salinas High School, she attended Colegio Percy de Ponce (Percy College of Ponce) and earned a degree in secretarial sciences. [1] [2]

Sandoval went to work for El Día, a local newspaper in Ponce. She first came into contact with the field of communications when she went to work as a secretary for Emilio Huyke in the radio station WPAB. She auditioned and was named director of a program directed towards a female audience. In 1949, she informed her parents that she wanted to become an artist and she left for San Juan, despite their protests, and went to work for Ángel Ramos' "Radio El Mundo", which later became known as WKAQ. She was given the surname "Sandoval" by the Argentine actress Queca Guerrero. Sandoval landed roles in radionovelas (radio soap operas) and became known in Puerto Rico as "The Queen of the Radio Operas". [3]

In 1954, Sandoval became a pioneer in the island's television when she participated, alongside Mario Pabón and Lucy Boscana, in Puerto Rico's first televised telenovela Ante La Ley which was transmitted through Telemundo. The soap opera caused a national scandal in Puerto Rico because in one scene she kissed her co-star Pabon in the mouth, an act that was totally unheard of in those days. [1]

Sandoval traveled to New York City, where she joined Míriam Colón's theatrical group "El Circulo Dramatico" (The Drama Circuit). Later she founded her own theatrical group and named it "Experimental Hall of Theater". They were located at the Lucerne Hotel of New York. There she produced and starred in Té y Simpatía (Tea and Sympathy) and Dondé esta la Luz? (Where is the Light?). Before returning to Puerto Rico, Sandoval made several presentations in the Teatro Puerto Rico. [3]

In 1959, Sandoval returned to the island and married Ivan Goderich, a Cuban soap opera musical director. They had two daughters, Yara Goderich and Ivonne Goderich. Ivonne would follow her mother's footsteps and become an actress herself. She continued working in soap operas, such as Bodas de Sangre (Blood Wedding), La Novia (The Bride), La Rosa Taluada, Un Tren Travia llamada Deseo, Santa Juana de America and Los Soles Truncos, where she acted alongside her daughter Ivonne and her son-in-law Xavier Cifre. She also lent her voice in the Spanish translation of movies. She was the voiceover of Joan Crawford, Barbara Stanwyck and Rosalind Russell. In 1978, her supporting role in the Telemundo soap opera Cristina Bazán was thoroughly acknowledged, alongside José Luis Rodríguez and Johanna Rosaly. In 1979, she participated alongside Norma Candal, Alicia Moreda, Gladys Rodríguez and Otilio Warrington in Jacobo Morales' movie Dios los Cría (And God Created Them), where she played the role of a prostitute. [1]

According to El Vocero (See reference) Sandoval received many awards and recognitions, including: [3]

  • Best Actress and Best Actress of the Year (1955)
  • Golden Coqui for Best Actress (1966)
  • Golden Aqueybana (1968 and 1974)
  • Selected amongst the most distinguished Puerto Rican women during the celebration of the International Year of the Women
  • The Golden Coral Award from the Festival of the New Latin Movie in Havana for her role in Díos los Cría
  • The Legislative Assembly of Puerto Rico approved a life pension for her in 1998 in honor of her valuable contributions to the Puerto Rican theater
  • The Puerto Rican Institute of Culture dedicated its 46th Festival of the Puerto Rican Film industry to her (1998)

Amongst the movies in which she participated are: [4]

  • Creature from the Haunted Sea (1961)
  • Thunder Island (1963) - Rena
  • Traitors of San Angel (1967) - Doña Consuelo
  • Las Pasiones Infernales (1969)
  • "Cristina Bazán (1978) TV series - Rosaura Alsina
  • Dios los Cría (1979) - Old Prostitute
  • La Otra Mujer (1980) TV series

In the late 1990s, Sandoval suffered from the complications of various health problems such as Alzheimer's disease, chronic diabetes and a cerebral hemorrhage, which left part of her body paralysed. She had been hospitalized at the Antiilas Hospital of Rio Piedras for several years. Her body was cremated on February 10, in accord with her wishes. [1] [3]


Bullet for Sandoval ★★ 1970 (PG)

An ex-Confederate renegade loots and pillages the north Mexican country-side on his way to murder the grandfather of the woman he loves. 96m/C VHS, DVD . SP IT Ernest Borgnine, George Hilton D: Julio Buchs.

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

"Bullet for Sandoval ." VideoHound's Golden Movie Retriever. . Encyclopedia.com. (June 18, 2021). https://www.encyclopedia.com/arts/culture-magazines/bullet-sandoval

"Bullet for Sandoval ." VideoHound's Golden Movie Retriever. . Retrieved June 18, 2021 from Encyclopedia.com: https://www.encyclopedia.com/arts/culture-magazines/bullet-sandoval

Citation styles

Encyclopedia.com gives you the ability to cite reference entries and articles according to common styles from the Modern Language Association (MLA), The Chicago Manual of Style, and the American Psychological Association (APA).

Within the “Cite this article” tool, pick a style to see how all available information looks when formatted according to that style. Then, copy and paste the text into your bibliography or works cited list.


PG&E Admits Missing ‘Critical' Pole Checks in Fire Risk Areas

PG&E has informed state regulators that it failed to test and treat more than 6,000 of its electric distribution power poles – including about 2,000 in high fire threat areas – despite regulatory reports asserting that all of its poles had been inspected as required by state law.

The utility first told regulators with the state Public Utilities Commission in November that an internal audit concluded the utility did not have records to verify that it had inspected and treated some 41,000 poles out of its inventory of more than 2.3 million wooden power poles.

Since then, however, the company has surveyed most of the 41,000 poles – including more than 12,500 in high-fire-threat areas – and found that most had, in fact, either been inspected – required at least once every 20 years -- or did not qualify for inspection. Some 6,212 poles, however, were not inspected -- despite PG&E telling regulators it had inspected all its poles as required in several annual regulatory filings.

The Investigative Unit

Have a tip for The Investigative Unit? Call Call 1-888-996-TIPS.

New VTA Surveillance Video Shows Shooting Response and Inside Facility

Dangerous Patient Care at Good Samaritan Hospital: Inspection Records, Inside Sources

The program requires the utility to excavate at the base of wooden poles, bore holes to check for rot or other damage, and treat them with preservative if needed to extend their useful life.

“We continue to correct and input the field results, resolve public and environmental access constraints and update our asset records,” the company told regulators in a letter Tuesday.

In a statement, PG&E spokesman Matt Nauman said the utility is in the process of reviewing records and other data but so far, it “did not locate evidence of timely pole test-and-treat work for 6,212 poles, and that work has now been completed on 5,081 of those 6,212 poles, with the remaining to be completed by mid- to late-2021.”

To avoid “further recurrence,” the company said, “PG&E is working to adjust the process by which poles are selected for annual program cycles, and to determine where the pole test-and-treat results should be stored, how asset data corrections are passed from pole test-and-treat to central data systems, and what technology platforms are used to collect the pole test-and-treat data.”

