S J Seymour

Everyone is unique, but we are all infinitely more alike than we are different.

My site is meant to introduce you to my novels,
my opinions, and some investment advice. Soon I may write about genetic genealogy.
Enjoy!

 

Filtering by Tag: healthcare

Bill Gates: Vaccinations Reduce Sickness, Improve Quality of Life, Develop Economies

Bill Gates is expanding his humanitarian focus and in his Annual Letter of 2013 outlines reasons worldwide vaccinations are essential.

Fewer Diseases Result in Stronger National Economies

Gates said that "In the same way that during my Microsoft career I talked about the magic of software, I now spend my time talking about the magic of vaccines. Vaccines have taken us to the threshold of eradicating polio. They are the most effective and cost-effective health tool ever invented. I like to say vaccines are a miracle. Just a few doses of vaccine can protect a child from debilitating and deadly diseases for a lifetime. And most vaccines are extremely inexpensive." 

He claims vaccinations lead to better quality of life with more health, education, and business opportunities. And vaccinations reduce sickness from disease, both the initial temporary acute sickness, and the permanent mental disabilities and the effect on cerebral development for survivors. A brain needs nutrition to develop, and cannot do so with sickness in the body that vaccinations help prevent. 

A child can lose a lot of potential by five years of age. And Bill Gates has found studies that  correlate lower IQs to high levels of disease in any country. And although IQ tests are imperfect, the dramatic effect on the population is "a huge injustice" to all citizens, he says. Vaccinations are important because they make people healthier. And healthier individuals can help develop economies. 

Vaccinations begin a Virtuous Circle

Another benefit of vaccinations is that parents have fewer children. "It might seem logical" Gates says, "that saving children's lives will cause overpopulation, the opposite is true." It might take years, but "as the childhood death rate is reduced, within 10 to 20 years this reduction is strongly associated with families choosing to have fewer children."

The rate of childhood deaths is reduced as a direct benefit of vaccinations. And parents with fewer children tend to have more time and money to spend on each one because vaccinated children live longer. And these children tend to get more education and job opportunities. So it's a virtuous circle, a constantly re-inforced win-win outcome all round.

Gates said that UNICEF, headed by Jim Grant, raised vaccination rates from 20% to 70% between 1980 and 1995. A free copy of Grant's book is here.

Gates writes that "Vaccines are the best investment to improve the human condition." And that's a weighty statement from the individual who was wealthiest person in the world for many years, and the former head of a global computer giant. And computers have infinitely improved the human condition. Bottom line: vaccinations improve business.

And Gates adds that childhood health issues are key to so many other issues, such as "having resources for education, providing enough jobs and not destroying the environment."

You can read his letter in its entirety here. And thank you for reading my summary.

Aren't Doctors Responsible for Patient Care and the Medical System?

Doctor patient relationships are a timely and important topic in America. For the fact is, medical training and education aren't guarantees of perfection in patient care. And it's time for doctors to take ultimate responsibility for the system.

Doctors have a tendency by virtue of education and authority to issue medical commands and assume they're done. But the command mentality doesn't work in profitable businesses (it may exist only in the legal and judicial systems, but that's a topic for another post).

And doctors must put patients first. It's not wise to put profits ahead of basic patient care. And medical care is different from business; it's like education in putting the needs of students first. But whether for profit or not, doctors need to learn to assess patient care. Because in present-day healthcare, patients go to doctors trusting they'll get competent care, but rely on nurses and office staff to deliver a large percentage.

An essential business issue is that businesses fail. Unless a restaurant's in a location where clients don't have any choice, the restaurant can fail. Or fashion designers can fail if they create clothes that fashionistas won't buy.

And yet doctors can be gruff, patient-unfriendly, and untrustworthy, and get away with it, simply by being in a certain location and invoking and marketing the fact they've been professionally trained and licensed, and so must, ipso facto, be delivering adequate patient care.

But doctors should know they won't be great doctors unless they give great service. And doctors don't even give adequate service if they simply issue commands. Doctors are trusted to do their work if they find out whether their advice has been carried out, and so they must care about patient experience. And they should follow-up better with patients.

Follow-up doesn't happen efficiently in a system where pay-per-visit insurance rules, tests are paid out of pocket in some cases, and where loyalty is uncommon as it is in America. And why should a patient be loyal if the doctor changes insurance plans, moves suddenly, and disappears after signing non-compete clauses. Doctors are also guilty of prescribing dangerous and expensive tests unnecessarily, and not advising patients of results by following through and reminding patients of another appointment. And doctors works in a system that doesn't reward loyalty and least expensive care. 

But isn't the patient the most crucial element of this doctor-nurse-patient triad? Because without the patient, doctors and nurses aren't necessary.

For the doctor who sits as a client at a restaurant and eats a meal is the most crucial element to the restaurant. The restaurant needs clients to profit and continue to exist, and the owner has responsibility for the client's experience. Or if the doctor can't find a sweater in a clothing store, the doctor knows the store is responsible for not providing it.

And what happens to a doctor's patient is the patient internalizes personal needs and complaints, and experiences firsthand the failings of doctors and the entire medical system. But if patient needs aren't met, who exactly is at fault, the doctor or the system?

