Chimps and Tools
These chimps seem very smart indeed. Especially the women. I guess I'm not surprised after all we have read this term about the intelligence of animals, and chimps in particular. I'm always fretting about eating meat, and ironically this made me feel better because it shows that meat eating is just a natural thing. It seems like so far, chimps haven't gotten caught up in neurotic guilt cycles.
Colossal Squid
I read an article in the New Yorker years ago about colossal sguid. Fishermen have been saying that they've seen them for years. Marine biologists scoffed at the idea and said the fishermen were just hallucinating, that this was merely the stuff of folklore like mermaids. When I read that article, they still hadn't caught one. In 2004 they finally did, and this is one is even bigger. Who knows, maybe mermaids are next...
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Week Twelve: Vaccination and Public Health
Parents' Roles in Immunization
The one thing that I really regret as a mom is not having more input for my kids' immunization schedule. I was at a stage in my life when I just blithely trusted the wisdom of western medicine. As a consequence, when the doctor suggested that we get some shots out of the way before we even left the hospital, I said "great". Both of my boys got a bunch of shots before they were four weeks old. The older one got shots preserved in mercury (thimersol). Thankfully, my kids have come through it all unscathed, but lots of kids don't. The wholesale assault on the babies' immune systems at such a young age is unnecessary and very damaging. So, obviously I am of the view that parents should play a very active role in immunization schedule. To that end, see generationrescue.org for a safe vaccination schedule.
Compulsory Vaccinations
I think this is such a tough issue. I think a lot of parents now just opt out of immunization without any real information on the risks and benefits. As a result, all kids are at risk, even immunized ones to some degree. I think that the institution of vaccination has gotten too out of touch with the real risks and the negative experiences of lots of kids and parents who have developed autism and other developmental problems as a result of vaccines. The medical establishment just wants everyone vaccinated, fast. The better approach is to change the schedule for vaccinations, so that kids are able to tolerate them. And, if kids have siblings who have developmental difficulties, they should be especially careful. But, I think the benefits of vaccinations outweigh the risks. Families should be able to opt out only if they have really educated themselves.
The one thing that I really regret as a mom is not having more input for my kids' immunization schedule. I was at a stage in my life when I just blithely trusted the wisdom of western medicine. As a consequence, when the doctor suggested that we get some shots out of the way before we even left the hospital, I said "great". Both of my boys got a bunch of shots before they were four weeks old. The older one got shots preserved in mercury (thimersol). Thankfully, my kids have come through it all unscathed, but lots of kids don't. The wholesale assault on the babies' immune systems at such a young age is unnecessary and very damaging. So, obviously I am of the view that parents should play a very active role in immunization schedule. To that end, see generationrescue.org for a safe vaccination schedule.
Compulsory Vaccinations
I think this is such a tough issue. I think a lot of parents now just opt out of immunization without any real information on the risks and benefits. As a result, all kids are at risk, even immunized ones to some degree. I think that the institution of vaccination has gotten too out of touch with the real risks and the negative experiences of lots of kids and parents who have developed autism and other developmental problems as a result of vaccines. The medical establishment just wants everyone vaccinated, fast. The better approach is to change the schedule for vaccinations, so that kids are able to tolerate them. And, if kids have siblings who have developmental difficulties, they should be especially careful. But, I think the benefits of vaccinations outweigh the risks. Families should be able to opt out only if they have really educated themselves.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Week Eleven: Forward
Global Crisis in Diet
I think my top priority would be for everyone to adopt Michael Pollan's idea: eat food, mostly plants, not too much. When I read that, my whole body smiled. I am beyond frustrated with misinformation on nutrition that is fed to the public as fact. It isn't just the food Kellogg's and Kraft Foods of this world that are to blame, though they do a lot to create false comfort to people that they are eating well. It comes from everywhere: sports enthusiasts, alternative health aficionados (for lack of a better word because they are in most cases self-appointed). I'm talking about extremism in any form: Atkins eaters, raw foodists, calorie restricters, etc. Everyone has a story to tell as to why their conception of the optimal human diets is correct. But, it just doesn't pass the common sense test. I can just see a grandma type hearing some of these ideas and scratching their heads. You eat what honey???