“We will continue to inform our regulators as we complete this critical safety work to help keep our customers and communities safe from the threat of wildfires.”
PG&E told regulators in November it intended to account for what led it to falsely report all inspections had been performed. But CPUC regulators say the company has not submitted that promised explanation to date and they are reviewing the company’s submissions so far, and may take further action, if deemed necessary.

The threat caused by power pole damage became real when one of the 2017 North Bay wildfires, the Sulphur fire in Lake County, was sparked when a woodpecker-damaged pole snapped in high winds. .

Catherine Sandoval, a former commissioner with the CPUC who focused on power pole safety, said the recent failure of the company’s recordkeeping and tracking of thousands of power poles is just one more in a series of recordkeeping lapses – and one that regulators should act on.

“This is a very serious concern in high fire threat areas,” she said. “This raises serious questions about violation of CPUC rules. Under the CPUC rules, it doesn’t matter if the false report was intentionally false or negligently false.”

Sandoval said the breakdown with power poles points to a “larger management failure” that both the CPUC and the federal judge overseeing PG&E’s criminal probation should act on.

Sandoval has written legal briefs advocating new court-ordered conditions over PG&E’s vegetation management effort to account for lapses by the utility.
“These inspections are important,” she said. “Whether it’s woodpeckers breaking into the poles, or things coming loose over time – we count on these inspections because without them, you can cause fires and kill people.”


PG&E's other big problem: Regulators detail gas record falsification claims

1 of 3 Firefighters spray water on hot spots at a home in San Bruno, Calif. on Friday, Sept. 10, 2010 thaat as destroyed after a massive natural gas pipeline explosion Thursday night. Paul Chinn / The Chronicle 2010 Show More Show Less

2 of 3 A piece of the large high pressure natural gas line, lies in the middle of the street covered with police tape, near the blast site on Friday Sept. 10, 2010, in which an explosion and fire leveled the surrounding neighborhood the night before in San Bruno, Calif. Michael Macor / The Chronicle 2010 Show More Show Less

3 of 3 Nick Stavropoulos PG&E new executive hired to reorganizes its natural gas operations, talks with Brandon Guillen a member of a PG&E crew installing a new pipeline on Hearst Avenue in San Francisco Wednesday August 1, 2012. Lance Iversen / The Chronicle 2012 Show More Show Less

About a decade ago, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. allowed a dangerous trend to take hold: Its workers repeatedly filed false records about the company&rsquos response to excavators who were trying to avoid striking underground pipelines, regulators say.

California law gives PG&E two days to answer requests to locate and mark its natural gas pipelines, a requirement designed to prevent catastrophic accidents. If the utility can&rsquot mark the lines in 48 hours, it&rsquos supposed to work out a different timeline with the excavator, or else the request becomes a &ldquolate ticket.&rdquo

But as early as 2009, regulators say PG&E employees &mdash under pressure from their bosses &mdash started misrepresenting internally how quickly they responded. The inaccurate records numbered in the tens of thousands over a later five-year period, an investigation from staff at the California Public Utilities Commission found.

Commission staff in the Safety and Enforcement Division laid out their investigation&rsquos findings in a 177-page report, a redacted version of which was reviewed by The Chronicle.

The allegedly falsified records were of particular concern to regulators because the problem grew in the years after the 2010 San Bruno pipeline explosion that killed eight people and destroyed 38 homes. While the blast wasn&rsquot caused by a failure to locate and mark the pipeline, it focused public attention on the safety of PG&E&rsquos gas operations.

In its haste not to record late tickets, PG&E risked creating even more problems, former regulatory officials said.

Catherine Sandoval, who was a state utility commissioner from 2011 to 2017, called the investigation&rsquos findings &ldquodisgusting&rdquo and &ldquodeeply appalling.&rdquo As a regulator who was sitting on the commission when much of the alleged record falsification took place, she said, &ldquoI feel lied to&rdquo after reviewing the report at The Chronicle&rsquos request.

&ldquoThey managed to falsify records tens of thousands of times over a period of almost 10 years and not kill anyone, which is a miracle,&rdquo said Sandoval, who is now an associate professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law. &ldquoIt was a tinderbox.&rdquo

PG&E said it has already taken important steps to rectify the problem, including upgrading its gas pipeline tracking system as well as its review and audit protocols.

In a Jan. 14 response to the utilities commission, PG&E said it understood the &ldquoserious concerns&rdquo raised by the investigative report.

The report &ldquodescribes conduct that was unacceptable and was not, and is not, condoned by PG&E,&rdquo the company said. &ldquoPG&E recognizes that gaps in culture, organization and systems, among other things, contributed to an environment where these issues arose and continued over time.&rdquo

Most of PG&E&rsquos recent struggles, including its likely bankruptcy, stem from the electrical side of its business, where power lines are at issue in wildfire liability that could exceed $30 billion. But the regulatory investigation found extensive shortcomings on the gas side of the business &mdash which was supposed to be reformed after the San Bruno blast.

The report found PG&E would sometimes record that it had reached an agreement with an excavator to delay the locating and marking of pipelines when, in reality, a company employee had left only a voice mail. That raised the possibility that construction could begin before a crew knew where the pipes were located.

PG&E also acknowledged in its own filing that some staffers &ldquounacceptably&rdquo took advantage of a software glitch they knew would cause late tickets to appear as timely. The company said the glitch has since been eliminated.

Certain PG&E leaders have known about the record falsification for years, the commission&rsquos report said. PG&E&rsquos internal quality assurance auditors found examples beginning in 2009 and repeatedly raised the issue, the report said.

PG&E hired two consulting firms to investigate the scope of the problem. One of them, Guidepost Solutions, found that ticket manipulation grew beginning in 2012 and continued through 2017, coinciding with the state&rsquos construction boom as California recovered from the financial crisis.

&ldquoIn short, as the number of tickets grew to unmanageable amounts, PG&E struggled to keep up with the demand, while at the same time increasing the pressure on locators to meet a goal of &lsquozero late tickets,&rsquo&rdquo Guidepost said in its report. &ldquoLocators responded by cutting corners.&rdquo

Though it has acknowledged the seriousness of the commission staff&rsquos findings, PG&E has also stressed that its rate of &ldquodig ins&rdquo &mdash in which a gas pipe is ruptured or other underground equipment is damaged &mdash has consistently decreased in recent years.

Late tickets are primarily an internal managerial metric that help the company allocate personnel resources properly, PG&E said in its response to the commission. PG&E is not required to report late ticket numbers to any public agency or regulator, so the issues identified by the commission staff &ldquoin no way constituted an effort to deceive the government,&rdquo the company said.

According to the regulatory staff investigation report, employees said PG&E leaders exerted pressure on them, including by threatening their jobs, to reach an unattainable response time to underground service requests.

The fierce demands, combined with insufficient staff, led to 135,000 late tickets from 2012 to early 2017, said a review by the second consultant, Bates and White. The figure was higher than PG&E&rsquos count by tens of thousands.

Investigators called PG&E&rsquos actions &ldquoserious and unacceptable.&rdquo

&ldquoThe problems presented significant risks to the public and went unreported for many years even though PG&E was aware that its system did not properly record late tickets at least as early as 2009 and continued to report to its leaders repeatedly about this issue,&rdquo they said in the report.