Obviously, doctors have to become more patient-centered, and care more about the patient. Instead of assuming all will be done according to command, doctors need to be more sensitive and vigilant about patient care. Because doctors have ultimate responsibility. And what they want probably isn't done as they expect and hasn't ever been.

The challenge is: it's time to be responsible, to change and improve patient care. And if the system has to be changed to improve patient outcomes, then it has to be done. Why? Because doctors head the medical system and bear ultimate responsibility for the quality of patient care. And because patients assume doctors have command of the system, and patients would like to be able to trust their doctors in all ways. Doctors simply must take command of their system in any country.

For further reading, an excellent article in The New York Times called "Healing the Hospital Hierarchy" (Mar. 16, 2013) discusses the doctor-nurse hierarchy, and how these relationships in hospitals sometimes break down. Doctors blame nurses, and nurses must either follow doctor's orders, or be terminated.


Weight Loss and Other Inexact Sciences

Another hurricane is on the way to us here in the Atlantic northeast. Sandy is meeting a western front, and creating a nor'easter to rival the Perfect Storm of 1991. A major movie was made from that one, so we're dreading what's in store for us. Forecasters and radars (which one ignores at one's peril) predicted Sandy will be here early next week, the last few days of October. Might not be as bad as all that, I hope not. Might not happen at all. But Holy Flying Dinosaurs, the television media has already begun scaring the living daylights out of us...

And yet how often are weather events correctly forecast? Weather Science is an inexact science.

Earth Science is not an exact science either, but Italy is going to imprison seven Earth Scientists to six years in prison for incorrectly issuing false reassurance that a major 6.3-magnitude earthquake that ultimately happened on the 6 April 2009 and killed 308 people would not follow weaker tremors. An open letter to the Italian president from 5000 international scientists asserts the charges are unfounded. A case of injustice if I've ever heard one.

If this post is going to be about inexact sciences, there are thousands of examples. But what are the exact sciences?

(W) Exact Sciences:

An exact science is any field of science capable of accurate quantitative expression or precise predictions and rigorous methods of testing hypotheses, especially reproducible experiments involving quantifiable predictions and measurements. Physics and Chemistry can be considered as exact sciences in this sense.

The term implies a dichotomy between these fields and others, such as the humanities.

Weight loss is definitely another inexact science in general. There's a wonderful BBC documentary by Dr. Michael Mosley I've watched twice this week about the 5:2 diet. This article describes the diet that might actually work, and inspires this writer. For two days a week, women eat 400-500 calories, and men eat 500-600. The other five days a week are unregulated. Any amount of calories is fine, up to about 2200. In this way, the BBC announcer claims he dropped fourteen pounds in six weeks.

I wrote about another diet way back in this post -- the "Sociable Diet." Any way to lose weight that works, like making money, is the best way. Be inspired. And listen to scientists even if the science is inexact.


Justice Has To Be Shown To Be Done

 

 I grew up thinking the Supreme Court was the almighty arbiter of truth and justice.  I had reverential respect for the institution.

Nowadays, I can't stop thinking of how much they disappoint me.

The Supreme Court is made of humans, and at this point in time, they've been shown everywhere as a group of dysfunctional,deeply flawed (biased) partisans, mostly Republicans. I think one of the worst, possibly the most obvious example of their inefficiency was thrust into the open for all to see when one of them called the President -- 'Liar' -- in the formal setting of the State of the Union address. Still shocks me.

 Honestly, how is that a fine example of the virtues the American people expect them to possess, such as self-restraint and thoughtful consideration?

 They see a police force around the country that is fragmented and unconnected and cannot possibly be doing a good job, where a speed limit charge costs more than a week's worth of groceries, and yet murderers and rapists are set free.They know this and yet do nothing to correct it, help the police patch together their findings, and prove justice is being done.

 I pity them, and yet they anger me. They have the power to do a better job and make America a better place to live. It's not enough to do nothing as they often appear, they have to actually do the right thing, or at least do something.

One of the areas where they could take leadership is surely healthcare. Most studies show other countries do healthcare better. Doctors and nurses, the helping professions, must be protected from expensive lawsuits to begin  with, without being totally exempt from punishment. Any basic summary of healthcare systems around the world, provided consumers like the system, shows that in all cases the government made the decision that everyone should be covered in some form. In addition, patients around the world in these better countries are covered whether they contribute or not to the system simply because they are there.

It's the civilized and the right thing to do, and the Supreme Court needs to be reminded.

Other countries are aware of how many people are in the country and who they are, but why doesn't America? America lacks in this way as well. They don't know who's even here! How can the country ignore twelve million illegals, many of whom are children? From childhood, they've been invested in, their educations funded by our property taxes, so how can they possibly be expected to self-deport i.e. just go away? Defies belief.

When the country looks to the Supreme Court for leadership, I see a breakdown in leadership, justice, and the power of the government.

Every time I hear a politician say America is the biggest and best superpower in some world, I tune out their empty words. Too late for that, I'm afraid, sorry.