The only advice that makes sense to eat a moderate amount of unprocessed foods, as natural as you can afford. I suppose this is where you need resources, to make more of such food available in more remote areas, and to create systems for doing this that are environmentally sound.
Carbon Offsets:
I am in favor of carbon offsets because they draw people's attention to the issue of global warming and their direct relationship with it. There's a good article in the NY Times today about carbon offsets. Basically, it says that when people know the effect of their energy consumption, they use less. People are looking into how to best communicate enregy consumption and its effect to consumers in real time. I think carbon offsets aren't a panacea, but their a positive development.
Laughter as the Best Medicine:
I think laughter is right up there. Deeply fabulous food and sex are right there too. But all of these things are definitely good for our health, and probably much more beneficial than anything they sell in a drug store. Strongly Agree.
I think my top priority would be for everyone to adopt Michael Pollan's idea: eat food, mostly plants, not too much. When I read that, my whole body smiled. I am beyond frustrated with misinformation on nutrition that is fed to the public as fact. It isn't just the food Kellogg's and Kraft Foods of this world that are to blame, though they do a lot to create false comfort to people that they are eating well. It comes from everywhere: sports enthusiasts, alternative health aficionados (for lack of a better word because they are in most cases self-appointed). I'm talking about extremism in any form: Atkins eaters, raw foodists, calorie restricters, etc. Everyone has a story to tell as to why their conception of the optimal human diets is correct. But, it just doesn't pass the common sense test. I can just see a grandma type hearing some of these ideas and scratching their heads. You eat what honey???
The only advice that makes sense to eat a moderate amount of unprocessed foods, as natural as you can afford. I suppose this is where you need resources, to make more of such food available in more remote areas, and to create systems for doing this that are environmentally sound.
Carbon Offsets:
I am in favor of carbon offsets because they draw people's attention to the issue of global warming and their direct relationship with it. There's a good article in the NY Times today about carbon offsets. Basically, it says that when people know the effect of their energy consumption, they use less. People are looking into how to best communicate enregy consumption and its effect to consumers in real time. I think carbon offsets aren't a panacea, but their a positive development.
Laughter as the Best Medicine:
I think laughter is right up there. Deeply fabulous food and sex are right there too. But all of these things are definitely good for our health, and probably much more beneficial than anything they sell in a drug store. Strongly Agree.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Week Ten: Bison
Bison
I think the reintroduction of the bison is an inspiring idea because it represents a rare confluence of ecological and social ideals. It's horrifying what happened to the ecosystem in the plains states after the bison were nearly exterminated. The reintroduction would enable the recreation of a viable and natural relationship between and among the land, the creatures on it and humans. This is a rare thing. It will also likely benefit the tribes because it reestablishes an important element of their culture lost with the bison.
Breast Cancer Pill
I am quite skeptical on this one. It seems to me that the manufacturer is looking for a secondary market for a drug that has proven politically unwelcome. (Viagra was originally developed as a headache med, until lots of men taking it reported certain happy side effects, which was paydirt for the manufacturer. It's also very possible that the drug will not be effective in protecting against cancer. There have been countless cases where a drug works in mice but not in humans.
I think the reintroduction of the bison is an inspiring idea because it represents a rare confluence of ecological and social ideals. It's horrifying what happened to the ecosystem in the plains states after the bison were nearly exterminated. The reintroduction would enable the recreation of a viable and natural relationship between and among the land, the creatures on it and humans. This is a rare thing. It will also likely benefit the tribes because it reestablishes an important element of their culture lost with the bison.
Breast Cancer Pill
I am quite skeptical on this one. It seems to me that the manufacturer is looking for a secondary market for a drug that has proven politically unwelcome. (Viagra was originally developed as a headache med, until lots of men taking it reported certain happy side effects, which was paydirt for the manufacturer. It's also very possible that the drug will not be effective in protecting against cancer. There have been countless cases where a drug works in mice but not in humans.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Deep Ecology
Deep Ecology Platform
Deep ecology provides a fairly radical framework to analyze the relative position of humans on the planet. Basically, deep ecology requires that we view ourselves as just another species, not more important or less. It requires a radical shift in our moral reasoning to one where our survival and comfort is not of paramount importance, or even a primary consideration. I think it threatens American values more than any others, given our culture's belief that consumption is the key to a satisfying existence.