PG&E says it received more than 4.6 million requests to locate and mark pipelines from 2012 to 2017, the period of focus in the commission&rsquos staff investigation. And in a filing to the commission last week, a coalition of utility worker unions said the problem was confined to &ldquoa truly small number of instances&rdquo given the large total.

Tom Dalzell, the business manager of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245, said employees may not have understood what they had to do if they wanted to renegotiate a request to locate and mark pipelines beyond the 48-hour requirement. Dalzell&rsquos union represents 12,000 PG&E employees, including about 3,000 on the gas side of the utility.

&ldquoI want to be clear that this was not optimal: People should have had a better understanding of what documentation is required to stop the clock,&rdquo Dalzell said. &ldquoBut I just don&rsquot think that it is as horrific as the Safety and Enforcement Division does.&rdquo

The commission&rsquos case against the utility will be considered by an administrative law judge, a process that should not last longer than two years, a commission spokesman said.

Commissioners will ultimately be the ones to impose any punishment against PG&E, which could include a steep financial penalty. But the commission also has &ldquoan opportunity to be creative in its approach,&rdquo said Steven Weissman, a former administrative law judge for the regulatory agency.

Regulators could decide, for instance, to require PG&E to report weekly for several years about its locating and marking practices, or they could require sworn affidavits from inspectors &ldquoon a random basis,&rdquo said Weissman, now an emeritus lecturer at UC Berkeley&rsquos Goldman School of Public Policy.

The allegations against PG&E matter because the commission &ldquocan&rsquot possibly be on top of absolutely everything every utility is doing,&rdquo so it relies on utilities reporting accurate information, Weissman said. The alleged falsification of records undercuts that trust, he said.

&ldquoThe commission takes dishonesty very seriously,&rdquo Weissman said. &ldquoThe fact that this particular story has to do with potential serial dishonesty &mdash it&rsquos going to go right to the core of their values as regulators.&rdquo

Catherine Sandoval (right), a former California utilities commissioner, said she felt “lied to” after reading a report about PG&E’s gas-safety records.

Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle 2018

Sandoval, the former commissioner, said the potential penalty could be more than $1 billion, given the number of violations. The commission needs to know immediately whether the problems have been resolved, and if they haven&rsquot, regulators could fast-track requirements for PG&E to change its practices, she said.

&ldquoWe should have been told about this in 2009, 2010,&rdquo Sandoval said. &ldquoThe duty is not simply not to lie. They have a duty to be forthcoming. By their failure to be forthcoming, we were deprived of the opportunity to address this issue and end the problematic behavior.&rdquo


Kung Fu Panda packs punch

SAN FRANCISCO -- He strolled to the plate in the seventh inning of a World Series game for the history books, taking in the scene around him.

There were 42,855 people hanging on the moment -- every one of them on their feet, their orange rally rags spinning in the night. They knew they were witnessing something special. If only they'd known how special.

It had been 86 years since any crowd in any stadium had seen anything like this -- a man heading for the batter's box, with a chance to hit four home runs in one World Series game.

The last man -- the only other man -- to find himself in that surreal position was a gentleman named Babe Ruth, facing Wild Bill Hallahan, in Game 4 of the 1926 Series.

Sandoval set the tone for the night with a laser over the center-field wall in the first inning. Doug Pensinger/Getty Images

And now it was Pablo Sandoval's turn.

We regret to report he never did hit that fourth home run. But that's OK. The San Francisco Giants probably won't fine him or anything. On this magical Wednesday night in October, they got much, much more than just their money's worth from the man they call "Panda."

They got the kind of baseball game people write poetry about.

The story of Game 1 of the 2012 World Series was supposed to be Justin Verlander, the most dominating starting pitcher of his time. But the third baseman for the Giants apparently had a different story in mind.

He sent three titanic home runs rocketing through the October sky. And when he was through, the Giants didn't merely have an 8-3 Game 1 victory over the Detroit Tigers on their hands.

They had an indelible night in World Series history on their hands.

"Man, I still can't believe it," Sandoval said, the aftershocks of his Richter Scale evening were still rocking AT&T Park after the game. "When you're a little kid, you dream of being in the World Series. But I [wasn't] thinking of being in this situation, three homers in one game."

Let's just say he wasn't the only one who didn't see this game coming.

Allow us to put what happened here in its rightful historical perspective:

• This was the 625th World Series game in history. Only three other men have ever done what Sandoval did Wednesday. You may have heard of them. There was George H. (Bambino) Ruth in both 1926 and 1928. There was Reginald M. Jackson in 1977. And there was Sir Albert Pujols, just one October ago. And that's all, folks.

• But what separated Sandoval from those other legends was this: He was the first man ever to launch his three home runs in his first three plate appearances of a World Series game. Only Ruth came close -- homering in his first three official at-bats of that 1926 trifecta but sneaking in a walk between the second and third homers.

• Now, let's add in a little extra degree of difficulty, by considering the ballpark Sandoval hit these three home runs in. There have been 2,108 regular-season games played in AT&T Park and 51 postseason games. And only one other time, in those 2,159 games, has any other player hit three homers in a game in this park. That would be Kevin Elster, who did it in the first game ever played there, on April 11, 2000. You read that right: Kevin Elster.

• There's also Venezuelan baseball history to consider. In one game, Sandoval hit as many World Series home runs as all the other major league players from his homeland had ever hit in all their Fall Classic visits put together. The previous three came off the bats of Dave Concepcion (1975), Miguel Cabrera (2003) and Alex Gonzalez (2003).

• And finally, let's factor in this game's place in Giants World Series history. This is the 19th time this franchise has played in a World Series, more than any franchise in this sport that isn't known as "the Yankees." And just in the first five innings of this game, Pablo Sandoval hit one more World Series homer than Willie Mays, Willie McCovey, Orlando Cepeda, Will Clark, Jack Clark, Matt Williams, Jeffrey Leonard, Johnny Mize and Bobby "The Giants Win the Pennant" Thomson hit in all their various World Series combined.

Oh. And we haven't even mentioned yet that the Panda hit the first of those two home runs off Verlander, a guy who had allowed two homers to the previous 137 hitters he'd faced -- going back exactly a month -- until Sandoval showed up at home plate.

Reggie Jackson made himself a postseason legend by hitting three jacks in one World Series game. AP Photo

And then, naturally, Pablo Sandoval did something no one had ever done against Verlander in 243 career starts (counting the postseason): Hit two home runs against him just in the first three innings. Sure. Of course he did.

In other words, ladies and gentlemen, this was special.

"It was special, really special," said Gregor Blanco, the man who occupies the locker next to Sandoval's. "Nobody could believe what he'd done -- even himself. He was saying to us, 'I feel like I'm dreaming right now.'"

And why wouldn't he? Two years ago, when the Giants were busy winning a World Series for the first time in more than half a century in San Francisco, Pablo Sandoval was as close to an afterthought as a 5-foot-11, 275-pound fireball can be.