AFTERWORD:  I'm glad to hear the Supreme Court passed Obamacare. Not passing it would have been such a great hardship for so many. My hope is that healthcare can be unified for all, just as time zones and train track rails had to be unified by federal mandate. I used to hope business could do it, but as the auto makers proved, business cannot unify healthcare.  Healthcare for all will only become a reality by federal force, as happened earlier in England and Canada.

Here's a wordle of reader's reactions to Obamacare at Daily Beast...Relief being the most popular!

Courtesy: The Daily Beast

American Foes of Healthcare Reform Exaggerate Costs, Should Apply Perspective



Certain Republican pundits are currently discussing religion and politics in America without admitting they are pushing political agendas and want certain people elected as ulterior motives. I see that they are mixing politics and religion, saying the two have always historically been held closely together, in America.

According to them, hospitals should instill practical religious principles when caring for patients. These self-professed experts want "religious" hospitals to follow their religious faith as they see it, rather than "politics" of the day, if they see a conflict. Then they conflate politics, religion, and science and the result sounds hilariously crazy.

Yet any biblical expert with opposing points of view could find phrases in the Bible to overturn the ideas of these ridiculous, self-styled "experts"...

They perceive science is anti-religious and unhelpful without respect for non-partisan medical principles and practices. They insist on imposing (dumping) their half-baked ideas on others, calling their partisan views "religious" and prefer that medical care be withheld by guilting others, and then twisting them into a paternalistic Republican agenda point.

If a doctor doesn't think a woman should use birth control for religious reasons, for example, according to these politicos, the doctor should tell her to find another doctor and another hospital and persuade her not to use birth control - without offering her a safe and certain alternative when one already exists for her use in just such a situation.

What would happen if hospitals decided not to treat those of different colors and religious faiths? Where would these very same pundits get their medical treatments?

Let's hope they don't lead hospitals into believing their ridiculously anti-scientific attitudes.

Toothless Tigers: Abortion and Homosexuality

The noisy foes of homosexuality and abortion baffle me. I live here in the northeast corner of the United States. We all constantly make choices about healthcare, vacations, home lifestyle, transportation, friendships, careers, and so on, as we go about our daily lives.

Why is there so much public hysteria about these essentially private issues?

Why do foes of those who are in favor of such issues believe they will ultimately somehow, some way, sometime pay the price for someone else's decision in favor of abortion or homosexuality?

Let's take these issues apart...I hope they decompose into smithereens on the scrap heap of triviality.

First of all, I don't want to imply these issues aren't important to individuals, perhaps of life-and-death importance. These are central issues to people deciding whether they need to have a third marriage to the same person, or whether or not to have an abortion.

My point is that those people should be able to choose and decide for themselves, just as people with money should be able to choose how to spend it (let's hope for good reasons), or any of the multitude of other lifestyle choices people make.

One theory I've heard is that the foes of abortion and homosexuality are running scared. Now, of what could they be frightened?

1. Perhaps they do not appreciate how new methods can solve old dilemmas. Homosexuality and safe, hospital abortions available for all, are age-old exceptions to the mainstream that have not been accepted by law until recently.

2. On homosexuality: perhaps people who are against homosexuality are frightened to accept them socially, even one at a time. Perhaps they have an us-them mindset, as if they were from a democratic society, and the others were Communists, so they call them different, worse, perverts, as if they were social predators. Perhaps they're worried it might spread, and society would fall apart if everyone did it, and there wouldn't be any babies. If so, they need to make themselves less frightened somehow, maybe read up on it and meet homosexuals.

3.On abortion: perhaps people are against abortion if they worry there won't be enough children like they used to be, as good as they used to be, whatever that implies, to replace themselves, spread their seed, their race, ahead of them into the future. Perhaps they are worried the cost will come out of their pockets.

Perhaps the extremists whipping up mass hysteria should confront the central question of their own immortality and sexuality. We are all humans, and we all have finite lives. Accepting the choices of others would go a long way to promoting peace if these toothless tyrants promoting mass activism would only care to listen.



If Helmets Aren't Enough To Protect Players, What's the Solution?

Dear National Hockey League Commissioner:


Why deny overwhelming scientific evidence that brain injuries in hockey players are caused by the sport? Why be so bold except to protect your future business?

More important: what is your solution?

                 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Today, an important article in the New York Times concerns the tragic death of a 28-year-old hockey star. Scientific proof has made into fact some suspicions deeply-held by many, that sports stars are dying in record numbers from degenerative brain diseases. Doctors who analyzed and studied his brain tissues and brains of similar sports stars believe there is no longer any doubt whatsoever that many sports cause and worsen health issues that can lead to needless premature death. Such brain diseases are diagnosed posthumously.

The business of sports in general continues to expand. At the same time lingering health issues of living players are ignored and categorically denied by bosses because players get   injured and treat themselves in different ways. The sports business depends on denying  such problems, but morally, it's wrong.  It's obvious to see the problems that degenerative health issues would imply for the world of sports.

I say SHAME on all those who profit from blood sports -- "blood" being contact sports that injure the brains and bodies of players for life outside the game. Pure greed is easy to recognize.

My best wishes and condolences go to those families who have made the ultimate sacrifice for any sport.

Luckily, this is not my personal problem. In my family unit, we prefer not to watch blood sports.


Does Driving Encourage Premarital Sex?