I think the platform is visionary, particularly given the fact that it was issued when the level of acceptance of a more ecological sensibility was in vogue. Its premises are readily acceptable to communities in Northern California, but I don't think people in middle America are likely to be sign on very quickly.
Ecosystems: Strong and Fragile
Ecosystems are strong and fragile. They show incredible resilience in being to adapt over time to changes. The problem is that rapid change to the environment, for example, threaten that underlying strength. Evolution of a species can take multiple generations, or thousands of years depending on which evolutionary biologists you believe. Similarly, evolution of a complex system like an ecosystem takes a long time. The rate of change in climate and in other aspects of our environment that is being caused by humans is so rapid that ecosystems are being undermined. Their delicate balance is being thrown into chaos. This, unfortunately causes a downward spiral causing more climate change.
Social Ecology
Social Ecology looks at the relationship between social institutions such as government and other cultural entities and the environment. It is only by analyzing both that meaningful improvement in our use of resources can occur. Clearly, at this point, social structures and the environment are on a collision course. Because of the materialist culture which dominates the whole world (west and east), we are consuming without any recognition of scarcity. Scarcity has even become a dirty word in lots of circles. It's all about abundance these days. Think big and get big.
Social ecology challenges social institutions to change the way we see the environment, and to make more sensible choices regarding the way we inhabit the world we live in. I think the idea is promising, but whether we have institutions that are amenable to any agenda other than one promoting consumption and the good life is questionable.
Deep ecology provides a fairly radical framework to analyze the relative position of humans on the planet. Basically, deep ecology requires that we view ourselves as just another species, not more important or less. It requires a radical shift in our moral reasoning to one where our survival and comfort is not of paramount importance, or even a primary consideration. I think it threatens American values more than any others, given our culture's belief that consumption is the key to a satisfying existence.
I think the platform is visionary, particularly given the fact that it was issued when the level of acceptance of a more ecological sensibility was in vogue. Its premises are readily acceptable to communities in Northern California, but I don't think people in middle America are likely to be sign on very quickly.
Ecosystems: Strong and Fragile
Ecosystems are strong and fragile. They show incredible resilience in being to adapt over time to changes. The problem is that rapid change to the environment, for example, threaten that underlying strength. Evolution of a species can take multiple generations, or thousands of years depending on which evolutionary biologists you believe. Similarly, evolution of a complex system like an ecosystem takes a long time. The rate of change in climate and in other aspects of our environment that is being caused by humans is so rapid that ecosystems are being undermined. Their delicate balance is being thrown into chaos. This, unfortunately causes a downward spiral causing more climate change.
Social Ecology
Social Ecology looks at the relationship between social institutions such as government and other cultural entities and the environment. It is only by analyzing both that meaningful improvement in our use of resources can occur. Clearly, at this point, social structures and the environment are on a collision course. Because of the materialist culture which dominates the whole world (west and east), we are consuming without any recognition of scarcity. Scarcity has even become a dirty word in lots of circles. It's all about abundance these days. Think big and get big.
Social ecology challenges social institutions to change the way we see the environment, and to make more sensible choices regarding the way we inhabit the world we live in. I think the idea is promising, but whether we have institutions that are amenable to any agenda other than one promoting consumption and the good life is questionable.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Weel Eight: Cell Biology HIV and AIDS
Western Approaches to AIDS
I think that the Western approach to AIDS has bought a lot of people a lot of time. The drugs available to treat HIV and AIDS are costly, both financially and to the general health of the patient. But they do seem to be working when they are available and that is an amazing thing. I think it's a tribute to social activism that the medical community mobilized and addressed the AIDS crisis in the relatively short time that it did.
Sadly, it's not perfect. It is extrememly expensive and too often unavailable. And, it makes people sick, degrading quality of life. The danger is that AIDS and HIV are dismissed as a thing of the past, and that better drugs and therapies aren't fast-tracked through the process of development and distribution. Too many people think that AIDS has been cured and the resultant lack of attention is scary.