He appeared in fewer games in that World Series than Nate Schierholtz. And got fewer plate appearances than Travis Ishikawa. And got fewer hits than Matt Cain. He never started at third base in a single game in that World Series -- DHing in his only appearance in the lineup, in Game 3, and going hitless in three trips.

But it's amazing the lessons a man can learn when he eats himself out of the lineup while his team is winning a World Series. And Sandoval learned his lessons well.

"He got humbled by 2010," said his hitting coach, Hensley (Bam Bam) Meulens. "He didn't play. He didn't play in the four most important games of that year: He didn't play when we clinched the division. He didn't play in the game where we beat the Braves [to win the National League Division Series]. He didn't play in the [final game of the championship series] in Philly. And he didn't play the last game, when we won the World Series. So he said, 'That's not going to happen to me next time around.'"

Giants pitchers also gave Sandoval plenty of reason to celebrate. Robert Hanashiro/USA TODAY Sports

The Sandoval of 2010 was a man who had lost his way at the plate, jumping at the baseball "with his hands dragging behind him," Meulens said. But the Sandoval who made history on this enchanted evening, two Octobers later, was a guy whose body was calm, whose swing was short and whose ability to pound balls all over the strike zone made this astonishing night possible.

So, his first time up, he saw an 0-and-2, 95-mph Verlander scorch-ball heading his way, letter-high, and somehow drove it 421 feet to deep right-center, into the first row of seats.

The last first-inning home run hit by a Giant in a World Series game was hit by Mel Ott, 79 years ago. And how many home runs do you think Verlander had given up all year on 0-2 pitches before that? Not a one, of course.

Then, two innings later, the Panda went down and got a vintage pitcher's pitch, driving a low-and-away 95-mph heater the other way, into the left-field seats. Verlander turned and mouthed a word that said it all: "Wow." But he wasn't the only one.

"Anybody who goes 'oppo' in this park," said Sandoval's teammate, Brandon Crawford, "is going to get a 'wow' from somebody. That's tough to do."

So there couldn't possibly be more after that. Could there? Oh yes, there could. Two innings later, Sandoval golfed an Al Alburquerque slider back, back, back, back, back -- and right into the history books.

When it disappeared into the empty spaces beyond the center-field fence, 435 feet from home plate, Sandoval kissed his hand, pointed it toward the galaxy above and circled the bases in a state of pure jubilation, as 42,855 witnesses shared the kind of mass euphoria that only great sporting moments like this one can deliver.

"It gave me chills," Blanco said. "But it also gave me frustration. I was thinking, 'I can't even hit a single. And he hit three home runs.' "

And Pablo Sandoval did that it, friends, in a World Series game.

A World Series game started by Justin Verlander.

Sandoval "only" singled in his fourth at-bat, to complete a 4-for-4 night. Doug Pensinger/Getty Images

And a World Series game played in AT & T Park -- a place where it's so tough to hit a home run that only three men on this entire roster (Sandoval, Buster Posey and Brandon Belt) hit three homers (or more) there all season.

But Pablo Sandoval actually made it to home plate, in the seventh inning, with a chance to hit four in one game. Wow.

Every one of his teammates climbed to the top step of the dugout: "I don't think there was anyone who wasn't watching that AB," Jeremy Affeldt said. "We could have been watching history."

As Sandoval smoothed the dirt in front of the plate, tapped his helmet and wriggled into the box, not a seat in his ballpark was occupied -- because every single former occupant of those seats was standing, flapping their towels in the breeze, creating their own personal thunder claps.

But Pablo Sandoval was the most calm human in the park. He knew what he had to do -- and hitting a home run wasn't it.

"I don't try to get excited," he said, "because when you get excited, that's when you get in trouble."

So on the second pitch he saw from deposed Tigers closer Jose Valverde, Sandoval "only" roped a line drive to left-center field for his fourth hit of the night. It may not have been his fourth home run of this spectacular evening. But it did make him just the second man in the past 84 World Series to 4-for-4 in a Series opener. The other was Hall of Famer Lou Brock, in 1967. Not bad.

He got one last standing ovation for that hit, and a special place in World Series folklore. But he was about to find out that no matter what you do in this life, you just can't please everybody.

When he returned to the dugout after the inning, he found his friend, Marco Scutaro waiting for him.

"I told him, 'C'mon, man. Anybody can hit three,'" Scutaro laughed. "Let's go."


3 Current Treatment Options

As illustrated in Figure 1, there are four categorical action sites in order to achieve analgesic effects for different types of pain. The neural circuits involved in the pain perception and amplification in the brain, the synaptic transmission and central sensitization in the ascending and descending pathways, and the peripheral stimulation, transduction, transmission, and amplification can be treated to modulate and suppress the pain. [ 30 ] In this illustration, both pharmacological and physical neuromodulation solutions are listed for various action sites. [ 30 ] More generally, the chronic pain treatment options include biomedical and biopsychosocial approaches we will focus on the first category in this review. Figure 2 depicts the available procedures and tools from pharmacology, surgery, electrical, magnetic, and acoustic stimulation approaches presented with invasiveness scale for each.

3.1 Pharmacological Treatment of Pain

Conventional analgesic medications are cheap and fast acting and routinely prescribed for acute pain. [ 32 ] Since the 1980's, growing concern have been raised about the use of opioids in the treatment of pain in an effort to combat opioid addition as a public health concern. [ 33, 34 ] The U.S. has declared the overuse of opioids and opioid related deaths an epidemic. [ 35 ] Opioids provide relief to nociceptive pain when compared to placebo. Strong opioids, for example, morphine and oxycodone were significantly more effected compared to non-opioid drugs while weak opioids, for example, propoxyphene, tramadol, and codeine, showed no significant difference in pain reduction compared to non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). [ 36 ] However, in cases of chronic neuropathic pain, side effects and adverse events are prone to occur due to the difficulty to control the dosing and use. Responsiveness to opioid was also found to be individual specific and non-consistent. [ 37 ] Furthermore, studies have shown particular mechanisms of chronic pain such as glial cell activation, spinal NMDA receptor activation can contribute to increased opioid tolerance and paradoxically hence sensitivity to pain. [ 38, 39 ]

In order to avoid opioid side effects, a type of commonly used non-opioid analgesic are NSAIDs, which reduces inflammation or the production of inflammatory factor to provide pain relief. [ 31 ] NSAIDs function through the inhibition of the cyclooxygenase enzymes COX-1 and COX-2, enzymes play major roles in vasodilatation, vascular permeability, sensitization of nociceptors, gastric acid secretion, and platelet aggregation. [ 40 ] Due to the complex involvement of COX-1 and COX-2, clinical trial show risk of serious thrombotic cardiovascular events. [ 41, 42 ] Hence, NSAIDs are not recommended in at-risk populations with history of cardiovascular diseases and stroke, and high dose of NSAIDs are not recommended for chronic use due to increased risks of renal and gastric side effects.