In countries where women have been driving for generations, the answer is negative. We wonder where the science could be behind that idea? We in the western world believe just as premarital sex encourages more premarital sex, driving encourages more driving....They are two different activities.

Does the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia sincerely want more drivers? Perhaps that is the real issue in such countries that do not encourage women to drive.  Everyone has to be persuaded with good reasons, which I give below because I believe Saudi Arabia should encourage women to drive.

Driving is a good skill to learn and can make girls safer if they have the option of not entering a car with drivers they do not feel comfortable with, and so they will not be kidnapped. 

Driving for women is an important human right and a good idea, and of course, they need to have the option of driving lessons.

If women drive, they can, among other activities:

1) help drive their families for food shopping
2) drive sick and old women who feel safer with a young girl
3) drive cars to schools
4) take pets to veterinarians and drive horse vans
5) go shopping for food and clothing by themselves
6) girls can safely go to movies with their girlfriends
7) some women prefer to drive enormous trucks and help the economy

They might be safer at night in their own car than in a bus, walking, or driving in someone else's car. They can use their own car if the other driver is not a safe driver or does not wish to drive, or they do not wish to enter a certain car. Of course, they have to learn how to drive, follow the legal rules of the road, and practice safe, defensive driving.

As a mother of two girls in New Jersey, both of mine have learned to drive, and have their own cars. They learned to drive first in classroom lessons, and then instructor-led outings in a car with dual brakes. Rules of the road here are so strict that girls and boys cannot drive until they are seventeen, and only fully when they are eighteen. Many teenagers delay driving a little longer...Students growing up in New York City itself often do not learn how to drive at all.

We want what we want, and life doesn't always give us what we want even if we deserve it.


On Kirtan Chanting

Those of us privileged to attend a yoga/writer's retreat  in Vermont recently as I did also learned Indian chanting  during our evenings, and benefited from sing-alongs led by a lovely, talented singer usually known simply as Yvette, or sometimes Yvette Om.
Yvette
I have been learning her chants by heart, aided by her CD "Into the Arms of Love" which I highly recommend. It is available at her website to order online, and makes the perfect gift for any yoga enthusiast, or buy it as background music, for meditation...She sings haunting Kirtan lyrics with the aid of her harmonium, other singers, and other musical instruments, such as the violin and sitar. 
Yvette

Please take a moment to buy it. You will soon find yourself adding quick chants throughout your busy days, and probably long, slow, chanting meditations,  as well.... Songs with titles like Sri Ganesha, Om Gam Ganapataye Namaha, Hey Ma Durga, Om Narayana, Om Namah Shivaya..Yvette's lovely lyrics will relax you when you allow her music to move you...

Book Review: The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks

Written by the immensely talented  and gorgeous Rebecca Skloot, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks traces the history of the biotech and gene therapy industries in America and makes it exciting.

Hela cells were used in research studies at Johns Hopkins University, and named after  a so-called donor, Henrietta Lacks, a 31-year-old mother in Maryland. Her cells evidently expanded and divided at an unprecedented speed. They were reproduced  and sent around the world for use in medical experiments. Her cells were used as building blocks  that created new products and ultimately led to the the expansion of the multi-billion-dollar  international pharmaceutical industry.  At the same time, Henrietta's family, after her death, did not make a penny and are currently deeply in debt.

The well-written, entertaining story is about so much more than one family, and yet learning about the Lacks family grounds the book in reality and gives the story urgency. We see how real people's lives were impacted by permissions they did, or did not give, for their tissues to be used in scientific experiments. We learn about how people have given up ownership of  the raw materials, their cells, blood, and body parts, whether voluntarily or not, in  medical procedures around the world.  Read this book to learn useful knowledge about the industry and about the world of medicine.

Listen to Rebecca Skloot describe her book, and be sure to buy it. I stayed up late reading  it, and was sorry when it ended. Don't worry, you will be in good hands when you read her book. She would make a very desirable friend...


Rebecca Skloot

American Healthcare Systems Needs Overhaul To Focus on Fair Access and Healthy Futures

The world will read this blog post, and probably correctly call their own health care system superior to the American model, despite any improvements that may have already been enacted here.

Doctors in America work in a system in which they routinely and unwisely lose interest in their patients and get away with it. Medical doctors in America refer their patients around other doctor's offices without caring about outcomes just because they don't have to, and get paid for it.

They do not automatically, and only rarely, request a follow up return visit. They just seek payment for referrals of patients to other doctors and forget who matters. I have had doctors at all levels do that, and it makes me angry at their irresponsibility. They don't get paid for caring. They get paid more for other so-called services, like ripping people apart in surgeries, whether or not they have had their medical education in the United States.

They are in it for the money, and they are not supposed to be and should care more for their patients. They do not know if patients have followed up on their ailments and they don't care if  patients don't follow the recommendations -- sometimes because patients can't afford to. If patients don't get treatment, doctors wouldn't know or care. I know because I have been treated that way, too, and I supposedly have good insurance that covers catastrophic incidents.

American medicine is a joke for most Americans, even me, a vacuous hollow of the good health care system the country could have if it ever got its act together. It is an extremely poor, inefficient system, as it has been for at least thirty years since I have lived, fortunately healthily, for the last thirty years in this country.