Can TCM Strengthen the Immune System
I think it can. Qi gong and acupuncture can stimulate our immune response and ramp up our bodies' ability to fight disease. It should be made a part of cancer and HIV therapies. In one study involving cancer patients, the phagocytic rate, which is a measure of the immune function, increased in the the group practicing qi gong but decreased in the control group. So, there you have it...
The Deal that Saved the Whale
I think that the Deal that Saved the Whale is a wonderful accomplishment. Any conservation effort that can meet the financial needs of indigenous populations while also conserving the environment is ideal. But, the scary part of the article is how much development on the Baja peninsula is taking place, and what the effects of that are almost certainly going to be.
I think that the Western approach to AIDS has bought a lot of people a lot of time. The drugs available to treat HIV and AIDS are costly, both financially and to the general health of the patient. But they do seem to be working when they are available and that is an amazing thing. I think it's a tribute to social activism that the medical community mobilized and addressed the AIDS crisis in the relatively short time that it did.
Sadly, it's not perfect. It is extrememly expensive and too often unavailable. And, it makes people sick, degrading quality of life. The danger is that AIDS and HIV are dismissed as a thing of the past, and that better drugs and therapies aren't fast-tracked through the process of development and distribution. Too many people think that AIDS has been cured and the resultant lack of attention is scary.
Can TCM Strengthen the Immune System
I think it can. Qi gong and acupuncture can stimulate our immune response and ramp up our bodies' ability to fight disease. It should be made a part of cancer and HIV therapies. In one study involving cancer patients, the phagocytic rate, which is a measure of the immune function, increased in the the group practicing qi gong but decreased in the control group. So, there you have it...
The Deal that Saved the Whale
I think that the Deal that Saved the Whale is a wonderful accomplishment. Any conservation effort that can meet the financial needs of indigenous populations while also conserving the environment is ideal. But, the scary part of the article is how much development on the Baja peninsula is taking place, and what the effects of that are almost certainly going to be.
Week Seven: Cell Biology and Cancer
Western Approaches to Cancer
I think the Western approach to Cancer is very unsophisticated. There are too many anomalies to believe that we have the whole story. Why do some patients survive when they are not expected to, and the other way around? It happens too much to create any faith in the western understanding of the disease.
It seems pretty clear that the environment is playing a role in cancer, and that there is some genetic component to it. But, why does it afflict some in a family and not others, or some in Chernobyl or Nagasaki and not others.
TCM and Cancer
I think the Chinese approach of recognizing the psycho-physiological connection holds the key. As we learned from the great presentation on the Biology of Belief, there is too much to ignore on this. The problem is that this type of inquiry seldom lends itself to generalization, and so the progress in dealing with the disease will be zig-zaggy.
Are We Still Evolving?
Hah! It's so typical of us to assume we are no longer evolving because we're perfect, right? I'm not surprised at all that there has been evolution in the last 10,000 years.
Of course not. The world keeps changing and so do we. I think it's interesting to look at the lactose-tolerant gene and that it developed in agrarian northern europe. It's cool that our bodies, over generations, update for new situations. I hope we don't need to adapt to excessive UV radiation, heat and swimming as global warming sets in...
I think the Western approach to Cancer is very unsophisticated. There are too many anomalies to believe that we have the whole story. Why do some patients survive when they are not expected to, and the other way around? It happens too much to create any faith in the western understanding of the disease.
It seems pretty clear that the environment is playing a role in cancer, and that there is some genetic component to it. But, why does it afflict some in a family and not others, or some in Chernobyl or Nagasaki and not others.
TCM and Cancer
I think the Chinese approach of recognizing the psycho-physiological connection holds the key. As we learned from the great presentation on the Biology of Belief, there is too much to ignore on this. The problem is that this type of inquiry seldom lends itself to generalization, and so the progress in dealing with the disease will be zig-zaggy.
Are We Still Evolving?
Hah! It's so typical of us to assume we are no longer evolving because we're perfect, right? I'm not surprised at all that there has been evolution in the last 10,000 years.
Of course not. The world keeps changing and so do we. I think it's interesting to look at the lactose-tolerant gene and that it developed in agrarian northern europe. It's cool that our bodies, over generations, update for new situations. I hope we don't need to adapt to excessive UV radiation, heat and swimming as global warming sets in...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)