Additional lipophilic analgesic can be applied topically for local release of analgesic effects while minimizing systemic side effects. The transdermal application of these analgesic such as fentanyl and buprenorphine have shown effectiveness for treating superficial localized pain regions such as peripheral neuropathic pain. [ 43, 44 ] Other adjuvants such as tricyclic antidepressants and serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors have been shown to exhibit analgesic effects in neuropathic pain patient populations that show no response to opioids. These antidepressants are understood to modulate pain from the central nervous system (CNS) modulating the endogenous serotonergic antinociceptive pathways and descending noradrenergic inhibition pathways. [ 45, 46 ]

3.2 Neuromodulation

Neuromodulation is a fast-growing field of neurotechnology that offers modulative effects on central or peripheral nervous systems by delivering physical energy into the body. It has a wide range of applications for understanding the brain and managing brain disorders. [ 47, 48 ] The brain neuromodulation technologies, via invasive or noninvasive approaches, provide a means to alter irregular activity by stimulating the brain injecting electrical, magnetic, optical, or acoustic energy to intervene with neural activation, which effectively realizing suppression of a certain diseased state and stabilizing the system back to a healthy state. [ 49 ] The technologies can be used to excite, inhibit, or disrupt brain network dynamics in a controlled way, depending on the stimulation parameters and applications. [ 50 ] When used as a treatment, neuromodulation offers higher specificity than medication, and noninvasive neuromodulation further provides more reversibility than surgical alternatives listed in Figure 2. Neuromodulation offers a spatially specific, direct way to interact with the nervous system that fills in unaddressed needs left by pharmacological treatment plans. As described in Figure 1, neuromodulation for pain can be separated into a few different categories, peripheral versus CNS modulation, and invasive versus noninvasive modes of interface. Given the level of risk and high initial cost, invasive neuromodulation is typically considered after pharmacological treatments have been deemed unviable. However, with the development of reliable noninvasive neuromodulation techniques, neuromodulation can become a promising nonaddictive alternative to opioids. Currently, such treatment options are limited for patients who do not respond to pharmacological treatments or have pre-existing complications that renders pharmacological treatment risks. Figure 3 provides a summary of invasive and noninvasive neuromodulation modalities for CNS.

3.2.1 Invasive Neuromodulation: Spinal Cord Stimulation

A myriad of mechanisms of pharmacological treatment involve the inhibition of spinal cord signaling with the CNS. SCS is proposed to perform the same inhibition in the spinal cord through a gating mechanism modulating the cortical and subcortical brain. [ 52 ] SCS uses subdermal implanted electrodes to deliver an electric field to the dorsal horn and dorsal column axons (Figure 3a), which inhibits pain signaling in the spinothalamic tract. [ 53, 54 ] Although mechanisms remain unclear, SCS is hypothesized to inhibit Aβ fibers in the superficial layers of the dorsal horn, disrupting the afferent sensory input from the dorsal root ganglia and releasing inhibitory neurotransmitters at the spinal cord and CNS. [ 55 ] Main stimulation targets include dorsal root ganglion for peripheral pain, [ 56 ] vagus nerve for headaches and inflammation mediated pain, and trigeminal nerves. [ 57 ] Traditionally stimulation frequency at a tonic 40–100 Hz stimulation frequency show a significant decrease in pain score in neuropathic pain patients. [ 58, 59 ] Pain reduction can be further improved in select patient groups by applying high frequency stimulation, [ 60, 61 ] or burst stimulation. [ 62 ] However, long term efficacy in pain reduction is not consistent due to potential foreign body response encapsulation of electrodes or therapy tolerance. Nearly half of the patients experience greater than 50% decrease in pain reduction, [ 58, 63 ] but the therapeutic effect decays over time in more than 13% patients. [ 64 ]

3.2.2 Invasive Neuromodulation: Motor Cortex Stimulation

In cases of neuropathic pain resulting in loss of pain-related afferent information, known as deafferentation, MCS, as the conceptual diagram illustrated in Figure 3b, has been shown to reduce pain in patients who show no response to pharmacological treatments. These pain types include post-stroke pain, [ 65 ] multiple sclerosis, [ 66 ] phantom limb pain, [ 67 ] spinal cord injury. [ 68 ] Epidural stimulation electrodes are placed on the motor cortex through localized craniotomies, stimulation frequencies are typically around 50 Hz. [ 69 ] Mechanism on the MCS are unknown. Deafferentation pain are theorized to be due to reorganization of somatosensory and motor cortex at the level of deafferentation or higher levels. Therefore, stimulation at the motor cortex disrupts the abnormal organization and provides pain relief. [ 65 ] The disadvantage of MCS is the difficulty to identify patient population that will respond to treatment, especially considering the risks and irreversibility of invasive treatment. Later sections in this review will discuss noninvasive techniques to help identify patients responsive to MCS.

3.2.3 Invasive Neuromodulation: Deep Brain Stimulation

In the CNS, DBS, first introduced by Hassler et al., in the middle of last century, [ 70 ] offers high specificity and treatment efficiency by implanting electrodes into deep brain (Figure 3b). Chronic DBS has been reported in several studies to elicit analgesia in animal and human studies at targets of sensory thalamus lateral and medial nuclei, [ 71-74 ] internal capsule, [ 75 ] periaqueductal/periventricular gray matter (PAG/PVG) [ 71, 75, 76 ] for the sensory component of pain, and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) for the perception of pain. [ 77, 78 ] More specifically, two clinical trial studies in the 1990's using Medtronic Model 3380 and 3387 (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN) were conducted examining the effect of DBS on chronic pain measured by percent pain relief (PPR) and VAS scales. The pain categories for the Model 3387 trial explored were >70% predominantly neuropathic pain, 20% nociceptive pain, and 8% unidentified. Model 3380 trial was unreported. For these clinical trials, patients who did not report analgesic results during testing period did not internalize DBS treatment, and were excluded from continuation in the study. Furthermore, many patients opted to withdrawal or discontinue follow up from the study, this withdrawal population accounted for 70–73% of the total population. This large withdrawal rate largely confounded study results. When withdrawal population are excluded from efficacy calculations, Model 3380 trial reported 66% of population with >50% PPR 3 months after internalization and 60% at the 24th month, and Model 3387 reported 38% population with >50% PPR 3 months after internalization and 50% at the 24th month. However, when withdrawals are taken into account, Model 3380 trial success rate dropped to 53% at 3rd month and 17% at the 24th month, similarly Model 3387 trial success rate dropped to 22% at 3rd month and 14 % at the 24th month. [ 79, 80 ] The studies did not have systematic criteria for DBS target selection and stimulation parameter, whereas the patient stimulation setup was based on surgeon's preference, the results of pharmacologic tests, or the patient's symptoms and responses. The drop-off in success rate over time is clearly observed, treatment tolerance mechanisms remain unexplained.