Here's a good example of a gross inefficiency of the medical system overall...Someone who has insurance in one state has to pay the bills for health services rendered in another state.

That's exactly what happened to a good, old friend of mine, my former cleaning lady, who lives in Florida and pays health insurance there. When she visited her daughter on holiday, she had emergency gall-bladder surgery in New Jersey. A couple of months later, she has been billed for more money than she makes in a year in Florida.

A little background: she was visiting her daughters in New Jersey  when she was admitted. They looked after her when she was discharged from the hospital. She lives alone in Florida, so it was actually better for her to have the operation in New Jersey and stay afterward with her daughter's family. She also knew and trusted some of the doctors who performed the operation because she used to work cleaning the hospital for thirty years and felt familiar with it. Another of her daughters works at the hospital...

Which brings us back to the paperwork and the expenses  she submitted from  her New Jersey hospital that are now being rejected by her Florida insurer. Does this make sense to charge her to pay more for a required procedure than she can  make in one year? In her sixties, she labors in a job requiring a lot of physical effort. She might have spent a few more expensive days in the hospital in Florida had she done the procedure in that state. She would certainly had a lot more personal trouble since she hadn't anyone to help her post-discharge. She is understandably disputing her bills.

In an even more extreme case, an article called "Stuck in Bed for 19 Months, at Hospital's Expense" in the New York Times today tracks a case in an extravagantly inefficient American health care system that lacks accountability for long-term patients without insurance. The profiled patient had previously made $400 in cash each week, and been abandoned by his wife and children who could not afford his care, although he ultimately returned home.

"For the $1.4 million in services that [the hospital] had provided, total reimbursement to the hospital from Medicaid was $114,000...

If he had been insured or immediately eligible for Medicaid or Medicare, he might have gone to a nursing home after a week or two, where the average daily cost in New York is about $350 — and where he might have had steady companionship. Or he might have received a home health aide in his apartment, which could have cost even less, depending on the required hours. 

For hospitals---that treat many illegal immigrants, the health care plan enacted last year does nothing to solve this liability...During debates about reform, lawmakers insisted that the plan’s benefits not extend to the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants...Nor is this likely to change."

Hospitals keep patients and can't efficiently care for them; they don't automatically transfer them to less expensive  locations. This inefficiency is another example that hospitals fail to address. Even if hospitals say they don't have the money, by not improving this practice they have, in fact, consciously condoned it. They  actually allow patients  like him to stay at a place that normally charged over USD$2,000 a day instead of  forcing them to transfer to another  less-expensive alternative at $350 a day.  Why are the 'powers that be' not ashamed of this administrative malpractice. Why are they not held accountable for their inefficiency?

Either expense will appear nonsensical and outrageous to my international audience.  Yet, America lacks the business and political will to improve health care. Meetings between hospital, long-term care facilities, and the government should have taken place to care for this patient instead of making me, a taxpayer, help pay for his excessive bill and their mistakes. Let's face it, many mistakes have been made that have not been corrected yet. There should be financial incentives to reward results in the best interests of the long-term health and longevity of the patient. Successful diagnoses  obviously need to be followed through with intelligent treatments. Treatments and results matter to patients. America has a system where doctors are better rewarded for referrals and invasive surgery than long-term results, and have the wherewithal to sway politicians with graft.

If you are an international visitor, or on business, in the United States, and happen to land in the hospital, these extremely high bills will have to be paid.

What about patients who are airlifted to safety only to have to pay more than they can afford? They have no choice but to pay, unless covered by the appropriate insurance.

Instead of being an intelligent, broadly inclusive health care system, the bureaucratic rules are unintelligible at times, disconnected, and open to inconsistency and misinterpretation on an individual level. 

It should have made taxpayers in America revolt by now. Oddly, that has not happened. Businesses could not change the health care system; the inefficient American health care system has led giant car companies to bankruptcy.

Sensible rules to reward follow ups and make records of results need to be formed by the government,  as the British and Canadian governments did after the Second World War, or else all that is left is inefficiency and chaos. The rich might or might not pay for high end treatments, but every taxpayer loses overall in the American health care system. And that's not being caring, charitable, or compassionate to patients. For this reason, the American government must rule where businesses do not for the greater good of all patients. I just hope I don't get sick; the risks of getting sick are too horrific and expensive for me to imagine.


Proust's Questionnaire: A Party Game


Marcel Proust, novelist, 1871 - 1922, believed that to understand others, we must understand ourselves. Over time, we change in many ways, physically, emotionally, and intellectually. Proust wrote a questionnaire we can each use for ourselves, and with others. If writing a novel, this questionnaire is useful to ask about characters.
Here are the questions---

What is your current state of mind?                                                  What do you most fear?
What do you most dislike about your appearance?                   What is your favorite occupation?
What do you consider the most over-rated virtue?                    Which living person do you most admire?
Which words or phrases do you most overuse?                           Who is your favorite fictional hero?
If you could change one thing about yourself, what would it be?     What is your most favored possession?
If you could change one thing about your family, what would it be?       Who are your real heroes?
What do you consider your greatest achievement?                    When and where were you happiest?
What is the quality you most admire in a man?                            What is your idea of perfect happiness?
What is the quality you most admire in a woman?                      What is your most obvious characteristic?
What do you value most in your friends?                                          What is the trait you most dislike in yourself?
If you were to die and come back as a person or animal  what do you think it would be?      
If you could choose an object to come back as, what would you choose?            
What is the trait you most dislike in others?                                      Where else would you like to live?
What historical figure do you most identify with?                         What is your greatest extravagance?
Who has been the greatest influence on you?                                   What is your favorite journey?
What do you regard as the lowest depth of misery?                      On what occasion do you lie?
Which natural talent would you like to have as a gift?                What is it you most dislike?
For which fault do you have the most toleration?                          Where would you like to die?
Which military event do you admire most?                                       What is your favorite bird?
If you could have been anyone in history, who would it have been?                   What is your motto?
What are your favorite names?                                                                Who is your favorite hero in a novel?
 What is your favorite food and drink?                                                  Who is your favorite heroine in a novel?
What is your favorite color?                                                                       Who is your favorite composer?
What is your favorite flower?                                                                    Who is your favorite painter?
Who is your favorite poet?                                                                          Who is your favorite author?

If they make you smile,you can answer questions like these interactively at this Vanity Fair site, and find out who you resemble from your answers.

At this site, your answers will be preserved at the New Library of Alexandria.

Of course, they make terrific questions to answer at your leisure, and share with a friend, or ask at a party, if you dare. If nothing else, these probing, personal questions will make you think privately about the lives we live and have lived in the past, and the hopes we have for the future.


This Crime Often Goes Unpunished

This isn't about me. My experiences don't matter and I'm not going to discuss them.

When I hear about a high official getting away with rape, it makes me angry. When I hear that the victim's own mother asked her to keep quiet about it, I can't stay quiet. If we women won't talk about this problem as if it is a big problem no one will believe us. It is a problem, a huge problem and it's happening quietly, unreported all over the world every day.

Why am I talking about it?

It's a human rights issue for all women. If men don't believe it is happening because they don't hear about it, then that is an excuse or a philosophical outlook. They may not hear a tree fall because they aren't there, but it does happen...flying squirrels fly, too, whether anyone believes me. I've seen them...

And rape happens whether or not it gets discussed, talked about, punished, reported on, and so on. It happens. 

I have not ever heard of a woman (with the exception of the one-in-twenty-million oddball  at Duke University) who would say they have been physically invaded unless they actually have been. Why?

Maybe people cannot understand rape if they have not experienced anything like it. Mainly that's because rape is an embarrassing experience. It's shameful, dirty, and humiliating. Victims loathed the experience by definition, and want to put it into the past and move on to a better future.

Men get raped, too, and I'm not trying to minimize that, either. Perhaps more should be made of that, and then it will help women get relief, too. 

People who have been raped need to be believed, and that is the number one reason they do not discuss it. Better to keep it quiet and forget about it  (like a bad dream) than tell someone one who refuses to believe it ever happened, and doesn't care, either.  It happens even by the powerful and the mighty, and that's how a crime goes unpunished. Enough said, for now.

UPDATE: Hilary Clinton is truly a saint for flying the Libyan law student who agitated about her mistreatment. Anyone who doesn't believe her wouldn't believe his own sister if it happened to her.  I also believe it would be the lowest of the low not to believe her story.
 6.5.11

UPDATE: On the DSK case, I think the police did the right thing. Unfortunately, the maid has hurt others in her position (if she was not raped and has indeed fabricated the story). Now lawyers will automatically seek injunctions if any wealthy person is accused of rape, according to Alan Dershowitz, and that hurts all women. Ouch. 7.4.11


Time to Question the Risks of Sports

A recent University of North Carolina study painted a grim picture of head trauma and its long-term affects.

“Repeatedly concussed National Football League players,” said the UNC report, “had five times the rate of mild cognitive impairment (pre-Alzheimer’s) than the average population,” while “retired NFL players suffer from Alzheimer’s disease at a 37-per-cent higher rate than average.” Then came the kicker. Two doctors determined “that the average life expectancy for all profootball players, including all positions and backgrounds, is 55. Several insurance carriers say it is 51 years.”
Toronto's Globe and Mail,  Tues April 5, 2011
 

The average American male's life-span, in contrast, has risen from 65 in 1950 to almost 80 in 2011 [table above].  Yet hockey and football players clearly have potential sports-related injuries. These injuries may haunt them for years. None of us would consciously want to play hard only to pay for years with chronic pain.

The trouble is, these sports, at least the way they are now played, are relatively new when looked at from the perspective of time. We don't know the long-term consequences. Certainly the single-minded pursuit of sports excellence is now unmatched by anything in the past. It is motivated by money, and fed by supposedly demanding masses. It's true, we seldom think about  the negative repercussions of sports as a daily reality if we don't live with it.

 Sports rise and wane in popularity. It is time to revisit the injuries suffered by players. Remember the gladiators of Rome and how popular they were? Bull-fighting and dueling were far more popular in the past than they are now, due to the possibility of severe injury leading to death. Even boxing in America used to be more popular than it is now. Fatal danger is a common thread in sports that disappear over time.