The main components of the latest DBS system include a thin DBS lead implanted to the targeted brain region unilaterally or bilaterally, an implantable pulse generator (IPG), connector wires from the DBS leads to the IPG, and a patient programmer. The patient programmer allows physicians to interface with the IPG wirelessly, through radio frequency or bluetooth, to adjust DBS stimulation parameters. Latest generations of FDA approved DBS leads in the U.S. market all consist of platinum/iridium electrode sites and polyurethane sheath. [ 81-83 ]

Adverse events related to implanted DBS can arise from implantation, hardware failure, and stimulation induced damage. Implantation adverse factors involve infection risks at all levels of the implanted device, and the adverse events occur in about 2.6–5% of patients, depending on study location, within the first year of implantation [ 84, 85 ] despite pairing with antibiotic treatments orally and locally at implantation site. Hardware failures and IPG material erosion of the IPG over time occurs in 5.5% of the treated patients. [ 84 ] Better biocompatibility and reduction of inflammatory response in both material sciences and engineering, and implantation techniques would be greatly beneficial to the patient population.

When selecting DBS lead designs and materials, a few areas need to be considered. The primary factor is the safety of material and stimulation parameters. In the early 1990's Shannon characterized the safety threshold of stimulation parameter space with respect to charge density and charge per phase [ 86 ] based on studies from McCreery et al. [ 87 ] These studies demonstrated the difference of charge injection mechanisms and safety based on stimulating material types. Considerations for safety arise based on the chemical reactions that occur at the electrode tissue interface. These chemical reactions can be due to faradaic oxidation and reduction at the electrode surface layer or through electrolytic and electrostatic capacitive charging. [ 88 ] Capacitive charge injection mechanisms are preferred over faradaic reactions due to the lack of need to generate or consume new chemical ionic species. Capacitive electrode materials include titanium nitride and tantalum oxide, where the capabilities of capacitive charge injection depend on material surface area. Faradaic electrode materials include platinum, iridium oxide, silver based, and tungsten-based electrodes. Macroelectrodes used in commercial DBS systems are almost exclusively platinum based, chosen for the ability to induce faradaic reactions and double layer capacitive charging and stability during chronic implantation. Novel materials have recently emerged as alternative materials for neural stimulation to enhance biocompatibility over time. Electronically conductive polymer PEDOT (poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene)-poly(styrenesulfonate)) shows promising ability to reduce electrode impedance and improve charge injection capability. [ 89, 90 ] Another aspect to improve biocompatibility of stimulating electrodes is to use soft electrodes for reducing damage due to the presence of chronically implanted stiff electrodes. Soft implantable electrodes have been achieved with carbon nanotubes, [ 91, 92 ] polymer-based electrodes, [ 89, 93 ] and graphene. [ 94, 95 ]

Side effect concurrence of infections, broken leads, surgery related neuropathic pain, and rare seizures have been observed. [ 80 ] The described clinical trials were closed without application for market approval. In 1996, FDA approved the use of DBS in movement disorders, and the introduction of DBS to market allowed physicians to use DBS to treat chronic pain on an off-label treatment basis. Current studies show the importance of stimulation target on long term pain treatment outcome. A metanalysis study showed PAG/PVG stimulation produced good to excellent results in 79% of patients and the addition of sensory thalamic or internal capsule stimulation increased the success rate to 87%. [ 96-99 ] Moreover, DBS also carries risk of inflammation, gliosis, cell death, [ 100 ] and requires irreversible surgical implantation procedures. Based on these results, there exists a need for better, safer stimulation target selection for the treatment of pain.

Noninvasive neuromodulation approaches have been developed to enable the modulation of neural tissue without necessitating invasive surgical procedures as demonstrated in Figure 3c, including TMS, TCS, and tFUS. Despite the relatively limited spatial resolution compared with invasive approaches, noninvasive neuromodulation techniques carry much lower overall risks due to their noninvasive nature and have the potential to be used in many applications.

3.2.4 Noninvasive Neuromodulation: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

TMS employs a coil of wire to generate rapidly changing magnetic fields, leading to electromagnetic induction and thus eddy currents within the brain, which thus elicit synchronous brain activities [ 47, 101-109 ] at the cortical brain regions with a few centimeters scale resolution according to Faraday's law. [ 110 ] As shown in Figure 3c, the figure-eight coil is a typical configuration for delivering the focal and pulsed magnetic stimulation. While TMS has been found effective in treating disorders such as pain, [ 111-114 ] depression, [ 115 ] stroke, and Parkinson's disease, [ 116 ] the focality and penetrating depth of TMS remains to be improved in order to have more targeted effects in managing brain conditions. Due to the inability of TMS to focally stimulate deep brain regions, MCS is mainly targeted for pain relief, where the reduction of pain sustains for days to weeks after daily stimulation due to presence of plasticity. [ 114 ] As described before, invasive MCS helped pave way for the target selection at the motor cortex. One pilot study of using 20 Hz repetitive TMS (rTMS) targeting at motor cortex for 20 min is reported to induce analgesic effects on half of the 12 therapy-resistant chronic pain subjects, but lacks significant difference between active and sham rTMS. [ 117 ] The positive outcome of 20 Hz rTMS was also validated by another double-blind study, [ 111 ] in which the placebo effects were concluded as non-trivial and discussed to be controlled for rigorous implication.

Later, multi-day rTMS applied at 5 Hz or higher frequencies using figure-eight coils, has been reported to induce long-lasting brain plasticity and explored in its efficiency to treat chronic neuropathic pain. In a 60-patient study, Lefaucheur et al., showed rTMS at M1 in right-handed subjects, efficacy in pain reduction varied significantly based on type of pain, with greatest reduction in VAS score in trigeminal nerve lesion subjects. Overall, in all pain types, rTMS significantly reduced pain score in 65% of the patients compared to sham stimulation. [ 118 ] Long term reduction of VAS pain score from rTMS has been demonstrated to last 2 weeks after daily rTMS for 5 consecutive days in both peripheral and central neuropathic pain compared to sham controls. [ 119 ] In more recent studies, by applying rTMS at contralateral motor cortex to pain, 58% of subjects were found to be responders to treatment, and showed significant decrease in VAS pain score after 9 stimulations, and this reduction in pain score is not only maintained but further reduced at 6 weeks after stimulation, at a mean reduction of 4.59 points out of 10. Non-responders showed no significant changes to baseline pain score at all time points. [ 46 ] TMS is hypothesized to lead to depolarizations in the neural tissue, at low intensities TMS seems to mostly stimulate low-threshold inhibitory interneurons, whereas higher intensities excite projection neurons. When pulsed at physiologically relevant frequencies during rTMS, local neural plasticity is hypothesized to account for sustained long term changes in pain perception. [ 110 ] The above results show promising, safe use of noninvasive neuromodulation technique in the treatment of specific types of pain. [ 120 ]

The material and design of the TMS coil play important roles in the efficacy of treatment. The capabilities of the TMS coil depends directly on the charge delivered to the tissue, focality of induced electric fields and depth of electric field penetration. The amount of charge delivered to the tissue is mainly determined by the capacitance of the stimulation coil. Therefore, the design of the TMS coil, the coil core material and stimulation pulse have a large influence on TMS performance. TMS coil core materials have employed air-cores, [ 107 ] or ferromagnetic materials such as iron-cores, [ 121-123 ] and steel-cores [ 124 ] to achieve high magnetization and more practically coil geometries. Recently modeling [ 125 ] of electromagnetic properties has enabled the field to examine characteristics of the emitted electric field, highlighting the tradeoff between spatial focality and depth of stimulation penetration. [ 107, 126 ] Further notable new TMS coil designs include fMRI integrated TMS [ 127-129 ] to ensure accuracy of stimulation target in patients.