Future ball players will have these statistics to ponder, and it is my hope they will pursue less dangerous pursuits in the future, in careers where risks are less costly. After all, exercise in moderation is excellent.
Pro athletes are overpaid  because their working life is short and for that reason, they enjoy compensation with astronomical salaries, support staffs, news coverage...I have long  marveled at how on earth sports salaries ever got so crazily high.

It's Better To Look Forward

An article in The Wall Street Journal about Chinese parenting has whipped up a firestorm of attention in the Comment section.

The author, originally from Asia, speaks only of her daughters, is a professor at Yale Law School, and author of a book about "Free Market Democracy" and how it breeds global instability and ethnic hatred. Little wonder, she is aiming to take the same lesson home to Americans, except on the personal scale. She thinks child and teenage freedom possibly lead to a great national weakness of character and strength. For example, she favors competitive classical music for her child over drama, without tolerance for art, and perhaps psychology.

 The article has moved many readers. One comment that boys in China would not have been insulted by their mothers, stays with me and bothers me. It surprises me that a law professor gets away with calling her daughter names like "garbage" and withholds bathroom trips, and yet hasn't been threatened with child removal by the Department of Youth and Family Services, as they have done for far lesser offenses. Such free publicity in a "serious newspaper" should help the author sell her books this week.

When my sixteen year old read the article, she reflected the author-mother illegally committed child abuse with her daughters. She, of course, thought I was being excessively strict with her last week when I wouldn't drive her and her friend through a snowstorm to attend a rock concert!

Another disturbing article this week concerns a long suicide note left by a graduate student at Princeton University. In it, he addressed the lingering effects of child abuse and that he could not forget them. He wrote the darkness of the pain is what drove him over the edge.

It is obvious to me: parents use strategies to raise children that worked out best for them; it's not necessarily what will work for all children. Each child is different, and needs to have a unique set of circumstances combine to create great success in a career. It's true that luck favors the prepared, but life is short, too. Each person has a unique life to live.

Gifts and Games: Findings from Positive Psychology

Try these 10 actions to get happier now:

 Give It Away, Give It Away Now! - G
 Take Initiative at Work - I
 Make Friends, Treasure Family - F
 Say Thank You Like You Mean It - T
Smile Even When You Don’t Feel Like It - S
 GIFTS


Have Meaningful Goals - G
Avoid Comparisons - A
 Put Money Low on the List - M
 Get Out and Exercise - E
Savor Everyday Moments - S
GAMES

 GIFTS and GAMES?
 Please forgive my anagrams.

More information in this article at  Alternet

Acknowledgements:
Jen Angel, Yes Magazine
Sonia Lyubomirsky, author, psychologist
E. Diener and R. Biswas-Diener and Stephen Post

American Drug Companies Pay Doctors To Sell Drugs

Do you ever worry a trusted doctor accepts secret payments from pharmaceutical companies at the expense of your life and health? Here's a place to check.

Investigative journalists have made an astounding report in ProPublica detailing how drug companies have cleverly managed to pay so little to get so much in many cases. Many payments they made are for a few hundred dollars in "speaking fees" where doctors tout a drug. It's not surprising doctors would accept the money, since they can be bombarded by drug company incentives. In fact, it's surprising how few did accept payments, at least according to this report, and most payments were surprisingly small (in the hundreds of dollars). But many doctors have accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars. Whether they earned it is not within the scope of this article, although the article mentions doctors sometimes only had to attend seminars to get paid.

ProPublica's report includes a national American database, check-able by state and by name of doctor, linked here. It says there is nothing wrong or illegal about doctors taking money from companies manufacturing drugs. In fact, some doctors assert they do so because they are "so good" at what they do. We cannot verify that advice.The problem is, more than seventy drug companies did not disclose their payments publicly, so this list may potentially be the tip of the iceberg. 

The database is restricted in many ways, unfortunately:
  • Payments to group practices were also excluded from this database; only  doctors practicing alone were included.  
  • Some doctors evidently have not received board certifications. 
  • The government removes older disciplinary procedures from websites.
  • We cannot be sure how long these doctors have accepted payments from drug companies. 
Perhaps that is the true point of the article: not only do we as patients not know how much money doctors make from drug companies and where it comes from, we can't find out how long it's been going on or how it influences their  practice of medicine without asking them, which we wouldn't.

The investigation found proof of practices as sleazy as one would suspect and fear possible. Doctor speakers were dropped if they did not write substantial prescriptions for a company. Doctors accepted "preceptor-ship programs" to allow sales representatives to spend time observing their practices, when in fact the sales reps were paid to use the time to push drugs to doctors. The report found evidence of illegal marketing of "off-label" uses of the drugs, i.e. those not approved by U.S. government regulators. Doctors rewarded for being "top injectors." Even vacation resort fees were covered.

While whistleblowers have tried to level the field,  skepticism about the purity of prescription-givers abounds in America. Consumer Reports found in  a study that 58% of Americans assume doctors give speeches paid for my drug companies, 51% believe that less than $500 could influence a doctor's judgment and 40% would not feel comfortable asking their doctors if they accept payments from a drug company for a drug they prescribe...a low number when considered, as if 60% would ask.

 Do you think all doctors should post how much and exactly what they accept from each and every pharmaceutical company on their waiting room walls and on their websites? Do you think they ever will?

ProPublica has achieved a victory with this report and found a great deal of truth however limited to disclose.

Full-disclosure: hip and spine injections by a Physiatrist have improved my own life immeasurably. While, doctors and drug companies by themselves are not the problem, our problem is with secret payments to doctors from drug companies possibly compromising the judgments of doctors.

Studies Indicate Body Mass Index of 23 is Optimal

We've all heard that excess weight shortens human lifespan. Medical researchers have now announced statistical evidence that Body Mass Index or BMI numbers of 23 and 24 are optimal for good health. Among the 900,000 men and women in a study, mortality was lowest in that narrow range, according to an interesting  press release from the British Medical Research Council.

Here is a BMI table of heights and weights:

In the study, moderately obese individuals (BMI 30-35) had lifespans reduced by 3 years. Worse, severely obese  individuals (BMI 40-50) had lifespans reduced by 10 years, similar to the effect of lifelong smoking. There was also a higher death rate among those who had a BMI well below 23-24, where more information would be helpful.

Obesity is a serious public health problem with increasingly global consequences. Do you know what your BMI is today?


The China Study by Colin Campbell draws very interesting conclusions as far as the virtues of recommending a plant-based diet for optimum nutritional and health benefits are concerned. Thousands of studies indicate it's the best way to head off heart disease and strokes, all kinds of cancers and autoimmune diseases.

In my early twenties, I worked in the office of venerable former Head of the British Medical Research Council in Oxford, Sir Richard Doll, when he was Warden of Green College, now Green Templeton College, Oxford. He now has a building named after him, and I also met Sir Richard Peto mentioned in this release many times. In fact, I may have met Colin Campbell, too, which is why I trust this work. Incidentally, another very nice nutritionist, Barbara Rolls, who eventually created the Volumetrics Diet was an acquaintance at Green College, too.


The Superior Diet: Varied and Lean to Protect Your Health

An article in today's Wall Street Journal, Not So Young at Heart? by Ron Winslow has important news on the topic of heart disease. New research from a 20-year study involving 3,258 people, 18-30 years of age, found that the cumulative effect of even modestly abnormal cholesterol heightens your risk of developing telltale signs of heart disease by age 45. LDL levels should be below 70, whereas current national guidelines consider LDL below 100 optimal.

As my recently recommended book, Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease by C.B. Esselstyn M.D. tells, national cholesterol levels are far too high at  200 and should be below 150. Rip Esselstyn, C.B. Esselstyn's son, has a book, Engine 2 Diet, with lots of tasty recipes and exercises to help reduce your cholesterol and LDL.

The China Study by T. Colin Campbell  tells the same news with a convincing case for a varied diet of plant-based fruits, vegetables and whole grains. This recent research taken from long studies of the Chinese population reinforces the need for more strictness in the American diet, as far as cutting back on oils, is concerned, along with the need for a vegan diet,  one without dairy, eggs and meats, fish, white flour foods. This is a diet that can be extremely challenging to follow if one eats out a lot or with others not on the diet, but the rewards make it well worth following: to have more energy, a settled digestive system, and it could push cancer away and save your heart. Diet does all this! 
Warning: These books are extremely persuasive.

In stock at Whole Foods Grocery stores and bookstores.

Super-caffeinated Beverages Are Actually Drugs

Did you know that one can of heavily marketed energy drink WiredX505 has the caffeine equivalent of ten (10!) cans of cola? How do the makers of these drinks get away with masking the truth? They're so loaded with caffeine, children shouldn't drink them and containers should be labeled to indicate they are drugs.

The editors of the

Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ)

warn that drinks such as WiredX505 and Fixx are really drugs marketed as tasty syrupy refreshments. Fuzzy labelings on caffeine-loaded drinks have lulled and by now repeatedly tricked consumers into buying products that doctors warn "have crossed the line from beverages to drugs." They maintain official warning labels on drinks are not comparable to those currently mandatory for caffeine tablets as they should be.

Dr. Noni MacDonald, Dr. Matthew Stanbrook and Dr. Paul C. Hebert in the current month's editorial, just published, entitled "

Caffeinating children and youth" (CMAJ, July 23, 2010)

exhort advertisers of these drinks to end promotions targeting vulnerable children who are "notorious for making poor health choices." Dr. MacDonald, Professor of Pediatrics at Dalhousie University et al. assert the marketing of energy drinks is "distinctly different" because companies increasingly target children and youth through sponsorship of events such as snowboarding and skateboarding competitions.

Astoundingly, caffeine information is invisible on these products,  and containers should be properly marked to warn consumers of the dangers. Too much caffeine is well known to cause "nervousness, irritability, sleeplessness and, occasionally, rapid heart rate." Red Bull was prohibited in France until 2008, and in Denmark until 2009. 

These drinks are often mixed with alcohol by college students, creating potentially hazardous combinations. A survey showed that "college students who mixed alcohol with energy drinks were three times more likely [than other patrons] to leave a bar highly intoxicated and four times more likely to drive while intoxicated."