Disadvantages of rTMS include limited spatial resolution and depth of penetration as restrained by the conductivity and permeability of the magnetic field. The potential discomfort at the stimulation site and possible headache are among the disadvantages of such a transcranial intervention tool. [ 130 ] Another safety concern of TMS for vulnerable populations, for example, children, senior subjects, or tinnitus patients is the loud, repetitive clicking sound accompanying the magnetic stimulation pulses. [ 131 ] One recent effort of reducing such undesirable sound and remitting the safety concern is the development of a quiet TMS (qTMS) which is featured with ultra-brief pulse for shifting the transmitted energy towards inaudible, high frequency range. [ 131 ] The improved coil design of qTMS consists of stiff winding block, high-stiffness epoxy-based polymer bedding, a bitumen-based polymer-modified-asphalt compound for a viscoelastic layer, elastic silicone for a decoupling layer, and polyurethane for casing. As an outcome, the qTMS was demonstrated to reach 9 times quieter than conventional TMS device. [ 131 ]

3.2.5 Noninvasive Neuromodulation: Transcranial Current Stimulation

TCS is a noninvasive neuromodulation technique [ 132 ] that applies low levels of current to the scalp through rectangular or ring electrodes to modulate cortical excitability (Figure 3c). Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) [ 116, 133-139 ] uses weak, direct currents to elicit changes in cortical excitability and spontaneous neural activity, while transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) uses currents with alternating polarities to similarly alter spontaneous activity and potentially entrain neural oscillations. Applying anodal tDCS to motor cortex was shown to reduce pain in patients with neuropathic pain due to traumatic spinal cord injury [ 140 ] and alpha-tACS was shown to relieve chronic low back pain by enhancing the alpha oscillations in the somatosensory brain region. [ 141 ] Similar to TMS, TCS's focality and depth penetration remain to be improved due to the volume conduction effect, despite of the recent development of high-definition tDCS for improved focality and intensity. [ 139, 142 ] Additionally, like TMS, applying direct electrical stimulation through the scalp can lead to unpleasant scalp sensations and potential safety hazards, which limits the amount of current that can be delivered via TCS and thus, the potential desired effects as well. Therefore, there is still an unmet need to further develop the noninvasive neuromodulation technologies by improving the spatial specificity, neuromodulatory effectiveness, and safety.


Contents

Numerous chronicles agree that Emperor Capac "left numerous descendants, but had few legitimate children". [ citation needed ] The parentage of Huáscar and Atahualpa remains uncertain, but they are commonly believed to be Capac's descendants. The lineage of female figures such as Coya is even more obscure. She is believed to be Andean of Incan descent, but her mother is unknown. Some claim she was the daughter of a concubine. A lack of evidence led historian Fernando Jurado Noboa to state the following about the Incan royal family: "The children of the Inca have not sought lawsuits of maternal origin: they were children of 'Sapa Inca the Inca' and that's enough." [2]

Francisca Coya was born in Cuzco [4] around 1515 as the legitimate daughter of Huayna Cápac. Her mother was respected for being an older and principal woman in Cuzco, according to the testimony of Indian Pedro Inga in Bogotá in 1575. The Indian Catalina, who witnessed her birth and was her maid, declared in Tunja in 1575, when 70 years old, that "Guaynacaba, her father, put her in another house, where she lived with the rest of his daughters and maidens". Francisca was called "La Coya" by the first vecinos of Quito. [2]

After Atahualpa's death at the hands of the Spanish in 1533, Sebastián de Benalcázar and Diego de Sandoval y la Mota invaded San Miguel de Piura. In 1535, the Spanish found a group of indigenous people in Chaparra in the Cañaris region of the Andes's western foothills, hiding and protecting Atahualpa's sisters Toctochembo, Marcachembom, Ascarpe, and Francisca, who were also Emperor Cápac's daughters. During the Spanish invasion, Coya and her people fled from Cuzco, but she and her sisters were captured and taken to de Benalcázar, who "gave her to Captain Diego de Sandoval". She became pregnant and marched with Sandoval to Quito, where she gave birth to their only child. Coya later accompanied Sandoval to Popayán, where she lived near one of her sisters (whom Benalcázar had also taken for himself). [2]

It was said that when La Coya went to mass, all of Quito's provincial chiefs and women accompanied her, and when she left the city, she was accompanied by two to three thousand native people. Witnesses of that time said that the Chiefs of Quito put down blankets, feathers, and flowers in front of her so that her feet would not touch the ground. [2] This description coincides with Canadian historian John Hemming's interpretation that "the natives of Quito venerated her with pathetic passion." [5] According to the rituals and customs of the time, such veneration was expected for women of the Inca elite, who were refined and were treated with great respect by the masses. [6]

In 1536, Francisca Coya gave birth to Eugenia de Sandoval Inca in Quito. She lived with her parents in Popayán and later, after her mother's death in 1544, moved to Anserma with her father. In 1545, Eugenia would receive the Royal Certificate of Legitimization from Charles V Holy Roman Emperor at her father Diego de Sandoval's request of "proof" (probanza) so that she could, in 1550 at the age of 14, marry Captain Gil de Rengifo Pantoja, born in Ávila, Spain. Between them, they had many descendants in Ecuador and Colombia. Eugenia died before 1575.

Francisca Coya was the daughter of Inca Emperor Huayna Cápac and slave-wife of the Spanish conqueror Diego de Sandoval. She gave birth to Eugenia de Sandoval Inca (the emperor's granddaughter) in Quito in 1536. Eugenia de Sandoval Inca became legitimized by the Spanish king and became the wife of the colonizer Gil de Rengifo. They had one daughter, María Rengifo y Sandoval (great-granddaughter of the Inca Emperor), born in Anserma, who became the wife of the Spanish man Vicente Henao Tamayo. Melchor Henao Rengifo (the Incan emperor's great-great-grandson), was born in Anserma around 1572. Around 1609, Rengifo married María Vivas in Cali. Gregorio Henao Vivas (the Incan emperor's fourth-great-grandson), was born in Cali around 1610. He moved to the city of Antioquia, where he married Jacoba Vásquez Guadramiros. [7]

From Gregorio Henao Vivas, it is easy to follow Coya's Colombian descendants in the book titled Genealogies of Antioquia and Caldas, by Gabriel Arango Mejía. The line included people such as ex-president Roberto Urdaneta Arbeláez, archbishops Arturo Duque Villegas and Aníbal Muñoz Duque, Braulio Henao, Anselmo Pineda, Abraham Moreno, José Tomás Henao and Braulio Henao Mejía, Tomás Carrasquilla Luis López de Mesa León de Greiff, and Manuel Mejía Vallejo. [7] This line of descendants is confirmed by historian Lucas Fernández de Piedrahita. [ citation needed ]

The historical and cultural values inherited by her descendants in Ecuador, such as the ex-Presidents Luis Cordero, Juan León Mera, and Antonio Borrero Cortázar, are an illustration of Doña Francisca Coya's important impact on history. Among other Ecuadorian historical figures that descend from her are Luis A. Martínez, Miguel Angel León Pontón, Octavio Cordero Palacios, Alberto Maria Ordonez Crespo, Carlos Concha Torres, Luis Quirola Saá, Emiliano Crespo Astudillo, Jose Maria Borrero Baca, Alfonso Borrero Moscoso, Manuel Borrero González, Vicente Salazar y Cabal, José Gabriel Pino Roca, and Pedro Cocha Torres. [2]

The genealogical works demonstrated how the Incan bloodline of Francisca enriched the elite (high and middle-high classes) of colonial and republican Ecuadorian and Colombian societies. [2]

  1. ^ Zapata, J. Descendientes del Emperador Inca Pachacútec. pg.2 https://www.academia.edu/10355786/Descendientes_del_Emperador_Inca_Pachac%C3%BAtec
  2. ^ abcdefg Jurado N.F. (1982) Las Coyas y Pallas del Tahuantinsuyo. pgs. 217,305,306,319
  3. ^ Costales, Piedad Peñaherrera de Costales Samaniego, Alfredo Jurado Noboa, Fernando (September 27, 1982). Los señores naturales de la tierra. Xerox. OCLC10851071 – via Open WorldCat. (See also [1])
  4. ^
  5. Centre, UNESCO World Heritage. "City of Cuzco". UNESCO World Heritage Centre . Retrieved 2021-04-19 .
  6. ^
  7. Hemming, John (1970). The conquest of the Incas. A Harvest Book. Harcourt, Inc. p. 340. ISBN0-15-602826-3 .
  8. ^ Herrero S, P. (2017) Las Mujeres en el Virreinato del Perú. p.7 IX Congreso Virtual sobre Historia de las Mujeres.
  9. ^ ab
  10. "La Princesa inca". 2011-11-04. Archived from the original on 2011-11-04 . Retrieved 2020-09-27 .

Piedad Peñaherrera, Alfredo Costales & Fernando Jurado Noboa. (1982) "Los Señores Naturales de la Tierra: Las Coyas y Pallas del Tahuantinsuyo". (Compilation of two investigations in one book)


Sandoval I PG - History

2018-2019: Shari Krieger
2017-2018: Kim Cherry 2001-2002: Curtis High 1983-1984: Joe Belton 1965-1966: Paul Bastas
2016-2017: Monica Guzman 2000-2001: Susan Simmons 1982-1983: David Jackson 1964-1965: Gene Chatham
2015-2016: Mary Berry 1998-1999: Donna Collins 1981-1982: Chris Ihorn 1963-1964: Cecil Lawrence
2014-2015: Dale Guedry 1997-1998: Judy Hobart 1980-1981: Lucy Lopez 1961-1962: O'Dell Oliver
2013-2014: Stephanie Moses 1996-1997: Ginny McClusky 1979-1980: Vickie MacNaughton 1960-1961: Buddy Reed
2012-2013: Phyllis Morris 1995-1996: Judy Miller 1978-1979: Bob Harris 1959-1960: Jack McLean
2011-2012: Jo Anne Leger 1994-1995: Lucile Wyatt 1977-1978: Jo Stanfield Young 1950s: Paul Burris, Emory Barton
2010-2011: Karen Morris 1993-1994: Glyn Poage 1976-1977: Tommy Mullins 1950s: Jack Morris, Jack Bishop
2009-2010: Pam Marcinik 1992-1993: Jaye Thompson 1975-1976: John Cline 1950s: Joe Williams, Ray Shield
2008-2009: Linda Kaiser 1991-1992: Dolores Stewart 1974-1975: Jerry (Will) Callaway 1948-1952: Paul Clendening
2007-2008: Melinda Garriga 1990-1991: Dan Stunkard 1972-1974: Dale Dye 1948-1951: T.N. Watkins
2006-2007: Robin Cooksey 1989-1990: Judy Werlinger 1971-1972: Jack Sykes 1946-1947: C.E. Bishop
2005-2006: Dana Hayden 1988-1989: Debbie Main 1969-1971: Carl Black 1945: Harvey Brown
2004-2005: Glenda Fuller 1987-1988: Ron Way 1968-1969: Barbara Marshall 1942-1944: B.E. Alexander
2003-2004: Susan Turner 1986-1987: Don Pollock 1967-1968: Fred Swanson 1941: Ben Dummit
2002-2003: Melissa Carson 1985-1986: Linda Baker 1966-1967: Bobby Rogers 1930s: J.L. McAtee

Distinguished service award (DSA)
The DSA is the highest honor bestowed upon a member of TCRA. They have answered the call of the profession to go above and beyond the ordinary. The recipients are recognized for their extraordinary service to the court reporting profession.

2020 Pam Marcinik
2019 Melinda Garriga
2016 Curtis High
2012 Glyn Poage
2010 Robin Cooksey
2008 Glenda Fuller
2007 Susan Simmons
2004 Judy Hobart
2001 Donna Collins
2000 Vicki MacNaughton King
1998 Judy Miller
1997 Jerry "Will" Callaway
1996 John Foster
1995 David Jackson
1994 Roger Miller
1993 David Langford
1993 Judge Frank Andrews
1992 Debbie Main
1991 Linda Baker
1989 Jerry Kelley
1988 Judy Werlinger
1987 Shirley Houston
1980 Jaye Thompson

Anyone wishing to tender a name for consideration may click here for the guidelines and qualifications.


texas hall of fame award
Election and induction as a member of the Texas Hall of Fame is a professional distinction given to a reporter of outstanding and extraordinary qualifications and experience in the field of court reporting and service to his/her profession.

2020 Pam Marcinik
2019 Melissa Carson
2016 Karen Morris
2014 Jo Anne Leger
2013 Melinda Garriga
2011 Rosemary Flores
2010 Robin Cooksey
2009 Marigay Black
2008 Glyn Poage
2006 Curtis High
2006 Nell McCallum Morris
2005 Mark Kislingbury
2004 Susan Henley
2004 Susan Simmons
2003 Ginny McCluskey
2002 Judy Hobart
2001 Donna Collins
2001 Ken Howard
2000 John Foster
2000 David Langford
1999 Georgette Graves
1999 Judy Miller
1998 Glenda Fuller
1998 Jerry Lancaster
1998 Jaye Thompson
1997 Opal Looke
1996 Jerry Kelley
1995 Bob Harris
1995 Jo Stanfield Young
1994 Jerry Callaway
1994 Debbie Main
1993 Vickie MacNaughton King
1992 Judy Werlinger
1991 David Jackson
1990 Peggy Antone
1990 Linda Baker
1990 Shirley Houston
1990 Roger Miller

Anyone wishing to tender a name for consideration may click here for the guidelines and qualifications.

2021 TCRA ANNUAL CONVENTION
September 23-25, 2021
Kalahari Resort - Round Rock, TX

BOARD MEETINGS
July 11, 2021
September 23, 2021


Watch the video: Arturo Sandoval